8
THE GEOGRAPHICAL BULLETIN
THE GEOGRAPHICAL BULLETIN
The Geographical Bulletin NOVEMBER 1997
Vol. 39 No. 2
GAMMA THETA UPSILON
President Dr. James N. Snaden Department of Geography Central Connecticut State University New Britain, CT 06050-4010 (860) 832-2799
First Vice-President Dr. Duane M. Nellis Eberly College of Arts and Sciences West Virginia University Morgantown, VA 26506-6286 (304) 293-4611
Second Vice-President Dr. Catherine Lockwood Geography Department Chadron State College Chadron, NE 69337 (308) 432-6275
Executive Secretary Dr. Virgil Holder Geography and Earth Science University of Wisconsin-La Crosse La Crosse, WI 54601 (608) 785-8332
Comptroller Dr. Leon Hallman Division of Continuing Education P.O. Box 6111 Stephen F. Austin State University Nacogdoches, TX 75962-6111 (409) 468-4605
OFFICERS 1997
© Copyright by GAMMA THETA UPSILON 1997 Printed in the United States of America ISSN 0731-3292
Historian Dr. Miriam Helen Hill 4217 Klerner Lane New Albany, IN 47150-2045 (812) 945-2296
Student Representatives Julie Henry Department of Geography and Planning Southwest Texas State University San Marcos, TX 78666 (512) 245-2170
Rachel Clement Department of Geography University of Tennessee Knoxville, TN 37916-1420 (423) 974-2418
Omega Omega (Alumni) Chair Dr. Richard Earl Geography and Planning Southwest Texas State University San Marcos, TX 78666 (512) 245-2170
Immediate Past-President Mr. Lawrence Handley National Wetlands Center 700 Cajundome Boulevard Lafayette, LA 70506 (318) 266-8691
Editor, The Geographical Bulletin (ex officio) Dr. Nicholas Raphael Department of Geography and Geology Eastern Michigan University Ypsilanti, MI 48197 (313) 487-8591
The Geographical Bulletin and Gamma Theta Upsilon The Geographical Bulletin is the publication of the international profes
sional geographical organization, Gamma Theta Upsilon. The organization was founded in 1928 as a professional geography fraternity by faculty and students at Illinois State University in Normal, Illinois. Since its inception, 220 chapters have been installed throughout the United States. Gamma Theta Upsilon currently has 45,000 members worldwide.
To promote geography the society provides scholarships, and with the cooperation of the American Association of Geographers supports the Visiting Geographical Scientist program to colleges and universities. The Executive Board meets twice per year ; during the annual meeting of the American Association of Geographers and during the annual meeting ofthe National Council of Geographic Education .
The Geographical Bulletin began publication as an outlet for student work. Indeed many who have gone on to graduate training in geography have had the opportunity to see their first professional publication appear in The Geographical Bulletin. In the past few years the Bulletin has expanded to two issues per year reflecting increased interest and contributions of both undergraduate and graduate students who are committed to further investigating the multidimensional aspects of our environment.
The Educational Fund of Gamma Theta Upsilon A tradition of quality in Geography has been created and maintained by
Gamma Theta Upsilon for over six decades. In 1982 the honor society established The Educational Fund to promote and support scholarly projects such as publications, visiting lecturers to universities and scholarships. Presently, Gamma Theta Upsilon awards five scholarships to undergraduate and graduate students.
Gamma Theta Upsilon, a tax exempted organization entirely staffed by a nonsalaried board and volunteers, is seeking to fully endow The Education Fund. All gifts will directly enhance to The Educational Fund and will guarantee the society's future efforts in promoting Geography.
Donations from Chapters, alumni, and friends of Geography and related fields may be sent to the GTU-Educational Fund to the address below. A brochure outlining The Fund in detail is also available on request.
Prof. Leon Hallman GTU-EDUCATIONAL FUND
P.O. Box 6111 SFA Nacogdoches, TX 75962-6111 U.S.A.
Telephone: (409) 568-4605 Fax: (409) 468-2369
E-mail: [email protected]
The Geographical Bulletin NOVEMBER 1997
Vol. 39 No.2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EDITOR C. Nicholas Raphael Eastern Michigan
University Ypsilanti
Editorial Board Malco lm Comeaux Arizona State University Tempe
Howard Johnson Jacksonville State
University of Alabama Jacksonville
Darrell E. Napton South Dakota State
University Brookings
Duane Nellis West Virgin ia University Morgantown
Robert Rosing Salisbury State University Salisbury
Wendy Shaw Southern Illinois
University Edwardsville
Thomas A. Wikle Oklahoma State University Stillwater
Leon Yacher Southern Connecticut
State University New Haven
Page Projections and Perceptions-Editorial Comment: The Hu-
man Factor in Recent Climate Change Remains Un-proven. Carl F. Ojala (Eastern Michigan University).. .... 67
The Electoral Geography of Oregon's Ballot Measure 16: The Death with Dignity Act. Kathleen O'Reilly (Univer-sity of Alabama) ...... . . .... ... .. . .............................. 70
Hydrogeomorphic Response of a Coastal Plain Stream to Tributary Channelization. Elizabeth J. Nabb and David Shankman (University of Alabama) . . . . ... . . . . . ......... . . . .
