Showing posts with label environment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label environment. Show all posts

Nov 9, 2008

Recipe for rescuing our reefs

The colourful world supported by coral reefs is under threat as oceans absorb greater quantities of carbon dioxide, says Rod Salm. In this week's Green Room, he says we must accept that we are going to lose many of these valuable ecosystems, but adds that not all hope is lost.

Great Barrier Reef coral (Image: James Cook University)
Imagine all the colour and vibrancy of coral reefs fading away into fuzzy, crumbling greys and browns, and you're left with a coral graveyard that could become the norm
I've been privileged to see many of the world's finest and least disturbed reefs.

Mine were the first human eyes to see many of the remotest reefs at a time when we really could describe them as pristine.

I would never have dreamed that they were at risk from people, far less than from something as remote then as climate change.

Today, despite the doom and gloom one reads so much about, one can still find reefs that are vibrant, thriving ecosystems.

But sadly, too, there are more and more that look like something from the dark side of the Moon.

These degraded reefs have been ravaged by destructive fishing, bad land use practices that smother them with silt, and pollutants that foster disease and overgrowth by seaweeds.

More alarmingly, there are large areas that are killed off and degraded by warming seas linked to climate change.

We've all read that global warming poses a tremendous threat to our planet, and that coral reefs will face an uphill battle to survive in warmer waters.

Yet the greatest threat to our oceans and to all of its wonders is little known, nearly impossible to see, and potentially devastating. This is not climate change, but does stem from the excess carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to climate change.

Changing chemistry

The ocean absorbs about one-third of the CO2 entering the atmosphere - a natural process that for millennia has maintained the carbon balance of our planet.

In recent times we have upset this balance; global CO2 emissions are at an all-time high, and our oceans are absorbing more CO2 and at faster rates than ever before, causing a shift toward greater acidity.

This removes carbonate from the water; and carbonate is an essential building block for calcifying organisms, like corals, molluscs, sea urchins and many other important creatures that live on reefs or help to build them.

Too much carbonic acid lowers the natural pH balance of the oceans, causing acidification, which wreaks havoc on marine habitats and species.

Just imagine all the colour and vibrancy of coral reefs fading away into fuzzy, crumbling greys and browns, and you're left with a coral graveyard that could become the norm if we don't address the threats to our oceans.

Bleached coral (Image: AP)
The high visibility of coral bleaching makes this relatively easy to see and study, but ocean acidification is difficult to detect by sight alone

We need to find ways to convince people to take action, but that is a major challenge.

Given the difficulties that many coral reef managers around the world have in controlling such pressing direct threats as destructive fishing, overfishing and pollution, they are understandably hesitant about taking on an issue that they feel is beyond their ability and mandate to tackle.

Climate change is often seen as too daunting and too global for them to address, and too abstract for them to communicate.

Fortunately, in some respects, the sudden and startling onset of mass coral bleaching linked to warming seas has changed that a little.

We have developed and are applying some straightforward, practical actions to design marine protected networks and zone the individual sites to protect areas that are naturally resistant to bleaching

These areas are key, as they provide larvae that are transported to more vulnerable reefs where they settle and enhance recovery.

The high visibility of coral bleaching makes this relatively easy to see and study, but ocean acidification is difficult to detect by sight alone.

It is creeping, progressive, and insidious - likened by some scientists to osteoporosis of the reef - a weakening of the reef structure that makes corals more vulnerable to breakage from waves and human use.

We simply do not know yet whether we have reached or surpassed the point of no return for some coral species.

If current emission trends continue, we could see a doubling of atmospheric CO2 in as little as 50 years.

This would lead to an unprecedented acidification of our oceans that coral reefs would be unlikely to survive, a scenario that should spur us into action to try and find solutions.

A significant lowering of ocean pH would mean potentially massive coral loss. That would lead to the death of countless marine species as well as the devastation of economies dependent on ocean health and productivity.

'Meeting of minds'

It would also mean the end of an era for coral reef and scuba diving aficionados around the world.

