Orangutans vs. Candy Bars

For most issues, citizens follow the laws that are set in place by the government, and in turn, the government helps by ‘supposedly’ solving the country’s issues. But when it comes to mother earth, the planet we call our home, some people cannot wait for our government to act. These people are activists. They come together to fight for public concerns, and it is when they do this that they are able to make significant change. According to Zukin, this is called civic engagement, and is a trend that society is turning towards. Zukin writes about how although an individual’s effort may not be recognized widely, when many individuals combine their efforts, considerable change is possible.

One of the most prominent examples of environmentally enthusiastic people coming together to solve issues affecting the planet is Greenpeace. They have worked with many arenas of the environmental world, a main one being deforestation. One of the more recent issues they took on is the massive deforestation that is occurring throughout Indonesia.

Although Indonesia is a fairly undeveloped country, this extreme forest destruction has ranked it the 3^rd largest greenhouse gas emitter in the world, following China and the US. The reason for this is that the quickest, most effective way to clear the peatlands covering Indonesia is burning them down, unleashing huge amounts of greenhouse gases from the carbon rich soil. According to Greenpeace and its affiliates, 1/5 of carbon emissions are due to logging, which equals out to be more than planes, trains, and automobiles combined!

Not only is the logging in Indonesia’s rainforests causing serious damage to our planet, but it is also occuring in the one place left on earth that the Orangutan lives in the wild. If logging continues on at the rate it is going today, it is estimated that the beautiful orange primate could be extinct within 6 years.

So, what exactly is all this logging for? So that the Indonesian government and farmers can replace the peatlands with trees that produce palm oil, a natural resource used to many products we use and eat today, including candy bars and soap! The palm oil industry and the immense deforestation occurring in Indonesia has made it the #1 producer of palm oil in the world.

Luckily, with the combined forces of volunteers working together, Greenpeace has been able to make significant steps in preventing the colossal logging in Indonesia. With the help of the media, Greenpeace was able to get both Nestle and Dove to join their efforts and to stop using palm oil that is the result of forest destruction.

Although Greenpeace is standing strong in the fight to save the forests and critters in Indonesia, it is going to take a lot more to save the planet. It is up to the citizens of planet earth to show their civic pride and join their efforts together to make sure that deforestation everywhere comes to and end. Join in!

-Maya Koziol

http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/forests

http://news.mongabay.com/2010/0517-hance_nestle.html

Greenpeace Campaigns Against Nestle and Dove

These videos are quite graphic, but also quite effective. Check them out!

Nestle:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7SZyidY7mQ

Original Dove commercial in case you haven't seen it:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ei6JvK0W60I

Dove:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odI7pQFyjso

A new alternative for deforestation...

I found this article in the Seattle Times. This article is not about the Pacific Northwest, but takes place in Brazil, where Marriott International is giving families a debit card of $29 per month in exchange for protecting the forests around their village instead of clearing it for land and fuel. For me this article was really interesting, and Marriott International did a great job in finding a successful alternative to stop deforestation from happening in Brazil.

I encourage you guys to read it if  you have a chance!
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2011354215_envrainforestbar04.html 

-Stephanie A.

A warmer, wetter Pacific Northwest

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2011688159_guest26kreidler.html

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19980412&slug=2744699

A warmer, wetter Pacific Northwest

The Pacific Northwest has been a region of tremendous environmental, economic and climatic opportunity. However, according to Robert G. Fleagle, in his Seattle time article “Nature's End Northwest's Climate Is Changing”, this region stands in coming decades to be transformed with shorter ski seasons, more winter flooding, reduced summer water supplied, increasingly destructive wildfires and further-stressed salmon runs due to over time climate change.

The most serious of these changes for the Northwest is likely to be the reduced winter snowpack. The University of Washington’s Climate Impacts Group’s (an interdisciplinary research group studying the impacts of natural climate variability and global climate change in the Pacific Northwest) temperature records indicate that Pacific Northwest temperatures increased 1.5°F since 1920. Increased participation is also projected, which causes wetter autumns and winters and drier summer. These changes in temperature and precipitation will affect decreasing in snow pack, stream flow and water quality throughout the Pacific Northwest region. Jorge Carrasco, superintendent of Seattle City Light, emphasizes the importance of snowpack in the region, “Climate is a core business issue for Northwest utilities like Seattle City Light, which depends on hydropower. Snowpack in the mountains stores the fuel for our power supplies. Warmer temperatures, shifting precipitation patterns and shrinking glaciers threaten our hydroelectric resources.”

