article - Warming could endanger Va.'s mountain wildlife [Archive]

View Full Version : article - Warming could endanger Va.'s mountain wildlife

wilconow

08-29-2010, 09:43

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/virginia-news/2010/aug/23/clim23-ar-466984/

about whitetop mtn

Pedaling Fool

08-29-2010, 10:03

I almost got ran over by a car the other day, I’ve been hit 3 times so far in my 20+ years of commuting, but this would have been really bad if I didn’t get out of the way really quick. A very close call and it shook me up for awhile.

Seems like it’s getting harder to commute by bike nowadays and I seem to be on the receiving end of driver’s hostilities more and more. So I think I’m going to convert to a global warming believer.

I say we raise the price of gas to $10 per gallon; that should be a good start.

Pedaling Fool

08-31-2010, 15:29

The wildlife, including us, would be hit very hard by an abrupt climate change such as this http://academic.mu.edu/meissnerd/4horses.htm
(More reading in the link, just an excerpt)

Abstract

During the 14th and 15th centuries, several horrific events took their toll European lifestyles. Famine, disease and war brought death and devastation in many forms. Many God-fearing people believed the end of the world had arrived, as - according to the Christian Bible - these events signaled the arrival of the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, mythical figures whose destruction of the Earth preceded the second coming of Christ and the advent of Judgement Day. The Great Famine of 1315-1317 entered first with a change in climate and subsequently exhausting effects on crop yields. It was soon followed by the Black Death, a potent attack of bubonic plague that would be remembered as one of the deadliest outbreaks in history. The Black Death coincided with the beginning of the Hundred Years War, which would dramatically change relations between England and France, the two most powerful countries in Medieval Europe.

Historical Background
For two hundred years, the world had been experiencing a warm era, reaping the benefits of a long growing season. Grain was grown in abundance, and food was plentiful. By the 14th century, however, the weather had begun to cool slightly. It seemed not to make too much difference aside from pushing spring thaw back a little and bringing harvest time earlier. 1315 signified a turn for the worse, and one year of bad weather sent Europe spiraling into one of the worst famines in European history.

Medical practices had yet to advance in years leading up to this time, and many illnesses were still treated with home remedies and superstitious “cures.” Therefore, Europe was completely unprepared for the virulent bout of Black Death that would strike in the 1340s and 1350s. Traditional treatments proved for the most part ineffective, and fear of the disease sent people scattering across the continent, unwittingly carrying the plague with them. With no effective protection from the disease, some clung to their superstitious potions and incantations, some prayed in hopes theif faith would save them, but many merely waited in fear of the day the plague would reach their town.

Constant unsuccessful attempts to mend the rift between England and France had led to an even more awkward situation; by the time of Henry II, the king of England had claims to more French land than the king of France. When his great-great-grandson Edward II married Isabella, daughter to Philip IV, king of France, the two countries met with an even stranger predicament; the only male heir to the throne of France after Philip’s death was Edward III, king of England. France’s efforts to keep him from claiming the throne angered Edward and formed the impetus to start a war that would last for the next 117 years.

Research Report
In the sixth chapter of Revelation, the last book of the Bible, John describes the horrors invited into the world upon the opening of the Book of Life. This Book has seven seals, and as each is opened, new and terrible things are introduced to Earth. The first four of these seals unleash the four Horsemen, instruments of Death, War, Plague, and Famine. While the abhorrences that follow are equally frightening, the four Horsemen stand out in history as warning signs of the end of the world, and in the 14th century, they paid a visit to Europe and the surrounding world.

Background of the Four Horsemen

The first Horseman rides a white horse, and he represents the anti-Christ, proclaiming false prophecies and crying the end if the world. He wears a golden crown and carries a bow in his hand. He is crafty, spreading a false sense of God’s Will while hiding behind the facade of Divine favor.

The second Horseman comes colored in the blood of conflict. To roughly translate what Emil Bock writes, the Red Horseman rides “to destroy peace on Earth and to sow fighting amongst the people.” With his arrival, countries’ leaders will fight each other, while the Horseman oppresses the faithful of God’s children.

