Daily News article

Here is another battle that's relevant to our cause. When will the people in power take their heads out of their #!* and realize the huge economic value and health benefits of open space, and in particular, forests.

Battle over University Woods for condos

By Heather Appel

Tuesday, December 11th 2007, 4:00 AM
Brandy Cochrane, 27, and others have been doing cleanups at University Woods Park since October 2006.

Brandy Cochrane, 27, and others have been doing cleanups at University Woods Park since October 2006.

Abused and just about abandoned, a little Bronx park tucked away above the Harlem River is finding itself caught in a tug of war.

Once a dumping ground for carcasses of animals sacrificed in Santeria rituals, the community board wants to use hilly 3.3-acre University Woods Park for an affordable condo complex.

But some local activists have been working to clean up and save the park.

Two years ago, Community Board 5 approached developer Andrew Lasala about swapping the park for his property on the waterfront just north of it, which would be ideal for a greenway, said District Manager Xavier Rodriguez.

The state was interested in buying Lasala's waterfront property, Rodriguez said, and there was interest in swapping it for the University Woods acres, which have been a haven for drug addicts and homeless people and last year was ranked as the worst park in the city by an advocacy group.

An alternative goal is for the city and Bronx Community College to develop the park.

Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrión has "wanted to see this place become an outdoor lab," Rodriguez said. "With BCC's involvement ... there's a real chance for this park, I believe."

Carrión supports the swap idea - if it would result in the acquisition of a waterfront parcel, said spokesman Mike Murphy.

"However, we may be receptive to the idea of keeping it undeveloped as a natural area with environmental programming, possibly with the support of Bronx Community College," he said. "This land should not simply sit there abandoned and useless."

Bronx Community College representatives said the school has no public plans for the park.

The Parks Department had a similar response.

"We do not have any capital projects lined up," said spokeswoman Jesslyn Tiao. "We would be happy to renovate if there's funding allocated."

Community resident Brandy Cochrane has been organizing monthly park cleanups since October of last year, and, with the support of the Natural Resources Group, planted 636 bulbs and learned about rare trees, plant life and wildlife there.

Geoffrey Croft, president of New York City Park Advocates, said the park is not beyond repair.

He pointed to Pugsley Creek and Highbridge parks, which he said posed bigger challenges than University Woods yet are undergoing capital improvements. University Woods could even accommodate bike trails, he said.

"I think there's some very real solutions to that park," he said, "and they certainly do not involve putting housing on it."

Send us an email

The Nature of Nature-Deficit Disorder

The following article is The Trust for Public Land's magazine "Land and People", Fall 2007:

A Conversation with Richard Louv
By William Poole

Three years ago, Richard Louv was a San Diego Union-Tribune newspaper columnist and book author who wrote often about social trends. Today he is chief spokesman for a rapidly growing movement that seeks to reconnect children with nature. Published in 2005, Louv's Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder details the many ways in which modern children are disconnected from the natural world. Now in its 14th printing, the book makes a powerful case for the importance of experiencing nature in childhood. Such experience, Louv contends, is essential for both the good of the children and the future of the planet—a message that has hit home with the American people. Louv speaks before packed houses nationwide, and the nonprofit he started, the Children & Nature Network, works tirelessly to promote programs that give children access to nature. Recently he shared with Land&People his thoughts on this work and its meaning for conservationists.

Your book and work call attention to the fact that children get a lot less outdoor play and time in nature today than they used to. Can you tell us a little about your own childhood experiences in nature?

Well, I grew up in the 1950s on the edge of Kansas City and spent hours outside. This was where the suburbs met farmland and woods. I write in the book how many of the farm fields had trees planted between them as windbreaks, and my friends and I would climb high up in them, to look out over the fields and mountains. Or sometimes I would climb alone, and I would imagine I was Rudyard Kipling's Mowgli—the boy raised by wolves. High up, the tree would sway in the wind, and it was both frightening and wonderful to surrender to its power. We had a creek to explore. And I built various outdoor shelters and tree houses. Looking back on it now, I realize that nature was both exciting and calming, and it helped me to focus.

In Last Child in the Woods you write about how when you talked about your childhood to your son Matthew, he would ask why it was "more fun when you were a kid." Was this what got you thinking about how nature is experienced so differently by today's children?

That was one of many things that got me thinking about it. I have been writing about children and parenting and nature for years, and the more I researched this topic, the clearer I saw this growing and destructive gap between children and the natural world. Today's kids are aware of global threats to the environment but at no other time in our history have children been so separated from direct experience in nature. At the same time, we are beginning to learn the importance of such experience. Recent studies show that nature can be powerful therapy for depression, obesity, and attention deficit disorder. Experience in nature can increase the ability to concentrate in both children and adults. And studies here and in Scandinavia strongly suggest that childhood experiences with nature increase creativity.

