Catsailor.com

Better Fact Check this one.....

Posted By: Todd_Sails

Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/02/13 03:30 PM

Read this short article until the end please!

The Washington Post

The Arctic Ocean is warming up, icebergs are growing scarcer and in some places the seals are finding the water too hot, according to a report to the Commerce Department yesterday from Consulafft, at Bergen, Norway

Reports from fishermen, seal hunters, and explorers all point to a radical change in climate conditions and hitherto unheard-of temperatures in the Arctic zone. Exploration expeditions report that scarcely any ice has been met as far north as 81 degrees 29 minutes.

Soundings to a depth of 3,100 meters showed the gulf stream still very warm. Great masses of ice have been replaced by more inches of earth and stones, the report continued, while at many points well known glaciers have entirely disappeared.

Very few seals and no white fish are found in the eastern Arctic, while vast shoals of herring and smelts which have never before ventured so far north, are being encountered in the old seal fishing grounds. Within a few years it is predicted that due to the ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable.

* * * * * * * * *
I apologize, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922, as reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post - over 90 years ago.
*****************
Damn that pesky global warming.......................
Posted By: Karl_Brogger

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/02/13 04:50 PM

We've got a thread already for this stuff Todd.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/02/13 06:09 PM

interesting to note from NPR (not exactly your climate skeptic)... sea ice melt will not change sea levels, as the ice has already displaced its mass in the ocean. Glacier and sheet ice over land might...

not that I want to hash this all over again on a SAILING forum...
Posted By: Jake

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/03/13 12:01 AM

Originally Posted by waterbug_wpb
interesting to note from NPR (not exactly your climate skeptic)... sea ice melt will not change sea levels, as the ice has already displaced its mass in the ocean. Glacier and sheet ice over land might...

not that I want to hash this all over again on a SAILING forum...



The devil is in the details - yes, melting "sea ice" will not change sea levels as the ice is floating and is displacing it's weight in water. However, I think some of the detail is getting lost in this translation because there is more than just "sea ice" out there. I'm betting another 10 minutes of that episode would have probably gotten around to this part of the subject.

After hearing some reports of a 30 foot sea level rise a couple of years ago, I too was skeptical so I did some research and math on my own. What I found is that even if you just consider Antarctica, where most of the ice is on a continental land mass, that a 30 foot sea level rise is incredibly EASY to hit if only a small part of Antarctica melted. This ignores Greenland, the arctic, and many other land based masses of ice. It's astonishing but true.

If Greenland were to all melt, the oceans would rise 20 feet. If Antarctica were to all melt, the oceans would rise 200 feet. We're talking about a LOT of ice out there and it's not melting "tomorrow". The main estimates on future ocean levels if the current melt rates continue is between 20 and 40 inches by 2100.
Posted By: Jake

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/03/13 12:55 AM

It's kinda fun to watch everyone gradually convert to the idea that "hey, things are actually getting warmer". It's only taken about 10 years. Todd, you are of a withering few, my friend. While it may be entertaining to point at the drastic cold snaps and make a snarky comment about how it ironically relates to "warming", the truth is that these are due largely to instability in the weather driven by incredibly slight changes in ocean currents and other variables. Giant snow event!? "Aaaaa! - Global warming is a farce!" Yet, it's moisture in the atmosphere (from extra warmth at various layers in the ocean surface and atmosphere) that creates snow. You'll get there eventually - hang in there.
Posted By: hobie1616

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/03/13 02:38 AM

Todd may not be onboard with global warming/global climate change but he is totally convinced the lizard people control our societies.

From Public Policy Polling

- 37% of voters believe global warming is a hoax, 51% do not. Republicans say global warming is a hoax by a 58-25 margin, Democrats disagree 11-77, and Independents are more split at 41-51. 61% of Romney voters believe global warming is a hoax

- 4% of voters say they believe “lizard people” control our societies by gaining political power

- 28% of voters believe secretive power elite with a globalist agenda is conspiring to eventually rule the world through an authoritarian world government, or New World Order. A plurality of Romney voters (38%) believe in the New World Order compared to 35% who don’t

- 15% of voters say the government or the media adds mind-controlling technology to TV broadcast signals

- 5% believe exhaust seen in the sky behind airplanes is actually chemicals sprayed by the government for sinister reasons

Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/03/13 03:55 PM

I would point out that I've always believed the climate changes. It's been doing so for millions of years and will continue well after humanity's demise.

