Planning Can be a Dam Nightmare (No Matter How Big or Small)

My major is in Resource Management - Land Use Planning, so over the past couple of years I have learned a bit about the planning process and how stakeholders play a huge role in the process. Until I started my college career at the University of Wisconsin Stevens Point in 2007, I had never realized how many people rely on dams. Dams have been created and are used to help prevent flooding, create an alternative energy use for the local community, hold water to be distributed to other areas such as farm fields, and to reduce the rate of flow to decrease the amount of soil erosion that occurs further down the stream. There are many uses to a dam, resulting in a large number of stakeholders. A large number of stakeholders can result in many opposing sides and a lot of controversy.

I recently gave a presentation on the Kootenai watershed (over 19,000 sq. mi. in size) located in Idaho, Montana, and Canada. Located on the Kootenai river is Libby Dam. Libby Dam was created to prevent flooding and create hydroelectric power for the surrounding area. Keep in mind that Libby Dam is a rather large dam and stands 422 feet tall and holds back 90 miles of water. Needless to say, there are a lot of people that are in favor of Libby Dam, and many that are opposed to it. I am sure that many citizens are grateful for this dam because it helps prevent their property from being flooded every spring. On the other hand, some biologists are concerned for the habitat that the Kokanee Salmon and White Sturgeon populations below the dam rely on for spawning in each year. Those are just a couple of the stakeholder groups located within that watershed.

Some may think that only those dams of great size, like Libby Dam, involve a lot controversy in the decision making process. While the dam may be a lot larger, one may be surprised how many stakeholder groups are involved in a dam of much smaller size. Let’s take for instance the McDill Pond Dam located in the Village of Whiting, just south of Stevens Point. This dam was originally created for the logging processes going on. The creation of the dam resulted in McDill Pond. Recently, the dam has begun to leak causing officials to draw down McDill Pond. This has caused many stakeholders to voice their opinion on the matter. Many of the lake front owners are very concerned. If the dam is not fixed, and is instead torn down, their property will no longer be lakefront property. This could cause a decrease in property value up to 25%. Other citizens see it as too much of an economic hassle and believe it should be torn down. This dam may be a lot smaller than Libby Dam, but the planning process can still be complicated and still involves various stakeholder groups.

While a dam serves many great purposes to a community, it can be a planning nightmare. This is because of the amount of possible controversy that can come along with a dam. The existence and function of a dam causes there to be a lot of stakeholders to please in the planning process. The planning process can be tricky no matter how big or small the project is.

Works Cited:
Kootenai River Network, Inc. . 6 February 2012.

Portage County. McDill Pond.
. 9 February 2012.

Lake Associations

Corey Mueller

2/12/12

               If you are a fisherman then there is a good chance that you have fished on a lake that has a fish association. It is my opinion that Lake associations are great benefit to our water resources. Lake associations have many good qualities that can be used to keep our lakes ecosystems healthy. A lake association is a group of people that live on a lake, which forms a community that votes on important events that affect the lake.  Matters that affect lakes can range from new buildings to environmental dangers like overfishing and invasive species. One of the things lake associations tend to have in common is that they have catch and release programs. I believe this is one of the greatest advantages to having a lake association. The creation of more restrictive regulations, are one of the great benefits that they have. Lake Forest is a Lake that one of some of our friends lives on and it has had amazing effects. For one it had Eurasian Milfoil introduced into there lake a long time ago and it took over 99% of the lake. While this wasn’t bad for predators in the lake, it did take its toll on swimming, boating, and other recreations. It looked terrible to have masses of weeds floating and inches from the surface no matter where you looked. So how did a Lake Association help? They all met and pooled their money in and got a specialist that used poisons to kill just the Eurasian milfoil and take it out of the lake. Instead of a giant bill, the amount was spread out and broken up into manageable amounts by the landowners. In addition, they created a catch and release lake to help protect the fish population. This decision has had outstanding effects!! Some of the biggest fish I have ever caught are from that lake and it is easy to go out and catch fish because there are so many of them. Because there is no more Eurasian milfoil, you can swim and be surrounded by schools of fish and healthy native vegetation.

               Now I know there are a lot of people who like to fish and keep their catch, so I am not advocating that all lake associations should have catch and release. I believe it is a good thing to have, but is not right for all lakes. More importantly, lake associations are important because they are organizations that bring neighbors together and are used to protect the lake. For instance, at the lake we have property on up north, there was one landowner that wanted to build a campground on our lake. This campground would hold up to 250 people, but our lake was only 50 acres. This was a problem because it would turn our quiet lake into a tourist area and it is way to small of a lake for that. We have great fishing and have a healthy ecosystem. We have sensitive creatures like loons and otters. What would thousands of tourists do to a small lake like ours? What would happen to the lakes ecosystem? They wanted to create a sewage dump area and a beach. These were things that would completely ruin the peaceful serenity of the lake. To stop this plan all the landowners of the lake had to get together and decide what to do about this problem. We decided that the best way to deal with the situation was hire a lawyer and fight it in court. Due to our actions, we won and kept our lake the way it is. This was only made possible because of group we created to deal with matters like this. Because of our lake association we were able to hire a lawyer, and it was cheap when split between all the landowners.

In conclusion, lake associations are a benefit to all lakes and should be created on each lake in Wisconsin. They have great effects on lake ecosystems and landowners property. It brings the lake community closer together and builds relationships. It is up to the lake associations to decide what they change or fix, but I encourage you to try and start a lake association if you can. I believe you will be happy with the results.

Delisting of the Gray Wolf (Canis lupus)

In this blog, I would like to talk about the delisting of the Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) as an endangered species and some of the effects I feel it will have. There has an obvious amount of controversy when it comes to this species ever since its’ decline and then its addition to the endangered species list. There has been much support for and against the actions being taken to help protect and preserve this species. I believe it has gotten so much attention because it is a mega fauna species and an apex predator and it easily noticed by all people. Children love them because their cool to look at and they think the babies are cute and they also seem to look a bit like the family dog. Adults like them for a variety of reasons, some think their cool and want to get a tattoo of one stating that they are the alpha male or they are the protector of a family. Those who study them, try to understand their complex behavior and the social hierarchy of the pack and many other reasons to like wolves. There are people that do not like the wolf and the fact that they have been protected to the point now that their population in well above, what is believed to be sustainable. Cattle ranchers seem to stick out as the most against wolves because they will sometimes depredate on their cattle herds and that costs the rancher money. There are other groups of people out there that dislike the protection the wolves, because they tend to worry about the safety of their families and pets and with more wolves out there they will possible be closer to humans, thus increasing the danger.
I am okay with the delisting of the gray wolf for the most part, but there are a few things that I take issue with. I understand the need to delist them from the standpoint that their populations are well above the numbers needed to have a sustainable population. The first issue I have is this want by people to institute a hunting season on them already. I feel that we need to wait a few years, before having a hunt for them to see if they can maintain that population. What I mean is that now that they are off the endangered species list, the penalty for going out and shooting a nuisance one for example is not nearly as high as it was before. Now that is delisted it will be easier for the DNR to give out depredation permits to those farmers and ranchers that have lost cattle to wolf attacks. These things will have an impact on the population so let’s just hold off on the hunting season for a few years, if not more to make sure the wolf population can sustain itself without human protection.
I believe that with the history of this species and the fact that it is an apex predator and has such a major image to most people that there will always be a controversy surrounding the Gray wolf.

Mountaintop Coal Mining In Alabama

Alabama is home to the Black Warrior River. It supplies drinking water to Birmingham and Tuscaloosa, two of Alabama’s largest cities. The river is home to many aquatic species including nine threatened or endangered species. Parts of the river are rated among the top 2% for having outstanding recreational values by the National Park Service. All of this is threatened by Mountaintop Coal Mining.
Every year, the US Army Corps of Engineers issues permits to the coal industry allowing the coal industry to dump mining fill material into the river. Alabama Department of Environmental Management and Alabama Surface Mining Commission have not controlled pollution, and tolerate the coal industry’s pollution of rivers. Coal mining in this region is destroying river systems by destroying wetlands and tributaries and threatening health by polluting the water with heavy metals.
Stronger protections must be enforced to hold the coal industry accountable for destroying these ecosystems. The clean water act promises the nation that our waters will be swimmable, fishable, and drinkable. If we continue to let the coal industry pollute our waters, this will not be achieved.
Wind energy is a alternative to coal power. A mountaintop wind farm could produce enough energy to power 70,000 homes. Not only that, it would provide permanent jobs and would provide an annual county tax receipt of $1.74 million whereas the receipt from coal would be $36,000.
Coal is an abundant source of energy but is the most carbon intensive of all fuels. Twice the levels of carbon dioxide are released when burning coal compared to natural gas and 40% more than petroleum. According to the National Research Council’s 2009 Report, Hidden Costs of Energy, “coal-fired power plants are the single largest source of greenhouse gases in the U.S. Unfortunately, greenhouse gas emissions are building up in the atmosphere, acting as a primary driver of global warming.”
Two of the main driving forces behind the coal industry are economics and policy. Policy makers continue to side with the coal industry, and our nations demand for a cheap reliable energy source keep the coal industry running strong. These two factors in combination with each other don’t paint a pretty picture for the future of the Black Warrior River.


"Coal Strip Mining Threatens Public Health Safety." American Rivers. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 Feb 2012. .

Elliot, Greg. "Coal from the Mountaintops." Environmentalism. N.p., 07-11-2009. Web. 13 Feb 2012. .

