Plastic fantastic lover (1/18/2026)

I am traveling this week and was struck by what is on my pill box.  We live in a "What the Fuck" time. (I know it is a plastic box)

A few years ago, I first learned from the book “Finding the Mother Tree” by Suzanne Simard that trees in the Northwest had accumulated fish DNA. This occurred in trees with a lot of fish carcasses around the base. All these fish bones were likely left there by bears (grizzlies) after they ate the salmon they caught. Can you imagine bears leaning against a big tree and munching on dead fish. It sounds like a Gary Larson Far Side comic. Some of these trees were a considerably distance removed from the stream from which the fish were harvested by these animals. It seems the mycorrhizal fungi were decomposing the carcasses and sharing the nutrients including the DNA with the tree.

Thinking about it, it begs the question will human DNA also be incorporated into nature? Could it be that the trees in the woods behind our home have some DNA from George Washington? He spent time in these woods, and I am sure that he left some DNA behind. I am not sure how long DNA remains unaltered when single cells are deposited in the natural environment.

Next question: is my DNA being incorporated into nature since I love to pee outside in the yard and in the woods? I learned that we are able to detect if people have corn products in their diet. Corn has a certain isotope composition that can be incorporated into our bones. An isotope analysis of these bones will show archaeologists what a person’s diet was like. Now this is not DNA, but I can now imagine that if I consistently use a single tree out there for my urination practice, it may actually incorporate something of me into its structure. This sounds like an idea that is fascinating and cool, but also scarry. Fascinating and cool because something of me may continue its presence after I am gone. I don’t know how long or even if it is more than a few molecules. Nobody has come back from being incorporated into a tree to tell me.

The scary part of this equation is that if this is true, anything we do has a long-term impact on nature. This seems to be undeniably the case anyway. It might explain why the eggs of chickens that are fed fish by products have a fishy taste, or the milk from cows solely grazing in organic pastures has a higher nutritive value than those fed with corn. The milk from these pasture and grass-fed cows has a higher Omega fat content. I have also heard somewhere that the meat from these cows rivals the Omega fat content of salmon.

While that may be not the scariest, even scarier is that we are so busy screwing up nature. We appear to be cavalier about what we are doing; it is insane. We know now that plant cells have PFAS and microplastics in them, and those chemicals are also being incorporated in us. We now find these chemicals in our brains and in men their testicles (this reminds me of Jefferson Airplane’s Plastic Fantastic Lover). Plastic babies anyone? (Is that a Frank Zappa song?)

It is unbelievable what we are doing to the environment! And then to think that the current administration is dialing back the clock and weakening the environmental regulations in favor of industry. It also seems that the large Wall street firms are distancing themselves from environmental causes. Many of the most polluting industries are in or near minority areas. It seems to be another form of genocide that they are attempting. Affluent folks can afford more expensive organic food, the costlier glass food storage containers, and so on, but let’s feed the poor and racial minority the unhealthy processed food. This seems to be the plan of the ultra-rich and the Stephen Millers of the bunch. If they cannot kill them with the Trumpstapo, by rounding them up and shooting them using the military or ICE like what happened to Heather Good, then we can at least try to poison them slowly. It is obscene! 

We need to set aside our politics. We need to protest what is going on in our environment, and fight for civil rights, environmental and social justice . Alternatively, we need to prepare ourselves to apologize to our children, grandchildren, and future generations for fucking up their world.

No snow in Montana in January.  Must be global warming.  

My world ethic (3/28/2022)

Reading a book that I was given by the family of our diseased friend (who was very spiritual) I came up to a call for a set of new planetary ethics. An interesting concept indeed. I write a lot about ethics and empathy, which in my eyes are closely linked at times. The book, “The Sacred Depths of Nature” by Ursula Goodenough was published in 1998 and the situation on this planet was somewhat different than it is now. Since then, we have endured tRump, a pandemic, neo-Nazi protests in Charlottesville, Black Lives Matter protests, school shootings, a war in Ukraine, accelerated global warming, you name it.

