Now — in one of the most significant conservation sales in history — The Nature Conservancy and The Trust for Public Land have preserved 320,000 acres of forestlands in western Montana that provide valuable habitat for species in the Crown of the Continent.

But scientists estimate that 70% of all corals reefs could be lost by 2050 if current rates of destruction continue — from factors ranging from overfishing to climate change.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife service has sent a letter to to the developers of three wind farms in upstate New York strongly urging they consider other locations for their proposed projects. Biologists for the agency are concerned that the wind farms will further threaten imperiled bat populations suffering from an unprecedented die-off.

One of the wind energy developers, Iberdrola Renewables has decided to hold off on moving forward with the Horse Creek project until the impacts of white nose syndrome on bat populations are better understood. But developers of the other two projects have yet to make similar moves.

There is little known about the so-called “white nose syndrome,” so-named because of the white substance found on the face of the sick bats. The unexplained illness has killed of tens of thousands of small brown bats throughout the northeast over the past two winters. As temperatures warm and bats emerge from a winter of hibernation, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has sent letters to three Jefferson County (NY) wind developers “strongly urging them to look at other places” for their proposed wind energy projects.

In the letters, USFWS requested the wind farm developers postpone their applications for ‘incidental take permits.’ Incidental take permits are required when any non-Federal activities will result in “take” of threatened or endangered species. A habitat conservation plan (HCP) must accompany an application for an incidental take permit. The HCP process is used to ensure there is adequate minimizing and mitigating of the effects of the authorized incidental take.

One of the species seeing some of the heaviest losses, the Indiana bat (Myotis sodalis), is listed on federal and state endangered species lists. The Indiana bat is the species of question in the New York case.

Scientists say that many bats are waking early out of hibernation because they are dehydrated, malnourished, and lacking sufficient energy to hibernate any longer. According to Biologist Susi von Oettingen, “[W]e have no clue what it is, and right now, it doesn’t look like we will find out any time soon…”

Although it is not clear what effect turbines have on bats, developers must be prepared for at least a few bat collision deaths. And with bat populations falling at such unprecedented rates, biologists fear that those few bat collission deaths could have a much more substantial impact than previously calculated. In other words, what once seemed “incidental,” may now be rather significant.

(For more information on white nose syndrome, watch this short USFWS video)

Watertown Daily Times

Photo: Wikipedia

Map: Cal Butchkoski, Pennsylvania Game Commission

Related Posts on Wind Energy:

“WINDPOWER 2008: Nordex to Build US Production Facility”

“NREL Announces R & D Partnerships With Siemes and U. of Houston“

“Branded Wind Farms - The American Way?“

In a paper published in the latest edition of Animal Conservation, researcher Mathias W. Tobler and several of his colleagues describe a study they conducted in an area of the rainforest in southeastern Peru. By experimenting with hidden “camera traps,” these scientists set out to inventory elusive, rarely seen large and medium-sized mammals that live in the Peru’s rainforests. What they discovered is both exciting and interesting.

While using cameras to photograph wildlife for inventories is not new, it is unquestionably becoming more popular as the devices to do it become more durable, weather-resistant, affordable, and easier to disguise. Tobler and his fellow authors write that “despite years of research throughout the Amazon, there are few complete mammal inventories and our knowledge of the distributions of rare and elusive species is still poor.” They explain further that traditional techniques for inventorying which animals are present in a given ecosystem, such as identification of tracks and scat, direct observations, and trapping of animals often do not account for species of animals that are rare and/or low in their numbers in a certain area. For these reasons, they wanted to test out how well cameras could document animals in the rainforest, where cover is dense and many species are hard to observe.

How the Researchers Designed Their “Camera Traps”

To better understand which larger mammal species were living in their study area, the researchers set up 39 camera stations using a grid. The grid was made along a system of trails so that stations were accessible and evenly distributed at 2 km intervals within a 50 square km space (about 30 square miles). Each station contained two cameras, on both sides of the trail. This allowed for animals to be photographed from various angles. The cameras are known as Deercams, and use infrared sensors to detect when an animal passes by. For 60 days periods both in 2005 and 2006, the cameras were on 24 hours a day, taking photos every time an animal passed by. The researchers checked the cameras regularly to replace batteries and film.