Protecting Isolated Wetlands in Wisconsin

Before the settlement of Wisconsin by Europeans, the state had about 10 million acres of wetlands. Since then, over half of those wetlands have been destroyed and many more damaged. Humans fill and drain wetlands for agriculture and building sites. This was common practice for many years until wetlands became protected by the federal government, thanks to the Clean Water Act in 1972 and other conservation laws passed around that time. The filling, draining, polluting, and other acts detrimental to wetlands became illegal and permits were then required for the alteration of wetlands. A big hit the protection of wetlands came in 2001 when the supreme court ruled that isolated wetlands (wetlands less than 2 acres in size and having no connection to a navigable body of water) were not protected under federal law. Wisconsin legislators quickly moved to create a state law which would protect isolated wetlands since federal laws no longer did and the state’s abundance of such isolated wetlands (about 20% of Wisconsin’s wetlands). Later that year, Wisconsin passed 2001 Act 6, which protected isolated wetlands under state law. Now, in 2011-2012, Wisconsin republicans are seeking to weaken or remove the state’s protection of isolated wetlands.
Under governor Scott Walker, Wisconsin republicans strive to make isolated wetlands easier to fill and develop on. It started in spring 2011 when Scott Walker signed an act that gave special permission for a small wetland near Lambeau Field in Green Bay to be filled. Now in February 2012, the state senate will vote upon Senate Bill 368 and Assembly Bill 463. These bills change the way permitting is done for developing on sites with wetlands. Previously, the state had developers look for sites that do not have wetlands on them, avoidance. If they could not find one of those, they asked that the damage done to the wetland be as minimal as possible, minimization. If filling the wetland could not be avoided, the state made developers mitigate the wetland, create a wetland elsewhere, mitigation. The new bills change this. They allow the filling of wetlands, so long as the wetlands destroyed are mitigated; they no longer heavily emphasize avoiding natural wetland destruction. It is feared that developers will not try to avoid natural wetlands since mitigation is allowed before considering other sites.
Mitigated wetlands are not nearly as ecologically beneficial as natural wetlands. Natural wetlands have more complex plant communities, are important to migrating waterfowl, are part of the land’s hydrology, and took thousands of years to form. A mitigated wetland contains a fraction of the diversity and is sometimes in an arbitrary place on the landscape, ecologically disconnected. Also, the new bills offer no special protection for the state’s highest quality wetlands. These have rare organisms, special importance to migrating birds or other unique characteristics.
I think that protecting Wisconsin’s natural wetlands is important. All wetlands should be completely protected, in my opinion, and there should be no legal options for their developers trying to fill them. The current republican party in Wisconsin is erasing years of environmental policy that extends beyond just wetland protection. Environmental protection should not be tied this closely to political will, but since it is, the best thing to do is vote and stay involved.

References
Cain, M. J. (2008, August 21). Wisconsin’s Wetland Regulatory Program. In Wisconsin Department of
Natural Resources.
Knight, J. (2012, January 26). Knight Life: State bills would weaken wetland rules. In Leader-Telegram.
Wetland Communities of WI (n.d.). In Wisconsin Wetlands Association. from
http://wisconsinwetlands.org/wetlofwisc.htm

Hunters Education and Connecting with the Great Outdoors

Throughout the state of Wisconsin people of all generations look at hunting as one of the state’s great traditions. Growing up there was nothing more exciting than walking down to my basement with my Dad to lace up the old hunting boots and head out into the field. The memories made with every step through yellow grass fields in northern Iowa or in a tree in central Wisconsin have lead me to a great passion for our natural resources, helping me to realize the importance of protecting those natural resources. Much to my dismay I have found myself and my passion for the outdoors to be in the minority amongst most people. Are they to be blamed for their lack of interest in the natural world? I don’t believe they should be. The opportunity to experience all that nature has to offer through recreational activities like fishing and hunting are simply not an option for the vast majority of people. Barriers like these are keeping people from connecting with nature and letting natural resource issues slide to the backburner of public interest.
Ask anyone who hunts and they will tell you it’s not exactly cheap; requiring land, licenses, and essential gear. Now ask that same hunter if it’s worth all the money and effort and you will receive a resounding YES! Ask them to explain why it’s worth it and the only answer is that you have to be out there, experiencing everything beyond just the trophy you hope to take home. It’s the bird landing on your leg as you sit perfectly still in your tree stand or the mouse ducking into his hole as you tromp through the woods hoping to kick up a roughed grouse. It doesn’t take much to find a connection with something as beautiful and mysterious as the natural world.
I have asked several of my friends for reasons why they have never been hunting and it boils down to not having a hunter’s safety license and not having a place to go. Thankfully the state already provides thousands of acres of public hunting land littered all over the state, leaving us with one final barrier, the hunter’s safety license. This seems simple, just take the class, however it’s not as simple as it sounds. It’s not easy to convince people that they should spend their hard earned time and money to take a class on hunter’s safety when they have never even been hunting before.
I believe a mentor program would allow hunters, like myself, to bring friends and family out in the field without the currently required licenses. Obviously a license of some sort will be required but a person without hunters safety should be able to purchase a special license requiring them to be with an experienced hunter as a mentor. The Wisconsin DNR is currently running a mentor program of this nature but on a very small scale. Expanding this program to allow anyone with the experience, gear, and land to become a mentor would allow for more people to take that first step. Experiencing the great outdoors and starting a relationship with our natural resources. Creating that relationship or connection with nature is vital to ensuring a future of nature enthusiast who will fight to protect our natural resources.

Odocoileus virginianu

Over the past century hunting the white tailed deer has been a favored pastime for the local hunters in Wisconsin. I have been able to share in the excitement of hunting the white tail since I was a little girl in a stroller because of my dad and moms love for the game. Fairly recently the sport of hunting this magnificent animal has changed. The change was not anything that Wisconsin Hunters have not see before but a change that instilled some of the older ways of hunting. In the northern hunting grounds near Superior hunting has gone back to only being eligible to shoot the Buck, in other areas such as Butternut it is simply required to shoot a Buck first and if you would like to shoot a Doe an individual may.
On a personal level I completely agree with the new found old ways of hunting. I can say this because I am a hunter myself. I have noticed a substantial decline in the White Tails population status. In fact Dr. James Kroll has been hired by Governor Scott walker to be the state of Wisconsin’s first and only Deer trustee because of the issues around the state regarding deer management. Dr. James Kroll has stated when asked, that he does feel he can make a substantial change in the deer population because he knows deer management can not be used in the same ways throughout the state; the issues near Illinois are vastly different from the issues near Superior.
Fellow hunters Anthony Worzalla and Todd Suhr have also shared there opinions with me regarding the deer population. Mr. Worzalla has claimed “even though I have been hunting for the past 12 years and have not been able to shoot a deer, I am very grateful something is being done to help the White Tailed Deer’s population; even if it means passing up on a Doe.” While Mr. Suhr feels that hunting all over Wisconsin should be like hunting in the northern regions of the state. Mr. Suhr feels that there are not enough deer left in Wisconsin to hunt them any other way then needing to shoot a Buck and only a Buck.
I feel that by brining in Dr. Kroll to assist in razing the White Tailed Deer’s population is overall an excellent idea. I have personally found that even though not having deer bound out in front of my car is kind of nice; I would greatly miss the majestic animal if it was killed off by our hunters, because of poor management skills. I also understand there are many individuals who disagree with me. In the greater picture I believe something needed to be done, and if bringing a specialist from Texas is the answer then I will support Dr. Kroll in what he was hired to do. However if this does not work out for the best then I know new ideas will need to be brought forth to help strengthen the deer population in Wisconsin.



Works Cited
"Doctor Deer - Www.nbc26.com." NBC26 - Green Bay, Wisconsin - News, Weather, Sports, Entertainment. Web. 14 Feb. 2012. .
Suhr, Todd B., and Anthony K. Worzalla. "Thoughts on Deer Poulation." Telephone interview.

The Timber Wolf: Some Much Needed Education

It seems the topic of wolves in Wisconsin is growing rampant the last few years, yet the education within the public hasn’t grown at all. There will always be uncertainty about the true population of any species in an entire state, but that estimation is best left to the “professionals” who are educated on the specific topic. As most know, there was a Timber Wolf (Canis lupis) population in the state of Wisconsin before European settlers. However, with the onset of bounties, civilians and military personnel COMPLETELY eradicated the species from the state by the 1960’s. What may not be so well known are the devastating effects on the land that can follow due to the lack of a major predator, such as the overpopulation of White-tailed deer.
Eradication aside, against all civilized and natural odds, the Grey Timber Wolf recovered in the 1980’s. It’s not clear why this species started its journey back into Wisconsin, but the increase in deer numbers may have played a part. The benefits of maintaining any predator, in a state where White-tailed deer are estimated at over 1 million, are numerous. It’s astonishing to think there are still so many that view this creature as a menacing killer, and nothing else. Granted, the goal outside of reservations was 350, and there were over 700 in 2010. But the public needs to realize the accomplishment this species overcame to make it to that number, especially considering its past. There are ecological benefits that predators (especially wolves) have on their environment as well; wolves keep grazing species in check, thereby helping vegetation growth and minimizing erosion along riverbanks, which in turn allows for smaller animals and carnivores to flourish, and river system health to increase.
As for wolves eating too many deer or only killing livestock, education would significantly help. It’s been studied that wolves kill an average of 12 deer/year/adult. Within a wolf pack there are only so many adult wolves that even hunt. There were 42 farm animals killed out of 7,000 farms in wolf territory in Wisconsin, in 2010. Moreover, according to the WI-DOT and DNR, there were well over 27,000 deer killed by motorized vehicles in Wisconsin in 2010, and hunters took at least 112,581 deer opening weekend, 2011 (WI-DOT, 2012 and WIDNR, 2012)! To incur that wolves still have such a drastic effect on deer populations, knowing this data, seems purely perverse.
To highlight the livestock dilemma, there are methods to deal with wolves near livestock that have already been implemented by willing individuals, without the use of firearms or a hunting season. Out West, cattle ranchers use electric fences and brightly colored flagging tape along fence borders to help deter wolf movements within a corral; those same ranchers also patrol their lands on a daily basis. There is a farming couple in Bayfield County who raise 650 sheep on 300 acres. They had depredation problems with wolves in the past; they use Maremma dogs that live within the herd, protecting and warding off any predators. After obtaining their third dog, there have been no fatalities from wolves in 3 years.
So, as you can see, there are ways to live with this resilient species, and even more interesting, there are several benefits to having wolves in Wisconsin.
By: Tabi Starjnski
References:
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WIDNR). 2012.
Accessed 06 Feb 2012.
Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WI-DOT). 2012. Motor Vehicle-Deer Crashes in 2010.
Accessed
06 Feb 2012.
Wisconsin Public Television. 2010. Wolves in Wisconsin. Aired on 02 Nov 2010.

