Article source: http://news.yahoo.com/fit-nature-us-evolutions-2-way-street-154100418.html

Perhaps even more troubling than freefall declines in red squirrels, harbour seals, hedgehogs, starlings and all the others, is the fact that the crisis facing the living fabric of our environment is hardly mentioned in politics. And not only have ministers recently turned their attention away from the protection of nature, they have presented efforts to protect it as the enemy of growth, development and business.

George Osborne’s claim that laws to protect rare species are a ‘ridiculous burden on business’, Owen Paterson’s championing the cause of Bayer and Syngenta in opposing the moratorium on the use of neonicotinoid pesticides and Michael Gove’s attempts to downgrade education about our relationship with the natural environment are recent cases in point. With this in mind we can confidently guess that the government’s on-going review of EU environmental laws is not intended to strengthen the protection of nature in these islands.

And when it comes to how we approach specific decisions that affect the natural environment, it seems we must doubt the extent to which we can rely on evidence-based policy. Today, policy-based evidence gathering is more common, seen for example in the proposed cull of badgers. And so-called Zombie infrastructure schemes, such as the proposed M4 motorway extension across the Gwent Levels, killed more than a decade ago because of its unacceptable environmental cost, are now back on the agenda.

All of this is predicated on the idea that looking after nature is somehow against the interests of people and the economy. It would be sad, rather than bad, if they actually had a point, but the evidence says the opposite. Material presented in the UK National Ecosystem Assessment, a major study commissioned by government, is a good place to start.

Among many other things, this comprehensive stock-take of nature in our islands found the benefits derived from improved river water quality (mostly down to EU rules) were found to be about £1.1 billion per year, while the value of coastal protection provided by wetlands was estimated to be about £1.5 billion per year.

The amenity value of inland wetlands added a further £1.3 billion per year. Upland peat bogs were assigned multi-million pound value, seen in their contribution to flood risk reduction, water purification and huge carbon storage. The 2012 report of the Independent Panel on Forestry (established in the aftermath of doomed forestry privatization proposals) found that the value of the publicly-owned forestry estate in England was about £400 million per year, delivered on the back of an investment of £20 million. All these values have conservation benefits too.

As politics has gone into reverse on conservation, there are glimpses of good news, in the work of The Wildlife Trusts, RSPB and other conservation groups behind the State of Nature report, who through practical work on the ground support nature’s recovery and help people deepen their contact with it, and in ways that leaves us all the better for it, including economically.

But the positive impact is being overwhelmed, as nature is sucked into an ideological vortex based on a fundamental lack of understanding of our dependence on it. The deeply misjudged anti-nature narrative that has become embedded in political discourse is hard to fathom. Not only is it unscientific it is hard to see whom it is meant to appeal to. It’s certainly not progressive and forward-thinking companies.

Most ministers lack any serious scientific education, but perhaps they could at least use their classical training to compile the Latin names of the species declining on their watch.

• Tony Juniper is a campaigner, writer and environmental advisor. His latest book, What has nature ever done for us?, is published by Profile Books.

Article source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/may/22/nature-uk-politics-wildlife

BALLWIN, Mo. — Thirty volunteers from Greater St. Louis grabbed a shovel, wiped the sweat from their brows on a humid Missouri Sunday and gave something back that generations will value decades from now. Such was the teamwork to help restore native forests emanating from a partnership between The PGA of America, Lexmark International Inc., The Nature Conservancy Missouri, The Monsanto Company and St. Louis County Parks.

Together, the participants planted more than 200 native bottomland trees and shrubs to offset the impact of printing and paper products generated for the 74th Senior PGA Championship presented by KitchenAid, May 21-26, at Bellerive Country Club. The environmental project is part of The PGA of America’s commitment to benefit the host communities that support its Championships. The PGA and Lexmark partnered for a similar event prior to the 2012 Ryder Cup near Chicago, by planting 50 large trees. The teamwork will continue in August prior to the 95th PGA Championship in Rochester, N.Y.

