Sunday, April 27, 2014

California City vs. AVC: Fancy Schemes and Never-built Dreams

an update on the third-largest city in California

There was a Willet this week in Cal City, that often-forgotten AVC feeder community way up on the 14 there past Mojave, Boron, and Edwards Air Force Base.

What's a Willet?

It's a seaside bird, at least it is for us here in Southern California. If you've been to the beach any month except maybe high summer (when it's too crowded to see any birds), you have come across these. They are basically the largest sandpipers on the beach, seen dozing on one leg in small flocks or maybe running along the water's edge, grabbing sand dabs. They're a New World species, and the Pilgrims called them humilities, since their blazing black and white wing pattern they kept hidden while on earth --- in appropriate Calvinist humility --- and they only showed their brightest patterns when in flight, which is to say, on their way to God.

Here is a picture from the National Geographic Field Guide to Birds of North America.


This is a species one expects along any undisturbed stretch of midwinter beach. It is not a species one expect to see in the Mojave Desert.

But then California City is indeed a place of surprises.

By territorial claim, it's always listed as the third-largest city in California, something I will take on faith since I have never double checked. If you look on a map today, it seems indeed to have been a dream that was partially fulfilled. Here's a page from a DeLorme road atlas. On paper, it looks like a real city.


As a plan, California City was one of those "turn the desert into paradise" mad dreams that the early 1960s were so full of, as is documented by this old issue of Life magazine.


Then as now, the desert was a problem for the mainstream American culture. It was never good enough by itself. It always had to be conquered (or at least improved). Few people even now look out and say, "This place looks like a desert," and means it in a happy, approving way. We have to alter it, tame it, make it "productive." Hmm, well, maybe we do and maybe we don't, but that doesn't stop people from trying. Here is a picture of Hesperia and Cal City at their groundbreakings, from the same issue of Life.


There's what should be the real California motto at work: Dream large, since if you build it, maybe they will come. The initial developers laid the town boundaries out huge, a sort of New Carthage or New Rome. They wanted something like all of Irvine and Mission Viejo combined, or all of Tarzana, Encino, Sherman Oaks, and Lake Balboa.

It did not work out that way.

Cal City is known mostly for the houses that did not get built. The map's tidy boundaries and filled-in color not withstanding, Here's a very typical intersection today --- there are many dozens more just like it.


Some streets never even got this much. This view below of a road to nowhere is well within the "city limits" of California City, not far from the town center (aka McDonald's).


California City was going to be grander and stranger even than Palm Springs, at least on paper. It was going to be water-themed, among other features. Here the central Lake can be seen, as laid out in 1962.


You can do this if electricity is cheap (so it costs little to run pumps) and if the aquifer is close to the surface still and all that Pleistocene-era fossil water has not yet been drawn down.

As a child, I came out here in the mid-sixties, just on a day trip from Los Angeles. One came out Sierra Highway back then; the 14 Freeway had not been built yet. In my memory it took days and days; it's possible we even overnighted in Barstow or Palmdale. My parents had come out to visit family friends, as I think the husband had gotten a job doing something with cement. The kids seemed to like it okay but my memory is of utter desolation. I distinctly remember the mom of the family complaining about trying to keep the sand from blowing inside the house. She described it building up in small drifts, in the corners. It may even have been as a joke, or I may have misheard the grownups completely. I had a childish and horrified vision of their entire house being buried in wind-blown sand overnight, and them waking up in the morning, utterly lost under a dune, with the weight of it all so heavy they couldn't push open the door.

Too many late night sci-fi thrillers on our black and white tv gave me that I guess. Even today, though, parts of the Cal City area still fit that nightmare.


It was really windy when I took this shot: I got a mouthful of sand, as did, I am sure, the innards of my fancy Nikon. This is on the Cantil side of town. Here's another pair of shots.


This shot (above) should have been an embedded video clip (not a still photo) in order to show the sand scooting across the highway in the 30 mph wind. The sign was vibrating in the wind and the wind even had a whooshy, howling sort of sound to it. This next shot below tries to do a forward-and-backward-at-same-time effect.


Please, if you're on the Board of Directors for the Chamber of Commerce, don't email me: I am reporting this with affection, not disrespect. First of all, after that initial childhood visit with my family, I did come back, and often so, because the birdwatching is quite interesting. I even debated buying a house in California City.

Second: I married into it, in that my wife grew up there. Here is Abbey with her brother Raymond.