You use the term "nature-deficit disorder" to refer to the human costs of alienation from nature. What's changed for kids these days?

Parents typically give a number of reasons why their children spend less time in nature. There's more competition from television and computers; children have more homework and activities that demand their time. And in some instances, they simply don't have access to natural areas. Fear plays a big part, too—fear of traffic, of crime, of stranger-danger, or of nature itself. In some areas, neighborhood covenants and government regulations seem almost to criminalize natural play and put nature off limits. But it's not only children who are subject to nature-deficit disorder. It's a much bigger concept than that. You could say that nature-deficit disorder also affects adults, neighborhoods, whole communities, and the future of humankind's relationship to nature.

Can you say a little more about what today's kids lose by being cut off from nature?

Health is one thing that can be damaged. Also an understanding of where we fit into the natural world and our communities. Without contact with nature, kids may also fail to develop what Harvard Professor Howard Gardner calls "naturalist intelligence"—an ability to identify and classify patterns in nature that have been with us through all of human evolution. There is also a sensual loss. Direct experience in nature simultaneously stimulates all of a child's senses, and the use of our senses is essential to learning. By moving childhood indoors, we deprive children of a full connection to the world.

But most of all, I think our plugged-in kids, who spend so much time in front of the TV and computer screen, are missing out on many chances to feel a sense of wonder. What I'd really like to communicate to fellow parents is that we shouldn't think about a child's experience in nature as an extracurricular activity but as a vital element for healthy child development. That's what the new research strongly suggests.

Your work has certainly struck a chord. Last Child in the Woods continues to sell well and a new edition is coming out next year. You are speaking to large crowds around the country about an emerging "children and nature" movement. Have you been surprised by the reaction?

Well, I have been immensely gratified by it, and it has given me hope. The issues in the book touch something deep within us, both biologically and spiritually. When I speak around the country, I like to tell how, as a boy, I would pull up survey stakes to discourage development of the farms near my home. At one speech in New Mexico, a rancher, probably in his sixties, stood up to say that he did the same thing when he was a boy. Then he started to cry. Despite his deep embarrassment, he continued to talk about his fear that his might be one of the last generations of Americans to feel a sense of attachment to land and nature. So many people feel that, and it's what's powering the interest in this movement. Many of us sense that something has been taken from our lives, and we know our kids are missing out. I think that once parents and other adults understand not only what is being lost but also what can be gained by reconnecting our kids, and ourselves, to nature, that great change will follow.

TPL and its supporters work to create neighborhood parks and other close-to-home natural places. What lessons does your work have for conservationists like those who support TPL's work?

Well, of course, we need places for kids to connect with nature, and we need the help of TPL and all conservation groups to make that happen. TPL's Parks for People program in cities is particularly helpful in putting nature where kids live. But we also need to think about specific ways to support children's use of natural areas. One idea would be to dedicate a portion of any proposed open space to children and families, where there could be nature centers, outdoor-oriented preschools, nature education programs, and other offerings.

And no matter how good a job they are doing now, conservationists and environmentalists need to do more. They need to realize that the future of the environmental movement—indeed of the planet itself—may depend on this work. Studies show that people who care deeply about the future of the environment almost always enjoyed transcendent experiences in nature when they were children. If nature experiences for children continue to fade, where will future stewards of the earth come from? I hope that Last Child in the Woods challenges conservation groups and environmental organizations to ask that question—and then bring their own creativity to the protection of Western society's keystone endangered species: the human child in nature. Ultimately, this is a matter of common sense.

More information on Richard Louv, the children and nature movement, and the Children & Nature Network can be found at www.cnaturenet.org. Last Child in the Woods is available in bookstores and from online vendors nationwide, including TPL's Web store at shop.tpl.org. TPL's reports detailing the benefits of parks can be found here.

Send us an email

Juniper Berry article

Here's a link to an Op-Ed piece in the current issue of the "Juniper Berry".

Send us an email

City Council Environmental Protection Committee

There are some matters before the City Council's Environmental Protection committee that are relevant to our cause. Removing any trees from the Ridgewood Reservoir forests, for example, flies in the face of what lawmakers are trying to accomplish with Int 0628-2007.