Using the Camera Traps Proved to be a Very Successful Inventorying Strategy

Tobler and company write that “our cameras successfully registered 86% of the species known for the area during a period of only 2 months. Of the remaining species, all are extremely rare and are only known from one or two records in the study area.” They documented a total of 24 out of the 28 large and medium terrestrial mammal species thought to be in the area. This is particularly impressive given that they also mention that the 4 animals they missed were rarely seen and that “out of three published inventories from the same region… the sampling period for those three inventories were 2, 3, and 21 years and the total number of large- and medium-sized mammals reported were 19, 25, and 27, respectively. This shows the high efficiency of camera traps for rapid inventories.”

So Which Animals Were Most Commonly Photographed, and Which Were Those That Were Not Seen?

Over the two years of the study, some of the more photographed animals included the Lowland tapir, which was caught on camera 102 times and also the White-lipped Peccary (seen 210 times). Among cat species, jaguars were photographed 51 times, ocelots 46 times, pumas 25 times, margays 15 times, and jaguarundis proved the most elusive, only being photographed twice.

The four species of animals that were not photographed included the pacarana, the grison, the Southern naked-tailed armadillo, and the Bush dog.

Implications from the Research

While the authors note that the camera traps were extremely efficient and successful, they also mention that just because animals aren’t photographed does not mean they are not present. Depending on the behavior of an animal and its relative abundance, it might take a longer period of time to obtain a photo of that animal, as was the case say with the Bush dog in this study. It also suggests that while this inventorying technique works well in the Amazon, it is an imperfect tool.

One other important finding of the researchers was that it did not appear to be incredibly important to have a large amount of area to place the camera stations in, nor to have cameras spaced far apart. They do say though that having a high camera density is ideal and “it is important, however, to make sure that all major habitat types are covered because some species might be more abundant or even restricted to one habitat type.”

In the end, Mathias Tobler and his fellow researchers have shown that a new inventorying technique using camera traps worked well to inventory mammals in Peru’s rainforest. Given the recent lowering of costs and improvements in camera technology, hopefully their example and those of others will help other conservationists around the world to better understand the location of important and rare animals in their respective ecosystems. Given the large range of jaguars and their need for connected habitat, this study gives us hope to think that little hidden cameras might help us better understand where these charismatic cats and other rare animals roam, and consequently give us better information with which to help protect them.

Related on the GO Network:

Largest Ever Debt Swap to Help Costa Rica by Joshua S. Hill

Photo Credit: purplegrum at Flickr under a Creative Commons license

One country, younger than my parents, defying the odds at its inception and surviving many challenges during these last 60 years. With the help of some and despite the enmity of others, Israel has survived. As the news of this beautiful national bird circles the globe, those of us who give great importance to environmental and political issues can celebrate too. The choosing of this bird has brought the Society of the Protection of Nature in Israel, the Israel Ornithological Society and the Jerusalem Bird Observatory into the limelight. Bringing them attention and hopefully financial donations to help their environmental causes. In an article from the Associated Press, Ornithologist Amir Balaban stated,

“We’re moving into our adulthood, as an adult state we should be working on protecting our environment.”

He, of course, is referring to Israel as a nation moving into their adulthood. I believe we can apply that as citizens of a great country and global community. We should all be working on protecting our environment.

Photo Credit: belgianchocolate via Flickr under Creative Commons Liscense

I was a mere toddler, blanket in one hand, thumb in mouth (think Linus) - wondering what all the fuss was about.

It was dusk and the bats were out, darting this way and that, catching insects as the summer’s sun slid from view, leaving that beautiful blue light before darkness descends.

I shrugged in an awfully precocious manner, looked at mummy, then turned my eyes back to the bats.

And today, Defra (the UK’s Department for Environment, Food And Rural Affairs) have announced that bats are to be used to help measure the biodiversity of the UK.

Bat populations are vulnerable, so they serve as a good indicator for the wider health of the UK’s wildlife. Pressures faced by bats including landscape change, agricultural intensification, development, and habitat fragmentation are also relevant to many other wildlife species.

