<aside> 💡
AI Summary:
Biodiversity loss is a critical global issue threatening ecosystems and human well-being:
Source: “We are in the sixth mass extinction event. Unlike the previous five, this one is caused by the overgrowth of a single species, Homo sapiens. Although the episode is often viewed as an unusually fast (in evolutionary time) loss of species, it is much more threatening, because beyond that loss, it is causing rapid mutilation of the tree of life, where entire branches (collections of species, genera, families, and so on) and the functions they perform are being lost. It is changing the trajectory of evolution globally and destroying the conditions that make human life possible. It is an irreversible threat to the persistence of civilization and the livability of future environments for H. sapiens. Instant corrective actions are required.”
Source: “The global-scale decline of animal biodiversity (‘defaunation’) represents one of the most alarming consequences of human impacts on the planet. The quantification of this extinction crisis has traditionally relied on the use of IUCN Red List conservation categories assigned to each assessed species. This approach reveals that a quarter of the world’s animal species are currently threatened with extinction, and ~1% have been declared extinct. However, extinctions are preceded by progressive population declines through time that leave demographic ‘footprints’ that can alert us about the trajectories of species towards extinction. Therefore, an exclusive focus on IUCN conservation categories, without consideration of dynamic population trends, may underestimate the true extent of the processes of ongoing extinctions across nature. In fact, emerging evidence (e.g. the Living Planet Report), reveals a widespread tendency for sustained demographic declines (an average 69% decline in population abundances) of species globally. Yet, animal species are not only declining. Many species worldwide exhibit stable populations, while others are even thriving. Here, using population trend data for >71,000 animal species spanning all five groups of vertebrates (mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians and fishes) and insects, we provide a comprehensive global-scale assessment of the diversity of population trends across species undergoing not only declines, but also population stability and increases. We show a widespread global erosion of species, with 48% undergoing declines, while 49% and 3% of species currently remain stable or are increasing, respectively. Geographically, we reveal an intriguing pattern similar to that of threatened species, whereby declines tend to concentrate around tropical regions, whereas stability and increases show a tendency to expand towards temperate climates. Importantly, we find that for species currently classed by the IUCN Red List as ‘non-threatened’, 33% are declining. Critically, in contrast with previous mass extinction events, our assessment shows that the Anthropocene extinction crisis is undergoing a rapid biodiversity imbalance, with levels of declines (a symptom of extinction) greatly exceeding levels of increases (a symptom of ecological expansion and potentially of evolution) for all groups. Our study contributes a further signal indicating that global biodiversity is entering a mass extinction, with ecosystem heterogeneity and functioning, biodiversity persistence, and human well-being under increasing threat.”
Image source: “...while the world’s GDP has increased 22-fold since 1970, there has been a vast die-off of the creatures with whom we share the earth. As shown in Figure 2, human progress in material consumption has come at the cost of a 58% decline in vertebrates, including a shocking 81% reduction of animal populations in freshwater systems. For every five birds or fish that inhabited a river or lake in 1970, there is now just one.”
Source: "The global wildlife population declined by nearly 60 percent over the past four decades according to an alarming new report from the World Wildlife Foundation and the Zoological Society of London. This rate of decline is set to continue so that by 2020, nearly two thirds of all living creatures on the planet will have died when compared with 1970 population levels."
Source: “Although humans have long been predators with enduring nutritive and cultural relationships with their prey, seldom have conservation ecologists considered the divergent predatory behavior of contemporary, industrialized humans. Recognizing that the number, strength and diversity of predator-prey relationships can profoundly influence biodiversity, here we analyze humanity’s modern day predatory interactions with vertebrates and estimate their ecological consequences. Analysing IUCN ‘use and trade’ data for ~47,000 species, we show that fishers, hunters and other animal collectors prey on more than a third (~15,000 species) of Earth’s vertebrates. Assessed over equivalent ranges, humans exploit up to 300 times more species than comparable non-human predators. Exploitation for the pet trade, medicine, and other uses now affects almost as many species as those targeted for food consumption, and almost 40% of exploited species are threatened by human use. Trait space analyses show that birds and mammals threatened by exploitation occupy a disproportionally large and unique region of ecological trait space, now at risk of loss. These patterns suggest far more species are subject to human-imposed ecological (e.g., landscapes of fear) and evolutionary (e.g., harvest selection) processes than previously considered. Moreover, continued overexploitation will likely bear profound consequences for biodiversity and ecosystem function.”