“This project is especially important to us because the plantings are alongside a freshwater stream, which ultimately flows into the Meramec River,” said Betsy LePoidevin, associate director of philanthropy for The Nature Conservancy Missouri. “It’s benefiting the health of an entire community. It’s not just about nature for nature’s sake. It’s about people getting fresh drinking water. It’s about people getting educated about the environment that affects them. This simply is not just a tree planting, or The Nature Conservancy would not be a part of it. It goes far beyond that, to benefit an entire community.”

The tree planting featured Gateway PGA Section President Joe Schwent of St. Charles, Mo., representing the 324 members of the Section. Schwent was joined by his wife, Laura, in the volunteer corps. “I was honored to be part of this event; nothing but good things going on all day,” said Schwent. “This is one great example to how we all can give something back to the environment, the community.”

The roots of the new trees in Queeny Park serve as a filtering system for ground water, and help prevent a clogging of the banks. “This tiny stream system will lead into the Meramec River and provide 250,000 individuals with drinking water in St. Louis County. It’s a small part, but you have to start somewhere. It will magnify positive effects for so many.”

Tom Ott of Spanish Lake, Mo., acting director of St. Louis County Parks, said the partnership helps enhance the ongoing campaign to benefit what he calls “one of our jewels of the country.” Edgar M. Queeny Park opened in 1974 and is named after the famed industrial-conservationist Edgar Monsanto Queeny. It is a 570-acre site and one of 70 similar sites encompassing 12,700 acres that are managed by St. Louis County Parks.

“It is great to see this partnership develop and help those who want to make the most of this park and many more like this,” said Ott. “The trees and shrubs planted today will help us eradicate bush honeysuckle, which grows like wildfire and doesn’t give anything else below a chance to grow under a tree canopy.”

The volunteers ranged in age from 9 to over 50, and were guided on proper planting methods by Angie Webber of Crestwood, Mo., community conservation planner for the Missouri Department of Conservation. “An event like this is so important today, considering the limited resources that state and governments are able to supply,” said Webber. “It is so important for volunteer support.”

Lexmark International, headquartered in Lexington, Ky., is the Official Printing Technology Provider of The PGA of America. Lexmark also is a founding member of The Nature Conservancy’s Corporate Sustainability Council.

“We had a great day and some outstanding support from those in the St. Louis area,” said Lee Ann Disponett, Lexmark’s global sustainability analyst. “We are encouraged by the effort being demonstrated in all host communities, beginning near Chicago last fall during the Ryder Cup and here. The Boys and Girls Club of America helped form our team prior to the Ryder Cup, and it was fun to see some youngsters on the team today. It all sets a great example.”

About The PGA of AmericaSince its founding in 1916, The PGA of America has maintained a twofold mission: to establish and elevate the standards of the profession and to grow interest and participation in the game of golf. By establishing and elevating the standards of the golf profession through world-class education, career services, marketing and research programs, The PGA enables its professionals to maximize their performance in their respective career paths and showcases them as experts in the game and in the multi-billion dollar golf industry. By creating and delivering world-class championships and innovative programs, The PGA of America elevates the public’s interest in the game, the desire to play more golf, and ensures accessibility to the game for everyone, everywhere. As The PGA nears its centennial, the PGA brand represents the very best in golf.

Article source: http://sports.yahoo.com/news/pga-teams-nature-conservancy-lexmark-191652107--golf.html

Their speed across the ground and the duration of the ‘touchdown’ are other factors in how widespread the devastation will be. In Moore, where residents were hit in 1999 by another major tornado, they say yesterday’s twister stayed on the ground for a long while and moved across it comparatively slowly – covering up to 12 miles and lingering for 40 minutes.

It was a category 4 storm, one below the highest rating, with winds up to 200 mph.