Wintering waterbirds such as the Whooper Swan have also been included in the UK Indicator* for the first time, helping to measure the effects of a changing climate. A recent decline in numbers has been associated with a spate of warm winters allowing the birds to remain in continental Europe.

Joan Ruddock, Minister for Biodiversity says:

“The state of our wildlife is an indicator of the health of our environment and life itself. We can be proud of our efforts to slow and halt the decline of wildlife. More money is being spent, more people are volunteering for conservation and more woodland and farmland is managed for wildlife.

“Bats are integral to the environment and are a good indicator of the wildlife we often don’t see - such as the insects they feed on.”

Amy Coyte, Chief Executive of the Bat Conservation Trust says:

“Bats are an excellent indicator of the state of the natural environment. As our wildlife continues to struggle against many threats, it is vital to have indicators of whether current efforts are working. By adding bats to the suite of indicators, we will gain a greater understanding of how our wildlife is faring.”

* You will note many times the term “indicator” used within this piece. From the following page:

A suite of biodiversity indicators for the UK was first published in June 2007. The indicators show changes in aspects of biodiversity such as the population size of important species or the area of land managed for wildlife.

Further reading:

Fear of bats - as suffered by my late dad.

Let’s Talk About the ‘C’ Word: Shirley Siluk Gregory

Coral Adventure on East Africa Coast: A Safari to Kenya’s Reefs: Sam Aola Ooko

Defra’s Press Release regarding this story

Image credit: oddsock at Flickr under a Creative Commons license

And according to a survey just released, only 40% of the US population actually recycle their cell phones while another 10% simply toss them into the bin while singing away…

But recycling your old cell phone could also be more than a green thing to do. You could be saving the highly endangered and rare Eastern lowland gorillas, also called Grauer’s gorillas.

The good news is that your phone will not be dumped in some poor, third world country for the bucks alone, but it will be refurbished and sold, with the proceeds going to paying eco-guards involved in gorilla conservation, and who protect the hapless animals from the bullets.

This band of eco-guards are doing a good job defending the gorilla population against rebel armies and poachers in the Democratic Republic of Congo, making it possible for the endangered animals to survive - and even to increase their numbers.

The eco-guards are not just forest sentries in some research project - they double up as community educators with the responsibility of spreading the message that hunting endangered lowland gorilla species is also a serious environmental hazard! Digging large forest areas for precious metals destroys the natural habitat of the apes.

We all understand that recycling can save energy and valuable resources, including the mining of precious metals and the manufacturing of new plastics. In Democratic Republic of Congo, the Eastern lowland gorilla lives deep in the bush where heavily armed militias patrol in search of wealth and resources to fuel their senseless and unending war, and only under 200 of them remain.

Coltan also called colombite-tantalite is a little-known, highly priced tarry black mineral contained in cell phones, laptops and video-game machines but the main attraction for the Congolese rebels and defines the dangerous ecology and habitat of these gorillas.

And that’s what links your prized cell phone to the plight of these apes. Michael Green, of the Santa Barbara Zoo, says: “Cell phones are directly leading to illegal activities that are harming gorilla populations.” Talk of a case of pay back time.

Aside from a separate joint effort by Uganda, Rwanda and Democratic Republic of Congo to save the mountain gorilla (only about 700 of them remain) in the jungle hinterland that the three eastern Africa nations share, notably the Virunga hills, conservationists believe more should be done.

The nonprofit organization Eco-Cell collects and refurbishes these old cell phones for resale in a project that also involves Santa Barbara Zoo and other American zoos.

Photo Credit: Flickr

Other motivation for this cartoon comes from the historical (and current) treatment of native Americans, and this unsourced quote from MAD Magazine: “The suburbs are where they cut down all the trees and then name the streets after them!”

The Bush administration has announced it will wave more than thirty federal laws to finish building a wall along the Mexican border by the end of this year. The Washington Post calls the move the most sweeping use of the administration’s waiver authority during the wall’s construction. The waivers allow the Bush administration to bypass mandatory reviews on how the wall will affect ecological areas in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas. House Homeland Security Committee chair Bennie Thompson called the waiver “an extreme abuse of authority.”

Environmental groups have filed petitions challenging the waivers before the Supreme Court siting several potential ecological hazards that would be created by the fence. Biologists are especially concerned about a handful of extremely rare jaguars that prowl up from Mexico over mountain trails in some of the wildest country in the southwest.

Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff issued two waivers covering 470 miles of the border from California to Texas where the department plants to build fencing into a flood-control levee in a wildlife refuge. In a statement issued on Tuesday, Chertoff warned, “Criminal activity at the border does not stop for endless debate or protracted litigation.”

Like it or not, what Secretary Chertoff refers to as, “endless debate” and “protracted litigation,” have become central components of our democratic system. Issuing a waiver of environmental impact studies for a controversial border fence threatens the very underpinnings of our democratic processes and sets a very dangerous precedent for future incursions. Slippery slope anyone?

Photo: Daquella Manera

In a stunning reversal of direction, the Bush administration has officially requested a new addition to the Endangered Species list. What threatened species could elicit this drastic change of course for the Bush Administration? It is, of course, the elusive Climate Change Skeptic (dubium mundus fervesco), whose habitat is being threatened by rational thinking, increased rates of deforestation, low gas-mileage standards, and the abundance of “cheap” coal. The stunning news comes just after a story in the Washington Post reported that the current administration has never requested that an animal be protected by the Endangered Species Act. Of the current administration’s 59 listed species, none of them were requested by the administration themselves.

But the Bush administration is not alone in wanting to protect such skeptics as Fred Singer and Patrick Michaels, in fear that the breed may die out completely in the coming years. Fortunately, the skeptics have received significant funding from coal and oil companies, including ExxonMobil. They also have well-documented connections with public relations firms that have set up industry front groups to sway public opinion and clean up the image of a notoriously dirty fuel. The behavior of Dubium Mundus Fervesco - in the words of one leaked memo - indicates the animals aim to “reposition global warming as theory (not fact).”

Compared to his father’s administration as well as President Clinton’s, George W. Bush has done remarkably little in terms of endangered species protection. Since 2001, Bush has listed 59 species, compared to Clinton’s 521 and Bush senior’s 231. Additionally, Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne has not declared a single native species as threatened or endangered since he was appointed nearly two years ago.

One can only hope that this is just the tip of the iceberg, and that this president and future ones will continue to use the Endangered Species Act to protect other imperiled species that are as critical to the political ecosystem as the elusive climate change skeptic.

GOAT- High Country News Blog
The Washington Post

[Note: The information in this post is for entertainment purposes only and is intended solely as an obligatory April Fools Day gag !]

Photo Courtesy of Luke Plunkett @ Kotaku.com

There isn’t a body count for wildlife, native plants, or eco-systems that have been killed in the struggle.

War takes a priceless toll on everything natural. Yet, nature may be the last thing that nations go to war over.

How long before we decide to protect the environment through force?

Can we go to war over the environment and still save it?

This may seem far fetched, but the possibility of an environmental war is already being discussed in the U.N.

“Ecological security must no longer be considered a luxury but rather an inextricable element of a durable peace policy,” states Klaus Topfer. He calls for international guarantees for protecting the environment similar to the Geneva Conventions, which protect the rights of prisoners and civilian populations in war. For ecological damage poses a threat greater than bombs to populations distressed by hunger, thirst, and disease.

If ecological damage is classified as such a great threat, could wars be declared to save the Amazon rain forest or Mediterranean fish populations?

Dr. Klaus Topfer, head of the U.N. environment program thinks that war is very likely. Perhaps not for the Spotted Owl. But as populations grow, natural resources are going to become more and more scarce. As nation’s need, war will likely occur.

Currently one quarter of the world’s population does not have access to clean water. If trends continue, Pakistan and China, both will be struggling to hydrate their populations. And a scary thing is they possess nuclear weapons. If push comes to shove for H2O, what would their options be?

To prevent this, we have to move away from our unsustainable systems. We need to use agencies like the U.N. to moderate, educate, and propagate nations towards an environmentally sustainable future. Not just for the birds and trees, but for our own survival.

We need to make our peace with green now.

Having waited all week for a relevant wildlife related idea to pop into my head, I ventured onto Google to look for information on local Swiss animals. I was surprised to learn that the chief animal topic in Switzerland does not relate to rare alpine species becoming endangered due to de-glaciation, or to urban foxes, or squirrels, or other wild animals, or to any thing else I might have guessed, but is principally related to the fair treatment of animals used in meat production.

