10 Ways War Harms Wildlife

Bombs and bullets are just the beginning.

As war and conflicts rage on in Ukraine, Yemen, South Sudan, Libya and other places around the globe, it’s important to look at the long-term effects of military strife, which can destroy the environment as easily as it destroys lives.

Here are 10 of the most dangerous ways war affects the animals and plants around us — many of which also harm humans in the process.

1. Bullets and bombs

The military may aim at people and infrastructure, but other life gets in the way. This can be hard to track, but a study published in Nature in 2018 found that even a one-year conflict can cause local wildlife populations to crash. And a 2013 paper from PLoS One speculated that the Barbary lion may have gone extinct when its last forest refuge was destroyed during the 1958 French-Algerian War.

2. Toxics and pollution

Heavy metals like lead can stay in the environment long after a bullet has been fired or a bomb exploded. Chemical agents like herbicides (often used in war to defoliate forested hideouts) can harm a wide range of species, either immediately or for decades after. The use of Agent Orange in Vietnam contaminated the soil for generations, affecting fish and birds before traveling up the food chain to humans.

A U.S. helicopter sprays Agent Orange in Vietnam. Photo: Admiral Elmo R. Zumwalt, Jr. (public domain)

Other damage can come from what gets destroyed during war. We see that on display in Ukraine right now, as hundreds of experts and organizations expressed their concerns March 3 in an open letter released through the Environmental Peacebuilding Association: “Russia’s military operations in a heavily industrialized, densely populated nation containing numerous refineries, chemical plants, and metallurgical facilities further compounds the threat of these hostilities for Ukraine’s people and their environment, both now and for years to come.”

3. Noise pollution

Those explosions, fighter jets, tanks and other weapons of war don’t have to hit you to hurt you. Firearms, missiles and vehicles make a lot of noise. This constant cacophony can disrupt the patterns of wild animals, affecting sleep, migration and the ability to hear and track prey. A 2016 study I covered for Audubon magazine found that owls could not hear their prey when manmade sound levels reached just 61 decibels. Many military rifles, by comparison, produce noise at around 150 decibels — and that’s quiet compared to some weapons or vehicles.

4. Habitat destruction and degradation

How would your home fare after a line of tanks rolled through your front yard? Not well, I presume.

And that’s true in war. A 2002 paper published in Conservation Biology documented the environmental damage from conflicts between 1961 and 2000, including deforestation, erosion, encroachment on wildlife reserves, pollution, oil spills, marshland drainage, the release of invasive species and more. The authors described many of these conditions as “severe.” Some nations have never recovered.

Flamethrower — Marines employ a to clear a path through what was once a thick jungle in Tarawa in 1943. (public domain)

5. Poaching, subsistence hunting, firewood collection and other ways of “living off the land” by hungry soldiers, locals and refugees

An army travels on its stomach — and, as we’re seeing in Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, those soldiers aren’t always well fed, either through lack of planning or supply-chain disruptions. This can cause…problems. During World War II, stranded and starving Japanese soldiers ate a flightless bird called the Wake Island rail out of existence. Wars have also caused widely documented declines in elephants, gorillas, bonobos, a range of ungulates and hundreds of other species.

6. Domino effect

Let’s say those hungry soldiers eat all the local herbivores — what happens to the ecosystem after they’re gone?

In Gorongosa National Park, the disappearance of elephants and other large vegetation-eating species during the 1977-1992 Mozambican Civil War resulted in a 34% increase in tree cover, according to a 2015 study published in the Journal of Ecology. This might seem like a good thing, but as the authors wrote it’s a sign of an ecosystem out of balance:

“Woody encroachment is a significant conservation and management concern in savannas, grasslands and rangelands where it threatens native herbaceous plant species and the animals and ecosystem processes that depend on them. Further tree-cover expansion in Gorongosa could inhibit recolonization of some areas by species that prefer open habitats (including buffalo, wildebeest and zebra).”

7. Killing of civilian conservation workers and destruction of conservation facilities and infrastructure

Who will help species in need if trained and experienced professionals are killed or displaced? In 2012 efforts to conserve the okapi (a giraffe relative that looks like a cross between a zebra and a horse) suffered a devastating setback when a militia attack killed six people at the Okapi Conservation Project in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The rebels also killed all 14 of the project’s resident okapi, burned buildings and looted supplies.

More recently, six rangers protecting the DRC’s famous mountain gorillas were ambushed and killed last year by the Mai-Mai militia group — one of many such attacks. The Thin Green Line Foundation, which supports wildlife rangers, estimates that 100 rangers are murdered every year on average.

As wartimes threatens these conservation personnel, they become ever-more important, as the authors of the 2002 Conservation Biology paper wrote:

“It is local conservationists and field staff who must maintain continuity of presence during periods of political instability, establish lines of communication with local government officials and military administrators in rapidly shifting political landscapes, and provide much-needed material and moral support to besieged reserve personnel in regions beset by war and civil conflict. In instances where government institutions have been overthrown or ceased to function, local nongovernmental organizations and conservationists can help maintain continuity in conservation programs.”

8. Epidemics affecting people, livestock and wildlife

War has long been a breeding ground for disease (and the advent of bioweapons makes things even worse). Just last week health experts warned that the invasion of Ukraine could speed the spread of Covid-19 and other diseases. Historical wildlife disease outbreaks documented during wartime include rinderpest, anthrax, rabies, human monkeypox, bubonic plague and foot-and-mouth disease. Many of these diseases either directly threatened people or pushed them further toward starvation.

9. Resource extraction

Too many wars have been fought over gold, oil or other lucrative natural resources. War also makes illegal extraction easier, whether it’s mining in conflict zones or poaching in lawless zones. The militia that attacked the Okapi Conservation Center in 2012 was retaliating against efforts to restrict their illegal ivory trading and gold mining.

There’s another angle to this, of course: Oil and gas extraction are the heart of the Ukraine conflict, and that’s just making climate change worse. How many more conflicts over food, water and other scarce resources will this fuel in the future?

10. Disruption of government services, financial and human capital, and political instability

If you’re busy fighting for your survival, patrolling for poachers or polluters is the least of your worries. Meanwhile death, exhaustion and trauma take their toll at every level of society.

Those are probably the biggest messages of the 2002 Conservation Biology paper, which should ring true in this time of war two decades later.

And the effects, the authors warned, won’t be short term. War causes scarcity, which furthers social and political conflict, which begets more war. The loss of wildlife can have cascading environmental consequences, ranging from extinctions to outbreaks of disease and invasive species. Opportunistic corporations and criminals use the cover of war to increase their environmentally destructive activities. Conservation funding gets shifted to military and police operations — perhaps permanently. Wartime disruptions to sanitation and medical infrastructure can cause long-term epidemics, while destruction of waste facilities or oil, gas or nuclear operations can poison the landscape for generations.

So can the human trauma of war. Just ask the millions of people fleeing Ukraine today, many of whom are descendants of refugees of earlier wars and already carry their ancestors’ stories in their hearts, minds, history and culture.

Previously in The Revelator:

20 Endangered Species at Risk in Ukraine

Listening to the Sounds of Extinct Birds

Digital audio recordings of species we've lost let us hear what the world used to sound like and could inspire efforts to protect what's left.

When people think of extinct animals, they may picture taxidermy, skeletons, 19th-century illustrations or perhaps grainy black-and-white photographs. Until very recently, these were our only ways to encounter lost beings.

However, technological advances are making it possible to encounter extinct species in new ways. With a few clicks, we can listen to their voices.

In September 2021, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service recommended removing 23 apparently extinct species from the endangered species list. This group included 11 species of birds, as well as various aquatic creatures, a fruit bat and a Hawaiian plant.

Of the birds listed as likely extinct, six were recorded while they were still present: the Bachman’s warbler, ivory-billed woodpecker and four native Hawaiian and Pacific Island species: the bridled white-eye, Kauaʻi ʻōʻō, large Kauaʻi thrush (kāmaʻo), and poʻouli. Technology capable of recording bird sounds was developed only about a century ago, so these are some of the first now-extinct species whose songs have been preserved.

