Category: Ecosystems

Life on land, life below water: Monitoring climate adaptation in Guatemala’s marine coastal zones – for the benefit of people and planet

Life on land, life below water: Monitoring climate adaptation in Guatemala’s marine coastal zones – for the benefit of people and planet

With around one-third of Guatemala cloaked in tropical rainforest, and dozens of volcanoes and UNESCO World Heritage sites, the “land of many trees,” is rightly famous for its life on land.

Yet this picture reveals only part of Guatemala’s riches. Below the ocean surface is a world of immense abundance and importance.

The oceans on either side of the country are national and international treasures. Home to thousands of species, they play a crucial role in regulating the Earth’s climate system, while also providing essential goods and services for sustaining human health and wellbeing: food, clean air and water, and livelihoods.

Guatemala is among 20 “megadiverse” countries listed under the Convention on Biological Diversity, which together cover around 10 percent of the Earth’s surface but hold about 70 percent of the planet’s biodiversity.

The impacts of climate change on Guatemala’s coasts

According to Germanwatch’s Global Climate Risk Index, Guatemala ranked 16th in the world for countries most affected by extreme weather events in the 20-year period 1999 to 2018.

Particularly vulnerable are the Pacific and Caribbean marine coastal zones, which straddle either side of the country (represented on the national flag by two blue stripes).

Here, the fingerprints of climate change are evident: rising sea levels, changing weather patterns, and other impacts are directly affecting communities, ecosystems, and the economy.

The implications are considerable. These zones – which include over 120,000 km2 of marine space, greater than the land area of Guatemala – directly and indirectly support the livelihoods of 25 percent of the country’s population.

They represent economic activities of great national significance – for example, tourism, fishing and aquaculture, subsistence and export crop farming, and ports. 

Recognizing climate risks has led Guatemala to emphasize climate adaptation, including marine coastal zones, in its National Development PlanNational Climate Change Action PlanNational Adaptation Plan, and its climate pledge (Nationally Determined Contribution, or NDC) under the global Paris Agreement.

Through the NDC Support Programme and Climate PromiseUNDP has been supporting Guatemala in its efforts.

Coastal systems are acutely sensitive to three key drivers related to climate change: sea level, ocean temperature, and ocean acidity.

Information key to decision-making

In 2019, the Guatemalan Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources established the National Climate Change Information System (SNICC) to support evidence-based decision-making around climate change.

It is a digital platform that contains data and strategic information to inform planning, investment, and public policy processes, to help Guatemala reduce its vulnerability and address greenhouse gas emissions.

In parallel, the country has been working on several fronts to improve its data and analyses on relevant sectors (for example, land-use and agriculture).

One area in which information has been lacking is marine coastal zones.

To address the gap, UNDP and the Rainforest Alliance have been working with the Guatemalan government over the past year to develop its first fully-fledged monitoring, evaluation, and reporting (MER) system in this area. 

Its completion is a significant milestone. And one achieved through partnership, between the government, NGOs, academia, and the private sector. 

How the system works

At the heart of the new MER system are 38 indicators, spanning climatic indicators – such as rainfall, sea level, water temperature, ocean acidification, and cyclones and storms – to indicators related to the economy and livelihoods – for example, water availability, floods, and crops – to indicators reflecting biodiversity and the health of ecosystems, and finally indicators around population and planning, including vector-borne diseases.

For each, the system lays out a precise description of what is being measured, the status of climate adaptation in these areas (‘baseline’), and a protocol by which responsible parties – including government agencies and private entities – will collect data to measure changes. 

The system is designed to ensure input is robust and transparent. Information is aligned not only with the National Climate Change Information System but also with the standards of Guatemala’s National Statistics Institute. Data generated by organizations outside the government will be validated to ensure the quality and transparency of sources and methodologies for collection. 

The results will be very valuable. As well as being used to inform government decisions and policies related to climate action, the system will contribute to the country’s reporting processes, such as the country’s upcoming Third National Communication on Climate Change to the UNFCCC. And be used as a model by other sectors.

Everyday citizens will also be able to view the data and analyses through the National Climate Change Information System.

The system will be central to promoting and tracking improvements in the management of marine coastal zones through the inclusion of climate change adaptation in municipal development, land use, and protected-area planning.

