Happy Hunting Season, Mad River!
Here’s a good luck at the very first deer to be weighed at the Village Grocery in downtown Waitsfield. A beaut – shot up near the Moretown Common road. Be safe out there, everyone, and happy hunting!
Entries Tagged as 'Habitat'
EVENT: “Living Lightly on the Earth: Your Future, Your Hope”
On Thursday, April 30th from 7:00 – 8:30 p.m. at the Big Picture Theater in Waitsfield, Sharon resident Dee Gish will deliver an educational slideshow on climate change, updating the information presented in the film “An Inconvenient Truth.” Ms. Gish, one of 1,000 Americans personally trained by Nobel Laureate Al Gore to spread the message about the challenges of and solutions to the climate crisis, is connected with “The Climate Project”, a non-profit organization with the mission of increasing public awareness of the climate crisis at a grassroots level in the U.S. and abroad. The evening’s events will be presented by the Mad River Valley Interfaith Council and generously underwritten by Carbon Shredders and the Mad River Valley Rotary Club. There will also be an opportunity to learn more about the nearly twenty organizations who are making unique and particular efforts to provide a sustainable and hopeful future for our immediate and worldwide community. Waitsfield Cable’s channel 44 will be airing Al Gore’s original film, “An Inconvenient Truth” the week of April 19th, a week that includes “Earth Day” on April 22 – originally celebrated for the first time in 1970 by over twenty million people. The presentation is free of charge, there will be free CFL’s available, and a simple, affordable supper will be offered in the Big Picture Café prior to the event.
For further information, contact Amalia Veralli at 496-3162
Q. What is “The Climate Project,” and how did you get involved?
A. The Climate Project, a nonprofit organization based in Nashville, TN, began operations in June 2006 with the mission of increasing public awareness of the climate crisis at a grassroots level in the U.S. and abroad. By April 2007, a diverse group of 1,200 volunteers from throughout the U.S. had been trained by Al Gore himself to present a version of the slide show featured in the Academy Award-winning film An Inconvenient Truth. As of October 2008, we have delivered nearly 20,000 presentations and reached a combined audience of 2 million people. I was fortunate enough to get selected for the 5th training session in January, 2007. Since then, I’ve given over 30 presentations to varied audiences – from civic groups, churches, colleges and universities, and open public forums.
Q. When did you first see “An Inconvenient Truth,” and how did it impact you?
A. I actually read the book first, when it was first published in 2006. The book did not contain any information that particularly surprised me, since intuitively I knew just by casual observation that climate change/global warming was happening now, and at an alarming rate. The book did inspire me, however, to learn more, to see the film, and to sound the climate change alarm to anyone willing to listen. The most surprising thing, to me, about the book and the film, was how many people at the time were NOT willing to listen and to dismiss An Inconvenient Truth as politically motivated.
Q. To what extent have you yourself researched the conclusions surrounding anthropogenic climate change?
A. I try to keep on top of the latest research as it emerges. The Climate Project is great at providing internal notices and links to many relevant scientific studies. I have the NSIDC (National Snow and Ice Data Center), GISS (Goddard Institute for Space Studies), UCS (Union of Concerned Scientists) and other research sites bookmarked on my web browser and refer to them often. I’ve also tried to beef up my basic ecological knowledge base by reading environmental classics like Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring and Bill McKibben’s The End of Nature, and I’m currently reading Hot, Flat and Crowded by Thomas Friedman. I am neither an climate expert, nor a scientist, however, and so also truly appreciate mainstream sources on climate change such as National Geographic and Scientific American.
Q. How do you respond to critics who suggest that global warming is caused by sunspots, or other non-human-caused phenomena?
A. There are definitely historical cycles to warming and cooling periods of the earth. For example, every 40,000 years, the tilt of the earth on its axis changes by nearly 1 degree, then back again. This small change in the tilt of earth’s axis has corresponded with some of the conclusions of the 100,000 year ice age cycles. We are currently in one of these interglacial, cyclical warming periods, with the last ice age ending nearly 11,000 years ago. The dramatic rise in global average temperatures that we have seen especially in the last 30 years, however, falls well outside of any warming that scientists can explain by natural and cyclical phenonemon such as changes in the earth’s orbit, axis tilt, or sunspot activity. Skeptics also need to revisit their elementary school science concerning the greenhouse effect. There is not a single reputable scientist that does not agree that when greenhouse gases are increased in our atmosphere, higher temperatures will result. Greenhouse gasses, such as CO2, nitrous oxide, and methane, trap more of the sun’s infrared radiation that would otherwise radiate back into space. By burning fossil fuels and deforesting many areas of the planet, mankind has increased the level of CO2 in the atmosphere to 385 parts per million. The current level of CO2 in our atmosphere is much higher than any time in the past 650,000 years of earth’s history.