Bachman’s warbler on a tree branch — A photo from 1958 of a male Bachman’s warbler. Photo: Jerry A. Payne, USDA Agricultural Research Service (CC BY 3.0 US)

A Not-So-Silent Spring

These recordings are available on the Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology’s Macaulay Library website, a giant multimedia wildlife archive that holds more than 1 million audio recordings. It includes the sounds of 89% of all bird species on Earth as of 2020, along with photos and videos. The site includes modern sound recordings uploaded by hobbyists, professional sound recorders and scientists, as well as digitized historical recordings captured as long ago as 1929.

Scientists use these recordings to study questions such as how bird song evolved and how animals behave. The recordings are also accessible to the public. Macaulay Library director Mike Webster told me that he thinks of the recordings as time capsules: They let us hear what the world used to sound like and preserve our current sounds for the future.

In his view, all of the library’s recordings are precious. But sounds made by lost species are akin to priceless artworks, like a Rembrandt or a Van Gogh – the very definition of irreplaceable.

Sadly, this new genre of extinct animal sounds is expected to grow. Birds have been hard hit by the current ecological crisis: In Canada and the U.S. alone, threats including habitat loss, toxic pesticides and free-ranging domestic cats have reduced bird populations by nearly 3 billion since 1970.

Rachel Carson’s 1962 book “Silent Spring” inspired a generation of American environmentalists by asserting that if humans continued the destructive behaviors Carson described, such as widespread use of pesticides, the nation could face a spring without birdsong. Sound recordings of extinct birds add a twist to this prediction by letting us hear what’s been lost.

To see the value of these recordings, let’s listen to two species: the ivory-billed woodpecker and the Kauaʻi ʻōʻō.

The Lord God Bird

The ivory-billed woodpecker, or ivorybill for short, is an iconic woodpecker species known as the “Lord God Bird” or “Holy Grail Bird” because of its striking appearance and extreme rarity. It was present in the southeastern U.S., with a subspecies in Cuba, but has dipped in and out of presumed extinction since the 1800s. The main causes of its decline are thought to be rapid large-scale deforestation after the Civil War and widespread culling by museum collectors.

This species is the most controversial on the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service list. Some people believe that ivorybills still exist in southeast U.S. forests. The last universally accepted sighting was in 1944, but many others have since been reported, including some by scientists from the Cornell Laboratory of Ornithology in the 2000s.

Sound recordings of ivorybills were collected in Louisiana in 1935 by Cornell ornithologists, who set out on a cross-country sound recording expedition to capture sounds and images of “vanishing birds” before they were gone. There have been several other claimed sound recordings of ivorybills over the years, including one in 1968 and some in 2006, but only the 1935 recording series is universally accepted by ornithologists and birders.

For those still searching for the ivorybill, the 1935 recording is an important tool, especially since it’s freely available online. People train their ears on the recording before their searches, and some even use it for “playback” – a technique where the recording is played in potential habitats in the hope that surviving ivorybills will respond. Scientists have also compared contemporary sound recordings they think might be ivorybills with the 1935 recording to suggest that the species is not extinct yet.

A Haunting, One-Sided Duet

The Kauaʻi ʻōʻō (pronounced ‘kuh-wai-ee oh-oh’) is a small, dark-colored bird endemic to the Hawaiian island of Kauaʻi and known for its intricate, flutelike “oh-oh” song. It is one of 11 Hawaiian and Pacific Island species on the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service list.

Hawaii has been particularly devastated by environmental loss because of European and American colonizers who tore up delicate island habitats to plant sugar cane and other cash crops. Introduced predators, malaria-carrying mosquitoes and Hurricane Iniki in 1992 also contributed to the birds’ demise.

Ornithologist Jim Jacobi made a famous recording in 1986 of an individual male Kauaʻi ʻōʻō singing one-half of a duet – with no response. We have no way of knowing if this was the very last bird, but it’s hard not to listen as if it were.

A remix of a Kauaʻi ʻōʻō song was uploaded to YouTube by Robert Davis in 2009, with an added echo and what he described as “the shrill sounds of commercial exploitation.” This remix, which juxtaposes the bird’s haunting calls with the cause of their decline, has been viewed over 1.5 million times.

In my Ph.D. research about historical bird sound recordings, people frequently bring up their emotional connection to this species’ song. One scientist told me he finds it difficult to listen to the recording without crying. Another plays it in lectures to bring home the emotional dimensions of bird loss to students.

The Sounds of Saving the World

Sound recordings give a voice to animals. They help to demonstrate their unique spirits and personalities. They remind us that these beings are invaluable, and that humans have a duty to preserve them. I hope that listening to the voices of extinct birds will lead people to lament those that are already lost, and strive to keep other species singing.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Links From the Brink, Ukraine Edition

The connection between war and environmental destruction is on full display in Putin’s invasion. Plus, other news you won’t want to miss.

All eyes are on the war in Ukraine these days, and with good reason. The invasion is far from the only conflict in the world — Yemen, anyone? — but Putin’s actions could do a lot to destabilize much of Europe, if not the entire planet.

Much of the media coverage around Ukraine serves to examine what’s happening in the moment — bombs falling, tanks rolling and so on — so we’ve collected some important environmental reads about Ukraine, which also show how we can move forward. We’ve included some other news you might have missed while the war dominates the news cycles.

Vladimir Putin’s aggression and weapons of destruction would not be possible without Russia’s abundant supplies of oil and natural gas. That’s why, as Bill McKibben argues in The Guardian, this war should serve as an incentive to expand renewable energy sources as quickly as possible:

So now is the moment to remind ourselves that, in the last decade, scientists and engineers have dropped the cost of solar and wind power by an order of magnitude, to the point where it is some of the cheapest power on Earth. The best reason to deploy it immediately is to ward off the existential crisis that is climate change, and the second best is to stop the killing of nine million people annually who die from breathing in the particulates that fossil fuel combustion produces. But the third best reason — and perhaps the most plausible for rousing our leaders to action — is that it dramatically reduces the power of autocrats, dictators, and thugs.

This change is past due, especially in Europe, as The Energy Mix pointed out recently (quoting energy analysts at IEEFA):

“Instead of diversifying the EU’s sources of energy to replace gas, Europe has spent a great deal of time diversifying gas supply routes, particularly pipelines from Russia.”

Russian gas pipelines, via Wikipedia (CC BY 3.0)

The move away from oil and gas needs to happen quickly, before more conflicts emerge, as Sammy Roth writes for Los Angeles Times:

It’s also important to remember that climate change poses a major national security threat, with the Defense Department and other federal officials warning last year that worsening climate-fueled hazards are likely to drive a surge in global migration, stoking political instability. That helps explain why the U.S. Army released its first-ever climate strategy this month, setting a goal of slashing its planet-warming emissions in half and powering all bases with climate-friendly electricity by 2030.

Of course, most news reports about the Russian invasion don’t mention the connection to oil and gas. Over at Neil Young’s Times-Contrarian news site, activist Rev. Billy Talen (a Revelator contributor) calls out media coverage of the war for omitting its environmental impact:

The Earth is the third party in this war by Russia on Ukraine. … How would the war’s violence look in the context of the great extinction of life that is now ongoing everywhere on the planet?

As many experts say, “Every story is a climate story.” Writing for Columbia Journalism Review, Covering Climate Now founder Mark Hertsgaard encourages journalists to put the Ukraine crisis in a climate context:

With heat-trapping emissions and global temperatures both continuing to rise, drought is bound to keep afflicting the U.S., Ukraine, and many other regions of the world. The consequences — for food production, social stability, and war and peace — are immense. News coverage should treat them accordingly.

Indeed, the need to expand our coverage of both the climate and extinction crises is broader than this one war, as Talen continued:

We have an obligation now, with what we know of the interconnectedness of all life, and with the high stakes of the great extinction, to bring the natural world to the foreground. We can’t afford to have any human drama that doesn’t mention the Earth, not now. We will have to discover a whole new kind of language — to foreground the Earth in sporting events, fashion shows or when Paul McCartney emerges from a limo.

While we’re calling out the media’s failure to link this war to environmental issues, we should also point out how badly last week’s latest United Nations climate report got buried in the “if it bleeds, it leads” news cycle.

Take CNN, for example. The climate report had an all-too-brief, yet prominent, placement on its website on Monday morning, but it quickly got shuffled down into far less important news:

CNN screenshot — CNN.com homepage screen grab, Feb. 28 at 10:30 a.m. PT.

