CRC Violates MCPS Condition
At the citizens advisory committee meeting last week, committee members were shown the new condom video and accompanying materials. We were also given a URL to watch the video online, written on a sheet of paper. To see it, you had to log in and give a password. The Montgomery County School District (MCPS) representative who gave out the information told the committee (of which I am a member) that it was OK to let members of our organizations watch the video, but that it was not for public consumption, and he asked us not to distribute the login and password.
The Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum stands for family values and a morality that is far superior to that of the rest of us. That must be why they decided that it was all right for them to put a link to the video on their web site, and to post the login and password information for the entire Internet to use.
Their disclaimer:
Ah, of course, their constituency is "the public."
No, he didn't ask us not to offer it for sale, he asked us not to distribute it to the public.
It will be interesting to see how MCPS responds to this breach.
The Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum stands for family values and a morality that is far superior to that of the rest of us. That must be why they decided that it was all right for them to put a link to the video on their web site, and to post the login and password information for the entire Internet to use.
Their disclaimer:
This video is copyrighted by MCPS. While Mr. Porter indicated the video could be shared “with your constituents”, ie the public, and because the video is protected by copyright, it should not be copied or offered for sale without the express permission of the Montgomery County Public Schools.
Ah, of course, their constituency is "the public."
No, he didn't ask us not to offer it for sale, he asked us not to distribute it to the public.
It will be interesting to see how MCPS responds to this breach.
posted by JimK at 11:40 AM
38 Comments:
Well remember one (group) of the suers said they were not planning to sue either...trusted words???
Not...so no surprise
Anne
"The Montgomery County School District (MCPS) representative who gave out the information told the committee (of which I am a member) that it was OK to let members of our organizations watch the video, but that it was not for public consumption, and he asked us not to distribute the login and password."
The discussion about the video should be public and the public should be informed enough to discuss intelligently. MCPS just wants to limit public input. That's their usual cabalistic MO. I'm glad CRC ignored their instructions.
Jim lets get some legal facts straight. Think about it
1. The CAC is a public meeting and materials were freely distributed to the audience [ the public are tax payers]
2. CRC put the disclaimer there because of the copyright and it is legal to do this.
3. MCPS has complete control of this video, they own the login and password and can change it at their will.
4. Remember how the BOE distributes draft versions of their policy changes etc out on the web and at the BOE meetings for public comment?
5. Feedback is important and I hope everyone can see it and write the BOE and tell them what they think. We want the very best for the children in MC!
These last two Anonymous comments are very interesting. CRC supporters really don't see any reason to keep their word or follow the rules. Just don't have the concept.
The link, login id, and password were given to members of an appointed committee, whose members were told they could share the video with their organizations but not with the public. This was intended to be for committee members to evaluate the video, and MCPS knew that those of us who represent organizations would want to ask our colleagues what they thought. So access was given to committee members, with a request that we respect the process and restrict availability to committee members and members of the groups they represent.
I didn't hear the CRC's committee member, Ruth Jacobs, object to the restriction. I didn't hear her ask if the rest of the group minded if she put it on the Internet. It just never occurred to her, as it does not occur to these Anons here, to respect the committee, the process, the hard-working staff at MCPS who might not want their "first draft" displayed in public.
Never occurred to them.
Both of these Anonymice express the mind-set perfectly clearly. Both of them think it was better to post this on the Internet. They have reasons why it's better.
Keeping your word? Working collegially with the committee? Respecting the process? It didn't cross their mind.
JimK
Jim K said, Keeping your word? Working collegially with the committee? Respecting the process? It didn't cross their mind.
Anyone remember how CRC got started and the posters on orignal message board? Remember the CRC lawyer running around with Michelle Turner sending bogus "empty threats" less than legal letters to those who dared take them on publicly? Remember the CRC president lying when she said there were no plans to sue with their buddies PFOX? Remember CRC'rs lying when they said they "did not want to recall the school board" but yet all officers, etc., in CRC had "recall montgomery school board" email addresses? Remember CRC's misuse of MCCPTA/PTA directories? List goes on an on.
Enough said on them respecting anything or telling the truth.
Anne
"CRC supporters really don't see any reason to keep their word"
who didn't keep their word?
"They have reasons why it's better."
and you have your reasons to keep the material secret
you want to let the teacher's union control the process by keeping the information out of the hands of the public
this is how they went astray before
"Remember the CRC lawyer running around with Michelle Turner sending bogus "empty threats" less than legal letters to those who dared take them on publicly?"
