Children and Nature need each other

January and February are typically the coldest and often snowiest months of winter, despite the fact that the days are slowly and gradually getting longer. At such times, most people (hardcore skiers excepted) adopt a modified form of hibernation, or at least nesting behavior, hiding out indoors where central heating, sweaters, and blankets – not to mention cups of hot cocoa or soup – help to make the weather more bearable.

It may seem strange at such a time to be talking about getting outdoors, but in fact what better time to think about, and plan for, warm weather? The fact is, though, that while we talk a lot about getting out more in the spring and summer, it’s by no means clear that we actually do it. This is particularly the case with children. The days when kids spent summer days outside in unstructured, largely unsupervised play seem to be just a memory.

They are certainly in my memories! Growing up in a then mostly-rural Howard County, I was almost literally kicked out of the house on sunshine-y days. Not because my mother didn’t love me, but because she knew what was common wisdom for untold generations, that playing outside was good for children’s health and development. That intuitive understanding, passed down through generations, has in more recent years been born out by study after study. But nowadays, the reality falls far short of that ideal.

Studies quoted in the Wisconsin State Journal indicate that children, on average, spend 30 hours per week plugged into electronic devices: iPods, PlayStations, cell phones, Wiis, the internet. In contrast, again on average, American children spend less than an hour each month – not each week, but each month – in nature. Even more optimistic reports indicate that the average American child spends less than a half-hour each week in nature.

And it’s been long established by research that the average American teenager can name or at least recognize 1,000 corporate logos, but can’t name 5 birds, 5 trees, or 5 wild animals local to his or her area. In short, we are developing a nation of children who are computer-literate, but nature-illiterate; who are deeply in tune with corporate marketing, but deeply out of tune with the earth on which we are absolutely dependent for our continued existence.

That this is bad news for children is well-attested. The American Academy of Pediatrics states that free and unstructured play is both healthy and essential to children, contributing to the cognitive, physical, social, and emotional well-being of children and youth. That news alone ought to have parents and educators earnestly seeking to provide opportunities for such free and unstructured play for the children in their charge. Sadly, this is not the case.

Nor is it children alone who benefit. The land itself benefits from children whose growing years included frequent, authentic, and positive experiences in the outdoors, and it suffers from the reverse. A Nature Conservancy-funded study has found that “The greatest threat to conservation…may be more subtle than bulldozers and chainsaws,” according to study authors Oliver Pergams, Ph.D. and Patricia Zaradic, Ph.D. “Direct experience with nature is the most highly cited influence on environmental attitude and conservation activism,” adding that if the youngest generation loses that experience, the future of conservation is in jeopardy.

The evidence is clear. Children need authentic, unstructured outdoor experiences for their psycho-emotional as well as physical well-being. And nature itself needs such children, to grow up and become its defenders. Sometimes, in this complex world, the answers really are simple: “go out and play” may well be one of the most important things you can say to your children.

Hopes for 2009

Well, here it is, 2009. If I sound less than enthused, it’s for two reasons: first, I’ve never bought into the whole super-hyped concept of New Years favored by some. Yes, it’s a clean slate, a new beginning. Sort of. It’s also very much a continuation of patterns and trends begun the year before, and usually a very long while before that.

And that’s the second reason I’m not jumping with joy over the advent of 2009: it brings a lot of baggage with it from 2008. So in lieu of a bunch of resolutions I might not be able to keep anyway, I’d like to offer a series of hopes – or maybe prayers – for 2009.

That India and Pakistan are able to overcome their deep-seated historical differences and unite against terrorism in the region: both al-Qaida and Taliban on Pakistan’s western border, and home-grown terrorists threatening peace in both countries and across their common border.

That the long cycle of violence between Israel and the Palestinians, particularly Hamas, may likewise be broken. This endless, grinding pattern of grievance, destruction, and death does neither side any good, and places the whole region at risk of a wider struggle.

That we are able to keep our disagreements with Russia and China civil and civilized. Neither of these large, populous nations is a superpower of the first rank at this point, but both are what used to be called “Great Powers,” and wield considerable influence in the world, as well as considerable military power. We cannot expect their interests and ours to coincide perfectly, but the more we are able to find commonality of interest, the better for all parties concerned.

That we are able, as a society, to view the twin specters of global warming and peak oil as one problem – petrochemical dependency – and not two, and find alternatives to our oil addiction that do not try to “solve” one of these in a way which exacerbates the other.

That we finally learn, once and for all, that the economy and the environment is not an either-or proposition. And furthermore, that we need to consider the impact of all of our doings in terms of what some call the triple bottom line: the economical, environmental, and social consequences of our actions, also known as “people, planet, profit.” Lacking any of these, true sustainability is impossible.

That we have the sense to repeal or dramatically alter “No Child Left Behind” to de-emphasize standardized testing, and re-emphasize authentic learning, and creative teaching. And that, in contrast, “No Child Left Inside” becomes more than a slogan, but an integral part of our educational tool-box. Study after study has shown that authentic outdoor experiences have myriad benefits for children. Apparently, our mothers’ admonition to “go outside and play” had more benefits than getting us out of her hair.

And finally, that our new president is given the chance to show what he can do before everyone starts jumping down his throat. I did not vote for Obama; I had and have my doubts about his readiness for such high office. But he’s the choice of a majority of the people, and he deserves both respect and support. Being president is a thankless job in the best of times, and the challenges facing this one are nearly mind-boggling. It will take all of us, working together, to meet them.

But haven’t we met challenges before? Yes, we have. Americans thrive on challenge, and have proven over and over again our ability to rise – sometime belatedly, sometimes grudgingly, but with a remarkable track record of success – to meet them. And that does give me hope for the future, in this year of grace 2009. Happy New Year!

Column: Independent rhetoric, dependent reality

Just a few days ago, we celebrated Independence Day, the anniversary of the United Colonies’ declaration of independence from Great Britain more than 225 years ago. We celebrated with fireworks, and perhaps still in a few places parades, with picnics and cookouts and trips to the beach and mountains.

And hopefully, somewhere along the line, we stopped for at least a few moments to give thanks for those who sacrificed much -- their “lives, fortunes, and sacred honor,” as they themselves put it -- to make us free, and to keep us that way in the years since.

But just how independent are we, actually? The truthful answer would have to be, not very. And less so, it seems, with each passing year.

Since our shift, c. 1970, from net oil exporter to net oil importer, we have been deeply dependent on sources of supply outside our own country to feed our ravenous appetite for oil and petroleum products. Some of those sources of supply are in countries that tolerate us at best, actively dislike us at worst.

We are dependent on 15,000-mile supply lines from China to supply us with the cheap consumer goods on which we have come to rely so greatly. Combine that with the last bit of dependency, and it’s easy to see why higher fuel prices are a concern for more than just filling our own tanks.

We have allowed ourselves to become dependent on government handouts and so-called entitlements in many areas of life. And we have acceded to the breakdown of organizations -- civic organizations and social clubs like the Grange, the Jaycees, and many others -- which previously served as buffers between individuals, the government, and the forces of nature, circumstance, and economics that buffet all of us.

That last is a clue to the fact that absolute and complete independence is an impossibility, of course. We could not have achieved our independence from England without the support of France, during our Revolutionary War. And even the most ruggedly independent pioneer or settler depended upon his neighbors, his family, or sometimes the local Indian tribe, to survive.

Interdependence is one thing, if it’s mutual. It is, in fact, probably the most basic, most natural, most normal condition for human beings. But the current situation, marked by trade deficits, military adventurism, and mistrust of American motives, is untenable.

If nothing else, the United States used to be able to be reliably counted upon to export its values: values like freedom, democracy, tolerance, and the rule of law. We still talk a good line in those regards, but place our rhetoric next to the Patriot Act, Guantanamo Bay, warrantless electronic surveillance, waterboarding, and other actions in Iraq and elsewhere, and it’s no wonder many people in many countries of the world still admire the ideals of America, but fear and mistrust our actions.

Our next President, whoever he may be, will have his work cut out for him mending fences abroad, and trying to rebuild our badly damaged reputation.

Between now and Independence Day, 2009, we need a national conversation on how we as a nation and as individuals can become more independent -- in fuel, food, consumer goods, and many other economic measures, and in our personal expectations -- while at the same time promoting healthy and reasonable inter dependence with our neighbors, both locally and internationally.