That “crucial tipping points” headline deserved at least equal prominence as the network’s Ukraine coverage. But boy, how about that Derek Jeter news, huh?

Want to know more about the new Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report? Here are a few must-read links:

- UN climate report: ‘Atlas of human suffering worse, bigger’ (Associated Press)
- 5 takeaways from the latest United Nations climate change report (The Washington Post)
- Urgent action on climate change needed ‘to secure a liveable future,’ U.N. report warns (NBC News)
- Against backdrop of war, major climate report calls for adaptation and mitigation now (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists)
- The world is getting climate change adaptation wrong (Quartz)
- Transformational change is coming to how people live on Earth, UN climate adaptation report warns: Which path will humanity choose? (The Conversation)

And if you want to dive even deeper, here’s the 3,500-page IPCC report itself. (Don’t worry, there’s a summary, too.)

Updates on previous stories:

Remember our recent op-ed about the need for an international treaty on plastic pollution? Well, the world listened, and one could soon be on the way.

And you know how plastic and other chemical manufacturers pose a threat to the climate? It turns out climate-fueled storms, wildfires and sea-level rise will bring threats to these very same hazardous chemical facilities.

In wildlife news, eight Florida panthers have died so far this year— compared to 27 in all of 2021. This year’s mortalities to date were all caused by motorists. At this rate, how much longer can Florida panthers survive?

What’s in a name? The spongy moth has the answer. Formerly known as the gypsy moth, a name based on a derogatory name for the Romani people, the change in moniker is one of two new steps in the move to decolonize species and place names. The other is an initiative by Interior Secretary Deb Haaland to remove the offensive term “squaw” from an astonishing 660 sites in the United States — a welcome change, indeed.

One last thing:

Could climate change kill off Florida’s beloved Key deer? Hurricane Irma wiped out 30% of the species in 2017, and although they’ve rebounded since then, the threat of more intense storms loom over both the tiny deer and the low-lying islands they call home. Noted conservationist Stuart Pimm told The Guardian that warmer temperatures, extreme weather events and sea-level rise “may not be quite as direct as someone going out with a shotgun and killing a bald eagle, but they are every bit as potent a factor in causing species extinctions.”

Something to think about as we celebrate Key Deer Awareness Day on March 11.

Previously in The Revelator:

20 Endangered Species at Risk in Ukraine

Protect This Place: Tallahassee’s Towering English Forest Faces Imminent Destruction

Home to one of the city’s last intact forests, this privately owned gem could soon face bulldozers and construction.

The Place:

An unprotected 740-plus-acre hardwood forest in southeast Tallahassee, Florida, called the English Property Planned Unit Development and PUD Amendment. This majestic upland hardwood forest, privately owned by the English family for a couple of generations, has withstood the test of time but has now become a figurative endangered species.

Why it matters:

This forest abounds with wildlife. According to a Biodiversity Matrix Report recently obtained from the Florida Natural Areas Inventory, a federally threatened flora species called zigzag silkgrass has been documented in or near this forest. The same report found a likely or potential presence of federally threatened and endangered fauna species such as the eastern indigo snake, wood stork, gopher tortoise and red-cockaded woodpecker, along with myriad other native flora and fauna.

English Forest — Photo courtesy midori okasako

This unprotected forest has been part of a crucial natural wildlife corridor that extends south into the Apalachicola National Forest. Much of the urban green corridor that still connects to this English forest is already protected, thanks to a privately preserved, sustainable conservation easement and an adjacent neighborhood with a conservation park maintained by the city of Tallahassee. Construction on the English forest would sever this wildlife corridor and add barriers for species roaming through these habitats.

In addition to featuring amazing biodiversity, this forest sits on a prominent geomorphic feature called the Cody Scarp, formed from an ancient shoreline. The land’s elevation significantly drops at the Woodville Karst Plain, an area characterized by active features such as sinkholes, karst lakes, a spring head, springs and underground streams. According to the Basinwide Management Action Plan, prepared by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, this site is in the Wakulla Spring Basin, a recharge area for the Wakulla Springs. This forest’s karst plain is a high-priority protection area uniquely vulnerable to runoff and stormwater containing nitrogen. Contaminants could easily seep into the Floridan Aquifer, which is connected to the Edward Ball Wakulla Springs State Park, and other sinkholes in the park located about 15 miles south of Tallahassee.

My place in this place:

As a youth, I spent many waking hours in a metropolis of sleek steel and glass, amid hordes of people, my day punctuated with pulsating sounds and lights. Yet at the end of the day’s sensory overload, an hour away by rail, a place of calm and silence always awaited me: this sylvan shelter in a valley nestled in small, forested mountains. Decades later, when driving by the English forest, I often reminisce about my childhood exploring those mountains, with city memories having long faded into hazy obscuration.

This city’s forests are also fading. Until the turn of the new millennium, lush greenery with majestic trees were ubiquitous at almost every corner of Tallahassee, our “Tree City.” Now our city is about to be engulfed by urban sprawl of short-lived, manmade constructions built without foresight or consideration of the environmental consequences.

The threat:

In 2012 the northernmost 245 acres of the English Property PUD were rezoned by the city of Tallahassee, and portions of the forest were completely clearcut. Construction soon began, resulting in the VA Tallahassee Outpatient Clinic in 2016, Lullwater multistory apartment complex in 2018, and Russell State of Florida Office Park (ironically housing the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission) in 2019. Builders still have plans for a 192-unit multistory apartment complex on a sloped 17-acre tract of this portion of the former forest.

But that’s not all: In August 2021, developers submitted an amendment to the city to rezone the remaining 494 acres of the existing English Property PUD. This would allow the realtor, developers and potential buyers of the land to construct medium-density residentials (multistory apartment complexes, single-unit homes), mixed office/commercial complexes and “neighborhood village centers” (a euphemism for gas stations, convenience stores and fast-food places), leaving a mere fraction of the property as disjointed “open spaces” with no evidence of conservation easements.

If we don’t keep a watchful eye on the remaining 494-acre wilderness, it will be clearcut and broken up piecemeal into development parcels — an irreversible environmental disaster that would harm our communities. The area will see massive displacements and local extinctions of wildlife, including endangered and threatened species that have inhabited one of the last remaining intact ecosystems in the southeast area of the city.

Residents have fought similar proposed land-use plans for years, although pleas for preservation have mostly gone ignored.

Earlier this year, the developer abruptly revised the amendment, as a temporary measure, to only rezone 36 acres of the original PUD to expedite yet another multistory, 300-unit apartment complex. The realtor has made clear that they are still eventually going to proceed to have the remaining 494 acres rezoned — as a whole or piecemeal, as parcels — for construction, so this is not progress, merely a change in tactics.

The City Commission is scheduled to render a vote on March 23, 2022. If it’s successful, this would move the 36 acres into the 2012 PUD and rezone this parcel for construction.

Who’s protecting it now:

Regrettably, the forested English Property PUD is privately owned. Ironically, residents who live near this property appear to care more about the forest’s wellbeing than the owners.

In February, six individuals of different age groups and social standings presented during the City Commission’s public hearing. Their underlying appeals were to urge the city commissioners, as well as staff and the developers, to listen to them and to consider their concerns and suggestions. Shortly after the hearing, we finally coined our collective efforts Save the English Forest, or Save TEF. Having a united front will allow us to strive forward; we plan to meet with city staff, the developer and the realtor and propose modifications on the PUD. We also intend to request opportunities to meet with the city commissioners and the English family.

Meanwhile, the developer and the realtor who have been representing the English family have stated that the owners wish to do what’s best for Tallahassee, and they would like to “leave a lasting legacy.”

Ultimately, we’d like the real lasting legacy of this land to be preserved — along with its wildlife, its natural resources and its features. Allowing the forest to continue to thrive under public protection and conservation would be great investment that would endure for generations. We are currently collecting information on the how to have the remaining forest so it can be preserved by a local conservancy, the state, or a couple of other public entities. However, we know the final decision is up the owner of this forest.

What this place needs:

The bottom line is that the city of Tallahassee has become lax in permitting and rezoning constructions.