Environmental Illiteracy

For many of us the connection and passion for the outdoors came from certain experiences we had as an adolescent. For me that passion came from the countless hours I spent either on the water fishing, hunting, or exploring the woods. Today as our society becomes more and more dependent on technology our youth are spending less and less time outside and more and more time playing video games, or watching T.V., which is leading to a society, which is environmentally illiterate. This phenomenon can be seen due to the decline in fish and hunting sales. It is hard for me to picture a childhood without fishing, hunting, or wildlife. Growing up in the city, the majority of my friends lived a very sheltered life from the outdoors and had rarely experienced the wilderness. Luckily for me my parents never let me own video games and pushed me to spend the majority of my youth outside. I would argue that the majority of my learning came from the interactions I had with environment. It helped me grow as an individual and pushed me outside my comfort zone. When I try to explain to my friends why I am so connected with the environment it is impossible to put in words, but I directly go to the experiences of my childhood.
Many people feel that it is not a true issue and that it is irrelevant, but I had the opportunity to witness this phenomenon at first hand. Last summer I was hired as a fishing instructor/counselor at North Star Camp for boys near Hayward, Wisconsin. This camp was unique; because most of the campers came from the Chicago area and were “environmentally illiterate”. Part of the duties included a three-week canoe trip in Canada’s Quetico Wilderness. Ten of these campers had never been camping before and three of them had never been in a canoe before. This trip proved to be challenging, but for many of these individuals this experience was eye opening, they left urban life, forgot about their cell phones, video games, and TV’s, and found great satisfaction in Canada’s Wilderness. By the end of the trip most of them could find satisfaction in outdoors.
Schools should make teaching environmental literacy mandatory in all schools. Studies have shown that teaching environmental literacy at a young age can have major impacts on a society. According to Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s environmental program No Child Left Inside “It is environmental education which can best help us as individuals make the complex, conceptual connections between economic prosperity, benefits to society, environmental health, and our own well being.” It is important for us to spread the passion and love for the outdoors, so the legacy of the environmental movement is not lost and spread on to future generations. “Keep close to Nature's heart... and break clear away, once in awhile, and climb a mountain or spend a week in the woods. Wash your spirit clean.” -John Muir

Chesapeake Bay Foundation. Web. 14 Feb. 2012. .

Chesapeake Bay Foundation. Web. 14 Feb. 2012. .

Conserving our State’s History and Farmland

I grew up in Verona, Wisconsin, which is just southwest of Madison in Dane County. We have a family farm that my uncle lives on and my father built just across the field from. Growing up in a rural agricultural setting instilled upon me the importance of farming not only to my family but to American culture and history. Knowing this, it has been extremely difficult to see multiple neighbors and farm families sell their farmland for development because taxes are too high and they can no longer afford their business. This is a problem not only in the surrounding Madison area but in southern Wisconsin as a whole.
In the past 25, over 800,000 acres of Wisconsin’s prime farmland have been lost to scattered rural residential or urban development. This is a huge number that continues to grow with the amount of people moving out of cities and into their perfect little rural communities. This fragmentation of farmland is not only hurting the farmers themselves but also the integrity of the forested areas and wildlife habitats surrounding the farmland.
The importance of maintaining the farmland in our state comes back to the value we place on farmers and what they do. Farmland near urban areas is more valued by the public as residential land than farmland, which is why property taxes for these farmers have skyrocketed in the past 25 years. This value needs to change so that farmers can continue working the land and producing much needed crops that help sustain a better community.
There are a few programs in place to help keep farmland in working condition, such as conservation easements, purchase of development rights, and farmland preservation plans. These all encourage farmers to continue farming their land through some sort of incentive programs that are all voluntary.
Personally, I think the problem associated with the development of farmland is not just that much needed crops will no longer be grown, but that the farming culture that was so important to southern Wisconsin will become extinct. Farming was a noble profession in the early to mid part of the past century. Many families took pride in the crops they grew and the family farms they established, passing it on to the next generations to farm. Currently there is a lack of this happening. Many sons or daughters of farmers do not wish to carry on the family tradition of farming and want to go on to do bigger and more profitable ventures. This lack of value associated with family farming is also hurting the continuation of farming in the state. The most common situation that is happening is a parent or both parents pass away and the farm is left to the children as a whole, who either do not have invested values in the land or have never been involved in farming it. This leads to the selling of the land and eventually development. I have seen this happen so many times in my hometown of Verona and surrounding areas. My hope is that a change of heart will happen and people will realize how important these farms are not only to the local economies but to preserving the culture and history of Wisconsin.

Wisconsin’s CWD

Being raised as a small town country boy, I was taught to hunt from a very early age, much like many of Wisconsin’s hunters. I grew to love the sport and it became my biggest passion. Being young and naive I didn’t think anything could possibly threaten the greatest hunting season of all, the white-tailed deer season. Then in 2002, Wisconsin’s first case of chronic wasting disease (CWD) was discovered. After the first case was detected the disease spread like wildfire throughout many counties in south-central Wisconsin and it looked like it could soon spread across the entire state.
Chronic wasting disease is a transmissible spongiform encephalopathy (TSE), in other words it is a disease that affects the animals nervous system. CWD is a disease that only affects the Cervid (deer) family, and is usually fatal. The disease is thought to be spread in two ways. The first way being through direct contact with another infected deer, or second through indirect contact with soil, plant vegetation or other surfaces. The disease is likely spread by saliva, feces, and urine of the deer.
Once infected the disease slowly runs its course, creating a slow prolonged death. Signs of infection may not appear obvious for months or even years. As the disease gets worse symptoms begin to appear. Symptoms include drooling, staggering, carrying the head lower than normal, droopy ears, exhibit poor coats, appear emaciated, show lack of fear from humans, etc. CWD has a wide range of knocking down its host.
There is no current evidence that CWD is transmissible to humans but many are not willing to find out. This devastating disease has scared away many who once loved the sport of deer hunting. Hunters are not willing to take the chance of transmitting the disease to themselves or their families. However this is the time we need hunters the most. We need hunters to stick it out and help eradicate any possible infected deer there are. If we let this disease continue to spread it could have a devastating effect on our deer herd or possibly eliminate it all together.
Most Wisconsinites couldn’t even bare to think of a year with no deer hunting, it’s what we know and what we do. Not only would this affect our state recreationally but also economically. Deer hunting is a billion dollar industry and it would devastate our state without it.

The Emerald Ash Borer in WI

Normally I am not a “bug” person, but what intrigued me about the invasive Emerald Ash Borer was the fact that it was discovered in Wisconsin literally five minutes from my home in southeastern Wisconsin. At the time, I did not know anything about the Emerald Ash Borer and was shocked to find it right in my backyard. After learning about the beetle, I was quite concerned because there is a campground right down the road from where I live, and firewood was a major contributor to the spread of this invasive species. I have seen first-hand what kind of damage this species can do to the trees surrounding my home, and it is not pretty. Many do not realize that the Emerald Ash Borer larva spend its life inside the ash trees feeding on the tissue under the bark. They kill the tree from the inside out, and it is impossible for us to physically see what the beetles are doing from the outside. We may not see the full effects of what they have done to the tree until two to four years down the road when the trees start dying. This is what makes removing the beetle such a necessity to Wisconsin. According to wisonsin.gov, Wisconsin has more than seven hundred million ash trees, which is seven percent of the tree population. That is quite a lot of trees at risk. Wisconsin is a beautiful state with thousands of acres of state forest. Our trees are such a big part of our state’s natural beauty. I would hate to see our forests diminish within a few years because of a tiny invasive species. I would hope everybody would agree with me as well. There are a few actions we can take as Wisconsinites to stop the spread of the Emerald Ash Borer. Please don’t travel with firewood when camping. It may still be legal, but the use of local firewood will greatly decrease the risk of infecting the trees. That being said, there are rules prohibiting the use of outside firewood within twenty-five miles of a state park or any Department of Natural Resources owned land. There are also many quarantined areas of our state prohibiting the movement of firewood since the discovery of the Emerald Ash Borer. There are a list of counties under quarantine on the wisconsin.gov website. There is nothing like camping under the clear night sky with a beautiful Wisconsin forest surrounding you! Take this into consideration the next time you go on a camping trip.
Like I said, I can’t believe how much I have grown to be such an advocate for this subject. It truly is amazing how much I have learned and am able to share with others. I really believe that I would not have even known what an Emerald Ash Borer was had it not been placed right in my backyard.