No. They won. The threats weren't empty.
"Remember the CRC president lying when she said there were no plans to sue with their buddies PFOX?"
They had no obligation to divulge their legal strategy to the enemy.
"Remember CRC'rs lying when they said they "did not want to recall the school board" but yet all officers, etc., in CRC had "recall montgomery school board" email addresses?"
That was explained repeatedly. The reason CRC was formed because there was a split between those wanted to recall the board and those who didn't. I was at the founding meeting. An individual told the membership she did not support recalling the board and was elected as the first president of the organization. Several TTF members were there too so their pretense at confusion constitutes a lie.
"Remember CRC's misuse of MCCPTA/PTA directories?"
No. I remember them using it as parents to communicate with other parents and alert them to an issue of importance that the PTA leadership had negligently neglected to engage.
Remember when the school board waited until right after the last election to announce the new curriculum?
Remember when they tried to pretend the teachers wouldn't ever be influenced by the resource material?
Remember when they tried to violate the students' constitutional rights?
Remember when MCPS put a preteen student on the old CAC?
Remember when the CAC tried to keep the new video secret from the public so they wouldn't have to listen to any dissent?
"MCPS just wants to limit public input."
It was the suers who insisted on reducing the Citizens Advisory Committee membership from 27 to 15 members in their *victorious* settlement agreement. The suers reduced public input by nearly 50%, not MCPS.
"you have your reasons to keep the material secret"
What a remarkable statement from a commenter who goes by "Anonymous."
The anonymices are just too funny. I bet they would invest in oceanfront property in Arizona too.
What a comical lot they are and proves why TTF is the logical common sense voice to their's and CRC's lying and all around nuttiness.
Wonder how CRC now likes not a cucumber on the table but a wooden penis?
Anne
"It was the suers who insisted on reducing the Citizens Advisory Committee membership from 27 to 15 members in their *victorious* settlement agreement. The suers reduced public input by nearly 50%, not MCPS."
Reducing the number of committee members simply reduced the ability of the school board to stack the committee with TTF-type lunatics and control the agenda. The public is still invited to meetings and there is no good reason the public shouldn't have access to the materials being discussed. CRC has consistently made public the shadowy maneuverings and political intrigue of the school board. Which is, of course, against the school board rules. All anti-democratic institutions try to make procedural rules that will protect their own power. This is, however, a Democratic society and as a member of the voting public, I want full disclosure and I'm sure the majority of my fellow voting citizens agree.
Thanks, CRC. In the finest American tradition, you showed Montgomery County citizens that they could indeed stand up to city hall!!
Jim said:
"The Montgomery County School District (MCPS) representative who gave out the information told the committee (of which I am a member) that it was OK to let members of our organizations watch the video,"
The civic-minded CRC said:
"Mr. Porter indicated the video could be shared “with your constituents”,"
Is there a discrepancy here? Did the MCPS rep say "members of your organization" or "costituents"? If the latter, I agree with CRC that the best way to accomplish this is on the website that their constituents read.
Is TTF playing a little fast and loose with rhetoric again?
The CRC was authorized to share the link with their members. They were asked not to share it with the public. They may think they are being tricky, defining "their consistuency" as "the public."
I'm no lawyer, but I would guess they are in violation of federal, state, and local laws regulating unauthorized access to secure government servers and software.
JimK
was the word used "member" or "constituency"?
The word was "peeps."
"The word was "peeps.""
well, I think CRC is OK then
the only people who read their site (other than Jim) are their peeps
of course that was until Jim publicized the availability here
CAC is governed by the MD Open Meetings Act and so is the BOE meetings.
All information at these meetings is available for the public.
"Remember when the school board waited until right after the last election to announce the new curriculum?"
No, I don't. I remember that a few days after the 2004 election, on November 9, 2004, as scheduled well in advance, the MCPS Board of Education voted on the CAC recommended curriculum. The BOE voted unanimously to approve the new curriculum for pilot testing and rewriting if and where needed. If it hadn't been for the footdragging of certain former CAC members, the BOE might have been able to vote before the election.
"Remember when they tried to pretend the teachers wouldn't ever be influenced by the resource material?"
