NY-21 congressional candidates answer climate change questions

an interesting read, particularly in light of recent discussions in class.

The questions are as follows. Read the article here to see the candidates responses!
(I assume "Stefanik" simply never responded to the questionnaire. But she is known as a "climate denier"...)

1. Do you believe that climate change is real and is caused by human use of fossil fuels?
2. Do you support new laws or regulations to reduce carbon emissions? If so, what will you do to help create new laws or regulations to reduce carbon emissions?
3. What is your position on the EPA’s draft Clean Power Rule currently in public hearing?
4. What is your position on the Keystone XL pipeline project?
5. What is your position on the expansion of crude oil processing at the Port of Albany and an increase in transportation by railroad through the Adirondacks of Bakken crude oil?
6. If elected on the House of Representatives, what will you do on the issue of climate change in your first year in office?
7. Please add any other statement you would like to make about the issue of climate change.

What Makes the Adirondacks so Pure?

In the most recent reading from Paul Schnider’s The Adirondacks: A History of America’s First, I was particularly fascinated with the Romantic conception that God is omnipresent in nature. As an individual who is not religious, I found this reading especially thought-provoking. First, Schnider writes, “…the terror wilderness evoked in the hearts and minds of mortals was due not to the presence of the devil, as had earlier been believed, but to awe in the face of God’s creative power” (160). To early Romantics, the Adirondacks at first seemed intimidating because they were unexplored and uninhabited. However, people were now frightened by how strong God’s powers are to have created the Adirondacks in the first place.

As Phillip Terrie in Forever Wild points out, there was a romantic belief that God was omnipresent in nature, and this omnipresence gave the Adirondacks a sacred connotation. For example, people believed that guides lived closer to God since they lived in the Adirondacks all year round. Moreover, the pastor of the influential Park Street Church in Boston suggested that every congregation should send their minister to the Adirondacks for a month each year. In doing this, the minister would be purified and would therefore become closer to God.

Additionally, Schnider also writes, “What endangered the soul was not the presence of wilderness at all, it turned out, but ‘the din and struggle’ of Broadway and Wall Street” (165). Again, the previous conception was that wilderness was impure because it was largely unknown to what exactly inhabited the forests. As mentioned in the quote above, it was widely accepted that a devil resided in the Adirondacks. However, Romantics emphasized that urban areas made an individual’s soul impure, and that a trip to the wilderness would help purify it. God created nature and resided in nature, and therefore a trip to the Adirondacks would strengthen and individual’s relationship with God. The fact that people saw God in nature made the Adirondacks more approachable and a more desirable destination. One could argue that we can thank religion for creating a bridge between humanity and nature that augmented the notion of tourism.

Sunmount Veterans Administration Hospital

In the spirit of Ianna’s post, I too would like to post about TB in the Adirondacks.  I know that many of us noticed the extensive white complex in Tupper Lake that seemed a bit out of place.  We all wondered what it was so I decided to do some research on it.  The facility opened in 1924 under the title of Sunmount Veterans Administration Hospital and was created to treat veterans with TB following the surge in TB cases among WWI veterans, who had previously stayed at private cure cottages in Saranac Lake.  As a consequence, Sunmount boosted Tupper Lake’s economy, but took away from Saranac’s cure industry.  Sunmount closed as a TB hospital in 1965, but reopened as a facility for people with developmental disabilities, now called Sunmount Developmental Center.  It is an immediate care facility for the mentally retarded.  It is a private – nonprofit facility that has been a Medicade participant since 1975.  There have been cases of abuse reported which is currently a contentious issue.  Also, contrary to what might have been said, this was not the location of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest which was mostly filmed in Oregon.        

http://images.delcampe.com/img_large/auction/000/098/860/819_001.jpg

Medicinal Wilderness: Sanatoriums in the Adirondacks

I was intrigued reading about Murray's 19th century attitude towards the Adirondacks' restorative and curative nature as put forth in his Adventures in the Wilderness.  I did some research on early sanatoriums in the Adirondacks and found the Adirondack Cottage (or Trudeau) Sanatorium to be an interesting one. Dr. Edward Livingston Trudeau opened the Adirondack Cottage Sanatorium in 1884. In the 19th century, Tuberculosis was a rampant and feared disease. The disease most noticeably affected a patient's lungs. In the 1800's there was no medicinal treatment, but rather doctors advised patients to rest, get fresh air, and eat healthy. As a result, multitudes of people came to the Adirondacks for this fresh air, seeking a cure to TB. Trudeau himself was diagnosed with TB and was cured after he moved to the Adirondacks and spending the majority of his time outdoors. 