My wife's folks still live in Cal City, so you can trust that I am very respectful about this place. At the same time, the dreams were so large and grand initially, it's hard not to smile, at least a little bit. A book titled Never Built Los Angeles looks at the museums, freeways, monorail systems, and housing tracts that were proposed but never completed. I just got it at Barnes & Noble in Lancaster, using a birthday gift card from history teacher Matthew Jaffe. Thanks, Dr. Jaffe!


According to this book's text, the planned civic center would have rivaled the Getty Museum. My scans have a lot of "blow back" of reflected light, but I hope you can make out some details anyway. Here is the from-above view and, below, the "inside-looking-out" view.


Here's the other picture.


What the book says is this. The project was titled "California City Civic Center," and was designed by Konrad Wachsmann. His "technologically elaborate design for the civic center would have used high-tension cables strung between massive abutments to form a 192-foot-long floating roof. The 1.5 inch cables, each tensioned at 105,000 pounds, were secured by steel anchorages, able to resist a thrust of 1 million pounds. According to Wachsmann's calculations, the cables could resist winds of 100 miles an hour."

I know what you're thinking: that the winds really do get up into that range out there. The design isn't strong enough. "100 mph" sounds exotic and safe, but isn't adequate. I found a source on the Internet that claimed gusts to 90 in nearby Mojave, and I myself have been there when the wind was doing 60 (as verified by the National Weather Service). Well, never mind all that, let's get on with our fantasy tour.

"Ten roof panels, made of fiberglass and filled with urethane foam, would be stitched together using a neoprene expansion joint, forming a roof skin that was incredibly light yet strong. Wachsmann wrote that 'the insertion of essentially unlimited variations of enclosed spaces' was possible under the open, plastic roof. Public and private spaces could be built, expanded, and rearranged as the city saw fit."

Ah, such is the stuff dreams are made of, indeed. In contrast, here is the City Hall as it actually exists today. It features that stucco-tile-storefront look, a look vaguely quoting Mission Revival but diluted nearly beyond recognition. At least the parking lot has been newly repaved, and the grass, more or less, is greening up nicely.


Before we mock them, it pays to remember that the Lancaster Campus of AVC dates from the same time. Indeed, oral tradition holds that when it was laid out here at 30th and K, locals all scratched their heads. "Watcha building it all the way out there, fur?? Ain't no roads even go all the way out thar."

And even though main campus has turned out fine, we still have our own private fantasy dream, the undeveloped parcel adjacent to the San Andreas Fault that is supposed to be the Palmdale Campus. Here's the actual site:


Will this be a college campus ever?

I have my doubts, and the seismic issue is just one of many to deal with.

Meanwhile, despite the empty roads I showed above, California City did build its central park. Some of the Cal City lake complex is still there, hence the rare ocean bird, that Willet, that showed up this week. Here are photos I took with my wife just a few days ago.


On a recent visit, and unlike previous trips, even the waterfall on the park's central hill was "on," or at least (like George Harrison's guitar), weeping gently. It is hard to get a shot of it, due to the many sections of the park that are fenced off due to disrepair, that arching pedestrian bridge included. The waterfall is the smeary green bit, in the middle of the frame below. Birds like to drink from it, and if you listen hard, it generates a soothing trickling sound.


Alas, some of the park has not done well at all. I remember the Lake Shore Inn, where my wife's family once worked. $4000-per-person birdwatching tours used to stay there. Times change, and it resembles a sort of Detroit kind of situation now, or parts of besieged Syria. Other than as a hideout for illicit raves, it remains in a grim state indeed.





 I have to agree with an elderly resident, out to walk her dog. She saw my fancy camera when I was here recently, and she assumed I was from the AV Press or some very august and powerful investigative organization at that level. (60 Minutes? The NSA?) She hoped the images could be linked to a forceful editorial, demanding that the eyesore be taken down.

Consider this blog to be on your side on this, madam. Speaking for myself and not the AVC Board of Trustees, I hereby call on Cal City to DO SOMETHING with this site. It faces the lake: even just a gravel parking lot and a few benches would be fine.


You can't fault the initial City Fathers from trying, though. Shakespeare's own Globe theatre should never have thrived --- and indeed, without Shakespeare himself and the language-drunk, sexualized, anything-goes delirium that was Elizabethan England, it later failed as well. True, it burned down, was rebuilt, and initially did okay, but in the end, it too failed, just like the Lake Shore Inn.


