Les epoques des testes nucleaires de la France

Dans un monde qui grandit chaque journee, on se trouve posant les questions de la defaite de notre planete causes par les nombreux accidents inexcusable de l'humanite. De nos jours, l'homme a decouvert les merveilles de la science, et avec cela, il a pu creer des objets de destruction massifs, telle que la force nucleaire. Si seulment le pauvre Einstein pouvait voir les horreurs nucleaires de quel ses theoremes ont evolue. La verite est qu'on a un si grand nombre d'armements nucleaire en reserve dans le monde que l'on pourrait detruire justqu'a sept fois la taille de notre planete avec la brulure de dix milles soleils. Vers la fin des annees soixantes, la France a debute sa poursuite vers les armements nucleaires. Et peu apres, General de Gaulle a etabli le role de la France comme un super- pouvoir nucleaire, promettant que sa patrie n'aura jamais besoin de l'aide etrangere pour sa defense et pour assurer l'independance de son pays. Cette rationalisation de de Gaulle, qui a ete supporte par d'autres presidents apres lui, comme Chirac, a entraine la France dans une etat d'industralisation nucleaire et a pave le chemin pour une multitude d'essais nucleaires qui ont defie l'opinion internationale. "Depuis de Gaulle, la France voit ses armements nucleaires comme centre de ses relations autonome avec les pays Allies, ainsi qu'avec les autres pays non-nucleaires qui forme l'Union European (EU)." (Yost, "France's Nuclear Dilemmas", Foreign Affairs, pp. 111.) Apres la deuxieme guerre mondiale et l'etablissement de NATO, quelques pays ont grimpe justqu'au sommet de l'echelle pour etre connu comme grande pouvoir nucleaire. La France est un de ces pays. Au lieu que les pays a grande pouvoir nucleaires entre- aident en cooperation, il se sont mis en competition avec l'un l'autre, afin d'accelerer la vitesse des nouvelles decouvertes nucleaires. Durant cette epoque, la France a du faire competition avec les Etats-Unis, la Chine, la Russe et la Grande-Bretagne. Quand la France s'est senti forte pour la premiere fois depuis la guerre avec ses defenses et armements nucleaires, elle voulait s'en ficher du protection nucleaire des Americains et reconfirmer son independance. "La France, surtout apres la fondation du cinquieme republique, a utilise la ligne <> comme raisonnement d'eviter le support Americain, qui etait considere comme un allie non-fiable." (Goldstein, "Discounting the Free Ride: Alliances and Security in the Postwar World.", International Organization, pp. 52.) La France ne veut plus etre sous la parapluie de protection des Americains, alors un organisation pour la protection de toute l'Europe contre les effraies nucleaires est en place avec la France comme chef. Ceci demontre un peu la fiertee nationale pour laquelle la France est renommee et sa determination vers son independance. Pourquoi la France continue-t-elle avec les recherches sur l'energie nucleaires et ses usages, tellesque les bombes? C'est bien simple: la France a une reserve d'huile tres minime, alors l'idee d'avoir une grande programme nucleaire etait la meilleur protection contre les frais enormes pour l'importation de ce produit. C'est pour cela que l'energie nucleaire en France fait marcher plus que 80% de l'electricite pour le pays, en plus d'en avoir en reserve et meme d'en vendre aux pays voisins. L'energie nucleaire est le moin flexible de toutes les sortes d'energies possibles, mais le gouvernement francais dit que l'emploi de l'energie nucleaire est moin cher que de faire importer l'huile d'ailleurs. Selon la France, qui n'ont aucun autre moyen de generer de pouvoir, la decision faite pour la recherche et l'emplacement des divers usines de production d'energie nucleaire (62) leur ont donne plus que l'energie suffisante pour leur pays, en plus d'aider l'environnement avec la reduction des polluants venants des huiles fossiles. Cependant, des organisations telleque l'AEI (Agence d'energie internationale) disent que: "Une haute dependance sur aucune combustible unique est sure d'etre une source d'insecurite et d'inflexibilite. Incroyablement, comme nation le plus dependant sur l'energie nucleaire, la France n'a pas encore etabli ou mettre ses dechets nucleaires" ("Fission a la francaise", The Economist, pp. 19-20.) Evidement, le taux d'etre un pays a haute pouvoir nucleaire a abaisse la France a la ridicule internationale en tant que sa manque de depotoires nucleaires et sa persistence continuelle de fermer les oreilles aux plaintes mondiales sur les essais nucleaires. "Ca serait completement irresponsable pour une nation de pouvoir majeur de ne pas faire des series de petites testes pour assurer que nos preventifs nucleaires sont aussi valables qu'ils peuvent etre." (Chirac, "No More Hiroshima Coalition", http://www.rucc.net.au/no.more/french.htm.) Voudriez-vous etre dans une situation ou des testes nucleaires seraient recherches dans votre coin du monde, sachant bien que la chance de la grippe de radiation peuvent vous saisir? Dans Juillet de 1995, Jacques Chirac a decide de commencer une serie de testes qui prendrait quelques temps dans le Sud- .Pacifique, sur une petite ile nomme Muroroa atoll dans la Polonesie francaise. Meme avec l'appui de sept millions signatures d'autour du monde etabli par Greenpeace, la decision faite par le gouvernement francais etait pour rester. "M. Chirac a explique que

Hemp The Truth About The Earths Greatest Plant

In a perfect world there would be a product that could serve as a fuel source, a food source, a paper source, a textile source, and this product would be easy to produce in any of its forms. Believe it or not such a product does exist; it is the plant known as hemp. No tree or plant species on earth has the commercial, economic, and environmental potential of hemp. Over 30,000 known products can be manufactured from hemp. Hemp was a common crop grown in the U.S. until 1937 when it was unjustly banned. A common misconception about hemp is that it was banned because it was a widely abused, harmful drug. Hemp was banned because it was a competitive threat to the wood industry. Corporations that profited from the demise of hemp spread rumors that marijuana was a major drug problem, which it was not at the time. They also propagated a campaign that it was a drug that induced uncontrollable violence, another complete falsehood. Hemp is the plant scientifically known as cannabis sativa. It is referred to as hemp when it is grown for its fibers, stem, and seeds. Its leaves and flowers produce the drugs marijuana and hashish. However, sterile breeds of the plant are still illegal to grow in the U.S. Literally millions of wild hemp plants grow throughout the entire Midwest today. Wild hemp, like hemp used for industry purposes, is useless as an intoxicant. Yet U.S. drug law states that one acre of this can result in the owner being sentenced to death. The death penalty exists for growing one acre of perfectly harmless, non-intoxicating weeds! Hemp can produce any product that paper can produce. The difference is that one acre of hemp can produce four times as much paper as one acre of trees ( a study done by the U.S. Department of Agriculture). Also, a crop of trees takes twenty to fifty years to be ready for harvest where hemp is ready to harvest four times as much in just a year. In addition, hemp produces twice as much fiber per acre as cotton. Twenty five percent of all pesticides in the world are used on cotton, averaging to four pounds of chemicals per acre of cotton in the U.S. every year. Since hemp is a natural repellent to weeds and insects, it needs almost no insecticides or herbicides. If it were substituted for cotton it could greatly reduce the pesticide usage. Again, hemp can produce anything cotton can and what's more it can produce it better. Levi Strauss tested a pair of hemp denim jeans and the results showed hemp jeans to be 65% more durable than the average store bought pair. Hemp produces more biomass than any other plant that can be grown in the U.S. This biomass can be converted to fuel in the form of clean-burning alcohol, or non-sulfur man-made coal. It is estimated that if hemp were widely grown in the U.S., it could supply 100% of the nation's energy needs. Hemp seeds are also a source of many products. The seeds contain high protein oil that can be used for human and animal consumption. Hemp oil is not intoxicating. Extracting hemp oil is cheaper than processing soy beans and it can be processed and flavored in any way that soy beans can. Hemp oil can also be used to make butter, cheese, and tofu. In addition to food products, hemp oil can be used to make paint, varnish, ink, and plastic substitutes. One of the many high points of hemp is that it's easily grown. Unlike almost all hemp substitutes, hemp can be grown in all fifty states. During the Second World War, the government temporarily re-legalized hemp so farmers could grow it for the war effort. Hemp helped win World War II! It is high time for this country to take a second look at this product. After reading these facts I challenge anyone to come up with a reason to maintain the hemp prohibition. Two of our founding fathers, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, were hemp advocates. They said hemp was a necessity to the success of our nation. Now we have an even greater cause than that; the success of the planet. We cannot continue to butcher our forests and pollute our soil and water with chemicals to meet the demands of our every day lives. In turn we will never be able convince enough people to change the way they live to do any good. Fortunately, we have the perfect solution right under our noses: hemp. However, this solution will not do us any good until people realize its potential, and this will only happen if the word is spread. I can only hope that enough people are educated before it's too late. "Make the most of the hemp seed, sow it everywhere." -George Washington

plastic not paper

PLASTIC NOT PAPER Walking through the grocery store I always try to look for the best buy. I always buy what's on sale, I guess you could say I'm cheep. Then I get to the check out lane, preferably the one with fewer people. I empty my wallet and pay. Then I wait. I think it's going to happen but I am not sure. Then it does, the baggier says, "Would you like paper or plastic?" I look that person right in the eye and I tell him, "I want the one that's better for the environment, I want the one that will help prevent pollution, I want the one that cost less, I want plastic." Plastic bags save money, they conserve energy, they are practical and they are better for the environment. That's why plastic bags are the best choice at the check out line. Of course your wondering how plastic bags save money, well just think 2,000 paper bags stacked on each other reaches a height of about 7.25 inches, while paper reaches a soaring height of 7.5 feet. This means it takes seven trucks to deliver the same amount of paper as one plastic delivering truck. Talk about a big waste of gas. Plastic bags cost about 1/4 of a cent to make, while paper cost close to 3 cents. This is money we save as well as the store owner. This is a lot of money that is going to waste considering that plastic bags are so much more practical then paper. You can use them for lots of other things. You can take on trips to the grocery store, your can protect dry clothing from wet towels in an exercise bag. You can line your house hold waste basket with them, you tote dry shoes to work on rainy days. Hold plastic, aluminum and glass for recycling. Plastic bags are also very practical to carry. You can carry 5 compared with 2 paper bags. Plastic bags also hold just as many items as paper. This is also very practical because you can get your groceries out of your car a lot faster, after all grocery shopping is not the most fun thing to do. A study by Franklin Associates LTD analyzed the environmental impacts of plastic and unbleached paper bag through out there life cycles. They found that plastic grocery bags conserve 40% less energy, 80% less solid waste,70% less atmospheric emissions, and release up to 95% fewer water born wastes. All these things are natural resources that we have to conserve and can't afford to lose. The brown paper bags used in most grocery stores are made from virgin paper without any contributions from recycled materials. Paper making pollutes the water, releases dioxins, contributing to acid rain and cost trees lives. Weird as it may sound some virgin paper can be more damaging to wildlife than plastic substances, like 6pack rings. If you choose paper over plastic you are supporting higher levels of pollution. The choice of plastic over paper doesn't seem to be that big of a decision, but as you now know it does effect the environment. If you don't care about the environment then use the plastic bags for there great other practical uses. So the next time you are at the check out lane and you get asked the question, say plastic with pride.