Reference:
wisconsin.gov/eab/article

Shoreland Zoning Regulations

Shoreland zoning is a topic of great controversy in Wisconsin. As a land use planning major, and avid outdoorsmen, the water quality of Wisconsin’s lakes, streams, and rivers is of great importance to me. I feel that other should be made of the issues and regulations tied to shoreland zoning as well.

NR 115 is the code that stipulates minimum shoreland zoning regulations. Some of the basic rules include how close structures can be to the water, how much of a natural vegetative buffer must remain intact, amount of impervious surfaces allowed, and walking and viewing corridors that are allowed around water bodies. These rules are in place to protect the quality, fishery, and integrity of the state’s water resources. Currently, these rules apply to non-municipal areas areas only. In other words, cities and villages are required to make their own rules and regulations regarding shoreland regulations. (WI DNR)

In my opinion, shoreland zoning in Wisconsin does not go far enough. “Protecting and Preserving Shorelands,” explains that for good water quality and prime wildlife habitat, at least 300 feet of buffer is needed around water features. For noise reduction, shoreline stability, and aquatic habitat at least 100 feet of buffer is needed to “exceed management goals.” (UWEX) With this in mind, even the minimum requirement of 35 feet of vegetated buffer, and 75 feet for buildings does not do nearly enough for water resources. These laws need to be adjusted to levels that scientific evidence and research backs up.

Obviously, a balance between economic and environmental needs is necessary, but current regulations don’t really aide either. The degradation of resources that current laws provide causes for decreased property values over time. Decreased water quality and fishery quality will cause for decreased desire for lakefront properties. People don’t want to live on a lake that has green algal blooms on a large portion of its surface. Poor water quality from septic tanks too close to the water also raises health issues for local beaches and boating opportunities. Finally, there is the issue of who the law applies for. Currently cities and villages do not have to follow shoreland regulations listed in NR 115. These municipalities often have lax regulations that degrade water quality more than the outlying towns who abide by NR 115.

Shoreland zoning is an issue that more people need to be aware of, along with improved enforcement measures. The consequences of shoreland regulations have a direct impact on Wisconsin’s water resources. Further regulation is needed in shoreland zoning, and people need to be made aware of current regulations to improve water quality throughout the state.

Work Cited
"Protecting and Restoring Shorelands." University of Wisconsin- Extension, 2003. Web. 13 Feb. 2012. .

Shoreland Zoning Minimum Standards. Ed. Gregg Breese. Wisconsin DNR, n.d. Web. 23 Sept. 2008. .

Utilizing Clear Cuts as a Resource-Wide Management Plan

Mention the words, “Clear Cut”, and “forestry” in the same sentence around almost any crowd apart from forest managers and the response will invariably come back negative. But why? Why do the general public and even some wildlife biologists view this as such a negative thing? I can sum it up in one word: Education. As a forester I can see both sides of the argument. People in the general public and the average wildlife or fishery student here at UW Stevens Point see clear cuts as devastation to the landscape. Loggers see clear cuts as the most efficient way of harvesting lumber resources.
Let’s think about the potentially negative impacts of clear-cuts. First off, aesthetics come into play. This is one of the most important factors viewed by the public, especially along major roads and adjacent to housing developments. Second, there is the loss of certain habitat for wildlife species. This tends to be the major concern amongst wildlife biologists. Third, there is the increased risk of landslides and soil erosion. Fourth, there is the loss of streamside habitat in riparian areas and the degradation of stream bank structure. Finally, there is an increased potential of wildfire hazards. Although there are many other perceived flaws with the idea of clear cutting a section of forest, I’ll just take the time to solve these five common negative views.
Generally I would agree that clear cuts are not exactly pleasing to the eye. With all of the knowledge that forest managers have today about public views on aesthetics, we (foresters) have certain strategies to make clear cuts appear more “friendly” to the eye of all those concerned. For instance, along side roads that are frequently being used a forester will leave a dense strip bordering that road so that people in cars won’t have to see the clear cut behind it. After a certain amount of years when the clear cut has had time to regenerate and grow, the forester will then appoint the loggers to go in and harvest the remained timber that was originally left behind.
Another very important issue with clear cuts is habitat loss. Knowledgeable wildlife and fisheries biologists know that although habitat for certain species may be lost in some cases, habitat for other species such as grouse, deer, and elk (too name only a few) will be created. Forest managers develop plans in accordance to wildlife and fisheries biologists they work with. We develop plans that minimize species’ losses and maximize species’ gain from new habitat created. When it comes to stream side habitat, foresters will leave the appropriate buffer area to eliminate negative effects on streams.
Soil science students will be relieved to know that clear cuts do not cause excess soil erosion at all. Soils that have the potential of forming a landslide will be eroded with or without clear cuts. The only time that forestry can prove to be negative on erosion is when new roads are being made without consent from the forester administering the timber sale.
The problem of increased fire hazard as a result of clear cuts is being handled more responsibly than it used to be in the past. When a pine plantation is clear cut the loggers will either make one burn pile that will be burnt in winter or some other low risk time, or they will scatter the brush which will be used for a controlled burn which helps forest structure in the long run.
Even with these five “myths” being busted, it should be apparent that clear cuts are not bad and have more benefits than negative impacts on the environment.

Future of Hunting

Hunting and gathering has already been taking place for generations and hopefully it can continue that way as we look into the future. It is just a part of who we are and the way we like to enjoy the outdoors as a part of recreation. With more people getting involved we can try and sustain the resources for our future outdoorsmen.

As a Wildlife Ecology major I clearly see myself as being an avid outdoorsman. Other things have a role on me liking the outdoors besides my wildlife major. Growing up out in a rural area surrounded by nothing but woods and farm fields it is pretty much a tradition to either hunt, fish, or just be out in the woods for recreation time. My grandpa and father are the ones to thank for getting me hooked on these traditions. Memories or times spent with people like them will always be cherished and hopefully someday my children will feel the same way as I do. All these experiences that I had throughout my life in the woods led me to the path of choosing my Wildlife Ecology: Research and Management major. It is my way of giving back to what I have learned.

It would be nice to see more people get involved in hunting, fishing, and many other outdoor activities that are out there. That is like with the new hunting age of 10 the children get their experience two year’s sooner than when I was that age. Also would be nice to see older people get out and enjoy it all as well. By getting them hooked or letting them just enjoy the outdoor activities will let them see how fun or important it is to keep these activities going into the future by showing others.

As taking part in the outdoors like hunting, fishing, and trapping we can play a role in managing, controlling, and also utilizing the natural resources that surround us. The most important thing though is to enjoy the activities that we take part in and have the ability to want what’s best for the natural resources that are in the surrounding environments. By getting more people involved or just to enjoy the outdoors we can keep hunting, fishing, and the other outdoor activities live on into future generations to come. What we do now always impacts the future generations that is why we need to instill how important this all is.

Wisconsin Sand Mines

Here in central Wisconsin we are living the present day “Sand Rush”. I’m not talking about any ordinary sand, but very fine grained silica sand derived from quartz. This sand is being used all across the United States as an aid in a mining process called hydraulic fracking. This is when mining companies pump this fine silica sand under thousands of pounds of pressure deep into the earth to create cracks or open existing fractures in the earth to open once inaccessible deep pockets of natural gas. Much has been said via the local newspapers, online articles, and news stations, but just as much of my knowledge has come from the small town ‘coffee talk’ at the local gas stations by men that work at these very mines. These mines shouldn’t be anything new to the state since we already have at least 60 active sand mines and 32 processing plants (Hubbish), but everyone seems to be blown away by the most recent events. These mines have been popping up in un-zoned areas of WI, and mining companies are rushing to push permits to get the sand out of the ground to cash in when the going is good. This however leaves citizens of the area scratching their heads saying what just happened, is this good or bad for the environment, will this affect me?
Silica sand in its own has been equated to poor man’s gold, since it is easily accessible in this area of Wisconsin and worth a fortune to those who demand it. Prime land containing high silica sand concentrations is selling for $10,000+ per acre, and land that is rail road accessible is selling for thousands more. One must understand that not all proposed mine sights are forested or crop land. Many sand mines are popping up in already established gravel or sand pits, but it seems large scale mines are taking a brunt of the negativity. Near Tunnel City, WI a 500+ acre mine is in place, and it went from a forested/ field atmosphere to now a gigantic excavated area with mountains of white sand piled to the sky and trucks that never seem to stop coming in and out hauling sand to be transported elsewhere. Post mining management plans are in place, that once this area is mined out, the over burden or (top soil) will be placed back on the landscape, and reseeding will be enacted (WIDNR).
I am not picking a side on whether these mines should or shouldn’t be in operation, but I will bring to attention as to the current problems or issues that local residence have with these mines especially the ones in Monroe Co, WI aka Sand Capital of Wisconsin. Concerns with these mines are that it consumes huge amounts of water for its wash plants, and in the case of the Tomah, WI, Unimin (sand mining company) wishes to buy its water usage from Tomah. This equates to millions of gallons of usage. Concerns of the near imaginable water use has many concerned about draining the aquifer and the consequences as a result. Cranberry growers who rely on its water supply for harvest every fall are asking questions as well. To mention a few more concerns come from the broad spectrum are what about the actual water quality and drainage impacts on the area, or the air pollution and nuisance of the fine sand dust. Then there is the thought of the sound and light pollution that goes along with any operation. Whether it is the loud machinery digging the sand, dump trucks constantly hauling sand on highways, or the increase railroad traffic has people on edge.
Most recently however, the mine in Tunnel City has come under attack from the state and Federal Government as the mine now has a direct impact on the federally protected karner blue butterfly. This butterfly has been protected since 1992, and its territory is primarily here in WI, on the very sand areas that these mines are buying up (Golden). These butterflies are in this area because of the wild lupine that thrives in the central sandier region of the state. However, actions have already been taken and land has been fenced off and set aside to help preserve karner blue habitat. The WI DNR is over viewing this process as stated in the La Crosse Tribunes article “A Threat to Sand Mining.”
We have just barely scratched the surface of the booming business of sand mining here on Wisconsin soil. I do know one thing for certain, that these sand mines are here and here to stay regardless of public opinion. So the public’s approach isn’t to stop these mines, but what can be done is to slow the process of mining permits and look more deeply at the environmental impacts.