Moore sits at the heart of what is know as Tornado Alley, an area between the Rocky Mountains and Appalachian Mountains. It is ripe for the unstable conditions that spawn tornadoes – with cold, dry air from Canada and the Rockies meets warm and moist air from the Gulf of Mexico.

Dr Steven Godby, an expert in natural hazards at Nottingham Trent University, said: “The tornado that struck Moore County in the suburbs of Oklahoma City was at least a mile wide and the US National Weather Service has rated it at least an EF-4 event on the Enhanced Fujita scale with winds at least 166-200 mph, although the scale of the damage suggests it may be upgraded to an EF-5 tornado eventually. The tornado was on the ground for 40 minutes and caused catastrophic damage across a wide area with many buildings swept away to their foundations – a tornado warning was provided 16 minutes before it touched down. There are reports that debris was carried over 100 miles from Moore.

He added: “Moore County already has an unenviable tornado history – on 3 May 1999 an EF-5 tornado following a very similar path to Monday’s tore through Moore County killing 36 people and injuring 583.  That tornado was one of the costliest in US history causing losses estimated at $1.4 billion and one of only six tornadoes to have losses exceeding $1 billion dollars. Aside from the deaths and injuries, experts in the United States are already suggesting that the losses from Monday’s tornado may approach that of the Joplin tornado of 22 May 2011, which is the costliest tornado on record at $2.8 billion – that storm claimed 158 lives.

“Lessons were learned from the Joplin tornado of 2011, especially in conveying to the public the sense of urgency needed to take life-saving action once a tornado warning is issued such as taking shelter in a basement or storm cellar. News reports are suggesting that many of the residential structures in the affected area did not have basements where people could have taken shelter.”

The website livescience.com asked in an article only last week: Is tornado intensity increasing?

“Global warming is making wet places wetter and dry places drier, and creating moisture-laden air that fuels hurricanes and snowstorms, making them much worse than they otherwise would be in a climate unchanged by human behaviours,” it reported.

But the position was less clear for tornadoes, said the article. “Climate change apparently affects the two major factors influencing tornadoes – energy and wind shear – in completely opposite ways.”

The article quoted Michael Wehner, a scientist at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, saying: “With tornadoes, what we don’t know is as much as what we do know.”

He added: “We need bigger computers, and better models. But what we really need is time. We don’t yet have an answer. But, that doesn’t mean we aren’t thinking about it.”

Article source: http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/natures-killer-fury-what-makes-a-tornado-8624896.html

The environment-focused competition included a “Jeopardy”-style nature quiz, relay races and individual presentations.

“The kids are becoming stewards of our environment,” said Bruce Forman, a naturalist with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the event sponsor. “This shows the kids that they, too, can make a difference in conservation.”

Dylan Ek, a third-grader from Lake Forest Elementary School in El Dorado Hills, was munching on a burrito after a long morning of competitions.

“It’s hard to hold onto your knowledge when you’re under pressure,” the 10-year-old said, relieved that he was done for the day.

The Nature Bowl is broken down into two divisions – one with third- and fourth-graders and the other with fifth- and sixth-graders. Students work in teams of three to seven children.

Even at the elementary level, the questions are challenging. At one “Jeopardy” session, Forman asked, “What is the origin of energy that drives the water cycle?”

The contestants huddled together discussing the answer before one shouted, “The sun.”

Parent Dale Cox said the competition got his daughter Madeline, 9, to “think on her feet.”

During the infomercial, where the kids are asked to make a 60-second pitch about an environmental issue, Madeline discussed the choice between paper and plastic bags at grocery stores.

“The answer is: None of them, bring your own bag,” she said.

Madeline has applied what she learned by making a special tag to put in the Cox family car reminding them to bring bags to the store.

Saturday’s contest was the culmination of three months of work, Forman said. The students had to conduct original research and study vocabulary terms extensively.

Workshops at the first of the year outlined the program, and eight regional semifinals occurred before the California State University, Sacramento, event.