Water Biomes

Water Biomes Marshland is covered with grasses, reeds, sedges, and cattails. These plants all have their roots in soil covered or saturated with water and its leaves held above water.Marshes may be freshwater or salt. Freshwater marshes develop along the shallow edges of lakes and slow-moving rivers, forming when ponds and lakes become filled with sediment. Salt marshes occur on coastal tidal flats. Inland salt marshes occupy the edges of lakes. They affect the supply of nutrients, the movement of water, and the type and deposition of sediment. Salt marshes are best developed on the Atlantic coasts of North America and Europe. In eastern North America the low marsh is dominated by a single species, salt- marsh cordgrass. The high marsh consists of a short cordgrass called hay, spike grass, and glasswort. Glasswort is the dominant plant of Pacific Coast salt marshes. Freshwater marshes provide nesting and wintering habitats for waterfowl and shorebirds, muskrats, frogs, and many aquatic insects. Salt marshes are wintering grounds for snow geese and ducks, a nesting habitat for herons and rails, and a source of nutrients for estuarine waters. Marshes are important in flood control, in sustaining high- water tables, and as settling basins to reduce pollution downstream. Despite their great environmental value, marshes are continually being destroyed by drainage and filling. Marine Life, plants and animals of the sea, from the high-tide mark along the shore to the depths of the ocean. These organisms fall into three major groups: the benthos, plants such as kelp and animals such as brittle stars that live on or depend on the bottom; the nekton, swimming animals such as fishes and whales that move independently of water currents; and plankton, various small to microscopic organisms that are carried along by the currents. Shore Life, the essentially marine organisms that inhabit the region bounded on one side by the height of the extreme high tide and on the other by the height of the extreme low tide. Within these boundaries organisms face a severe environment imposed by the rise and fall of tides. For up to half of a 24-hour period, the environment is marine; the rest of the time it is exposed, with terrestrial extremes in temperature and the drying effects of wind and sun. Life on rocky shores, best developed on northern coasts, is separated into distinct zones that reflect the length of time each zone is exposed. At the highest position on the rocks is the black zone, marked by blue-green algae. This transition area between land and the marine environment is flooded only during the high spring. Below the black zone lies the white zone, where barnacles are tightly glued to rocks. Living among the barnacles are rock-clinging mollusks called limpets. At low tide, barnacles keep their four movable plates closed to avoid drying; at high tide they open the plates and extend six pairs of wandlike tentacles to sweep the water for microscopic life. Preying on the barnacles are hole-drilling snails called dog whelks. Below the white zone and in some places overlying the barnacles are rockweeds, which have no roots but attach themselves to rocks by holdfasts. Brown algae are rockweeds that grow more than 8 ft long. The most common are the bladder wracks, with branching thalli up to 6 in wide. In the lowest zone, uncovered only during the spring tides, is the large brown alga Laminaria, one of the kelps. Beneath its frondlike thalli live starfish, sea cucumbers, limpets, mussels, and crabs. On the sandy shores, life lies hidden beneath the surface, waiting for the next high tide. Shifting and unstable, sand provides no substrate on which life can anchor itself. The environment of sand-dwelling animals, however, is less severe than that of animals dwelling on rocky shores. Although the surface temperature on a beach varies with the tide, below the surface the temperature remains nearly constant, as does the salinity. The upper sandy beach, like the upper rocky shore, is transitional from land to sea. It is occupied by ghost crabs and beach fleas, animals more terrestrial than marine. True marine life appears at the intertidal zone. Two common inhabitants, active at high tide, are the lugworm, which burrows through the sand and feeds on organic matter; and the coquina clam Donax, which advances up the beach and retreats with the tides. Among the sand grains live small copepods and worms that feed on microscopic algae, bacteria, and organic matter. On the lower beach, which remains uncovered for only a short period of time, live clams, crabs, starfish, and sand dollars, whose calcareous skeletons lie partially buried in

Water Pollution

WATER POLLUTION Water pollution has affected many people and animals. Water pollution is the disposal of garbage into a water stream. Some of the water pollution is from littering, some water pollution is done by chemical leaks, and others by ships. Also, There is much information about water pollution. I am going to take that education on water pollution a step farther; and explain how water pollution affects us, how it affects marine life, what companies affect it the most, and what people are doing to help. There are many causes for water pollution. The main one is plastics. The reason for that is that plastics take four hundred and fifty years to decompose in the water. Also many companies use plastic and people throw it in the waterways. Because water can float and be carried by the wind, it can cause harm to unsuspecting creatures hundreds of feet from where it was originally dumped. Such waste includes bags, bottles, cups, straws, cup lids, utensils, six pack holders, cling wrap, fishing line, bait bags, and floats. The second highest cause of water pollution is ship waste. Ships used to take much garbage with them on their ships and dump them. This was very common until the government took action. They were giving sailors up to one million dollars fines for disposing waste. Because of that, ships now carry less garbage with them. Animals are not the only thing being harmed by water wastes. Fishing lines, rope, and plastic nets are being caught in the rutter and the engine, but the ships are not exactly perfect. The other main cause of water pollution is industrial waste. Industries do not be harmed by water pollution but the cause much it. Many companies pour chemicals into the waterways. Some of the businesses that contribute to the water pollution are businesses that repair and maintain motor vehicles, electroplate, operate printing and coping equipment, perform dry cleaning and laundry services, process photographs, operate labs, involve building and construct roads, provide pest control, preserve wood, and make Furniture. Water pollution doesn¹t just effect humans, it affects are whole ecosystem. Birds and marine life are affected by it. More than fifty species of birds are known to ingest plastic. When they eat plastic, they feel full, so some of them die of starvation. Algal blooms are another thing that kills marine life. Algal blooms are sea scum, whale food, and sea sawdust. Algal blooms are bundles of fine threads, rusty brown, they have a fishy smell, and are common in August through December. Water is our main source of our life. We need it to live, drink, bathe, recreation, manufacturing, and power. We need water for almost everything; if we don't start cleaning up we will be in big trouble. Bunches of families dispose of chemicals everyday. It affects us drastically and we depend on it to be clean. Right now the government is fining people for illegal dumping. But that is all the government is doing. People in cities are organizing water pollution groups. A lot of people are producing fliers and giving them out. The are asking people to adapt a waterway. In Australia they had a national clean up day and went out to the ocean and cleaned it up. I think the people are taking this more seriously than the government. We need to start cleaning up the water or we will be in big trouble. the government needs to get active and so does the public. In some places water pollution is a main concern. The last defense of water pollution is water treatment. Their are two main reasons for water treatment. The first one is to protect the public's health. The second one is to protect the water quality. Most of the waste water comes from industries, homes, businesses, storm runoff, ground water, and schools. Also sludge is being treated to remove some of its water. Then it is further processed by stabilizing, dewatering, and disposal. If more effort isn't being made the human race will die. Eventually all the water will be infested and unable to drink out of. We will have no places to bathe or anything. We will have to do something soon or else we will not make it.

Hurricans

Hurricanes get their start over the warm tropical waters of the North Atlantic Ocean near the equator. Most hurricanes appear in late summer or early fall, when sea temperatures are at their highest. The warm waters heats the air above it, and the updrafts of warm, moist air begin to rise. Day after day the fluffy cumuli form atop the updrafts. But the cloud tops rarely rise higher than about 6,000 feet. At that height in the tropics, there is usually a layer of warm, dry air that acts like an invisible ceiling or lid. Once in a while, something happens in the upper air that destroys this lid. Scientist don not know how this happens. But when it does, it's the first step in the birth of a hurricane. With the lid off, the warm, moist air rises higher and higher. Heat energy, released as the water vapor in the air condenses. As it condenses it drives the upper drafts to heights of 50,000 to 60,000 feet. The cumuli become towering thunderheads. From outside the storm area, air moves in over the sea surface to replace the air soaring upwards in the thunderheads. The air begins swirling around the storm center, for the same reason that the air swirls around a tornado center. As this air swirls in over the sea surface, it soaks up more and more water vapour. At the storm center, this new supply of water vapor gets pulled into the thunderhead updrafts, releasing still more energy as the water vapor condenses. This makes the updrafts rise faster, pulling in even larger amounts of air and water vapor from the storm's edges. And as the updrafts speed up, air swirls faster and faster around the storm center. The storm clouds, moving with the swirling air, form a coil. In a few days the hurricane will have grown greatly in size and power. The swirling shape of the winds of the hurricane is shaped like a dough-nut. At the center of this giant "dough-nut" is a cloudless, hole usually having a radius of 10 miles. Through it, the blue waters of the ocean can be seen. The hurricane's wind speed near the center of the hurricane ranges from 75 miles to 150 miles per hour. The winds of a forming hurricane tend to pull away from the center as the wind speed increases. When the winds move fast enough, the "hole" developes. This hole is the mark of a full-fledge hurricane. The hole in the center of the hurricane is called the "eye" of the hurricane. Within the eye, all is calm and peaceful. But in the cloud wall surrounding the eye, things are very different. Although hurricane winds do not blow as fast as tornado winds, a hurricane is far more destructive. That's because tornado winds cover only a small area, usually less than a mile across. A hurricane's winds may cover an area 60 miles wide out from the center of the eye. Another reason is tornadoes rarely last as long as an hour, or travel more than 100 miles. However , a hurricane may rage for a week or more (example: Hurricane Dorthy) In that time, it may travel tens of thousands of miles over the sea and land. At sea, hurricane winds whip up giant waves up to 20 feet high. Such waves can tear freighters and other oceangoing ships in half. Over land, hurricane winds can uproot trees, blow down telephone lines and power lines, and tear chimneys off rooftops. The air is filled with deadly flying fragments of brick, wood, and glass.