Sources:
Hubbush, Chris. “Bill seeks more mining control.” La Crosse Tribune 28 Jan. 2012: A1 & A7. Print.
Golden, Kate. “A Threat to Sand Mining?” La Crosse Tribune 5 Feb. 2012: A1 & A6. Print.
Smathers, Jason. “State feeds national fracking boom; health, environmental concerns rise.” La Crosse Tribune. 14 August 2011

“Silica Sand Mining in Wisconsin.” Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources: 1-43. January 2012. Web. http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/Mines/documents/SilicaSandMiningFinal.pdf

Northwoods Mine

The Northwoods. Picturesque lakes and crystal streams abound. Loons cry at dusk while brook trout rise for the evening mayfly hatch. This image is in danger of changing into a far grimmer reality. Giant trucks hauling away the spoils loosened by blasting will roll down county roads designed to handle sparse local traffic. Streams now teaming with fish could be poisoned by chemical leaching, making them fishless forever.
A 22 mile swath of land will strip mined for taconite, the natural form of iron ore. I am fully aware of the need for resource extraction. After all, I drive a 5500 pound truck made of steel. As a consuming, growing, driving economic nation, we all need iron and wood and aluminum and coal. However, the activities required to acquire these resources should not be allowed in all forms or in certain areas. This mine is analogous to harvest practices in forestry. Clear cutting is no longer considered an acceptable method of harvest. Nor is cutting on steep slopes prudent. The same is with mining. Done properly, mining provides us with valuable and necessary resources. However, the proposed mine up north would not be done in a manner that took into account the risks inherent with mining. The mine occurs within the Lake Superior basin, considered one of the last great unspoiled lakes in the world. Is risking the quality of Lake Superior, along with the affected tributaries, wildlife, and people worth 30 years worth of iron ore?
The main argument in this controversy is jobs vs. environment. Northern Wisconsin is known to be an economically depressed area save to industries; tourism and logging. The area has the highest unemployment rate in the state. A economic impact study performed by the proposed operator of the mine, Gogebic Taconite, says that building the mine will create 2000 jobs and operating the mine will produce 700 jobs over the 30 year life of the mine, in addition to a couple thousand indirectly related to the mine. That sounds fine and dandy, but what about the thousands of jobs that would be lost in the tourism industry, a sector that has sustained the area for 50 years? The area relies on the aesthetic beauty of the region to bring in tourism dollars. All that could be lost from a leeching from the mine. No one wants to fish in a river without any fish in it. After the 30 year life is over, what then? Some remediation that is never as good as the original and possibly leeching effects lasting the next several hundred years.
I am certainly not opposed to mining, but it must be done properly. The wealth of nations is built on the health of its land. Throughout the thousands of years of human history, wars have been fought chiefly because some other group has a natural resource that another one doesn't have and wants. Let us not foolishly squander what semi-pristine areas we have for a few years worth of iron ore. The 40 percent of western streams that are fishless from mine leeching should have taught us, but apparently hasn't. Let's not make the Northwoods mine another stop on the too long learning curve of proper resource extraction.

Light Goose Conservation Season

For more then a decade now, waterfowlers have been trying to reduce the number of Light Geese in North America. Light Geese are the target species due to the degradation of subarctic breading grounds. This group of waterfowl consists of three separate species; the Lesser Snow Goose, The Greater Snow Goose, and the Ross Goose. The Snow goose is also known as the blue goose, they are often mistaken as separate species because of the difference in plumage colors. The Blue Goose has a grayish blue plumage with a white head; where as the Snow Goose has a white body with black tipped wings. Regardless of the effort to reduce light goose populations through conservation seasons, the population is remaining steady and healthy.
Though we have had Light Goose conservation seasons for a number of years, the snow goose population has thrived well through these management techniques. Stopping the degradation of subarctic habitat is crucial for species diversity of waterfowl and other wildlife. Management techniques for Light Geese come from the rate of recovery in subarctic nesting grounds. Light Geese are destroying subarctic habitats faster than the rate of recovery. Snow Geese are now expanding into uncommon habitats like trees and forested habitat. The need for conservation seasons is essential in managing Light Goose populations.
The main and most efficient way in managing populations is through conservation seasons. Waterfowlers are the key in reducing the number of Light Geese in North America. An estimated 700,000 Light Geese are taken annually, and yet the population stays steady and healthy. The reason we have conservation seasons is to reduce the number of Light Geese, not keep the population at an overabundance. There have been few proposals in management techniques for Light Goose populations, mainly because of cost and time. Some of the techniques that have been proposed are massive live captures to chemical avicides, both of which are very time consuming and expensive. Management techniques can be very skeptical not only because of time and money, but also the public view and attitudes towards the problem.
Much of the harvested snow geese are taken from avid waterfowlers that have an unexplainable passion for waterfowling. The most effective tool in reducing the number of Light Geese is easily the sportsman of North America. This is a group of people with very similar interests, passions, and determination to keep the wildlife and their habitat pristine for not only ourselves but future generations. There are few options in limiting the number of Light Geese in North America, yet the only efficient method is through conservation seasons for waterfowl hunters. Until we have recovery of subarctic nesting grounds, we need to keep close attention to the unique and adaptable Light Geese. We can be certain there will be a spring conservation season for Light Geese in the coming years, what we are uncertain about is the amount of time it will take for Light Geese to decline to an appropriate population

Burmese Pythons in Florida

If you were to poll a group of people of things that scared them the most, it wouldn’t be a surprise if at least a few of them mentioned snakes. Snakes have always had a bad reputation among the general public, but it is lucky that here in the United States, we do not need to worry about the massive snakes so frequently featured in horror films. That is, we do not need to worry about them until now. Although the origins of the snakes are unclear, the fact is that large pythons can now be found in some areas of the United States and are rapidly affecting the ecosystem they inhabit.

Now, before anyone gets alarmed, there is some basic information to put on the table. The large snakes I was referring to are Burmese pythons. They were introduced to the Florida everglades ecosystem anywhere from 10-20 years ago and their population has exploded since. They are thriving in the subtropical climate of southern Florida and show no signs of stopping. These snakes grow to up to 20 feet long and hunt their prey by constricting and suffocating them. They hunt everything from shorebirds to deer in the everglades and are making a massive impact on the ecosystems they live in. They are wiping out endangered species and threatening even more. There have been horror stories about attacks on humans, and a few have been confirmed. Attacks on children by pets are the relatively most common, although they are still incredibly rare. This does not, however, discount the fact that these pythons are incredibly dangerous to the ecosystem that they are now invading.

These pythons need to be effectively managed for in Florida to prevent this predator from completely dominating their landscape. I can’t pretend that I have a solution that will solve the problem, because if I did, I’m sure I wouldn’t be writing this blog at the moment; however, I have presented information on why this is a major problem. It is no secret that there are huge ecological implications to introducing a predator like at Burmese python to an ecosystem as fragile as the Florida everglades. The everglades are already threatened by urbanization and pollution. The animals that live in this ecosystem are just as fragile as the ecosystem they live in. More and more species are becoming threatened and adding a predator into the mix only complicates them even more. There has been evidence that even the American alligator is preyed upon by these pythons. If the historically top predator in the area is being displaced by a new species, it is impossible to predict the outcome of this situation.

All in all, it is clear to see that this situation is a major problem. While there is no clear solution to the problem at the moment, an important lesson can be learned. It seems like the common theme when talking about introduced species; non-native species are often incredibly dangerous to the ecosystems that they are introduced to. We can only hope to learn from this dangerous predator that we need to do everything we can to stop the spread of invasive species, regardless of what they are and where they come from. The effects are impossible to predict and often result in unexpected consequences. We need to learn from mistakes and use this knowledge to protect our resources for the future!

