Gangster cowbirds resort to violence

Brown-headed cowbird. Photo courtesy of www.wildphotosphotography.com

Brown-headed cowbirds of North America have long been known as "brood parasites" or "nes parasites". They routinely lay their eggs in the nests of other birds, then abandon the eggs. The nest owners, often warblers, are left to raise the noisy and hungry cowbird chicks, which are usually bigger than their own chicks. Warbler chicks sometimes starve, because the husky cowbird chicks take all the food.

Scientists and birders have long wondered why the unwitting babysitters don't toss out the cowbird eggs and young and devote their time and energies to raising their own offspring exclusively.

New observations of cowbirds and the exploited nest owners may have turned up the answer.

When cowbird eggs are removed from a warbler nest, more of the warbler eggs wind up being smashed or carried away than in nests where the cowbirds are allowed to stay.

Scientists Jeffrey Hoover and Scott Robinson designed an experiment to test their idea that cowbirds are retaliating when their eggs are removed, by returning to the nests and destroying the warbler eggs. The researchers used warbler nest boxes in Illinois that are set atop greased poles to keep out raccoons, snakes, and other ground-dwelling predators. For years the warbler nests had been parasitized by cowbirds. When the cowbird eggs were allowed to stay, only 6% of the warbler nests were vandalized. But when the researchers removed cowbird eggs, a whopping 56% of the warbler nests were damaged by marauders.

To test their theory that the vandals were cowbirds, the scientists removed all the cowbird eggs but put new fronts on the warbler nest boxes with holes too small for the adult cowbirds to re-enter. The warbler nests remained intact.

So the nest-molesters were cowbirds.

A parallel situation exists between cuckoos and the magpies that parasitize cuckoo broods in Spain. Magpies also retaliate by trashing the cuckoos' nests if the magpie eggs are kicked out.

What's a parent warbler to do? The best strategy is to work like hell around the clock and raise those cowbird chicks as well as their own. The fact is, because of cowbird retaliation, warbler nests with the cowbird eggs removed produce only 40% as many warblers as the nests that retain the cowbirds.

It doesn't pay to cross those gangster birds.

Conservation issues related to brood parasitism
Is brood parasitism a threat to the species survival of smaller songbirds such as warblers? In the past it hasn't been, because most of the parasitized species have habitat preferences that generally take them beyond the reach of cowbirds, such as deep extensive woodlands. Cowbirds avoid deep continuous forests. They prefer agricultural or residential landscapes near scattered trees or woodland edges. Such edges are created when deforestation leads to fragmented forests and open brush or grassland.

Unfortunately, North American forests are becoming more and more fragmented due to the paper and timber industry, and due to development from the growth of our human population. So warblers and other small songbirds that are the most common targets of cowbird brood parasitism are losing their refuge from cowbirds, forced to nest in forest fragments that are easily penetrated by edge-seeking cowbirds.

What can you do? Contact the director of the division of natural resources in your county or state and ask what you can do to encourage the perservation of large tracts of continuous forest. Ask what opportunities there are for citizen input into land-use planning on public lands.

A parent warbler (right) feeds a bigger cowbird chick (left).
Photo courtesy of www.birds.cornell.edu.

Sources:
Susan Milius. March 10 2007. "Mafia cowbirds: do they muscle birds that don't play ball?" Science News 171: pages 147-8.

Vincent Muehter. "Cowbirds and conservation." Audubon. www.audubon.org/bird/research/#habitat

Sara Goudarzi. March 5 2007. "Cowbirds: thugs of the bird world." Live Science. Animal domain. www.livescience.com/animalworld/070305_cowbirds_thugs.html


Keywords: cowbirds bird behavior nest parasitism brood parasitism conservation timber industry paper industry development fragmented forest forest edge continuous forest prothonotary warblers

Many lines of fire: women at war

Many Americans assume that women in the U.S. military are stationed far from the fighting. While it's true they can't train for frontline combat positions, the changing nature of the Iraq war has placed many women at the center of the conflict. Yet the women serving and dying for the U.S. have received very little attention. Who are they, why did they join and what are their experiences and points of view?

On this edition, Sarah Olson speaks with veterans of the U.S. Army, Navy and Marines, and to one active duty soldier who served for a year as an Army journalist in Iraq. Each woman has a unique story, but all share an understanding of the power politics of the U.S. military and the price that is paid by women seeking to serve their country.

Featuring::

Anuradha Bhagwati, Former Marine Captain; Maricela Guzman, Former Information Technician in the U.S. Navy; Linsay Rousseau Burnett, Sergeant U.S. Army, first brigade combat team 101st Airborne division; Stefani Pelkey, Former Army Captain.

Senior Producer/Host: Tena Rubio
Mixing Engineer: Phillip Babich
Intern: Alexis McCrimmon

For more information::

Vets for Vets
520-250-0509; info@vets4vets.us
www.vets4vets.us

Iraq and Afghan Veterans for America
770 Broadway, 2nd Floor
New York, NY 10003
212-982-9699; info@iava.org
www.iava.org

Iraq Veterans Against the War
P.O. Box 8296
Philadelphia, PA 19101
215.241.7123; ivaw@ivaw.org
www.ivaw.org

Women of Color Resource Center
1611 Telegraph Ave. #303
Oakland, CA 94612
510-444-2700; info@coloredgirls.org
www.coloredgirls.org

Women Veterans of America
National Headquarters
P.O. Box 72
Bushkill, PA 18324
570-588-4674
www.womenveteransofamerica.com

A tale of two cetations

A life sized blue on your desk top is the latest initiative designed to raise awareness about the risk to whales from on-going whaling by countries like Japan, Norway and Iceland.

The Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society, has announced the runaway success of its latest awareness-raising initiative; a life-sized blue whale on the web.

The banner, as part of WDCS’s Stop Bloody Whaling campaign, gives viewers a glimpse of a life size animated blue whale, the largest animal ever to live on Earth. The campaign highlights the growing danger to great whales from a cruel and increasingly aggressive commercial whaling industry.

The animated whale banner can be seen at www.whales.org.

“The response we’ve had has been overwhelming”, says Lindsay Bruce, IT Manager at WDCS. “Now we’re finding that our hosted solution is close to saturation as demand for the banner really takes off. We hoped the banner would be popular, but seeing this level of public interest is both gratifying and creating a real technical problem. The banner has registered over 90,000 downloads of the animation in the past week and we have been inundated with requests for a version to use as a screen-saver. We’re now looking for a generous IT partner who can help us host this. Clearly it’s made an impact on the public and we want it to stay up, but we don’t have the infrastructure to cope with the demand”.

