Will be being shown at Gulfplace on Jan. 11 at 6:30. Press release below.
Please join us 6:30 pm, Thursday, January 11th, 2007 on the lawn at Gulf Place for a community gathering to discuss environmental issues in Walton County. Bring your own seating and blankets as the event will be outside. Gulf Place lawn is located on the corner of Scenic Hwy 30-A and S. County Road 393 behind frontage buildings.
Contact: Jenifer Kuntz 303-819-6725
Arix Zalace 850-855-9641
D&A Maintenance has teamed up with event producer Jenifer Kuntz to facilitate a community discussion regarding environmental issues in Walton County. We will be showing An Inconvenient Truth, a slide presentation documenting global warming, followed by a roundtable discussion about Walton Counties? responsibilities as stewards of the environment. The discussion will address two points, our power and our waste.
Following the film, representatives from Alabama Electric Company and Waste Management will each give a 10-15 minute presentation about Walton Counties? current power, and waste/recycling programs. After which the audience will take part in a Q&A discussion with the representatives. We will be investigating/understanding where our power comes from, what constitutes green energy and is it in our future. And, where does our garbage go, what sort of recycling does Walton County have, and can we implement a more comprehensive recycling program.
This will not be a political event, but rather an opportunity for the community to come together to discuss the state of the environment both globally and locally.
Additional sponsors and guests will have informational booths. Guests include Sundog Books offering topic related literature, For the Health of it serving natural snacks and beverages, Tiahrt Lopez Construction sharing green building practices, D&A Maintenance educating guests on home efficiency, as well as several others.
Replies
378
Skunky
Now the kids have a guilt complex thanks to the thick hysteria...
Will global warming become the next big fear?
Climate emerges as threat du jour in minds of Americans
Sunday, April 01, 2007
By Gabrielle Glaser
PORTLAND, ORE. -- Leslie Carlson remembers fallout shelters and school drills that sent kids diving under their desks. In college, worries about nuclear catastrophe kept her up at night.
But today Carlson, 42, has global warming anxiety.
"I worry about the quality of my children's lives and the connection to nature I love so much," says Carlson, a mother of three and a Portland public relations manager. She recently was skiing with her children and surveyed the mountain landscape. "I wondered, 'Are they even going to be able to do this when they grow up?' "
Every generation has its fears. Before the polio vaccine, parents kept their children indoors on hot summer days -- no swimming pools, no picnics. Then came the Cold War and its fears of sudden annihilation. For several years after the 9/11 attacks, terrorism dominated the worry agenda.
But today, concern about climate change appears to be replacing atomic Armageddon or anthrax epidemics. For some families, compost piles have supplanted bomb shelters and duct tape as household essentials.
Recent national polls show the majority of Americans now see global warming as a serious threat.
"The news has really been unremittingly bad," says Madeline Levine, an adolescent psychologist in Marin County, Calif., and author of a book on the angst of today's middle-class kids. Increasingly, Levine says, she sees young patients beset by their fears for the planet. "They're worried," Levine says, "and they're angry. They feel that older generations screwed up the Earth and now it's up to them to fix -- but they don't have the skills or ability to do it."
Levine estimates that one in three children struggles with anxiety, and that many have fixated on global warming.
Westerners are especially gloomy about the chances of coping with the problem, according to a new Yale University survey.
"When I think of global warming," says Katrina Rapp, a sixth-grader fresh from a sleepover at Portland's Sunnyside Environmental School, "I think of those poor polar bears. It makes me so sad."
Her classmate, Julia Mann, echoes her concerns. When she sees lights left on in empty rooms, her mind races to carbon emissions. "It makes me worry about what kind of world will exist for my children," she says, pausing. "Maybe I won't even have them."
The issue also dogs young adults. Rob McKirdie, 27, a Portland artist, has discussed the issue with his girlfriend. "I do worry about what kind of world we'll have," he says. He sometimes feels anxious when he sees pregnant women. "I wonder," he says, " 'What is that child's future?' "
McKirdie's concerns carry over into his daily life. He walks to work, recycles everything he can and carries reusable cloth shopping bags. He's read about a vast vortex of plastic trash -- toothbrushes, water bottles, grocery bags -- in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. And yet at his job -- at an environmentally friendly supermarket -- he dispenses plastic all day long. "I want to ask people, 'Are you sure you need this bag for your one little item?' "
Joe Rhinewine, a Lake Oswego, Ore., psychologist, says Americans have a tendency to overstate the dangers of imponderables. Nobody knows exactly what the future will hold, and parents can help their children by putting threats in perspective. They can, he says, validate their kids' fears while reassuring them.
"It's actually invalidating to always reassure by saying, 'It's OK,' and, 'Stop worrying,' " Rhinewine says. "Excessive reassurance can actually help to reinforce the worry."
Better to say, "Yeah, it is scary to think of the planet changing. But it's important to remember that it has changed a lot in the past," Rhinewine says. "When I feel scared, I remind myself that there are lots of steps we can take to make things better, like recycling and driving less."
Engaging children in solutions, he says, can help them gain a sense of control. "Kids under the age of 12 lack the cognitive skills to distance themselves. In a well-intentioned effort to motivate kids, you might show them a picture of some polar bears drowning. . . . But it's a little like using a sledgehammer when you can use a hammer. A sensitive child is going to think, 'Oh, no, that polar bear is dying, and it's all my fault!' "
Will global warming become the next big fear?
Climate emerges as threat du jour in minds of Americans
Sunday, April 01, 2007
By Gabrielle Glaser
PORTLAND, ORE. -- Leslie Carlson remembers fallout shelters and school drills that sent kids diving under their desks. In college, worries about nuclear catastrophe kept her up at night.
But today Carlson, 42, has global warming anxiety.
"I worry about the quality of my children's lives and the connection to nature I love so much," says Carlson, a mother of three and a Portland public relations manager. She recently was skiing with her children and surveyed the mountain landscape. "I wondered, 'Are they even going to be able to do this when they grow up?' "
Every generation has its fears. Before the polio vaccine, parents kept their children indoors on hot summer days -- no swimming pools, no picnics. Then came the Cold War and its fears of sudden annihilation. For several years after the 9/11 attacks, terrorism dominated the worry agenda.
But today, concern about climate change appears to be replacing atomic Armageddon or anthrax epidemics. For some families, compost piles have supplanted bomb shelters and duct tape as household essentials.
Recent national polls show the majority of Americans now see global warming as a serious threat.