According to Fish and Wildlife, the competitive aspect of the bowl is downplayed so that all students enjoy the activities, which are aligned with the state’s science standards.

In the 29 years Forman has organized the Nature Bowl, he said, the focus has shifted from international issues to local environmental problems, such as water, pollution and recycling.

“This is about getting involved and being good stewards of the environment,” Forman said.

For information on the Nature Bowl, go to www.dfg.ca .gov/regions/2/naturebowl.

Call The Bee’s Richard Chang, (916) 321-1018. Follow him on Twitter @RichardYChang.

© Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved.

• Read more articles by Richard Chang

Order Reprint

Article source: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/05/19/5431444/elementary-students-gather-at.html

The environment-focused competition included a “Jeopardy”-style nature quiz, relay races and individual presentations.

“The kids are becoming stewards of our environment,” said Bruce Forman, a naturalist with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the event sponsor. “This shows the kids that they, too, can make a difference in conservation.”

Dylan Ek, a third-grader from Lake Forest Elementary School in El Dorado Hills, was munching on a burrito after a long morning of competitions.

“It’s hard to hold onto your knowledge when you’re under pressure,” the 10-year-old said, relieved that he was done for the day.

The Nature Bowl is broken down into two divisions – one with third- and fourth-graders and the other with fifth- and sixth-graders. Students work in teams of three to seven children.

Even at the elementary level, the questions are challenging. At one “Jeopardy” session, Forman asked, “What is the origin of energy that drives the water cycle?”

The contestants huddled together discussing the answer before one shouted, “The sun.”

Parent Dale Cox said the competition got his daughter Madeline, 9, to “think on her feet.”

During the infomercial, where the kids are asked to make a 60-second pitch about an environmental issue, Madeline discussed the choice between paper and plastic bags at grocery stores.

“The answer is: None of them, bring your own bag,” she said.

Madeline has applied what she learned by making a special tag to put in the Cox family car reminding them to bring bags to the store.

Saturday’s contest was the culmination of three months of work, Forman said. The students had to conduct original research and study vocabulary terms extensively.

Workshops at the first of the year outlined the program, and eight regional semifinals occurred before the California State University, Sacramento, event.

According to Fish and Wildlife, the competitive aspect of the bowl is downplayed so that all students enjoy the activities, which are aligned with the state’s science standards.

In the 29 years Forman has organized the Nature Bowl, he said, the focus has shifted from international issues to local environmental problems, such as water, pollution and recycling.

“This is about getting involved and being good stewards of the environment,” Forman said.

For information on the Nature Bowl, go to www.dfg.ca .gov/regions/2/naturebowl.

Call The Bee’s Richard Chang, (916) 321-1018. Follow him on Twitter @RichardYChang.

© Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved.

• Read more articles by Richard Chang

Order Reprint

Article source: http://www.sacbee.com/2013/05/19/5431444/elementary-students-gather-at.html

SAN FRANCISCO, May 16, 2013 /PRNewswire/ — In what could be coined a natural fit, Draftfcb San Francisco has been awarded the creative account for the California arm of The Nature Conservancy, the world’s leading conservation organization working to protect the environment.

Three other undisclosed agencies participated in the pitch, which marks the first time the California branch of The Nature Conservancy has enlisted a marketing communications agency partner.

According to Jordan Peavey, director of marketing at The Nature Conservancy, California, “The team at Draftfcb lives and breathes our mission and understands our vision to make our work in California a model for innovative conservation worldwide.”

The agency will develop messages that articulate why the work of The Nature Conservancy is critical in California, and then create a compelling and highly differentiating external marketing campaign designed to motivate the Conservancy’s target audience to help the organization achieve its mission.

The Conservancy, in partnership with industry, governments and communities, works to create economically and environmentally sustainable solutions for people and nature. Throughout California, The Nature Conservancy is involved in finding solutions for the state’s most pressing environmental challenges, which include how we respond to the impacts of climate change; how we ensure safe, reliable water for cities and farms; and how we meet the energy demands of a growing population with renewable sources.

