The research also shows that 55% of the public has heard nothing at all about the cap and trade legislation. (Photo courtesy of the Architect of the Capitol)
A new survey indicates fewer
people think global warming
is a serious problem. Lester
Graham reports many still
think companies should reduce
greenhouse gas emissions:
Transcript
A new survey indicates fewer
people think global warming
is a serious problem. Lester
Graham reports many still
think companies should reduce
greenhouse gas emissions:
The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press surveyed 1500 people, asking what they thought about global warming.
Carroll Dougherty is the Center’s Associate Director. He says there’s growing public skepticism about climate change.
“What we found was a sharp decline in the percentage of Americans who say there was solid evidence that the earth was warming. 71% said that in April of ’08 and it’s down to 57% in the survey we released a few days ago.”
Fewer Republicans and Democrats says they see evidence of climate change, but the biggest decline was among independent voters.
Despite the skepticism, half of all those polled by Pew are still in favor of setting limits on carbon dioxide emissions and making companies pay for their emissions even if that might mean higher energy prices.
Citizen scientist divers brave the chilly waters of Washington State to count the marine life below.
(Photo by Ann Dornfeld)
The REEF survey is clipped to volunteer diver Pete Naylor's gear as he waits to dive in to the Hood Canal in Washington State.
(Photo by Ann Dornfeld)
Citizen scientists count dozens of invertebrate and fish species - such as this cabezon - to help professional scientists monitor marine populations. (Photo by Ann Dornfeld)
As governments tighten their belts,
it’s getting harder for them to pay
scientists to monitor the health of
the nation’s ecosystems. So increasingly,
they’re turning to citizens who do
that kind of work for free. Ann Dornfeld
reports on the growing influence of these
“citizen scientists”:
Transcript
As governments tighten their belts,
it’s getting harder for them to pay
scientists to monitor the health of
the nation’s ecosystems. So increasingly,
they’re turning to citizens who do
that kind of work for free. Ann Dornfeld
reports on the growing influence of these
“citizen scientists”:
It’s the kind of cloudy, wet day that most people spend indoors. But the cold and wet doesn’t matter as much when you’re planning to spend your day at the bottom of a Puget Sound fjord.
(sound of divers splashing into water)
About 75 miles from Seattle, these scuba divers are conducting volunteer surveys for REEF, an organization that monitors fish populations around the world. The data help researchers understand where fish live, and in what kind of numbers. It’s the kind of information governments need to understand how fishing and pollution are affecting waterways.
Back on the boat, surveyor Janna Nichols has just emerged from the 48-degree water. She pulls out her survey and goes down the list marking off what she’s just seen.
“Sunflower stars, definitely, many of those – saw a lot of those around. No sand dollars, no sea urchins. Ah! Ooh! Ah! Here’s an exciting one! I saw a giant nudibranch! A very small giant nudibranch. But those are very cool to see – a treat!”
Identifying fish can be tricky, because the same species can have different coloration depending on its age, gender, or even time of the year.
“Black-eyed gobies were everywhere. I would say under a hundred of them. And – they were mating! Because I don’t know if you noticed, they had black pelvic fins. And they kind of hover around and say “Hey, baby baby, look at me!”
As much fun as these “citizen scientists” have, professional scientists take the data these divers collect seriously. Last summer volunteer surveyor David Jennings went diving in Washington’s Olympic National Park Marine Sanctuary. He was excited to see the colorful tiger and china rockfish he’d heard were abundant at the park. But when he got there, he only saw a couple. So he looked at the past six years of REEF survey data to see how the rockfish populations had changed.
“One of the best sources was someone that wrote up a diving experience he had in 2002 where he saw dozens of tigers and many chinas. Whereas I in a week of diving saw two tigers and just three chinas. so it was a very big contrast to what people saw in the past.”
Jennings took the data to the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife. That’s the agency that decides fishing limits. Greg Bargmann is a department fisheries biologist who’s working on next year’s catch limits for rockfish. He says even though the REEF divers aren’t as highly-trained as the state biologists, the data they collect are more current and cover a wider area.
“The REEF survey shows a very dramatic decrease in abundance over the last five years. Our state surveys don’t show that, but we have a lot of imprecision in our surveys so we’re relying on the REEF surveys to look for changes in population.”
That’s because the state can’t afford to send its biologists out as often or to as many sites as the volunteers dive.
“We really appreciate the interest of our citizens to spend time going out there and using their own transportation costs and their own equipment to go out and collect data, and to listen to us and collect things that are not easy to do sometimes.”
You don’t have to dive to be a citizen scientist. In Ohio, citizens track everything from salamanders to spiders. In California, tighter budgets mean more poaching – and not enough game wardens. So states are training volunteers to do more work. And across the country, the Environmental Protection Agency relies on citizens to monitor water quality in lakes and streams.
Bargmann says while governments rely on citizen scientists more during budget crunches, he sees programs like these becoming increasingly important for keeping track of the health of the environment.
A group that generally considers itself to be conservative disagrees with many of the Bush administration’s policies on the environment. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham reports on a survey of hunters and anglers:
Transcript
A group that generally considers itself to be conservative disagrees with many of the Bush
Administration’s policies on the environment. The Great Lakes Radio Consortium’s Lester Graham
reports on a survey of hunters and anglers:
The National Wildlife Federation commissioned a nationwide survey of people who hold hunting or
fishing licenses. It revealed that hunters and anglers generally liked some of the Bush
conservation programs, but disagreed with the Bush approach to controlling mercury pollution,
drilling for gas on public lands, and changing how wetlands are protected. Brian Preston is with the
National Wildlife Federation. He says the survey shows hunters and anglers want to protect the
environment; not just their hunting and fishing rights.
“They’re not the ‘Bubba’ that just cares about filling a bag limit. They do care about their natural
resources, and based on those values, they’re not happy with some of the current policies put forth
by the White House.
More than two-thirds of the hunters and anglers voted for Bush in the last election, but an even
greater number disagree with some of the Bush policies on the environment.
The research also shows that 55% of the public has heard nothing at all about the cap and trade legislation. (Photo courtesy of the Architect of the Capitol)
