Black Friday 2018

In the US it's "Black Friday" aka the day where the majority of people lose their minds and spend money on things they don't actually need. It's consumerism at it's worst. And the beginning of the worst time of year, in my opinion. The time of year where it's "Christmas" and "a time of giving" but really it's all peer and societal pressure to give elaborate/expensive gifts to prove that you care.

So instead - prove that you care year round, and do it in your own way. Change the societal rules! That being said, if you actually WANT to buy a gift (big or small), do that. But if you don't actually WANT to do that, give something you actually do want to give. It's a gift for a reason. Gifts should not be expected because then it's no longer a gift.

"People are incurring debt and working longer hours to pay for the high-consumption lifestyle, consequently spending less time with family, friends, and community organizations. "Excess consumption can be counterproductive," said Gardner. "The irony is that lower levels of consumption can actually cure some of these problems."" - As Consumerism Spreads, Earth Suffers, Study Says

Even if you don't agree with me that the societal pressure to give big gifts is bad this time of year, let's look at another facet: The consumption of resources required to create those gifts. In reality, so much of Christmas presents is junk. It's used once or twice, or worn a few times, or breaks right away, or wasn't actually wanted in the first place.

"This boom has not happened by accident. Our lives have been corralled and shaped in order to encourage it. World trade rules force countries to participate in the festival of junk. Governments cut taxes, deregulate business, manipulate interest rates to stimulate spending. But seldom do the engineers of these policies stop and ask “spending on what?”. When every conceivable want and need has been met (among those who have disposable money), growth depends on selling the utterly useless. The solemnity of the state, its might and majesty, are harnessed to the task of delivering Terry the Swearing Turtle to our doors." - The Gift of Death

The amount of resources needed to make a plethora of objects that may or may not be wanted is a huge detriment to the environment. Think about the precious metals that go into electronics, the forests needed to make wood or paper objects, the plastics needed to make that novelty item of no actual value or use, and the time and energy spent wasting creating it. 

"As the demand for goods increases, the need to produce these goods also increases. This leads to more pollutant emissions, increased land-use and deforestation, and accelerated climate change [4]." - The Negative Effects of Consumerism 

It's truly staggering. So instead of buying into it, literally, be different! Break the norm! Together we can change the tide. Alternatives to buying a gift abound. 

(I have no idea the source, so if you know, please let me know!)

In my own shopping ban experiment, I have discovered that I now have a negative physical reaction to buying things (or the idea of buying things, actually). I have begun to rethink every single purchase. Which is really good. It's also a bit overwhelming sometimes. So instead, in this holiday season, I suggest rethinking how you give gifts and how you shop.

Go spend time with the person you care about doing something different (take a hike! #optoutside). 

Give an experience instead of an object (tickets to a show or concert). 

Make something (knit, crochet, or bake something, etc)

Give consumables from a local shop (tea, spices, or coffee come to mind). 

Buy second hand items (books are good for this). 

Upcycle/repurpose items to make a gift (recover a throw pillow or refinish something). 

Donate money to a cause your person cares deeply about. 

More Information:

The Gift of Death, Monbiot.com, published 10/10/2012
As Consumerism Spreads, Earth Suffers, Study Says National Geographic, 1/12/2004
Consumerism plays a huge role in climate change Grist, 2/24/2016
Consumers have huge environmental impact ScienceDaily, 2/24/2016
Shop Till We Drop: Does Consumption Culture Contribute to Environmental Degradation? Scientific American, accessed 11/22/2016
The Negative Effects of Consumerism Greentumble, 7/22/2016
Overconsumption is costing us the earth and human happiness The Guardian, 6/21/2010

Recycling Electronic Waste

Surely I'm not the only one that has an old laptop, ink cartridges, an iPod classic, and random cords and things lying around the house because I have just no clue what to do with them. But they can be recycled! RECYCLED!!

First, let me say that you should use your electronics as long as possible. Just like anything else, the less you replace something the less resources you consume. Using 1 phone every 2 years vs 1 phone every 1 year is a big difference long term. So first step is to REDUCE consumption - use only what you really genuinely need to.

But if you're like me and don't live in the most environmentally progressive place, recycling your electronics can be a problem and/or a hassle.

