I’d like to share with you some captivating music that I first discovered on You Tube. Click over to the video now, then read on if you’d like to hear more about this impressive musician.

After being enthralled by this and other videos, I e-mailed the musician, Robert Tiso, who lives in Italy. It turns out that he has studied the “glass harp” as seriously as any classical musician trying to reach perfection.

Robert was born in 1968 in London and has moved between England and Italy in pursuit of his music. At age 15, he got his start playing classical guitar and later studied under Paolo Marzocchi, learning about composition — including harmony, counterpoint and orchestral arrangement.

“The idea to start playing the glass harp came in year 2000 after attending a performance held by glass harp virtuoso Petr Spatina in Prague,” Robert wrote in an e-mail. “From him, I got not only inspiration and enthusiasm but also understood the potential possibilities of this instrument — although its origins are antique and well documented.”

Robert dedicated two solid years to researching and experimenting with the instrument. In 2002, he created his first professional glass harp and continued to master his skills.

“Many attempts are necessary, because nobody teaches this form of art,” he said.

For the past seven years, the musician has been called on to play in many venues — theaters, auditoriums, musical and art festivals, television and radio programs, rock and pop bands, wine festivals, private parties and more.

On Tuesday of last week, he played for the UNICEF water conference in Switzerland. UNICEF is working to build clean water systems in third-world countries.

People seem to love the musical glasses, since they add a touch of watery class to many situations, he says.

Film producer Michael Lawrence included one of Robert’s videos in his new “Bach Project,” which will be released in January. Listen to the cut on You Tube.

Robert has collaborated with Paolo Marzocchi on many projects, including the soundtrack for the movie “The Shadow Within” and the opera “Lucia di Lammermoor.”

In March, he is scheduled to perform at the opening ceremony of the Phaeno water exhibition in Wolfsburg, Germany.

For other videos, check out Robert’s Web site on You Tube. One may also purchase his CD, “Crystal Symphony,” on the site CDBaby.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Washington departments of Ecology and Agriculture are reissuing a warning that first came out in March of 2008 regarding metal canisters washing up on ocean beaches.

Canisters found on ocean beaches may contain dangerous aluminum phosphide.
Department of Ecology photo

The canisters are the type that often contain aluminum phosphide, a chemical that turns into poisonous phospine gas when exposed to moisture. This gas is commonly used to kill insects and other pests on cargo ships.

The problem comes about if someone finds one of these canisters with the lid still on. If the person then opens the canister, he or she may breathe the residual phosphine gas.

I’m not sure anyone can predict potential exposures, because it would depend on the amount of aluminum phosphide or phosphine in the canister. But I found the following info in medical management guidelines issued by the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry:

“Phosphine is a respiratory tract irritant that attacks primarily the cardiovascular and respiratory systems causing peripheral vascular collapse, cardiac arrest and failure, and pulmonary edema.”

In other words, this stuff is nothing to mess around with. Lots of folks walk the ocean beaches in winter. If you find a canister like this, keep the lid on and alert authorities.

“We asked the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to develop a model that would give us a better idea where these canisters might be coming from,” said Dale Jensen, Ecology’s spills program manager in a news release. “The results strongly indicate the likely source is the cargo ships exporting bulk grain to Pacific Rim nations. These ships are loading grain at terminals on the Columbia River as well as Grays Harbor, Puget Sound and British Columbia.”

Cliff Weed, manager of pesticide compliance for the Washington State Department of Agriculture, added, “Our goal is to raise awareness that these canisters must be properly handled and disposed of – whether the vessel is outbound from a Washington port or a foreign ship inbound with cargo. This will help ensure the canisters stay out of our waters, off our beaches and protect the public.

For information, check Ecology’s Web page on the aluminum phosphide.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

After 74 days, salvage crews finally stopped the flow of crude from a leaking oil well about 150 miles off the coast of Australia.

The spill, which hasn’t gotten much attention in our part of the world, appears to be roughly the size of the Exxon Valdez spill, according to estimates. The good thing is that the oil has not hit land, and Australian officials are doing their best to make sure that it doesn’t. Crews are using chemical dispersants and oil-collection equipment.

A fire that started on the oil rig Sunday also was extinguished.

Even though the oil has not hit shore, environmental officials are concerned about the number of marine mammals and sea birds affected by the oil.

“We still have a toxic cocktail created by the thousands of barrels of oil and condensate that have been pouring into the sea, along with the thousands of litres of dispersant,” said Gilly Llewellyn, conservation director for World Wildlife Fund – Australia. “All of this in one of the world’s most intact tropical marine ecosystems.”

Mike Bossley, the managing director for the Australasian office of the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society expressed concern for the longterm and chronic effects on marine life in the area of the spill, where four species of whales and dolphins and 28 species of birds were spotted in recent days.