It made me think, what would my so-called new planetary ethics be? I would like to propose the following: Climate, peace, ethnic cleansing, sustainable fuel sources, habitat preservation, human rights, black lives matter, hunger, infectious disease (pandemic), oceans, pollution, population, mindfulness. Some are borrowed from Ms. Goodenough; some have been added by me. I am struggling with some of these items, in that some bring up a negative emotion while others may engender more neutral or positive feelings. However, they are my key words of items we as society or planet need to focus on by fixing the negatives or enforcing the more positive items. Moreover, the order I put them in is random except maybe the last word: Mindfulness.

I realize, who the hell am I that I have the audacity to even think, propose, or write about a list like this and dare to call for a new planetary ethics? Oh well, this is my blog, and as a regular reader you know I have strong opinions, at times. These are my new planetary ethics. If you want to propose your own, tell me yours in the comment section below. However, these are some of the credos I would want to preach and live by.

Climate, sustainable fuel sources, oceans, pollution, population are all somewhat related. As you my regular reader will know, I have been on a climate change soap box for a long time. I have written a lot about the legacy we are leaving future generations, out children and grandchildren. While a lot of conservatives worry about money and the economic future, they do not appear to care if anyone survives to spend that money. Fuel relates to air pollution and that appears to be the driver to a lot of the environmental issues. Oceans don’t only address sea level rise, but also warmer ocean temperatures which allows less oxygen to dissolve in it, but it also addresses ocean acidification from increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere.

Peace and ethnic cleansings should be clear to you all. The war in Ukraine and the so called claim of Naziism. Putin’s need to cleanse that country. Let’s not talk about what China is doing to its Muslin population in the west. Hey, we are not much better in the white supremacy circles in this country. That is where Black-Lives-Matters comes in and all human rights. Naturally, hunger needs to be included as well.

Now where does population fits in? As I mentioned in a post, while I am not a Malthusian freak, I do believe that the earth has a carrying capacity. What I mean with this is that it can only support a limited number of people. What that will be or is, I have no idea. We are probably there already. I am for population control. Not mandatory, but birth control should be available to all and should be taught in school, so that everyone can make a sensible decision of their own. This includes a woman’s right to choose. Too many rats in a cage makes for wars and pandemics, the other word on my list.

Finally, the last word. The word I throw around a lot: Mindfulness. As regular readers and followers of my Instagram account know, I am a huge proponent of forest bathing or spending mindful time in the woods. I personally think that the interpersonal, health and mental health issues for a lot of people can be taken care of when we spend more time in nature. The world would be a better place. In addition, we would appreciate what is being done to the environment, our senses would calm down and we would become more peaceful. Can you just imagine Putin walking through the woods instead of sitting at one end of a very long table ordering to kill more Ukrainians?

So here you have it. My (not so new, somewhat borrowed) world ethics. I’ll be trying to live by them. Let me know yours, please!

We had a nice walk in Yorktown this weekend.  Spring had started and we enjoyed the spring flowers and the budding green.

What does the word environment mean to you? (12/14/2021)

What comes to mind when you hear the word environment? That was a question I read in a periodical I get called Yes! Yes! calls itself “Journalism for People Building a Better World.” It is a very provocative and informative magazine, and I enjoy it. The question what the word environment means to you was partially answered in the magazine, and I thought it was worth spending some time on here in my blog, since I often write about the environment, environmental protection, and environmental justice.

The Oxford Dictionary defines environment in two ways:

1. The surroundings or conditions in which a person, animal, or plant lives or operates.
2. The natural world, as a whole or in a particular geographical area, especially as affected by human activity.

From a biological viewpoint, some define environment as follows:

1. The uninhabitable portion of the environment
2. Uninhabited part, and
3. Inhabited part of the environment

Those darn biologists again! They know how to ruin a good thing and make something uninhabitable. But I guess they (we) are correct, places like the lava flow in Tenerife or Iceland are still part of the environment and are pretty darn uninhabitable. It just makes it sounds so clinical.