Prior to construction, it’s imperative that the city, the realtors, the developers and even the owner grant requested meetings with concerned members of the community whose homes neighbor the property and will be adversely affected. This will allow us to reexamine and modify the cookie-cutter land-use plan to significantly integrate more acres as conservation easements that will be connected so they can effectively function as permanent green corridors and sustainable wildlife habitats. Currently slivers of sloped, unbuildable and swampy, undesirable areas have been set aside as a “open spaces,” implying as conservation easements.

Since the southeast region of Tallahassee is currently deprived of a public-protected preservation area, designating a significant portion of the English property — specifically, areas that are considered vulnerable, buffering surrounding parcels and green corridors — could be acquisitioned by a national nonprofit organization and eventually handed over to the state of Florida or the Northwest Water Management District. For example, the 1,000-foot parcels adjacent to the city’s 52-acre Jack L. McLean Park could be publicly preserved and managed to promote passive nature-appreciation activities and to function as habitat for wildlife.

Lessons from the fight:

Since the initiation of raising residents’ awareness about the plight of the English forest, the first question I often encounter has been, “Can you win this fight?” All too often, it has become keenly obvious that most people only want to know the result, even before it happens. As with any undertaking, it is all in the laborious process. It has been one individual, one step, one voice, one flyer, one email, one small gathering, one commitment, one action at a time. There are no quick or easy shortcuts.

Not everyone supports our efforts — in fact, many have already made up their minds against them, believing there is nothing to gain from them. There have been oppositions to our efforts. Nonetheless, since time is of the essence, we strive to focus on the immediate task, with the responsive support and dedication of those who really care.

It is crucial to publicly address one’s concerns, make comments, and submit input on the record. Casual complaints, silence, complacency and inaction will yield nothing. One learns to become flexible in order to quickly react and adjust to sudden alternations and to last-minute meeting notifications.

It is a time-consuming, exhaustive endeavor. Yet, collectively, there is a chance to make a difference and to modify the course to save and to preserve much of the forest. We need to speak up for the forest and its wildlife — for they alone have no voice, no choice.

Follow the fight:

Save the English Forest

Previously in The Revelator:

Protect This Place: The Fragile and Enchanting Costa dos Corais

A Historic Chance to Protect America’s Free-Flowing Rivers

Ten bills in Congress would add conservation protections to 7,000 miles of river to safeguard drinking water, biodiversity and recreation.

Each year thousands of tourists who visit Central Oregon trudge up a steep half-mile path to see Tumalo Creek emerge from the pine forest and plunge 97 feet over lava rock into a narrow canyon. Tumalo Falls is the highlight for visitors who hike along the 20-mile creek. But for residents in nearby Bend, the creek is also a prized source of drinking water and a haven for wildlife.

Years-long efforts to protect the ecological integrity and scenic values of Tumalo Creek could be solidified with a bill now in Congress. The River Democracy Act would designate not just Tumalo but 4,711 miles of rivers throughout the state as part of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.

“This legislation will be good news for anyone who likes clean drinking water, fish and wildlife habitat, and public lands recreation,” says Erik Fernandez, wilderness program manager at Oregon Wild. “It will protect some of the most scenic rivers we have in Oregon.”

The National Wild and Scenic Rivers System was established in 1968 after passage of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. Under the Act, rivers are classified as “wild,” “scenic” or “recreational,” depending on the surrounding development — or lack thereof — and are managed to maintain those values. In general, that usually means no new dams and mining claims, and a designation could also limit other kinds of developments, including logging and roadbuilding.

As of 2019 the nation’s Wild and Scenic Rivers System included 13,400 miles — less than one-half of 1% of the country’s river miles. But Congress has a chance this year to significantly expand the system.

There are currently 10 bills in Congress, including Oregon’s River Democracy Act, that, if passed, would add 7,000 miles to the national tally and an additional 5 million acres of protections of riverside land. Most additions to the system come by congressional legislation like this, but states can also make nominations to the secretary of the Interior.

In addition to Oregon’s River Democracy Act, the other bills in Congress include:

The M.H. Dutch Salmon Greater Gila Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, which would designate nearly 450 miles of river in New Mexico along the Gila and San Francisco rivers and tributaries.
The Wild Olympics Act, which would designate 454 miles of river in Washington in the Queets, Hoh and Elwha rivers.
In California, the Northwest California Wilderness, Recreation, and Working Forests Act would protect 480 miles of river including sections of the South Fork Trinity, Canyon Creek and South Fork Elk River.
Another California bill, the Central Coast Heritage Protection Act, would cover 59 miles of river, including Matilija Creek, Mono Creek and Indian Creek.
The San Gabriel Mountains Foothills and Rivers Protection Act would also add to California’s total another 45 miles of river protections in the East, North, and upper West Forks San Gabriel River.
The Montana Headwaters Legacy Act would double the state’s amount of Wild and Scenic river miles by adding 385 miles from segments of rivers and streams in the Greater Yellowstone ecosystem and Smith River watershed.
In Florida, the Kissimmee River Wild and Scenic River Study Act would help protect 103 miles of a river that has undergone a dramatic restoration.
The York River Wild and Scenic Rivers Act would add 30 miles of river protections in Maine.
The Malheur Community Empowerment for the Owyhee Act would designate 15 miles of river in Oregon’s Owyhee Canyonlands.

Proponents say the bills would help ensure clean drinking water, protect cultural resources, safeguard important habitat for aquatic and riparian species, and boost the recreational economy.

One way that would happen is by preventing harmful developments like dam building.

“It would be extremely helpful to get more and more of our free-flowing rivers designated under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, if for no other reason than to stop them from being dammed,” says Daniel Estrin, general counsel and advocacy director at Waterkeeper Alliance.

Building more hydropower dams “is a false solution to the climate problem and would really dramatically exacerbate problems for our rivers’ biodiversity,” he says. “And it would certainly make it much harder to reach 30×30 conservation goals where there’s an enormous amount of work that needs to be done.”

Oregon’s Historic Effort

snow along creek bank and log over creek — Tumalo Creek in Bend, Oregon. Photo: Meghan Nesbit

The River Democracy Act is by far the largest effort currently to add new Wild and Scenic designations, and it would go a long way in helping improve Oregon’s river protections. Only 2% of the state’s 110,000 river miles are protected as Wild and Scenic. The new legislation would triple that.

“Oregon hasn’t done a great job of protecting our rivers, so this is a pretty historic effort,” says Fernandez. “We’ve not seen this scale of effort here before.”

In addition to protections in Central Oregon, the bill includes tributaries of the Illinois River in the southwest part of the state, which he calls “some of the most biodiverse in the West,” as well as multiple coastal streams where protections have been lacking.

“If you want to protect salmon and steelhead, the coast range of Oregon is a great place to do that,” says Fernandez. “You have some potentially long-term viable runs that would be protected by this legislation.”

Protecting New Mexico’s Biodiversity

Compared to Oregon, New Mexico has even fewer river miles designated as Wild and Scenic — a measly 124 miles, which is less than one-tenth of 1% of all river miles in the state.

The M.H. Dutch Salmon Greater Gila Wild and Scenic Rivers Act — named after the late environmental activist, author of the book Gila Libre: The Story of New Mexico’s Last Wild River — would increase that number significantly by adding 446 miles of the Gila and San Francisco rivers in southwestern New Mexico.

“This bill seeks to currently protect the entire watershed of both the Gila Wilderness and the Aldo Leopold Wilderness as well as major tributaries that are outside of the existing wilderness areas,” says Nathan Newcomer, an organizer at New Mexico Wild.

Land protections in the region came nearly a century ago. The Gila Wilderness was the first designated wilderness area in the country. Aldo Leopold advocated for its protection as supervisor of New Mexico’s Carson National Forest in 1924.

River protections however are long overdue, says Newcomer. And they’re needed.

One of the biggest benefits of the bill, if passed, he says, would be ensuring that no dams are built.

Backpackers crossing a stream in New Mexico’s Gila Wilderness. Photo: Bradley Lanphear / No Barriers (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

“People have been trying to dam the Gila River for over 100 years,” he says. “We’re constantly faced with threats for major dams and diversions on the Gila River and the Wild and Scenic designation’s main tenet is to prevent that from happening.”

Keeping rivers in the watershed flowing free would also help protect the area’s rich biodiversity.

