I was very fortunate to visit Joshua Tree National Park in southern California in March, 2019, on my way back from a month spent wandering around the Baja, Mexico.  Joshua Tree started as a national monument in 1936 before becoming a national park in 1994.  Currently, the park includes 320,763 hectares (792,623 acres) of desert habitat, at the confluence of part of the Colorado Desert with the southern end of the Mojave Desert.  While the landscape is definitely desert, Joshua Tree supports an amazing amount of biodiversity, including almost 750 species of vascular plants, annuals, trees and shrubs, and cacti.  Besides the awesomeness of just being a desert, the area offers great recreational opportunities, especially hiking and climbing.  The area is a mecca for rock climbers, with over 8000 climbing routes and 2000 boulder problems; Joshua is a world-class climbing destination.  I camped three nights at the Ryan Campground, one of the first-come first-served campgrounds; my site, #10, was great, even if a tad busy with a short sport route bolted up a nice rock wall at the back of the site.  It was spring in the desert when I visited, cool almost cold at night, but always sunny and warm during the day, definitely shorts weather.  A superbloom of spring annuals was underway in parts of the park, and the joshua tree itself was flowering.  Joshua Tree has suffered some abuse of late, especially during the government shutdown which ended in late January just before my visit.  There are so many special places to visit in the US, including many national parks.  Joshua Tree is one of those special places, the vegetation, the animals, the rocks, and the climbers having fun on those rocks, beautiful place worthy of a visit.  Put this park on your list.

​

National Park Week began yesterday, 18 April 2020, and runs through the 26th.  And unfortunately, most national parks around the US are closed, strange and difficult times.  But, this does not mean that we should not still celebrate "America's best idea", even if our visits must be mostly virtual these days.  Let us celebrate National Park Week regardless of whether we can visit these amazing landscapes, beautiful and majestic, filled with incredible species and habitat diversity, in person, or if only in photographs of past adventures.  These are special places.  I have been fortunate enough to visit 22 of the 62 national parks scattered around the country (plus a bunch of national seashores, monuments, lakeshores).  Over the next week, I hope to show you some of what I experienced and witnessed at a few national parks I have been able to visit, my way of celebrating National Park Week, but also my way of escaping our current situation, getting out to revisit some of our incredible national parks.

And of course, we have to start our visual journey at the beginning, our first national park, Yellowstone.  Yellowstone is huge, diverse, both in terms of species, and in terms of physical and geologic landscapes.  Yellowstone is all about geothermal activity, and is much more than simply geysers.  This is a busy place, though because of its size, it is relatively easy to escape the crowds, and explore.  You must visit Yellowstone National Park at some point in your life, it is a must, it is worth it.

For those of us who enjoy spending as much time as possible outside, there is something special about seeing animals in the wild, especially large animals.  And for those of us living in the Eastern United States, these opportunities are rare, though I did see three moose while I lived in Maine, including two bulls.  So when I returned to Pennsylvania for a bit, I had to get out and see the elk herd in north-central Pennsylvania.  I grew up in PA, and while I have known about the wild elk wandering around Elk and Cameron Counties for years, I had yet to actually get out to that part of the Commonwealth, and see some Pennsylvanian elk.  I have seen elk before, in New Mexico (Cibola National Forest, San Mateo Mountains on the flanks of Mt. Taylor), California (Roosevelt elk (Cervus elaphus roosevelti), Prairie Creek Redwoods State Park nestled in Redwoods National Park), Montana (National Bison Range), Arizona (Grand Canyon National Park, South Rim, Desert View Campground), Tennessee (Great Smoky Mountains National Park), and in Wyoming (Yellowstone National Park). They are huge, and majestic, especially the bulls, which can weigh up to 330 kg (though a male Roosevelt elk can weigh up to 540 kg, or more), supporting huge racks, antlers with up to eight or more tines per side.

The history of elk in PA is interesting, and good example of extirpation, and a successful reintroduction and conservation program.  The example of elk in Pennsylvania is also a good illustration of the “issues” faced when trying to reintroduce a large mammal into parts of its former range.  Eastern elk (Cervis canadensis, or C. canadensis canadensis), also know as wapiti (“light-colored rump”) by Native Americans, were once common throughout the Northeast, including throughout most of Pennsylvania.  But this changed quickly in the mid-19th century.  According to the Pennsylvania Game Commission, elk were eliminated in Southeastern PA by the early 1900s, and by the late 1940s, they were gone elsewhere in the Commonwealth, except in north-central Pennsylvania in Cameron, Elk and McKean Counties.  Though there are reports that the last elk was shot by a hunter named John D. Decker in 1877 in Centre County, most suggest that they were probably gone by the late 1860s to early 1870s.  The elk population, along with most wildlife in the Commonwealth, was decimated by over-hunting, habitat loss and modification, and development.  This is the story of wildlife throughout most of the United States.

