Fuzzy hubs and mass extinction

It’s easy to mock the language of the National Climate Change and Wildlife Center Proposed Five-Year Strategy, so I’m going to. Consider it a nervous laugh. This proposed framework for “fuzzy hubs” of various government agencies to cope with collapsing eco-systems and mass extinction deserves at least something that conveys how scary it is. Here is a sample of the kind of language being used by government scientists as the politicians who supposedly direct their activities argue over a climate change bill:

… climate change is already driving observable changes on the landscape, and will bring additional, large-scale changes in the coming decades. Many of these changes will have direct implications to wildlife and fish species and communities, and the habitats and ecosystems upon which they depend. For example, we are likely to see shifts in species’ ranges; changes in timing of breeding seasons and animal migrations; disassembly of

Adaptation

Big problem, big title. The US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Water has issued the National Water Program Response to Climate Change report for 2009. Click here for highlights or to read the full report.

Water strategy for climate change

One only need read James G. Workman’s op-ed in today’s Los Angeles Times to deduce what we aren’t doing about water in advance of the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen next week.

Rather than wait for hell to freeze over and heaven to melt, the US Environmental Protection Agency has got out in front of politicians with this presentation on what’s happening to our climate in the meantime, its impact on our fresh water supply and what we should be doing as a matter of urgency.

Read it carefully before confidently taking the quiz, or, as I did, read it carefully the second time before re-taking the quiz.

This posting was updated at 7.10pm, 11/30/2009. The Workman reference and link were added.