Cities may or may not actually collect or allow for drop off of e-waste. And that can be frustrating. But nationwide, Best Buy does! If you've been in one of their stores lately, you may have noticed the bins near the entrance. Well you can drop off a variety of e-waste at their shops: laptops, cell phones, calculators, landline phones, laptop batteries, printers, tablets, e-readers, cables and cords, that old ipod, alarm clocks, charging cables.... the list goes on.

Best Buy doesn't accept old discs - CDs, DVDs, Blu-ray, etc so that's a bit tricky. And many of us have old burned CDs and scratched DVDs around that we don't or can't use anymore. You can mail them to the CD Recycling Center of America [if you're in the US anyway]. Sure it's a few bucks to mail a box of things to be recycled, but it's totally worth it and also good environmental karma.

If you have CDs still in cases and in good shape, there's likely to be a used music shop in your town that you can donate or sell back to. Alternatively Goodwill and other thrift stores are also a good option because at least the items can have a second life instead of landing up straight in the trash.

If you have some newer tech that is still functional, you can also trade it in at Best Buy! How cool is that? Getting a few bucks for something and knowing it's taken care of is better than recycling it outright and also infinitely better than chucking it in the trash (and into a landfill).

For more local options, you'll have to do some digging. I found a great local place I had no idea existed for me by googling "electronics recycling [insert city name]". Turns out they also refurbish used electronic equipment and resell it at discounted rates, which is awesome.

I've made a resource sheet here for everyone to share/add to. Happy Recycling!

Additional Reading:
The Global Cost of Electronic Waste The Atlantic, 9/26/2016
Best Buy's Recycling Guidelines accessed 11/16/2018
CD Recycling Center of America accessed 11/16/2018

Personal Decisions to Combat Climate Change

A few weeks ago, the IPCC report on climate change was released. And there were a slew of articles about the personal decisions an individual can make to combat climate change. 

CNN says the 5 things you can do about climate change are make small changes at home (LED bulbs, turning off the lights, changing thermostats to be more eco-friendly, use less water), recycle at the office, use public transportation, get informed, and get involved. 

Sure, you definitely SHOULD use energy efficient appliances/bulbs, turn off the lights and water when not in use, and all of that. I definitely agree that everyone should do the list of things that CNN has laid out. 

In the same vein, Forbes recommends that you should campaign/protest/lobby/vote, change your commute to be more eco-friendly (hybrid cars, public transit, carpool, biking), build better and utilize green infrastructure, use less energy and invest in solar, use the 5 Rs (refuse, reduce, repair, reuse, recycle), and eat less meat and focus on locally sourced food. 

I also agree with these. 

However, all of those things are only drops in the bucket. They are helpful, yes, and you SHOULD do them. 

But there's bigger picture steps that you can take, as an individual. 

1. VOTE VOTE VOTE. You can check to see how much money various industries give to politicians and use that information to vote wisely. For example, Ted Cruz (R-TX) received the most oil & gas money in 2018. https://www.opensecrets.org/
2. VOTE VOTE VOTE 2.0. Vote for politicians who are environmentally minded. Who are pro-green new deal. Who have the environment's best interests at the forefront, not those who are pawns for polluting industries. 
3. You can invest your money with Swell Investing which uses UN Sustainable Development Goals to pick the mixture of companies for various impact areas - like climate action, clean water, etc. You can make a change by voting with your dollars. Put your money where your brain is, so to speak.
4. Buy from companies with sustainable practices, or to not support companies you disagree with. The movement is called voting with your wallet, and you have many options to learn more about that. Boycotts can be effective to make companies change their ways. I also talked more about this with clothing in a previous post. 
5. Donate money to organizations doing the good work. Non-profits like The Nature Conservany, The Ocean Conservancy, Sea Legacy, and the like are all doing their part. 
6. Rethink your daily actions. Consider the impact of your habits. For example, if I buy a single use bottle of soft drink every day, I'm generating 7 pieces of plastic that are recyclable but avoidable. I could use aluminum cans instead. Or buy a 2-liter larger bottle and drink from a reusable cup everyday. I could eliminate the soft drinks all together and opt for water, tea, etc in reusable cups. The same idea could work for the daily coffee on the go (use a reusable cup), lunches, etc. Just rethink your habit and find creative ingenious solutions to be more eco-friendly!
7. VOTE!

