http://www.populationconnection.org/site/DocServer/Reporter.pdf?docID=1221

Species evolve as their world
changes. So do organizations.
Founded in 1968 as ZPG, our
mission has evolved from “stop at two”
children to its present form:

Overpopulation threatens the quality of
life for people everywhere. Population
Connection is the national grassroots population
organization that educates young
people and advocates progressive action
to stabilize world population at a level
that can be sustained by Earth’s resources.

As for the still-relevant goal of “zero
population growth,” will the earth be
sustainable if population stabilizes at
nine or ten billion? I think not.
ZPG played that early role urging
Americans to “stop at two” children. It
worked. Currently, our two biggest
challenges are unplanned births and net

migration.
Global population growth is different.
Unless one believes that extraterrestrials
walk among us, no one is migrating
to—or from—Planet Earth. Addressing
the unmet need for contraception of
200 million women worldwide is the
top priority these days.
How can we move toward population
stabilization? One part seems easy, in
theory. Just get 218 members of the
House and 60 members of the Senate
to pass bills addressing various aspects
of the issue with funding and programs.
President Obama signs them into law.
Mission accomplished.
Watching the Senate debate health
care provided a sense of just how excruciating
that process is these days. As
Teddy Roosevelt said, politics is “the art
of the possible.” Alas, it demands compromise
that’s often hard to swallow.
At Population Connection we work
on solutions. We reach three million
students each year. We painstakingly
correlate our curricula with thousands
of state and national standards.
We work with Congress, which is
besieged on all fronts by groups, each
convinced that its own issue—from
farms to schools, from energy to cities
—is most important.We work with prochoice
legislators who carry the banner.
We also work with legislators who
oppose abortion, but support family
planning.
All things considered, 2009 was a
very good year for our cause with the
rescission of the Global Gag Rule,
restoration of UN family planning
funds, and a remarkable 40% increase
in congressionally-appropriated international
family planning funding.
I have a certain fondness for those
early “glory days” of ZPG. Times
change, though. Today, we measure
success in terms of training 11,000
teachers annually on hundreds of campuses
and elsewhere.
We also measure it in terms of getting
legislation through the labyrinthine corridors
of Congress, where awkward
compromise lurks around every corner.
Thanks to your support, we can tell legislators
that people “back home”
expect them to take action. That matters
a great deal.
Population Connection will continue
to evolve as circumstances change and
new opportunities present themselves.
Evolution is essential.

John Seager
john@popconnect.org

–
Albert Kaufman
Portland, Oregon

Population growth affects the quality of life for everyone. Population Connection is the national grassroots population organization that educates young people and advocates progressive action to stabilize world population at a level that can be sustained by Earth’s resources.

Click the link below to make a donation:
https://donation.populationconnection.org/form/donate.php

I read the Oregonian article below which talks about Google’s PowerMeter application, and I’d like to know what it would take to bring this service to Portland?

here’s a link to the article: http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index.ssf/2010/02/qa_with_googles_green_energy_c.html

and here’s a link to the application. http://www.google.org/powermeter/

I assume this will take some action on PGE’s and Google’s part to make it happen.

Albert Kaufman

If you’re in the mood to ask PGE about this, here’s a link to their contact form. https://cs.portlandgeneral.com/Secure/ContactUs/Default.aspx?cookie_test=true

Thanks!

OPB Think Out Loud 12/22/09

Photo credit and great background info here!

For years I have been encouraging people to remove their lawns and plant food instead. As the economy continues to sour people are growing more of their own food, but for a long while I’ve been wondering about Oregon as a whole, and what we grow. After watching Food,Inc., I was again reminded about our State’s food production system, or lack thereof. The soil of the Willamette Valley is considered some of the best farming soil in the world – and in it we mostly grow grass seed and Christmas trees.

As the article “Bean Man” in the Winter 2009 issue of Edible Portland points out “Today 95% of what’s grown in the Willamette Valley is non-edible”.

Ellen Jackson writes: “As recently as 50 years ago, the assortment of fruits, vegetables, and grains produced in the valley provided the region with the means to feed itself, an important measure of social and economic stability. The once robust regional food system has floundered in favor of planting profitable non-edible crops like fescue, rye grass seed, and Christmas trees”

Beyond the questions raised by groups like Food Not Lawns about how growing grass leads to pesticide use and pollution of our waterways there’s the question of grass and allergies. During the grass cutting season many complain of a constant state of sneezing, headaches and other symptoms, and the experience seems to worsen over the years. This is great news for the makers of anti-allergy medicines, but why are we willing to grow something that people are allergic to?

