Extinctions don't just rob the planet of species but also of functional and phylogenetic diversity, the authors of a paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences argue. "They are much newer ideas than species richness, so not as much exploration has been done about patterns of decline in these two metrics, particularly globally," said Jedediah Brodie, first author of the study and conservation biologist at the University of Montana.
For example, rhinos loom large in public imagination but are, in fact, marching into oblivion. The Bornean rhinoceros (Dicerorhinus sumatrensis harrissoni), a subspecies of the Sumatran rhinoceros, has gone extinct in Malaysia. "It is such a tragedy because it's an iconic and culturally important species," Brodie said, "but also because they are super important both functionally and phylogenetically."
Harvesting animals for subsistence or sale is the greatest threat to land-dwelling mammals, the new study found. About 15% of people in the world depend on wild animals, particularly vertebrates, for food. But hunting, illegal and legal, also feeds the global supply chain for wildlife and wildlife parts.
Rhino populations plummeted in the second half of the 20th century; they are heavily poached for their horns, and their ranges have shrunk dramatically over the decades. Of the five existing rhino species, three are critically endangered.
The study focused on terrestrial mammals, one of the most extensively studied groups. They used the IUCN Red List, the most widely cited and comprehensive compilation of endangered species and the threats they face.
By removing animals from their habitats, humans also remove them from ecosystems in which they evolved and play critical roles. To gauge the consequences is not a simple calculus.
"Say there are twenty species of grazing animals and only two species of seed-eating animals. If two species of the grazers go extinct, that doesn't have that much impact on the functional diversity because there are still eighteen grazers left," Brodie said. "But if the two species of seed-eating animals go extinct, it has a huge impact on functional diversity because all of a sudden you've lost this entire ecological function."
In both cases, Brodie said, the species richness would decrease by two, but the effects would be very different.
Despite their fearsome reputation and bulk, rhinos, some of which can weigh as much as two cars, are herbivores. Bornean rhinos are one of the few large-bodied frugivores and herbivores on Borneo, an island shared between Malaysia, Indonesia and Brunei. It is also home to another herbivore, the island's famous pygmy elephants. However, rhinos eat different plants than the elephants, so losing them would alter plant seed dispersal and plant evolution.
The research shows that extinctions driven by human activities lead to a more significant decline in functional diversity than if species were randomly going extinct.
"Some species groups are very vulnerable. Be an antelope, and people want to eat you. Be a parrot, and people want you as a pet. Live only on Cuba -- as a subfamily of mammals does -- and you're in trouble," said Stuart Leonard Pimm, an ecologist and leading authority on the extinction crisis, who was not involved in the recent study. "This leads to a disproportionate loss of ecological function as human actions drive species to extinction."
The disappearance of species doesn't just wipe away entire ecological functions. It also leads to the irredeemable loss of evolutionary history. Millions of years of evolution are encoded into species that coexist with humans today; to lose them is to lose that biological heritage.
The disappearance of the remaining five rhino species would sever an entire evolutionary lineage, the Rhinocerotidae family that arose about 40 million years ago, from the tree of life.
"They are the last remnants of what was a hugely diverse and amazing family found all across the world in the not too distant past," Brodie said of Rhinocerotidae, which counts more than 40 extinct species.
But conservationists warn that it is not just wholesale extinctions that we should be worried about, but also disappearing populations -- what Brodie and his co-authors call "biotic annihilation." Only one in every 10 dramatic declines in populations results in extinctions, but those losses have repercussions for ecosystems which experience them.
"Species extinction is an endpoint, and it's a really, really, bad endpoint. Before that happens, species will start to go extinct in individual countries first," Brodie said. "The focus on population decline is really important because it's in some ways a better illustrator of the magnitude of the extinction crisis."
Their research maps out the relationship between species richness and functional and phylogenetic loss for individual countries to aid national-level policymaking.
The work shows that habitat destruction results in more functional diversity loss in Indonesia, Argentina and Venezuela. "This suggests that instead of focusing on harvest management and human diets, conservation actions in these areas might be better directed toward protected areas and land use policy to best conserve this component of biodiversity," the researchers write.
The study also found that climate change is emerging as a major driver of biodiversity loss. What remains to be seen is how these relationships pan out for other animal groups, like reptiles, amphibians and birds.
Reposted with permission from Mongabay.
The bill passed by 38-2 vote in the State Senate and in the House 145-9, but Baker has not committed to signing the bill and could use a pocket veto to let it die following the conclusion of the legislative session overnight. In addition to mandating net-zero greenhouse gas pollution by 2050, the legislation would also boost offshore wind energy and codify the definition of "environmental justice populations."