The Black Horsemen brings with him disease and famine. His actions are directed to affect mostly the economy of a society, driving up food prices when crops fail, and making labor more valuable when plague kills off workers. Under him, the wealthy thrive upon the misfortune of the poor, who are unable to pay for the items they need to survive.

Finally comes Death, riding a pale horse - one which is often described as ashen or greenish-yellow, the color of a corpse. Death brings with him Satan’s minions, and they in turn wreak havoc on mankind’s souls, throwing millions into the “Great Pit,” which descends directly to Hell. His goal is to destroy all that has life on Earth.

SIGNS OF THE APOCALYPSE IN 14TH CENTURY EUROPE

The Great Famine of 1315-1317 In truth, the Great Famine lasted seven years, from 1315 to 1322, for which reason it is sometimes compared to the famine of Egypt in Genesis 41. The first three years, however, were the most severe, and they adversely affected the next decade. Even chroniclers in the 18th and 19th centuries pointed out the severe food shortages and torrential weather patterns of 1310-1320.

One major cause of the famine was sudden changes in the weather. The Little Ice Age, the first major ice age for 10,000 years, was in its beginning stages, putting an end to the Medieval Warm Period that had prevailed for the previous two centuries. This cold trend began in different places at different times, but between 1250 and 1400, the entire planet surrendered to colder climates. Extremely cold portions of the Little Ice Age have been attributed to a lack of sunspots, extremely hot spots on the sun’s surface, and the volcano Tambora’s (Indonesia) 1815 eruption, which preceded the “Year Without a Summer” in New England and Northern Europe. Glaciers advanced from the north and from the mountains, and average temperatures dropped as much as nine degrees, actually making the climate similar to today’s, but nevertheless colder than Europe and Asia had seen in millennia. Northern seas froze, and China’s ancient orange groves died off in the harsh winters. Despite colder winters, summers were about the same in temperature, but they were wetter and came later. Eventually, Europe learned to cope with the new climate, with London having Frost Fairs when the Thames River froze, and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein was the product of a summer vacation ruined by the inclement weather of the Little Ice Age. Long before these events, though, northern Europe struggled with two major climatological phenomena: abnormally cold winters between 1310 and 1330 and very rainy summers from 1310 to 1320, the worst being 1315 and 1316.
Many people at the time saw the famine as a result of supernatural occurrences. A comet was visible from 1315 to 1316, and it is recorded in Chinese as well as European chronicles. Comets were traditionally bringers of famine and strife. Swedes and Britons witnessed red lights reminiscent of spilled blood in the night sky, and they were seen as signs of pestilence or war. Another ominous celestial event, Europe saw a lunar eclipse in October of 1316, and France was rocked by earthquakes in 1316 and 1317. In hindsight, all of these events were seen as forewarners of the Great Famine.
The rains began early in May of 1315, and they did not let up until September. Consequently, grain could not ripen in the dry, sunny weather it needed, and bread was difficult to come by. Poor soil and farming practices contributed to low yields long before this time, but the unrelenting weather assured the harvest of 1315 would be far more devastating. The rains continued to return, altering spring and fall harvests until 1321. Manors in England reported wheat yields from 1315 to 1317 as much as 20 percent below normal for the period, and 30 percent or more below average yields of the previous decade. From the late 12th century to the late 14th century, grain prices were at their highest during this decade.
Grains were not the only crops affected, however. Friedrich Dochnal of the wine town of Neustadt, Germany, reported sparse production of wine in 1316 and 1317. Sporadic good wine years (in quantity) ensued, but in Dochnal’s opinion, no good quality wine was seen in Neustadt until 1328.
The cold weather also took its toll on the livestock. Westminster manor in England reported sheep fleece to weigh 1.35 pounds on average in the 13th century. Cold weather encourages thicker, heavier animal coats, and in 1317, the average fleece weighed 1.93 pounds. These thicker coats also made it difficult for sheep to reproduce, and lambs were few, making it important to get as much fleece as possible from existing sheep.
The shortage of food brought many families and villages to drastic measures. Animals were eaten despite the need for them in the field. Children were abandoned because families could not feed them; the fairy tale “Hansel and Gretel” is an example of such events, and it probably had its roots in true stories of famine. Elderly people starved to feed their younger, stronger relatives, and some people even resorted to cannibalism. Weakened by hunger, many people died of illness, and nobles and clergy were no better off than peasants. In Bingen, a small town on the Rhein River, a white tower stands about 100 meters offshore. Legend has it that this tower was built by a greedy bishop who was keeping food from the people of the village. He built himself a tower with no doors so that no one could steal his food, and he sealed himself inside, only to be attacked by starving rats from the village who swam out to the tower after the food.

