Sell Me A Bridge

This lesson will test students on their ability to read a map, and will lead to discussions on how building a bridge might have an impact on the environment. The second portion of this lesson is a debate on whether or not the bridge should be allowed to be built. Students will take different roles to look at all aspects of the bridge- how will it affect the economy and how will it affect the environment.

Grade Level: 6-9

Subjects: science, ELA

Duration: 2 45-60 minute periods

NYS State Science Standards: Standard 4: The Living Environment: Key Idea 6 and Key Idea 7

Objectives:

1. Students will be able to use pictures and descriptions from a news article to locate things on a map and be more comfortable reading a topographic map.
   

2.  Students will gain a better understanding of water quality issues as they relate to the building of a bridge over Lake George.

Prerequisites:

1. Students should have had some background in water quality parameters and issues: either from participating in the Floating Classroom, or doing the lesson “Human Influence on Water Quality” or some other background on water quality.

2. Some mapping knowledge may help- see Mapping Exercise 1, or look at lessons under USGS site: http://interactive2.usgs.gov/learningweb/teachers/lesson_plans.htm.

Materials:

(The first two items may be obtained by contacting the LGA Education and Outreach Coordinator).  

1. A copy of the article “Lake George Plan Advances” from the March 28-April 3 issue of The Chronicle and photocopies for the students.

2. A detailed topographic map of Lake George and a map of Lake George that includes Ft. Ann/Whitehall. [Student version]  [Teacher version]

3. Rulers for each group of students

4. Timer (for 2^nd period)

Procedure: (1^st 45 min.)

1. Have students read the Chronicle article.

2. Discuss with students any potential problems or anything strange that they read in this article. [This could include: “Preference in hiring will be given to enrolled Republicans”, “It will ease congestion…” “The bridge, itself will make a gorgeous lake that much prettier.”, “The fishery should benefit…” “No people will be impacted; it’s just woods.” “Environmentalists haven’t spoken out against it because the governor agreed to “give them everything they ask for.””]

3. Pair or group students and give them a topographic map of Lake George and a ruler. Based on the article and pictures from the article, have students draw a line on the map to represent a bridge. [This is a fairly precise location- see teacher’s map] [It may help to point out to the students that the picture on the front page is looking south from Buck Mt.]

4. Review: Is this the best place to put the bridge? Would there be potential traffic problems at either end? What other logistic problems might there be? [The length of road that they would have to build to get to Rt. 22, in addition to the rough terrain they would have to get through would be difficult and expensive. Would property values be affected?] Where would you want to put a water monitoring station(s), like the RUSS unit, in comparison to the bridge? [One above the bridge and one below- to specifically compare the impact of the bridge- during construction and after construction] What trends might you see with DO, temp, clarity, pH, etc? {Especially during construction, you may see clarity go down, you may see DO go down due to more nutrients getting into the lake, more plant growth due to nutrients, and then less DO as it is removed as the plants die. Temperature and pH would probably not change.] What difference would you see over the years and from one station to the other? [During construction years, clarity may be greatly affected. The northern monitoring station will see more of the decline in clarity and possibly DO. The southern one won’t fluctuate as much.]

5. Have students try and find the best path for a road from the bridge to Rt. 22. They need to keep in mind cost and practicality (Going over a mountain might not be practical.)

Second session: Debate Debridge: Town Meeting

 Procedure:

1. Divide the class into groups and give each group one of the following categories:
• Chamber of Commerce
• Developer
• Local business owner (s)
• Local Property owner (s)
• Fishing guide
• Conservation association (you may want to pick more than one depending on class size). [LGA, LGLC, The Fund for LG, ADK, Residents Committee to Protect the Adirondacks, Adirondack Council, etc.]
• Bridge Developer
• Mayor/Supervisor [Teacher may want to do this role, to help keep things on track and to keep order]
• Bridge Developer [Depending on the amount of time you have, the Developer doesn’t need to present their project, you can have everyone make the assumption that it was done in the previous session. The Developer may also need to make up information that the article did not provide to answer questions the town may ask of them. It is appropriate for them to say that they don’t know the answer to something, or they haven’t finished looking into that aspect of something, if they don’t know the answer.]

2. A town meeting is held to discuss the proposed bridge. [It may be appropriate to pick what town this is taking place. Lake George or Bolton would be the most impacted towns.]

3. Give the students about 10 minutes to discuss in their group what their position is and reasons why. They also need to come up with questions and/or comments and concerns they have for the bridge developer. Have them write everything down [You’ll want to collect this at the end].

4. When everyone is ready, have the supervisor call the meeting to order. You can assume that the bridge developer gave their presentation earlier or at an earlier meeting. The supervisor can then open the meeting up to public comments and allow members of the community to make comments or ask questions to the developer. Limit each group/person to 2-3 minutes and the developers response to 1-2 minutes. You can set a timer if that helps. The supervisor needs to make sure that no one is interrupted during their time to speak. Students may become frustrated because they won’t be able to respond back to the developer, but if time allows, you can let them come up again after everyone has been able to speak.

5. Have the community vote at the end as to whether they are in favor of the project or opposed.

6. Wrap- up (5 minutes), Have everyone set their roles aside and discuss major concerns that came up, what questions are still unanswered, etc.
   

Assessment/Evaluation:

            Session 1:

1.     Did students position the bridge correctly on the map?

2.     Did the path for the road to Rt. 22 make sense logistically/feasibly, or were they going over mountains?

Session 2:

1.     Collect their papers and see how well thought out their questions/concerns/positions were. Did their reasons support their position? Were their questions appropriate and helpful in making their position?

2.     You could also quiz students:

·        Would you suspect that water quality would be affected by building this bridge? [Most likely]

·        In what ways? [water clarity may decrease, DO may go down as algae dies after nutrients are washed into the water and increase plant growth, runoff from the bridge itself- oil, salt, sediment.]

·        What would be the advantages of building the bridge? [It may be a boost for tourism, it may keep traffic down in other parts of the lake, it is a quicker way to get around the lake, it would me an employment opportunity for local workers…]

·        What would be the disadvantages? [Decrease in water quality, visual impacts, it may affect property values of those close to the bridge in a negative way, it may affect tourism negatively, it may affect fish populations, it may allow the transport of invasives into the lake more easily (Easier access from Champlain or an invasive could fall off a boat and wash into the lake from the bridge), it could increase traffic problems, it would be expensive…]