Landfills

Landfills- A Growing Menace When asked to think of the largest man made structure, people will invariably come up with an answer like The Great Wall of China, the Great Pyramids, or the Taj Majal. In contrast to these striking achievements of mankind is the Durham Road Landfill outside San Francisco, which occupies over seventy million cubic feet. It is a sad monument to the excesses of modern society [Gore 151]. One must think this huge reservoir of garbage must be the largest thing ever produced by human hands then. Unhappily, this is not the case. The Fresh Kills Landfill, located on Staten Island, is the largest landfill in the world. It sports an elevation of 155 feet, an estimated mass of 100 million tons, and a volume of 2.9 billion cubic feet. In total acreage, it is equal to 16,000 baseball diamonds [Miller 526]. By the year 2005, when the landfill is projected to close, its elevation will reach 505 feet above sea level, making it the highest point along the Eastern Seaboard, from Florida to Maine. At that height, the mound will constitute a hazard to air traffic at Newark airport [Rathje 3-4]. The area now encompassed by the Fresh Kills (Kills is from the Dutch word for creek) Landfill was originally a tidal marsh. In 1948, New York City planner Robert Moses developed a highly praised project to deposit municipal garbage in the swamp until the level of the land was above sea level. A study of the area predicted the marsh would be filled by the year 1968. He then planned to develop the area, building houses and attracting light industry over the landfill. The Fresh Kills Landfill was originally meant to be a conservation project that would benefit the environment. The mayor of New York City issued a report titled "The Fresh Kills Landfill Project" in 1951 which stated, in part, that the project "cannot fail to affect constructively a wide area around it." The report ended by stating, "It is at once practical and idealistic" [Rathje 4]. One must appreciate the irony in the fact that Robert Moses was considered a leading conservationist in his time. His major accomplishments include building asphalt parking lots throughout the New York Metro area, paved roads in and out of city parks, and the development of Jones Beach, now the most polluted and overcrowded piece of shoreline in the Northeast United States. In Stewart Udall's book The Quiet Crisis, the former Secretary of the Interior praises Moses. The JFK cabinet member calls the Jones Beach development "an imaginative solution ... (the) supreme answer to the ever-present problems of overcrowding" [Udall 163-4]. JFK's introduction to the book provides this foreboding passage: "Each generation must deal anew with the raiders, with the scramble to use public resources for private profit, and with the tendency to prefer short-run profits to long-run necessities. The crisis may be quiet, but it is urgent" [Udall xii]. It is these long term effects that the developers of landfills often fail to consider. Oddly, the subject of landfills is never broached in Udall's book; in 1963 landfills were a non-issue. A modern state-of-the-art sanitary landfill is a graveyard for garbage, where deposited wastes are compacted, spread in thin layers, and covered daily with clay or synthetic foam. The modern landfill is lined with multiple, impermeable layers of clay, sand, and plastic before any garbage is deposited. This liner prevents liquids, called leachates, from percolating into the groundwater. Leachates result from rain water mixing with fluids in the garbage, making a highly toxic fluid containing inks, heavy metals, and other poisonous compounds. Ideally, leachates are pumped up from collection points along the bottom of the landfill and either shipped to liquid waste disposal points or re-introduced into the upper layers of garbage to resume the cycle. Unfortunately, most landfills have no such pumping system. [Miller 527]. Until the formation of the Environmental Protection Agency by President Nixon in 1970, there were virtually no regulations governing the construction, operation, and closure of landfills. As a result of this lack of legislation, 85 percent of all landfills existing in this country are unlined. Many of these landfills are located in close proximity to aquifers or other groundwater features, or near geologically unstable sites. Many older landfills are leaking toxins into our water supply at this very moment, with no way to stop them. For example, the Fresh Kills landfill leaks an estimated one million gallons of toxic sludge into the surrounding water table every day [Miller 527]. Sanitary landfills do offer certain advantages however. Offensive odors, which characterized waste depositories at one time are dramatically reduced by the daily cover of clay or other material over the garbage. Vermin and insects are also denied a free meal and the opportunity to spread disease by the daily layer of deposited clay. Furthermore, modern landfills are less of an eyesore than their older counterparts. However, the sources of these positive affects are the very reasons for some of the significant drawbacks to landfills [Turk and Turk 486]. The daily compacting and covering of the garbage deposits squeezes the available oxygen out of the trash. Whatever aerobic bacteria are present in the garbage are soon suffocated and decomposition stops. Anaerobic bacteria, by their very nature, are not present in appreciable numbers in our biosphere. What few manage to enter and survive in the garbage deposits are slow-acting and perform little in the way of breaking down the materials. In other words, rather than the giant degrading compost heap most people imagine, a landfill is actually a huge mummification center. Hot dogs and bananas, decades old, have been recovered from landfills, still recognizable in their mummified state [Rathje 111-12]. What little decomposition does occur in landfills generates vast amounts of methane gas, one of the significant greenhouse effect gasses. Some landfills have built-in processes to reclaim the methane from the atmosphere. The Fresh Kills landfill pipes methane gas directly into 12,000 homes, but in most instances the gas is either burned off or leaked directly into the atmosphere. Based on ice core samples from Antarctica, the methane concentration in the Earth's atmosphere, over the past 160,000 years, has fluctuated between 0.3 and 0.7 parts per million. The methane levels in the atmosphere are now triple that.[McKibben 17-17]. It is not only the modern landfills that defy decomposition. Because of the stench from the thousand year old refuse of an ancient Roman landfill, an 1884 archaeological dig had to be halted periodically so the workers could get fresh air.[Rathje 113] In today's landfills decomposition is negligible. While the total tonnage of garbage decreases over years, due mostly to decay, the volume varies less than ten percent. Most of the actual short-term rotting is from scraps of prepared food. Plastics present in landfills will most likely be there forever. Even the most unstable plastic requires intense sunlight to decompose, and sunlight is denied in a sanitary landfill. Newspapers from before World War Two are still readable in these landfills; they have in fact become important date markers for scientists examining garbage strata in landfills [Rathje 112-13]. If burning garbage and dumping garbage at sea are unacceptable, what are the alternatives? Of the landfills, sanitary and otherwise, open for business in 1979, 85 percent are now closed [Miller 527]. Where is all the garbage going? Some municipalities are shipping garbage to other cities, or even other states, a costly proposition. Larger metropolitan agencies have even taken to shipping garbage to Third World countries who are strapped for cash and eager for the money that comes along with the trash. This, of course, only transfers the problem from one population to the other. Stories of wandering garbage barges and orphaned garbage trains have appeared in American newspapers. Covert garbage disposal has become a lucrative business, as the plethora of medical waste washed up along the New Jersey shoreline proves. Despite these horror stories, recycling really is making a difference. Newspapers, which used to make up 25 to 40 percent of the garbage volume of a typical city, are now effectively eliminated from household garbage. Aluminum can recycling has become a profitable enterprise, both for the economically disadvantaged and for the average homeowner trying to offset the ever-increasing cost of garbage collection. Construction waste is now barred from landfills in most areas; this high volume material is now recycled or put to Earth-friendly uses, such as making barrier reefs. Plans for the safe incineration of refuse to generate electric power have presented some highly contentious issues. The ash from such incinerators is normally highly toxic, since it concentrates existing toxins. Citizens object to these plants, as long as they will be located in their neighborhood. A clear-cut answer is probably non-existent. Several effective programs enacted in unison is the only option that can stop the growing mounds of trash that are piling up around the country.

Acid Rain Legislation

Acid Rain Legislation Acid rain is a destructive force as a result of nature and man colliding. It is formed through harmful industrial emissions combining with contents of the earth's atmosphere; a dangerous combination. This prompted governments throughout North America to take action. Many laws and regulations have been implemented, yet the question still remains, "Should tougher legislation be implemented to force industries to reduce acid rain emissions?" To decide whether tougher legislation should be implemented, one must first understand the details of what exactly acid rain is. Acid rain is a result of mankind's carelessness. It travels a long one of the most efficient biogeochemical cycles on earth, the Hydrologic Cycle. This allows acid rain to distribute itself further away from it's source causing more than local problems. Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) is released by fossil fuels when they undergo combustion. Power plants and other fossil fuel burning industrial areas release various forms of nitrous oxides (Nox). These two chemical compounds combine with the water in the atmosphere to form what is known as acid rain. The main reason that has prompted legislation of industrial emissions from governments is because of the negative effects they can have on the environment. Acid rain is harmful to the environment because of it's low pH. It can harm the biotic components of earth, and also the abiotic components. It's high acidity degrades soil to the point where it cannot support any type of plant life. Trees in forests are killed over long-term exposure. When these trees are killed, an imbalance in the hydrologic cycle can occur. Without living trees to consume the precipitate, it must be consumed by the earth or any other plants. These will receive an excess of water, causing other problems in the hydrologic cycle. This in turn causes a chain reaction of death among our forests. Some regions are more susceptible to acid rain because they don't have enough Alkaline soil to "neutralize" the acid before it is able to destroy the rest of the soil or before it can run off into lakes or rivers. Aquatic environments can be greatly affected by soil runoff. Acidic soil may runoff into lakes and rivers due to erosion, causing acid rain to destroy more environment. Acid rain aquatic animals as well as aquatic plant life. When acid rain combines with water in major bodies of water, it not only destroys wildlife habitat, it destroys our drinking water. An aquatic ecosystem is very dependent on each and every aspect within itself. Once one species dies off, others that depend on it, will eventually begin to die off also. This systematic chain continues until the entire body of water is completely abiotic. The reason acid rain is so effective in destroying ecosystems is because it harms everything in that particular ecosystem. Being distributed through the hydrologic cycle, acid rain is capable of destroying everything in it's path. Many laws and agreements have been implemented by governments in North America to reduce acid rain emissions. The question governments are asking is: "Are these regulations enough?". One of the more famous laws/organizations implemented by North American governments was the "Clean Air Act" which was signed in 1991. Also in 1991, Canada signed an agreement with the United states concerning air quality. Media explains that the agreement has enough framework to address all transboundary air pollution issues. It is a very broad/general agreement that should highly reduce air pollution between these two major countries of the world. This agreement contains other specific commitments for emissions reductions relating to acid rain precursors and research as well as a commitment to review the Agreement in it's fifth year. This allows for expansion of the agreement in the near future. Research and studies forced by this agreement is also an intelligent decision among these countries; education is the basis of all knowledge. Besides agreements and legislations of sorts, technology is an awesome force in the reduction of acid rain emissions. The only down side to this technology is that it is extremely expensive. Scrubbers have been placed in the smokestacks to remove harmful emissions. Lime is used in lakes to "neutralize" the low pH levels. Without studies being conducted and research being taken out on acid rain, these technologies would not be here today. This is why education may be the ultimate technology in the reduction of acid rain emissions. Should tougher legislation be implemented to force industry to reduce acid rain emissions? From an environmental point of view...yes, anything that can be done, should be done. Whether it be through studies, research, new technologies, anything for our environment. From an economical point of view...no, technology is very expensive and hardly affordable in terms of most industries. Technology can reduce the dangers of acid rain, but at what cost? Tougher legislation should be implemented to preserve our environments, to preserve our lifestyle, and life on earth.

