Author: Tim

Posted on

Talking of the Cantabrian bear population of Spain, its growth is incredible – can its success be replicated?

In the 1990s the bear population of this mountain range consisted of about 50-65 in the western population, and 14-20 in the east. No more than 30 years later, that population numbers 300-400 (as much as a 6 fold increase).

How did they do this, and can the success be replicated. It is thought that just two stems were responsible for their recovery.

  1. Firstly, efforts to protect the environment have been successful. With a healthier ecosystem, the country is more capable of sustaining a bear population.
  2. Secondly, education of both locals and visiting tourists has lead to a greater acceptance of the bears. Furthermore, with the success of tourism, locals increasingly seeing the bears as an asset rather than a threat.

These bears are almost entirely vegetarian, and while efficient hunters whatever meat the consume, here it is usually carrion – animals that have naturally died, or been killed by other animals.

As a result, the bears are far less of a threat than wolves (though even wolves can cause little threat if farming is set up correctly). Bee keepers are threatened to a greater degree by the bears, however by returning to ancient bee keeping habits, this can be reduced to a minimum.

With a Bee keeping structure like this, if built properly then bears are incapable of breaking in

Back in the 1950s there is thought to have been as many as 1000 bears in the wilds of Spain, so the population still has some recovery to go through.

Never-the-less this is a good news story that is extremely encouraging that large carnivores and omnivores are still capable of surviving in the modern landscape of a western European country.

This is well worth a visit. A link will hopefully be added to this page in the next week or so

Posted on

Hello – I am back. Wildlife trip watching Cantabrian bears

Currently, we are still a small operation, so when I am away articles cease. This will change we move forwards.

I have been in Spain. I drove our new electric car down and spent a few days in the Cantabrian mountains.

An image showing what much of the Somiedo national park is like

Why the Cantabrian mountains? I visited them with my family some time ago, but with little time available (and two small children in tow) I was unable to get to the right places to see the bears.

That was not the case here.

Continue reading “Hello – I am back. Wildlife trip watching Cantabrian bears”
Posted on

Rare sightings, where even a wildlife guide gets excited Aardvarks and Pangolins – and seeing them in the zoo

When you go on safari, as with other places there are animals that while fascinating you can be almost certain you will not see.

This Aardvark lives at Chester zoo

I am not talking about Black leopards, or white lions – rare genetic mutations which are therefore not always present, and when they are, there might be one or two in the whole of an ecosystem. In recent times, when a black leopard was sighted, a British photographer flew out specifically to stake out the area it was in to get his shot. He did succeed, but spent a whole trip getting the picture (Will Burrard Lucas) flew to the part of Kenya where it had been sighted, and put up camera traps which caught the creature). These are almost impossible to see, as they tend to occur very rarely. The white Lions of Timbivati are very good for this private reserve as it is almost impossible to see wild white lions anywhere else.

No, the animals that are rarely seen (and perhaps for most would not feature on a list of 100 animals they would like to see) tend to be nocturnal. I am talking of animals like the Aardvark and the pangolin. Often these species are also extremely fussy eaters, which means that not only are they incredibly hard to see in the wild, but they are incredibly hard to keep alive in captivity – increasingly zoos are starting to get these fascinating animals, as the unfounded belief that pangolin scales can treat a variety of conditions has pushed all species nearer to extinction (so it is becoming increasingly necessary to have a captive population to back up the wild one).

In the UK, the only place that you can see an Aardvark is in Colchester zoo, where they have a group of them. Knowing this, Colchester zoo is one of those that I will visit as often as I get the chance, and spend a significant amount of time by the Aardvark burrow hoping to see them awake.

Our visit last week was incredibly lucky, as the Aardvarks had to be weighed, so they all had to wake up and be moved around. I hope to put together a video after the summer, with pictures of Aardvark burrows in the wild, and the animal in captivity. If I am very lucky, I will be able to add in some wild Aardvark pictures but this is very unlikely.

Either way, a video will be coming in the Autumn – to our youtube channel. Do subscribe so as to not miss it (there are many more videos in the pipeline) https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsz9rwvtlpsdQgB-52CY-_w

This link will take you to our youtube channel.

We have 2 trips planned in the next few months. Later this week, I am travelling to Spain in the hope of seeing bears and wolves, and over August, my family are travelling to Kruger national park. Our aim is to film many videos during these trips, and be able to add greatly to what is listed on the channel.

Posted on

1 in 5 (1800) reptiles around the world are facing extinction

Impacts on the worlds ecosystems from this many animals disappearing could have disastrous effects. The loss of this many reptiles could cause knock-on effects such as huge increase in the number of insects. As much as 30% of forest dwelling reptiles are threatened by extinction, due to their homes being cut down.

Reptiles are often quite beautiful, but we would also miss what they do- if they ceased to be there

Hunting is also adding an unhelpful pressure, as many reptile species have skins that can be made into items for human consumption.

In some countries such as the UK, it is usually looked down on so much, that you rarely see reptile skins (we have other problems) but elsewhere this is not the same. Reptiles are also very important seed dispersers

Posted on

Climate pledges are now high enough to be confident in keeping global emissions below 2 degrees, how to get down to 1.5 or even less

For anyone who has thought about it, the way that limiting temperature rise has been discussed has been ridiculous. Up till now, hitting 1.9 degrees average warming would be a success, allowing 2.0 would be complete failure.

We need instead to recognize that for any reduction in average global temperatures that we are able to achieve, there is a significant reward.

The work is not done, until the human race is no longer adding pollution to the atmosphere.

We need as a human race, to be replanting vast areas of the planet. We need to be cutting our emissions as fast as possible, and we need to be looking for ways to capture and lock away as much carbon as we can.

