Back to the Burden

The unspeakable horror unfolding in Japan has naturally usurped the original purpose of this blog - which has been to record the death of trees - and it isn't at all clear how much longer the crisis there will overshadow the more leisurely, almost imperceptible, decline of plantlife from exposure to rising levels of background tropospheric ozone.  But truthfully, so much new material has been uncovered on this topic recently that I have scarcely been able to formulate a coherent presentation anyway.  I have been overwhelmed and more than willing to defer to the multi-faceted disasters that are a scourge on the other side of the world.  But now it's time.  The silent trees cannot wait for the outcome in Fukushima.  So the focus now returns to documenting their plight.

When the multiple disasters struck Japan, it was the end of a week in Cambridge for me.  When I first arrived at the same house where I stayed almost exactly a year ago, I had a vague perception that the neighborhood looked a little different than before.

Despite how hyper-vigilant as I have become about trees, it didn't even cross my mind what had occurred until I happened to look out a window from the second floor, with a vantage high above the neighbor's fence - where I spotted this enormous, freshly cut stump.  In the satellite photo below, you can see the tree's dead branches in the lower center.  This is how our world is disappearing before our eyes, almost unnoticed.  It is so obscenely ignored, I do not know how much longer I should bother to transcribe it.

While in the Boston area I went to five museums - the Harvard Natural History Museum, the Aquarium, the Children's Museum, the Museum of Science and the Museum of Fine Arts.  I was grateful and at the same time excruciatingly sad to see the collections of exotic species, so boggling in their immense diversity, knowing that soon such museum exhibits will be all that remains to illuminate the many wild creatures that inhabit our Earth.  I took lots of pictures and so, instead of damaged trees, for the most part I will stick to the latest news that is relevant among these lovely memories of exhibits and art. (All quoted passages in lavender!)

When I was a teenager in Ipswich I used to love to take the train to Boston, to wander through the museums.

A great favorite was the peacefully secluded Harvard Museum with its splendid displays of Nature's creatures and the impressive, impossible glass flowers, which utterly captivated my admiration.

It was exhilarating to imagine then as now, how many kinds of butterflies there are in the world, and striped snails!

In my incessant googling searches to locate corroborative evidence for the inescapable conviction that ozone is killing trees incrementally, I began to look for evidence in dendochronology - the study of tree rings - which are sure indicators of growth rates.  One article I found, published in 2009 in Science Direct says:

Both manual and electromechanical dendrometer techniques have been used to define growth patterns of mature forest trees at scales ranging from hourly to seasonal, and to evaluate the roles of ozone and physical climate as contributors to observed variability in growth. This chapter addresses the issues of quantifying and modeling the specific effects of ozone in the presence of co-varying influences of other important environmental variables. A variety of statistical models have been developed that provide strongly converging evidence that short-term variations in ozone exposure, although they contribute only about 2% to hourly scale variations, have strongly accumulative effects over the growing season. Model predictions of growth loss in the range of 50% in high ozone years agreed well with observed growth changes with similar levels of ozone increase for selected sample trees. Observed and predicted growth losses in a high ozone year greatly exceed levels typically assumed for mature forest trees based on controlled studies with seedling trees.

In other words, the effects in the real world far exceed the predicted effects from controlled experiments.  Ooh...Also, it's rather interesting that as the snow melts, people are astonished by the accumulated tree debris being unveiled, according this description in Boston.com.

Now, a steady March thaw has brought them back to the surface, a jagged collection of cracked boughs and snapped twigs strewn across lawns, parks, and roadsides. As homeowners take stock of winter’s damage and bundle sticks under their arms like campers gathering firewood, public works crews and private contractors across the region are busily clearing away more wooden debris than most anyone can remember.

“We’ve never had this magnitude of fallen branches,’’ said Marc Welch, director of urban forestry in Newton, where crews have begun canvassing the city to clear the streets.

It is the refrain that is becoming so familiar on many fronts of ecosystem collapse, the 6th great extinction, and the rapidity of climate change - never seen anything like it.  Worse and faster than expected or predicted.

This is just one corridor of the blown-glass flowers, an extraordinary labor of love, which I adored when I was young.

Now they look a bit faded.

But there is a marvelous array of fossils and crystals to admire.

Next day, I ventured to the Aquarium, where the penguins frolic.

The images in the tanks are so beautiful that art students line the benches, trying to capture their luminous hues and mesmerizing motion as the sea urchins flutter in artificial waves and schools of fish turn en masse, beholden to a secret signal.

In 2006 a report emerged from that beleaguered country, Japan, that is unusually blunt about the impacts of ozone.

I can't explain how I missed it 'till now.

It's complete, and easy to read.

Titled "Tropospheric Ozone, A Growing Threat," it was published by the Acid Deposition and Oxident Research Center.  Following are excerpts and some excellent graphs.

