Written by: Cole Stillings
In recent years management of predators has changed drastically from past policies of elimination. There are now programs that are focused on reintroducing predators such as wolves, cougars, and even crocodiles back into their native habitats and ranges. However there are still problems with the current management strategies that are in place. The biggest problems are the lack of education for the public about coexisting with predators and the aftermath of human and animal confrontations.
When dealing with top level predators people need to realize that they have different needs to survive and obviously have a specific diet. With the reintroductions, people need to take it upon themselves to get educated about what they need to do to protect themselves and protect their domesticated animals.
People also need to learn that these predators are not picky on what type of meat that they ingest. It is there main goal in life to survive. If that means that they need to kill and eat a domesticated dog that is not being looked after and is roaming free in the woods then that is what the cougar, wolf, or bear will do so that it can live. In this case the person needs to acknowledge that it wasn’t the fault of the predator it was their own fault that they lost their pet or livestock for letting them roam. If they are truly concerned about losing their domesticated animal then they should bring it indoors where there is no chance of confrontation.
As I already stated the second major problem is the consequences of interactions with predators. In most cases the ending result will be death to the animal. This I believe is not the appropriate response to any encounter. There are many instances where a cougar or wolves may attack a farmer’s livestock. After the attack the farmer then takes it upon himself to kill the predator and eliminate the threat. This is “death penalty” can be avoided. All that has to be done is trap the animal and bring it to a reserve. Threat is eliminated and the animal doesn’t have to be killed merely because it was trying to survive.
Now the death penalty was brought up for a reason. Now yes there are activists that don’t believe in the death penalty or killing animals. But what about the people that will go and kill a wolf because it killed their dog but at the same time say that capital punishment is horrific and should be banned. That’s just hypocritical. My question is why is ok for wildlife? Because they are animals, because they aren’t as intelligent as humans. Well I find that a sad excuse, I’ve dealt with many animals that were more intelligent than some people I know.
Now I know that some people might think that I am an activist from PETA or some other animal rights organization but I’m not. I am an avid hunter and fisherman. I just don’t understand why people believe that they are so much more superior than wildlife that they can be killed off so easily without a second thought for simply trying to survive, which is a harder life than any of us have to deal with. I guess the main point is that people need to learn that the wildlife has the right to live like everybody else does and we shouldn’t be the ones to take it away from them.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Where Have All the Walleye Gone?
Written By: Adam Grunwald
Working in Taylor County, Wisconsin there are limited area lakes that have walleyes as a potential catch. Lakes where walleyes can be commonly found in Taylor County are Spirit Lake, Diamond Lake, and Rib Lake where walleye are common. Along with lakes such as Sacketts Lake and Esadore Lake, there have also been walleyes stocked into the Chequamegon National Flowage. The two most common lakes to go catch walleyes are Rib Lake and Spirit Lake and from local anglers and businesses around the area they say that the number of walleyes in Rib Lake have become non-existent. I can personally have been fishing on Rib Lake in recent years and every time I go out the only thing that I catch are bullheads and you just don’t catch a bullhead every once and a while but it’s every cast. Again there is evidence when the local community had their annual ice fishing tournament on the lake on January 8, 2011. Where there was no game fish species on the leaders’ board. I believe that small numbers of walleyes that are being caught in Rib Lake can be due to the large population of bullheads. To try and combat the problem the local lake association set out nets every spring for a couple of weeks to remove bullheads and every year they remove thousands of bullhead. However, since bullheads are a species that have a high fecundity and low predator/prey relationship with other fish species. This allows the remaining sexually mature bullheads to replace the removed stock. Some people would say that you could leave the nets in the lake longer to remove more bullheads. This could work, however it would be extremely time consuming and expensive. Since you would need the man hours to go check the nets and remove any bullheads. My method of removal would seem the most drastic because it would be just to rotenone the entire lake. Rotenone is a chemical that affects the cells of any aquatic species and stops them from using oxygen basically suffocating the species. This would remove all the aquatic species that live in the lake; however the ability for fisheries to recover it wouldn’t be too long before there was a healthy stock of walleyes, northern pike, bluegills, crappies and perch along with aquatic invertebrates. People would be concerned about getting fish stocks back into Rib Lake, they would be even more concerned on how the food sources for these fish species would come back. However, since aquatic invertebrates are extremely adapted to environmental changes, I believe that there will be a higher population of aquatic invertebrates before there is a high population of fish species. Granted there would be years of extremely low fishing ahead but with regular stocking of fish species this could make Rib Lake the premier fishing spot of Taylor County for years to come. If the lake association wants to stick to the net removal tactic it could lead to years and years of poor fishing.
Working in Taylor County, Wisconsin there are limited area lakes that have walleyes as a potential catch. Lakes where walleyes can be commonly found in Taylor County are Spirit Lake, Diamond Lake, and Rib Lake where walleye are common. Along with lakes such as Sacketts Lake and Esadore Lake, there have also been walleyes stocked into the Chequamegon National Flowage. The two most common lakes to go catch walleyes are Rib Lake and Spirit Lake and from local anglers and businesses around the area they say that the number of walleyes in Rib Lake have become non-existent. I can personally have been fishing on Rib Lake in recent years and every time I go out the only thing that I catch are bullheads and you just don’t catch a bullhead every once and a while but it’s every cast. Again there is evidence when the local community had their annual ice fishing tournament on the lake on January 8, 2011. Where there was no game fish species on the leaders’ board. I believe that small numbers of walleyes that are being caught in Rib Lake can be due to the large population of bullheads. To try and combat the problem the local lake association set out nets every spring for a couple of weeks to remove bullheads and every year they remove thousands of bullhead. However, since bullheads are a species that have a high fecundity and low predator/prey relationship with other fish species. This allows the remaining sexually mature bullheads to replace the removed stock. Some people would say that you could leave the nets in the lake longer to remove more bullheads. This could work, however it would be extremely time consuming and expensive. Since you would need the man hours to go check the nets and remove any bullheads. My method of removal would seem the most drastic because it would be just to rotenone the entire lake. Rotenone is a chemical that affects the cells of any aquatic species and stops them from using oxygen basically suffocating the species. This would remove all the aquatic species that live in the lake; however the ability for fisheries to recover it wouldn’t be too long before there was a healthy stock of walleyes, northern pike, bluegills, crappies and perch along with aquatic invertebrates. People would be concerned about getting fish stocks back into Rib Lake, they would be even more concerned on how the food sources for these fish species would come back. However, since aquatic invertebrates are extremely adapted to environmental changes, I believe that there will be a higher population of aquatic invertebrates before there is a high population of fish species. Granted there would be years of extremely low fishing ahead but with regular stocking of fish species this could make Rib Lake the premier fishing spot of Taylor County for years to come. If the lake association wants to stick to the net removal tactic it could lead to years and years of poor fishing.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Guatemalan Crafts
Lauren Hildreth
January 18th 2011
Peten crafts a future
This article may have been published over a decade ago, but I find it holds great value discussing the future of developing countries.
In places like Guatemala, there are still areas that remain undisturbed by industry or expansion. A lot of people live in villages that practice traditional means of living, which may be much more sustainable than the urbanizing areas of the country. The article talks of people living in the Maya Biosphere Reserve, which was created by the Guatemalan government to help protect Peten’s deforestation and habitat problems. Previously, new residents flocked to the land, but were unaware of how to use forest products and decided to cut the trees down to establish farms, ranches, and logging businesses. The people saw a change in the land. The effects of deforestation led to a longer dry season and the developed farms/ ranches hurt the growth of the forest surrounding it.
In the protected location, residents have forever been woodcarvers of the beautiful, and seemingly bountiful, forests. New traditions have been made by the people of Peten. The article includes the story of Rolando Soto, an artisan who creates sculptures from the fallen trees near his home. He has created the idea of ecologically based woodcarving; “showing the beauty of Peten hardwoods as a way of preserving them, teaching artisanry, and his ideas for a Peten community supported by income from renewable resources from the forest”. One of the tree species most used is Cericote, which grows quickly. Rolando not only created a sustainable lifestyle, but one of good income too. He explains that a family of ten can live of the proceeds from a carving a single tree.
This past summer I spent a month in Guatemala working with children at an orphanage and traveling as much as possible. I managed to go see the Mayan ruins, which is quite near where the article is talking about. While traveling around the country, as well as to El Salvador, I encountered many people who tried to live more “one with the earth.”
A new friend, Alex, owns a surfing-hostel on the beach in El Salvador and told me about his sustainability efforts. He explained the essence of community to me, where he fit into it, and what he wanted to contribute. As a firm believer in organic farming (animal and produce), Alex has plans to expand his garden, which already produces all of the vegetables used at his hostels restaurant, and raise his own chickens. Some of his goals are to provide an option for the community to get safe and healthy foods, live sustainably, and become more self-sufficient.
After visiting with Alex and traveling around the country, while reading an amazing biography of a man who lived in a 12X12 foot house without electricity and running water, I felt so inspired! My trip experiences opened my eyes to a new way of life and how I could possibly develop a career that related to sustainable living. I so excited to see where I fit into this remarkable lifestyle.
Stafford, K., & Crespi, J. (1994). Peten crafts a future. Americas, 46(5), 28. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
January 18th 2011
Peten crafts a future
This article may have been published over a decade ago, but I find it holds great value discussing the future of developing countries.
In places like Guatemala, there are still areas that remain undisturbed by industry or expansion. A lot of people live in villages that practice traditional means of living, which may be much more sustainable than the urbanizing areas of the country. The article talks of people living in the Maya Biosphere Reserve, which was created by the Guatemalan government to help protect Peten’s deforestation and habitat problems. Previously, new residents flocked to the land, but were unaware of how to use forest products and decided to cut the trees down to establish farms, ranches, and logging businesses. The people saw a change in the land. The effects of deforestation led to a longer dry season and the developed farms/ ranches hurt the growth of the forest surrounding it.
In the protected location, residents have forever been woodcarvers of the beautiful, and seemingly bountiful, forests. New traditions have been made by the people of Peten. The article includes the story of Rolando Soto, an artisan who creates sculptures from the fallen trees near his home. He has created the idea of ecologically based woodcarving; “showing the beauty of Peten hardwoods as a way of preserving them, teaching artisanry, and his ideas for a Peten community supported by income from renewable resources from the forest”. One of the tree species most used is Cericote, which grows quickly. Rolando not only created a sustainable lifestyle, but one of good income too. He explains that a family of ten can live of the proceeds from a carving a single tree.
This past summer I spent a month in Guatemala working with children at an orphanage and traveling as much as possible. I managed to go see the Mayan ruins, which is quite near where the article is talking about. While traveling around the country, as well as to El Salvador, I encountered many people who tried to live more “one with the earth.”
A new friend, Alex, owns a surfing-hostel on the beach in El Salvador and told me about his sustainability efforts. He explained the essence of community to me, where he fit into it, and what he wanted to contribute. As a firm believer in organic farming (animal and produce), Alex has plans to expand his garden, which already produces all of the vegetables used at his hostels restaurant, and raise his own chickens. Some of his goals are to provide an option for the community to get safe and healthy foods, live sustainably, and become more self-sufficient.
After visiting with Alex and traveling around the country, while reading an amazing biography of a man who lived in a 12X12 foot house without electricity and running water, I felt so inspired! My trip experiences opened my eyes to a new way of life and how I could possibly develop a career that related to sustainable living. I so excited to see where I fit into this remarkable lifestyle.
Stafford, K., & Crespi, J. (1994). Peten crafts a future. Americas, 46(5), 28. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Tornado Damage
Andrew LaChance
January 18th 2011
Blowdown: Tamara Dean
This article, published in American Scholar in Autumn 2010 describes in detail the extent of damage a tornado can cause to a Wisconsin mixed hardwood forest and the forest owners emotional state. Weighing the possibility of either letting the splintered forest go to regenerate itself or log it and manage the wind damaged site back to a healthy producing stand of trees is more directly the question to consider. The article also describes assessing timber value from a damaged woodlot and finding a logger to come carry-out a harvest on a difficult site.
As the author first explores the devastation that she once called a forest, she is completely moved by the appearance of her trees that now lay on their side. Thinking that she may be brought to tears upon first sight she finds herself amazed by the power of the storm. In her mind Dean likens the power of tornados that often rip across the Wisconsin landscape to the power of a hurricane in coastal areas; specifically, Hurricane Katrina that attacked New Orleans just days after. I can definitely picture the aftermath in my mind that Dean first saw as she drove up to her once woods as I experienced first-hand the power of a blowdown in the Boundry Waters Canoe Area back in 1999. After that storm, sometimes finding a campsite was very difficult even near the water’s edge.
After the initial shock value of viewing a destroyed forest subsides, Dean moves on and decides she better decide what to do with the downed wood; if anything at all. Though trees snapped off or blown-down in such a storm are worth typically far less than they would if cut standing, there still is some value to the timber. The next step is then having a forester come and assess the stands value. The final estimate given by the forester will reflect to the best of his or her knowledge the current market value for certain species as well as an educated guess of the timber’s grade. In the situation of a blown-down forest, that estimate will be a fraction of what the timber WOULD be worth had it been cut prior to the storm. A forester will probably urge a landowner in Dean’s situation, to have the area logged so some money can be generated from the timber, cleaning up the forest floor allows for better regeneration and major disturbances invite pioneering (often invasive species) to dominate.
Dean decides that she will have the downed trees removed and sold by a local logger. Finding the right logging firm for the job was not an easy task. Occasionally, there is a stand of trees that because of the terrain on which they grow is so uneven and insecure logging becomes dangerous and many firms will not take the project on. Interestingly enough, I am involved in managing a 28-acre stand of mixed hardwoods much like Dean describes and though all (ok, most) trees still stand, not on logging firm has been able to offer the landowner a fair price for his timber. There exist other disadvantages to a logger now; however the difficulty is mostly attributed to the terrain.
Dean describes in detail how she felt the entire time the trees were being harvested that she may be doing the wrong thing or that somehow she was losing a part of her woods. The fact is she is literally losing part of her woods. The way I look at it though, she is just doing her part to be a good steward of the land, providing better opportunity for regeneration as well as taking what life deals and making the best of it.
January 18th 2011
Blowdown: Tamara Dean
This article, published in American Scholar in Autumn 2010 describes in detail the extent of damage a tornado can cause to a Wisconsin mixed hardwood forest and the forest owners emotional state. Weighing the possibility of either letting the splintered forest go to regenerate itself or log it and manage the wind damaged site back to a healthy producing stand of trees is more directly the question to consider. The article also describes assessing timber value from a damaged woodlot and finding a logger to come carry-out a harvest on a difficult site.
As the author first explores the devastation that she once called a forest, she is completely moved by the appearance of her trees that now lay on their side. Thinking that she may be brought to tears upon first sight she finds herself amazed by the power of the storm. In her mind Dean likens the power of tornados that often rip across the Wisconsin landscape to the power of a hurricane in coastal areas; specifically, Hurricane Katrina that attacked New Orleans just days after. I can definitely picture the aftermath in my mind that Dean first saw as she drove up to her once woods as I experienced first-hand the power of a blowdown in the Boundry Waters Canoe Area back in 1999. After that storm, sometimes finding a campsite was very difficult even near the water’s edge.
After the initial shock value of viewing a destroyed forest subsides, Dean moves on and decides she better decide what to do with the downed wood; if anything at all. Though trees snapped off or blown-down in such a storm are worth typically far less than they would if cut standing, there still is some value to the timber. The next step is then having a forester come and assess the stands value. The final estimate given by the forester will reflect to the best of his or her knowledge the current market value for certain species as well as an educated guess of the timber’s grade. In the situation of a blown-down forest, that estimate will be a fraction of what the timber WOULD be worth had it been cut prior to the storm. A forester will probably urge a landowner in Dean’s situation, to have the area logged so some money can be generated from the timber, cleaning up the forest floor allows for better regeneration and major disturbances invite pioneering (often invasive species) to dominate.
Dean decides that she will have the downed trees removed and sold by a local logger. Finding the right logging firm for the job was not an easy task. Occasionally, there is a stand of trees that because of the terrain on which they grow is so uneven and insecure logging becomes dangerous and many firms will not take the project on. Interestingly enough, I am involved in managing a 28-acre stand of mixed hardwoods much like Dean describes and though all (ok, most) trees still stand, not on logging firm has been able to offer the landowner a fair price for his timber. There exist other disadvantages to a logger now; however the difficulty is mostly attributed to the terrain.
Dean describes in detail how she felt the entire time the trees were being harvested that she may be doing the wrong thing or that somehow she was losing a part of her woods. The fact is she is literally losing part of her woods. The way I look at it though, she is just doing her part to be a good steward of the land, providing better opportunity for regeneration as well as taking what life deals and making the best of it.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
The Intriguing Field of Wildlife Diseases
Written by: Kyle Lannon
Wildlife disease is a newer field that keeps growing, for we have a greater need to research and understand it in order to better manage and protect our wildlife populations. The reason that this field keeps growing, is that it is such a diverse subject, bringing in experts from a wide array of areas. Areas like virology, toxicology, parasitology, ecology and pathology. This field of study is influence by so many factors that finding a solution is almost never a cookie cutter situation.
To just give you an understanding on this diverse field, I want to share a definition that I feel best wraps up a definition of what a disease is. Gary Wobeser defines disease in his literature as “any impairment that interferes with or modifies the performance of normal functions, including responses to environmental factors such as nutrition, toxicants, and climate; infectious agents; inherent or congenital defects; or combinations of these factors”(Wobeser, 1994).
