Urban Ecoist

At first, I was attracted to this article because it was about the inevitable famines the world will suffer, due to climate change and a 50 percent increase in the world’s population. But then reading through, I noted that the US State Department’s Chief Science Advisor, Dr. Nina Fedoroff, made a strong statement about genetically-modified crops.

Like Professor Beddington [Britain’s chief scientist] and Bob Watson, the chief scientist at the Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, Dr Fedoroff believes genetic engineering must be expanded if the world is going to be able to feed itself.

Genetic modification, she said, can have strong environmental benefits, such as significant reductions in pesticide use, while improving crop yields. Of crucial important will be the ability of scientists to identify genes which enable plants to survive in hot and dry zones so that they can be used to help the most productive crop strains survive and thrive as global warming intensifies.

She said it was important that both GM technologies and conventional crop development were encouraged now because the process of bringing new strains from the laboratory to the field took years. — TimesOnline

Ah, CM crops. Thay sound like such a great idea, don’t they? Just go in and tinker with a plant until it doesn’t need water to grow or frightens away certain insects. But we have a multitude of examples of science being used to catastrophic ends, and I am of the opinion that genetically-modifying crops is most probably a bad idea.

However, that said, we may not have a choice in the matter, and due to desperation, we may just have to play god and hope that things work out.

The “top US Scientist” as the title of the Times article suggests, is in France for the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development conference this week. Dr. Fedoroff is there to talk about food shortages and the action needed to prevent them.

Fedoroff is “convinced that food shortages will be the biggest challenge facing the world as temperatures and population levels rise. Food security in the coming years, she said, is ‘a huge problem’ that has been met with little more than complacency. ‘We are asleep at the switch,’ she said.”

It’s funny that she’d advocate for GMO’s over population control. If there will be a shortage of food in 2030 that will affect 1 billion people, and the population at that time would be around 9 billion, why not instead try to promote family-planning and reduce the future population by one billion people? Problem solved.

And yes, I’m being glib.

US, State Department, Nina Fedoroff, famine, food shortage, climate change, population

Ok, so a little insight into me…I like watching cooking competition shows. You know, like Top Chef or Iron Chef. And I really like watching shows that pit restaurant against restaurant, like last year’s Last Restaurant Standing on BBC or this year’s The Chopping Block.

Anyhoo, while watching The Chopping Block last night, there was quite a little to-do over Chilean Sea Bass. The restaurant’s client did not approve of serving Chilean Sea Bass as it is severely over-fished (thanks to a brilliant marketing decision to rename the Patagonian Toothfish). The “chefs”, and I use that term loosely in this case, had already ordered 25 pounds of the Chilean Sea Bass. They quickly tried to get a different fish, halibut, but that did not last the night. When a lady’s order for halibut could not be made, the kitchen suggested the Chilean Sea Bass. The client actually went into the kitchen to express that she did not want Chilean Sea Bass served…at all. Bravo to you, Nicole Miller. But alas, the “kitchen” (now that is loose too) sent out farmed-raised salmon. Another no-no.

And on top of that a few days ago, I found out about a campaign to stop the unregulated swordfish trade. Which makes me cringe as I wrote my very first newspaper-published article back in 1997 about how swordfish were being overfished and responsible chefs were taking off their menus. Sigh.

Which leads me to my topic today. Do you know what fish is safe and responsible to eat?

I know there are some people out there that think that if a restaurant has it on the menu, it must be okay to eat. Wrong. You see, the thing about Chilean sea bass is that is brings in a really good price due to its growing scarcity. Same with tuna. Same with swordfish. And if something brings in enough money, it doesn’t matter if it is harvested in a responsible manner or not. Think of fish as the tar sands of wild foods. It may still make money for people, but at what cost?

And unfortunately, with fish, there are fewer and fewer good choices out there. I’m pretty nerdy about this kind of thing, and yet, I even have a hard time keeping up with what’s ok to eat. I pop by the Monterey Bay Aquarium Seafood Watch website (click here to go) a few times a year to check out their handy guides (paper or mobile) about not only which fish are overfished or unsustainably harvested, but which fish tend to carry heavier burden of ocean pollution (i.e. mercury and other heavy metals) and pass them onto their devourer in a sort of poetic justice.

I know what a a pain it can be to be picky about the species of fish you will and won’t eat. But trust me, all chefs are total whores for your approval. The kitchen may make fun of you for bitching about farm-raised salmon, but not for long. They will know that you are right, and I bet they’ll change that menu as soon as they run out of the product.