“We are thrilled to have been chosen for this important job. It’s a big deal for us as Californians because the stakes are so high for our state,” said Dominic Whittles, president of Draftfcb San Francisco.  “The Conservancy exists to ensure that people prosper while protecting the lands and waters that sustain all life. Helping them achieve their mission is a huge responsibility, one we take very seriously.”

About Draftfcb

With an equal focus on creativity and accountability, Draftfcb is committed to producing brilliant ideas that change consumer behavior. As a global, fully integrated marketing communications agency operating against a single PL, Draftfcb provides clients with highly collaborative, channel-neutral thinking that delivers engagement and, most importantly, action. With nearly 140 years of combined expertise, Draftfcb has roots in both consumer advertising and behavioral, data-driven direct marketing. The Draftfcb network spans 150 offices in 90 countries and employs nearly 9,000 people. The agency is part of the Interpublic Group of Companies (IPG). For more information, visit www.draftfcb.com.

Article source: http://finance.yahoo.com/news/nature-conservancy-california-awards-marketing-175200263.html

What I mean is that, in my experience, most people are highly unlikely to come eyeball-to-eyeball with a large wild animal in their everyday lives, and much of their knowledge of wildlife comes from a screen.

If you’re North American or get US-produced satellite TV, you’ve probably learned a lot about wildlife from outlets like the Discovery Channel, Animal Planet and History. You might trust these channels because you’ve seen educational, factually accurate shows on them, unlike the ‘trashy’ material that dominates free-to-air network TV.

But not everything on on these ‘factual’ channels might be as ethical or even as accurate as you might think, and the implications for conservation could be profound.

I recently spent a few entertaining hours watching episodes of Discovery’s Yukon Men, a hit ‘reality’ series about the residents of the small town of Tanana in central Alaska. Launched in August last year, it’s consistently gained over two million US viewers in its Friday night slot, been syndicated overseas, and helped the channel win some of its biggest audiences ever.

The first episode brings us to midwinter Tanana, which a theatrical, husky male voiceover tells us is “one of America’s most remote outposts” where “every day is a struggle to survive”. A dramatic, orchestral score pounds as we see a lynx struggling in a leghold trap, guns firing, a man attacking a squealing wolverine with a tree trunk, a wolf which a voice tells us “might eat one of those kids”, a hand lifting up the head of a bloodied, dead wolf to show us its teeth, and then a gloved hand dripping blood while the voiceover rumbles that in Alaska, it’s “hunt or starve, kill or be killed”.

That’s all in the first minute.

In the second minute the voiceover tells us that “the town is under siege by hungry predators”. We see wolves eating a bloody carcass, a growling bear, men with guns shouting bleeped-out words, then a coffin. Another voice says that “there’s always somebody that’s not going to make it home”.

We’re soon told that Tanana’s water pipes are freezing up “but that’s not the only crisis. Wolves have been spotted on the edge of town.” Charlie, a hunter, shows us the tracks of “a lone wolf”. “Wolves are mean, ferocious animals and they can tear a man apart real easy” he says, so “we have to get this wolf, it’s not an if, its a must, because he’ll go to any measure to eat. They’re the worst kind.”

We then meet Courtney, a local mother, who’s scared that the wolf could eat her young daughter. Charlie agrees, “if we turned our backs for a couple of minutes, that baby would be gone.”

“There have been twenty fatal wolf attacks in the last ten years”, the voiceover intones.

Charlie kills the wolf in the next episode, pursuing it on a snowmobile and shooting it outside town with an AR-15, the same semi-automatic assault rifle used by the Sandy Hook school shooter. “The only good thing about a wolf is the quality of their nice fur”, says Charlie, holding up the blood-smeared pelt. Courtney agrees: “Dirty little rotten bastard.”