I know that is a mouthful, and a bit difficult to understand just with the definition. Let me break it down into an example. This covers any type of disease that a person can think of and for good reasons. If a person thinks of alcoholism, chronic wasting disease, or even avian botulism, they are all diseases because they affect the way the organism lives. This even deals with conditions that we usually do not associate with disease. For instance, if a “snowshoe hare dies as a result of severe intestinal damage caused by parasitic worms, most people would consider this to be an example of disease. If another hare were killed by a great horned owl, we generally would consider this to be an example of predation rather than disease” (Wobeser, 2005). Now, imagine that the hare that was picked off by the owl had the same intestinal worms. Instead of just dying from the parasitism, the hare has to put in extra energy and time into eating more. This means, when all of the other hares are sitting motionless and hiding, waiting for a better time to eat, this parasitized hare has to be out running around getting food. So now, in that extra hour that it had to spend eating, it was then picked off by the owl? Is the death of the hare now contributed to the parasitic worms, or bad luck and predation? You could even extend this definition to cover a deer hit by a car that now has to live its’ life differently because it has a broken leg. This is why his definition includes anything that causes an energetic cost to the organism, as well as creating unnatural behaviors can be linked back to wildlife disease.
It is for this reason, the understanding that there are so many factors you cannot always account for, when trying to manage and understand why wildlife populations react the way they do, that I love this field, and feel it will be around for a long time to come.
One last point that I think is important to remember for all wildlife managers is the idea that “although the thought is unpleasant, it is important to realize that totally natural area’s no longer exist and that all wild animals live in environments that are modified by humans” (Wobeser, 1994). It is for this reason that we must be responsible and do the best jobs we can to protect our remaining populations and natural resources.
Thanks,
-Kyle
UWSP-Wildlife Ecology: Information and Education major, Captive Wildlife minor
Special thanks to Dr. Gary Wobeser and his literature that is the reason I am studying what I am.
Wobeser, Gary A. Essentials of Disease in Wild Animals. Grand Rapids: Blackwell Professional, 2005.
Wobeser, Gary A. Investigation and management of disease in wild animals. New York: Plenum P, 1994.
Wildlife disease is a newer field that keeps growing, for we have a greater need to research and understand it in order to better manage and protect our wildlife populations. The reason that this field keeps growing, is that it is such a diverse subject, bringing in experts from a wide array of areas. Areas like virology, toxicology, parasitology, ecology and pathology. This field of study is influence by so many factors that finding a solution is almost never a cookie cutter situation.
To just give you an understanding on this diverse field, I want to share a definition that I feel best wraps up a definition of what a disease is. Gary Wobeser defines disease in his literature as “any impairment that interferes with or modifies the performance of normal functions, including responses to environmental factors such as nutrition, toxicants, and climate; infectious agents; inherent or congenital defects; or combinations of these factors”(Wobeser, 1994).
I know that is a mouthful, and a bit difficult to understand just with the definition. Let me break it down into an example. This covers any type of disease that a person can think of and for good reasons. If a person thinks of alcoholism, chronic wasting disease, or even avian botulism, they are all diseases because they affect the way the organism lives. This even deals with conditions that we usually do not associate with disease. For instance, if a “snowshoe hare dies as a result of severe intestinal damage caused by parasitic worms, most people would consider this to be an example of disease. If another hare were killed by a great horned owl, we generally would consider this to be an example of predation rather than disease” (Wobeser, 2005). Now, imagine that the hare that was picked off by the owl had the same intestinal worms. Instead of just dying from the parasitism, the hare has to put in extra energy and time into eating more. This means, when all of the other hares are sitting motionless and hiding, waiting for a better time to eat, this parasitized hare has to be out running around getting food. So now, in that extra hour that it had to spend eating, it was then picked off by the owl? Is the death of the hare now contributed to the parasitic worms, or bad luck and predation? You could even extend this definition to cover a deer hit by a car that now has to live its’ life differently because it has a broken leg. This is why his definition includes anything that causes an energetic cost to the organism, as well as creating unnatural behaviors can be linked back to wildlife disease.
It is for this reason, the understanding that there are so many factors you cannot always account for, when trying to manage and understand why wildlife populations react the way they do, that I love this field, and feel it will be around for a long time to come.
One last point that I think is important to remember for all wildlife managers is the idea that “although the thought is unpleasant, it is important to realize that totally natural area’s no longer exist and that all wild animals live in environments that are modified by humans” (Wobeser, 1994). It is for this reason that we must be responsible and do the best jobs we can to protect our remaining populations and natural resources.
Thanks,
-Kyle
UWSP-Wildlife Ecology: Information and Education major, Captive Wildlife minor
Special thanks to Dr. Gary Wobeser and his literature that is the reason I am studying what I am.
Wobeser, Gary A. Essentials of Disease in Wild Animals. Grand Rapids: Blackwell Professional, 2005.
Wobeser, Gary A. Investigation and management of disease in wild animals. New York: Plenum P, 1994.
Environmental Education and Interpretation at Their Best
Written by: Michael Mandli
After being exposed to the elements of whether or not Environmental Education and Interpretation are one in the same, I find myself exhausted by the discussion. Remarkably, my wits will not allow me to retire from this contest without developing my own compelling opinion on the subject.
I have attended countless interpretive programs and more than enough educational programs, that just happened to pertain to the environment. While all of them may have been, in some ways, similar, I must pick apart their key differences.
I must start by reflecting back on a time when I had to sit on the floor with my legs crossed like a pretzel. Certainly not the best days of my life, but I survived. All I can remember is going to some camp on a grade school field trip where we were supposed to have a “ton of fun.” Upon arriving, I remember running off the big yellow bus and being herded into some room in a lodge style building lit by those eye-exasperating fluorescent lights with lots of windows and the shades drawn. We sat there for a couple hours and listened to a person talk about something that we were supposed to remember before they released us from our misery into groups where we would actually get to go outside and learn about things through experience. I remember the first station my group went to was supposed to educate us on the topic of geology. We looked for rocks on the side of a hill and then we were taught about the different types of rocks that we could have found. After learning the difference between sedimentary, igneous, and metamorphic rocks, we were supposed to classify the ones we found accordingly.
I believe that this can be referred to what is known as an environmental education since it was for the most part - structured, formal and meant to teach us something. While at some point, it did allow us to use our senses and engage ourselves in the activity, we did not have a choice in the matter which means it really is not the same thing as interpretation.
Interpretation, on the other hand, is supposed to be less formal, deeply engage the audience not because they have to be there, but they want and have the choice to be there. Interpretation also addresses many principals as noted by Freeman Tilden in Interpreting our Heritage. In that book, he introduces many principals such as provoke, relate, reveal and whole, just to name a few. Provoke really means to get the audience’s attention. Relate simply means to attach meaning to the audience. Reveal is the act of presenting the meaning of what is being interpreted in a way that keeps the audience connected all the way to the end when it is all pulled together. Whole basically says that the what is being interpreted should address a main theme. While these are key components of interpretation, it is important to understand that this is not what makes interpretation different from education. Interpretation is often times much more abstract than education. Interpretation is supposed to enhance the experience of those that partake in the program.
My concluding thoughts say that Interpretation can be a form of environmental education, but not necessarily. I say this because the people listening to the interpretive program may become educated through the program. On the other hand, I do not believe that environmental education and interpretation can go hand in hand since environmental education is an entirely different way of presentation. It involves teaching people about something in a formal setting and there is not really a choice in the matter rather, there is some sort of obligation or pending force that brings the attendees to the program.
After being exposed to the elements of whether or not Environmental Education and Interpretation are one in the same, I find myself exhausted by the discussion. Remarkably, my wits will not allow me to retire from this contest without developing my own compelling opinion on the subject.
I have attended countless interpretive programs and more than enough educational programs, that just happened to pertain to the environment. While all of them may have been, in some ways, similar, I must pick apart their key differences.
I must start by reflecting back on a time when I had to sit on the floor with my legs crossed like a pretzel. Certainly not the best days of my life, but I survived. All I can remember is going to some camp on a grade school field trip where we were supposed to have a “ton of fun.” Upon arriving, I remember running off the big yellow bus and being herded into some room in a lodge style building lit by those eye-exasperating fluorescent lights with lots of windows and the shades drawn. We sat there for a couple hours and listened to a person talk about something that we were supposed to remember before they released us from our misery into groups where we would actually get to go outside and learn about things through experience. I remember the first station my group went to was supposed to educate us on the topic of geology. We looked for rocks on the side of a hill and then we were taught about the different types of rocks that we could have found. After learning the difference between sedimentary, igneous, and metamorphic rocks, we were supposed to classify the ones we found accordingly.
I believe that this can be referred to what is known as an environmental education since it was for the most part - structured, formal and meant to teach us something. While at some point, it did allow us to use our senses and engage ourselves in the activity, we did not have a choice in the matter which means it really is not the same thing as interpretation.
Interpretation, on the other hand, is supposed to be less formal, deeply engage the audience not because they have to be there, but they want and have the choice to be there. Interpretation also addresses many principals as noted by Freeman Tilden in Interpreting our Heritage. In that book, he introduces many principals such as provoke, relate, reveal and whole, just to name a few. Provoke really means to get the audience’s attention. Relate simply means to attach meaning to the audience. Reveal is the act of presenting the meaning of what is being interpreted in a way that keeps the audience connected all the way to the end when it is all pulled together. Whole basically says that the what is being interpreted should address a main theme. While these are key components of interpretation, it is important to understand that this is not what makes interpretation different from education. Interpretation is often times much more abstract than education. Interpretation is supposed to enhance the experience of those that partake in the program.
My concluding thoughts say that Interpretation can be a form of environmental education, but not necessarily. I say this because the people listening to the interpretive program may become educated through the program. On the other hand, I do not believe that environmental education and interpretation can go hand in hand since environmental education is an entirely different way of presentation. It involves teaching people about something in a formal setting and there is not really a choice in the matter rather, there is some sort of obligation or pending force that brings the attendees to the program.
Environmental Education and Interpretation at Their Best
Written by: Michael Mandli
After being exposed to the elements of whether or not Environmental Education and Interpretation are one in the same, I find myself exhausted by the discussion. Remarkably, my wits will not allow me to retire from this contest without developing my own compelling opinion on the subject.
I have attended countless interpretive programs and more than enough educational programs, that just happened to pertain to the environment. While all of them may have been, in some ways, similar, I must pick apart their key differences.
I must start by reflecting back on a time when I had to sit on the floor with my legs crossed like a pretzel. Certainly not the best days of my life, but I survived. All I can remember is going to some camp on a grade school field trip where we were supposed to have a “ton of fun.” Upon arriving, I remember running off the big yellow bus and being herded into some room in a lodge style building lit by those eye-exasperating fluorescent lights with lots of windows and the shades drawn. We sat there for a couple hours and listened to a person talk about something that we were supposed to remember before they released us from our misery into groups where we would actually get to go outside and learn about things through experience. I remember the first station my group went to was supposed to educate us on the topic of geology. We looked for rocks on the side of a hill and then we were taught about the different types of rocks that we could have found. After learning the difference between sedimentary, igneous, and metamorphic rocks, we were supposed to classify the ones we found accordingly.
I believe that this can be referred to what is known as an environmental education since it was for the most part - structured, formal and meant to teach us something. While at some point, it did allow us to use our senses and engage ourselves in the activity, we did not have a choice in the matter which means it really is not the same thing as interpretation.
Interpretation, on the other hand, is supposed to be less formal, deeply engage the audience not because they have to be there, but they want and have the choice to be there. Interpretation also addresses many principals as noted by Freeman Tilden in Interpreting our Heritage. In that book, he introduces many principals such as provoke, relate, reveal and whole, just to name a few. Provoke really means to get the audience’s attention. Relate simply means to attach meaning to the audience. Reveal is the act of presenting the meaning of what is being interpreted in a way that keeps the audience connected all the way to the end when it is all pulled together. Whole basically says that the what is being interpreted should address a main theme. While these are key components of interpretation, it is important to understand that this is not what makes interpretation different from education. Interpretation is often times much more abstract than education. Interpretation is supposed to enhance the experience of those that partake in the program.
My concluding thoughts say that Interpretation can be a form of environmental education, but not necessarily. I say this because the people listening to the interpretive program may become educated through the program. On the other hand, I do not believe that environmental education and interpretation can go hand in hand since environmental education is an entirely different way of presentation. It involves teaching people about something in a formal setting and there is not really a choice in the matter rather, there is some sort of obligation or pending force that brings the attendees to the program.
After being exposed to the elements of whether or not Environmental Education and Interpretation are one in the same, I find myself exhausted by the discussion. Remarkably, my wits will not allow me to retire from this contest without developing my own compelling opinion on the subject.
I have attended countless interpretive programs and more than enough educational programs, that just happened to pertain to the environment. While all of them may have been, in some ways, similar, I must pick apart their key differences.
I must start by reflecting back on a time when I had to sit on the floor with my legs crossed like a pretzel. Certainly not the best days of my life, but I survived. All I can remember is going to some camp on a grade school field trip where we were supposed to have a “ton of fun.” Upon arriving, I remember running off the big yellow bus and being herded into some room in a lodge style building lit by those eye-exasperating fluorescent lights with lots of windows and the shades drawn. We sat there for a couple hours and listened to a person talk about something that we were supposed to remember before they released us from our misery into groups where we would actually get to go outside and learn about things through experience. I remember the first station my group went to was supposed to educate us on the topic of geology. We looked for rocks on the side of a hill and then we were taught about the different types of rocks that we could have found. After learning the difference between sedimentary, igneous, and metamorphic rocks, we were supposed to classify the ones we found accordingly.
I believe that this can be referred to what is known as an environmental education since it was for the most part - structured, formal and meant to teach us something. While at some point, it did allow us to use our senses and engage ourselves in the activity, we did not have a choice in the matter which means it really is not the same thing as interpretation.
Interpretation, on the other hand, is supposed to be less formal, deeply engage the audience not because they have to be there, but they want and have the choice to be there. Interpretation also addresses many principals as noted by Freeman Tilden in Interpreting our Heritage. In that book, he introduces many principals such as provoke, relate, reveal and whole, just to name a few. Provoke really means to get the audience’s attention. Relate simply means to attach meaning to the audience. Reveal is the act of presenting the meaning of what is being interpreted in a way that keeps the audience connected all the way to the end when it is all pulled together. Whole basically says that the what is being interpreted should address a main theme. While these are key components of interpretation, it is important to understand that this is not what makes interpretation different from education. Interpretation is often times much more abstract than education. Interpretation is supposed to enhance the experience of those that partake in the program.
My concluding thoughts say that Interpretation can be a form of environmental education, but not necessarily. I say this because the people listening to the interpretive program may become educated through the program. On the other hand, I do not believe that environmental education and interpretation can go hand in hand since environmental education is an entirely different way of presentation. It involves teaching people about something in a formal setting and there is not really a choice in the matter rather, there is some sort of obligation or pending force that brings the attendees to the program.
Invasive Who?
Written By: Ashley Beavens
Species that have been introduced, or moved, by human activities to a location where they do not naturally occur are termed exotic. When these ‘exotic’ species cause ecological threats they are than termed invasive and invasive is what they are. Destroying crucial habitat for our native plants and animals, the invasive species start spreading rapidly and taking over.
It is hard to believe that humans are the cause of introducing exotics. Humans are at the top of the intelligence, but we can do some very dumb things. Not thinking about the consequences of introducing non-native species into an ecosystem ranks high on the dumb list. You think we would have learned when the first invasive species was discovered a threat, but no we did not. Now invasive species are just getting to be expensive, causing billions of dollars in damage.
The federal government is engaged in millions of dollars in effort to stop the advance of Asian carp in our freshwater rivers and streams. Asian carp are aggressive eaters that can consume about 40% of their body weight a day in plankton and they tend to push out native fish for the food. These fish were imported years ago and escaped from their holding ponds when rains flooded them out into the local rivers. We should have thought about the potential backfires to working with there exotic species before anything crucial would happen.
If we humans would have thought about our actions before they were brought out, we would have a better ecosystem than what we have today. We would not have a list of several hundred invasive species to worry about or threatened habitat conditions. If we would of just thought on how we could control our own invasive actions, the world would be a better place. It is hard to see that we worry about invasive species spreading and harming the ecosystem, but do we ever worry about our own invasiveness spread?
Humans, in my opinion, are more toxic to the ecosystem then all of these invasive species we have among us these days. We are the ones constantly threatening everything from organisms at the bottom of the ocean to extraterrestrials in outer space. We, ourselves, do not know when to stop until it is too late. When we clear forests, drain wetlands, farm and build cities, dams, and roads, we significantly alter the landscape. This so called human presence severely decreases biological productivity as seen in today’s cities which occupy large patches of what had been some of the most fertile lands.
I would really like for the human species to look at themselves and start with changing their invasive actions before blaming the other exotic species for their destruction. Human destruction to the environment has been more deadly than our Asian carp, feral pigs or zebra muscles that linger about a nonnative niche. Just think back into the past before Stevens Point was founded. There were a variety of animals, peaceful streams, natural rocks, wonderful wildflowers, and hardy trees. Now it is just a polluted human foot print, a human foot print that will last.
Species that have been introduced, or moved, by human activities to a location where they do not naturally occur are termed exotic. When these ‘exotic’ species cause ecological threats they are than termed invasive and invasive is what they are. Destroying crucial habitat for our native plants and animals, the invasive species start spreading rapidly and taking over.
It is hard to believe that humans are the cause of introducing exotics. Humans are at the top of the intelligence, but we can do some very dumb things. Not thinking about the consequences of introducing non-native species into an ecosystem ranks high on the dumb list. You think we would have learned when the first invasive species was discovered a threat, but no we did not. Now invasive species are just getting to be expensive, causing billions of dollars in damage.
The federal government is engaged in millions of dollars in effort to stop the advance of Asian carp in our freshwater rivers and streams. Asian carp are aggressive eaters that can consume about 40% of their body weight a day in plankton and they tend to push out native fish for the food. These fish were imported years ago and escaped from their holding ponds when rains flooded them out into the local rivers. We should have thought about the potential backfires to working with there exotic species before anything crucial would happen.