“The Gila is in a really unique area in terms of ecological configuration where you’ve got the Colorado Plateau coming into the Chihuahuan and Sonoran deserts,” says Newcomer. The area includes forests of cottonwood, sycamore and ponderosa that are home to 250 bird species.

“The riparian habitat for birds alone is just immense,” he says.

The region is also home to threatened and endangered species like yellow-billed cuckoos, Chiricahua leopard frogs, northern Mexican garter snakes, southwestern willow flycatchers and Gila trout.

Legislative Action

The public often widely supports river conservation efforts. In New Mexico, for example, polling found that three-quarters of state residents support the new Wild and Scenic rivers bill. It also has the backing of local Tribes, faith and civic organizations, and more than 150 local businesses and conservation groups.

“This has been a community-driven effort,” says Newcomer. “The local communities have come together and asked Congress to get this into law.”

The situation is similar in Oregon where 50 breweries in the state announced their support of the River Democracy Act. Another 200 businesses added their approval in a letter last October. Clean and free-flowing rivers aid the recreation economy, which totaled more than $15 billion in Oregon in 2019.

“You’ve got this big cross section of everybody from hunters and anglers to trail runners and breweries all supporting protecting our rivers,” says Fernandez.

Even with support in home states, getting the 10 river-protection bills through Congress will be a fight.

Today marks 1 year since @RonWyden and @SenJeffMerkley introduced the #RiverDemocracyAct! It’s made positive progress through the Senate, now we just need to get it across the finish line. Join us in thanking them today! #WildandScenicOregon pic.twitter.com/Z0gDBNIrJ7

— Oregon Wild (@OregonWild) February 3, 2022

“It used to be that provincial bills like this would pass with straight up or down votes back in the 60s, 70s and 80s,” says Fernandez. “But the last couple of times we’ve had bills [like this] pass nationally, it’s been part of what we call omnibus bills, where you need enough bills from around the country that there are enough senators who have something in it they want.”

Whether a big bill like that comes together in this election year remains to be seen. But Fernandez says that the pandemic has helped remind people of the benefits of protected public land and waters.

“The peace of mind for so many people these last couple of years has been safely getting outside,” he says. “I just hope that everybody who wants to can get out to a river or on public lands and enjoy it.”

Previously in The Revelator:

Can Roadless Areas Help Stem the Extinction Crisis in the United States?

20 Endangered Species at Risk in Ukraine

Will Russia’s invasion threaten not just innocent people but the country’s unique wildlife?

The Russian bombs falling on Ukraine are putting millions of people and a vibrant culture at risk.

Vladimir Putin’s invading forces could also damage the Ukrainian landscape, home to dozens of unique and endangered species.

Here are 20 species that could find themselves further threatened by the invasion.

Russian desman (Desmana moschata) — The only member of its genus, this endangered semiaquatic mammal is related to moles (and like moles, it’s functionally blind). Found in Russia, Kazakhstan and Ukraine — and recently extinct in nearby Belarus — the species faces declines due to poachers’ fishing nets and habitat loss. It went extinct in Ukraine in the 19th century but was reintroduced there in the 1950s — around the same time Joseph Stalin died.

Sandy mole-rat (Spalax arenarius) — A rodent unique to Ukraine, this endangered species has just one remaining stronghold, the Black Sea Biosphere Reserve, which may put it firmly in the path of Putin’s invading forces.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by @mosdragmet

Crimean rowan (Sorbus tauricola) — Native only to Ukraine, this rare plant exists in just 3-5 locations, where an invasive wasp called the mountain ash seed chalcide (Megastigmus brevicaudis) damages 99% of its seeds before they can become the next generation.

Vitrea nadejdae — This endangered snail is known from just five locations in Ukraine, each of which is (or was) a popular tourist destination.

Saker falcon (Falco cherrug) — This wide-ranging but endangered species faces a host of threats across its range. The birds don’t breed in Ukraine, but they do spend time there every year. The Ukrainian Birds of Prey Research Centre calls the population in the country “extremely vulnerable.” War won’t make the nation any more hospitable.

Zubowski’s plump bush-cricket (Isophya zubowskii) — Most of this endangered insect’s habitat is found in Romania, but its populations in Moldova and Ukraine are described as “very small and isolated.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Alexandru Pintilioaie (@thenaturalistro)

Idänvaskinen (Orthonevra plumbago) — This hoverfly was historically found in more than a dozen European countries, but according to the IUCN “all assumed 10 localities might be so small that they are at the risk of immediate extinction.”

Betula klokovii — Endemic to Ukraine, this birch tree remains in just two mountainous locations. Its population has declined to about 50 mature individuals, mainly due to mining and chalk quarrying.

Pontian shemaya (Alburnus sarmaticus) — This endangered carp may be extinct in Hungary and Romania, but it remains in Croatia, Slovenia and Ukraine. Its current population is unknown.

Crimean stone grasshopper (Asiotmethis tauricus) — This endangered insect is found in just a small portion of Ukraine, including Crimea. It also lived in Russia, but its continued presence in that country is uncertain. Most of its former habitat has been converted to farmland.

Melanogaster jaroslavensis — This fruit fly is known from just seven locations in Russia and one in Ukraine. Grazing, fertilizer pollution and river development have made it endangered.

Chornaya gudgeon (Gobio delyamurei) — This critically endangered carp is restricted to a 1 kilometer stretch of stream below Ukraine’s Chornaya Gorge. The IUCN, which hasn’t assessed the species since 2008, warns this tiny habitat “may totally dry up in the summertime” and adds that “the species is also susceptible to climate change as the severity of droughts is predicted to increase.”

Retowski’s tonged bush-cricket (Anadrymadusa retowskii) — Native only to Ukraine, this insect has become endangered due to habitat destruction. The IUCN warns that some of its severely fragmented populations “may go extinct.”

Sorbus roopiana — Ukraine is one of the four countries in which this plant still grows, although according to the IUCN “the populations in Crimea are separated from the main part of its distribution.” Fewer than 100 individuals are thought to remain on Earth.

Merodon dzhalitae — An endangered hoverfly found only in Crimea, which has mostly been carved up by urbanization.

Medicago saxatilis — An endangered herb with no common name, known from just five locations in Crimea.

Andrena labiatula — This Ukrainian bee hasn’t been seen since 1963 and is only known from three specimens found on the Crimean peninsula. It’s officially listed as critically endangered.

Cobitis taurica — This poorly studied freshwater fish, a relative of Europe’s spined loach, exists in under one mile of a river below Chornaya Gorge.

Allium pervestitum — A garlic relative, this plant grows in just two areas of Ukraine. Limestone quarrying and urbanization put it on the endangered species list.

Фискомитриум песчаный (Physcomitrium arenicola) — This endangered moss grows in Russia and Ukraine, where it’s at risk from intensive livestock grazing and tree plantations. Scientists don’t know how well the species is doing — only that it’s rare. The IUCN says its populations are “considered to be severely fragmented since the subpopulations are small and isolated from each other.”

Previously in The Revelator:

Memorializing the Wake Island Rail: An Extinction Caused by War

It’s Time for a Global Treaty on Plastics

The United Nations has an opportunity to address plastic pollution on an international level. Will it finally act?

In 2016 I sailed with scientists across an oceanic vortex filled with plastic and other human detritus swirling between the coasts of Hawai‘i and California to see the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. While the word patch seems to confer a floating island of trash, the reality is far more dire: A shocking amount of consumer waste has traveled to a place distant from any kind of human settlement, creating a dense, uncontainable soup of all manner of plastic stuff, from household objects to fishing gear — and the infinite number of small chemical-laced particles all plastics constantly shed.

As representatives of United Nations member states prepare to meet Feb. 28-March 2 at the fifth Environment Assembly in Nairobi, Kenya, addressing plastic pollution in the seas is a top priority. But they must recognize that, like the illusion of the “Garbage Patch,” our present plastic predicament is far more catastrophic than most people are aware — and it continues to worsen.