It will also facilitate innovations such as adaptive agriculture that respond to climate variations, systems to mitigate flood impacts, and marine spatial planning.

monitoring, evaluation and reporting system for adaptation of the agricultural sectors, supported by UNDP and FAO, will complement the system and ensure a more holistic picture for Guatemala’s decision-makers.

Driving adaptation and ambition

Monitoring is essential for informing the adaptation actions of different sectors and institutions – and to driving progress toward national climate commitments.  

The new MER system will serve as the basis for this, tracking marine coastal zone adaptation targets, intimately linked to national development priorities. 

Importantly, however, the system will also help inform the ambition of next-generation adaptation goals.

With Guatemala now updating its climate commitments under the Paris Agreement, the new MER system is incredibly timely – helping the country to define clearer targets and propel action for resilience.


This article was originally posted on the UNDP website.
Cover photo by Caroline Trutmann/PNUD Guatemala
Natural hotspots lose ground to farms and cities

Natural hotspots lose ground to farms and cities

By Tim Radford

Nature concentrates its riches in selected spots. Save those natural hotspots, and you could save biodiversity. Really?

Nations that signed up to preserve biodiversity − the richness of living things in the world’s forests, grasslands and wetlands − are not doing so very well: in one generation they have altered, degraded or cleared at least 1.48 million square kilometres of natural hotspots unusually rich in wildlife.

This is an area in total larger than South Africa, or Peru. It is almost as large as Mongolia. And importantly, this lost landscape adds up to 6% of the scattered ecosystems that make up the world’s biodiversity hotspots.

The biodiversity hotspot was defined, in 2000, as an area of land home to at least 0.5% of the world’s endemic species of plant. That means that a tract of marsh, savannah, upland or forest that may have already lost 70% of its cover is host to at least 1500 species native to that landscape and nowhere else.

Researchers at the time calculated that 44% of all vascular plants and 35% of all amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals could be concentrated in just 25 such hotspots on the world’s continents and islands.

The hotspot count has since been increased to 34. But the message has remained. Focus on preserving and protecting these areas and you have a “silver bullet” strategy for conserving wildlife worldwide.

First such inventory

But, say scientists in the journal Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, between 1992 and 2015 much of this precious wilderness has been consumed by agriculture, or paved by sprawling cities.

Their analysis of high resolution land-cover maps made by the European Space Agency is the first to try to look at the global inventory of hotspots, over a time frame of almost a quarter century.

“We see that not even focusing protection on a small range of areas worked well,” said Francesco Cherubini of the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, who with colleagues carried out the research. “There was major deforestation even in areas that were supposed to be protected.”

Two fifths of the lost landscapes were in forests, and agriculture accounted for most of this loss, particularly in the tropical forests of Indonesia, the Indo-Burma region and Mesoamerica. Five per cent of the lost hotspots were in areas formally declared as under state protection.

“The soils in these areas are very fertile, and agricultural yields can be very high. So it’s very productive land from an agricultural point of view, and attractive to farmers and local authorities that have to think about rising local incomes by feeding a growing population,” Professor Cherubini said.

“Not even focusing protection on a small range of areas worked well … There was major deforestation even in areas that were supposed to be protected.”

But most of the lost land went not to feeding people: it went instead to producing palm oil or soybeans for cattle feed. And local people may not have benefited: the change was driven by commercial agribusiness.

“You have these big companies that are making these investments, with high risks of land overexploitation and environmental degradation. The local population might get some benefits from revenues, but not much.”

The tension between hungry humans and vulnerable wilderness continues. Once again, such research supports a call for the people of the planet to consider a switch to plant-based diets, a switch that could contain climate change and preserve the natural capital on which all life depends. But many of those rich habitats are in some of the poorest countries.

“We need to be able somehow to link protection to poverty alleviation, because most of the biodiversity hotspots are in underdeveloped countries and it’s difficult to go there and say to a farmer, ‘Well, you need to keep this forest − don’t have a rice paddy or a field to feed your family’”, Professor Cherubini said.

“We need to also make it possible for the local communities to benefit from protection measures. They need income, too.” − Climate News Network


This article was originally posted on The Climate News Network.
Cover Image: By Cygnis insignis, (public domain), via Wikimedia Commons
Hunger threat as tropical fish seek cooler waters

Hunger threat as tropical fish seek cooler waters

By Paul Brown

Stocks of tropical fish that have provided vital protein for local people for generations may soon disappear as the oceans warm, leaving empty seas in their wake, scientists believe. But there could be help in international protection schemes.