If everyone makes the small changes AND votes wisely

https://www.opensecrets.org/ - database for campaign financing 

https://www.buycott.com/ - vote with your wallet

https://grabyourwallet.org/ - database of companies in support of Trump or NRA

Put Your Money Where Your Mouth Is. Vote With Your Dollars Huffington Post, 2/19/2017

Every Purchase You Make Is A Chance To Vote With Your Wallet Fast Company, 4/5/2017

5 things you can do about climate change CNN, 6/2/2017

IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5ºC 10/8/2018

Five things we have learned from the IPCC report BBC, 10/8/2018

It's getting harder for Big Cola to not take responsibility for its plastic pollution Quartz, 10/10/2018

What Urbanites Can Do To Slow Down Climate Change Forbes, 10/18/2018

The Land and Water Conservation Fund

Yesterday, 1 October 2018, the Land and Water Conservation Fund expired. It's insane to me that programs like that do expire, but that's another point. ESPECIALLY programs that don't cost the taxpayers any money and are for the good of all people.

If you've never heard of the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), here's the basic primer. 

The LWCF "is a Federal program that was established by Act of Congress in 1965 to provide funds and matching grants to federal, state and local governments for the acquisition of land and water, and easements on land and water, for the benefit of all Americans. The main emphases of the fund are recreation and the protection of national natural treasures in the forms of parks and protected forest and wildlife areas." [source] 

So the whole point of the LWCF is basically to secure land for the enjoyment of the general public. Which is pretty awesome, in my opinion, and those politicians in the 1960s maybe got a few things right. 

So far, in the last 50 years, the LWCF has protected 5 million acres of land all over the country. You can see a map of all the projects HERE that was put together by The Wilderness Society.  

Funding for LWCF comes energy company royalties. Oil and gas companies pay royalties to the federal government to conduct offshore drilling. A portion of those revenues goes to fund the LWCF. That money is then used to buy land for public access and use. So at no cost to me or you the taxpayers (and at no additional cost to the energy companies - because they were paying this money anyway), we get funding for conservation works, parks, public lands, and other related projects. This is everything. 

And Congress got lazy and let it lapse. It isn't the first time. And maybe it won't be the last time. But honestly it SHOULD be the last time. Permanent reauthorization of the LWCF is a no-brainer and tell your Senators/Representatives as much. 

There are currently multiple bills that have been introduced. 

1) S.569 "Land and Water Conservation Authorization and Funding Act" 

2) S.896 "A bill to permanent reauthorize LWCF"

3) HR.502 "To permanently reauthorize the Land and Water Conservation Fund"

4) HR.6759 "Land and Water Conservation Authorization and Funding Act"

Less legalese updates can be found on the LWCF Coalition page HERE. 

It seems likely that they will come to an agreement, and permanent funding could be possible. But continued support and action is important so keep telling your Senators & Reps!

Take action by signing the LWCF Coalition Letter HERE.

News articles: 

Expired: Congress Fails to Reauthorize Land and Water Conservation Fund GearJunkie, 10/1/2018

Congress allows parks program to expire over the weekend Think Progress, 10/1/2018

More information:  

LWCF Coalition

Mapping the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF)

The Wilderness Society, accessed 2 October 2018

Why LWCF Matters

Continental Divide Trail Coalition, accessed 2 October 2018

It's time to #SaveLWCF

Pacific Crest Trail Association, accessed 2 October 2018

LWCF: A Win for Conservation and Our Economy, but Only if Congress Acts

The Nature Conservancy, accessed 2 October 2018

Land and Water Conservation Fund

The Wilderness Society, accessed 2 October 2018

Land and Water Conservation Fund

Wikipedia, accessed 2 October 2018

Plastic is a Problem

Plastic is everywhere. Literally everywhere. It's in the microbeads in toiletries, it's woven into clothing as synthetic fibers, it's the waxy coating on a paper cup, it's in shiny wrapping paper that's ubiquitous at holidays, it's in everything we consume on a daily basis and don't even realize it. The microfibers and microbeads end up in the water supply and are literally everywhere. 

Plastic is cheap, durable, and can be used in almost anything. From a business perspective, I understand; from an environmental perspective, I'm appalled. 

The biggest problem with plastics are the single use plastics. That includes straws, cigarette filters, cups from drive thru restaurants, plastic zippy bags from the kitchen, food jars, milk jugs, yogurt containers, plastic bags of any kind, drink lids, to go cutlery, drink bottles, single person water bottles, and the list goes on and on. It's nearly never ending. 