http://www.usgwarchives.net/ny/essex/postcards/trusan.jpg

There is an impressive amount of primary sources about the Sanatorium including a "Rules and Information for Patients" Handbook from the early 1930's. It has information ranging from specific handkerchief dimensions and directions for disposing of sputum cups, which people would spit their mucus into it. In addition, there is a heavy emphasis on spending time outdoors, even at night as sleeping porches were constructed:

"Patients are expected to lead an out-of-door life---that is to remain seven to ten hours in the open air during the daytime. In the cottages provision is made for sleeping out on the porches. Each patient is required to be out-of-doors from 9:00 am to 12:30 pm and from 2:00 to 5:00 pm." https://localwiki.org/hsl/Rules_and_Information_for_Patients.

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgI8IYqXDzwAi2YZF8S-YrLe2DJb1R_Ay2GKKjhOSUFzKPI5NUxPbDW_NcOFz1QORueN9TRCC5_8ihUrZ-DBn4fRiGFIq7umYkggVP6r-jPbzHBnR5c1Kp6-ILzaJIdT5_0CRkYeCTSoEra/s640/Curing.jpg

Although this was an institution, the people who resided at the Sanatorium still had parties and community events. In the spirit of Halloween, here is a photograph of the patients all dressed up for a Halloween party in the 1930s. 

https://localwiki.org/hsl/Trudeau_Sanatorium_History/_files/Halloween%20at%20the%20San.jpg/_info/

The Most Recent in Climate Change!

For once, I am glad I left my blog post to the last minute, because earlier today the Pentagon released a new report that says that global warming is an immediate threat to national security. This is just the newest way the government is responding to global warming.

Basically, the Pentagon is here to remind us that global warming causes rising sea levels, natural disasters, and droughts. Our military cares because these things can lead to political unrest and instability that terror groups could thrive on. One very current example is that drought in Syria made farmers relocate to cities where they are vulnerable to joining extremist groups (ISIS).

Another current example of climate change: severe storms (tornadoes, floor warnings) hit southern and midwestern United States over the weekend (and continues today), killing at least two people. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal declared a state of emergency because of the storms. This is late in the season for such bad storms, so it is another example of the severe weather that comes with climate change.

It's kind of weird that there were two major developments concerning global warming on the day we talk about global warming in class. While neither of these examples directly relate to the Adirondacks, if people keep talking about global warming, and the military gets involved with climate change mitigation, it could affect the Adirondacks in the long run. It just seems like it's too late to save the Adirondacks as they are today.

Chub Pond Lean-to... private residence on preserved lands?

http://www.protectadks.org/2014/09/a-forest-preserve-lean-to-on-chub-pond-in-the-black-river-wild-forest-area-has-been-extensively-modified-and-turned-into-a-private-camp/

The end of winter?

McKibben’s article from Adirondack Explorer scared me, which is exactly what it was intended to do. McKibben’s article is important despite its lack of scientific value because it reminded me of the impact that climate change could potentially have on my life--particularly, the fact that shorter and warmer winters will reduce snowfall throughout the northeast and spell the end of cross-country skiing in the northeast. Perhaps it is selfish and trivial to worry about skiing considering that rising sea levels will dislocate millions of people who live near sea level, but the end of skiing in the northeast would be a significant loss to me. Such a consequence may motivate me to be a little more conscious of my carbon-emissions. McKibben’s article is dated March/April 2002 and he cites “scientists” who say that it may already be too late to reverse the effects of climate change. The fact that this article is so dated makes me worry that scenarios that McKibben warns of are already present or inevitable.

There seems to be some anecdotal evidence pointing to declining snowfall and shorter ski seasons--the winter of 2011-2012 was the warmest and least snowy I can remember. I did a bit of research to see what the snow conditions were like during the 1932 Olympic Games in Lake Placid. I found a video of the ski jumping from 1932 and the thing that struck me most about the video, other than the lack of technique and frantic arm-flailing of the competitors, was that there was no snow outside of the jump and landing area. It looked as if they had brought in snow from the mountains for the Olympics in 1932. I do not doubt the science behind climate change, but maybe the fact that skiers have had a reason to complain about insufficient snow at least as early as the 1930s indicates that the randomness of weather may be underemphasized relative to the effects of climate change.