Image source: “The most accepted background rate estimated from the fossil record gives an average lifespan of about one million years for a species, or one species extinction per million species-years. But this estimated rate is highly uncertain, ranging between 0.1 and 2.0 extinctions per million species-years. Whether we are now indeed in a sixth mass extinction depends to some extent on the true value of this rate. Otherwise, it's difficult to compare Earth's situation today with the past. In contrast to the the Big Five, today's species losses are driven by a mix of direct and indirect human activities, such as the destruction and fragmentation of habitats, direct exploitation like fishing and hunting, chemical pollution, invasive species, and human-caused global warming. If we use the same approach to estimate today's extinctions per million species-years, we come up with a rate that is between ten and 10,000 times higher than the background rate. Even considering a conservative background rate of two extinctions per million species-years, the number of species that have gone extinct in the last century would have otherwise taken between 800 and 10,000 years to disappear if they were merely succumbing to the expected extinctions that happen at random. This alone supports the notion that the Earth is at least experiencing many more extinctions than expected from the background rate. It would likely take several millions of years of normal evolutionary diversification to ‘restore’ the Earth's species to what they were prior to human beings rapidly changing the planet. Among land vertebrates (species with an internal skeleton), 322 species have been recorded going extinct since the year 1500, or about 1.2 species going extinction every two years. If this doesn't sound like much, it's important to remember extinction is always preceded by a loss in population abundance and shrinking distributions. Based on the number of decreasing vertebrate species listed in the International Union for Conservation of Nature's Red List of Threatened Species, 32 percent of all known species across all ecosystems and groups are decreasing in abundance and range. In fact, the Earth has lost about 60 percent of all vertebrate individuals since 1970.”
Source: "...between 15 and 37 percent of Earth’s plants and animals will have populations so small by 2050 that extinction is virtually certain. Other than the Arctic, deserts may have the most to lose as the planet warms because anything surviving there already lives on the edge... At one location in the Mojave Desert, Twentynine Palms, weather station records indicate that the mean temperature has increased 2 degrees Fahrenheit over 40 years. But the real change came in the nighttime lows, which are nearly 8 degrees Fahrenheit above average.”
Image source: “The world’s insects are hurtling down the path to extinction, threatening a ‘catastrophic collapse of nature’s ecosystems,’ according to the first global scientific review. More than 40% of insect species are declining and a third are endangered, the analysis found. The rate of extinction is eight times faster than that of mammals, birds and reptiles. The total mass of insects is falling by a precipitous 2.5% a year, according to the best data available, suggesting they could vanish within a century.”
Image source
Source: “The total mammal biomass is overwhelmingly dominated by livestock (≈630 Mt) and humans (≈390 Mt)… the total biomass of wild marine mammals [is] ≈40 Mt… [the] total wet biomass of all terrestrial wild mammals [is] ≈20 million tonnes (Mt)… there is only ≈3 kg of wild land mammals per person on earth… ≈40% of the global biomass of wild land mammals is concentrated in only 10 species, four of which are deer species that have likely benefited from declining populations of keystone predators like the gray wolf (Canis lupus)… the mass of dogs or sheep outweighs all wild mammals combined.”