Fortunately for us, and elk in Pennsylvania, wildlife managers decided early on to try and reintroduce elk into parts of their former range in north-central PA.  What is amazing to me is that this reintroduction began in 1913, well before most land and wildlife managers even considered reintroduction as a part of a conservation strategy.  In 1913, Pennsylvania got the first shipment of elk from Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming, shipped by train.  It has been estimated that each of the 50 individuals in that first shipment cost about $30 each to get to Pennsylvania and release.  These elk were released into Clinton and Clearfield Counties via what is called a “hard release”, where there is no acclimation period.  Another shipment of 22 more were brought in from a private preserve and released into Monroe and Centre Counties.  I think it is amazing that any survived, things in Pennsylvania are quite different from their former habitats in Yellowstone National Park.  And in 1915, an additional 95 individuals, also from Yellowstone, were released into six counties in north-central Pennsylvania.  They quickly began hunting elk, starting in 1923.  And while initially the hunt was pretty successful, the harvest quickly dropped and in 1931, only 1 bull was shot.  By this time, it was estimated that maybe 200 animals survived in the wild, restricted to Cameron and Elk Counties, where elk made their last stand in the Commonwealth in the 1870s.  

The size of the herd fluctuated over successive years, and by 1952 it was estimated that fewer than 50 individuals remained.  Local farmers never supported the reintroduction, and shot many.  This seems to be a recurring theme when large animals are reintroduced into part of their original range, areas now often occupied by ranchers and farmers, few of which support the return of large animals, competitors or predators.  Poachers also killed many elk over the years.  The first comprehensive census was taken in 1971, which reported that only 65 animals survived, and by 1973, that number was down to only 38 individuals.  Things did not look good, as the elk herd faced a number of issues, including a brain parasite, continued poaching, and individuals shot by farmers.  For example, in 1982, 15 elk were shot illegally, and 11 others were shot by farmers who suggested the animals were causing crop damage.

But, things improved with active habitat and game management, and better research efforts.  The herd grew, and by 1993, there were estimated to be 224 individuals in the herd.  Then in 1998, a relocation project began, with 63 elk being moved from Elk to Clinton County, mostly in Sproul State Forest.  Things continued to improve for the herd, and in 2001, the first elk hunt in the Commonwealth in more than 70 years was approved; over 50,000 applied for a permit, 30 were selected, 27 elk were harvested.

Today the elk herd is doing well, and is estimated to include about 1000 individuals, with a current range covering over 2000 km2 (about 800 sq. mi.).  The herd is concentrated in Elk and Cameron Counties, around the town of Benezette along State Route 555.  When I visited early in October 2019, we camped at Kettle Creek State Park, east of Benezette.  There were plenty of elk to see just up the road from the campground, north along Kettle Creek Road, and across the creek and along Proctor Road.  We saw a number of bulls, even heard them bugle, along with many cows, and at least a couple of calves.  They seemed pretty tame, and would let you approach to take photographs, though remember, these are wild animals, and the bulls, they are big, really big, and often with huge antlers.  It was a great trip, nice little campground up on a hill overlooking the Kettle Creek Reservoir, and plenty of elk to see nearby, and without driving all the way back to Benezette.  If you get a chance, it is definitely worth it, seeing large animals in the wild (well ....), elk, huge, majestic creatures.        

I came across a recent scientific publication, and the results were sobering, troubling, and indicated a real problem, one which many of us were aware of a long ago.  Climate change is real, and we are seeing the impacts everywhere we look, from melting glaciers and problems with penguins (check out an earlier post), rising sea level and beach erosion, phenological changes, increased incidence in intense storm events and subsequent flooding, droughts, and an increase in the intensity, frequency and extent of wildfires.  And while all of us will see, feel the impact of climate change sooner rather than later, some are going to be impacted in much more significant ways when compared to others.  This is where the idea of environmental justice comes in.  According to the US EPA, environmental justice is "... the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies."  This idea, policy, would be great, if all environmental disasters equally impacted all people.  But unfortunately, this is not the case.  While we hope that laws, regulations, and policies do not "see" race, color, or income as a factor, we know that there are many cases where this is not true.  And apparently, this applies to the impacts of wildfires in the western U.S.A.

The number of acres burned in the US by wildfires has more than doubled in the last 30 years, and climate scientists claim that approximately 1/2 of this increase can be attributed to extreme warmth during the summer, along with an increase in drought, caused by climate change.  The nature of forest fires in particular,  burn patterns, frequency and intensity, is complicated.  And while the continued increase in frequency and intensity of forest fires predicted as a result of climate change in the future will depend on many factors, especially local ecosystem properties, there is no question among scientists that there will be more large and intense fires in the future due to climate change.  And unfortunately, the impacts of these fires will not be felt equally among those people living in fire-prone areas.  The impacts of environmental disasters, like wildfires, are not felt equally among all socioeconomic groups.  While disasters themselves appear to have a random element (often in terms of when and where a disaster strikes), the impacts are not random.  Low-income communities are more at risk, and much less able to respond, to disasters such as wildfires.  In this recent publication, by Davies et al. (2019) published in PLoS ONE, the authors present an impelling case, supported by lots of data, that the impacts of wildfires are not felt equally among all socioeconomic groups.  They reported that 12 million of the over 29 million Americans who live in areas with significant potential for intense wildfires are socially vulnerable.  For these 12 million people, a wildfire event could be catastrophic.  This is sad, and totally unacceptable.  We will all be impacted by climate change, but let us be sure, let environmental justice be served, such that all of us are impacted the same, regardless of race, color, country of origin, or income.  And then, maybe, when the wealthy are exposed to the same risks as the rest of us, there will be action.

A recent report by the National Parks Conservation Association (NPCA) has reported that "... 96% of 417 national parks [includes all different units of the NPS, such as parks, monuments, seashores, etc.] assessed are plagued by significant air pollution problems in a least one of four categories."  The different categories considered in the study include:

1. Unhealthy air - air which is unhealthy to breathe.
2. Harm to nature - air pollution which damages sensitive species and habitats.
3. Hazy skies - pollution which impacts the view, the aesthetics of a park.
4. Climate change - parks where climate change, and subsequent impacts (i.e., fires, floods, intense storm events), pose serious threats. 

