"An Epidemic of Extinctions: Decimation of life

on Earth" is the title to article I read today at CommonDreams website. This is the link to the original article.

http://www.commondreams.org/...

The article deals with very rapid extinction of species here on our planet, approaching today near one-third of species, unmatched in history since the great dinosaur extinction event. They cite as the reference "a report, produced by WWF, the Zoological Society of London (ZSL) and the Global Footprint Network," which reports that, "land species have declined by 25 per cent, marine life by 28 per cent, and freshwater species by 29 per cent." Those are frightening figures, folks.

I'll add a few more points from the article,

Jonathan Loh, editor of the report, said that such a sharp fall was "completely unprecedented in terms of human history". "You’d have to go back to the extinction of the dinosaurs to see a decline as rapid as this," he added. "In terms of human lifespan we may be seeing things change relatively slowly, but in terms of the world’s history this is very rapid."

And "rapid" is putting it mildly. Scientists say the current extinction rate is now up to 10,000 times faster than what has historically been recorded as normal.

The study picked out five reasons for species decline, all of which can be traced back to human behaviour: climate change, pollution, the destruction of animals’ natural habitat, the spread of invasive species, and the overexploitation of species. At a time when America has finally added the polar bear to the endangered species list, it is emerging that the scale of species destruction reaches far beyond the headline animals. But as in the case of the polar bear, mankind’s behaviour needs to be radically changed in order to stop this pillaging of the Earth’s biodiversity.

And one last quote,

The implications of such drastic reductions in biodiversity are already having an impact on human life. "Reduced biodiversity means millions of people face a future where food supplies are more vulnerable to pests and disease and where water is in irregular or short supply," said James Leape, director general of WWF.

There is more to the article, and I suggest you read it, and they have links to the underlying studies, which can then be viewed.

Politics and policy are inseperable, and so I add this diary to a politically oriented site. Our choices of politicians determines what the policies will be that help determine our future, and those of the other inhabitants of this planet, with all included.

Our current mis-administration has been so very lacking that I'm lost for words. It seems that everything they do is anti-environmental, anti-people, anti-Earth. I'm personally sick of them, both R and D, but will vote for Obama when it happens. He seems to have more sense than most.

•  tip jar, n/t

  by allep10 on Fri May 16, 2008 at 09:36:30 PM PDT

  •  Thanks for posting this

    Modern civilization has become a tragedy of unspeakable proportions. The inability of our governments, and society as a whole to respond to the environmental crisis is incredible to witness. History and future generations will not be kind to the greed stricken anti-environmentalists like Mr Bush. I assure you, when all is said and done, Hitler will seem like small potatoes compared to those who are now engaged in the deliberate attempt to prevent us from taking corrective actions only to serve their own greed. All I can say is why wait. Let's not be kind to them now. If projections are correct, they will have killed far more people than Mr Hitler ever did. In fact, by their deliberate campaign (I'm speaking to you ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson) to sacrifice future generation for present profits, they are killing people who haven't even been born yet.

    You might want to correct the attribution in that this is an article from the The Independent newspaper. It's usually good to link to the real source if possible. Also the source has a snappy graphic.

    by TocqueDeville on Sat May 17, 2008 at 12:22:02 AM PDT

•  And what do we get from the meetings of the

  Convention on Biological Diversity? Cover for the global corporatists, impenetrable jargon, final agreements to kick the can a little further down the street.

