Site Discussions

Thanks Jon (and Michaeline via e-mail) for pointing out the information for Maine.

The current northern limit of adelgid in Maine seems to be Route One in much of the areas we’ve found so far, but it is a tough insect to find.  The insect has been found as far east as Bristol.  We will have interns scanning hemlocks in coastal areas east of Owl’s Head this summer, and are conducting surveys in towns adjacent to known infested towns. 

In Maine we also have a group of dedicated volunteers who help us look for hemlock woolly adelgid (and some who never pass a hemlock without peering up at the foliated twigs or flipping over a branch)and help pass out information about the insect.  Our program relies on such dedicated individuals.

We also have partners in tracking where adelgid has been looked for.  If you spend some time looking for hemlock woolly adelgid in Maine, even if you don’t find it, please take a moment to report your observations at: vitalsignsme.org.  They have a Field Mission set up for hemlock woolly adelgid http://vitalsignsme.org/mission-hemlock-woolly-adelgid. 

If you think you have found adelgid you can report it directly to the Maine Forest Service (207) 287-2431 or .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).

Thank you!

Thanks, Dave; certainly putting in gardens in where asphalt was is a good start.  I specifically am interested, however, in knowing if anyone is replacing asphalt - and/or concrete, unused portions of parking lots, etc. - with native forest trees and allowing the native community of forest plants, aka NATIVE HABITAT, to grow back again.  Anyone?  Thanks.

Dave, replacing excess asphalt with gardens is a good start.  But I specifically am asking:  Does anyone know of a project anywhere where someone is restoring the forest to areas from which it was removed?  And, with apologies to Irwin Post who put up the original article of this thread, I’m also not asking about anyone who may be setting up a woodlot or tree plantation for timber production (although that is better than asphalt too!)  What I am asking is: does anyone know a project where people are replanting the ORIGINAL COMMUNITY of trees, understory, and groundcover plants that was native to the place before human disruption of it? That is, is anyone trying to RESTORE THE FOREST?  -Thanks.

That’s cool that we can take the loan and that opens up completely new opportunities.

I watched “Dirt” last night, Connie, which if you haven’t seen it is a documentary-type movie on soil and soil health. One of my big criticisms of the film was that it was a little too shrill, but apropos of your question, there were a number of real life examples shown where urban schools ripped up asphalt playgrounds and replaced them with gardens. So yes, absolutely it can be done. Along the lines of your thinking, you might want to also read the book The World Without Us, which imagines what the world would be like if we humans suddenly disappeared. Worth checking out.

I’ve read the thread of this discussion and want to respond to a single comment by Al Mollitor on Oct. 25, 2010, namely:  “...Those artificial and engineered landscapes [i.e., shopping malls and suburban housing developments] will never grow any kind of forest again”.  This is a commonly expressed sentiment among us environmentalists—- “Once the forest is cut down, we will never get it back”, etc.—- but one I want to challenge.  How do we know this?  Has anyone ever tried to re-grow forest in one of these areas?  I dearly wish we could get an actual experiment running, on returning “developed” land back to its original forested state.  Can anyone help me with this?  - Connie Ghosh, Atlanta, GA

An enduring symbol of Cape Cod - chickadees in a Pitch Pine.  I hate these Eastern White Pines that are spreading from so many yards.  The Pitch Pine is the most beautiful completely natural self reliant tree on the planet.

I am retired and I spend much of my day outdoors and I see No flying insects. The lack of pollinators has resulted in poor yields from my vegetables compared to a period of thirty years. The decline was abrupt and I noted the decline in my ledger in May of 2004..

We plant flowers and leave clover for bees and other insects. I only see insects at a local river and swamp ecosystem and they are in vastly reduced numbers.. The local VT extension agents I have talked with have dismissed my observations.

Rachel Carlson and her book Silent Spring may be too true.

Thank you for that clear explanation.  What raised this question in my mind was discovering Pick’s theorem which, since acreage is measured as the projection on a plane, should allow a simple way to make excellent approximations of the acreage of parcels with irregular boundaries.

What troubles me about solar and wind power is the amount of real estate they cover to generate power on a scale great enough to replace conventional generation plants. And in the Northeast, sunshine and wind are irregular at best, so something always needs to be available as backup.