Q. What suggestions and solutions do you have for anyone interested in becoming involved in these issues?
A. Do not wait. Jump in with both feet. The climate crisis is such an immediate emergency. After educating yourself on the science behind climate change, the most effective (and simplest) thing individuals can do is to correspond with your elected officials and urge them to pass sweeping emissions reduction legislation. Write or call your local selectmen, State Representatives, Congressmen and Senators. Send them pictures of your children, write personal stories, tell them why you are concerned about global warming. Do whatever it takes to persuade them to initiate and vote for legislation that invests in energy efficiency, renewable energy, coal plant moratoriums, and CO2 emission reductions. Sign up with organizations such as The League of Conservation Voters, Natural Resources Defense Council, 1Sky, 350.org, and Sierra Club. These organizations will notify you when an important piece of relevant legislation is coming to a vote. They will also prompt you to get involved with international, national and local environmental activities. 350.org, for example, is organizing an international day of activities on October 24, 2009, six weeks ahead of the world-wide climate negotiations in Copenhagen this December. 350.org wants everyone to understand that scientists believe the “safe” upper limit of CO2 in our atmosphere is 350 parts per million. This day of action is intended organize global citizens to call for a fair global climate treaty. You are welcomed and encouraged to be a part of the movement, by visiting www.350.org.
Wildlife Habitat from the Birdseye View
This article below was written by Jens Hilke and printed in the winter edition of Natural Heritage Harmonies, a publication of the Vermont Department of Fish and Wildlife. The regional, or valley, perspective of habitat fragmentation underscores the importance of the MRV’s Forests, Wildlife, Communities Project.
Several years ago, I was involved in a project to reshoot a series of aerial photos of washed out bridges and flooded buildings taken just after the 1927 flood . Our team logged many hours in a small Cessna flying the river valleys of Vermont trying to capture the same angles that a photographer had used some eighty years prior so that we could document the changes seen in the landscape, creating a matched pair of “then and now” photos. Flying affords an incomparable macro perspective. Terrain details blur and you’re left with a mosaic of towns and forests and farmland. The more we looked at the photos and then at the distant terrain out the plane window, the more history blurred as we imagined how clearing for farming in the 1800s led to the flooding and erosion seen in 1927, and how those fields have grown up into today’s varied habitats.
So, when we ask the question “what is good quality fish and wildlife habitat on our land,” we should begin by “looking out the plane window”—adopting the birdseye view of the mosaic and patterns of forests and fields, as well as the history of an ever changing landscape.
A few landscape patterns jump out immediately. We are likely to see broad expanses of forests that haven’t been developed. They are bordered by roads and buildings but include continuous mixes of natural communities, from evergreen and deciduous forests to meadows, streams and wetlands. I call these areas contiguous habitat blocks and use them to represent biological diversity. The mix of varied topography, climate and physical features (such as bedrock), produces niches in which more wildlife species can find homes.
So, bigger blocks of contiguous habitat generally have more species diversity than smaller blocks. This gives us a sense of biological diversity based simply on the size of the blocks. It isn’t an absolutely comprehensive measure since there are many rare species and significant natural communities that fit in small parcels. But this landscape perspective gives us a quick and easy sense of where diversity might be greatest.
Now these blocks often include working forests, and lands important for recreation and other values compatible with wildlife habitat. So we’re not defining lands that are free from human use, but simply lands that aren’t developed.
In many places in Vermont we see isolated forest “islands” surrounded by development and agriculture. This forest fragmentation is a problem of both reducing the size of the forest patches as well as degrading the quality. We’re still losing wildlife habitat as development continues to isolate forest blocks and as development creeps into forest blocks, hiding under the canopy but still reducing habitat quality.