It would increase fines for pipeline safety violations, following a deadly series of explosions in late 2018. The bill's passage follows Gov. Baker's release of plans to eliminate greenhouse gas pollution by 2050, ban the sale of new internal combustion cars by 2035, and electrify heating in 1 million homes.
As reported by The Associated Press:
The focus on pipeline safety follows the series of explosions in Lawrence, Andover and North Andover in September 2018 that killed one person, injured almost two dozen and damaged more than 100 buildings. Federal investigators blamed the explosions on overpressurized gas lines.
The explosions led to a $56 million settlement between Massachusetts and Columbia Gas of Massachusetts and its parent, NiSource last year.
Newly elected Democratic House Speaker Ron Mariano said the bill sends the message Massachusetts "will empower our environmental justice communities, achieve net zero emissions by 2050, continue to lead on offshore wind, increase equitable access to our clean energy programs, and create pathways to clean energy jobs for underserved and low-income communities."
For a deeper dive:
AP, E&E, WBUR, MassLive , Boston Globe; Baker administration plan: The Hill , Car & Driver
For more climate change and clean energy news, you can follow Climate Nexus on Twitter and Facebook, sign up for daily Hot News, and visit their news site, Nexus Media News .
From Your Site Articles * The Biggest Environmental Wins and Losses of the 2020 Election ... > * Bipartisan Climate Bill Highlights Forest Restoration, Conservation ... > Related Articles Around the Web * Massachusetts Climate Bill a Important Step Forward | Sierra Club > * Lawmakers Push For Gas Pipeline Safety In Climate Bill > Read More Show Less climate action greenhouse gases environmental justice renewable energy wind pipelines massachusetts Trending species extinction What We've Lost: The Species Declared Extinct in 2020 4h birds Rare Painted Bunting Draws Flocks of Birders to Maryland Park 05 January greenhouse gases More Than Two Degrees of Climate Warming Is Already Locked In, New Study Finds 5h orcas Stranded Orca Saved by Rescue Divers and Local Volunteers Olivia Rosane 3h Animals Conservation charity British Divers Marine Life Rescue (BDMLR) led the rescue of a stranded orca in Scotland. Emma Neave-Webb and Imogen Sawyer / British Divers Marine Life Rescue / Facebook A rare orca stranding on Scotland's Orkney Islands had a happy ending when volunteers and local residents teamed up to send the animal back out to sea.Conservation charity British Divers Marine Life Rescue (BDMLR) led the operation, in a first for the organization.
"Strandings of Orca do occur but are incredibly rare and it is thought that this is the first successful refloat of an Orca by BDMLR in the UK," the group wrote on their Facebook page.
The orca, an 11 foot animal believed to be a male, was first seen on a beach at the Bay of Newark on the Orkney Island of Sanday, BBC News reported.
Local residents Colin and Heather Headworth first thought it was a dolphin when they saw it in the surf near their home Monday morning, according to BDMLR. They alerted BDMLR Area Coordinator Emma Neave-Webb, who called a local team to the scene.
However, when they arrived, medics realized that the stranded animal was in fact an orca. The animal was lying on its side parallel to the sea, making it hard for it to swim to freedom.
"The first thought really is a little bit of panic on how on earth are we going to deal with it, and then all the training kicks in," Neave-Webb told ITV News.
The BDMLR team recruited local residents to help them turn the whale so that it was upright and its blowhole was out of the water, making it easier for it to breathe. They then turned it to face the sea as the tide came in and placed it on a dolphin stretcher.
"After about an hour and with help from local residents to stabilise the animal, it suddenly took matters into its own fins and made a move to swim off," BDMLR wrote. "Unable to hold the animal any longer, the stretcher was lowered and the orca swam forward straight out towards the open sea. It rolled a couple of times and then submerged and continued straight out away from the beach without looking back."
Neave-Webb told ITV News that the orca's escape was cause for celebration.
"There was a lot of cheering, awful lot of cheering," she said. "I'm still buzzing now."
Medics think the orca will survive, since it had fed recently and was in good condition. However, they are monitoring the shore to make sure it does not get stranded again. They believe it is a young male of about three to four years old.
Neave-Webb told ITV News that the orca had likely been feeding in shallow water when the tide went out, leaving it stranded on shore.
Orcas are common in the Orkney Islands, according to BDMLR. However, area experts think the stranded orca may not belong to any local pods.
The Orkney Marine Mammal Research Initiative is talking with colleagues in Norway to try to identify the animal, according to BBC News.