If we can accomplish this, whether by next Fourth of July or ten Fourths of July down the road, we will really have something to celebrate.

Column: Court strikes the right balance

Finally, at long last, the Supreme Court has confirmed what for many of us has always been self-evident: that sane, law-abiding citizens of the United States have an individual right, under the Second Amendment of the Constitution, to own guns for self-defense.

The Court was predictably divided on this decision, with the so-called “liberal” Justices opposed, and the more conservative ones in favor. Justice Kennedy, typically viewed as a moderate, voted with the majority to make it a 5-4 decision in favor of liberty, Constitutionality, and common sense.

Nonetheless this is not really, or at least exclusively, a liberal versus conservative issue. AP writer Mark Sherman accurately notes that the reaction broke less along party lines than along the divide between cities wracked with gun violence and rural areas where gun ownership is embedded in daily life.

This is the reality which partisan rhetoric has largely obscured: there is not a single “gun culture” in the United States. There are two. One of them is mostly an urban phenomenon: the “thug” or “gangsta” culture celebrated by gangsta rap and exemplified by the “Stop Snitchin’” DVDs put out by Baltimore’s gangs. For this culture, guns are about power obtained through violence, and wealth obtained the same way.

The second, and vastly larger, gun culture in the United States is often, but far from exclusively, rural. It reflects the estimated 43-55 million law-abiding gun owners -- only a fraction of whom are NRA members -- who own guns for hunting, shooting sports, and not least, personal safety. That includes defense against members of the first-mentioned gun culture.

Contrary to the views of at least one Presidential candidate, who seems to be doing some serious fence-sitting in view of the Court’s decision, members of the second-named gun culture are rarely bitter. In fact, they are typically optimistic, although sometimes frustrated by certain directions taken by this country’s ruling elite.

This second and much larger gun culture is peaceful, law-abiding, generally patriotic, and stresses personal responsibility. It views the Second Amendment as the “first freedom,” the right that, in the final analysis, guarantees all the others. It is, in other words, the culture that has remained in tune with the original intent of the Founders, now finally affirmed by the Supreme Court.

In making this ruling, the Court has struck the right balance. Writing for the majority, Justice Scalia noted that nothing in the ruling should “cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings.” In other words, it is only sane and law-abiding citizens who have the right to bear arms, and even then, not everywhere.

He further noted the justices in the majority “are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country" and that the Constitution "leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns.” This is hardly a return to a Wild West approach to problem-solving, as asserted by some fear-mongering anti-gun activists. If anything, statistics show the reverse: restricting gun ownership increases crime, as in Britain and Australia.

The right to keep and bear arms for a variety of purposes, including personal defense, is exactly that: a fundamental, individual right, on par with the right to speak freely, freely assemble, worship in accordance with conscience, and all the rest. It’s really rather sad that it’s taken this long, and required a Supreme Court decision, to affirm such a basic and self-evident truth.

Column: Summer Reflections

As the wheel of the year turns from the Winter Solstice, December 21st, to Candlemas, February 2nd, there is an old axiom that “as the light lengthens, so the cold strengthens.” And in fact, the period between Christmas and Groundhog Day is often the coldest and snowiest of the year. In fact, the cold and snow sometimes extends right up to the Vernal Equinox, on March 21st.

If there were a similar axiom for this time of year, it might go “as the dark lengthens, so the heat strengthens.”

We are just past the Summer Solstice, the longest day and shortest night of the year. From now on each day will be just a little bit shorter, and each night a little bit longer, than the last. It’ll be barely noticeable at first, but within a few weeks we’ll be noticing, regretfully, that it’s not staying light quite as late as it was before.

That does not mean that the intensity of summer heat will lessen along with the light. It will eventually, of course, but we are now facing the hottest part of the year: “High Summer,” or the “Dog Days,” as some call them. From the Summer Solstice until at least Lammas (“Loaf-Mass,” the old harvest festival on August 1st), and perhaps until the Autumnal Equinox on September 21st, we can look forward to days, weeks or months of hot, hazy, and humid weather.

Nonetheless, this is a wonderful time of the year in many respects. Traditionally it’s a time for vacations, a word stemming from the so-called “Gilded Age,” when Vanderbilts, DuPonts, and other wealthy families literally “vacated” cities for the healthier climate of exclusive mountain or coastal retreats. With the advent of the Automotive Age, ordinary families could join the pilgrimage, and the Great American Vacation was born.

Present fuel costs may keep more people closer to home this year, and in years to come, but that’s not all bad: there are many places and events worth visiting here in our home state of Maryland, in fact right here in Carroll County. It’s even possible that some families may focus more on being families, and doing things together, rather than just going places.

And of course, this is the most fruitful time of the year, when fresh vegetables, fruits, and berries abound at farmers markets and roadside stands. What would late spring and early summer have been without strawberries and asparagus? But now we can look forward to locally-grown tomatoes, corn, and beans, yellow and zucchini squash, plus peppers and eggplant for those who like them, along with cantelopes and watermelons, cherries and peaches, red raspberries and plump blackberries, and much more.

And if the heat and humidity gets you down, be of good hope! It won’t be that long until the first Canadian cold fronts sweep through the area, bringing crystal blue skies and crisp nights, and the markets will be replete with apples and pumpkins, Indian corn and colorful gourds.

But that’s for the future. The wheel of the year keeps turning, ever-varied, eternally interesting. Best not to look too far ahead: better to simply enjoy what this turn of the year brings. Although the seasons may come back around, each moment in time is unique, and once gone, it can never be recaptured.

A visit from Jack Boots and E.N. Forcer

*knock, knock*

“Yes? Hello?

“Ms Homeowner?”

“Yes, that’s me. How can I help you gentlemen?”

“Ms Homeowner, I’m Jack Boots, from your neighborhood association, and this E. N. Forcer, from municipal government.”

(apprehensively) “Yes? What’s wrong?”

“Ms Homeowner, I’m sorry to tell you this, but you aren’t allowed to hang your clothes out to dry. Clean clothes flapping in the breeze is an eyesore, on a par with rusting automobiles left on blocks in the front yard. You’ll have to take them down.”

“But I do that to save energy, and also to reduce my carbon footprint. Hanging clothes out to dry saves fuel and protects the environment, while it also saves me money.”

“That’s what they claim, Ms Homeowner. I wouldn’t know about that. All I know is that we can’t have people thinking the folks living in this development can’t afford to use the dryer. You’ll have to take them down.”

“But…”

“Now Mr. Forcer has something to say to you.”

“Ms Homeowner, I understand you watered your vegetable garden last evening.”

“Well, yes, I did. We haven’t had much rain, as you know, and I depend on those vegetables to provide fresh, healthy food for myself and my family. We even can the excess to help us through the winter.”

“I’m sorry, Ms Homeowner, but I’m afraid that’s not allowed. Water restrictions, you know. You’re going to have to rely on canned and frozen foods produced a thousand miles away and shipped here, just like the rest of us.”

“But wait a minute, sir, if there are water restrictions, why are they continuing to build new houses? There are several big developments going in, I pass them on my way to work every day. And even one of those houses would use many times more water than I do to water my little garden!”

“I wouldn’t know about that, Ms Homeowner, not my department. I just know that watering your garden is a no-no. Thanks for your time, ma’am. Have a nice day.”

“Oh, and one more thing.”

“Yes, Mr. Boots?”

“Your American flag in the front yard -- is that a 12 foot pole?”

“Why, yes, it is. Why?”

“Four feet too high for our neighborhood covenants. You’ll have to cut it down to size, or take it down entirely. Have a nice day, ma’am.”

“Ummm… well, thank you. Goodbye.”

Exaggerated? Well, yes… but not by much. Though the names have been changed to protect the not-so-innocent, conversations much like these have been held with many people across our county, state, and nation since the advent of homeowners associations, neighborhood covenants, and the like.

I grew up surrounded by one of the first major planned communities, the so-called “New City” of Columbia, Maryland. Columbia was notorious for its restrictive covenants. You had to get association approval to change the color of your front door, and even then, only limited colors were allowed. Still, I’d be the first to admit some covenants are appropriate. Few of us want to live next door to the rusting hulk of a ’57 Chevy on blocks, surrounded by pink plastic flamingos.

But some restrictions, such as the ban in many neighborhood association agreements on drying clothes by hanging them outside, are not only silly, but in this age of rising energy costs, shrinking supplies, and global climate change, are downright wrong-headed. Anything we can do, within reason, to save energy and help the environment should be not only allowed, but applauded by the relevant authorities.