Temagami

Introduction "Our understanding of the way the natural world works - and how our actions affect it - is often incomplete. This means that we [must] exercise caution, and special concern for natural values in the face of such uncertainty and respect the 'precautionary principal'." - Ontario Minister of Natural Resources, 1991 The History of the Forest Forests have long been recognized as having vast power, both through their potential and how it has been viewed by humans, as well as through their effect on humans in sometimes subtle ways. The inherent properties of wood have always made it attractive as a versatile resource but there are other, more subtle ways in which it affects people. The tropical rainforests, responsible for producing most of the earth's breathable air, have been given the lofty title of "lungs of the Earth," and as stated by the Canadian Encyclopedia Plus '93, "forests provide an additional, although intangible, benefit: the opportunity for renewal of the human spirit" (CAN ENCYC). Once humanity accepts these facts, we open ourselves up to profound responsibilities regarding their protection. Unfortunately for both ourselves and our environment, we have long deigned to shoulder these responsibilities, seeing only the obvious potential of the end product of wood; overall, humanity has always managed the forests very poorly, even before forest management became an issue. Since earliest civilized times, wood has been coveted as a resource for its ability to burn, as well as its pliable nature. With the discovery of fire, came hand in hand the need for fuel. Fortunately, trees have always been abundant in all reaches of the earth, which has made living in harsh climates easier, greatly increasing our already rapid rate of expansion. Eventually electricity replaced wood as a source of energy, but the uses for wood have expanded over time to include building material and paper, and to the present day trees remain important to industry on a global scale. Unfortunately, humans have always had a poor reputation in regards to their environment, the forests being no exceptions. We have always looked upon resources as something to be exploited - used to the fullest, then forgotten. Therefore it should come as no surprise to learn how clear-cutting of forests has become the norm, even knowing that the forest will likely not recover fully for generations after clear cutting and countless animals will die in the process. It should come as no surprise to learn of the appallingly large quantities of tropical rainforests destroyed each day merely to make room for resorts or temporary farmland that will eventually become desert land. It is not highly surprising to learn of these and other such facts, yet they are still terrible to behold, especially knowing that they continue to be true today and will most likely continue to be true in the future. The Forests of Canada The forestry industry has always adopted a "cut and get out" philosophy, which has been accepted and most often encouraged by land-hungry industrialized populations who view trees as little more than an obstruction to growth. (ENCARTA) Such philosophies mean in simple terms clear-cutting large tracts of land and running as quickly as possible, leaving behind nothing but slash, a slowly eroding landscape and animals searching for lost habitat. For a long time forestry was no more than trying to reap maximum profits, clear maximum land in minimum time and get out quickly. We have indeed come far since those times. Clear-cutting is now a thing of the past and strict measures are in place to ensure that logging is done in a sustainable manner. That can be assured . . . can't it? No, not so readily as it may seem; that we have come a far way already is evident but in which direction? Clear cutting, as will be shown, is not a thing of the past and as to the regulations in place... we shall see. These question, and many others besides, can be answered by looking at the case study of Temagami. The word Temagami has become inextricably associated with terms like "old-growth", "protest", "forestry", "environment" and many more. However the actual Temagami issue has always been shrouded in an impenetrable fog which has only lifted at two times in its history as a potential logging and mining site. Behind the fog, a great many things were going on but the focus on Temagami herein will be the two times it surfaced as a genuine concern. "Red Squirrel Road" and "Owain Lake" have become commonly heard phrases but the questions, those which will be examined herein, are more apparant; what do these key phrases mean? And more importantly, what have they to do with the law? Temagami is a prime example in determining the relationship between the environment and the law - both natural and positive. Forestry is a major issue in Canadain society. There are many fundemental problems with the industry and accociated attitudes as stands today but how can the situation be changed for the good of all concerned? This difficult question will be answered herein to a great extent and perhaps some light will be shed on a murky but important issue. Although not all aspects of the issue can be covered, this essay will, through the case study of Temagami, focus on the legal perspective of forestry - the laws which are in place, those which have been changed or should be changed, as well as those laws which are being broken by either side of the controversy - and outline some methods by which conservation can be acheived through our legal system. Part One: The History of the Logger "What are the roots that clutch, what branches grow out of this stony rubbish? Son of man you cannot say, or guess, for you know only a heap of broken images, where the sun beats, and the dead tree gives no shelter, the cricket no relief, and the dry stone no sound of water."--T.S. Eliot The Canadian Forestry Industry Forestry has been longstanding as an industry in Canada; in some ways it was the first real industry - as European settlers found a land of endless forest, they realized that lumber would be the prime resource. Today, approximately 300 000 Canadians are directly employed in the forestry industry - almost 15 percent.(Can Encyc. "Forestry") In practice, forestry means much more than merely cutting trees. Forestry is defined by Encarta '95 as "the management of forestlands for maximum sustained yield of forest resources and benefits." This may seem a simple definition, however the wording of it deserves further attention. First, forestry means management; management means looking after the forests rather than adopting a 'slash and burn' attitude. Second, forestry attempts to attain maximum yields; this appears to support the 'slash and burn' attitude, rather than a conservationist approach. However, the word 'sustained' is the catch; when added it means that this maximum yiled must be available year after year. Therefore, in theory, forestry is sustainable management, as the definition states. Past practices have strayed greatly from this definition. In North America, the first foresters were interested in only exploiting forests, worrying little about management and even less about sustainability. This view, which has persisted well into the 20th century, has always been supported by settlers who have viewed the immeasureable number of trees as an inconvenience which had to be removed before farms, houses, towns and roads could be built. (ENCARTA) As more and more settlers came to North America, agriculture began to expand, roads were built, and trees were cut and burnt more for room than for use as a resource. Such activity became common throughout the United States, as well as the lowlands of Canada where early settlers found the best soil for farmland. Unfortunately, once the majority of trees had been cut down, previously lush soil would begin to erode as rain and wind pounded on the unprotected earth. Under reasonable, small scale farming, such would be of little consequence, however when huge tracts of forest are removed at once, it becomes almost impossible to keep the farmland from turning to wasteland - one has only to look at ancient nations such as Mesopotamia, once a heavy agricultural area and now a vast desert, or the ever expanding Sahara desert to see the devestating effect of soil erosion. (CAN ENCYC) After a time, people began to understand this, at least in a crude sense. Forestry, it seemed, must be more than simply cutting down trees. The forests must also be managed to ensure more cutting in the future. It was not until the end of the nineteenth century, with the signing of the British North America Act in 1867, that forestry was considered important under Canadian law. It was written into the act that "The Management and Sale of the Public Lands belonging to the Province and of the Timber and Wood thereon" would be assigned to the jurisdiction of the individual provinces. (CAN ENCYC) Although this gave the forests some protection under the law in regards to supposed 'sustainability', there remained - as there still remains to an extent to this day, a greed which, for the most part, overpowered any thoughts of conserving for the future. The Ontario Forestry Industry The year 1893 marked the beginning of a somewhat dubious ecological protection program in Ontario with the establishing of the Algonquin National Park as a "public park and forest reservation, fish and game preserve, health resort and pleasure ground for the benefit, advantage and enjoyment of the people of the Province." (GRAY 92) The purpose of the park was the logging of the tall pines, rather than for any conservationist motive. Scattered parks were established on a purely ad hoc basis throughout Ontario for almost eighty years, during which exploitative logging grew and forests were destroyed. Eventually, starting in the 1960s and spreading in the 70s, people began to notice the forests dissapearing, began to see parks as more than merely recreational; more and more concerns were being voiced regarding "uncontrolled development, uncoordinated land-use planning, and the corresponding loss of wilderness." (GRAY 91) One of the outcomes of these protests was that the Ministry of Natural Resources developed the Ontario Provincial Park Planning and Management Policies - titled "The Blue Book". (GRAY) The blue book, which is still in use today, is perhaps the closest thing to forest protection in Ontario. It allowed a comprehensive park system to be created with six classes of park which could ensure some measure of protection to these areas. More parks were created but it was becoming apparant that these parks were doing little to stop the great change being forced on the landscape of Ontario. Writers from the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) state that "over the past 200 years Ontario's natural landscape has been changed on a scale greater than any other since glaciation." (GRAY 92) Most old growth (120+ yrs) pine forests have been cut and replaced with alien monocultural trees - to make future harvesting easier; the land of the Teme-Augama would come under dispute due to fear of such. Part Two: Forest Conservation In Ontario Political Activity In 1990, the election of the provincial NDP under Bob Rae appeared to herrald a new beginning for forestry conservation. Rae had been arrested a year previous in the protest over the Temagami Red Squirrel Road extension - which will be discussed further in part two - and appeared to place the environment high on his agenda. Promises were made to protect five previously unrepresented natural regions by 1994, to be added to the thirty-two already protected out of sixty-five [see appendix, map 2]. (GRAY 95) However little ever came of the promises; by the end of 1993 only one old growth area, inside Algonquin Park itself, was to be protected from logging and road building. Meanwhile, Howard Hampton, the new minister of natural resources, declared that forest harvest across the province was to be increased by up to 50 per cent as a result recommendations by a committee made up entirely of foresters, labour, and the government. (GRAY 94) Public interest groups were outraged; as a means of appeasing them, the government announced a "Keep it Wild" program. The program was said to be a means of protecting the old growth forests in a meaningful way but in the end it became more about public relations than anything. Bits and pieces of forest throughout the province were protected but the outcome was by absolutely no means sufficiant for sustainability. One good thing did come out of the NDP government; a piece of legislation which seemed minimal at the time but would have resounding influence from a legal perspective in the future, the Crown Forest Sustainability Act. The act requires that certain guidlines be followed by the MNR when approving any logging plans. (WILDLANDS) However, for the time being, it appeared that the NDP was as hurtful through their inaction as any past government. And today the PC government appears to be doing nothing to keep the out of control lumber industry in check. Logging practices continue to decimate the landscape, replacing it with rows of arrow straight man-made trees. It appears that each successive government is more willing to promise to support the environment but less willing in actuality to make any meaningful progress. In order to explain this in a meaningful way, the issue of the Temagami old growth forests should be examined; it is a perfect example of Ontario's battle between industry and the environment. Temagami Temagami is named as the land of the Teme-Augama. It is known as one of the most diverse ecosystems in Ontario, if not Canada; known for clean, clear lakes and "one of the highest quality lake trout fisheries remaining in Ontario"; (TEMAGAMI 1) for the 2,400 km of canoeable river systems; for one of the last remaining old-growth forests in the province. Temagami has been glorified by painters Archibald Lampman and David Brown Milne, as well writer Archibald Belaney - known as the Grey Owl. (CAN ENCYC) Also, Temagami is known for the controversy between industrialists and environmentalists over the wildlands it contains. In the course of the past century, loggers and miners have slowly eaten away at the Temagami wilderness while successive governments have sat idly by, and