The Sound Green

So, the quarter has ended, and my project has been a good experience for me, but hasn't been fruitful for others yet! I can't force other institutions to work on UW's timeline.

My meeting with Camp Long has been delayed - again - but here is the link to the fan page. Look out for updates when they let me. :)

Here is the guide I put together for the Green Seattle Partnership - inviting forest stewards to create their own Twitter accounts to reach out about their work site events.

And finally, here are the other suggestions I had for the GSP website to integrate it more with social media.

(These docs are in lower quality than my original files. Enjoy...)

-Cecile

The BP oil spill in the Gulf is already causing mass amounts of damage to the underwater environment not visible by our eyes. The oil spill will definitely create dead zones and some irreversible damage to the eco-system! Posted below are two links to current articles on the issue.

The topic of dead zones has been observed and studied scientifically often over the last decade, but has had little presence in the public sphere in the Northwest United States and even the global sphere. A failure to recognize the existence and expansion of dead zones in the Puget Sound would be fatal to the health of the environment and the standard of living of those that reside in the Northwest. Dead zones are of particular relevance because its relation to the world’s current issues of climate change, food scarcity, and pubic health. Research analysis of dead zone discourse and the larger contributing factors reveals that dead zone growth is enabled by an absence of regulation, poor accessibility and transparency of dead zone information, and insufficient funds to solve the problem. The findings suggests that education and working to solve the problem in small communities would be more efficient as policy making decisions on regulation has been sluggish and needs additional reinforcement from society.

     There is a large network of individuals that are readily available for contact on public areas of the internet.  With the growing number of social media users, and new marketing tactics to tap into that population, my objective was to introduce or expand some of those concepts to volunteerism and environmental communication.  Ultimately, to implement a strategy which would frame the organization’s visibility as appealing to isolated persons, and consequently increase the number of volunteers.  To target the strategy locally, make it easily shareable, and be personally appealing, I suggest ways for the GSP to implement social media directly on their website.  For volunteer forest stewards that wish to put in the effort to maintaining a Twitter account, I recommend an appropriate way to do so.  Finally, I create a Facebook fan page for Camp Long, which is undergoing governmental review but has the potential to be a template for all Seattle Parks pages.  While not everything has worked out as anticipated, these efforts thusfar have driven more traffic to the GSP website.

This is an advocacy project to help spread the word on the Puget Sound water system and the non point-source pollution that haunts it. Hopefully by the end of the project we will be able to educate people on the cause of pollution, why it is harmful, and what we can do to prevent it. In order to achieve this we attended events and interviewed specialists, conducted research on local non point source pollution, and created a graphic design to educate the uninformed citizen. The poster will be sent all around the internet as well as posted physically on public billboards. Only the most valid and applicable information was on the poster in order to quickly and effectively communicate to our audience. The goal is for a poster of this type to represent the harm caused by non point source pollution and how you can make easy everyday changes to reduce your pollution contribution.

For my project on water pollution I've decided to focus my research on dead zones and also addressing dead zones in the Puget Sound. My Paper outline looks like:

Nature is a PBS show that is in its 28^th season. The show is designed to bring the ‘natural world’ into people’s homes. It has received upwards of 450 awards. Does the number of awards it seems to accumulate mean that people do care about nature? Is the show soaking up the advantage of having a widespread audience to get out an environmental message for change. Messages need outlets to be heard and this show is a perfect one. It is an example of working with what is popular to make something else popular. I recommend watching a show!

http://ncseonline.org/NAE/envirojustice.html

Here is the link to some of the “alternative” environmental views of Native Americans. Essentially they look at humans, plants, and animals as equally important. I was actually talking to my roommate about this over the weekend and his response was, “Hey just like those blue people in Avatar.” This is absolutely correct, because the “blue people” of Avatar are BASED on the ideas of Native Americans, which many people don’t actually realize. This makes me think of the “Avatar Depression” people faced, where after seeing Avatar they became depressed they can’t live in a place like Pandora. When in reality there are places like this and Native Americans have been teaching these “alternative” views for a very long time.

For my project interview I met up with Janet Nazy from the Partnership for Water Conservation. The main purpose of the company is to bring together other companies and help communicate the message of water conservation. So of course, she had a wealth of information on good communication techniques. She noted that by far the most successful way to get people to agree with your message is by appealing to their emotions. I thought this was very interesting because we talk about this all the time in class. One example she gave is when she has a booth set up at a public event, she gets much more of a response when she includes disturbing pictures of what can happen if we don’t take care of the water. If she has no visuals, not as many people notice the booth or care to stop by. She said that through her experience most people out there don’t want to change their habits and could care less about water conservation. To change those types of people you just have to make it hit home, and the only way to do that is through an emotional response.