Similarly, distinctions need to be made between keeping one’s lawn as green as a golf-course, or nurturing a bevy of blooming ornamentals, and growing food for one’s table. The first two are pretty, but not essential. The latter is a fundamental human right, and a decision in favor of good health, good food, and good stewardship of the land, and against the social, political, and energy costs of centralized production and long-distance transport.

The bit about the American flag was included partly because that, too, has come up in covenant disputes, and partly because finding the balance between individual liberty and community responsibility, and between deep, essential values and trivial, superficial desires, has been part of what America is all about.

Unfortunately, blanket restrictions, applied without consideration of why some people may choose a particular course of action and without weighing the specific situation on its merits, are counter to both individual liberty and true community. We can and should do better.

Fresh, local produce sure sign of Summer

The recent warmth and humidity we've been experiencing make it clear that spring is edging into summer. But for many of us, there are other indicators, too. One is the changing hue of the green leaves, from the lacey light-green of spring to the darker, more solid-appearing greens of summer.

As we move toward the Summer Solstice on June 21st, the quality of light is changing, too: the sun riding ever higher in the sky, the days lasting just a bit longer, and the nights a bit shorter. The birds are in full song, even the laggards having made their yearly pilgrimage along the migration routes. The scent of wild roses and honeysuckle perfumes the air with a magical fragrance.

But perhaps most wondrous of all, fresh local produce is beginning to appear. As many know, I work on a farm called Spoutwood in Glen Rock, PA, which offers weekly bags of produce to shareholders. But even though our distribution season will not begin for another week or so, the gardens are already starting to produce greens, radishes, asparagus, and more.

Spoutwood is a community supported agriculture project (CSA), in which shareholders pay a set fee up front in exchange for 22 weeks of produce. But there are many others, including a number here in Carroll County. Lists of local CSA farms can be found at http://www.sare.org/csa/index.htm and http://www.localharvest.org/csa/, among other sites.

Not everyone will sign up for a CSA, however, and even those of us who do often find that we want one or two veggies that didn't come in the box or bag this week. Or, we may want more of something than our CSA share provided. For those folks, or anyone else looking for a taste of summer, fresh and local, farmers markets cannot be beat.

Not all farmers markets are created equal, however. Some, like the Farmers Market at the Ag Center in Westminster, combine a heavy complement of crafts with their produce-selling farmers. In some ways, this has filled in -- at least seasonally -- the void left by the departure of the Pennsylvania Dutch Market. Some markets allow their vendors to "buy in" produce from off the farm, or even out of state: just because it's at a stall in a farmers market does not necessarily mean the farmer grew it.

Others, however, are proud of their status as "producers only" farmers markets. As the name indicates, these markets require their farmer-vendors to sell only what they grow on their own farms, or if they are providing a value-added product (such as bread or preserves) to have made it themselves, often with at least some proportion of local ingredients.

The Downtown Westminster Farmers Market is one such producer-only farmers market. In addition to offering fruits, vegetables, breads, and even meats, this market offers the assurance that everything available for sale was grown, raised, or made on the farm or in the kitchen of the vendor.

Says Jackie Miller, market manager,

"There are many different things that people are concerned about when it comes to their food. Some are vegetarians, some want organic, some want to preserve the environment and conserve fossil fuels by eating locally, and some simply want the freshest, best quality produce available. Customers looking for chemical-free products can walk up to the farmer and talk with him or her about their growing methods. Furthermore, you are supporting your local economy by shopping at producer-only markets. We feel that this label is of utmost importance in keeping the integrity of our market."

This is not to say that other models for farmers markets are bad or incorrect. But for the assurance that what you buy is both impeccably local and impeccably fresh, it's hard to beat the knowledge that it's been picked in the farmer's own garden that very morning.

This is just a sampling of the many sources for fresh produce available this summer, including of course roadside farmstands, and even your neighbor's garden -- or if you're feeling ambitious, your own. Despite suburban encroachment, Carroll County retains a strong agricultural component, and there's no time like summer to take advantage of it.

Buying food locally -- becoming a "localvore" -- is good for the environment, good for farmers, good for local communities, and good for the eater of that delicious, fresh, local food. Be it garden or farmstand, CSA or famer's market, find your favorite source and enjoy summer's bounty. Bon appetit!

Remembering fallen heroes on Memorial Day

Yesterday we observed the national Memorial Day holiday. Observed by custom, over recent decades, on the last Monday of May, it yields a long weekend for the traditional (if unoffical) first weekend of summer. As such, it forms the backdrop for picnics, backyard barbecues, and trips to the beach, the lake, or the mountains.

All of this is well and good. The older I get, the shorter summer seems to become, and I am all for squeezing every ounce of gusto out of it that we can manage. I'm always up for a trip to the mountains, a session of grilling and partaking of potluck picnic fare, or exploring some waterfront location.

But it's important, I think, that we don't let these enjoyable observations of the beginning of summer obscure for us the deeper significance of Memorial Day, or Decoration Day as it was originally called. Though the precise date and location of its origin are unknown, it clearly dates back to the Civil War. As the website www.usmemorialday.org notes, it is "likely that… every planned or spontaneous gathering of people to honor the war dead in the 1860's tapped into the general human need to honor our dead."

Memorial Day was officially first proclaimed by Union General John Logan, commander of the Grand Army of the Republic, and first observed on May 30, 1868. It is very much in keeping with the tenor of the day that, even at that early date, flowers were laid on the graves of Union and Confederate soldiers alike.

The first state to officially recognize the holiday was New York, in 1873. By 1890, again according to the website, it was recognized by all northern states, although perhaps understandably, the states of the former Confederacy resisted the trend, honoring their dead on separate days. World War One, however, brought the country together in many ways. One of those was making Memorial Day no longer about honoring the dead of the Civil War, but honoring all American servicemen (and later women) who had died fighting for their country.

The wearing of red poppies originated in the famous World War One poem, "In Flanders Fields." In 1915, Moina Mitchell was inspired by this to compose her own brief poem: "We cherish too, the Poppy red / That grows on fields where valor led, / It seems to signal to the skies / That blood of heroes never dies." She thus conceived the idea of wearing red poppies to honor those Americans fallen in battle.

At a time when more than 3,400 Americans have died in the fighting in Iraq, and hundreds more in Afghanistan, it is appropriate to pause amidst our understandable celebrations of the coming of summer to recall, for a moment, just why we commemorate this day. Westminster and some of the other municipalities of Carroll County are better at this than much of the country, it seems, honoring both the day and our fallen heroes with a parade and, often, further observances at the local cemetery.

Nonetheless I tend to agree with the views expressed on www.memorialday.com, that "Traditional observance of Memorial day has diminished over the years. Many Americans nowadays have forgotten the meaning and traditions of Memorial Day... What is needed is a full return to the original day of observance. Set aside one day out of the year for the nation to get together to remember, reflect and honor those who have given their all in service to their country."

How best to do this? Move the observation of Memorial Day back to its original date, May 30th, on whatever day that might fall. Making it an excuse for a 3-day vacation, some justly hold, undercuts the very meaning of the day, which is all about sacrifice and gratitude for that sacrifice. Without the valor and selflessness, even unto death, of those honored on this day, the U.S. would not be a nation, and neither we nor much of the rest of the world would enjoy the freedoms we so often take for granted.

In the words of General Logan, in his order proclaiming the day in 1868, "Let no vandalism of avarice or neglect, no ravages of time testify to the present or to the coming generations that we have forgotten as a people the cost of a free and undivided republic." May we not forget. May we never forget. Tomorrow marks the traditional Memorial Day, May 30th. Let us truly, and gratefully, remember.

2007 Fairie Festival at Spoutwood Farm

Please note: there are many spellings of fairie/fairy/faery, but "fairie" is how Spoutwood has chosen to spell it, so that is the form I have used throughout.

----------

On the first weekend of May, I attended a most remarkable event. Nestled into a peaceful corner of York County, PA, near the borough of Glen Rock, is Spoutwood Farm. Most of the year it quietly produces fresh, organic-quality vegetables from its community supported agriculture gardens, honey from its hives, and grapes for a local vintner. It also hosts educational programs related to sustainable agriculture, simple living, and the environment.