People also seem to think that solar and wind power do no environmental damage. Maybe not after they are installed, but putting them in—at a large scale—requires a great deal of industrial production and transportation, all involving fossil fuels, as well as mashing up the locality with trucks and cranes, installing permanent access roads, etc. And how much gasoline would be consumed every summer to keep field and forest from overtaking the open space of a solar farm?

Has anyone yet figured out how to avoid bird, insect, and bat mortality from wind turbines?

I would be interested in seeing a comparison of how much acreage is actually used to run the Northern Pass lines vs. how much acreage and how many hilltops would be needed for the same amount of power via solar and wind. Is that information available anywhere?

I didn’t realize the importance of dandelions to bees until I read this article.  How unfortunate for the bees that this plant is dreaded by those who seek the perfect lawn.

It’s good to see Brian finally recognizes the wonder chickadees bring to the world.  I’m sure Brian doesn’t remember me, but in a conversation more than 5 years ago, he made a disparaging remark about the all so common chickadee and how everyone has them at their feeders.  Ever since I’ve been going to write an ode to this friendly, spirited bird, so obviously full of the joy of life.  I haven’t witnessed the mobbing, but chickadees are the friendliest birds in my section of the woods.  Instead of quietly devouring bird seed, like nuthatches and blue jays do, they cheerfully call everyone to the feast they have found.  Being dare devils, they fly in for a seed at a feeder inches from my head, while I fill another.  They will also land on your hand for a seed, if you stand still long enough, being great teachers of patience.  I know because I’ve done it twice.  Still, unlike ducks who will follow anyone around looking for more handouts, the chickadee is always a free spirit, flying back to shelter with it’s bounty.  Sure it’s fun to catch a glimpse of a reclusive bird that lives far in the woods.  Though it it technically true of every species, if the chickadee were to disappear the world would be a much sadder place.

Solar and wind power are not yet cost effective but would be when sufficiently developed and used…but we have powerful oil companies lobbying against them, and seemingly no public will and patience to withstand them.  No energy source is free from either harmful or nuisance effects, but solar and wind seem to offer the safest-for-the-planet source.  For that I would be willing to ‘sacrifice’ some scenery for the common good. 
  We live in the middle of Marcellus gas drilling; we see and feel the negative affects from it, will not benefit monitarily from it.  Our friends who will benefit hate it…hate the destruction, degradation, everything about it.  I hate the sacrifices we’re all making to have this gas produced and used, knowing that the primary benefactors from the gas drilling will be the oil companies.  Local economies, private citizens will benefit to some degree, but in what proportion to the cost of what is lost to them and to the planet we all inhabit?  Marcellus gas is another finite power source, and its production is another ‘mess’ we’re leaving for our children to deal with.  Why are we not putting our efforts toward a clean, constant energy source?  See above paragraph!

A very much needed discussion. In my town very recently there has been serious debate about the siting of wind turbines. Most of the inhabitants are aware of the almost constant wind flow at the projected sites.Both locations are at relatively high elevation. Both are places townsfolk like to walk when in need of a pleasant breeze on sultry days, or a magnificent view for miles in any direction. One site is on school property. The other is on a huge piece of land owned by a large fraternal organization. Town folks raised a ruckus about rather questionable ill effects caused by the turbines “flicker effects”. Nothing is settled yet. The NIMBYS have a way of shifting much attention to nit picking instead of necessary action on behalf of our environment and our populace at large.

What a wonderful description not only of nature, but of children… and the opportunities we have to let them learn.

A friend e-mailed your article to me as I live on the projected route of the Northern Pass Project.  My husband and I have invested our life savings in a home with a beautiful mountain view.  135 foot steel transmission powers will pass right through my property and I guess we are considered NIMBY’s; however, first of all it appears to me that your analogy comparing the tragedy in the Delta to the Northern Pass Project is apples versus oranges.  Mother Nature was the cause of the crisis in the Delta while Hydro Quebec, which is owned by the Canadian Government stands to make billions and billions of profit at the expense of thousands of individuals like my husband and me, whose property values will be destroyed, pristine landscape destroyed, refinancing of homes unobtainable as well as reverse mortgages not given, and ecotourism hurt.  The natural disaster which occurred along the Delta and the actions taken were unavoidable, while the actions proposed by the Northern Pass Project and resulting damages are avoidable as the transmission lines could be buried, however, Hydro Quebec elects to make a greater profit at the expense of New Hampshire residents.  Hopefully, the victims of the Midwest disaster will be able to rebuild with the help of our government and while the flooding will subside, the scar across New Hampshire will be permanent.