That plastic single use straw you didn't really need to drink your soda at the restaurant where you ate lunch isn't recyclable, and will end up in the trash, and therefore in a landfill, and maybe one day end up in the ocean, and then in a sea turtle. That may sound extreme, but it happens. 

Straws are the gateway plastic.       

Yesterday I encountered single use plastic no fewer than 4 times even though I spent most of my day at home yesterday and ate out only for breakfast because I was desperate and late for work. 

#1 - Smoothie King to go cup and lid

#2 - Smoothie King straw

#3 - Film packaging on a package of ground beef

#4 - Plastic jar of spaghetti sauce

Single use plastics are often not recyclable, or are not recycled even when they are recyclable. 

But then there are the bigger battles. My Smoothie King cup was unfortunately plastic, but that's an improvement over styrofoam, so also my cup was fortunately plastic. I can't recycle the straw they gave me and they wouldn't take it back at the window so I ended up just giving in and using it. The battles continues on every day. 

There is reason to hope, of course. There always is. Hope is never fully lost. 

There are simple actionable tasks you can do daily to reduce your plastic consumption. To name a few: 

1) Reduce, Reuse, Recycle!

2) Refuse a straw. You don't need it. You habitually think you do, but you don't. 

3) Say no to the plastic bag. Bring your own reusable bags to the shop. 

4) Use a reusable and refillable water bottle instead of single use bottles. 

5) Bring a reusable container for leftovers if you go out to eat. 

6) Pack your meals in reusable containers instead of plastic baggies. 

7) Avoid toiletries with microbeads in them

8) Don't buy items that are wrapped in plastic

9) Lunch takeout in the workday is easily solved - keep reusable cutlery, napkins, & a straw in your desk

10) Buy in bulk and store the extra so you can reduce packaging!

11) DON'T LITTER. 

I personally already bring reusable bags to the grocery by keeping a stash in my car. I also have reusable produce bags. I have metal straws stashed in my car and desk at work. I have a stash of spoons leftover from the froyo place that I leave in my desk and take home and wash periodically. I typically bring my lunch in plastic containers but they're reusable. I have a reusable Camelbak water bottle that I have been toting around with me since Flagstaff AZ in 2009. It's plastic but going on 10 years old now. That's a lot of single use bottles saved! I don't eat takeout often but generally I will not get a drink if possible. When I drink sodas I tend to drink them in cans to limit plastic consumption but also soda consumption by volume. 

Like everyone I have areas to work on. I end up at Subway once a week or so and end up with the plastic bag. However I at least reuse the plastic bags I do end up with to clean the cat litter box (though I could probably be more environmentally friendly here too, hmm....). I still need to focus more on plastic packaging at the grocery store, which is the hardest place to reduce consumption because the options are often limited. 

Despite the prevalence and ease of single use plastics, we don't need them. Do your part. Reduce your use of plastic in your everyday life. Recycle what you do end up with. 

Sign the National Geographic pledge to reduce your plastic consumption HERE. 

Organizations doing good work

Plastic Pollution Coalition

National Geographic: Planet or Plastic?

The Ocean Cleanup

4Ocean

More information: 

WE MADE PLASTIC. WE DEPEND ON IT. NOW WE'RE DROWNING IN IT.

National Geographic, accessed 27 September 2018

Get Started Living Plastic Free

Plastic Pollution Coalition, accessed 27 September 2018

Fast Facts About Plastic Pollution

National Geographic, accessed 27 September 2018

Fact Sheet: Single Use Plastics

Earth Day Network, accessed 27 September 2018

LESSONS FROM PLASTIC FREE JULY

Bee's Wrap, accessed  27 September 2018  

Half a billion plastic straws are used and discarded every day. What an unacceptable waste

Los Angeles Times, accessed 27 September 2018

Plastic Pollution

Our World in Data, accessed 27 September 2018  

Cycling for the Planet

A friend of mine recently said he commutes by bike from a neighborhood near me to the same campus as me. We have similar careers and yet I am slacking it up over here by driving the 7.2 (car) miles roundtrip to work everyday. By bike, it's more like 10 miles roundtrip to use safer residential streets. But I digress. I fully have the means to bike a lot of days to work. There are days where it's not feasible or practical (like, before a work trip when I have overnight bag etc). There are more days per year though where it IS practical. So what am I doing??