There's a common roadside plant of our rural roads here in the high desert, the sacred datura or jimsonweed. Here shown below is one that I saw in California City, on the road to the airport. Another word for them is angel trumpet, and yet another, moonflower. This is a toxic, highly poisonous plant that Native Americans at times used for hallucinogenic trances. DO NOT TRY IT. It is lethally poisonous: don't mess about with this, even a little bit. It can be fatally toxic, even in minute doses. Shamans knew what they were doing; you do not. But I mention it since it seems to be an appropriate plant for us, given our history of dreaming big and wanting to connect Palmdale to LAX by 300 mph bullet trains, wanting to deliver mail by dirigible, hoping to turn California City into the Venice of the High Desert, or any of the other wild dreams that have been proposed, partially built, and later abandoned.



God bless plucky and beat-up California City, perhaps the most accurately named township in all of the Golden State.

++++++


Photographs not credited to an outside source were taken by the blog curator, Charles Hood, Language Arts. He can be reached at chood@avc.edu. This blog does not represent the views of the Board of Trustees nor the District as a whole. To leave comments, you need to be logged into some kind of blogspot or gmail account, or so it seems. Sorry about that: it's just how the system is set up. Hood also can forward comments through email.

Wednesday, April 9, 2014

Fun Things to Do in the Middle of the Night

(at least when there is an eclipse---as there soon will be)

We have a total eclipse of the moon coming up, and here in the Antelope Valley, we have great skies for just such an event.


I am always a big fan of spectacular experiences, especially when they are free. Mark your calendars because we have a big, fun, spectacular, free sky show due to come our way next week.

Courtesy of Griffith Observatory (and more about them in just a moment), here is the schedule for what we can expect.


If you have binoculars or any kind of beat up telescope, that's even better. But just with one's own eyes, this will be overhead, and this time of year, odds are, it will be a clear night. For the best effect, go a few minutes out of town, away from the brightest lights. If you're in your own backyard, be sure to turn off the house lights (or close the blinds) and turn off the porchlights. Give yourself a few minutes so your eyes adapt, but soon you'll be able to see just fine. Most people way over-illuminate their nighttimes; as primates, we evolved to see fairly well in the dark, if we can just give ourselves a chance to try it out.

As you can see from the chart, the best action is around midnight. Unlike during a solar eclipse, no filters are needed: it's safe to look at the uneclipsed or the eclipsed moon all you wish.

There is a lot of debate about the exact mechanics of how eclipses happen.

Here is a diagram from a book called Discovering the Universe by Neil Comins and William Kaufmann.


Looking closely you can see the process is basically like this: the sun is a very round, ripe lemon; the Heavenly Father / Mother shines a flashlight down, causing the dragon to swallow its tail. When enough people beat pots and pans in their front yards, the dragon gets scared and runs off, knocking over the flashlight. The eclipse is then over.

For an alternate perspective---oh geez, everybody has to get out an opinion---you can go down to Griffith Observatory that night and use the telescopes there. They will no doubt have some fairy tale about the shadow of the earth and all of that: well, it's a free country and you may believe whatever you wish. From their website, here is more information:

Griffith Observatory Hosts Public Viewing of Lunar Ecipse
April 14-15, 2014 / 7:00 p.m. to 2:00 a.m.
Admission is Free 

Activities

  •     Building, roof, and Zeiss telescope OPEN
  •     Lawn telescopes, binoculars, and naked eye viewing from lawn, sidewalks, and terraces
  •     Shows in the Samuel Oschin Planetarium (7:45 p.m., 8:45 p.m., 10:15 p.m., 11:15 p.m.)
  •     Café at the End of the Universe and Stellar Emporium OPEN (starting at 7:00 p.m.)
  •     LiveStream of the eclipse live from the Zeiss dome on Griffith Observatory's LiveStream page.
  •     Special presentation about the Moon with Griffith Observatory Curator, Dr. Laura Danly, and Griffith Observatory Astronomical Observer, Anthony Cook. Joint program with the Los Angeles Astronomical Society.
What if there's a snow storm or a sudden flurry of dragon poop? See their website for more contingency plans, but trust me, they've thought of everything. One prediction I can make is that it will be crowded; you can see more details about which access roads will be open on their web page, but be prepared to have to park a bit of the way down the hill and walk up to the summit. Given the possibility of a marine layer in Los Angeles proper (and the huge amount of light pollution), if you have binoculars and a lawn chair, this might be a fine event just to watch from home. It's too soon yet to know what the weather will be like: both L.A. and Palmdale show a 10% chance of rain on Monday.