Here is the website to the Partnership for Water Conservation; they do some really cool stuff.

http://www.partners4water.org/index.html

Last night i was reading the Alex Steffen article preparing for the quiz today. Reading it right after the Gore article was very disturbing. Although I'm not sure i feel the same pending death and destruction the Al Gore does, i do feel that he is making a good point in that strong action needs to be taken to combat global warming. Steffen's article further made me realizes that drastic measures need to be taken in order to change the process that has already been started. The reason this is depressing to me is our government in its current form can not take dramatic action of any sort. If al Gore is even close to right about the seriousness of this issue then we are all doomed. Things are not going to change in the way Steffen is proposing, there are to many powerful interests opposing them. Real change can not happen if our government continues to work, or not work, as it does. I don't want to be a downer but i believe that our government in incapable of anything but the smallest of reforms, and if Steffen and Gore are right then we are f-ed. Change will not come, no we can't. Sorry but we are all going to die.

These are prototypes without knowing anything more, what do these make you think about???

20. You Must Be the Change You Wish to See in the World

19. Every Time History Repeats Itself the Price Goes Up.

18. Where Do You Think the Environment Is?

17. What Would Nature Do?

16. I Object to NOT Saving our Planet

15. Can You Hear the Eco?

14. Hear the Trees Falling?

13. Ignore It And It Will Go Away

12. What Will Your Children Breathe?

11. What Will Your Children Drink?

10. See Green, See Life

9. Melting Ice – A Hot Topic!

8. Delivering Environmental Innovation Through Sustainable Practices.

7. Kick the CO2 Habit

6. Green. That’s how we’d like the world to be.

5. Good Golly, Go Green Girl

4. It’s Cool to Be an Eco-school

3. Green for Bikes

2. Reduce, Reuse & Recycle

1. Will Work for Trees

I found these slogan approaches to be interesting and it got me thinking about what each of them is asking audiences to do or what exactly the slogan is getting at. Try to think of ways you react to these twenty slogans. The website below also offers some insight into what each one means or draws on.

One of the most interesting challenges that I have run into with my project is working with a government agency - Seattle Parks & Recreation.  From day one at my internship in social media marketing, I was so surprised that people would just trust me not to post inappropriate or irrelevant information through Facebook, Twitter, Wordpress, etc, accounts.  I hold in my hands the passwords to dozens of accounts of big-named clients!  Working with the government is an entirely different story.  I thought it would be as simple as creating a Facebook page and Twitter account, making it look pretty, coming up with a good strategy, and approving it before going live.  In reality, the page has to be set up and branded as seattle.gov by one person for every single government organization that wants to go on FB, and after that's done, I have to go to their office and edit it from their computer on their account.  They are toying with giving me access temporarily as an admin of the fanpage.  They are advanced enough to have a social media policy, and I hate to challenge our government (Ok, no, I really don't) but Facebook changes every few months and they are not up-to-date to deal with it.  I realize now that it's a struggle because they have to bring up policy changes in official meetings which might be laden with pressing issues... but seriously, if they have a social media addict and professional come in to help for free, you've got to be able to accept their help!  This project might be more than just a temporary nice Facebook page... jobs in the parks department are just waiting to be cut, and if we can build a shown fanbase and outreach for events and classes at the Camp Long Environmental Learning Center, who knows, a few more naturalist jobs might be able to stay after all.  Get with the program, and accept my help already, Seattle, WA!

With minimal effort, I was able to locate a very important resource for our project. Please paste these links directly and click on a few of the initial links to parts of the document. There is more than enough information in here to support our claims about pollution sources. It is time to discuss the "bigg Comm question" and how we are going to answer it!!!!

This is the link to the Dep. of ecology website,
http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/nonpoint/index/html

This is the EPA's impervious surface pollution run-off site
http:/www.epa.gov/nps/MMGI/Chapter4/ch4-1.html

Under "C. Scope of this Chapter" have a look at "general sources" they are all outlined very well. Lets choose some topics from those?