Latest Matters before the Environmental Protection Committee

November 28,2007
Reducing the emission of global warming pollution.
Click to Read Int 0020-2006

November 28,2007
Reducing the emission of global warming pollution.
Click to Read Res 1171-2007

November 26,2007
Oversight - Cleaning up the Oil Spill in Newtown Creek: An Update
Click to Read T2007-1702

November 08,2007
Allowing on-site disposal of storm water runoff.
Click to Read Int 0321-2006

November 08,2007
Sustainable stormwater management, trees and vegetation.
Click to Read Int 0628-2007

Click to view the Environmental Protection Committee Archive

Meeting at Oak Ridge

Last week, on November 28th, the department of parks had a meeting at their Forest Park headquarters. The breakfast meeting was attended by several people in our group, as well as, Jennifer Manley (Queens Director of the Community Affairs Unit for Mayor Bloomberg's office) and representatives from Senator Maltese office, Assemblyman Darryl Towns office, Queens Community Board 5, The New York Environmental Law and Justice Project, Juniper Park Civic Association, The Ridgewood Property Owners and Civic Association and Partnerships for Parks. There were a few people present that I didn't get to meet, so forgive me if I omitted any groups. The meeting was organized by Forest Park and Highland Park administrator Deborah Kuha and was motivated by parks perception of "miscommunication" regarding the Ridgewood Reservoir plans.

Representing the department of parks were Jonna Carmona-Graf (Capital Projects), Deborah Kuha (Administrator for Forest Park and Highland Park), Dorothy Lewandowski (Queens Commissioner of Parks), Kevin Quinn (Capital Projects) and Josephine Scalia (Landscape Coordinator, Forest Park).

The meeting began with Ms. Lewandowski making some opening remarks, which included pointing out that I was the person who created "the video". I'm not quite sure why that was necessary, but whatever. She asked that we go around the room and introduce ourselves and our affiliations. Kevin Quinn then gave a PowerPoint presentation that began with the history of the Ridgewood Reservoir and ended with the New York City Department of Parks ideas for the future of the 50 acres. It was a very thorough presentation that also gave preliminary information obtained from an ecological assessment report being prepared for the city by Round Mountain Ecological LLC. Included in that segment of the slideshow was the recognition that basin 1 and basin 3 contained several endangered species of plants.

The final slide of the presentation was divided into sections; an opening list of priorities followed by three columns - Option 1, Option 2 and Option 3. The options ranged from leaving the basins as nature preserves (Option 1) to Option 3, which would be the most disruptive to the reservoirs and include turning basin 3 into active recreational facilities.

Kevin Quinn opened with the aforementioned graphic by stating that certain items were "givens", things that would happen regardless of the option chosen. Included in the list of "givens" was the breaching of Basin 3, in a location opposite the parking lot, exactly where I had described in a previous posting. When I asked about the fact the basin 3 would be breached not matter what, I received explanations from both Ms. Lewandowski and Ms. Carmona-Graf that didn't make a lot of sense to me, but included the concept that they were just exploring ideas. I replied that if it was just something that was being explored, shouldn't it be moved from the top list to the options list. I didn't get a good feeling about the responses. It also didn't make a lot of sense to me that parks recognizes the existence of endangered plant species in sections of basin 3, but all drawings indicating possible recreational facilities in that basin have it butting right up against that section of forest. I'm not sure those plants would be around for very long once any construction began. I also addressed the use of the word "miscommunication". Commissioner Benepe used the word at a recent presentation for New York City Audubon in reference to this group's concerns and activities. I pointed out to Commissioner Lewandowski that we were merely responding to public statements and documents from the Department of Parks and Recreation. One such document is the department of parks "Open Space Report" for PlanNYC 2030. Regarding the Ridgewood Reservoir it states, "the largest will be transformed into a 60-acre active recreation center." I'm still not sure how they plan to do that considering the entire parcel is only 50 acres and the largest basin 26 acres.

Unfortunately, there were times during the presentation when questions from the audience became fervent and somewhat adversarial. For the most part, I think that the people who put together the meeting were sincere in their desire to have our group work with parks. Unfortunately, given the current Department of Parks and Recreation's reputation for misleading the public about capital projects, I think we should remain open minded but vigilant. At one point during the question and answer period, Ms. Carmona-Graf was asked if any development would occur in basins 1 and 2. Her response was, "I'm thinking that nothing will be happening with basins 1 and 2." How about a "yes" or "no".

Click here to watch a video on Washington Square Park.

Send us an email

The Nature Conservancy article

The following article is from The Nature Conservancy's magazine "Nature". Commissioner Benepe seems to understand the need for trees in New York City. So why would he be so determined to ruin a forested area that resides at the top of the Jamaica Bay Watershed and serves the very functions that he correctly believes NYC desperately needs?

