Climate Change and National Parks

What are some of the effects climate change could have on our national parks? Why is it important to understand these impacts and what does it mean for our future enjoyment of these places?

In order to understand the effects of climate change on our parks we must first understand the impacts of climate change on our global environment. Some things, such as warmer average temperatures, are kind of a “no-brainer” but what does all of this mean? How will it impact the flora and fauna, our hydrologic cycle, or our air quality? It is a relatively easy determination to make because it is already happening. Here are some examples of the effects:


 Changes in soil temperature & moisture affects soil microflora & microfauna
 As temperatures change animals seek different & more optimal habitats
 Sensitivity to temperatures affects the reproductive biology of many species as well as how they rear their young
 Temperature increases can cause a reduction in the number of species within a community
 Population densities & geographic distribution of insects change as ambient temperatures change in their ranges
 Sex of many reptile species is often determined by temperature thus the effective population of one sex limits that populations genetic diversity
 Global temperature changes can lead to massive reorganizations of the time, activities, and movement patterns of animals
 Drought causes leaves of plants & trees to turn yellow as chlorophyll production is reduced, cavitation increases and plants dehydrate making them more attractive to phytophagus insects leaving vegetation susceptible to insect outbreaks
 As sea ice cover declines, arctic marine ecosystems will suffer from coastal erosion, melting of tundra/thawing of permafrost, loss of algae, elimination of ice associated communities such as polar cod, and a loss of habitat for ice platform dependent species such as polar bears, seals, and walrus.
 Increased wildfire frequency
 Increased windstorms sometimes causing the mortality of entire stands of trees and leaving the stressed survivors susceptible to disease and insect infestation
 More extreme and unpredictable weather patterns (floods and droughts) cause damage to resources

These examples are merely a drop in the bucket of what we are faced with in regards to the effects of climate change on our environment. While it is understandable that Earth undergoes periods of warming and cooling it is evident that our planet is currently undergoing a very serious and disconcerting period of rapid change. In the last century our planet has warmed an average of 1.3F. This rate of warming is faster than anything on record for the past 1000 years. Emissions of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and methane have been on the rise since the beginning of the industrial revolution. The concentration of these gasses in the atmosphere is more than 70% higher than pre-industrial levels, and according to the EPA combustion of fossil fuels account for most emissions in the US. Like it or not our environment is changing. Alpine species are running out of higher ground, polar species are running out of ice, droughts, floods, heat waves, and intense hurricanes have increased, glaciers and snow packs are disappearing, sea level is rising, arctic sea ice is thinning, and our oceans are becoming more acidic. Bearing this in mind, it is not hard to imagine how climate change will, and already is, affecting our national parks.

It is no secret that Rocky Mountain National Park is currently undergoing a battle with bark beetle infestations that are killing millions of trees. It is believed among entomologists that these massive infestations are a result of climate change. Remember those phytophagus insects? These insects are specialized to detect ultrasound and vibrations from cavitation (the breaking of water columns in trees) caused by drought and reduced chlorophyll production.

In November 2006 over 18 inches of rain fell in just 36 hours in Mount Rainier National Park. This was the most damaging flood in the park’s 108 year history, breaking utility lines, washing out roads, trails and campgrounds, and filling streams and reservoirs with mud and debris. Some major roads through the park were closed for a year. It is estimated that rebuilding will cost between $36 and $100 million.

Glacier National Park may soon be called “Puddles” as many of the glaciers retreat from view and often disappear altogether. Dan Fagre, a USGS ecologist who works at Glacier, estimates that by the year 2020 there very well may be no more glaciers in the park. This means more than just less ice in the park. It also means the destruction of fragile ecosystems that have taken thousands of years to develop destroying the treasures the park was created to protect.


A hot dry climate weakens trees and vegetation making them more susceptible to fires. Record heat waves make for extremely dry vegetation and can even turn good intentions into disasters. A prescribed burn for brush control in Yosemite National Park recently jumped fire lines and as of yesterday evening (August 27, 2009) has burned an estimated 2200 acres and is only 10% contained.

The North Cascades National park is one of the largest and most rugged alpine wilderness in the Lower 48 and its 300 glaciers cover more area land than any glaciers than in any other national park south of Alaska. It is home to grizzly bears and wolves as well as virgin Western Red Cedar (Thuja plicata) and Douglas fir (pseudotsuga menziesii). As the climate warms glaciers retreat and alpine meadows disappear leaving high-mountain species like the pika no where higher to go.