Water Pollution is one the most pressing environmental concerns. There isn't one source of all water pollution but a multitude of contributors. In areas of the Puget Sound, parts of the water system have become dead zones where no life exists because of water pollution. For my project I plan on examining-

After looking at different waste products we can recycle, I decided to focus on electronic waste (e-waste) recycling.  So here are the main points of my project:

Sam and I were finally able to meet this last Wednesday before class and discuss our plans for this project. In order to complete this advocacy project we are going to make a short video concerning local (Puget Sound area) water pollution issues.

Video construction: this will get planned out after some brief research this weekend. Since the video needs to be no longer than about 5 minutes we need to make sure points are made and supported concisely. The first segment will outline current pollution sources and problems in the Sound. The second segment will go over current projects and measures taken to alleviate the pollution. The final portion will offer insight and further analysis of pollution management practices and what "you" the individual can do.

This video will be targeted towards highschool/collegiate people. We hope to use responsible humor to make our point.

Let’s face it, the water system of the Puget Sound is in trouble. Everyday there seems to be more and more threats on the Sound, including toxic chemicals, polluted storm water, and regular pollution from the ever increasing human population.

The Puget Sound is the nation’s second largest estuary, so why aren’t we doing more to save it? It might simply be that the message is not getting out to enough people. So, Jacob and I are heroically taking matters into our own hands.

After some brainstorming we have decided the best way to successfully communicate our message would be through video. We are going to create an advocacy video about the troubles of the Puget Sound water system and send it around the web.

I think the natural progression of things is our video will not only save the Puget Sound but also save the world and our class will become famous. Well maybe that won’t happen but hopefully we can at least educate a few people about the issues surrounding the Sound and what they can do to help.

Let's start from the very beginning. The Cascade Land Conservancy put out the Cascade Agenda - a 100 year plan which "identifies strategies for conserving forestlands and farmlands and creating vibrant, spectacular cities" (via cascadeland.org).  As part of these strategies, they spawned the Green City Partnerships, to restore urban forests.  Green Seattle has a twenty-year plan to restore and maintain urban forests, which they say are "public assets that beautify and strengthen our local neighborhoods. Not only do they provide recreational opportunities for citizens, they also protect native wildlife habitat, improve air quality, mitigate stormwater runoff, and help keep our cities cool" (via greenseattle.org).  The canopy cover that they provide are being threatened by invasive species, which will potentially destroy 80% of that cover which we need for a healthy city.

With budgets falling apart all over the government, the only way the plan can be achieved is through volunteer work and community service.  We need to communicate this message to the public in a way that they will feel stewardship over the place they live, and feel a compelling responsibility to physically pitch in.  Realistically, we just need to make it incredibly convenient for people so that they'll show.

I think I can help.  I want to get more volunteers, or even at least make it easier for current volunteers to stay up-to-date.  I've talked with the Green Seattle Partnership and am working on making it possible for volunteers to share updates about the parks over which they have stewardship.  Before we can think about implementing a standard system for dozens of sites, I am going to test it out with one site, namely Camp Long in West Seattle.  This will involve updating their Facebook page and tweeting out about their next event in May, to see if building a following on Facebook and inviting individuals on twitter will actually increase their regular number of volunteers.  If this works, I can write a general strategy, and hopefully it can help out the cause all around Seattle. Woohoo! The wheels are in motion! Can Seattle last 20 more years?

Because of this sore throat I had, I had been having reoccurring fevers.  But I am a lot better now.

Thanks to a capstone analysis paper, this project has been chillin in the back seat. The great and new news is that Sam and I will be collaborating on this Seattle water supply project. Hes got the Communication skills and I got the Environmental Science skills...together...unstoppable.

I have had baaad luck getting an interview set up and am now considering my watershed management professor from last quarter. He is an extremely valid source of information concerning policy as well as ecology.

Sam and I were to meet last Friday but plans were interrupted so EARLY this week we will sit down and draw up some focused plans.

Finally, I plan to research Gregoire's emergency drought plan further and present my findings to my partner and discuss whether we want to get specific about it.

My project steps for the next week are

1.) First I will decide whether to focus my project research on water pollution in the Puget Sound and laws in relations to boats or on water pollution in the Puget Sound and dead zones created by this and how that is regulated.

2.) Then the next step is to get a good grasp of the nature of the problems regarding my topics from my interview.

3.) Finally, I will narrow down my topic and focus on conducting research on similar bodies of waters in other states/regions and look into how those are regulated and the issues and solutions comparing the similarities and differences with that of the Puget Sound

Here are three steps I’m taking this week to further my project:

1.Start doing more in-depth research on how Puget Sound water advocacy groups communicate their messages to the public.