The eclipse will be visible across almost the entire continental United States, most of Canada and Central America and parts of South America.  You could always go out to Death Valley --- if we are statistically more likely to be clear than L.A., think how much better Death Valley's odds are compared to ours.

We may be in a drought year water-wise but not for eclipses: if you sleep through your alarm for this one, you have another shot this coming October.

To repeat what Alan MacRobert said in the Los Angeles Times, "Whether you have a small telescope, a pair of binoculars or even just your naked eye --- you'll be seeing part of the geometry of the cosmos happening right in front of your eyes."

I do agree with him on that, but of course we have another vantage point to imagine. At some point in the future, humans will be watching a different series of eclipses . . . from the surface of the moon.


+++++++++

The AVC Blog is curated by Charles Hood, Language Arts, and he can be reached at chood@avc.edu. This blog does not represent the views of the Board of Trustees or the District as a whole. To leave comments, you need to be logged into some kind of blogspot or gmail account, or so it seems. Sorry about that: it's just how the system is set up. Hood also can forward comments through email.

Saturday, March 15, 2014

Where Did All the Ugly People Go?

Living in an Ever-More Demanding World

God bless the Middle Ages. True, the life expectancy of a peasant was 35 years, but at least they did not wake up every morning remembering how ugly they were.

Think of it: one's entire span of humanity might just be the 100 people in your village. Mirrors were rare, and who wants to stare into a bucket of water to see your own face? You just didn't worry about it. Being hungry or getting eaten by a wolf --- the Black Death of the 1350s was a great thing for the population of wolves in Europe --- yes, these were the things one worried about. I really don't think a single peasant for the past few thousand years woke up asking, "Does this hay rake make me look fat?"


This was on my mind today because I go in the mail my members' magazine from the Norton Simon Museum of Art. They're having a portrait show open soon. That's fine, but look at the cover image:


Whoever this young man is, he's somebody the camera has fallen in love with. It's a tribute to the portrait maker's skill here, and the lighting and so on are textbook perfect. It's a very striking image, no doubt about it. But even the Norton Simon must feel that the need to boost their visual presence, since surely, there must have been other shots to use. They did not have to go for the prettiest boy on the block. Who can compete with him? He's perfect. Not so long ago, he would have looked more like these four guys.


Yet now, these days, beauty is normal for us. We see it everywhere. Magazines like Men's Fitness or Cosmo have one message they tell us over and over: however you are now, what it is that you do, you're not okay. Your face is not okay, your tummy is not okay, your cologne is not okay, your bedroom technique is not okay. Buy this product, read this article --- however you are, you must change and try to become closer to perfection.

This flirty tableaux from Vogue Italia is typical of many ads which show us people ten times more beautiful than we ever will be.


Did I miss something? When did People magazine secretly re-brand itself as Beautiful People magazine?


What a voracious beast beauty can be. Whatever happened to all the ugly people? They have been banished from public display. Even if we buy ever kind of shampoo in the world, wear only the finest couture, still, even so, every day the clock ticks and we grow older, older. We will never be young enough, rich enough, thin enough --- or so the magazine covers promise us. Helen of Troy was the most beautiful woman of her era (if Homer is to be believed) and look what came of that: the Trojan War and the death of thousands.

Wouldn't it be nice to banish all the mirrors in the world? True, we might have trouble combing our hair, but that's what hats are for.


This has come up for me as a problem because in Language Arts, we are trying to build up our website inside the larger campus home page. One of the things we want is a directory with room numbers, phone extensions, academic bios. Each staff member gets a picture and an entry.


We have decided not to make any visual distinction between tenured instructors and the adjuncts who may do identical work but usually for less money.  Instead, we are all here in alphabetical order inside of disciplines (Foreign Language, Speech Communications, Reading, and so on). There will be 98 entries when I am done ---- name, photo, email address, and so on.

The photos have been fun to take and most people cooperate readily. Yet I have had some resistance, too; for some of us, photography causes tension, even outright panic. To have your picture taken is to admit to yourself that your beard has some gray in it finally, or that you are indeed the weight you think you are. Few of the 98 folks I have shot have been happy with themselves straight out of the gate. Many of us feel that need to apologize or in some way "change'" in order to be presentable.


Gosh, what a sad thing that is.

In actual fact, we have a tremendous diversity as a staff, and with that, a great range of beauty, charm, brainiac super power, grace, and life. True, the Norton Simon museum may not use us on the cover of the members' magazine, but I have yet to see anybody who isn't really fabulous in one way or another.