Your apparently low opinion of public school teachers disgusts me. Try spending some time in the classroom as I have because I know from my own experience that you are dead wrong to hold MCPS teachers in such low regard. The MCPS teachers my children have been fortunate to study under have all been perfectly capable of distinguishing between what information is for the students and what is not.
"Remember when they tried to violate the students' constitutional rights?"
I remember when Judge Williams granted a TRO because there was that "potential." Do you remember the Dover ID case where it was decided that "both views" do not have to be included in a curriculum when one of them is religious? That's why the advice of the suers' legal team was to settle because delay ("mere inconvenience to Defendants") was the best they could do.
"Remember when MCPS put a preteen student on the old CAC?"
Yes I do, and I remember that her parents approved and were fully informed and involved in her decision to serve her community. Do you remember when the CRC put up a young MCPS coed for public comments at the BOE who actually claimed to have taken the "homosexuality" part of MCPS sex ed, a part that to this day does not exist?
"Remember when the CAC tried to keep the new video secret from the public so they wouldn't have to listen to any dissent?"
There were probably 8-10 empty audience seats for every full one at the August 30 CAC meeting when the new condom demonstration video was shown. Every person in the audience received the necessary information to see the video online and was reminded that this first draft was not for public dissemination. If you weren't so paranoid about revealing your identity, maybe you'd attend the CAC meetings instead of sitting back playing armchair dictator.
All information at these meetings is available for the public.
Nice try.
From The Maryland Open Meetings Act Manual:
With the exception of certain provisions dealing with minutes, discussed in Chapter 3, the Open Meetings Act does not regulate access to documents. Instead, the Maryland Public Information Act governs public access to State and local records. Thus, even if members of a public body refer to certain documents at a public meeting, the Open Meetings Act does not require that the documents themselves be made public; the status of the documents would be determined by the Public Information Act or other law.
I'm sure the video would be considered a "document" in this case, and would not need to be made public.
JimK
"Every person in the audience received the necessary information to see the video online"
So if they announced the password in a publicly open meeting, why would anyone think they were trying to keep it secret? The whole accusation Jim's made against CRC makes no sense. MCPS has no basis for expecting that members of the public will keep contents of a public meeting secret. This is absurd.
They didn't announce it. They printed it on pieces of paper and gave them to the people who would need it. That included, I understand, some TTF and CRC members who were in the audience.
Then they asked us not to make the link public.
Jim
"Then they asked us not to make the link public."
But they said they could share it with their "constituents"- did they not? Are the minutes available so we can read the actual words used?
"That included, I understand, some TTF and CRC members who were in the audience."
Did anyone in the audience who wanted the password get it? If so, they made it public. This attempt to control dissent is despicable on the part of MCPS- assuming your interpretation and recollection is correct.
Let's get this straight: MCPS held a publicly open meeting and passed out a password to the audience and told them to only let their "constituents" see it. Still doesn't make sense.
Anon, you're a hoot.
MCPS is working on a project. They have no responsibility to show their half-finished drafts to the public. On the other hand, they do want the public's representatives, that is, members of the CAC and the people in the organizations they stand for, to see early drafts and comment on them, as part of the development process.
You can cry "conspiracy" all you want to. The fact is, the CRC at this moment has posted, on their web site, without authorization, the user ID and password to an account that was secured on the county's computer system. The account was created to enable MCPS to conduct their official business, and MCPS specifically told people who received the password not to share it with the public.
JimK
Where are the minutes of the meetings or even the lists of invitees to Cheney's energy policy discussions back in 2001? All tax paying US citizens have the right to know who these record breaking profit reaping industry leaders were and how they influenced the public servants who are supposed to work for us.
"MCPS is working on a project. They have no responsibility to show their half-finished drafts to the public."
But they did that when they showed it at a publicly open meeting and then passed out a password to the audience allowing online access to it. They chose to make it public.
"On the other hand, they do want the public's representatives, that is, members of the CAC and the people in the organizations they stand for,"
I don't remember anyone asking if those organizations represented me. I don't think either group represents the public.
"to see early drafts and comment on them, as part of the development process."
They need more broad-based advice, obviously.
"You can cry "conspiracy" all you want to."
Never did. I suggested you either misunderstood or misrepresented what happened.
"The fact is, the CRC at this moment has posted, on their web site, without authorization,"
They were authorized to share it with their constituents. That's how they generally communicate with them.
Regardless, I would question the authority of a government body to disclose something at a public meeting and then order the hearers to keep it confidential.
