In recent years, chickens have come home to roost in backyards across the country. While the numbers are hard to document, cities and towns all over the U.S. are taking up the issue and modifying their laws to allow backyard chickens. Nearly every week in the news, a story appears reporting another town or city considering amendments to local laws that would allow backyard chickens. Proponents in North Huntingdon, Pennsylvania, and Nixa, Missouri have been working to amend the law; while just last week, local government in Hampton, Virginia and Howard County, Maryland, approved ordinance amendments to allow backyard chickens.

Seeing this trend as an extension of the local, urban food movement, people are realizing that chickens make great, productive pets. There’s evidence that eggs from backyard chickens have greater nutritional value than commercial eggs, and chickens eat pretty much anything – ticks, grasshoppers, kitchen scraps, weeds, you name it. They even have the added bonuses of being adorable and kids loving them. How could you not love that beak?

Photo Credit: stevenljohnson @ flickr

However, in 2012 an outbreak of salmonella that was traced back to several backyard flocks made at least one NPR blogger wary of the recent trend – dubbing backyard chickens “spreaders of salmonella.” A CDC report found that most of the people infected in this outbreak handled live chickens and that many of them had purchased chicks from one Ohio mail-order hatchery. A single hatchery, in this case, was responsible for the outbreak that affected 195 people in 27 states.

The story, unfortunately, focused on the chickens themselves when instead it should have focused on the bigger picture: when outbreaks can be pinpointed to a single source, it demonstrates the vulnerabilities of a large, global food economy. When there’s a problem, like an outbreak, it tends to spread faster, and farther in our interdependent, global economy. For example, in 2010, a salmonella outbreak that sickened hundreds across the country was traced back to one Iowa egg company and the company had to recall 380 million of its eggs.

And this blogger is not a lone voice in decrying backyard chickens. Alongside the stories of municipalities voting to change laws to allow backyard chickens, you will find stories of municipalities voting to ban backyard chickens, often in the name of public safety. It makes me wonder, how have we come so far as a society to be more skeptical of the food produced right before our eyes than food produced primarily behind closed doors and transported more than a thousand miles before reaching our plates?

Industrial food-animal production is largely responsible for the growing threat of antimicrobial resistance, while the lack of appropriate handling of waste at many of these facilities contaminates nearby air and waters with harmful nutrients and toxins. In addition, the focus on profits means animals are raised in as little space as possible and not surprisingly, these cramped, dirty conditions are fertile breeding grounds for diseases. On the other hand, a decentralized, local, scaled-down food economy offers numerous benefits. Local food significantly reduces these types of risks, makes us more resilient, and the food produced tends to be healthier too.

So do backyard chickens pose a public health risk? The facts just don’t bear this out. Consider this: salmonella causes about 1.2 million cases of food poisoning each year in the U.S. The outbreak that was traced back to the mail-order hatchery constitutes 0.01% of the total number of cases.

Photo Credit: edenpictures @ flickr

In addition, research suggests backyard chickens present no more of a health risk than other animals that may be kept as pets. If chickens are well-cared for and are kept in a clean environment, as with all pets, they are more likely to stay healthy. Very few poultry diseases are transmissible to man and salmonella is not an airborne disease (read: salmonella will not simply float from the chickens in your neighbor’s yard into your home). If you do decide to handle a chicken, simply wash your hands afterwards.

For the better part of mankind’s history, food was produced and consumed locally. Prior to World War II, nearly one-third of Americans lived on farms and even if you didn’t live on a farm, you probably bought your meat, milk, and eggs directly from your local farmer. During this time salmonella and avian flu certainly did not run rampant. These diseases that now make the news cycle on a near daily basis – and emerging concerns about antibiotic resistance and indiscriminate pesticide use – are products of our large, industrialized food system. Backyard chickens are a part of a solution that will strengthen our local food economy and at the same time, create foods that are both better for us and the environment.

Platform at Park Street Station. Photo: takomabibelot@flickr

“Watch the doors. Doors are closing. There is more service immediately behind this train. Please wait for the next train. Doors are closing.”

I find I am hearing this message more and more on the MBTA. So when the transit agency announced yesterday that average weekday ridership topped 400 million trips in FY2012, setting a new record, I was not the least bit surprised. Ridership was up 5.7% over last year and June 2012 marked the 17th consecutive month of growth as compared to the same month in the previous year.

Ridership increased across all modes, with the biggest increase in trolley ridership, up by 8% followed by buses up by 5.9% and then subway, up by 5.2%.

MBTA general manager Jonathan Davis credited the record ridership to various factors including a growing state economy, lower state unemployment rates, increased availability of real-time information for riders and an overall improvement of MBTA reliability. To me, the reasons for the increased ridership are less important than the bigger, general trend: more and more people are relying on the Commonwealth’s transit system. This is great news for people and the environment because it means less air pollution and fewer greenhouse gas emissions. Choosing transit instead of driving alone produces half the greenhouse gas emissions per mile.  For this we can all breathe easier, whether you use public transit or not.