Here are some recent shots of Language Arts adjuncts taken for this directory project:


Dr. Robinson, Journalism --- she is in charge of helping to relaunch our student paper, the AVC Examiner. Her dissertation focused on Community College Leadership and Policy Studies. Rumor has it that she is going to be nominated for Adjunct of the Year.


Mr. Horner, English. He has published a book titled Creative Ideas for Teaching Youth the Bible. He has two Masters degrees and a Divinity degree.


Ms. Perez, English. She was kind enough to race like heck from her day job at Eastside High School, home of the Lions, to make it to AVC for our afternoon photo session. She was also able to fill me in on what our colleagues at College of the Canyons have been doing.


Ms. Willers, English. She was previously an adjunct but this year is on contract as full-time. At fashion shoots, the production team brings a wind machine to keep the model's hair blowing in the breeze. Here in the Antelope Valley, we don't need a wind machine, we just have to step outside and we can get the same effect.

While I do not yet have all the 98 photos of staff members that I will need, I do know we won't need any PhotoShop magic or airbrushed perfection.

Unlike what the newsstand magazines tell us, each of us is already exactly fine as is.


+++++

The AVC Blog is curated by Charles Hood, Language Arts, and he can be reached at chood@avc.edu. This blog does not represent the views of the Board of Trustees or the District as a whole. To leave comments, you need to be logged into some kind of blogspot or gmail account, or so it seems. Sorry about that: it's just how the system is set up. Hood also can forward comments if you email him directly.

Monday, February 24, 2014

Are Polar Bears Going Extinct?

looking for the real truth about environmentalists' "poster animal"

Once you get on certain kinds of mailing lists, you never got off, or at least so it seems. After my parents passed away, I had their mail forwarded to my house, thus increasing (in a bad way) the volume and variety of junk mail I get.

One thing I seem to get a lot in the mail are pictures of polar bears. There are a lot of pandas, sea turtles, and white bunnies, but polar bears seem to top the the list.


Inside the envelope or out, polar bears are everywhere. They are hyped as the face of global warming --- large, cute, and very endangered.


They also are part of most zoos. In the San Diego Zoo, for enrichment, they give the bears carrots to play with. (Keeping animals sane and active in zoos is a real challenge. Other kinds of enrichment provided to carnivores are blood Popsicles, chunks of tree trunk, and elk antlers.)


And of course, natural history museums like them too. There are a lot of stuffed polar bears, both in L.A. and across all the cities of the world. This one is in San Diego.


So what's the story? Are they as endangered as the press would have us believe, or is this some kind of liberal, biased, unreasonable, scare tactic? I am sure we have all seen a poster or mailing with one lonely polar bear huddled on the final ice floe.

This question has been asked by others. In my files I have a copy of this magazine which asks the same question.


On one hand, the evidence of decline is hard to deny. There have indeed been cases of polar bears hybridizing with grizzly bears. There are also documented cases recently of bear cannibalism: the hungry dad bear digs out a mama bear from her dean, then kills her and eats her. The babies starve, are eaten, or get crushed in the collapse of the cave. We know that arctic ice is diminishing by overall volume and know too, globally, temperatures are rising.

Since polar bears need sea ice to hunt seals from, bad news from them.

Polar bears have been seen swimming in ice-free sea, 100 miles from land. Apparently, some died of exhaustion swimming this way.

And yet on the other hand, some of the reports are so alarmist that it's hard to take them seriously. If polar bears number in the 10,000 to 20,000 range (and they may well), then the idea that they'll be extinct tomorrow or even the decade after tomorrow, that just does not hold up. But where's the truth?

The decline though seems very real. I have been to look at polar bears first hand, is one reason I know that some of these stories are trustworthy. My wife and I went on board a schooner to sail to the Arctic one summer. It's called the Noorderlicht ("northern light") and oh, this is one beautiful ship.


This part of Norway is called Svalbard. When you land at the final air strip, you have to be careful about the free-roaming wildlife, as this sign indicates.


And sure enough, over the course of several weeks, we did indeed see many living, wild, free, undead polar bears. Here's a frisky cub so cute he could be on the cover of an eco-swag catalogue.


There were other animals new to me too, seals and foxes. Even the famous walrus of song and legend made an appearance.


