Wildlife and conservation new, wild travel information and links for booking
Sumatran tigers are known to live in the Leucer ecosystem of Sumatra, but camera traps from the next door state in Aceh. This is exciting, as the population is dangerously low, but may be less low than we thought.
This does not change their conservation status, but may mean that they are more secure than we thought.
While these fuels power much of the creation of electricity around the world, as well as most transport and heating, they all need to either be left in the ground or 100% of their emissions. Below is a roundup of a group of articles of importance on these subjects.
Uk’s £22 billion carbon capture pledge follows surge in lobbying by fossil fuel industry, records show
Continue reading “Oil, Gas and coal roundup ( more in future)”
The car industry has done a great job over the last roughly 30 years, of confusing people. It was once the case, that there were 2 different states – the first cars were electric (so suggesting that modern electric cars are a new technology is ridiculous) and then we developed internal combustion engine vehicles. This meant that there were 2 different types of propulsion 1. fossil fuels (petrol, diesel) or 2. electric cars, charged from the mains.
Toyota developed the Prius back in 1997. At the time, a huge step forwards – it only had a battery of 1.3kwh, but this was enough to store energy recovered from braking and release it back, when the car was able to start moving again. This was the first mild hybrid as it is now called.
Continue reading “Motoring body saying “UK needs to ban full hybrid cars by 2030 or face net zero ‘catastrophe’ (only cars that can drive on pure electricity)”
Now the article (click here to read) goes on and on about this, talking about Musks previous perspective on Hydrogen, the roads being full of this future “stupid fuel” and how this might impact tesla future (suggesting dual fuel would be good – it did not help Toyota).
So, while this article came out in early November, the fact check that I have looked at came out in December (I am sure that there was an earlier one). Click here to read the fact-check but it is outlined below.
It is thought that the rumours came from various online videos and articles, with one specific piece frequently regularly cited. However, despite the fact-checkers tried to find this cited evidence, they were unable to find any about a Model H. Further more, large tech companies did not report this.
Given Elon Musk’s historic disgust on the use of Hydrogen in cars, it should take a lot of evidence to suggest that this was right. Furthermore, the suggestion that Tesla would have fully switched by 2025, rather than offering both is particularly ridiculous.
Is this false story good for Eldario24? Well, clearly it had a moment in the sun, but certainly I will not be bookmarking them. I believe that they should be punished for their behaviour.
The problem with stopping deforestation, is that for the majority of the world we are far removed from rainforests (from where I sit in the UK, I would have to travel 3250km (over 2000 miles) to the nearest rainforest, which is an area on mainland India). Indeed, rainforest is generally something that only survives in developing countries.
This means that, for most people, they either live far removed from the rainforest, and so cant see it impacting them, or they live near a rainforest, but are struggling to provide for their family and those around them. It is quite true that many people in both the first and third world would like the rainforest to survive – indeed, should you talk to people in the west, many are very worried about the survival of the great apes, who are rapidly loosing land.
The problem is simple. Those living in the third world are living hand to mouth, so unless they work in tourism, the rainforest is often an inconvenience that makes life harder.
In 2023 a total of 6.4 hectares of forest were destroyed – more than 25,000 square miles. However, more concerning is the fact that 62.6 million hectares of forest (almost quarter of a million square miles) was degraded – for road building, logging, and forest fires. Degraded land is often less good for carbon storage, as well as conservation of the worlds wild species. It is often, then not long, before someone comes along a removes the rest of the plants so that the land can be used for something else.
And what was this deforestation for (other than logs)? Beef, soy, palm oil paper and nickel.
The Brazilian Amazon is one of the bright spots, where since the election of Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, deforestation has fallen 62%. Unfortunately, in the same time period, Indonesia’s deforestation is up 57%
It seems hard to see how the world will meet its goal of cutting deforestation to zero by 2030 as most countries have pledged. Also, despite reductions in deforestation, the Amazon has had one of the hardest years in terms of forest fires – something that only gets more likely as rainforests are lost, and climate change increases the temperature in many parts of the world. It is a sad fact, that there is often not a great deal of temperature difference between a rainforest which is functioning, and one that dries out and becomes a fire hazard.
Having said all this… a study in Indonesia has found that controlled low-intensity logging doesn’t have to negatively impact a forest in terms of carbon storage or food availability – this in turn means that much wildlife can survive.
The problem often is that if the land is in private hands, then low- intensity logging is not going to happen. If the landowner has decided to deforest, they will raze the land. In national parks, in theory low intensive logging would be possible, but this would require people to control the logging, and this is the issue that we have in the first place. Unfortunately, despite the pledge by 140 countries, deforestation is coming back.
In a related subject, the Indonesian president Prabowo Subianto has stated that palm oil expansion won’t deforest because palm oil has leaves. There are many issues with this, but perhaps primarily amongst them, when forests are cut down, they are usually replaced with grass lands for grazing cattle – these are also covered in leaves. This is obviously stupid – it may well be a better thing, that the rainforest is going to be replaced with plantations, but it has been shown that palm oil plantations take up a tiny proportion of the carbon that rainforests take up.
In another article, there was a finding that macaques living in palm oil plantations have an alarming infant mortality. Unfortunately, these macaques are not unique in being threatened by palm oil, but others include orangutans, elephants, tigers, pangolins, bonobos, and Irrawaddy dolphins.