The Swiss are proud of their happy animals, who spend their lives between birth and the slaughterhouse (the animals, that is) being well looked after, free from growth hormones, battery farming, over crowding, excessive road transport and other mass production practices which are counter to animal welfare. Swiss cows in particular lead a happy life, grazing on the fresh alpine grasses and herbs that give their milk a distinct flavour and makes their meat taste delicious.

This leads me to the fundamental question of this post: should we be eating animals in the first place?

I’d like to briefly explore this topic and invite your feedback, since it is a question which surfaced in my mind several weeks ago whilst standing in line for a veal bratwurst. Having been a relatively care free meat eater for most of my life, I suddenly recalled a recent conversation with my vegetarian fiancée regarding a visit to a slaughter house that crossed meat off her menu forever. At this moment the image of a young cow being executed filled my head, and I had to change my order in a sudden traumatising moment of animal compassion.

I’ve been psychologically challenged as an omnivore ever since. Cows and lambs seem to be a complete no-no - I have great difficulty eating them now that I’ve started viewing them as creatures with feelings, rather than just tasty things to eat. I appear to have less sympathy for pigs and chickens, but I think this is changing too. I cut do

It’s been a native of the British Isles for 10,000 years now, yet the naivety of the Victorian era threatens this creature with extinction.

In 1876, one Mr Brocklehurst, formally of Cheshire, in the north of England, now turning in his grave, decided it was a good idea to release a pair of North American grey squirrels into the wild. The rest, as they say, is history.

A fateful event. A century or so later, and with many more greys released into the UK in the meantime, we have the red squirrel now afforded the highest level of protection under UK law, the Wildlife and Countryside Act.

As the greys have spread northwards they have out-competed red squirrels for food and carry a virus (squirrel-pox) which is lethal to the native reds. Further outbreaks of this virus have been reported recently.

This is so often the case. Introduce a non-native species to an island and endemic species are the ones to suffer. Despite significant and on-going conservation projects, red squirrels are still very scarce throughout most of the UK. The loss and fragmentation of this creature’s woodland habitat hasn’t helped either.

A double-barrelled assault on one of the UK’s most charismatic creatures. Consider that whilst the greys are immune to squirrel pox, whole communities of reds can be wiped out in just two weeks, and really, it’s a wonder that we have any red squirrels left at all.

The grey squirrel is much larger. It consumes far more food and in so doing, reduces the amount of food available. If starvation is likely, the female reds can stop breeding altogether.

A recent survey commissioned by the European Squirrel Initiative (ESI) highlighted the support the general public has for controlling the growing grey squirrel population in Great Britain.

80% of those surveyed stated their support for control of the alien population of grey squirrels to preserve the native red from extinction and restore the threatened population.

Miles Barne of the ESI comments, “This survey shows there is a real demand from the public to see effective action that reverses the decimation of our native red squirrel population by the invasive grey.”

He continued: “The survey is also timely and puts in stark relief Natural England’s decision to grant licences allowing captured non-native greys back into the wild. As a government agency whose mission statement is to ‘conserve and enhance biodiversity, landscape and wildlife in rural, urban and coastal marine areas’, these releases set a dangerous precedent and cause unnecessary alarm.”

Who’d have thought? A government agency at odds with what the public really wants. The red squirrel. Yes, there’s hope, but we’re not out of the woods yet.

Further Information:

UK Biodiversity Action Plan

Sources:

European Squirrel Initiative

Image courtesy of Flickr

The one thing that struck me about the story of Joseph Carey Merrick a.k.a. The Elephant Man was that he could never smile. However, he could weep a lot, so documented Sir Frederick Treves, the English surgeon who rescued him after years of performing in carnival freak shows. His great deformity, now postulated as the rare Proteus syndrome (named for the shape-shifting god Proteus) which affects tissue other than nerves, was allegedly caused by the trampling feet of a rogue elephant, many decades before some wildlife conservationists ever thought of culling.

