Costa Rica Revisted

Its now been ten years. Ten years since I last stepped foot on Costa Rican soil. Fresh out of high school and still trying to find my way in life I somehow drifted down to our continental isthmus. Into a world strange but not unkind.

In one week I'll be heading back down to that lush country, and I could not help but reminisce a little. I admit that I was young and naive when I first found myself in Costa Rica, but that only made my experiences more important. In Costa Rica I learned many life lessons: That I had been a sheltered child, a privileged child, and a child that other people would want to rob, and did. I learned that a human cannot out run a bull. That friends need not speak the same language, and are not permanent. And that Central America has an amazing array of cultural and biological diversity.

I learned these things by leaving behind what I had known and embracing difference, by speaking another language, and absorbing some cultural history found in what we eat.

Being young I traveled the rougher paths, and stayed in the cheaper hostels, and sometimes flirted with danger by drinking... tap water. And rather than other Americans joining me in these enterprises my companions were from Denmark or the British Isles, Korea or Japan. Less often did I meet fellow Americans, and less often did I want to.

Most Americans relish comfort, and it is my fear that when Americans travel in too much comfort, in too much familiarity, that they fail at traveling. Because being in another country should be to push your comfort zone, to rub abrasively against a new language and culture, and in doing so learn something about yourself and the world. Cancun is not traveling. Tijuana is not traveling. Acapulco is not traveling. Resorts, comfort, and familiarity are vacations. Americans need more travel.

Americans are poor global citizens, but I think if we can get out there and meet what's across the border that will change. The next time you travel abroad, push those boundaries, knot your tongue around another language, and I promise I'll do the same. So bring on Costa Rica Round 2. After a ten year hiatus there's nothing I could look forward to more.

Choose Both

Would you rather…

You know the game, right? I hate it. But here I am, asking the question. So get ready. Squirm. Giggle. Feel awkward. Be nervous (really nervous). You can do whatever you want, but ultimately, like Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, there is no choice but to play.

Don’t worry. This time the question has nothin’ to do with eating gross things or kissing a hoary librarian. If you were responsible for solving the world's environmental woes would you start at the global scale and work your way down to local communities or would you rather start on the ground and work your way up?

Does the question sound familiar? I hear references to it a lot; its pretty engrained in the conservation community. There are a lot of folks, including myself, who feel pretty strongly one way or the other. But maybe we need to stop thinking about it in such polarized terms. Does the debate really have to be modeled after a game intended to humor forth graders?

Sure, large-scale conservation, touted by TNC et al, certainly has appeal. Who doesn’t want to “preserve the plants, animals and natural communities that represent the diversity of life on Earth by protecting the lands and waters they need to survive”? But the large-scale approach isn't flawless. A lot of resources have been poured into lofty initiatives and reports like the Millennium Goals and the Ocean Blueprint. And the intent is great (amazing actually). But have these visions translated into results? Have they concluded anything that we didn't already know?

On the other end of the spectrum is small-scale, local conservation. Community conservation, at its best, is about empowerment and diversity and creativity. It centers on the conviction that everyone has a role and if we all take ownership, global problems will be resolved. I’ll admit, I’m a sucker for small-scale.

I love the concept of grassroots organizing and the idea that we're in charge of our world. But it’s a bit naïve to ignore the obvious. Small-scale often equates to disorganization, inefficiency, and ineffectiveness. And obviously if we're too focused on small-scale we might outright miss the big picture all together.

So where does that leave us? What would you rather?

A year ago, maybe less, I would have said small-scale is the key. But it's not so black-and-white. Small-scale action is embedded in the large-scale context. They can't be separated, and maybe we shouldn't try. There's no reason we can't choose both.

The China Syndrome: One (or Two) Babies, Please!

Most people are aware of China’s population policy permitting each couple to have only one child in order to control the population explosion.