Decreasing concentrations of ozone in the stratosphere are causing a serious problem of depletion of the ozone layer. Meanwhile, ozone concentrations are increasing in the troposphere—the ozone within about ten kilometers from the Earth’s surface. A strong oxidant, tropospheric ozone is harmful to humans and ecosystems. It is also a powerful greenhouse gas. Average concentrations of ozone are increasing in Japan and other countries. Even in remote places like the Oki islands in the Sea of Japan, far from any urban center, ozone concentrations in air transported from far away sometimes exceed environmental standards in Japan.

Experiments in Europe, the United States and Japan indicate that yield losses of agricultural crops and suppression of tree growth may occur even in under current ozone concentrations. It is projected that if concentrations continue to rise in East Asia, vegetation will be exposed to higher levels of ozone stress, and economic losses will affect not only Japan but also China, the Republic of Korea and other countries in this region.

This is a rather telling comparison from that report, NO2 levels in China, 1996, and 2002.  Hate to think what they are like now!

There is also analysis of ozone as the third most powerful greenhouse gas contributing to climate change (ahem, Real Climate) including this interesting observation:

Since the increase of tropospheric ozone in the northern hemisphere is larger than in the southern hemisphere due to the higher intensity of human activities in the North, in the past the global warming effects of ozone have been much greater in the northern hemisphere. In addition, even within the northern hemisphere, there are large differences in the size of the effects depending on location. These are special features of the greenhouse effect of tropospheric ozone.

And then wait!  There is a section on damage to vegetation!

In 1944, photochemical smog damage was observed for the first time on plants near Los Angeles in the United States. Later, ozone was identified as the primary causal agent of the damage. Since then, many studies conducted on the effects of ozone on plants have shown that ozone is damaging plants in various regions across Japan, Europe and North America. When a high-concentration of ozone diffuses into a plant, the strong oxidizing power injures the plant tissues, resulting in visible damage, such as white, yellow, or reddish spots in the leaves.

The leaf damage in leafy vegetables like spinach reduces the commercial value significantly (Photo 5-1). Even if the ozone concentration is less than a level that causes visible damage, the elevated level of ozone concentrations reduces the photosynthesis function and accelerates aging in plant leaves. Plant growth is hence retarded, and, in agricultural crops, the harvest is reduced.

So, seeing as how EVERY LEAF  I have recorded these past two summers has exhibited visible ozone damage, what the heck can we imagine is happening inside the trees???

Wang and Mauzerall (2004) predicted that daytime surface ozone concentrations in July will exceed 55 ppb in most parts of China in 2020, using a global-scale model of atmospheric chemistry and transport. They also predicted that the total production of soybean, corn and winter wheat in China will be reduced by about 40 to 60 percent in 2020.

Since Chinese crop production is the world’s largest for wheat, second- largest for corn, and fourth-largest for soybean, the Wang-Mauzerall predictions on the crop losses to ozone have very strong implications for the global food supply in the future.

Ho ho!  We aren't done yet!  There is still to go, an entire section devoted to trees!

Forests act as a life-support system on the Earth. Through photosynthesis, trees, a main component of forest ecosystems, supply the oxygen that is indispensable to support life. Forests also preserve our environment by fixing carbon dioxide, a major cause of the global warming, and by absorbing air pollutants. Unfortunately, forest decline and tree dieback are being observed in many areas of Japan (Izuta 2001).

Japanese Beech Tree Decline at Mt. Hirugatake

 In the Tanzawa Mountains of Kanagawa Prefecture, the decline and dieback of Japanese beech (Fagus crenata) have been observed at Mt. Hinokiboramaru and Mt. Hirugatake (Photo 6-1 top), and decline of Japanese fir (Abies firma) has been observed at Mt. Ohyama. In the Oku-Nikko area of Tochigi Prefecture, Veitch’s fir (Abies veitchii), Maries fir (Abies mariesii) and Erman's birch (Betula ermanii) are in a state of decline (Photo 6-1 bottom). In the Sanyo Region, which includes Hiroshima Prefecture, the decline of Japanese red pine (Pinus densiflora) has been observed. In some areas along the Sea of Japan, including Ishikawa, Tottori and Shimane Prefectures, the decline and dieback of konara oak (Quercus serrata) and mizunara oak (Quercus mongolica) have also been observed.

Vietch's Fir and Maries Fir in Decline in Oku-Nikko

Several hypotheses have been presented on the causes of forest decline or tree dieback in Europe and North America. Possible causes differ with each site. Ozone, soil acidification due to acid deposition and excess nitrogen deposition from the atmosphere have been suggested as causes in northern Europe; ozone, acid deposition such as acid mist and fog and sulfur dioxide have been suggested in western Europe; and sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone and acid deposition such as acid mist/fog have been suggested in eastern Europe. In North America, meanwhile, ozone is thought to be closely related to the forest decline and tree dieback. For example, in the Sierra Nevada-San Bernardino Mountains, ozone is regarded as the main cause of the decline of pine species such as ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) and Jeffrey Pine (Pinus jeffreyi). In the northern Appalachian Mountains, where the decline of red spruce (Picea rubens) has been observed, relatively high concentrations of ozone have been recorded. In the southeastern part of the United States, it has also been suggested that ozone is a factor in the decline of eastern white pine (Pinus strobus).