Once a year, however, this sleepy farm is transformed. Like Brigadoon coming out of the mists, it becomes the site of the annual May Day Fairie Festival. The Fairie Festival was the brainchild of Rob and Lucy Wood, owners of Spoutwood, and began 16 years ago as a party for 100 friends. Last year, 2006, some 12,000 people came through the gates over the three days the Festival ran, and this year, the number was closer to 15,000. Patrons came from as far away as Japan, and performers from as far as Scotland.

Why do they come? To "celebrate the beginning of spring and the return of the nature spirits to the warm world," according to the professionally-produced program. It is a participatory celebration of the spirit of nature and of the springtime, and judging by the expressions of joy and wonder on the faces of patrons both young and old, the enchantment runs deep.

To be sure, the Fairie Festival is not for everyone. I think the reality is that what one sees in the Fairie Festival is, to a large degree, based on what one brings to it. If you bring a desire for order, structure, and normalcy, as society understands these, you may be disappointed. If you're looking for creativity, freedom of spirit, and openness to difference, change, and transformation, you'll find it, in vast and indeed bewildering variety. For some, it can be an experience of sensory overload -- even, perhaps, intimidation.

Yet the spirit of the Fairie Festival is a spirit of whimsy, play, and celebration of the mythic imagination. Fairies, sprites, and pixies, dryads and Green Men, brownies, gnomes, and elves, and maybe even a sleepy dragon are among the mythical creatures found represented there, by performers, presenters, and patrons alike. Fairie wings and pixie dust abound, along with Maypole dances, the throbbing rhythms of drums, the skirl of bagpipes, the haunting melodies of Celtic music, and the driving beat of world fusion.

Music and dancing is in many ways the heart of this embodiment of the Fairie Realms here on earth: a celebration of the growing light and warmth of spring, the re-emergence of the life of trees and flowers, plants and animals -- and the re-awakening of human beings, too, as we throw off our winter torpor and embrace the springtime pulses that flow in our veins. In the drums and penny-whistles, bagpipes, fiddles, and guitars, the human spirit soars and leaps with the spirit of the season.

Food and drink (of the non-alcoholic variety) abound as well, as do rows of booths where merchants sell their fairie-themed, and usually hand-made, wares. Whether your taste is for ceramics or leather goods, jewelry or wood-carving, decorative ironwork, textiles or other visual arts, you can find it among the stalls on Frodo's Hill, Glimmer Place, Rainbow Court, or elsewhere throughout this temporary fairie village.

The Fairie Festival is about more than merriment and mythical imagination, however, important though those are. It is also about reawakening a sense of wonder and appreciation towards nature. Fairies, after all, are generally conceived as spirits of nature, of the elements -- earth, air, fire and water -- and of the Earth herself. While evoking the "Otherworld" of the Fairie Realms, the Festival also seeks to evoke love, respect, and care for this world, in all its imperilled beauty and wonder.

A particular theme of the last few years has been zero-waste, and while that ideal has yet to be fully realized in practice, the Festival generates far less waste than any event of comparable size I've ever intended. In part this is because of a policy that requires food vendors to offer serving containers and flatware, even cups, made of recyclable paper or compostable corn, soy, and potato-derived materials. Nearly everything that could be waste is compostable, recyclable, or both.

"The fairie and May Day themes," the festival brochure continues, "go back to ancient times in almost all cultures, especially to the Celts of the British Isles who had a festival on the first day of May called Beltane. It was a time of great rejoicing at the return of the earth's abundance in spring and the impending bounty of summer. The Celts celebrated the spirits of nature by honoring not only the plants that they could see and smell but also the unseen beings of the fairie realms."

So, on the first weekend of May each year, do the thousands of people who pass the portals of Spoutwood Farm for this mythical, mystical rite of spring.

Mothers Day reflections

By the time you read this, it will be over: my first Mothers Day without my mother. As regular readers of this column will recall, my mom, Jean E. Harbold, died at the end of February this year, after a long and valiant fight against a range of increasingly debilitating ailments. To slightly paraphrase St. Paul, she fought the good fight, and she finished the race.

Since my father died in 1999, I am now, along with my brothers, an adult orphan. And since I do not have a wife or family of my own, and lived with my mother as her companion and caregiver in the final years of her life, the loss is particularly acute.

The combination of choosing to focus on good memories, and throwing myself wholesale into my work, has helped to blunt the pain to some degree, but it recurs at odd times. And of course, seeing the ads and cards and all the panoply of commercial and sentimental marketing of Mothers Day just makes me remember how much I wish I had my mother back to buy a card for, take out to dinner, hug, and tell her I love her.

I think it's wonderful to have a Mothers Day to remember our mothers once a year. But I am sometimes concerned that all too often, we take our mothers for granted the rest of the year. Remembering them becomes something to be fit in around the essentials of life, rather than being one of those essentials. And that's a shame. Mothers deserve better.

Although there are unfortunate exceptions, mothers, as a whole, are wonderful people who are often deeply under-appreciated for all the things they give their children. These gifts start with the gift of life itself, of course. Our mothers bore us for nine months before we ever came into the world, and -- again, in most cases -- were largely responsible for providing us with the sustenance, care, and nurturance we need to survive and thrive thereafter.

I was fortunate, I believe, that my own mother was a full-time, stay-at-home mom. But I am also in awe of the mothers who manage to raise balanced, well-rounded, productive children to adulthood while working, and sometimes without the aid of a husband and father.

Parents in general, but mothers in particular, typically make a huge number of sacrifices for the good of their children: sacrifices of time, energy, and money that often go unnoticed by their beneficiaries, especially during childhood. Later, perhaps, looking back, adult children may realize the scope of the gifts they have been given.

If we are fortunate, we may have the opportunity to pay some of that care back in the care we give to our aging mothers, "pay it forward" by following their examples in the care of our own children, if we have any, or more likely a combination of both. That, at least, is the way the world should work.

So if you are fortunate enough to have a mother, take some time to show her your gratitude for all she has done for you: not just on Mother's Day, but all year. Take the time to truly talk to her, listen to her memories, and tell her how much you care, how much you appreciate her sacrifices and generosity over the years. And if for some reason you don't have a good relationship with your mother, perhaps this is a good time to mend fences.

Above all, be grateful that you have a mother, however imperfect she may be, because the time will come when you do not. How sad if she were to die with things left unsaid, love unexpressed, between you!

And if, like me, you no longer have a mother living, take comfort in the knowledge that you are not alone. Sadly, burying one's parents is inevitable, unless one dies first. Recall the good times. Set aside any that may have been less good. Be grateful for all the gifts your mother gave you, over the years: not just or even primarily material things, but sayings, teachings, stories, hugs, shared memories. If, again like me, you believe that death is not the end, remember that there will be a meeting again.

And to all you moms out there, thank you for all you've done and continue to do for your children. May blessings of health, long life, and joy be yours.

No Child Left Inside

Okay, you know about “No Child Left Behind,” but do you know about “No Child Left Inside”? In case you've been sleepwalking through the last five or six years, No Child Left Behind is the propaganda… errr… umm… excuse me, public relations name given to the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (EASA), and was signed into law in 2002. It is controversial, and justly so, for subjecting students and teachers alike to a regimen of standardized tests in the name of “accountability.”

The No Child Left Inside Initiative is in some ways almost the polar opposite of ESEA. Signed into law on April 21st -- John Muir's birthday - by Washington state governor Christine Gregoire, the initiative will provide $1.5 million a year to outdoor education programs working with underserved youth in the state, according to a press release by the Children and Nature Network.

Nor is Washington the only such forward-looking state. New Mexico's legislature passed, in March, the Outdoor Classrooms Initiative, an effort to increase outdoor education in the state through the use of state parks, federal public lands, ranches, nature centers and other locations, again according to the C&NN (not to be confused with CNN, the cable news provider).

Martin LeBlanc, vice president of C&NN and national youth education director for the Sierra Club, was quoted as stating that “In pursuing a national Leave No Child Inside movement, our goal is to secure this level of support for all children in every state.” That is indeed a worthy goal. But it's sadly ironic that government support is needed to get children outside to play.

I clearly remember my own youth, in which “go outside and play” was a commonly-heard refrain, often coupled with “it's too nice a day to be indoors.” And go outside and play I did, often and for extended periods.

Either alone or with friends from the neighborhood, I built forts in the woods, climbed trees, explored (and splashed, and occasionally fell) in the streams, and created whole worlds of fantasy and imagination -- just the sort of self-directed, unstructured free play experts now hail as essential for psychological and emotional development in children, not to mention the development of an ecological consciousness.