Reptile Bans

As an avid reptile fan and owner, I can sympathize with others who have the fascination with these amazing animals but all across the country bans on reptiles are being discussed or implemented. There are multiple reasons as to why all or only certain species of reptiles are banned in some areas from public safety to the protection of native wildlife. Public safety is a broad reason for banning a reptile. It can include protecting the people who want to own dangerous reptiles, protecting people from escaped reptiles, preventing diseases, or just preventing people who are terrified of reptiles from hurting themselves (I know someone who almost made a new exit through a window when I took out a snake from across the room).
As a wildlife management major, I feel that it is very important to protect native species. While banning certain reptiles from the pet trade could be very effective, it would not be popular with people. Restrictions on potentially dangerous species in regions where they could possibly thrive would be fairer to people who are willing to take the extra steps to be responsible owners. With restrictions like permits, less people would be inclined to own them and it would be much harder for escaped or released reptiles to start a population in the wild. Not all reptile bans can be bad for enthusiasts though. The new ban on four large snake species (the Burmese python, the two species of African rock pythons, and the yellow anaconda) stop the importation of these snakes into the country. It is still legal to own the captive bred animals from a breeder within your state. The ban only stops people from buying these snakes from people who catch them in the wild and captive breeders outside the country. This protects the wild populations of the species in its native range at least from Americans wanting cheap prices on the reptiles.
It is understandable that Florida is one of the first to enact a reptile ban because of the python problem they are having in the everglades, but bans on owning reptiles in cities in the northern most parts of the country? It doesn’t make sense from an ecological stand point. The reason the Burmese pythons flourish in the everglades is because it’s so similar to their natural habitat on the other side of the world. But to ban reptiles in northern parts of the country because of the fear of what is happening in Florida is nonsense. Different climates limit how well reptiles can survive in a habitat. For example, the tropical Burmese pythons wouldn’t be able to survive a winter if they escaped into a habitat that had a colder climate than what regions they were naturally found in (which means knowing their realized and potential niches in their native range). Most reptiles wouldn’t be able survive in the wild unless they happened to be native to that area or to a similar climate.
While reptile bans differ between states, and even communities, they are increasing in number. The reasons are many, but it is essential to look them under the microscope to find out why they are coming up, where they will be in effect, and how will it affect people.

Real Hunter Education

Wisconsin should develop a new hunters safety program that requires all hunters to take it. This includes all of the older hunters who were born before 1973 that previously never had to take hunters safety. The new program also should require kids to be at least 12 years of age, and it should have a pass fail ratio closer to that of taking your driver’s test.
The way it is now everyone passes on their first try. Hunter safety participants only have to go through 10 hours of class. So kids just show up to class with their phones, text most of the time, and hardly listen to what is going on. The little work that has to be done is sometimes done by their parents and that is unacceptable. It is the paperwork that counts in the hunters safety program now. All they have to do is pass a written test. So everyone always passes the coarse. Everything can’t be taught through a book. It is the hands on experience that people learn best from.
In order to make this coarse harder there should be a field examination. Yes there is a field exam now, but its only about a 20 min walk through of what it is like to physically have a gun in their hands. Kids are constantly doing things wrong during this and nothing is done about it. There needs to be way more time spent outside so people can participate in hands on activities. Then there needs to be a graded field test and points should be deducted for mistakes just like the driver’s test.
Kids under 12 should not be allowed to hunt whether they are with a parent or not. They are just too young to have a deadly weapon in their possession. They don’t have the real life experience to be aware of the consequences of what could happen after they pull the trigger. In today’s age, kids learn from playing video games, and young kids are used to having a restart button when they screw up. But once that gun goes off it is permanent.
Hunters that didn’t have to take hunters safety before because they were “old” enough when the DNR came up with the idea of hunters safety should still have to take it. Just because your old it doesn’t mean anything. A lot of older hunters are still hunting using unsafe methods that they learned from their fathers before hunters safety was even thought of. Now these harmful ways of hunting are being taught to this generation.
2 years ago a man mistook his own grandson for deer, and shot him. I have no idea how you mistake some body for a deer. Some people just shoot at anything that moves. This is why the older age class of hunters needs to take this new hunters safety coarse.
There is going to be some people that disagree with this new hunters safety program. The older hunters aren’t going to like that they have to take this new coarse. We’ve been hunting for years their going to say. The truth of the matter is that the younger generations are learning from them, by watching them, and listening to their stories. Then the younger age classes go out in the field and repeat what they have seen and heard. The older people grew up without things like harnesses that keep you from falling out of the tree. So when grandpa doesn’t wear his harness and little Jonny sees him not wearing one Jonny goes out the next day and doesn’t wear his, and falls out of his tree stand who’s fault is it?

Invasive Pets

Most of us are aware of how destructive invasive species can be. They out compete native animals and plants and throw the local ecosystems into chaos. We have heard the various stories of how zebra mussels are taking over Lake Michigan or the threat that Asian Carp pose. Perhaps we have even seen the Japanese beetles devour our gardens. It doesn’t often seem to occur to people that our own beloved pets can contribute to the invasive species problem.
One of the many sources of pets-gone-invasive are abandoned pets. The problems these released pets can cause are enormous. First of all releasing a pet into the wild does not guarantee its survival, not all animals survive. It is very likely that the animal the owner is trying to “give a chance to be free” will not live very long at all on their own. After all, as a pet they had most if not all of their needs taken care of for them, on their own they have to find it all themselves. Then you have the problems from the opposite extreme, some released pets do too well. They become invasive species, able to out-compete the native animals and wreak havoc on local ecosystems. In some cases they even are doing well enough to breed and are really causing native animal populations to dwindle.
One case of abandoned pets causing damage is the growing population of “wild” Burmese Pythons in Florida. These snakes originally were household pets most likely bought at a pet store and cared for by those who brought them home. Now, Burmese Pythons can make good pets if you’re into snakes and are willing to care for them and consider their needs. Not everyone who brings home a Burmese Python considers everything that goes into owning one, however. They don’t realize how big the snakes can grow, or what it takes to maintain them. For whatever reason these would-be python owners decided they were no longer able to keep them, so they let them go. Big mistake. The Burmese Python population in Florida is growing and destroying native animals, many of which aren’t doing so well to begin with. To top it off this ecological danger has led Congress to pass a Python Ban that punishes all would be reptile enthusiasts because a few made a bad decision.
These are just the “exotic” pets who cause this much damage. Other not so “exotic” pets can also inflict substantial damage to native animals. Feral cats and even not-so-feral outdoor cats are amazingly detrimental to local song bird and small mammal populations. These domesticated cats act as highly skilled invasive predators that efficiently out-compete native predators of small animals. Studies have averaged that a single cat will kill 25 animals per year. It is no joke when bird watchers complain of the neighbor’s cat killing all the songbirds.
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying that no one should have any cats or pythons or pets in general, but there are things one can do to limit their negative environmental impact. Before getting a pet please consider all the responsibility and needs they require. What food, shelter, attention, and medical care do they need? How long do they live? How much will they grow? In the case of cats consider keeping them indoors which in addition to preventing untold deaths on local songbirds will also keep them healthier and help them live longer. If for whatever reason you find yourself no longer able to care for your pet do your best to find a new owner to adopt them. Most important of all do not ever consider releasing them to the wild.
Pets are amazing and enjoyable to have, but please consider their impacts.

References:
http://www.livescience.com/16204-florida-invasive-reptiles-amphibians.html http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/17/us/florida-python-ban/index.html?iref=allsearch http://exoticpets.about.com/cs/resourcesgeneral/a/exoticsrelease.htm http://joomla.wildlife.org/documents/cats_ecological_impacts.pdf

Loss of Organic Matter Due to Improper

Soil conservation is one of the most overlooked issue regarding our environment. Soil erosion is continuously occurring and not much is being done to prevent it. Soil is the most basic unit that gives rise to all living things. We would be nothing without the soil. Improper soil management practices cause many problems regarding soil conservation. One of the biggest problems is the loss of soil organic matter.
Organic matter is the portion of the soil that is made up of dead and decaying plants and animals. It contains most of the nutrients that plants need to grow and be healthy. Organis matter also has many other advantages. One is the ability of organic matter to hold water so that it is more readily available to plants. With less organic matter the soil does not have the ability to hold as much water. Organic matter also promotes root development and houses organisms that are beneficial to the soil. Without organic matter, soils are much less fertile and generally do not support much plant life.
There are many ways in which soil organic matter can be depleted from improper management techniques. One of these techniques involves leaving plant residue on the soil surface for ground cover. This plant residue is the main source of new organic matter for the soil. The ground cover also helps to protect the soil from erosion by wind and water. Erosion is a major factor that leads to loss of organic matter so with more ground cover erosion is reduced and less organic matter is lost.
Another way that organic matter is lost from the soil is through improper tillage techniques. Whenever the soil is tilled it is allowed to come into contact with the air. When more air is added to the soil the oxygen in the air reacts with the carbon in organic matter. This results in the depletion of organic matter and the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere which creates a whole other issue. Because of this tillage should be reduced and should only be done when it is necessary.
Organic matter can also be lost if crops are not rotated properly. Different crops have different effects on the soil. Different crops take up different nutrients from the soil and put certain nutrients back into the soil. When improper combinations of crops are planted in consecutive years certain nutrients are being utilized a lot more than others and the soil is not receiving the proper nutrients in return. This is becoming more and more of a problem because corn prices are so high. Farmers want to plant corn on the same land year after year. When situations like this occur, plants are utilizing more and more of the organic matter in the soil and it becomes depleted.
I have lived on a farm for most of my life so I know how essential the soil is. I help to make management decisions on my parents farm and we are always implementing techniques that ensure that very little organic matter is lost and promote soil conservation. I believe that more people should take a deeper look into this issue and really think about what is best for the soil when they are making management decisions.