Posted on

Carbon dioxide levels is 50% higher than pre-industrialized levels!

Regularly the claim is made that, we may be adding carbon to the atmosphere but we are not changing the number by to great a degree. Well that excuse is now also gone – we have increased carbon emissions by 50%. This means that the planet is entering a condition that it has not been in for millions of years – far before humans arrived.

Why does this matter? There was life back at this time, wasn’t there? Well of course there was. However, last time the carbon dioxide concentration levels were this high, average temperatures were 2-3 degrees higher and sea levels were 15-25m above where they are now. Nowadays 634 million people live 10m above the sea level or less, approximately 10% of the human population – other studies put this number as high as 1 billion. The paper Nature communications 267 million people live on land 2m above sea level or less. Nearly 2 billion live at 100m height or less.

It is reasonable to suppose that perhaps 1 billion would be heavily effected by sea levels rising 25m- needing to move to other countries rapidly. Furthermore places like the UK would get a lot smaller and become more of an archipelago.

Last year there were less than 300 million migrants worldwide, and yet there is a great deal of worry about this. What would it be like if 1 billion people had to emigrate over a relatively short period of time – and this would be permanent – there would be no chance of these people every returning home.

This fails to take account of the fact that there would likely also be a similar number of people who would have to move from parts of the planet which are too hot to support human life any more.

Cutting carbon emissions very fast is now essential, but it is not enough. We also need to be removing billions of tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere.

Posted on

UK electricity generation to be carbon neutral by 2035 says Boris Johnson

By 2030 all cars sold will need to be electric or some other form of fuel. Combustion engines will be banned, this is good news. However, if the national grid continues to burn fossil fuels, the cars will still pollute, even if their efficiency, and therefore the amount of emissions that they create will have fallen.

This will mean that all power in the UK will come from wind, solar, hydro and nuclear.

One of the big advantages, is that this will shield us from price rises of gas impacting electricity prices. Unfortunately, at this time, many houses will still be heated by gas. This can be replaced over time.

At the moment gas power plants are still very important for keeping the lights on in the uk, but this will disappear over the next 15 years.

While there are still challenges, what we need as a country is to be moving in the right direction as fast as possible. Renewables plus nuclear is already above 50% – renewables supplied 43% with nuclear adding another 16%.

By removing carbon emissions from our electricity generation and travel, each family in the UK will cut their emissions by about 17%. No where near finished, but a very good start.

Posted on

Tanzania reimposes a rule banning export of animals, one day after they rescinded the ban put in place 2016

The ban was to be lifted for traders to clear their stocks, and would have been lifted from the start of June to the start of December.

Outrage forced the minister in charge to reverse the change within 24 hours.

WWF the worldwide famous conservation organisation warned on Saturday that relaxing this ban would undermine progress made in wildlife protection, particularly by encouraging poaching which has been on the decline in recent years.

Hosting 50% of Africa’s lions, Tanzania is essential for the thriving of many species and so this is a good thing.

Posted on

A study found that 3/4 of oil palm concessions in Indonesia and Malaysian Borneo certified by RSPO were forest or wildlife habitat just 30 years ago!

It seems that so long as the initial cause of the deforestation was not palm oil (or perhaps not the current owners of the palm oil farm?), then even if it is immediately converted into palm oil plantations, it can be counted as sustainable.

I think that few people would claim that practices like this are sustainable

This is absurd. It should obviously be the case that if an area is deforested illegally, then it should be reforested, not get the right to permanently become part of the crop areas.

Not really good.

It essentially means that the RSPO affiliation means nothing, as those of us concerned about the destruction of the rainforest and the loss of the biodiversity that it contains cannot trust them at all. I have written in the past, about Newquay zoo getting its signs wrong on avoiding palm oil. What is clear, is that almost none of the palm oil from Indonesia can claim to be avoiding deforestation as you’d expect. Has the RSPO destroyed their authority for ever? Time will tell.

What is clear is that this is not a new thing. Back in 2016 the Huffington post wrote an article “RSPO: Completely Worthless, or Just Mostly Worthless? (UPDATED)” (click the article to read it in another tab) in which it basically outlines many of the points from this latest assessment. This study was more thorough, so can tell us the extent of the problem, but what is clear is that it is not new.

Should the RSPO be given a second chance? I would argue not. If they have not cleaned up shop in 6 years, then there is going to be little rainforest left before they actually get their act together. Can it be done? Ferrero is ranked number 1 out of 173 by WWF on sustainable palm oil sourcing. Clearly it can be done – However, brands that hold onto RSPO may well start being avoided by the eco-concerned. If they are that useless then why even look for their mark

Posted on

A simple change in how bitcoin is verified, could cut energy consumption by 99%

Bitcoin and other crypto currencies have rightly gained a reputation of using insane amounts of power to run. Even by using the excess heat to heat other buildings, it is still a problem.
Bitcoin mining already uses as much power as Sweden. However this could all change. Currently, the software uses, “proof of work” which requires massive computer arrays to validate purchases.

Rival system such as Ethereum uses “Proof of Stake” where miners have to pledge their coins to verify transactions. Any inaccurate information leads to penalties.

With how much energy bitcoin is using, they must follow suit or find another way to cut their energy demands dramatically.

Bitcoin mining is requiring so much power, that coal powerplant stations that are due for dismantling are being given a reprieve. This is concerning, particularly in America where their power grid had made much progress, but could see all this reverserd.

We do not want to be in a world, where countries that do not clean up how they power the grid, can make huge piles more money, simply by continuing to pollute.

See Animals Wild