Dear Citizens and Elected Officials:
I couldn’t let today’s NY Times’ guest editorial on collapsing US bird populations go by without commenting, and I’ve turned in two which have been published, and I’ll put them below shortly.
The Times article, today, Thursday, September 19, 2019 one day before the Climate Strike, was written by two well credentialed academics, one from the famed Cornell Lab of Ornithology, host of the popular E-bird listing system, which I use, and the other from Georgetown University. They are, respectively, John Fitzpatrick and Peter Marra, and the full title of their Op-Ed piece is “The Crisis of Birds is a Crisis for All of Us: the mass disappearance of North American Birds is a dire Warning about the planet’s well-being.” Here it is: www.nytimes.com/…
My first comment was directed a woman who criticized the Green New Deal for putting people ahead of nature. Here’s her comment and my reply:
Lorna Salzman
East Quogue NY2h ago
This disturbing news reveals the inadequacy of the Green New Deal, which puts human needs (jobs, economic equality, etc.) ahead of PLANETARY NEEDS. Only by focusing on the preservation and integrity of species, habitats and ecosystems will we be able to assure the fulfillment of human needs. This simple fact is studiously ignored (as is the overpopulation crisis in Africa,, the middle east and parts of Asia). Without putting biodiversity and planetary ecosystems first our efforts to combat climate change will be nothing but a waste of money and a loss of valuable time. Earth First should be our motto, and then human survival will be assured.
Reply18 Recommend
Share
My reply to Ms. Salzman:
@Lorna Salzman
As the former Director of Conservation of NJ Audubon Society, a New Jersey which pioneered the use of large scale ecosytem protections in the Hackensack Meadowlands, the Pinelands and the NJ Highlands and enacted the nation's toughest freshwater wetland protections, and also a strong promoter of the ideas in the Green New Deal Resolution, I couldn't disagree more. In getting to page 9, I saw references to global warming harming coral reefs, and two or three other references to protecting nature. Then, on page nine, the goals to carry out the Green New Deal, these ideas: fighting green house gases "by restoring natural ecosystems through proven low-tech solutions that increase soil carbon storage, such as preservation and afforestation; restoring and protecting threatened, endangered and fragile ecosystems through locally appropriate and science-based projects that enhance biodiversity and support climate resiliency..."The Resolution also calls for a job guarantee, and given the values I've listed above fairly calls out for a new Civilian Climate-Conservation Corps, which can begin to repair the damage already done to nature, and be as ambitious as the economic struggle over "how do we pay for it" will allow. Bernie Sanders almost tripled the length of this document with his plans (from 14 to 35), many of which go beyond the resolution in their protection of nature. How about starting tomorrow with "biodiversity inventories" required in each state? Jobs of all types
And then my general comment thanking the authors and the Times, but not uncritically: they wrote around the type of programs NJ fought so hard to enact, and I to defend.
Thanks to the authors for calling our attention to these shocking numbers. The Times has been doing an excellent job covering the insect collapse as well. Therefore it seems strange to me that it is not more enthusiastic about the Green New Deal, which, while not perfect, is the best outline in terms of goals and scope, to reverse the directions dismally declared here.
And I write as the former Director of Conservation of NJ Audubon Society, from 1989-2001, which gave me the chance to defend some of the best habitat protection programs in the nation: in chronological order of enactment: the Hackensack Meadowlands, the NJ Pinelands, the Freshwater Protection Act (the strongest in the nation, as was the Pinelands Protection Act) and the Highlands Act. All have come under attack by the Republican Right, which is anti-government, anti-spending and anti-regulatory. It is a firm believer in all the economic illusions that will not get us out of the deep whole we have dug for Nature, and doesn't seem to be doing much for most of our citizens either. These NJ programs held off the onslaught of two of the worlds most powerful real estate markets, New York and Philadelphia, which saw habitats as purely real estate. These regional regulatory agencies brought "Social Democracy" to the land, and at their strongest, worked very well. Not anymore.
Every state needs to conduct a biological inventory along the lines of Maryland’s Biodiversity Project - all volunteers and ably conducted by Bill Hubick and Jim Brighton. Here at: www.marylandbiodiversity.com
Many jobs of all types could be created, from professionals with advanced degrees to field trainees who just love to be outdoors searching and recording. The CCC’s time will come again, and face bigger challenges.
PS Next time you run into MD Governor Larry Hogan, ask him or his state environmental officials why they think Maryland is immune to these trends.
I asked Bill Hubick of the informal Biodiversity project, and after some prodding, he admitted they we are following these terrible trends, with much more evidence to be gathered as to the exact where’s and how fasts.