So I started googling what the carbon footprint reduction would be if I rode my bike to work even half the days of the week, so 2-3 per week by bike. Firstly, let's define carbon footprint as the amount of CO2 (carbon dioxide) emitted during an activity or span of time. Example: yearly carbon footprint or in this story the amount of CO2 emitted by my work commute.

Based on the very cool tool MAPMYEMISSIONS, my commute carbon footprint by car is ~5lbs of carbon, roundtrip, everyday. That's around 25lbs of carbon produced per weekday just to get me to/from work. Lazy.

Into the rabbit hole I went, to learn about carbon footprint reduction, biking options, and how to do the math. However, I discovered that not everyone thinks biking is a perfectly clean alternative to driving solo in a car. It seems that some people think that fossil fuels powering your motorized vehicle and food powering me on my bike are equivalent. I'm looking at you, Harvard guy. But that's a false equivalence for me. My diet will stay the same, regardless of my mode of transportation to work. I have already mostly fine tuned my diet for my training and schedule so it won't change. Besides, I still have to eat to drive my car to work, so that's an assumption I am going to make in this experiment.

I pledge to ride my bike for 2 days per week until October, and bump it up to 3+ once the weather is nicer in the best month of the year and beyond. I often go to the gym before work, when it's still very dark out, and I'm not comfortable riding my bike to the gym at 530am. So I need to tweak my schedule but I think this is going to be great! How could it not be?

Now, if I could just have a widget tracker to keep myself accountable for how many days per week I ride my bike and stay on track!

More information: 

Map My Emissions

accessed 12 September 2018

Climate Impacts of Biking vs. Driving

Harvard's Keith Group, accessed 12 September 2018

How much CO2 does cycling really save?

European Cyclists' Federation, accessed 12 September 2018

What's the carbon footprint of ... cycling a mile?

The Guardian, accessed 12 September 2018

Cycle like the Danes to cut carbon emissions, says study

The Guardian, accessed 12 September 2018

How Much Can Bicycling Help Fight Climate Change? A Lot, If Cities Try

Streets Blog USA, accessed 12 September 2018

Brett Kavanaugh is a disaster for the environment

Brett Kavanaugh has been nominated to fill the empty seat on the Supreme Court of the United States/SCOTUS. It's a disastrous idea for a literal million reasons, but for climate change and everything that's at risk with it, it's particularly dangerous in the longterm and worldwide. Others have outlined it more clearly than I can, so here you go:

"When joined by fellow conservatives, he wrote opinions rejecting EPA rules to limit greenhouse gases or air pollution that blows across state lines. And when the majority upheld regulations, including limits on power plants that pump out carbon pollution or put toxic mercury in the air, Kavanaugh filed long dissents, usually arguing that Congress, not the EPA, is the only body with the power to take such steps."

-- LA Times

"As a D.C. appeals court judge, he argued against the EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases, and wrote the majority opinion striking down the EPA’s attempt to regulate hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), which are potent climate pollutants used in cooling applications. He even wrote a majority opinion overturning EPA regulation of air pollution that crosses state lines." 

-- Institute for Policy Studies

RESIST! 

Sign the Sierra Club Petition to Oppose Brett Kavanaugh as Supreme Court Justice HERE

Endangered Species Act

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) is a piece of US legislation that was enacted in 1973. "The act aims to provide a framework to conserve and protect endangered and threatened species and their habitats." [source]

The purpose of ESA, from it's very own text: "The purposes of this Act are to provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved, to provide a program for the conservation of such endangered species and threatened species, and to take such steps as may be appropriate to achieve the purposes of the treaties and conventions set forth in subsection (a) of this section." [source]

There's 48 pages of text in ESA but the main point is clear - to protect and conserve endangered species and the habitats and ecosystems the populations rely upon. Wikipedia puts it pretty clearly: "The ESA's primary goal is to prevent the extinction of imperiled plant and animal life, and secondly, to recover and maintain those populations by removing or lessening threats to their survival." [source]

There's ~2000 species listed in the ESA,  ranging from large charismatic megafauna like the Whooping Crane, to amphibians like the Wyoming Toad,  to plants like the Texas poppy-mallow.

