Nitrogen fertilizers and nitrogen compounds in general are not topics that easily boost circulation higher or alter the public conversation. Nobody would hence expect much of a news bump for a multi-institution report, led by University of Washington authors in this week's Science, on the persistent impact on lakes and other wild ecosystems due to settling of airborne nitrogen from human industry. And there isn't much of one, important as it may be that extra, human-caused N pollution (the isotopic ratio gives it away) persists in lakes for more than a century and significantly alters food chains from algae on up.
But the paper got two takers in Canada, land of a lot more than 10,000 lakes.
First...
One finds a pretty good example of broad-brush story with a telling, finely-focussed example to give it punch in the Sunday Charlotte News & Observer.
Reporter Bruce Henderson has a story that, as a type, is common enough. North Carolina is warming up. Birds and other wildlife are shifting their ranges. (Link goes to sister paper, the Raleigh News & Observer). OK, that's important but it's been reported, in general, many times. Also not unusual is to find a naturalist quoted on fear that surprises are in store, nobody knows what. But what is gratifying at that...