"The news has really been unremittingly bad," says Madeline Levine, an adolescent psychologist in Marin County, Calif., and author of a book on the angst of today's middle-class kids. Increasingly, Levine says, she sees young patients beset by their fears for the planet. "They're worried," Levine says, "and they're angry. They feel that older generations screwed up the Earth and now it's up to them to fix -- but they don't have the skills or ability to do it."
Levine estimates that one in three children struggles with anxiety, and that many have fixated on global warming.
Westerners are especially gloomy about the chances of coping with the problem, according to a new Yale University survey.
"When I think of global warming," says Katrina Rapp, a sixth-grader fresh from a sleepover at Portland's Sunnyside Environmental School, "I think of those poor polar bears. It makes me so sad."
Her classmate, Julia Mann, echoes her concerns. When she sees lights left on in empty rooms, her mind races to carbon emissions. "It makes me worry about what kind of world will exist for my children," she says, pausing. "Maybe I won't even have them."
The issue also dogs young adults. Rob McKirdie, 27, a Portland artist, has discussed the issue with his girlfriend. "I do worry about what kind of world we'll have," he says. He sometimes feels anxious when he sees pregnant women. "I wonder," he says, " 'What is that child's future?' "
McKirdie's concerns carry over into his daily life. He walks to work, recycles everything he can and carries reusable cloth shopping bags. He's read about a vast vortex of plastic trash -- toothbrushes, water bottles, grocery bags -- in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. And yet at his job -- at an environmentally friendly supermarket -- he dispenses plastic all day long. "I want to ask people, 'Are you sure you need this bag for your one little item?' "
Joe Rhinewine, a Lake Oswego, Ore., psychologist, says Americans have a tendency to overstate the dangers of imponderables. Nobody knows exactly what the future will hold, and parents can help their children by putting threats in perspective. They can, he says, validate their kids' fears while reassuring them.
"It's actually invalidating to always reassure by saying, 'It's OK,' and, 'Stop worrying,' " Rhinewine says. "Excessive reassurance can actually help to reinforce the worry."
Better to say, "Yeah, it is scary to think of the planet changing. But it's important to remember that it has changed a lot in the past," Rhinewine says. "When I feel scared, I remind myself that there are lots of steps we can take to make things better, like recycling and driving less."
Engaging children in solutions, he says, can help them gain a sense of control. "Kids under the age of 12 lack the cognitive skills to distance themselves. In a well-intentioned effort to motivate kids, you might show them a picture of some polar bears drowning. . . . But it's a little like using a sledgehammer when you can use a hammer. A sensitive child is going to think, 'Oh, no, that polar bear is dying, and it's all my fault!' "
Beach Fanatic
I must say: this thread is grayt reading; and 
:funn:
And besides, what would the world be without Fat Bastard?????
Harvard takes Vandy's sloppy seconds?I thought it was Big Macs he was into lately.
:funn:
Fleetwood Mac or a Big Mac, I'm drooling over whatever that sandwich is in your tar Skunky!
And besides, what would the world be without Fat Bastard?????
Beach Fanatic
It is no wonder ?30A Skunkape? who lives in a coastal ?sinking city? is in Global warming denial?.
Coastal living ? a growing global threat
http://environment.newscientist.com...coastal-living--a-growing-global-threat-.html
* 14:54 28 March 2007
* NewScientist.com news service
* Catherine Brahic
The Mekong delta in Vietnam, seen in red at the bottom of this map, is at high risk from flooding, sea-level rises, and stronger storms due to climate change. Areas in red are 10m or less above sea-level, areas in green are higher, and darker colours indicate denser populations (Image: CIESIN)
The Mekong delta in Vietnam, seen in red at the bottom of this map, is at high risk from flooding, sea-level rises, and stronger storms due to climate change. Areas in red are 10m or less above sea-level, areas in green are higher, and darker colours indicate denser populations (Image: CIESIN)
Most of Bangladesh is at high risk from flooding, sea-level rises, and stronger storms due to climate change.Most of Bangladesh is at high risk from flooding, sea-level rises, and stronger storms due to climate change. Areas in red are 10m or less above sea-level, areas in green are higher, and darker colours indicate denser populations
One person in 10 worldwide, including one in eight city-dwellers, live less than 10 metres above sea-level and near the coast ? an "at-risk zone" for flooding and stronger storms exacerbated by climate change, a new study reveals.
The research, led by Gordon McGranahan at the International Institute for Environment and Development in London, UK, is the first ever to map the location of low, coastal urban centres around the world. "These are areas where the risk of sea-level rise and stronger storms needs to be taken seriously," says McGranahan. View a map of coastal urban populations in the eastern US, for example.
In February 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a consortium of about 4000 international climate scientists, said that sea-levels were likely to rise by up to 59 centimetres by the end of the 21st century, if fossil fuel consumption and economic growth continue unabated.
Also in February, Stefan Rahmstorf at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, published a study suggesting that IPCC forecasts could be on the conservative side (see Sea level rise outpacing key predictions).
Double jeopardy
McGranahan explains that low coastal cities pose a double risk. Firstly, they attract large human populations to a zone that is at higher risk of suffering the impacts of worsening storms, rising sea-levels and more floods. Furthermore, these urban developments degrade ecosystems ? such as mangroves in Asia ? that can provide natural barriers against the damage of rising sea-levels and strong storms.
The study's main findings are that:
? About 75% of people living in the "at-risk zone" ? living in a place that is 10 metres or less above sea level - are in Asia
? 21 nations, most of them small islands, have more than half their population in the at-risk zone
? Nearly two-thirds of urban settlements with more than 5 million inhabitants are at least partially in the at-risk zone
? In the world's least developed countries, 14% of people live in the at-risk zone, compared to 10% in developed countries that are members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
? 11% of urban populations in OECD countries are in the at-risk zone, compared to 21% of the urban populations of least developed nations
"What really struck me was the extent to which it was the big delta regions such as Bangladesh and the Nile delta were at the centre of the issue," McGranahan told New Scientist.
View a map of coastal urban populations around the Nile delta.
Misguided policy?
McGranahan says the maps made it clear to him how misguided current policy approaches to sea-level rise were In the UK. View a map of coastal urban populations in the UK.
"My impression is that if the government decides to develop flood defences they will have to attract private investment ? the public sector cannot afford the costs," he says. But the private sector will only fund flood defences if they have a vested interest in them. For instance, a company could be convinced to foot the bill if the government gave it low-lying land to develop into residential or commercial property.