But, more importantly, it would remove the livelihoods of hundreds of millions of people around the globe who depend on reefs for food, income, coastal protection and stability.

Current estimates predict that we could lose all coral reefs by the end of the century - or, in the worst case scenario, possibly decades sooner, if we don't take action now to prevent ocean acidification.

Diseased coral


We have to maintain hope and optimism and keep trying to find solutions.

The Nature Conservancy recently convened leading climate change experts, top marine scientists, and prominent coral reef managers from around the globe for a "meeting of the minds" session to chart a course of action for addressing ocean acidification.

The key findings and recommendations from this gathering were compiled into the Honolulu Declaration on Ocean Acidification and Reef Management.

The most logical, long-term solution to ocean acidification impacts is to stabilise atmospheric CO2 by reducing emissions around the globe.

Yet the Honolulu Declaration also outlines tangible steps that can be taken now to increase the survival of coral reefs in an acidifying ocean, while also working to limit CO2 emissions.

For example, we need to identify and protect reefs that are less vulnerable to ocean acidification, either because of good flushing by oceanic water or biogeochemical processes that alter the water chemistry, making it more alkaline and better able to buffer acidification.

We can achieve this protection by designating additional "marine protected areas" and revising marine zoning plans.

We also need to integrate the management of these areas with reform of land uses that generate organic wastes and effluents that contribute to acidification.

At the local level, we may need to restrict access to more fragile coral communities or limit it to designated trails, much as we do with trails through sensitive environments on land.

We should consider designating "sacrificial" reefs or parts of reefs for diver training and heavy visitor use.

Another intriguing option is the prospect of farming local corals that prove more resistant to acidification, and "planting" them in place of those that weaken and break apart.

The consequences of inaction are too depressing to contemplate.

Global leaders, reef managers, and citizens around the globe should give all the support they can to the Honolulu Declaration to ensure the survival of the beauty and benefits of our marine treasure trove for future generations.

Dr Rod Salm is director of The Nature Conservancy's Tropical Marine Conservation Program in the Asia-Pacific region

The Green Room is a series of opinion articles on environmental topics running weekly on the BBC News website


Do you agree with Rod Salm? Is too little being done to halt human activities harming fragile marine ecosystems? Are efforts to save coral reefs being overshadowed by problems on land? Or are you optimistic that scientists, conservationists and politicians will find a way to save the colourful underwater worlds?

The oceans sustain all life on earth. There are phytoplankton which regulate the bio chemical balance in the oceans.

If the ph drops too much, then the phytoplankton may die. If they die, evrything dies. Nothing makes it.
MR SPIRIT, GLASTONBURY, UK

I agree that coral reefs faces long term problem of acidification. What about short term problems in the mean time so that reefs will survive to face the acidification issue. Also looking at all issues of global warming effect, by the time that CO2 level reaches the concentration twice as the present or even at 450 ppm, would coral reef fate still be the issue to worry about. After all Homo sapiens disappear, coral reefs can still have time to adapt to the environment.
Hansa Chansang, Phuket, Thailand

It is only logical that if two-thirds of the Earth's surface is oceans, what happens to those oceans will affect the entire world, including the creatures that live on the land.
Donna Metreger, Be'er Sheva, Israel

I wouldn't worry too much about ocean acidification - the current levels of CO2 in the atmosphere are approximately one tenth of those when the corals first evolved and are near the lowest they have ever been.

Corals will not notice a lowering of pH in the slightest.

Bleaching occurs when the algae that the coral lives in symbiosis with are expelled by the coral. This often occurs as waters warm or cool and is quickly reversed when new algae that are more suited to the new temperatures take the place of the old ones.

So global temperatures warming from the current lows also won't kill off the corals.