References:
http://www.extension.iastate.edu/publications/pm1871.pdf

Get Back to Basics

The United States was founded on the idea that each generation should be “better off” than their parents. This meant a higher quality of life, more income, and to live comfortably. At what point do we say enough is enough and stop believing that we still need to strive to do better than our parents. Society’s mentality for our generation is to go to school, get a good paying job, get married, have kids and have enough money to not only live comfortably, but buy whatever you want.
I think society is pushing us in the wrong direction. We should be working towards learning skills that have been lost to our grandparents’ generation. Everyone can relate to visiting grandma’s house and the first thing she does is offer you a mound of homemade food. Chances are if your grandparents grew up in a rural area, or used to live in one, they had a large garden, canned a lot of food for over the winter and either prepared wild game or raised their own animals. My point is they didn’t rely on money as their main means of survival. They knew how to do things for themselves, produce some of their own food, and could live self-sufficiently if need be. They didn’t have cable and weren’t worrying about how they were going to afford the next new phone or computer.
I think there is more joy and reward in trying to live simply and ignore many of the superficial things that people want but really don’t need. Life is much less stressful when you aren’t focus on your high paying stressful job to afford all of the things you THINK you need. There is nothing wrong with having a lower paying job if it is rewarding and you enjoy the work. Society frowns on the “hippies” that choose to live off the grid and trade for goods that they cannot produce themselves. I am not saying that I think everyone should go to that extreme, but I think it’s wise to start doing more things for yourself. Even if you have a city lot and can only plant a small garden, it’s more rewarding and better than not planting one at all. Eating wild game such as venison in lieu of ground beef purchased from the store is not only healthier, but environmentally friendly.
These are just some suggestions in a long list of ways you could live a more sustainable and rewarding life. I’ve found that eliminating modern conveniences like cable and videogames are not very difficult and you find more productive things to do. Start small and ask yourself as you go through your daily routine are the things you think you need really that important. My reason for eliminating unnecessary things and learning how to do practical things for yourself is twofold: 1. there is more satisfaction in producing your own goods, whether it be food from the garden or a cabinet for the house. You learn to think about and appreciate things more when you produce them yourself instead of tossing them in the garbage when you’re tired of them. 2. as a general rule the fewer things you purchase the more environmentally friendly you are going to be. When you buy things try to buy locally as it reduces transportation waste and puts money into peoples’ pockets, not corporations. Buying local food or growing your own is one of the best ways to be environmentally friendly since large scale agriculture is degrading land at an unsustainable rate, but that’s a whole other discussion.
I would like to conclude by saying that I am not an environmentalist or a hippie, rather a realist. I see the things the way they are and am by no means an extremist. I am an avid trapper and outdoorsman who has an interest in subsistence. I speak my piece today because I think society has missed the ball and is pushing our youth in an unhappy and materialistic direction.

Biking, a Positive Lifestyle Change!

My parents took me around to see things when I was a kid, we would go to places like California, New Jersey, or even Europe; they taught my sister and I to travel. On these trips we would run sightseeing ventures out of our way to historic monuments and other significant sites. We didn’t always go far to experience new things, we would also go just a mile down the road to Military Ridge state trail where we would use our bikes to get around. This was always my family’s chance to experience the sites that were familiar to us personally and not from the confines of a car window plus, we always got to stop for a soda midway.
Now that I’m older I don’t have the time to engage in that much recreational exercise activity, I need to get to class. The scenery isn’t always the best on my daily rides to school either, but what really stands as the pay off is the amount of exercise that I receive from my commute. Imagine that, instead of acting like most Americans, I live close to my place of toil and what’s great about that is I don’t have to sit in the car and let my muscles atrophy away in to fat, I bike. As a possible measure of my aerobic success I have noticed a difference in the way that people look at me, finally, I’m a fit man!
Biking has been quite influential for my health both physically and mentally; while I am in a car I have the reality that what I am doing is potentially dangerous to someone else, when I am on the bike that no longer applies. It’s not just that the car is piece of potentially dangerous machinery it also hurts people and the environment just by getting turned on. America has the worst per capita carbon out put of any nation on the planet and our economy is centered completely on the combustion of fossil fuels. This causes the earth to warm and with that comes the rise of the oceans, something that will have an effect on all of us by the end of my lifetime this nation really needs to change its lifestyle.
Biking is the best thing that we can add to the American lifestyle not only because it saves the environment or builds muscle but because it helps to save money. I have been able to save money for weekend fun just by biking to class; I don’t have to pay $50 at the pump each week that I drive. I can spend that $50 on something else like a CD, new pair of headphones, or a six-pack of fine beer. My personal lifestyle is further improved.
Biking has been one of the best things in my life. It has helped me save money and save the environment, it has improved my own personal fitness, and it has given me a chance to be closer to my surroundings. I don’t see why most urban Americans chose to abandon that as a lifestyle option, it really makes no sense. Biking needs to stop being perceived as only a recreational fitness booster it needs to be accepted as a primary means of transportation. From here on out I choose to call the bike a vehicle.

Golden Eagle Falconry in Wisconsin

I have been interested in the sport of falconry my entire life, and have been increasingly interested in it in the past years. Falconry is defined as the sport of catching prey with a trained bird of prey. In this sport there are many different types of birds you can use, everything from a little kestrel falcon (Falco sparverius) , to a golden eagle (Aquila chrysateos).
However, the state of Wisconsin does not allow the use of golden eagles in the sport of falconry. Personally having worked with captive eagles for the past four years I cannot see why they are not allowed in the sport. I can see how, if you are not trained correctly on how to work with them, they can be dangerous, but in order to obtain an eagle permit you need to have seven years of experience with birds of prey. Someone with that much experience should not have any trouble dealing with an eagle.
I was confused as to why falconers in Wisconsin could not use golden eagles for falconry, so I decided to ask a couple of my falconry friends if they knew why this was so. I got the same story from all three people. Apparently there were a couple of guys that wanted to become professional falconers, and provide golf courses and airports with geese control. So they went and got themselves a couple of Gyrfalcons (Falco rusticolus), one of the largest falcons in the world that can fly well over 200 miles per hour. Once they had their Gyrfalcons they began flying them in the golf courses and airports to scare away the geese. This worked for a while, until the geese learned that the falcons would not do anything to them, just fly over their heads. Then the two falconers decided to go and get themselves a couple of golden eagles, because nothing stays around when there is a golden eagle in the air, and a eagle is more than capable of taking a goose.
It was going really good for the two falconers, their eagles were chasing and killing geese left and right, and the air ports and golf courses were very pleased that the geese were gone. One day, however, one of the eagles decided to kill something that it was not supposed to, someone’s dog. Because the eagles were so used to people they have no problem flying right next to someone to kill a prey item, in this case a small dog. Now the eagle was only doing what came naturally, it saw something that was a potential prey item and it caught it.
It was really no one’s fault that one of the eagles killed a dog, but as so happens with today’s society, this ended in a law suit that put golden eagles on the “no fly” list for falconers in Wisconsin. Personally I do not believe that golden eagles should not be on the “no fly” list just because of one accident that happened a long time ago. There are some changes that could be made that, in my mind, would make it possible for golden eagles to once again be used in the sport of falconry in the state of Wisconsin. For example the government could make it mandatory that if you are going to be flying a golden eagle, you first need to have a certain number of hours of experience working with eagles. I believe that the more you know about something, the better chance you have at knowing how to control it. Now you will never have one hundred percent control over a wild animal, if anybody ever tells you that you will they are lying.
Golden eagles are amazing animals, and are a great companion to falconers all over the world. But I do not believe that all the falconers in a state should be punished for something that a different falconer had done and really had no control over. There should be changes in policies that allow falconers to regain the ability to fly golden eagles in Wisconsin.

Asian Carp: Nuisance or Nutrition?

The saga of the Asian carp is a major problem in many of the lakes and streams in Illinois. Trying to rid this invasive species that was introduced in U.S. waters is not an easy task. The Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR) considers this fish species a plankton-gobbling nuisance. Asian carp are showing a great threat to the Great Lakes and the numerous waterways in Illinois. The IDNR have come up with a way to make use of these fish. In September of 2011, IDNR held a public tasting event to sample what these bottom feeding fish taste like. A Louisiana chef by the name Philippe Parola says that “fish are one of the greatest resources we have”. Hundreds of people attended this taste testing event, but they were not aware of what they were eating. This was done to prevent the volunteers of having a negative attitude before they even tasted it. It was a success, says Philippe, many people gave two thumbs up. There were many comments stating how flavorful and light tasting the fish tasted.

This new idea for using Asian carp was for feeding the hungry and also making use of this unwanted fish in Illinois waters. I personally think this is a great idea because it serves two positive purposes. It is a great idea to make use of an animal that may be killed or harmed when they are captured. This is where I feel environmental ethics comes into play. We have to remember that this invasive species is still an animal that we should treat with same respect as a sport fish, such as a Musky. This is an ongoing issue that the public is paying for with their tax dollars to sustain this threat to our waterways. This has been in the news frequently stating that Asian carp will be served at homes or kitchens that house people facing hunger. I would think that this is a great idea because we will know if it is actually going to use or being thrown away. This new way for making use of an unwanted fish is spreading in the U.S. and internationally where the fish populations are scarce. Overall, this could be a great way to gain income and help clean up Illinois waters
Tareen, Sophia. "Illinois Launches Asian Carp Anti-hunger Program." Associated Press [New York] 23 Sept. 2011. Print.