Image source: “The 11 papers in this collection examine insect decline from geographic, ecological, sociological, and taxonomic perspectives; evaluate principal threats; delve into how the general public perceives news of insect declines; and offer opinions on actions that can be taken to protect insects… Although conservation efforts have historically focused attention on protecting rare, charismatic, and endangered species, the “insect apocalypse” presents a different challenge. In addition to the loss of rare taxa, many reports mention sweeping declines of formerly abundant insects [e.g., Warren et al. (29)], raising concerns about ecosystem function. Insects comprise much of the animal biomass linking primary producers and consumers, as well as higher-level consumers in freshwater and terrestrial food webs. Situated at the nexus of many trophic links, many numerically abundant insects provide ecosystem services upon which humans depend: the pollination of fruits, vegetables, and nuts; the biological control of weeds, agricultural pests, disease vectors, and other organisms that compete with humans or threaten their quality of life; and the macrodecomposition of leaves and wood and removal of dung and carrion, which contribute to nutrient cycling, soil formation, and water purification. Clearly, severe insect declines can potentially have global ecological and economic consequences. While there is much variation—across time, space, and taxonomic lineage—reported rates of annual decline in abundance frequently fall around 1 to 2% (e.g., refs. 12, 13, 17, 18, 30, and 31). Because these rates, based on abundance, are likely reflective of those for insect biomass [see Hallmann et al. (26)], there is ample cause for concern (i.e., that some terrestrial regions are experiencing faunal subtractions of 10% or more of their insects per decade)… Abundant evidence demonstrates that the principal stressors—land-use change (especially deforestation), climate change, agriculture, introduced species, nitrification, and pollution—underlying insect declines are those also affecting other organisms. Locally and regionally, insects are challenged by additional stressors, such as insecticides, herbicides, urbanization, and light pollution. In areas of high human activity, where insect declines are most conspicuous, multiple stressors occur simultaneously.… Insects are suffering from ‘death by a thousand cuts.’”
Image source: Human supremacy / speciesm is even more deadly than white male supremacy / racism + sexism, and yet they are all interlocking systems of domination and oppression: “The world’s 7.6 billion people represent just 0.01% of all living things... Yet since the dawn of civilisation, humanity has caused the loss of 83% of all wild mammals and half of plants, while livestock kept by humans abounds... The new work reveals that farmed poultry today makes up 70% of all birds on the planet, with just 30% being wild. The picture is even more stark for mammals – 60% of all mammals on Earth are livestock, mostly cattle and pigs, 36% are human and just 4% are wild animals... The destruction of wild habitat for farming, logging and development has resulted in the start of what many scientists consider the sixth mass extinction of life to occur in the Earth’s four billion year history. About half the Earth’s animals are thought to have been lost in the last 50 years. But comparison of the new estimates with those for the time before humans became farmers and the industrial revolution began reveal the full extent of the huge decline. Just one-sixth of wild mammals, from mice to elephants, remain, surprising even the scientists. In the oceans, three centuries of whaling has left just a fifth of marine mammals in the oceans.”
Source: “Here we quantify and categorise extinction-risk footprints for 188 countries. Seventy-six countries are net importers of extinction-risk footprint, 16 countries are net exporters of extinction-risk footprint, and in 96 countries domestic consumption is the largest contributor to the extinction-risk footprint…. Figure 1: Category of extinction-risk footprint by country. Each of the 188 countries in scope is colour-coded according to which of the imported, exported, or domestic footprints has the highest value in that country. Net importers (orange) primarily drive extinction-risk footprint in other countries, the extinction-risk footprint for net exporters (green) is primarily driven by consumption in other countries, and consumption within the country primarily drives extinction-risk footprint for domestic countries (blue). The darker the colour, the higher the corresponding footprint value… Figure 2: Extinction-risk profiles for selected countries. Each country’s domestic, exported, imported and net footprint is plotted for: (a) a selection of importers of extinction-risk footprint where, with the exception of China, the value of the imported footprint is greater than both the domestic and exported footprints; (b) a selection of net exporters of extinction-risk footprint, where the value of the exported footprint is greater than both the domestic and imported footprints; and (c) a selection of countries for which domestic consumption is the key driver of the extinction-risk footprint, with the value of the domestic footprint higher than both the exported and imported footprints. Figure 3: Global extinction-risk footprint by consumption sector. Each sector’s contribution to the global extinction-risk footprint is shown, including a high-level taxonomic breakdown.”