Already researchers have found that fish are voting with their fins by diving deeper or migrating away from equatorial seas to find cooler waters. But now they have calculated, in a study published in the journal Nature, that tropical countries stand to lose most if not all of their fish stocks, with few if any species moving in to replace them.

Although scientists have known that the composition of stocks is changing in many world fisheries, they have not until now fully appreciated the devastating effect the climate crisis will have on tropical countries.

In the North Sea, for example, when fish like cod move north to find cooler and more congenial conditions for breeding, they are replaced by fish from further south which also have a commercial value, such as Mediterranean species like red mullet. But when fish move from the tropics there are no species from nearer the equator that are acclimatised to the hotter water and able to take their place.

Now Jorge García Molinos of Hokkaido University and colleagues in Japan and the US have undertaaken a comprehensive study of 779 commercial fish species to see how they would expand or contract their range under both moderate and more severe global warming between 2015 and 2100, using 2012 as a baseline for their distribution.

“The exit of many fishery stocks from these climate change-vulnerable nations is inevitable, but carefully designed international cooperation could significantly ease the impact on those nations”

The computer model they used showed that under moderate ocean warming tropical countries would lose 15% of their fish species by the end of this century. But if higher greenhouse gas emissions continued, fuelling more severe heat, that would rise to 40%.

The worst-affected countries would be along the north-west African seaboard, while south-east Asia, the Caribbean and Central America would also experience steep declines.

Alarmed by their findings, because of the effect they would have on the nutrition of the people who relied on fish protein for their survival, the scientists examined existing fisheries agreements to see if they took into account the fact that stocks might move because of climate change.

Analysis of 127 publicly-available international agreements showed that none contained language to deal with climate change or stock movements to other waters.

Some dealt with short-term stock fluctuations but not permanent movements, and did not deal with the possible over-fishing of replacement stocks.

Global help

The scientists suggest an urgent look at the issue at the annual UN climate talks because of the loss of fish stocks and the financial damage that warming seas will do to the economies of some of the world’s poorest countries.

They go further, suggesting that poor countries could apply for compensation for damage to their fisheries during negotiations under the Warsaw International Mechanism for Loss and Damage associated with Climate Change Impacts (WIM), and also raise the possibility of help from the Green Climate Fund, set up to help the poorest countries adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change.

Professor García Molinos, based at Hokkaido’s Arctic Research Center,  said: “The exit of many fishery stocks from these climate-change vulnerable nations is inevitable, but carefully designed international cooperation together with the strictest enforcement of ambitious reductions of greenhouse gas emissions, especially by the highest-emitter countries, could significantly ease the impact on those nations.”

While the research relies on computer models to see how fish will react to warming seas in the future, the scientific evidence available shows that they are already responding. It also shows that keeping the world temperature increase down to 1.5°C, the preferred maximum agreed at the 2015 Paris climate talks, would help fisheries globally.

And the Hokkaido research demonstrates yet again how it is the poorest nations, which have contributed least to the carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions causing climate change, that will suffer most from their effects.


This article was originally published on the Climate News Network.
Cover photo by jean wimmerlin on Unsplash
Worst marine heatwave on record killed one million seabirds in North Pacific Ocean

Worst marine heatwave on record killed one million seabirds in North Pacific Ocean

By Tim Birkhead

The common guillemot (known as the common murre in North America) breeds in both the Pacific and the Atlantic and is among the most abundant seabirds in the northern hemisphere. But like many other seabirds, its numbers have declined over the last few decades. Part of that decline is due to the marine environment – a seabird’s home and hunting ground – becoming increasingly unpredictable and difficult to survive in.

Between the summer of 2015 and the spring of 2016, a marine heatwave swept the northern Pacific Ocean that was hotter and lasted longer than any since records began in 1870. Known as “the blob”, the heatwave caused sea surface temperatures along the Pacific coast of North America to rise by 1-2°C. That may sound trivial, but it was enough to cause massive disruption in the marine ecosystem. The fish that common guillemots normally eat, such as herring, sardine and anchovy, either died or moved into cooler waters elsewhere, leaving the guillemots with little to eat. As a result, many birds starved.