finally this became too much to bear. In the early seventies, the Teme-Augama Anishnaibi decided they must speak out; the method they chose was the launching of a formal challenge against the government's right to allow industry into their homeland. (TEMAGAMI 1) As word of the challenge spread, others joined the call and the opening stage was set for what would later become the first protest to be looked at herein; the Red Squirrel Road blockade. The Red Squirrel Road extension was perhaps the most expensive fifteen kilometres of road laid down by the Ontario government. The bill ended up at six million dollars - half of which was for security against the protesters. (MAITHERS) The Teme-Augama banded together with other concerned protesters, chaining themselves to bulldozers, blocking roads by sitting in the path of loggers, and destroying machinery; all in all, performing a great many acts of civil disobedience which will be discussed later. The outcome, besides the spending of copious amounts of money by both sides, was the setting up of the Comprehensive Planning Council (CPC) by the NDP, meant to "strengthen the role of local communities in the management of natural resources in the Temagami area." (MNR 1) Many protected areas within Temagami were proposed however, dispite making many protective recommendations, eventually it became clear that the CPC did not intend to recommend any sort of substantial protection. This brings the issue to where it stands today. "Red Squirrel Road" has been replaced with "Owain Lake" but from a legal perspective the concerns are the same. The provincial government appears to be even less environmentally friendly than the CPC. In fact, according to Northwatch, an independant environmental group, "seventeen of the thirty-nine recommendations of the CPC were not accepted beyond an amiguous 'agreement in principal' (ie. not in practice)." [see appendix] (NWNEWS) The Ministry, however, boasts that they have "increased environmental protection in the Temagami area, protected old-growth red and white pine and resolved long-standing land use issues." (MNR) The debate, which will be discussed in the next section, remains relatively the same, with a few twists. Industrialists still battle for the right to carry on with their jobs while environmentalists and Anishnaibi fight to protect the diverse wilderness. In order that a better background of the debate be presented, the concerns of each must be presented individually; only then can the actual legal conflict be truly appreciated. Part Three: The Temagami Debate "If Greenpeace devoted all the energy to northern forests as it did to tropical forests, we'd be in trouble" -- Tony Shebbeare, director of the Brussels office of the Canadian Pulp and Paper Association The Forester Almost fifteen percent of Canadians were employed directly in the forestry industry in 1989; (C.E.) since then, little has changed. This type of fact is the basis for what is, and always has been the industrialist response to environmentalist concerns; you can't criticise industry because it creates jobs. And clearly most people accept it, especially today as jobs are becoming more and more scarce. The forest industry has arisen, as was stated earlier, from an attitude of exploitation fostered by greed, expansion, and industrialization. Since early europeans first came to Canada, logging trees has been second nature, a part of the conquering of the country. Only today is there any apparant feeling of conservation; people are perhaps admitting, if somewhat reluctantly, that such practice as clear cutting might be wrong. However, though foresters may be beginning to reconcile a small amount of what has been long ingrained into the industry, the mentality remains today that industry cannot be impeded no matter the cost, as long as jobs are at stake. Basically, forestry today is just like any other industry; a means of raping wilderness such as Temagami in order to make a quick buck. Can they be blamed for wanting to earn a living? In the Temagami case, the MNR has been responsible for most of the logging facilities already set up in Temagami, however, according to the Wildlands League, a Toronto-based environmental organization, they have largely withdrawn from the area and will probably seek to hand management over to a large forest company. (WILDLANDS) As of yet, no such company has stepped forward, however several small companies have begun logging already. What these companies, along with the MNR, want, is the ability to conduct their industry as it has always been conducted; the adage "if it's not broken, don't fix it" seems to apply perfectly to them as they vehemently deny myths like global warming and animal extinction. They feel that the concessions allowed by the MNR in this case are more than fair, and there is the suspiscion that environmentalists wont be happy until all forestry activity has been eliminated. The Environmentalist The environmentalists do not have the same long-standing base that foresters do. The environmentalist movement itself is a recent thing, beginning in the 1960s and 70s with the Green Revolution. Since that time, such individuals and groups have sprung up all around the globe; in the beginning no more than a minor annoyance to industrialists, farmers and average citizens, yet eventually becoming a major factor to be considered by industrialists whenever they attempt anything affecting the environment in any way. Today, environmental concerns are bringing many people to believe that resources are not as 'unlimited' as everyone has believed for so long and the industrial movement is finding it more and more difficult to accomplish the same goals they would have easily accomplished as recently as ten years ago. In response to the Temagami issue, four prominent environmental groups have risen to to stand against the industrialists. They are the Wildlands League - headed by Tim Gray in Toronto, Northwatch - the Northeastern Ontario environmental coalition, Temagami Lakes Association - a powerful cottage owners organization, and Friends of Temagami - a coalition created for the specific purpose of fighting against Temagami loggers and miners. What they want, as outlined in the Wildlands League's Future of Temagami Plan, is a Wildland Reserve established to protect important watershed areas, as well as several other sites of ecological value, amd the Red Squrrel as well as two other roads permenently closed where they enter the Reserve. (TEM. 3) They feel that these measures are the only way to preserve the ecological diversity found in the Temagami wilderness; their feeling is that the MNR and the forestry industry simply do not care about ecological stability. From a legal perspective, there is much to discuss in the Temagami case. Some laws have already been hinted at but little has been said yet about specific legal issues. There are three different aspects of the law which are brought into play in this issue; the purely criminal aspect of civil disobedience, the environmental laws and regulations (or lack thereof), and the ever pressing conflit between positive and natural law. These will all be dealt with individually in the next section, then weighed together to come up with some definite conclusions. Part Four: The Law of the Land "What gives us the right to take the law into our own hands? The answer is simple. Our birthright as natural creatures, citizens of the earth, gives us the right to uphold and defend the laws of nature." ---Watson (TALOS 23) Civil Disobedience According to Abbie Hoffman, "the best way to get heard is to get arrested, and the more times the better." Deemed troublemakers by some and revolutionary by others, the Red Squirrel Road and Owain Lake protesters did just that. Scores of people; sitting in the dead center of the road and refusing to move regardless of threats or coersions, destroying bulldozers or chaining themselves to them, sitting on platforms high atop the trees, hammering metal stakes into various trees to destroy chainsaws; and calling it all civil disobedience. The end result? Many arrests were made, yet few were ever charged for the acts of mischief (mischief being the most likely charge) - most were held for a night or even dropped off in North Bay; those who actually caused damage were never caught or pursued. The government was forced to pay three million dollars for security measures or damages caused by the protesters in the Red Squirrel Road building alone, and the builders lost a great deal of time and money. The legal battle over the civil disobedience is of two views. Some people view the acts as a waste of time and tax payers money, holding the belief that if there is a legal way to protest, it should be used rather than resorting to illegal practices. Clearly, such reasoning is sound; there are many legal methods of protesting and governments always hold the policy of being more willing to listen to the legal protesters than lawbreaking troublemakers. Knowing such, some might wonder as to the reasoning behind such a clearly premeditaited group crime. The answers are varied however, looking at the effects of the disobedience, one comes to mind. Media. Those of the second view towards civil disobedience see it as a means of voicing their concerns to the public effectively and quickly. The fact that their actions are illegal serves only to attract media attention. To them it is a last ditch effort at raising public concern and perhaps forcing the government into action. To a large extent they have succeeded; the only times Temagami has really come up in headline news were during the two large-scale protests. The environmentalists also believe that, as a justification to the laws that are being broken, natural law must prevail over positive law; such will be dealt with later. First, the issue of environmental law must be dealt with. Government Legislation / Wildlands League Lawsuit Environmental legislation is one of the big issues under contention. Environmentalists say that under current legislation the old growth forest cannot sustain itself, provided that loggers take full advantage of the lack of any real legislation. The industrialists, backed by the government, believe that they are just trying to do their job and that the current legislation is strict enough, protecting over fifty per cent of the remaining old growth pines. The actually protected areas fall under the Ontario Provincial Park Planning and Management Policies but what is under contention today is the Crown Forest Sustainability Act. This past September, the Wildlands League and Friends of Temagami, represented by the Sierra Club Legal Defence Fund, filed a law suit against the government under the CFSA, claiming that the MNR had "failed to ensure that logging will protect wildlife, ecosystems or the public interest".(SIERRA) This lawsuit is in itself a landmark, being the first attack on Ontario forestry from a legal point of view. As simply stated by Tim Gray of the Wildlands League, "we are seeking to have the Ontario Court order the Minister to obey the law . . . we had to act now to draw the public's attention to the MNR's plans to rid themsleves of even these minimal laws to protect the public interest." (TEM. UPDATE) As such, the earilier government's weak legislation has become an unlikely hero in the eyes of the environmentalists. The two groups sought an injuction forcing a 'stay' of the logging in the Owain Lake forest area until the case was completed; their feeling was that "we will lose the forest by the time our case is heard." (TEM. UPDATE) After three days of testimony and four days of deliberation by an Ontario Divisional Court judge, the request was denied. However, the case will proceed to full trial this winter and the outlook is optimistic for the environmentalists. If the case succeeds, the industrialists will be forced to cease all activity in the area until the MNR develops the neccessary environmental guidlines. There are few other pieces of legislation corresponding with forestry conservation - it is mainly left up to the individual regional MNR to establish guidlines as regarding their area. The Environmental Assessment Act requires that an assessment be carried out prior to allowing logging of an area, but the Environmental Protection Act does not even mention forestry. That there is no real forestry or even habitat protection in any current Canadian legislation is perhaps an indication that governments still don't realize the full consequences of our present practices. That thought brings up the issue of whether such dire circumstances as environmentalists see us to be in - and with no legislation to back their claims up - warrant the breaking of laws set down by governments - in order to enforce those made by nature. Natural vs. Positive Law Early philosophers believed that those laws created by humans (positive laws) should stem from and reflect those created by nature (natural laws). Cicero is credited as saying that "civil or human laws should be set aside or disobeyed if, in the minds of 'wise and intelligent men,' the laws were deemed in conflict with those of nature." (TALOS 17) In some ways however, along the way, humanity has failed to see the connection or it being severed. Environmental resources have always caused some controversy in this regard; human greed sometimes has an insidious way of overriding care for nature. People are unwilling to compromise their ability to make money, even though it might mean that nature is severly damaged in the process. The desire to make money cannot, in itself, however, be seen as greed; in that respect we must aknowledge that loggers are not to blame for distruction they wreak. It is the law makers themselves who are perpetuating the constant rate of natural destruction both through inaction and harmful action. The question then arises; are environmentalists justified in disobeying positive law In order to bring about what they see as disobedience to higher law? The question brought up in this case is highly disturbing; clearly, the activists acted in disobedience to the law as defined by our government. Yet, just as clearly, there was a cause for their actions - to save ancient forests and the ecological diversity they hold from annihilation and replacement by tree farm. The question in the case is highly sim