"the user ID and password to an account that was secured on the county's computer system. The account was created to enable MCPS to conduct their official business,"
Well, they made a big mistake disclosing it in a public forum then. Maybe they should be recalled.
"and MCPS specifically told people who received the password not to share it with the public."
Again, by what authority do they do this?
They chose to make it public.
No, they specifically asked those who received the information not to make it public. They also wrote "NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION" across every page they handed out. Is that not clear enough for you?
I don't think either group represents the public.
Then I cordially invite you to elect a different school board. There will be a primary election in a few days.
They were authorized to share it with their constituents. That's how they generally communicate with them.
Uh, yeah, of course, the CRC posts all their communications on the worldwide web. The times they have done that -- and they have done that, the results were very informative. They should do it more.
Regardless, I would question the authority of a government body ...
Hey, it's your right to question. Whether you have the right to enable unauthorized persons to breach the scurity of a government server, I suppose a judge and jury would have to decide.
Maybe they should be recalled.
Ka-ching.
Again, by what authority do they do this?
You're asking, by what authority does a government entity claim the right to regulate access to its computer system? What planet do you come from, Anon?
JimK
"No, they specifically asked those who received the information not to make it public. They also wrote "NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION" across every page they handed out. Is that not clear enough for you?"
No, it isn't. This was not a closed door meeting. They're entitled to have those, although, as a voter, I object to them treating the curriculum development process as a matter of national security.
"Then I cordially invite you to elect a different school board. There will be a primary election in a few days."
Well, yeah, you're Mr Cordial. Neither of those groups were elected. State law, not county law, mandated that the CAC represents the community. The CAC is made of individuals not groups.
"They were authorized to share it with their constituents. That's how they generally communicate with them.
Uh, yeah, of course, the CRC posts all their communications on the worldwide web. The times they have done that -- and they have done that, the results were very informative. They should do it more."
They did what they were instructed to do. They didn't an obligation to do even that.
"Regardless, I would question the authority of a government body ...
Hey, it's your right to question. Whether you have the right to enable unauthorized persons to breach the scurity of a government server, I suppose a judge and jury would have to decide."
I think when the government publicly distributes it, the public has a right to look at it. The access was to one video file. I think a judge would laugh this out of court. Not that I think MCPS actually cares about this as much as you.
"Maybe they should be recalled.
Ka-ching."
It's only their latest fumble. There have been many.
"Again, by what authority do they do this?
You're asking, by what authority does a government entity claim the right to regulate access to its computer system?"
No, I'm asking who they think they are to distribute something to the public and then tell everyone who received to not let it go any further. The audience members who got the password weren't MCPS agents.
"What planet do you come from, Anon?"
We were originally planted here by an ancient race of super-aliens. Didn't you ever watch Star Trek?
State law, not county law, mandated that the CAC ...
But the County school board appoints them. If you want different members, you and both your friends should vote for a new school board. Don't bitch to me about it, I didn't appoint the committee membership.
They did what they were instructed to do.
Anon, I must be reading this wrong. I don't see the word "not" in that sentence. They did exactly what they were instructed not to do.
I think when the government publicly distributes it, the public has a right to look at it...
It was not publicly distributed, access was given to an advisory committee working within the school district and some of the people represented by committee members.
No, I'm asking who they think they are to distribute something to the public and then ...
And the answer to your question is: they did not distribute it to the public. Easy. You're living in fantasy land. I'm sorry if you're so sad at not being appointed to the committee ... but you weren't.
The audience members who got the password weren't MCPS agents.
Those who were not "MCPS agents" (and some were) received the information because they were known to be officers of organizations with representation on the citizens advisory committee.
Didn't you ever watch Star Trek?
Actually, no, I never found it that interesting.
JimK
Divulging information to the public and then telling the public they can't discuss it? Sounds like a violation of the citizens' constitutional right to free speech. Not the first time this board has ignored the constitution (flyer policy; Fishback revisions)This has happened so many times that I think we need to give mandatory training in constitutional law to all MCPS board members.
Dude, you can discuss it all you want. That's why this blog is here.
You just can't give out user ID and passwords for government computers.
Sheesh. This is getting old.
JimK
"But the County school board appoints them. If you want different members, you and both your friends should vote for a new school board. Don't bitch to me about it, I didn't appoint the committee membership."
They didn't just give it to committee members. They gave to audience members. They're the public.