Created by the German ad agency “Jung von Matt” in Hamburg with the help of "Soulpix 3D animation", the blue whale animation is composed of 10,000 JPEG images stitched together to illustrate the enormous size of these marine mammals. An ingenious Flash engine downloads the images on demand as the whale “swims” slowly across the screen. The completed image is over 80Mb in size.

“The banner is both a fascinating impression of this gigantic animal, the blue whale and a key reminder of the very real danger of commercial exploitation faced by this and other great whales should pro-whaling countries succeed in overturning the ban on commercial whaling.” Says Nicolas Entrup, spokesperson for WDCS “We want the banner to demonstrate to people how amazing these animals are, and how important it is that we do everything in our power to protect them.”

In the twentieth century, whaling pushed many species to the very brink of extinction. In the Antarctic alone, between 1904 and 1978, 1.4 million whales were killed. This number includes the 350,000 blue whales taken by whaling fleets during that time. Thousands more were killed and not reported. With populations slow to recover, these giant creatures are now classified as endangered with some populations in the Antarctic numbering just a few hundred. Many other populations of whales were similarly decimated.

Greener Magazine

One African Family Struggles to Survive

Photo courtesy of www.womenaid.org

I want to go to Africa. There is little that I want more, other than the health of my children.

For someone who loves wildlife and is intrigued by cultures different from my own, what destination could be more compelling? The fact that Africa's ecosystems are in serious peril makes me all the more desperate to get there before it's too late. I read yesterday, in an article from Emmanuel Koro of the World Resource Institute, that African conservation areas like Kruger National Park could risk losing up to 60% of their species as a result of the coming climate change.

But ecological changes will impact human communities just as much as the they affect the natural world. The early stages of climate change already exacerbate sub-Saharan Africa's pervasive and increasing poverty, through drought and subsequent crop failure as well as degradation of natural resources.

Poverty is one result of natural resource depletion and degradation, but poverty also causes resource depletion. Some of these causes are obvious, some less so. For example, poverty together with political instability means that social programs to improve options for women are often grossly underfunded. Women without access to education, health care, and employment, and the autonomy those opportunities bring, tend to marry in their teens and have large families. Larger families lead to rapid population growth and contribute to the consumption of natural resources at unsustainable rates. The high rate of HIV infection in sub-Saharan Africa also contributes to increased reliance on forest resources.

Poverty feeds habitat destruction; habitat and natural resource depletion feed poverty.

The problems facing sub-Saharan Africa are daunting.

Below, from the World Resource Institute, is a profile of one family's struggle to make a living, to survive, as forest resources dwindle. Their plight is difficult to fathom in the relative comfort of our 2200 sq ft (average) American home. But it puts a face on the challenges of rural life in an impoverished nation with an average income of less than $2 per day.


Fueling Malawi’s Environmental Challenges

by Charles Mkoka

(Blantyre, Malawi, February 2004) At 2:30 in the afternoon the Dyeratu family has just clambered down one of the highest mountains near Blantyre, the commercial capital of Malawi. Idan and Feligasi Dyeratu and their daughter, Gertrude, began the trek up the 1,400 meter-high Mount Michiru at sunrise on empty stomachs. Eight hours later and a little more than half way home, they have stopped to take a rest under a Eucalyptus tree, each burdened with a load of firewood that they carry on top their heads.

As Blantyre has grown in size and population -- almost tripling in the past decade -- the forests that blanketed the two mountains around the city have been under increasing pressure. Already the trees shrouding Ndirande Mountain have been entirely cleared for fuel wood and brick making. Families are now hiking to the forests on Michiru for their fuel.

In Malawi, 93 percent of energy comes from fuel wood. Under this pressure, deforestation is not just an ecological threat; women are negatively affected as well. Traditionally, it is women's work to gather wood for cooking. Increasingly, they have to walk long distances to gather firewood. This has consequences for the entire family: as firewood becomes scarce, the nutritional status of families often declines. Limited supply of fuel and energy forces many families to reduce the number of meals they eat and to prepare food that requires less cooking, which is often less nutritious.

Idan says his family climbs the mountain every Saturday so he can sell the wood in the densely populated township of Chirimba. They purchase loads of firewood from forestry officials that are managing a plantation on Mount Michiru. "The exotic pine plantation is benefiting us a lot," said Idan. "I make a profit of about 400 Kwacha [about US$4] per head load carried down the mountain after buying it at 15 Kwacha from forestry officials."

A recent survey conducted by the Wildlife and Environmental Society of Malawi identified poverty as both a major social problem faced by local people, and as a serious cause of pressure on the environment in Malawi. According to William Chadza, head of the organization's natural resources management program, poverty and lack of resources "lead the people to use available natural resources unsustainably."

Chadza cites charcoal production as an example. Around the country, rural communities are rapidly burning their forestlands to produce charcoal, which is in high demand in cities. To make 50 kilograms of charcoal requires 250 kilograms of wood. The disappearance of forests has resulted in massive soil erosion and siltation in low-lying areas resulting in floods during heavy rains. Increased flooding and siltation not only threatens rural communities, it has disrupted operations at the biggest hydroelectric dam in the country, resulting in power outages.

The UN's 2000 Human Development Report ranks Malawi as one of the 10 poorest countries in the world -- 163 out of 173 nations. About 65 percent of the people live below the poverty line, and 28 percent suffer from "severe poverty."

Malawi has a population of about 12 million, with most of the population living in rural areas. Nearly 85 percent of the population is dependent on agriculture, and in 2002 more than half of those people were not able to produce enough food to feed themselves the entire year.

While the country has taken measures to address poverty -- launching a poverty-monitoring system to inform and oversee poverty related issues -- the rapidly growing population continues to exert pressure on the country's natural resources. Until recently, Malawi was home to more than a million refugees from Mozambique refugees who fled armed conflict in their country a decade ago. Further, an influx of firearms from the conflict has helped poachers finish off elephants in Majete wildlife reserve and the Black Rhino in the Mwabvi Wild reserve.

Like the Dyeratu family many people now earn their living by selling fuel wood and charcoal. Idan says business of selling firewood assists his family to buy necessities like food, soap and salt and supports five of his children, who attend primary school and secondary education. However he is not sure what the future holds, when resource that he collects from Michiru Mountain is exhausted. "If the forest officials stops selling firewood from the mountain, then we have to decide as a family, what we have to do," said Idan. (WRI Features, 730 words)

---

Charles Mkoka (cmkoka@mw.loita.com) is a freelance writer based in Malawi and a contributor to WRI Features.