Source: "...animals are still being wiped out around 15 to 100 times faster than they should be - in fact, the rate of species loss hasn't been this high since the dinosaurs disappeared 65 million years ago... At this rate, the team estimates that around 41 percent of all amphibian species and 26 percent of all mammals will be wiped out. Such dramatic biodiversity loss will also put humans in danger within just three generations, the team estimates, particularly if we also lose crucial pollinators such as the honeybee. 'If it is allowed to continue, life would take many millions of years to recover, and our species itself would likely disappear early on,' said one of the lead researchers, Gerardo Ceballos from the Universidad Autónoma de México. 'We are sawing off the limb that we are sitting on,' added Ehrlich. The researchers also found that the main culprit for this mass extinction... [is] human activity. The researchers found the following four activities had been particularly damaging: (1) Land clearing for farming, logging and settlement, (2) Introduction of invasive species, (3) Carbon emissions that drive climate change and ocean acidification, (4) Toxins that alter and poison ecosystems. 'We emphasise that our calculations very likely underestimate the severity of the extinction crisis, because our aim was to place a realistic lower bound on humanity's impact on biodiversity,' the researchers write in the journal Science Advances, where their results are published."
Source: “Increasing evidence—synthesized in this paper—shows that economic growth contributes to biodiversity loss via greater resource consumption and higher emissions. Nonetheless, a review of international biodiversity and sustainability policies shows that the majority advocate economic growth. Since improvements in resource use efficiency have so far not allowed for absolute global reductions in resource use and pollution, we question the support for economic growth in these policies, where inadequate attention is paid to the question of how growth can be decoupled from biodiversity loss. Drawing on the literature about alternatives to economic growth, we explore this contradiction and suggest ways forward to halt global biodiversity decline. These include policy proposals to move beyond the growth paradigm while enhancing overall prosperity, which can be implemented by combining top-down and bottom-up governance across scales. Finally, we call the attention of researchers and policy makers to two immediate steps: acknowledge the conflict between economic growth and biodiversity conservation in future policies; and explore socioeconomic trajectories beyond economic growth in the next generation of biodiversity scenarios.”
Source: “Eighty per cent of global forest loss is due to the conversion of forest to agricultural land to produce so called ‘forest risk commodities’, such as beef, soya and palm oil, which are largely exported. The European Union (EU) is a large driver of this deforestation through its consumption of agricultural commodities and its financing of infrastructure projects. The EU is one of the major importers of forest risk commodities: i.e. palm oil (25% of global imports), soy (15%), rubber (25%), beef (41%), maize (30%), cocoa (80%), and coffee (60%). Agricultural deforestation happens because of increased global demand for forest risk commodities, government policies that aim to meet and stimulate that demand, and trade and finance policies that facilitate their sale and transport. Addressing deforestation is not possible without addressing EU demand. Nearly half of forest conversion (2000 – 2012) for agricultural commodities is estimated to be illegal. The EU is a large driver of illegal deforestation: in 2012, the EU imported €6 billion of soy, beef, leather and palm oil which came from land illegally cleared of tropical forest. This represents almost a quarter of the total world trade, the equivalent to one football pitch of illegal deforestation every two minutes. Fern calls on the EU to develop policies that reduce its consumption of forest risk commodities to a level that can be sustainably produced AND pass a regulation ensuring its imports are free from deforestation and human rights violations.”
Source: “Agriculture expansion is already the primary cause of terrestrial biodiversity loss globally; yet, to meet the demands of growing human populations, production is expected to have to double by 2050. The challenge of achieving expansion without further detriment to the environment and biodiversity is huge and potentially compounded by climate change, which may necessitate shifting agriculture zones poleward to regions with more suitable climates, threatening species or areas of conservation priority. However, the possible future overlap between agricultural suitability and wilderness areas, increasingly recognized for significant biodiversity, cultural, and climate regulation values, has not yet been examined. Here, using high-resolution climate data, we model global present and future climate suitability for 1,708 crop varieties. We project, over the next 40 years, that 2.7 million km2 of land within wilderness will become newly suitable for agriculture, equivalent to 7% of the total wilderness area outside Antarctica. The increase in potentially cultivable land in wilderness areas is particularly acute at higher latitudes in the northern hemisphere, where 76.3% of newly suitable land is currently wilderness, equivalent to 10.2% of the total wilderness area. Our results highlight an important and previously unidentified possible consequence of the disproportionate warming known to be occurring in high northern latitudes. Because we find that, globally, 72.0% of currently cultivable land is predicted to experience a net loss in total crop diversity, agricultural expansion is a major emerging threat to wilderness. Without protection, the vital integrity of these valuable areas could be irreversibly lost.”