I guess, I could just copy what is written in the article since I assume that not many of you read the magazine, but that would be plagiarism, now wouldn’t it? Still, to paraphrase what Breanna Draxler wrote in her article, she writes it should not (only) be the charismatic things around us like the National Parks, the majestic peaks, and the beautiful forest. However, it should also the mundane including the soil, our air, things around our home, our workplace, and schools. We should understand how we are interconnected with each other, with the planet and everything living on it. Wow that is a Unitarian principle if I have ever heard of one.

The article then goes into environmental justice and makes the argument that wherever the environment is under assault, the local inhabitants will be under assault as well. It always seems that these inhabitants will mostly be minorities, especially women and children.

Why is it that when I start writing, things go where I did not intent it to go? This time I only read the introduction to Ms. Draxler’s article, and I thought it would make a great post: wondering what the word environment means to me. So, let’s see if I can bring it back to there. What does it all mean to me? As someone who is acutely aware of my surroundings, I like to “forest bathe”, meditate, observe and study nature, my environment is all around me, wherever I am and go. As I mentioned before, winter walks are my way of examining the canopy of trees in search of a design for the perfect bonsai. So yes, I consider myself acutely aware of my environment.

At the same time, I recognize the larger environment and often write about global warming. Right now, I am upset that our republican governor elect is either bowing to his own or to the conservative belief or bias and wants to dial back regulations that fight global warming and sea-level rise. The only thing I can think is “here we go again”. Let’s fight whatever progress we have made for future generations for short-term gain, and who really gives a damn how our kids and grandkids will suffer? Our generation’s legacy be damned!

To me environment includes all that and the people around me, my family and friends, you all who read my blog posts, my students, neighbors, foes, even my enemies, or shall I call them the folks I do not really like that much or get along with. That part of the environment is important. I once wrote a post on the difference between being alone and being lonely. As an introvert, I like being alone at times but being lonely without community or folks in my environment is not good.

In conclusion then, for me, the word environment encompasses everything, the whole, the web of our and my existence, as well the minutia everything and everybody around me. I need to cherish it and them, respect them, love them, take care of them; because they are all I have and all I can leave as legacy for future generations. They (you) contribute to who I am.

This photograph symbolizes what I am trying to tell you all here.  I walk by this scene probably at least once a day, if not more.  The perfect embrace of two different tree species: a loblolly pine and a maple.  If they can do it, humankind can do it, and fight for the environment on all different scales.

 

20 to 7-year storms (7/30/2021)

There was a report in one of the professional publications that I read that predicts that what we call in our profession 20-year storms are shifting and becoming 7-year storms. Now that is an interesting concept that I teach in my classes on stormwater, in particular in the class entitled “Where the Water Goes.” The class has a subtitle Hydrology for ESC and SW Inspectors. ESC stands for Erosion and Sediment Control and SW for Stormwater.

So, what does a x-year (24-hour) storm means and what do these values mean? I tell my students that those famous 100-year storms do not occur only once every 100 year. I remember well that in 2003 we had two 100-year storms in one week, followed the next week by hurricane Isabel, which dumped another 100-year storm in our area. As you can imagine that September the ephemeral ponds behind our home were full to the brim, a thing that usually only occurs in February. They are usually dry in the month of September. Those two 100-year storms in a row actually created a major issue during Isabel; the soil was saturated, and the trees were extremely unstable because of this. Trees were falling all over the place during the hurricane. I lost 13 trees in my back yard that day.

In a simple explanation, I tell my students that the concept of so many year storms is based on statistics. For example, a 100-year storm tells us that the storm has a likelihood of 1% (or 100%/100) of occurring any day of the year. A 20-year storm has a chance of occurring 5% (100%/20) any day of the year, and so on. Somehow, NOAA or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, could not find a better name for this phenomenon than calling it a so-many-year storm. In particular, since if it occurred today, it has the same probability of occurring again tomorrow. So, although rare what happened in 2003 having three 100 year storms in two weeks, it was statistically explainable.