Although the worst years of the Great Famine were over, Europe still struggled to bounce back for the next ten to fifteen years. Grain prices eventually returned to normal, and farming adapted to the shorter growing season. Population would soon begin to grow again, but not until the end of the Horsemen’s reign of terror was over.

10-K

08-31-2010, 16:15

JAK

08-31-2010, 20:22

It is going to become increasingly difficult to be empathetic.
It is already too difficult for some.

chief

08-31-2010, 21:42

4eyedbuzzard

08-31-2010, 22:44

Well, eventually the sun is going to swell, melt the earth, and all life will end on our little planet. Between now and then, I'm willing to wager we will have both warming and cooling spells, and that while we may be contributing to a warming cycle by our current human activity, what we do will have little effect compared to what solar variance and vulcanism do. I'm not saying we shouldn't try to curb our impact in the short term, but given population growth and energy demands I don't see us reversing the trend. Species come and species go. Extinction is inevitable - not a matter of if, only when.

JAK

09-01-2010, 04:22

I would agree with 4eyedbuzzard that we need a somewhat fatalistic approach,
but I think we need to put that approach back into the context of living within the realm of what nature will support sustainably, rather than the realm of the false, wasteful, inefficient, and unsustainable economy and mindset that we all live in today.

JAK

09-01-2010, 04:31

I guess what I am saying is when some artsy dude or granola chick grow vegetables and ride bikes and wear out old clothes that's all well and good, but society won't be turned around until the average joe in the woods decides its time to settle for 5 or 10 mph on his ATV and settle for no less that 200mpg, running on some sort of biofuel. Same idea for his pickup truck. 30 horsepower was plenty in 1945 and will be again.

JAK

09-01-2010, 04:41

I always get a kick out of these news artid then of some guy or lady with way too much money trying to save the world with a 100 zillion square foot home and a heat pump. Yeah, that's the future. Just hand over the Grey Poupon and ****.

Gray Blazer

09-01-2010, 09:07

My 2cents. I believe in non-polluting industries and non-pollution in general. I believe global warming is caused by the sun. But what do I know, I'm just a moron.

JAK

09-01-2010, 11:36

Global warming is caused by the sun, and thank goodness for that.
We are just turning a very good thing into a very bad thing.

and for what?

10-K

09-01-2010, 11:47

Even the most die-hard supporters of climate change do not dispute that the earth goes through climatic cycles. At issue is how human activity is influencing these cycles.

A loose analogy is species extinction. No one disputes that there have always been extinction events or that species come and go on the planet based on their ability to adapt and survive. However, the passenger pigeon, which numbered in the billions, became extinct within a few hundred years directly due to human involvement. We did the same with the dodo bird, almost did it to the bison, and are doing our best to kill off the last gorillas in Africa.

In the same way, we have an impact on the climate of our planet. I don't see how any intelligent person could dispute that.

Pedaling Fool

09-03-2010, 11:01

Our impact on species is not a good analogy on our impact on the climate. The climate is so much more complex and we do have an impact, as do all living organisms. We’re not the only species that has caused other species to go extinct, I guess you could argue that we’ve had a larger impact, but so has the climate and other natural events. Yet life continues, albeit forever changed, such is life.

As for our impact on the climate I believe it’s measurable, the problem is we just don’t understand enough to measure it; in the same way we have no way to accurately measure how much impact other organisms have by their own introduction of CO2 into the environment. And even if we did know how to measure it, that’s still only a small factor in the climate problem. (BTW, I will concede that the increase from the "baseline of ~280 ppm of CO2 is human-caused, but the other questions I have on how this effects the climate – which is an extremely complex thing – remain unanswered). This is usually when someone suggest we take action "just in case". And I say there’s a lot of things we should be taking action on and many of them are known facts of life and a great threat to us, but we do nothing and keep this laser-like focus on our impact on the "fragile" environment :rolleyes: – that’s called tunnel vision.