This piece is a rhetorical pastiche attempting to connect mostly unrelated things.  Its attempted dialectics show little understanding of the actual geographic or social issues.  Few of the poor MS & AR counties along the river are actually suffering in any great degree from the flooding, which is contained within the levees in all but a few places.  Where flooding is occurring, poor and rich alike are suffering, and these are mostly farmers.  Whether they are rural, urban,rich or poor seems a ridiculous distinction to make. 

Anyone who has spent much time aroung the river understands its long term risks.  The choice to open up designated floodways to flooding is an unfortunate, but long anticipated eventuality.  If you farm or choose to live in a designated floodway, sooner or later you are going to be flooded.  Those are the risks you take.  Ergo the acceptance of same. 

Mississippi flooding has nothing to do with class warfare. BTW, New Orleans and Baton Rouge are full of poor urban people.  The economic infrastructure threatened by flooding is far more important to the common good than the lightly populated floodways.

There is a way to preserve New Hampshire’s natural beauty and prevent the takeover of private citizens’ property for the benefit of a corporation. (And to answer a question posed earlier in the blog: Yes, takeover of private property by eminent domain has been proposed by the Northern Pass people.)  The Northern Pass could bury its lines anywhere they spoil a public view, or anyplace where the sight of the Northern Pass’s power lines lowers the value that people paid extra money to enjoy.  If you don’t believe views are worth money, just ask a realtor—or the homeowner who pays taxes extra for a view. 

Moreover, NH’s unspoiled mountain vistas have enormous economic impact on the state—impact that affects both rural and urban dwellers.  Visitors do not come to northern New Hampshire to see huge power transmission lines.  If they wanted to see that, they could stay in the cities.

New Hampshire’s Travel and Tourism Department estimates that, on average, each tourist spends $81.76 every day they’re in the state.  A recent Granite State Ambassador case study cites New Hampshire’s tourism industry as the state’s second largest employer. Tourists to this state pay over $125 million in rooms and meals taxes each year, all of which goes directly into the General Fund. Tourism and the services it requires are the source of $4.35 billion to the state’s economy.

Since tourism depends on unspoiled scenic beauty, tampering with it is economically foolhardy. 

Burying the Northern Pass’s power lines is a compromise that would allow New Hampshire’s citizens to reap the benefits of cheaper energy without having the beauty of their mountains and towns diminished. The Project’s planners claim that burying the lines is too expensive, but what else would they be expected to say about costs that narrow their profits?  Over time, the Project will surely make enough profit to amortize the extra costs it will incur. By contrast, New England’s scenic beauty, once it is lost, can never be regained.

Over 27% of the Granite State’s economy depends on preserving New Hampshire’s unspoiled natural majesty. Burying the lines would be a win-win.  This is not a time to sit back in silence and let one of America’s most scenic treasures, the White Mountains, be sacrificed to corporate profits.  The ultimate costs to the public, rural and urban alike, will be anything but cheap.

Jacqueline Simon
Ashland, NH

There were some prelimary discussions about the possibility of a wind energy site along the mountain ridge that I look at every day from my house on the hill. Would that be an eyesore or would it look like a more natural way to generate power? I can’t help but wonder how people several generations felt when power lines started being put up everywhere to bring electricity to homes & farms. Did they view these as eyesores at the time? We grew up with them and accepted them as a part of the way it is. Would the next generations do the same?
It is a dilemma! Unfortunately we have to start making those hard decisions. For me, I think I could look out at a wind energy site and see it as an attempt to go gentle on the earth.

The bottom line is that consumers were more valuable in the eyes of “the powers that be” than were the producers. Let’s see the casinos grow a little wheat, or corn or cotton. And let’s listen to the folks whose properties were spared squall about food prices when the crops come up short.