Rediscovering the Roots of Moroccan Geography in an Era of Interdependence. Donald J. Zeigler (Old Dominion University) and Driss Fassi (King Mohammed V University) . .. .......... . . . . . . . . . ... ..... .... .. .. . . . . ... ......... .
Transformation of Japan 's Rural Landscape and Economy: The Case of a Rice Growing Village in Central Japan. Akira Tabayashi (University of Tsukuba) ........... . ... ... .
81
90
98
News from the Chapters 1996-1997.. . . .... .... .. . .... ........ 113
Book Review. Population-Enivronment Dynamics. Ideas and Observations. Wendy Shaw (Southern Il linois University) .. . . ........ ... . .. .. ............. ........ .......... .... 121
Book Review. Climate Change: Impact on Coastal Habitation . C. Nicholas Raphael (Eastern Michigan University) . . . . . .. . . .. . .. ...... ... ....... . ....... ....... . .. . ...... 122
Book Review. Charting the Inland Seas: A History of the U. S. Lake Survey. Robert B. Mancell (Eastern Michigan University) .... ... ... .... .......... .. ............ .... .... . . . ...... 124
Book Review. The Geography of South Dakota. Donald J. Berg (South Dakota State University). .... ... . .... .......... 125
Editorial Policy and Instructions to Authors All manuscripts must be in acceptable form and ready for peer review. Contributions to The Geographical Bulletin of Gamma Theta Upsilon should follow the general specifications noted below:
1. All manuscripts should be double spaced on 8 '/2" x 11 " paper w ith 1'/," margins on all sides. Type on one side only. Submit the original and one copy of the manuscript.
2. References are to be listed on separate pages in alphabetical order by author and double spaced. References should include date, ti tle, journal, volume number and pages. Footnotes are to be avoided. Consult recent issues of the Bulletin for specif ic style.
3. All tables and figures must be typed on separate pages, double spaced and referenced by Arabic numerals. Include a list of doublespaced table and f igure captions.
4. All line drawings and tables must be in finished form ready for reproduction. Maps must have scales and patterns which will tolerate reduction. All graphics and photographs must include titles, and figure and table numbers.
5. An abstract up to 150 words double spaced followed by up to five key words must be included on a separate page.
6. It is advisible, but not required to prepare your manuscript on a word processer so that corrections can be made accurately and rapidly.
7. If the manuscript is put on a word processor use the same type style and font size throughout the paper to include all headings and subheadings. Do not italicize words such as books and periodicals. Underline these words and they will be typeset in italic type by th e pri nte r.
8. It is suggested that student manuscripts be reviewed by a faculty member for editorial comments prior to submission.
Send all manuscripts to: Dr. C. Nicholas Raphael, Editor
The Geographical Bulletin Department of Geography and Geology
Eastern Michigan University Ypsilanti, Michigan 48197 Telephone: (313) 487-8591
Fax: (313) 487-6979 E-mail : [email protected]
The Editor and Editorial Board of The Geographical Bulletin and its Board of Directors and officers are not responsible for the facts, opinions, or statements of the authors contained in this volume.
If you are planning to change your residence or office in the near future, please remember to inform the Editor of The Geographical Bulletin at the above address.
Projections and PerceptionsEditorial Comment: The Human Factor in Recent Climate Change Remains Unproven
Carl F. Ojala Professor
Department of Geography And Geology Eastern Michigan University Ypsilanti, MI 48197
Global warming, the theory and controversy involving artificial enhancement of the greenhouse effect of the atmosphere, has emerged as one of the prime environmental issues of recent years. Proponents conclude it may produce serious worldwide problems in the near future, such as rising sea levels, geographic shifts in farming and forest regions, and changes in agricultural yields, water resources, and wetlands. Conversely, skeptics imply that any warming due to proposed increases in greenhouse gases is undetectable and unpredictable among the natural variations in long-term atmospheric temperatures.
The issue has evolved into one of the leading domestic and foreign policy concerns in this nation. Environmental activists continue to demand limitations on carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel consumption, and several nations around the world support immediate action. In the United States, several legislative bills related to climate change have been introduced in recent years. However, many decision-makers continue to feel that additional research is necessary to assure that the threat of global warming is both real and urgent.
The issue appears to involve some proven facts as well as many uncertainties. In many cases computers, input with myriad assumptions, have been used to develop general circulation models for predicting future changes in the atmosphere. On the other hand, one of the most argued aspects of the controversy is whether the increase in greenhouse gases has changed the world's climate during the recent past. Increased interest in this possibility has resulted in analyses of historical temperature data on a variety of scales from worldwide to national to local.
