|
CONTENTS
|
Mission Statement: We are attempting to strengthen and unify the young environmental community in the Bay Area by sharing interests, information, and calls to action between 1,500 local youth. We seek to inspire participation in projects and events between groups, strenghten journalistic skills, and foster career exploration. |
|
February 2003
Volume 1, Issue 3 |
|
Question of the Month What experience or person has inspired you to care about the environment
and why?
Rebecca Smith:
Rayona Young:
Andrew Mossett:
Katie King:
Charles Holz:
Zach Bjornson Hooper:
Thien Le:
Jeff Gustafson:
Jessica Burgeson:
Therman Rich:
Dan Bedford:
Nick Tablanza:
Stuart Lessig:
Jennifer Williams:
Angela Westmoreland:
David Willis:
David Harris:
Willie Siddiqi:
Arlen Silva:
Emily Robinson:
Daniel Evans:
Isaac Aquilar:
Elizabeth Kemp:
Daniel Hernandez:
Jessica Dean: Lontavious Johnson:
|
|
River Pumps Shut off from California by Order of the Federal GovernmentEditor: Natalie RochaBy order of the federal government, the Los Angeles-based Metropolitan Water District of Southern California shut off three of eight major pumps on Lake Havasu that transfers water from the Colorado River to California on New Years Day at 8:00 am. The federal government called for a suspension on California’s use of surplus water from the Colorado River. According to New York Times, the district and other California water agencies did not meet the December 31 federal deadline for an agreement that would outline how California would reduce its overuse of the Colorado River water.
The federal government warned that it would cut off the state’s excess Colorado River water supply if an agreement was not approved by the deadline.
Sources report that for years, California has used 800,000 acre-feet of surplus water that neighboring states didn't need. Under an agreement with six other Western states, California is entitled to draw 4.4 million acre-feet of water, but has typically used 5.2 million acre-feet of water. Rapid growth and drought across the region prompted the other states to complain to the U.S Department of Interior about enforcing the agreement. However, Adan Ortega, a spokesman for the water district stated that the water would have been not used by consumers, but stored as part of a long- term strategy to build California’s reserves and wean the state off the river.
Here are few water saving tips from the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California:
For further information on the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California water saving tips, the website link has been provided below:
Water Saving Tips
|
|
A ViewEditor: Jeff GustafsonAfter being subjected to many years of anti-drug courses from fourth grade on through my junior year in high school, I find it sad that I fall into a minority: those of us who haven’t tried any drugs and plan not to. Certainly I was not one of only a few students who actually paid attention in my D.A.R.E years. The D.A.R.E program along with all other anti-drug programs now widely taught have one common flaw. This is that they label drugs as “bad” and “harmful,” words powerful enough only to keep elementary and middle school children away from them. But, we adolescents are immortal and invincible, great beings that can neither harm nor feel any pain. With this mind-set, drugs are no longer “bad,” for they, like everything else, can do nothing to harm us. The result: drugs everywhere. There is no question that the human race has a great impact upon the natural environment and as every day passes, the effects of our species become ever clearer and more defined. News reports and articles describing what seems to be an Armageddon due to ecological disaster and destruction has lost almost all practical meaning to many around the world. Pollution, greenhouse gas emissions, population, loss of ecosystems, etc. are issues that we all confront on a day to day basis and yet the majority of the population sits back and continues contributing to the escalating problems. It is hard to convince society of the great need to reform when the effects appear to be so small that they are unnoticeable to the average person or have no direct influence in their lives. Yes, we hear constantly about global warming, but it was cold enough to make everyone wear a jacket this morning, so what’s the problem with a little more heat? We are immortal and invincible, great beings that can neither harm nor feel any pain. The result: a population driving rapidly (in an SUV) toward an unsustainable future and ultimately destruction. For me, the urge to protect the environment comes from my own personal connection with nature, from the sense of awe and wonder that the natural world presents, but also from an innate desire for survival. In the course of human history, there was a point where we broke away from the typical circle of life and began our domination over the world. At this very point, we reached a deep gorge with a frail rope bridge only strong enough to allow the population to the other side. As industry and technology increased as it continues to do today, the environment, our rope bridge, suffered drastically. What doesn’t seem to be understood by the general population is that we absolutely depend upon a healthy environment and a healthy planet, for it supplies everything that we need to live. As we destroy the environment, we are each standing on the bridge with saws cutting away in ignorance as the future becomes the long fall to the jagged rocks on the bottom of the gorge. It is possible to pass the gorge safely, but it will require change immediately. Let us put down our saws and continue crossing into a sustainable future! We are killing ourselves and we don’t even know it. I’ll give everyone the choice to live or to die. I already know the overwhelming vote will be to live. This is it, this is life, and we know nothing but it and if you see clearly enough, you will love it and realize that it is everything. You can find it everywhere in our society and in nature, this obsession with betterment and survival and I praise all who are “selfish” even though our society interprets and uses the word “selfish” almost always to denote something in a negative manner. Now, for those of you who are questioning the significance of the first paragraph, I have not forgotten it and plan to expand upon it. After the insufficient influences of the anti-drug programs have bowed to the adolescent monarch, drugs are tried by a large