We’re all concentrating on saving rainforests: but will they survive?

Rainforests are essential for many different things. At the moment, we (as the human race) are concerned about rainforests for their capacity to store carbon – thereby reducing the amount in the atmosphere and therefore the threat of carbon dioxide causing the greenhouse effect.

Here, you can see what happens to land that is deforested. It is not good for the rainforest that survives either

The problem is, that even without cutting any more rainforests down, we have already changed the weather dramatically. If rainforests are cut down there may then not be enough rain to sustain regrowth. One example is the Amazon, where it is predicted that half its rainfall is caused by the forest itself.

In the Amazon, Congo and even south-east Asia, there are already worrying signs in particularly highly deforested areas, that the rainforest weather is drying, turning the forest into a more savannah like area.

What is clear, is that a fragmented rainforest is deeply threatened. We need large blocks of unbroken rainforest if the planet is to survive in a form that we will continue be good for the human race to continue to thrive within. Of course, this is also essential for the many planet services that the human race requires to keep going.

Of course, this is not a reason to be allowed to cut down the fragments, it is a reason to not create the fragments in the first place. What is important to realize, is that many of the activities that the rainforest is being cut down for, will not work without the rain that the forest creates.

Just food for thought

Namibian cheetah on the way to India for reintroduction!

Argued back and forth for decades (since their local extinction in 1952), the idea of reintroducing cheetah has never gone away for India. For the government, it is clearly at least partly a matter of pride – as the only home of the Asiatic lion, claiming over 50% of remaining wild tigers living within its borders, more than 10,000 wild leopards and even 4-500 wild snow leopards, cheetah was the only big cat to be allowed to go missing.

In the initial translocation 8 cheetah are being flown from Namibia to India

Even Cheetah is derived from the Hindi word Chita which means spotted one.

Continue reading “Namibian cheetah on the way to India for reintroduction!”

Red panda awareness day

Today is red panda awareness day. Many people are not particularly sure what a red panda is. Indeed, when I volunteered in a local zoo, I often found myself standing by the red pandas as so many visitors walk past without giving this little animal a proper look.

It was once considered a member of the bear family, but recent analysis has shown that while it is in its own family Ailuridae, They are carnivores and have been found to be most closely related to the group that includes Skunks raccoons and weasels.

Although now considered the lesser panda, the Red panda was the original – indeed the giant panda was discovered later, and named because of similarities that they share. Panda is thought to come from the Nepalese words: “nigalya ponya” , which means bamboo eater.

Continue reading “Red panda awareness day”

The changing fortunes of Cheetah and wild dog

When we trained in the Kruger, there were about 70 cheetah and about 350 wild dog. 15 years later there were over 400 cheetah, and nearer 500 wild dog.

Cheetah are an exciting thing to see

What happened?

Well wild dog and cheetah are the most successful hunters, but they are also smaller than lion leopard or hyena.

Another change is far more hyena with a Kruger population of about 5000 up from around 2500 when we were here last time. There seems to be a similar number of Lion.

It would be a fascinating problem to try to create a computer model for a savannah population, while including Cheetah and Wild dog.

We are hoping to put some videos together over the next few weeks. Do like and subscribe to our youtube channel as well (seeanimalswild) though any new videos are likely to be copied here.

What should we make of attempts to bring back species?

There have been many big announcements about bringing back recently lost animals. In theory I applaud the effort.

Places like the Russian steppe would be much more healthy with thousands of mammoths roaming around. They would likely make the great Russian Taiga forests more productive, and it is thought that they would greatly increase these forests ability to absorb carbon – something the planet needs in the face of global warming.

However, I believe that at the current time, with so many species close to extinction, we need to concentrate on protecting what is left, and only when there are excess habitats should we consider bringing back recently (or long) dead species.

Animals such as the Mammoth would make a huge difference in Russia and north America. However, another serious problem is the fact that the animals that would have to play surrogate for the Mammoths to be born are also endangered.

Whatever science can do, it is wrong to bring species back just for human entertainment. As a result, if any species is to be resurrected, it must be good for the world and the ecosystem – indeed it must have a good ecosystem into which it can be reintroduced.

What do you think?