If we humans would have thought about our actions before they were brought out, we would have a better ecosystem than what we have today. We would not have a list of several hundred invasive species to worry about or threatened habitat conditions. If we would of just thought on how we could control our own invasive actions, the world would be a better place. It is hard to see that we worry about invasive species spreading and harming the ecosystem, but do we ever worry about our own invasiveness spread?
Humans, in my opinion, are more toxic to the ecosystem then all of these invasive species we have among us these days. We are the ones constantly threatening everything from organisms at the bottom of the ocean to extraterrestrials in outer space. We, ourselves, do not know when to stop until it is too late. When we clear forests, drain wetlands, farm and build cities, dams, and roads, we significantly alter the landscape. This so called human presence severely decreases biological productivity as seen in today’s cities which occupy large patches of what had been some of the most fertile lands.
I would really like for the human species to look at themselves and start with changing their invasive actions before blaming the other exotic species for their destruction. Human destruction to the environment has been more deadly than our Asian carp, feral pigs or zebra muscles that linger about a nonnative niche. Just think back into the past before Stevens Point was founded. There were a variety of animals, peaceful streams, natural rocks, wonderful wildflowers, and hardy trees. Now it is just a polluted human foot print, a human foot print that will last.
Mining in Canoe Country
Written by: Marshall Black
If you have never spent time exploring the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCAW) in Northeastern Minnesota you are missing out on the time of your life. This million acre wilderness area is known for its pristine lakes, streams, rivers, and forests which are home to wolves, moose, and many other animals. The BWCAW provides some of the best fishing, canoeing, camping, and many other recreational opportunities unlike anywhere else. I was lucky enough to attend college at Vermilion Community College in Ely MN which is located near the Southwestern border of the BWCAW. Ely is a small town that caters to tourists travelling from all over the country and world to spend time in the BWCAW. Unfortunately, Metallic Sulfide Mining (MSM) operations that have been proposed to be built just miles outside of the BWCAW could put the health of this ecosystem and the economic well being of small communities like Ely in jeopardy.
Northern Minnesota has a history of mining since the late 1800’s. Around the 1900’s there were several iron ore mines which provided many jobs which attracted hundreds of thousands of people to this region. When these mines closed down most people moved away and the mine pits were left vacant or were flooded with water. Although these mining operations had negative effects on the resource, they did not create mass amounts of waste and over the years the ecosystem has recovered for the most part. This is not the case with MSM. MSM operations leave exposed sulfur ore deposits. You might be asking, why is leaving exposed sulfur ore a problem? When water (groundwater, rain etc.) comes in contact with the sulfur ore, the sulfur oxidizes which creates sulfuric acid. This sulfuric acid spreads and contaminates nearby lakes, streams, and groundwater. When the sulfuric acid spreads from the mine site it is called Acid Mine Drainage (AMD). These contaminated waters are dangerous to the health of humans (swimming, eating fish from these waters), fish, wildlife, and can destroy entire ecosystems. Since these proposed mine sites are located near extensive water systems that make up a large portion of the BWCAW, these systems could potentially become severely contaminated.
MSM sites in the southern United States have experienced devastating after affects which have contaminated thousands of water systems due to ADM. These mines were located in very arid sites which meant the potential for acid mine drainage was low, yet water still came into contact with the sulfur ore to produce sulfuric acid. Most of these mining companies refused to pay for the clean-up costs, making it a Superfund site which means that taxpayers pay for it. Considering the fact that these mines in Minnesota will be in an area surrounded by groundwater, lakes, and streams you can almost guarantee that sulfuric acid will be produced and mass amounts of AMD will occur.
There is a way to prevent this type of devastation from ever occurring. In 1997 Wisconsin passed the “Prove It First” law. This law states that before a MSM operation can open, the mining company must be able to refer to a similar mine to the one being proposed. This mine being referenced must have been operating for 10 years with no pollution and be closed for 10 years with no pollution. No company has been able to provide such an example, therefore no new mines have been proposed. If Minnesota passed a similar regulation it would essentially eliminate the chance of AMD destroying this unique ecosystem and the economic well being of the surrounding communities. To learn more on what is being done to prevent MSM in Northeastern Minnesota visit the Friends of the Boundary Waters website at http://www.friends-bwca.org/issues/sulfide-mining/.
If you have never spent time exploring the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCAW) in Northeastern Minnesota you are missing out on the time of your life. This million acre wilderness area is known for its pristine lakes, streams, rivers, and forests which are home to wolves, moose, and many other animals. The BWCAW provides some of the best fishing, canoeing, camping, and many other recreational opportunities unlike anywhere else. I was lucky enough to attend college at Vermilion Community College in Ely MN which is located near the Southwestern border of the BWCAW. Ely is a small town that caters to tourists travelling from all over the country and world to spend time in the BWCAW. Unfortunately, Metallic Sulfide Mining (MSM) operations that have been proposed to be built just miles outside of the BWCAW could put the health of this ecosystem and the economic well being of small communities like Ely in jeopardy.
Northern Minnesota has a history of mining since the late 1800’s. Around the 1900’s there were several iron ore mines which provided many jobs which attracted hundreds of thousands of people to this region. When these mines closed down most people moved away and the mine pits were left vacant or were flooded with water. Although these mining operations had negative effects on the resource, they did not create mass amounts of waste and over the years the ecosystem has recovered for the most part. This is not the case with MSM. MSM operations leave exposed sulfur ore deposits. You might be asking, why is leaving exposed sulfur ore a problem? When water (groundwater, rain etc.) comes in contact with the sulfur ore, the sulfur oxidizes which creates sulfuric acid. This sulfuric acid spreads and contaminates nearby lakes, streams, and groundwater. When the sulfuric acid spreads from the mine site it is called Acid Mine Drainage (AMD). These contaminated waters are dangerous to the health of humans (swimming, eating fish from these waters), fish, wildlife, and can destroy entire ecosystems. Since these proposed mine sites are located near extensive water systems that make up a large portion of the BWCAW, these systems could potentially become severely contaminated.
MSM sites in the southern United States have experienced devastating after affects which have contaminated thousands of water systems due to ADM. These mines were located in very arid sites which meant the potential for acid mine drainage was low, yet water still came into contact with the sulfur ore to produce sulfuric acid. Most of these mining companies refused to pay for the clean-up costs, making it a Superfund site which means that taxpayers pay for it. Considering the fact that these mines in Minnesota will be in an area surrounded by groundwater, lakes, and streams you can almost guarantee that sulfuric acid will be produced and mass amounts of AMD will occur.
There is a way to prevent this type of devastation from ever occurring. In 1997 Wisconsin passed the “Prove It First” law. This law states that before a MSM operation can open, the mining company must be able to refer to a similar mine to the one being proposed. This mine being referenced must have been operating for 10 years with no pollution and be closed for 10 years with no pollution. No company has been able to provide such an example, therefore no new mines have been proposed. If Minnesota passed a similar regulation it would essentially eliminate the chance of AMD destroying this unique ecosystem and the economic well being of the surrounding communities. To learn more on what is being done to prevent MSM in Northeastern Minnesota visit the Friends of the Boundary Waters website at http://www.friends-bwca.org/issues/sulfide-mining/.
Back to Basics Deer, If You Get My Drift
Written By: A Lady Dressed to Kill With a Poodle
Though now at the end of the pecking order of the deer hunter’s craft, still hunting has fallen to the side of the road. Hunters with the wool pulled over their eyes think that good things come to those who wait if you act dead as a doornail in a deer stand. I’m not just whistling Dixie here- chew on it and maybe give still hunting a shot. You’ve got nothing to lose, and maybe you’ll score big. Even if you come up empty, the excitement will blow you away.
Still hunting is not about getting dressed up with nowhere to go for nine days. Its boot scoot boogie’n over hill and dale while biting the dust of a deer trying to fly the coop. It’s all about feathering your nest by hook or by crook to bag the deer before it catches on and ducks under the radar to lead you on a wild goose chase. The barn burner is the hunter and the deer at loggerheads in the battle royal with their ears to the ground.
As described by the late Wisconsinite George Mattis in his famous 1969 book, Whitetails, Fundamentals and Fine Points, in still hunting the hunter’s movements are slow as molasses with radical chic precision requiring the patience of a saint. For all intents and purposes, an old logging road, frozen waterway or grassy field edge is used to clam up and put one foot in front of the other. No surprises here, but you can be quiet as a mouse if you don’t jump the gun until just the perfect moment when the morning frost softens the ground cover. In the ridge-and-river country of Western Wisconsin, you can grab the brass ring in spot-and-stalk pursuit if you mind your ps and qs.
Some people miss the boat on still hunting because they won’t jump on the band wagon and scare a deer off a property. If this gets your goat, use the middle of the week for your bottom line or keep your junk in the trunk until others are at lunch in the middle of the day. Seriously, dreams are made of this and you’ll get all that and a bag of chips if you just let it go and go with the flow.
The elephant never forgets the law of the jungle and keeps his cards close to his vest knowing he is the fox in the henhouse. The info dump is the parts of the deer, antlers, tail, and horizontal line of the back that are more often in the cross hairs first. This should be grist for the mill.
If you are looking for a hunt that will totally stun, awe and amaze you, and snap your game without losing a streak, still hunting could be your ace in the hole.
Though now at the end of the pecking order of the deer hunter’s craft, still hunting has fallen to the side of the road. Hunters with the wool pulled over their eyes think that good things come to those who wait if you act dead as a doornail in a deer stand. I’m not just whistling Dixie here- chew on it and maybe give still hunting a shot. You’ve got nothing to lose, and maybe you’ll score big. Even if you come up empty, the excitement will blow you away.
Still hunting is not about getting dressed up with nowhere to go for nine days. Its boot scoot boogie’n over hill and dale while biting the dust of a deer trying to fly the coop. It’s all about feathering your nest by hook or by crook to bag the deer before it catches on and ducks under the radar to lead you on a wild goose chase. The barn burner is the hunter and the deer at loggerheads in the battle royal with their ears to the ground.
As described by the late Wisconsinite George Mattis in his famous 1969 book, Whitetails, Fundamentals and Fine Points, in still hunting the hunter’s movements are slow as molasses with radical chic precision requiring the patience of a saint. For all intents and purposes, an old logging road, frozen waterway or grassy field edge is used to clam up and put one foot in front of the other. No surprises here, but you can be quiet as a mouse if you don’t jump the gun until just the perfect moment when the morning frost softens the ground cover. In the ridge-and-river country of Western Wisconsin, you can grab the brass ring in spot-and-stalk pursuit if you mind your ps and qs.
Some people miss the boat on still hunting because they won’t jump on the band wagon and scare a deer off a property. If this gets your goat, use the middle of the week for your bottom line or keep your junk in the trunk until others are at lunch in the middle of the day. Seriously, dreams are made of this and you’ll get all that and a bag of chips if you just let it go and go with the flow.
The elephant never forgets the law of the jungle and keeps his cards close to his vest knowing he is the fox in the henhouse. The info dump is the parts of the deer, antlers, tail, and horizontal line of the back that are more often in the cross hairs first. This should be grist for the mill.
If you are looking for a hunt that will totally stun, awe and amaze you, and snap your game without losing a streak, still hunting could be your ace in the hole.
Musky Regulations
50 Inch Musky Regulation
Ross Dary
Musky fishing is a sport that is growing exponentially. There are more musky fisherman now than ever before, which I believe is an important reason for more management of this species. Muskies grow to be the largest fish in most inland Wisconsin waters, and in order to reach their potential they need to be protected. Right now the regulations throughout much of the state are set at a 34 inch harvestable size limit, but this is much lower than their potential as they can grow to be well over 50 inches. This species doesn’t even begin reproduction until they are about 37 inches long.
In order to reach a sustainable population the size limit needs to be raised significantly. Currently stocking muskies is common practice, but I believe this could be changed with many other benefits. If the size limit is raised it will not only create a sustainable population, but also will increase the size of this trophy fish.
Does anyone else have experience with fishing for musky and have you caught any? If you have I think you can relate with me on how exciting a single fish can be. Personally I believe the bigger fish the better when fishing for musky, and I believe catch and release is the only way to accomplish this goal.
In my musky career I have fished in Wisconsin for 8 years, and have rarely seen a fish that is larger than 45 inches in length. This past summer I took a trip to Minnesota to go fishing, where the size limit is 50 inches, and boated a 51” fish (which was healthily released), and saw multiple that were over 48” in length. I believe along with other factors, the bigger fish seen and caught here is largely because of the high size limit.
Do you have any similar experiences fishing? Do you think the size regulations are having that large of an effect on the musky population in Minnesota and Wisconsin? In allowing the fish to become so large before they are kept they are able to reproduce creating a larger natural population. This means more large fish and more opportunities to catch them. To this day the weekend trip to Minnesota was the best weekend of fishing in my life. Having spent the entire past two summers in northern Wisconsin fishing this is very surprising to me, as I would expect to have equal days in both places since Wisconsin is the musky capital of the world.
I am a firm believer in the push to get the size limit for musky raised to a 50 inch minimum. Do you agree that this action would be beneficial to Wisconsin musky fishing? Are there any disadvantages to this plan that you know of? Are there any different suggestions that would be useful for helping increase the musky fishery in Wisconsin? Even if the regulations aren’t changed just remember you can always practice catch and release to ensure a healthy population and give the chance for others to catch their own trophy!
Ross Dary
Musky fishing is a sport that is growing exponentially. There are more musky fisherman now than ever before, which I believe is an important reason for more management of this species. Muskies grow to be the largest fish in most inland Wisconsin waters, and in order to reach their potential they need to be protected. Right now the regulations throughout much of the state are set at a 34 inch harvestable size limit, but this is much lower than their potential as they can grow to be well over 50 inches. This species doesn’t even begin reproduction until they are about 37 inches long.
In order to reach a sustainable population the size limit needs to be raised significantly. Currently stocking muskies is common practice, but I believe this could be changed with many other benefits. If the size limit is raised it will not only create a sustainable population, but also will increase the size of this trophy fish.
Does anyone else have experience with fishing for musky and have you caught any? If you have I think you can relate with me on how exciting a single fish can be. Personally I believe the bigger fish the better when fishing for musky, and I believe catch and release is the only way to accomplish this goal.
In my musky career I have fished in Wisconsin for 8 years, and have rarely seen a fish that is larger than 45 inches in length. This past summer I took a trip to Minnesota to go fishing, where the size limit is 50 inches, and boated a 51” fish (which was healthily released), and saw multiple that were over 48” in length. I believe along with other factors, the bigger fish seen and caught here is largely because of the high size limit.
Do you have any similar experiences fishing? Do you think the size regulations are having that large of an effect on the musky population in Minnesota and Wisconsin? In allowing the fish to become so large before they are kept they are able to reproduce creating a larger natural population. This means more large fish and more opportunities to catch them. To this day the weekend trip to Minnesota was the best weekend of fishing in my life. Having spent the entire past two summers in northern Wisconsin fishing this is very surprising to me, as I would expect to have equal days in both places since Wisconsin is the musky capital of the world.
I am a firm believer in the push to get the size limit for musky raised to a 50 inch minimum. Do you agree that this action would be beneficial to Wisconsin musky fishing? Are there any disadvantages to this plan that you know of? Are there any different suggestions that would be useful for helping increase the musky fishery in Wisconsin? Even if the regulations aren’t changed just remember you can always practice catch and release to ensure a healthy population and give the chance for others to catch their own trophy!
Black Walnut Disease
Laura Arts
01/ 17/2011
Thousand Canker Disease A recently Recognized Threat to
North America Black Walnut
By Whitney Cranshaw and Ned Tisserat
This article is from the ISA (International Society of Arboriculture) newsletter under arborist news. I recently subscribed to in November. In the article they talk about a new disease that is affecting Black Walnut (Juglans Nigra) trees in the Western U.S. By a Fungus called, Geosmithia and the beetle that carries the fungus called Pityopthovous juglandis.
First off I want to give everyone a description of Black walnut for those that don't know what the tree looks like. It's a tall tree height of 70 to 150 feet. the bark is grey to black and deeply furrowed. Black walnut can be found in well drained bottoms and likes to grow in the open sun. Leaves are alternate with 15-23 leaflets. The fruit is round and brownish/ green which falls in October. The twig pith is black with small air pockets. The bundle scar right below the bud looks like a heart shaped monkey. With that, do you have a black walnut tree close to your home or in your backyard?
The disorder is called Thousand Canker Disease. It gets its name from the numerous cankers that form on the branches and trunk. It currently is so far east as southeastern Colorado. Increasing temperatures are a factor to eastern spread. It is important to be aware of this disease because the fact that Wisconsin has many black walnut trees and I'd hate to see them disappear like: American chestnut tree, American Elm, and Ash trees here due to the unawareness of the spread of disease. Black walnut is very prized for its beauty in wood products This disease happens and develops within the walnut twig. The twig beetle is yellow/ brown and is three times long as is wide. it is native to Southwestern U.S. and likes to tunnel and breed in branches greater than 2 cm in diameter. Branch cankers are visible until outer bark is shaved off to expose tunnels that the beetles create. Often the tree will die after two to three years after foliar symptoms are observed.
To not spread the disease it is important to not transport diseased wood to other areas. The fact that the beetle is so small it still can live in chopped wood. Right now there is no insecticides or methods to stop the spread of Thousand canker disease once it establishes itself in a community. I want to know is if butternut trees will be affected by this do to the fact that they are closely related? I want to know if the western U.S. is enforcing rules like here in Wisconsin. As in establishing quarantine areas that have this disease and firewood regulations or slogans that get the general public aware of this issue. The public are the biggest concern they need the most information. I had no idea that black walnut had a disease until this article came out and I'd hate to see such a prized wood go extinct. I hope this information has enlighten everyone to realize what's happening out west and to keep watch for further information on this current issue.