I'm still not sure (1) how much of that (as a % of total) is "our" fault and (2) how much of the climate we can "control"

My contribution to the green movement is primarily through conservation. Because I'm too much of a cheapskate to pay for wasted energy (like leaving the lights on, driving a gas guzzler, etc)
Posted By: bacho

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/03/13 04:23 PM

Originally Posted by waterbug_wpb
I would point out that I've always believed the climate changes. It's been doing so for millions of years and will continue well after humanity's demise.

I'm still not sure (1) how much of that (as a % of total) is "our" fault and (2) how much of the climate we can "control"

My contribution to the green movement is primarily through conservation. Because I'm too much of a cheapskate to pay for wasted energy (like leaving the lights on, driving a gas guzzler, etc)


X2, I believe things change in cycles and I am not sure humans can contribute much towards the change in either direction. Plenty of instances in recorded history where places were once warmer (and cooler) than they are now.
Posted By: Timbo

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/03/13 04:55 PM

Well, I can tell you I have seen the effects of humans on the atmosphere, every time I descend into LAX or SAN, there is a huge brown layer of smog you come into at about 5000', give or take a few, depending on temps and surface winds. It has gotten better in the past 20 years, due to the emission controls put on the cars, and better fuel blends, etc. but it's still there.

And then there's China and India, you should see some of the smog they generate! It makes the worst day in LA look like a spring morning in the alps!

Now, compare that to what Mother Nature throws up into the atmosphere all by herself, in the way of volcanic ash and forest fire smoke, and the big red dust storms coming off the African coast, well, I'd call it a draw.

BUT...one thing is certain, we humans can at least try to do something about it, in the way of conservation and/or emissions reductions. Will it change anything, long term?

Who knows, but at least we could try to clean up after ourselves. It couldn't hurt.
Posted By: pgp

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/03/13 05:55 PM

The environment is a commie plot.
Posted By: jkkartz1

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/03/13 05:59 PM

Disregard for the environment is a capitalist plot.
Posted By: pgp

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/03/13 06:31 PM

Where is the environment anyway? The yucca pen? Maybe Cecil Webb?
Posted By: jkkartz1

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/03/13 08:24 PM

To paraphrase Savwafair, It's everywhere.

I'm a water person.

The Red Neck Yacht Club is meeting out on Bermont Road this weekend. I'll pass.

I spent last weekend at the Fish Shacks off Pineland. But I'm wary of eating the oysters. Unfortunately, in much of Charlotte Harbor the eating of raw oysters is not recommended due to fecal coliform. The developers of Cape Coral and Port Charlotte did not put in sewers. It's cheaper that way. Now when we really need them, no one is willing to pay the price.
Posted By: jkkartz1

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/03/13 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by Timbo
Well, I can tell you I have seen the effects of humans on the atmosphere, every time I descend into LAX or SAN, there is a huge brown layer of smog you come into at about 5000', give or take a few, depending on temps and surface winds. It has gotten better in the past 20 years, due to the emission controls put on the cars, and better fuel blends, etc. but it's still there.

And then there's China and India, you should see some of the smog they generate! It makes the worst day in LA look like a spring morning in the alps!

Now, compare that to what Mother Nature throws up into the atmosphere all by herself, in the way of volcanic ash and forest fire smoke, and the big red dust storms coming off the African coast, well, I'd call it a draw.

BUT...one thing is certain, we humans can at least try to do something about it, in the way of conservation and/or emissions reductions. Will it change anything, long term?

Who knows, but at least we could try to clean up after ourselves. It couldn't hurt.