"This is fine as long as you know exactly how the floods are going to happen," says McGranahan. "But if you get it wrong then you've brought more people to the zone immediately behind the flood barrier."
Life's a beach
In China, he says the key thing is the rate at which populations are moving to coastal cities. He points out that the infrastructure investment in coastal cities in China is "enormous", and, in the long term, is putting large populations at risk.
View a map of coastal urban populations in China.
The proportion of African cities that are on the coast is 12% ? higher than the global average of 7%, and is partly due to the fact that colonial rulers stuck mostly to the accessible coasts.
Living on the edge
The new maps, published in Environment and Urbanization on 28 March, are the result of a massive effort to gather 2002 population censuses from around the world.
The 10 countries with the largest number of people living within the at-risk zone are: China, India, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Indonesia, Japan, Egypt, the US, Thailand, and the Philippines.
The 10 countries with the largest share of their population living within 10 m of sea level are: Bahamas (88% of population); Suriname (76%); Netherlands (74%); Vietnam (55%); Guyana (55%); Bangladesh (46%); Djibouti (41%); Belize (40%); Egypt (38%); and the Gambia (38%).
Journal reference: Environment and Urbanization (DOI: 10.1177/0956247807076960)
Climate Change - Want to know more about global warming ? the science, impacts and political debate? Visit our continually updated special report.
Related Articles
* China and US at highest risk of damage from asteroids
* http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn11467
* 27 March 2007
* Ice sheet complexity leaves sea level rise uncertain
* http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn11396
* 16 March 2007
* Sea level rise outpacing key predictions
* http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn11083
* 01 February 2007
Weblinks
* Gordon McGranahan, International Institute for Environment and Development
* http://www.iied.org/aboutiied/HR/staff/bios/mcgranahan.html
* International Institute for Environment and Development
* http://www.iied.org/
* Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
* http://www.ipcc.ch/
* Environment and Urbanization
* http://eau.sagepub.com/
Coastal living ? a growing global threat
http://environment.newscientist.com...coastal-living--a-growing-global-threat-.html
* 14:54 28 March 2007
* NewScientist.com news service
* Catherine Brahic
The Mekong delta in Vietnam, seen in red at the bottom of this map, is at high risk from flooding, sea-level rises, and stronger storms due to climate change. Areas in red are 10m or less above sea-level, areas in green are higher, and darker colours indicate denser populations (Image: CIESIN)
The Mekong delta in Vietnam, seen in red at the bottom of this map, is at high risk from flooding, sea-level rises, and stronger storms due to climate change. Areas in red are 10m or less above sea-level, areas in green are higher, and darker colours indicate denser populations (Image: CIESIN)
Most of Bangladesh is at high risk from flooding, sea-level rises, and stronger storms due to climate change.Most of Bangladesh is at high risk from flooding, sea-level rises, and stronger storms due to climate change. Areas in red are 10m or less above sea-level, areas in green are higher, and darker colours indicate denser populations
One person in 10 worldwide, including one in eight city-dwellers, live less than 10 metres above sea-level and near the coast ? an "at-risk zone" for flooding and stronger storms exacerbated by climate change, a new study reveals.
The research, led by Gordon McGranahan at the International Institute for Environment and Development in London, UK, is the first ever to map the location of low, coastal urban centres around the world. "These are areas where the risk of sea-level rise and stronger storms needs to be taken seriously," says McGranahan. View a map of coastal urban populations in the eastern US, for example.
In February 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a consortium of about 4000 international climate scientists, said that sea-levels were likely to rise by up to 59 centimetres by the end of the 21st century, if fossil fuel consumption and economic growth continue unabated.
Also in February, Stefan Rahmstorf at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, published a study suggesting that IPCC forecasts could be on the conservative side (see Sea level rise outpacing key predictions).
Double jeopardy
McGranahan explains that low coastal cities pose a double risk. Firstly, they attract large human populations to a zone that is at higher risk of suffering the impacts of worsening storms, rising sea-levels and more floods. Furthermore, these urban developments degrade ecosystems ? such as mangroves in Asia ? that can provide natural barriers against the damage of rising sea-levels and strong storms.
The study's main findings are that:
? About 75% of people living in the "at-risk zone" ? living in a place that is 10 metres or less above sea level - are in Asia
? 21 nations, most of them small islands, have more than half their population in the at-risk zone
? Nearly two-thirds of urban settlements with more than 5 million inhabitants are at least partially in the at-risk zone
? In the world's least developed countries, 14% of people live in the at-risk zone, compared to 10% in developed countries that are members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
? 11% of urban populations in OECD countries are in the at-risk zone, compared to 21% of the urban populations of least developed nations
"What really struck me was the extent to which it was the big delta regions such as Bangladesh and the Nile delta were at the centre of the issue," McGranahan told New Scientist.
View a map of coastal urban populations around the Nile delta.
Misguided policy?
McGranahan says the maps made it clear to him how misguided current policy approaches to sea-level rise were In the UK. View a map of coastal urban populations in the UK.
"My impression is that if the government decides to develop flood defences they will have to attract private investment ? the public sector cannot afford the costs," he says. But the private sector will only fund flood defences if they have a vested interest in them. For instance, a company could be convinced to foot the bill if the government gave it low-lying land to develop into residential or commercial property.
"This is fine as long as you know exactly how the floods are going to happen," says McGranahan. "But if you get it wrong then you've brought more people to the zone immediately behind the flood barrier."
Life's a beach
In China, he says the key thing is the rate at which populations are moving to coastal cities. He points out that the infrastructure investment in coastal cities in China is "enormous", and, in the long term, is putting large populations at risk.
View a map of coastal urban populations in China.
The proportion of African cities that are on the coast is 12% ? higher than the global average of 7%, and is partly due to the fact that colonial rulers stuck mostly to the accessible coasts.
Living on the edge
The new maps, published in Environment and Urbanization on 28 March, are the result of a massive effort to gather 2002 population censuses from around the world.
The 10 countries with the largest number of people living within the at-risk zone are: China, India, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Indonesia, Japan, Egypt, the US, Thailand, and the Philippines.
The 10 countries with the largest share of their population living within 10 m of sea level are: Bahamas (88% of population); Suriname (76%); Netherlands (74%); Vietnam (55%); Guyana (55%); Bangladesh (46%); Djibouti (41%); Belize (40%); Egypt (38%); and the Gambia (38%).