Children Losing Out

Our children are losing out on valuable experiences that would help them to succeed in school, social circumstances, and overall quality of life. How is this happing you may ask? It’s all due to ‘Nature Deficiency Disorder’. Kids are not getting the exposure to the great outdoors that they so greatly need.
Nature Deficiency Disorder has become a prominent issue among American children. They are spending more time inside than ever before, not receiving adequate time immersed in nature. Gone are the days of children riding bikes around town, playing made-up games at recess, or laying in a field watching the clouds.
How could something like this be damaging kid’s development? Free-play outside helps expand kids’ cognitive and social abilities. Aspects such as self-esteem, problem solving, confidence, and independence all are increased through experiencing the outdoors.
Cutting recess and environmental programs in schools is supposed to have a positive influence on test scores, allowing for more learning time in the classroom. However, according to studies by the California Student Assessment Project students understanding of science when they participated in outdoor education programs. They showed that students’ who participated in environmental programs did better on standardized tests in reading, math, spelling, and language.
Richard Louv, author of Last Child in the Woods, interviewed a plethora of children. One boy told him that “I like to play indoors better, ‘cause that’s where all the electrical outlets are.” If that isn’t a red flag to the future of children, what else could be? Getting kids away from the electrical outlets is in their best interest.
Unstructured, free play outside has been shown to significantly advance kids cognitive, social, and emotional capabilities. Everything from stress reduction and self-awareness to problem solving and reduced aggression is positively affected. Now some may say that hours kids put into playing sports should have the same effects, but free play offers something different.
Away from the control of adults, kids have the opportunity to be creative and make up their own games. They also have to deal with the issues and conflicts that arise without adult intervention. This helps them to be better prepared for the future and common conflict resolution issues that come from everyday life.
Kids are spending too much time inside. For their own health they need to get outside. In a society that is so caught up in achieving excellence, why are we not helping children to gain the experiences that will help them attain greater success in their lives?


California Student Assessment-
http://www.seer.org/pages/csap.pdf

Last Child in the Woods- Richard Louv

Declination of Timber Rattlers in Wisconsin

There are many people out there that are terrified of snakes because they have none or very little knowledge about what ones are venomous and what ones are not, and their typical behavior. Wisconsin is home of 22 different species of snakes, however only 2 of them are venomous. The larger of the two is the Timber rattlesnake also known as the “canebrake”. This species of snake was once very common in Wisconsin in the early 1980’s, but when people purposely go out of their way to track these beautiful creatures down to kill them (even though the snakes were not near a populated area causing harm to people) for no reason, their population has decreased to nearly nothing in the state of Wisconsin, along with many other non-venomous snake species. People have been killing off Northern Water snakes, Bull snakes, Fox snakes, and even Rat snakes because people are ignorant from telling the difference between the two; whenever someone spots a larger bodied snake they automatically assume it’s a rattler. Since 1900, there has only been one person to die in Wisconsin from a rattlesnake bite and just a handful of bites since then. These rattlesnakes are a very passive and would rather try to avoid you and escape than turn and bite. The people that get bite from these snakes are the ones who try to handle them without any experience or have consumed alcohol. To avoid this a law was passed in Wisconsin to avoid people from killing endangered or threatened species, and to help bring their population back to where it was in the 1980’s, so in the year 1997 the Timber Rattlesnake was put on the list of threatened species by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). Rattlesnakes have many good qualities, the most important is the control of rodents. Rodents carry many diseases that can cause illness and even death to people and other wildlife. If the rodent population was not controlled by snakes they would over run people’s houses and kill over 100 times more people than do rattlesnakes. There are many ways to avoiding these creatures if you know their range and habitat they are found in. They range from central Wisconsin near Devils lake state park to west Wisconsin by La Crosse as well as along the Mississippi river. Their habitat consists of high bluffs, deciduous forests and woodland edges with large rocks to lie on top of. People should also now how to identify a venomous to a non-venomous snake. Timber rattlesnakes have very narrow necks with a large wide head shaped in a “V”. They have a heavy, light yellow, gray or in some case a greenish body with dark black or a rust-colored “zigzag” strips along the length of their back and a black tail that are tipped with rattles. We need more people educated on species like this to help others better understand how important these creatures are to our wildlife, and also to tell the difference between a venomous and non-venomous snake.


References
http://learningstore.uwex.edu/assets/pdfs/g3139.pdf
http://www.weau.com/home/headlines/19477979.html
http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/huntwild/wild/species/timberrattlesnake/

Is Energy Efficiency Bad? Jevons’ Paradox: the more efficiently you use a resource, the more you will use it.

Piggy Principle: instead of saving the energy conserved though efficiency; we find new ways to spend it, leading to greater consumption than before while raising the carrying capacity of the human population. (The more we can the more we do.)
We live on a crowded planet thanks to one thing, oil. The historical jump in population initiated by easy containing and easy to burn fuel allowing us to spend lots of energy. The more energy we spend the more we allow our uncontrolled population to grow. But there other is limiting factors such as water and disease from overcrowding. Science is continually suppresses these limiting factors so the rising populations continue to flourish and expedite resource consumption eating away at our natural life supporting systems. Instead of learning how to use energy more wisely we need to focus more on using less energy. I am an advocate for energy efficiency but it needs to be seen as a tool to transform society and not make the Earths poison cheaper.
The Four System Conditions for Sustainability (review)
1. In the sustainable society, nature is not subject to systematically increasing concentration of substances extracted from the Earth’s crust.
2. In the sustainable society, nature is not subject to systematically increasing concentrations of substances produced by society.
3. In the sustainable society, nature is not subject to systematically increasing degradation by physical means.
4. In the sustainable society, people are not subject to conditions that systematically undermine their capacity to meet their needs.
Anything that does not meet these demands is not sustainable. Energy efficiency is great, although we are still users, consumers and destroyers. This planet is more complex and intricate then we can imagine. The mysterious natural cycles and systems create life and let it thrive. We forget how delicate it is, how the simplest organisms and the simplest molecules are what give us everything we know and breathe. We need to break out of the “clockwork” way of thinking(that everything functions in separate parts) and understand that we need to ponder the interwoven nature of all things.
Until humanity reaches a new level of enlightenment where we care for others more than ourselves (“greed is good”), the more we think it is ok to burn energy the more we will buy.
What it will take for everyone to realize this is a massive grass-roots movement. Either a revolution or our civilization has ever seen. We need to stop thinking the problem is too big for us to handle and get off your ass and act. Seek the knowledge and teach – Go door to door and talk to the people next to you on the bus on the street at school, work – everywhere and everyone. There is no time to be shy anymore!
Everyone does not need and fully understand the science… They just need to comprehend that this planet is the one and only; that it is possible to burn down the temple that we reside in. New theology or faiths can be transformed to influence people to do what needs to be done. Whatever it takes is fine with me but just relying on energy efficiency may make things worse. We need that paradigm shift now more than ever and we need our firesouls to be easily accessible and easy to use create the new historical jump of population of people who understand the need to live sustainably.
“…the climate is a problem that can just be fixed or quickly solved by technological fixes without addressing the larger structure of ideas, philosophies, assumptions, and paradigms that have brought us to the brink of irreversible disaster… There are certainly better technologies to be deployed, and far better ones soon to come. But the climate is not likely to be reestablished by any known technological fix quickly, easy, or painlessly.” (Orr, David Down to the Wire, 2009)

What the frack is going on here?

Hydraulic Fracturing. That’s what. If you are not familiar, here’s the drive-thru version of what fracking all entails. A well is drilled several thousand feet into the earth, into rock formations that hold natural gas. A hydraulic system then pumps a chemical cocktail down the well into the rock formation. The pressure caused by the righteous chemical reaction that takes place deep within the earth fractures the surrounding rock formation and creates millions of little cracks for gas to flow into the well and up to the surface where we burn it to fry our bratwurst and heat our homes.
Fracking has come under very heavy scrutiny lately. The major concern being groundwater contamination either from the chemicals used in the process or natural gas entering groundwater through the fractures or improperly maintained wells. Either of these poses a threat to humans, livestock, and wildlife that rely on water from fracked areas. News crews are scurrying about, collecting footage of people lighting their faucet water on fire and mules that are losing their hair. A couple documentaries have even been made chronicling the environmental and human health threats of hydraulic fracturing.
My opinion on fracking is so radical, so utterly countercultural, that I should really restrain myself, alas. After ruminating this topic for some time, I posed this simple question; so what?
Fracking as we know it today was first performed in the 1940’s and has been used in thousands of natural gas wells all over the country ever since. Today it is hard to find a well that has not been fracked at some point in its life cycle. The sheer pervasiveness of this practice and the relative scarcity of cases where groundwater contamination has been linked to fracking begs the question; is all of the negative attention really warranted? I will concede that there is the potential to harm people and natural resources through fracking, but this is hardly grounds for wholesale condemnation. Instead, we should invest in this technology, improve it, make it safer, more controlled, and more productive. Fracking improved the productivity of gas wells by as much as nine times when it was introduced. The foreseeable future holds no promise of a reduction in energy demand or a viable substitute for natural gas. Simply put, gas is here to stay, and fracking is too. Imagine if we needed to drill 9 conventional wells to meet the productivity of one fractured well. Don’t forget to count the environmental toll brought on by all of the additional infrastructure. Water use is another reason that many are condemning fracking. David Yoxtheimer, a hydrogeologist at Penn State put fracking’s water use in perspective. He claims that every day roughly 9.5 billion gallons of water are consumed in the state of Pennsylvania. Of that, 1.9 million gallons (.002% if my math is right) is used for fracking. A five-fold increase in fracking would bring that figure up to 1% of the daily water usage.
Instead of crying wolf, let’s tame it. Fracking has come a long way and it still has a long way to go. Continued development of this technology will foster the safe production of reliable energy within the nation’s borders. The accidents and damages will always be front page news, fodder for fools says I. In my opinion, this is one of two viable, long-term energy sources this county has on the table. We really don’t have a choice at this point. Frack away.


spe.org/jpt/print/archives/2010/12/10Hydraulic.pdf

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/coal-oil-gas/top-10-myths-about-natural-gas-drilling-6386593#slide-2