There's only one problem with the ESA, in my opinion, and that is only that it needs to exist in the first place. If humans hadn't messed everything up in the first place and destroyed habitat, polluted environments, and hunted animals to near extinction then we wouldn't even need ESA. Therefore it's our responsibility to make it right and protect and conserve these species that are on the cusp of extinction. We need to atone for our mistakes.

Even if I've never heard of or seen a particular plant or fish or frog or bird, I know there's an intrinsic value to having that species on this planet, regardless of my existence. In ecology, the intrinsic value of a species is the value of the species itself, not the worth of the species in relation to humans.

Who are we to decide which species get to survive because they're "useful" while also condemning others to extinction because they are not "useful" to us?

Follow me on this thought experiment for a moment. Does a Mallard have more right to survival than the Wyoming Toad? Mallards are not endangered, are hunted, provide food, and are managed to keep a sustainable population going for the sake of the species but secondarily for the sake of the sport. The Wyoming Toad is tiny, very rare, and of no economic use. Does one species deserve to exist more than the other?

No.

We should do everything possible to conserve these species on the brink of extinction because every species is valuable in its own right.

Sign the Change.org petition to oppose changes to ESA HERE.
Sign the MoveOn.org petition to oppose changes to ESA HERE. 

More Information:
OVERVIEW OF NEW ENDANGERED SPECIES DRAFT REGULATIONS

Environmental Policy Innovation Center, accessed 21 August 2018

Law That Saved the Bald Eagle Could Be Vastly Reworked

The New York Times, accessed 21 August 2018

TAKE-ACTION TOOLBOX #1: DEFEND THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT

Center for Biological Diversity, accessed 21 August 2018

The White House is working to undermine the Endangered Species Act — here's how

The Hill, accessed 21 August 2018

Fight for the Endangered Species Act

Change.org Petition organized by Center for Biological Diversity, accessed 21 August 2018

Endangered Species Act of 1973

Wikipedia, accessed 21 August 2018

Take Action for Threatened and Endangered Birds

American Bird Conservancy Petition, accessed 21 August 2018

Full Text of the Endangered Species Act of 1973

US Fish and Wildlife Service website, accessed 21 August 2018

The Pearl River is a river, and let's keep it that way

The Pearl River is a beautiful winding river that forms the southern part of the border between eastern Louisiana and western Mississippi. That is my personal opinion, and although I am not as eloquent as many, I think if you saw the river in its glory you would agree.

The issue: There is currently a proposal for the "One Lake" project that would "dredge 10 miles of the Pearl River and build a dam to create a 1,900-acre lake near Jackson, MS" [source].

This isn't a water management project. It's a development project with many interconnected downstream consequences. It's also a 40 years later reaction to the 1979 flood.

From the Coalition to Restore Coastal Louisiana: "We are very concerned about the downstream effects of this project on communities and ecosystems in Louisiana. Louisiana is currently in a battle against land loss that is affecting the people and industries that call the lower Pearl River Basin home. The fact that there is consideration for altering the Pearl River Watershed without considering the downstream affects is astounding." [source]

I couldn't have said it better myself, so I won't even bother, just know I agree 10000%.

The Pearl is home to many species of flora and fauna, and is a source of freshwater in a brackish area that is prone to salinity influx. If you need a champion species, look no further than the Gulf Sturgeon. They are endangered, and call the Pearl home. An upriver dam would have consequences for the species and everything else connected to its environment.

Sign the petition to oppose the One Lake Project HERE.

More information:
The Devastation of a Dam — Saving Mississippi’s Pearl RiverWaterkeeper Alliance, accessed 16 August 2018

CRCL Blasts “One Lake” Project as Destructive to Louisiana
Coalition to Restore Coastal Louisiana, accessed 16 August 2018

One River, No Lake
Pearl Riverkeeper, accessed 16 August 2018

Protect the Pearl
Gulf Restoration Network, accessed 16 August 2018

New flood plan in Jackson could have dire effects on Coast’s oyster business, fishermen say

Mississippi Sun Herald, accessed 16 August 2018

Slidell City Council joins opponents of Mississippi's Pearl River flood plan

NOLA.com, accessed 16 August 2018

Coast seafood industry skeptical of Jackson lake project. ‘I have a lot of concerns.’

Mississippi Sun Herald, accessed 16 August 2018