And Speaking of ...

...environuts:


Ecosystems dependent on snow and ice 'most threatened' This will not be welcomed news in all quarters:

"“The vulnerability of cool, wet areas to climate change is striking,” said Julia Jones, a lead author of the study. In semi-arid regions like the southwestern United States, mountain snowpacks are the dominant source of water for human consumption and irrigation. Research by Jones and her colleagues showed that as average temperatures increase in these snowy ecosystems, a significant amount of stream water is lost to the atmosphere. The study involves more than thirty years of data from 19 forested watersheds across the country. All of the study sites provide water to major agricultural areas and to medium and large cities. But, like many long-term studies, this one revealed a surprise. Water flow only decreased in the research sites with winter snow and ice. “Streams in dry forested ecosystems seem more resilient to warming. These ecosystems conserve more water as the climate warms, keeping streamflow within expected bounds,” Jones explained. "

[---]

"According to Andrew Fountain, lead author of another LTER study, “The cryosphere, or the part of the earth affected by snow and ice, has been shrinking. The populations of microbes, plants, and animals that depend on the snow and ice will decrease if they are unable to migrate to new areas with ice. But life that previously found the cryosphere too hostile should expand.” In shallower snow, he explained, animals such as white-tailed deer, mule deer, elk, and caribou expend less energy and can more easily escape predators. “One species’ loss can be another species’ gain,” said Fountain."

However, over at CBC, they are gloating uncontrollably, even if some of the commenters are poking fun. And at the Financial Post (ooooh, big oil, etc., etc., etc.) we are being told that knowledgeable conservatives no longer have much respect for scientists:

"Gauchat in his study strives mightily to disentangle his subsets of data and explain the mysteries of conservative thinking. Yet had he not been obsessively preoccupied with conservatives in what advertises itself as a study of the broad public’s trust in science, he could have stepped back from his data and seen it for what it actually shows. The conservatives aren’t the oddity; the true-believing liberals are."

PS: Gotta love the sole comment at the bottom of this scaremongery. Good to see somebody out there still understands basic science.