In Japan, tropospheric ozone concentrations have been increasing in recent years, and concentrations of ozone high enough to cause harmful effects on forest tree species have been recorded. Based on these facts, ozone is considered to be one of the main factors relating to forest decline and tree dieback in Japan. In fact, relatively high concentrations of ozone over 100 ppb have been recorded in the Oku-Nikko area and at Mt. Hinokiboramaru in the Tanzawa Mountains, where the decline and dieback of Japanese beech (Fagus crenata) have been observed. Thus, adverse impacts of ambient ozone on growth and physiological functions such as photosynthesis of forest tree species are matters of concern.

Oh, never mind all that...

Imagine my joy when I found FRIED IPSWICH CLAMS at Faneuil Hall!!! Oh, rapture!!

It was a long and gratifying day.  I have always thought downtown Boston is so charming.  Not overwhelming, like New York City.

Here is the view heading home from between the layers of expressway.

A number of places have reported recently about the dwindling supply of coffee, and the soaring prices.  The first article I saw happened to be in the Seattle Times.  It annoyed me because like all the others, it blames climate change and never mentions ozone, even though the "withered leaves" and lowered yields are exactly what scientific research has demonstrated is classic ozone damage:

Near the crest of a hill on a farm named La Edda for his mother, Francisco Flores bends a knee to touch the curled, yellowed leaves of a young coffee tree, one of hundreds on a windswept ridge where coffee grew strong two decades ago.

"They live, but they don't produce," Flores explains. "I have an ache in my heart. It's very difficult to see coffee businesses that went from generation to generation to generation, closing."

Costa Rica has 25 percent fewer acres planted in coffee than it did a decade ago, according to the national coffee agency iCafe. Roughly 10,000 farmers have quit coffee, some converting their land to pasture for cattle or dairy businesses.

The remaining coffee farms produce less, with yields down 26 percent in a decade.

Next on the agenda, the Museum of Science.

It was a grey and foggy day, best spent indoors.

The museum has everything from hypnotic kinetic sculpture to luscious samples of petrified wood.

There was an article about the Amazon which I believe has misinterpreted the original percentage of forest loss, published in Treehugger magazine.  But the part that interests me is this passage:

In addition to deforestation, areas of Amazon degradation have also increased at an alarming rate. IMAZON notes that 541 km² (209 mi²) were degraded in December 2010. Throughout that month in 2009, only 11 km² (4 mi²) were impacted -- representing an astonishing increase of 4,818 percent.

Unfortunately, while last year ended poorly for the Amazon rainforest, the trend seems to be carrying into the new year. Just last month, 83 km² (32 mi²) of forest were cleared and 376 km² (145 mi²) degraded -- representing increases over last year's rates of 22 and 637 percent, respectively.

The latest figures of devastation confirm concerns outlined by Brazil's Institute of Space Research (INP), which uses satellite imaging to monitor deforestation.

These findings stand in stark contrast to downward trend in deforestation over the last several years, and are the first indications of an increase in forest loss in more than two. It may be too soon to tell whether or not the latest reports are simply outliers, or if the tides have changed for the largest and most important forest on Earth.

Regardless of whether the percentage of forest loss was not accurately translated, this is interesting because I cannot ascertain what exactly is meant by "degradation."  It also may be significant because although supposedly ozone is more of a northern hemisphere problem, Brazil has been bananas for biofuel for quite some time, and here's the skinny on that source of emissions, from wiki:

Pollution

Formaldehyde, Acetaldehyde and other Aldehydes are produced when alcohols are oxidized. When only a 10% mixture of ethanol is added to gasoline (as is common in American E10gasohol and elsewhere), aldehyde emissions increase 40%.[citation needed] Some study results are conflicting on this fact however, and lowering the sulfur content of biofuel mixes lowers the acetaldehyde levels.[20] Burning biodiesel also emits aldehydes and other potentially hazardous aromatic compounds which are not regulated in emissions laws.[21]

Many aldehydes are toxic to living cells. Formaldehyde irreversibly cross-links protein amino acids, which produces the hard flesh of embalmed bodies. At high concentrations in an enclosed space, formaldehyde can be a significant respiratory irritant causing nose bleeds, respiratory distress, lung disease, and persistent headaches.[22] Acetaldehyde, which is produced in the body by alcohol drinkers and found in the mouths of smokers and those with poor oral hygiene, is carcinogenic and mutagenic.[23]

The European Union has banned products that contain Formaldehyde, due to its documented carcinogenic characteristics. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has labeled Formaldehyde as a probable cause of cancer in humans.

Brazil burns significant amounts of ethanol biofuel. Gas chromatograph studies were performed of ambient air in São Paulo Brazil, and compared to Osaka Japan, which does not burn ethanol fuel. Atmospheric Formaldehyde was 160% higher in Brazil, and Acetaldehyde was 260% higher.[24]

This may matter, because as I quoted from an earlier post:

Based on the current state of knowledge in this field, it can be safely concluded that the use of E10 (ethanol) would result in a 5-15% reduction of CO; a near-neutral effect for NO2 emissions; a fairly neutral effect for ozone in smog events; small increases in aldehydes during smog events; possibly large increases in longer-term average aldehyde (e.g., acetaldehyde) levels; small increases in longer-term average levels of peroxyacetyl nitrate; and a small effect on benzene emission levels, dependent on fuel formulation.