To read more, check out these stories:

The Australian: Timor Sea oil leak stopped at last
ABC News (with video): Oil Impact May Last Seven Years
Asia Sentinal: Timor Oil Well Fire Snuffed Out
WA Today: ‘We know what caused oil spill’
Antara News: Australia Limits Montara oil spill`s effects

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

When it comes to environmental protections for shorelines, local critical areas ordinances continue to be a source of controversy.

The latest development involves a letter from state Rep. Jan Angel asking the state departments of Ecology and Commerce to quit giving legal guidance to local agencies. See my story in today’s Kitsap Sun.

It seems clear from court decisions and legislative actions that the Shoreline Management Act will provide long-term regulations for properties within 200 feet of the shoreline. This law — unlike the Growth Management Act that spawned critical areas ordinances — requires local shoreline plans to be approved by the Washington Department of Ecology.

But the immediate conflict involves what regulations should apply until local shoreline master programs are updated, a process under way for most Puget Sound cities and counties.

The practical aspects are that critical areas ordinances, updated within the past few years, generally include more restrictive regulations, such as larger buffers, in comparison to shoreline plans, most of which were drafted in the 1970s with updates that vary by jurisdiction.

Legally, the issues become complicated. Angel’s position appears to be that court rulings direct local governments to fall back to rules listed in the shoreline master programs until new shoreline plans are approved. Read her letter to Interim Ecology Director Polly Zehm (PDF 172 kb).

Ecology’s position seems to be that local governments should not throw out rules developed in their critical areas ordinances until the shoreline plans are updated.

I should point out that Brian Hodges, an attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation, maintains that Kitsap County would be putting itself at legal risk if county officials continue to process shoreline applications under the Kitsap County Critical Areas Ordinance. Hodges was the prevailing attorney in a lawsuit brought by Kitsap Alliance of Property Owners. County officials say they will appeal the ruling to the Washington State Supreme Court.

As for Ecology’s updated “guidance,” the reasoning goes as follows. See Ecology’s Web site for the complete analysis.
Read the rest of this entry »

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

The Environmental Protection Agency has announced the winners of the third annual Rachel Carson Sense of Wonder Contest, which is designed to recognize intergenerational creativity.

Winning photo in the Rachel Carson Sense of Wonder contest. This photo was offered by Isabel L., age 16, and Isabel M., age 42.

The winners are not identified specifically, but you can review the photos, essays, poems and dances named as winners and honorable mentions by going to the EPA’s Web site. It doesn’t appear we have any winners from Washington state, but I hope local folks are entering this contest. Maybe we’ll have a winner or two next year. (See EPA site for entry details.)

The first-place photo at right is by Isabel L., age 16, and Isabel M., age 42. Here’s the description: “My mom and I were in the beach at Acapulco watching the sunset and while we talked about time and growing up. We took a picture of the sea and the sunset but we also captured a small boy playing in the sand enjoying the beach.”

Click here for the three photo winners and an honorable mention.

The winning poem was a combined effort of three generations of women: Katie, 21; MaryKate, 53; and Kate, 92.

Place of Peace
By: Katie, MaryKate and Kate

Knee-deep in purple asters, where maples gaily spill,
Unwept living crimson on our firm New England hill,
Our little half-built house awaits you, serene and still.
Such peace is here
And quiet dreaming.
No din of fear
Like sirens screaming
Or brass bells tolling, no dark hate rolling
That troubles the wind-washed silence under
These white clouds flying.
Only the crying of a far bird calling
Like a feather falling
That flutters earthward from above.
Warm as the sun that softly spills
Its life-giving light across the hills,
Kindling the crimson apples for the day of your returning.
When sunwashed sky turns crimson gold
And cool breezes fall from top of hill
Bringing clouds of bat food buzzing still

After the day’s chores done. Memories wash over
Of small children laughing in silver drops of water,

Blushing under other’s gazes peeking through clover.
My family founded in elder days
Continues the call that Nature makes
For our souls returning to this place of peace,
Where time stands still until we say
Who we are and where we are from.

From black olives and candy flowers made on Sunday’s
I am from the Lake (wet, warm, natural)
I am from the lily, dogwood, earth, planted in the front yard.
My mother’s earth. I’m from long trips and dark features.
From the long line of Kate’s and of Robert.
I’m from the stubborn and matriarchal.

I’m from tall altars and winding passages with spires from the sky.
I’m from Europe, France, England, Germany, Ireland, Scotland,
A mutt all around.
From the broken butt to being my rock and storms.
The stubborn women through and through
I am from the old, dust, moths, mold.
I am from mothers and lakes and lots of people,
With love.

Click here for the other winning poems.

