Agriculture has a well known liberal bias

Take a look at this map, and notice how the climate zones have changed over the last 17 years. For those concerned with gardening, landscaping, and agriculture, it’s pretty obvious that areas that were once too cold for certain kinds of plants are suddenly warm enough to find themselves in an entirely new zone. Warmer weather plants that were limited to southern climate zones can now grow in climate zones further north.

From a natural point of view, this points to an ongoing problem of climate change, but from a political point of view, it’s worth noting that the U.S. Department of Agriculture has been working on updating its climate map for nearly four years, but hasn’t produced a finished product. (Thanks to reader B.M. for the tip.)

A warming climate has required a new look at what plants and trees can be grown in what parts of the country, according to the National Arbor Day Foundation. The nonprofit tree-advocacy group has put together its own version of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s “hardiness-zone” map….

The foundation created the revised map after its members kept asking about an update and providing feedback about species that were thriving in areas contrary to the USDA zones, he said. The problem with the USDA map is that it uses 1990 information, [Woody Nelson, spokesman for the National Arbor Day Foundation] said. “The climate has gotten so much warmer since then,” he said. “Our understanding is that the USDA has been working on an update for years, beginning back in 2003.

“They never get around to announcing when they’ll get it done. In the meantime, millions of people want to plant trees and gardens, and we just wanted to get on with it.”

Both maps are based on National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration climate data, but the foundation uses the more recent information. That makes a difference, because the 10 warmest years on record — records that officials began keeping about 1880 — were logged during the last 15 years, according to NOAA. Last year is in the No. 1 slot as the warmest.

The USDA, which started working on a new map in 2003, said an update should probably be available in the “near future.” One hates to be cynical, but do you suppose the Agriculture Department doesn’t want to help highlight global warming trends and their impact on U.S. climates? Just throwing that out there as a possibility.

Reader B.M. has already crafted an administration response: “You can’t trust plants. Agriculture has a well known liberal bias.”

There’s a cool animation on the same site that lets you see the colder zones creeping northward.

  • Agriculture has a well know liberal bias
    .
    C’est vrai.

    Ever read The Grapes of Wrath?

    The TV news in my area has been whining about the biting cold we’ve been experiencing recently- only thing is, this kind of weather would have been normal throughout the winter when I was 10 or 11, even throughout November. Now, this year it’s the first real cold we’ve gotten, with the exception of a few cold days earlier on. There was unseasonable warmth in December.

  • Moments of wishful thinking in the Bush administration:
    – If we wish hard enough, we’ll win the war in Iraq.
    – If we wish long enough, tax cuts will pay for themselves.
    – If we wish ignorantly enough, the deficit will go away without any sacrifice.
    – If we wish decidely enough, Repubs will always defeat Dems for ever and ever.
    – If we wish faithfully enough, checks from James Dobson will keep rolling in.
    – If we wish charismatically enough, George W. Bush wil be the greatest president ever.
    – if we wish with cool heads, global warming will go away.

    Is it any cooler yet?

  • [Woody Nelson, spokesman for the National Arbor Day Foundation]

    Really?!? The spokesman for the National Arrbor Day Foundation is named Woody! You just can’t make something like that up;>

  • Wow, so pretty soon when we’re watching Hollywood movies set in the North East and we see palm trees in the background, we won’t treat these as gross continuity errors.

  • Good call, CB—I missed the mail-truck today, and was going to get the seed order out on Monday.

    It’s strange weather here—5 degrees Thursday morning; 37 right now. It was only supposed to go to 27 today….

  • Check out the website of the Office of the New Jersey State Climatologist and you’ll find data here. According to this, during the first 10 years of my life- 1979 and so on- the average monthly temperature for New Jersey in November was 43.32 degrees F. For the past 10 years, it’s been 44.8. And I’ve definitely noticed a decrease in winter precipitation (= less fun), with the exception of some outlier years (one of them was probably ’94 or ’95, actually- in other words, more than 10 years ago). And that’s just November.

  • The matter of hardines/climate zones works in the opposite direction, too. I.e. some plants which couldn’t have been grown here, in VA, 20yrs ago (because it was too cold) now thrive. But some others, which used to do well, now won’t; they need at least 4-6 weeks of winter “break” and they’re not getting it.

  • I just sent the URL for that outstanding map out to my extended family, most of whom have become conservatives but are also gardeners. I’m curious to see how they’ll handle this: keep the GOP faith or cave in to the evidence of their own lying eyes. I think I already know the answer.

  • What information is the USDA willing to dole out? The USDA web site has PDFs of publications, some of which examine climate change and agriculture. A featured reference, >Agricultural Adaption to Climate Change: Issues of Longrun Sustainability

  • That was produced in 1996 (I am sure you can count, but that was 11 years ago, folks! Do you think they have had any new thoughts since then?). The chapter on farm-level responses to climate change states that: “Agricultural adaptation at the farm level depends on … the ability of the farmer to detect climate change and undertake any necessary actions.” So, at least for this past decade, it seems the farmers should have just figured it out, no? The USDA is a government department, but at least they were acknowledging “climate change” way back in the 20th century. We must also keep in mind that they are witness to the impact of climate change not only on crop farming – they also conduct research on irrigation, pest movement and have data on grasslands and forests. So what is keeping them sitting on their updated figures, maps and research? What kind of lobbying and PR has left the Department of Agriculture circulating climate change resources the public library considers too out-of-date to circulate?

  • In the face of overwhelming evidence, it is prudent to simply ignore it.

    If questioned, deny it (see VP Dick Cheney).

  • Comments are closed.