I do, however, agree with fact that coral reefs should be protected from over-fishing, boating and pollution as these do have the potential to destroy the marine and reef environments.
James S, Auckland, NZ

If you would like to DO SOMETHING to help coral reef decline, please support organizations that are actively working to save them including ReefCheck.org. Reef Check has volunteer teams in over 90 countries carrying out citizen science, student education and expeditions. You are welcome to participate and help save reefs.
Gregor Hodgson, Pacific Palisades, California, USA

I've recently moved to Kaua'i feeling a desire and need toward working to preserve one of the most beautiful places in the United States. I am agast at the destruction the near shore reefs have endured from excessive developement, bad strom water runoff management, and lack of nutrient reduduction via sound waste management. What will become this place, and others? Time will tell, I have confidence in the ability of the natural world to rebound from the destructive forces of our species. However lets do all we can to correct this problem, be aware and get involved. Now is the time to re- investigate our role on this planet, and a time to give back.
keith l conant, princeville, Kaua'i, Hawaii

A very well written and well structured article. Not only giving us the facts but also ideas to pursue. In business jargon "We need answers, not problems" and the article gives some which added to the quality of the piece.

I live on Bonaire, a divers paradise. I have been diving here for 20 years and the degradation of the island's reef is not in question.

Our Marine Park is very active in trying to prevent further reef damage at local level, but like all Marine Parks, it needs helps from governments to slow down coastal construction, provide infrastructure to deal with run off and to create legislation to prevent damaging fishing techniques.

Congratulations to the writer and all those people that are doing whatever they can to protect the reefs whatever the cause of their decay.
Ron Sewell, Bonaire, Netherlands Antilles.

Mark, Coventry / UK and all other people who speak of Global Warming saying it's all utter rubbish... (this includes my parents)

I believe we could be in real trouble, one way or another. However I always say one thing to those who are in total doubt or denial; It might be a natural cycle that is warming the planet, or nature might find a way to regulate any damage we may cause to the earths eco system. But for the sake of our children's children are you prepaired to take that risk??
Paul M, Wellington, NZ.

Acidifcation may be a threat but we should not rule out more hefty pollutants. Corals especially appear vulnerable to urine and sun protection oils produced and spread in the sea by visitors such as tourists. The very divers and snorklers that 'inspect' the coral bleaching may very well be causing it. We should compare for once the pristine coral reefs that are never visited by tourist to the man-trodden beaches of the big tourist resorts. You want to preserve coral? Then start diving clean. Or stay out of the water.
Peter Ambagtsheer, Apeldoorn The Netherlands

Mark from Coventry, UK wants a break.. I feel like breaking something but I'm not sure he would like it. The facts are we are losing these ancient creatures and habitat by slow death and there is nothing 'cloudy' or 'funny' about that. For some 400 million or so years they have contributed to life's diversity and to quibble over weather it is CO2 emissions, over fishing or agricultural run off, seems petty to the extreme and just for good measure, you, Mark from Coventry seem to be the one 'clouding the issue' with your arrogance.
Keith Cook, Auckland, New Zealand

We continue to look for the 'technological fix' to take care of our biosphere inbalances. The root of all this is that we are a species in overshoot, consuming far too many resources and creating too much waste (including the favourite villain, CO2).

The only solution is, and will be, a natural one. All species that go into overshoot, inevitably crash in numbers. When this happens, the die-off of the human species will reduce to population to a level that is in balance with the biosphere life processes. It is very simple ecology. Everything else is fantasy.

Thank you for taking time to read this.
Mr Rpnald Brown, Phuket, Thailand

Definitely too little is being done. Why isn't Coral an Endangered Species? Surely that would make the legislation easier to pass. What about Artificial Reefs? It would be good to see some more purpose-sunk wrecks. The Coral farming is an interesting idea too.
Jane, Playa del Carmen, Mexico

Sounds simple and foolish, but could over harvesting of the Ocean's sea shells be making the Ocean more acidic? In a fish tank, just one shell added can have profound effects on the acidity.
Elizabeth Parrish, Seattle

I agree that much of a damage is man made through a thorough fish pouching for aquarium use. In order to capture a life fish from the reef a poison is spread through out the area to numb the targeted biome of fish, unfortunately the side effect is catastrophic for the coral. Just a note.
Tomasz Stanek, San Bernardino, California USA

