Category Archives: habitat loss

Oklahoma, where the denial comes right before the drought

I lived in Oklahoma, a half-hour’s commute from Tinker Air Force Base, where I was assigned, for nearly three years in the 80s. When I saw and read this article, I just had to share it here. So read it and then remember that Oklahoma is represented by denier-in-chief James Inhofe in the U.S. Senate. Whatta champ. Well isn’t he?

Global disaster? Climate change not on today’s media agenda

According to the National Climatic Data Center, July 211 to June 2012 was the hottest 12-month stretch on human record. But even as the devastation resulting from humanity’s ongoing alteration of the Earth’s atmosphere became more and more obvious, coverage of the 2012 presidential election campaign seemed completely impervious to the effects of climate change,”the media watchdog organization FAIR reported. You can read about FAIR’s findings right here. The conservation impact of what we humans are doing to our fish and wildlife heritage by burning fossil fuels goes well beyond the crisis faced by one or two species.

In Idaho, voters will be asked to enshrine hunting/fishing in state constitution

One glaring problem with this proposed constitutional amendment is this: It won’t mean a thing if the state and its people do not begin taking steps right now to protect fish and wildlife habitat. Right now, Idaho is losing big chunks of habitat daily thanks to sprawl development in what the media continues calling the “Treasure Valley.” (“Sprawl” is a treasure?). Pennsylvania’s constitution has long had language to the effect that clean air and water etc. are rights of Pennsylvanians.

Climate change: Admitting the problem a first step

This well-crafted and well-researched article focuses on Delaware and the Delaware Bay, but its conclusions are widely applicable.

A conservation goal: Keeping the land ‘whole’

My latest newspaper column:

In fish and wildlife conservation lingo, the concept of “wholeness” is everything.

Wholeness means a whole habitat, one whose ecological values are intact, not chopped up (what conservationists refer to as “fragmented”) into smaller chunks.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, in a fact sheet for the 2002 observance of International Migratory Bird Day, states: “Habitat is defined as an area that provides the food, water, cover and space

that a living thing needs to survive and reproduce. The quality and quantity of a particular type of habitat determines the

number and variety of its inhabitants.


“Unfortunately, in altering or creating habitat for human uses, people often cause the loss or damage of habitat needed by birds and other wildlife. This loss and degradation of habitat has resulted in widespread declines and extinctions of many species.


“It is not possible for people to live and prosper without affecting their surroundings. However, people do have the ability to consider the needs of other species and can choose to modify their activities to decrease the negative effects they have on wildlife habitat.”


This means that the little five-acre woodlot down the street (the one with the real estate agency’s sign on it, declaring the land as “available”) has much less ecological value to native flora and fauna than the 5,000-acre (or larger) forest that grows on yonder ridge.


Conservationists, whether toiling in Utah or New England or Pennsylvania (or any other place) know this to be the case. That’s why proposals to build mammoth land-devouring things like airports and highways and such generate lots of opposition. People who value, cherish and fight to protect Pennsylvania’s natural heritage really should be (excuse the cliché) “up in arms” over the still-alive chance that a cargo airport (isn’t “freight” airport a more accurate term?) will be constructed on terrain near Hazleton.


Before “authorities” allow bulldozers to be cranked to life and their land-eating blades lowered, let’s take a gander at the fate today of closed, former Air Force bases. I served at two such places that are within a one-day drive of Hazleton.

Both Griffiss AFB, near Utica, N.Y., and Plattsburgh AFB (four hours due north of Albany, N.Y.) were Strategic Air Command bomber bases. Aircrews at these, and many other SAC installations pulled what everyone referred to as “alert duty,” living together in secure dorm-style buildings referred to (no joke) as “alert facilities.” The base at Plattsburgh, not too long after the Air Force pulled out) became Plattsburgh International Airport. (In this case, unlike the Avoca airfield which still bills itself as an “international” port, the label is true as suburban Montreal, Quebec, is only an hour due north). Plattsburgh already had a 13,000-foot runway, loads of adjacent tarmac, and office space and aircraft hangars. Learn more at


Griffiss was home to a B-52 bomb wing (Plattsburgh had a fleet of the smaller FB-111 bomber). Visit to learn about the civilian tenants that now operate at Griffiss International Airport. And by visiting you get to see a nice aerial photograph of Griffiss. A brief look is all that’s needed to realize just how much land the place covers. Then, consider how a “cargo” airport in northern Schuylkill County would look from the air.


People who know the real “value” of Pennsylvania’s natural heritage (a value that covers a lot more territory than just dollars) ought to be nice, yet vocal in battling the very notion of putting a new airport near Hazleton. And think how you would reply to this question: If there’s such a grand need for a new “cargo” airfield, here or anywhere else in the Northeast or mid-Atlantic, how come the many ex-military airfields that dot a map have not already been pressed into service for such a mission?


Oddly, this ongoing discussion and debate brings to mind a late-afternoon chat I had with a pickup truck driver on a road splitting apart a Pennsylvania Game Commission holding in the Lehigh River watershed. The motorist (also a hunter, as evidenced by the .30-.06 rifle in the window rack behind his head), lamented that he didn’t see one white-tail, not even one, while driving down the road.

Give everyone, not just license buyers, a chance to fund conservation

That’s the theme of my latest newspaper column. You can read it here.

RThe politics of climate change

This outstanding paper, co-authored by conservationist George Wuerthner, is made available courtesy of the Rewilding Institute, which is run, in part, by conservationist Dave Foreman.

Nev. panel OKs strategy to keep sage grouse off endangered species roster

And that strategy, implied but not directly indicated in this article, revolves around political considerations, not actual, real science. This is yet another case of “junk” science masquerading as the real thing. I would respect the politicians a little bit more if they simply said it’s about politics, instead of what PR flak tells them to say.

We have met the enemy, and it is us

Cute headline, NY Times. Cute. And this column by these two professional “environmentalists” was OK as far as it went. But until folks – like my neighbors here in Vermont – start connecting the dots, there seems little hope. Let me know what you think. A first objective, dear columnists, should be to get the grassroots back in action. And I don’t mean only in terms of raising money so tat you can get your paycheck on time. Go it?

Oil/gas rush in Eastern forests spark questions and then some

I witnessed the destruction of already diminished hardwood forests in northern Pennsylvania by natural gas drillers punching holes in the Marcellus shale geological formation. Little covered by the mainstream media were such topics as forest fragmentation and the effects on native flora and fauna of road-building. Read more in this piece from the Washington Post.