Rainforest

The destruction of the rainforest is a problem that the people of the world can not continue to ignore. 14 percent of the Earth's land used to be covered by rainforests yet this number has dropped significantly to only about 6 percent (http://www.ran.org/ran/info_center/index.html). Rainforests provide the people of the world with many necessities, some of which would no longer be available if rainforests did not exist. In the last 50 years, rainforests have declined at a terrifying speed of 150 acres per minute or 75 million acres per year (http://www.ran.org/ran/info_center/index.html). People must open their eyes to the horrible tragedy that will inevitably occur if the citizens of the world do not realize the seriousness of this problem. To better understand the importance of the rainforest, one must be knowledgeable about what a rainforest actually is. The two main types of rainforests are temperate and tropical. Tropical rainforests are located in Latin and South America, Africa, Southeast Asia, and other areas in which temperatures stay above 80 degrees Fahrenheit year round. They can be found in 85 countries all over the world, however, 90 percent of them are concentrated into fifteen countries, each containing over ten million hectares. Tropical rainforests receive 160 to 400 inches of rain each year. Although these dense, damp forests cover just 5 percent of the Earth's surface, they can provide homes for between 50 and 90 percent of the Earth's plants and animals (http://www.davesite.com/rainforests/review1.shtml). Tropical rainforests consist of three distinct layers referred to as the forest floor, the understory, and the canopy. The forest floor contains very poor soil which is mainly due to the trees not allowing for ample sunlight to reach the ground. Because only one to two percent of the light at the top of the forest's canopy manages to reach the floor below, photosynthesis ceases to exist. On top of the soil lies a thin layer of the remains of millions of dead trees, plants, and animals which are quickly broken down by the numerous number of organisms on the floor (Nichol 45). It contains a variety of insects as well as larger mammals such as gorillas and jaguars. The understory is home to smaller mammals such as anteaters, lemurs, and tree kangaroos. It also contains small trees and numerous shrubs. The top layer, the canopy, is made up of the tops of trees which can grow to be over 200 feet in height. Here, trees receive the necessary sunlight to undergo photosynthesis which is crucial for the survival of the forest as a whole. Many tropical birds, monkeys, apes, snakes, and other animals reside in the canopy (http://www.davesite.com/rainforests/review1.shtml). Temperate rainforests are located along the Pacific coast of Canada, the United States, New Zealand, Tasmania, Chile, Ireland, as well as Scotland and Norway. Most temperate rainforests are much younger than tropical rainforests only being less than 10, 000 years old. The temperate rainforests differ from the tropical in that their soil is full of much more nutrients. Temperate rainforests are also much more scarce than tropical rainforests (http://www.davesite.com/rainforests/review1.shtml). The rainforests of the world are homes to just about every group of animals known to man and it would be impossible to give recognition to them all. The only animals that appear to be few in number are large mammals. The largest animal of the rainforest is thought to be the okapi, "a shy, elusive beast from west Africa (Nichol 56)." Gorillas, apes, the orang-utan of the Far East, gibbons, and chimps which can grow to the size of a human are also among the larger animals in the forest. A wide variety of monkeys including the tiniest monkeys in the world, the pigmy marmoset, live among the trees in the South American rainforests (Nichol 61). One of the rarest primates in the world, the golden lion tamarin, lives in a very small portion of the rainforest in Brazil. These breathtakingly beautiful little monkeys resemble golden toys and it is believed that only 150 survive in the wild. Without the rainforest, these precious treasures would be lost forever (Nichol 61). Over 100 types of birds including the spix macaw, hoatzin, and a numerous variety of parrots would be extinct if the rainforests were non-existent. Many birds of the rainforest appear seasonally, or when the trees begin to bud. Other rare animals in the rainforest include the Javan rhinos, capybaras, and the giraffe stag beetle (Nichol 71). The rainforest has a larger diversity of plants than any other area on Earth. For example, "a single hectare in Kenya's Kakamega Forest may host between 100 and 150 different tree species, compared to only about 10 different species in a hectare of the forest of North America ( http://www.davesite.com/rainforests/review3.shtml). Many of these plants don't appear in any other part of the world. A small portion of these species are the passion flower, the rambutan, the heliconia flower, and an abundance of hardwood trees. For hundreds of thousands of years, indigenous people, or Indians, have called the rainforest home. They are very knowledgeable about the rainforest and the secrets it holds. They have taught the people of the world how to find and use wild plants and how to farm small crops on the poor soil of the rainforest floor. There are said to be more than a thousand of these groups of people throughout the world, many of which are close to extinction. If these people become non-existent, the secrets of the rainforests may remain a mystery forever (http://www.stevensonpress.com/intro.html). Many of the plants in tropical rainforests are used for medicines by both people in the forest and hospitals throughout the world. One-fourth of the drugs that are sold in the United States have products that come from rainforests (http://www.ran.org/ran/). From something as important as a treatment to help fight heart disease to an over the counter drug such as aspirin, every medicine that comes from the rainforest serves a significant purpose to the people of the world. One of the best-known medicines that comes from the rainforest is quinine. For many years, quinine was the only treatment for malaria. Another plant that aided in the fight against a deadly disease is the Madagascar periwinkle. It was discovered that two compounds from this plant could be used in the treatment of leukemia. As a result of this plant, the survival rate of victims of leukemia has risen form one in five to four in five (Nichol 78-79). On a global basis, the rainforests are of extreme importance because they help control the Earth's climate. The plants in the forest store carbon dioxide in their roots, stems, branches, and leaves which lessens the greenhouse effect, consequently, lessening global warming. Also, when rain falls in the rainforest, the high temperatures make the water evaporate back into the air which recycles the water. Also, the clouds that cover the rainforests around the equator reflect the sunlight. This keeps the rainforest from getting too hot (http://www.stevensonpress.com/intro.html). Destroying the rainforest could have devastating results. The people who live in the rainforests would be forced to move into camps or cities. These people would ultimately die off because of the new diseases that city life would bring, diseases that are not found in the rainforest. If they ceased to exist, their culture could be lost forever (http://www.ran.org/ran/). The destruction of the rainforest could also cause an increase in the greenhouse effect. The carbon dioxide that the plants of the rainforest had been storing would be released and cause the temperature of the Earth to rise and the ice caps to melt. This would cause major flooding around the world. Yet another important downfall of the cutting down of the rainforest is the effect on the forest floor. It is a known fact that 80 percent of the rainforest's nutrients comes from trees and plants which means the other 20 percent remains in the soil. When the leaves fall to the forest floor, these nutrients are immediately recycled back into the plants and trees. When a rainforest is clear-cut, this process is dramatically affected. The sun is not blocked by the trees which begins to dry up the soil. It is then blown away by the wind which makes it nearly impossible for the rainforest to grow back (http://www.stevensonpress.com/intro.html). One of the most devastating affects of the cutting down of the rainforests would be the extinction of a tremendous amount of the plants and animals that reside there. Also, the remedies that have prevented many deaths over the years would no longer exist because the plants in which they originated from would be gone. Although it should be obvious that the rainforest is better left alone, some people insist on destroying them. The Forest Alliance of British Columbia accounted for this by saying, "The global population has more than tripled this century, and will continue to grow for the next 50 years, particularly in developing countries. World population is expected to reach ten billion by 2050. Because the number of people living on the planet increases every year , the number of forest products needed also increases, forcing temperate and tropical rainforests to be cut down (http://www.davesite.com/rainforests/review4.shtml)." Farming in the rainforest is very hard because of the poor soil but is still done because the land is cheap. Because of the lack of nutrients, farmers can not use the same piece of land over and over. In following years, many farmers just move to a new piece of land which destroys the forest little by little. Ranchers also follow the same process of using a piece of land to raise cattle and then clearing another large piece of land. "During the 1980s, about 16.9 million hectares of tropical rainforest was cut down and replaced with farms and grazing land for cattle (http://www.mtc.com.my/lib/formal/fact4/overview.htm). Another reason why the rainforests are being destroyed is the logging industry. Trees from the rainforest are used for building houses, making furniture, and providing pulp for paper products. Many corporations have convinced countries that contain rainforests that it would improve their economy if they would allow logging in the rainforest. Many of these countries' economies now depend on their support (http://www.davesite.com/rainforests/review4.shtml). Many companies such as Occidental Petroleum try to bribe and trick the natives of the rainforest into giving them their land. This oil company was unsuccessful in trying to illegally force the people of the rainforest to sign away rights to the land which would violate the Ecuadorian and international law protecting indigenous people. This will hopefully set an example for the companies of the rest of the world who want to cut down the precious rainforest (http://www.davesite.com/rainforests/review4.shtml). Although the destruction of the rainforest seems as if it is a problem that only world leaders can attack, it is definitely something that a person as an individual can protest. Many people have boycotted fast food restaurants that serve hamburgers that came from cattle raised on rainforest land. If there is no demand, then companies will stop raising cattle on land cleared from a rainforest. Also, an individual could help by not buying furniture products made from rosewood, mahogany, ebony, or teakwood, materials that are most likely from the rainforest. In many cases, people have taken it upon themselves to adopt acres of the rainforest. The 1996 Tropical Rainforest Coalition has stated that it would cost only forty-five dollars to "adopt" one acre of the rainforest. This amount of money would fund land acquisition, legal fees, and security costs which would make sure that the adopted land would be protected (http://www.davesite.com/rainforests/review5.shtml). The destruction of the rainforest is a problem that the people of the world can not continue to ignore. 14 percent of the Earth's land used to be covered by rainforests yet this number has dropped significantly to only about 6 percent (http://www.ran.org/ran/info_center/index.html). Rainforests provide the people of the world with many necessities, some of which would no longer be available if rainforests did not exist. In the last 50 years, rainforests have declined at a terrifying speed of 150 acres per minute or 75 million acres per year (http://www.ran.org/ran/info_center/index.html). People must open their eyes to the horrible tragedy that will inevitably occur if the citizens of the world do not realize the seriousness of this problem.

Hawaiian Goose

Hawaiian Goose The Branta sandvicensis, or Hawaiian goose looks similar to the Canada Goose except only the face, cap, and hindneck are black; and Nene have buff-colored cheeks. The males and female have the same plumage. The feet of this goose are not completely webbed like the other geese. Lots of calls have been described but the most common call is very similar to that of the Canada Goose, a resonate "honk." The goose has very strong toes; long legs, decreased webbing. They are good swimmers but are not found much near water. The birds nest on the ground and the young can fly at 1012 weeks. The adult Goose cannot fly while in molt for 46 weeks. Wild Nene populations can be seen in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, Mauna Loa, and Pu'u Wa'awa'a on the island of Hawaii; in Haleakala National Park on Maui; and at the Kilauea National Wildlife Refuge, along the Na Pali coast and outside Lihue on Kauai. Captive Nene can be seen at he Honolulu Zoo. Designated Hawaii's State Bird on May 7, 1957, the Nene has endured a long struggle against extinction. During the 1940s this species was almost wiped out by laws which allowed the birds to be hunted during their winter breeding seasons when the birds were most vulnerable. By 1957, when the Nene was named the State Bird, rescue efforts were underway. Conservationists began breeding the birds in captivity in hopes of preserving a remnant of the declining population and, someday, successfully re-establishing them in their native habitat. Other programs for returning captive birds to the wild life was difficult, but more efforts have been successful. Some other efforts used to help this bird have been to get donations for the bird and have schools help out by donating money to organizations. There are now small populations of Nene on the islands of Hawaii, Maui, and Kauai. There are about 1000 Nene outside of Hawaii's zoos, and private collections. The Nene is currently on the Federal List of Endangered Species, threatened by mongooses and dogs and cats which prey on the Nene's eggs and young. They are also endangered by human intrusion of the environment.

Greenpeace

I Living in the Faroe Islands means that you have experienced Greenpeace in action. It also means that your opinion regarding Greenpeace is not as positive as it might have been, without the influence of your fellow countrymen. "Credit, where credit's due". Greenpeace has done a magnificent work when it comes to preserving our environment, even though their methods are questionable and sometimes rude and immoral. From Greenpeaces campaigns against the Faroe Islands, where pilot whale hunting has been the subject, we know them and their methods of argumentation to be detestable. Pictures and video-recordings were manipulated with and information, that we can only laugh at, were feeded to the public. The questionable procedures that have been used in the campaigns against the Faroe Islands however is not a general perspective of Greenpeace and their actions. But the keyword for Greenpeace and what is common for almost every venture that Greenpeace takes, is that they are active. Greenpeace does not believe in bureaucracy, and is that something that we should respect. Taking on a action for Greenpeace sometimes means that you have to break the law or at least bend it a little. In USA where they protested against some factories which deliberately lead their toxic waste to lakes nearby, Greenpeace sealed the pipes, from which the toxic waste was coming from and furtermore the activists refused to leave. A up-to-date example could be Mururoa, where the French government held a series of underground nuclear tests and banned all nearby sailing activities meanwhile. Greenpeace had no hesitation, sailed right to Mururoa and stayed there until they were forced to leave by a commando squad. Even though straight on action, seems to be their game, Greenpeace also has it's own research center, from where the ozone-friendly refrigerators was designed. But 'direct action' is still what Greenpeace stands for. One could say that in a world where bureaucracy blooms and people do not seem to care - Greenpeace is the rebel. II Pat Hanson 875 Green Street Seattle, WA98116 USA Greenpeace Denmark Linnésgade 25 1361 København K 1 October 1995 Dear Sirs Being a environmentalist like myself and having followed Greenpeaces ventures with interest and expectations, I have gained respect and admirations for your organization and the work it has been doing for the environment. It is therefore I write to you, now that I am going to start my own shop in the centre of Copenhagen. The name which I have chosen to my shop is GREEN MACHINE The goods will consist of environmental literature and environmental articles to begin with. To mention but a few ecological articles, I am planning to sell, are: • Clothes • Caps • Bags • Toiletries I believe that the shop can be a success and my degree in business administration will be a reliable help to make that happen. My financial status is also good and I intend to spare no expense in the making of the GREEN MACHINE shop. For me it would an honour and a privilege to sell Greenpeace articles in my shop and I hereby ask for your permission to do so. I believe that a business deal between us would be beneficial to both parts, since your goal obviously is to reach as many customers as possible with your merchandises. I look forward hearing from your and to eventually do business with you in the future.