Recently, Jonathon Porritt, who chairs Great Britain’s Sustainable Development Commission suggested to a London Newspaper, “Curbing population growth through contraception and abortion must be at the heart of policies to fight global warming and green campaigners should stop dodging the issue of environmental harm caused by an expanding population.” Porritt also mentioned that he thinks we will work our way towards a position that says having more than two children is irresponsible.

Without a doubt, the contemporary clash of worldviews regarding children, contraception, abortion, and now the environment comes quickly to mind.

Albert Mohler, a conservative, Christain radio talk-show host reacted to Porritt saying, “Christians must be reminded that we do bear responsibility as stewards of God's creation. But we cannot be faithful in that stewardship if we adopt the logic of the Culture of Death. Human beings cannot be reduced to any cold economic or ecological value. Each human being is made in God's image, and each can be part of the fulfillment of our stewardship.”

As a religious conservative, I do not support the idea of including abortion as a population tool in any kind of policy. I also understand the crudeness of putting an economical or ecological value on a life. However, before all of my conservative counterparts quickly agree with Mohler’s statement, I’d like to take this opportunity to raise some valid points about population. A real concern does exist over the relationship between population growth and resource depletion. When we talk about population’s effect on the environment, we are not necessarily talking about the birds and the trees and the abstract environment. We are mostly referring to the environmental resources that our lives depend on every day, like clean water and clean air.

Just like we learned in high school biology, the supportable population of an organism, given the available food, habitat, and water within an environment is known as the carrying capacity for that organism. For the human population, more complex variables such as sanitation and medical care are sometimes considered as part of the necessary infrastructure. If the carrying capacity is exceeded, the quality of life for the entire population will decline. If our population continues to grow at our current rate, we will have a hard time coming up with the natural resources our lives depend on. We may not feel it in the United States the way other developing countries will (and already do.)

In Great Britain, the country at issue in Proitt's remarks, population density is the issue. Increased population density puts added stress on infrastructure such as sewers and water distribution systems. While the world may not need regulated family planning, people should be mindful of their consumption and realize that our resources are not endless. Some will argue that by considering population limits, economic prosperity and a high standard of living are being valued more than life. This argument is crude because most people want to avoid putting a monetary or physical value on a life, but the truth is, exploding populations will create for those on the margins of society (most commonly the rural poor) a decrease in standard of living so severe that it actually threatens the standards which are necessary to live.

Goats are on the Front Lines in the Battle Against Invasive Plants

A particularly rampant invasive plant species in the southern U.S. is Kudzu (Pueraria montana), a vine introduced from Asia and widely planted to combat soil erosion. Unfortunately, it now covers 7 million acres and has buried native vegetation under a thick coat of vines, choking off much-needed sunlight.

So what’s the newest way people are combating the spread of Kudzu?

The answer: Goats.

Goat herds have been brought in to eat the pesky kudzu in several southern states, including Tennessee, North Carolina, and Georgia. In addition to removing the vine without the cost or risk of pesticides, the goats will eventually help fulfill the growing demand for goat meat. The profitability of the enterprise has even led a former Wall Street businessman to make goat farming a fulltime job.

Of course he wasn’t the only one to recognize the business potential here; even in the Triangle area you can hire a goat herd to take care of the weed problem in your backyard.

It isn’t often that the solution to a serious environmental threat is such a win-win situation. And it begs the question: Are there other creative, beneficial solutions to environmental problems out there just waiting to be discovered?

This is the kind of out-of-the-box thinking that breeds new innovation in science. Rather than trying to fully eradicate invasives, perhaps we should work to identify their benefits and then exploit them. In fact, fostering this kind of entrepreneurial thinking may the best way to deal with many of our biggest environmental challenges.

How do we reach the people who have been mauled by shrews?

Ever stepped on a yellow jacket nest? You should try it!

No, really, you shouldn't. For your convenience, I present the things you should avoid in bold (excepting, of course, the word "bold").

Yellow jackets love to build their nests in forest detritus, such as leaf piles and rotten logs (so watch it). They are incredibly touchy, getting upset over the least little things, like a human coming along and flattening their home.