Here’s a link to an interesting NY Times article from a couple years ago about snowmaking at cross-country ski areas throughout the northeast, particularly Craftsbury in VT

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/09/travel/creating-winter-for-cross-country-skiers.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0       

A Gloomy, yet Optimistic Outlook: Adaptability

As we discussed today, the drive towards halting anthropogenic climate change will require a massive revolution on the parts of both individuals and major organizations: governments, industry, etc. (we couldn't even decide on which would be more influential). While individual actions will make a huge difference, industries will keep pumping carbon into the air - unless the individuals mess with the economy - and vice-versa, legislation and industry-initiated action will not be sufficient unless individuals are not invested in reducing their footprints from heating and transportation by-products. As of now, it doesn't seem like we are anywhere close to either side revolutionizing: People are not invested enough to give up some luxuries such as two homes and multiple gas-guzzling cars and many influential politicians won't even admit that there is an issue with climate change - and some who do embrace it. Thus, we should expect significant climate change within the next few decades. 

Given that life on Earth has survived significant disturbances in its history - from meteors to volcanic eruptions - life will continue on Earth regardless of what humans due to it, short of nuclear war (even then some microbes will thrive). The species that survived those disturbances were either the most resilient or the ones that adapted the most to the new conditions - both behaviorally and evolutionarily. If climate change were to cause significant change, it most likely will not be in a "Day After Tomorrow" fashion where the Northern Hemisphere slingshots into an ice age in three days; it will be over decades, with punctual changes throughout. For example, the melting ice is currently buffering the increase in temperature of ocean temperature; when the ice is gone, there will be no more buffering and ocean temperatures will increase significantly. This could have all kinds of effects, ranging from salinity changes, ocean current changes, microbial blooms, storm patterns, etc. Also, there is methane locked in ice - called clathrates - and permafrost, and when this is released it will drive greenhouse gas-based global warming over a shorter time. Decades are long enough for most species to adapt to climate change. Aside from megafauna, most species have life spans of less than a decade. Insects have spans as short as days, and microbes as short as hours. Therefore, those species that can adapt to climate change within that period of time will survive. This will include many humans. Life on Earth will live regardless. 

1980 Winter Olympics in the Adirondacks

Since we discussed winter tourism in today's class, I thought it would be appropriate to look into the effects hosting the 1980 winter Olympics had on the park's environment, economy, and reputation. I found this article in the Adirondack Almanac: http://www.adirondackalmanack.com/2014/01/moon-boots-miracles-olympics-impact-lake-placid.html.

One effect that the Olympics had was to increase local pride in Lake Placid. More tangibly, the olympics sparked development, both the construction of new facilities and the updating of winter sports venues from the 1932 olympics. Many hotel and motel owners renovated their facilities in hopes of attracting tourists.

According to the article, the Adirondack's tourism industry doubled after the 1980 Olympic Games, so the Olympics may be to thank for much of the winter recreation that may suffer due to climate change.

The Inevitability of Climate Change

Someone made a sobering comment in class this morning about how climate change has already progressed to a point where significant temperature increases are no longer avoidable. I was more surprised than I should have been--I think I was overly optimistic that the "point of no return" was still far enough away that changes could be made before dire consequences occur. However, I did a little bit of research after class that has been pretty disheartening.

First of all, if every single country stopped emitting any greenhouse gases today, would that be in time to reverse climate change? According to a new study by the University of Washington, no it would not. Researchers there created a climate model of the earth and predicted that if all greenhouse gas emissions stop right now, the earth would still warm between 1.5 and 3.5 degrees farenheit in the next several decades. This is enough to create significant environmental damage, according to the climatologists cited in the news article. 

However, the chances of all greenhouse gas emissions stopping tomorrow are impossible. Cars, planes, power plants, even cattle farms are all embedded in the world economy, and for that to change would require huge leaps in technology and the way we all live our lives. According to another study by NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), carbon dioxide levels are currently at 385 parts per million. The article looks at what would happen if we stop emitting carbon dioxide at different "peak" levels. If CO2 is allowed to increase to between 450 and 600 parts per million, which will most likely happen in the near future, the article predicts drought conditions similar to the Dust Bowl in the 1930s that would devastate Northern Africa, Southern Europe, and southwestern North America. More than 600 parts per million could cause the sea level to rise over six feet.

These articles were disheartening, but I think it is even more disheartening that this is not a more prominent issue right now. Climate change is a hot topic right now on a whole, but I think that it is not common knowledge just how dire of a situation we are in.

The Disappearing Winter: A Blessing in Disguise for Tourism?