Alaska‘s national parks provide valuable habitat for caribou, which is still central to the diet and culture of many Alaskan Natives. A warmer climate has pushed the caribou as far north as they can go as the tundra ecosystem is being pushed steadily north. In some places in Alaska warmer winters increase the frequency of freeze-thaw cycles which creates thick layers of ice that caribou must break through in order to forage. In other places the snowfall is so heavy that caribou have a hard time finding food under deep snowpack.

Biscayne National Park in Florida, a popular marine vacation destination, generates millions of dollars every year for local economies. The coral reef that attracts so many visitors is now fading, its brilliant colors turning white as they lose the tiny algae living inside the cells that give them their color. This bleaching also causes long term changes in the communities of fish that live on the reef. Diseases that thrive in warmer water have increased dramatically since 1994.

The Great Smoky Mountains National Park is the most visited park in the country. Every year more than 20 million people drive along the Blue Ridge Parkway which connects the park with Shenandoah. Increased traffic and the resulting smog decrease the air quality in the park, compounding an already existing problem.

Sequoia, Kings Canyon, Joshua Tree, and Yosemite National Parks all have higher ozone levels than allowed by EPA health standards as warmer temperatures boost the formation of ground level ozone.

Documenting, understanding, analyzing, and interpreting the changes currently taking place in both our global environment and within our national parks can provide crucial information on how we can deal with what is coming our way, what we might expect to happen, and how we can prevent or minimize the effects of climate change. This is the exact reason why it is necessary to establish and fund scientific research within the parks. We need to accumulate the knowledge necessary to formulate a comprehensive, adaptable and systemic plan to minimize or eliminate the threats to these valuable resources.

The species within the parks will not be the only ones suffering the consequences of climate change. Visitors and neighboring communities will also feel the effects. Poor air quality will decrease the number of days that people with respiratory problems such as asthma can safely enjoy the parks. Poor visibility due to smog will degrade the quality of those grand vistas in places like Joshua Tree, Great Smoky Mountains, Yosemite and the Grand Canyon. Increased natural disasters not only damage park structures but take a toll on gateway towns such as the hard hit Flamingo area just outside of the Everglades National Park. Just getting into many parks could prove to be difficult as flooding and erosion wipe out roadways into the parks and inconvenience visitors and spell trouble for neighboring communities dependent on park visitor traffic.

National parks are doing their part to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by taking advantage of solar and wind power, providing shuttle services to visitors helping to eliminate emissions from visitor traffic, converting to fuel efficient vehicles and promoting bicycle use in parks. So far there are almost 50 national parks participating in the Climate Friendly Parks program. This partnership between the EPA, NPCA, and NPS aims to educate every park employee about climate change so they can take action in addressing the problem. The program also calls for each park to reduce its emissions of greenhouse gases and air pollution as well as educating the public about the effects of climate change on park resources while encouraging them to reduce their own greenhouse gas emissions.

It is clear that global warming is a global problem. We all must become more aware of our contributions to this problem and take steps as individuals to reduce the effects of climate change on our world and in our national parks. We must begin now before the things we love disappear forever.

To Be or Not To Be, Organic

Last Saturday I was pleased to accompany Elise to an event sponsored by CAGJ (Community Alliance for Global Justice) As described by there website

“Our visit to Carnation, WA will begin at Local Roots for a farm tour, and then continue down the road for a work party at Jubilee Farm! Both farm stops will offer opportunities to talk with the farmer and ask questions!”

Obviously this was a great opportunity for us. First stop Local Roots Farm this is a small farm (about 5 acres) and a big inspiration. About 3 years ago Jason was recently married living in a small apartment in capitol hill and having recently passed the BAR exam was a high paid and very unhappy lawyer. His wife on the other hand was interning on a farm and would come home singing. She was only interning for a few months before the land owner (whose name I have regrettable forgotten) noticed her enthusiasm as well as his, shall we say, ripening age and offered the sweet hearts a proposition. Jason quit his job and they split the land three ways all of them now having equal ownership and equal responsibilities. I was impressed by the amount and variety of food that came off of this small farm.