majority of students and people. Although many drugs are far from lethal when just experimented with a single time, multiple doses can be extremely harmful to one’s health in the long term and can even be deadly. What keeps one in the boundaries of the law? Is it the great desire to follow rules and to please society as a role model community member? I think not, for when a law is made official, there is the enforcement of the law and the penalties. Why don’t I drive 50 mph up my residential street? Because I fear the consequences. Fear is the key. I praise the "selfish,” for they fight for the betterment of themselves and fear anything that could possibly end their life or progress. What if we went into elementary school classes and replaced the statement, “drugs may be harmful to your health” with “drugs can only have negative influences in your life and on your health and WILL contribute to an earlier death or missed opportunities?” The idea of guaranteed problems and even a shortened life will motivate kids and provide support for their position on “saying no” much stronger as well as making each person more prepared to support it through the reign of the adolescent mind. Fear will force us to fight for the betterment of our lives and ourselves. Although many might argue that fear should not be added to the curriculum at any age, I retort that it’s far too late for that. After all, why do we do our homework? When you listen to the agenda of the present presidential administration, the environment does not come up and this very idea puzzles me. If people are naturally and innately striving for their own success and happiness, then it would only be fitting that organizations and governments would hold the same traits, for they are only institutions made up of people. It is no mistake that governments and society run exactly as they do, yet I have heard ideal after ideal on saving the environment calling for a massive and complete social revolution to reverse the destructive ways of the world, that we must all come together as one, and that social justice must be obtained before any ecological revolution is to occur. In my opinion, revolution is not necessary and will take far too long. The environment is beginning to collapse and what we don’t have to stop this, is time. It is my view that although we are bound into a community, each individual is in constant competition with each other and “selfishness” is rampant. It is quite sad, but peace and social justice will never be completely obtained because the human mind is set with this state of competition at all times and will create rifts between individuals no matter how intimate. I am fully supportive of the fight for social justice and find it to be one of the noblest movements to stand behind, however, I believe that although laws may reduce social injustice, it is not erasable completely. Although in many ways this “selfishness” creates large social problems, I believe the answer to saving the environment can be found by using it. By using and manipulating the social systems, governments, and institutions that we already have established, we can use the innate urges of each individual to change to world. This way, a revolution is not needed to pioneer its way into a sustainable future and waste precious time. We must not present the issue fully in an environmental context, for many hold the same ideals as an adolescent towards drugs with the environment: it has no effect on me. We must move past words that anti-drug courses use to fully convince the population of the world that our lives are in serious danger in the future and that problems WILL emerge sooner that we think. The message must reach down to the “selfishness” of most everyone to trigger an innate urge for reform as the downfall of nature presents itself more obviously in our everyday lives. To those who are not deeply passionate for nature, the message must make them fully grasp that the environment in their bridge, their life-line, and that destroying it as we are today, is cutting the bridge as they stand upon it and without the life-line, there is no life or hope. I am not writing to tell everyone what that message should be or how to present it, but rather to say that it is greatly needed and that all who wish to save the environment are responsible to work on developing it to present to the world. In so doing, the environment will not be left off the agenda of the most influential country in the world or any other for that matter and steps will be taken to allow the signs of environmental disaster to reverse and man to live more equitably with nature. I understand that this ideal is quite vague and undefined, buy I invite everyone to help answer this question: how can we, at this present time, use the current social institutions to bring about rapid environmental reform? Social revolution takes drastic time that is too valuable to waste so I suggest that we must manipulate the systems that we have to get the fastest results. Society is perfectly created for the workings of the natural man, so revolution will prove in vain. We must use the system! The clock is ticking! A Visit to the Monterey Bay Aquariumby Eduardo Valenzuela, sophomore at Oakland High SchoolEvery day I would love to hear something about aquatic life. After my experience at the Monterey Bay Aquarium, I value marine life even more. I love all of the amazing sea animals that look so alien-like. It would be horrible to hear on the news one day that the lives of sea animals were in danger because of human acts. It would be disrespectful to disturb, injure, or even kill our sea animals just because of some project. It would be like someone running us all out of our area with no warning; just tearing down our houses, destroying precious lives, and forcing us to move to a brand new area, without much time to adapt. If people don't adapt quick enough, it would only lead to one thing - death. That is like what happens to our aquatic life. |
|
Interview of Pittsburg High School SeniorsEditor: Rayona YoungI thought it would be interesting to find out what opinions my fellow classmates have about the environment before we head out into the world to start our new lives so this month, I decided to do brief interviews with nine seniors at my high school. Note: These interviews were done with students not actively involved with environmental causes in order to get the perspective of average teens. Sara Estrada At what point do you think environmentalists cross the line?