ACETALDEHYDE (possibly large increases)! Hmmmm, here's an entry in Wikipedia. But I want to copy this part in full because it gives me the chills.

Peroxyacyl nitrates, or PANs, are powerful respiratory and eye irritants present in photochemical smog. They are formed from a peroxyacyl radical and nitrogen dioxide, for example peroxyacetyl nitrate, CH3COOONO2:

Hydrocarbons + O2 + NO2 + light → CH3COOONO2

The general equation is;

CxHyO3 + NO2 → CxHyO3NO2

PANs are both toxic and irritating, as they dissolve more readily in water than ozone. They are lachrymators, causing eye irritation at concentrations of only a few parts per billion. At higher concentrations they cause extensive damage to vegetation. Both PANs and their chlorinated derivates are said to be mutagenic, as they can be a factor causing skin cancer.

PANs are secondary pollutants, which means they are not directly emitted as exhaust from power plants or internal combustion engines, but they are formed from other pollutants by chemical reactions in the atmosphere. Free radical reactions catalyzed by ultraviolet light from the sun oxidize unburned hydrocarbons to aldehydes, ketones, and dicarbonyl compounds, whose secondary reactions create peroxyacyl radicals, which combine with nitrogen dioxide to form peroxyacyl nitrates.

The most common peroxyacyl radical is peroxyacetyl, which can be formed from the free radical oxidation of acetaldehyde, various ketones, or the photolysis of dicarbonyl compounds such as methylglyoxal or diacetyl.

Since they dissociate quite slowly in the atmosphere into radicals and NO2, PANs are able to transport these unstable compounds far away from the urban and industrial origin. This is important for tropospheric ozone production as PANs transport NOx to regions where it can more efficiently produce ozone.

As I noted last year, the plants in the butterfly garden exhibit chlorosis.

This is difficult to reconcile with anything other than an atmospheric influence.

You'd think the caretakers of the butterfly garden would know how to water and fertilize the plants,

so that they would have adequate moisture and nutrition to thrive.

And yet there they are - yellowing, singed, speckled, mottled...

everything you'd expect to see had they been exposed to toxic levels of tropospheric ozone.

Here is a sliced sequoia, mute testimony to the innate longevity of trees.

And this ash - click and read!

Planted in 1835, it was cut down at age 165, as its falling branches posed a hazard, partially (at least) due to pollution...according to the plaque.

On Saturday I walked to the T and passed this church.

It is slated to be torn down - what a travesty!

The paint on this revolving sculpture at the station is oxidized.

The square around the subway stop is a dreadful shambles.

This is the split where that large limb fell, but all of the trees have holes.

They are rotting on the inside.  I have limited the number of dead trees on this post because there are just so many, the drive from New Jersey to Boston is simply indescribable.  It is comprised of mile after mile of decimated woods.

Reproduced below is my latest correspondence with employees of the vaunted US Forestry Timber Industry Service, in the order emails were sent and received.  You will find my mounting irritation reaches a crescendo when I cannot avoid the conclusion they are outright charlatans, because there is no way, absolutely no way on earth that they do not have hard data indicating the exponential death of trees spiraling into extinction.  So we will start at the entrance to the MFA here, with the beseeching sculpture, "Appeal to the Great Spirit" which didn't result in much mercy - and continue with pictures of my beloved American Wing, with its exquisite colonial furniture, and art.

Wit's End <witsendnj@yahoo.com> 03/04/2011 10:50 AM

To greams@fs.fed.us cc Subject questions from Gail Zawacki

Dear Mr. Reams,  I am trying to get a better sense of what is being collected in the Forest Inventory data, I hope you don't mind answering a few questions and maybe steering me to the correct links.  1.  On pages such as this, for my own state, New Jersey, the most recent data is 2009.  When will the data for 2010 be available on-line?  2.  On that same page, when I click on the 5 year report, it sends me to Illinois.  Is there a NJ 5 year report from 2005 as well?  Will there be a 2010 report?  3.  I'm also interested in knowing when there will be a more current version of this report, "Ozone Bioindicators and forest health..." which was published in 2008 and utilized data from 2006. This gigantic painting gave me nightmares when I was young. The reason I am asking for more recent reports is that it appears to me that the pace of forest decline is rapidly accelerating, particularly since 2008 when trees began noticeably dying in vast numbers.  In general, whether published reports are available or not, are you getting information from your annual inventories that there is a precipitous increase in the number of dying trees, falling branches, ozone-damaged foliage and related increases in attacks by insects, disease and fungal-caused cankers?  I would appreciate any response to these questions.  As a life-long tree-lover and gardener, I am quite alarmed by the visible die-back of vegetation and I wonder if the Forest Service isn't alarmed as well.  Sincerely,  Gail Zawacki Oldwick, NJ

Early American antiques have been a passion for me, having grown up in a town with more intact 17th century houses than any other in the US.  Thanks to poverty!  I have loathed industrialization and revered the hand craft that created these masterpieces of architecture and furniture long before power tool existed.