"Air pollution is harming public health, obscuring views and degrading our nation's most precious park sites, from Glacier National Park in Montana to the Natchez Trace Parkway in Tennessee to Cuyahoga Valley National Park in Ohio." (NPCA, 2019).

The Clean Air Act (passed in 1970, amended in 1990) made possible decades of improvements in air quality in the USA.  Yet, in just two years or so, the Trump administration's policies have reversed this positive trend.  Air quality is getting worse, including in our national parks.  Four of the most polluted parks are in California, including Joshua Tree (which I recently visited), Mojave, Sequioa (which I have also visited), and Kings Canyon National Parks.  Pollution levels in these parks are often comparable to large urban areas such as Los Angeles, at least based on the data and information presented in the study by NPCA (2019).

And another study, by Keiser et al., published in 2018 in Science Advances, found that the "... average annual ozone concentrations in national parks are statistically indistinguishable from those in metropolitan areas."  This study included data for 33 national parks and 20 of the nation's largest metropolitan areas for the years between 1990 and 204.  They also reported that exceedance days at some parks are higher than for nearby metropolitan areas.  For example, the exceedance days at Sequoia National Park were actually higher than for Los Angeles in all but two years since 1996.  Exceedance days, as defined by the US EPA, are the number of days per year where the maximum daily 8-hour level of some pollutant exceeds some predetermined level, a level determined by what is considered to "unhealthy for sensitive groups."  For low-level ozone (which is different from the ozone level in the stratosphere, high in the atmosphere), the primary pollutant considered in this study, has a threshold level of 70 parts per billion (ppb).  The authors also reported that there is a statistically significant, and negative, relationship between ozone pollution (monthly mean daily 8-hour maximum ozone concentration), and visitations at parks included in the study.  In other words, between the years 1990 to 2014, when ozone levels were high, fewer people visited the parks.  This study only included data up to and including 2014.  What might things look like now, in 2019, after two years of Trump and the significant roll-backs of environmental regulations, lack of regulatory compliance, and significant increases in drilling, fracking, and mining taking place all over the country, including in areas adjacent to our national parks.  This is bad, for us, when visiting these parks, and for the species and habitats found in these amazing places, our national parks. 

While we know that nature is good for us, that we need biodiverse habitats in order to support the diverse array of ecosystems services upon which we rely, we continue to allow for significant declines in species diversity around the globe.  A new Report by the UN, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), finds that global biodiversity  is declining at an alarming and accelerating rate.  The Summary of the Report suggests that 1 million species are threatened with extinction.  The full Report, the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, is expected out later this year (and expected to exceed 1500 pages, including data).  The Summer Report paints a bleak picture.

• The average abundance of native species in land-based habitats has fallen by at least 20%,
• Over 40% of amphibian species, almost 33% of reef-forming corals, and 1/3 of marine mammals are threatened with extinction,
• A tentative estimate suggest that 10% of insects are threatened,
• More than 9% of domestic mammals used for food/agriculture could soon be extinct, with at least 1000 more breeds threatened.

The primary drivers behind these trends are not a surprise, at least not to me, as I preached the threats posed by these drivers for years in my conservation biology classes.  The primary drivers of species decline include, 1) changes in land and sea use, 2) overexploitation, 3) climate change, 4) pollution, and 5) invasive exotic species.  While there is time, the clock is ticking, and each and every day, more species become threatened, and many become extinction.  And extinction is forever, once a species is gone, that is it.

     "... when the last individual of a race of living things breathes no more, another heaven and another earth must pass before such a one can be again." (William Beebe)

There actually is an entire literature out there considering the relationship between nature, and outdoor experiences, and the physical and mental health of people.  And the research makes it clear, being in nature, as often as possible, is good for you, very good for you.  Also, other studies have pointed out something related, how a sense of awe, often only experienced in nature, also relates to physical and mental well-being.  Being in 'awe' is good for you, very good for you.  I have frequently told others that physical exercise is the closest thing to a health panacea that we have.  Now, add 'awe'.  Experiencing awe, that complex emotion and that experience, of wonderment, of surprise, of impressiveness, of, just wow, especially in the natural world is good for one's mental and physical health.  So, get out there, experience the wonder and 'awe' that is nature, the physical (including geological and hydrological), chemical and biological world which surrounds us, and feel good, very good.  Some 'awe inspiring' photos follow.

This week, April 20-28 is National Park Week, a time to celebrate "America's best idea", our National Park System.  Currently, there are a total of 61 national parks, though the National Park Service administers many additional units, designated as national monuments, battlefields, lake shores, sea shores, etc.  The first national park, Yellowstone, was founded in 1872, while the most recent park, Indiana Dunes was just created, 15 Feb 2019.  These parks protect a total area of approximately 211,000 sq. km, protect thousands of different species, both plant and animal, and provide for amazing recreational opportunities for us.  And, annual visitations to these parks continue to break records, with the top three most visited national parks, Great Smoky Mountains, Grand Canyon and Rocky Mountains National Parks, alone drawing 22,392,188 visitors in 2018 (National Park Service data).  Nine parks broke visitation records in 2018, and five of these broke records set the year before, in 2017.  In 2018, the NPS reported approximately 318.2 million recreation visits within all units of the national park system, the third highest total ever (NPS, News Release March 5, 2019).  And unfortunately, we continue to under-fund the NPS, and currently it has been estimated that there is over $10 billion worth of required maintenance and upgrades to keep our parks working smoothly, and allow them to continue to deal with record visitations.  As many have said, we are "loving our parks to death", but that is better than the alternative, though something needs to be done.  But this week, let us all celebrate National Park Week, and the beauty and majesty of these amazing protected landscapes.  So get out there, explore, experience and support "America's best idea", our incredible national parks.  I have been very fortunate to have visited many of these parks (about 22 of 61 parks to date), and below are a collection of photographs which I took at these parks.