The essay by McKibben illustrated the climate change that the Adirondacks is predicted to be exposed to in the coming hundreds of years, as well as unveiling the effects it will have on the culture of the area itself. Towards the end of the essay, McKibben talks about the effect that climate change will have on tourism in the Adirondacks. At first, the warming climate is described as sending "paradoxical shivers down the backs of some Adirondack business owners." Increasing temperatures would drastically reduce tourism numbers for winter activities in the Adirondacks, such as skiing. As displayed in the graph below, winter activities, like snowmobiling and skiing, have the most economic potential in the Adirondacks. 

http://adirondackresearch.com/projects/tourism/hbperspective.html

What got me thinking, however, is the fact that warming winters isn't a bad thing for many business owners in the Adirondacks. McKibben mentions a quote from Art Devlin, saying "Summers are always good, some are just better than others. Winters are always bad, some are just not as bad as others." Although recreational snow activities may be the one of the first things we think of when making a list of what brings tourism into the Adirondacks, we must not forget the couple months of the year that thrive in the warmer temperatures. In fact, James McKenna, president of the visitors bureau in the Lake Placid regions says that 65-70% of receipts come between Memorial Day and Columbus Day - during the summer months. What may be completely devastating to one business may be essentially crucial to another. There just doesn't seem to be a happy medium. So, with the onset of this climate change, one side will prosper while the other side flounders. Its a matter of determining how much the decrease in snow activities will effect economy of tourism. From the graph above, it would appear as if it will have quite a large effect. However, with the shifting climate, maybe we will experience a shift in the prevalence of warm weathered recreational activities as well. 

I began writing this post this morning, but our class today seemed to be distinctly pertinent to my post. In class today, we discussed the issue of whether adaptation or mitigation was more prevalent in terms of the response method for climate change. Recreationally, adaptation seems to by the most practical route. Climate change happens on such a global scale that attempting to mitigate the issue seems trivial. Adapting our activities to suit those of a warmer climate would both benefit tourists as well as the economy of the Adirondacks as a whole. 

The Shrinking Habitat of Birds

I stumbled upon an article that the National Audubon Society recently published a comprehensive report on the condition of bird species in the US and Canada and how climate change poses a significant threat to many local Adirondack species. This is a great short video to provide a background.

The report cited that close to 600 species of birds in North America are at risk including the Ruffed Grouse, the Mallard, Black Duck and Loon. Scientists expect these birds, among many others, to completely abandon their New York Habitat and leave the state as their climatic range shrinks. The Report says that around 300 bird species will lose over half of the range that they inhabit now by 2080 due to climate change. As Ally mentioned in her presentation on Friday, the loon will abandon the Adirondacks because of the drastic climate change to their habitat. In addition, scientists fear that the effects of climate change would completely demolish any progress made toward mollifying the effects that acid rain had on the loon population because it would result in a changing temperature of water.

It's not only important to enact change for the sake of native birds, but also for the other animals that will be subsequently affected. If you take birds out of the equation, the local ecosystem of the Adirondacks will be completely thrown off affecting fish, bugs, and plants. 

http://m.wamc.org/?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F#mobile/99636 

The Audobon website has a really great interactive map where you can view a map of the changing ranges of particular species spanning from 2000 to the projected data of 2080. This is the data for the Ruffed Grouse.

Ruffed Grouse range in 2000

Projected Ruffed Grouse range in 2080

Climate change - It might not be so bad

As climate change becomes more and more prominent, we’re seeing a trend for plant and animal species to change their phenological behavior accordingly. Primarily, species are moving northward and higher in elevation, whether through successional changes or adapting migration patterns, to compensate for the rising temperatures and increased precipitation. There are also interesting cases of birds breeding on average 9 days earlier than usual, which goes to show how climate change doesn’t just impact habitat location. But as a result, we’re starting to see ecosystems characteristic of more southern latitudes replacing northern ecosystems, and the traditionally northern ecosystems moving into even more northern regions where there may not have been much biodiversity to begin with. This pattern of southern ecosystems pushing northwards is most evident when looking at forest composition, as hardwoods merge into traditional conifer zones and conifers step into alpine territory.

We’ve been throwing around the question in class of what will happen to the Adirondacks as climate change gets more severe in the next several decades. Certainly, this pattern of shifting ecosystems will continue, but is it necessarily a bad thing? People worry about northern habitats being pushed to extinction because they can't find colder climates to inhabit, but at the same rate, completely new habitats must constantly be forming at the southern edge. I think climate change will bring the extinction of some species, will cause others to adapt, and also introduce "new" species that can tolerate inclement weather.

If you're looking for more info on how climate change has already impacted ecosystems, here's a good read: http://www7.nau.edu/mpcer/direnet/publications/publications_m/files/McCarty_2001.pdf