01/ 17/2011
Thousand Canker Disease A recently Recognized Threat to
North America Black Walnut
By Whitney Cranshaw and Ned Tisserat
This article is from the ISA (International Society of Arboriculture) newsletter under arborist news. I recently subscribed to in November. In the article they talk about a new disease that is affecting Black Walnut (Juglans Nigra) trees in the Western U.S. By a Fungus called, Geosmithia and the beetle that carries the fungus called Pityopthovous juglandis.
First off I want to give everyone a description of Black walnut for those that don't know what the tree looks like. It's a tall tree height of 70 to 150 feet. the bark is grey to black and deeply furrowed. Black walnut can be found in well drained bottoms and likes to grow in the open sun. Leaves are alternate with 15-23 leaflets. The fruit is round and brownish/ green which falls in October. The twig pith is black with small air pockets. The bundle scar right below the bud looks like a heart shaped monkey. With that, do you have a black walnut tree close to your home or in your backyard?
The disorder is called Thousand Canker Disease. It gets its name from the numerous cankers that form on the branches and trunk. It currently is so far east as southeastern Colorado. Increasing temperatures are a factor to eastern spread. It is important to be aware of this disease because the fact that Wisconsin has many black walnut trees and I'd hate to see them disappear like: American chestnut tree, American Elm, and Ash trees here due to the unawareness of the spread of disease. Black walnut is very prized for its beauty in wood products This disease happens and develops within the walnut twig. The twig beetle is yellow/ brown and is three times long as is wide. it is native to Southwestern U.S. and likes to tunnel and breed in branches greater than 2 cm in diameter. Branch cankers are visible until outer bark is shaved off to expose tunnels that the beetles create. Often the tree will die after two to three years after foliar symptoms are observed.
To not spread the disease it is important to not transport diseased wood to other areas. The fact that the beetle is so small it still can live in chopped wood. Right now there is no insecticides or methods to stop the spread of Thousand canker disease once it establishes itself in a community. I want to know is if butternut trees will be affected by this do to the fact that they are closely related? I want to know if the western U.S. is enforcing rules like here in Wisconsin. As in establishing quarantine areas that have this disease and firewood regulations or slogans that get the general public aware of this issue. The public are the biggest concern they need the most information. I had no idea that black walnut had a disease until this article came out and I'd hate to see such a prized wood go extinct. I hope this information has enlighten everyone to realize what's happening out west and to keep watch for further information on this current issue.
Choosing Trees to Cut
Adam Ulman
1/17/2011
How Do I Choose Which Trees to Cut?
Summer 2009 Issue of Northern Woodlands Magazine
This article, published in the Northern Woodlands Magazine in May 2009 discussed ways to choose which trees should be used for firewood. It explains why firewood should be selected and why other trees should be left for the fact of timber value that could be produced from certain trees.
Growing up in northern Wisconsin means cold winters and gathering firewood. I have never really taken the time to think about the legitimate reasons of why certain trees were selected to be firewood. I don’t think many people actually do think about it besides for the fact that it will burn good in the fireplace or the outdoor wood burner. However now that my major is Urban Forestry I am always thinking about why things are done or how something could be improved with the use of trees or forests. This article has also expanded my thoughts on something as simple as selecting trees that would make good firewood. Do other people have specific reasoning’s behind their choice of firewood trees?
This article explains how firewood should be selected while leaving other trees that will be a valuable timber product for the future. Someone that is going to cut firewood already knows that any hardwood trees will be a good source of firewood, however you can only make profitable saw timber from the best form of hardwoods. To start the process of cutting firewood the first step should be to identify the trees that will have the greatest timber value. This will be the trees with perfectly straight sound stems and free of defects. Once these high-valued trees have been identified then remove the nearby trees that are going to steal growth resources from them use those for firewood. This will allow the valued trees to thrive for future production of timber value and also create firewood from the competitors. Now selecting trees for firewood will be much easier to find and remove by looking for trees that have defects such as multi-stemmed trunks, gnarled trunks, poor shape, and diseased or dying trees. Another aspect to look at is whether the tree will be a future high-value tree and if not than it can be used as firewood. Finding trees that have a disease or defect may sometimes be hard to see visually. However a good way to notice them is if they have anything growing on the trunks such as mushrooms, fungus, and white or yellow blobs which will mean there is some part of the tree that is dead or rotten. The focus should not just be on the dying trees if there are some trees that have a serious defect they should be left in the woods, they will most likely be too rotten to make good firewood and will also create a good habitat for wildlife.
I can honestly say I never used all of these aspects into selecting firewood and don’t think that everyone out there cutting firewood from their own land use these steps. For those of you that have cut firewood before or still do, have you made your selections by these steps or similar to these ways? From my experience cutting firewood for my house or with friends we usually go out with the idea of getting the job done as fast as we can. However I will now take the time to select the best firewood with respect to the greatest growth for future trees in the woods.
1/17/2011
How Do I Choose Which Trees to Cut?
Summer 2009 Issue of Northern Woodlands Magazine
This article, published in the Northern Woodlands Magazine in May 2009 discussed ways to choose which trees should be used for firewood. It explains why firewood should be selected and why other trees should be left for the fact of timber value that could be produced from certain trees.
Growing up in northern Wisconsin means cold winters and gathering firewood. I have never really taken the time to think about the legitimate reasons of why certain trees were selected to be firewood. I don’t think many people actually do think about it besides for the fact that it will burn good in the fireplace or the outdoor wood burner. However now that my major is Urban Forestry I am always thinking about why things are done or how something could be improved with the use of trees or forests. This article has also expanded my thoughts on something as simple as selecting trees that would make good firewood. Do other people have specific reasoning’s behind their choice of firewood trees?
This article explains how firewood should be selected while leaving other trees that will be a valuable timber product for the future. Someone that is going to cut firewood already knows that any hardwood trees will be a good source of firewood, however you can only make profitable saw timber from the best form of hardwoods. To start the process of cutting firewood the first step should be to identify the trees that will have the greatest timber value. This will be the trees with perfectly straight sound stems and free of defects. Once these high-valued trees have been identified then remove the nearby trees that are going to steal growth resources from them use those for firewood. This will allow the valued trees to thrive for future production of timber value and also create firewood from the competitors. Now selecting trees for firewood will be much easier to find and remove by looking for trees that have defects such as multi-stemmed trunks, gnarled trunks, poor shape, and diseased or dying trees. Another aspect to look at is whether the tree will be a future high-value tree and if not than it can be used as firewood. Finding trees that have a disease or defect may sometimes be hard to see visually. However a good way to notice them is if they have anything growing on the trunks such as mushrooms, fungus, and white or yellow blobs which will mean there is some part of the tree that is dead or rotten. The focus should not just be on the dying trees if there are some trees that have a serious defect they should be left in the woods, they will most likely be too rotten to make good firewood and will also create a good habitat for wildlife.
I can honestly say I never used all of these aspects into selecting firewood and don’t think that everyone out there cutting firewood from their own land use these steps. For those of you that have cut firewood before or still do, have you made your selections by these steps or similar to these ways? From my experience cutting firewood for my house or with friends we usually go out with the idea of getting the job done as fast as we can. However I will now take the time to select the best firewood with respect to the greatest growth for future trees in the woods.
Surplus Animals
Surplus Animals in Captive Facilities
“Surplus Animals: Stewardship on the Ark”- A. Lewandowski
Liz O’Brien
I had never given much thought to the idea of surplus animals, and let’s face it, most people wouldn’t. They aren’t the animals you normally see “on display” in a zoo or in other captive facilities. They are the understudies. This idea came to me from a previous class I had taken, where the issue was brought up for a single lecture and never mentioned again. I began thinking that surplus animals are a class of animals grossly underappreciated, not given much time for thought, just as they had been in my class. While it may not seem to be a huge issue in the overall picture of natural resources, I believe that it does require much deserved attention.
Since zoos have shifted their focus as sources of entertainment to centers endeavoring to foster conservation awareness, surplus animals have resulted from this paradigm shift. Unfortunately, the amount of literature available on surplus animals is dismal, and that’s putting it lightly. I find this to be quite sad, actually. Most topics discuss what defines a surplus animal (those that are no longer reproductively viable, sick or injured animals), prevention methodologies (contraception, separation of the sexes) as well as decreasing surplus (zoo transfers, releasing back into the wild). Ethics and the welfare of surplus animals were also mentioned. I believe this emphasizes the need to acknowledge the issue of captive surplus animals.
Probably the most controversial and delicate strategy to employ when trying to decrease surplus animals is the idea of euthanasia or culling of animals. There are arguments both for and against it. It can be an enticing option when transfers between zoos are not possible due to spatial limitations or there are no available habitats in which to release an animal. It can become even more of a controversial problem when a zoo is attempting to help a severely endangered species recover to a stable population or when there is public opposition to the killing of healthy and fit animals.
However effective and necessary euthanasia may be when it’s needed, it’s usually avoided mainly because of the negative connotations and anthropocentric view the public associates with it. In this way, zoos are providing a disservice to patrons of their facilities. Part of the role of a zoo as a steward of conservation is also to educate. And part of that education should make clear that life and death occur in a cyclic pattern; that one cannot occur without the other.
“Surplus Animals: Stewardship on the Ark”- A. Lewandowski
Liz O’Brien
I had never given much thought to the idea of surplus animals, and let’s face it, most people wouldn’t. They aren’t the animals you normally see “on display” in a zoo or in other captive facilities. They are the understudies. This idea came to me from a previous class I had taken, where the issue was brought up for a single lecture and never mentioned again. I began thinking that surplus animals are a class of animals grossly underappreciated, not given much time for thought, just as they had been in my class. While it may not seem to be a huge issue in the overall picture of natural resources, I believe that it does require much deserved attention.
Since zoos have shifted their focus as sources of entertainment to centers endeavoring to foster conservation awareness, surplus animals have resulted from this paradigm shift. Unfortunately, the amount of literature available on surplus animals is dismal, and that’s putting it lightly. I find this to be quite sad, actually. Most topics discuss what defines a surplus animal (those that are no longer reproductively viable, sick or injured animals), prevention methodologies (contraception, separation of the sexes) as well as decreasing surplus (zoo transfers, releasing back into the wild). Ethics and the welfare of surplus animals were also mentioned. I believe this emphasizes the need to acknowledge the issue of captive surplus animals.
Probably the most controversial and delicate strategy to employ when trying to decrease surplus animals is the idea of euthanasia or culling of animals. There are arguments both for and against it. It can be an enticing option when transfers between zoos are not possible due to spatial limitations or there are no available habitats in which to release an animal. It can become even more of a controversial problem when a zoo is attempting to help a severely endangered species recover to a stable population or when there is public opposition to the killing of healthy and fit animals.
However effective and necessary euthanasia may be when it’s needed, it’s usually avoided mainly because of the negative connotations and anthropocentric view the public associates with it. In this way, zoos are providing a disservice to patrons of their facilities. Part of the role of a zoo as a steward of conservation is also to educate. And part of that education should make clear that life and death occur in a cyclic pattern; that one cannot occur without the other.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Wis River Walleyes
Wisconsin River Walleye Regulations
Gavin Hutchinson
I have been fishing the Wisconsin River’s Walleyes for many seasons. In recent years the regulations on the legal length for walleyes on the river has changed. Until this change occurred the legal length on walleye has been fifteen inches with a limit of five walleyes per day. Under the new regulations the legal limit is five walleyes between fifteen and twenty inches, none between twenty and twenty five, and only one over twenty eight not to exceed five total walleyes per day.
The purpose of the regulation is to protect the large breeding age fish in the river. Over the years I believe the regulation has definitely had an impact on the quality of the walleyes on the river. Before the regulation was put into place catching a walleye that was bigger than 14 7/8”inches was a miracle. Now it is not uncommon to catch a few legal walleyes every time you fish the river. I also have caught many more walleyes that are in the upper twenty inch range since the new regulation has been put in place. Has anyone else noticed this change while fishing on the river? I know not everyone agrees with the new law but I think it is a great thing. I understand that most people like to take home a dinner of fresh fish at the end of the day so throwing that twenty five inch walleye back into the river is sometimes hard. I would have to argue that a smaller walleye tastes better than a big one, and that without those bigger breeding age fish there would be less opportunity to catch walleye altogether. The river has plenty of pan fish if dinner is what you are looking for, but the Wisconsin River has great potential to grow trophy walleye so I think the sacrifice is totally worth throwing back a few fish. I just hope everyone shares these same values about growing walleyes as I do.
I know in other parts of the state there are regulations on some lakes so that you can only keep one walleye over and one under fourteen inches. This regulation might work well too by removing some smaller fish to reduce competition for food and yet not taking too many big walleyes to effect the population of breeding age fish. Reducing the total number of fish that can be taken home can be a great way of maintaining a healthy population of fish in a water body. What do you think about this regulation on the river? Do you think it would be better than the current law? Possibly there is a regulation that would be even better that both of these. If you have any Ideas I would love to hear them. Walleye fishing is one of the best hobbies in the world if you would ask me. It will take everyone who participates in this great sport to ensure its healthy fish populations continue. So next time you have to throw that big walleye back just remember, you just helped to grow a trophy for the future!
Gavin Hutchinson
I have been fishing the Wisconsin River’s Walleyes for many seasons. In recent years the regulations on the legal length for walleyes on the river has changed. Until this change occurred the legal length on walleye has been fifteen inches with a limit of five walleyes per day. Under the new regulations the legal limit is five walleyes between fifteen and twenty inches, none between twenty and twenty five, and only one over twenty eight not to exceed five total walleyes per day.
The purpose of the regulation is to protect the large breeding age fish in the river. Over the years I believe the regulation has definitely had an impact on the quality of the walleyes on the river. Before the regulation was put into place catching a walleye that was bigger than 14 7/8”inches was a miracle. Now it is not uncommon to catch a few legal walleyes every time you fish the river. I also have caught many more walleyes that are in the upper twenty inch range since the new regulation has been put in place. Has anyone else noticed this change while fishing on the river? I know not everyone agrees with the new law but I think it is a great thing. I understand that most people like to take home a dinner of fresh fish at the end of the day so throwing that twenty five inch walleye back into the river is sometimes hard. I would have to argue that a smaller walleye tastes better than a big one, and that without those bigger breeding age fish there would be less opportunity to catch walleye altogether. The river has plenty of pan fish if dinner is what you are looking for, but the Wisconsin River has great potential to grow trophy walleye so I think the sacrifice is totally worth throwing back a few fish. I just hope everyone shares these same values about growing walleyes as I do.
I know in other parts of the state there are regulations on some lakes so that you can only keep one walleye over and one under fourteen inches. This regulation might work well too by removing some smaller fish to reduce competition for food and yet not taking too many big walleyes to effect the population of breeding age fish. Reducing the total number of fish that can be taken home can be a great way of maintaining a healthy population of fish in a water body. What do you think about this regulation on the river? Do you think it would be better than the current law? Possibly there is a regulation that would be even better that both of these. If you have any Ideas I would love to hear them. Walleye fishing is one of the best hobbies in the world if you would ask me. It will take everyone who participates in this great sport to ensure its healthy fish populations continue. So next time you have to throw that big walleye back just remember, you just helped to grow a trophy for the future!
Sustainability: A full box of marbles
A Full Box of Marbles
By Cindi Breschak
What does sustainability mean to you? According to my dictionary “to sustain” means to hold up, and nourish or supply with sustenance. As a UWSP Natural Resource student I have learned concepts of sustainability as they apply in different contexts. From forestry and soils to wildlife ecology and monetary economics, an important component in sustainability is recognition of the carrying capacity threshold. I liken this abstract but measurable point to a box of marbles. The box has a finite size. Only so many marbles will fit. While it is possible to re-arrange the marbles to hold a maximum number, the amount is still limited.
Is Natural Resource sustainability possible in our global circumstances? In a recent blog by Aaron Reynolds, Wisconsin’s Dry River he mentions “the mindset of growth” in reference to what appears to me to be a situation of Garret Hardin’s classic Tragedy of the Commons dilemma. The frequency of this conundrum is becoming more and more disturbing in our un-sustainable culture of free capitalism. It is a perpetual mindset of growth, dependent on private property ownership where individuals and companies compete for their own economic gain. While our current system is based on the separation of state and business activities we hypocritically assume and depend on governmental agencies to regulate allocation of our shared finite resources of land, water and air. This is illustrated from another aspect in a blog by Ross Dudzik transfer-of-development-rights-programl where Ross points out that we assume the right to use our property according to our own wishes and plans.
In "Common Sense," Thomas Paine wrote, "A long habit of not thinking a thing is wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right." This is certainly true for compensation strategies in business, finance and resource management as well. I think we have all had recent adjustments to consider in relation to the recent economic recession. Current political efforts are concentrating on economic growth through monetary re-arrangement and job creation, but can you think of one single thing can grow indefinitely in a finite world? I cannot. It is a reasonable assumption that growth in one area will come at a cost to another, and that this growth will reach a threshold of capacity and either sustain or die.
I do not have a pessimistic nature, and I do not advocate opinions of inevitable doom but as my resource textbooks estimate our planets human capacity to be around 6 billion, a Google search shows our current population will reach 7 billion in 418 days and that we are growing at the rate of 2.43 people per second. I am no more comfortable considering these issues than most. Some days I can push it into the darkest corner of my consciousness. It can be easy hide and ignore these pressing issues beneath the frantic momentum of everyday activities and accept a compliant paradigm. To me however, the worst fate I can think of for myself is to suddenly be 90 years old and think “damn, I wish I would have…” This thought inspires me to incite a revolution to on behalf of our planet. In the logic of moderation though, I will simply implore you to dare to use your education for the non-conformity required to attain true sustainability because if not you, then who?