Journal reference: Environment and Urbanization (DOI: 10.1177/0956247807076960)
Climate Change - Want to know more about global warming ? the science, impacts and political debate? Visit our continually updated special report.
Related Articles
* China and US at highest risk of damage from asteroids
* http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn11467
* 27 March 2007
* Ice sheet complexity leaves sea level rise uncertain
* http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn11396
* 16 March 2007
* Sea level rise outpacing key predictions
* http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn11083
* 01 February 2007
Weblinks
* Gordon McGranahan, International Institute for Environment and Development
* http://www.iied.org/aboutiied/HR/staff/bios/mcgranahan.html
* International Institute for Environment and Development
* http://www.iied.org/
* Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
* http://www.ipcc.ch/
* Environment and Urbanization
* http://eau.sagepub.com/
Skunky
What am I denying Ecopal?
Beach Fanatic
It is no wonder ?30A Skunkape? who lives in a coastal ?sinking city? is in Global warming denial?.Wow! Land surrounded by large bodies of water are at a higher risk of flooding?? Amazing! Another study by the AICS (American Institute of Common Sense) found that people who frolick on a beach have an 92.86% greater chance of getting sand in their butt crack. This study came on the heels of a finding that sticking a hot poker in your eye can cause blindness.
Coastal living ? a growing global threat
http://environment.newscientist.com...coastal-living--a-growing-global-threat-.html
* 14:54 28 March 2007
* NewScientist.com news service
* Catherine Brahic
The Mekong delta in Vietnam, seen in red at the bottom of this map, is at high risk from flooding, sea-level rises, and stronger storms due to climate change. Areas in red are 10m or less above sea-level, areas in green are higher, and darker colours indicate denser populations (Image: CIESIN)
The Mekong delta in Vietnam, seen in red at the bottom of this map, is at high risk from flooding, sea-level rises, and stronger storms due to climate change. Areas in red are 10m or less above sea-level, areas in green are higher, and darker colours indicate denser populations (Image: CIESIN)
Most of Bangladesh is at high risk from flooding, sea-level rises, and stronger storms due to climate change.Most of Bangladesh is at high risk from flooding, sea-level rises, and stronger storms due to climate change. Areas in red are 10m or less above sea-level, areas in green are higher, and darker colours indicate denser populations
One person in 10 worldwide, including one in eight city-dwellers, live less than 10 metres above sea-level and near the coast ? an "at-risk zone" for flooding and stronger storms exacerbated by climate change, a new study reveals.
The research, led by Gordon McGranahan at the International Institute for Environment and Development in London, UK, is the first ever to map the location of low, coastal urban centres around the world. "These are areas where the risk of sea-level rise and stronger storms needs to be taken seriously," says McGranahan. View a map of coastal urban populations in the eastern US, for example.
In February 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a consortium of about 4000 international climate scientists, said that sea-levels were likely to rise by up to 59 centimetres by the end of the 21st century, if fossil fuel consumption and economic growth continue unabated.
Also in February, Stefan Rahmstorf at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany, published a study suggesting that IPCC forecasts could be on the conservative side (see Sea level rise outpacing key predictions).
Double jeopardy
McGranahan explains that low coastal cities pose a double risk. Firstly, they attract large human populations to a zone that is at higher risk of suffering the impacts of worsening storms, rising sea-levels and more floods. Furthermore, these urban developments degrade ecosystems ? such as mangroves in Asia ? that can provide natural barriers against the damage of rising sea-levels and strong storms.
The study's main findings are that:
? About 75% of people living in the "at-risk zone" ? living in a place that is 10 metres or less above sea level - are in Asia
? 21 nations, most of them small islands, have more than half their population in the at-risk zone
? Nearly two-thirds of urban settlements with more than 5 million inhabitants are at least partially in the at-risk zone
? In the world's least developed countries, 14% of people live in the at-risk zone, compared to 10% in developed countries that are members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
? 11% of urban populations in OECD countries are in the at-risk zone, compared to 21% of the urban populations of least developed nations
"What really struck me was the extent to which it was the big delta regions such as Bangladesh and the Nile delta were at the centre of the issue," McGranahan told New Scientist.
View a map of coastal urban populations around the Nile delta.
Misguided policy?
McGranahan says the maps made it clear to him how misguided current policy approaches to sea-level rise were In the UK. View a map of coastal urban populations in the UK.
"My impression is that if the government decides to develop flood defences they will have to attract private investment ? the public sector cannot afford the costs," he says. But the private sector will only fund flood defences if they have a vested interest in them. For instance, a company could be convinced to foot the bill if the government gave it low-lying land to develop into residential or commercial property.
"This is fine as long as you know exactly how the floods are going to happen," says McGranahan. "But if you get it wrong then you've brought more people to the zone immediately behind the flood barrier."
Life's a beach
In China, he says the key thing is the rate at which populations are moving to coastal cities. He points out that the infrastructure investment in coastal cities in China is "enormous", and, in the long term, is putting large populations at risk.
View a map of coastal urban populations in China.
The proportion of African cities that are on the coast is 12% ? higher than the global average of 7%, and is partly due to the fact that colonial rulers stuck mostly to the accessible coasts.
Living on the edge
The new maps, published in Environment and Urbanization on 28 March, are the result of a massive effort to gather 2002 population censuses from around the world.
The 10 countries with the largest number of people living within the at-risk zone are: China, India, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Indonesia, Japan, Egypt, the US, Thailand, and the Philippines.
The 10 countries with the largest share of their population living within 10 m of sea level are: Bahamas (88% of population); Suriname (76%); Netherlands (74%); Vietnam (55%); Guyana (55%); Bangladesh (46%); Djibouti (41%); Belize (40%); Egypt (38%); and the Gambia (38%).
Journal reference: Environment and Urbanization (DOI: 10.1177/0956247807076960)
Climate Change - Want to know more about global warming ? the science, impacts and political debate? Visit our continually updated special report.
Related Articles
* China and US at highest risk of damage from asteroids
* http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn11467
* 27 March 2007
* Ice sheet complexity leaves sea level rise uncertain
* http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn11396
* 16 March 2007
* Sea level rise outpacing key predictions
* http://environment.newscientist.com/article/dn11083
* 01 February 2007
Weblinks
* Gordon McGranahan, International Institute for Environment and Development
* http://www.iied.org/aboutiied/HR/staff/bios/mcgranahan.html
* International Institute for Environment and Development
* http://www.iied.org/
* Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
* http://www.ipcc.ch/
* Environment and Urbanization
* http://eau.sagepub.com/
Beach Fanatic
Wow! Land surrounded by large bodies of water are at a higher risk of flooding?? Amazing! Another study by the AICS (American Institute of Common Sense) found that people who frolick on a beach have an 92.86% greater chance of getting sand in their butt crack. This study came on the heels of a finding that sticking a hot poker in your eye can cause blindness.