Tiny toxic plastic particles now permeate not only the oceans, but indoor and outdoor air, freshwaters, soils, plants, outer space, and the bodies of humans and other animals. UN negotiators must take urgent steps to recognize plastic pollution as more than a matter of litter in the ocean, as it has historically — and misleadingly — been portrayed. It’s now time to develop a binding, enforceable agreement that would require the plastics industry and other entities that have supported its rapid rise be held accountable for the damages caused to people and the planet, and lay out a pathway to a safe, equitable future without plastics.

plastic beach — Plastic on a beach in Mumbai. Photo: Ravi Khemka (CC BY 2.0)

In the long span of human history, plastic is a relatively new invention, only rolled out for mass production in the mid-1900s. By 1960, when widespread use of plastic was not yet ubiquitous globally, plastics made up less than 1% of household trash by weight in middle- and high-income countries. Today plastics make up at least 10% of the same countries’ household waste. In less than 80 years, industries have churned out more than 8.3 billion metric tons of various kinds of petrochemical-based plastics, most of which has been discarded or entered nature and will never benignly biodegrade.

plastic beach Hawaii — Plastic on a beach in Hawai‘i. Photo: LCDR Eric Johnson, NOAA Corps.

Just 9% of thrown-away plastic is recycled, mainly because industry doesn’t design most plastics to be recycled. It’s much cheaper to throw it away, and governments and waste-hauling industries make fortunes off others’ misfortunes.

All the plastic we use will never disappear. Instead it is shipped, landfilled, incinerated, open-burned or dumped in someone else’s backyard to release noxious odors, plastic particles, dangerous toxins, diseases and climate-warming greenhouse gases.

All along the plastics production, transportation and disposal pipeline, it’s predominantly communities of color and lower-income people who are harmed by pollution, industrial emissions, plastics’ toxic chemicals and industrial accidents. For these reasons, plastics were finally recognized last year by the UN as an urgent human-rights problem, though frontline communities have been fighting continued fossil fuel, chemical and plastics development for many decades. Our world is presently set up to allow plastics’ producers to benefit from a kind of industrialized systemic racism as toxic and insidious as plastic itself.

Plastic Ghana — Plastic waste clogs sewers in Ghana. Photo: Sucram Yef (CC BY 2.0)

But plastic’s toxic reach harms us all. Plastic is made with any combination of thousands of chemicals known to harm humans — including hormone-disrupting PFAS, phthalates and BPA. Plastic particles and the chemicals they carry are accumulating in plants, animals and ecosystems, our bodies and bloodstreams alike, and are even passed down through generations. Recent research suggests mothers pass plastic particles into their babies’ bodies through the placenta. People appear to eat, drink and breathe in plastic pieces. One researcher, Sherri Mason, described them to me once as “little poison pills.”

Plastics and their particles — and the hundreds of thousands of other synthetic chemicals humans have created — have become so widespread across the planet in the past century that scientists recently published a peer-reviewed scientific paper warning there’s more entering nature than any entity can reliably assess or control. This puts the long-term survival of all life at risk. The scientists urged swift action be taken to curb the rising tide of chemicals and plastic, though they also acknowledged that the plastic and chemicals already out there will continue to pose risks well into the future.

plastic pellets from a beach — Plastic pellets, or nurdles, are the feedstock of plastic manufacturing. Photo by madicattt (CC BY-NC 2.0)

Those risks must be immediately mitigated, especially for communities of color worst harmed by plastics’ environmental injustices.

The core part of the answer to our plastic problem is to stop making more of it and require industries to address the mess they’ve made. We need a treaty that would hold international industries and governments accountable for ceasing plastic production. The Basel, Rotterdam and Stockholm Conventions are designed to protect human and environmental health from dangerous chemicals and wastes during production, transportation, use and disposal. These binding existing frameworks for regulating hazardous substances could be broadened and strengthened to include plastic and its petrochemical based ingredients and additives.

The Stockholm Convention is specifically designed to restrict or stop production of long-lasting “persistent” substances known to cause serious harm to humans, wildlife and ecosystems. Given this criteria, plastics would also qualify.

We also need to make sure our world works in a manner that minimizes waste and maximizes human and environmental health, in ways that are just and equitable to people and nature. UK economist Kate Raworth has proposed a donut-shaped economic model under which humanity would focus not on the usual measure of GDP but on “meeting the human rights of every person within the means of our life-giving planet.” The UN should lay out a pathway for replacing our current industrially driven exponential-growth society with restorative and regenerative local systems. Societal values that minimize waste — like sharing, reuse and repair — could be fostered through regulations, education, incentives and other behavior-changing strategies.

Plastic bag — Photo: John Platt (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

The biggest opponents of efforts to tightly regulate plastics, petrochemical and fossil fuel production are the industries perpetuating the problem. Industry misinformation continues to portray plastic as an important lightweight material for the “low-carbon” future that’s now necessary on our warming planet. But just as it has been doing all along, the industry is continuing to try to delay the necessary action of turning off the plastics tap once and for all. The plastic industry is on track to churn out more plastic than ever before and will only accelerate production unless we demand global negotiators take serious action to hold industries accountable now.

Ironically, in a world hyperconnected by plastics, the dire truths about this material have rapidly spread. Today, support for a global treaty on plastics has never been greater and more diverse. A significant and growing coalition — spanning businesses, communities, nonprofits, leading scientists, and many others — have recently called for an international agreement on plastics. Now such a treaty is a near-future possibility. We must ensure one is created — and that it doesn’t get watered down by industry interests as so many other plastic regulations have.

It’s critically important to use this present opportunity to officially identify the true causes of plastic pollution — industries’ continued production of plastics, petrochemical and fossil fuels. Instead of continuing to burden consumers with the tasks of cleaning up and fruitlessly recycling, as we always have, it’s time to stop plastics production at the source and change the systems that have supported its rise.

The opinions expressed above are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Revelator, the Center for Biological Diversity or its employees.

Previously in The Revelator:

4 Major Environmental Treaties the U.S. Never Ratified — But Should

The Surprising Biodiversity Hidden in the World’s Fragile Mangrove Forests

New research finds mangroves host thousands of unique insect species — and these trees are more vulnerable than previously understood.

Mangrove forests protect coastal ecosystems around the world from erosion and serve as habitats for an amazing array of fish, birds and other species. But because of the groves’ low levels of plant diversity, scientists have long assumed these famously twisty, salt-tolerant trees didn’t play host to many insect species.

A study published last year in the journal BMC Biology turns that assumption on its ear. Mangroves, the research reveals, are hotspots of insect biodiversity.

To reach this startling conclusion, a team of scientists from Singapore and other countries spent four years studying more than 140,000 insect specimens from 107 sites in mangroves and other habitats in Southeast and East Asia. They discovered an enormous and diverse number of insect species living in the mangroves — including more than 3,000 species in Singapore alone.

The researchers say their finding may have conservation relevance in the face of worldwide insect declines that are increasingly being called the “insect apocalypse.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by @blossooom_iris

It may also aid in the preservation and restoration of mangroves.

“We definitely hope that is the case,” says Darren Yeo, a biologist with National University of Singapore and lead author of the study. “We were able to show that even rather fragmented mangroves can house a huge amount of evolutionarily unique species and are worth protecting.”

That’s especially important considering the state of mangroves around the world.

Mangroves on the Decline

Mangroves — dozens of tropical and subtropical tree species of the Rhizophoraceae family — are distinguished by their aerial roots that emerge from brackish, estuarine shores. They serve as important nurseries for fish and shrimp species, including the threatened rainbow parrotfish and endangered goliath grouper.

They also serve people by protecting coasts from storm surges and sequestering millions of tons of carbon dioxide every year.

But despite their value, many mangrove forests have disappeared. About 35% worldwide were cut down between 1980 and 2000.

The new finding of mangrove insect diversity comes at a promising time. The rate of mangrove forest loss has slowed, and it has also been offset by significant gains from restoration and natural regeneration, according to a report published last year by the Global Mangrove Alliance.

Unique Invertebrates

Adding to the forests’ value, the researchers found that many insect species are specific to mangroves. More than half are not found in other habitats, even if normally species-rich coastal forests grow right next to the mangroves.

On top of that, the mangroves share few species among themselves. For some families of flies, 90% of species are unique to each region. Of the 74 known species of flies in the Thai mangroves, only 34 also exist in Singapore and 10 in Brunei.

The scientists say that the harsh conditions of the mangroves — extreme tides, wide variations in temperature and fluctuations in salinity — may result in physiological and behavioral adaptations that account for the unique insect community.

polistes major — Polistes major on mangrove. Photo: Bob Peterson (CC BY 2.0)

And many of those unique species remain to be identified by scientists.