How Climatic Changes Effect Society

There has been a significant climatic change that has taken place throughout the years on Earth. These changes have effected society in more than one way. However, there is nothing society can do about the long term influences of climatic changes. Society has tended to address the short term effects of climatic changes that influence the global temperatures within the life span of present generations. The following will show how climatic changes does effect society, health, and economics. Society depends a lot on natural resources for various aspects. First of all, society depends largely on forests to supply trees which in turn supply wood for construction. Other resources include oil and animals (livestock). In the focus of wood, there is the Western Canadian Boreal Forest which is a large producer of wood for the United States construction industry. However, climatic changes has had large and impacting effects on the construction industry. Compared to eastern Canada, the southern boreal forest region of western Canada has a relatively dry climate. Thus, drought effects are one of the major concerns being addressed by researchers in this region. climate modellers have predicted a large increase in temperature for this region, which could lead to even drier conditions and enormous stresses on vegetation in the western Canadian boreal forest. This type of impact was observed following the 1988 drought it experiences, when there was a die-back of aspen over extensive areas of the aspen parkland in Western Canada. Associated with this drought was a drying up of large lakes in the region. Another potential impact for the region is a major increase in forest fires. This is due to the fact that fire frequency is closely linked to moisture levels which are expected to decrease under climatic change. Thus, it is noticed that with increased climatic change the future that this forest has in supplying lumber is decreasing, and the construction industry will face a slight drawback due to this. In this it is noticed that, with a drawback in the construction industry's output, will also effect the economy and society. The economy will effect society and the decrease in output means a decrease in jobs, which in effect hurts society. Contrary to the example of the forests in Canada, is the information found on its agriculture. Because average temperatures are expected to increase more near the poles than near the equator, the shift in climatic zones will be more pronounced in the higher latitudes. In the mid-latitude regions ( 45 - 60 latitude ), the shift is expected to be about 200-300 kilometers for every degree Celsius of warming. Since today's latitudinal climate belts are each optimal for particular crops, such shifts could have a powerful impact on agricultural and livestock production. For example, in the Canadian prairies, the growing season might lengthen by 10 days for every 1oC increase in average annual temperature. Another example (Taken from sources on the net) is the impact of climate change on water. Now, water is a survival of mankind, in general, but almost for all life. Thus, if water was effected by climatic changes, so would society, health, as well as economics be impacted by climatic changes. In areas where climate change causes reduced precipitation, freshwater storage reserves, primarily in the form of groundwater, will steadily shrink. Areas where more precipitation was not matched by increased evaporation would experience floods and higher lake and river levels. An increase in extreme events such as droughts and floods would undermine the reliability of many critical sources. Diminished snow accumulation in winter would reduce the spring run-off that can be vital to replenishing lakes and rivers; a 10% decline in precipitation and a 1-2oC rise in temperature could reduce run-off by 40-70% in drier basins. Worsening droughts combined with the over-exploitation of water resources would cause salt to leach from the soil, thus raising the salinity of the unsaturated zone (the layer between the ground and the underlying water table). In coastal zones, a lowered water table would also draw salt-water from the sea in the fresh groundwater. At the same time, higher levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere are expected to improve the efficiency of photosynthesis in plants, which could in turn cause more rapid evapo-transpiration. Together, these various effects would have extremely negative consequences for river watersheds, lake levels, aquifers, and other sources of freshwater. As it is seen in the information found, such consequences would in reality effect society, agriculture, and economics. Society, would have lower levels of freshwater, agriculture would also have lower levels of freshwater to survive on. Because of this, the economy would be effected since more work will need to be enforced to revitalize the sources of freshwater, or find more. It can be seen through these previous examples, that society is effected by various forms of climatic change. Thus, if society is effected, so is the health of people within the society, and economics is also effected. It basically is like a continual cycle that persists with a relation between climatic changes and the effects it has on society, health, and economics.

Hippopotamus Endangered Species

The Hippopotamus: Endangered Species Report The ban on elephant ivory trading has slowed down the poaching of elephants, but now poachers are getting their ivory from another creature, the hippopotamus. For the poacher, the hippo is an easy target. They stay together for long hours in muddy water pools, as many as eighty-one can be found in a single square mile. This concentration is so big it's only second to that of the elephant. Poachers kill the animal, then pick out the teeth and sell them for as much as seventy dollars per kilo. This is a very cheap price. Elephant ivory sells for as much as five-hundred dollars per kilo. The reason the price-per-kilo is so slow is because hippo ivory is very brittle compared to the much stronger elephant ivory. Elephant ivory is no longer at the biggest risk for poaching; hippo ivory is. Eastern Zaire once had one of the largest hippo populations in the world, around 23,000 hippos. According to a count done in 1994, this number has now dropped to 11,000. The 1989 ban on elephant ivory is the main cause attributed to the exponential rise to hippo ivory trade. "European and African activists are petitioning advocacy groups, including last week's annual Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species in Florida, for a ban on hippo poaching. But they say they're a long way from putting an end to the slaughter." (Howard & Koehl) The hippopotamus is an enormous amphibious animal with smooth, hairless skin. Hippos can be found in Liberia, the Ivory Coast, and a few can also be found in Sierra Leone and Guinea. Hippos used to be found anywhere south of the Sahara Desert where they could find enough water and plenty of room to graze. Now, due to poachers and predation they are confined to protected areas, but they can still sometimes be seen in many major rivers and swamps. Hippos need water that is deep enough to cover them, but it also has to be very close to a pasture. They must wallow in the water because their thin, hairless skin is vulnerable to overheating and dehydration. Hippos were once thought to sweat blood. Actually, hippos secrete a pinkish colored oil that helps them keep their skin moist in the hot African climate. Hippos are herbivores. They prefer the short grass of African plains to any other possible food. They normally eat up to eighty-eight pounds of this grass nightly, which they mow away a large patch at a time with their twenty-inch muscular lips. Hippos spend most of their days in the water or wallowing in the mud, only coming up on land to feed at night. Hippos defecate in the water. Their dung provides essential basic elements for the food chain. Tiny microorganisms feed on it and then larger animals feed on those organisms. On land, hippos' large bodies make trails through the vegetation that other animals may use for easy access to water holes. Because hippos' favorite food is short grass, they keep these grasses well-trimmed which may help to prevent grass fires. Hippos are an important part of the African ecosystem. If the hippos become extinct, and the likelihood grows more and more each day, the repercussions it may have on the fragile African ecosystem are tremendous. Imagine a brush fire consuming acres of previously-livable land under the hot African sun. These people have no way to put out fires like we do here in the U.S.. The fires in California were barely maintainable. In short, if the hippos die, everything dependent on the hippo and it's way-of-life also suffers.