Free play in the outdoors is the absolute antithesis of standardization and cramming for tests. Perhaps that's one of the reasons it may seem threatening to some educators, government officials, and even parents.

From “the land of the free and the home of the brave,” I am struck -- and not positively -- by the way in which 21st century Americans have become willing to let the government make their decisions for them, in effect almost live their lives for them, dictating everything from how subjects are taught in schools to what kinds of food we can and cannot eat.

The much-quoted ideal that “that government is best which governs least” seems to have been left lying wounded somewhere along the road to a plasticized, idealized, technotopian future.

One of the ways in which governments can provide a positive impetus, however, is in funding opportunities for children to get out into the wider world of nature and play. If the so-called “learning” and “educational” opportunities are not themselves too structured -- remember the wise dictum that “the work of children is play” -- these kinds of programs can provide a healthy (in every sense of the word) counterbalance to our increasingly inward-looking, indoor, virtual, and regimented future.

But come on, folks: we don't need to wait for the government to fund our children's play. In fact if we do, we're just buying into the system again. All we really need are parents willing to encourage, if not require, that their children get out from behind the PlayStation or X-Box, up from in front of the TV or DVD player or internet-enabled computer, and go outside to play.

Yes, it may require a bit more parental supervision. But then, any of the aforementioned indoor, technological activities really requires more supervision than it often receives. And anything worth doing requires making choices, and setting priorities.

What is your priority for your children? To be cogs in a well-oiled machine? Or to know and appreciate the beauty, grandeur, and awe-inspiring possibilities of the natural world within which we live? The choices we make, for ourselves and our children, have never been more important, for our future and theirs. Let's choose to leave no child inside.

Reflections on Virginia Tech tragedy

No one with an ounce of human decency could fail to be heartbroken at the tragic massacre on campus at Virginia Tech last week. A deeply disturbed, indeed deranged, student, a South Korean resident alien named Cho Seung-Hui, killed 32 students and professors before turning his gun on himself, making this the largest mass shooting in American history.

Students and professors alike demonstrated true courage and even heroism, blocking the murderer with closed doors, piled-up desks, and sometimes even their own bodies. The first victim was a freshman girl, the second her RA (Resident Assistant), who tried to come to her aid. A 76-year-old engineering professor and Holocaust survivor, Liviu Librescu, was killed holding his classroom door closed so that his students could escape.

In the midst of this tragedy and heroism, it is all the more saddening, although predictable, that elements of the gun-ban lobby, in the media and elsewhere, would try to use this horrific event to bolster their agenda. But then, many of the same people attempted to do the same thing after 9/11, in which no firearms were even used. Ideology bows to neither human tragedy nor reason, apparently.

Far from being a showpiece for what is euphemistically called gun "control," this incident clearly demonstrates the futility of expecting laws to stop criminals, who by their very nature transgress laws. Guns are banned on college and university campuses -- but that did not keep Cho from bringing his onto the campus at Virginia Tech. Granted, a person with his psychological profile ought to have been barred from purchasing a firearm. Somebody dropped the ball, somewhere.

Still, I recall thinking sadly, as I received news of this incident, "oh no, guns are prohibited on campus: those students were defenseless, no way to fight back." At least some VT students felt the same: one member of the campus shooting club, interviewed by ABC's Good Morning America, expressed frustration that if concealed carry of a handgun were allowed on campus, he or someone else might have been able to stop the shooter before he'd killed so many.

I am reminded of the woman, some years ago, who watched her mother gunned down in a fast-food restaurant, unable to intervene because she had left her handgun legally locked in her car in the parking lot. Or again, of the high school vice principal who retrieved his handgun from his car parked legally off-campus and was, in fact, able to subdue a shooter who was rampaging through his school.

In fact, as Gun Owners of America director Larry Pratt accurately points out, according to UPI, "all the school shootings that have ended abruptly in the last 10 years were stopped because a law-abiding citizen -- a potential victim -- had a gun." Yet the gun-ban crowd would like to further restrict legal access to firearms. This makes no sense at all.

I cannot emphasize this strongly enough: criminals may be crazed, they may be deranged, but they are not stupid. They are far more likely to pick "soft" targets, places where they know no one is going to be shooting back at them, for their rampages. Would not knowing whether a given victim or bystander would be able to return fire absolutely dissuade all violent crime, all the time? No, of course not. Would it help the situation? I believe it would, and there are statistics to back up this view: see John Lott, "More Guns, Less Crime."

More productive is trying to figure out why so many signals were missed in the case of Cho: an individual who had twice been accused of stalking, who had been examined and found to be mentally unstable, who had frightened classmates and professors alike with his graphically violent and twisted poetry and plays, who was so distant and sullen his tutor said that attempting to communicate with him "was almost like talking to a hole,” according to an AP report. Yet neither the university administration nor law enforcement authorities proved willing or able to step in and prevent the tragedy.

As a hunting safety instructor, and a certified range officer, I will proudly admit my bias: that ordinary, law-abiding citizens clearly have the Constitutional right, and ought to have the means, to protect themselves from deranged, murderous psychopaths like Cho. If this incident at Virginia Tech makes one thing clear, it is that citizens who count only on the authorities to protect them are in for a grievous, and perhaps lethal, disappointment.

Westminster City Council's "green" resolution falls short

A journey of a thousand miles, so goes the old saying, begins with a single step. However, I would add, someone who stops after that first step won't get far on the journey. The decision by the Westminster City Council to adopt a "Resolution on Climate Disrupting Pollution" may be viewed as an important first step in joining the battle against global climate change, but I hope it won't be the city of Westminister's last.

As a Times article on Monday, April 9th, pointed out, the Catoctin Chapter of the Sierra Club had asked the City Council to approve and sign the U.S. Mayor's Climate Protection Agreement. The agreement, already signed by some 400 municipalities nationwide, is a pledge to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 7 percent below 1990 levels by 2012: the goal set in the much-maligned Kyoto Protocol. This is admittedly a challenge, but hardly an un-reachable one, as the number of cities signed on attests. Seven Maryland cities, including Sykesville and Baltimore, have already signed.

Instead, the Mayor and Council of Westminster decided to adopt what councilman Gregory Pecoraro described as "sort of a homegrown version of how we want to approach this."

As a general rule, I am all for homegrown, local approaches. However, there are times when local authorities need to band together to deal with problems and issues which are beyond what any of them can solve on their own, when the need for unified action transcends the importance of local autonomy. The crisis we as humans face due to global warming is one of those. Furthermore, the U.S. Mayors Agreement is not something being forced on us from above; it is a voluntary union of equals to accomplish something in our common interest.

Encouragingly, the same edition of the Times reported the formation in Mount Airy of a new “green” organization dedicated to "raising awareness about global warming, rising energy costs and other environmental issues.” Sometimes citizens catch on quicker than their elected leaders.

And there's little excuse for ignorance or apathy. The scope and urgency of the problem has been clearly articulated and reinforced by a whole series of recent articles in the Times. On April 6th, an AP article headlined “Experts say natural wonders at risk from global warming” elucidated threats to “natural treasures” from Australia's Great Barrier Reef to the Amazon rainforests due to climate change. Some of the damage may already be irreversible.

An article on Easter Sunday focused on mountaineers and ice climbers worldwide who are firsthand witnesses to "vanishing glaciers, melting ice routes, crumbling rock formations, and flood-prone lakes" as a result of rising temperatures. A report from Bangkok, Thailand, on Wednesday the 11th stated that continued warming could result in food shortages for 130 million people across Asia by 2050 and cause potentially catastrophic problems in Africa. And we think we have immigration problems now.

Yet still some people refuse to either admit that there's a problem, or take ownership of humanity's part in it. It's easier to say, "oh, it's just natural fluctuations" -- despite indications that without human input, the earth would now be in a slight cool-down -- or complain that the costs would be prohibitive. Ironically, doing nothing will likely prove even more costly, in the long run.

The Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments is another group that gets it. According to a Capital News Service report, the Council passed a regional climate change initiative that will unite efforts to reduce greenhouse gasses in the National Capital Region. Maryland faces the largest impact from climate change in the region, according to the Council's Stuart Freudberg, due to the amount of Maryland's land adjoining the Chesapeake Bay.