Food Security. Then there’s the question of peak oil. If it’s true that we’re running out of oil, then it behooves us to start growing more of our food closer to home rather than paying to ship it from far away. In this regard, Jackson writes:

“Changing agricultural philosophies over time has meant a loss of experience and expertise in growing beans, grains, and other valuable food crops in the valley, which is two generations deep in grass seed farmers, many of whom are at least 60 years old. The Bean and Grain project recognizes that reclaiming the region’s past agricultural knowledge and reviving previous growing techniques are critical steps to breathing new life into the regional food system. Converting large parcels of grass seed acreage into plots for organic beans, grains, and edible seeds is the next order of business.”

I think we should follow the lead of the Bean and Grain project which is the work of farmer Harry MacCormack:

“The Southern Willamette Valley Bean and Grain Project is a step by step strategy to rebuild the local food system by increasing the quantity and diversity of food crops that are grown in the valley, evaluating deficiencies in the food system infrastructure, building buyer/seller relationships for locally grown food, incorporating the culture of community into the fabric of the food system, and compiling resources on organic and sustainable agricultural practices specific to this region. As the name of the project implies, central to the task is stimulating the cultivation and local marketing of organically grown beans and grains to provide a foundation for year-round food resources in the valley.”

As much as I’ve appreciated the Oregonian’s support for an end to grass-seed field burning during this legislative session, I think the real issue is growing grass-seed in the first place. I look forward to a healthy state-wide discussion of how our rich farmland is used and what makes sense long-term as we take into consideration changing fuel realities, global climate change and the need to strengthen our local food supply.

Oregon’s number 2 crop, Christmas trees, is also a crop that has a lot of problems associated with it – pesticide use (local watershed pollution), shipping trees in refrigerated trucks around the country, the carbon sequestration that is lost when the trees are harvested, erosion, the costs to municipalities to discard the trees (landfills…). This is another crop that needs a look at going forward. Considering that the planet is heating up, we might do well to pay Christmas tree farmers to just let the trees grow rather than cut them down as this article in today’s Seattle Times suggests for federal forests.

“I’ve been walking around my neighborhood lately, and have noticed lots of spray-painted areas where sidewalks are cracked and are to be repaired. My thoughts when I see this is: are we really spending all of this money to replace something that’s just going to break (either through tree roots pushing up sidewalks, or regular wear and tear) again in the not too distant future? If we were thinking 50-100-200 years into the future – we might consider different solutions – perhaps leaning towards removing asphalt rather than replacing it. And all of the money going into turning corners into easier-to-use corners (ADA accessible), that really makes me wonder – isn’t there a cheaper way to turn what we have into something that can be biked/skate-boarded or roller-skated on and off of – like a small ramp instead of completely re-doing, and re-pouring the sidewalks seems like a good start to me. Anyway, that got me to thinking about how we might be doing things differently if we were planning for a Portland 100 or 1,000 years from now.

We all know cheap oil is going away – so that probably also means the cheap fixing of our streets is also going away. So, I’m mostly wondering out loud here, but I guess I’m posing the question and I’m curious what people think about the concept of long-range planning.

For instance: we all know that putting on chains and studded snow tires wrecks our roads. So, why didn’t the message come out loud and clear over the past 2 weeks: Please don’t drive unless it is absolutely necessary. Why wasn’t that transmitted loud and clear by every government agency with a loudspeaker/blog/radio transmitter/e-mail/TV, etc.? Instead, we heard that we should support the economy through shopping, and get to work, if possible. During the storm I wondered to myself, do we have the ability to stop if we need to? I’ll rephrase it – when it makes sense for our society to come to a stop – for our own good, for our own economic good – are we capable of doing so? My sense is that the damage done to our roads by people driving with chains and studded tires far outweighed the profits made by area retailers. And I know, local retailers are hurting, no doubt about that. I’m not trying to be insensitive here, but am trying to make a few points about how looking down the road a few years, we might do things differently.

We seem to be on a very “live for today” diet in this country. If we were looking further down the road how might we do things differently? Portland Mayor, Sam Adams wants to plant 80,000 trees in a year. If we were envisioning a future where we had to grow more of our food (I do), might we want to plant 80,000 fruit and nut trees a year, starting now? How about policies that make it really simple to grow food in your yard and sell or share that with your neighbors – how about a City Urban Ag department – helping Portland transition into a city that grows more of its own food?

What kinds of changes would you suggest as you consider Portland 100, 200 or 1,000 years from now? And, fill in your City/State here: Bend 3000? Oregon 3000?