  After four years of intensive negotiation, the 2,000 participants attending the Bonn Biosafety Meeting, the largest ever gathering on biosafety, agreed to work towards legally binding rules and procedures for liability and redress for potential damage caused from the transboundary movements of living modified organisms (LMOs), commonly referred to as genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The meeting of the Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety has agreed on a time-table and a framework for the negotiation of the rules and procedures. The legally binding instrument for liability and redress will be discussed in October 2010 at the next meeting of the Parties to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, in Nagoya, Japan.
  ~~~~~
  "The Bonn meeting has achieved its objectives and fulfilled a legally binding requirement of the Protocol. It is great news for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety," said Ahmed Djoghlaf, Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Mr. Djoghlaf went on to say, "It is also a good news for the biodiversity family in its journey to Nagoya, Aichi prefecture, Japan, where it will assess, in 2010, the achievement of the Johannesburg target of substantially reducing the rate of loss of biodiversity, as well as adopt an international regime on access and benefit sharing." Speaking at the closing press conference, Ursula Heinen, Parliamentary State Secretary and Deputy Minister at the German Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection, said, "After difficult negotiations, we have achieved a positive outcome. The legally binding rules and procedures for liability and redress will ensure the implementation of the Protocol in the next two years. I’m very satisfied with this result."

  So the new goal is to maybe, someday, have a meeting about reducing the rate of loss.

  The CBD is an utter failure and needs to be restructured and taken out of the hands of UN bureaucrats. At this point the only resistance is being offered by peasant and indigenous groups, with  their severely limited resources.

  by melvin on Fri May 16, 2008 at 09:51:01 PM PDT

  •  Thanks for your comment, melvin.

    I'm at the point that I don't know what to suggest.

    by allep10 on Fri May 16, 2008 at 10:00:47 PM PDT

    •  What has been needed for a long time

      is an equivalent to the IPCC. Many people know this, and Chirac launched an attempt: Consultative Process Towards an International Mechanism Of Scientific Expertise on Biodiversity. CPTaIMoSEB just kind of rolls off the tongue, doesn't it?

      Clumsy as it was, it was an attempt. It has now been murdered in its cradle by, oh just guess who?

      And then we need an Al Gore or two. Or a hundred.

      by melvin on Fri May 16, 2008 at 10:16:13 PM PDT

•  The Republicans are dinosaurs.

  It is time that we make them extinct. Then we can make progress on the envoirment!

  by humphrey on Fri May 16, 2008 at 09:55:10 PM PDT

  •  I agree. Thanks for your comment,

    and I do hope we'll make them extinct.

    by allep10 on Fri May 16, 2008 at 10:02:05 PM PDT

•  One despairs

  Or, I have done so.  As the other species go extinct, humankind is faced with widespread famine.  Malthus's Law was never disproved, just delayed a few years by the Green Revolution.  Unfortunately the agricultural techniques involved in the Green Revolution are unsustainable:  heavy use of fertilizer and pesticides, and monoculture.

  Technological tinkering (have a solar cell!) will not solve the problems of climate change as fresh water supplies dry up, and desertification progresses.

  Furthermore, emissions of greenhouse gases are increasing more-than-arithmetically, and will continue to do so.

   

  by willb48 on Fri May 16, 2008 at 10:19:18 PM PDT

  •  I also despair, willb48

    but perhaps there is reason to hope, and I certainly do hope so, because otherwise we're toast.

    This is my last comment for the night, but I'll check back tomorrow. Evening, all, and I thank you.

    by allep10 on Fri May 16, 2008 at 10:35:55 PM PDT

    •  99.9% of all species that once existed are

      extinct.  It is natures way and should be embraced, not fought.  Relax and let nature take its course.

      by poolkey on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:14:11 AM PDT

      •  I presume you mean, including Humans?

        by wrights on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:33:31 AM PDT

        •  Just some of them

          by poolkey on Sun May 18, 2008 at 05:10:49 AM PDT

  •  99.9% of all species that existed are

    extinct.  It is natures way and should be embraced, not fought.  Relax and let nature take its course.

    by poolkey on Sat May 17, 2008 at 03:15:11 AM PDT

    •  Moronic trollish comment

      Consistent with your history of hidden comments.

      by FishOutofWater on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:01:12 AM PDT

•  America has failed the world.

  We've been a  superpower for the entire time that human-induced climate change has been identified as a serious threat, and have done nothing significant during that time.

  Meager initiatives under Democratic administrations are openly mocked and undermined, then abolished once Republicans return to power.

  I see the only way to implement any significant initiative as declaring a state of climate emergency and mandating programs that can be aproved, financed and set in motion within 18 months, and can't be repealed or defunded without a congressional supermajority.

  Since that's  pretty unlikely, it's fair to say the majority of species are toast, the planet is fucked, and we bear most of the blame for our inability to create a governmental structure capable of saving ourselves.

  by Bob Love on Fri May 16, 2008 at 10:28:08 PM PDT

  •  I agree entirely with you, Bob Love,

    and if we, as a species, are not to become toast, we need to take some action. The problems seem insurmountabe, but we have to do something if we are to save ourselves. Hey, what else have you got to do today?

    Unfortunately, for most of us it seems, the answer is "too much."