"They did what they were instructed to do.
Anon, I must be reading this wrong. I don't see the word "not" in that sentence. They did exactly what they were instructed not to do."
They instructed them to share the video with their constituents. They're the only ones who would have looked at the website except that you alerted everyone to it.
"I think when the government publicly distributes it, the public has a right to look at it...
It was not publicly distributed, access was given to an advisory committee working within the school district and some of the people represented by committee members."
At a public meeting. To members of the audience.
"No, I'm asking who they think they are to distribute something to the public and then ...
And the answer to your question is: they did not distribute it to the public. Easy. You're living in fantasy land. I'm sorry if you're so sad at not being appointed to the committee ... but you weren't."
Yes they did distribute it at a public meeting.
"The audience members who got the password weren't MCPS agents.
Those who were not "MCPS agents" (and some were) received the information because they were known to be officers of organizations with representation on the citizens advisory committee."
Who were told to share them with their constituents. Which they did in the most effective manner possible. Stop changing your story.
"You just can't give out user ID and passwords for government computers."
"Giving it out" is speech. Once they've let it out of bag, they can't expect people to not repeat it.
If they wanted to be discreet, they shouldn't have passed it out.
While it might be convenient to keep an unfinished product out of sight, there's really no compelling reason to do so once they've shown it publicly.
Guess their attempt at a controlled leak failed. Now anyone who wants to can learn how to put on a condom. Egad!
"They also wrote "NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION" across every page they handed out. Is that not clear enough for you?"
"No, it isn't."
and
"and MCPS specifically told people who received the password not to share it with the public."
"Again, by what authority do they do this?"
When the curriculum writers complete writing it, the curriculum will be widely distributed for public examination and comment. During the writing process, however, the various drafts are working products which are propietary, not public.
"If they wanted to be discreet, they shouldn't have passed it out."
Every page of the curriculum documents handed out at the August 30, 2006 CAC meeting has half inch tall capitalized print running diagonally across the page that reads "NOT FOR DISTRUBUTION." We can see who was not "discreet" when they published a link to some of these materials on their website.
"The CAC is made of individuals not groups."
The BOE approved the following resolution on July 27, 2005, which stated that "seven representatives of organizations" will be included and designated three of those seven groups:
Resolved, that the Board of Education hereby reconstitute the Citizens Advisory Committee on Family Life and Human Development as an advisory committee to the Board of Education and superintendent, under Policy BMA, Board of Education Advisory Committees, and to the superintendent and educators under his direction as required by COMAR 13A.04.18.03.D(1) Community Involvement; and be it further
Resolved, That the reconstituted committee shall be appointed by the Board of Education in open session, and be comprised of 15 members, all of whom shall be bona fide residents of Montgomery County, otherwise qualified to serve, and include eight members at large, one of whom shall be an MCPS high school student; and seven representatives of organizations, one of whom shall be an MCPS high school student representing the Montgomery County Region of the Maryland Association of Student Councils, one of whom shall be a representative of Citizens for Responsible Curriculum, and one of whom shall be a representative of Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays and Gays; and be it further
Resolved, That, pursuant to COMAR 13A.04.18.03.D(1), this committee shall serve in an advisory capacity only, to consult with professional educators within the school system in the course of their developing, implementing, and evaluating the family life and human development program to the degree deemed appropriate by the superintendent; and be it further
Resolved, That, consistent with provisions in Board Policy BMA, applications for membership
on this committee shall be solicited publicly by the Board Office in collaboration with a liaison to be designated by the superintendent; and all applications shall be presented to the Board of Education and superintendent for review and consideration; and be it further
Resolved, That members of the reconstituted committee be comprised of individuals who have not served on this committee previously, and who have applied individually or been nominated by organizations in response to the solicitation of applicants following this action; that organizations interested and designated shall submit one nominee and two alternate nominees; and that final appointment of all individuals, including organizational representatives and the committee chairperson, shall remain within the discretion of the Board, upon consultation with the superintendent; and be it further
Resolved, That normal terms of appointment shall be for two years for the adult members and one year for the student member, expiring on June 30th, except that the terms of the initial appointments of the reconstituted committee shall be for a lesser term reflective of their Board appointment subsequent to July 1st; and the Board of Education may direct further changes in the formation or operation of this committee, as it may deem advisable; now, therefore, be it further
Resolved, That to the extent this resolution may be inconsistent with any existing Board policies or administrative regulations of the school system, the resolution shall supersede only those provisions in any Board policies or administrative regulations that are in conflict with this resolution."