My story:

A friend and I had decided to do some trailblazing on a fine summer day. We started at a rocky bluff (see picture) and moved downhill. It was a hot day on a steep slope.

I stopped to catch my breath and admire the view. I would have taken a picture of said view had I not stopped to catch my breath whilst standing on a yellow jacket nest.

Having already experienced a yellow jacket swarm once before, I wanted to curl up in a ball and weep uncontrollably (no bold; weeping is perfectly acceptable).

Fortunately, adrenaline kicked in. I became strangely calm, almost detached from the situation. That lasted for almost a full second before the first sting came. Then I started shrieking.

My friend and I enjoyed a frantic scramble back up the steep slope, in the hot Pennsylvania summer, getting repeatedly stung by irate yellow jackets.

They chased us a good half mile. My friend made out alright with only 6 stings. I had 15. I still occasionally have nightmares about that day.

So, here's a question: what do we do with people who are legitimately afraid of nature because, say, they were once attacked by badgers, and so they wouldn't mind seeing a few more acres of forest get bulldozed? Has anyone had an experience in nature that was so awful that they won't ever go back? What do we do with them?

I loved hiking too much to give it up after the attack, but I never go trailblazing anymore except in the dead of winter. So we might start with gentle coaxing. Take the traumatized person for a walk along a well-maintained trail in a busy park where the risk of badger attacks remains low. Choose a trail that includes a waterfall or something equally spectacular. Try to slowly rekindle the capacity in that person to love nature.

Either that or get them right back into the saddle by dropping them out of a helicopter in front of a buffalo stampede (the "sink or swim" method).

More Blogging Tips

Some things to note as you blog:

1. Remember that hotlinks should go within the body of your post, highlighting particular words in your sentences, not listed separately at the end. You can list additional references at the end, of course. Also, mix up your links. The best links are ones that support your claim or serve as precise reference for a specific concept. General info links (like Wikipedia entries) are okay, but don't work well if you link to some huge page explaning, say, "energy" in general.
   
2. Another hotlink practice to try is to link to other blog posts/news, aka backlinking (example here, backlinking to GG). Backlinking starts the "you-scratch...I scratch-yours" cycle that places you within the blogosphere community, and can start some rather friendly (or unfriendly) debates if you are writing a rebuttal to someone else!
   
3. Keep posts short! Obviously, the fun of blogging is that it takes many forms and sizes. But try practicing at least one post within the 250-word limit. Instead of explaining some common concepts, use hotlinks to a reputable source ("the reasons for buying sustainable seafood are well known...").
   
4. Don't forget to use labels/tags. These help categorize your post within the blog, making your post searchable. Try to pick labels that already have been used -- if someone already used "climate change", use that instead of making a new label of "global warming". Keep labels to keywords or timely lingo that readers could be attracted to. Use esoteric or specific terms as last resort.
5. Pictures are awesome.
   
6. Let your voice come through. Yes, our initial tipsheet is more for a "professional/corporate blog" -- as if you blogged on behalf of your NGO or agency. This can be a bit bland sometimes. But there may come a time when you are the focus: if you start a personal blog, or you're the star blogger for your org (à la Green Grok), or you're simply given free rein by your bosses to be more unconventional. You'll then have to let your personality come through, while being mindful of your audience (age, political affiliation, etc.). How would you say something in everyday conversation -- your figures of speech, humor, pop references? Blogging has its origins on online diaries and op-ed columns -- follow those roots, and creat your personality!
   

In all, great work on Blog #1. Great job on the tone and level of depth. There are some great hooks/ledes/headlines out there, as well as some good current events and commentary pieces. Check your posts for our comments, and we encourage all to read and comment on posts outside of your groups.