2.Meet up with Jake and start mapping out our project and figure out what direction we want to take it.

3.Meet up with Janet Nazy of the Partnership for Water Conservation on Friday and conduct an interview.

After discussions with three different sources, at Camp Long and at Green Seattle Partnership, I am going to begin strategizing with them to let social media help them.  With Camp Long, I will focus on building a Facebook fansite targeting "hip" internet-savvy West Seattleites middle-aged and younger.  With the GSP, I will help introduce Twitter as a marketing tool to their volunteer park stewards to help get more of a turnout.  To a more realistic and minor extent for first-time internet users, this means merely being able to update the Twitter feed in the case of an emergency event-detail change.  For those who want to tackle something larger, I will explain how to make the Twitter account relay an appealing plea for more volunteers and to become an interesting account to follow.  The following three steps I will by no means finish in the coming week, but I will certainly outline and somewhat flesh out:

1. A Facebook fansite splash page for Camp Long that looks legit! I want to better learn how to design an image like on the Best Buy or Starbucks splash pages where I can make clickable, appealing buttons which link to sections on the Camp Long parks website, for example.
2. Start to publicize the fan page and aggregate followers, even without the final touches I am sure people will "Fan" (well, now "Like") the page.  Lincoln Park has over 2000 and they don't even update!
3. Start making an intuitive "how-to-use twitter" guide for those who primarily write hand-written letters! This will be tough, and I'll have to get many pairs of eyes to proofread it so that I really do speak in terms that will be helpful for those who have never used Twitter, and rarely use the internet.  I think it could evolve to be a great tool in the volunteer service.

I am still trying to do something artistic for my final project, although my view on the best way to present this project in the context of the class has changed. I feel that creating something in the public sphere and analyzing the communication processes that take place as a result of it may be a good way to go about. What does art communicate to the average person? Can art bring about a shift in ideas? What is arts relationship with the environment? These are a few questions I hope to get at in my final project. I have always had an unstable relationship with “activism” art and I would like to explore this relationship in my final. To help me with these questions I will engage with the artistic community and environmental community and create an artistic form of communication to be displayed in public. My presentation will be a discussion of the communication taking place through the art work and its relative success or failure.

Prompt 1: I know that simply because we are in this class means that we are all now, and always have been, die hard environmentalists. The fact that we are at UW means that we are all open-minded liberals, boiling with hatred for all the right wing morons that we hear about MSNBC (but rarely ever meet personally). Im sure that everyone is super pissed that Obama is opening drilling in Alaskan and Atlantic waters, and that we are not all zooming around in electric cars in our politically homogonous city, but in case you forgot, America still runs on oil and will for quite a while longer. It is not very difficult to imagine Hiskes’ clean, pedestrian friendly, high speed train city, but all you have to do is look around you to realize that there is a lot of work to be done before we get to that point. Our progressive eco friendly city was built with oil and continues to be built with oil. The free trade coffee you are drinking right now would still be in Central America without oil. Things don’t change in an instant just because there is some new cat running things. Not everyone in this country is an atheist living in Seattle with a compostable toilet. We still need oil, and we need oil to get to a point where we can stop using oil.

The issue of water pollution is an extremely pressing and controversial issue. Water is instrumental to life and the amount available to the world that is usable is limited despite the large bodies of water that exist. More and more water eco-systems are damaged and tainted from run-off of impervious surfaces, oil from boats, and C02 emissions that sink into the water. The Puget Sound is an eco-system at risk of water pollution. Especially because everyday thousands of people commute using the ferries. I propose to research the current water laws and learn how and if water pollution is regulated in the Puget Sound and if there are sustainable alternatives that can be implemented to lessen the damage of water pollution on the Sound.

To sum up my findings from the Hiskes articles, the move to open up more sections for offshore drilling seems motivated by political agenda more than the need for resources and stabilizing the economy. The political agenda is evident from clear codes and signs from the discourse. In Obama's reasoning to allow offshore drilling, he argues that we need the fuel while we "ramp up production of new sources of renewable, homegrown energy". It sounds reasonable to a person who doesn't know much about offshore drilling and utilizing fuel. If the argument is we need fuel now, then the truth is it would take years before the oil that is found is gathered and usable and we wouldn't be able to use the fuel now. Then his point is constructed as positive by considering the energy "homegrown" acting as an appeal to nationalists. The way the proposition is constructed is more about making political moves than telling a solution. The question I have is, do we really need oil now more than ever? The plan is that offshore drilling will help the economy of the nation, but the plan in no way is a sustainable one. Obama's decision reveals the true issue of over consumption and lack of sufficient practices and frugality.

