Scientists and researchers have been able to watch the introduction of a new skill, but this one arrived very fast, on some of the islands within Thailand. This perhaps shows the intelligence of the Long-tailed macaques in question rather than being any sudden change. The requirement to develop the skills occurred because the arrival of COVID meant that tourists, who often give food to the monkeys, dried up almost overnight.
While many of these tourism activities were (and likely are) labelled as eco-tourism, clearly there needs to be a big change, if humans had such a big impact on these monkeys wild behaviour.
Monkeys on Thailand islands, rapidly developed tool use when Covid dried up the tourist handouts
Monkeys around the world often come to rely on tourist handouts far to readily. Monkeys on some of the Thailand islands rapidly developed the ability to use tools, when the tourist handouts ended as a result of covid.
This shows their incredible intelligence and their ability to adapt rapidly, and it also shows how much easier tourists are making the lives of some wild animals (while at the same time making life for others hard or impossible).
It also asks the question – is taking food from tourists tool use? If so, there are a very wide range of species that use a tool, if one which requires very little intelligence on the part of the animal
Camp Granit – Sumatran rainforest (not the same place)
There is a variety of different causes for deforestation. However, the majority of the work is usually done by individuals – often for subsistence farming, though often the land is only fertile for a short period of time, requiring more rainforest to be cut down.
However, if people on the ground know that cutting down the rainforest will make life worse, then they will not do it.
Efron Simanjuntak (clickhereto see a photo in a new window) was once a successful logger (illegally) in Sumatra. In 2017 he was caught, and in 2018 he was imprisoned for 2 years. In these two years, he had a lot of time to think, and realized the damage that he was doing.
The wolf disappeared from Holland around 1870, though their decline was rapid – in 1760 (just over 100 years before) people in Brabant talked of a wolf plague). In 2015, the wolf was first sighted in Holland, and while some people had said that Holland was to densly populated to allow the wolf to return, this seemed to be wrong. Wolves have returned to many of the countries around Holland, and so it seems quite odd to think that it wasn’t considered that they would cross into Holland.
In 2022, there were thought to be 4 packs of wolves (including 16 pups) as well as an individual wolf. This number has, however, grown fast in the time since, and the current number is thought to be 9 packs. What is even more exciting, it is predicted that the country can support between 23 and 56 wolf packs at a minimum – which as a wolf pack contains 6-7 wolves on average, means a total population of between 138 and 392. It should be noted, that this number is not likely to remain genetically healthy into the long-term, however Germany has a wolf population of over 1000, and while these are mostly based in the East of the country, wolves disperse great distances, so it is likely that genetic material will arrive naturally, relatively regularly. There is also a founding (if small) population of wolves in Belgium, thought to number between 15 and 24 (it is also predicted to grow by 30% a year.
There is a problem, the Hoge-Velue is one of Hollands biggest reserves, but it is owned privately. They have decided that wolves are not welcome, and are making efforts to kill those that get through their fence. This is because, without the wolf, deer are easily seen within the reserve, and they believe that the number of tourists will dry up, if it becomes hard to see the red deer, as well as the roe deer and boar.
I find this attitude rather baffling and perverse. Furthermore, when we were there last year, we spent time in the government owned reserve, which borders the Hoge-Velue, this is government owned, and wolves have settled here. I spent a number of nights within the reserve in a hide. I did not get to see a wolf (though I met a local who had a wide range of fantastic shots he had taken over the previous years), but while watching and waiting in the hide, I saw red and roe deer, as well as wild boar, in significant numbers. The idea that someone would believe that the amount of tourism visiting after wolves return would decrease, seems quite contrary to what usually happens elsewhere.