Watch the Chinese Grand Prix this weekend. You'll see the air.
Posted By: pgp

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/03/13 08:28 PM

Ah, Grasshopper! Cape Coral (by area the 2nd largest city in the state) started an extensive water, sewer, reclaimed water program years ago. I've had all three for well over 10 years.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/03/13 08:57 PM

Marco Island had the same issue (septic causing fecal coliform blooms in the waterways). I think they just finished up a huge sewer project that cost a go-zillion dollars, but maybe it will help in the long run.

I recall Tampa Bay used to be pretty dang ugly in the 60s, but has since cleaned up quite nicely.
Posted By: hobie1616

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/05/13 04:14 AM

[b]In Sign of Warming, 1,600 Years of Ice in Andes Melted in 25 Years[/b]
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/05/13 01:05 PM

so if we stopped generating electricity and using petrol, how much could we stop or reverse?

I use +/- 700 KwH per month at the house (no heating oil) and my car gets 40 mpg on low octane gas.

I travel locally a lot (radius 100 miles, average trip 25 miles). I could bike perhaps, but would never cover my territory even if I were doped up like Lance.
Posted By: pgp

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/05/13 02:58 PM

The only estimate I've read is that 2% of the increase in green house gases is directly attributable to human influence.
Posted By: Tony_F18

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/05/13 03:01 PM

Todd:
Even if you don't believe in global warming, the worst case scenario of "going green" is that we will have less pollution, cleaner air, and less dependency on oil and coal.
How can that be a bad thing?
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/05/13 04:00 PM

I guess the only "bad" thing to going "green" would be the current cost of such decision.

Conservation seems to be my only option, even for food.
Posted By: Todd_Sails

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/10/13 08:16 PM

Unfortunately, I don't think hardly anyone read that article word for word.

Then, maybe they didn't read the bottom line, which was :

I apologize, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922, as reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post - over 90 years ago.

Get a grip people!

Every lefty is bashing me here, as if I'm some kind of skeptic ot something!

I didn't write the article, my time machine wasn't working well then, this was from the 'Washington Post'- IN 1922!!

I thought it was bery interesting, and ironic, coming from 1922!

What a bunch of......
Posted By: Todd_Sails

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/10/13 08:24 PM

Originally Posted by Tony_F18
Todd:
Even if you don't believe in global warming, the worst case scenario of "going green" is that we will have less pollution, cleaner air, and less dependency on oil and coal.
How can that be a bad thing?


Tony- for instance- producing 'electric cars', and then generating the electricity to power them, is usually more pollutant than just driving a modern car? Look it up. Yet, someone gets a 'tax break' for doing it?

How much clean water is used, before one gallon of ethanol is produced? While you're at it, look that one up too.

Tony, did it ever occur to you that someone like me for instance, might have forgotten more than you ever knew?

Just saying, the OP was a quote from an article, from 1922!
Posted By: Jake

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/10/13 10:58 PM

Originally Posted by Just Todd
Unfortunately, I don't think hardly anyone read that article word for word.

Then, maybe they didn't read the bottom line, which was :

I apologize, I neglected to mention that this report was from November 2, 1922, as reported by the AP and published in The Washington Post - over 90 years ago.

Get a grip people!

Every lefty is bashing me here, as if I'm some kind of skeptic ot something!

I didn't write the article, my time machine wasn't working well then, this was from the 'Washington Post'- IN 1922!!

I thought it was bery interesting, and ironic, coming from 1922!

What a bunch of......


It might be hilarious if our scientific capabilities were still the same as they were in 1922. We're a little better at measuring things now...so the article's surmise doesn't really carry through to the similar things we hear today.

Added to which, you can ~probably~ find an article that claims just about any point over the last 91 years.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/11/13 02:47 PM

Originally Posted by Tony_F18
Todd:
Even if you don't believe in global warming, the worst case scenario of "going green" is that we will have less pollution, cleaner air, and less dependency on oil and coal.
How can that be a bad thing?


