hudson valley

The electrifying redemption of America’s revolutionary declaration that all human beings are born equal sets the stage for the renewal of United States leadership in a world that desperately needs to protect its primary endowment: the integrity and livability of the planet.
— Al Gore, The New York Times (Nov. 9, 2008)

The results of the recent election promise a sea change in how the U.S. confronts the most daunting challenge facing us — reducing greenhouse gas emissions. President-elect Obama has made it clear he intends for America to lead by example in efforts to halt climate change and its potentially disastrous consequences, including extreme coastal flooding, sweltering temperatures and cataclysmic storms. As he said during the campaign:

“The issue of climate change is one that we ignore at our own peril. There may still be disputes about exactly how much we’re contributing to the warming of the earth’s atmosphere and how much is naturally occurring, but what we can be scientifically certain of is that our continued use of fossil fuels is pushing us to a point of no return. And unless we free ourselves from a dependence on these fossil fuels and chart a new course on energy in this country, we are condemning future generations to global catastrophe.”

Part of this catastrophe — the acidification of our oceans — gets very little attention. That should change shortly. Hudson Valley filmmaker Barbara Ettinger and her husband, Sven Huseby, are putting the finishing touches on an eye-opening film (which I originally wrote about Sept. 18, 2007) showing how the huge amount of carbon absorbed by our seas is decimating fish, shellfish and coral reefs. Without immediate action, experts predict more than one million aquatic species will become extinct within the next century. ...

read more

comment | permalink | print | email |

share

reddit digg Del.icio.us facebook newsvine stumble What is share?

Recently I took a journey to a place of importance in the history of American and international art and in the geography of my soul.

The occasion was a trip to Williamstown, Massachusetts, where a dear friend took me to see a superb exhibition at the Sterling and Francine Clark Art Institute—one of America’s great small art museums. The main galleries of the Clark are nestled at the foot of Stone Hill, while a recently completed art conservation annex sits on its flank. The bucolic hill itself, part forest, part open farm meadows, with meandering wood roads, provides inspiring views of three mountain ranges—the Berkshires, Taconic, and Green Mountains. Its romantic landscape serves as the backyard and escape for many college students and local residents. My memories span the seasons with skinny-dips in a stream at its base, cross country ski trips and toboggan rides through its snowy fields, and long runs through autumn leaves of fiery yellows and reds. Any trip onto the hill promised to blur the lines between the real and spiritual worlds, to offer escape from the cares of the day and refuge in the beauty of nature’s most discrete and secret realms.

No better venue could be found for the spectacular art exhibition entitled Like Breath on Glass: Whistler, Inness, and the Art of Painting Softly. This show displays and offers insights into a brief but important movement in American art at the turn of the 20th century. A small group of landscape painters, including George Inness and James McNeill Whistler, moved away from hard-edged realism, instead filling their canvases with luminous, hazy depictions that captured the mood or spiritual essence of a place. The exhibition’s title comes from a quote by Whistler, who said “Paint should not be applied thick. It should be like breath on the surface of a pane of glass.” ...

read more

comment | permalink | print | email |

share

reddit digg Del.icio.us facebook newsvine stumble What is share?

Earlier this summer Rand Wentworth, president of the Land Trust Alliance, noted that the open space protected by land trusts in the United States last year exceeded the acreage lost to development. This statistic may be a result of the growth and increasing effectiveness of land conservation organizations across the country, the slumping real estate market or a combination of the two. In either case, those committed to safeguarding our working farms, habitat for endangered species and places of beauty for parks gave a cheer upon hearing the news.

So what effect is the depressed real estate market having on land preservation? The answer is a mixed bag.

First, the good news: Land-conservation organizations are having banner years acquiring properties once considered beyond their budgets. From Hawaii to Florida, developers are selling off prime land at a loss, preferring to make back a portion of their investments now instead of waiting for the crisis to abate – whenever that may occur. One conservation leader has called this a “green lining” ...

read more

comment | permalink | print | email |

share

reddit digg Del.icio.us facebook newsvine stumble What is share?

When a developer announced plans to build nearly 1,000 homes across 2,200 acres of open space in a rural Hudson Valley town, I asked the conservation biologist at Scenic Hudson, the group I head, to conduct an ecological study. He concluded the project would so fragment the site’s fragile ecosystems that many of its amphibian and reptile species would be wiped out. Our work supplemented and supported a massive and effective effort by a local grass-roots organization opposing the oversized project on roughly a dozen other grounds -- traffic, cost of school expansion, visual impacts, among others. Shortly after these findings were made public, the developer announced it was going back to the drawing board. It has promised to make protection of the site’s natural resources the beginning point and focus of revised plans. Time will tell whether these plans achieve this laudable goal.

Scan the Web site of any land preservation organization and you’re likely to see the word “contiguous” before you read too far. It’s not enough that we safeguard America’s fields and forests, mountains and marshlands; it’s crucial these open spaces be connected. In other words, it’s far better to conserve one 100-acre plot than to protect 50 unlinked two-acre parcels.

Why? For one thing ...

read more

comment | permalink | print | email |

share

reddit digg Del.icio.us facebook newsvine stumble What is share?