Season's End : What You Can Do

What You Can Do

John Cooper / Wednesday, April 30th, 2008

John Cooper

Facing a problem as large and complex as global warming, it�s easy to feel frustrated and pessimistic � to wonder what, if anything, can be done about climate change impacts to wildlife and fish.

A common argument is "What's going to happen will happen based upon mother nature and nothing I can do will matter in the long run." Certainly some people will take this position, just as some will argue that humankind's release of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases has very little to do with global warming and that this phenomenon is nothing more that a "natural weather cycle of the earth." But science is not on the side of global warming deniers; nor is it on the side of those who say there�s nothing any of us can do.

Global warming is real. Across the globe, temperatures have increased an average of one degree Fahrenheit during the last century, a rate that far exceeds any natural climate change occurring in the last 10,000 years. The fast pace of global warming should concern all of us who love the outdoors. This increase in atmospheric temperature poses a significant threat to our fish and wildlife resources as we know them. But what can we do to address global warming and climate change?

We�ve all read about small, commonsense changes we can make in our daily lives to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere: switching to compact fluorescent bulbs, changing thermostats to save heating and cooling energy, purchasing the most fuel efficient model of car we need. Beyond these personal choices, there are several steps each of us can take to mitigate the impact of global climate change on fish and wildlife:

Get informed

Take the time to become better informed about what the resource management agencies in your area face as they address the effects of climate change. Urge your state resource agencies to provide annual reports on what they are dealing with related to global warming impacts and what programs are being pursued to address them.

Help where you can

Get involved at the local level with sportsmen's clubs, conservation districts and county commissions. Participate in local conservation projects and partnerships that maintain or improve habitat such as restoring wetlands or conserving in-stream flows to streams, rivers and lakes.

Support management, monitoring and research efforts

As climate changes occur, federal, state and local government agencies and conservation organizations tasked with managing and conserving fish and wildlife as a public trust will have to adapt policies and programs to changing realities in the environment. The nature and extent of some impacts of global warming remain uncertain and hard to quantify, so increased monitoring and research are critically important to good decisions being made for wildlife. All of us must realize that a significant portion of our license dollars will have to be devoted to researching and monitoring the effects of climate change in order to make good long-term decisions for resources.

Support climate change legislation that benefits fish and wildlife

Sportsmen must keep up with the issues that are critically important to the future of fish and wildlife as climate change legislation is discussed. We must speak out in support of climate change public policy that funds conservation.

Accept the necessity of change

Prepare to adjust personally to changes and impacts on your favorite species and your recreational expectations. As fish and wildlife populations respond directly and indirectly to climate through changes in habitats, their recruitment, productivity and sustainability may increase or decrease on a regional basis. Wildlife managers and their agencies will adapt yield and harvest regulations as research and monitoring call for tough decisions. Sportsmen might have to travel much longer distances to pursue hunting and angling opportunities as sustainability decreases in their traditional areas and waters. Ultimately, we might even have to adjust to reduced limits and shortened or closed seasons.

Stay involved with your sport

Become or stay involved with organizations working on global warming and climate change issues for their membership. Ducks Unlimited, Pheasants Forever, Trout Unlimited, Bass Angler's Sportsmen's Association, National Wildlife Federation and the Izaak Walton League of America are examples of major conservation organizations involved in climate change and global warming issues and the related need for improved research, monitoring and adaptive management.

John Cooper
A lifelong angler and waterfowl hunter, John L. Cooper has won numerous awards for his leadership on conservation issues. Active in international, national and regional fish and wildlife organizations, he currently is senior policy adviser to the South Dakota Governor for the Missouri River and Environmental Affairs. He has served as secretary of South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks, as field editor and columnist for Dakota Outdoors magazine, and in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service law enforcement.

Comments Login or Register to post a comment.

Sorry Dan 06/08/2008 - Mrs. Duck
. .. but you are repeating talking points being fostered by political and wacko environmental group interests, instead of looking at the real data, which is not solid and never has been. Just the simple task of taking world-wide daily temperature has never been accomplished. The oceans cover 71% of the earth. What scientists were out there 100 years ago taking accurate daily temperature readings? What scientists are out there now? Who has taken the temperature in 3rd world countries over the last 100 years?

The USA probably has the most accurate temperature readings. So why does that data show no change in average temperature taken in rural areas? You are right in saying "Ground sensor data is corrected for local effects". That means the raw data was manipulated. It was adjusted up or down depending on whatever calculation was invented by whomever did the adjusting. Solid science or speculation?