By Cindi Breschak
What does sustainability mean to you? According to my dictionary “to sustain” means to hold up, and nourish or supply with sustenance. As a UWSP Natural Resource student I have learned concepts of sustainability as they apply in different contexts. From forestry and soils to wildlife ecology and monetary economics, an important component in sustainability is recognition of the carrying capacity threshold. I liken this abstract but measurable point to a box of marbles. The box has a finite size. Only so many marbles will fit. While it is possible to re-arrange the marbles to hold a maximum number, the amount is still limited.
Is Natural Resource sustainability possible in our global circumstances? In a recent blog by Aaron Reynolds, Wisconsin’s Dry River he mentions “the mindset of growth” in reference to what appears to me to be a situation of Garret Hardin’s classic Tragedy of the Commons dilemma. The frequency of this conundrum is becoming more and more disturbing in our un-sustainable culture of free capitalism. It is a perpetual mindset of growth, dependent on private property ownership where individuals and companies compete for their own economic gain. While our current system is based on the separation of state and business activities we hypocritically assume and depend on governmental agencies to regulate allocation of our shared finite resources of land, water and air. This is illustrated from another aspect in a blog by Ross Dudzik transfer-of-development-rights-programl where Ross points out that we assume the right to use our property according to our own wishes and plans.
In "Common Sense," Thomas Paine wrote, "A long habit of not thinking a thing is wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right." This is certainly true for compensation strategies in business, finance and resource management as well. I think we have all had recent adjustments to consider in relation to the recent economic recession. Current political efforts are concentrating on economic growth through monetary re-arrangement and job creation, but can you think of one single thing can grow indefinitely in a finite world? I cannot. It is a reasonable assumption that growth in one area will come at a cost to another, and that this growth will reach a threshold of capacity and either sustain or die.
I do not have a pessimistic nature, and I do not advocate opinions of inevitable doom but as my resource textbooks estimate our planets human capacity to be around 6 billion, a Google search shows our current population will reach 7 billion in 418 days and that we are growing at the rate of 2.43 people per second. I am no more comfortable considering these issues than most. Some days I can push it into the darkest corner of my consciousness. It can be easy hide and ignore these pressing issues beneath the frantic momentum of everyday activities and accept a compliant paradigm. To me however, the worst fate I can think of for myself is to suddenly be 90 years old and think “damn, I wish I would have…” This thought inspires me to incite a revolution to on behalf of our planet. In the logic of moderation though, I will simply implore you to dare to use your education for the non-conformity required to attain true sustainability because if not you, then who?
Rodent Poison and Wildlife
Discussion of: Rat poison and the threat to Wildlife
By The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB).
England and Wales no. 207076, Scotland no. SC037654.
Written by Lisa McCabe
As a child I remember discovering my first mouse, and it was dying of rat poison; I heard him crying on the lawn. It soon became apparent to me that my dad was baiting the garage. Rodent problems are apparent in a lot of different situations, rural and urban settings are targets for the populations. One thing that people often forget to consider is that rodents are a large part of our ecosystem, and adding poisons to that lower level of the food chain upsets the entire circle.
This past summer I spent my time doing an internship with the Wildlife in Need Center of Wisconsin; where I had brought lots of wildlife as a child, including the mouse I found on the lawn. Sometime in late July a young turkey vulture was brought in for rehabilitation that was found sick on the side of the road. There were no apparent parasites, wounds, or obvious symptoms that led to anything in particular. Blood tests were run, and before the results were back the vulture had died. We later came to the conclusion that he had eaten a rodent that had eaten poison.
The problem arises when we see wildlife, domestic livestock, and pets dying from the toxic nature of these products. Scavenging birds are particularly at risk like the red kike, as they receive secondary poisoning from the rodents. Other birds of prey also consume the rodents like barn owls, buzzards, and kestrels; predatory mammals are seeing this same risk.
Rodents become resistant overtime to the toxins and are surviving and reproducing, leading to use of the second generation rodenticides which are even more lethal to wildlife. Trapping is still the best way to handle a small population of rodents, and it eliminates the possibility of secondary poisoning with wildlife.
The report gives many different methods of prevention of rodent problems, since once a rodent infestation occurs it will be much more difficult to control. One simple way of preventing this is to clean up food, spills, and debris that are close to buildings so the rodents won’t have an available food source directly next to shelter. Keeping food in rodent proof containers also helps, along with eliminating possible entrance ways. Any openings in the building should be covered with 6mm wire mesh to prevent young mice from entering. The dairy farm I work at uses barn cats and trapping as means of rodent control.
There are many other methods discussed such as attracting predators to control the populations. Online I’ve found multiple different products that use a natural repellant, and have found great results. One site recommended using peppermint oil and soak rags or cotton balls in it, and leaving them in areas where rodents are frequently active. Other methods include sprinkling pepper, cinnamon, and cayenne in those areas, as well as use of the many herbs that deter rodents. If you do plan to go ahead and use rodenticides for large infestations follow the instructions carefully, and use this report (listed at the link below) as a guide to preventing wildlife exposure.
Wildlife plays an important role in the ecosystem, as well as maintaining our own existence. Although one may see the impact as small, a domino effect is a preventable inevitability when using poisons. Please consider the alternative methods available if possible when considering rodent control.
http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/ratpoison_tcm6-16130.pdf
By The Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB).
England and Wales no. 207076, Scotland no. SC037654.
Written by Lisa McCabe
As a child I remember discovering my first mouse, and it was dying of rat poison; I heard him crying on the lawn. It soon became apparent to me that my dad was baiting the garage. Rodent problems are apparent in a lot of different situations, rural and urban settings are targets for the populations. One thing that people often forget to consider is that rodents are a large part of our ecosystem, and adding poisons to that lower level of the food chain upsets the entire circle.
This past summer I spent my time doing an internship with the Wildlife in Need Center of Wisconsin; where I had brought lots of wildlife as a child, including the mouse I found on the lawn. Sometime in late July a young turkey vulture was brought in for rehabilitation that was found sick on the side of the road. There were no apparent parasites, wounds, or obvious symptoms that led to anything in particular. Blood tests were run, and before the results were back the vulture had died. We later came to the conclusion that he had eaten a rodent that had eaten poison.
The problem arises when we see wildlife, domestic livestock, and pets dying from the toxic nature of these products. Scavenging birds are particularly at risk like the red kike, as they receive secondary poisoning from the rodents. Other birds of prey also consume the rodents like barn owls, buzzards, and kestrels; predatory mammals are seeing this same risk.
Rodents become resistant overtime to the toxins and are surviving and reproducing, leading to use of the second generation rodenticides which are even more lethal to wildlife. Trapping is still the best way to handle a small population of rodents, and it eliminates the possibility of secondary poisoning with wildlife.
The report gives many different methods of prevention of rodent problems, since once a rodent infestation occurs it will be much more difficult to control. One simple way of preventing this is to clean up food, spills, and debris that are close to buildings so the rodents won’t have an available food source directly next to shelter. Keeping food in rodent proof containers also helps, along with eliminating possible entrance ways. Any openings in the building should be covered with 6mm wire mesh to prevent young mice from entering. The dairy farm I work at uses barn cats and trapping as means of rodent control.
There are many other methods discussed such as attracting predators to control the populations. Online I’ve found multiple different products that use a natural repellant, and have found great results. One site recommended using peppermint oil and soak rags or cotton balls in it, and leaving them in areas where rodents are frequently active. Other methods include sprinkling pepper, cinnamon, and cayenne in those areas, as well as use of the many herbs that deter rodents. If you do plan to go ahead and use rodenticides for large infestations follow the instructions carefully, and use this report (listed at the link below) as a guide to preventing wildlife exposure.
Wildlife plays an important role in the ecosystem, as well as maintaining our own existence. Although one may see the impact as small, a domino effect is a preventable inevitability when using poisons. Please consider the alternative methods available if possible when considering rodent control.
http://www.naturalengland.org.uk/Images/ratpoison_tcm6-16130.pdf
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Protecting Prime Agricultural Land from
Written by: Luke Olson
As a study land use planner, I feel that prime farmland is being rapidly replaced as development pressures from surrounding communities and rural residential development for non-farm families proliferate into the countryside. Let me first take the time to discuss the definition of prime farmland. Areas classified as “prime” for agricultural production posses a combination of ideal soils, moisture regimes or levels for plant production, and also topographic features that allow for cultivation. An example parcel that could be delineated as prime farmland may have well-drained silty soils on slopes less than 2 degrees. County planning departments use zoning or the division of the landscape into different zones of best use, to distinguish prime farmlands.
A strong social norm that appeared with the advancement of the motor vehicle was to expand residential development into the countryside. There are several benefits for residents to flee to the countryside when they are considering potential development areas: cheaper land prices, free of problems that exist in cities (like crime and congestion), and less restrictions on structure placement. Many citizens saw the potential of moving outside of the city boundaries as an easy decision. Many rural developments sprang up before prime farmland was clearly established. This resulted in the fragmenting of large contiguous farmland as well as a permanently preventing effective farming on the site.
Several problems appear as more and more resident slide past the city limit line and into the countryside when building. For residents in farming district, problems include: constant manure smell, late noise of tractor operations, and roadway mess from spreading and cultivation. From the farmer’s stance, rural residents bring with them higher traffic volumes, on-lot septic systems, private wells, and conflicts between farmer and resident. Some locations are more susceptible development pressures. In many cases farmers, who are ultimately land rich, have the opportunity to negotiate some rather lucrative development deals if the location is desired by a firm. Luckily, there are several methods to actively protect farmland.
Methods of protecting prime agricultural land can be unique to a given area because of development pressure applied by a major metropolitan area. Another unique factor may reiterate the area’s strong agricultural sector and its attachment to land preservation for crop production. Each parcel of land comes with a number of development rights which can be purchased outright or transferred to direct development in a certain manner. Urban growth boundaries or the barriers that restrict development beyond the designated urban area as set by the municipality can also effectively protect valuable farmland.
I feel that more focus be put on the loss of prime farmland protection by municipal, county, and regional planning departments. There are further methods than the ones discussed that can be used as a multi-method approach to corralling residential development in rural areas. It should be more of a cooperative effort between natural resource management agencies, agricultural sector stakeholders, development firms, and planning departments to keep vital prime agricultural land connected and uninterrupted by rural residences. Neither side seems to benefit when they interact with one another, so there should be no valid reason that either side could make as to why this interaction should occur in the first place. Beyond environmentalism, the economics surrounding the loss of a valuable resource, prime farmland, should provide enough common sense in people’s minds to prevent rural residential development from continuing in these areas.
As a study land use planner, I feel that prime farmland is being rapidly replaced as development pressures from surrounding communities and rural residential development for non-farm families proliferate into the countryside. Let me first take the time to discuss the definition of prime farmland. Areas classified as “prime” for agricultural production posses a combination of ideal soils, moisture regimes or levels for plant production, and also topographic features that allow for cultivation. An example parcel that could be delineated as prime farmland may have well-drained silty soils on slopes less than 2 degrees. County planning departments use zoning or the division of the landscape into different zones of best use, to distinguish prime farmlands.
A strong social norm that appeared with the advancement of the motor vehicle was to expand residential development into the countryside. There are several benefits for residents to flee to the countryside when they are considering potential development areas: cheaper land prices, free of problems that exist in cities (like crime and congestion), and less restrictions on structure placement. Many citizens saw the potential of moving outside of the city boundaries as an easy decision. Many rural developments sprang up before prime farmland was clearly established. This resulted in the fragmenting of large contiguous farmland as well as a permanently preventing effective farming on the site.
Several problems appear as more and more resident slide past the city limit line and into the countryside when building. For residents in farming district, problems include: constant manure smell, late noise of tractor operations, and roadway mess from spreading and cultivation. From the farmer’s stance, rural residents bring with them higher traffic volumes, on-lot septic systems, private wells, and conflicts between farmer and resident. Some locations are more susceptible development pressures. In many cases farmers, who are ultimately land rich, have the opportunity to negotiate some rather lucrative development deals if the location is desired by a firm. Luckily, there are several methods to actively protect farmland.
Methods of protecting prime agricultural land can be unique to a given area because of development pressure applied by a major metropolitan area. Another unique factor may reiterate the area’s strong agricultural sector and its attachment to land preservation for crop production. Each parcel of land comes with a number of development rights which can be purchased outright or transferred to direct development in a certain manner. Urban growth boundaries or the barriers that restrict development beyond the designated urban area as set by the municipality can also effectively protect valuable farmland.
I feel that more focus be put on the loss of prime farmland protection by municipal, county, and regional planning departments. There are further methods than the ones discussed that can be used as a multi-method approach to corralling residential development in rural areas. It should be more of a cooperative effort between natural resource management agencies, agricultural sector stakeholders, development firms, and planning departments to keep vital prime agricultural land connected and uninterrupted by rural residences. Neither side seems to benefit when they interact with one another, so there should be no valid reason that either side could make as to why this interaction should occur in the first place. Beyond environmentalism, the economics surrounding the loss of a valuable resource, prime farmland, should provide enough common sense in people’s minds to prevent rural residential development from continuing in these areas.
Disappearing Birds
Disappearing birds of young forests
Steve Backs
January 11, 2011
By Chris Zupo
This article makes me think back to the time when life was simpler. Growing up on 864 acres of a Pennsylvania farm, with woods as far as, I can see. Of course, I was thirteen years old and would stay outside from sun up to sun down exploring everything in my path. My father sold timber from selected cuttings for extra income, which in turn made great habitat for my favorite quarry; the ruffed grouse. I’ve had a life long admiration for these birds and that is what got me started in pursuit of these wary adversaries through most eastern states, where I am originally from. Now I chase the birds through the Midwest states. However, this article focuses on the disappearance of these birds in young forests, largely due to the past use of pesticides (in particular DDT). It’s been noted that the ruffed grouse doesn’t stand-alone, the whip-poor-will and the American woodcock are two other birds sharing the same fate. It has been said these three birds are “coal mine canaries” and with their disappearance from young forest habitats is happening faster than we ever imagined. Anyone, who has ever heard the drum of the ruffed grouse or the “peent” of the woodcock, and the famous calling that gives the whip-poor-will its name are unforgettable. All three birds have vary distinct mating rituals, for example the Woodcock male at dusk in spring evenings; fly high into the sky, then tumbles downward toward the earth as if to crash land, all in hopes of finding a receptive female and nest.
Many other factors have brought the birds hardships. Deforestation started when timber in the 1930’s was in high demand to build homes for settlement, and its effects are still felt today. Do not forget about natural disasters like firestorms, floods, tornados, predators, long wet springs, which affect hatch and brooding and now we live in a world facing Global Warming. With these ever increasing signs I ask you; are we listening? How can we make a difference? As a society have we moved so far away from our moral obligations to care and foster the well being of management towards the shared environment? How can we convince others to see what we see? How do we change behaviors? These questions, I ask myself on a daily basis. Please share your thoughts.
Forests are resilient, and wildlife can usually find the habitat within them to suite their needs. However, man has created an “urban sprawl,” which has had such an environmental impact. Now in many places regeneration can no longer act under the natural forces. Today, organizations like The Ruffed Grouse Society, Pheasants Forever, and Quail Unlimited are helping to restore these areas back to what they once were. Many volunteers donate their time and dollars in hopes of bringing back the birds. Would you support an organization like RGS? Do you think they can make a difference? Non hunters and hunters alike we share common goals; be a good steward of the land and the waters, conserve today for tomorrow. What about the generations to come after we have left can we pass this these wild areas on to them?
For me the love of the hunt and admiration of such wonderful wild creatures and for those like me; who live for the fall colors, and cooling temperatures knowing it’s that time of year to pull out the gear and tune-up the dogs, even though my dogs stay in tune all year. Share your own experiences won’t you? Tell me, what is your take on habitat deprivation?
------
Chris Zupo a Natural Resource student of the University of Wisconsin Stevens Point. He was born in Western Pennsylvania, home of the Ruffed Grouse Society. Chris has been long into professional versatile dog training, helping kids get introduced to hunting through the learn to hunt youth programs. He has taken pleasures in volunteering time to many environmental issues and restoration an advocate to cause for both upland and wetland habitats.
Steve Backs
January 11, 2011
By Chris Zupo
This article makes me think back to the time when life was simpler. Growing up on 864 acres of a Pennsylvania farm, with woods as far as, I can see. Of course, I was thirteen years old and would stay outside from sun up to sun down exploring everything in my path. My father sold timber from selected cuttings for extra income, which in turn made great habitat for my favorite quarry; the ruffed grouse. I’ve had a life long admiration for these birds and that is what got me started in pursuit of these wary adversaries through most eastern states, where I am originally from. Now I chase the birds through the Midwest states. However, this article focuses on the disappearance of these birds in young forests, largely due to the past use of pesticides (in particular DDT). It’s been noted that the ruffed grouse doesn’t stand-alone, the whip-poor-will and the American woodcock are two other birds sharing the same fate. It has been said these three birds are “coal mine canaries” and with their disappearance from young forest habitats is happening faster than we ever imagined. Anyone, who has ever heard the drum of the ruffed grouse or the “peent” of the woodcock, and the famous calling that gives the whip-poor-will its name are unforgettable. All three birds have vary distinct mating rituals, for example the Woodcock male at dusk in spring evenings; fly high into the sky, then tumbles downward toward the earth as if to crash land, all in hopes of finding a receptive female and nest.
Many other factors have brought the birds hardships. Deforestation started when timber in the 1930’s was in high demand to build homes for settlement, and its effects are still felt today. Do not forget about natural disasters like firestorms, floods, tornados, predators, long wet springs, which affect hatch and brooding and now we live in a world facing Global Warming. With these ever increasing signs I ask you; are we listening? How can we make a difference? As a society have we moved so far away from our moral obligations to care and foster the well being of management towards the shared environment? How can we convince others to see what we see? How do we change behaviors? These questions, I ask myself on a daily basis. Please share your thoughts.