--- On Fri, 3/4/11, Greg Reams <greams@fs.fed.us> wrote: 
From: Greg Reams <greams@fs.fed.us>
Subject: Re: questions from Gail Zawacki
To: "Wit's End" <witsendnj@yahoo.com>
Cc: "Will McWilliams" <wmcwilliams@fs.fed.us>
Date: Friday, March 4, 2011, 11:17 AM
Dear Gail, 
As you may well guess I'm a tree lover myself and appreciate your interest. 
I've copied Will McWillliams who leads our analysis and reporting for the Northeastern U.S.   Will can assist you with the timing of the NJ reports and information.  He and others in our Northeastern location will know the local trends in NJ better than myself. 
Thanks for calling and emailing me.    Greg 
Greg Reams, PhD
National Program Leader, Forest Inventory & Analysis
USDA Forest Service
Rosslyn Plaza C, 4th Floor1601 North Kent Street
Arlington, VA 22209
Voice: (703) 605-4189
Fax: (703) 605-5131
Email: greams@fs.fed.us 

To wmcwilliams@fs.fed.us cc Subject Fw: Re: questions from Gail Zawacki

Dear Mr. McWilliams, Hi, I'm just checking to see that you got my list of questions forwarded by Mr. Reams...please let me know if I can clarity in any way the information I requested. Thanks so much, Gail Zawacki

To Wit's End <witsendnj@yahoo.com> cc Subject Re: Fw: Re: questions from Gail Zawacki

Thanks Gail - yes, I have referred your question to Sue Crocker, our representative for NJ - she should be in touch soon - meanwhile, here is a link to our field data manual for your perusal (link one) - we expect the 2010 results to be posted later in the Spring or early summer - the link on the annual page is a mistake - it should be removed (thanks for pointing this out) - there is not a report for NJ for 2005 -  I do not know the status of another Ozone report - I know of NO widespread tree mortality occurring in NJ, unless you are talking about urban forests, that are experiencing some serious diseases/pests, as well as severe weather related blowdowns this past winter - pls keep in touch on your needs in this regard - THX http://www.fia.fs.fed.us/library/field-guides-methods-proc/ http://www.nrs.fs.fed.us/fia/data-tools/state-reports/NJ/default.asp 
=======================================

William H. McWilliamsUSDA Forest Service
Northern Research Station
Forest Inventory and Analysis11 Campus Blvd., Suite 200
Newtown Square, PA, USA  19073
Tel.  610-557-4050  Fax 610-557-4095
E-mail:  wmcwilliams@fs.fed.us
web:  www.nrs.fs.fed.us/people/wmcwilliams

From:

"Susan J Crocker" <scrocker@fs.fed.us>

Add sender to Contacts

To:

"Wit's End" <witsendnj@yahoo.com>

Cc:

"Will McWilliams" <wmcwilliams@fs.fed.us>

Hi Gail, Thanks for your questions.   The data for 2010 is in the final stages of processing.  Once this is complete, the data is then reviewed and posted to the web.  As the data for individual states has begun to roll in over the past few weeks, I would expect that the NJ 2010 data and report should be on-line within the next 3 to 4 months.  My apologies for the erroneous link to the Illinois 5-year report.  New Jersey's 5-year report is currently underway and I hope that it will be available within the next 6 months.  In the meantime, I would direct you to the last comprehensive analytical report for NJ called "Forests of the Garden State" - http://nrs.fs.fed.us/pubs/6933.  Hopefully, this report can provide further information that you find of interest.   In regards to the report on Ozone, I have been trying to track down more information on upcoming analyses.  At this time, data is available through 2009, but I am unaware of the timeline for future reporting.  However, I can only assume that this is also in the works.  In lieu of a report, you may find it interesting to look at the data itself.  Ozone data for NJ can be downloaded at the FIA DataMart - http://199.128.173.17/fiadb4-downloads/datamart.html. 
I recently met with Foresters and Forest Health Specialists in preparation for the 5-year report.  While a few damage causing agents are on the rise (including the native Southern Pine Beetle, gypsy moth and bacterial leaf scorch),  I am not aware of a large increase in the number of dying trees.  Perhaps what you are seeing can be attributed to localized increases in decline and mortality due to the increased activity of some of these pests.  For example, Southern pine beetle has been increasing, in terms of mortality, over the past 2 years in the southern portion of NJ. I would also like to direct you to the Statewide Assessment for NJ, which was completed in 2010 - http://www.stateforesters.org/files/NJ-Assess-Strategy-20100810.pdf.  This document has a lot of great information regarding forest conditions, pests and strategies for managing statewide resources. I hope this response provides some of the information that you were looking for.  Please feel free to contact me with any future or further questions. Cheers, Sue ***************************************************************
Susan J. Crocker
Research Forester
U.S. Forest Service, Northern Research Station 
Forest Inventory and Analysis1992 Folwell Ave  St. Paul, MN 55108
Voice:  651.649.5136    Fax:  651.649.5140
Email:  scrocker@fs.fed.us