During surveys for the study, Patrick Grootaert, who heads the entomology department at the Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Science, discovered two new species of fly in the mangroves of Pulau Ubin, a small, lush island that lies in the straits between Malaysia and Singapore.

One, which he called the long-legged fly, feeds on sandflies and midges. The other, the black scavenger fly, had been thought to be a previously discovered fly until further studies revealed it was a separate species. More surprisingly, entomologists recognized that it needed to be categorized into a completely new genus, as well.

The scientists were able to count the species and discover the new ones using new genetic technology. Until recently, taxonomy was a time-consuming, tedious task of viewing each collected specimen to identify and sort it according to its species. The new technology, called Next Generation Sequencing or NGS, can sequence the DNA of large numbers of specimens quickly and in a cost-effective manner.

Yeo says performing their work the old-fashioned way is theoretically possible but “would cost orders of magnitude more in funding and time.”

A Fragile Balance

Even as science begins to understand the biodiversity of mangroves, new research also shows that ecosystems may be more vulnerable than previously thought.

Another team of scientists recently looked at mangroves around the world to estimate what ecologists call ecological redundancy, or species redundancy, which quantifies how many species perform the same function in a biome — such as pollinating plants, consuming dead organisms or turning sediment by burrowing in the ground. A biome with lower redundancy has less “insurance” that its essential functions will be carried out.

By looking at mollusks, mussels and other invertebrates, the researchers — whose dataset did not include insects — found that even small mangrove patches serve as homes to quite diverse fauna. But they also found that redundancy of these invertebrates is extremely low, meaning that a disruption, even to a small extent, could have profound consequences for the rest of the mangrove ecosystem.

The team examined 16 functional traits of 364 invertebrate species. They looked at how the organisms feed, such as scavenging or feeding on fresh leaves, as well as behaviors such as digging, wood boring and burrowing. In many of the mangrove forests, only one species performed each ecological function.

The scientists say their findings may reveal mangroves to be among the most vulnerable ecosystems in the world.

Yeo, who was not affiliated with the second study, says he believes his work and that of other scientists will help further the knowledge needed for mangrove conservation and restoration efforts.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Community Forests Intl (@community_forests)

One clue that emerges here is that plant diversity matters, too.

“For one of our sites, Pulau Semakau, we were able to show that a mangrove that was replanted with a monoculture yielded poorer insect diversity than an adjacent pristine site,” he says. “We hope that future mangrove restoration and rehabilitation efforts would also consider the original floral diversity. This should lead to the better long-term health.”

Previously in The Revelator:

Shark Quest: Are the World’s Most Endangered Rays Living in New Ireland Province, Papua New Guinea?

Protect This Place: Burley Estuary, Threatened by Industrialized Aquaculture

Acres of plastic and gear for an industrial geoduck installation jeopardize a small, fragile lagoon in the Salish Sea.

The place:

Burley Lagoon in Purdy, Washington, about 25 miles southwest of Seattle

Why it matters:

Two salmon-spawning streams run directly into the small Burley estuary. The lagoon itself is an embayment partially blocked by a sandspit; only a narrow 300-foot channel allows the water level to rise and fall with the tide. This narrow opening restricts its water exchange with the greater Puget Sound. Because open waters are partially blocked by the natural sandspit, the lagoon is a low-energy environment and serves as a refuge from incoming wave action from the larger Henderson Bay just outside.

The lagoon environment may be protected from the harsher open waters, but this leaves it with a limited flushing capacity, which is important to water quality, ecosystem functions, sedimentation, pollutant distribution and other healthy functions. Because of this, if this ecosystem is disrupted by industry, it will take longer for it to recover.

The mudflats at the bottom of the bay are exposed during low tide, providing food sources for waterfowl. The mudflats themselves would typically teem with life when they haven’t been scraped bare and netted over by industry. As the tide rises, they can provide feeding grounds for fish and marine mammals like seals, otter, and sometimes even orca or gray whales. Eelgrass and other salt-tolerant nearshore vegetation grows on the edges of the mudflats. Shellfish naturally grow on the rocky shoreline.

This combination of characteristics creates an ecosystem that sustains flora and fauna adapted for these unique living conditions. Restoration of salmon runs is paramount in the Puget Sound, including the runs in Burley Lagoon that are the lifeblood of Southern Resident killer whales (orcas), whose population is already dwindling. This special estuary is considered a nursery of sorts for forage fish that provide sustenance for salmon, which in turn feed the orcas.

The threat:

A large industrial aquaculture company already has a presence in the lagoon. But it currently has its sights set on a cash crop that will fetch a high price on foreign markets: geoducks — a giant saltwater clam valued as a delicacy in Asia.

Geoduck site in Puget Sound. Photo: Wendy Ferrell (used with permission)

Even now, the Burley estuary has large areas of tideland covered in plastic predator-exclusion nets to protect industrial oyster and clam beds from aquatic animals and birds considered “pests” by the industry. Visitors to the lagoon are already troubled by the loss of natural habitat and feeding grounds for aquatic animals, plants and waterfowl that call Burley Lagoon and Puget Sound home.

Now the industry has proposed installing a 25.5-acre geoduck site in the Burley Lagoon. This would bring even more plastic gear and nets. If the permit is given the green light, cumulative impacts of industrial aquaculture practices could threaten the estuary’s ecosystem and continue to interfere with the natural food web of Puget Sound. A 25.5-acre industrial geoduck installation means millions of PVC pipes pounded directly into the substrate and covered by large predator nets. The disruption to the entire ecosystem and the natural processes of the estuary threatens to be severe, potentially damaging the restoration efforts of critical species like salmon and orcas.

Geoduck PVC pipes in Puget Sound. Photo: Wendy Ferrell (used with permission)

My place in this place:

As a fifth-generation resident on the Salish Sea, and on Burley Lagoon in particular, the estuary, full of life, has been my neighbor and my friend. I’ve watched the tiny crabs and shrimp scurrying in the tidepools, the small forage fish darting in the shallows, the loyal salmon returning to spawn, and the playful seals and sometimes whales visiting to feed. The ecosystem was always alive and vibrant before aquaculture became modern and took over with acres of plastic and gear.

Now, in Burley Lagoon, I see plastic predator-exclusion nets spread out on the tidelands for commercial shellfish aquaculture operations. This is what greets the spawning salmon returning to Purdy and Burley Creeks after their time in the open sea. Should we further disrupt their runs and their ecosystem by adding millions of PVC pipes to their feeding ground? Will the ecosystem of the bay be able to withstand this loss of diversity of species? Will the dollar signs of this geoduck cash crop be too tempting to pass up?

How will our fragile lagoon that is already stretched to its tipping point withstand another onslaught of industrialized gear and methods with a potential geoduck farm?

Who’s protecting it now:

Many hardworking families, some who have lived here for multiple generations, have watched the increasing and shocking industrialization of the lagoon and the loss of myriad sea creatures who used thrive in local tidepools. These neighbors and friends have rallied together in a grassroots effort to bring awareness to the current and future threats to this unique body of water.

What this place needs:

Burley Lagoon needs scientists and activists who care about the food web of the Salish Sea to stand with us against industrial aquaculture and its big pocketbooks.

Follow the fight:

www.friendsofburleylagoon.org

Previously in The Revelator:

5 Reasons to Rethink the Future of Dams

7 Exciting Ways Researchers Study Elusive and Endangered Wildlife

New and developing technologies are helping to push conservation efforts at a critical time.

Each fall thousands of pronghorns migrate 150 miles between their summer grounds in Grand Teton National Park and their winter habitat in Wyoming’s Green River Valley. It’s a journey complicated by fences, roads and other development. Conserving this antelope-like species means identifying these threats — not an easy task for such a wide-ranging mammal.

But after outfitting the animals with GPS tracking collars, researchers were able to identify the pronghorns’ routes and areas of potential problems. It turned out that a critical piece of their pathway was slated for development, which would have made their journey even more difficult and dangerous.

The tracking data helped rally conservation support to cancel the development and led to the establishment of the country’s first protected wildlife corridor.

Roaming ungulates aren’t the only beneficiaries of the technology. Since the mid-1990s, GPS collars — and now smaller GPS satellite tags — have been used to map the journeys of migrating birds, well-traveled sea turtles and countless other animals.

