Wentworth Group of concerned Scientists estimate that for just $7.3 billion a year for 30 years, most extinctions could be avoided as well as repairing soil and restoring rivers. That sounds like quite a lot? Well, invasive species cost the Australian government $24.3 billion a year now.
Recovery of some of the endangered species, could well save more than they cost to save, in reducing this invasive species bill. This would also improve agricultural output, as a result of improved soil health.
The Siamese crocodile is recovering in Cambodia, with 60 hatched babies this year – more than at any time this century. Five nests were found by locals at the end of June with the eggs that resulted in these crocodilians. Thought extinct, until being rediscovered in Cambodia they have made an impressive recovery since 2012 when the project started, with 196 of this species returned to the wild in the last dozen years.
Local community wardens regularly cross the mountainous area, to check on them. In recent times, they have been observed in new territory, suggesting that their population is growing again naturally.
The skeleton above is the closest we can get to a real mammoth, as a result of their extinction. However, it is not the only missing large species – indeed, the elephant family alone, is thought to have around 30 extinct members. Aside from these, there are 2 known extinct species of the woolly rhino, cave lions and sabre-toothed tigers, and various species of bear, among many others.
If you go back 50,000 years, there were 57 species of megaherbivores (herbivores weighing over a ton), yet just 11 of these survive today – these include the elephant species, the rhino species the hippo and the giraffe.
Around the world, there are invasive species – from grey squirrels in the UK, to Macaques on Gibraltar, however, all these pale on comparison to having to live with wild elephants.
The elephants were bought to the Andaman islands in the late 19th century, to work in the timber operation, which continued until the last few decades. Thankfully, much of the forest in the islands survives – with some islands retaining almost 90% forest cover. This means that the elephants might well be able to thrive into the future.
The islands lie 850 miles from the coast of India, which means that while elephants would not have existed natively on the islands, there are many species which would be found in the same area.
Interview Island and North Andaman hosts these elephants – though they need to be watched, as a population of 100 elephants is already small, but if split between 2 islands, humans may well have to be helped to remain genetically varied enough to survive long-term.
While some have suggested that the elephants have damaged biodiversity, with some species having become less common, this ignores the impact of the timber extraction – it is far more likely that this is an impact of the many decades of pulling specific trees out of the forest.
Given the endangered status of the Indian elephant, this population is precious, but whether it can be left where it is long-term is something we do not know. There are still roughly 30,000 elephants in India, but the Andaman island elephants are going to need to be watch, long-term, to make sure that they do not damage species only found in their new home.
It is thought that the Galapagos housed a population of roughly 200,000-300,000 giant tortoises, before humans arrived. This compares to a population of around 15,000 at the current time. Rangers have been trying to boost the rate of recovery, by taking eggs from the wild, raising the tortoises in captivity and releasing them, when their survival is more likely – with 560 animals returned to the wild in 2023 (it should be noted, that wild this is an impressive number, at that rate, it would take several centuries for the population to fully recover).
The project (Iniciativa Galapagos) aims to rewild 15 species across the range, including the giant tortoise, iguana and wandering tortoise.
This is a video of one of the clashes that I am talking about. The Grizzley bear population in 1975 ( in the lower 48 states) was just 700-800 (this excludes Alaska, where the current figure is 30,000) . The lower 48 states population has grown to around 1000 or an almost 50% increase.
There is a problem with this. Both in and out of Alaska (as well as Canada) these bears need space, and so are colonizing land that they previously roamed. Unfortunately, people rapidly forget how to live with animals like grizzly bears, so it is taking some significant work to live alongside these large animals once again.
The problem is, that when those encounters spike, generally authorities panic, and this generally leads to them looking to allow hunting once again. THIS IS DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE POPULATION IS NO-WHERE NEAR RECOVERED AT THE CURRENT TIME.
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.
One of our systems is not working as it should be, hence the wrong look today. It has been disabled, which is allowing the website to run, but will run slower and not quite right until we fix, sorry for the interruption
We will put out more articles, while we try to fix the underlying issue
There is still large areas of wildernesses in places like Romania, but this needs to spread across the continent.
What will it do?
Restore at least 20% of the EU’s land and sea areas by 2030Â
Restore all ecosystems in need of restoration by 2050Â
Set legally binding targets for nature restoration in terrestrial, marine, freshwater, and urban ecosystemsÂ
Maintain and increase urban green space and urban tree canopy coverÂ
Restore at least 25,000 km of rivers into free-flowing rivers by 2030Â
Plant at least three billion additional trees by 2030Â
This plan was dropped in March as a result of Hungary blocking it, as well as Austria and a variety of other groups. It is unfortunate, that often in order to meet an agreement, the environmental rules are often watered down so much as to become meaningless. It was cleared, after Austria changed its mind (it should be noted that the Hungarian MEPs were in favour and it is only the Hungarian government that got in the way – as they often are; unfortunately the leader of Hungary Victor Orban is not helpful, and is often the block for the EU. Whether this will change in the near future is anyones guess.
Still this will have to be implemented across the continent to be useful. Having said this, should it be successful it is likely to have a big impact.
Increasingly, it seems Shell is a company which repeatedly makes pledges when the light is on them, and then backs away, when no one is looking any more.
In the summer, they dropped a pledge to turn 1 million tonnes of plastic a year, back into oil. They now say that this goal is unfeasible. Advanced, or chemical recycling, involves breaking down plastic polymers into tiny molecules, ready to be reformed into something else. The most common method is called pyrolysis – which uses heat.
They first used pyrolysis in 2019, when they made oil using this process in a Louisiana chemical plant. It should be noted, that this uses so much energy, it is likely to be worse for the worlds climate than continued use of virgin plastics (this is not to say that we should, but that this is not a viable solution). Shell has suggested that this pledge is impossible as a result of not enough plastic waste coming back to them, but as hundreds of millions of plastic is created each year, this seems rather a cop-out.
They are not the only company to back away, but they are the latest. It should not be possible to get off the hook by simply making a declaration, but instead should require them to do something else that will have a similarly positive impact on the world