Because climate change is abstract in time, in scale and in its effects, most people tend to view it as a future problem. Moreover, uncertainties in incomplete understanding of the processes of climate change also hard to catch public’s attention. Fleagle says that “If we wait for better estimates, the consequences and the costs of taking corrective actions are likely to be much greater.” One way to solve this problem is to make connections to immediate experiences such as, for example, local weather events and using media to keep inform and educate the local people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKbrRUuea6Q

When the overwhelming majority of earth scientists, research group, and the media say climate change is occurring, it seems like scientific evidence still unable to communicate the urgency of the climate crisis to a larger public. Mike Kreidler and Jorge Carrasco argue that we need government action; they say “it is the time for Federal climate legislation”. There are many environmental organizations, media, and activist group that involved and put so much effort to save our environment and now it’s time for government to take more responsibility on environmental issues.

by Rachel Pak

“Only You… Can Prevent The Endangerment Of The Spotted Owl”

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_tvspottedowl.html
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2008109742_spottedowl13m.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endangered_Species_Act



When most people think about endangered species in the Pacific Northwest they think of salmon, (not that the general public even exists, according to Jacobson) not spotted owls. However, maybe that’s only my opinion because I’ve actually seen more spotted owls in the wild than I have seen salmon and experiences resonate more with individuals than just hearing about it through the mass media.



So is the spotted owl actually endangered? If so, how did this come about?
The Endangered Species Act (ESA) was passed by congress in 1973 in hopes to preserve vulnerable and endangered species by determining their standing and then providing for their recovery. Though some acts had been passed before, they were not really accomplishing anything so President Richard Nixon declared current species conservation efforts not to be doing enough and called on the 93rd United States Congress to pass comprehensive endangered species legislation.



The first article I looked at was from National Geographic, obviously a trusted news reporter, their slogan is even, “REPORTING YOUR WORLD DAILY.” The very first paragraph is strategically placed (like the majority of the mass media) and says “A northern spotted owl swoops down silently from its roost high in a mammoth redwood tree, zeroing in on the unsuspecting rodent below. It is a rare sight. Despite their 1990 listing under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), these once-abundant nighttime raptors—a necessary check in the balance of these Pacific Northwest forests—are becoming ever scarcer.” A reader can’t help but conjure up an image when reading this paragraph and feel some kind of emotion.



According to an assessment done by a wildlife biologist, “spotted owl populations have dropped by roughly half in Oregon's Warm Springs Reservation and parts of Washington—and by almost a quarter along parts of the Oregon coast and Cascade Mountains.” Loss and division of the owls' old-growth forest home was one of the reasons for it being listed on the ESA. For the last two centuries, approximately 80 percent of old growth forests have been logged from Northern California to British Columbia.



The media holds a lot of power simply due to the fact the majority of the public is surrounded and sees or hears something every day. According to Dunwoody, experiences matter more than data. So even though we might hear about an endangered spotted owl one day, unless we live in or near a forest, we most likely are not going to think of it as a pressing issue, or even a long term one.



In 2008 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service released a new recovery plan and reduced the amount of forest land voted as significant to the owl's recovery. The 30-year plan is projected to cost $489.2 million. The plan identifies barred owls as a primary threat to spotted-owl survival, and eases restrictions on logging in some areas. No one knows for sure what the future holds for the owl but we can all do our parts by not logging.
By Brynne

Catching the Government’s Attention

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004433574_trees23m.html

I recently came across this article from the Seattle Times titled, “State praised for logging sustainability” where Washington State’s Department of Natural Resources (DNR) earned an award for their sustainable logging practices that overall saved 145,000 acres of forest in the Pacific Northwest region. While this is an excellent accomplishment, how and why did the Washington state government aim to achieve these top grades? Or more specifically, what made the DNR start to regulate deforestation more in our state? The answer that comes to mind is the activists in the Pacific Northwest.

Activists in Washington State such as the Seattle Audubon Society, Conversation Northwest, and several others have been working hard for the past twenty years in hopes of conserving Washington State’s forests. These organizations are excellent examples of a public sphere, where individuals come together to discuss their interests of a certain topic, and thus forming a public opinion about it. Organizations such as those listed above believe that deforestation in our state is a public issue. It is a public issue because it affects all of society in regards to our air quality and the speeding up of climate change (allowing more emissions into the air), which is why so many environmentalists fight to bring it to our government’s attention. Public opinions on issues, such as deforestation, leads to political actions by governments, which is what led to Washington State’s ‘sustainable’ logging practices.

