Now, there’s moose

Lately, I’ve noticed in the Rochester-area environmental news that there are increasingly more stories about sightings of coyotes, bears, mountain lions, and now moose. What is one to make of these alleged come-backs—animals previously lost to us, now inching their way back into our environment? Could it be the enthusiasm of the editorial staff of our newspapers short on things to titillate the public with, or have there really been actual sighting of these animals?

I know people have seen coyotes, some have seen bears, it’s really sketchy as to whether anyone has seen a mountain lion in these parts, and moose—I doubt it. But, that just my opinion. What I find interesting most, though, is the impressions each of these animals and their anticipated returns bring with them. Few care about having the coyote around because there is so much misinformation about them and few think they do any good.

Some like the idea of bears being back, but most have no desire to see one except through closed car windows. Almost no one wants mountain lions around because of the fear factor. But, I suspect everyone except speeders on our winding country roads are for moose coming back to our area. Except for dangerous car collisions with these humongous beasts, what’s not to like in these majestic beasts making a come back?

Overall though, we should be wondering what is causing these animals to return (though actually the Eastern Coyote is not really returning, but making its way East because there are no wolf populations existing here) to our area. Why were they all killed? Why are they coming back? What role did they play in our environment? What role would they play in our environment if anyone of these creatures made a significant come back?

These top predators and plant eaters play a significant role in areas where man has not taken over, but do they still have a place in our local Rochester-area environment today—with all our houses and roads and factories and lawns and, you know, man’s ubiquitous footprint. These are questions for scientists and though our opinions will ultimately decide whether or not these creatures are allowed to stay, it would be interesting if our colleges and/or governmental bodies actually went out and did a complete study on each of these animals and how each has and will help frame our environment.

“America’s Report Card on the Environment”

"According to the first annual installment of a new national survey, majorities of Americans are pessimistic about the state of the natural environment and want a lot to be done to improve its health. "

As this study shows, most American care deeply about the condition of our environment and they are unhappy the way our public officials are handling environmental issues. And, most Americans believe that our environmental problems are severe.

So, why is there such a massive disconnect between a widespread public desire to create a sustainable environment and wholesale disinclination for corporations and our public officials to begin work on the greatest threat to our existence—an unsustainable future? Could it be corporate greed, misinformation by a corporate lead media, politicians elected by constituents who want a safe environment, but instead get ideologues more interested in preserving their own parties?

There a probably countless answers why people say that want a sustainable environment and why they are not getting one, but there is only one answer to the problem: Nature wins.

Environmental Research Foundation - Rachel's Weekly

Environmental Research Foundation - Rachel's Weekly

THE COAL INDUSTRY IS IN DEEP TROUBLE By Peter Montague

"Big Coal is in deep trouble and wants Congress to provide a massivefederal bailout. Since the beginning of 2006 at least two dozen newcoal-fired electric power plants have been canceled, most forenvironmental reasons. As of May there were only 132 coal plantsscheduled for construction nationwide, down from 137 in 2006, andeven this number will likely dwindle. A small but effective citizens'movement has managed to box in Big Coal.

Last week Alan Greenspan, the nation's financial elder statesman,acknowledged that the Iraq war "is largely about oil." Big Coal is hoping instability in the Middle East will spook Congress into a $10billion subsidy for 10 or more coal-to-liquid (CTL) plants, to makediesel fuel from coal instead of from oil. Coal-to-liquid (CTL) is BigCoal's best hope for remaining viable, but the chances of successgrow dimmer each passing day."

wxxi NewsRoom

Senator Schumer Wants Guarantee to Rebuild Russel Power Plant ROCHESTER, NY Senator Charles Schumer says the sale of Rochester Gas and Electric to a Spanish company shouldn't go forward -- until the company agrees to convert R-G-and-E's Russell Station to the latest natural gas burning technology. (2007-09-24) WXXI NewsRoom

This story about our senior NYS senator holding RG&E and the future of the Russell Power Plant to the iron on promising no coal and environmentally clean energy is, I argue, one of the most important environmental stories coming out of Rochester this year.

All the talk about global warming and wind farms and what individuals are doing for conserving energy in our area won’t mean much if our main energy source falls back on coal. We get a lot of our energy from the Russell Power Plant--15% to 20% of our energy comes from this source.

If the public and the media ignore this issue and allow (for economic reasons, i.e. only caring about lower energy bills) to shape our energy future instead of sound environmental reasons, we shall be directly responsible for pollution to continue from this power plant.

I suggest that the public write letters to the editors of their favorite loca