[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[OL-Forum] Digest Number 856



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading! Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Lj3uPC/Me7FAA/ySSFAA/mcTolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

OutdoorLighting-Forum - "The largest uncensored and most active forum on light pollution." 
  
Inbox out of reach? Choose "no email" at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OutdoorLighting-Forum/join?referer=1
and view posts in the archives, http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OutdoorLighting-Forum/messages - only on OLF. 
To join: OutdoorLighting-Forum-subscribe@yahoogroups... 
Unsubscribe from any Yahoo list: listname-unsubscribe@yahoogroups...
==============================================================================
No endorsement of content posted to OLF by any organization is implied.
==============================================================================
------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are 5 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

      1. Moonlight and beetles
           From: "John M. McMahon" <mcmahon@mail....edu>
      2. Great American Shootout?
           From: "Roger L. Hammer" <hamme1rl@cmich...>
      3. Re: Mandating "level"
           From: "David M. Keith" <david.keith@mindspring...>
      4. Re: Mandating "level"
           From: patric@ghostriders...
      5. A Statement on IDA's Mission and Philosophy (fwd)
           From: kgfleming@att...


________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 1
   Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 09:17:24 -0400
   From: "John M. McMahon" <mcmahon@mail....edu>
Subject: Moonlight and beetles

"Dung Beetles Navigate by the Moon, Study Says"

Excerpts:

"Out on the African savanna, a fresh and moist pile of
fine-grained antelope dung is a nutritious treasure
aggressively fought over by a melee of critters. The spoils
go to those with the craftiest strategies to snatch and
stash a  piece of the pie. To gain an edge in this battle
for the poop, the African dung beetle Scarabaeus zambesianus
orients itself by the polarized light pattern cast by the
moon to make a straight, nighttime escape with its morsel,
according to Marie Dacke, a biologist at the University of
Lund in Sweden."

[snip]

"To find out if the beetles are able to use the polarized
light of the moon to navigate,  Dacke and her colleagues
observed the beetles under the night sky. On nights when
there was a moon, the beetles continued to forage and roll
their dung balls in a straight line. On moonless or cloudy
nights the beetles could not maintain a straight path. 

To determine if this continued ability to forage after
astronomical twilight is a result of the polarization of
moonlight or of the moon itself, the researchers placed a
polarizing light filter over a ball-rolling beetle feeding
inside a ten-foot (three-meter) diameter arena. 

When the researchers changed the pattern of polarized
moonlight by 90 degrees, the beetles changed course by 90
degrees. The results indicate that indeed the beetles are
using the polarized light of the moon to navigate, which
extends their foraging time."  

Full story:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/07/0702_030702_dungbeetle.html

John McMahon


________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 2
   Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 09:54:09 -0400
   From: "Roger L. Hammer" <hamme1rl@cmich...>
Subject: Great American Shootout?

I really appreciated the David Orr excerpts posted by John. Although I
believe we are making progress, I don't think we have yet turned the corner
and are now installing more good lights than bad.  I believe history in
democratic societies has shown that the fastest, perhaps most effective way
to force change past those "for whom the economy is far more important than
the
environment", is civil disobedience.  Although I don't support violence or
terrorism in any form, I do wonder what would happen if the radical
EarthFirst group sponsored a nationwide "Great American Shootout Week" of
offending light fixtures to accompany the "Dark-Sky Week" sponsored by IDA?

>We bent over
> backward to accommodate the style and intellectual
> predilections of self-described 'conservatives' and those
> for whom the economy is far more important than the
> environment, in the belief that politeness and good evidence
> stated in their terms would win the day. Accordingly, we put
> the case for the earth and coming generations in the
> language of economics, science, and law. With remarkably few
> exceptions we have been reasonable, erudite, clever,
> cautiously informative, and -- relative to the magnitude of
> the challenges before us -- ineffective.







________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 3
   Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:33:12 -0600
   From: "David M. Keith" <david.keith@mindspring...>
Subject: Re: Mandating "level"

> .. disable the light if the angle were not
> within 1deg of level. Then you have no choice but the install it
> correctly.

This presupposes that level is the proper installation - which it is
mostly - but NOT ALWAYS!

Of course with such a switch everyone would be required to do it one way
regardless of if that were the desired (for example "least trespass" or
"most dark-sky friendly") condition e.g. a moderately sloped parking lot
with a residence at the low end.

Rigid rules and limits create their own problems - known as "unintended
consequences" and as universal as Murphy's Law. This of course does not keep
folks who "know better" from trying to force everyone to do the "sometimes
wrong" thing all the time.

David Keith

Remember - only you can prevent stupidity!