From "Nature New York", Fall/Winter 2007

A Shady Plan for New York City

Deep in the Adirondacks, The Nature Conservancy is safeguarding millions of trees from development and destruction. Miles away in New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has announced a plan to add an additional one million trees to the city's urban forest by 2017.

Nature New York wondered how this plan will make a difference to New York City, and how it might play into the Conservancy's own global forest initiative. Adrian Benepe, NYC Parks and Recreation commissioner, took time out to talk.

NNY: What will an additional one million trees do for the city?

Benepe: Trees are a vital part of our city, they improve air quality by reducing temperatures which in turn, reduces energy consumption by buildings. They remove pollutants from the air and they mitigate climate change by capturing and storing carbon. Trees also help our water systems by intercepting rain before it reaches sewers and filtering runoff through their soil and roots. And finally, they benefit the health and safety of our residents and promote neighborhood revitalization, economic development and greater community pride.

NNY: What will it cost, and who will pay for it?

Benepe: The money will come almost completely from New York City's budget. The great part is, when you take into account all the services we get from trees, the USDA Forest Service estimates that for every dollar we invest, we get a return of five dollars in property value, pollution mitigation, energy savings, and storm water management.

NNY: What can The Nature Conservancy do to support this effort?

Benepe: The Conservancy already does so much by raising awareness, promoting conservation, and encouraging people to think about healthy ecosystems. The bottom line is that trees, whether in the Adirondacks or New York City, are of tremendous value for people and or nature.

Send us an email

Birds at risk

The following article was in today's New York Times. I thought that it was relevant to our cause given the amazing number of birds that have been observed at Ridgewood Reservoir. I have added a link to Audubon's watchlist to the sidebar.

December 1, 2007

A Rising Number of Birds at Risk

By Anthony DePalma

Relentless sprawl, invasive species and global warming are threatening an increasing number of bird species in the United States, pushing a quarter of them — including dozens in New York and New Jersey — toward extinction, according to a new study by the National Audubon Society and the American Bird Conservancy.

The study, called WatchList 2007, categorized 178 species in the United States as being threatened, an increase of about 10 percent from 2002, when Audubon’s last study was conducted. Of the 178 species on the list, about 45 spend at least part of the year in this region.

Among the most threatened is the rare Bicknell’s thrush, a native of the Catskill and Adirondack highlands whose winter habitat in the Caribbean is disappearing. Although less at risk, the wood thrush — whose distinctive song was once emblematic of the Northeast’s rugged woodlands — is on the list because a combination of acid rain and sprawl has damaged its habitat and caused its numbers to decline precipitously over the last four decades.

The Audubon list, which was released Wednesday, overlaps the federal government’s official endangered species list in some cases. But it also includes a number of bird species that are not recognized as endangered by the federal government but that biologists fear are in danger of becoming extinct.

“We’re concerned that there’s been almost a moratorium on the listing of endangered birds over the last seven years under this administration,” Greg Butcher, Audubon’s bird conservation director and a co-author of the new study, said in a telephone interview. Placing a threatened bird on the new watch list can bring it the kind of attention it needs to survive even if the federal government does not act, he said.

“When we pay attention to these birds and do the things we know need to be done, these birds recover,” Mr. Butcher said. “All these birds have a chance to rebound if we put the right actions in motion.”

Those actions include channeling new development to established areas, being vigilant about new invasive species that can devastate habitats and limiting carbon dioxide emissions, which contribute to climate change.

The national watch list is divided into two categories: 59 species, including the whooping crane and the lesser prairie-chicken, are on the “red list” for species that are declining rapidly and facing major threats; 119 are on the “yellow list” for species that are declining or rare but are not yet endangered.

In New York, 10 birds — including the Henslow’s sparrow — are on the red list. The cerulean warbler, the short-eared owl and 35 other birds are on the yellow list. New Jersey’s list includes many of the same birds as New York’s. The count in Connecticut is similar, Mr. Butcher said.

The region’s coastal location raises issues of particular concern. Mr. Butcher said he was especially worried about beach birds like the piping plover, the least tern and the black skimmer, as well as birds whose habitat is the region’s disappearing salt marshes. They include the saltmarsh sharp-tailed sparrow and the clapper rail. And he noted that migratory shore birds, including the red knot and the semipalmated sandpiper, would face increasing difficulties in this region.

“As sea level rises, and the salt marshes disappear, these species don’t have anyplace to go,” Mr. Butcher said. “In New York and New Jersey, so many people live close to the coast that we do what we can to safeguard people but we don’t necessarily protect the natural habitat.”

Send us an email