:rofl:
Skunky
I like the link at the bottom dealing with China and the US being at high risk if the Earth is struck by a killer asteroid...no wonder Ecopal is on here so rarely, he is probably scared poopless hiding under a bed somewhere
needs to get out moreAuthor
the primrose path is quite nice until it ends.
Skunky
the primrose path is quite nice until it ends.
Where ya been John R? You sound like a fortune cookie
Happy Passover, by the way
Beach Fanatic
the primrose path is quite nice until it ends.I tried walking down the primrose path but with all the endangered flora and fauna we now have, I wasn't permitted.
SoWal Insider
Today's news.....G "knucklehead" W knows better than the Republican Supreme Court what's best for our country.http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0325028820070403
Skunky
Today's news.....G "knucklehead" W knows better than the Republican Supreme Court what's best for our country.http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0325028820070403
And to think you spent all that time and energy whining about his nominees
Beach Comber
Not to break from all the debate, but I did want to give everyone a chance to get together and have some fun. Blue Turtle Seduction from California are touring the country, and will be in Destin April 15-16th at the funky blues shack. These guys are good friends of mine, and phenomenal musicians. They have been described as high mountain adrenaline funk blues grass. Don't let that description intimidate anyone, they are a lot of fun. Their instruments range from fiddles, mandolins, all the way down to pan pipes. The shows will only be $5 per night. I promise it will be a good time. I have attached a venue poster.
Edited
SoWal Insider
Not to break from all the debate, but I did want to give everyone a chance to get together and have some fun. Blue Turtle Seduction from California are touring the country, and will be in Destin April 15-16th at the funky blues shack. These guys are good friends of mine, and phenomenal musicians. They have been described as high mountain adrenaline funk blues grass. Don't let that description intimidate anyone, they are a lot of fun. Their instruments range from fiddles, mandolins, all the way down to pan pipes. The shows will only be $5 per night. I promise it will be a good time. I have attached a venue poster.Anything like The Avett brothers???????????????/
Beach Comber
I was going to try and compare them to other bands out there, but decided against it. Instead I will just let everyone decide for themselves what they sound like. Check them out at www.myspace.com/blueturtleseduction
I also forgot to mention that their tour bus will be on display after the shows. I asked them to do this because the bus runs on recycled vegetable oil. They pick up old fryer grease in every town they play in, and fill their tanks with it. A special filtration system then purifies the oil turning it into bio-diesel. There has been talk on this thread about moving away from our oil dependence, well here is a perfect example. I encourage everyone to come hear the music, or if nothing else at least come see the bus. They have been driving the bus all over the country with no problems, unless you consider the smell of french fries emanating from the tale pipe a problem.
I also forgot to mention that their tour bus will be on display after the shows. I asked them to do this because the bus runs on recycled vegetable oil. They pick up old fryer grease in every town they play in, and fill their tanks with it. A special filtration system then purifies the oil turning it into bio-diesel. There has been talk on this thread about moving away from our oil dependence, well here is a perfect example. I encourage everyone to come hear the music, or if nothing else at least come see the bus. They have been driving the bus all over the country with no problems, unless you consider the smell of french fries emanating from the tale pipe a problem.
SoWal Guide
Today's news.....G "knucklehead" W knows better than the Republican Supreme Court what's best for our country.http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0325028820070403
he says he has a better plan for the war on global warming.
Skunky
he says he has a better plan for the war on global warming.
Well, look at it this way, by sending Al Gore to the ranks of the marginally employed, he provided big Al a chance to perfect his wonderful movie and 'get the message out'.
Meow
This just in from the D Magazine Blog...and just for you, Skunky!
So apparently Laurie "I married Larry and now I'm a climatologist" David and Sheryl Crow will be flying into Big D this weekend on private jets to kick off their "Stop Global Warming: The College Years" tour or whatever it's called. They'll join Mayor Laura Miller for a press conference on Monday at SMU at 1 p.m., hop on a bus fueled by corn squeezin's and pixie dust to hit some college campuses, and then Gulfstream on home. Heck, maybe David can at least unload some of those 50,000 copies of Al Gore's propaganda piece that the National Science Teachers Association refused to take.
So apparently Laurie "I married Larry and now I'm a climatologist" David and Sheryl Crow will be flying into Big D this weekend on private jets to kick off their "Stop Global Warming: The College Years" tour or whatever it's called. They'll join Mayor Laura Miller for a press conference on Monday at SMU at 1 p.m., hop on a bus fueled by corn squeezin's and pixie dust to hit some college campuses, and then Gulfstream on home. Heck, maybe David can at least unload some of those 50,000 copies of Al Gore's propaganda piece that the National Science Teachers Association refused to take.
SoWal Guide
Well, look at it this way, by sending Al Gore to the ranks of the marginally employed, he provided big Al a chance to perfect his wonderful movie and 'get the message out'.
very true. things do happen for a reason, don't they?
Skunky
This just in from the D Magazine Blog...and just for you, Skunky!
So apparently Laurie "I married Larry and now I'm a climatologist" David and Sheryl Crow will be flying into Big D this weekend on private jets to kick off their "Stop Global Warming: The College Years" tour or whatever it's called. They'll join Mayor Laura Miller for a press conference on Monday at SMU at 1 p.m., hop on a bus fueled by corn squeezin's and pixie dust to hit some college campuses, and then Gulfstream on home. Heck, maybe David can at least unload some of those 50,000 copies of Al Gore's propaganda piece that the National Science Teachers Association refused to take.
I hear that the UN is going to release a new revised double secret apocolyptic version of global warming chaos today...a snowy Easter weekend to do so is just too funny.Beach Fanatic
What am I denying Ecopal?
I think that you are denying that the "fat bastard" as someone else called him is anything other than a complete freaking idiot. Sorry to the people that post 30 to 40 times a day. I know I'm a troll. I usually don't chime in on these discussions but when I see Al Gore's name mentioned it gets under my skin.