So, I looked at the data for my home. A 20-year 24-hour storm at my home dumps around 6.5 inches of rain or 165 mm in those 24 hours, according to NOAA. In the good old days, a 7-year storm drops 5 inches or 127 mm in the same 24 hours. In other words, as a result of climate change the 7-year storm at my home would increase 1.5 inches or almost 40 mm of rain. Surprise, this is something we are all experiencing, thunderstorms are increasingly getting stronger and more severe.

I realize this is only an example for one place, but in the past weeks we have seen similar examples in Germany, Belgium, Arizona, and China just to name a few where we are seeing that storms are getting increasingly severe and dumping more water. Naturally this is not helped by all the development around us and the imperviousness that we are creating in our watersheds. It all means more runoff and flooding. The problem on top of this is the imperviousness that we appear to have created and are increasingly creating in neighborhoods of disadvantaged racial minority groups.

Some of these things going on with our climate and our earth are most likely very difficult to reverse. We will have to learn to live with them and adapt to them. That is part of the job I do professionally. I am part of a group that teaches stormwater management. We teach designers, developers, and regulators that it is best to try to infiltrate all that stormwater, by minimizing the impervious areas such as parking lots and roads. We also tell them that they need to preserve the soil, not compact it, so that water can infiltrate. Plant trees and shrubs, minimize lawns. Trees and shrubs intercept rain in their canopies and often only 40% of the rain makes it down to the ground. Are my students listening? Some, few are. But we keep working on them. But we don’t get discouraged, it is the right thing to do.

This is a picture I took a few years ago of a rain garden/bioretention area in Charlottesville, Virginia.  We teach students that the placement of ponds like these help with the infiltration and cleanup of stormwater and hopefully reduce the flooding danger.

The need for a fractal society (and this is not what you think it means) (5/29/2021)

I got a new subscription to a periodical with the interesting name “YES.” The subtitle is: “Journalism for people building a better world.” It looked interesting when I got the advertisement, and now reading the second issue, I dare say it has not disappointed me. I like it.

The first issue we got was all about plastics, the harm it does, sustainability clothing, microplastics, etc. I received the earlier issue which deals with the Ecological Civilization. While that is more utopian, from what I read, it may probably be the only way we can save our earth from spiraling down the proverbial celestial drain.

Reading the article by Jeremy Lent in Yes reminded me of an argument I have tried to make a long time. Many of you know I am a physiological plant ecologist by training. That is a lot of expensive words for someone who tries to explain why and how plants grow a certain way at that particular spot in nature. At times, we also call ourselves stress physiologists. Now the argument I make is that there is order in nature, while a lot of my non-biology friends tell me that I am nuts, and they see chaos. I even try to argue there is a form of mathematical order to it.

Now a fellow bonsai grower, Nigel, Saunders, puts it really well on his YouTube channel. I believe Nigel used to work as a graphic designer and he is a keen observer of nature and trees. In other words, you do not need to have a Ph.D. in physiological plant ecology; anyway, that may even be a handicap. I have seen more biologists that cannot keep a house plant alive. But back to our collective observations.

Nigel designs his trees going from one branch that splits into two, which then each split into two, which then again, each split into two, and so on (now here are your fractals). You also, according to Nigel have to make the length of the branches progressively shorter; actually half the length (fractals again). This is a very common rule in bonsai which Nigel discusses well on his videos. Others talk about it as well, but again he is a great teacher and a keen observer. Now, I tell the same thing to my friends. Other observations are that canopies usually do not touch and branches do not sprout from the inside of a curve. I have also always maintained that when a tree does this the total circumference, diameter or volume of the two branches can hardly be larger than the original from which it split into the two above (fractals anyone), otherwise there would be a deficit, and not enough water could flow to the top of the canopy.

Like Nigel, I have been fascinated by trees, their bark and canopy.  Feel free to look through my labels of trees, roots and bonsai to see what I have written about them.  Here is a good example of how canopies do not touch.

Now here comes Mr. Lent who argues that in an ecological civilization we need a fractal organization. He argues that what Nigel or I are talking about are in fact a form of fractal organization of trees in in a larger form of nature. He says we see it everywhere in life, not only in trees, but in rivers, coastlines, in our lungs, our blood vessels, you name it. In ecology he argues it may go from microscopic cells to organisms, species, ecosystems, and the entire living earth. It is very much like what I describe in my last post about the book I am reading: “Finding the Mother Tree;” were it not for the microscopic mycorrhizae the forest would not thrive.