The Chopping Block, farm-raised salmon, chilean sea bass, overfished, Monterey Bay Aquarium, Seafood Watch, seafood, fish, restaurant, pollution, mercury, responsible fishing, sustainable fishing, unregulated fishing, swordfish, tuna, patagonian toothfish

Within days of getting my email from the Great Sunflower Project asking me to confirm my mailing address for my free sunflower seeds, I also get news that the Natural Resources Defense Council is campaigning to get the EPA to suspend use of and review its approval of the pesticide imidacloprid, a “moderately” toxic pesticide that works on the neurotransmitters in insects.

If you are a regular reader, you know that I often lambaste the EPA for its shortsightedness when it comes to approving chemicals for use in industry and agriculture (and pharmaceuticals and consumer use) without any true long-term testing. And in the case of imidacloprid, the NRDC is asking that something as simple as multi-generational studies on how this pesticide affects honey bees.

Imidacloprid was first patented and put into use in the late 1980’s. The pesticide is a neonicotinoid, which is based on the chemical makeup of nicotine. Imidacloprid works on a an insect’s nervous system, after the insect ingests the chemical after feeding on a plant’s sweet juices. A neonicotinoid blocks a receptor in the brain and causes an excess amount of acetylcholine. The excess creates paralysis and then death in the victim.

France has banned imidacloprid, sold thereunder the name Gaucho, for use on sunflowers since 1999 after one-third of all the country’s honeybees dies after a season of wide-spread usage. The French further banned the chemical on sweet corn, and last year, decided not to approve its use at all. Germany banned imidacloprid and its 8 neonicitinoid cousins last year after a huge die-off of honeybees following an application of the pesticide, clothianidin. Furthermore, imidacloprid’s maker, Bayer, is being sued by various groups, from farmers to local and national environmental groups.

What you can do

You can write to the EPA calling for action. Click here for the NDRC action site to send a pre-written letter to the Office of Pesticide Programs.

Also, buy organic produce and support farmers that eschew chemical pesticides.

EPA, pesticide, agriculture, imidacloprid, neonicotinoid, honeybees, colony collapse disorder, bees, toxicity, chemicals, organic, France, US, Gaucho, corn, farming, Germany, banned, Europe, clothianidin, acetylcholine, brain, nervous system, insects, plants

I want to say yes here, but it really depends on what your bio-diesel is made from.

Researchers at the University of Illinois have tested various sources of bio-diesel and have determined that the best choices for bio-diesel and ethanol production that actually reduce the net carbon released into the atmosphere is …drumroll, please…perennial grasses.

The researchers analyzed published estimates of changes in soil organic carbon in landscapes converted from natural or agricultural land to biofuel crops.

They focused on corn, sugar cane, Miscanthus, switchgrass and native prairie grasses. They also evaluated the impact of harvesting and using corn stover (the plant debris left over after corn is harvested) as a cellulosic biofuel source.

Their analysis showed that converting native land (grassland or forest) to sugarcane dramatically reduced soil carbon, creating a carbon deficit that would take decades to repay. While perennial grasses add carbon to the soil each year, DeLucia said, it could take up to a century for the sugar cane to rebuild soil carbon to former levels on native land.

Harvesting the corn residue for cellulosic ethanol production also reduced the carbon in the soil. The more plant residue was removed, the more the soil carbon declined.

Planting perennial grasses on existing agricultural lands had the most beneficial effect on soil carbon, the researchers found. –SPX via Biofuel Daily

Maybe you have and maybe you have not heard that corn-based ethanol is not the wisest choice for biofuels. First, you have the issue that 20% of American-grown corn is being diverted into ethanol production, and that is corn that is not being consumed as food, by Americans or anyone for that matter. Most ethanol is produced from corn kernels, so it’s not like this is waste plant matter that would be tossed or composted anyway. No, this is food stuff that no one is eating, which means if there is less corn in the supply side of the economic equation, the price of corn has gone up. With the price of corn rising, more and more farmers (yes, especially the big corporate farms) are planting corn.

With more corn going into the limited amount of arable farmland available to the US, that means less of everything else being planted. So, we now have an issue with other food crops supplies decreasing — pushing up the prices of well, everything. Have you noticed the cost of a loaf of bread lately? Less wheat is being planted and the decreased supply leads to increased prices, even if demand were to remain steady.. which it won’t as more and more people join us on this wacky blue marble in space.