But in the end it really doesn’t matter, because although I’m a global warming skeptic, I’m very much a supporter of new technologies to reduce our use of fossil fuels. I come at this issue from a national security issue vice an environmental issue. I’ve made that very clear in some circles, yet that is ignored and people seem to want to call me an idiot for my skepticism. It freakin’ irks me, but I’m letting it go now – right now!!

:sun

4eyedbuzzard

09-03-2010, 11:08

Getting rid of 5 billion or so of us humans would likely solve a lot of the demand / consumption induced problems by significantly reducing the pressure on natural resources. The only sticky issue, of course, is deciding amongst ourselves which 5 billion of us go, and how. :D

10-K

09-03-2010, 11:22

I've been on the internet almost since Al Gore invented it and I don't think I've ever seen anyone change their position on a previously held political or religious view.

Carry on!

Pedaling Fool

03-24-2011, 08:21

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/virginia-news/2010/aug/23/clim23-ar-466984/

about whitetop mtn
I wonder, are those little critters still moving up in elevation for cooler climate? These seem to disagree and thus are spending some time in the south http://www.thebostonchannel.com/r/27255042/detail.html

Would be really interested to hear how the fauna and wildlife on the AT is doing now, been looking, but can't find anything. Appreciate if anyone can provide an up-to-date link.

sheepdog

03-24-2011, 08:38

don't believe in global warming or moose

Pedaling Fool

02-04-2013, 18:00

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/virginia-news/2010/aug/23/clim23-ar-466984/

about whitetop mtnHow's that mountain wildlife in Virginia doing?

Looks like the Polar Bears are doing just fine, remember all them stories of how we were killing them off. Turns out it was just hot air, no pun intended :D

P.S. You can listen to an audio version of this story if you open the link.

http://www.npr.org/2013/02/02/170779528/the-inconvenient-truth-about-polar-bears?ft=1&f=1025

The Inconvenient Truth About Polar Bears

In 2008, reports of polar bears' inevitable march toward extinction gripped headlines. Stories of thinning Arctic ice and even polar bear cannibalism combined to make these predators into a powerful symbol in the debate about climate change.

The headlines caught Zac Unger's attention, and he decided to write a book about the bears.

Unger made a plan to move to Churchill, Manitoba, a flat, gray place on the Hudson Bay in northern Canada accessible only by train or plane. For a few months out of the year, as the bay starts to freeze, tiny Churchill boasts as many polar bears as it does people.

Unger packed up his wife and three small kids, and set out with a big bold idea. He wanted to write the quintessential requiem of how human-caused climate change was killing off these magnificent beasts.

In the end, he came away with something totally different, Unger tells NPR's Laura Sullivan.

Interview Highlights

On wanting to write the next great environmental tract

"My humble plan was to become a hero of the environmental movement. I was going to go up to the Canadian Arctic, I was going to write this mournful elegy for the polar bears, at which point I'd be hailed as the next coming of John Muir and borne aloft on the shoulders of my environmental compatriots ...

"So when I got up there, I started realizing polar bears were not in as bad a shape as the conventional wisdom had led me to believe, which was actually very heartening, but didn't fit well with the book I'd been planning to write.

"... There are far more polar bears alive today than there were 40 years ago. ... In 1973, there was a global hunting ban. So once hunting was dramatically reduced, the population exploded. This is not to say that global warming is not real or is not a problem for the polar bears. But polar bear populations are large, and the truth is that we can't look at it as a monolithic population that is all going one way or another."

On moving his family to "Polar Bear Capital of the World"

"We were in this town in northern Manitoba where polar bears literally will walk down Main Street. There are polar bears in this town. People will leave their cars and houses unlocked, and it's perfectly good form just to duck into any open door you can find when there's a polar bear chasing you.

"People use what they call Churchill welcome mats, which is a piece of plywood laid down in front of the door or leaned up against the door with hundreds of nails sticking out so that when the polar bear comes up to pad across your porch, he's going to get a paw full of sharp nails."

