Various organizations throughout the United States—including government agencies at national, state, and local levels; nonprofit groups; universities; and corporations—have developed hundreds of environmental indicator sets in recent years to address environmental issues on a variety of geographic scales. Most of the environmental indicator sets were developed for a myriad of purposes, including assessing environmental conditions and trends, raising public awareness, communicating complex issues, and tracking progress toward goals. Some environmental indicator sets are limited to political jurisdiction, such as county, state, or nation; others are limited to natural areas, such as watersheds, lake basins, or ecosystems. Many environmental indicator sets address complex, crosscutting issues—such as ecosystem health—that are affected by environmental, economic, and social factors. For instance, the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement calls for the development of a set of about 80 ecosystem health indicators for the Great Lakes to inform the public and report progress toward achieving the objectives of the agreement. Indicators address specific geographic zones of the entire Great Lakes Basin ecosystem—such as offshore, near shore, coastal wetlands, and shoreline—and other issues such as human health, land use, and societal well-being. The indicator list is continually evolving. Every two years, Environment Canada—the Canadian agency primarily responsible for the preservation and enhancement of the quality of the natural environment—and EPA host a review and discussion of the indicators as required under the agreement, either at the State of the Lakes Ecosystem Conference or through alternate processes. Moreover, some cities, such as New Orleans, Pittsburgh, and Seattle, have developed comprehensive indicator sets that focus on broader issues that incorporate such factors as economic prosperity, social equity, and environmental quality to measure and sustain the quality of life for the citizens in the community.
1. The author would most likely consider all of the following as appropriate purposes for an indicator set except:A. To alert the public to the dangers of feral cats to indigenous species of birds
B. To count the number of baby chicks in nests of bald eagles
C. To note the effect of the encroachment of the suburbs on the natural habitats of coyotes
D. To evaluate the effect on fish of pollutants emitted into lakes by motorboats
E. To assess the trend toward vegetarianism as delineated in healthfood magazines
2. The author refers to the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement toA. discuss an example of an ecosystem that encompasses multiple systems.
B. explain why indicator sets must be limited to a single jurisdiction.
C. contrast with complex ecosystems that require multifaceted reviews.
D. detail the need to attract more attention to wetlands that are endangered by pollution.
E. illustrate the geographical limits of indicator sets that overlap more than one jurisdiction.