Source: "The problem with Anthropocene Boosters promotion of growth and development is that most species losses are due to habitat losses. Without reigning in population and development, plants and animals face a grim future with less and less habitat, not to mention changes in their habitat that makes survival difficult if not impossible... the general scientific consensus is that parks, wilderness reserves and other lands where human exploitation is restricted provide greater protection of ecosystems and biodiversity.”
Source: Forest Pulse: The Latest on the World’s Forests
Source: Our Forests | Timelapse in Google Earth. Protect indigenous sovereignty. Stop extractive industries. Give land back.
Source: "Parts of Brazil's Amazon rainforest are being illegally sold on Facebook, the BBC has discovered. The protected areas include national forests and land reserved for indigenous peoples. Some of the plots listed via Facebook's classified ads service are as large as 1,000 football pitches. Facebook said it was ‘ready to work with local authorities,’ but indicated it would not take independent action of its own to halt the trade.’ Our commerce policies require buyers and sellers to comply with laws and regulations,’ the Californian tech firm added.”
Images source: The Economics of Biodiversity: The Dasgupta Review.
Source: “Global biodiversity decline is best understood as too many people consuming and producing too much and displacing other species. Wild landscapes and seascapes are replaced with people, our domestics and commensals, our economic support systems, and our trash. Conservation biologists have documented many of the ways that human activity drives global biodiversity loss, but they generally neglect the role of overpopulation. We summarize the evidence for how excessive human numbers destroy and degrade habitats for other species, and how population decrease opens possibilities for ecological restoration. We discuss opportunities for further research into how human demographic changes help or hinder conservation efforts. Finally, we encourage conservation biologists to advocate for smaller populations, through improved access to modern contraception and explicit promotion of small families. In the long term, smaller human populations are necessary to preserve biodiversity in both less developed and more developed parts of the world. Whether the goal is to save threatened species, create more protected areas, restore degraded landscapes, limit climate disruption, or any of the other objectives key to preserving biodiversity, reducing the size of the human population is necessary to achieve it.”
Source: “Over 200 health journals call on the United Nations, political leaders, and health professionals to recognise that climate change and biodiversity loss are one indivisible crisis and must be tackled together to preserve health and avoid catastrophe. This overall environmental crisis is now so severe as to be a global health emergency. The world is currently responding to the climate crisis and the nature crisis as if they were separate challenges. This is a dangerous mistake. The 28th UN Conference of the Parties (COP) on climate change is about to be held in Dubai while the 16th COP on biodiversity is due to be held in Turkey in 2024. The research communities that provide the evidence for the two COPs are unfortunately largely separate, but they were brought together for a workshop in 2020 when they concluded: ‘Only by considering climate and biodiversity as parts of the same complex problem … can solutions be developed that avoid maladaptation and maximize the beneficial outcomes.’ As the health world has recognised with the development of the concept of planetary health, the natural world is made up of one overall interdependent system. Damage to one subsystem can create feedback that damages another—for example, drought, wildfires, floods, and the other effects of rising global temperatures destroy plant life and lead to soil erosion and so inhibit carbon storage, which means more global warming. Climate change is set to overtake deforestation and other land use change as the primary driver of nature loss. Nature has a remarkable power to restore. For example, deforested land can revert to forest through natural regeneration, and marine phytoplankton, which act as natural carbon stores, turn over one billion tonnes of photosynthesising biomass every eight days. Indigenous peoples’ approaches to land and sea management have a particularly important role in regeneration and continuing care. Restoring one subsystem can help another—for example, replenishing soil could help remove greenhouse gases from the atmosphere on a vast scale. But actions that may benefit one subsystem can harm another—for example, planting forests with one type of tree can remove carbon dioxide from the air but can damage the biodiversity that is fundamental to healthy ecosystems.”