On Churchill's strategies for living among bears

"There are definitely polar bears that come into town; there are definitely polar bears that will eat people's dogs. But Churchill has developed an innovative polar bear alert program. The way it works is you dial a phone number — 675-BEAR — if you see a bear, and a bunch of wildlife conservation officers will come by in a truck with a bunch of guns. And they try really hard not to harm the bears, and they kind of scare the bears out of town. They have a progression that they use: First, they will fire firecracker shells; then they move up to rubber bullets; and as a last resort, they'll move up to real bullets.

"They don't want to do that. These are conservation officers so their job is to keep bears safe. Churchill also has a polar bear jail. These are for bears who keep coming into town and can't be hazed out of town. And what they'll do is they will trap these bears and put them in the polar bear jail, which is just a great big decommissioned military building. And they will give them no food, and they're given only snow to drink and then they wait until the bay freezes up. And when the bay freezes up, these bears can be released to go back out on the ice.

"[The bears] don't want to be in town, they're just waiting for the ice to freeze. But if they're a hassle in town, put them in jail, give them a short sentence, and the problem is solved."

On trick-or-treating when polar bears might be lurking around the corner

"Halloween is when you're supposed to go up with lots of food and run around with your kids. So we were up there for Halloween ... and so what they do is when you go out trick-or-treating you go out with somebody who has a gun — whether it's a police officer, or a volunteer or someone from the military. They all come out and they help you go trick-or-treating. Now, they have one rule, which is that kids can't dress in anything white — no princesses, no ghosts — because you don't want to be dressed as something white in the darkness when there's a bunch of guys with guns looking for polar bears."

Rasty

02-04-2013, 18:08

I like the polar bear welcome mats! Does Home Depot sell those?

Pedaling Fool

03-29-2014, 11:43

Just an update to the supposed fate of many aniamls. http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303725404579460973643962840

IMHO, preventing habitat loss is our biggest challenge and the most important, by far.

Excerpt:

"The forthcoming report apparently admits that climate change has extinguished no species so far and expresses "very little confidence" that it will do so. There is new emphasis that climate change is not the only environmental problem that matters and on adapting to it rather than preventing it."

rafe

03-29-2014, 12:08

NOAA forecast of 2014 US temperature anomalies: http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions/long_range/poe_index.php?lead=1&var=t

26559
(http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions/long_range/poe_index.php?lead=1&var=t)
Maybe we'll hear from the PCT and CDT hikers later this season. AT will miss the worst of it.

Feral Bill

03-29-2014, 12:51

Damn Yankee

03-29-2014, 14:15

Or baby seal lined gloves and hats made of spotted owls

myakka_

03-29-2014, 14:53

I avoided this thread because I was afraid of what I would read. Turns out you guys are having a realistic discussion and not hyping a specific agenda driven story. So I will chime in.
I work for a government agency that manages large amounts of land. During a webinar last year the instructor brought up "climate change". She said that we are in a significant dangerous event of global warming. By looking at the temps of the last 20 years, then she paused and said, no, just the last 10 years, and disregarding year xx, xx, and xx (since they were anomalies and didn't fit) then you could see this rise in temp. I just thought "REALLY? Global climate change and you sell it by a 10 year period, and still have to leave out 3 years?" Climate change is cyclic, and takes hundreds of years to track.
Would it be better if we made less green house gasses? of course! But there are so many other countries that have unchecked industrial polluting, And even here, I write a ticket if a citizen is burning a small pile in their yard and puts a plastic bag in it, but next door the tomato fields burn large piles of plastic and get an agricultural exemption. There is more hype and politics in this topic than any germ of truth.

The only bit of realistic thought that has been discussed was the idea of how we treat invasive species/ non-native species. As land managers we fight to keep plants and animals in a state of stasis. If the flower wasn't there when we took over a park, then it shouldn't be there ever. And this isn't nature's way. Long before man plants and animals gained and lost habitat. And long after we self destruct they will again. So instead of looking at invasives/ non-natives as black or white, we should consider if the plant and animal is coming in to a new area by natural development or a change in the environment. It means taking a much longer view of our world, and opening up our narrow ideas. Money that is spent now on eradicating these plants and relocating animals could be focused in to stopping destructive invaders that are truly only there because of human meddling, like kudzu, and melaleuca down south.