In later blog posts here, you can read how conservation organizations such as The Nature Conservancy in partnership with the African Wildlife Foundation, the Jane Goodall Institute, and the Green Belt Movement are working to develop incentives to help rural Africans protect natural resources in ways that also support their families. The challenge is immense, but the progress is encouraging. Because poverty and resource depletion are so intricately linked, any solution must address both. To be in some way a piece of that solution......what could be more gratifying or more meaningful?

Keywords:: habitat loss Africa povery wildlife Malawi population growth AIDS HIV deforestation resource depletion solutions incentives

African forests at risk

Africa lost nine per cent of its trees between 1990 and 2005, according to a UN survey of the world's forests.

This represents 0ne half of the earth's forest loss, this despite the fact that the continent accounts for just 16 per cent of the earth's forests.



In a news release this week (13 March) by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, it was reported that the highest losses occurred in countries with the densest forest cover: Angola, Cameroon, DRC, Nigeria, Sudan, the United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe, all in Africa.

Although forests are obtaining greater political support and commitment in Africa, the report says "implementation and law enforcement remains weak in most countries".

In Latin America and the Caribbean, home to a quarter of the world's forest cover, 0.5 per cent of forest was lost each year between 2000 and 2005 ― up from a rate of 0.46 per cent in the 1990s. The conversion of forest to agriculture was the leading cause of deforestation.

Costa Rica, however, reversed its forest decline in the 1990s subsequently realizing a growth of of almost one per cent of forest area expansion per year. But the extent to which this is related to reductions in agricultural land or innovative policies is not clear, warns the report.

The survey highlighted positive action in Latin American countries. This includes a large increase in forest area designated for biodiversity conservation, indicating that countries are taking steps to prevent loss of primary forests ― those undisturbed by human activities.

According to the report, the region is "among the world leaders in innovative approaches to international cooperation on forest issues". Methods used include forming networks to fight fires and improve the management of protected areas.

The Amazon Treaty Cooperation Organization ― whose member countries comprise Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, Suriname and Venezuela ― and the Central American Commission on Environment and Development are among those cited in the report.

Forested area increased in Asia between 2000 and 2005 ― largely due to China's investment in tree plantations, which offset high rates of forest clearing in other regions.

Related links::
State of the World's Forests 2007 report
UN Food and Agriculture Organization
The Amazon Treaty Cooperation Organization

Keywords:: RESOURCES FORESTS AFRICA LOGGING PLANTATIONS CHINA

April 14, 2007: National Day of Climate Action

Photo courtesy of peacecorpsonline.org

Here's your chance to meet other global-warming activists in your own community.

The website Step It Up! 2007 is promoting a "national day of climate action" on April 14, 2007. Great idea, and a desperately needed action. Already 920 events are planned in 50 states. The Step It Up 2007 website has an interactive map that allows you to locate the event closest to your home.

Step It Up! is pushing Congress for an 80% reduction in carbon emissions by the year 2050, which is just a 2% reduction per year.

Here is Step It Up's explanation of why they've chosen this particular goal. From their website:

"The latest science tells us that temperatures are increasing faster than expected, and the results are showing up in melting ice caps, intensifying storms, and rising sea levels. America's foremost climatologist, NASA scientist James Hansen, has said that we have just a few years to start reducing carbon emissions, and he's endorsed our goal of 80% by 2050. That won't prevent global warming - it's already too late for that - but it may be enough to stave off the most catastrophic effects.

"While few experts have said explicitly 'we need to reduce carbon emissions 80% by 2050,' we're sticking to this message. Here's why: Scientists have resisted in nearly every case prescribing policy because they don't want to enter the political realm. That's why the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and others won't suggest policy, but rather leave it up to legislators to do the dirty work. That said, Jim Hansen, the Stern Report, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), a number of European countries, the State of California and others (including the new USCAP business-environmental partnership) have either suggested or explicitly referred to 80% carbon cuts by 2050 as a solution commensurate to the scale of the problem.

"And it's possible. The cost of renewable energy is falling fast. New conservation technologies, like hybrid cars, are becoming more available. Many Americans are starting to switch already, but only leadership from Washington can allow this transformation to happen fast enough. And if we begin to get our house in order, then we can play some role in helping China and India steer away from cataclysm as well.

"There are no guarantees we'll succeed. But if we act ambitiously, we have reason to hope."

Step It Up's website (link above) also has suggetions for how to plan an action near you, if there isn't one already planned, and other steps you can take to reduce our contribution to climate change. Americans are right now the world's biggest producers of the greenhouse gases that are warming the planet. But we're not helpless to stop it.

Keywords:: global warming, day of action, step it up, Congress, 80% reduction, greenhouse gases, carbon emissions, climate change

Africa: the race for dwindling resources

Cheetah photo courtesy of www3.nationalgeographic.com

Any given evening of channel-surfing is likely to turn up a show on African wildlife....hyenas scuffling over a zebra carcass, meerkats socializing, cheetahs chasing antelopes. We're fascinated with African wildlife. Of course we are. No other continent offers the variety of "charismatic megafauna" found on the African savannah. Troll the internet for safari prices, and you'll find many African packaged trips for $7,000 to $12,000 per person. But Americans continue to pony up because we're entranced by the grandeur and drama of African wildlife.

Yet Africa is a continent in serious crisis. It's the only continent where poverty is actually increasing. More than 70% of the world's HIV infection is in sub-Saharan Africa. The AIDS epidemic, as you probably know, has killed so many people in Africa that a large proportion of households in sub-Saharan Africa are missing one or both parents. In many cases, a child or granny is the head-of-household.

The disruption of family and village life by the AIDS epidemic has profound ripple effects throughout African culture and the natural world. Traditionally, rural villages have relied heavily on forest resources, especially fuelwood, but also plants for traditional medicines, and bushmeat, or wildlife for the dinner table. In some countries in sub-Saharan Africa, more than 90% of household energy is from locally gathered wood. For centuries, villagers have harvested only dead branches, and the wood has come from the village commons - the communally owned area around each village. The harvesting of fuelwood, bushmeat, medicinal plants, wood for fencing and household implements and furniture, etc. has been at sustainable rates.

But families without a breadwinner tend to increase their use of forest resources, because such resources are free. In addition, the human population in east Africa is projected to double in the next 55 years or so. So the demand for forest resources is increasing for a number of reasons. The use of many of these resources, including trees for fuelwood, has surpassed sustainable levels. In South Africa, some studies have shown that at current rates of use, fuelwood resources will be exhausted within 15 years.