Skunky
I think that you are denying that the "fat bastard" as someone else called him is anything other than a complete freaking idiot. Sorry to the people that post 30 to 40 times a day. I know I'm a troll. I usually don't chime in on these discussions but when I see Al Gore's name mentioned it gets under my skin.
Now, now, lets not call people names, my jeans are getting kind of tight as well.
Beach Comber
Not to cut in on a good old fashioned name calling spree, but the location I posted for the Blue Turtle Seduction concert is wrong. They will be playing at the Funky Blues Shack in Baytowne Wharf April 15th and 16th starting at 8pm.
View attachment 4648
View attachment 4648
Skunky
There?s No Such Thing As a 'Perfect' Temperature
By Richard S. Lindzen
Newsweek International
April 16, 2007 issue - Judging from the media in recent months, the debate over global warming is now over. There has been a net warming of the earth over the last century and a half, and our greenhouse gas emissions are contributing at some level. Both of these statements are almost certainly true. What of it? Recently many people have said that the earth is facing a crisis requiring urgent action. This statement has nothing to do with science. There is no compelling evidence that the warming trend we've seen will amount to anything close to catastrophe. What most commentators?and many scientists?seem to miss is that the only thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes. The earth is always warming or cooling by as much as a few tenths of a degree a year; periods of constant average temperatures are rare. Looking back on the earth's climate history, it's apparent that there's no such thing as an optimal temperature?a climate at which everything is just right. The current alarm rests on the false assumption not only that we live in a perfect world, temperaturewise, but also that our warming forecasts for the year 2040 are somehow more reliable than the weatherman's forecast for next week.
A warmer climate could prove to be more beneficial than the one we have now. Much of the alarm over climate change is based on ignorance of what is normal for weather and climate. There is no evidence, for instance, that extreme weather events are increasing in any systematic way, according to scientists at the U.S. National Hurricane Center, the World Meteorological Organization and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (which released the second part of this year's report earlier this month). Indeed, meteorological theory holds that, outside the tropics, weather in a warming world should be less variable, which might be a good thing.
In many other respects, the ill effects of warming are overblown. Sea levels, for example, have been increasing since the end of the last ice age. When you look at recent centuries in perspective, ignoring short-term fluctuations, the rate of sea-level rise has been relatively uniform (less than a couple of millimeters a year). There's even some evidence that the rate was higher in the first half of the twentieth century than in the second half. Overall, the risk of sea-level rise from global warming is less at almost any given location than that from other causes, such as tectonic motions of the earth's surface.
Many of the most alarming studies rely on long-range predictions using inherently untrustworthy climate models, similar to those that cannot accurately forecast the weather a week from now. Interpretations of these studies rarely consider that the impact of carbon on temperature goes down?not up?the more carbon accumulates in the atmosphere. Even if emissions were the sole cause of the recent temperature rise?a dubious proposition?future increases wouldn't be as steep as the climb in emissions.
Indeed, one overlooked mystery is why temperatures are not already higher. Various models predict that a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere will raise the world's average temperature by as little as 1.5 degrees Celsius or as much as 4.5 degrees. The important thing about doubled CO2 (or any other greenhouse gas) is its "forcing"?its contribution to warming. At present, the greenhouse forcing is already about three-quarters of what one would get from a doubling of CO2. But average temperatures rose only about 0.6 degrees since the beginning of the industrial era, and the change hasn't been uniform?warming has largely occurred during the periods from 1919 to 1940 and from 1976 to 1998, with cooling in between. Researchers have been unable to explain this discrepancy.
Modelers claim to have simulated the warming and cooling that occurred before 1976 by choosing among various guesses as to what effect poorly observed volcanoes and unmeasured output from the sun have had. These factors, they claim, don't explain the warming of about 0.4 degrees C between 1976 and 1998. Climate modelers assume the cause must be greenhouse-gas emissions because they have no other explanation. This is a poor substitute for evidence, and simulation hardly constitutes explanation. Ten years ago climate modelers also couldn't account for the warming that occurred from about 1050 to 1300. They tried to expunge the medieval warm period from the observational record?an effort that is now generally discredited. The models have also severely underestimated short-term variability El Ni?o and the Intraseasonal Oscillation. Such phenomena illustrate the ability of the complex and turbulent climate system to vary significantly with no external cause whatever, and to do so over many years, even centuries.
Is there any point in pretending that CO2 increases will be catastrophic? Or could they be modest and on balance beneficial? India has warmed during the second half of the 20th century, and agricultural output has increased greatly. Infectious diseases like malaria are a matter not so much of temperature as poverty and public-health policies (like eliminating DDT). Exposure to cold is generally found to be both more dangerous and less comfortable.
Moreover, actions taken thus far to reduce emissions have already had negative consequences without improving our ability to adapt to climate change. An emphasis on ethanol, for instance, has led to angry protests against corn-price increases in Mexico, and forest clearing and habitat destruction in Southeast Asia. Carbon caps are likely to lead to increased prices, as well as corruption associated with permit trading. (Enron was a leading lobbyist for Kyoto because it had hoped to capitalize on emissions trading.) The alleged solutions have more potential for catastrophe than the putative problem. The conclusion of the late climate scientist Roger Revelle?Al Gore's supposed mentor?is worth pondering: the evidence for global warming thus far doesn't warrant any action unless it is justifiable on grounds that have nothing to do with climate.
Lindzen is the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His research has always been funded exclusively by the U.S. government. He receives no funding from any energy companies.
? 2007 Newsweek, Inc.
By Richard S. Lindzen
Newsweek International
April 16, 2007 issue - Judging from the media in recent months, the debate over global warming is now over. There has been a net warming of the earth over the last century and a half, and our greenhouse gas emissions are contributing at some level. Both of these statements are almost certainly true. What of it? Recently many people have said that the earth is facing a crisis requiring urgent action. This statement has nothing to do with science. There is no compelling evidence that the warming trend we've seen will amount to anything close to catastrophe. What most commentators?and many scientists?seem to miss is that the only thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes. The earth is always warming or cooling by as much as a few tenths of a degree a year; periods of constant average temperatures are rare. Looking back on the earth's climate history, it's apparent that there's no such thing as an optimal temperature?a climate at which everything is just right. The current alarm rests on the false assumption not only that we live in a perfect world, temperaturewise, but also that our warming forecasts for the year 2040 are somehow more reliable than the weatherman's forecast for next week.