On January 1 and 2 2016, 6,540 common guillemot carcasses were found washed ashore near Whitter, Alaska. David B. Irons, CC BY

A new study has revealed that one million common guillemots died due to the heatwave, and two thirds of them are thought to have been breeding adults. In a healthy population, about 95% of the breeding birds survive from one year to the next. But a bad year for adult survival causes big problems for the total population.

This is because guillemots live up to 40 years and mature slowly, producing a single egg per annual clutch. A female may start breeding at the age of seven and continue to breed each year until she dies. Most seabirds live similar lives because the food on which they rear their offspring is often a long way from land. Ferrying food back to the breeding colony is what limits how many offspring they can rear in any one year. Rearing just a single chick at a time makes sense, but if many adult birds of reproductive age die, there are no new chicks to replace those birds that are lost, and so the population declines.

Seabirds wrecked by ocean warming

Researchers based the estimate of one million dead guillemots on the numbers of dead or dying birds that washed up between California and the Gulf of Alaska. A total of 62,000 birds were found on 6,000km of coastline, but not all birds that die at sea end up on beaches. Previous studies have shown that the number of birds actually found dead needs to be multiplied by at least seven times – and possibly as much as several hundred times – to find the minimum estimate of the total numbers dead. That means that “one million dead seabirds” might actually be a conservative guess.

According to the new study, breeding populations in the Gulf of Alaska suffered a 10-20% decrease in numbers. Complete breeding failure, where birds either failed to lay eggs or failed to rear any chicks, was reported at 22 regularly monitored guillemot colonies in Alaska during the breeding seasons of 2015, 2016 and 2017. Complete breeding failure is extremely unusual among guillemots and it’s a clear sign that food is in extremely short supply.

Temperatures in the northeast Pacific Ocean broke records during the 2015-2016 heatwave. NOAA

The appearance of unusually high numbers of dead birds washed up on the shoreline is referred to as a “wreck”. Wrecks of common guillemots and related species such as puffins have been known about for many years. These population crashes may be a regular aspect of guillemot biology, but this one was far larger and over a much wider geographic area than any wreck seen before.

In most cases, wrecks are the result of persistent stormy conditions, disrupting the availability of fish on which seabirds like guillemots and puffins depend. When seas are rough and the weather harsh, the increased energy demands can kill many birds. The most recent wreck in the UK and western Europe occurred in the spring of 2014, and it killed at least 50,000 birds, mainly common guillemots and Atlantic puffins.

The common guillemot populations in the Pacific and western Europe will probably recover from both of these recent wrecks, providing there’s no further turmoil, but there’s no room for complacency. The only way scientists will know if populations have recovered is by monitoring the birds. It’s an activity that is generally regarded as the lowest form of scientific endeavour, but one that’s absolutely vital in a world of declining wildlife.

Tim Birkhead and his field assistant Dr Jess Meade on Skomer in 2012. Tim Birkhead, Author provided

I’ve been studying and monitoring the number of common guillemots on Skomer Island, Wales since 1972. In that time, I’ve realised how essential this work is to understanding how guillemot populations work. Beach counts of dead seabirds allow scientists to detect unusual events, but these counts are meaningless without information on the overall size of the population. Without regular monitoring of seabird colonies on North America’s west coast, the researchers wouldn’t have known what proportion of the total population died, and would have missed the total breeding failures in the Alaskan colonies.

The North Pacific common guillemot wreck was unprecedented for the sheer numbers of birds killed, and the vast region over which it occurred. But the marine heatwave that caused it may be just a taste of what is to come for seabirds around the world as climate change accelerates.


This article was originally posted on The Conversation.
Cover photo by Duncan Wright., CC BY-SA 3.0
Climate change is forcing butterflies and moths to adapt – but some species can’t

Climate change is forcing butterflies and moths to adapt – but some species can’t

By Callum Macgregor

Butterflies are rather like Goldilocks, preferring conditions to be neither too hot nor too cold, but “just right”. Under climate change, the temperature at any given time of summer is, on average, getting warmer, leaving butterflies (and their nocturnal cousins, the moths) with the challenge of how to remain in their optimal temperature window.