Forests are resilient, and wildlife can usually find the habitat within them to suite their needs. However, man has created an “urban sprawl,” which has had such an environmental impact. Now in many places regeneration can no longer act under the natural forces. Today, organizations like The Ruffed Grouse Society, Pheasants Forever, and Quail Unlimited are helping to restore these areas back to what they once were. Many volunteers donate their time and dollars in hopes of bringing back the birds. Would you support an organization like RGS? Do you think they can make a difference? Non hunters and hunters alike we share common goals; be a good steward of the land and the waters, conserve today for tomorrow. What about the generations to come after we have left can we pass this these wild areas on to them?
For me the love of the hunt and admiration of such wonderful wild creatures and for those like me; who live for the fall colors, and cooling temperatures knowing it’s that time of year to pull out the gear and tune-up the dogs, even though my dogs stay in tune all year. Share your own experiences won’t you? Tell me, what is your take on habitat deprivation?
------
Chris Zupo a Natural Resource student of the University of Wisconsin Stevens Point. He was born in Western Pennsylvania, home of the Ruffed Grouse Society. Chris has been long into professional versatile dog training, helping kids get introduced to hunting through the learn to hunt youth programs. He has taken pleasures in volunteering time to many environmental issues and restoration an advocate to cause for both upland and wetland habitats.
Marking Timber
Marking Timber, Summer 2008 Issue of Northern Woodlands Magazine
Written by Alex Danczyk
January 13th, 2011
A woodland hermit is what I may one day become. The woods are abundantly alive, even when you may not think so. The bitter cold winter days that are as calm as a sleeping baby have more life than you think. The trees may appear seemingly dead, but as a storm moves in and the trees sway back and forth creaking, it's as if they are speaking. There is so much going on that if you do so much as blink, you might miss something. Becoming deeply in touch with what nature has to offer never ceases to amaze me. A few weeks ago while ice fishing on a backwater slough of the Wisconsin River I encountered on the shoreline a shrew scurrying amongst the leaf litter left uncovered by the snow. I listened and then I watched as it was most likely searching for food. I watched the small gray rodent without any intentions of disturbing it's lifestyle and so it continued on living as if I was never there. During the time of the encounter, it was as if I could feel the flow of energy between us. A flow of energy that contains trust and respect.
This article happens to address a deep connection not with man and animals but with man and trees. It goes in depth into the life of a forester as he marks trees to be cut or not to be cut in a future timber harvest. Many foresters may just see their job as... well... just that, a job. Bob Perschel, the author, does not see it that way. He is not the typical forester. However, he does get his job done in an efficient manner with great quality, but in such a way that allows him to see the individuality in each tree. Every tree has an identity unique to all others. An identity that serves as the personality of the tree. Bob has the ability to pay great attention to this detail and respect each tree as equally as the other. He treats trees as if they're alive and have fully functional minds, but he also looks deeper into the situation. He looks into the future health of the forest to depict which trees to mark. After all, he does control the fate of the tree within his own hands. This relationship amongst man and tree is another example of a deep unified connection between the two. Unfortunately in this relationship the tree gets cut down, but an old tree dies and a young tree lives.
The next time you're in the woods, take time to really appreciate what is there. There is a lot of beauty provided by nature that is there to be shared by all inhabitants. We are fortunate to have such intricate and complex minds that allow us to connect to the natural world with such great emotion. Pay attention to all the little details out there or else you just might miss something spectacular.
Written by Alex Danczyk
January 13th, 2011
A woodland hermit is what I may one day become. The woods are abundantly alive, even when you may not think so. The bitter cold winter days that are as calm as a sleeping baby have more life than you think. The trees may appear seemingly dead, but as a storm moves in and the trees sway back and forth creaking, it's as if they are speaking. There is so much going on that if you do so much as blink, you might miss something. Becoming deeply in touch with what nature has to offer never ceases to amaze me. A few weeks ago while ice fishing on a backwater slough of the Wisconsin River I encountered on the shoreline a shrew scurrying amongst the leaf litter left uncovered by the snow. I listened and then I watched as it was most likely searching for food. I watched the small gray rodent without any intentions of disturbing it's lifestyle and so it continued on living as if I was never there. During the time of the encounter, it was as if I could feel the flow of energy between us. A flow of energy that contains trust and respect.
This article happens to address a deep connection not with man and animals but with man and trees. It goes in depth into the life of a forester as he marks trees to be cut or not to be cut in a future timber harvest. Many foresters may just see their job as... well... just that, a job. Bob Perschel, the author, does not see it that way. He is not the typical forester. However, he does get his job done in an efficient manner with great quality, but in such a way that allows him to see the individuality in each tree. Every tree has an identity unique to all others. An identity that serves as the personality of the tree. Bob has the ability to pay great attention to this detail and respect each tree as equally as the other. He treats trees as if they're alive and have fully functional minds, but he also looks deeper into the situation. He looks into the future health of the forest to depict which trees to mark. After all, he does control the fate of the tree within his own hands. This relationship amongst man and tree is another example of a deep unified connection between the two. Unfortunately in this relationship the tree gets cut down, but an old tree dies and a young tree lives.
The next time you're in the woods, take time to really appreciate what is there. There is a lot of beauty provided by nature that is there to be shared by all inhabitants. We are fortunate to have such intricate and complex minds that allow us to connect to the natural world with such great emotion. Pay attention to all the little details out there or else you just might miss something spectacular.
Wisconsin’s Dry River
Wisconsin’s Dry River
By Aaron Reynolds
Water is a resource that all humans need to survive. Many people consider water as something that is limitless. In the Central Sands of Wisconsin residents are learning water is not constant. In recent summers, the Little Plover River is running dry. The little Plover River is a popular class one trout fishing stream. Residents have said that they have seen hundreds of trout that died from the dried up stream. Some people may wonder how the Plover River can go dry. The answer is straight forward, improper management from a local municipality and local irrigators.
The first thing a person needs to know about the Central Sands region is that the soil is sandy. A characteristic of sandy soil is its lack of ability to hold water. Water flows directly through the soil and down into the ground water. With these characteristics, the water should be a precious resource to all the residents of central Wisconsin.
The main reason the Plover River has been drying up is from municipalities pumping water excessively. It is unfair that one community is excessively using a resource to the point of depletion. Water is a resource that everyone has the right to use. Due to the negligence of this Village, fishermen are no longer able to utilize the rivers resources. Why does this Village think it has more of a right to the water than other individuals?
The other guilty party is the local irrigators. When you drive down I-39 you see large irrigation systems pumping water on their potato fields. Farmers have been withdrawing excessive amount of water to achieve a higher yield of crops. The other issue is the crops they are growing demand an excessive amount of water. For those who do not know, the Central Sands region is the 3rd largest potato producer in the nation. The Potato is a plant that is best suited in well drained and slightly acidic soils. The drawback to growing potatoes is they require an excessive amount of water for growth, but not too much.
I believe the main problem with the Plover River area is the excessive amount of greed by the local residents. The Village of Plover has always had the mindset that they must grow as a community at all costs. With this mindset of growth, they have neglected proper management of their water bodies. The farmers have the same problem as the Village of Plover they think their needs of growing crops outweighs the needs of other residents. If this problem is going to be addressed the State government needs to step in and add more regulations of surface water levels.
Who do you think is causing the depletion of water in the Central Sands?
By Aaron Reynolds
Water is a resource that all humans need to survive. Many people consider water as something that is limitless. In the Central Sands of Wisconsin residents are learning water is not constant. In recent summers, the Little Plover River is running dry. The little Plover River is a popular class one trout fishing stream. Residents have said that they have seen hundreds of trout that died from the dried up stream. Some people may wonder how the Plover River can go dry. The answer is straight forward, improper management from a local municipality and local irrigators.
The first thing a person needs to know about the Central Sands region is that the soil is sandy. A characteristic of sandy soil is its lack of ability to hold water. Water flows directly through the soil and down into the ground water. With these characteristics, the water should be a precious resource to all the residents of central Wisconsin.
The main reason the Plover River has been drying up is from municipalities pumping water excessively. It is unfair that one community is excessively using a resource to the point of depletion. Water is a resource that everyone has the right to use. Due to the negligence of this Village, fishermen are no longer able to utilize the rivers resources. Why does this Village think it has more of a right to the water than other individuals?
The other guilty party is the local irrigators. When you drive down I-39 you see large irrigation systems pumping water on their potato fields. Farmers have been withdrawing excessive amount of water to achieve a higher yield of crops. The other issue is the crops they are growing demand an excessive amount of water. For those who do not know, the Central Sands region is the 3rd largest potato producer in the nation. The Potato is a plant that is best suited in well drained and slightly acidic soils. The drawback to growing potatoes is they require an excessive amount of water for growth, but not too much.
I believe the main problem with the Plover River area is the excessive amount of greed by the local residents. The Village of Plover has always had the mindset that they must grow as a community at all costs. With this mindset of growth, they have neglected proper management of their water bodies. The farmers have the same problem as the Village of Plover they think their needs of growing crops outweighs the needs of other residents. If this problem is going to be addressed the State government needs to step in and add more regulations of surface water levels.
Who do you think is causing the depletion of water in the Central Sands?
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Pheasants Forever
Written by: Josh Johnson
The Pheasants Forever (PF) organization was established in 1982, and today it consists of 125,000 members. Pheasants Forever is dedicated to the conservation of pheasants, quail and other wildlife through habitat improvements, public awareness, education and land management policies and programs. Having over 600 different chapters allows this organization to reach out to the public in many different locations and backgrounds. My experiences with PF have broadened my horizons in many different ways.
Having a step-father, Jim, who is an avid outdoorsman, especially pheasant hunting, has allowed me to grow up already knowing about a lot of the issues today. One of those issues being the lack of young pheasant hunters today. A main cause of this is due to the regions where pheasants are inhabited, which is mostly in the northern states. People in the southern states don’t have nearly as much opportunity to fall in love with this sport without travelling. One positive to attracting young hunters is the annual PF Youth Day that the Wisconsin Coulee Region Chapter conducts every year. I participated in this event when I was a teenager and it opened my eyes even more to the excitement of hunting and being outdoors. We not only got to go out in the field and shoot pheasants over the dogs, but the PF members also set up a trap shooting range, dog training exhibit, and demonstrating correct bird cleaning techniques. Since then, my brothers and I have accompanied Jim and our two English Setters on several pheasant hunting trips to South Dakota. I would encourage each and every PF chapter to find time to incorporate a youth day into your schedules; it’s well worth it.
Pheasants Forever has also motivated Jim to become more involved with the outdoors. He has done a lot of research and attended many different dog training seminars which have allowed him to produce some very productive bird hunting dogs. In turn, this has gotten me more involved with hunting and helping with the dog training. Since our involvement with PF, we have replanted much of our lawn and additional acreage into native prairie, and have been enrolled in the CRP program.
This organization has done a lot to help the youth become more involved and educated, but there’s a lot more to PF. Another example is their focus on habitat maintenance and restoration. The Coulee Region Chapter has recently purchased a new seed drill to plant native grasses. This service is promoted to the public and members alike. They also focus a lot of their time in the spring to controlled burns. PF has a list of property owners who request or volunteer their land to be managed and burned. These properties on a rotation and burned every other spring. This is something that I have been very familiar with since I was a kid. Burning prairies is probably one of the things I look forward to most in the spring other than turkey hunting. Some people may think that the black ground after the fire is an ugly sight, but it’s one of the most beneficial things that can be done to native grasses. I would encourage anyone who has any questions about potential controlled burns on your property to contact your local PF chapter.
To conclude, Pheasants Forever is a organization based on education, habitat improvements, public awareness, and land management. I would encourage everyone who reads this to visit the PF website and attend an upcoming meeting or banquet. This organization has really been a big influence on myself as well as my family through the years, and I feel as though you could say the same thing if you become involved.
References:
Pheasants Forever: The Habitat Conservation Organization. Web. 12 Jan. 2011.
The Pheasants Forever (PF) organization was established in 1982, and today it consists of 125,000 members. Pheasants Forever is dedicated to the conservation of pheasants, quail and other wildlife through habitat improvements, public awareness, education and land management policies and programs. Having over 600 different chapters allows this organization to reach out to the public in many different locations and backgrounds. My experiences with PF have broadened my horizons in many different ways.
Having a step-father, Jim, who is an avid outdoorsman, especially pheasant hunting, has allowed me to grow up already knowing about a lot of the issues today. One of those issues being the lack of young pheasant hunters today. A main cause of this is due to the regions where pheasants are inhabited, which is mostly in the northern states. People in the southern states don’t have nearly as much opportunity to fall in love with this sport without travelling. One positive to attracting young hunters is the annual PF Youth Day that the Wisconsin Coulee Region Chapter conducts every year. I participated in this event when I was a teenager and it opened my eyes even more to the excitement of hunting and being outdoors. We not only got to go out in the field and shoot pheasants over the dogs, but the PF members also set up a trap shooting range, dog training exhibit, and demonstrating correct bird cleaning techniques. Since then, my brothers and I have accompanied Jim and our two English Setters on several pheasant hunting trips to South Dakota. I would encourage each and every PF chapter to find time to incorporate a youth day into your schedules; it’s well worth it.
Pheasants Forever has also motivated Jim to become more involved with the outdoors. He has done a lot of research and attended many different dog training seminars which have allowed him to produce some very productive bird hunting dogs. In turn, this has gotten me more involved with hunting and helping with the dog training. Since our involvement with PF, we have replanted much of our lawn and additional acreage into native prairie, and have been enrolled in the CRP program.
This organization has done a lot to help the youth become more involved and educated, but there’s a lot more to PF. Another example is their focus on habitat maintenance and restoration. The Coulee Region Chapter has recently purchased a new seed drill to plant native grasses. This service is promoted to the public and members alike. They also focus a lot of their time in the spring to controlled burns. PF has a list of property owners who request or volunteer their land to be managed and burned. These properties on a rotation and burned every other spring. This is something that I have been very familiar with since I was a kid. Burning prairies is probably one of the things I look forward to most in the spring other than turkey hunting. Some people may think that the black ground after the fire is an ugly sight, but it’s one of the most beneficial things that can be done to native grasses. I would encourage anyone who has any questions about potential controlled burns on your property to contact your local PF chapter.
To conclude, Pheasants Forever is a organization based on education, habitat improvements, public awareness, and land management. I would encourage everyone who reads this to visit the PF website and attend an upcoming meeting or banquet. This organization has really been a big influence on myself as well as my family through the years, and I feel as though you could say the same thing if you become involved.
References:
Pheasants Forever: The Habitat Conservation Organization. Web. 12 Jan. 2011.
Humans Will Thrive on it
Written by: Matthew Pagel
Global warming is defined as an increase in the earth’s temperature caused by human activities, such as burning coal, oil, and natural gas. The burning material releases carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The gases then trap the sun’s heat near the earth’s surface, thus increasing the planet’s average temperature. I have thought a long time about global warming. It is a topic I enjoy discussing with friends when we have the time. We all agree that global warming is a concept that is definitely happening. We also all agree that global warming is generally a bad thing. What if we are wrong? Maybe global warming could be a good thing for the human race. I have come up with four benefits to the human race from global warming. First, plants would grow faster. Next, global warming will save money. Next, we will have an increase in diversity on the planet. Finally, recreational opportunities will greatly increase.
Plants will grow better and faster. The increase of CO2 in the atmosphere will be a bounty of food for plants. Farmers will enjoy a longer growing seasons which will increase the output of food that they produce. Some areas that couldn’t grow certain crops, because the growing season was too short, will be able to grow new crops. Antarctica would melt and reveal a new land for settlement. The faster growing plants could be the answer to our dwindling rainforest problems. If plants are growing faster time will regenerate these forests.
Global warming will save both consumers and corporations money. The increase in food will draw prices down, and consumers will see this savings at the supermarket. The increased corn being produced will be used for fuel, thus bringing fuel prices down. The melting of the North Pole will make crossing the Atlantic Ocean a snap. The main savings to corporations will be from less fuel being consumed. Heating fuel will become cheaper because you won’t need to heat your house as much.
The diversity of the planet will not change much, and will probably even increase. A few species may die out, but these species will be replaced by species that can adapt to the changing climate. Most of these new species will be insects. The increase in insects will be a bounty to fish and song birds, which will thrive. Global warming will be pushing evolution. Evolution may be accelerated enough that we see changes in just a few thousand years instead of millions.
Recreational opportunities will vastly increase. Summer will not technically be any longer, but there will be additional warmer days. There will be more days to hike, more days to swim, and more days to bicycle in the sun. The new vacation destination might be the sunny beaches of Alaska.
These are the good qualities of global warming, but are they worth it? The plants will grow better, but with what water? Without water no amount of CO2 will make plants grow. Are the loss of the polar caps and the death of the polar bears worth saving a little money? The greatest diversity today is in the insect world. That diversity will increase at the expense of most other species. Lastly, summer days may be more plentiful, but who is going to recreate when they are getting burned by UV rays? Global warming is happening. Global warming isn’t all bad, when looking at it from a human point of view. When looking at it from the planets point of view, I don’t think it cares. I do, and it is worth saving.
Global warming is defined as an increase in the earth’s temperature caused by human activities, such as burning coal, oil, and natural gas. The burning material releases carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The gases then trap the sun’s heat near the earth’s surface, thus increasing the planet’s average temperature. I have thought a long time about global warming. It is a topic I enjoy discussing with friends when we have the time. We all agree that global warming is a concept that is definitely happening. We also all agree that global warming is generally a bad thing. What if we are wrong? Maybe global warming could be a good thing for the human race. I have come up with four benefits to the human race from global warming. First, plants would grow faster. Next, global warming will save money. Next, we will have an increase in diversity on the planet. Finally, recreational opportunities will greatly increase.