Another scene shows Stan, a fur trapper, dealing with a wolverine. Wolverines, about as big as a medium-sized dog, are the largest members of the weasel family. One has been caught by its front paw in one of Stan’s steel leghold traps and is trying to get away, squealing and snarling as he approaches. “He’s really dangerous”, says Stan, “I don’t think any human being could keep an attacking wolverine from killing them.”

Stan chops down a small tree, which he bashes the struggling wolverine with — to “stun” it, he says. Once the wolverine’s strength is somewhat depleted, he approaches it with a small handgun. The animal’s head turns, tracking the gun, and he shoots it. The camera zooms in to show steam rising from the carcass.

Charlie, too, sets a leghold trap for a wolverine, and catches it. As it squeals in the trap, trying to run away, the voiceover tells us dramatically that “wolverines are capable of tearing human beings apart.”

“He could gut me”, says Charlie, before raising his AR-15 and opening fire on the hapless animal. Many of his shots miss, but he eventually kills it.

All through Yukon Men we see predatory animals being killed: a leghold-trapped lynx is strangled to death with a wire noose by Stan’s son, a grizzly bear is shot in the head, etcetera, and every time the producers use the techniques of the reality TV genre to convince us that the animals are man-woman-and-child killers which are best turned into fur coats.

Joey Zuray kills a lynx – Yukon Men promo video

(Click here to view this video on YouTube.)

Frenetic edits and manic music are used to build drama, authoritative-sounding voiceovers combine with the tightly edited words of the on-screen characters tell how dangerous, vicious or deadly the creatures we’re seeing on screen are. I spot occasions where animal noises seem to have been overdubbed to make them sound scarier. It makes for gripping viewing, but I wondered if Discovery wasn’t betraying its viewers who trust it to deliver reliable, factual TV. As a trained zoologist and filmmaker, much of what I was seeing didn’t make sense to me.

Take wolverines for example: I lived in Alaska for almost a year and never saw one. They’re extremely shy and avoid humans. Although they’re capable predators of small animals and found in many cold, high-latitude regions of the northern hemisphere, I’d never heard of a wolverine killing a person.

I searched the web and could not find a single documented case of a wolverine even attacking a person anywhere in the world, ever.

To double-check, I emailed Jeff Copeland of the Wolverine Foundation, who told me that “we are not aware of any instance in which a wolverine has killed a human, or even attempted to do so”, which perhaps explains why the wolverines in Yukon Men are doing their desperate best to get away from their human assailants.

Wolves are a lot larger than wolverines, of course. But even though the US and Canada hold over 60,000 wolves, I found only two records of fatal attacks by wild wolves in these countries in last ten years; one controversial case in Saskatchewan, Canada, in 2005, which some experts think was actually a bear attack, and another in Alaska in 2010.

Why did the producers of Yukon Men tell their viewers that there had been twenty fatal wolf attacks in the last ten years, implying that these had taken place around Tanana? Why does a ‘factual’ show portray Alaskan wolves as man-eating monsters straight out of Victorian fairytales, a serious threat to life and limb, when the data show that wolf attacks are extremely rare in North America?

Idaho-based wolf expert Suzanne Stone told me that she’d once been surrounded by a howling pack of gray wolves while sitting by a campfire in the twilight, armed only with a marshmallow on a stick. The animals were only twenty or thirty yards away. Was she scared, I asked? “No, not at all. It was an incredible experience. I howled back and forth with them”, adding that people and domestic livestock were the most dangerous creatures she’d encountered in many years of walking in wolf-inhabited backcountry.

Yukon Men isn’t the only ‘factual’ show about people who kill wild animals that seems to hysterically hype up the danger the animals pose to humans while minimising (or completely failing to address) their important ecological roles.