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 4
   Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 12:47:49 -0700
   From: patric@ghostriders...
Subject: Re: Mandating "level"

David M. Keith wrote:
 > This presupposes that level is the proper installation - which it is
 > mostly - but NOT ALWAYS!


I would hope that any ordinance worth it's salt would set it's goals on 
performance outcome, rather than blind adherence to a specific technique 
or piece of hardware regardless of the outcome (and yes, I understand 
Davids point about the need to look at the "system" and not focus solely 
on a component).

There's going to be ample instances where installation of a stock, 
flat-lens Full Cutoff Optic wont meet goals of trespass or glare 
abatement without some tweaking, or careful modification of a fixture 
with different optics (and a law that just says "FCO or no" will have 
disappointing results).

What an "operates at level only" shielded fixture might accomplish would 
be more along the lines of preventing someone from, say, mounting a 
GlareBuster at 90 degrees and then claiming it's crap (or that the mere 
use of a FCO satisfies the law so a blinded neighbor next door cant 
complain).

Also, the proliferation of such leveling interlocks might help to modify 
the habits of consumer-installers, electricians and maybe an architect 
or two, by not allowing a bad installation of what could be a good 
fixture.

Also, such an interlocked fixture might end up someday being legally 
easier to install if a foolproof design were not subject to permit and 
inspection processes that floodlights eventually should face.
Patric.



________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 5
   Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 19:57:17 +0000
   From: kgfleming@att...
Subject: A Statement on IDA's Mission and Philosophy (fwd)

FYI - 
I received this earlier today and assume it's for distribution. It appears to 
be a re-release of a statement distributed here a few months ago, with a few 
updates.

Kevin

----------------------  Forwarded Message:  ---------------------
From:    David Crawford <crawford@darksky...>
To:      idasony@aol...
Subject: A Statement on IDA's Mission and Philosophy
Date:    Thu, 03 Jul 2003 11:08:03 -0700

A Statement on IDA's Mission and Philosophy

By Dave Crawford, for IDA.

July 2003

We get questions about IDA, its mission, its goals, and its philosophy, 
what we believe and what we are working for, what we can realistically do?

Here is a general answer to those questions.

The IDA Bylaws say that IDA's Objectives are to give service to the public 
and to astronomy via scientific research, education, and public information 
concerning the issue of light pollution.  Service to membership via 
collection of information, distribution of information, education on all 
aspects of the light pollution issue and related topics [to include the 
impacts on astronomy of radio interference and of space debris], assistance 
with member's local problems by sharing common knowledge on a local, 
national, and international basis.

Many of our documents say: IDA's Goal:  To preserve and protect the 
nighttime environment and our heritage of dark skies through quality 
outdoor lighting. Through educating everyone, everywhere about the value of 
dark skies and quality nighttime lighting.

Info sheet 14, "About IDA," says:  Established in 1988, IDA strives to be 
effective in halting the adverse environmental impact of light pollution on 
the nighttime environment by providing education on the value and 
effectiveness of quality outdoor lighting.

The Summary of the Issues on the information sheet says:
Quality nighttime lighting is the key to reducing light pollution.  It 
means better visibility at night, freedom from glare, an improved and 
comfortable nighttime ambiance, and very significant energy 
savings.  Everyone wins.
Most existing astronomical observatories suffer from light pollution, radio 
interference, or the effects of space debris.  Amateurs and professionals 
alike are adversely affected by these environmental obstacles, which are 
still increasing rapidly at most locales.
The profoundly human experience of the inspiring beauty of the night sky is 
at risk for all people, not just scientists, as light pollution destroys 
our view of the cosmos.

IDA is a 501 (c) 3 tax exempt, non profit organization, with formal bylaws, 
incorporated in 1988.


I often use some "sound bytes" to spell out our mission:

There is great value to both dark skies and good night lighting.

Make allies, not enemies.  We are not "at war" with anyone  Teamwork counts.

We will get there one step at a time.  We are in this for the long haul.

We can all win.

Educate everyone, everywhere.  Recognize that education takes time and 
never ends.

Think global, act local.



With all that in mind, it is clear that the IESNA, NEMA, and other 
organizations are potential strong allies in our mission.  They must be, 
and they are well on that route due to a lot of personal involvement by 
those of us who spend the time to show up at their meetings.  A wide range 
of individuals from many types of organizations are now coming to our 
meetings as well.  We want to work with all such interested organizations.

If we don't like their recommended practices, we should work with them (not 
against them) to get them changed.  If we are right about our views, these 
practices should be changeable once the value of the change is 
understood.  Indeed, even though change in the IESNA has always taken a 
long time it seems, in this area it is changing rapidly.  Same with 
lighting companies.  Most manufacturers now have some very good fully 
shielded fixtures in their catalogs. They market them heavily, now even 
using the dark sky issue as a marketing tool.