Plants will grow better and faster. The increase of CO2 in the atmosphere will be a bounty of food for plants. Farmers will enjoy a longer growing seasons which will increase the output of food that they produce. Some areas that couldn’t grow certain crops, because the growing season was too short, will be able to grow new crops. Antarctica would melt and reveal a new land for settlement. The faster growing plants could be the answer to our dwindling rainforest problems. If plants are growing faster time will regenerate these forests.
Global warming will save both consumers and corporations money. The increase in food will draw prices down, and consumers will see this savings at the supermarket. The increased corn being produced will be used for fuel, thus bringing fuel prices down. The melting of the North Pole will make crossing the Atlantic Ocean a snap. The main savings to corporations will be from less fuel being consumed. Heating fuel will become cheaper because you won’t need to heat your house as much.
The diversity of the planet will not change much, and will probably even increase. A few species may die out, but these species will be replaced by species that can adapt to the changing climate. Most of these new species will be insects. The increase in insects will be a bounty to fish and song birds, which will thrive. Global warming will be pushing evolution. Evolution may be accelerated enough that we see changes in just a few thousand years instead of millions.
Recreational opportunities will vastly increase. Summer will not technically be any longer, but there will be additional warmer days. There will be more days to hike, more days to swim, and more days to bicycle in the sun. The new vacation destination might be the sunny beaches of Alaska.
These are the good qualities of global warming, but are they worth it? The plants will grow better, but with what water? Without water no amount of CO2 will make plants grow. Are the loss of the polar caps and the death of the polar bears worth saving a little money? The greatest diversity today is in the insect world. That diversity will increase at the expense of most other species. Lastly, summer days may be more plentiful, but who is going to recreate when they are getting burned by UV rays? Global warming is happening. Global warming isn’t all bad, when looking at it from a human point of view. When looking at it from the planets point of view, I don’t think it cares. I do, and it is worth saving.
Transfer of Development Rights: A Program to Redirect Development
Review of: “Transfer of Development Rights Programs: Using the Market for Compensation and Preservation.”
By Jason Hanly-Forde, George Homsy, Katherine Liberknecht, and Remington Stone. Department of City and Regional Planning, Cornell Cooperative Extension, Cornell University. 28 January 2005.
Written by: Ross Dudzik
The idea of controlling how a person uses his/her land has historically been a touchy subject. Traditionally, governments have used zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, and other measures to control the development and use of private land. But the question always arises as to how much regulation is too much? I mean, how would you like it if you were not allowed to use your property as planned when you purchased it?
This article describes a technique local governments can use to control the development of private land. In some cases, local governments wish to restrict development in rural areas because of the land’s unique agricultural, historical, or natural resource value. How might a community go about achieving protection for this land without “taking” the owners rights to his land away from him? One potential answer is through establishing a Transfer of Developments Rights program (TDR).
TDR’s, as described by Hanly-Ford et. al, rests on the inherent “bundle of rights” that an individual receives when he/she purchases a parcel of land. Some of these rights include the ability of the owner to develop the land, restrict access to it, utilize its natural resources, or sell it outright. TDR’s allow an owner to separate the development rights from the rest of the rights, and sell just this “right to build” to a purchaser.
For example, lets say farmer Bob wants to make some money from his farm without selling any of his land. Bob could opt to sell the development rights of all or a portion of his property. He would still be allowed to farm and use his land as he is currently; the only stipulation is that farmer Bob cannot build any additional structures on his property. In addition, this protection from development is tied to the property indefinitely, even if it changes owners. In the end, Bob receives a substantial sum of money, keeps his land, and can continue to farm.
The purchaser, usually a land developer, benefits from the transaction as well. For example, if developer Jan buys 40 acres of development rights from farmer Bob, she will receive a set amount of “credits”. These credits can be “cashed-in” to allow her to build more houses in her upcoming development project than is allowed by zoning. Note that this development occurs in a designated region the municipality has selected as suitable for this increased density. Jan figures she can make more money selling these additional houses than she will spend on purchasing the development rights. In the long run, she is making more money.
As you can see, the benefit is two-fold. This transaction not only benefits both parties involved, it also can be used to protect valuable farmland or environmentally sensitive areas from future development. Additionally, a county or municipality can achieve this goal without spending virtually any public money. This is perhaps my favorite aspect of the TDR program- the fact that the public does not bear the burden of protecting these areas. This, however, has some drawbacks tied to it as well. Since the property does not come under public ownership, the protected lands may not be accessible to the general public.
If metropolitan areas in the U.S. continue with their destructive habits of suburban sprawl, we will eventually find ourselves with few quality land resources left. I hate to be a “doom and gloom” proponent, but the reality is that we are headed down an unsustainable path. Despite their low cost to the public, Hanly-Ford et. al describes that TDR’s are not that common in the U.S. I feel that through effective social marketing many communities could realize the benefits of TDR’s and act proactively about this growing problem.
By Jason Hanly-Forde, George Homsy, Katherine Liberknecht, and Remington Stone. Department of City and Regional Planning, Cornell Cooperative Extension, Cornell University. 28 January 2005.
Written by: Ross Dudzik
The idea of controlling how a person uses his/her land has historically been a touchy subject. Traditionally, governments have used zoning ordinances, subdivision regulations, and other measures to control the development and use of private land. But the question always arises as to how much regulation is too much? I mean, how would you like it if you were not allowed to use your property as planned when you purchased it?
This article describes a technique local governments can use to control the development of private land. In some cases, local governments wish to restrict development in rural areas because of the land’s unique agricultural, historical, or natural resource value. How might a community go about achieving protection for this land without “taking” the owners rights to his land away from him? One potential answer is through establishing a Transfer of Developments Rights program (TDR).
TDR’s, as described by Hanly-Ford et. al, rests on the inherent “bundle of rights” that an individual receives when he/she purchases a parcel of land. Some of these rights include the ability of the owner to develop the land, restrict access to it, utilize its natural resources, or sell it outright. TDR’s allow an owner to separate the development rights from the rest of the rights, and sell just this “right to build” to a purchaser.
For example, lets say farmer Bob wants to make some money from his farm without selling any of his land. Bob could opt to sell the development rights of all or a portion of his property. He would still be allowed to farm and use his land as he is currently; the only stipulation is that farmer Bob cannot build any additional structures on his property. In addition, this protection from development is tied to the property indefinitely, even if it changes owners. In the end, Bob receives a substantial sum of money, keeps his land, and can continue to farm.
The purchaser, usually a land developer, benefits from the transaction as well. For example, if developer Jan buys 40 acres of development rights from farmer Bob, she will receive a set amount of “credits”. These credits can be “cashed-in” to allow her to build more houses in her upcoming development project than is allowed by zoning. Note that this development occurs in a designated region the municipality has selected as suitable for this increased density. Jan figures she can make more money selling these additional houses than she will spend on purchasing the development rights. In the long run, she is making more money.
As you can see, the benefit is two-fold. This transaction not only benefits both parties involved, it also can be used to protect valuable farmland or environmentally sensitive areas from future development. Additionally, a county or municipality can achieve this goal without spending virtually any public money. This is perhaps my favorite aspect of the TDR program- the fact that the public does not bear the burden of protecting these areas. This, however, has some drawbacks tied to it as well. Since the property does not come under public ownership, the protected lands may not be accessible to the general public.
If metropolitan areas in the U.S. continue with their destructive habits of suburban sprawl, we will eventually find ourselves with few quality land resources left. I hate to be a “doom and gloom” proponent, but the reality is that we are headed down an unsustainable path. Despite their low cost to the public, Hanly-Ford et. al describes that TDR’s are not that common in the U.S. I feel that through effective social marketing many communities could realize the benefits of TDR’s and act proactively about this growing problem.
Snake Mortality vs. Golf Carts
Review of: DeGregorio, Brett A., Eric J. Nordberg, Jacob E. Hill, and Katherine E. Stepanoff. "Patterns of Snake Road Mortality on an Isolated Barrier Island." 09 Feb. 2010. Web. 01 Jan. 2011.
Written by: Nicole Rinehart
In this article, published by four college students, from different colleges that came together on Bald Head Island in North Carolina to conduct research. They were to research if vehicles can have an effect on wildlife. In this article, the researchers are taking a look at five different kinds of garter snakes (Coluber constrictor, Opheodrys aestivus, Pantherophis alleghaniensis, Cemophora coccinea, and Nerodia fasciata) and of them, which species gets run over more by, in this case, golf carts. The research is being done on Bald Head Island which is an isolated barrier island. On the island, the majority of the transportation is slow-moving electric golf carts.
Aside from the island, the article states that the United States contains more than 6.4 million kilometers of roadways with 84% of land being located within 1 kilometer of a road. On an annual basis, tens to hundreds of millions of snakes are killed by vehicles on the roads within the United States. Snakes may be more prone to being run of because of their camouflage with the road but also in my experiences many people don’t care for them and thus increasing the number of snakes killed on roads relative to other wildlife.
The site they are studying, Bald Head Island, is an 800 ha barrier island which is located in southeastern North Carolina. On the island, there are approximately 35 kilometer of paved roads. There are 1000 homes on the island, with less than 200 year round residents. The island has a town ordinance that requires the natural habitat around each home must not be cleared. The section surveyed was 4.59 kilometers of a main island road by a golf cart, and they collected all snakes, dead and alive. The time and location of the snake caught was documented and then brought the snake back to the lab for processing. Once in the lab, they took a look at what kind of snake they had, what the weight and measurement was, and also sexed the snakes. They concentrated their surveys on the main road because it traverses mature maritime forest. Besides the main road, whenever staff and vehicles were available, they would go on other roads and collect all the snakes they encountered. All of the living snakes that were caught were released within a 24 hour period from the time of capture back to where they were captured. They picked this location, because to their knowledge, there hasn’t been a study done like this on a barrier island.
In this study, they collected a total 186 dead snakes of the five species between April 25th and October 1st 2009. Along with the dead snakes, they captured and marked 50 snakes of the same five species that were alive on the road. They concluded that paved roads and vehicles clearly can have negative impacts upon snake communities on their populations. After their study was done, they found that the neonates of 3 out of the 5 snakes got run over more (C. constrictor, N. fasciata, and P. alleghaniensis). They think that the neonates may have been in large numbers due to the propensity of this life stage and for erratic dispersal movements. In conclusion, they didn’t think the vehicle traffic had as much of an impact on the snakes’ mortality; it was the way the snakes moved throughout the day that they thought contributed to more snake deaths. Either way, we just have to be more cautious of what is on our roads and try to avoid anything that comes on the roads. Snakes have an impact on the environment too, so keeping them around can be a good thing for the future.
Written by: Nicole Rinehart
In this article, published by four college students, from different colleges that came together on Bald Head Island in North Carolina to conduct research. They were to research if vehicles can have an effect on wildlife. In this article, the researchers are taking a look at five different kinds of garter snakes (Coluber constrictor, Opheodrys aestivus, Pantherophis alleghaniensis, Cemophora coccinea, and Nerodia fasciata) and of them, which species gets run over more by, in this case, golf carts. The research is being done on Bald Head Island which is an isolated barrier island. On the island, the majority of the transportation is slow-moving electric golf carts.
Aside from the island, the article states that the United States contains more than 6.4 million kilometers of roadways with 84% of land being located within 1 kilometer of a road. On an annual basis, tens to hundreds of millions of snakes are killed by vehicles on the roads within the United States. Snakes may be more prone to being run of because of their camouflage with the road but also in my experiences many people don’t care for them and thus increasing the number of snakes killed on roads relative to other wildlife.
The site they are studying, Bald Head Island, is an 800 ha barrier island which is located in southeastern North Carolina. On the island, there are approximately 35 kilometer of paved roads. There are 1000 homes on the island, with less than 200 year round residents. The island has a town ordinance that requires the natural habitat around each home must not be cleared. The section surveyed was 4.59 kilometers of a main island road by a golf cart, and they collected all snakes, dead and alive. The time and location of the snake caught was documented and then brought the snake back to the lab for processing. Once in the lab, they took a look at what kind of snake they had, what the weight and measurement was, and also sexed the snakes. They concentrated their surveys on the main road because it traverses mature maritime forest. Besides the main road, whenever staff and vehicles were available, they would go on other roads and collect all the snakes they encountered. All of the living snakes that were caught were released within a 24 hour period from the time of capture back to where they were captured. They picked this location, because to their knowledge, there hasn’t been a study done like this on a barrier island.
In this study, they collected a total 186 dead snakes of the five species between April 25th and October 1st 2009. Along with the dead snakes, they captured and marked 50 snakes of the same five species that were alive on the road. They concluded that paved roads and vehicles clearly can have negative impacts upon snake communities on their populations. After their study was done, they found that the neonates of 3 out of the 5 snakes got run over more (C. constrictor, N. fasciata, and P. alleghaniensis). They think that the neonates may have been in large numbers due to the propensity of this life stage and for erratic dispersal movements. In conclusion, they didn’t think the vehicle traffic had as much of an impact on the snakes’ mortality; it was the way the snakes moved throughout the day that they thought contributed to more snake deaths. Either way, we just have to be more cautious of what is on our roads and try to avoid anything that comes on the roads. Snakes have an impact on the environment too, so keeping them around can be a good thing for the future.
Eating For the Good of Our Environment
Discussion of: “Environmental Sustainability in Agriculture: Diet Matters”
Written by Angela McGauley-Jacobson
1/11/11
How many of you ask the question: “where did this come from?” before you take a bite out of your snake or meal? Perhaps some of you do? But how many ask the question how am I affecting the environment by eating this?
I decided to become a vegetarian about 5 years ago, not because I knew that meat production in the U.S. is harmful to the environment but simply because of my own preferences. I don’t like the taste of most meat and the idea of not knowing exactly where the meat I am eating is coming from simply grosses me out. I was anemic, which means being low on iron, so it was easier for me to cut out eating meat all together and in turn find other ways of getting the iron I needed such as taking supplements and making sure that I added plenty of foods high in iron into my diet that were not meat.
A while after I stopped eating meat I became rather interested in learning how food production in the U.S. is impacting our environment, specifically meat production. The daily decisions we make have a much bigger impact on the environment than we might realize. The food industry has a much greater effect on the environment than just the wrappers, cartons, cups, or the extra food that you throw away at the end of a meal, these are just the typical things were think of as “waste”. You also probably realize that if the food you are eating is not locally grown, it was shipped here one way or another in a vehicle that used fuel, but what about the resources that were used to actually make the food?
When meat is produced in mass amounts it takes a large toll on the environment and mass production of meat in on the rise due to the popularity of fast food restaurants. The animals that are raised for this meat are often the product of corporate factory farms. These concentrated animal feeding operations confine thousands of animals in one facility, and produce staggering amounts of animal waste in the process (500 million tons per year) (Sierra Club, 2008). Multiple problems can arise from these sorts of settings including contamination of water and soil.
Another factor to consider with mass meat production is that astounding amount of water that is required to produce livestock. According to the PETA website, nearly half of all the water used in the U.S. goes to raising animals for food. It takes 5,000 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of meat, while growing 1 pound of wheat only requires 25 gallons. A totally vegetarian diet requires only 300 gallons of water per day, while a meat-eating diet requires more than 4,000 gallons of water per day.
It was so interesting to me to research this topic because I had never even considered the difference eating meat and not eating meat could make on the environment. With this blog I am interested in finding out if other people feel the same way I did. Did you know about the impacts mass meat production made on the environment? And now knowing do you think it will cause you to think twice about eating meat? I don’t expect that anyone will consider turning vegetarian because of this information, I certainly wouldn’t if I was an avid meat-lover, but do you think you might take the opportunity to choose spaghetti with meat-less sauce over spaghetti with meat sauce the next time you are given the choice?
Written by Angela McGauley-Jacobson
1/11/11
How many of you ask the question: “where did this come from?” before you take a bite out of your snake or meal? Perhaps some of you do? But how many ask the question how am I affecting the environment by eating this?
I decided to become a vegetarian about 5 years ago, not because I knew that meat production in the U.S. is harmful to the environment but simply because of my own preferences. I don’t like the taste of most meat and the idea of not knowing exactly where the meat I am eating is coming from simply grosses me out. I was anemic, which means being low on iron, so it was easier for me to cut out eating meat all together and in turn find other ways of getting the iron I needed such as taking supplements and making sure that I added plenty of foods high in iron into my diet that were not meat.
A while after I stopped eating meat I became rather interested in learning how food production in the U.S. is impacting our environment, specifically meat production. The daily decisions we make have a much bigger impact on the environment than we might realize. The food industry has a much greater effect on the environment than just the wrappers, cartons, cups, or the extra food that you throw away at the end of a meal, these are just the typical things were think of as “waste”. You also probably realize that if the food you are eating is not locally grown, it was shipped here one way or another in a vehicle that used fuel, but what about the resources that were used to actually make the food?
When meat is produced in mass amounts it takes a large toll on the environment and mass production of meat in on the rise due to the popularity of fast food restaurants. The animals that are raised for this meat are often the product of corporate factory farms. These concentrated animal feeding operations confine thousands of animals in one facility, and produce staggering amounts of animal waste in the process (500 million tons per year) (Sierra Club, 2008). Multiple problems can arise from these sorts of settings including contamination of water and soil.
Another factor to consider with mass meat production is that astounding amount of water that is required to produce livestock. According to the PETA website, nearly half of all the water used in the U.S. goes to raising animals for food. It takes 5,000 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of meat, while growing 1 pound of wheat only requires 25 gallons. A totally vegetarian diet requires only 300 gallons of water per day, while a meat-eating diet requires more than 4,000 gallons of water per day.
It was so interesting to me to research this topic because I had never even considered the difference eating meat and not eating meat could make on the environment. With this blog I am interested in finding out if other people feel the same way I did. Did you know about the impacts mass meat production made on the environment? And now knowing do you think it will cause you to think twice about eating meat? I don’t expect that anyone will consider turning vegetarian because of this information, I certainly wouldn’t if I was an avid meat-lover, but do you think you might take the opportunity to choose spaghetti with meat-less sauce over spaghetti with meat sauce the next time you are given the choice?