Good point, but could we also achieve those goals by a 10% reduction in our use of current "non-green" energy?
Posted By: Anonymous

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/11/13 04:35 PM

the world goes through natural hot and cold cycles. rise and fall of water levels, naturally occurring toxins and billions of tons are spit into the air by volcanoes... solar flair cycles affect our world too - and gravity sucks!

That is all our of our control, but we still can reduce our own toxic footprint.

we pour billions of tons of toxins into our air & water, plus drugs and toxins in our cattle, pork, and chix. (cattle/pig contribute more methane than human industry)

changes in human energy sources/infrastructural, life style and diet WILL reduce toxins in our environment

want to debate who benefits from "Global warming" and how corrupt the world is ... or do WE want to make small changes that will help our envelopment, and maybe even make a better one for our children or grandchildren.....


Originally Posted by pgp
The only estimate I've read is that 2% of the increase in green house gases is directly attributable to human influence.
Posted By: Timbo

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/11/13 04:36 PM

I'd be good with going back to living in a cave in the woods (near a beach of course, with some logs to build a Proa!).

And then you asked yourself; Isn't there something MORE to life??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suAhGfVr_4U

Well let me tell you, There isn't!
Posted By: pgp

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/11/13 05:59 PM

As long as there is a good dentist close by.
Posted By: catman

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/11/13 06:53 PM

Originally Posted by Tony_F18
Todd:
Even if you don't believe in global warming, the worst case scenario of "going green" is that we will have less pollution, cleaner air, and less dependency on oil and coal.
How can that be a bad thing?


Because no matter how much we do to go green it will never be enough. Cut and paste brings up 1600 years of whatever. Lets talk about what has happened to this planet in the last 40 million years to get a true perspective on "climate change".

No the power and control freaks push this agenda pure and simple and short of wiping out the entire population of the world (except for them) they will never be satisfied. NEVER. And if you believe otherwise your a fool.
Posted By: Todd_Sails

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/12/13 08:28 PM

Originally Posted by Timbo
I'd be good with going back to living in a cave in the woods (near a beach of course, with some logs to build a Proa!).

And then you asked yourself; Isn't there something MORE to life??

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suAhGfVr_4U

Well let me tell you, There isn't!


OK, NO SOUP FOR YOU! - TWO WEEKS!
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/13/13 06:06 PM

Originally Posted by Timbo


And then you asked yourself; Isn't there something MORE to life??


uh, yeah... BOOBS (that don't talk)
Posted By: Timbo

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/13/13 08:20 PM

Boobs yes, boobs are good!

And it's a good thing there's two of them, because nobody can eat just one!
Posted By: David Parker

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/14/13 12:42 AM

Quote
And it's a good thing there's two of them...


And boobs are the only time where two pair is better than three of a kind.

[Linked Image]

Attached picture kaitlyn-leeb.jpg
Posted By: TeamChums

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/14/13 02:11 AM

Don't turn this into SA. Not too cool with under age people on here.
Posted By: David Parker

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/15/13 01:13 AM

Just a photo from a PG-13 movie, Total Recall. So if you're 13, check with your folks before reading any further.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 04/15/13 08:49 PM

yes, we do need to encourage youth and female sailors, which is why it's best left to keep those events separate from us old drunks and our "colorful metaphors"
Posted By: Will_R

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/01/13 06:51 AM

Been working in air quality for more than a decade and now work at a headquarters level DoD component environmental office where we write policy and drive that whole "group" so to speak.

This has been a research subject of mine since I was a freshman in college; it's BS.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/

If you want to make a positive change, the administration will pull it's head out of its rear, finish Yuca Mtn (or some equivalent) and build more fission plants. Additionally, we need to end this antiquated policy of not reprocessing spent fuel rods due to non-proliferation concerns; the EU has done it for years w/o incident.

There are some basic facts that cannot be overcome.
- "renewables" cannot meet baseline generation needs; no if ands or buts.
- "renewables" have environmental impacts, i.e. you gotta pay to play. Where did the carbon, glass, resin come from to produce the blades for a turbine? What about the transportation and maintenance cost of the equipment? You have to put those things in the middle of nowhere, so you also have to install a distribution system to move the power from nowhere to somewhere.
- Forcing the market to purchase renewable energy over conventional results in less efficient operation of plants and higher cost. Look into the problems that germany is having with this right now....
- Cost per MW is significantly higher for "green" energy than conventional methods.