Landscape context is important. There is no minimum or maximum number of acres to define contiguous habitat. Instead consider the size of the contiguous habitat block as well as all the associated species of plants and animals, within the context of the level of fragmentation in the region. Habitat configuration also has an impact. For example, an area of forest habitat that is highly irregular in shape, with a high degree of forest edge may be less functional for some species than forest habitat of the same acreage with a regular shape. So as these contiguous blocks become more isolated and have more edge, they become less diverse and functional.
We can see from our birdseye view that many of our forests or contiguous habitat blocks are often connected by narrow bands of greenspace. Sometimes these “connecting lands” follow river corridors, sometimes they are upland. Connecting lands (corridors) may include roads, lightly developed lands or even less suitable lands but still allow wildlife species to cross between big blocks of forests and wetlands. On this landscape scale, this connectivity function is incredibly important, effectively increasing the size of habitat blocks. Even though it might be clear that these connections aren’t as good quality habitat as the bigger blocks, they are incredibly important functionally.
At a landscape scale, we often look at the needs of far-ranging species such as black bear or moose as representatives for a variety of the smaller-ranging species that live within the bear’s home range. If we manage enough land in a way that allows for these far-ranging species to survive, we’ve also allowed for the host of smaller-ranging, often lesser-known, species within that block.
As we look at our birdseye view, we must keep in mind that it is the history of the land use that has helped form this mosaic. For example, some of today’s white pine stands were badly eroded sheep pasture in the 1800s and prior to that they were likely mixed hardwoods. This serves to remind us that the landscape is constantly changing, reacting to people’s decisions for hundreds of years now. Our mosaic is in large part a pattern of our own making and has shown many other patterns over the land’s long history. The land use decisions we make today, that improve or degrade wildlife habitat quality, will be clearly visible in the patterns of our landscape tomorrow.
Forests, Wildlife, Communities Project Oct. 30th Event
The Forests, Wildlife, Communities (FWC) Project is a fantastic planning initiative has been taking place in the Valley over the past year. This is an effort to bring diverse interest groups and residents together to share information and strategies for wildlife and forestland conservation. The project intends to create a coordinated approach to wildlife and forestland conservation through providing assistance in conservation efforts across town boundaries and providing mapping data, planning information and guidance that could benefit landowners and local conservation planning efforts.
Partners in this effort are the Mad River Valley Planning District, Audubon Vermont, Vermont Natural Resources Council, Vermont Coverts: Woodlands for Wildlife, Northern Forest Alliance, and the Vermont Fish and Wildlife Department. The project is supported through a grant from the Wildlife Action Opportunity Fund of the Wildlife Conservation Society. A full description of the project in PDF is available here: fwcpdescription.
The project has included a variety of landowner workshops exploring management practices to benefit wildlife (eg: Invasives on Your Property) and landowner bird habitat assessments. A successful Natural Resources Values Forum took place in the spring of this year, resulting in 45 attendees identifying places in the Valley that are well used and valued by residents.
The results of the Forum, along with other work undertook by the Steering Committee, will be presented on October 30th, 7-9 PM, at the 1824 House. All Valley residents are encouraged to attend this event, which will include information and initiatives relevant to creating a balance between the interests of people, forests, and wildlife.
A PRESENTATION OF THE FORESTS, WILDLIFE, COMMUNITIES PROJECT
OCTOBER 30 – 7-9 PM – 1824 HOUSE BARN WAITSFIELD
The forests of the Mad River Valley provide a home to wildlife and provide its residents and visitors with recreational opportunities, timber, fuel, views, and a sense of place.
How can the Valley best protect these vital resources?
As a follow up to the community values forum last spring, please join us for a presentation and open discussion on the following topics:
- Forest Fragmentation: What is it, why it is a concern, and what are the implications for diverse uses of the forest such as recreation, timber management, wildlife, watershed protection, and carbon sequestration.
- Wildlife resource maps for the Mad River Valley: How suitable is the valley for sustaining wildlife?
- What are the trends in the Valley and Vermont concerning the fragmentation of forests?
- What are the results of the community values mapping exercise performed last spring?
- How will future development in the Valley impact forests and wildlife?
- What are the strategies for protecting forests and wildlife?
The event is free and open to the public. Questions contact: Jamey Fidel, Vermont Natural Resources Council (223-2328 x. 117) or Joshua Schwartz, Mad River Valley Planning District (496-7173).