But I do have to admit, there were times when the bears seemed voracious, as if the general eco-line of "they're all starving to death" were true. But then all bears seem voracious to me all the time. I've seen dozens of bears in the wild, including grizzly bears, black bears, and even one in India called the sloth bear. If it's not hibernating, a bear is probably hungry. I could feed Lucy my mutt dog pork chop cutlets all day and still she would pretend to be hungry for more. It's just the nature of "feast or famine" wildlife: if there's food, gorge yourself. If I had been feeding Lucy all day long, when my wife got home, Lucy would go to the door and give her best "I'm so neglected" look, and try to cadge a few pork chops from my wife, too. 


So even agreeing that polar bears look hungry most of the time no matter that the actual conditions, statistics show that some populations overall are losing weight, producing fewer young, and declining, year to year to year.

One problem is, it's a big place, the high Arctic, and to do census work is nearly impossible. There are not enough helicopters to go around, nor enough funding to send biologists to count in every piece of ice and tundra. Just compare that to something local. Let's say it were important to know how many coyotes were living in the Antelope Valley. First, we would have to decide what we even mean by the "Antelope Valley." Does Gorman count? Cal City? Acton? Second is when to do the survey --- often (though not always) coyotes are nocturnal. If we used some kind of night-vision or infrared goggles, can we be sure we're not counting feral dogs, skunks, bobcats, or even small mountain lions?

Third, even if we do come up with a perfectly reliable number --- we know for sure that 1,483 coyotes are alive and well as of 6 a.m. today in the Antelope Valley --- how can we then know anything stable about their status? We would not know if they were expanding or contracting their population, and even if we knew for sure which of those it was, we would not know why. It could be global warming or it could just be that the landfill fence has a hole in it, so more coyotes are getting more tummy-loads of garbage for more nights in a row, so their pups are doing better this year than they were last. It could be a one-time thing, not an actual trend.

Maybe we should just be happy looking at coyotes in the museum.


Even though it's dead, seeing a polar bear in a museum somehow feels less upsetting than seeing a dead one just out in the wide world. I once stayed with an Inuit family on an island off the coast of Nome, half way to Siberia. (I was on a bird study trip.) They had a dead polar bear frozen in their service porch. Here is a different one --- dead of unknown causes --- I found on a beach in Svalbard.


Global warming may or may not have had the slightest thing to do with this one, but I must say, it was a shock, either way.

After reading all of the comments, pro and con, my thoughts are these. (1) Global warming will reduce ice, and in doing so, speed up further warming. (Black mud warms up faster than white ice, et cetera.) (2) Some polar bear populations may be able to find alternatives, eg, raiding land-based goose colonies, eating berries as grizzly bears do, or getting good at finding fish and seals via ice at times other than high summer. Some won't, though. These are essentially marine mammals --- sort of like four-legged killer whales. They're designed to operate differently than do, say, grizzly bears.

 
(3) Does that mean polar bears will be extinct by 2050?

No. One sees a lot of numbers but the actual situation (as with the coyotes) is much too complex and consisting of too many unknown variables to pick an exit date, and even if one were to pick a date, that one is too soon. In that sense, there is a degree of alarmist reporting in the popular media.

(4) Can zoos help? No, not really. A zoo polar bear won't be able to hunt in the wild, and there just are not that many, and especially not in prime breeding condition.

(5) Does it matter? After all, a jungle cockroach may go extinct before sunset tonight, and we all will sleep as soundly as ever. Will it matter if the ice thaws and the bears go extinct?

It may, but not for the reason you think. It may not be the bear itself we should worry about, but the causes behind its decline.

Dr. Steven C. Amstrup of Polar Bears International writes "I cannot overemphasize that hybridization provides no solution to the polar bear's dilemma. And to the extent there may be increased hybridization, it probably will be of little consequence to polar bears facing dramatic declines in their habitat base. Polar bears are likely to starve out of their present ranges long before their genes are swamped by those of grizzly bears. If some polar bear genes persist in grizzly bears, after polar bears have disappeared from their current sea ice home, that fact will be irrelevant with regard to efforts to retain the magnificent and highly specialized life form we now know as the polar bear."

He concludes, "Discussions of hybridization aside, it is important to remember that by the time we allow the world to warm enough that the polar bears' sea ice habitat disappears, challenges to humans will be so great that no one will be thinking about polar bear conservation."


++++++

The AVC Blog is curated by Charles Hood, Language Arts, and he can be reached at chood@avc.edu. This blog does not represent the views of the Board of Trustees or the District as a whole. To leave comments, you need to be logged into some kind of blogspot or gmail account, or so it seems. Sorry about that: it's just how the system is set up. Hood also can forward comments internally.