The demand for arable land is also increasing as human populations increase. Conflicts between the needs of human communities and the needs of wildlife for habitat grow more pressing. Many rural villages depend on livestock for their livelihoods. In east Africa - Kenya and Tanzania - predation on livestock can be a major source of friction between wildlife conservation efforts and community interests. In southern Africa, elephants often damage farm fields, and even invade villages, sometimes killing people. The Nature Conservancy is working with the African Wildlife Foundation toward solutions to these problems. The key lies in finding incentives for local Africans to preserve natural resources, including wildlife, and in finding ways that African villagers can improve their livelihoods through resource conservation. That is a major challenge for the century that lies before us.

On June 5 of 2006, Voice of America's Cole Mallard interviewed Adam Henson of the African Wildlife Foundation on the conflict over the use of natural resources by humans and wildlife in Africa, and solutions that AWF is trying to facilitate. Following is a link to the audio of that interview (less than 2 minutes long) and a written summary of the interview from the website of the African Wildlife Foundation.

Humans vs. Wildlife: How Serious Is the Race for Resources?

The audio of the interview

"Tonight, in our continuing series on the competition for resources between humans and wildlife, these questions: How serious is it? Can a compromise be worked out? Voice of America English to Africa reporter Cole Mallard put those questions to Adam Henson, a program manager with the African Wildlife Foundation in Washington, who said Human-wildlife conflict is one of the most serious threats facing conservation efforts in Africa today. Our mission is to work with the people of Africa to insure the wildlife and wildlands of Africa will endure forever through strategies that create incentives for conservation and opportunities for people to earn a living.

"He says the cause of the conflict is competition for resources between wildlife and people, such as water and grazing areas. Henson says the kind of conflict depends on the region. For example, in East Africa, lions and other large predators devastate livestock, whereas in Southern Africa, large elephant populations raid crops, destroy houses and sometimes kill people.

"He says the way to deal with conflict is through prevention and mitigation. He says prevention involves improving livestock husbandry, and containing of livestock from predators such as lions. He describes mitigation as financial compensation for economic loss resulting from destructive wildlife behavior.

"Henson says it's not the role of the Africa Wildlife Foundation to promote or oppose sport hunting or other similar activities, but to promote a wide range of economic activities that are derived from conservation and that create benefits for local people that can, in the end, sustain livelihoods and, most importantly, protect conservation of wildlife."

Sources:
African Wildlife Foundation. June 8, 2006. "Humans vs wildlife: How serious is the race for resources?" http://www.awf.org/content/headline/detail/1279

Twine, Wayne. "The rural fuelwood crisis: sifting through the myths." Kruger Park Times. October 4, 2004.

Keywords: Africa African wildlife sustainable resource use natural resources elephants predation tribal villages rural livelihoods conservation incentives compensation AIDS grannies AIDS orphans bushmeat traditional medicines fuelwood AWF Nature Conservancy

International council of the 13 indigenous grandmothers

Women are gaining influence as leaders throughout the world fighting for peace, justice, the environment and civil society.


In this program, we visit with three eloquent members of the International Council of Thirteen Indigenous Grandmothers.

The Council is a global alliance of elder women healers who represent more than 900 years of collective wisdom and traditions. The women come together to speak in one voice, with one very simple, yet urgent message: we must take care of our Mother, the Earth, for the next seven generations.

This Women's Desk program is a special collaboration with the Women Rising Radio Project, Lynn Feinerman and Crown Sephira Productions.

Featuring::

Rita Pitka Blumenstein of the Yupik nation practices plant and energy medicine. She is on the staff of Anchorage's South Central Foundation Traditional Healing Clinic; Flordemayo is a Mayan curandera, or healer, and serves on the board of the Institute of Natural and Traditional Knowledge in New Mexico; Beatrice Long-Visitor Holy Dance is an elder in the Native American Church, a sundancer and a health worker with the Lakota Oglala people.

Program Producer: Lynn Feinerman
Senior Producer: Tena Rubio
Guest Host: Sandina Robbins
Mixing Engineer: Stephanie Welch

Keywords:: INDIGENOUS SEVENTH GENERATION GRANDMOTHERS TRADITION EARTH

For more information::

The International Council of Thirteen Indigenous Grandmothers
The Center for Sacred Studies
P.O. Box 745 Sonora, CA 95370
209-532 9048; info@grandmotherscouncil.com
www.grandmotherscouncil.com
www.forthenext7generations.com

Tardy report on climate change is long overdue

Later than the latest homework assignment, more inadequate than the most half-hearted school project, the US’s upcoming climate change report is expected to disappoint climate scientists around the world.

The report, required by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, was due to the UN no later than January 1, 2006. Yes, 2006. Nonetheless, it is currently still under review by the White House Council on Environmental Quality.

According to the Council, the fourteen-month delay has been the result of an exhaustive review process. Skeptics, however, beg to differ. Rick Plitz, director of Climate Science Watch and a former senior associate of the federal Climate Change Science Program, hypothesizes that the postponement is largely because “the administration is reluctant to make an honest statement about likely climate change impacts on this country.”

This reluctance is rather understandable, given the degree of action that an honest assessment would necessitate. The UN’s own report, released last month, stressed more harshly than ever the drastic need for a significant worldwide reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Although the US ratified the report, along with 112 other nations, the administration has yet to appropriately address the gravity of this news. The US’s current emissions policy calls for limiting the nation’s rate of increase to 19% – which still allows emissions to increase from 7.7 billion tons in 2000 to 9.2 billion tons by 2020.

This slowed rate of increase is simply not enough, according to Washington’s own Climate Institute. “We really need to be seriously reducing emissions, not just reducing the growth rate, as the president is doing,” says Michael MacCracken, the Institute’s chief scientist.

It’s easy to understand why the administration, and indeed, the American public, is hesitant to admit the decisive stance that is truly needed. After all, the greatest sources of greenhouse gases are coal, oil, and natural gas – the very fuels that support almost every aspect of the comfortable American lifestyle. Acknowledging the gravity of the true need for change is going to require a serious policy change from the government and citizens alike.

Both the U.S. Climate Change Science Program and the Climate Science Watch offer continued monitoring of the report’s progress, as well as further information on climate change in the political arena.