There are common sense things we could be doing to improve environmental quality without spending trillions. I agree that the issue isn't truly env quality; it's control/power and redistribution of "equity". Go dig into the IRS and UN info on environmental taxation; it becomes clear very quickly.

The way I see it is that I'd rather have a place out in the desert where I put a sign that says "stay back, danger" and store radioactive waste instead of taking and burning coal which releases fine particulate matter which is in part composed of bioaccumulative/persistent toxic metals. Those metals are then ingested by us (and everything else) through inhalation, and ingestion from soil/water and hence food.

I could really melt your brain if I went into how lowering emissions limits in the US and driving industrial activities to other countries (China, Mex, etc) actually increases global emissions due to their lax (or nonexistent) standards... Another fun one is how plastic bags are actually better for the environment than paper (outside of the problem with disposal).

.... only came here looking for info for a project and end up doing this... ack.

Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/01/13 07:45 PM

Originally Posted by Will_R
Another fun one is how plastic bags are actually better for the environment than paper (outside of the problem with disposal).



Maybe we should make them heavier so they won't fly around and end up in the ocean...?
Posted By: Will_R

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/01/13 11:18 PM

All kidding aside, go look at how much energy is required to manufacture and transport paper bags. Everything from pulpwood harvesting and transport to paper production, bag production then shipping. It takes a lot more resources to produce and utilize them than plastic, however... people don't dispose of them properly and...

http://www.treehugger.com/culture/paper-bags-or-plastic-bags-everything-you-need-to-know/page5.html
Posted By: Ventucky Red

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/01/13 11:50 PM

Originally Posted by TeamChums
Don't turn this into SA. Not too cool with under age people on here.


You're taking this out of context Lee, when they are referring to boobs, they are referring to you laugh

The pictures are there to through you off...
Posted By: hobie1616

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/01/13 11:53 PM

All you need is a bag trap.

[Linked Image]
Posted By: Ventucky Red

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/01/13 11:55 PM

Originally Posted by David Parker
Quote
And it's a good thing there's two of them...


And boobs are the only time where two pair is better than three of a kind.

[Linked Image]


Better fact check this one too
Posted By: bacho

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/02/13 04:35 PM

Originally Posted by Will_R
All kidding aside, go look at how much energy is required to manufacture and transport paper bags. Everything from pulpwood harvesting and transport to paper production, bag production then shipping. It takes a lot more resources to produce and utilize them than plastic, however... people don't dispose of them properly and...

http://www.treehugger.com/culture/paper-bags-or-plastic-bags-everything-you-need-to-know/page5.html


The problem with plastic bags is the cashier that doubles bags each loaf of bread. I use paper because a buggy of groceries will fit into 2 paper bags instead of 25 plastic ones, I am not a tree hugger, but the amount of packaging we have to wrap everything in just to be thrown away disgusts me.
Posted By: rehmbo

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/02/13 05:04 PM

Ah, but those bags make awesome doggy do-do picker uppers. Good thing were sending that to the landfill.
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/02/13 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by rehmbo
Ah, but those bags make awesome doggy do-do picker uppers. Good thing were sending that to the landfill.


and great liners on portable potties for kids (and parents) on long road trips... Ours doubles as a step-stool, too.
Posted By: hobie1616

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/02/13 07:29 PM

Originally Posted by rehmbo
Ah, but those bags make awesome doggy do-do picker uppers. Good thing were sending that to the landfill.

[Linked Image]
Posted By: TeamChums

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/02/13 09:05 PM

In my efforts to go green, I've abandoned paper AND plastic bags all together. Anymore, when I go grocery shopping, I simply eat all of it in the store, thus eliminating the need for bags. Then I go home and take a huge $h!t.
Posted By: Will_R

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/03/13 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by TeamChums
In my efforts to go green, I've abandoned paper AND plastic bags all together. Anymore, when I go grocery shopping, I simply eat all of it in the store, thus eliminating the need for bags. Then I go home and take a huge $h!t.


