Humanity has wiped out 60% of animal populations since 1970

CalamariFritti wrote: »

...

Capitalism may work in a way. As in actually get some stuff done. But it is incredibly wasteful at the same time. Incredibly wasteful...

You don't want to know what the communist regime in USSR put in the Arctic forever.

And neither do I to be honest.

Maybe you meant to say consumerism or materialism.

green shoots wrote: »

Hi all. I've been checking here the last few days to see if there's a post about this, I find it remarkable how little anyone cares really!
We seem to be destroying our ecosystem, worldwide, and 60% of all wildlife has now perished since the 70s.

Just to be clear on what the report says. It says that the average loss in population among animal groupings is 60%. This can be complicated both within a species and across species.

So for example imagine there is a species of lizard with three known populations, one in Spain, one in France and one in Germany. Their 1970 numbers are:

Spain: 200
France: 150
Germany: 6,000

And the 2018 numbers:

Spain: 40
France: 30
Germany: 5,600

That's a drop of:

Spain: 80%
France: 80%
Germany: 6.7%

Leading to a species average of -55.56% drop in population group numbers, even though the species as a whole has dropped by -10.7%

In the case of some species the population group loss is around 50%, even though the numerical loss is only 4%, due to the extinction of small population groups.

At the inter-species level the figure is driven down by reduction in numbers for species with small populations as a whole. So for example the crow wouldn't have declined at all practically, but the Rhino with a small population will have any reduction show up as a large negative.

Overall the report shows a very bad decline in species with natural small population numbers, who nevertheless form an important part of their ecosystem. In addition to that many middle population species have had small local groups nearly wiped out, even if their main enclave (like the German cohort of lizards above) remain largely untouched.

green shoots wrote: »

No one cares, it's mind boggling really. I guess people just want to wear blinkers regarding the situation, and are unwilling to make even small changes. Slowing down the economy and buying less stuff goes against the world order. If it doesn't change we're doomed, quite soon. At least I've no kids to worry about...

I think though news outlets should really accurately report these kind of findings.

For example, the report only deals with 6.4% of all vertebrate species (invertebrates, the vast majority of life, don't really feature in it) with some statistical methods used to enlarge the conclusion to all vertebrate species (and I have seen other biologists question these methods). Even then of the 6.4% of all vertebrates covered, about half are actually having their numbers increase.

What the report really shows is that we are killing off vertebrates (if you accept their methods of extending to all vertebrates) with naturally small population numbers and pushing moderate population vertebrates back to their home territories (i.e. wiping out their colonies).

If we don't make changes now, rarer vertebrates will be critically endangered and moderately populous ones gone from any satellite locations, meaning they will only be found where they evolved.

MadYaker wrote: »

But then life will just start all over again and new species will evolve to replace the ones we destroyed (including ourselves) it's a big cycle so I'm kind of resigned to it now. If you look at the timeline of our planet humans have only been around for a tiny percentage and when were gone it will still only have been a tiny part of this planets life.

The difference from any other time there has been a mass extension and whats happening now is All the pollution, All the dangerous chemicals and All the radioactive power plants that will just spill out into the world.

Sad really how few post are on this thread.

The biggest difference you can make to the world is you... Anon

Other than that I find you are just wasting your time talking about it. The disconnect has never been greater.

vistafinder wrote: »

The difference from any other time there has been a mass extension and whats happening now is All the pollution, All the dangerous chemicals and All the radioactive power plants that will just spill out into the world.

There's nothing yet observed that would make the current human driven extinctions worse than previous mass extinctions.

Again a mass extinction is bad, but all the pollution, chemicals and radioactive power plants would have a hard time matching the Permian extinction.

Igotadose wrote: »

Your last sentence is where it's at. The problem is human overpopulation. Choosing not to use soybeans doesn't matter. Recycling doesn't matter. Electric solar powered whatever doesn't matter, only reducing human population will make any kind of difference. More humans, more demand.

And it's probably too late anyway. Just a matter of time now.

Human overpopulation is not the problem.

One could have the same population, but if humanity had renewables (or better nuclear fusion) powering it's industries, climate change would be drastically reduced.

In fact most studies show that a sudden drop in human population wouldn't fix the issues and that of the two switching over to other forms of power would be the preferable option if you could only do one. Look at Britian where switching to renewable has cancelled the carbon impact of all people in excess of the 1890's population.

Note, I am not saying overpopulation is not a problem. Although certainly in Ireland it is not a major issue. Here our environmental issues have little to do with overpopulation as we are well below carrying capacity (due to the Famine in the 19th and the Year of Slaughter in the 18th centuries)

Continual growth is good, good for the economy, but strangely enough doesn't seem all that good for all living species, including ourselves!

archer22 wrote: »

Talking about simple things that can be done to help...one never mentioned is if Farmers simply stopped flail mowing their hedgerows down to skeletons.

Nothing can survive through the winter in these hedge remnants and there is no food berries or nothing of value left in them.
This is one of the big causes of bird decline in Ireland...and I can't see what logic there is in any sense to cut hedges like that.

It even deprives the farm animals of shelter from cold winds and rain.

Shocking, but not all farmers cut all their hedges. The hedges you see must be on the roadside as I have yet to see all hedges scalped.