So, what kind of biofuels are okay, for all us urban ecoists that want to help the planet, live lightly, be kind and rewind our consumption practices, etc? The latest study, that is going to be published in next month’s Global Change Biology Bioenergy journal (try saying that three times fast), details that every time the Earth is plowed or dug up, that action releases carbon. Soil acts as a carbon sink, and that carbon is what makes soil good for crops. Plants really, um, dig carbon dioxide, remember?

Hmm, what “crop” needs no plowing, or at least not yearly plowing? Perennial prairie grasses. The grasses grow during the growing season, can be cut or harvested at the end of that season, and the plants spend the winter dormant, and then grow again the next season. No plowing, no seeding, and little to no fertilizer required.

How ironic that so many farmers spent years and years and years plowing under the native prairie grasses of the Great Plains, only to find that those perennial grasses just may save the US transportation fleet one day…

bio-diesel, University of Illinois, biodiesel, biofuel, biofuels, corn, ethanol, perennial grasses, prairie grasses, carbon, carbon dioxide, crops, farms, farming, wheat, prices, food supply, carbon sink, plowing

If you have been reading this site, you may have noticed that I spend some days focused on ecology outside the Urban Ecoist’s immediate concern, and I do that because most people that are concerned about the ecology in one place are concerned about the ecology every place.

Has anyone out there caught Animal Planet’s new series Whale Wars?

Whale Wars follows the increasingly incompetent adventures of the Sea Shepherd, an environmental NGO hell-bent on saving the whales. Go ahead, check out the link in that last sentence, and you will find no end of things to laugh at on the site. Actually, that is not fair. The website doesn’t seem funny until after you’ve watched an episode or two of the series.

OK, let’s begin. Whaling has a long history of greed and waste and the near-extinction of many species of whales. I abhor whale hunting, and only in a few instances, do I think it is “culturally justified” and in those cases, I think the number of whales harvested should only be enough to satisfy the handful of people on this planet who entire way of life revolves around the whale, as it was one of the few prey that those few, few people had throughout their history.

When it comes to the Japanese (picture above to right), sorry, but you are an industrialized nation that has absolutely no need whatsoever for hunting whales. And yet, Japan regularly hunts whales, and a lot of them.

This is where the Sea Shepherd ship of fools come into play.

Sea Shepherd sails out and tries to harass the Japanese whaling fleet every season, and this last season was filmed and we get to watch it from the comfort of our urban living rooms.

And oh my, if you have ever had the desire to volunteer for an environmental organization or maybe still harbor that notion, Whale Wars will make you happy that you never signed up for active duty on the front lines, per se.

I honestly don’t know where to begin, as I don’t want to dissuade anyone from checking the show out on their own. It is too, too funny. The captain is a fat, slovenly, kicked-out-of-Greenpeace fascist that never seems to be around when the sh*t is going down. He has two toadies, a guy that looks just like the guy who was the right hand man of Jack Nicholson as the Joker in the first Batman movie; and the other guy is a scrawny guy from Sweden (although his accent is strangely Middle-American) with huge nostrils and an upturned nose, so you cannot help but be looking up his nose the whole time. He has an “executive producer/quartermaster” that seems to also do nothing most of the time, except talk about everyone else. Luckily, she decided to stay behind in Melbourne in this last episode, so hopefully, she won’t be on camera anymore.

And then there is the crew. A lot of bleeding hearts that thought, “hey, a semester at sea and we get to save whales. Righteous.” But the crew is likable, and you only like them more when you see what madness they have subjected themselves to aboard the Sea Shepherd’s flagship, the ill-named Steve Irwin (I don’t think Mr. Irwin would want his name attached to this megalomanical captain and his delusions of grandeur).

I think the most shocking thing about Whale Wars i.e. Sea Shepherd is how absolutely incompetent these people are. I mean, seriously, I am surprised they manage to keep the boat afloat.

If this is all the whales have, they are screwed.

Animal Planet, Whale Wars, Sea Sheperd, conservation, environmentalists, NGOs, whaling, Japanese, extinction, Steve Irwin, Melbourne, whales, ecology

When will humankind learn to choose a cautious path? Why is it that our species, and I am especially pointing fingers at the American sub-species, is quick to make a poor decision on a subject that would be best served with a little more understanding.

The Alaskan Pollock has become a “go-to” fish for a good portion of the American fishing fleet. Pollock is used in place of other seafood, such as crab and lobster, as well as in fish sticks and those unspecified-species-of-fish-sandwiches you get at fast food places. For years, fisheries experts have cited the Alaskan Pollock of an example of a successfully (sustainably) managed fish stock.