The Louisiana alligator hunter stars of the History Channel’s blockbuster show Swamp People use huge baited hooks to snare alligators and various guns to blow their brains out, all the while telling us how desperately dangerous they are. Despite Louisiana having almost two million alligators, I could not find a single record of a fatal alligator attack there in the last century, although Florida ‘gators do occasionally eat people. (Swamp People gets record ratings for the channel, despite the contemporary alligator hunt’s tenuous connection to history.)

“It’s a Texas thing” – Rattlesnake Republic promo video

(click here to watch this video on YouTube.)

Animal Planet’s Rattlesnake Republic shows Texan snake wranglers capturing dozens of rattlesnakes at a time while repeatedly playing up their lethality. In the episodes I watched I never saw anything about how snake hunters have helped make the Eastern Diamondback Rattlesnake so rare that it’s now a candidate endangered species. Rattlesnake Republic sends a clear meta-message that the only good rattlesnakes are dead ones, sewn into boots.

Discovery and the BBC Natural History Unit have arguably similar status in the wildlife filmmaking industries on their respective sides of the Atlantic, and have co-produced high-profile series like Planet Earth and Africa. The BBC displays its editorial guidelines for natural history shows on a public website which, on the face of it, Discovery’s Yukon Men seems to fall afoul of. The BBC guidelines say that “audiences should never be deceived or misled by what they see or hear”, that “we [the BBC] should never be involved in any activity with animals which could reasonably be considered cruel”, for example.

This begs the question: What are Discovery’s editorial guidelines?

After numerous calls and emails to the Discovery Channel and Animal Planet, I’ve yet to find out. I’ve not received any indication that either of these channels (which are owned by the same company) even have editorial guidelines or an ethics policy. The Discovery Channel gave me only one line in response to my questions: “We are committed to the highest standards of natural history filmmaking.”

Despite partnering with them on multimillion-dollar shows, the BBC’s Natural History Unit also seems to have no idea what Discovery’s policies are; when I asked, the BBC would only say that they expected any versions of their programs aired by co-producers to adhere to BBC standards.

The History Channel told me that their standards and practices department ensures that all their shows meet “the standards of good taste and community acceptability while also allowing our creative departments the freedom to explore new and innovative ideas.” Each programme is individually evaluated, but “given the subjective judgments that are required, it is difficult to come up with a detailed list of guidelines.” History’s statement said nothing about factual accuracy or animal cruelty.

I contacted National Geographic TV, assuming that this flagship brand would have a policy something like that of the BBC’s. Christopher Alberts, the Senior Vice President of Communications for the National Geographic Channels, told me that they have “one of the best policies there is”, but refused to send it to me or tell me anything about it.

Why are these factual networks, whose survival depends on building trust with their audiences, so reluctant to clarify their ethics policies with respect to wildlife?

What does it mean for conservation if high-rating shows on leading channels are portraying wildlife in a negative, seemingly misleading way to millions of viewers worldwide? And why are so few people saying anything about it?

Article source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/nature-up/2013/may/17/bloodthirtsty-wildlife-documentaries-reality-ethics

Article source: http://news.yahoo.com/tools-nature-155200005.html

News Watch interviewed Lois Morrison about her passion for both nature and education, and why she sees the BioBlitz as a special opportunity to reinforce our connection with the natural world.

This is the fifth year the Morrison Family Foundation is sponsoring the BioBlitz in a national park. How does this event give expression to the goals and aspirations of the foundation?

The mission of our foundation is to promote environmental education opportunities for children and families in underserved communities. The BioBlitz, by choosing to highlight national parks close to urban areas, dovetails nicely with everything we are working towards as a foundation.

Tell us a little about the family behind the establishment of the foundation, and the family’s connection to the environment.

The Harold M. and Adeline S. Morrison Family Foundation was formed almost 20 years ago. We have always supported environmental organizations though our grant-making, but it wasn’t until we went through a year-long strategic planning process about five years ago that we decided to focus and work to make a difference through investing in and partnering with organizations that connect kids to nature. Although our board represents a diversity of professions, every member of the board has personal stories and experiences that passionately commits them to our mission.