A warmer climate could prove to be more beneficial than the one we have now. Much of the alarm over climate change is based on ignorance of what is normal for weather and climate. There is no evidence, for instance, that extreme weather events are increasing in any systematic way, according to scientists at the U.S. National Hurricane Center, the World Meteorological Organization and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (which released the second part of this year's report earlier this month). Indeed, meteorological theory holds that, outside the tropics, weather in a warming world should be less variable, which might be a good thing.
In many other respects, the ill effects of warming are overblown. Sea levels, for example, have been increasing since the end of the last ice age. When you look at recent centuries in perspective, ignoring short-term fluctuations, the rate of sea-level rise has been relatively uniform (less than a couple of millimeters a year). There's even some evidence that the rate was higher in the first half of the twentieth century than in the second half. Overall, the risk of sea-level rise from global warming is less at almost any given location than that from other causes, such as tectonic motions of the earth's surface.
Many of the most alarming studies rely on long-range predictions using inherently untrustworthy climate models, similar to those that cannot accurately forecast the weather a week from now. Interpretations of these studies rarely consider that the impact of carbon on temperature goes down?not up?the more carbon accumulates in the atmosphere. Even if emissions were the sole cause of the recent temperature rise?a dubious proposition?future increases wouldn't be as steep as the climb in emissions.
Indeed, one overlooked mystery is why temperatures are not already higher. Various models predict that a doubling of CO2 in the atmosphere will raise the world's average temperature by as little as 1.5 degrees Celsius or as much as 4.5 degrees. The important thing about doubled CO2 (or any other greenhouse gas) is its "forcing"?its contribution to warming. At present, the greenhouse forcing is already about three-quarters of what one would get from a doubling of CO2. But average temperatures rose only about 0.6 degrees since the beginning of the industrial era, and the change hasn't been uniform?warming has largely occurred during the periods from 1919 to 1940 and from 1976 to 1998, with cooling in between. Researchers have been unable to explain this discrepancy.
Modelers claim to have simulated the warming and cooling that occurred before 1976 by choosing among various guesses as to what effect poorly observed volcanoes and unmeasured output from the sun have had. These factors, they claim, don't explain the warming of about 0.4 degrees C between 1976 and 1998. Climate modelers assume the cause must be greenhouse-gas emissions because they have no other explanation. This is a poor substitute for evidence, and simulation hardly constitutes explanation. Ten years ago climate modelers also couldn't account for the warming that occurred from about 1050 to 1300. They tried to expunge the medieval warm period from the observational record?an effort that is now generally discredited. The models have also severely underestimated short-term variability El Ni?o and the Intraseasonal Oscillation. Such phenomena illustrate the ability of the complex and turbulent climate system to vary significantly with no external cause whatever, and to do so over many years, even centuries.
Is there any point in pretending that CO2 increases will be catastrophic? Or could they be modest and on balance beneficial? India has warmed during the second half of the 20th century, and agricultural output has increased greatly. Infectious diseases like malaria are a matter not so much of temperature as poverty and public-health policies (like eliminating DDT). Exposure to cold is generally found to be both more dangerous and less comfortable.
Moreover, actions taken thus far to reduce emissions have already had negative consequences without improving our ability to adapt to climate change. An emphasis on ethanol, for instance, has led to angry protests against corn-price increases in Mexico, and forest clearing and habitat destruction in Southeast Asia. Carbon caps are likely to lead to increased prices, as well as corruption associated with permit trading. (Enron was a leading lobbyist for Kyoto because it had hoped to capitalize on emissions trading.) The alleged solutions have more potential for catastrophe than the putative problem. The conclusion of the late climate scientist Roger Revelle?Al Gore's supposed mentor?is worth pondering: the evidence for global warming thus far doesn't warrant any action unless it is justifiable on grounds that have nothing to do with climate.
Lindzen is the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His research has always been funded exclusively by the U.S. government. He receives no funding from any energy companies.
? 2007 Newsweek, Inc.
Skunky
The global warming couldn't come fast enough for these poor otters...:roll:
Frozen bay turns otters into easy prey
By ALEX deMARBAN
Anchorage Daily News
(Published: April 8, 2007)
An extra-cold winter on the Alaska Peninsula has frozen sea otters out of the bay and pushed them onto the tundra near Port Heiden where they're easy prey for wolves, humans and hunger.
Some of the starving animals -- with ribs showing -- have waddled or belly-slid several miles inland, residents said. Others have been attacked by dogs near houses, killed by villagers for their hides, or died on sea ice where eagles and foxes pick at their remains.
No one knows how many have come ashore in the unusual exodus, said Mark Kosbruk, village fire chief. Natives have skinned at least 17 to make hats, gloves and blankets from the luxurious pelts.
They've clubbed some with 2-by-4s or axe handles, shot others and collected a couple of frozen carcasses, he said. Several rotted before they could be gathered or died on the sea ice where people won't travel.
"When it first froze over, they were everywhere," said Kosbruk, 34, who is teaching younger hunters how to skin and salt the hides for tanning.
The sea otters are probably on land looking for water where they might find food, said Douglas Burn, head of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska sea otter program. They usually scour sea bottoms for clams or sea urchins, but the ice froze them out.
Similar die-offs have been documented before, but biologists are worried and keeping an eye on the situation, he said.
Western Alaska sea otters from the Aleutian Islands to Cook Inlet are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. They number 48,000, a drop of more than 50 percent in the last 20 years, the agency estimates.
Some scientists blame increased predation by killer whales and a bacteria that causes heart lesions.
Burn and other biologists have been monitoring the ice in Port Heiden and other shallow bays on the peninsula, reviewing satellite images and other data, he said.
"We're concerned about large concentrations of sea otters that might get trapped and not have a way into the water," he said. "The hard part is, what would we do if we found that? We'd have to ask what are our options."
People can't legally hunt, kill or harass sea otters under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, he said. But the 1972 law allows Alaska Natives to kill them for food or making handicrafts.
Port Heiden, an Alutiiq village of 79 about 400 miles southwest of Anchorage, sits on the northeast edge of the frozen Port Heiden bay.
People in the village don't eat sea otters and rarely hunt them. The number of animals near the village seems to have increased in recent years, Kosbruk said. During summer, the number of sea otters gathering on a low-tide sandbar have grown from 50 to 200.
The animals haven't come ashore in large numbers since 2000, the last time the bay froze, he said.
Partially enclosed by spits of land, the bay hardened into a solid surface of ice this winter after a cold spell -- beginning in January and lasting through March -- dropped temperatures to zero and below, he said.