Forests that Surround Us
The Forests that Surround Us
By: Sarah Fisher
1-12-11
Have you ever thought how such a small thing as a pine cone can turn into a giant tree? After taking a Dendrology class this question has been very intriguing to me. For me this idea is mind blowing especially when thinking about the giant redwoods. The cones of redwoods are typically half an inch to an inch long in length which eventually change into trees over 300 feet tall. Are there any types of trees or characteristics about them that are mind-blowing for you?
Since I’ve currently been pursuing my forestry major I have increased my love for trees and all that they provide. Don’t think of me as a hippy that will chain herself to a tree so you won’t cut them down, I’m not like that. I understand the importance of harvesting timber and agree with this type of action. I do however believe that we need to protect our trees/forests better. Trees offer so much for the inhabitants on earth like: providing shelter, food, resources, carbon sequestration, recreation, and so much more. For me the woods are a comforting and relaxing place to go. Being with nature and experiencing the wonders it has to show us is pure enjoyment. For other people the woods are a source of income and wellbeing while others see it as a place for recreation and adventure. What do the woods do for you?
With all the possibilities that are available with forests don’t you think they should be taken care of better? Our population is greatly increasing and with this comes expanding of cities into rural settings. Because of this expansion more trees need to be cut down to make room for residential living. Many things are lost when forests are cut down. Wildlife are forced to move out of the area which may result in them inhabiting urban areas. We also obviously lose trees that are essential in storing carbon dioxide. This storage is especially important with our current problem of global warming. If we want to ever decrease this problem we need to not cut down our forests.
Finding better ways to protect our forests and trees can be difficult. One possibility that I think will work would be to set aside more forest land into protected programs that don’t allow the land to be developed or clear cut. Programs of this type would leave more land forested that could still be managed for timber if needed, used for recreation, or left to naturally manage itself. Do you have any ideas on how our forests could be protected better?
By: Sarah Fisher
1-12-11
Have you ever thought how such a small thing as a pine cone can turn into a giant tree? After taking a Dendrology class this question has been very intriguing to me. For me this idea is mind blowing especially when thinking about the giant redwoods. The cones of redwoods are typically half an inch to an inch long in length which eventually change into trees over 300 feet tall. Are there any types of trees or characteristics about them that are mind-blowing for you?
Since I’ve currently been pursuing my forestry major I have increased my love for trees and all that they provide. Don’t think of me as a hippy that will chain herself to a tree so you won’t cut them down, I’m not like that. I understand the importance of harvesting timber and agree with this type of action. I do however believe that we need to protect our trees/forests better. Trees offer so much for the inhabitants on earth like: providing shelter, food, resources, carbon sequestration, recreation, and so much more. For me the woods are a comforting and relaxing place to go. Being with nature and experiencing the wonders it has to show us is pure enjoyment. For other people the woods are a source of income and wellbeing while others see it as a place for recreation and adventure. What do the woods do for you?
With all the possibilities that are available with forests don’t you think they should be taken care of better? Our population is greatly increasing and with this comes expanding of cities into rural settings. Because of this expansion more trees need to be cut down to make room for residential living. Many things are lost when forests are cut down. Wildlife are forced to move out of the area which may result in them inhabiting urban areas. We also obviously lose trees that are essential in storing carbon dioxide. This storage is especially important with our current problem of global warming. If we want to ever decrease this problem we need to not cut down our forests.
Finding better ways to protect our forests and trees can be difficult. One possibility that I think will work would be to set aside more forest land into protected programs that don’t allow the land to be developed or clear cut. Programs of this type would leave more land forested that could still be managed for timber if needed, used for recreation, or left to naturally manage itself. Do you have any ideas on how our forests could be protected better?
Getting Over Yuck: Water Recycling (re-post)
Getting over yuck: moving from psychological to cultural and sociotechnical analyses of responses to water recycling
Volume 11 Number 1: Official Journal of the World Water Council
S. Russell and C. Lux
Written by TJ Dahlke
This article addressed the history of the public’s disgust towards recycling water. It started by going through the history of the public disgust or, “yuck,” factor. This has been proven through research of the public view of water recycling. It has been opposed to not only because of what has happened to the water before treatment, but due to the human emotion of not wanting to feel like an animal and using other sources of water. Another thing that goes with using recycled water is the thought that there may be pathogens and other transmissible diseases in it that could have potential to enter a person’s system and affect them. These reasons are the main points laid out in the paper toward public discourse.
Recycled water is a reality in many parts of the world due to shortages of fresh water for drinking. This forces them to use other sources of water for purposes that don’t involve eating or drinking, such as showering, toilet water and spigot water. In the U.S. it seems that people can’t get over using treated water for these purposes because of our phobia towards water that may have had excrement in it previously. This should not concern us seeing as treated water is as clean as most of the cities’ tap water that so many people ingest on a daily basis. Water used for these other sources would then simply be re-circulated within this system and have the water used for drinking and food purposes introduced into it.
The only real setback that I feel people would really oppose is the introduction of more piping into their homes. This could come at a significant cost to the individual, whether through taxation with city implementation, or having to pay for the installation of the pipes into their own home. This initially would be a large undertaking by the city due to placing new piping throughout the municipality and would result in closed streets and angered citizens. However, it should decrease the costs of water to the citizens and have less of a taxing on the water table in the community.
Once the work is complete the community would have less of an impact on the water table, and be able to reuse water rather than dump treated water into a nearby surface water source.
Volume 11 Number 1: Official Journal of the World Water Council
S. Russell and C. Lux
Written by TJ Dahlke
This article addressed the history of the public’s disgust towards recycling water. It started by going through the history of the public disgust or, “yuck,” factor. This has been proven through research of the public view of water recycling. It has been opposed to not only because of what has happened to the water before treatment, but due to the human emotion of not wanting to feel like an animal and using other sources of water. Another thing that goes with using recycled water is the thought that there may be pathogens and other transmissible diseases in it that could have potential to enter a person’s system and affect them. These reasons are the main points laid out in the paper toward public discourse.
Recycled water is a reality in many parts of the world due to shortages of fresh water for drinking. This forces them to use other sources of water for purposes that don’t involve eating or drinking, such as showering, toilet water and spigot water. In the U.S. it seems that people can’t get over using treated water for these purposes because of our phobia towards water that may have had excrement in it previously. This should not concern us seeing as treated water is as clean as most of the cities’ tap water that so many people ingest on a daily basis. Water used for these other sources would then simply be re-circulated within this system and have the water used for drinking and food purposes introduced into it.
The only real setback that I feel people would really oppose is the introduction of more piping into their homes. This could come at a significant cost to the individual, whether through taxation with city implementation, or having to pay for the installation of the pipes into their own home. This initially would be a large undertaking by the city due to placing new piping throughout the municipality and would result in closed streets and angered citizens. However, it should decrease the costs of water to the citizens and have less of a taxing on the water table in the community.
Once the work is complete the community would have less of an impact on the water table, and be able to reuse water rather than dump treated water into a nearby surface water source.
Microalgae biodiesel (repost)
Microalgae for biodiesel production
and other applications: A review by Michael Petesch
AUTHORS:
Teresa M. Mata a,1,*, Anto ́ nio A. Martins a,2, Nidia. S. Caetano b,1
a Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto (FEUP), R. Dr. Roberto Frias S/N, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal b School of Engineering (ISEP), Polytechnic Institute of Porto (IPP), R. Dr. Anto ́nio Bernardino de Almeida, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal
Biodiesels, specifically produced from microalgae, present a viable solution to our currently looming energy predicament: a finite source of fossil fuel beneath our feet. This article outlined several barriers and benefits of utilizing microscopic one-cell organisms floating on lake and river surfaces to produce biodiesels as an alternative to gasoline and natural gas. The success of microalgae biodiesels is highly dependent on societal acceptance. In order for society to seamlessly accept and begin utilizing biodiesel, it must be produced in large quantities with the least amount of environmental impact yet still compete on both the same performance and economic level as current fuels.
Likely the most important aspect of microalgae production, outlined in this article, is that it marks the transition of biodiesels created from food crops such as corn and soybeans to biofuels not linked with human consumption. This transition is essential for receiving and maintaining social acceptance. However, promoting secondary uses of microalgae such as a concentrated source of protein, vitamins A and C, and antioxidants, is not a bad idea either. Other reasons for transitioning to microalgae biodiesel are: it has rapid growth rates, is more productive than most terrestrial plants, can easily adapt to different environments, and can be easily cultivated all while cheaply feeding off an abundant source of atmospheric carbon dioxide, water and sunshine. The result of all these traits squeezed into a microscopic organism is a production potential of 121,104 kg of biodiesel per hectare per year, compared to corns 152 kg of biodiesel per hectare per year.
Simply based on this potential productivity, do you believe our government should subsidize microalgae biodiesel research, and production the way they do corn ethanol production? I believe so. Something that can sustain that kind of productive potential while thriving on cheap and practically limitless sources of inputs (sun, water and CO2) is something worthy government dollars. However, great caution must be applied to any “too good to be true” situation. Microalgae cultivation, processing and storage should be piloted in small, isolated facilities before it is augmented to a commercial operation. If this does not happen, algal colonies may escape into the natural environment and likely result in water toxification and oxygen depletion leading to the death of fish and other aquatic organisms. If this were to happen, the publics’ stance on microalgae for biofuel may be soured, consequently stunting or shutting off income streams dooming any future studies or tests.
Personally, I equate microalgae to Robin Hood. Stealing is unpleasant; giving is respectable. In large blooms microalgae steals oxygen from both aquatic systems adversely affecting the health of the ecosystem including our ability to recreate. On the other hand microalgae is like a magical elixir. It can sequester carbon, excrete biofuels, accumulate heavy metals, help prevent cancer and cardio sickness, as well as produce the element we rely on most, oxygen.
I believe microalgae production can be used for good. It has the capability of infiltrating and appealing to a vast array of markets, in turn boosting economies worldwide. However, legislation stemming from common sense and influenced by an active civilian body must be implemented to prevent undesired algal breaches and contamination of global water sources by holding companies accountable for their actions.
and other applications: A review by Michael Petesch
AUTHORS:
Teresa M. Mata a,1,*, Anto ́ nio A. Martins a,2, Nidia. S. Caetano b,1
a Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto (FEUP), R. Dr. Roberto Frias S/N, 4200-465 Porto, Portugal b School of Engineering (ISEP), Polytechnic Institute of Porto (IPP), R. Dr. Anto ́nio Bernardino de Almeida, 4200-072 Porto, Portugal
Biodiesels, specifically produced from microalgae, present a viable solution to our currently looming energy predicament: a finite source of fossil fuel beneath our feet. This article outlined several barriers and benefits of utilizing microscopic one-cell organisms floating on lake and river surfaces to produce biodiesels as an alternative to gasoline and natural gas. The success of microalgae biodiesels is highly dependent on societal acceptance. In order for society to seamlessly accept and begin utilizing biodiesel, it must be produced in large quantities with the least amount of environmental impact yet still compete on both the same performance and economic level as current fuels.
Likely the most important aspect of microalgae production, outlined in this article, is that it marks the transition of biodiesels created from food crops such as corn and soybeans to biofuels not linked with human consumption. This transition is essential for receiving and maintaining social acceptance. However, promoting secondary uses of microalgae such as a concentrated source of protein, vitamins A and C, and antioxidants, is not a bad idea either. Other reasons for transitioning to microalgae biodiesel are: it has rapid growth rates, is more productive than most terrestrial plants, can easily adapt to different environments, and can be easily cultivated all while cheaply feeding off an abundant source of atmospheric carbon dioxide, water and sunshine. The result of all these traits squeezed into a microscopic organism is a production potential of 121,104 kg of biodiesel per hectare per year, compared to corns 152 kg of biodiesel per hectare per year.
Simply based on this potential productivity, do you believe our government should subsidize microalgae biodiesel research, and production the way they do corn ethanol production? I believe so. Something that can sustain that kind of productive potential while thriving on cheap and practically limitless sources of inputs (sun, water and CO2) is something worthy government dollars. However, great caution must be applied to any “too good to be true” situation. Microalgae cultivation, processing and storage should be piloted in small, isolated facilities before it is augmented to a commercial operation. If this does not happen, algal colonies may escape into the natural environment and likely result in water toxification and oxygen depletion leading to the death of fish and other aquatic organisms. If this were to happen, the publics’ stance on microalgae for biofuel may be soured, consequently stunting or shutting off income streams dooming any future studies or tests.
Personally, I equate microalgae to Robin Hood. Stealing is unpleasant; giving is respectable. In large blooms microalgae steals oxygen from both aquatic systems adversely affecting the health of the ecosystem including our ability to recreate. On the other hand microalgae is like a magical elixir. It can sequester carbon, excrete biofuels, accumulate heavy metals, help prevent cancer and cardio sickness, as well as produce the element we rely on most, oxygen.
I believe microalgae production can be used for good. It has the capability of infiltrating and appealing to a vast array of markets, in turn boosting economies worldwide. However, legislation stemming from common sense and influenced by an active civilian body must be implemented to prevent undesired algal breaches and contamination of global water sources by holding companies accountable for their actions.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
UWSP Food and Compost Waste
Brian Luedtke
January 11, 2011
Polylactic Acid Technology (2000)
Ray E. Drumright, Patrick R. Gruber, and David E. Henton
There have been many notable technological advances over the last two decades; from the internet, to 4G phones, to compostable plastics. The future is here ladies and gentlemen, and it’s waiting for you to reach out and embrace it. Polylactic Acid Technology has made compostable plastics a very real and bright addition to the reality that is the 21st century. Polylactic acid (PLA) is versatile, biodegradable, and constructed completely from renewable resources. PLA plastics have good crease retention and crimpling properties, excellent grease and oil resistance, as well as low temperature heat seal-ability and provides a great barrier to flavors and aromas. All of these properties are very desirable characteristics for just about any plastic product, including applications such as bags and packaging, coated paper, or food containers.
PLA compostable plastics are gaining attention in markets around the globe. However, these plastics are not receiving all this attention due to their biodegradable properties or the fact that they are created from renewable resources. It is the high quality, cost-effective properties that these plastics possess that are causing a global stir. These plastics are increasing the demand for crops like corn and sugar beets while decreasing our reliance on petroleum.
NatureWorks™ (Cargill Dow, LLC) is a company pioneering the PLA industry. They have such products as the compostable smoothy and coffee cup, as well as compostable dinnerware that is used right here at the University of Wisconsin – Stevens Point (UWSP) by the on campus dining services. This company is hard at work creating the renewable plastics of tomorrow; the question is, are they ahead of their time? Currently UWSP is paying premium prices for these NatureWorks dinnerware items and disposing of them with the traditional trash, paying the tipping fees and sticking the students with the bill.
The University of Wisconsin – Stevens Point is more than capable of setting up a compost program on campus to deal not only with the PLA dinnerware wastes, but with our food and paper wastes. The new waste building is a step in the right direction, but it is not a step in the proper on-site handling of our own compostable wastes. There are numerous esteemed professionals on campus that are more than capable of designing and implementing a composting program. Over the last year I have personally contacted several persons on campus in regards to a composting program and have received no dignifiable response. Is it justifiable to keep paying double for dinnerware and tipping fees when the campus could easily process these waste streams on-site? Not to mention an on-site composting program would be priceless hands-on experience for students studying waste with potential employment in the emerging composting field. Please, if you feel that UWSP should implement a composting program send the chancellor an e-mail at bpatter@uwsp.edu showing your support for an on campus composting program.
January 11, 2011
Polylactic Acid Technology (2000)
Ray E. Drumright, Patrick R. Gruber, and David E. Henton
There have been many notable technological advances over the last two decades; from the internet, to 4G phones, to compostable plastics. The future is here ladies and gentlemen, and it’s waiting for you to reach out and embrace it. Polylactic Acid Technology has made compostable plastics a very real and bright addition to the reality that is the 21st century. Polylactic acid (PLA) is versatile, biodegradable, and constructed completely from renewable resources. PLA plastics have good crease retention and crimpling properties, excellent grease and oil resistance, as well as low temperature heat seal-ability and provides a great barrier to flavors and aromas. All of these properties are very desirable characteristics for just about any plastic product, including applications such as bags and packaging, coated paper, or food containers.
PLA compostable plastics are gaining attention in markets around the globe. However, these plastics are not receiving all this attention due to their biodegradable properties or the fact that they are created from renewable resources. It is the high quality, cost-effective properties that these plastics possess that are causing a global stir. These plastics are increasing the demand for crops like corn and sugar beets while decreasing our reliance on petroleum.
NatureWorks™ (Cargill Dow, LLC) is a company pioneering the PLA industry. They have such products as the compostable smoothy and coffee cup, as well as compostable dinnerware that is used right here at the University of Wisconsin – Stevens Point (UWSP) by the on campus dining services. This company is hard at work creating the renewable plastics of tomorrow; the question is, are they ahead of their time? Currently UWSP is paying premium prices for these NatureWorks dinnerware items and disposing of them with the traditional trash, paying the tipping fees and sticking the students with the bill.
The University of Wisconsin – Stevens Point is more than capable of setting up a compost program on campus to deal not only with the PLA dinnerware wastes, but with our food and paper wastes. The new waste building is a step in the right direction, but it is not a step in the proper on-site handling of our own compostable wastes. There are numerous esteemed professionals on campus that are more than capable of designing and implementing a composting program. Over the last year I have personally contacted several persons on campus in regards to a composting program and have received no dignifiable response. Is it justifiable to keep paying double for dinnerware and tipping fees when the campus could easily process these waste streams on-site? Not to mention an on-site composting program would be priceless hands-on experience for students studying waste with potential employment in the emerging composting field. Please, if you feel that UWSP should implement a composting program send the chancellor an e-mail at bpatter@uwsp.edu showing your support for an on campus composting program.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)