Wolves are a part of Hollands animal food web, and while it is likely to take some time to get used to living with them present once again, it is going to allow the whole ecosystem to thrive. I feel frustrated, that in the UK, we do not have a similar situation, where wolves can simply wander across an unmarked border. I do believe that in the end, wolves will return to the UK (our food web is horrifically out of balance because of a lack of predators), however, on the last occasion that it was debated, numbers from a very specific country were used to block any further discussion (Click here to read a previous article on this subject, or visit the wolf page here to get a complete list of all occasions that they have been mentioned on this site)
Borneon orangutan mother with her offspring – photo credit stockcake (Photo by <a href=”https://stockcake.com/i/orangutan-treetop-rest_758559_866654″>Stockcake</a>)
Life is hard in the Indonesian rainforest – compared to Africa and South America, there is very little to be found to eat (except in specific areas. As a result, orangutans become solitary, with the only time they are seen together is a mother with young, or a courting couple. Another problem, is demonstrated here – there is so little food to be had, that every food opportunity has to be realized. This has meant that orangutans have become the best climbers (followed by Chimpanzee and then Gorilla), as where ever the food is, it needs to be accessed.
It is true, that with tools, humans can become even better climbers (as can be seen from the image), which is taken from further up the tree than the orangutans have even climbed.
News article on a recent study on chimpanzee medicine
It would appear that chimpanzee medicine is quite a complicated field.
Christella parasitica: A fern with anti-inflammatory properties that one chimp ate to reduce pain and swelling in an injured hand
Scutia myrtina: A cat-thorn tree whose bark was consumed by a chimp with a parasitic infection
Khaya anthotheca: An East African mahogany tree whose bark and resin have anti-inflammatory effects
Antiaris toxicaria: A plant with leaves that have anti-tumour properties
Cordia abyssinica: A plant with pith that has anti-malarial and anti-bacterial properties
Ficus capensis: A plant with anti-bacterial properties
Ficus natalensis: A plant with bark that has anti-diarrheal properties
Ficus urceolaris: A plant with leaves that act as a de-worming agent
Vernonia amygdalina: An African relative of the daisy whose pith is consumed to get rid of intestinal worms
They have been known to apply insects to injuries – the insects may have anti-inflammatory or antiseptic properties that help heal wounds. Chimpanzees also have quite a range of cultural behaviours, so there are some of their behaviours with little notable purpose behind them (though it is possible that some or all of these may prove to have a purpose that we as observers have not yet discovered)
This is a significant range of conditions that can be treated, though it should also be noted, that this knowledge is likely to be shared in the group, as no one individual will have seen their mother suffer from all these conditions.
While gorilla medicine does not appear to be quite as advanced, it does include
Fromager tree (Ceiba pentandra) – The bark of this tree contains chemicals that are effective against multidrug-resistant strains of E. coli.
Giant yellow mulberry (Myrianthus arboreus) – The bark of this tree contains chemicals that are effective against multidrug-resistant strains of E. coli.
African teak (Milicia excelsa) – The bark of this tree contains chemicals that are effective against multidrug-resistant strains of E. coli.
Fig trees (Ficus) – The bark of these trees contains chemicals that are effective against multidrug-resistant strains of E. coli.
Orangutans have also been observed –
Rakus the Sumatran orangutan – In June 2022, researchers observed Rakus treating a wound on his cheek with a poultice made from the leaves of the Akar Kuning plant. Rakus chewed the leaves, applied the juice to the wound, and repeated the process several times. The wound was fully closed within eight days. This was the first time scientists observed a wild animal using a medicinal plant to treat an injury.
Bornean orangutans have been observed eating plants with known medicinal properties, including ginger leaves and stem, and plants used by traditional healers to treat internal illness, tumors, and hemorrhage.
Orangutans also use plant extracts to treat pain.
Dracaena cantleyi – A study found that orangutans use the bioactive properties of Dracaena cantleyi for self-medication.
Manniophyton fulvum – Bonobos have been observed swallowing the leaves and stem strips of this plant, which has medicinal properties.
Leaf-swallowing – Bonobos may swallow leaves as a form of self-medication. One hypothesis is that the leaves act as a time-release capsule, with medicinal and scouring effects.
Overlapping plant use – Bonobos’ food repertoire overlaps with many plant species used by local populations to treat disease.
