Environmental Writer's Conference:
Tomorrow's Oceans
Conference Report
By Sierra Senyak, Class of '03
Covering 71 percent of the earth’s surface,
producing more oxygen than the rain forests, and
providing more than 100 million tons of food per
year, the world’s oceans make life possible. But
few Americans understand the importance of the
oceans to our health and well being, and fewer still recognize that the oceans are under siege. Marine scientists and environmental writers gathered to
discuss the state of the oceans, and the media coverage of them, in a conference co-hosted by Boston University’s Knight Center for Science and Medical Journalism and the New England Aquarium on November 23 and 24.
The Environmental Writers 2002: Tomorrow’s Ocean conference tackled issues such as coastal development, climate change, over-fishing, and the overall future health of oceans, and discussed how science writers could inform the public about these complex and controversial topics.
With the news on all fronts largely grim, most speakers agreed that the health of the oceans depends on a more complete public understanding of the issues. “All these problems require a fundamental change in the way humans relate to nature,” said oceanographer James McCarthy.
Bringing about that change is partly the job of environmental writers. Citing the “special burden on journalists and educators,” science writer Deborah Cramer called for more and better environmental stories. "By and large, we have reduced the way we report on the environment to the way we report everything else, and that is conflict,” she said. For instance, by giving both sides of the global warming story equal coverage, we’re cheating readers of the real story, which is that the weight of scientific opinion lies heavily on one side. “We’re killing the messenger,” Cramer said. “We’re killing the science that could save us.”
One panel explored the worldwide phenomenon of collapsing fish stocks. With larger and more sophisticated fishing vessels using improved technology to catch ever more fish, many of the most commercially valuable species are in decline. In response, fishermen are turning to previously untapped species, fishing deeper and deeper into the food web. The often contentious process of designing fishing regulations strives to balance the needs of fishermen while protecting fish. Nonetheless the numbers of fish and of fishermen are shrinking, and fishing as a way of life is on the decline.
Anthropologist Madeleine Hall-Arber and fisherman Vito Calomo argued for the preservation of the fishing culture, not just the fish. Calomo, a third-generation fishing boat captain from Gloucester, said that his community, the oldest fishing community in the U.S. since European settlement, acknowledges that the fisheries are in trouble, and is willing to work with scientists to protect them. Otherwise, he said, “We fishermen would be out of a job.”
Author and scientist Carl Safina argued for putting the fish first. “I’ve noticed that when we defend the fish the fishing improves, and when we defend the fishermen the fishing deteriorates,” he said.
Panelist Heather Tausig of the New England Aquarium mentioned the problem of bycatch, how depleting one species affects the rest of the ecosystem, the importance of habitat to fisheries management plans, and aquaculture as hot topics for journalists.
A panel on coastal sprawl addressed the growing ecological threat of people making their homes along the nation’s shores. About half of all Americans live along the coast, and according to Dana Beach of the South Carolina Coastal Conservation League, their land use is outpacing their population growth. The development of coastal areas has myriad effects, on everything from water quality to climate. “The link between the pattern of growth and the health of watersheds, and of oceans, shows that we can make a difference, but we need to move quickly,” said Beach.
The solution, according to Beach, is to protect those parts of the coast that are untouched, and to be smarter about managing growth in already developed areas, from the regional down to the neighborhood level.
A focus of this discussion was government flood insurance, the $600 billion of taxpayer-subsidized insurance that, said Beth Milleman, the former executive director of the Coastal Alliance, allows developers to build on some of the most hurricane-prone land in the United States. Eliminating this loophole would both protect coasts and save taxpayers money, and Milleman expressed frustration that despite extensive news coverage and lobbying, the program is still intact.
Beach said that media can interest readers in coastal development by grounding the issue in local concerns. “Protecting special places and preserving traditional layouts have enormous appeal,” he said. Reporting on communities that have been successful in managing development can provide readers with possible solutions to their own zoning problems.
With panelists jokingly competing over who could deliver the direst news, the discussion moved to global climate change and it’s canaries in the coalmine, the Arctic and Antarctic. Harvard oceanographer James McCarthy reported that the area covered by polar ice sheets has shrunk by ten to fifteen percent, and that the sheets are forty percent thinner than just fifty years ago. The warming trend of the planet is no longer in question, said McCarthy; the question is how the planet will respond.
L.A. Times science reporter Usha Lee McFarling said that the complexity of the topic made it difficult for the media to cover. Incorporating elements of ecology, earth and atmospheric science, government, and business, the subject is daunting to many reporters; scientists’ hesitation to make statements in the face of scientific uncertainty doesn’t help. “This makes for a muddy story,” said McFarling.
McCarthy mentioned that one of the largest untapped sources for stories on climate change is how humans can respond. Noting that certain states and companies have decided to form their own “mini-Kyoto Protocols”, McCarthy said he’d like to hear more about research and ideas for ways to deal with global warming. “There are opportunities for the future that haven’t been reported,” he said.
Several reporters complained that, when they did manage to capture the public interest, it sometimes wasn’t enough to spur government action. One solution, said a panelist, is to cover the politics, not just the science, of environmental stories. Another is to focus on environmental problems that hit people in their pocketbooks. Author and Time magazine journalist Eugene Linden mentioned that insurance companies are reevaluating their policies in light of the increasing natural disasters associated with global warming. If that cost gets transferred to consumers, Linden said, government will act; “Money affects politics in ways that science cannot,” he said.
Despite the seriousness of the problems discussed at the conference, they may be just symptoms of a disease: ignorance. To protect the oceans, said former NOAA chief Sylvia Earle, we need to make people understand their value as a thriving ecosystem, not just as a resource to be blindly exploited. “The number one threat to the world’s oceans,” said Earle, “is lack of awareness."