By Sara Kate Kneidel

keywords:: global warming, climate change, UN report, US greenhouse gas emissions

Birds Plan their Future Menus, Scientists Say

Western Scrub Jay photo courtesy of Arizona Game & Fish Division

Researchers say that Western scrub jays are the first animals to unambiguously meet the criteria for "planning" behavior. Scientist Nicola Clayton of the University of Cambridge in England reported her observations in the Feb. 22 issue of the journal Nature. The birds in the study were seen to store food in places where they were previously stuck with nothing to eat. They also were observed to cache certain kinds of food in spots where that kind of food had not been available in the past.

In humans, planning is the result of imaginary time travel. Whether the birds were engaging in imaginary time travel can't be known for sure. But behavior that seems to result from imaginary time travel has never been reported for any animal in research journals before now.

To set up the study, Clayton and her colleagues housed the jays in suites with two annexes. On some mornings, the researchers confined a bird in one of the annexes for 2 hours with no breakfast. On other days, the researchers kept the bird in the other annex, where food was available. So the birds knew which annex had food and which didn't.

For the experiment, the researchers served whole pine nuts to the jays. The birds could eat as many as they liked and cache the rest in either annex. The 8 birds in the test cached most of their nuts in the no-breakfast annex.

In a second experiment, the researchers offered the birds peanuts in one annex and kibble in the other. The birds cached more of each food in the annex that lacked it.

The researchers say the results show that the birds planned what they would have available to eat for future meals.

Other scientists - Sara Shettleworth of the University of Toronto and Thomas Suddendorf of the University of Queensland - concur with Clayton that the results show strong evidence of planning, much more so than previous behavioral experiments.

This behavior is different from, say, a dog running to the door at the sound of a car in the driveway, which is simply a response to a conditioned stimulus. It is also different from a cat lying next to a chipmunk hole, which may seem to be planning but is actually a hunt already in progress.

This behavior is not the same as a squirrel hiding nuts, either, which can be explained as just instinctive behavior with no imaginary reflection on how satisfactory the nuts will be at a future time.

The caching by Western scrub jays does seem to show "imaginary time travel" to events that could be weeks away - events which require some menu-adjustment in order to satisfy the choosy diners.

Source: S. Milius. "Bird plans." Science News, Volume 171. February 24, 2007.

Keywords: bird behavior bird intelligence scrub jays bird research planning behavior food cache

Activists Succeed in Blocking One New Coal Plant

Dear Global Warming Activists,

You’ve probably heard the news by now that the NC Utilities Commission yesterday approved only ONE 800-megawatt unit for Cliffside. Thanks to all of you for attending the hearing, providing public and written comments, getting friends and family to submit comments, writing letters to the editor, talking to people about the importance of moving away from fossil fuels and toward clean energy and energy efficiency, and all the other ways you contributed to making sure the Utilities Commission heard the public’s concerns. I am convinced that without the large turnout at the hearing in Charlotte and the many comments sent in, that the Commission would have no doubt approved both proposed units. So thank you for your part in this critical campaign to fight global warming pollution here in North Carolina!

There are several silver linings in this decision:

1) Duke stated under testimony that it would be cost-prohibitive to build just one unit. In the paper this morning Duke Carolinas President Ellen Ruff, stated that “We have to look at where we are.” She said they could choose to build more natural gas plants. So we will keep you posted on the latest developments.

2) Duke still needs to get an air quality permit from the state Division of Air Quality. In terms of concerns over air quality and global warming, we have better legal standing with the DAQ than with the UC on these issues. There may be a public hearing on this.

3) We now have the Charlotte Observer, the Raleigh News and Observer and the Winston-Salem and Durham papers on record as opposing Cliffside.

4) We also have the attention of the state legislature which is considering legislation that NC adopt a RENEWABLE ENERGY PORTFOLIO STANDARD that would require utilities to have a certain percentage of their energy portfolio met through energy efficiency and renewable energy sources.

ACTION: We need folks to thank Rep. Becky Carney, Rep. Martha Alexander and Rep. Drew Saunders for co-sponsoring House Bill 77 which would ensure that at least 20% of North Carolina’s energy demand is met through efficiency measures and clean, renewable sources by the year 2020. Contact your specific legislator in the house and ask them to support this bill.

To find out your legislators and their contact info, follow this link from our website: http://www.clean-air-coalition.org/action_center.htm

FOR YOUR READING: You should know that Susan Tompkins of Charlotte is a member of the N.C. Legislative Commission on Global Climate Change. She is a wonderful advocate on our behalf. I’ve attached a Summary of Proceedings from their meeting on February 22. Please read over these and get familiar with the types of policy changes we need to support to reduce our carbon emissions in North Carolina and thank Susan when you see her!

CALENDAR ITEM: Mark your calendars for Thursday, March 22 to attend a presentation on climate change at Davidson College by Dr. Tim Flannery, Scientist and author of The Weather Makers: The History and Future Impact of Climate Change, 7:00 p .m, Duke Auditorium, http://www.theweathermakers.com

Thanks again for using your voice to help the Carolinas Clean Air Coalition restore clean and safe air to the Charlotte region!

Best regards,

June Blotnick
Executive Director
Carolinas Clean Air Coalition
402 W. Trade Street, Suite 104
Charlotte, NC 28202
(704) 342-9161
www.clean-air-coalition.org

Keywords: coal plant coal plants coal-fired power plants activism activists clean air coalition cliffside victory North Carolina Utilities Commission Duke Energy global warming public hearing Duke Power activist success air quality asthma air pollution mercury Tim Flannery weather makers

North Carolina is not alone in our struggle to block the construction of new coal-fired power plants. Far from it. The Illinois chapter of the Sierra Club recently posted the article below about the "Midwest coal rush." The article explains why coal is making a comeback in spite of considerable health and environmental costs. To find the original article go to the Illinois Sierra Club Home Page, then scroll down and click on "Clean Air", then click on "Midwest Coal Rush". Or read it right here:

Midwest Coal Rush

Dirty coal is making a comeback...

For three decades the devastating pollution costs associated with burning coal for energy has prevented the construction of new coal power plants. American innovation has helped clean the air while meeting US energy demands with clean energy choices such as energy efficiency, wind, solar and clean-burning natural gas.

All that progress is now at risk. With a sympathetic White House, relaxed environmental protections, and large state and federal subsidies, dirty coal is staging its most serious resurgence in thirty years. 114 new coal-burning power plants are in various stages of planning and permitting in the US today. Most of the plants are proposing outdated coal combustion technology which would create the largest new source of global warming pollution in the US.

Almost one half of the new coal plants are proposed in the Upper Midwest – with a record 12 plants in Illinois! These new coal plants, some of which are already being permitted and funded with taxpayer subsidies, will not replace the old existing coal plants but instead will compound our existing pollution woes. These “new” coal plants emit essentially as much carbon dioxide – the principal cause of global warming -- as a 1950s-era coal plant.