I think its awesome wat they are doing because its leting the world knw that all though this is an issue no one really knws about it is an issue that is real and its now.! If these great people and scientist did not pick up on this problem who knows wat devestating consequence could have cme out of the distruction of this beautiful live'n coaral.
Tamara, Auckland New Zealand

This gentleman talks of "hope", but when you end the article you discover that the only thing he can muster to support the hope is a "Mind meeting", that is to say, another gathering of talking people. I lost my hope on those meetings many many years ago...
Fernando Villegas, Santiago de Chile

Ocean acidification is the forgotten problem. It is so overlooked that the climate change denialists don't have any of their usual pre-prepared responses (it's entirely natural event etc.. ). It is also worrying that some of the proposed geo-engineering solutions to climate change (for example the rather fanciful mirrors in space solution) will do nothing to curb the increasing concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere that is responsible for the acidification of oceans. We have to raise the profile of this issue. Firstly, so that the public is aware that our CO2 emissions are causing more than one problem. Secondly, to emphasize that we can only get ourselves out of this mess by curbing our emissions.
Paul A, London, UK

Certainly not enough care has been taken of the marine environment for decades. Although the marine environment is arguably the most important in terms of global weather and also atmospheric composition it has largely treated as an open sewer. The sad fact is for most people it is 'out of sight, out of mind'. For example Broward, and Miami Dade councils of South Florida... have denied the mounting scientific evidence that effluent being pumped over coral reefs causes damage and favour the "It does no harm" opinion. Such dangerous opinions in the legislature of so called 'developed nations' will ultimately end in the ruin of some of the more accessiable reefs in Southern Florida. And sadly by the time that people believe it to be true - it's often far too late. As a marine biologist I am constantly saddened by the attitudes of people that could make a difference in terms of environmental protection legislation and frustrated that there is little funding or help for early career marine biologists who desparately want to "make a difference" and show the importance of protecting fragile habitats such as coarl reefs and mangroves in a global context. Once it's gone it's gone. That's the sad thing about it - but it doesn't have to be this way.
Claire Phillips, Oxford

I feel very strong empathy for Dr Salm. I walked away from this 14 years ago. He is still watching it face to face. There is only one answer; we had to stop - and we had to stop about 40 years ago, when Kennedy was committing us to flying to the moon, he should have been committing us to living on the planet we had. We have to stop, and make a balance with the levels of human activity that the planet will tolerate. Until that message sinks in to the minds of 6 billion people; there is nothing that can be done for now. At present course; that understanding will not register till the World's ecosystem has collapsed; taking our human society and economics crashing down with it. The governments of the world cannot pump enough money to keep this "more more more" expectation ramping up an ever steepening curve for much longer. At least 4 billion people, of the 6 billion people presently on the planet, go into free fall, and that will be that. In a couple of million years, the oceans will cool, the ph values will settle, the coral will flourish again . . and it will be as if we were never here, even in the blink of an evolutionary eye. The only question left is . . if any of us survive the die back - will the humans that remain evolve to be smart enough to learn our lessson, make peace with our home, and not mess it up all over again ? How long will it take you to explain it to 6 billion people Dr Salm ? Will the reefs last that long ? No ? - then I'm afraid the learning process will be one of cold hard practical experience. I am deeply sorry.
steven walker, Penzance

Fishing practices are devastating "links in the chain" that enable the life cycle of the marine ecosystem to support itself. If all "net fishing" were banned there would be little damage to and destruction of the species not being fished and their habitats. Commercial net fishing is very destructive. Just watch "blue planet" until the message gets through.
Shaun M White, Edmonton, Canada

Although I am not in any way an expert that could agree or disagree with Mr. Salm, I strongly believe we are doing far too little to stop damaging our environment and start to repair what has been damaged. I am optimistic that ways can be found to begin those repairs, and I find the idea of "farming" coral reefs very interesting, but I fear we have become too self-absorbed to recognize our responsibility to the planet we live on. I sincerely hope I am wrong - and I applaud Rod Salm and his colleagues for all of their efforts.
Yolanda, Greenfield USA

