UK one of the most nature depleted countries; is that a surprise for anyone?

The UK is in the lowest 10% of countries in terms of wildlife depletion. It is also last amongst the G7 of developed nations. It is thought that we have about half of our biodiversity left (average world levels in 75%). More alarming, it is thought that long-term 90% is the lowest level biodiversity can reach safely and sustain itself long-term.

It should be noted, that this biodiversity loss in the UK is not a new thing. Indeed, the UK has survived in this state for quite some time.

There is currently a conference going on in Kumning China, which is trying to address this.

Addressing biodiversity loss alongside carbon reduction would be the most sensible. Halting the loss of carbon sinks, is also very good for the wide range of biodiversity that thrive in its ecosystems. Can we move to doing both in tandem?

A new act in the US congress might have the capability to slow or halt deforestation, or at least force instigators to face financial penalties

The Forest ACT bill would make global suppliers responsible for the illegal deforestation that their products cause.

This is a long overdue issue. Currently, large companies will structure things in such a way, that small farmers and other land users are encouraged to deforest their land, knowing that the big company wishes this, and will buy all their resources.

It cannot work this way. If these companies are made legally responsible for any deforestation that occurs to provide their products, they will manage to put an end to illegal deforestation over night.

As well as enacting this process nationally, the bill would require USA trade partners to buy in on these new rules.

Will it work? Who knows, but it is likely to have a huge impact on deforestation, as if this rule is implemented, it will never pay to deforest.

It cannot be the be all or end all, but is a fantastic first step.

Could mammoth help us fight climate change

Roughly speaking, there is 3000 billion tonnes of carbon in the atmosphere. This is a huge number, but then we have to remember that this is higher than at any other time in human history. Before humans were on the planet, there were time periods where carbon concentrations in the atmosphere were dramatically higher.

While rainforest hold large amounts of carbon, so do bogs. Having lost most of its mega fauna, the colder regions of the planet do not function as they should, so these

However, the problem is that there is thought to be roughly 1600 billion tonnes locked in the permafrost around the world. If global warming continues, this permafrost will melt and release its carbon stores – increasing the carbon concentration by around 50%.

This is obviously a point at which a significant amount of planet warming will be inescapable.

So what needs to happen?

In the past great mammals behaved in such ways that it largely kept this carbon locked in the soil. There were far fewer trees, vast grasslands often covering bogs.

If mammoths were to return, perhaps alongside woolly rhinoceros and bison the same processes could return allowing a far greater quantity of carbon to remain in the permafrost soil.

Will this happen? Who knows, though with the increasing quantity of carbon known to be locked in the Siberian soil, it seems worth giving it a go.

25 biggest European banks are failing on their own green pledges

Over the last decade or so, the laws of countries across the developed world have not kept up with changes in our knowledge of threats to the natural world. As a result, promises to not fund projects that destroy ecosystems are what consumers have to go on in choosing which bank to let use your money.

Yet, out of the 25 biggest European banks none are actually living up to their promises. ShareAction, the body which carried out the research, did state that some banks such as NatWest are doing well on net zero targets, and restricting funding for fossil fuel projects.

Continue reading “25 biggest European banks are failing on their own green pledges”

The Florida manatees are facing significant threat to the long-term survival

Runoff from farms has caused an algae bloom which has not left space for enough sea grasses – the primary food of the manatee.

a Floridian Manatee

Without food the manatee population is severely endangered and likely to suffer mass starvation. 12 manatees have already died this year due to this poisonous algae.

The united fish and wildlife service changed the conservation status of manatees from endangered to threatened in 2019: this was clearly not a good move.

A considerable number of Floridians are blaming the current administration and Rick Scott who has determinately reduce the budget of of these environmental protections. Without a significant changing governmental behaviour this is unlikely to be reversed anytime soon.

Deforestation particularly in protected reserves has happened at an increasing rate in the democratic Republic of Congo

Unfortunately deforestation in the largest remaining African rainforest seems to be going on more and more. Unfortunately not only is this happening in general, at a large quantity of this over the last two decades has also occurred within protected areas.

If this happens across the DRC, there will be many problems particularly as the amount of carbon dioxide released would largely lock in in an unacceptably large amount of temperature rise. However in the natural world, it would also severely damaged the long-term future of gorillas chimps and the last of the bonobos.

How can an average UK household reduce their carbon footprint?

The average UK household has a footprint of around 20 tonnes. Now it is true, that this is well below USA emissions as that is for 4 people – so average emissions of around 5 tonnes per head.

However, with relatively small adjustments, this can be cut dramatically. 12.3% of emissions come from heating, and a further 10.4% comes from electricity.

Furthermore, a significant cut can be made through replacing beef mince with Turkey mince. This can reduce your food carbon footprint by as much as 50%, and given that most mince is eaten in dishes with other foods, it is often unnoticeable

Continue reading “How can an average UK household reduce their carbon footprint?”

Delacour’s langur is a critically endangered monkey with just 300 of these remain in the wild, but now 80% are protected

Delacour’s langur is a severely endangered primate fewer than 300 of these remain in the wild

Delacour Languars are critically endangered, but their future is slightly more secure

What is gratifying about this situation, is that more than 80% of the remaining langurs live within a community reserve that has been set up by the locals being supported by various conservation bodies particularly in Germany.

This reserve has been recognised in an international survey of protected areas that have done the best work for saving wild species.

Indeed it is a perfect example of what can happen with local conservation. 

Indeed it is these sort of projects that we wish to support through the in the shadow of mankind project that we are running on the website.

Palm oil plantations are growing in the northern Amazon and the army seems to be in charge of the forest.

While palm oil plantations are not currently the people doing the clearing in this part of the Amazon, the fact that they are desperate for land means that other people (be them soya farmers or or cattle farmers) find the risk of clearing land is worth it as they know they will be able to sell it to the palm oil plantations.

Much of the invaded land is actually indigenous areas. This has many issues. These invasions bring them into close proximity with people from outside, leading to regular outbreaks of illness. They are also extremely worried about the large quantities of pesticides these palm oil plantations use. Given that much of this land is actually indigenous, it would seem that it should be an incredibly simple legal matter to throw them off it.

Continue reading “Palm oil plantations are growing in the northern Amazon and the army seems to be in charge of the forest.”

Why does the debate continue to be pay to fight climate change or … don’t?

We continue to hear ” fighting climate change is to expensive” in one form or another. 

Problem is that this looks at this issue wrong. Sure, right now it is pay to fight or not, but if we don’t in a couple of decades our children will have to pay terms of times more to undo or damage.

In other words, the decision is pay a little now, or make our children pay huge amounts.

What parent makes that decision? What will future generations make of our collective ambivalence?

Continue reading “Why does the debate continue to be pay to fight climate change or … don’t?”
See Animals Wild