What Is At Stake?

Our Health: Coal-burning power plants are the single largest source of mercury, a potent neurotoxin contaminating our nation’s waterways. The Illinois Department of Health has issued a fish consumption advisory due to dangerous levels of mercury in every waterway in the state. US EPA estimates that one in six women in America has levels of mercury in their bodies that presents a risk of permanent brain damage to her child in utero.

Coal-burning power plants also cause the fine soot pollution that blankets our cities. This fine soot bypasses the lung’s natural defenses and becomes lodged deep in the lungs where it causes asthma attacks, lung cancer, heart attacks, and even premature death. The Midwest already has its share of air quality alert days – more coal plants will only mean more dirty air days.

Our Economy: Investing in dirty old coal technology closes the market to expanding clean energy opportunities in the Midwest. Modern clean energy technologies, such as energy efficiency and wind power, are viable solutions to meet future energy needs in the US. The Midwest has an exciting opportunity, with its abundant wind and biomass resources, to become a leader in the 21st century energy market. Midwest wind energy alone could meet 25% of America’s electricity needs and create thousands of additional jobs in manufacturing, installation and maintenance of clean energy systems.

Our Future: Leading experts agree that the single largest threat facing our planet and our children’s future is global warming. A 2004 Pentagon-commissioned report states that “ because of potentially devastating consequences, the risk of abrupt climate change … should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a U.S. national security concern.” The proposed Midwest coal plants would add billions of tons of new carbon dioxide to the air, making them the #1 US threat to global warming, at a time other states and 140 nations are taking action to reduce their global warming pollution.

Stop New Dirty Coal NOW To Build A Clean Energy Future

Building dirty coal-burning power plants is a giant step in the wrong direction, leading us into a future of at least 50 more years of additional air pollution and increased health risks. The Midwest needs to become a leader by banning new dirty coal-fired power plants and instead investing in safe and clean energy technology. Clean energy alternatives should be considered before any other technologies. [end of article]

To learn more about the fight against coal's resurgence, go to the Energy Justice Network. Among other things, they have an interesting map of the nation's coal supply regions. I begin to understand why the Southeast has a hefty proportion of the nation's existing coal-fired power plants.

To register your objection to Duke Energy's proposed new Cliffside coal plants in North Carolina, e-mail the NC Utilities Commission with a brief statement at vance@ncuc.net (Subject heading: Cliffside or Docket E-7, Sub 790). Ask the Utilities Commission to reject Duke's construction request, and include any negative comment about coal. Send it by Weds February 28 if you can, although that decision date may wind up being postponed (at the request of several concerned legislators). You don't have to be a resident of NC to object. We'll all pay the price for the 11 million tons of carbon dioxide that these new NC plants will generate every year.

Thanks for any e-mails. For more about the struggle in NC against the mighty Duke Energy, which has its tendrils deep into local government and local corporations, see previous posts on this blog. More will be forthcoming.

Keywords: coal coal-fired power plants Duke Energy midwest coal rush Illinois Sierra Club map of coal supply largest source of global warming mercury brain damage asthma

How to Have a Green and Eco-friendly Wedding

Using potted plants is one way brides and grooms can minimize waste
and "go green" on their wedding day

I try to shop for second-hand and recycled goods when possible, whether it's clothes, furniture, books, cars, whatever. I make the effort partly to save money, but also for environmental reasons. Let's face it, Americans are huge consumers. We use 25% of the world's resources and energy, yet we have only 5% of the world's population. It's not sustainable.

In this vein, big and elaborate weddings have always been a puzzlement to me. They seem to me the ultimate in extravagance and waste. All that money spent in one day - when instead the couple could put the money toward a lengthy vacation, or a house down-payment. The average wedding costs $25,000 to $30,000! I could travel for a year on that. Ken and I got married in my parents' living room. I wore a dress that my brother made for the occasion; Ken wore a borrowed jacket. Our two dogs were our attendants. They sat very quietly and attentively while the remarks were made. The whole thing probably cost $200, or less. Even that, to me, seemed extravagant at the time.

So I was pleased when I saw the other day in the NY Times two articles about "green weddings." What a great idea! A Feb 11 article by Mireya Navarro, "How Green Was My Wedding", gives lots of ideas about how to have a greener wedding. One couple in the article plan a "zero waste" wedding for 250 guests. It will include compostable plates and utensils, organic and fair-trade certified food, locally brewed beer and organic wine and wedding rings that are "100% reclaimed recycled ecologically responsible gold." In lieu of gifts, the couple are asking guests to sign up for conservation projects, or to donate to environmental groups.

The second NY Times article, by Matthew L. Wald ("Making High-flying Guests Fuel Efficient") describes how to purchase carbon credits to offset the environmental impact of flying. A $9.95 pass for a 1000 mile trip goes toward developing green sources of energy, such as wind power. This is useful information for green-wedding planners, since travel is the biggest-impact component of a wedding. It's also useful for vacation travelers such as myself. The passes are available from TerraPass, directly or through Expedia, the travel website.

The "How Green Was My Wedding" article refers to several wedding professionals and companies who are offering eco-friendly wedding options, such as OrganicBouquet.com which offers organic flowers, and Portovert.com, a magazine devoted to eco-friendly weddings. The editor of Brides magazine says the interest in green weddings has blossomed to include vegan menus, halls that recycle, caterers who use locally grown ingredients, and decorating with potted plants that can be transplanted. The Feb-March issue features a planning guide for a green wedding.

It sounds good! These weddings will still probably cost plenty. But the significance of these trends is that people are trying. Awareness is increasing. The established authorities on the subject are recognizing changing consumer values. That's exciting! After all, the power rests with consumers ultimately. Markets will provide what we demand. A green wedding can be a gateway to an eco-friendly lifestyle and environmentally-conscious parenting. One step at a time...toward a sustainable future.

Keywords: green wedding organic flowers brides magazine how green was my wedding eco-friendly wedding ecofriendly wedding vegan menu consumers portovert organic bouquet minimize waste carbon credits TerraPass impact of travel

My plea to the Utilities Commission to take a stand on climate change

Drought is a growing problem worldwide due to changes in rainfall patterns
from greenhouse gases, mainly CO2

Dear Commissioners:

I'm writing regarding Duke Energy's proposed Cliffside plants.