From Your Site Articles * Why Do Whales and Dolphins Strand? - EcoWatch > * Orca Who Carried Dead Calf for 17 Days Gives Birth Again to ... > Related Articles Around the Web * The extraordinary beach rescue of an orca whale in Orkney | ITV News > * Orca rescued in Sanday, Orkney following rare dolphin stranding ... > Read More Show Less orcas marine life conservation oceans meat consumption It's Time to Rethink What We Eat, Annual Meat Consumption Report Argues Deutsche Welle 3h Climate Morning breaks over Smithfield Market, one of London's busiest Meat suppliers as an Extinction Rebellion environmental activist offshoot Animal Rebellion wake up after a night occupying the space which is usually open from 2 a.m. - 8 a.m. to supply London's wholesale food industries on Oct. 8, 2019 in London. Ollie Millington / Getty Images "Industrial meat production is not only responsible for precarious working conditions, it also pushes people off their land, leads to deforestation, biodiversity loss and the use of pesticides -- and is also one of the main drivers of the climate crisis." Such were the words of Barbara Unmussig of green think tank, the Heinrich Boll Foundation, at the Berlin presentation of the so-called "Meat Atlas 2021."Across 50 pages, the atlas -- which is collaboratively published by the foundation, Friends of the Earth Germany (BUND) and the international monthly newspaper Le Monde diplomatique -- outlines trends and the implications of global meat production on both human and planetary health.
It highlights, for example, how the over-use of antibiotics in intensive animal farming is leading to increasingly resistant germs, thereby threatening the effectiveness of drugs used for humans.
Similarly, the clearing of forests for animal feed is held up as a threat to human health. As habitat loss brings animals and humans into closer proximity with one another, viruses can be transmitted more easily. This, in turn, can lead to new pandemics.
In a survey for the report, young people between the ages of 15 and 29 were asked about their thoughts on meat. The majority said they rejected the meat industry in its current form.
Olaf Bandt, chairman of BUND, says policymakers must take account of society's desire to restructure the sector. "This requires far-reaching political realignment of agricultural policy," he said. "But there can be no agricultural transition without a food transition."
Bandt describes Germany as a key player in the production of pork and milk, with a 20% share of the EU market.
"Huge amounts of meat are exported," he said, adding that this reliance on international markets is having a detrimental effect on the environment, livestock and farms. "More and more animals live on ever fewer farms, further exacerbating the pollution of groundwater in those regions."
Meat Devours RainforestGlobal population and economic growth are the drivers behind increasing demand for meat. In 1960, the planet was home to just 3 billion people and, according to the report, meat consumption at that time was around 70 million metric tons. That equated to an annual per capita global average of 23 kilograms.
By 2018, however, when the population had grown to 7.6 billion people, meat consumption had risen seven-fold to around 350 million metric tons -- or a global average of 46 kilograms per person annually.
A key problem with this trend is that meat production requires vast areas of land. According to the German Environment Agency (UBA), the country's central environment authority, 71% of global arable land is currently used for livestock feed. That is four times the amount required for direct food growth (18%) or other raw materials such as cotton (7%) and energy crops like corn for biogas (4%).
As global demand for meat continues to grow, so does the pressure on available arable land. As a result, huge areas of forest in countries such as Brazil are being lost to create land on which to grow animal fodder.
In order to feed the world's population and stop rainforests from being cleared, while simultaneously designating land for reforestation, experts are calling for a dietary rethink: less meat and more plant-based foods that require much smaller areas.
In a report on the health of the planet published last year, leading global scientists such as Johan Rockstrom, director at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) suggested dietary changes that would equate to an average of 16 kilograms of meat and 33 kilograms of dairy products per person per year. Current meat consumption in North and South America as well as in Europe can be as much as seven times that amount.
The Problem With PesticidesBesides revealing the power and global impact of the international meat industry, authors of the "Meat Atlas" also illustrate links to the global chemical industry. They write that dangerous and sometimes banned pesticides are exported by large chemical companies. Among the producers and exporters of such chemicals are European players, Bayer Crop Science, BASF, and Syngenta, as well as U.S. companies Corteva and FMS.
According to Unmussig, the use of such pesticides threatens thousands of lives, which is why, Bandt says the "German government must do everything it can to ensure that German companies no longer export toxins that have been banned in the EU."
Unmussig warns that the planned EU-Mercosur agreement would exacerbate the use of dangerous substances. "Dismantling tariffs would lead to more pesticides being delivered to Latin America and more rainforest would be cleared for soy plantations and meat production."