You just tell them to save the bag when you buy the charmin to take home? lol
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/03/13 05:05 PM

Originally Posted by hobie1616
Originally Posted by rehmbo
Ah, but those bags make awesome doggy do-do picker uppers. Good thing were sending that to the landfill.

[Linked Image]


I'll look into them. What makes them more biodegradable than the 'regular' bags?

The good thing is the poop weighs the plastic bag down so it won't fly away in the breeze at the landfill..

Of course, our local shopping store also has a recycle station for the plastic bags which we sometimes use (when we've got more bags than poop - which is rare).

I use the cloth bags for groceries occasionally, but it seems those things are often used for beach bags and other purposes than what they were originally bought for...

Anyone have a decent design for a bike trailer so I can just load that baby up and be done with the whole "bag" concept altogether?

Of course then I'd have to leave the poop 'where it lay' on the grass (which I'd be happy to :)) but the condo-commandos would launch a nuclear strike on my house as punishment...
Posted By: rehmbo

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/03/13 06:12 PM

Originally Posted by waterbug_wpb

What makes them more biodegradable than the 'regular' bags?


Not sure about this particular brand, but I vaguely recall from my materials engineering buddies that "biodegradable" bags often have starch included in the plastic which allows them to break apart after a certain amount of time. Not sure if it actually works, but...
Posted By: waterbug_wpb

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/03/13 06:53 PM

so they break up into tiny bits of plastic faster?

Or actually break down on a molecular level?
Posted By: hobie1616

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/04/13 12:34 AM

Originally Posted by waterbug_wpb
Originally Posted by hobie1616
Originally Posted by rehmbo
Ah, but those bags make awesome doggy do-do picker uppers. Good thing were sending that to the landfill.

[Linked Image]


I'll look into them. What makes them more biodegradable than the 'regular' bags?

The good thing is the poop weighs the plastic bag down so it won't fly away in the breeze at the landfill..

Of course, our local shopping store also has a recycle station for the plastic bags which we sometimes use (when we've got more bags than poop - which is rare).

I use the cloth bags for groceries occasionally, but it seems those things are often used for beach bags and other purposes than what they were originally bought for...

Anyone have a decent design for a bike trailer so I can just load that baby up and be done with the whole "bag" concept altogether?

Of course then I'd have to leave the poop 'where it lay' on the grass (which I'd be happy to :)) but the condo-commandos would launch a nuclear strike on my house as punishment...

You can buy the bags from Amazon. On top of being biodegradable they're also lavender scented.
____________________
Once a week, Dwight Farias-Rios visits Max's yard to clean up after him. The owner of Call of Doodie, a pet waste removal service in New Jersey, is typically welcomed by about 14 mounds of the American Bulldog's feces -- some droppings fresher than others.

"Poop is gross," Farios-Rios told The Huffington Post. "It's also not healthy."

That can go for both pets and their human companions.

In fact, Max had been suffering sequential bouts of giardia infections before his owners hired Farias-Rios to do his weekly dirty work. "A vet had fixed Max up, but then he kept going back out into the yard and catching [giardia] again because the owner didn't clean up his waste."

A long list of potentially infectious agents are known to live in dog and cat feces -- from E. coli to tapeworms. But perhaps less well known is the fact that a lot of these parasites actually become more infectious as the poop ages.

"It takes many types of parasite eggs a while to ripen," said Dr. Emily Beeler, an animal disease surveillance veterinarian for the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health. Toxoplasmosis, which is more common in cats than in dogs, typically takes more than 24 hours to become infectious, she explained. Roundworm can take up to three weeks, and then may remain infectious for years in contaminated soil and water. (A recent CDC study found 14 percent of Americans tested positive for roundworms.)

Of course, this is not to say that fresh is always best. Newly dropped doo-doo still contain tons of bacteria, noted Dr. Beeler, which may also pose a health risk.