One of the main ways in which species are achieving this is by changing the time of year at which they are active. Scientists refer to the timing of such lifecycle events as “phenology”, so when an animal or plant starts to do things earlier in the year it is said to be “advancing its phenology”.

These advances have been observed already in a wide range of butterflies and moths – indeed, most species are advancing their phenology to some extent. In Britain, as the average spring temperature has increased by roughly 0.5°C over the past 20 years, species have advanced by between three days and a week on average, to keep track of cooler temperatures.

Is this a sign that butterflies and moths are well equipped to cope with climate change, and readily adjust to new temperatures? Or are these populations under stress, being dragged along unwillingly by unnaturally fast changes?

In a new study published in Nature Communications, colleagues and I sought to answer this question. We first pulled together data from millions of records submitted by butterfly and moth enthusiasts to one of four recording schemes run by charities or research institutes. This gave us information on 130 species of butterflies and moths in Great Britain every year for a 20-year period between 1995 and 2014. We could then estimate the abundance and distribution of each species across this time, along with how far north they had moved. The data also, crucially, allowed us to estimate subtle changes in what time of the year each species was emerging from the chrysalis as a fully-grown butterfly.

It pays to reproduce quickly

Analysing the trends in each variable, we discovered that species with more flexible lifecycles were more likely to be able to benefit from an earlier emergence driven by climate change. Some species are able to go from caterpillar to butterfly twice or more per year, so that the individual butterflies you see flying in the spring are the grandchildren or great-grandchildren of the individuals seen a year previously.

Among these species, we observed that those which have been advancing their phenology the most over the 20-year study period also had the most positive trends in abundance, distribution and northwards extent. For these species – such as Britain’s tiniest butterfly, the dainty small blue – emerging early in spring gives more time for their later-summer generations to complete their reproductive cycles before the arrival of autumn, allowing more population growth to occur.

Small blue: Britain’s tiniest butterfly. Callum Macgregor, Author provided

Other species, however, are less flexible and restricted to a single reproductive cycle per year. For these species, we found no evidence of any benefit to emerging earlier. Indeed, worryingly, we found that the species in this group that specialise in one very specific habitat type (often related to the caterpillar’s preferred diet) actually tended to most harmed by advancing phenology.

The beautiful high brown fritillary, often described as Britain’s most endangered butterfly, fits this category perfectly. It is found only alongside the dog-violets that its caterpillar eats, in coppiced woodland and limestone pavement habitats. It’s also a single-generation butterfly that has advanced its phenology. This suggests that climate change, while undoubtedly not the sole cause, might have played a part in the downfall of this species.

The high brown fritillary was once widespread, but is now found in just a few sites in Lancashire and the south-west. Callum Macgregor, Author provided

All is not lost, however. Many of Britain’s single-generation species show the capacity, in continental Europe, to add a second generation in years that are sufficiently warm. Therefore, as the climate continues to warm, species like the silver-studded blue might be able to switch to multiple generations in the UK as well, and thereby begin to extract benefits from the additional warmth, potentially leading to population increases.

Specialists are at risk

More immediately, we can arm ourselves with this knowledge to spot the warning signs of species that may be most at risk. Clearly the single-generation habitat specialists are of particular concern, as many are already endangered or vulnerable – not just the high brown fritillary and silver-studded blue, but also species such as pearl-bordered fritillary, grizzled skipper and the particularly sought-after white admiral of southern England. Multi-generation species that are failing to advance their phenology might also be threatened: into this category falls another of Britain’s most sharply-declining butterflies: the wall brown.

Using this knowledge to help protect moths and butterflies from climate change is not simply important for the sake of the butterflies and moths themselves – these species also play a number of important roles in our ecosystems. Their caterpillars consume vast quantities of plant material, and in turn act as prey for birds, bats, and other small mammals, while moths even act as pollinators of a surprisingly wide range of plant species, possibly including some important crops.

According to Butterfly Conservation, around two-thirds of butterfly species have declined in the UK over the past 40 years. If this trend continues, it might have unpredictable knock-on effects for other species in the ecosystem. Only by arming ourselves with an understanding of why butterfly numbers are down can we hope to halt or reverse the decline.