For humankind this would mean that the health of entire world would depend on the health of every individual living in it. Regardless of scale, whether it is humanity as a whole, a country, town, a community or a family unit, the same would be for the wellbeing of those folks; they depend on the environment around them, their health, happiness, income, of themselves and that of everybody near them. In other words, we cannot think of the whole without considering all the parts and make sure they are ok.

Some of you may claim that this is bordering on socialism or worse communism. Is taking care of your neighbors and wanting them to be as well as you, socialism? No, in a fractal society it is empathy and self-preservation and the preservation of this earth for future generations.

I am a tree hugger (1/23/2021)

Of all the environmental news and stories that came out last year there was one that has stayed with me. Regular readers know that I am a huge student and lover of trees. OK, you can even call me a tree hugger! When I walk in the woods there is nothing better than petting the occasional tree with my bare hands, or just laying my hands on the trunk and enjoying my connection with the wood, the tree, and by way of its vascular and root system with the earth; the entire world around me. 

In winter, I enjoy looking up in the canopy of trees and look at the branching.  This helps me in my studies for the development of my bonsai, but also just the enjoyment of the simple beauty and majesty. 

But that is not necessarily what I want to write about today. In the department that we work, we have bi-monthly climate change webinars, and sometime mid-2020 we had a talk by Dr. Jeremy Hoffman climatologist from the Virginia Science Museum in Richmond about how urban treescapes modified the urban climate. More specifically, he had studied how city sections where minorities live had fewer trees and parks then Caucasian neighborhoods. These African American neighborhoods were much warmer during the summer which resulted in heat related 911 (or emergency/ambulance) calls. Now here I was looking at the year end review in the New York Times and they showed to 10 most important articles of 2020 and there it was, an article on this specific research. Here is the link to this article. They did another article about it earlier.

While I promised not to bother you all about politics in my blogs as much as I have done in the past 4 years, the issue in Richmond and many other large cities goes back many years. It is known as environmental justice. Environmental justice is very closely aligned with racism and economic justice, where the poor and minorities were delt the short end of the stick. They lived closer to the pollution generating area; the areas that were cheaper to live in; across the tracks as it is called. They could not afford high rent, health care, the electricity to cool or heat their homes. There you have it, heat related illnesses because of the lack of trees in the summer, including asthma because trees also scrub the air.

It still amazes me to see in this neighborhood where I live, how eager newcomers are to cut the trees in their yards around their homes (even today I could hear the whining of the chainsaws), in the pursuit of, I am not sure what. More sun, the perfect lawn, more exposure and heat in the summer, more wind, and even lower temperatures in winter? Yes, having a yard full of trees is a pain. We have a lot of leaves in fall and no sun any longer for a decent vegetable garden, and my bonsais. I previously wrote about my gripe over the eagerness that some of the folks here have about leaf disposal and tree killing. 

This tree had split in two exposing this inner wood.  It shows that vascular system that connects the upper part of the tree (and me when I touch the tree) with the earth.  I just love the vein pattern.

But even planting a young tree or a smaller species in place of the old majestic one they just nuked really does not help. A lawn or a young, small tree are so much less efficient in fixing carbon out of the air and thus reducing CO2 than large mature trees. In addition, my bike and car both have a temperature gauge on them, and we can see the difference when we go from our yard down to the primary school less than a mile away, which has absolutely no tree around it. In summer, the temperatures are easily 5 or more degrees higher than in my wooded front yard. In winter, when the thermometer reads 32 degrees (or freezing), the windshields of my cars may not need scraping while the neighbor’s cars are frosted over.

Concluding trees are not only good for the soul, but they also help in moderating the microclimate around your home, they are good for the climate as a whole, and they provide great habitat for all kinds of critters, be it up there or in the fallen leaves. In other words, become a tree hugger.