The experts conclude that establishing a way to farm animals in a cruelty-free way that doesn't harm the climate or the environment, requires a far-reaching shift in agricultural policy as well a rethink in consumption and production.
"As yet, we have not seen the start of any real meat transition," Unmussig said.
This article was adapted from German.
Reposted with permission from Deutsche Welle.
From Your Site Articles * World Must Reach 'Peak Meat' by 2030 to Fight Climate Crisis ... > * Climate Cost of Organic Meat Is Just as High as Conventionally ... > * Cut Beef Consumption in Half to Help Save the Earth, Says New Study > Related Articles Around the Web * Meatless meat is going mainstream. Now Big Food wants in. > Read More Show Less environment health meat consumption meat plant based agriculture agribusiness factory farming pesticides deforestation climate crisis antibiotics greenhouse gases Global Grasslands Now Contribute to Climate Warming, Study Finds Emily Denny 3h Climate A drought leaves the grass dry and brown in a farm field in central California. JohnnyH5 / iStock / Getty Images Plus Grasslands play a critical role in carbon sequestration. But a recent study found human activity is causing grasslands to become a source of greenhouse gas emissions.Covering approximately 25 percent of the earth's surface and containing nearly 12 percent of the land-based carbon stocks, grasslands are essential in supporting food and livestock production, according to the United States Department of Agriculture's Climate Change Resource Center.
Yet, citing the expansion of pasture lands and higher livestock numbers, researchers warn current management of grasslands is accelerating climate change.
Up until recently, natural and managed grasslands emitted and removed an equal amount of greenhouse gases, canceling each other out. Researchers from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) sought to learn how these fluctuations in greenhouse gases have contributed to climate change in both managed pastures and natural grasslands, between the years of 1750 and 2012, according to an article by the IIASA.
Through their model, the team of researchers found that the ability for natural and sparsely grazed grasslands to absorb more carbon has intensified over the past decade. Grasslands heavily managed by humans, on the other hand, became a source of greenhouse gases, emitting similar quantities of greenhouse gases to that of croplands.
"Our results show that the different human activities that have affected grasslands have shifted the balance of greenhouse gas removals and emissions more towards warming in intensively exploited pastures, and more towards cooling in natural and semi-natural systems," Thomas Gasser, an author of the study said, according to the IIASA.
In response to their findings, the team of researchers called for countries to assess greenhouse gas budgets for both managed grasslands and natural and sparsely grazed grasslands.
"Full greenhouse gas reporting for each country could facilitate the assessment of progress towards the goals of the Paris Agreement and better link national greenhouse gas budgets to the observed growth rates of emissions in the atmosphere," the IIASA wrote.
Currently, the U.S. Forest Service tracks the net carbon stock in forests, but only in some grasslands. The recently introduced Trillion Trees and National Carbon Storage Act may change that.
"The Trillion Trees Act expands accounting and objective setting to also cover all grasslands, wetlands and coastal ecosystems," the Environmental Defense Fund wrote in a blog. "Incorporating these ecosystems into the national net carbon stock objective could help lead to much needed conservation and restoration," it added.
Efforts to conserve grasslands could also pose benefits to storing greenhouse gas emissions as wildfires in California grow more severe.
Grasslands sequester their carbon underground, unlike forests which hold carbon above in their biomass and leaves, a report by the University of California, Davis states. When fires burn through the forests, this carbon is released. Researchers at UC Davis suggest that if global carbon emissions continue to increase, grasslands could be the only successful net carbon dioxide sink through 2101.
"In a stable climate, trees store more carbon than grasslands," said Benjamin Houlton, director of the John Muir Institute of the Environment at UC Davis, in the report. "But in a vulnerable, warming, drought-likely future, we could lose some of the most productive carbon sinks on the planet."
While nearly half of all temperate grasslands and 16 percent of tropical grasslands have been transformed for agricultural or industrial use, according to National Geographic, conserving grasslands to preserve soil health and reduce emissions from managed grasslands could provide a significant reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions.
From Your Site Articles * Rewilding the Arctic Could Slow the Climate Crisis - EcoWatch > Related Articles Around the Web * Endangered grasslands may be lifeline in face of climate change ... > * How grasslands in Texas and beyond can help fight climate change ... > * Grasslands and Climate Change > * Climate Change Impacts to Grasslands - Conservation in a ... > Read More Show Less greenhouse gases climate change forests agriculture conservation
A baby African elephant at Kruger National Park. Rhett A. Butler
A Bornean rhino. Jeremy Hance and Tiffany Roufs / Mongabay
Germany Plays Leading Role in the Meat Industry