"I don't remember anyone asking if those organizations represented me."
Oh my! And just who the heck do you think is supposed to ask you if the organizations selected to provide community input on the CAC represent you or not? Grow up! MCPS does not have to spoon feed you any information. If you want to know what goes on at CAC meetings, you should attend them; they are open to the public.
"Grow up!"
TTF should. All this hulabaloo because someone other than them could see the video.
"MCPS does not have to spoon feed you any information."
I don't here them complaining. Only TTF, who apparently believes they lost something important if someone else beside them could see the video.
"If you want to know what goes on at CAC meetings, you should attend them; they are open to the public."
Well, MCPS realizes we're in the technological age so they gave CRC permission to share it with their constituents so they wouldn't have to come to this boring meeting. Of course, Jim kind of screwed up things by telling the world where they could see the video. Otherwise, only people who view the CRC website, that is, their constituents, would see it.
anon said,
Of course, Jim kind of screwed up things by telling the world where they could see the video. Otherwise, only people who view the CRC website, that is, their constituents, would see it.
_____________
Ocean front property in Arizona waiting to be bought by anon to justify that sorry logic.
Anne
"Ocean front property in Arizona waiting to be bought by anon to justify that sorry logic."
The global warming nuts say that will be reality soon. Although, I asume they mean right after all them hurricanes heading our way.
Hurricanes aren't necessary to make ocean front property a reality in Arizona. This might do it:
"Polar Bears Drown, Islands Appear in Thaw
By Alister Doyle
Reuters
OSLO (Sept. 15) - Polar bears are drowning and receding Arctic glaciers have uncovered previously unknown islands in a drastic 2006 summer thaw widely blamed on global warming.
Signs of wrenching changes are apparent around the Arctic region due to unusual warmth -- the summer minimum for ice is usually reached between mid-September and early October before the Arctic freeze extends its grip.
"We know about three new islands this year that have been uncovered because the glaciers have retreated," said Rune Bergstrom, environmental adviser to the governor of Svalbard, a Norwegian archipelago about 600 miles from the North Pole.
The largest is about 300 by 100 meters, he told Reuters.
On a trip this summer "We saw a couple of polar bears in the sea east of Svalbard -- one of them looked to be dead and the other one looked to be exhausted," said Julian Dowdeswell, head of the Scott Polar Research Institute in England.
He said that the bears had apparently been stranded at sea by melting ice. The bears generally live around the fringes of the ice where they find it easiest to hunt seals.
NASA projected this week that Arctic sea ice is likely to recede in 2006 close to a low recorded in 2005 as part of a melting trend in recent decades. A stormy August in 2006 had slightly slowed the 2006 melt.
"There are very unusual conditions this year from Svalbard to Alaska," said Samantha Smith, director of the WWF's environmental group's Arctic Programme.
One international study in 2004 projected that summer ice could disappear completely by 2100, undermining the livelihoods of indigenous peoples and driving creatures such as polar bears toward extinction.
WAKE-UP CALL
Smith said the shrinking ice should be a wake-up call for governments to cut emissions of greenhouse gases, mainly from power plants, factories and cars that most scientists say are causing global warming.
"The Arctic is likely to warm more than any other part of the world" because of global warming, said Dowdeswell. Darker water and soil, once exposed, soaks up far more of the sun's heat than mirror-like ice and snow.
The melt may also open up the Arctic to more exploration for oil, gas and minerals, increase fisheries and open a short-cut shipping route linking the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.
Ian Stirling, a researcher with the Canadian Wildlife Service, said polar bears were finding it harder to find food, threatening their ability to reproduce.
"In 1980 the average weight of adult females in western Hudson Bay was 650 pounds. Their average weight in 2004 was just 507 pounds," he said in a report this week. Numbers in the Hudson Bay region dropped to 950 in 2004 from 1,200 in 1989.
For some, the unseasonal warmth is good news. It was 5 C (41 F) on Friday in Longyearbyen, the main village on Svalbard. "Last year the first snow fell here on September 11 and stayed all winter," said Bergstrom.
"A lot of people here have boats to go out hunting in summer and go to cabins. So it's a good year for them -- the ice melted earlier and they can still use the boats," he said."
global warming it is a good thing.
Post a Comment
<< Home