The first-place essay is an illustrated story by Logan, age 6. It’s called “Fish with a Crab.” His kindergarten teacher, Linda, age 61, had this to say:

“I was amazed when Logan handed me his first story. It was two months ago. In one school year, he was gone from a total nonreader/writer, to a storyteller/illustrator. Equally amazing is his wealth of information about the natural world. He loves his fish tank, his tarantula, and all of the creatures that fill his life with joy… I see his pure delight in observing nature. He sees nature for what it is, an interaction between the living and nonliving world. His love of the wonder of nature fills him with stories and they flow freely from his heart and mind.”

The essays, including Logan’s can be found by clicking here.

Mixed media include both written creations and poetry.

This year, the EPA included a category of dance for the first time. I thought the Winged Migration dance — the second one below — was creative.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

“Salish Sea” is now the official name for our inland waterway that stretches across more than 1,400 square miles of Western Washington and British Columbia. See my story in today’s Kitsap Sun.

Salish Sea watershed
EPA graphic

The question now is whether the name will catch on and be used more frequently.

One application that comes to mind is the description of the three pods of killer whales known as Southern Residents. I’ve often referred to these animals as the orcas that frequent Puget Sound. That’s because “Southern Residents” have little meaning to the average reader, who wishes to know why they are “southern” and what I mean by “residents.”

It so happens that the Salish Sea just about defines the range of these whales for a large percentage of the year.

Now I may refer to them as the killer whales that frequent or mainly reside in the Salish Sea — including much of the summer in the San Juan Islands, with winter and fall stints into Puget Sound.

I’m not sure how else I will use this term, but I no longer feel constrained by the idea that the Salish Sea is not a real name and has never been defined by any authority.

Here are some facts about the Salish Sea provided by the SeaDoc Society. (I’ve converted meters to feet and kilometers to miles.)

• Coastline length, including islands: 4,642 miles
• Total number of islands: 419
• Total land area of islands: 1,413 square miles
• Sea surface area: 9,942 square miles
• Maximum depth: 886 feet
• Number of different marine animals species estimated: 20 species of mammals, 128 species of birds, 219 species of fish, and over 3000 species of invertebrates
• Number of species listed as threatened, endangered or are candidates for listing: 64
• Total watershed area, not counting the upper Fraser River area (See Stefan Freelan): 42,000 square miles

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Winners. Losers.

These two words have been spinning around in my brain since I attended a conference on water resources a couple of days ago. Check out my story in today’s Kitsap Sun.

Western Washington may not experience an overall water shortage as a result of climate change the way some regions will, according to climatologists. But our rains, on average, are likely to come in heavier downpours. To me, that means we will have our hands full trying to reduce the frequency of flooding, which affects natural systems as well as man-made ones.

In areas of the country that become drier, water could become scarce and the price of water is likely to go up. We’ve seen an ongoing drought in the Southwest. While it could be a just temporary trend, the situation calls for better water management and makes people nervous about the future. Click here to see an animation of changing conditions over the past 12 weeks.

A speaker at the conference, Michael Read of the Water Environment Federation, predicted that the Northwest will attract population from the Southwest as climate change continues. Winners and losers?

It may not be a question of whether we want the extra people. It may be more about whether we can manage the population growth with the least disruption to our ecosystem. Will we find ways to work with the coming changes in climate — or not? Will we be winners or losers?

If water gives our region a competitive edge, maybe we could attract industry looking to move away from more arid regions. That could help stabilize our economy, which seems to be a perpetual goal of many people. Winners and losers?

If climatologists are right, many species in the Northwest will struggle to adapt to the changing conditions. Some will survive and some will go extinct. Winners and losers.

I am not discounting efforts to reduce greenhouse gases and possibly avert some of the more dire consequences of climate change. But a growing effort is looking into how humans and animals may adapt to whatever changes will come.

While experts study adaptation, I don’t believe the concept has entered our general consciousness, let alone our actions. Perhaps waiting to see what happens is the prudent thing to do. After all, how do we plan for something uncertain?

On the other hand, maybe it would be wiser to begin considering the range of futures we could face within a few short decades. How do we become winners instead of losers?

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Kitsap Alliance of Property Owners has jumped out in front of what promises to be a lively debate over shoreline science.

Don Flora, a retired forest researcher, conducted a statistical analysis of data compiled in separate shoreline assessments of East Kitsap and Bainbridge Island. Flora concluded that the reports show no apparent relationship between man-made stressors and ecosystem functions. Please take a look at my story in today’s Kitsap Sun.

Not finding a correlation between these two factors does not mean that man-made structures are harmless or without effect on the ecosystem. But these findings do raise questions, as Flora points out. Download his report here (PDF 188 kb).

So far, I have been unable to find a qualified scientist who has read Flora’s report and wishes to respond on the record. I’ve heard from a few who have questions about the analysis and may prepare a response in the future.

Among the complaints about Flora’s report are these: It does not follow standard protocol for a scientific report; it is not obvious how he conducted his analysis; and it was not peer reviewed by third-party experts.