Average winter temperatures usually hover in the 20s, producing only ice floes, he said. Spring temperatures have recently melted snow off tundra and opened cracks in the frozen bay miles from shore, but the sea otters are still coming on land.
Kosbruk shot one on land Thursday that was about 200 yards from the sea.
Three weeks ago, he watched with binoculars as about 35 gathered in a small sea-ice hole several hundred yards off shore, he said. They took turns diving for food. Eagles fed on about seven carcasses lying around the hole.
Sea otters dive for several minutes at a time, and they're voracious eaters. They rely on their super-dense fur for warmth instead of the blubber that protects other marine mammals. They normally eat the equivalent of 25 percent of their body weight daily.
Die-offs happen where animals live at the edge of their natural range, Burn said. The Port Heiden sea otters live farther north than other Bristol Bay sea otters, and similar freeze-outs have been documented since the early 1970s.
Once forced onto land, their chances of survival fall sharply, he said. They travel awkwardly, pulling with front paws while dragging flipperlike hind feet. They walk with a rolling gate and bound away when startled.
Kosbruk said he feels bad for the starving animals. But he's glad people who have caught them, including his 14-year-old son, are respecting Alutiiq hunting traditions of sharing.
"We don't hunt for ourselves," he said. "We hunt for people who can no longer hunt for themselves, the elders."
Andrew Lind, a 27-year-old commercial fisherman who moved to Port Heiden a few years ago, killed his first sea otter and four others last month. His grandmother told him to bring some otter pelts home so she could make fur hats for children and grandchildren.
Lind followed belly tracks in the snow on his four-wheeler. A couple of sea otters were so exhausted they didn't flee, he said. Others hissed or growled, scurrying away until they tired and he clubbed them.
He's giving all of them away, most to elders. He gave the first to his mother, he said, and the next to his grandmother.
"She was very happy and thankful," he said.
Daily News reporter Alex deMarban can be reached at ademarban@adn.com or 257-4310.
Frozen bay turns otters into easy prey
By ALEX deMARBAN
Anchorage Daily News
(Published: April 8, 2007)
An extra-cold winter on the Alaska Peninsula has frozen sea otters out of the bay and pushed them onto the tundra near Port Heiden where they're easy prey for wolves, humans and hunger.
Some of the starving animals -- with ribs showing -- have waddled or belly-slid several miles inland, residents said. Others have been attacked by dogs near houses, killed by villagers for their hides, or died on sea ice where eagles and foxes pick at their remains.
No one knows how many have come ashore in the unusual exodus, said Mark Kosbruk, village fire chief. Natives have skinned at least 17 to make hats, gloves and blankets from the luxurious pelts.
They've clubbed some with 2-by-4s or axe handles, shot others and collected a couple of frozen carcasses, he said. Several rotted before they could be gathered or died on the sea ice where people won't travel.
"When it first froze over, they were everywhere," said Kosbruk, 34, who is teaching younger hunters how to skin and salt the hides for tanning.
The sea otters are probably on land looking for water where they might find food, said Douglas Burn, head of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska sea otter program. They usually scour sea bottoms for clams or sea urchins, but the ice froze them out.
Similar die-offs have been documented before, but biologists are worried and keeping an eye on the situation, he said.
Western Alaska sea otters from the Aleutian Islands to Cook Inlet are listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. They number 48,000, a drop of more than 50 percent in the last 20 years, the agency estimates.
Some scientists blame increased predation by killer whales and a bacteria that causes heart lesions.
Burn and other biologists have been monitoring the ice in Port Heiden and other shallow bays on the peninsula, reviewing satellite images and other data, he said.
"We're concerned about large concentrations of sea otters that might get trapped and not have a way into the water," he said. "The hard part is, what would we do if we found that? We'd have to ask what are our options."
People can't legally hunt, kill or harass sea otters under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, he said. But the 1972 law allows Alaska Natives to kill them for food or making handicrafts.
Port Heiden, an Alutiiq village of 79 about 400 miles southwest of Anchorage, sits on the northeast edge of the frozen Port Heiden bay.
People in the village don't eat sea otters and rarely hunt them. The number of animals near the village seems to have increased in recent years, Kosbruk said. During summer, the number of sea otters gathering on a low-tide sandbar have grown from 50 to 200.
The animals haven't come ashore in large numbers since 2000, the last time the bay froze, he said.
Partially enclosed by spits of land, the bay hardened into a solid surface of ice this winter after a cold spell -- beginning in January and lasting through March -- dropped temperatures to zero and below, he said.
Average winter temperatures usually hover in the 20s, producing only ice floes, he said. Spring temperatures have recently melted snow off tundra and opened cracks in the frozen bay miles from shore, but the sea otters are still coming on land.
Kosbruk shot one on land Thursday that was about 200 yards from the sea.
Three weeks ago, he watched with binoculars as about 35 gathered in a small sea-ice hole several hundred yards off shore, he said. They took turns diving for food. Eagles fed on about seven carcasses lying around the hole.
Sea otters dive for several minutes at a time, and they're voracious eaters. They rely on their super-dense fur for warmth instead of the blubber that protects other marine mammals. They normally eat the equivalent of 25 percent of their body weight daily.
Die-offs happen where animals live at the edge of their natural range, Burn said. The Port Heiden sea otters live farther north than other Bristol Bay sea otters, and similar freeze-outs have been documented since the early 1970s.
Once forced onto land, their chances of survival fall sharply, he said. They travel awkwardly, pulling with front paws while dragging flipperlike hind feet. They walk with a rolling gate and bound away when startled.
Kosbruk said he feels bad for the starving animals. But he's glad people who have caught them, including his 14-year-old son, are respecting Alutiiq hunting traditions of sharing.
"We don't hunt for ourselves," he said. "We hunt for people who can no longer hunt for themselves, the elders."
Andrew Lind, a 27-year-old commercial fisherman who moved to Port Heiden a few years ago, killed his first sea otter and four others last month. His grandmother told him to bring some otter pelts home so she could make fur hats for children and grandchildren.
Lind followed belly tracks in the snow on his four-wheeler. A couple of sea otters were so exhausted they didn't flee, he said. Others hissed or growled, scurrying away until they tired and he clubbed them.
He's giving all of them away, most to elders. He gave the first to his mother, he said, and the next to his grandmother.
"She was very happy and thankful," he said.
Daily News reporter Alex deMarban can be reached at ademarban@adn.com or 257-4310.
Checking your forum account
Please wait while we verify your forum account.