You as utility commissioners have so much power. You have the power to leave our fields and forests viable and productive, for the thousands of generations of humans who will follow us on this planet. If we ruin our atmosphere and continue to change the world's climate, the rest of humanity from here until the end of our species will have their survival choices limited by what we did and didn't do.

Already, in sub-Saharan Africa, the rainy season has changed substantially due to global warming. Their rainy season is too short. When the rain finally comes, it falls in torrents, eroding fields. Lakes are shrinking, mountain snowcaps are receding. Their crops are failing, and soon, agriculture around the world will be similarly impacted.

What will people eat in the year 2100 and 2200 and 2300, when the human population surpasses 10 billion? How will they produce enough food, with fields degraded by climate change? They won't have the choices we have today in 2007. When their choices for survival are limited, it will be because some of us in 2007 could not see beyond the political expediency of the moment, could not waver from the shortest route to shareholder profits.

But it is your duty to see beyond the convenience of the moment and business-as-usual. When you take on a job as a public servant, your duty is to the humans of 2200 as well. They depend on your clarity of vision and your integrity even more than we do.

Please do the right thing. Please don't let Duke Energy build the new Cliffside coal plants. Force them to turn to energy-efficiency and green sources of power, to invest in maximizing the potential for these options. Force them to offer real efficiency incentives and education to ratepayers.

Please.

We're depending on you.

Sincerely,

Sally Kneidel, PhD

Coastal cities will be increasingly flooded in coming years as sea levels rise, and as the intensity and frequency of tropical storms increase.

A Few More Days to E-mail Utilities Commission to Block Coal Plants

Coal-burning smokestacks, courtesy of EPA

Dear Friends

Across the country, activists are pleading with the NC Utilities Commission to block construction of Duke Energy's two massive proposed coal-fired power plants. We have just a few more days to get our consumer message to the Utilities Commission before they reach a decision. The commission was created to represent the interests of the public. It's our responsibility to let them know what we want.

Duke Energy is huge. Their profits are huge, their legal staff is huge, and their environmental impact is national and global. Please email the NC Utilities Commission at the address in the box below and tell them to support energy efficiency and green power, not more climate-changing coal plants.

You don't have to be from this area to write the Utilities Commission. The 11 million tons of carbon dioxide per year from the two proposed coal plants will affect everyone's climate. Just a simple statement to register your disapproval of the coal plants is worthwhile. It doesn't have to include facts. Sentiment is valuable too. Although if you wish to include some of the facts below, have at it. The summary below of some of the salient facts was composed by environmental activist Beth Henry, a human dynamo and one of my heroes. She has been fighting 18 hours a day, for months, to educate consumers and influential people about the dangers of more and more CO2.

Register your brief objection ASAP with the NC Utilities Commission at vance@ncuc.net (re: Docket E-7, Sub 790)

The recent IPCC report said global warming is already having and will have more destructive and earlier impacts than previously thought – stronger hurricanes, longer droughts, and more. We must act urgently to reduce emissions. Cliffside would be a global-warming machine, emitting over 11 million tons of CO2 every year—the equivalent of adding about 1,730,000 cars to our roads (according to EPA formulas).

Duke hopes to have Cliffside exempted from looming federal carbon regulation, but that is a risky strategy for both our climate and our pocketbooks. If not exempted, Cliffside would add huge CO2 emissions costs to our electric bills.

Studies have shown that energy efficiency programs could substantially reduce the need for more power plants and that North Carolina could get much of its electricity at less cost, with thousands more jobs, from local, renewable sources like wind and animal waste. Even after Cliffside’s price tag jumped to almost $4 billion, Duke did not consider efficiency programs or clean energy as less expensive, less polluting options.

Numerous studies, including the Stern Review, have shown that curbing emissions now would cost much less than it will cost to repair the devastation that will be wreaked by accelerating global warming.

Cliffside is one of over 150 US coal plants being fast-tracked by utilities rushing to get plants built or at least approved before carbon regulation kicks in. Coal plants already emit about one third of US CO2 emissions. If Cliffside and other anticipated coal plants get built, the US Dept. of Energy predicts that CO2 emissions from US coal plants will increase 50% by 2030. Such a huge increase in coal emissions would threaten the health and security of us all and place the burden of reducing emissions heavily on other industries and individuals.

Denying Cliffside would not cause brownouts. Duke has not demonstrated a need for such a huge plant; in fact, Duke hopes to sell half of the project to a secret partner. Duke should turn first to efficiency, the cheapest, quickest fuel. Then, if plants are needed, Duke should build cheaper and cleaner gas-fired plants. Duke’s own models picked a gas and nuclear portfolio -- not coal -- as the “least-cost” option.

Duke’s publicity about retiring old coal plants is misleading. Duke has agreed to retire less than 200 mw of very old “peaking” plants that run about 30% of the time, but it would add 1600 mw of “baseload” plants.


Keywords: Cliffside global warming coal carbon dioxide greenhouse gases Duke Energy Beth Henry coal-fired power plants NC Utilities Commission activists energy efficiency green power

Lobster Fishery Denies Threat to Whales

North Atlantic right whale mother and calf, photo courtesy of NOAA

For 70 years, laws have protected the North Atlantic right whale from whaling ships, but the population is not increasing. Their numbers are so low that just a few deaths of mature females could trigger the collapse of the entire group. The species is the most critically endangered in the Atlantic with only about 300 in existence.

U.S. lobster and fisheries fleets are currently a major threat to the right whales' survival.

North Atlantic right whales are coastal animals that tend to hang out in waters with coastal fisheries, heavy ship traffic, and pollution. Deaths today are caused largely by fishery rigging and lobstering gear that entangles them, and by ships that run into the whales.

But scientists say that a few simple changes by the lobster industry could greatly increase the North Atlantic right whales' chances of survival and recovery. The recommended changes are fewer lobster traps and a shortened lobstering season. In the January 9 issue of Current Biology, biologists recommend a 6-month lobster season and a 90 percent reduction in the millions of traps that are currently allowed. Especially reducing the number of traps in the Gulf of Maine in fall and spring, when the whales migrate through the Gulf, would improve the whales' chances of survival.

The thriving Canadian lobster fishery already limits its lobster season, while U.S. regulations permit lobstering year round. The U.S. lobster fleet also uses a lot more traps than they need to - 13 times more traps than Canadian fleets for an equivalent number of lobsters!

With more efficient methods, U.S. workers could harvest the same number of lobsters with less danger to the whales, say the biologists, Drs. Ransom Myers and Boris Worm of Nova Scotia's Dalhousie University.

The Maine Lobstermen's Association objects to these recommendations. They deny that changing the industry's methods could have any benefit to the whales.