In his brief autobiographical note just before he died, he wrote: “The deformity which I am now exhibiting was caused by my mother being frightened by an Elephant; my mother was going along the street when a procession of Animals were passing by, there was a terrible crush of people to see them, and unfortunately she was pushed under the Elephant’s feet, which frightened her very much; this occurring during a time of pregnancy was the cause of my deformity”. But that was all allegory.

The Culling Debate is back! Fast track to the 21st Century and focus on the wildlife fields of southern Africa. Do you support South Africa’s decision to cull its elephant population? Do you believe the elephant’s trampling is that bad for the local ecology? This is where animal conservationists (or ain’t they?) differ.

Elephant population in South Africa has increased to more than 20,000 from 8,000 thirteen years in 1995 when the country was talking tough against culling. With overpopulation, the elephants come into conflict with people as they search for their daily diet of about 300 kilograms of grass, leaves and twigs.

South African environment minister, Marthinus van Schalkwyk, says: “Our simple reality is that elephant population density has risen so much in some southern African countries that there is concern about impacts on the landscape, the viability of other species and the livelihoods and safety of people living within elephant ranges.” Do you agree?

Here is an opposing view: “Culling is a cruel, unethical and a scientifically unsound practice that does not consider the welfare implications to elephant society as a whole,” says Jason Bell-Leask, International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW)’s Southern Africa Director. Do you agree?

Dr. Richard Leakey, chairman of Wildlife Direct, famous elsewhere for unearthing pre-historic human skulls and a former director of the Kenya Wildlife Service, in an article posted on his blog, says: While I will never ‘like’ the idea of elephant culling, I do accept that given the impacts of human induced climate change, and habitat destruction, elephants in and outside of protected areas will become an increasingly serious problem unless some key populations are reduced and maintained at appropriate levels. A part of the problem is caused by increasing demand for resources by humans and I believe that we have are responsibility to check our own impacts in order to reduce conflicts between elephants and humans by controlling human activities as well.

Reducing elephant populations may therefore, be a necessary part of population management, and this will be done in a humane and considered manner. South Africa intends to reserve culling as a last resort after all other options such as translocations, fertility control have been exhausted. Though I find elephant culling repugnant, I can see the sense in it in some scenarios, as I imagine many others do also. Do you agree?

In Kenya, 14 elephants have been killed in a classic animal-human conflict scenario. Does this give credence to the culling crusade? Does a large elephant population trample on the local ecology with a serious damage to the environment? What’s the larger factor, an equitable food chain balance with the elephant playing an important role or human interference with nature? Can this deform the environment so as to invite the Curse of the Elephant Man?

Resources: IFAW Campaign , BBC - The Green Room, South Africa Dept of Environment

Photo credit: Flickr

In Argentina one of the main factors that puts wild birds in danger is unrestricted hunting. Most Provincial Governments don’t put a limit on this. When a limit is set, there is no control over its observance.

One of the most beautiful and more threatened species is the cauquenes or kaikenes (Ruddy-headed Goose or Magellan Goose), similar in aspect to the goose.

They have robust bodies and small heads and inhabit Tierra del Fuego, a great island in the south of Argentina. These birds are chosen by hunters because they are a good size.

There are five species of cauquenes (Chloephaga) in Argentina. Some of them, for instance cauquens with grey heads (Ashy-headed Goose), are indeed abundant. However, red-headed cauquens (Ruddy-headed Goose) are in danger of extinction.

A troubling factor is that grey cauquen females are very much alike to red-headed cauquens. Grey cauquens are considered a plague to agriculture, so governments have freely given permission to hunt them. Moreover, the government is in favour of hunting grey cauquens, which is a controversial issue per se. The consequences: because of hunter’s ignorance and lack of government control, threatened red-headed cauquens are drastically decreasing in numbers.

Only two populations of red-headed cauquens exists in the world. One lives in Malvinas Islands and the other in Tierra del Fuego’s northern steppe. In the winter they fly from the south, all trough the Patagonia land , to the fields in Buenos Aires province.

This population is estimated to be only a thousand individuals. In Argentina it is in the red book of threatened birds, flagged as endangered.

Fortunately, some provincial governments from Patagonia and the Buenos Aires government recently became aware of the need to protect read headed cauquens and started working together. This is something to salute; they have even handed out brochures with information.

Image1: Flickr

Image2: Flickr