Live blogging at Sustainable Foods Seminar

http://www.nicholas.duke.edu/people/students/orgs-farmhand-seminar.html

• Yay Deb Gallagher, oh matron saint of ENV 301.25! (Deb co-advises the seminar with UNC partners)
  
• Kudos to Nicholas MEM's Cassie Ann and Gretchen
  

7:00PM - SEED (Durham, NC) - Kavanah Ramsier

• They campaigned to allow chickens in the City of Durham!
• DIG encourages local youth to get into the whole of food process, from encouraging peer education on planting science, managing gardens, marketing produce, and ecology of farming. Big emphasis on pollination, beekeeping.
  
• Weekly meals with the food they grow!
• On food justice:

  "It's appealing to kids that 50 cent or Beyoncé drink Coke."

• "We need to be thinking of ways to turn more consumers into producers of food."

7:20pm - Carrboro Farmers Market (Carrboro, NC) - Sarah Blacklin, Manager

• Chapel Hill area had a ton of markets (at churches, etc.) back in the 70's!
• North Carolina Agricultural Marketing Project forms the Carrboro Farmers Market in 1979 (Ken Dawson).
  
• Farmer-run, farmer-owned; farmers form 7-member board.
• All farmers live within 50 mile radius - reduces fuel cost.
  
• They even work with food stamps and cost programs.
• Brewmasters: they do hops!
• Buffalo jerky! Liverwurst! Kimchi! Gluten-free pies!
• Rule: farmers must grow their own. No reselling.
• Farmers are mandated to be within 50-miles of market.
• Unique Rule: Require farmers to be at market -- they can't send reps or farmhands.

  "The best way to learn about your food is from your buyers."

• Obesity program, giving families a plot to grow own produce.
• Starting a new organization called Friends of the Market, to do more community outreach and farmer support. Goals: access for minorities; CSA's for families in need; Spanish translation; group health insurance plan for farmers! Also catastrophe relief fund for farmers; scholarships for minority/farmer families in need.

7:36pm - Chatham Marketplace (Pittsboro, NC) - Mary DeMare, General Manager

• A young co-op, founded in 2003
• Counts local as 250-mile radius, to include coast; majority of local food comes from within 50-miles.
  
• 120 local producers; works with Eastern Carolina Organics
• Local rice! (204 miles, just into SC border :))
• $2.6 million in sales last year!

(dah... battery running out... cutting off any moment!)

7:42pm - Open Questions

• Concern over buyers assuming that local farms = organic. Sarah Blacklin: "Some farmers get defensive, but we encourage farmers to say, 'ask me about my produce' to get more clarity and detail. But farm practices really change from year to year -- it's not that clear cut. And every shopper has unique preferences on organics/spraying etc. I would love suggestions on better communication of practices."
  
• How do you enter the market... of the farmer's market? Sarah Blacklin: "Mid-week test to see if they are viable. Seniority is set for someone who does at least 17 weeks, to prevent fair-weather friends. There is also limits on crafts booths, to prevent it from becoming a flea market. But we have recently allowed farmers to take sabbaticals -- without losing seniority."
  
• How does a cash-based market deal with debit and credit society? Kavanah/Sarah: Carrboro has applied for a EBT machine to accept food stamps... but complicated situation dealing with LeafLife(?)...also complicated to have one machine for market, having someone manage the machine, and having a swipe/token exchange.
• Decrease in African-American farmers? Kavanah: That's certainly a focus of DIG is to encourage more urban families to learn about farming and food. All three panelists: we want to bring in and support minority farmers, but don't have/know a specific strategy for African-American farmers specifically.
  
• Better consumer education? (sorry... tuned out...)
  
• Most pressing concern for sustainable local food systems? Collectively: wow, tough questions... um, everything? Cost for consumers; cost/time for farmers to produce for market and make profit to sustain farm; young farmers face high start-up costs; and more...
• Where will supply come from with increasing demand? What are incentives for farmers to stay/start farming? Sarah: Young farmers are crucial. Eastern NC and mountain NC are suffering though, being far from markets like Durham/Raleigh. Triangle/Piedmont benefits from being close to markets, and small farms are growing!
  
• Promo for Real Food, Real Medicine conference.
  

(Reception time... nummy foods.... Peace!)
8:20pm