This article was originally posted on The Conversation
Photo by Ana Martinuzzi on Unsplash
Not just dirt: Why soil health is vital to build climate resilience

Not just dirt: Why soil health is vital to build climate resilience

By Lydia Messling

The IPCC’s recent report on climate change and land, highlighted the pressing need for changes to be made to land management practice. Land degradation and climate change threaten to reduce food production and lead to a 25% food production deficit by mid-century. Globally, soil biodiversity has been estimated to annually contribute between US$ 1.5 and 13 trillion to the value of ecosystems services. Despite this, soil biodiversity is often overlooked in policy. This neglect poses a serious threat to food security.

Producing sufficient food to feed a growing population, relies upon being able to grow healthy crops that survive until harvest season after season. To a large extent, this depends on the health of the thin 30-40cm layer of topsoil that plants grow in. Measuring the soil organic carbon (SOC) of this soil provides an indicator of the soil’s health. When soils reach low levels SOC they can tip past the point where they have any hope of being restored, resulting in devastating irreversible degradation of the land. Poor land management practice, soil erosion, and other land degradation processes can reduce soil health. Climate change and its impacts act as an additional stress factor.

Just as poorly managed soils can exacerbate climate change and reduce food security, healthy soils can have the opposite effect. Sequestering carbon in the soil can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, as well as improving the soil’s resilience to extreme weather events and also increase crop yields.

How does climate change affect soil health and what can be done?

Through changes in average temperatures, more frequent and intense extreme events, and other factors, climate change can affect soil structure, stability, topsoil water holding capacity, nutrient availability and erosion. The IPCC’s report on land lists many interconnected processes that affect degradation processes, but climate change also directly effects salinization, and permafrost thawing, waterlogging of dry ecosystems and drying of ecosystems, and a broad group of biologically mediated processes like woody encroachment, biological invasions, pest outbreaks, together with biological soil crust destruction and increased burning.

For example, prolonged dry seasons can dry out the soil, causing the organisms in the soil to die and for nutrients to be lost. Similarly, prolonged wet seasons can inundate the soil and wash away the nutrients needed for plant growth, as well as eroding and removing the soil. One of the ways that soil can be made more resilient to climate change is by increasing the soil’s organic matter.

What are soil organic carbon (SOC) and soil organic matter (SOM)?

Soil organic matter (SOM) is divided into ‘living’ and ‘dead’ components, such as roots and microorganisms and decaying plants and animals. SOM contains all sorts of elements such as carbon, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulphur, potassium, calcium and magnesium, and also determines how much water the soil can contain – all important elements for plant growth. SOM is quite hard to measure though, so measurements are taken of Soil Organic Carbon (SOC) instead. About 58% of the mass of organic matter exists as carbon (depending on geography), so the percentage of SOM can be calculated from the SOC measurement. Therefore, a decrease in SOC means a decrease in SOM.

Why is SOM important?

Besides providing crucial plant nutrition, SOM provides soil with its structure. This structure is the reason healthy soil doesn’t just get blown away in the wind, and how plants can spread their roots to remain stable. Soil structure is also important for being able to hold moisture whilst not waterlogging plants and retain nutrients, preventing them from being washed away completely in heavy rains. Land that has been overworked and lost much of its SOM content will have poor soil structure. Farmers may use chemicals to replace the nutrients that have been lost from a lack of SOM but will find it difficult to provide the soil structure that is needed for plants to grow and be resilient to climate impacts.

How can SOM be lost, and how can it be replaced?

Agriculturalists have already been adopting different methods to increase SOM content and to improve soil health, as loss of SOM is also related to intensive farming practices. As such, many methods exist for increasing SOM in soils, many of which are easy to deploy but are yet to see the rapid adoption. These include reducing how often soil is tilled, erosion control measures, soil mulching, maintaining ground cover, rotating crops, using different crop breeds, careful timing of grazing, and diversifying plants by including trees and shrubs amongst the crops.

All of these measures seek to increase and preserve the amount of SOM in the soils. As such, they improve fertility rates, make the soil more resilient to weather events, and secure the food supply by increasing the likelihood of a good harvest year after year. Soils also have the potential to be an important carbon sink. The 4 per 1000 initiative, launched at the Paris COP in 2015, champions increasing SOC content as a climate mitigation measure. A theoretical increase of just 0.4% of the world’s SOC would be greater than the increase in atmospheric CO2 experienced in 2015.