When they put the needs of animals over the needs of people
In comparison to other issues that you feel affect you, how would you rate your concern about environmental causes on a scale of 1 to 10.
Four. It’s not that I think other things are more important, it’s just that I don’t think about it that much.
What is your opinion of environmentalists?
It is nice that they’re doing it [helping the environment] so we can have clean air and stuff because pollution causes cancer and I don’t want cancer.
Are there any environmental issues that you strongly agree or disagree with?
I don’t like it when I see people trashing their own community. I also don’t like that President Bush is drilling for oil in the Mexico Gulf.
Do you feel like you are more informed about local or worldwide environmental issues?
Worldwide issues because of mass media and celebrities talking about it.
What is your opinion of environmentalists?
I think that environmentalists are good because without them we’d end up with like 3 trees left.
Are there any environmental issues you strongly agree or disagree with?
I really agree with animal rights. I don’t think people should wear animal skin and I don’t think people should be allowed to do testing on animals or have them in the circus. Dressing a chimpanzee up in a tutu for amusement is wrong.
At what point do you think environmentalists cross the line? I think they cross the line when they put people’s lives in danger or when what they do affects our way of life. In comparison to other issues that you feel affect you, how would you rate your concern about environmental causes on a scale of 1 to 10?
Six or seven because I go hunting and fishing a lot so since I am always around nature it makes me want to preserve it. It’s not the most important thing in my life though.
Do you feel like you are more informed about local or worldwide environmental issues? I don’t know because nobody tells me anything. I guess local because of the weather. |
|
Editor's CornerEditor: Jenny CadeI’d like, for a moment, to touch on the issue of war. It has come to my attention that some environmentalists are touting that the potential war on Iraq is not at all an environmental issue, and that it only relates to the worlds of politics and social problems. I, for one, strongly disagree. Firstly, once nuclear, biological, chemical, or even just plain ol’ warfare is brought into the picture, we’re obviously talking about an environmental issue. Common sense, as well as past experience, tells us that battle totally devastates the local natural environment. Bombs don’t just kill people, you know. More importantly though, is the fact that neither the human race nor nature lives in its own private, impenetrable bubble. We do in fact completely share the same world. I propose that war and the environment are not only related issues, but are in fact two sub-issues of an overarching one. And no, I’m not just talking about oil. I probably don’t have to tell you that a war in Iraq is expected to turn into urban warfare in huge cities, resulting in thousands upon thousands of civilian deaths. How can we expect to become, or even pretend to be, a society with any regard for the environment if millions of us are willing to do that to members of our own species? After all, are those civilians guilty of anything more than being at the wrong place at the wrong time? I say that we, as a movement of committed individuals looking to limit, reverse, or revolutionize the way our people treat Mother Nature, must take this timely opportunity to limit, reverse, or revolutionize the way we treat each other. Now, I’m obviously not speaking to those of you who believe a war on Iraq is a moral imperative, or even ethically acceptable. To you, I can only direct you to sources that may convince you otherwise: Global Exchange, Alternet, and Not In Our Name. I’m writing this for the majority of us, who know, feel, or think that there’s something just plain wrong about Bush’s plans for war. I feel with all my heart that we must come together around this issue, whether or not it fits the traditional definition of an “environmental issue”. We need to mobilize around this issue simply because it is so immediate, so important, and because there is so much we can do about it. (Perhaps your environmental club can start an anti-war campaign?) |
|
Poetry:"Glory's Dying Rays" by Rebecca SmithEditor: Rebecca Smith
Glory's Dying Rays On a spur of rock jutting out into the sea lies a lighthouse, |
|