While palm oil may be a better vegetable oil than other crops, it still looks like it will lead to us loosing most of our rainforests, unless a grip on this is found.
The eastern black rhino is incredibly endangered, with just 1000 spread across a huge area. In this region, just 8 are known to live, so to see young is incredibly rare.
Rhino horn is incredibly valuable on the far East traditional medicine market, despite the fact that multiple scientific studies have shown that the rhino horn does nothing for humans. Never-the-less, this unmet demand for rhino horn, linked with the huge explosion of wealth in places like China, means that rhino horn is incredible valuable. While eastern black rhino horns rarely weigh more than 3kg, this can still be worth $200,000, which is very tempting, in a country where the average salary is under $200 a month.
As living conditions increase in the area, the desire to poach these animals is likely to decrease. Of course, these rhino are also likely to be worth similar amounts in tourism dollars across their lifetime, but that is a long-term thing, and something that the whole area benefits from (rather than the poacher, who is often struggling to make ends meet – though middlemen are instead making a fortune).
A small herd of 170 bison, released into a 20 square miles area of Tarcu mountains in Romania, are estimated to allow the land to capture 59,000 tones of carbon each year.
Big animals like this, stimulate the soil and plant growth, allowing the soil and plant growth to take up far more carbon than without them. Although Romania is one of the wildest countries in Europe, the European Bison was lost around 200 years ago. Between 2014 and 2021, 100 bison were reintroduced into the area, and that population has naturally grown such that there are now 170.
Scientists estimate that the lands carbon storing potential is as much as 10 times greater with the bison (they suggest that it is between 5 and 15 times more carbon.
Continue reading “Could Bison allow the land to reduce air pollution? – Yes”
Large parts of Australia look like the above photo, beautiful in a rugged way, but quite useless for the survival of many of Australia species. Australia has a wide range of habitats, which means that there are many areas which need to be protected.
The problem is, according to this study, declaring an area protected appears to be having little change on what is happened.
1/3 of all land that is set aside for restoration and conservation, has got worse rather than better. Given the fact that so many species are just hanging on to existence, this could be very bad news.
In one area that was studied, the majority of the area was cleared paddock – a serious problem for the koala and grey-headed flying fox which called the area home.
In particular, the idea of this scheme is so called biodiversity offsetting – if you are to clear wildlife habitat, you protect a similar sized area elsewhere.
Continue reading “Analysis has found that 1/3 of land set aside for restoration is worse than before in Australia”
Tigers once roamed Russia from East to West, but by the mid 19th century, the population had fallen to just 1000. However, the question is what was it like originally? Well, one thing we have found out in the last decade, was the fact that the Caspian tiger never existed, this was instead, merely the most westerly population of the Amur tiger. The scary thing about this, is it suggests that the Amur tiger would have roamed possibly millions of square miles of land – and presumably have existed in huge numbers, perhaps over 100,000, though the decline in these numbers is likely to predate modern humans (our ancient pre homo-erectus ancestors were incredibly efficient at killing mega-fauna, thought to be responsible for much of the worlds extinct mega fauna).
While parts of the western end of the tigers range are now well populated by humans, there are still vast areas ready for the tigers return – such as countries like Kazakhstan. This move is perhaps less of a jump forwards – never-the-less, tigers have not been seen in this new area for 50 years.
The Amur tiger population dropped very low, which means that these 6 initial translocations are well suited to form an initial core for the new population, though to retain genetic diversity, it will be necessary to translocate tigers back and forth for the next few decades, until both tiger populations are more safe.
We are a long way from the Pri-Amur tiger population being viable in the long-term, but this reintroduction is a good first step. I hope to see an acceleration of these reintroductions (it was a decade ago that translocation into Kazakhstan was discussed, and this has not yet happened). Is this just the first step in allowing the Amur tiger to return to former haunts, or will this be the only step? Time will tell, but at its worst, this should double the habitat, and potentially the population of the Amur Tiger, and is therefore healthy.
Wolves have only recently returned to Austria, with an estimated 80 wolves spread throughout the country. It is perhaps not surprising therefore, that animal welfare activists, took the government to court, when it set cull numbers at 20, or 25% of the population a year.
The Austrian government had pointed to a condition in the 1992 EU directive on protecting wildlife, which states that wolf hunting to prevent financial damage can only be done if the population is in a favourable conservation status – something certainly not true in Austria. This condition can only apply to a wolf population which is stable.
I would also suggest that plans to kill 25% of the population each year, should also damage this, but this is a discussion for another day – when the population is far larger than it currently is. Other countries like Holland have similar sized wolf populations, and so this ruling could be applied in a variety of places.
Regional governments have absurdly argued that the wolf is no longer endangered in Austria, and that therefore its protection should be reduced. had the government listened would a ruling similar to the USA have come forward? Such that open season could be declared?
It is a good thing that wolves are so good at holding on, as we have spent much of our time attacking.
It is funny to think, that it is estimated our relationship with wolves (in the form of domesticating them as dogs) likely goes back to a similar point to the advent of growing crops, and well before the time that we started to keep livestock.
Given our fondness of dogs has deeper roots than our fear of wolves, it seems odd, that wolf persecution ever really got underway. It is true that wolf populations do need handling, but their existence is more good than bad. Places like the UK where they are missing, show this (when looked at the situation rationally)
Join as an ambassador supporter to
support this site, help save wildlife
and make friends & log in