Jair Bolsonaro is trailing in the polls and is currently looking unlikely to win re-election – but undoing his damage might be difficult

In the run-up to the Brazilian election, we will be looking at what is happening in this country. While only the people of Brazil have a say, what they decide is likely to have a big effect on the rest of the world:

who will win? Will the Amazon and therefore the planet get a reprieve?

Re-election of Bolsonaro will likely mean the end of the Amazon functioning properly or they can go with a former politician – both have issues, but Lulu appears on the cusp of taking over, and if this happens it is predicted to have a fantastic impact on deforestation (though it would be hard for any change to not be dramatic).

Given the huge impact this election could have on the rest of the world, there seems to be little coverage, maybe this will change as the time draws near.

UK government changes rules for farmers: now allow killing beavers?

Beavers have returned to the UK in the last couple of decades. Becoming extinct in the 16th century, Beavers were an important part of the UK ecosystem.

Beavers are incredible engineers. They build large pools, held back by dams, as well as canals running in many directions. One of the biggest bonuses of this behaviour, is to slow the speed that water has as it runs back into rivers and eventually the sea. This means that in areas where beavers exist, there remains plenty of water even in times during the year when there is little rain. The beaver pools are also fantastic for wildlife, from fish fry, to vast quantities of insects – which can increase farmers yields by pollinating the crops.

So what is the problem? Well, in many places in the country, farmers are now farming on low grade land, and some of this will be lost.

Given that beavers have only been in the UK for about 15 years, and the population only numbers a few thousand at most (while some populations like in Devon numbering in the hundreds or even approaching one thousand), in most of the country they are incredibly rare. Lethal methods of control should very rarely be required. In the vast majority of cases, the beavers should be worked around as the benefits they bring even to the farm are usually greater than the problems they cause. In the rare occasion where the beaver needs to be removed, then it is not necessary to kill it, with the numbers of beavers still so far below the carrying capacity of the UK, it would be relatively simple to catch it and to move it to a river which does not yet have enough.

While it may be cheaper in the short term, for both the farmer and the government, shooting the beaver is unlikely to deal with the problem. In many instances, it will not be long before another beaver takes up the area, which means that the problem is likely to occur again, furthermore, apart from the benefits for the local farm, the beavers behaviour has wider positive impacts.

If the government was to fund nature trusts in each county to help in this work, the price could be kept incredibly low, and the countries environment would benefit greatly

Uninvited black bear crashes party in Connecticut

American Black bears are far and away the most numerous bear in the world by some margin. It is thought that at least 800,000 American black bears still roam the continental north America – though the closely related Asiatic black bear has a far smaller population of about 50,000 spread across south-eastern Asia and is therefore far more endangered (the spectacled bear is also thought to be relatively closely related).

In America, black bears are relatively common sites where they are found.

While black bears are not found everywhere in the USA they are pretty widespread
Continue reading “Uninvited black bear crashes party in Connecticut”

What did Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip do for conservation, and will things change under King Charles the third

The queen has died suddenly at the age of 96. This is a good age by anyone’s standards, but understandably, across the UK and the many parts of the Commonwealth where the queen remains the head of state it is still disconcerting when things change.

What impact did the queen have on wildlife? Well unfortunately ruling a country like the UK, there is relatively little wildlife left to protect. Of course, the UK monarch while retaining many powers in theory has little sway over decisions in practice. Of course, in the Commonwealth this is quite different.

Continue reading “What did Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip do for conservation, and will things change under King Charles the third”

Thwaites or “doomsday” glacier is disintegrating faster than expected

The Thwaites glacier is an important glacier in western Antarctica. It is already thought to account for about 4% of global sea level rise. This glacier has suffered a rapid retreat from the land shelf in just 6 months – a process that can naturally take several centuries.

The bigger problem that Thwaites glacier currently brings, is the fact that this glacier seems to largely be the dam wall, holding much of the ice back. As a result, while Thwaites glacier can increase water levels by an alarming amount, a collapse is predicted to increase global sea levels by between 90cm and 300cm.

In other words, this glacier alone, with a full collapse, as much as 5% of the worlds population will have to move as their home will be under water. Unfortunately far more people may well find that their way of live is no longer possible.

Regular readers of this blog will remember me mentioning this not long ago, unfortunately the last 6 months has shown the situation to be far worse.

See Animals Wild