Much is said about save the planet and its many ecospheres ,but is anybody really going to make the sacrifices needed to make a difference? 90+ percent of the population want to be what they see on the TV,shameless ,ignorant consumers that adhere to the motto "more is better"..Even the education we recieve in schools directs us to become a well oiled part in the mechanism of consumer domination. Wise and educated men such as leaders of state know of all these problems,yet chose not to adress them because they fear the solutions would alienate them from the voter.Green seems to be good only as far as ti suits the consumer and his supplier.Shame on us all.Rod Salm has it right in his article.How right do you have it in your life?? Lets see if we can spend and save the coral reefs.Real education is what is needed to see consumerism exposed as the terrifying monster that it is. Consume less= sustained life forms.We all make a difference,even you. Best wishes.
Martin Jackson, Tavira ,Portugal.

good article but ideas for solutions exist mainly in the realm of pie-in-the-sky, particularly for the developing countries within whose waters the majority of the coral reefs lie. as such, without specific programming and funding (akin to those that might equally be dreamt up for tropical forests) from donor or developed countries, little will be achieved. the consequences of inaction are indeed too depressing to contemplate, but a small, sand wall will not hold back the tsunami.
sdw, maputo. mozambique

Lets not forget that ours is the Water Planet, if the Oceans are in peril the entire planet faces extinction, everything humanly possible should be done at all levels to stop polluting our Oceans and bring back eco systems where ever possible, set up ocean preserves and stop over fishing.
gert glende, Vancouver, BC , Canada

There are those that may argue that the effects are not as bad as predicted, but the reefs here in Pohnpei definitely seem to follow the trend. I have yet to find a part of the reef here that does not show the effects of an acidifying ocean. I'm sure that foreign fishing boats, harbored inside the reef boundaries, who recklessly dispose of their used oil directly into the water don't help the situation any!
Lemuel Recinos, Kolonia, Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia

This is an excellent summary of a major issue that even most marine scientists have been unaware of up until recently. ...and if you're one of those who doubt the predictions of future climate models, then you can suspend doubt now: the acidification of the oceans isn't a matter of debate, or models, or future projections, it's already happening and it will continue to happen so long as atmospheric CO2 keeps going up. That much is well understood chemistry. Yes, it's true that atmospheric CO2 level have been much higher in the past, and yes the oceans can buffer these changes, but we'll have to wait about 1000 years for that to happen. The problem is that the CO2 levels are rising SO RAPIDLY. If ever there was a good reason for reducing CO2 emissions as fast as possible, this is it.
Prof. Jon Havenhand, Strömstad, Sweden

Simple speechless. What utter rubbish. They've given up on 'Global warming' and called it 'Climate Change' as the world has stopped warming. Now we need a new 'you're all doomed Captain' scenario to keep the waning interest up. Coral reefs are suffering because of over fishing for aquarium fish, physical damage and agricultural run off, you are merely clouding the issue with CO2. You can find coral fossils dating back hundreds of millions of year, from times when CO2 levels were much might (x17 or more) than they are now. Funny how they seem to have thrived. Give us a break.
Mark , Coventry / UK

We should use bicycle power more, and the bus!
Marion Johansson, Denmark

source: bbc

Fort Lauderdale Blog and Real Estate News
Rory Vanucchi
RoryVanucchi@gmail.com

www.LasOlasLifestyles.com
www.FortLauderdaleLiving.net


Nov 8, 2008

100-year-old Keys wildlife refuge looks to the future

The Key West National Wildlife Refuge celebrates 100 years and prepares for challenges that include public overuse and diminishing food sources for its birds.

Key West wildlife refuge celebrates 100th birthday
Key West National Wildlife Refuge was created in 1908 by President Theodore Roosevelt to protect the habitat of migratory birds.
Miami Herald Staff

cclark@MiamiHerald.com

The Key West National Wildlife Refuge turned 100 on Aug. 8, seemingly as pristine and wild as it was in 1908 when President Theodore Roosevelt made it part of his conservation legacy.