Heatwave kills ‘a third’ of spectacled fruit bats in Australia

Heatwave kills ‘a third’ of spectacled fruit bats in Australia

By Georgina Wade

Researchers from Western Sydney University have concluded that about 23,000 spectacled flying foxes, also known as spectacled fruit bats, died in a two-day heatwave in Northern Australia. Temperatures exceeded 42° C on 26 and 27 November, causing the bats to topple from trees into backyards, swimming pools and other locations. As rescuer David White put it, “it was totally depressing”.

And while the numbers already seem astronomical, they may not entirely representative of the devastation as some settlements were not included in the count. In fact, lead researcher Dr. Justin Welbergen believes the deaths could be as high as 30,000 deaths. He also sees the spectacled fruit bats as a “canary in the coal mine for climate change” because the events raise concerns regarding the fate of animals with more secretive and secluded lifestyles.

Experts have long been concerned about the survival of the spectacled flying foxes. Prior to November, government-backed statistics had estimated that only 75,000 spectacled flying foxes resided in Australia.

Mass deaths amongst the flying foxes used to be attributed to cyclones, but regularly occurring heatwaves have become a bigger, more formidable risk. National Flying Fox Programme Chairman, David Wescott, believes this is a major cause for concern, “it’s been a massive population decline for a species that isn’t under a great deal of pressure outside of these weather events,” he explains.

And the heat is not showing any signs of cooling down anytime soon. Just last week, Sydney experienced its hottest day since 1939 with temperatures reaching 47.3° C, resulting in rescuers working around the clock to save a number of koalas, birds and possums.

Nursing possums with burnt paws caused by hot roads and rehydrating birds that have fallen out of the sky are only some of the tasks rescuers are facing. Because, like the spectacled flying foxes, these native animals are particularly vulnerable to heat stress.

Kristie Harris, Office Manager for the New South Wales Wildlife Information, Rescue and Education Services (Wires) says responses like this are necessary as animals continue to succumb to heat extremes. “Any time we have any type of heat event, we know we’re going to have a lot of animals in need,” Harris said.


Cover photo from Max Pixel (public domain).
Arctic reindeer numbers decreasing due to climate change

Arctic reindeer numbers decreasing due to climate change

By Georgina Wade

A new report from the American Geophysical Research Union (AGU) finds that the population of caribou in the Arctic has crashed by more than half in the last two decades, falling from 5 million to around 2.1 million animals.

The findings reveal that changes in weather patterns and vegetation are making the Arctic tundra a much less hospitable place for the species. And while reindeer and caribou are the same species (caribou were never domesticated and tend to be much bigger), it’s the wild caribou herds in northern Canada and Alaska that are faring the worst. To date, herds have shrunk by more than 90 percent,a decline so drastic that “that recovery isn’t in sight”, the 2018 NOAA Arctic Report Card stated.

Prof Howard Epstein, an environmental scientist from the University of Virginia and one of the many scientists involved in the research behind the Arctic Report Card, warned that warming in the region shows no signs of abating. “We see increased drought in some areas due to climate warming, and the warming itself leads to a change in vegetation.”

Increases in the number of insects are also a problem. “If it’s warm and windy, the insects are oppressive, and these animals spend so much energy either getting the insects off of them or finding places where they can hide from insects,” Epstein explained.

And while carbon emissions can be reduced at a global scale in an attempt to limit the temperature increase and save the species, the growing pile of evidence suggests warming in the Arctic will continue. Additionally, scientists at AGU have revealed that East Antarctica’s glaciers have begun to “wake up” and show a response to the warming. NASA says that it has detected the first signs of significant melting in a swathe of glaciers in East Antarctica, adding to the mounting evidence of unprecedented climate-driven change at the top and bottom of the planet and signifying the opening of the “world’s freezer”.


Cover photo by Marcus Löfvenberg on Unsplash
Once eradicated mosquito-related diseases may return to Europe thanks to climate change

Once eradicated mosquito-related diseases may return to Europe thanks to climate change

By Will Bugler

Diseases including malaria, yellow fever, zika virus and dengue fever could return to Europe, according to the largest ever study of the mosquito evolutionary tree. The study investigates mosquito evolution over the last 195 million years and suggests that climate change today could provide favourable conditions for mosquito-borne diseases to spread in areas where they had been previously eradicated.