Sir Hall speaks of how meaning gets constructed through language (symbols and signs); in other words socially constructed codes that can be changed. Throughout his post on the struggle between finding alternate energy sources and sticking with oil Hiske used a series of descriptive language moments and a couple strong key words. For instance, the word offshore drilling is a constructed sign. Why not say something along the lines of “searching for oil in surrounding coastal waters”? Offshore makes the drilling seem distant and less close to home which could raise popularity. Also, using descriptive language is another key tool of Hiske writing. He uses a story about stale bread to convey the public sphere of perception and ideas. Making the masses seem smaller and more tangible to understand.

I am going to be taking a look at the legal side of water in Washington, more specifically the Puget Sound. For my event I will be attending the 2010 Water Year Update and Overview of Water-Related Climate Change Adaptation Efforts Lunch. For a person of interest in the interview process I am leaning towards three different people. Either a recent law school graduate who has an emphasize on water law, Paul F. (Seattle Water), or Jen M. Breaking into the legal realm surrounding water through the event and interview and the going to be pivotal in grasping Washington’s situation. Looking into political platforms, getting in touch with a representative in Olympia, and visiting a couple companies are also ideas of exploration for the project.

For my project, I will focus on Seattle's system of compost as a part of the city's waste management.  I am going to attend a seminar which will provide individuals with the knowledge to compost in the right way in Wallingford on April 22nd.  I hope the seminar will give me a better sense on composting and perhaps inspirations on to promote the concept of compost in the community.  As for the communication question, I want to look into the education aspect of compost.  What are different organizations or state departments doing to educate the public?  How well educated are the Seattleites on the concept of compost?  And how many household are doing some sort of composting at home?  I will also go check out the first compost toilet in Seattle and perhaps interview the organization or people who came up with the design.  I may use the UW as a case study and find out how the UW community is doing with composting.  It will be a great help if any of you can give me some feedback!  

Looking over the Hiskes readings, I was able to find a few instances of signs and codes used by the author to help shape his message. In the Hall reading “Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices” he explains representation is the “essential part of the process by which meaning is produced and exchanged between members of a culture.” I saw this come into play in the second Hiskes article when he brings in opinions of different groups on Obama’s off-shore drilling campaign. These opinions ranged from being highly against too showing some support. We use the different points of view in order to shape a better understanding of the subject and help decide if it is the correct thing to do. The second system of representation in the process of constructing meaning, as Hall describes, is language. When Hiskes mentions how we are so used to our “auto-centric, gasoline-dependent living” he is not only communicating his ideas, but also using signs to make his statements carry more meaning to the reader.

For my project I have decided to focus on the water of the Puget Sound. I would like to look at the current pollution problems surrounding it and what exactly we are doing to fix it. More specifically, I’d like to look at the communication tools (if any) and strategies that are being used to get the message out there. I feel that with such an important and timely issue we are not going to get anywhere without solid communication across all fronts. On Thursday, I am going to Dr. Emoto’s talk titled “Messages From Water.” I think the talk will further my understanding of the importance of water and the urgency we must use to save it. For my interview, I have reached out to groups such as Partnership for Water Conservation, The Puget Sound Nearshore, and the NAWQA program. I would like to not only discuss the current water problems of the Sound with them, but also learn about the advocacy work they are doing and how they get their message to the public.

Our fearless instructor has framed his friend Jonathan Hiskes as an obsessor over nothing but oil.  I'm sure it was for instructive purposes.  Some "signs" Hiskes used include: offshore drilling, jobs, Palin, and Gulf Coast.