''The refuge is the greatest gift any president could have given his country,'' said Tom Wilmers, biologist for the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. ``It's a wonderful, fragile, wild place.''

The refuge, located off the coast of Key West, is full of life -- and surprises. Green sea turtles nest on its sandy beaches. Rare Miami blue butterflies flutter along its dunes. Hawks use the mangroves for resting areas to and from the Caribbean.

Hurricane Wilma's storm surge devastated many of the refuge's 26 islands -- but also created a new one. Wilma Key became a haven for endangered roseate terns, piping plovers and red knots.

To celebrate the centennial, the Florida Keys Eco-Discovery Center in Key West is hosting a daylong event from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Nov. 15 that includes an environmental fair. Wilmers and a Teddy Roosevelt look-alike will be among several speakers.

The real Roosevelt never saw the Key West refuge, a 15-mile-wide swath of islands and water that runs west 22 miles to the Marquesas Keys. The Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean converge in the midst of its 208,000 acres.

Roosevelt, president from 1901 to 1909, designated 42 million acres of national forests, 53 national wildlife bird refuges and 18 areas of special interest, including the Grand Canyon.

He began establishing bird refuges in response to the lucrative plume trade. Hunters massacred whole colonies of wading birds for feathers to adorn ladies' hats, refuge manager Anne Morkill said.

Development is an ongoing battle for environmentalists in the Keys. But the establishment of the refuge thwarted the potential for building on the islands within its borders -- with the exception of privately owned Ballast Key. A four-bedroom mansion and three-bedroom guesthouse sit on the 26-acre island, which was for sale earlier this year for $13.8 million.

The rest of the refuge remains undeveloped and serves as a habitat for 250 bird species, including endangered white-crowned pigeons. The pigeons, which nest in the refuge's mangrove forests, fly daily to Key West's dwindling hardwood hammocks to find fruit to eat and carry back to their young, said Ken Meyer, founder of the Gainesville-based, nonprofit Avian Research and Conservation Institute.

''You can have all the mangrove forests in the Western Hemisphere to nest in, but without the kitchen, the white-crowned pigeons won't be successful,'' Meyer said.

Wilmers also is working to help the white-crowned pigeons, among many projects he has embarked on since arriving in the Keys in 1984.

''I planned to stay only two years but became enraptured,'' Wilmers said. ``Inch for inch, the refuge is the greatest place I've ever been in my life, and I've worked in Alaska, Montana, Oregon and Massachusetts.''

Wilmers estimates that he's made nearly 2,000 trips to the refuge during his 24 years in the Keys.

''I see something new and different every time,'' he said Wednesday. ``Just got back now and I'm blown away. I saw a bird I had never seen there before, a marble godwit.''

Morkill, the refuge manager, said there is a balance between protecting the habitat and allowing the public to enjoy the refuge that taxes help support.

About 400,000 people visit the refuge annually, most while fishing, boating, snorkeling or kayaking, Morkill said.

Mangroves, which are not hospitable to human exploration, make up most of the islands. But a few, including Boca Grande and Woman Key, have sandy beaches that attract recreational users by boat.

In 1992, Wilmers helped put together a state and national management plan known as the Back Country Agreement that allowed public access to about half the beaches and closure of the rest to maintain unspoiled habitat for wildlife.

''It's still a problem,'' refuge ranger James Bell said. ``On holiday weekends, 30 to 40 boats can be lined up end to end along the beach, with large music parties, barbecuing on the beach and fistfights.''

Cuban migrants landing on the islands also have caused problems. They leave behind debris and oil and fuel that leaks from their boats. Some also camp, trampling precious habitat and destroying vegetation for campfires.

Then there's damage caused by treasure diggers, including a father and son duo from Tavernier.

''One had a vision of a religious icon buried on Boca Grande,'' Morkill said. ``They dug a huge hole. . . . That was not good.''