But when it comes to boosting conservation work, it’s not the only tool in the toolbox. A bevy of new and evolving technologies and techniques are helping researchers better study animals that are few in number, far-ranging or hard to find. And that can lead to more protections for imperiled wildlife and the habitat they need to survive. The research comes at a critical time as we face accelerating extinction rates across the world.

Here are some tools helping to gather information and inform policy:

1. Smile, You’re on Camera

Wolverines are so elusive that for decades scientists didn’t know much about them. That’s changing now with help from new technologies, including motion-triggered remote cameras, relatively cheap and noninvasive devices also known as “camera traps.”

“Camera traps have completely revolutionized how we study wolverines because they’re [our] eyes out in the landscape over huge areas,” says Jason Fisher, a wildlife ecologist at the University of Victoria. “Instead of putting a collar on a small handful of wolverines, you can now monitor an entire population — and you can do that continuously for as long as you want to.”

Camera traps can be paired with passive infrared sensors, which trigger the cameras when they detect an animal’s body heat.

And if positioned correctly, the photos can help identify individual animals that have distinctive markings.

Wolverines, like American martens and Asian black bears, often have unique fur patterns on their chests or throats that aren’t visible when they’re walking on all fours, so scientists sometimes suspend bait in front of camera traps to encourage animals to stand and expose those unique ventral markings.

wolverine facing camera — A adult female wolverine stands at a camera station in Mt. Rainier National Park. Photo: NPS/Cascades Carnivore Project

Tigers and jaguars often need cameras on both sides to capture distinctive flank markings. Others, like bottlenose dolphins or African lions, are identified best through facial markings.

Camera traps can also help even when they don’t get images of the animals being studied.

“We put them in places where we think wolverines are and where we think wolverines aren’t because getting those absences are just important,” says Fisher. “If we think they should be using a piece of landscape, but they’re not, we need to know that so we can figure out why — is it human pressure from recreation or landscape development or climate change?”

2. Listen Up

Researchers don’t always need to see an animal to know it’s there. Acoustic recorders can help capture birdsong and can be combined with automated species identification programs like Cornell University’s BirdNET to assess bird populations.

Much like camera traps, these systems allow recordings to be collected 24 hours a day and without any noticeable human intrusion.

“These low-cost and automated tools may greatly improve efforts to survey bird communities and their ecosystems, and consequently, efforts to conserve threatened indigenous biodiversity,” researchers from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife wrote in a 2021 study.

Surveys and song meter recordings conducted at Mt Haupu, Kauai, by @NTBG and Archipelago Research and Conservation found new evidence of an endangered seabird ‘A’o (Newell’s Shearwater) colony adding to the importance of this unique site! pic.twitter.com/v01GiluYfK

— Nina Rønsted (@NinaRonsted) February 4, 2022

In Australia researchers enlisted the help of landowners to attach recorders to trees on their property. But the scientists were interested in capturing koala bellows, and not birdsong, to determine which areas had the most suitable koala habitat in private forests, where survey work is often limited. The research may help the species, which Australia declared endangered in February due to habitat loss, disease and other threats.

3. Tag, You’re It

Passive Integrated Transponder (PIT) tags have been around for decades, but they’re still incredibly useful to researchers — especially those who track fish that are often out of sight.

The devices, which don’t require batteries, function like microchips used to identify pets. A tiny radio transponder with a unique code is housed in a glass cylinder, then affixed or injected into an animal.

Syringe injecting tag into fish — Injecting a PIT tag into a yearling pallid sturgeon at Gavins Point National Fish Hatchery. Photo: Sam Stukel/USFWS

They’ve helped scientists understand the life cycles, predation, habitat and movement of not just fish but creatures like snakes and turtles. And because some PIT tags can be as small as a grain of rice, they’ve also been used to keep track of freshwater mussels, which are among North America’s most imperiled species.

“We take a microchip and we glue it on the shell of the mussel and we have a [transponder] wand that can go underwater and we can find that mussel without having to dig for it,” says Matt Ashton, an aquatic biologist at Maryland’s Department of Natural Resources who was involved in research assessing an effort to restart populations of eastern elliptio mussels in Maryland’s Patapsco River.

4. Snagged

If you want to study a grizzly bear, it might be easier — and less invasive — to just snag a piece of its fur than capture the whole animal. So-called “hair traps” or “hair snares” can take different forms, but often involve using a scent to lure the animal to barbed wire that will harmlessly grab a tuft of fur, but not restrain the animal. Researchers then use the DNA in the hair follicle to get biological information.

Since the 1990s the practice has grown in popularity and has been used for a wide variety of animals, especially elusive carnivores — including wolverines.

“DNA from hair samples has gone a long way to helping us understand how wolverines use landscapes and for documenting population size, because you can identify those right down individuals,” says Fisher.

5. DNA at Large

In more recent years, collecting DNA from animals has evolved. Scientists can now collect genetic material shed from plants and animals in the water, soil or air — known as environmental DNA or eDNA.

Although the technology still has much room for improvement, it’s already proving useful in aquatic ecosystems, where it’s been used to look for the presence of invasive carp. It’s also being used to assess whether threatened or endangered species are in an ecosystem.

Recently researchers in Brazil using eDNA detected the presence of a frog, Megaelosia bocainensis, not seen since 1968.

“For conservation it’s really helpful, because by using environmental DNA you don’t need to directly see the species and it’s not an invasive process — you don’t need to manipulate the animal and you don’t need to disturb the environment — and it’s cheap,” Carla Martins Lopes, a scientist involved in the Brazil discovery, told Mongabay.

There have also been recent breakthroughs with airborne DNA. Two recent studies showed that researchers could detect and identify dozens of species in a zoo through eDNA collected from the air.

And the work is spilling over to plants, too. In another effort, scientists analyzed eDNA from dust traps which collect pollen and other airborne molecules. “The team found several species of grass, fungi, and even an invasive species called tree of heaven (Ailanthus altissima) that had all been overlooked by more conventional surveys,” The Scientist reported.

6. Going Global

The more tools researchers have to collect information, the more data they have. Generating more data is good, but being able to share, access and analyze data from other researchers all over the world is even better.

A new study looked at a global data set with information from 8,671 camera traps on four continents and found that there was more mammal diversity in protected areas than other wilderness areas that lacked protections.

It’s the kind of research that could help drive big policy decisions.

“Under the Convention on Biological Diversity, the world is currently discussing new targets for how much of the earth’s surface should be covered by parks,” Cole Burton, a conservation biologist and study coauthor told Science Daily. “We need to have better information to inform these policy discussions. Hopefully this study helps fill the gaps in our knowledge.”

More tools are also being developed to help on this front, too.

One is Movebank, a free online database hosted by the Max Planck Institute of Animal Behavior, which lets researchers upload animal tracking data that can be shared or privately held. It gets about 3 million new data points each day.

There’s also a corresponding app, Animal Tracker, which allows researchers to connect with citizen scientists who can help with tracking, including locating a tagged animal that’s gone down.

7. Nose for Conservation

Found — Humans investigate a Rogue’s find. Photo: Deanna Williams/U.S. Forest Service

Not every conservation tool these days is high tech — sometimes you just need a really good nose.

Specially trained conservation detection dogs sniff out information that will protect endangered species and aid scientific research.

For Eba, that’s putting her nose to work on the Salish Sea, helping researchers find scat from endangered Southern Resident killer whales, which can reveal a lot about the orca’s health and habits.

For Filson, trained by Rogue Detection Teams, that’s helping to find endangered Franklin’s bumblebees or Sierra Nevada red foxes.

“I think we can all agree that dogs can find the scat of myriad species in the wild,” Jennifer Hartman, Filson’s handler and a field scientist from Rogue Detection Teams, told The Revelator. “But when you start to think about caterpillars, or viruses on plants, or invasive species at different stages in their life cycle, that’s when you really start to see the power of the nose at work.”

Of course no single tool — be it high- or low-tech — can save an endangered species by itself, but the more information we have the more we can protect. And with each technological development, the conservation picture from that information — and the processes to understand it — gets a little bit sharper.

Previously in The Revelator:

A Nose for Science: Conservation Dogs May Help in Search for Endangered Franklin’s Bumblebee