"Offshore drilling" is loaded.  But in completely different ways depending on your context.  If you've heard some statistics, you might think offshore drilling is barely harmful, and a great way to get oil from your own country.  If you believe others, you snap in disgust, can't understand why some people think it's even an option, and vomit a bit in your mouth.  Hiskes clearly belongs in the latter group.  Yet again, my favorite problem comes up.  Here we read three entire articles (1, 2, 3)... and no one has said anything about facts, only about the false realities that different political parties have constructed around a concept.  FACTS, people!  Why does the GOP think offshore drilling is ok?  It must come from somewhere.  Why would you as a democrat assume that it's awful?  Quoted from a Republican and a Democrat, respectively, I've heard drilling as "only literally harming the tiny area over which the oil pump is placed; even environmentalists say it," and "devastating the entire ecosystem and watershed; all the environmentalists know it."  In exchange for less reliance on our warring enemies?  Will someone please convince me either way?  With links to a pure scientific report?  Who has done the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for these locations?  Is a Democrat environmentalist doing one EIS, and a Republican environmentalist, another? Can we have one of those for our required readings in this class, or do they simply not exist?  Are there any researchers in this entire world?  Bueller?

I would like to focus on the Hiskie article titled "Understanding the allure of drill baby drill" and draw upon its connections with the Hall article. In Halls piece, the three major forms of representation are discussed. "Reflective" representation is how language can reference/describe something or meaning that already exists in the world. "Intentional" representation is language selected to communicate or represent ONLY what the writer/painter/speaker etc wishes. The third, "constructionist" representation is more complex and is the idea that meaning can be extracted/interpereted by individuals based on the language used. I feel that much more meaning and more diverse interpretations arise through this form of communication and due to the individuality of most people, dominates over the previous two forms of representation. Hiskies article disects the meaning and different interpretations of the well known slogan "drill baby drill." More importantly, why people are attracted to and support this mentality. I found the analogy of impoverished/starving people in bread lines to be a bit far fetched but fundamentally true. People in our nation have a dangerous love for oil and like the bread liners, tend to just want more rather than think about getting somthing else that may be more nutritious or less harmfull to the environment. I feel that the slogan "drill baby drill" embodies the "intentional" form of representation; politicians and citizens of this nation who support the idea read and interpret the slogan strait up. They dont want to/cant think about changing their lives or investing in alternative energy sources so they simply want to drill, drill, drilllllllllllll.

The presentation that I will be attending this Tuesday is the second of three weekly presentations concerned with watershed management and Puget Sound water supply. A major part of a healthy and functional watershed capable of supporting a large metropolis with water are natural floodplains. Floodplains help slow runnoff, reducing erosion and increasing water quality. Vast amounts of floodplain/riparian areas in the Puget Sound area have been altered/developed and the upcoming seminar addresses the challenges of large-scale floodplain restoration on the Lower Tolt River. A Major Watersheds Strategic Advisor, a rep from the Seattle PUD, King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks and a senior ecologist will speak at the presentation, offering a well rounded assesment of the issues. I plan to use the information presented to gain a better understanding of current restoration discourse from the perspective water as a resource.

I spent the morning picking out tiny pieces of Styrofoam out of Lincoln Park's beach.  I was truly enlightened, today!

My morning began at Camp Long, where one other straggler showed up for a work party advertised on greenseattle.org.  I called the number that I saved from the website, to find that not only was the coordinator running late because of a family emergency, but the work site had been moved to Lincoln Park beach.  Running through my head: "Communication need #1: a need to update live changes as they happen on the website."

At Lincoln Park, I met another coordinator, Gretchen, and chatted with her as we searched the beach, trash bags in hand.  It turned out, she just got approval from the City of Seattle (she was with Parks and Recreation) to set up social media for Camp Long. A volunteer had set up a Facebook, but it turned out all wrong and they were just waiting to figure it out.  Is this divine intervention, or what??  I volunteered my services to create a social media strategy and fix their fanpage.

I am so excited for this project!  I am still meeting with Andrea W. from the Green Seattle Partnership, who oversees volunteer outreach for all of their work sites, to see if I can help out with that; but for now, I think I can set up a great model with the Camp Long strategy.  I've written out some ideas like creating a manual of appropriate subject matter to tweet out/post on Facebook, how to use Tw/FB for public outreach, and what to do to get followers.

For the last hour at the beach, Gretchen took some of the volunteers and I out on a nature walk, searching for marine life.  She had so much knowledge about all of the slimy wonderful critters that were hiding under those rocks at low tide!  Also, as we were picking up the drifted litter, she explained how certain things got there, and expressed hope that by doing these volunteer projects we would think about where all of our trash goes.  It certainly worked for me! All of the tips she had were translating into fun tweets or updates in my head.  I think that her social media page would do really well if it was updated with cool tips and wildlife to look out for.

...just a start

Here is a link to a news story that talked about the compost toilet. It is located at 25th Ave. NE and NW 82nd St.