Not surprising - professional organizations seldom voluntarily impose limits on their own production or harvesting methods. So it will likely be up to the U.S. government to impose limitations on American lobster fisheries.

If you would like to encourage federal limitations on the lobster season and number of traps, write to your representatives in Congress. And remember that your food selection is a powerful form of activism. When you choose fish and lobster, you're supporting the fleets that harvest these animals, with all of the unintended bycatch of other marine animals. Consider eating for environmental change. Consider choosing plant foods, or if you must eat animal products, choose products from pastured animals. If you must eat seafood, consult Oceans Alive's "Best Seafood Choices."

For more reading about the natural history and conservation of right whales, see the NOAA's right whale web page.

Entangled right whale photo courtesy of the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration

Sources:
Much of the information in this article came from "Saving Whales the Easy Way: Less lobstering could mean fewer deaths" by Susan Milius in the January 20, 2007 issue of Science News. Another source was an article by the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration about efforts to rescue an entangled North Atlantic right whale.

Keywords:: RIGHT WHALES LOBSTER TRAPS ENTANGLEMENT ENTANGLE FISHERIES MAINE HARVEST WHALING EXTINCTION SURVIVAL WILDLIFE MARINE MAMMALS ENDANGERED BYCATCH

High genetic diversity discovered in Eritrean barley

Researchers have discovered varieties of barley with a surprisingly high level of genetic diversity in Eritrea, which could be useful for researchers trying to breed drought and disease resistant barley.

But the scientists warn that the resource could be lost if seed conservation measures are not improved.

The barley, found in farmer's fields surrounding the capital city Asmara in Eritrea, has the highest level of genetic diversity ever discovered.

Lead researcher Ahmed Jahoor, of the University of Copenhagen, Denmark, says he observed that the barley grows under diverse levels of drought severity, which could be useful to plant breeders wishing to select the level of drought tolerance needed. He expects to find genetic variability for disease resistance as well.

Jahoor says the seeds will be invaluable for improving barley "not only in Eritrea but elsewhere in tropical highland where barley is grown".

They could be used as a new source of useful genes that have not previously been used in barley breeding programmes, and will be available for research purposes through common material transfer agreement procedures.

However, Jahoor told SciDev.Net that the new gene pool is under threat due to poor seed conservation facilities in Eritrea. He urged the scientific community to establish a seed bank to conserve the genetic resource before it is lost forever.

Jahoor says he has had difficulties obtaining funding for a seed bank because the Danish government has stopped supporting Eritrea for political reasons, and other funding agencies have not committed any funds.

Mike Gale, emeritus research fellow at the UK-based John Innes Centre, says the levels of genetic diversity that the researchers found clearly demonstrates the value of international genebanks.

The research was part of the Integrated Cereal Disease Management programme that aims to enhance research collaboration between Danish research institutes, National Agricultural Research Institutes in developing countries and centres of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research.

It was published online in Theoretical & Applied Genetics last week (6 February).

By Wagdy Sawahel

Link to abstract in Theoretical and Applied Genetics

Reference: Theoretical and Applied Genetics doi: 10.1007/s00122-007-0505-5 (2007)

Related links:
Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
Photo Credit: USDA/J.Dykingay

Pastor Nabbed in Wildlife Smuggling Ring

From NPR's Morning Edition, February 13, 2007

by John Nielsen

Photo by Mike Liu, iStockPhoto.com

Caption: Baby leopard sharks are popular with aquarium hobbyists, but they can grow to a length of eight feet — far too big for most tanks.

Morning Edition, February 13, 2007 · Federal officials have broken up a major wildlife smuggling ring led by a pastor at a San Francisco Bay area church. The smugglers pulled thousands of baby leopard sharks from the bay, then sold the live sharks to pet stores and private buyers around the world.

Authorities say the operation began many years ago. About that time, the weekly sermon at the Ocean Church in San Leandro, Calif., was devoted to an unusual topic: pet sharks.

"For the past 13 years, Ocean Church has had this little shark business," Pastor Kevin Thompson said. "We catch these baby sharks, this big. And we sell them to pet stores, live."

Thompson's products were baby leopard sharks fresh from the San Francisco Bay. Customers paid up to $40 for each of the one- to two-foot sharks. Fish collectors loved them for their big dark spots and the elegant way they glided through the water.

But the business wasn't legal. Earlier this year, Thompson and five other men pleaded guilty to wildlife smuggling and Thompson was sentenced to a year in jail.

Federal officials say Thompson ran a poaching gang that may have removed as many as 10,000 baby leopard sharks from San Francisco Bay.

At a press conference at the Monterey Bay Aquarium Monday, Lisa Nichols of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, said the poachers caught hundreds of sharks a day during the breeding season.

"A majority of them would just fish, hook 'em, bring 'em in," Nichols said. "If you're out there in the dark and nobody checks you, you take it back to your truck and you're gone. If somebody shows up, they get dumped in the water and the evidence is gone."

The ring began to fall apart in 2003, when a smuggling expert with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration saw a baby leopard shark that was for sale on a Web site and started asking questions. The investigation led him to the Ocean Church and Pastor Thompson and his partners, some who also happened to be his parishioners.

Monday, Nichols and other officials closed the book on this investigation by unveiling a $1.5 million plan to restore some the marshes where the leopard sharks give birth. More than $400,000 will come from Thompson and his partners as part of their sentence, and $500,000 will be donated by the Unification Church of America, to which the Ocean Church belongs. The rest of the money will come from foundations and conservation groups.

Lisa Nichols says the prosecution has helped drive other leopard shark poachers out of the business.

"Once we started openly prosecuting people in this case — after the investigation was at a certain level — word spread fairly quickly in the industry," Nichols said. "Working undercover I tried to make attempts to buy in the last year and it's pretty much shut down."

Towards the end, according to investigators, some of these poachers asked their preacher whether they were doing the right thing. He responded, allegedly, that the poaching was God's will.

After Monday's press conference, Mike Murray said there are many reasons why the trade in baby leopard sharks should never be allowed to recover. One: that baby sharks don't stay that way for long.

"They become very large: six, seven, eight feet in length," said Murray, a Monterey Bay Aquarium staff veterinarian. "That's a big fish."

Too big, he says, for the fish tank in your living room.

Keywords:: WILDLIFE SMUGGLING RING ILLEGAL WILDLIFE TRADE BLACKMARKET LEOPARD SHARKS KEVIN THOMPSON PREACHER POACHING SAN FRANCISCO BAY