Dear Sue and Will,
Thanks so much for supplying those links.  I have a few more questions if you don't mind.
The State Foresters Assessment states:

(http://www.stateforesters.org/files/NJ-Assess-Strategy-20100810.pdf)

"...overall, NJ’s forests are also relatively even-aged with a mean age somewhere in the 60-79 year-old age class. In 2005, Widmann attributed this trend to the fact that many acres of forest land in the state are abandoned farmlands that reverted to forest since the 1940’s." p. 11

Mortality data for FIA inventories later than 1999 was not available at the time of this assessment. Mortality data for 1987 was only available for growing stock trees on timberland. Since the majority of

NJ’s forest land is classified as timberland by the federal government, these estimates may be used to gain insight into patterns on statewide forested lands as a whole. Mortality appears to be on the rise for both hardwood and softwood species. Consequently, the number of dead trees per acre has also increased.

An increase in dead trees is a normal sign for a maturing forest and can even be important for biodiversity and providing structure for wildlife habitat.  However, mortality should be closely monitored in NJ because of the relative homogeneity of the forest statewide in terms of forest type-groups and age class distribution. Coupled with these factors insects and pathogens could lead to widespread, rapid changes that would be detrimental to biodiversity, social, and economic values of the resource. p. 24

This would seem to indicate that there has been a trend of increasing tree death, which, contrary to the subsequent claim that "an increase in dead trees is a normal sign for a maturing forest" cannot be attributed to that since 60-79 years is hardly to be considered "mature" for many species of trees that should naturally be capable of living for centuries.

Furthermore, I found only one mention of "pollution" and no specific reference to ozone or acid rain with consequent loss of essential minerals in soil listed in any of the threats to forests in that report, and I have to wonder why, since it is well-established in the scientific literature that

1. Ozone and acid rain are toxic to trees

2.  The background level of tropospheric ozone is inexorably rising and

3.  Trees exposed to ozone are more susceptible to all the threats the report DOES list, i.e., various insects, disease, and fungus.

I note that on page 45 there is a quantification of the beneficial pollution uptake of trees, including NO2, SO2, PM10  and O3 - with no regard whatsoever to the inevitable damage done to those hapless trees that are absorbing that pollution!

"152.7 million trees 29.1 million metric tons of C stored ($663.5 million value) 961,000 metric tons per year of C sequestered ($21.9 million value) 30,070 metric tons per year total pollution removal ($244.2 million value) 668 metric tons per year of CO removed $940,300 value) 6,234 metric tons per year NO2 removed ($61.8 million value) 11,289 metric tons per year of O3 removed ($111.8 million value) 2,114 metric tons per year of SO2removed ($5.1 million value) 9,760 metric tons per year of PM10 removed ($64.5 million value)."

This omission is so egregious that it borders on blatant fraud.  For public money to be spent on a 118-page report so duplicitous that it omits the principal threat to trees while blaming secondary, opportunistic attacks from insects, fungus and disease is quite frankly outrageous.  As a taxpayer, I am aghast.

In your correspondence to me you have both stated that you are not aware of any large, widespread increase in the number of dying trees.

Well, now you are aware because I have just told you, there is a large, widespread increase in the number of dying trees.  In fact there is such an obvious and dramatic increase that the only way the Forest Service could not be "aware" of it is to be deliberately, willfully, systematically blind - and to either falsify or withhold data.

The report mentions:

  

The NJ Forest Service in cooperation with the NJ Department of Agriculture conducts aerial surveys in June and early July each year to determine the extent of defoliation.

Where can I access those surveys?  They will doubtless show the reduction in tree canopy, both urban and forest.

Cheers,

Gail

I just love signing off "Cheers!"  I can do it, too!  It's important to note that the Forest Timber Industry Service's very own draft Forest Inventory and Analysis for 2010 states on page 40:

Ozone Injury - Ozone is a widely dispersed pollutant that reduces tree growth, changes species composition, and predisposes trees to insect and disease attack.
This is so basic that it's even being taught in upper elementary grades -  here's a course called:  "No Littering O-Zone:  How Rising Ozone Levels Affect Tree Growth!"

I revel in still-lives from all schools - the worship of fruit, and flowers, food and drink.  The top of this dresser is made from one enormous board, because it was made back in the day when the forests were largely untouched and the trees were huge, and centuries old.

This ball-and-claw foot is from a Goddard/Townsend highboy, made in Rhode Island.  They perfected the carving of such feet, as well as the shell and reverse shell decorations seen on the desk below.

I can't remember what started me on it, but I did a search of Discover Magazine and found this title, from 2004, "The Pollution Blackout" which details the decrease in pollution following the 2003 blackout.