I asked Farmer Jason where he sells his food and to my delight he said to many local restaurants, the Madison Market , CSA partners and a variety of farmers markets. I then asked if his produce would be at the Ballard Sunday Farmers market, as I knew I would, and he said no. “But why not” I replied, this unfortunately opened a can of worms I was not prepared for. I believe the reason he gave was something to the extent that the Ballard farmers market and, the vendors there in, are allowed to participate by the vote of one person. Obviously disgruntled he began opening my eyes to the fairness of this as well as the fact that many of the vendors are retail and not even local retail at that. I have been stewing on this for a while and I understand that from a marketing standpoint it makes sense to appeal to all the yuppie condo dwellers that have been destroying the Ballards vibe for some time. I also know that I am an avid supporter of a non food booth at the market, when the rainy season sets in I usually buy a candle a week from ascents candle. So I am torn but I do lean toward the side of farmer Jason who says farmers markets should be for farmers.

A bit later in the tour we began talking about organic certification, and it turns out that Local Roots farms is not certified as organic, it also turns out that the regulations on organic certification are buried in bureaucracy and loop holes that I am only begging to understand. Thankfully Russ Parsons of the LA times does a pretty good job of describing some of the issues here: http://www.latimes.com/features/food/la-fo-calcook1-2009jul01,0,2885942.story So fine organic is all jaded by the media and the money so what do I look for in food now? Well one option is to be CNG (Certified Naturally Grown) as their website states

“Farmers created Certified Naturally Grown to provide an alternative way to assure their customers that they observed strict growing practices. CNG strives to strengthen the organic movement by removing financial barriers to certification that tend to exclude smaller direct-market farms, while preserving high standards for natural production methods.”

Another thing to keep your eye out for is to be Salmon Safe and as their website explains,

“Almost a decade after we first started certifying fish friendly farms in Oregon's Willamette Valley, Salmon-Safe has become one of the nation's leading regional eco labels with more than 50,000 acres of farm and urban lands certified. The Salmon-Safe retail campaign has been featured in 200 supermarkets and natural food stores.
Salmon-Safe is an independent 501(c)3 nonprofit devoted to restoring agricultural and urban watersheds so that salmon can spawn and thrive. We're based in Portland, Oregon.

FYI Local Roots is certified as both Salmon Safe and CNG but to be clear, not organic, are you still with me?

Great, now its time to move on to our next farm this was less chat more dig. We harvested potatoes, I loved it! Again I was impressed by the amount of food we harvested just one strip of land and it gave us about 5 or 6 huge bags, three cheers for mother nature.

The big lesson I took away from Jubilee was Farmer Eric’s (a philosophy teacher turned farmer) method of sharing. At Local roots they had 5 interns that basically were in it for the experience and making about 200 dollars a month working 6 days a week in 12 hour shifts, this is not very sustainable. However Jubilee had a lovely solution members would donate 4 hours weekly to the farm and be given weekly large shares of food in return. Farmer Eric said he has about 80 people on work share, that’s a lot of weeding! Of course this can only work on a larger farm that have that much extra food to give to workers but either way it left me optimistic, as I hope it did you.

An Interview

As part of my inquiry, I interviewed someone who has worked in the environmental sector for twenty years, including some work specifically with the religious environmental community. One of her areas of expertise is coalition-building, especially among religious and environmental organizations. As I did not ask permission to publicly use her name in this blog, I am just going to call her Jane (not her real name). We had a lovely talk, and if this research turns into a thesis like I think it might, I hope to interview her again.

Part of the interview was Jane recommending authors, organizations, and people working in the religious environmental arena that she thought would be good resources for me. Many of her suggestions have made it into my list of “Resources” to the right. A good part of the interview was a rambling conversation about the topics of environment, spirituality, and the environmental movement. Below are some of her insights and some highlights of the directions our conversation took.

Early on, Jane stated, “The environmental crisis is a spiritual crisis. It is a movement away from oneness, connection.” I began this quarter writing in my syllabus, “It is my belief that this sense of human disconnection from nature is at the root of our current environmental crisis,” so Jane and I were in agreement from the start.

Without separation, she explained to me, we don’t have the experience of coming back together, of union. That longing for union is a driving need. Our separation, and not just from nature, leaves us with a longing to be filled. This longing has found many different outlets in modern society – for example, our materialism, in a world where many don’t have adequate access to the basic materials needed for life. This observation let Jane to say that it was the loss of balance, more so than loss of connection, which is the real crisis. Balance in nature is dynamic and changing and often cyclical, and that is true also in terms of the type of balance we need. It’s not about going back to the Stone Age – it’s about coming back to right relationship here and now.