Unfortunately, last January, the MBTA announced a budget deficit of $159 million. Just a month ago, on July 1, fares went up 23% to raise an additional $84 million a year for the agency. The rest of the deficit was closed by a combination of service changes, administrative efficiencies, and one-time revenues. Already, the MBTA has projected a new operating budget gap of close to $90 million for next year. That means that it’s a guarantee we’ll be having the same conversation again soon and fare increases and service cuts will be on the table once again if we do not come up with a long-term solution and balance the MBTA’s budget for good. The numbers are clear. People want a healthy transit system and the time to invest is now.

The St. Croix River (Photo credit: NOAA Photo Library)

•  Tuesday, June 5 – “Taking Stock of New England Fish: Part 3” – TalkingFish.org interviews Mike Palmer, Research Fisheries Biologist in the Population Dynamics Branch of the Northeast Fisheries Science Center. In this post, Mike Palmer explains how uncertainty comes into play in stock assessments and how it is accounted for.

• Thursday, June 7 – “CLF Lawsuit to Protect Alewives in Maine” – Last week, CLF filed a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in an effort to overturn a Maine law that has prevented the alewife, a key forage fish, from accessing its native habitat in the St. Croix River in Maine.

• Friday, June 8 – “Fish Talk in the News – Friday, June 7” – Interesting stories this week: bad grades for ocean policy, mermaids, yeast research, and environmental and health risks of imported shrimp.

The Gulf of Maine (Northern) shrimp season ends today (Photo credit: Aldric D'Eon, courtsey of the NEFSC).

• February 13: “A behind the scenes peek at the Gulf of Maine cod stock assessments” - What really happened to Gulf of Maine cod? Heather Goldstone of Climatide investigated last week by talking to Liz Brooks and Mike Palmer, two of the scientists at the Northeast Fisheries Science Center who were involved in producing the 2011 Gulf of Maine cod stock assessment.

• February 14: “To help GOM cod, NMFS should not touch closed areas” - It’s been widely reported that at its February meeting, the New England Fishery Management Council voted to ask the National Marine Fisheries Service to take emergency action on Gulf of Maine cod for the 2012 fishing year. The measures proposed, including a mere 3-13% reduction in the catch limit, were notable largely for their failure to address the condition of the depleted cod stock. But there is an aspect of the proposed package that has received little attention, which is troubling, because it would have NMFS open up five of the six existing areas currently closed to groundfishing.

• February 17: “Fish Talk in the News” - A weekly roundup of stories we think will interest readers. This week: news and opinion on Gulf of Maine cod regulations and fisheries science, the end of this year’s Gulf of Maine shrimp season.

Photo Credit: zeldablue/flickr

The MBTA is broke – and, for that matter, broken. According to the MBTA, it is facing a $161 million dollar budget gap. So bad is the MBTA’s financial situation that, last year, it resorted to using hairnets to protect subway motors.

Last week, the MBTA demonstrated its commitment to addressing a chronic lack of funding for public transportation by proposing two scenarios that are as narrow as they are unfair. In its attempt to close its funding gap, the MBTA has painted a bleak future for transportation users – especially bus riders. The public is justifiably upset by this news. Not only is the agency proposing to increase fares, but cut service all around.

One scenario, dubbed Scenario 2, proposes a fare increase of 35% (compared to 43% in Scenario 1) and is accompanied by drastic service cuts to all modes of transportation. (Scenario 1 also involves service cuts, though less drastic.) All ferry routes will be eliminated. Commuter rail service after 10 pm and weekend service will be eliminated. The E line (on the Green line) and Mattapan Trolley will both cease to run on the weekends. The most severe cuts, however, affect bus services.

Richard Davey, Secretary of MassDOT, explains that they “are looking at some underutilized service. [They] have some suburban bus carriers that are not well utilized.” In reality, however, Scenario 2 completely eliminates 101 bus routes. Not just during off-peak hours. These bus routes will cease to exist!

I’m not sure “some” is the best word to describe 101 bus routes, listed and illustrated on the map here from a CTPS Report produced for the MBTA. The routes depicted in red will no longer be served if Scenario 2 is passed. The blue routes, which are sparse in comparison, will be maintained. The bus routes to be eliminated are urban and suburban.

I am shocked to see how many bus routes are proposed to be cut and how pervasive the cuts are.

To be fair, the MBTA’s situation is difficult. As CLF and Transportation for Massachusetts said in a statement last week, “any fare increase should be part of a comprehensive financial plan that addresses not only the MBTA’s operating deficit for at least the next several years, but also provides the funds needed to address the T’s maintenance and capital needs without further driving up debt service costs.” Last year, CLF convened a group of national and local transportation finance experts and they came up with a menu of solutions, the Governor and the Legislature could pick from. We need a plan that solves the whole problem, not one that makes it impossible for people to get to work, school, or the doctor.

Under the current proposals, millions of riders will be forced to drive to work or drive to the nearest transit stop. Others who depend on the bus may be less fortunate. Scenario 2 is predicted to impact 38.1 million riders. Will you be one of them?