"The blackout of 2003 upset a lot of routines, but Lackson Marufu of the University of Maryland was thrilled to divert his scheduled air-quality monitoring flight over eastern Maryland. He relocated to Selinsgrove, a Pennsylvania town in the middle of the blackout area, which happens to be downwind of more than 100 Ohio River valley power plants. “It was a unique opportunity to quantify directly, and for the very first time, the contribution of power plants to regional air quality,” he says.

Marufu’s samples show that coal-burning power plants produce a bigger-than-expected share of the chemical cocktail that people in the northeastern United States inhale every day. Within 24 hours of the blackout, sulfur dioxide levels dropped by 90 percent, and ozone declined by 50 percent. Both chemicals are linked to global climate change, lung disease, and increased mortality rates. Daytime visibility in the region during the blackout increased by nearly 25 miles due to a 70 percent decrease in light-scattering particles. Tall smokestacks, built to alleviate pollution close to power plants, may contribute to the regional air problem by causing emissions to stay suspended long enough to react and produce other, more harmful pollutants. At least Marufu sees a silver lining in his smoggy data: “If effective control measures are implemented, the results would be immediate.”

What is so remarkable is that an automatically generated, related story linked to at the bottom of that page leads to an article from the current (April) issue of Discover, "Made in China - Our Toxic, Imported Air Pollution" which, incredibly, was sent to me via snailmail by a helpful gentleman from Swarthmore, PA (a member of the National Society of the Sons of the American Revolution, no less, and so he will no doubt be enjoying these pictures of the American wing...and THANK YOU!)

 

which I just opened this morning and must therefore mean, it's tremendously if not cosmically significant - here are some portions:

“There is no place called away.” It is a statement worthy of 
Gertrude Stein, but University of Washington atmospheric chemist 
Dan Jaffe says it with conviction: None of the contamination we pump into the air just disappears. It might get diluted, blended, or chemically transformed, but it has to go somewhere. And when it comes to pollutants produced by the booming economies of East Asia, that somewhere often means right here, the mainland of the United States.

The MFA has some very clever exhibits for those who care about the construction of antique furniture.

Jaffe and a new breed of global air detectives are delivering a sobering message to policy makers everywhere: Carbon dioxide, the predominant driver of global warming, is not the only industrial by-product whose effects can be felt around the world. Prevailing winds across the Pacific are pushing thousands of tons of other contaminants—including mercury, sulfates, ozone, black carbon, and desert dust—over the ocean each year. Some of this atmospheric junk settles into the cold waters of the North Pacific, but much of it eventually merges 
with the global air pollution pool that circumnavigates the planet.

China in particular stands out because of its sudden role as the world’s factory, its enormous population, and the mass migration of that population to urban centers; 350 million people, equivalent to the entire U.S. population, will be moving to its cities over the next 10 years. China now emits more mercury than the United States, India, and Europe combined. “What’s different about China is the scale and speed of pollution and environmental degradation,” Turner says. “It’s like nothing the world has ever seen.”

The Classic Windsor Chair.

A modern artwork, made from recycled caps.

From here I wandered away from Americana into a modest but choice array of European Impressionism.

By 1997 Jaffe was living in Seattle, and his interest had taken a slant: Could pollution reaching his city be blowing in from somewhere else? “We had a hunch that pollutants could be carried across the ocean, and we had satellite imagery to show that,” Jaffe says. “And we noticed our upstream neighbors in Asia were developing very rapidly. I asked the question: Could we see those pollutants coming over to the United States?”

Oldest daughter loved this when she was tiny.  See the reflection of the dancers on the right?

Jaffe’s colleagues considered it improbable that a concentration of pollutants high enough to significantly impact American air quality could travel thousands of miles across the Pacific Ocean; they expected he would find just insignificant traces. Despite their skepticism, Jaffe set out to find the proof. First he gathered the necessary equipment. Devices to measure carbon monoxide, aerosols, sulfur dioxide, and hydrocarbons could all be bought off the shelf. He loaded the equipment into some university trucks and set out for the school’s weather observatory at Cheeka Peak. The little mountain was an arduous five-hour drive northwest of Seattle, but it was also known for the cleanest air in the Northern Hemisphere. He reckoned that if he tested this reputedly pristine air when a westerly wind was blowing in from the Pacific, the Asian pollutants might show up.

Jaffe’s monitors quickly captured evidence of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, ozone, hydrocarbons, radon, and particulates. Since air from North America could not have contaminated Cheeka Peak with winds blowing from the west, the next step was identifying the true source of the pollutants. Jaffe found his answer in atmospheric circulation models, created with the help of data from Earth-imaging satellites, that allowed him to trace the pollutants’ path backward in time. A paper he published two years later summarized his conclusions succinctly. The pollutants “were all statistically elevated . . . when the trajectory originated over Asia.”