People want and seek a direct relationship with nature. And yet, we also want to keep their spirituality compartmentalized – something above it all. Yes, those times of that spiritual connection are important. Yet, Jane argued, we also need to reconnect our spiritual life with our “real” life. We have an incredible opportunity at this point in time to reconnect our spirituality and the environment, to reawaken our consciousness, to strive for balance and right relationship.

We spoke about the power of language. “God,” for example, means many things to many people. (Jane’s definition was that it is a symbolic term for whatever we want to be in relationship with. Personally, I like the word “Mystery” to describe what others might call God.) Additionally, religion, spirituality, mysticism, and activism – all are different, but have intersections, and the places where overlap occurs is powerful. Jane notes that Washington State has a large population of unaffiliated religious people – folks who identify as “spiritual but not religious.” (It also has a lot of outdoorsy people. Jane wondered if there was a connection between the two.)

People are attached to their language because it reflects their experience, and it ties them to community. If you can hear beyond the language, to let go of your own prejudices and assumptions, you will be able to find similarities, and be more able to hear what is really being said. As we explored the topic of connection between humans and nature, we acknowledged that our language and our world have shaped those topics into separate ideas even as we tried to describe them as one.

We also talked quite a bit about the environmental and religious environmental movements – and how they have been very separate from each other. The religious environmental movement came about at the same time, but separate from, the environmental movement – because the environmentalists wanted no part in the religious movement, and they generally have not been open to the spiritual aspects of environmental work. And yet, environmentalists use the same language to describe nature as mystics as other religious people do.

One essay Jane recommended to me was the influential Historical Roots of Our Ecological Crisis by Lynn White, Jr. in 1967, which pointed a finger at Christianity and the Biblical interpretation that humans have dominion over nature. This essay was a factor in environmentalists being wary of religious groups. Further, Jane believes environmentalists were concerned that the religious groups would be out to convert them.

Jane’s opinion was that environmentalists don’t want to connect with moderate religious people because it’s too close to home. 45% of moderate religious people voted for Bush because he talked about values. “Values,” she told me, is a term that means something (it is code for spiritual relationship) to some people, but this was missed by groups for which is meant something different. The progressive left pushed a whole bunch of people away – people who shared their values but came to it from a place of religion. This reflects a lack of recognition from an environmentalist standpoint about what moves people.

My talk with Jane felt like opening many doors. My list of books to read grows longer. The direction my inquiry could take expands. I would love to help bridge the gap between environmentalists and religious environmentalists, and certainly feel called or led to do that in my own spiritual communities. The growth of the religious environmental movement among major religious faiths in this country has the potential to lead to profound change. And yet I worry about some of my own hang-ups about language and my own prejudices – there are some religious beliefs that are in such opposition to my own, could I really be as open-minded as I’d like to be?

I also worry that pursuing how to bridge the gap between these two movements would lead me away from the piece that drives me, my interest in the experience of connection with nature, and the spiritual and holy aspects of that connection. Hmm ... or maybe that experience of connection with nature is actually the piece that would bring the two groups together?

(Originally posted on my Env & Spirit blog).

Update/Checking In

In my pursuit to learn the science behind the Zero Emission Research Initiative (ZERI), which is based on the work of American biologist Lynn Margulis, I ended up opening Pandora’s box. Luckily at the bottom of the box I found hope and understanding, just like Pandora did. However, the burdensome labor of reading and comparing a multitude of biological theories from Endosymbiotic Theory to Neo-Darwinism and even (Un) Intelligent Design has slowed down my pace to achieve my academic goals that I have set for myself in Collaborative Methods.
I have to admit that I have really enjoyed the journey and the many unintended consequences that have come along with it. Much of what I have discovered on the diversion from my path will be cataloged for a later date.
The main lesson learned here is that if you do not have a background in biology, the stuff I have been reading will blow your mind, while simultaneously turning your brains into scrambled eggs.
Lesson number two is to not let an academic discussion/debate with Italian-Systems- Theorist-turned-Intelligent-Designer deter you from your main reason for going to the park to have a study break and play soccer.