It is ridiculous for anyone to claim we have world temperature data accurate to within plus or minus 1 degree. And it is arrogant for any one to claim human activity could change the climate. The climate has been changing since the beginning of time. Which climate was the best?

The global warming crowd will not debate the facts because they have nothing but faith, wild guesses and computer models to base their theory on, same as the global cooling crowd in the '70s, same as the Eugenic's crowd of the '30s. I don't listen to the opinions of corporations or politicians on climate change, and I'm sure Dr. Fred doesn't either. Climate is science, and the theory of global warming is political science.

The outdoors we love is not in danger from energy use. The only danger is economic collapse, socialism and poverty which will be caused by the religion of global warming, unless people wise up and stop this outrageous attack on our freedom.

This website and the organizations that support it are here for the money. Carbon credit trading has been big business in the European nations since 2005. Billions of dollars have been taken from taxpayers and given to conservation and wildlife groups to fund the same projects they previously did for the benefit of the environment . Now they do it for money. After three years, the people have wised up and are now revolting against this redistribution of wealth which is wrecking their economy and solving nothing.

Global warming is simply a fantasy of socialists.
Sorry, Dr. Fred... 05/27/2008 - Dan
...but you are repeating deliberately misleading propaganda being fostered by political and corporate interests.

The data is quite solid documenting the alarming temperature rise of recent decades. This data is from all over the planet, from ground stations, radiosondes and satellites. Your statement that "No one has yet corrected the existing ground-level data for this effect" is simply false. Ground sensor data is corrected for local effects. It agrees well with data from the other sources.

Unfortunately, the rest of your post contains similar misstatements and distortions of the science. I am sure you sincerely believe what you wrote, but you are spreading disinformation that is helping to delay practical action on a real problem, one that will negatively impact much of what we love in the outdoors.
Right On 05/21/2008 - Mrs. Duck
Excellent post Dr. Fred, you are exactly right. Global Warming is a political hoax that is not based on facts. And no matter how much you and you're cohorts repeat it over and over again, it will not change the facts. Go ahead and throw your money at a non-existent problem, but count the rest of us out. We're not buying.
Bad Science Makes Bad Policy 05/14/2008 - Dr. Fred
Sorry to challenge the whole premise of your website. I know you're hoping to work to do the right thing for habitat preservation BUT here's the problem. The data is not even close to solid regarding ANY aspect of climate warming OR cooling. I'm a scientist - physical chemistry and biological sciences - and a hunter. Been doing both for many years. Unlike all the politicians and most pundits, I've looked at the hard original data - and it is basically what we in the real physical sciences call... NOISE. Not enough data we can come close to trusting, not enough of a timespan for the collected data. One example from just this year - some 60% of the 1500+ sites across the US where ground-level temperature measurements are recorded do not meet established standards for construction of their enclosures and siting of their instruments. Even the paint used is a problem. Turns out the standard is white-wash and many site substituted latex paint which absorbs infrared radiation resulting the box holding the thermometer being too hot by several degrees. No one has yet corrected the existing ground-level data for this effect - we can't even believe our own data going back several years - we can't predict because the empirical data is suspect. The past meteorological data can not even accurately predict the past global temperatures, let alone give a temperature estimate accurate to +/- 5 degrees for tomorrow or next week let alone 5, 10, 20 or more years in the future. The CO2 historic estimates do not PRECEDE temperature shifts, they LAG after these shifts by several hundred years. This is presently thought to be due to solar radiation driving ocean warming, which in turn results in release of CO2 from the ocean to the atmosphere. This data is from places like MIT. Another aspect of the issue is the whole problem with models, not enough detail, precision and accuracy to base any huge and costly initiatives on - not with my dollars anyway. If you do some hard checking with hard-core physical scientists you'll discover most of those who are actually familiar with the data are very concerned about the deadly problem of politicization of science to achieve an economic outcome favored by a relative few who are looking to make money - or gain notoriety - off unsound thinking and stampeded action. Please do not add to the problem. Habitat preservation is important - but honest science with a critical evaluation of the most basic of measurements underlying the studies must be the driver. Ask your colleagues to show you the beef - make sure the instruments used to make these measurements meet accepted standards. I think once you start to ask these types of questions you will be quite surprised at what you find. Regards!