Faster Dissolved Oxygen Test Kit

The purpose of my project is to determine if there is any significant difference in dissolved oxygen (DO) levels as measured by the traditional HACH(r) method or the newly developed CHEMets(r) test kit under typical field conditions. Hypothesis My hypothesis is that there is no significant difference in dissolved oxygen (DO) levels as measured by the traditional HACH(r) method or the newly developed CHEMets(r) test kit under typical field conditions. Review of Literature "Ours is a watery world, and we, its dominant species, are walking sacks of sea water. The presence of large amounts of liquid water on Earth make our planet unique in the solar system." (Hill, 1992 p. 477) People have recently become more concerned with preserving our earth for future generations. Even the government pitches in to help save our earth by enacting laws to help preserve our natural resources. There is local evidence that improved sewage treatment means improvement in water quality. Monitoring on a national level showed that large investments in point-source pollution control have yielded no statistically significant pattern of improvement in dissolved oxygen levels in water in the last 15 years. It may be that we are only keeping up with the amount of pollution we are producing. (Knopman, 1993) The early biosphere was not pleasant for life because the atmosphere had low levels of oxygen. Photosynthetic bacteria consumed carbon dioxide and produced simple sugars and oxygen which created the oxygen abundant atmosphere in which more advanced life forms could develop. (Brown, 1994) The mystery of how Earth's oxygen levels rose is very complex. Scientists don't agree when or how the oxygen on earth got here, but we know we could not live without it. (Pendick, 1993) Oxygen is crucial for humans to survive. Dissolved oxygen is also crucial for most fish and aquatic organisms to survive. Dissolved oxygen is for them what atmospheric oxygen is for humans. If humans have no oxygen to breathe, they die. The same goes for fish. However, fish get their oxygen from the water, and humans get theirs from the atmosphere. (Mitchell and Stapp, 1992) Different aquatic organisms need different levels of dissolved oxygen to thrive. For example, pike and trout need medium to high levels of dissolved oxygen. Carp and catfish are the exact opposite, needing only low levels of dissolved oxygen. (Mitchell and Stapp, 1992 ) Low levels of dissolved oxygen inhibit the growth of Asiatic clams. ( Belanger, 1991) In the American River, too much dissolved oxygen resulted in mortality of salmonoid fishes. (Colt, Orwicz and Brooks, 1991) Brood catfish, or catfish raised on fish farms, are especially susceptible to low dissolved oxygen. Since catfish are a major food source for many people, their production is important. (Avault, 1993) There are two main sources of dissolved oxygen: (1) the atmosphere - waves on lakes, rapidly moving rivers, and tumbling rivers all act to mix oxygen from the atmosphere with water; (2) aquatic plants - algae and benthic plants (bottom-rooted plants) deliver oxygen into the water through photosynthesis. The solubility of all gases, including oxygen, is inversely proportional to temperature which means that the solubility of gases goes down as the temperature goes up, and vice versa. The concentration of dissolved oxygen also varies directly with atmospheric pressure and atmospheric oxygen concentration. When the atmospheric pressure or atmospheric oxygen concentration goes up, the level of dissolved oxygen goes up. (Roskowski & Marshall, 1993) D.H. Farmer studied the fluctuation of dissolved oxygen content in a body of water before, during, and after a storm. During the storm, the increased wave activity increased the dissolved oxygen content. (Farmer and McNeil, 1993) Turbulent flow in streams has caused most of the biocenogenesis (the environmentally determined characteristics of an organisms) to be represented by attached or benthic organisms. For this reason, a method of evaluating the role of benthic organisms in the total dissolved oxygen balance was created. Benthic plants play an important role in providing dissolved oxygen. These plants respire oxygen through photosynthesis. Benthic plants are plants such as cattail, bulrush, arrowhead, water lily, pond weeds, and muskgrass. (Nebel, 1990) Many things can change the level of dissolved oxygen in a body of water. Dissolved oxygen levels rise from morning through afternoon as a result of photosynthesis. Photosynthesis stops at night, but animals and plants continue to respire and consume oxygen. Water temperature and volume of water also affect dissolved oxygen levels. Dry weather causes dissolved oxygen levels to decrease and wet weather causes dissolved oxygen levels to increase. (Mitchell and Stapp, 1990) The breakdown of organic matter by bacteria decreases dissolved oxygen in the water and yet enriches the water with plant nutrients. A reasonable amount of breakdown is good, so the water won't become oligotrophic or nutrient poor. But too much organic breakdown will decrease dissolved oxygen and leave an excess of nutrients. Eutrophication is a term used to describe a body of water in which the organic nutrients reduce the level of dissolved oxygen to such a point that plant life is favored over animal life. Algae blooms cause excessive organic material also. When algae die, they become a part of the organic wastes. (Nebel, 1990) Most organic material can be broken down by microorganisms. Microorganic biodegradation can be either aerobic or anaerobic. Aerobic oxidation results in the further depletion of dissolved oxygen. When dissolved oxygen in water is decreased by excessive organic matter and ongoing degradation, the process then shifts to an anaerobic process. Anaerobic bacteria actually flourish in the absence of oxygen. Animal life can be permanently suppressed in this environment. (Hill, 1992) When dissolved oxygen decreases, major shifts occur in the kinds of aquatic organisms found in a body of water . The insects that need high levels of dissolved oxygen are replaced by anaerobic organisms. Mayfly nymphs, stonefly nymphs, caddisfly nymphs, and beetle larvae (all need high levels of dissolved oxygen) are replaced by pollution tolerant worms, fly larvae, nuisance algae, and other anaerobic organisms. (Mitchell and Stapp, 1992) So what is a good level of dissolved oxygen? Under 4 ppm is not good. But what about too much dissolved oxygen? ( Hidaka, Shimazu, Kumanda, Takeda and Aramaki, 1991) "A nonlinear relationship was found between oxygen concentration and median lethal concentrations values, with significantly increased toxicity at the middle oxygen concentration. It was concluded that dissolved oxygen concentration was an important environmental factor in the assessment of photo-induced toxicity of anthracene to fish." (McCloskey and Oris, 1991 p.145) We have present day examples of the effects of pollution on dissolved oxygen, which then in turn effects the ecosystem. Following are two clear examples of the devastating effects of neglect of our ecosystem. (1) The Chesapeake Bay. Chesapeake Bay is the largest estuary in North America. Before the 1970s the bay was also the most productive, yielding millions of pounds of fish and shellfish and a home for a variety of waterfowl. Most of the food chains started with the sea grasses. Over half a million acres of this underwater "grass" was present only a few feet beneath the surface. The sea grass provided food, a place for spawning, shelter for young fish, and dissolved oxygen for the fish to breath. In the early 1970s, the sea grasses started to die. By 1980 the grasses were gone, except in the lower bay. All animals that had depended on the grasses died accordingly. Even worse, the bottom water did not have enough dissolved oxygen and caused large numbers of lobsters, oysters, and fish to be suffocated. The water of the Chesapeake Bay was very murky and cloudy. The cloudiness persisted over extended periods of time. The reduced light was decreasing photosynthesis and the sea grass began to die as a result. Without the photosynthesis of the sea grass, dissolved oxygen was no longer being adequately supplied. In addition, bacterial decomposition was consuming dissolved oxygen, thus making it unavailable to fish and shellfish. Chesapeake Bay has been overcome by the process called eutrophication. This is not unusual. In the past 40 years, many other ponds and small lakes have also suffered this fate. (Nebel, 1990) (2) The Black Sea. The polluting of the Black Sea is causing the Black Sea to die. Over 300 rivers dump into the Black Sea a deadly mix of nitrates, phosphorous, and oil. A local joke in Varna, Bulgaria, tells suicide cases not to worry about drowning, since the sea's poisons will kill them first. The worst offenders are the Danube, Dniester, and Dnieper Rivers. Waste from the Danube River has increased at least tenfold over the past decade. Johann Strauss Jr.'s "Blue Danube" would hardly be recognizable to the composer. Its never blue now, instead it's always a color of pea-green or black. When the sun hits puddles of oil, it forms rainbows on its ripples. The biggest problem is not the poisons but the nutrients - the phosphorous and nitrogen. The entry of more nutrients into the sea means more harmful surface algae to keep sunlight from the seabeds, killing them and halting the production of dissolved oxygen. (Pomfret, 1994) Other rivers are polluted also, such as the River Borovniscica (Yugoslavia), which is polluted with organic substances and the River Bistra, which is polluted with inorganic substances. Also the death of the Cuyahoga River, which burst into flames on June 22, 1969. ( Gordon and Steele, 1993) Dissolved oxygen levels can vary even within the same stream, river, or body of water. Outside the main current of a stream, dissolved oxygen levels can be low. This point was graphically illustrated by biologist E.P. Pister as he attempted to rescue an endangered species of pupfish. In his hurry to collect more pupfish, he had placed the cages containing previous captures in eddies away from the main current. By the time he noticed his error, a number of these fragile creatures were already dead. (Pister, 1993) Sometimes it's not lack of dissolved oxygen that kills the fish. Rather it can be too much dissolved oxygen, as in the case of the American River. Dissolved oxygen levels were considerably higher in the American River than those reported to cause death in hatchery salmonoids due to gas bubble disease. The source of this gas bubble disease and supersaturation in the river was from air entrainment, solar heating, and photosynthesis. The impact of the high dissolved oxygen levels in the hatchery water supplies was decreased with the installation of degassing structures to remove excessive dissolved oxygen. (Colt and Orwicz and Brooks, 1991) As people try to solve disasters like those cited above, they need to determine the source of the problem before they work on a solution. Sometimes even while people are trying to clean up, there is no statistically discernible pattern of increases in the water's dissolved oxygen content. Many companies offer test kits to measure water quality. Some tests take a long time to run, but people are always looking for a quicker way to run the tests especially under field conditions where response time is critical. Some companies have come up with a quicker way to run tests, but are they as accurate as we'd like to believe? One type of kit for measuring dissolved oxygen is put out by CHEMetrics. The CHEMets ampoules contain a solution of indigo carmine in reduced (near colorless) form. When you snap the tip the ampoule fills with your water sample and any dissolved oxygen in that sample will cause the reagent to oxidize to a blue color. Then the ampoule is compared with the standard color bars. A noticeable problem is that there is definitely a change in the shade of color from 0-4 ppm, but in the higher ranges it is hard to tell any difference. For example, 5-10 ppm seem to be the same shade of blue, and there is not even a specific color bar for 9 ppm. There is an 8 ppm and then a 10 ppm. If you say that the shade of blue is darker than the 8 ppm color bar but less than the 10 ppm color bar, then you could declare it 9 ppm. There is no way of saying if something is 7.5 ppm because there is no shade of blue halfway between 7 ppm and 8 ppm. The HACH method takes longer, but it is easier to determine the amount of dissolved oxygen in the water. The way you determine the amount of dissolved oxygen in the water is by how many drops of Sodium Thiosulfate Standard Solution you add until the sample changes from yellow to colorless. Each drop equals one ppm of dissolved oxygen. We need to think about accuracy, but what about safety? The HACH method uses chemicals that are labeled with "Keep Out Of Reach Of Children. For Laboratory Use Only. Causes Eye Burns. Do Not Ingest. May Cause Skin Irritation." along with direction what to do if you inhale, ingest, or come into contact with the chemical. The directions indicate the need to be very cautious with the chemical, particularly because it isn't safe without proper use. By contrast the CHEMets kit has no warnings like this. The obvious hazard is that you would squeeze the glass ampoule too hard and it would break. There are many things to take into consideration when you are selecting a test kit , not just which one is faster. Such as quality, time, safety, expense, accuracy and much more. Materials HACH(r) TESTING KIT -Dissolved Oxygen 1 Reagent Powder Pillows -Dissolved Oxygen 2 Reagent Powder Pillows -Dissolved Oxygen 3 Reagent Powder Pillows -Sodium Thiosulfate, Stabilized, Standard Solution, 0.0109N -Bottle, Dissolved Oxygen, glass stoppered -Bottle, square, mixing -Clippers -Stopper, for dissolved oxygen bottle -Tube, measuring 5.83 mL CHEMets(r) TESTING KIT -Self filling ampoules for colorometric analysis -Chart with color bars for comparison to self filling ampoules TABLE -Covered with newpaper and/or paper towels WATER -Kankakee River -Melted snow -Tap water -Tap water stirred for one minute -Roof runoff -Fish aquarium EQUIPMENT TO RECORD RESULTS -Paper -Pencil -Clipboard SAFETY EQUIPMENT -Rubber gloves -Goggles -Rubber aprons Procedure HACH TESTING KIT 1) Fill Dissolved Oxygen bottle (round bottle with glass stopper) with the water to be tested by allowing water to overflow the bottle for 2 or 3 minutes. To avoid trapping air bubbles in the bottle, incline the bottle slightly and insert the stopper with a quick thrust. This will force the air bubbles out. If bubbles become trapped in the bottle in Steps 2 or 4 the sample should be discarded before repeating the test. 2) Use the clippers to open one Dissolved Oxygen 1 Regent Powder Pillow and one Dissolved Oxygen 2 Reagent Powder Pillow. Add the contents of each pillow to the bottle. Stopper the bottle carefully to exclude air bubbles. Grip the bottle and stopper firmly, shake vigorously to mix. A flocculent (floc) precipitate will be formed. If oxygen is present in the sample, the precipitate will be brownish orange in color. A small amount of powdered reagent may remain stuck to the bottom of the bottle. This will not affect the test results. 3) Allow the sample to stand until the floc has settled halfway in the bottle, leaving the upper half of the sample clear. Shake the bottle again. Again let it stand until the upper half of the sample is clear. Note the floc will not settle in samples with high concentrations of chloride, such as sea water. No interference with the test results will occur as long as the sample is allowed to stand for 4 or 5 minutes. 4) Use the clippers to open one Dissolved Oxygen 3 Reagent Powder Pillow. Remove the stopper from the bottle and add the contents of the pillow. Carefully restopper the bottle and shake to mix. The floc will dissolve and a yellow color will develop if oxygen is present. 5) Fill the plastic measuring tube level full of the sample prepared in Steps 1 through 4. Pour the sample into the square mixing bottle. 6) Add the Sodium Thiosulfate Standard Solution drop by drop to the mixing bottle, swirling to mix after each drop. Hold the dropper vertically above the bottle and count each drop as it is added. Continue to add drops until the sample changes from yellow to colorless. 7) Each drop used to bring about the color change in Step 6 is equal 1 mg/L of dissolved oxygen. CHEMets(r) TESTING KIT 1) Immerse the snapper into the sample. 2) Place a CHEMet ampoule, tapered end first into the snapper. 3) Press down on the ampoule to snap the tip. 4) Remove the ampoule from the snapper, and invert it several times, allowing the bubble to travel from end to end to mix the contents. 5) Wait 2 minutes for a full color development. 6) Use the color chart (inside box) to determine the dissolved oxygen content by matching the filled CHEMet ampoule with the color bars on the chart. The chart should be illuminated from above by a strong white light. Be sure to place the ampoule on both sides of the color bar before concluding that it gives the best match. Results Location Chem Hach Temp C° difference Kankakee River (near our dock) 10 12 2.2 -2 Kankakee River (near our dock) 10 11 3.3 -1 Kankakee River ( near our dock) 9 13 4.4 -4 Kankakee River (near our dock) 10 12 5.0 -2 Roof Runoff 4 5 5.6 -1 Kankakee River (near our dock) 10 11 5.6 -1 Tap Water 7 7 18.9 0 Snow (melted) 8 8 21.1 0 Tap Water (stirred for 1 minute) 7 8 21.1 -1 Fish Aquarium 7 7 23.3 0 Fish Aquarium 7 8 23.3 -1 Fish Aquarium 7 8 23.3 -1 Tap Water 3 1 23.3 2 Graphs Conclusions My conclusion is that there is a significant difference in dissolved oxygen (DO) levels as measured by the traditional HACH(r) method or the newly developed CHEMets(r) test kit under typical field conditions. CHEMets(r) test kits are very hard to read, especially in the higher ranges. CHEMets(r) does not compare well to HACH(r) in areas where dissolved oxygen is higher than 8 ppm, and it does not measure above 10 ppm. CHEMets(r) would be fine for temperatures of about 150C or warmer. The HACH(r) test kit is the method of choice for field analysis because it is more reliable at all levels in providing accurate measures of dissolved oxygen. The HACH(r) method requires more caution in use, but actually produces significant differences in measures of dissolved oxygen. Statistics Wilcoxson Matched Pairs Signed Rank Test Data gathered in the course of performing analysis is subject to certain random fluctuations. These fluctuations may vary in size and in many cases make it difficult to decide whether the observed differences are due to real differences in the sample or to simple chance. The discipline of statistics allows one to assess the probability (the odds) that measured differences arise from chance alone. Once one has a feel for the odds that the differences arise from chance, one can decide to reject or conditionally accept a hypothesis based on that data. The statistical test being used for this study (Wilcoxson - Matched Pairs Signed Ranks) was chosen for its computational ease and power. A nonparametric test was chosen because there was a question about the level of measurement (ordinal or interval) and whether or not the assumptions for a parametric test could be met. Procedure to apply Wilcoxson - Matched Pairs Signed Ranks test. (see table) 1. Pair all data from each sample according to date. 2. Take the difference between each pair of measurements. 3. Rank the size of each difference paying no heed to sign (drop zero differences - split ranks on ties) 4. Compute the sum of the rank with the less frequent sign (T). 5. Set alpha for 0.05 with a two tailed test. 6. Look up the value for T in an appropriate statistical table. (table G page 254 of Nonparametric Statistics by Sidney Sigel 1956 McGraw Hill) 7. Reject the null hypothesis (Ho) if T is equal to or less than the tabled value. Chem Hach Temp Cº Chem - Hach Rank 7 7 23.3 0 7 7 18.9 0 8 8 21.1 0 4 5 5.6 -1 3.5 7 8 21.1 -1 3.5 7 8 23.3 -1 3.5 7 8 23.3 -1 3.5 10 11 3.3 -1 3.5 10 11 5.6 -1 3.5 3 1 23.3 2 8 10 12 5.0 -2 8 10 12 2.2 -2 8 9 13 4.4 -4 10 N= 10 (number of non zero differences) T= 8 (sum of ranks with less frequent sign) a = 0.05 (significance level) Ho is rejected.