​

Forty-nine years ago, CBS News addressed the first Earth Day with a special report by Walter Cronkite, and others.  During this report on 22 April 1970, Mr. Cronkite said "The gravity of the message of Earth Day [from reports from around the world] still came through: act or die."  Unfortunately, while we have made some progress in some areas (i.e., air and water pollution in the USA), environmental problems have actually gotten worse, all being driving by human activity.  Climate is changing and the world is getting warmer, glaciers are melting, sea level is rising, large storm events are becoming more frequent, along with catastrophic wildfires, habitats are being destroyed, trees are being cut, and species are becoming extinct.  It has gotten so bad around the world, that many warn that even our very survival as a species is at risk.  The following has been attributed to the actor Harrison Ford, and these statements really make the point very clearly.

"Nature doesn't need people - people need nature; nature would survive the extinction of the human being and go on just fine, but human culture, human beings cannot survive without nature."

The natural world is just wonderful, is what motivates me almost day-to-day.  I have been very fortunate to be able to visit, and explore and experience, some amazing places, natural areas with incredible landscapes and vistas, impressive mountains, rivers and lakes, and interesting and beautiful biodiversity.  So get out there, explore and experience nature, and be sure to appreciate the beauty, complexity and intricacies of the species and natural habitats of the world, before they are all gone.  We are just one species of the millions of species which have evolved on this Earth, yet we are the one species with the capability to destroy it all.  We must act, now, and aggressively, if we are going to address climate change, and all the other environmental threats which are causing such devastation to natural habitats, and resulting in the loss of so many species.  We must do something, or this amazing natural world will be altered and maybe even lost, forever, and this is unacceptable.

​Below are a number of images of some wonderful places I have had the opportunity to visit, photographs of places and species, all of which deserve to be preserved.

I came across this information in a blog post by Adventure Journal, and found it really interesting, and fun.  This is essentially a Google Doc, a collection of nature and outdoor films, mostly shorts, curated by Geoffrey Holstad, and is available free, online.  There are different categories in the collection, including Canoe, Bushcraft, Native Culture, Art/Craft, Flora/Fauna, Enviro/Activism, and Fun/Misc., pretty much something for everyone.  While the quality of some of what is included is not great, still is a worthy effort, and just fun to watch.  So, check it out, the link is below (hopefully it works for you).

docs.google.com/document/d/1vSIbMtzB3Dxc84bEqhMfrVdWB7KNbOlt4kduRiXyI3Y/edit?usp=sharing
​

I found this short movie to be very funny, in an almost classic British humor sort of way. This is definitely worth the watch, a fun, and really cold adventure by a couple of "blokes".

6 November 2018. Vote for adventure, vote for public land, vote for preservation and conservation, vote for future generations, vote for nature. 

There are people out there who seem to do things which would appear absolutely crazy to the rest of us, just crazy adventures which do not even appear possible.  And yet, these people, who do these seemingly crazy things, are not themselves nuts (or at least not totally).  One such person is Alex Honnold, one of the best rock climbers in the world, and one who did one of the most amazing things, just crazy, ever accomplished on rock.  Alex was the first person to free solo El Capitan in Yosemite National Park, California, USA.  And this feat has been captured in a film which debuted in theaters around the country on September 28th.  The film, "Free Solo", was directed by Jimmy Chin (another great rock climber, and mountaineer, as well as an amazing photographer and cinematographer) and Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi.  This film is already being hailed by some as the best climbing movie ever made, and while I have yet to see the film, the trailer suggest the film is amazing, and the entire premise is just nuts.  The film is about Honnold's successful attempt to free solo El Capitan in Yosemite, which means that he climbed almost 3,000 ft of near vertical granite by himself, without ropes, without any protection, all while being filmed; a single slip, and subsequent fall, would mean certain death, captured on film.  On June 3rd, 2017, he free soloed the Freerider route on El Capitan in only 3 hours and 56 minutes (it typically takes the average climber on El Capitan 3 to 4 days to top out, depending on the route taken).  What he did was amazing, scary, and yup, just a bit crazy.

El Capitan is an iconic, giant chunk of mostly vertical granite in the Yosemite Valley of Yosemite National Park in California.  The most famous climbing route on El Cap is The Nose, which was first climbed in 1958 by Warren Harding, Wayne Merry and George Witmore.  They relied on direct aid climbing, using pitons, bolts and ropes, and it took them 47 days, spread over 18 months.  The first free climb of The Nose, the most popular route on El Capitan, was completed by Lynn Hill in 1993.  Free climbing means that while you use a rope for protection if you fall, you climb without the direct aid of ropes attached to pitons or bolts; you climb the rock, not ropes.  Eventually, many other climbing routes have been established, first assents have been completed, speed climbing records have been set, and more, and then, Alex Honnold completed his free solo climb up El Capitan.  What an incredible feat, and just a bit crazy.  Congratulations to Alex, and those who followed him up with cameras so that the whole adventure could be available for all to witness, just amazing.  'Free Solo', find it a theater near you.

