Hardiness Zone Changes

Snicker away, Stefan, but there is undeniably climate change going on. (What we should do about it is not entirely clear, of course.)

But something is happening. For example, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) is supposed to issue a "Hardiness Zone Map" every fifteen years. This animated graphic (from a private organization, The National Arbor Day Foundation) shows the changes over the past sixteen years which effect what you can plant etc etc.

You wonder why I specifically mention a "private organization?" Well apparently the USDA has NOT issued a revised map, even though one was due in 2005. According to Raintree Nursery (whose on-line catalog I was browsing in search of a citrus which might grow in Seattle — yes I have very recently developed an interest in my back yard)

Every fifteen years the USDA puts out a new Hardiness Zone Map. In 2005 a new map was due out however it has not yet been published... (italics added)

Is this failure to issue a revision a political decision by the Bush administration? Or is this delay just one of those bureaucratic Snafus? Or is there something deeper? Honestly,  I have no idea. But nothing would surprise me. It strikes me as curious.The USDA has been issuing these maps for many decades; I would assume it has the system to issue revisions down pat.

Any gardeners out there? Are any readers informed about such matters? Why the delay? One part of me hopes that it has nothing to do with politics and manipulation of information by the Bush administration. Another part of me recognizes that I am sometimes overly-trusting.

Comments

[Hal O'Brien]

Stefan may not believe in climate change. But Lloyd's of London does. Their report is titled, "Climate Change: Adapt or Bust."

Of course, to pay attention to insurance companies regarding what risks are actuarially likely would require being a believer in the free market as an organizing force in society...

Oops.

There was a great segment of Radio Open Source on the crisis measures the insurance companies are taking as a consequence of climate change.

[Glen Raphael]

If a private organization is on the case and doing a decent job, why would we want the USDA to be doing it too? The optimist in me hopes they simply decided the task wasn't worth doing any more - the USDA's involvement wasn't adding any value to the process.

There's /always/ climate change going on. Can't be stopped, can't be helped. Even if it could, it'd be a heckuva coincidence if right this very moment was the perfectly optimal climate for humanity, wouldn't it?