So again, it is a good and important first step that Westminster's Mayor and City Council have passed a resolution to "work diligently to identify and implement such environmentally responsible practices as may be practical… with the goal of conserving energy and reducing the amount of global warming pollutants generated by City operations." But the Devil is in the details, and this provides few of them. In fact, "practical” provides copious wiggle room.

I hope -- and would strongly urge -- that the Council adopt the higher levels of focus, commitment, and accountability represented by the U.S. Mayors Protection Agreement. Doing so would not only provide specific goals and assistance in achieving them, but would send a signal that Westminster is proactive, forward-looking, and committed in facing one of the greatest challenges of the new century.

The greening of Maryland

Spring is the season of green growing things. And this year, in Maryland, spring seems also to be the season for growing "green" initiatives.

Even as the earth greens up with the coming of spring, so the State House in Annapolis is "greening up" with the combination of an ecologically-friendly Governor with an ecologically-friendly General Assembly. As a recent front-page article in the Washington Post put it, in Maryland this year "it's suddenly very, very easy being green." For those of us who love the earth and care about its welfare, that is good news indeed.

The article delineates a string of eco-friendly initiatives either passed by the Assembly or proposed by the current Governor, former Baltimore mayor Martin O'Malley. Former Governor Bob Ehrlich was more of a conservationist than he often got credit for, but certainly the election of a new governor is a contributor to this greening of the Maryland legislative process. So is the election of Attorney General Doug Gansler, who campaigned heavily on green issues. But, the article points out, there are other factors involved which transcend partisan politics.

One is concern over global warming, popularized by former Vice-President Al Gore's award-winning documentary "An Inconvenient Truth." Inconvenient or not, the idea that not only is the earth warming, but that human activity contributes dramatically to that warming, has captured the imagination and awakened the concern of many in state government and the electorate alike.

The article notes that the Global Warming Solutions bill, which would reduce Maryland's emissions of greenhouse gases by 2020, has been criticized by the Chamber of Commerce, "which says Maryland businesses shouldn't bear the burden for a global problem." The problem with that idea is that if everyone says they shouldn't have to bear the burden, no one ends up bearing the burden. Global warming is a common problem, it was created collectively, and it needs everyone working together toward a solution.

Closer to home, the deadline for cleanup of the Chesapeake Bay has been set for 2010, a goal which now appears impossible to meet. But the looming nature of that deadline has increased both awareness and urgency to do something about the Bay, and to do it sooner rather than later.

One important feature of this move is a new alliance between environmentalists, such as the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, and those traditionally seen as opponents of environmental clean-up, such as farmers and watermen. It is not quite correct that, as the article states, "environmentalists decided that cow manure, as bad as it is, is better than the oil, metals, fertilzer, and sewage that flow downstream after a farm becomes a suburb." While true, this statement doesn't tell the whole story.

I wrote an article on this subject for a magazine called Edible Chesapeake, and the reality is that most farmers are genuinely concerned about the land, and will do all they can to enact conservation measures -- as long as they can pay for them without cutting even further into their already tenuous bottom line. The external pressures on farmers -- low commodity prices, foreign competition, pressure from developers -- make it hard enough to keep on farming, and conservation measures only add to the cost. Since the public is largely responsible for these challenges, it makes sense for the public to help farmers meet them.

The new alliance between farmers, watermen, and environmentalists to clean up the Bay points to the biggest reality of the expanding green movement: common problems require common solutions. We all drink the water, we all breathe the air, we all rely on food from the earth. It will take all of us, working together, to make a dent in the host of significant environmental challenges we face in the 21st century.

If we can rise to these challenges with the same level of ingenuity, innovation, and determination we brought to facing the political and military challenges of the 20th century, we could be in the beginning years of a century filled with promise and accomplishment. If we fail, we'll have a rough row to hoe, moving into the third millennium. The choice is ours - but Maryland, it seems, is off to a good start. Let's keep up the momentum.

"War to end all wars" still resonates

"Over there! Over there! Send the word, send the word, over there! That the Yanks are coming, the Yanks are coming, the drums rum-tumming everywhere -- over there!"

Corny, perhaps, to our jaded modern ears, but those were stirring words to the people of both America and Europe in 1917, when the American Expeditionary Force under General "Black Jack" Pershing landed in France. Brought willy-nilly into World War One by the sinking of the Lusitania by a German U-boat, the United States for the first time intervened in a European conflict.

The isolationism which had sidelined us during the first three years of the war had been overwhelmed by the deaths of American at the hands -- or torpedoes -- of the villainous "Huns." In the wash of patriotism that followed, our intervention was seen as a direct repayment for French assistance in winning our own independence from Britain, less than a century and a half earlier. As General Pershing stepped ashore and saluted the French Field Marshall who greeted him, his words were, "Lafayette, we have returned!"

My paternal grandfather was among those Yanks, the famous "Doughboys" with their khaki uniforms and flat helmets, who fought Kaiser Wilhelm's troops to a standstill and then slowly but steadily pushed back their line until the Armistice on November 11, 1918. Like many, he did not escape unscathed: a mortar shell, exploding near him, broke his leg in fourteen places and flung it up over his shoulder.

Amazingly for the time period, he did not lose the leg, although it healed an inch-and-a-half shorter than the other one. My father tells that, as he grew older and taller, he'd tease his father that he was getting taller than he was. In response, "Pop" Harbold would rock up onto his longer leg, fix his son with a mock glare, and growl, "Not yet, you're not."

What has put me in mind of "the Great War," as it was called -- the "war to end all wars," that signally failed in that ambition? The fact that this Friday, April 6, marks the 90th anniversary of our entry into that war. An article in USA Today, entitled "One of the last: WWI vet recalls the Great War," profiles Frank Buckles, now the ripe old age of 106. He is one of only four surviving members of the 4,734,991 Americans that served in World War One: less than one in a million now surviving.

The articles points out that that although the days of trench warfare and biplane dogfights are long gone, "the first industrialized war set the stage for all that came after. It marked the emergence of the United States as a superpower." Furthermore, the article states, the war in Iraq, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, ethnic cleansing, weapons of mass destruction -- the terrible chemical weapons that killed or maimed so many during WWI -- as well as globalization, U.S. foreign policy, and even women's rights and controversy over the treatment of surviving veterans, all have roots in World War I.

"If you want to understand the world of today," the article quotes Harvard historian Niall Ferguson, "you need to go all the way back to 1914." Yet World War One is largely a forgotten war, today. Veterans of World War Two, including my father, have justly received accolades as member of "the Greatest Generation," that stood against first Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, then fought the long Cold War against the Soviets. Even the veterans of Korea have received recognition.

Ironically, however, echoes of the now little-known WWI continue to resonate in today's world. While the conclusion of World War Two eventually knit the continent of Europe together, and made Japan a staunch ally, the victorious Allies in the First World War not only humiliated Germany into spawning the Nazis, but carved up the former Ottoman Empire into arbitrary nation-states which Yale historian Jay Winter is quoted as saying were "usually made in an afternoon after tea without much thought to ethnic balance or viability of these countries."

These capricious borders, as the article points out, remain to this day, and control the lives of Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds in Iraq, and rival ethnic groups in Lebanon. The establishment of Israel can also be linked to the post-WWI Balfour Declaration. "Most of our headaches in the Middle East today are a hangover from the great military binge of 1914-18," notes Ferguson.

An ironic legacy indeed, for the war to end all wars.


Note: A reader wrote to me, after this was published, stating that

"I can find no reference to Gen. Pershing saying, "Lafayette, we have returned." I can find reference to, "Lafayette, we are here," being said at the grave of Marquis Lafayette."

He did not indicate who said it. I accept the correction as given, since I was operating from memory in that instance (not personal memory, of course, memory of something I'd read). The point remains the same, in either case.

Pause to welcome the coming of Spring

Winter was late in arriving this year, but it made up for its tardiness by lingering longer than is often the case. Most conspicuously, it made a liar out of famed groundhog prognosticator Punxatawney Phil, who allegedly failed to see his shadow on February 2nd, thus ensuring an early spring. As the saying goes... "Not!"

But now at last it seems that spring is finally in the air. That air seems softer, moister, and is graced with the song of birds: both the winter birds that have weathered the cold and storms with us, such as the cardinals, chickadees, and downy woodpeckers, and the newer arrivals, such as American robins, who have returned from wherever they take shelter from winter's cold.