​'Free Solo' Trailer
​​https://www.nationalgeographic.com/films/free-solo/

While I am not as well traveled as many, I have been very fortunate in the past to visit some of the most wonderful places nature has to offer, including places rarely visited by humans.  These places are truly special, wild and isolated, raw nature at its most amazing.  The places I am talking about are a series of small, isolated islands in the Subantarctic.  Subantarctica lies north of the Antarctic region, circling the Antarctic continent, roughly between 46-60 degrees S latitude.  What makes this part of the world so special are the many islands in the southern Indian, Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, isolated islands, desolate and barren save a few grasses, lichens and moss, and the seasonal visitors, those species which come ashore on these islands to breed.  These islands are rarely visited by humans.  Those islands truly in the Subantarctic region include, among others, Bouvet Island, Heard and McDonald Islands, the South Georgia Group, South Sandwich Islands, Kerguelen Islands, and Crozet Islands.  A few of the islands support permanent scientific/weather stations, but most are deserted, except for the amazing wildlife which visit every year during the breeding season.  While I was fortunate enough to visit South Georgia, Heard Island, and Kerguelen Island, it was my visit to the Crozet Islands which was the most special.  And unfortunately, this post is all about what has happened to one of the most amazing spectacle of nature I have ever experienced.  First, a bit of history.  While I was an undergraduate student at Colgate University (NY, USA), majoring in biology, I was offered an amazing opportunity; a trip of a lifetime to New Zealand, Singapore, and south into the Subantarctic.  The trip was made possible due to the generosity of Richard C. Damon (Colgate '50).  I hope to write more about this amazing experience in later posts, but for now, this story is about the Crozet Islands.

The Crozet Archipelago is located in the southern Indian Ocean, and is part of Terres Australes et Antarctiques Francaises (French Southern and Antarctic Territories).  The archipelago includes five larger islands, and fifteen tiny islands.  I was fortunate to visit three of the five larger islands, including Ile de l'Est (East Island), Ile de la Possession (Possession Island), and, Ile aux Cochons (Island of Pigs).  This post is about our visit to Ile aux Cochons.  We, including Richard, another student from Colgate (Stan S.), and a professor (Dr. Novak), along with almost sixty other passengers, were on a small ship, the Lindblad Explorer, operated by Lindblad Travel at the time.  The 72.9 m long passenger ship, an ice-class vessel, was build in Finland in 1969, and was the first custom-built vessel for the expeditionary cruise market, and we were definitely on an expedition.

We visited a number of islands during our travels, but our stop at Ile aux Cochons was incredible.  We left the ship and boarded Zodiac boats for the ride to shore.  Our primary destination on the island was a large colony of king penguins (Aptenodytes patagonicus), a bit of a hike from the beach where we landed.  King penguins are the second largest species of penguins (emperor penguins are the largest), typically between 78.7 to 89 cm tall, and weighing from 12 to 16 kg.  As we headed for the colony, we were first exposed to the smell, it was not pleasant, as the size of the colony turned out to be immense, and these large birds, year after year, deposited a lot of guano.  Next, even before we could see the colony, we could hear it, and as we approached, it was almost deafening.  And then, as we crested a small ridge, spread out before us was a massive colony of king penguins, estimated to be 1 million birds strong.  This was, and still is, the most amazing spectacle of nature I have ever experienced.  The smells, the sounds, overwhelming, and almost as far as you could see, in almost every direction, were king penguins.  It was amazing.  But since we visited in late 1980, things have changed, and unfortunately, not for the better.

In 2018, Weimerskirch and others published a paper documenting a massive decline in the colony  of king penguins on Ile aux Cochons.  At the time we visited in late 1980, this colony was believed to be the largest king penguin colony in the world, and second largest colony of any penguin species.  Weimerskirch et al. (2018) pointed out that the colony we visited was estimated to have about 502,400 breeding pairs (or a little over 1 million birds) in 1982, but recent estimates (December 2016) from satellite imagery and photographs taken from helicopters suggested the colony had shrunk to 50,926 pairs, a decline of almost 90%.  The incredible colony we visited, that we experienced in late 1980, was decimated, and at this point, the exact reasons for the decline are unknown.

​While the exact reasons for the significant decline of birds in this colony on Ile aux Cochons is unknown, Weimerskirch et al. (2018) suggest a number of possibilities, including large-scale climatic events (e.g., Sub-Tropical Indian Dipole and El Nino Southern Oscillation) which have been shown to impact "foraging capacities", partial relocation of the colony, feral introduced cats and house mice, or disease or parasite outbreaks.  The authors offered little support for any of these hypotheses (Weimerskirch et al. 2018).  And surprisingly, the authors do not mention changes in food resources and/or climate change as a potential cause of the significant decline, even though these have been implicated in changes observed in other penguin species in the Antarctic (i.e., Barbraud and Weimerskirch 2001, Forcada et al. 2006, Trivelpiece et al. 2011, Klein et al. 2018). 