Fermin Fortun and his son, Fermin Fortun Jr., pleaded guilty in 2007 to a felony charge of destruction of federal property and served six months in jail.

Wilmers said he never grows tired of visiting the refuge. ``It's hard to beat sea turtle nesting season. But it's also just magical at the end of September to the second week in October to watch all the migratory birds come through. It's something I look forward to every year.''

source: miami herald

Fort Lauderdale Blog and Real Estate News
Rory Vanucchi
RoryVanucchi@gmail.com

www.LasOlasLifestyles.com
www.FortLauderdaleLiving.net


Nov 7, 2008

In Mayor’s Plan, the Plastic Bag Will Carry a Fee

In its struggle to make New York more green, the Bloomberg administration has tried discouraging people from using plastic bags. It has taken out ads beseeching residents to use cloth bags and set up recycling bins for plastic bags at supermarkets.

Skip to next paragraph
Librado Romero/The New York Times

Bags at a Fairway store in Manhattan.

But now the carrots have been put away, and the stick is out: Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg has called for charging shoppers 6 cents for every plastic bag needed at the register.

If the proposal passes, New York City would follow the lead of many European countries and become one of the first places in the United States to assess a so-called plastic bag tax.

Seattle voters will weigh in on a similar measure next year, and other places, like Los Angeles and Dallas, have studied the idea.

City officials estimate that the fee could generate $16 million a year, a figure that Mr. Bloomberg would no doubt appreciate, given the lingering and concussive effects of the global economic crisis on the city’s economy.

But while the fee would burnish Mr. Bloomberg’s environmental record, it might not be a lasting source of revenue. Just a few weeks after Ireland adopted a similar, though much heftier tax in 2002 — charging shoppers 33 cents a bag — plastic bag use dropped 94 percent, and within a year, nearly everyone in that country had purchased reusable cloth bags. Still, the mayor believes that the 6-cent fee would have a major impact on consumers’ behavior.

Environmentalists like the sound of Mr. Bloomberg’s idea. But from the corner deli to the high-end grocery store, other New Yorkers are not so sure.

At the 2000 N.Y. Deli on Second Avenue at 103rd Street in East Harlem, the owner, Sammy Ali, 30, said his customers would balk at paying for plastic. “No way,” Mr. Ali said on Thursday. “They ask us for plastic bags for free as it is. When we say no, they curse us out. They demand a bag for a 25-cent bag of chips.”

At Citarella on the Upper West Side, a customer, Anita Ramautar, said she would begrudgingly change her behavior, if only to deny the city the pleasure of collecting the money. “I’ll bring my own bag,” she said. “Why would I give them 5 cents?”

Ah, but remembering to bring that bag is another matter altogether. After all, New York is a place where people are almost programmed to do things impulsively, because it is so easy to just hop into a bodega or a deli or a 99-cent store to buy anything, anytime, no forethought required.

“You have to get used to using these,” said Lauren Robertson, 54, an occupational therapist who lives in Washington Heights, who was loading groceries in canvas bags into her car in the Fairway parking lot on 130th Street near the Hudson River on Thursday morning. “So many times I’d get into the store and realize I forgot my bags in the car.”

Bloomberg officials say the proposal remains a work in progress. But for now, the plan is to charge customers 6 cents a bag at the point of sale, with 1 cent going to the store owner as an incentive to comply, said Marc La Vorgna, a Bloomberg spokesman. The officials did not elaborate on the mechanics of how the money would be remitted to the city, or how the law would be enforced.

It sounds like a tax, but officials call it a fee. The distinction is important: A fee requires approval only from the City Council, while a tax requires approval from the State Legislature.

Unlike a number of ideas that seem to have been inspired by experiments in other countries (such as exploring wind power, based on windmills which Mr. Bloomberg saw off the coast of England, or temporarily closing off streets to cars, based on a program in Bogotá, Colombia, that the mayor had heard about), this one, city officials say, was hatched in the mayor’s Office of Long-Term Planning and Sustainability.