On April 14 U.S. District Court Judge William G. Young issued a final judgment in CLF’s favor in our suit against the MassHighway Department, bringing to a close nearly five years of litigation to push the department to manage stormwater runoff from state roads that was polluting nearby waterbodies. The court found that MassDOT (which now includes MassHighway) is finally, sufficiently carrying out its obligations. As a result of CLF’s suit, MassHighway has now built new stormwater treatment measures at the three sites that were contributing to discharges that cause on occasion instream exceedance of water quality standards. In addition, it submitted a revised Storm Water Management Plan that addressed the numerous deficiencies in the original plan which the court approved. The court noted, however, that MassHighway has more work to do. MassHighway has committed to assess its storwmater impacts on over 600 locations over a five-year schedule and to install new treatment if necessary.  MassHighway will have to submit two more reports to the Court detailing its activities throughout 2011.

When CLF filed suit in 2006, MassHighway had not even obtained permit coverage for its stormwater from EPA as required under the Clean Water Act. Two years later, in 2008, Mass Highway had done nothing to comply with the federal court order to clean up three sites in Milford, Franklin and Lancaster, Massachusetts, and had not revised its statewide cleanup plan for degraded waters.  CLF took MassHighway back to court, and at a hearing in May, 2010, Judge Young called MassHighway to the mat for non-compliance with federal law and issued an order to begin the cleanup immediately. (For a more detailed history of the case click here.)

At long last, the Judge issued a final judgment in CLF’s favor. This lawsuit sets a precedent for how stormwater is managed, on MassHighway’s remaining 2,500 miles of roadways in Massachusetts and the 600+ locations throughout the state where stormwater is being dumped into degraded rivers, lakes, and streams. The true measure of our success, however, is cleaner water. One important thing to note is that Judge Young, in the court’s final judgment, explicitly said this does not preclude suits for future violations so you can be sure CLF will be closely monitoring MassHighway for years to come. Until next time…

Charles River on a sunny day. Photo Credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/nostri-imago/

In times of economic woes, environmental concerns are often pitted against fiscal concerns. Take the recent attacks on the EPA’s power to enforce the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, for example. Republicans in Congress argue that the US cannot handle the economic costs necessary to comply with regulations and that the alleged “job-killing” regulations threaten our economic recovery. However, recent studies are testimony to the inaccuracy of these claims.

In one instance, a $2 million one-time investment in a bike path along the Little Miami River in Cincinnati resulted in $6 million – per year – in economic benefits to the local community. In addition, another $2 million per year is generated from canoe and kayak rentals. So in one year alone, all of the initial investment costs are returned and then some!

But what about restoring a river? Do the high costs associated with such projects also make sense? Another study found that restoring Mill Creek, which runs through a heavily industrialized section of Cincinnati, would result in $100 million increase in property values, a $3.5 million annual increase in recreational use and a $5.5 million increase in property tax revenue. There is now a $1 million investment per year to restore Mill Creek. (You can read more about these studies and others here.)

This research confirms what we learned from cleaning up Boston Harbor and other waterways in New England. Clean rivers are essential to a healthy economy and investments in clean waters can drive economic growth. Even if you do not fish, boat, kayak, or swim, local communities stand to benefit tremendously by investing in the preservation or restoration of their waters.

Ipswich, Massachusetts received its first wind turbine this week!

Parts for the wind turbine, including three 132-foot-long blades were delivered to the Town Farm Road site on Wednesday March 30th.  The wind turbine is expected to be constructed and in operation by Memorial Day and it will supply power to the Ipswich High School/Middle School. Check out the enthusiasm displayed by kids as the blades passed by Ipswich Elementary School:

Less than a week after I posted my blog post about the environmental and health problems associated with road salt, the Boston Globe published an article about de-icing alternatives some Massachusetts communities are turning to. Boston has received almost 50 inches of snow this winter compared to a total of 17 inches on average around this time. We can only assume that it means we’re using record amounts of salt to combat all this snow. While it is difficult to say if the increased snowfall we’re seeing is directly related to climate change, increased temperatures tend to increase evaporation thus resulting in increased precipitation.  (In the Northeast, there has been a 5 to 10% increase in annual average precipitation since 1900.) More generally speaking, scientists are increasingly concerned about the link between global warming and anomalous winter weather (such as the bizarre snowstorms seen recently in the South). As such, it is encouraging to hear that towns are looking to more environmentally friendly alternatives to deal with our new weather conditions as the planet continues to warm.

Besides rock salt (sodium chloride), calcium chloride and magnesium chloride can be used in colder temperatures but unfortunately, they are significantly more expensive than the traditional rock salt. Instead a growing number of Massachusetts communities are returning to an age-old solution: brine. The mixture is a combination of rock salt and water. Applying brine before snow falls and ice forms on the roadway (known as “anti-icing”) can prevent snow and ice from sticking to roads. Unlike plain old rock salt, this stuff doesn’t bounce or get blown off the roads like we’ve all seen. As such it dramatically reduces the amount of salt used and the time it takes to remove snow and ice from the roads in turn saving towns money. A study done in Oregon and Washington state showed that anti-icing can decrease costs by more than 50% compared to conventional de-icing. And it reduces the amount of salt that gets into our drinking water and the negative impacts on the environment.

This yet again reinforces the idea that solutions that are good for the environment are often also good for people and the economy.