The study veers into an in-depth examination of mercury and other pollutants originating in China and traveling to the US, but then returns to ozone:

Perhaps the most counterintuitive traveling contaminant is ozone, commonly associated with ground-level pollution in cities. Volatile organic compounds, carbon monoxide, and nitrogen oxides from Asian cars and industry mix in the atmosphere as they cross the Pacific Ocean and convert in sunlight into ozone, a main ingredient in smog, Jaffe explains. When air with high ozone concentrations touches down in North America, it can pose the classic dangers of urban smog: heart disease, lung disease, and death.

Jaffe recently coauthored a paper on Asian ozone coming to America. It found that ozone levels above western North America creep upward every spring. “When air was coming from Asia, the trend was strongest. That was the nail in the coffin,” Jaffe says. “The increase was estimated at 0.5 part per billion [ppb] per year. But that’s huge. In 10 years that’s another 5 ppb. Let’s say the epa orders a 5 ppb reduction and we achieve that, and yet, because of the growing global pool, in 10 years that gets wiped out. We’ll have to keep reducing our emissions just to stay even.”

The underlying message of Jaffe’s detective work should not be all that surprising: All of the world’s atmosphere is interconnected. People have accepted this notion when it comes 
to carbon dioxide or the chemicals that eat away at the ozone layer, but Jaffe is finding that they are still coming to terms with the reality that it applies to industrial pollutants in general.

The fact is, those pollutants are everybody’s responsibility, not just China’s. The epa has estimated that just one-quarter of U.S. mercury emissions from coal-burning power plants are deposited within the contiguous U.S. The remainder enters the global cycle. Conversely, current estimates are that less than half of all mercury deposition within the United States comes from American sources.

“It’s a classic example of a tragedy of the commons, ” Jaffe says, referring to a dilemma in which individuals act in their own self-interest and deplete a shared resource. “If 20 people are fishing in the same pond, with no fishing limit, then you catch as many as you can because it will be empty in weeks. Nobody has an incentive to conserve, and the same goes for pollution. ”

When it comes to some pollutants, China has taken important steps. For instance, recent policies encourage desulfurization and other filtering technology in power plants. But convincing developing nations to move aggressively on mercury may be at least as tough as mobilizing them against carbon emissions. “This is not considered a pollutant that urgently needs to be controlled on the national level,” Feng says. “It’s not fair that you emitted so much mercury and other pollutants when you had the chance to industrialize. You had 200 years, and now you want to stop other countries from developing too.”

“We need to be concerned,” Jaffe counters in his low-key way. “There is no Planet B. We all live downwind.”

How crazy was it that on a Saturday afternoon, these galleries were deserted.  I am left to wonder if even Jaffe understands how potent the pollutants he is tracking are, and how destructive to the trees.

I had the antiquities of Greece, Rome all to myself.

Also Egypt!

And China.

I guess most Americans are too busy watching the teevee to go to a museum and look at the masterpieces of art.

THANK YOU MFA for letting me take as many pictures as I wanted!

AAuuuugghhh.  I can't get away from these assholes.

David Koch, who has been fighting wind power on the East Coast, has his name on this rather bleak European art gallery.

It has paintings of dead game, rather appropriately.

There are scenes of vicious hunts.  Is that a coincidence?

As I meandered my way to the exit I passed this bleak assessment of the modern human predicament.

There was a little bit of daylight left to the afternoon.

From the MFA I had hoped to visit the Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, which is a short walk away, but when I arrived I was told the garden was demolished and under new construction, and that the courtyard would not have the usual spectacular display that I had so looked forward to seeing again - (Due to unfortunate conditions which prohibited sufficient plant growth, the Gardner’s traditional April display of 15 to 20-foot-long nasturtium vines will not be on view this year) both highly suspicious - so instead I commenced a long stroll along the Fenway through the path under the trees, towards Copley Square.

Of course bark is in terrible shape, cracking, splitting, and peeling.

I was frankly horrified but don't want to dwell on how deteriorated the formerly dense woods have become.

There are plenty of other sources of horror, such as this new plague in Wyoming, from natural gas extraction.

Perhaps we can reconcile ourselves to trees with plastic bag leaves instead!

Folks who live near the gas fields in the western part of this outdoorsy state are complaining of watery eyes, shortness of breath and bloody noses because of ozone levels that have exceeded what people in L.A. and other major cities wheeze through on their worst pollution days.

...in the Upper Green River Basin, where at least one daycare center called off outdoor recess and state officials have urged the elderly to avoid strenuous outdoor activity, some wonder if they've made a bargain with the devil. Two days last week, ozone levels in the gas-rich basin rose above the highest levels recorded in the biggest U.S. cities last year.

Here's the latest on the politics of EPA regulating ozone, from the New York Times.

It takes a certain amount of fortitude to read about how industry controls the agency that is supposed to control industry.

One final, frightening revelation - Scientists reveal that the decline of the bee is now a global phenomenon, warning:

The fact is that of the 100 crop species that provide 90 per cent of the world's food, over 70 are pollinated by bees.

listing among the reasons for worldwide decline, ta da...

* Air Pollution, which may be interfering with the ability of bees to find flowering plants and thus food – scents that could travel more than 800 metres in the 1800s now reach less than 200 metres from a plant.