We could watch for endangered plants and animals, and help them find new habitat that wasn't available before. That's where we should be looking.

Each of us should try to reduce our carbon footprint on principle, but we should also understand that this world is bigger than humanity and is going to do what it wants, and we should be finding our role working with the changes instead of pretending that if we stop mining coal then everything will freeze as it is.

rafe

03-29-2014, 15:05

Here's what's going on in California right now. PCT hikers take note.

http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2014/03/californias-historic-drought/100706/?google_editors_picks=true

26560

Feral Bill

03-29-2014, 15:37

Myakka: The climate change evidence is bases on ice cores and other evidence spanning thousands of years. The recent rate of change is not natural. What's worse, our culture and economy are not as adaptable to such change as natural systems. As I said earlier, it's us civilized animals which are in trouble. In a couple of weeks I'll have 60+ ninth graders looking for solutions, so don't panic yet.

Odd Man Out

03-29-2014, 15:37

The problem with global climate change is not the destruction of other species, at least not in the long run. New species will emerge and a new balance established. We are the ones in trouble, as we make our civilization increasingly nonviable. The loss of five billion people mentioned above is no joke. Loss of viable farmland and other resources, along with the conflicts involved with the scramble for what's left are way scarier to me than the loss polar bears and Virginia salamanders. The environment will recover, we may not.

Exit soapbox

FB

I agree that nature is more resilient than we give it credit for. Sustainability is perhaps a better word than conservation to describe the optimal situation. It pains me to hear a politician pander for votes by saying we need a smaller government, claiming that it is irresponsible to pass such a large debt on to our children, and then at the same time call for lower gas prices to make his constituents happy. Basing the world's economy and food production on non-renewable fossil fuels is much more problematic that the size of government and budget deficit that preoccupies short-sighted politicians. Today, a few percent of the world's fossil fuel consumption is used just to make ammonia, needed to fertilize crops to feed about half the world's population. In other words, if starting today, everyone in the world only ate food sustainably grown food (i.e. grown with no synthetic fertilizer, pesticides, or herbicides), we could only feed half of the world's population. Not quite 5 billiion people would be without food and the scramble for what's left would be bad. Of course it's easy to dismiss that as being far in the future - we probably have at least a few generations of natural gas left. We may run out of water much sooner (PCT hikers notice that this summer). But I'm not worried. Michigan has 20% of the world's surface liquid fresh water, so I guess we're OK.

myakka_

03-29-2014, 15:44

Feral,

I am not denying change, but suggesting that there is a lot of hype involving political agendas that try to use this as a platform. I am certainly not in a panic, since I think that the earth will long survive us peeples. I fully expect a big event that will reduce our meddling, but that isn't what this site and forum is about LOL.

Keep the kids working on solutions. You are completely correct that the problem is us trying to keep our perception of "civilization".

rafe

03-29-2014, 15:54

Here's an easy way to think about the CO2 issue.

It took nature tens or hundreds of millions of years to soak up the CO2 that was absorbed by the fossil fuels that we humans are burning. The current rate of release of CO2 is at least 1,000,000 times faster than the rate at which it was absorbed from the atmosphere. This is not sustainable. The correlation between CO2 concentration and atmospheric temperature is not subject to debate. It is well-established fact.

Yes, the earth has seen many violent changes in its long history. Humans have only been part of that history for (let's say) 50,000 or 100,000 years -- out of a 4,500,000,000 (4.5 billion) year history. And "modern" humans, well, much less than that.

And in the newest twist we have fracking, wherein we put our water supplies at risk for the sake of cheap gas to burn. I do fear for future generations.

Feral Bill

03-29-2014, 16:05

How is it that we are having a civilized discussion of a hot button issue? That's just odd. :)

myakka_

03-29-2014, 16:10

Not sure, but that is the only reason I joined in. I actually clicked "mark posts read" multiple times before I ever opened this thread because I expected the typical chest thumping.

akrewson

07-14-2014, 02:14