    As a respone to my own call to "take some action," exactly what would that be? I don't really know. The forces that are against us are huge and rich and mighty, what can we, as individuals, do? My only resonse would be that we people should try to reduce our consumption in any way possible. A "non-consumption" strike would hit them where it hurts, in the pocketbook. I'll bet if people just quit spending money for trinkets for a few weeks, we'd see some attention to our problems. Or at least I hope we would.

    by allep10 on Fri May 16, 2008 at 10:53:09 PM PDT

    •  The one thing we can't do is beat the powers

      that be. We can however defeat one corporation at a time.

      It's so easy it's beyond belief. We simply do NOTHING. We do nothing every day of our collective lives. Now we simply must focus the great American past time of doing nothing as it concerns a singular corporation.

      Doesn't matter which corporation, PICK ONE.

      Wonder bread, BF gas, NY Times, a candy company, a retail store, a specific brand of sardines,.....

      We simply decide which corporation we will no longer buy their product/service and ignore that corporation completely.

      One stinking corporation. Just one.

      When it dies the rest of the corporations will pay attention.

      Look around the USA at the moment. WHO made Obama?

      We did. We supplied the millions of dollars, we supplied the millions of votes. We, the people.

      We can do any thing we so desire without violence, without harm, without destruction, etc.

      We just need to get their attention.

      I have never bought a video game. Never wanted one. What would happen if every Mom and Dad in America didn't ever buy another video game?

      Name any specific brand, item, service, etc. and I'm 100% sure I'll get by the rest of my life without the product/service that is selected. So will you.

      You eat an elephant one bite at a time.

      by 0hio on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:29:55 PM PDT

      •  It's too much of a hydra

        kinda like taking out drug kingpins in hopes of reducing supply.

        The system has to be changed, not its face.

        by 2ajpuu on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:45:42 PM PDT

        •  Disagree...

          It's a matter of culture change.

          It needs to become popular to conserve, to consume less, to make one's purchase decisions with careful consideration.

          This would have to happen at the same time as fairly strict regulation of BIG business.  Mega-corporations have only one purpose - to make more money.  They will fight anything, any trend, any regulations that make it harder for them to make more money.

          People have forgotten the Depression, which was a painful and harsh period of time.  But it's amazing how many things people can do without, and still get by.

          by AnnCetera on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:03:58 AM PDT

  •  Would Require a Constitutional Amendment...

    Seems unlikely.

    by in the Trees on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:17:50 PM PDT

  •  well ,what abvout The Clear Skies Act?

    you know - the one that lets us get rid of all those pesky mountaintops and cut down all them thar trees that so impede us from viewing the Sky and really obstruct letting us see just how dirty we can make it?

    or maybe those are some different (in)significant acts ...

    by grollen on Sat May 17, 2008 at 01:35:34 AM PDT

  •  Last I checked...

    The EU is also a superpower of sorts. Why are they any less to blame than we?

    Why not the former soviet union? Why not China? Why not Japan?

    Also, how exactly would these emergency measures of yours not be hijacked and turn into fascism? Because you're pure of heart?

    by NoMoreNicksLeft on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:39:58 AM PDT

  •  Tell it Bob...

    well said bro.

    Iraq Moratorium

    by One Pissed Off Liberal on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:11:50 AM PDT

•  I think the human species

  has an inherent "design flaw". We're smart but not smart enough and it looks like that might take us down. I'm pessimistic but not without hope.

  by Eyz on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:10:07 PM PDT

  •  I don't know if I'd call being a predator

    a design flaw.

    However, there are inherent limits on all predators.

    by walkshills on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:30:52 PM PDT

    •  we always talk about the cockroaches..

      but the real survivor species is us.  we are the most generic, adaptable species the planet has ever produced.  If humanity goes extinct, just about everything else will follow.

      by ScrewySquirrel on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:54:53 PM PDT

      •  Even in the worst of extinctions

        at least 10% have survived. If you're thinking in terms of Life, nothing has stamped it out completely.

        So saying this:

        If humanity goes extinct, just about everything else will follow.

        is pretty arrogant. However, the reverse is probably true. Is the evolution of DNA about humans? Or about DNA.

        The roaches have about 250 million years on us. In their creation myth, they're just here to piss us off and remind us there's a lot of unconsumed energy on this planet because humans leave a trail of waste.

        We're not the only trail of waste; we're merely a convenience. And roaches have legitimate extinction experience we lack. They're from a different era.

        And what really pisses me off is that I have to defend roaches. Of all the catastrophes that could befall the human race, surviving ourselves seems to be the most simple to handle and yet it's the toughest. The short-termers will get you every time.

        by walkshills on Sat May 17, 2008 at 01:47:07 AM PDT

        •  Cockroaches...

          Anyone see Mythbusters?  You should have seen the radiation levels at which cockroaches still survive, but in which people are dead, dead, dead.

          Our large brains and complex nervous systems come with a price.  But I will go so far as to say that, since industrialization, it appears that most societies act collectively, more parasitically than symbiotically.