The widespread literature and media attention has caused dramatic growth in interest in the "greenhouse" controversy among many sectors of the population. Indeed, it has taken geography out of the halls of academia into the real world. Just one year with temperatures deviating from the norm, or even a single summer or winter warmer or colder than normal,
67
evokes comments such as "I guess this proves, or, whatever happened to, global warming ." Patrons and doubters scribe a constant flow of letters to the editors of various newspapers throughout the country arguing pro and con. Some of those I have seen in recent months, written to muzzle warming advocates, highlight seasonal, small-scale cooling in North America 's Great Lakes region . Many others, however, refute that idea and claim data from larger regions and longer periods are necessary.
And, personally, I agree with those letter writers arguing that one cold winter should not affect our opinions on the possibility of global warming . However, even though various recently completed studies postulate that average global temperature has increased by one degree C. over the past century and a few years in the last decade have been among the warmest on record , I am still not in complete agreement with the enhanced global warming theory.
My colleague, Bob Ferrett, and I recently completed a detailed case study of Michigan as well as a larger-scale analysis of the United States. Our analyses show that, after warming from the late 1800s to the 1950s, the average temperatures of both Michigan and the United States have actually been cooling for the last three or four decades. This is a perplexing problem, indeed, in view of the apparent increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide during the same period. It appears that some aspects of the problem remain mysterious.
Part of that mystery may be popular misunderstanding of the terms climate and weather that we all learned in our first geography class. It has been stated that climate is what we expect while weather is what we get. Climate is the long-term manifestation of weather, and it is defined by short-term weather statistics collected at specific weather stations, normally for at least several decades. A single weather event, or even a spell of abnormal weather, such as a cold winter or a hot summer, may actually be unusual but still within the range of " normal" climate variability for a particular place.
68
Though a few places in the world have records which are more historic, "reli able" weather and climate records have only been collected for about 100-150 years. For many people, this may seem a long time, but scientifically this is much too short a period to determine whether human intervention is causing climate variability.
Paleoclimatology has shown that natural global temperature changes have occurred throughout several thousands of years of recent earth history. The average temperature of our atmosphere has risen and fallen by a degree or two in longwave curves, time periods lasting hundreds or even thousands of years. And occasional "blips" occur in the record where short-wave warm ing or cooling periods have skewed the long-wave trend for only a few centuries, decades, or less. Perhaps the current global warming controversy is simply a result of a short-wave curve traversing the longer-wave curve through which we are currently passing.
My overall point is that many uncertainties continue to plague studies aimed at detecting the human factor in recent climate change. Whether one is analyzing the problem-plagued temperature records over the last century or assumption-laden computer global circulation models of future climate possibilities, proof remains elusive. It is a situation where experts disagree: if you ask 100 cli matologists, 50 may be advocates while 50 may be skeptics. I have personally heard the "experts" speak at meetings and conventions in recent years. The advocates claim current theory is based on models that have been largely validated, though not to the satisfaction of the skeptics, who feel that the models are not valid and cannot be trusted. It seems that neither group can be convinced the other has credibility, and disagreements abound .
Some analysts conclude that global warming may produce serious worldwide problems. It has evolved into a leading domestic and foreign policy concern in this country. What should we do? What are the current choices available to us? I propose three options. First, we could do
nothing but wait and see if global warming actually develops in the near future. If warming is only slight, little impact will occur. But if it turns out to be significant, its impact will be more severe than if we take some action now.
As another option, we could prepare now for the worst-case scenario. We could enact massive cuts in the mining and use of fossil fuels, stop deforestation, and reforest millions of square miles. Such action would deal with the "worst" case right away, but it would cause great and immediate economic impacts (such as loss of jobs) in the country as well.
On the other hand, we could choose the "middle-of-the-road " option. We could each do things now that make sense, whether the global warming predictions are right or not. For example, we could do whatever possible to reduce air pollution and acid precipitation. We could put more effort into recycling . We could try to improve energy efficiency in everything, from our cars to factories, homes, businesses, and so on . The advantage of such action would be that current unnecessary costs and major adverse economic
impacts could be avoided . However, ifthe "worst-case scenario" develops, such " middle-of-the-road" action may prove inadequate.
Regardless of whether global warming is a present or future real problem, each of us should consider whether we approve the cost/benefit ratio of energy production and its impact on the environment. Then we should make our opinions known to decision-makers. No matter where one stands in the global warming controversy, this is important for the fu ture of humankind. Perhaps the research and policy communities need to be reminded that analysis of climatic trends is still far from being a precise science.
I believe that the current global warming dispute has done for geographers what plate tectonics did for geologists in recent decades. Controversy is good. Our awareness of the world has increased. Debate creates interest and stimulates research . It conveys to the public that geographers are involved with real -world problems. Finally, it shows that our discipline is not simply a compilation and memorization of " people and places."
69