The southern oceans are among the fastest warming areas on the planet; mean winter air temperatures along the West Antarctic Peninsula and adjacent Scotia Sea have been observed to have increased from 5-6 degrees C (as reported in Trivelpiece et al. 2011).  This, and subsequent loss of sea ice and changes in krill biomass, have been suggested as the primary drivers of significant declines in populations of other penguin species, Adelie and chinstrap penguins, over the last 30 years (Trivelpiece et al. 2011).  Klein et al. (2018) modeled the impacts of rising sea surface temperatures (SST) on krill and their predators and model output suggested that rising SST could result in a decline of krill in the northern Scotia Sea of over 40%, with a concomitant decline in penguins of up to 30%.  Others have also suggested that warming of SST could decrease krill biomass and drive reductions in the sizes of penguin populations (Barbraud and Weimerskirch 2001, Forcada et al. 2006).  Krill (Euphausia superba) are a crucial component of food webs in southern oceans and areas around the Antarctic continent, but, king penguins are much less dependent on this food resource when compared to other penguin species such as chinstrap and Adelie penguins.  Instead of relying on krill, king penguins dive deeper in search of fish (e.g., lantern fish) and squid.  What is not known is how might warming impact food resources of king penguins.  But, it would be hard to imagine that the significant warming of SST in southern oceans has not had an impact on king penguins, even though Weimerskirch et al. (2018) do not implicate climate change and subsequent warming of SST in the massive decline of the colony on Ile aux Cochons.  We need more data, and we should be alarmed.  What if other king penguin colonies, such as those on South Georgia, start to experience declines on the order of magnitude experienced by the population on Ile aux Cochons?  We could have yet another species seriously threatened with extinction as a result of climate change.  How long can we continue to let this happen?  I was very fortunate to experience one of the wonders of nature, and now, that amazing sight is no more.

References

Barbraud and Weimerskirch. 2001. Emperor penguins and climate change. Nature 411:183-186.

Forcada et al. 2006. Contrasting population changes in sympatric penguin species in association with climate change. Global Change Biology 12:411-423.

Klein et al. 2018. Impacts of rising sea temperature on krill increase risks for predators in the Scotia Sea. PLoS ONE 13(1):e0191011.

Trivelpiece et al. 2011. Variability in krill biomass links harvesting and climate warming to penguin population changes in Antarctica. PNAS 108(18):7625-7628.

Weimerskirch et al. 2018. Massive decline of the world's largest king penguin colony at Ile aux Cochons, Crozet. Antarctic Science 30(4):236-242.
​

Pollution continues to be a serious environmental problem, and the current administration in control of the US government continues to attack environmental regulations and make the situation worse.  This is bad for the environment, and, bad for us as well.  And now, wherever we look, we find contaminants, including in beer.  This is not good.  A recently published study (see below, Kosuth et al. 2018) has found that microplastics are a common contaminant in beer, found in all samples tested.  The study, completed by Kosuth et al. (2018) sampled tap water (from global sources), domestic beer, and sea salt (internationally sourced but sold in the US), looking for microplastic contaminants.  And the results are disquieting.  They found that 81% of all tap water samples contained microplastics, and all beer and sea salt samples were found to contain microplastics as well.  The twelve beers sampled were all domestic, and all used municipal water taken from one of five of the Great Lakes in the US.  The worst of the beer sampled used water from Lake Michigan, and it contained 16 particles per liter.  Most of the microfiber contaminants were tiny fibers, and it looks like they are everywhere.  Looks like we are going to have to filter our beer.  And, imagine what might be in wine.  Plastics are everywhere, in our forests, on our beaches, in the oceans, in our rivers and lakes, and now, in much of what we drink.  I have included a copy of the paper in case you want, need, more information.
​

Adventure, or at least outdoor adventure, the activity, the concept, the way of life, is complicated, at least to me.  Adventure is a state of being, a merger of mind, body and spirit, with the natural habitats which surround us.  For me, adventure, like true solitude, can only be experienced in nature, in habitats relatively untouched by human hands. True adventure cannot happen in urban or suburban landscapes, you must be exploring the woods and waters, deserts and mountains, oceans and islands of the undeveloped world.  This does not mean that wandering the streets of a foreign city is not adventurous, even almost dangerous, especially if you do not speak the native language, but this is a different kind of experience, not really an outdoor adventure.  There will be times when an adventure passes through developed areas, towns and villages, but these times should be ephemeral, and you should be spending the majority of your time immersed in nature.  Adventure does not have to be experienced alone, and actually, it often works better if it is shared with good friends, or a lover.  Adventure must include at least some element of danger, of risk, though it does not have to rise to the level of being life-threatening.  Fear is good for the mind.  Fear keeps us sharp, alert, and hopefully, more fully aware of our surroundings and the risks inherent in time spent outdoors.  Adventure must be challenging, there must be difficulty involved, otherwise, an activity is not adventurous, it is instead just a vacation.  As they say, if it was easy, everyone would do it, and then, it would not be a true adventure. The challenges involved do not always have to be extreme physical challenges, not many of us are fit or skilled enough to climb the Dawn Wall on El Cap in Yosemite, or sail around the world.  But, it must be a test, adventure must be work, it must be hard, it cannot be easy. Adventure must also involve a level of uncertainty, success should not be guaranteed, though it should not be impossible either.  Adventures can be long, or short, though long adventures are always more challenging, more difficult and possibly more dangerous, and thus more worthy and rewarding. The rewards of adventure have nothing to do with what others think, it is all about the personal experiences that result from the adventure, the personal growth, physically, emotionally, and intellectually.  It is also always rewarding, at least for me, to be more completely connected with and immersed in nature during the adventure.  I want to hear, see, smell, touch all that surrounds me, all that the biological and physical world has to offer.  Again, true adventure can only take place while enveloped by the natural world.  Some of the best adventures possible are nested within beautiful landscapes, filled with a diversity of life, rocks and waters, mountains and valleys, and a sky filled with otherworldly clouds which race overhead.  And, many adventures include the possibility of encounters with animals which can pose a significant risk to us.  There are animals out there who can eat us; this is part of the adventure.  It is always hoped that the weather is good, as this makes an adventure more enjoyable, though often the real adventure is dealing with the variability in the weather experienced which makes a trip a real test of body and will.  And finally, adventure does not have to be life altering, you do not have to come out of an adventure a changed person. But, while an adventure does not have to change who you are, it had better be lots of fun, be an experience not soon forgotten, be something talked about for many years to come, or otherwise, you might as well just stay at home.  So, get out there, and be adventurous, it will definitely be worth it, I promise.  Outdoor adventures are a huge part of what makes me who I am, and without them, I would really question whether life is worth living, they are that important.