"People just tend to think [old poop] is not as smelly, a little less disgusting," and therefore easier to scoop or simply ignore, added Dr. Beeler, who co-authored a report on the link between animal feces and infectious disease this summer.

In his song "Ordinary Average Guy", Joe Walsh reflects this common attitude:

Every Saturday we work in the yard /
Pick up the dog doo /
Hope that it's hard (woof woof)

While Farias-Rios noted that Max is back to being a happy and healthy hound, Emily and other experts warn that once-a-week poop-scooping -- which is also typical of other businesses in the arising industry such as The Grand Poobah, Entremanure -- is still not enough to ensure the safety of pets and people.

"We recommend daily pickup of stool, no matter who is doing it," Dr. Beeler told HuffPost.

Max actually does his "doodie" in the front yard, potentially exposing neighborhood dogs in addition to himself. Further, both he and the neighboring mutts could also share the parasites, viruses and bacteria with their owners. When HuffPost spoke with Farias-Rios, he had just returned from doing an estimate at another potential client's home. The family's dogs use the backyard as their bathroom and end up stepping in their own poop and tracking it inside.

"Now there's a possibility of E. coli poisoning for the kids and family," he said. Of course, not all pathogens affect humans, and not all pathogens that affect humans show symptoms in pets.

Janet Geer, spokesperson for Seattle-based Puget Sound Starts Here, a partnership of regional governments dedicated to improving local water quality, also urges more frequent clean-up to limit these risks. Her organization is leading a campaign, complete with a music video to the tune of "No Diggity," aimed to persuade people to pick up after their pets. The public service announcements instruct how to "bag it up" and toss it in the trash.

Since the launch of Dog Doogity, Geer said she continues to see increasing social awareness and decreasing evidence of fugitive feces. Some Puget Sound-area cities have recently instituted new laws, even going as far as to require the removal of pet waste from private property every 24 hours, on top of an all-out ban on leaving any poop in public.

The education campaign continues. "A lot of people around here still think of it as organic fertilizer," she added.

Like many parts of the country, local water pollution is a growing concern in the Seattle area. When it rains, feces left on sidewalks or yards can wash into storm drains and ditches, which then flow untreated to the nearest lake, stream or wetland and ultimately wind up in the Puget Sound. Even in small doses, E. coli can get into the water system and cause significant trouble.

In addition to releasing nutrients into the water that can feed on algae and kill marine life, excrement contamination can also send unlucky beach-goers home with bouts of diarrhea or hives.

As performer Martin Luther sings in the video, "Hey yo, you don't want to swim in poo."

The Washington State Department of Ecology has studied the local sources of pollutants and linked higher counts of fecal coliform -- an indicator for the potential presence of harmful pathogens -- to residential compared to commercial areas. "This spells out dogs."

So what can be done to protect the public from parasitic poop, and help them to enjoy only the health benefits of pet ownership?

Some communities are enlisting high-tech solutions such as DNA testing or video surveillance to track culprit dogs and their owners.

But Michael Brandow, author of "New York's Poop Scoop Law: Dogs, the Dirt, and Due Process," doesn't see these strategies catching on. Instead he suggested on Pet Life Radio that the answer is far more simple: peer pressure and the "policing of each other" that comes with increased awareness.

And this peer pressure can be of the active variety, as described by another HuffPost reader. "I've gotten into the habit of always carrying extra bags with me when I take my dogs out," wrote NatureNerd in a comment on July's story. "When I see someone not picking up after their dogs, I will walk up to them and say, 'Oh, did you forget a bag to pick up after your dog? That happens to me too. Here, have one of mine.' So far, has worked every time."

In addition to regularly cleaning up after their dog -- or hiring help to do the task -- pet owners should also make sure that they get their animal regularly checked for parasites, advised Dr. Beeler.

"They should follow any treatment protocols that their vet recommends," she said. "This helps protect people too."



Posted By: hobie1616

Re: Better Fact Check this one..... - 05/04/13 03:53 AM

Cheetos!

© 2024 Catsailor.com Forums