Can Networking California's Coastline Save Fishing Industries? by Jaymi Heimbuch

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/03/ocean-film-fest-2011-can-networking-californias-coastline-save-fishing-industries-video.php?campaign=th_rss#ch02

Summary:

Marine Protected Areas, or MPA's, are areas designated for marine animals to have an easier time living. Some species thrive so well in that area that they go beyond the border. Multiple MPA's come together to form a network, and human can then benefit from the life that exits the zone. The Monterey Bay Sanctuary Foundation is trying to connect and expand the MPA's so that marine life get an overall healthier area to live in. In time, it will help " boost fishing industries". As of 2007, 60 MAP's have been designated in Central California, but the MSBF are trying to encourage other areas of the nation and the world to designate areas for MPA, as it will benefit Marine life, Environmentalist, Fishermen and the entire ecosystem.

Reflection :

I think it was a spectacular idea to create these zones around California. All marine life in that area can finally go back to living the way they did about 200 years ago, with little to no human impact. What's more amazing is that how much all these animals thrived in the areas. Many different types of species rapidly increase in number thanks to less causes of death, such as the school of fish above. This made me realize how much we affect our oceans, by adding pollutants and waste into the ocean. I can relate to this article because when I was in 4th grade, I remember watching a video on MPA's, and now that I read this article, it makes me feel so bad for the marine animals that have to suffer through living in more polluted water. I hope more coastlines countries consider this idea to not only help their marine animals, but their fisherman as well, by giving them enough fish out side the zone to capture and keeping the ecosystem in control.

Questions:

1. What is so bad about this idea that makes most countries not want to make MPA's?

2. Who came up with this idea to make protected zones?

3. What are some good/bad things that would happen if more and more MPA's are built?

4. Why does marine life thrive more in MPA's than any other part of the ocean?

5. What other countries have a lot of MPA's?

http://oceanicdefense.blogspot.com/2009/07/court-oks-aquatic-ecosystem-destruction.html

Summary: An, Alaskan mine just got to okay to dump the mines waste into a local lake. The Lower Slate Lake, in Tongess National Park. This lake happens to be just 3 miles from the mine, and though all the fish will die from the mines toixns it was still approved. The mine had been closed for about 80years and its reopening was pending on the ruling of the dumpage. Evnviormentlist fear that this ruling will lossen protection on all lakes and streams. In usally when dealing with mines all their waste goes to a special talings pond. The judge agreed that this taling is not what is considered "fill material" and there for did not need any speical treatment from the EPA. The mine issued for their permint in 2005 just 3 years after the Bush administrain widened the parimiters of fill material making it so some conamtianed wastes could be dumped in water ways.
reaction: This is just absloutly ridclouse. I can not belive that congress or the judge allowed this to happen. With learning all we have about biodiversty and how at risk out water ways are I am shocked. I thought that more people who are in charge would have better sense than this. And it really makes me wonder way they just didn't go with a standered tialing pool like the do noramlly with mines.
questions
1) How many animals can die from this?
2) What effects will this have are the lake besides animals deaths?
3) Why didn't they use a taling pool?
4) Who were they people that voted for this?
5) Is the EPA trying to fix this in any way?

Will Congress Stop Spending $860,000 Annually on Bottled Water?

By Rachel Cernansky

Link: http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/02/will-congress-stop-spending-860000-annually-bottled-water.php

Summary: The House of Representatives spends at least $860,000 on bottled water a year. George S. Hawkins, general manager of DC's Water and Sewer Authority said, “…I would remind them that our tap water costs about a penny a gallon, and bottled water costs hundreds of times more." Some members of congress are saying we need to stop spending almost a billion dollars a year on bottled water when we can get clean, purified water from the tap. Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) said, "Let's start cutting close to home and shifting our priorities from an entirely unnecessary expense to reinvesting in our nation's public water infrastructure.” They can get perfectly clean water from the water fountains on Capitol Hill, instead of using bottle water. Even though the bottles are compostable there is no guarantee that they will end up being recycled

Reflection: This is ridiculous! Congress is spending almost one billion dollars a year on bottled water. This means that every person is spending $2,000 a year on water, when they can get it much cheaper from the tap. In class when we tested our water from home, the tap water turned out to be extremely clean. There is nothing wrong with tap water in our area because it is treated well and purified, unlike other places around the world. Congress needs to stop this unnecessary spending on plastic bottled water; they would be saving tons of money and the environment at the same time!

Questions:

1. Who allowed congress to spend this money?

2. Does congress understand that tap water is clean and purified?

3. What are the alternates to using bottled water?

4. Why should congress use tap water instead of bottled water?

5. Is congress being irresponsible, by drinking bottled water?

Tongass National Forest

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2011/03/tongass-national-forest-receives-needed-protection.php?campaign=th_rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+treehuggersite+%28Treehugger%29


summary:
     Last Friday night the news came that a district judge in Juneau, the capital of Alaska, overruled an exemption made by the Bush administration. He made it against the law for people to log in roadless areas of the Tongass National Forest. this is big news for everyone in the area and one more step in halting deforestation. Despite being so far north Tongass is actually a rain forest, says native Elizabeth Wagner. Tongass is vast, over 17 million acres. That's around 29% of the world's remaining unlogged coastal temperate rainforests. It provides a home for many grizzlies and spawning salmon. Many locals depend on the forest and it's animals for survival.

opinion:
     I am glad that we are perserving forests like Tongass. People are taking the right steps in environmental protestion. Giant rainforests like this are huge contributers to the fight against global warming, because they suck in carbon dioxide and give off oxygen. Sometimes resources that are found in the rainforest are needed by the people living in the area, like the people living near Tongass. I feel like this connects to what we are learning in class about wetlands. Both wetlands and rainforests are very easy to overlook but are actuall very crucial to the area around it.

questions:
     1. How much important forests remain unprotected?
     2. What else can we do to protect rainforests like Tongass?
     3. Should America push other countries to protect rainforests?

Surveying Rwanda’s Water Supply

http://scientistatwork.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/24/surveying-rwandas-water-supply/?partner=rss&emc=rss

The supply of drinking water is very scarce throughout Africa, but the article that I read focuses on Rwanda. Since 1994, after its civil war, the government has devoted its time and money to human sanitation efforts. Yet a huge part of the country lacks access to clean drinking water and even a larger portion lacks human sanitation which is what the government wanted to try and fix. Since Africa is one of the continents that is most vulnerable to climate change, global warming is most likely going to make its clean drinking water situation worse. As the years progress, the sanitation and drinking water situation in the African country of Rwanda is not getting better.

I was not surprised with the information in this article. I was also aware that this situation is occurring. It is not our job to try and support the government of Rwanda. We have our own government with its own problems. We also should only be sending minimal money Africa, as our country has debt problems and cannot balance the budget. I can relate to this because when I was in second grade, there was a water main break. We had to drink from bottled water and use minimal amounts of water. The picture above is of three kids drinking dirty water. It shows how scarce the water is and also how unsafe it is to drink.

Questions:

1. How long will it take to fix the water problem?

2. From what bodies of water can the people of Rwanda obtain clean water?

3. Why is the United States government sending money to Rwanda when it has a large debt?

4. Is it possible to tap into the water tables in Rwanda?

5. Why does global warming affect clean water in Africa?