          (Yes, I think industrialization is a large part of the key.)

          by AnnCetera on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:09:41 AM PDT

          •  I agree with the conclusion.

            Industrialization and the resultant large scale urbanization generate a world of problems themselves.

            Have you ever read I'm Chellis Glendenning and I'm in Recovery from Western Civlization? An older book, it scratches at the itch of progress.

            Some civilizations are more equal than others and some are not healthy whatsoever. Sustaining people spread across a wide area who are all somewhat self-sustaining is much different than the systems necessary for supporting cities over 60-100,000 people. It's not just the food, but the disease and spread of pathogens and the pollution by-products at a greater scale.

            by walkshills on Sat May 17, 2008 at 11:49:06 AM PDT

    •  I don't know

      if I'd call it designed ...

      by grollen on Sat May 17, 2008 at 01:38:59 AM PDT

      •  definitely didn't mean "Intelligent Design"...

        ..as in Creationism! I was using that term metaphorically.

        by Eyz on Sat May 17, 2008 at 12:22:40 PM PDT

        •  yeah, I figured ...

          but just thought I'd throw it out there.

          by grollen on Sun May 18, 2008 at 12:38:14 AM PDT

    •  We're not just predators...

      We're omnivores.  We're opportunistic eaters.  While we are predators, we are also prey, at least in those places where we haven't completely wiped out all apex predators.

      by AnnCetera on Sat May 17, 2008 at 02:06:16 AM PDT

      •  Being omnivores should give us some flexibility

        in terms of adapting to our ecological food sources: we can survive over a range of sources. We're not so specialized and that is good in the evolutionary process.

        I suspect we are more preyed upon by viruses and bacteria and some insects (mosquitoes, malaria) than any large scale predators (the big cats, bears (also omnivorous), the occasional croc, the giant constrictors or sharks, say). Malaria has killed half the people who have lived on Earth; it really is our number one predator.

        We have been totalitarian in our farming, killing not just our direct enemies, but the enemies of of our food sources (ala Ishmael, by Daniel Quinn). IMHO, it is that psychology of totalitarian farming we are seeing playing out in many of the politics across the world.

        The point is that humans could have an effective overall strategy (as opposed to some good localized solutions) to alleviate food problems. There is enough food at this time; the problems are political. And this has been known for some time. And societies under stress (from whatever sources) produce more children (like all mammals in such situations) and societies which are stable and relatively unstressed produce fewer. The key to Earth's population explosion is political stability.  

        Biological studies have shown that organic populations adjust directly to energy sources. Stable food equals stable populations. Declining food results in declining populations. And increasing food results in increasing populations. At our point now, we do not have declining populations except in specific places, such as the sub-Sahara.

        Perhaps we all should be asking how we obtained our oil addiction and who it directly benefits. Like most drug trades, there usually are specific (and limited) beneficiaries. Oil is one of the political elements which turns the world upside down and seemingly diminishes rational choices for alternatives, channeling resources and power to specific and small sectors which are much more prone to manipulate and sustain their position than to alleviate more general problems they have generated or exacerbated.  

        by walkshills on Sat May 17, 2008 at 11:35:57 AM PDT

•  There is a mold creeping northward

  that is killing Bees,Bats, and now frogs. This needs attention now. Heard this on "Doc.One" out of the CBC Canada!

  by Owllwoman on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:20:01 AM PDT

  •  Gotta be multiple species-

    Fungi are usually pretty specific to a narrow range of environmental conditions- seems as though that much variation in host would be unlikely. I can see one doing mammals, but not the same doing birds/insects, because the body temp differance would be so great.

    Loads of candidates already known to thrive in each host- seems more likely to me ( and I am nobodies expert, ) that it's more likely that individual pathogens are spreading into non-resistant populations via changes in migration patterns etc, then a single fungus hitting that broadly.

    Again, I'm a layman- if I'm wrong let me know.

    by Remembering Jello on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:55:50 AM PDT

•  A question.

  Insect species number in the many thousands, going up towards one million I believe.

  It seems they should be counted somewhere, and yet they can't possibly be, unless you're saying 250,000 of them are gone. Which I know is incorrect.

  So which numbers are you cooking, and how, to arrive at the approximately one third extinct that you're claiming?

  Also, how far from the baseline is this? Even at the best of times, species go extinct. Is it naturally 5%? 3%? What? I admit, it must be lower than what we see now, and maybe even close to zero... but we're not to blame for every single one of those. It seems dishonest not to mention it.

  by NoMoreNicksLeft on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:37:27 AM PDT

  •  Getting to this late.

    Generally there is no way to know with precision. What biologists do is assess the number of known species (and more generally health of populations) from some time back (25 yrs, say) and the present. Even so, new species are constantly being discovered, and it's always possible if increasingly less likely that remnant populations exist in some remote corner of the world, so that number can't be stated with precision either. But it does give us a pretty good idea.

    by alefnot on Mon May 19, 2008 at 06:38:47 PM PDT