On March 1, 1872, the first national park in the United States, in fact the first in the world, was created when the US Congress approved the creation of Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming, USA. Then on August 25, 1912, President Woodrow Wilson signed the act creating the National Park Service, a new unit in the US Department of the Interior. Since then, the National Park Service has grown to include the management of 417 different units, including 59 which are officially known as "national parks", all of which encompass more than 84 million acres.  And 2017 was a banner year for the nation's national parks, as yet another record was set in terms of attendance, with almost 331 million people visiting our national parks. This breaks the record just set in 2015 when a then record-breaking 307 million people visited our national parks. The most visited parks, in order of attendance, are the Grand Canyon, Yellowstone, Rocky Mountain, and Zion National Parks. These are impressive numbers. But, we have problems.

Recent reports have suggested that our national parks are actually in trouble. For instance, due to years of Congressional under-funding, our parks need around $11.9 billion USD to address needed repairs and upgrades, to provide for routine maintenance, ensure adequate staff to deal with the growing number of visitors, and adequately protect the amazing natural resources found in our national parks. More people are visiting our national parks than ever before, yet it seems as though there is never enough money to protect one of our most important resources, our beautiful public lands.

Our national parks are beautiful, diverse in terms of habitats and species, and obviously of importance to the citizen of this country, and the many tourist from other countries who also are frequent visitors. National parks in some ways are uniquely American, as important to the heritage and history of the United States as democracy itself. And yet in spite of their importance, funding is rarely adequate to maintain and protect these facilities, and the future actually looks bleak.

According to the National Parks Conservation Association, the Trump Administration FY2018 budget proposes serious cuts to the Department of the Interior and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The budget proposes a 12% cut for the Department of the Interior and a 31% cut for the EPA. And while the proposal for Interior does propose to increase funding for park maintenance, it cuts construction programs, and proposes deep cuts to land acquisition and historic preservation programs, both critical to the future development of national parks. And with a gutted EPA, there might be little effort to protect habitats adjacent to, or near national parks, from pollution and other impacts of human activity. 

Last January, in the early days of the Presidental primaries, a then candidate-Trump, in an interview with Field and Stream magazine, said that he was "very much into energy", and "very much into fracking and drilling." How long might it be before we see drilling platforms in Yellowstone, Big Bend, or other national parks close to current drilling activity? And what about our National Forests, our "Land of Many Uses", what might happen to these lands, many of which have already been abused by drilling and other forms of resource extraction?

We do apparently love our national parks here in the United States, but what can, or will we do to protect them? We created the whole concept of a national park system, a system which has served as a model for many other countries. But what is next, what will we show other countries about how to properly manage, and protect, our national parks? What is next?
​ 

As 2016 quickly comes to a close, and we move into a new year, 2017, it is a time of reflection, but also a time for hope, hope for a wonderful year ahead of us all. What do I hope for? Well, that sometimes depends on the day, but as I look forward to yet another year, I hope for many things. I hope that fewer species of plants, animals and other organisms become extinct as a result of human activity than in 2016. I hope that a little less natural habitat is lost to human activity, and that we preserve a little more to prevent future destruction. I hope that a little less carbon dioxide is released into the atmosphere, and that 2017 is not another "hottest year on record". I hope that our streams, rivers and lakes are less polluted in 2017, and that so many of the freshwater species found in these habitats thrive in a new year. I hope that the growth of the human population on this planet slows, at least a little. I hope that fewer people die of starvation, of malaria, of cancer, around the world, and that we do more to protect the health of not just natural habitats, but the health of all living things. I hope that we plant more trees than we cut down, plants are so important for us, and all animals. And mostly, I hope that family, and all of my friends, both old and new, have a fun, healthy, happy and adventurous 2017. These are just a few of the things I am hoping for as we move into another year. Please, be well.

Brian

p.s. And I also really hope that Trump doesn't screw up too badly, might be a long four years.

I wrote this for an old friend after I learned of the death of her husband. I also wrote this for myself, and thought I might share with others.