What is your personal connection to the natural environment, and the national parks in particular?

A love for nature and the outdoors has always been central to who I am. My college essay was about meeting John Muir, and my master’s thesis from Yale’s School of Forestry and Environmental Studies was on the Greater Yellowstone ecosystem. Needless to say, I have always been in love with, and in awe of, our national parks. Before taking on the executive director role at the foundation, I worked for a number of conservation-related agencies and organizations including the President’s Council on Sustainable Development and The Nature Conservancy. Both my education and my career path have given me the luxury of being connected to our country’s iconic national parks.

What I love about the National Geographic and National Park Service partnership is that each BioBlitz is about our national parks, but they are also about fostering awareness and excitement about the natural treasures right in our own back yards.

The BioBlitz and your foundation are all about connecting kids to nature. You have brought your family to participate in the bioblitzes. How have you seen younger people, including your children, relating to nature? What does the natural world mean to them?

I have observed hundreds of school kids at each BioBlitz, and see the same excitement in them that I see in my daughters, nieces and nephews. My daughters love coming to the BioBlitz. They can’t wait to explore the science exhibits and earn their diplomas from the Biodiversity University. They enjoy learning about species in their native habitat, and they even remember the names of many of the scientists they have met. The BioBlitz scientists have provided an introduction to whole new professional disciplines they never knew existed.

My favorite example of this is Ian, my high school soccer star nephew, who, when taken out of his element, started balking at his every step into a wetlands habitat at the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore. “What could we possibly be collecting samples of,” he complained as he timidly worked his way waist-deep into what he declared was just “muck.” The scientist persevered with just the right touch, and soon a whole new reality of the world opened to Ian. When Ian looked at his samples through a microscope, he discovered thousands of living organisms! His whole demeanor changed. Later that day he declared he was going to become an aquatic ecologist!!

What other projects does your foundation support to advance environmental education?

Our foundation supports a number of national and international efforts to inspire conservation action, but the bulk of our work is focused in northeastern Illinois, and specifically the Lake County area. We support education programs in cities like North Chicago and Waukegan that focus on connecting kids with the nature that is right outside their windows. Some of these programs teach kids how to farm. Others teach them about the complex ecosystems that are found within their community. And others are simply about getting out to enjoy unstructured playtime in nature.

What are the threats and opportunities for coming generations in the evolving relationship between humans and nature?

The threats we face are many, including increased time spent indoors and behind some sort of electronic screen, and decreased freedom for kids to roam and experience unstructured time in nature. The concern is that this leads to a society disconnected from where our food comes from, from where our water comes from, and from being able to name the plants, animals and insects in our backyards.

The underlying belief in all our work is that by getting kids out into nature, they will learn to love and appreciate it, and over time they will become stewards and advocates in protecting it. The BioBlitz plays an important role in addressing these threats by building the foundation of the next generation of stewards of the natural environment, including our national parks.

You have supported environmental education to foster the bonds between people and planet. In this regard, what do you hope your legacy will be for future generations?

We hope our legacy will be, in part, one of consciousness — inspiring a sense of pride in our natural communities. We also hope our legacy will be the actions taken by those we’ve helped connect with the environment to secure, protect, and expand our National Park treasures, but also our local watersheds, our county forest preserves, and our public and private nature preserves.

We are an urban family, and we have seen the hands-on BioBlitz experience really strengthen our family’s connection with the natural world in a way no classroom or museum ever could. The sense of wonder kids experience at the BioBlitz carries over – they are no longer afraid of insects, or getting dirty, or exploring what’s under a rock or up in a tree. They really see the natural environment as something exciting to explore, important to study and understand, and critical to protect. We are hopeful that this is the experience of every participant in the BioBlitz. And we hope this will be part of our legacy.

Article source: http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2013/05/15/bioblitz-raises-future-stewards-of-the-environment/