Flora told me that his intent was to create a paper that could be read by average people, and he did ask a couple of people to edit it for readability. He did not intend for it to be considered a scientific paper nor for it to be peer-reviewed in the scientific sense.

I have heard complaints that Flora did not show his work, and I found myself asking him to point me to the data tables that he used to plug numbers into the standard regression analysis — a statistical tool used to show relationships between two independent variables. I suggested to Flora that he include an appendix that would show the raw data and help people replicate his work. He thought this might be a good idea.

If you want to take a closer look, review the findings related to Bainbridge Island shoreline planning and Kitsap County shoreline planning, including the county shoreline assessments.

Some scientists find it offensive that Flora lifted data from these two reports and manipulated them to his own ends without consulting the scientists involved. Others are suspicious that Flora used these data to reach his own conclusions — a suspicion heightened because Flora is a member of KAPO. And KAPO’s press release (PDF 64 kb) about Flora’s report makes a leap that stirs the pot of controversy:

“These reviews bring into question the justification for any nearshore restorations or the need to impose any shoreline buffer zones in the upcoming Shoreline Master Program updates.”

Dealing with numerous scientific studies will be an important part of the effort to update the county’s shorelines plan. Kitsap County planners say they aren’t sure how they will deal with Flora’s report, but they intend to lean heavily on expertise from the Washington Department of Ecology to point them to reliable scientific studies.

The planners say they want to make sure that any studies upon which they rely for planning are vetted before they move into policy discussions. During the update of the county’s Critical Areas Ordinance, such studies were never fully vetted — at least not to the satisfaction of property rights advocates. KAPO members ended up arguing about science all the way to the Washington State Supreme Court — though the court did not address science issues at all when it overturned the county’s shoreline buffers. See the Sept. 9 Kitsap Sun and the Water Ways entry the next day.

I’ve always expected that experts would engage in a healthy discussion about what it will take to protect the ecological functions of the county’s shorelines. Now it appears the discussion may take on the tone of a debate. In comments posted at the bottom of today’s story, some people are showing their distrust of government while others are showing their distrust of KAPO.

I hope everyone can somehow relax enough to embark on a real search for truth knowledge as it relates to shoreline ecosystems. After all, isn’t that what science is really about?

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

This week’s bit of humor comes to us from National Lampoon, which espouses the health benefits of water in a new video.

Water has numerous effects, thanks to unintended additives, according to the video at right. But watch out for the consequences of consuming drinking water.

Quoting from the video:

“With residual pharmaceuticals entering our water table daily, you can be confident the cure is only a faucet away. Results may vary by region.”

And then the requisite warning:

“Water is not for everyone. Water may not be consumed if you are currently on water. If you’re pregnant and nursing, … might become pregnant or are reaching puberty before the age of 7, water may not be right for you. Please discontinue use of water while drowning or if drought occurs.”

And then come the freaky side effects of water, which take up the remainder of the video.

Another video about water purports to show a world record for drinking 1.5 liters of water — just about 4 seconds.

I found another video that has nothing to do with water but shows a world-record speed for a person getting undressed. I’m hoping this is amusing without being offensive.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post 

Dissolved oxygen in southern Hood Canal has dropped to dangerously low levels, and the table appears to be set for a fish kill if we get strong winds out of the south. See my story in today’s Kitsap Sun.

It seems a lot of experts are surprised that we have reached this level of low oxygen, considering that we were seeing near-record high oxygen levels earlier this year. See a story I wrote in August.

Although we have had low-oxygen problems in Hood Canal for years, monitoring buoys installed a few years ago now allow us to see what is happening at the moment and to describe the conditions in some detail.

In 2006, for the first time, scientists were able to show the factors leading up to a fish kill. Until then, it was only reasoned speculation. What may be equally troubling, however, is the level of stress that sea creatures are coming under before and after a fish kill — or if none occurs at all.

I didn’t mention it in my story, but oxygen levels at Twanoh and probably up toward Belfair are even lower than at Hoodsport. Lower Hood Canal is an area where the oxygen is so chronically depleted that fluffy mats of bacteria can be seen growing on the bottom at times when no other life can survive.

I feel that I need to express my disappointment with some of the comments posted to my story. To write this piece, I took note of the monitoring buoys; I pulled together observations of divers and others; and I even informed a few officials about the conditions that were developing.

I told this story straight, basing it on facts and observations that I gathered. Yet some people apparently chose to believe that my writing had something to do with taxation, government control, funding for Puget Sound Partnership, another costly study or hysterical tactics by environmental wackos.

I suppose I should be used to cynical comments by now, and I am glad that one person took the time to say he was pleased that I was “telling it like it is.” I just thought people would like to know of the dire conditions facing sealife in southern Hood Canal and what might occur if a south wind blows.

Share on Facebook

Tweet This Post