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2011445678_bluebox26m.html


I think I will go check it out since I am planning on doing my project on composting.

This article written by Jackie White is really helpful for me to understand the basic of composting.  The article includes things to compost, things not to composts, what happens to our waste etc.  It was written in 2008 so some of the things mentioned may be out-of-dated.  But I still think it is worth reading.

Along with plant material, food waste and food-soiled paper can be placed in the bin for collection.  

Things to compost include: meatless food scraps, eggshells, grains, coffee filters, tea bags, pizza boxes, paper towels, non-coated paper cups and plates 

Don't compost:  meat, dairy, grease, plastics or plastic-coated paper products 

I grew up on the south shore of the Hood Canal, the hooked shaped inlet to the west of greater Pudget Sound, in a small town called Union. Though Union population is only a few hundred people, there are a variety of environmental issues affecting the town and the south hood canal area. The decline in native salmon population as a result of human development in salmon habitats is a local issue that I, myself feel a strong connection too. When I was young my Father operated a salmon hatchery in a pound on our property, and when I was in high school I worked for a non-profit group called the Salmon Enhancement Group, who’s sole goal was improving salmon habitats throughout Hood Canal. Given my connection to this issue and the people surrounding it, and my work in photography and art, I would like to create a photographic essay documenting the people who are involved in this effort and their work to save an aspect of their community that they feel is important.

While reading the Corfee-Morlot et al. article, I was amazed by the fairly long scientific history of global warming research, as compared to the relatively short history of public discourses and activities concerning the environment and climate change. For about a century the role of the green house effect in global warming has been discussed among academics in a relatively private space, but actual change in how ordinary people felt about there world and environment was did not arises until much later. A middleman was needed to condense and simplify the information that scientists had known for years, and “sell” it to the public. This “sell” was made with images, popular books, and nonscientific language. For hard science to affect the public sphere it needs to become soft science so ordinary people can understand it. I feel that this transfer of information is the most important aspect of the rise of global warming discourse and activism, because science without public interaction does not change policy.

One thing I often notice while looking out in the water of the Puget Sound while riding the ferry are the unnatural streaks left behind in the water. The streaks are a result of boats and ferries that help thousands of Puget Sound residents commute everyday. My concern is, are we as a society ignorant of the constant damage caused by using the ferries because of the convenience that it provides for us everyday? I think it would be interesting if there isn't already to have a system similar to a carbon emission tax for the ferries as well, because boat travel does indeed leave an imprint on the environment. Boating commuting I believe could have similar implications on the water ecology as CO2 does on climate change and the environment.

The reading "Global Warming in the Public Sphere" by Corfee Merlot, discusses the beginning of global warming research, which reveals the importance of scientific discourse and questioning it. I found it interesting that the catalyst which fueled the start of global warming research was by accident, and more ironically discovered during the Cold War in the process of developing tools for the use of war. More importantly, the start of global warming research is an example of environmental communication in relation to scientific discourse. Many at the time during the 1950's came to the conclusion that human activity on the climate was "insignificant" and "benign". I think it's important we remember the early science of global warming and how it was perceived and has changed over time. If we make the same judgments we made in the past about human impact on the environment, then we'll get stuck trying to move forward trying to deal with issues of the environment. Scientific discussion and analysis doesn't except just one conclusion and continues to examine and challenge ideas. Taking the same sort of flexible approach in environmental communication is important because the issues of the environment aren't static issues that continue to remain the same. We have to be willing to communicate while not making conclusions that aren't subject to change.

While reading "Global Warming in the Public Sphere" by Corfee-Morlot, I thought there was a very interesting point brought up in the media section of the essay. The media not only helps the understanding of environmental issues by making scientific analysis assessable to the public, but can also direct public attention to certain concerns by putting an important environmental issue on the front page for everyone to see. It is clear that global warming and climate change has made it to the mainstream media, which has helped spread concern to a wider audience. It is especially true through mediums like television and film, as an example the reading gives of the movie “The Day After Tomorrow” from 2004. Though the movie is clearly just another big budget Hollywood trauma film, it was extremely successful in box offices and opened people’s eyes to climate change and some possible disastrous results it might cause. Though of course some of these disasters that movies show are a little far fetched, I think it’s fantastic that more and more people are starting to learn about possible environmental issues in the future, and it seems like those who maybe wouldn't have before are starting to engage and do what they can to help.