It perhaps should not be a surprise that other great apes have the ability to treat simple ailments – after all, there are a wide range of illnesses, for which a sensible treatment is very simple. One of the most common simple long known treatments in humans in dock leaves – when rubbed on a stinging nettle sting, it greatly reduces both the pain and irritancy of the of the sting. It is not even restricted to the great apes with birds, bees, lizards, and elephants all regularly treating simple conditions. Even a domestic dog knows to eat grass when feeling sick.
Of the slightly over 8 billion humans on earth, 4.641 billion, or just under 60% live in Asia. While this is expected to grow to 5.25 billion people in 2055 it will only be 54% (due to increasing populations elsewhere in the world) of global population at the time.
So, what is the problem? An average fertility rate of 2.1 is currently considered necessary to maintain population levels (that is, 2.1 births per female). When the fertility rate drops below this rate, there are not enough babies being born to replace all of the people dying. As environmentalists, this is good, as the human population is thought (by some) to be too high to sustainable retain long-term (estimates as to what population the earth can sustain long-term range from a relatively small 0.65 billion to an enormous 9-10 billion). Of course, it depends on what we consider as sustainable survival – for me, and I hope for most of you, what I would consider sustainable, would be a low enough population to allow all other species on earth to thrive, so I would suggest that a number near the bottom of this list is more reasonable.
Below, we will look at a range of Asian countries with large populations
The Chinese government has introduced a carbon neutral policy, in an attempt to mitigate and reduce the impact of climate change. Under the expected model for what is going to happen to the climate (at the current time) the North Chinaleopard will gain in range, However, with the increase in carbon emissions, this territory is also expected to the reduction, migration, and fragmentation of the suitable habitat distribution of the North China leopard. It should be noted, that under genetic analysis, some authorities merged the north China leopard with the Amur leopard. Many disagree with this.
Havin said this, carbon neutrality policies can protect suitable wild habitats when carefully planned. In the future, the impact of carbon neutrality policies on future wildlife habitat protection should be carried out in depth to effectively promote the construction of wildlife protection projects – for instance, by making sure that planted woodland matches native woodland, and therefore adds to existing ecosystems. In many parts of the world, trees planted for carbon sequestration are often picked for how fast they grow – and thus eucalyptus trees have often been used. The problem with this, is that they are often impossible of supporting local wildlife, from insects to birds and even mammals. This was seen clearly in the UK, where a pine plantation replaced an oak woodland, the number of species supported, dropped from 200 to just 4.
The North China leopard is considered critically endangered, with the population definitely under 400 (given its remote habitat, a clear count is hard to get. It is undeniable that the North China Leopard and the Amur Leopard are genetically close, and quite conceivably closer than they should be for 2 subspecies. Should these 2 subspecies be recognized as one, it would allow us to greatly expand the genetic makeup of both populations. This would likely have a huge impact on both areas, and allow each population to expand rapidly.
It is essential, that as we grow huge areas of forest, to soak up as much of our carbon emissions as possible, that these fit into their ecosystems and are a positive addition. Apart from this appearing to be common sense (why would you not boost endangered species around the world, if we have to plant these forests anyway) but also, should you plant fast growing trees from elsewhere, very often they die, or cause serious issues elsewhere.
The right climate mitigation will have a bigger and longer term impact, something that is essential.
The Cao Vit gibbon is a species found on the border of Vietnam and China. Only thought to number 74 in the wild (and having suffered a loss of 38% of the population in recent years, this is a little known and critically endangered species. Once thought to be a subspecies of the Hainan black crested gibbon, it was found to be far to distinct for this.
Its name is an attempt at mimicking its name.
While in the past it has been hunted, and could be the reason that the population is so low, its biggest threats at the current time, include loss of habitat, and habitat degradation for firewood.
This species was already only thought to have a wild population of 120, however the population has been found to have fallen to just 74 (a 38% reduction).
Before and after (after being above) image of a river in the Amazon rainforest
Why is this a problem? Well there are several issues that should concern everyone. The natural end of the line, is for the complete loss of the Amazon rainforest. There is much fear that it may be another tipping point, and that therefore, once the rainforest starts failing, it would accelerate the loss of the rest.