And now, the realization that maybe we are in fact overfishing the Alaskan pollock is starting to dawn on those who pay attention and worry about other species that also eat pollock — stellar sea lions, fur seals, whales, among other marine creatures.

I mentioned in Urban Ecoist’s step-sister site, Daily Science Dose, that it has been reported that a large percentage of Alaskan pollock are moving to the cooler waters of Russia. As waters around the Aleutian Islands, which are the spawning grounds for Alaskan Pollock (also known as walleye pollock), warm up, the fish are following their food to colder waters, leaving the American waters behind and depleting the numbers that American fishing ships are catching.

Well, not only are the pollock movin’ on up to the East Side, but there are also less of them.

Pollock was not always the fish of choice for US Consumers. Remember cod? Maybe you don’t actually, as it has been severely over-fished and extreme hard to find. The World Wildlife Fund has gone so far as to call cod endangered. Because cod was taken off the menu for a cheap white fish, pollock stepped in to fill the gap. And now, 20 or so years after the cod fishery started sinking, and the pollock became the substitute of choice, scientists are finding evidence of plummeting numbers of pollock. Low enough to cause concern among environmentalists and scientists that are allowed to be honest about the situation (i.e. not paid for by the fishing industry).

And that brings me to the fur seal. Northern Fur Seals live on the remote Commander Islands (the westernmost Aleutians that are actually closer to Russia than Alaska) as well as the Pribilof Islands up in the Bering Sea (map at right). And the fur seals, after almost being wiped out by over-hunting (they have really nice pelts), face a similar fate if their main food source is over-fished.

Greenpeace has launched a campaign to try and help the fur seals before their numbers also plummet. The North Pacific Fisheries Management Council is about to set the 2009 quota for pollock, and you can write a letter to the NPFMC to speak out against their ideas to raise the quota rather than lower it in order to try and restore the pollock population. If you want to get involved, check out the link here.

Also, you may want to avoid pollock. If demand is driven down, we may be able to rectify the situation that certain fishery management councils won’t.

pollock, Alaska, Alaskan pollock, walleye pollock, American fishing, fisheries, Pacific, Commander Islands, Pribilof Islands, Aleutian Islands, Bering Sea, Russia, fish stocks, fishsticks, fast food, imitation crab, imitation lobster, stellar sea lions, fur seals, whales, Greenpeace, cod, overfishing, North Pacific Fisheries Management Council

The wonderful thing about Urban Ecoists is that we are not only concerned about the immediate eco-system around us, but we see the macro-system as it is all inter-related. Healthy forests and rivers means healthy cities. Despite the fact, that we urbanites live in cities, we love our wilderness. And we love the myriad creatures that inhabit those places. We see protecting that wilderness and the organisms that dwell there as a sacred (not a word I use often) responsibility.

Too bad we don’t have an open season for this species…

In such, do you know what your lame duck president and his hench men are trying to do before they leave office? Well, I could never cover it all in this little blog, but today I will urge you to submit your comment during this next week to the Secretary of the Interior, Dirk Kempthorne regarding proposed changes to the Endangered Species Act. The public comment period ends September 15, 2008.

The changes in a nutshell are a good start at gutting the very things that have made to the Endangered Species Act a success. I will not bore you with all the details, I will let the Center for Biological Diversity do that for me, but essentially, the ESA works because any federal agency, such as the Office of Surface Mining, would have to work with the Fish and Wildlife Service to make sure that any new mine approved by the OSM would be environmentally-sound and not pose a danger to any, well, fish and wildlife. Do you like how I chose agencies whose names tell the story for me? A good writer is an efficient one, ask Hemingway. Not that I am comparing myself to Hemingway, oh, never mind. I’m lazy, there I said it.

Anyhoo, the new rules could lighten up on having “interagency checks and balances.” Also, the period for scientists to evaluate a project is cut by a third and automatically okay’d if the science doesn’t make the deadline. There are some other scary changes, too, like re-defining or limiting what effects would be considered harmful, and the like. Check out the Center for Biological Diversity’s website to find out more and to take action by emailing in a pre-written letter to Secretary Kempthorne and the Department of the Interior. I always like to email the [sic]President as well when it comes to these sorts of things. He whose name must not be named’s email is comments@whitehouse.gov.

Endangered Species Act, Dirk Kempthorne, Department of the Interior, Office of Surface Mining, Fish and Wildlife Service, Center for Biological Diversity