It used to be said that robins migrated south, to return again in the spring; more recently, studies have revealed that our local robins, at least, often seek shelter in wetland thickets, where decaying marsh vegetation moderates the ambient temperature, and clumps of brush break the wind. Another good reason these wetlands should be preserved.

Other migrants are on the move, too: although many of the geese we see in this area are residents, meandering from pond to lake to farm field, also visible -- or audible -- are high-flying V's of migratory geese. The great conservationist Aldo Leopold considered these the surest sign of spring, writing, in A Sand County Almanac:

"One swallow does not make a summer, but one skein of geese, cleaving the murk of a March thaw, is the spring. A cardinal, whistling spring to a thaw but later finding himself mistaken, can retrieve his error by resuming his winter silence… But a migrating goose, staking two hundred miles of black night on the chance of finding a hole in the lake, has no easy chance for retreat. His arrival carries the conviction of a prophet who has burned his bridges."

"A March morning," he asserts, "is only as drab as he who walks in it without a glance skyward, ear cocked for geese. I once knew an educated lady, banded by Phi Beta Kappa, who told me that she had never heard or seen the geese that twice a year proclaim the revolving seasons to her well-insulated roof. Is education," asked the man known to his loyal graduate students as "The Professor," "possibly a process of trading awareness for something of lesser worth?"

That question resounds through the decades since it was penned, and may well prove fodder for another column. But for now, it is enough to fling open the windows, step out through the door, and open our awareness to the changing season: winter into spring, the wheel of the year turning from the season of darkness, rest, inwardness, and even, yes, death and decay, toward the season of unfolding, opening, blossoming, growth -- rebirth and burgeoning life.

For all our scientific knowledge, the process by which a bulb sends out a shoot that pushes through the earth to become a crocus, daffodil, or tulip, a tree-bud contains the complete essence of the coming season's growth of branch, leaf, and flower, or a seed unfolds to become an herbaceous plant, shrub, or tree, is still something which smacks of mystery and wonder.

Just as mysterious and wonderful are the guidance systems that steer flocks of neo-tropical migrants, our beloved summer songbirds, from their winter haunts in Central and South America to grace our woods and fields, our backyards and even city parks. They are already beginning their journey, and the next month or two will see a veritable explosion of color and birdsong.

The end of winter and the coming of spring may not have quite the impact on us climate-controlled and industrially-fed urbanites and suburbanites that it did on earlier agriculturalists, nomadic herders, or hunter-gatherers. But the tides of spring still flow in all of our blood, if we could but shut off the flood of external stimuli -- traffic, radio, TV, CDs and DVDs, and the internet, among other sources -- that constantly bombard us, quiet the racing of our minds, and open our windows and our senses to the turn of the seasons.

No matter the stresses and pressures of our workaday lives, let's each take a moment, sometime this week, to go outside, stand quietly on the good earth, close our eyes, open our ears and nostrils, and breathe deeply of the essence of spring. I don't doubt that we'll be the better for it.

A frog in troubling waters

It has been said that those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. I agree with that assessment. A historical education allows one to detect patterns that are difficult or impossible to discern without that perspective. One of those is the effect of outside dangers and threats, real or imagined, on the development of government, and the transmutation of free societies into authoritarian ones.

This pattern can be detected as far back as ancient Sumeria, where the peaceful, pastoral rule of the archetypal shepherd-king, Dumuzi, gave way to the iron-fisted, brutal rule of the archetypal conqueror and law-giver, Gilgamesh. Similarly, outside threats led to the rise of the first kings in ancient Greece. Invasions or threats of invasions from the Celts, among others, brought ancient Rome from a Republic, to a Dictatorship, to an Empire, as a fearful people willingly agreed to their own subjugation by demagogues who claimed to be able to protect them.

In more recent years, trumped-up threats of attack by Communists and others led to the overthrow of the democratic Weimar Republic in Germany by Adolf Hitler and his Nazi henchmen. The pattern is clear: fear, whether justified or not, leads to autocracy and loss of freedom, freedom which is regained -- if at all -- only with great cost and difficulty.

In the United States, however, we have the example of Benjamin Franklin, widely credited with asserting that those who are willing to give up their freedom for a little security deserve neither freedom nor security. Other Founders expressed similar views. Is the United States in danger of becoming another Weimar Republic, rather than the free Republic of our Founders' vision? The signs are troubling.

A recent Justice Department audit recently revealed that the FBI systematically abused its powers to secretly obtain information on American citizens, ostensibly in the name of the war on terrorism. Eight federal prosecutors have been fired, apparently for resisting political pressure on their investigations. A new Homeland Security program called ADVISE will mine already collected data to gather still more information on U.S. citizens.

That's in addition to the sweeping provisions of the inaptly named USA Patriot Act, and various surveillance programs against American citizens, including electronic eavesdropping by the NSA. Some of these have supposedly been shut down or limited under Congressional oversight. But how limited? We don't really know. That information is secret. We're expected to trust the government, and accept their word on it.

Then there's the “Real ID” program, aimed at creating a de facto national identity card, beloved of all authoritarian states. "Papers, please!" used to be a cliche in old war movies. Now it may become a fact of our national life. Although not part of the current plan, modern technology would make it feasible to include a microchip allowing individual persons to be tracked by satellite.

Satellite tracking and GPS location are already part of the National Animal Identification System, which in the name of food security would effectively abolish private ownership of food animals, making all livestock part of a closely-monitored “national herd.” Recent E. coli scares have raised the spectre of similar federal control over vegetable production, too. And whoever controls the food, controls the populace.

More locally, there is the ever-growing number of red-light cameras, now reportedly to be joined by speed-enforcement cameras. Whatever happened to the old dictum that “only in a police state is the job of the police easy”?

For that matter, how often are books like Animal Farm, 1984, and Brave New World taught in schools, these days? I hope they are, but you don't hear too much about them. Most of what you hear is emphasis on math and science over history and the humanities, and standardized tests that emphasize recalling pieces of data over detailed analysis and thoughtful reflection. Hmmm, you don't suppose that's part of the pattern, too?

It is said that a frog who jumps into boiling water will immediately jump back out again, but a frog swimming in water which is gradually increasing in temperature will stay there until it is too late to avoid being cooked. I worry for our country, and the people of our country, lest we are becoming too much like that frog.

A recent Times editorial suggested that “a majority of Americans are opening their eyes and seeing how they have been duped.” I sincerely hope that's the case, and that we will, as that editorial suggested, “return to the day when America was truly the home of the free.” The alternative is deeply troubling.

Unintended consequences haunt U.S. actions

Okay, I admit it. I was wrong.

In the days leading up to the Iraq invasion, I questioned the so-called "Bush Doctrine" of pre-emptive war, on the grounds that it would lead dozens of other countries around the world to preemptively invade their neighbors on a variety of flimsy pretexts. After all, if the great United States thinks it's morally justified to invade because it thinks someone might attack it, why shouldn't others?

This, however, did not happen. Unfortunately, however, what did happen, which I utterly failed to predict, is even worse. Countries around the world started making decisions, and conducting actions, out of fear that we might attack them preemptively.

Iran has been the loudest and most belligerent of those, but North Korea's efforts have been the most successful (read: frightening). Kim Jong Il's autocratic but impoverished family fiefdom has managed to "go nuclear," at least in a minor but worrying way. It has also done pretty well about developing long-range missiles that could, if they get the bugs ironed out, carry a North Korean nuclear warhead all the way to the West Coast of the United States.

Kim is a nut-case, granted. But his histrionic avowals that his nuclear program is only defensive in nature, to avert a U.S. attack, don't ring as hollow as they should, taken in the context of Iraq. Ditto Iran, and its pursuit of a "peaceful" nuclear program. Ditto Syria. Ditto, probably, half-a-dozen other countries that may be surreptitiously trying to create or acquire nukes: the fact that we attacked Iraq, which didn't have nuclear weapons, and did not attack North Korea, which does, is not lost on despotic regimes worldwide.

Most concerning of all has been the reaction of Russia. A few weeks ago, the general commanding Russia's strategic missile forces warned that Poland and the Czech Republic could be targeted by Russian missiles if they agreed to host U.S. anti-missile defenses, according to an AP report. This, despite U.S. insistence that the defenses are aimed at a missile attack from the Mideast, not Russia -- a claim bolstered by the small size of the defense, which Russia could overcome with ease.