Although in the article, thousands of acres of forestry were saved, environmentalists in the Pacific Northwest viewed it only as a first step to many in protecting the forests throughout the area. The forests that were referenced in this article pertained to forests located in popular recreation sites such as Tiger Mountain in Issaquah and Capitol Forest in Olympia. While activists were happy with this accomplishment, they know that more needs to be done, and want the government to do more. "This is a relatively easy, safe step and not really changing management practices,” said Cantrell, Executive Director of Audubon, "If it is good enough for the liberal Puget Sound region, it should be good enough for all the lands around the state." So, what do we need to do to get the government to listen to our concerns? The answer is with the activists: continue to create a strong public opinion about deforestation that the government will listen to, and thus act on.

"When people generally are aware of a problem, it can be said to have entered the public consciousness. When people get on their hind legs and holler, the problem has not only entered the public consciousness — it has also become a part of the public conscience. At that point, things in our democracy begin to hum.” - Hubert Humphrey

Here is some cool organizations right here in the PNW who are fighting against deforestation:
http://www.seattleaudubon.org/sas/
http://www.conservationnw.org/

BY: Stephanie A.

Framing Weyerhaeuser

(By Sadie W.)

Because they are such a massive corporation around the world, and happen to be based in our Pacific Northwest, Weyerhaeuser will be the focus example for logging companies and the framing for and against them.

Who frames Weyerhaeuser in the media and why?

People for the Environment vs. Weyerhaeuser and friends:


Weyerhaeuser:
Weyerhaeuser calls themselves a “forest products company.” This name has quite a different effect than just “logging company” would. Using “forest products company” makes it sound like the forest is just naturally producing something for them to take, not that they are hurting the forest or leaving nothing behind once that have taken their “products”. This is one of the small ways (but one of the first things you see on their website (http://www.weyerhaeuser.com/))that Weyerhaeuser frames themselves to look more innocent, more environmentally friendly, and more concerned about communities and the future than they really are. Other things you see on the Weyerhaeuser home page include,
“Making the Most of our Resources”
“Sustainability” (can be found 5 times on the home page) and
“Can a tree cure cancer? Clothe you? Fuel your car?” (Because then it would be okay to deforest our backyards and the whole world?)
Weyerhaeuser is adamant to prove that they are not hurting the environment as all the activists claim. The main way Weyerhaeuser frames themselves to the public as being a good, helpful, wholesome, concerned company is through commercials on TV. Take a look:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0vapmz0MaEs

Weyerhaeuser is hoping people will look at the cute innocent children and view the company as nurturing and caring, as well as think that it’s okay to cut down millions of acres of local forest as well as precious rainforests all over the world, as long as everyone recycles (cause that is gonna happen). There are other, more current, commercials that talk about replanting of trees and secret new innovative ideas for wood. Key words: talk about.

But, as always, there are two sides to every story, and the other side is willing to do more than just talk….

Environment Lovers Everywhere:

The environmental activists against Weyerhaeuser don’t go about their framing as peaceful and serene and some of the Weyerhaeuser commercials appear. The activists are mad about the logging and its harmful effects on the environment, and therefore the people and animals that inhabit this environment. There are documented land and mudslides that give fault to Weyerhaeuser logging sites, ruining people’s homes, farmland, as well as clogging up rivers and streams and polluting them. (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2011140187_forestcetification21m.html) Future blogs will go more deeply into the endangered species (from the PNW) further hurt and homeless because of the Weyerhaeuser deforestation, like many owls, wolves, and caribou. There are many people as well, around the world but specifically in the PNW as well, who depend on forests for survival. (http://www.articlesbase.com/environment-articles/harmful-effects-of-deforestation-131219.html)

The fact that deforestation has risen 8.5% in the last five years, shows that logging companies really aren’t that concerned, and make environmental activists become very upset, and take action in framing companies like Weyerhaeuser as the bad guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3MVqGyaz5g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_t86w3TTNU



People, Businesses, Corporations, can all be framed in many different ways to appear to the public however the framer desires them to appear. In the case of logging, I would have to say science prevails, it tells the truth better than anyone else, and the upside of logging cannot possibly outweigh the downside of deforestation.


-Sadie W.