The research from the Milner Centre for Evolution at the University of Bath, University of York and China Agricultural University, shows that the rate at which new species of mosquitos evolve generally increases when levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide are higher. This is a concern because the greater the number of mosquito species, the more potential exists for new ways of transmitting disease, and perhaps for new variants of those diseases.

“It is important to look at the evolution of the mosquito against climate change because mosquitoes are responsive to CO2 levels” explained Dr Katie Davis, from the University of York’s Department of Biology, “Atmospheric CO2 levels are currently rising due to changes in the environment that are connected to human activity, so what does this mean for the mosquito and human health?

“Despite some uncertainties, we can now show that mosquito species are able to evolve and adapt to climate change in high numbers. With increased speciation, however, comes the added risk of disease increase and the return of certain diseases in countries that had eradicated them or never experienced them before.”

Chufei Tang, formerly at the Milner Centre for Evolution and now at the China Agricultural University, said “The rising atmospheric CO2 has been proven to influence various kinds of organisms, but this is the first time such impact has been found on insects.”

More research is needed to understand what climate change means for the future of the mosquito and the work will contribute to further discussions about the value of the mosquito to the ecosystem and how to manage the diseases they carry.


Tang et al (2018) “Elevated atmospheric CO2 promoted speciation in mosquitoes (Diptera, Culicidae)” is published in Communications Biology, DOI: 10.1038/s42003-018-0191-7. Click here to access the study.

Cover photo by U.S. Air Force/Nicholas J. De La Peña (public domain)
Biodiversity is plummeting, humanity needs a radical response

Biodiversity is plummeting, humanity needs a radical response

By Will Bugler

The scariest thing about Halloween this year? Digesting the findings of the World Wildlife Fund’s (WWF) most recent 2018 Living Planet report. The report shows that in the 40 short years between 1970 and 2014, more than 4,000 species of mammal, bird, fish reptile and amphibian are in decline. The average rate of decline of the species in the study? 60 percent. This astonishing loss of biodiversity presents a grave threat to human prosperity. The loss of wildlife and the ecosystems that support it will undermine any attempt to mitigate or adapt to climate change.

WWF’s report lists many factors for the decline, noting that just 25% of land on the planet has not been severely damaged by human activity. It also warns that this is likely to drop to just 10 percent by 2050 due to pollution, disease and climate change. The report was particularly striking in its timing, coming just weeks after the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s recent report on climate change, which warned of the impacts that the world faces at 1.5 degrees of warming. The impacts included wiping out almost all of the world’s coral reefs and altering other fragile habitats and ecosystems.

These two reports together show that significant and far reaching change is necessary in order to protect the vital systems that we rely on to grow food, access fresh water, and power our lives. They also clearly imply that only a holistic approach to climate change adaptation will be effective in safeguarding human systems in the coming decades.

Broadly speaking, the purpose of adapting to climate change is to safeguard lives and livelihoods of people in the face of considerable changes to the climate system; many of which are now inevitable. This goal becomes impossible if we are unable to protect the ecosystems that support life. These may seem like straightforward statements of the obvious, however this does have implications for the way we respond to climate change.

Decision making on climate adaptation should be part of a much broader approach to socio-ecological protection. When making decisions about how best to adapt to climate related impacts such as flooding for example, a narrow, impact-specific approach might be to identify the threat (an overflowing river) and then come up with a cost-effective way to reduce the risk it poses to people and property (a flood barrier perhaps). Congratulations you have successfully reduced the risk of flooding – but have you increased the overall resilience of the people and the environment?

The flood barrier might have diverted the flood risk further downstream leading to flooding of a fragile ecosystem or farmland. It may have cut off vulnerable populations from accessing the market to sell their goods or reduced access to the river for fishermen, or it may provide a perverse incentive for people to build houses and property behind the barrier, increasing the potential impact of a future, more severe flood event.

Finding solutions to climate change that build long-term resilience, requires decisions that are taken in line with a coherent, systemic approach to strengthening ecosystems and protecting the lives of the most vulnerable people. Decisions that reduce climate risk or indeed cut carbon emission at the expense of either people or the environment are self-defeating.

Download the full WWF Living Planet Report by clicking here.


Cover photo by Thomas Kelley on Unsplash