It might be tempting to dismiss these threats as the blusterings of a bellicose, vodka-swilling bullyboy (take a look at a picture of General Solovtsov, and you'll see what I mean), were it not for the words of his suave, sophisticated, and coldly dangerous boss not long before.

Vladimir Putin is a shining example of the fact that you can take the man out of the KGB, but you can't take the KBG out of the man. He has the background of a Soviet-era secret police boss, which he was, and the instincts of a Russian tsar, which he appears to be headed toward becoming.

On February 10th, again according to AP reports, Putin accused the U.S. of "almost uncontained hyper use of force in international relations," and stated that "one state, the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way," and that this was forcing countries opposed to the U.S. to build up their nuclear arsenals, fomenting a new arms race.

Now, one can observe that the Kremlin complaining of American use of force in international relations and overstepping our national borders is a decided case of the pot calling the kettle black. But that does not mean that Putin is entirely wrong, particularly when he notes that "unilateral, illegitimate actions have not solved a single problem, they have become a hotbed of further conflicts."

One can quibble over the use of the word "illegitimate." But it is plain that our post-9/11 tendency to go it alone, or with a shaky coalition of the not-entirely-willing, to believe that preemption is an appropriate response to potential threats, to attempt to solve political and social problems with military force, and to believe that 9/11 gave America the moral right to do basically whatever we felt like in the world, has not only failed to achieve the desired ends, but has destabilized the balance of power both in the Middle East, and in the world as a whole.

We can only hope that the next president, of whichever party, proves more willing to engage in multi-lateral negotiations to resolve problems and threats diplomatically, preserving the option to use force as a last resort, not a first choice -- and that the world situation does not worsen too much in the interim.

Living life in the "ready room"

On U.S. aircraft carriers during World War Two, fighter pilots who were on duty but not actually in the air waited in “ready rooms” until the time they were called to launch themselves into action. By all reports, the atmosphere in these rooms was a mixture of boredom, tension, nervous anticipation, memories of past actions, and fears and concerns about future ones. The pilots typically put on a brave, even blasé, front, but undoubtedly fooled no one, not even themselves.

As my mother's health problems have advanced over the last year-and-a-half or more, both the number and variety of her ailments and the number and variety of her hospitalizations increasing all the time, I have been experiencing my own version of what I've come to recognize as “ready room syndrome.” Nervousness, tension, fearful anticipation of the next incident, and a mix of unpleasant memories and worries about the future have become a part of my day-to-day life.

I am not complaining when I say this, I am merely noting the fact. My mother has always been my best friend and confidant. After the loss of my father back in 1999 in an accident that left her injured, and perhaps jump-started the series of health problems that led to her current situation, I have felt ever more responsible for her, and protective of her.

My brothers, both of whom live reasonably close, and their families have helped, of course, and I am deeply grateful for their efforts. Without them, the situation as a whole, and my stress level, would be vastly worse than it is now. However, they have families of their own, and so their efforts, energies, and attentions have necessarily and rightly been divided.

Since I am currently single, and have furthermore been living in the home I've shared with my mother (and my father, while he was still alive) since 1989, Ma has been the major focus of my life since her health started to decline. Again, this is not a complaint, merely a statement of fact: I love my mother, I am deeply grateful for all she has done for me throughout my life, and I consider it a privilege to return some of the love and care she lavished on me when I was growing up. To slightly modify the familiar saying, “she's not heavy, she's my mother.”

Nonetheless, I cannot deny that it has been a strain at times, especially recently, as her overall health has declined still further. I have spent ever more time, it seems, in the ready room, less time below-decks in the crew quarters or wardroom.

Recently it has come to me that I need to be much more intentional about practicing what is known as “self-care.” This is not selfishness, it is an awareness that if I am constantly stressed out -- and thus run down -- not only can I not function as well in other necessary areas of life, of which there are many, but I am also not in condition to provide the best possible support to Ma when she does need me.

Unfortunately this is easier said than done. It is hard to get out of that ready room mentality, to force oneself to relax -- a seeming contradiction. It is essential, though. And so I am trying hard to practice better self-care: to eat fewer meals out, get less carry-out, and cook more at home; to get in bed earlier, rather than stay awake until exhaustion overtakes nervous tension and forces me to bed, and even to find or make time for an occasional nap; to practice spiritual disciplines that are relaxing and centering; to take time to spend time with friends.

Has it helped? A little. You can't undo patterns of 18 months duration or more in a few days or even a few weeks of trying. But I'm making progress. That's the important thing. And so I want to encourage other caregivers who may be in similar situations to do the same: it's easy, I've found, all too easy to let the cares and strains of caregiving interfere with other aspects of life.

It's important to eat right, sleep enough, exercise and/or spend time outside in nature, where the largeness of the natural world helps put our human issues in perspective, pray or meditate, and as the saying goes, “let go and let God.” It's not easy, but it's essential. You can't spend your whole life in the ready room.

Giving up consumerism for lent (Column)

Tomorrow is Ash Wednesday, the first day of the Christian penitential season of Lent, as observed by Roman Catholics, Anglicans, and even many Protestants, although our Eastern Orthodox brothers and sisters began their Lent yesterday. For Western Christians, today is Shrove Tuesday, the past tense of a somewhat archaic English word ("shrive," past perfect "shriven") meaning to have confessed and been forgiven one's sins.

The forty days of Lent are traditionally a time of fasting -- abstaining from food, especially rich foods -- in penitence for one's past sins, for the grace to amend one's life, and in memory of the forty days Christ fasted in the wilderness. Therefore today is also sometimes called "Pancake Day" or "Doughnut Day," for the same reason that the French (including the Cajun French of Louisiana) call it Mardi Gras, literally "Fat Tuesday": making doughnuts or pancakes is a good way to use up all the fats and oils in the house, before the Lenten fast begins.

If you see a friend or neighbor with what looks like a smudge of dirt on their forehead tomorrow, Ash Wednesday, it is the mark of ashes, imposed by a priest or pastor in order that the recipient may "remember that thou art dust, and unto dust thou shalt return." It is a sober, and indeed salutary, reminder of our own mortality, and the fact that we don't have an unlimited amount of time to get our lives in order.

Traditionally, Lent has been largely about individual sins, whether of commission or of omission: "We have left undone those things that we ought to have done; and we have done those things that we ought not to have done, and there is no health in us," in the words of the traditional Anglican prayer of confession. But individual sins often manifest in ways that affect other people, or even the larger world, and it's to some of those that I'd like to direct our attention as we -- whether Christian or otherwise -- move into the season of Lent, the season of repentance.

To repent of something one has done is not just a matter of feeling sorry about it. It means to literally turn back or turn around, and proceed in a more positive direction. So you may consider this, if you like, a call to both individual and collective repentance.

I would like to call us, first of all, to repent of our pattern of consumerism, of conspicuous consumption, which the Christian tradition has historically named as "greed." Despite notable exceptions, many of us have internalized, to one degree or another, the absurd notion that "whoever dies with the most toys wins," a recipe for social inequity and environmental catastrophe. Consumerism is a good word for this, as we are consuming the world's resources -- many of them, like fossil fuels, irreplaceable in any kind of human timescale -- at a frightening rate.

Closely allied to this, and equally needful of repentance, is the arrogance of power which allows us to carelessly or callously exploit both other people and natural resources in our "climb to the top," whatever we consider the "top" to be. Striving is not a bad thing, nor is achievement. But they become damaging and hurtful when we pursue them to the extent that we forget to love our neighbors as ourselves, or to practice responsible stewardship of this Earth, our home.

Finally, I want to call us to repent of over-emphasizing those elements in our spiritual traditions which direct our attention primarily, even solely, to the next world, to the exclusion and even detriment of this one.

Expectation of a continued spiritual existence in a world to come, a belief common to most religions, can empower us to live more fully and hopefully in this one. But an excessive emphasis on our heavenly home which allows us to devalue, degrade, and damage our present, earthly one is, I believe, wrong-headed, dangerous, and even sinful. Just as Jesus said you cannot love God and hate your neighbor, so you cannot rightfully claim to love the Creator while doing violence to the creation.

And so, on this Shrove Tuesday, as you eat your pancakes or doughnuts and ponder how to observe the Lenten fast, I hope that you'll consider emphasizing simplicity over consumerism, humility over prideful ambition, and care for the good earth God has given us over an obsessive concern for the world to come. These thoughts in mind, I wish you a holy Lent.