0
   

Back to 1969 - a year in the rainforest (thread 69)

 
 
ul
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Apr, 2006 09:28 am
Interesting articles. Thanks.

wayfarer- Barcelona, great. Have a good time!
The weather forecast for Spain looks nice. The rest of Europe might get a cold front- brrr.

I am leaving early tomorrow morning, will be back on the 19th.

Happy Easter to all.
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Apr, 2006 09:30 am
Hope your Irish weather is good too.
0 Replies
 
danon5
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Apr, 2006 10:30 am
Hi Merry Andrew, welcome home.........

Ahhhh, all this travel - and I'm stuck here in NE TX............ Maybe soon though we will begin traveling again.
ul and pwayfarer, have a good time and come back with photos...... Very Happy

sumac, interesting stuff - thanks.

Stradee, glad to see you're having some nicer WX.

all clicked........... :wink:
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Apr, 2006 10:47 am
Hello Smile

http://213.176.115.248/pic/nature%20pic/site-nature%20(267).jpg
0 Replies
 
pwayfarer
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Apr, 2006 11:01 am
Amigo - that is unreal! Where is it?
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Apr, 2006 11:05 am
I don't know. It didn't say. I just got it off the internet. I post a picture after I click in. Smile
0 Replies
 
pwayfarer
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Apr, 2006 11:56 am
It's beautiful - thank you.
0 Replies
 
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Apr, 2006 12:52 pm
If there was some lava pouring down the side of one of those cliffs, it looks like it might be part of the coastline of the Big Island of Hawaii. (It still might be. The flow changes course from time to time.)
0 Replies
 
devriesj
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Apr, 2006 01:19 pm
Absolutely gorgeous, Amigo! I've been clickin', just haven't had much to say! I can hardly keep up with all the articles!
Happy Easter to you too, ul, and all. Hope you have a wonderful trip.
Dan, any news on Patty's condition?
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Apr, 2006 02:08 pm
Is it Big Sur? Organ?

Hey! when I (or somebody else) Post a nature scene we can try to guees the location.
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Apr, 2006 02:30 pm
Then I guess Glen Canyon. With the severe drought and the lake going down, some of the red cliffs look like that.
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Apr, 2006 02:54 pm
It looks like it's on the coast to me. Ain't that water breaking on the coast?
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Apr, 2006 07:11 am
aktbird57 - You and your 293 friends have supported 2,323,382.6 square feet!

Marine Wetlands habitat supported: 106,685.5 square feet.
You have supported: (0.0)
Your 293 friends have supported: (106,685.5)

American Prairie habitat supported: 50,375.2 square feet.
You have supported: (12,149.9)
Your 293 friends have supported: (38,225.3)

Rainforest habitat supported: 2,166,321.9 square feet.
You have supported: (169,667.2)
Your 293 friends have supported: (1,996,654.7)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

2323382.6 square feet is equal to 53.34 acres
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Apr, 2006 08:00 am
You can count on the Bush admin opposing anything that will cost a company money, or some of their profits.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/08/AR2006040800920_pf.html

"Montana Pollution Rules Draw Federal Objections

By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, April 9, 2006; A04



Federal energy officials are opposing new rules by Montana to force companies that extract methane gas from underground coal beds to clean up the water pollution caused by drilling operations, even as state officials cite an unreleased 2003 federal report that says cleanup costs are relatively inexpensive.

The Denver office of the Environmental Protection Agency produced the report but never published it, saying it related to a proposed drilling application that was dropped.

A Montana consulting firm obtained a copy of the EPA report, however, and handed it over to Gov. Brian Schweitzer (D). Last month, Montana's Board of Environmental Review, citing the EPA paper and other economic studies, voted to force coalbed methane companies to leave the state's streams as clean as they were before drilling started, although the companies do not have to clean up existing pollution.

"We want to develop energy in Montana, but we want to do it right," Schweitzer said in an interview. "Here's the bottom line with the federal government: They're usually not helpful, and they weren't this time, either." "
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Apr, 2006 01:43 pm
0 Replies
 
devriesj
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Apr, 2006 05:44 pm
Thanks, sumac! I'll try to check it out.

All clicked.
0 Replies
 
danon5
 
  1  
Reply Sun 9 Apr, 2006 08:29 pm
Hi all, clicked in ...............
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Apr, 2006 05:24 am
And I forgot to watch it. <sigh>
0 Replies
 
sumac
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Apr, 2006 05:56 am
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/09/AR2006040901207.html?referrer=email&referrer=email

"Scientists Try to Count Fish in Sea

With numbers shrinking industry-wide, scientists' counting formulas are all the more crucial. But often, politics is part of the equation as well.


With nets and divers, sonar and surveys, scientists around the world grapple with one of Earth's great unknowables: how many fish in the sea.

Fish counts are the science behind regulations from Virginia's Northern Neck to the South Pacific, dictating a charter boat's take and an island nation's diet. But this is a science so inexact that some call it an art. And when the counting ends, the fighting often has just begun.

That's what happened this winter when Maryland tried to open the Choptank River to commercial yellow perch netters for the first time in nearly two decades. Counts had documented a 530 percent increase in the Eastern Shore river since 1988, Piavis said.

But sport anglers disputed those findings in raucous public hearings, questioning how the fish could be so plentiful when they have trouble catching their limit of five. The department withdrew the proposal."
0 Replies
 
devriesj
 
  1  
Reply Mon 10 Apr, 2006 10:45 am
sumac wrote:
And I forgot to watch it. <sigh>

Alas, me too! My son asked me to watch a movie with him and I just plum forgot! Rolling Eyes Sad

But I did remember to click!
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/08/2025 at 10:06:08