Likewise, we will continue to work with those who have been promoting 
lighting ordinances: all of these are well meaning but some are not good 
ordinances, in clarity, simplicity, or technically.  The bad ordinances can 
do more harm than good.  Of course, there are good ones too, and we have 
used these as examples many times, including in our current MLO work.

We must all educate ourselves as much as we can on good lighting and its 
value.  It is more than just "Use full cut off for everything."  No matter 
that we want simple answers, outdoor lighting is a very complex subject.  I 
learn new things every day.

I do not think IDA has or is ever going to compromise our mission as stated 
above.  That mission is not just dark skies, but it always includes dark 
skies.  We are moving the IESNA, the CIE, and others, into that 
mission.  That will include improving their business and their profits, as 
they are making better products that should be good for both new markets 
and the potential huge retrofit market.

I don't see that we are "compromising".  Are not our goals really the 
same?  To educate about good lighting, to support the needed basic 
research, and to apply such knowledge in the field.  They have done what 
they can when they can (not always perfectly, of course; we are not perfect 
either), but they are actively moving along that path.  Same as us.  Same 
mission.  Some of them have misconceptions about us (getting rid of all the 
lights, telling everybody to ignore the IESNA and its RP's, that we think 
all lighting people are idiots, etc), and many of us about them (only 
interested in promoting the sale and use of any kind of lighting, that they 
think any light, even glare, is good, etc).

Codes are happening, of all varieties.  We have an active (to say the 
least) conversation going on about an IDA model lighting ordinance (MLO), 
and we have an excellent Outdoor Lighting Code Handbook already on the web 
site.  Such dialogs, when they do not become invective, are healthy to 
progress, and we value them.

As to the upcoming MLO, I think the IDA MLO will meet IDA goals.  It can be 
done.  It will be.  If it doesn't meat our needs, it will not be an IDA 
MLO.  It will be a dynamic document, as most codes are, changing as we 
learn more, as technology changes, and for other reasons.  This is one of 
the very few issues in life where we all can win.

Unfortunately, we also get many questions about the motives and the 
abilities of some of the activists in the light pollution control 
efforts.  Some of these activists are not IDA members, nor could they ever 
be.  A few seem to want to fight more than to make progress, clearly not 
followers of the IDA mission philosophy.  We try to answer those questions 
too, for we can easily see and indeed share their frustrations with the 
current and past state of some outdoor lighting practice.  Still, two 
wrongs do not make a right.  We try to educate everyone as to the value of 
the night environment and of good outdoor lighting.

Some of these questions have to do with list servers, and other things that 
look a bit like IDA sponsored things.  They are not.  They include many 
good things, of course, but also some things that we do not condone at 
all.  That seems to be the nature of free speech everywhere.  Official IDA 
statements come from the IDA Headquarters and its newsletter and other 
materials, such as this one.


To summarize:

IDA is not going in a new or different direction.  We are on the same path 
we have always been on, as described above.

The MLO will reflect these goals and offer solutions to help many people 
and organizations.  It will do so, or it will not become an IDA model.  A 
tough job, but it can be done.  We will take the time necessary to insure 
that it does.

Neither I, nor IDA are abandoning any of our principles, nor will we 
ever.  IDA is on the same mission it always has been.  The Board agrees so 
far as I can tell.

I agree with much of the pro bono work that Jim is doing on the MLO.  With 
the time he has, I think he has done a wonderful job in spite of the all 
the critiques he has gotten (and IDA too).  We are not there yet by a long 
shot, but we have raised a lot of dust and are making progress.  I much 
appreciate our members' past efforts in so many ways.  We could not be 
where we are without the input.  I hope it will continue.

I would much rather see constructive, detailed input about the MLO, such as 
we get from some, rather than general input that seems only to say:  "I 
don't like it."  Values for the tables, and why, for example.

There are so many things for IDA to do, and people make great suggestions 
of what IDA should do.  Almost always these are already on our lists.  As I 
have said many times, I think it is remarkable that so much has been done 
by so few with so little to work with.

We do what we can.  There is a nearly infinite amount more to do.  We do 
not tell people what to do, but only try to educate them about what to do, 
mostly in general, as we have little or no time to get involved in local 
issues on a specific basis, with rare exceptions.  By focusing on the 
overall issues, we hope locals everywhere, not just in a couple of places, 
will have what they need to make local progress.  We want to make lasting 
progress everywhere, and we are working as hard on it as we can.

Hang in there, please, everyone.  We are in this for the long haul.  We 
will all win.


Dave Crawford



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/