The idea is not totally foreign to the metropolitan area. The Ikea furniture chain, which opened its first New York City store in June, on the Brooklyn waterfront in Red Hook, began charging customers 5 cents for each plastic bag in 2007; since then, the store says, plastic bag use has been cut in half. Several large supermarket chains in the region, like Whole Foods Markets, offer refunds when customers bring reusable bags.

Eric A. Goldstein, a senior lawyer with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said that he was encouraged by the idea.

“It’s simple, it’s streamlined, it advances environmental objectives and it generates some funds,” he said.

And one environmentally conscious resident who applauded the idea was Richard Marshall, a retired opera director, who was shopping outside a Key Food supermarket in Astoria, Queens, on Thursday.

“I think Bloomberg should start charging a dollar a bag,” he said, clutching two reusable bags. “All this waste. All these millions and millions of bags. They don’t decompose, and they use all this oil to make them.”

Several City Council members said they were intrigued, but needed to see more details. Several did note, however, that it was only a few months ago that the Council passed — with the help of environmentalists and plastic bag manufacturers — a law requiring all stores that provide plastic bags to accept plastic bags for recycling, with some exceptions. And during the lengthy public debate over that bill, council members heard speakers testify that fees of at least 25 cents a bag needed to be imposed to get consumers to change their behavior.

Another concern is whether the tax would hurt poor residents, as well as small businesses, disproportionately — a concern mentioned by council members, environmentalists and manufacturers alike.

“A tax on plastic shopping bags would be regressive, with the most severe impacts on those who are least able to absorb them,” said Keith Christman, senior director of packaging for the American Chemistry Council, a manufacturers’ lobby. “There are better ways to protect the environment, to encourage sustainable choices and to support recycling without making it harder for those who are already struggling to make ends meet in a difficult economy.”

Some residents, meanwhile, complained that the timing of the plan could not have been any worse, given that the mayor recently announced plans to raise property taxes earlier than expected, cut financing for a host of programs and possibly raise the sales or income tax.

“We’re paying taxes on everything else; why not bags, right?” Juana Perez, 25, of East Harlem, said with a sigh. “How many other taxes is he going to raise?”

“These people,” she continued, indicating the neighborhood at large, “they already pay so much for rent and food.”

“New York City,” she said, shaking her head.

source: ny times

Fort Lauderdale Blog & Real Estate News
RoryVanucchi
RoryVanucchi@gmail.com


www.LasOlasLifestyles.com
www.FortLauderdaleLiving.net

Nov 5, 2008

Corals gain climate-change shield

By Peter N. Spotts| Staff Writer for The Christian Science Monitor/ October 22, 2008 edition

Rare species of staghorn corals may bear some good news for reef conservation: It appears that some rare types of staghorns can readily breed with related species, creating hybrids that may be far more resilient to climate change or other stresses than anyone thought.

That’s the word from a team of coral researchers at James Cook University and the Australian Research Council’s Center of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies in Townsville, Queensland.

Reefs worldwide are under pressure from human fishing practices, pollution, climate change, and ocean acidification. Rare species, which often live in smaller colonies than other, more-common corals are thought to be among the most vulnerable.

The team studied the genetic makeup of 14 rare and eight common species of staghorns, the leading reef-builders in the Indian and Pacific Oceans.

To their surprise, they found that some of the rare species are hybrids that had cross-bred with other staghorn species, and still retained their ability to reproduce fertile offspring.

In principle, these hybrids may be better able to adapt to changing conditions, the team says, because they display a higher degree of genetic diversity than the blue-bloods of their species.

“This is good news, to the extent that it suggests that corals may have evolved genetic strategies for survival in unusual niches,” notes Zoe Richards, who led the effort.

The results appeared recently in the online journal PLOS One.


source: csmonitor.com

Fort Lauderdale Real Estate Blog & Homes For Sale

Rory Vanucchi

www.LasOlasLifestyles.com

RoryVanucchi@gmail.com