Special Places and Special People

Special places in nature, and special people make life worth living. Find those places, and those people, then live, and love. Cherish each moment you get to spend in those places and with those people. The beauty of nature has no equal in this world, except in those wonderful people who become part of our lives. Find peace and happiness in all that is beautiful in life. Live for the love of those special places, and for the love of those special people.  B.C.L. Shelley 2016

I guess you could say that I "missed" the holiday in the United States known as Thanksgiving, as I was not in the US at the time, I was actually in Puno, Peru, along the shores of Lake Titicaca, at 12,650 feet in elevation. It definitely was not your typical Thanksgiving, no turkey, no American football, no pumpkin pie. Instead, I enjoy some trout from Titicaca, and a couple of cold Cusquenas before getting to bed early, needed to catch a boat for an excursion on the lake early. But while my Thanksgiving was atypical, it was still a time to reflect on what I am thankful for, think this is what this holiday is supposed to be about, right? And yes, I am thankful for family and friends, that I am still alive, sure, but I wish more people would think about many other things we should all be thankful for.  Here is my short list (very short list), scratched on a piece of paper while finishing my second, maybe third Cusquena, at some random restaurant in Puno.
1. I am thankful for the beauty and majesty of nature, of natural places, especially those untouched by the hand of man.  Nothing in this world can rival the beauty of nature, of the plants and animals, the physical structures like waterfalls and mountains, the wind-swept dunes and crashing waves, the sun and the moon, nothing can equal what we have on this amazing Planet (well, moon and sun are not really on this planet, but are part of what we experience here). I just wish more would appreciate what we have more often, as wild nature is vanishing quickly , and it will not be long before there is very little left. Please, be thankful for wild places, please appreciate the beauty of wild nature, and please let us all do as much as we can to preserve as much as we can before it is all gone.
2. I am thankful for fresh, clean, often cold, water, the water which sustains and nourishes us all. I have studied the ecology of freshwater systems for years, and this research is an important part of who I am. You can go days without eating, but you will not last long without a drink of water. And also, when we look at the number of species threatened with extiction, a much higher percentage of species living in our streams and rivers, our lakes and wetlands, are endangered when compared to species living in terrestrial habitats. Freshwater species are in trouble, they need our help, they need our special attention.
3. I am thankful in general for the diveristy of life on the planet, the diversity of all living things, plants, animals, even those often pesky microorganisms. While we do not know exactly how many species do exist on the planet, we know that there are many more undiscovered than discovered species, we know that many species are being lost to extinction before they are even identified, and that if we do not act quickly, we could lose as many as 25% or more of all species which once existed on the planet in the next fifty years, on top of what we have already lost. These species, all of them have value, and most offer us valuable ecosystem services, services with which we cannot do without.
4. I am thankful that Trump did not win the election to become the next president of the United States ..... oh damn, I got that one wrong. Oh damn. What happened?
5. And lastly (though I could go on, and on), I am thankful that I have had many opportunities to experience the wonders of nature, including the opportunity to be experiencing my current adventure, my trip to South America. This adventure has not started out as planned, but I have seen some really cool things, and hope to see much more as my travels continue south, in Chile, into Patagonia, the real focus of the trip. 

When I woke up early on the 9th, after a staying up a bit later than usual, I immediately turned on the TV.  Now understand, I am in La Punta, Peru, still (check out my other blog for more details on this adventure, or mis-adventure), a bit removed from the insanity of election season in the US.  I turned on the TV, and could not believe what I heard on BBC America, Trump had won, Donald Trump was going to the next president of the United States. My new friends in La Punta are as shocked, and worried as I am. He is a racist, he is not a fan of Latin America, he has never run for or been elected to public office, and I am sure he is unlikely to visit Peru, or any country in South America any time soon. I have know for a number of years, have said it, that America has become one of the dumbest countries in the world, especially when considering what is going on in other parts of the world, and this provides much evidence to confirm that.  How did this happen? Do people really think a billionaire businessman who has never done anything, ever, in terms of public service, is going to look out for the average American? Do those coal miners in West Virginia have a clue? And all environmental scientists, conservationist, had better be worried.  While he does think that public land should remain federal lands, wait until they put up gas wells in Yellowstone. And he has tweeted that climate change is hoax invented by the Chinese to hurt American businesses. He wants to protect water resources in the US, but wants to do away with the EPA, and probably any regulations which might in any way stand in the way of business, development, protection of natural habitats.  Do wonder what will happen with funding for the NSF, NIH, other sources of funding for basic research. He is a billionaire developer, a reality TV host, a con artist of the highest order, he conned enough Americans to get elected, just unbelievable. During my time here in Peru, before the election, I met many tourist from around the world, and many asked me, Clinton or Trump. Boy did I, like so, so many get this one wrong. And there is no question, most of the rest of the world is laughing at the US, asking how, how could Americans be so stupid as to elect such an inexperience idiot as Donald Trump.  Just unbelievable.  I, and many from around the world, including many here in Peru, are worried, very worried.  How did this happen?

This is the beginning, of what I hope will be a steady and continuous stream of posts, where I talk about my outdoor adventures, and more.  I am currently in Peru, La Punta to be exact, not far from Lima.  My first outdoor adventure is a big one.  I shipped my modified Sprinter van, along with lots of gear, to the port of Callao, outside of Lima, Peru.  The plan, if I ever actually get out of Lima, is to explore Southern Peru, and then spend a significant amount of time, months in fact, exploring Chile and Argentina, Patagonia.  There will be much more to follow, though posts might come slowly at first, because I am new at this, still figuring out how to format things, and because I hope to finally hit the road very soon, and I do not know what internet access will be like.  But I hope you follow my adventures, or mis-adventures.  I hope to educate, excite and entertain.  There is so much to love about the outdoors, about outdoor adventures, just get out there, experience it, enjoy it, love it.  Thanks.
Brian C.L. Shelley