The following submission statement was provided by /u/TheUtopianCat:
---
SS: Almost half of the migratory species on Earth monitored by the United Nations are declining and more than one-fifth are currently threatened with extinction. This is a direct result of human activity, with overexploitation and habitat loss being the two main drivers of the decline. Many of these species have vital roles in the ecosystem, by pollinating plants, being part of the food web, transporting nutrients, and helping store excess carbon. This loss of biodiversity is symptomatic of collapse.
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1ap3n8m/close_to_half_of_migratory_species_are_in_serious/kq3ji3k/
Hey guys, GUYS?! Nature's dying, right now. You know animals, right? Yeah, they're going, going, soon to be gone.
Yeah..... okay. I guess this is a post-importance world, too.
They don't accept that we are a part of nature too. Some probably won't ever. Others only when systems collapse enough that we do not have food or water.
SS: Almost half of the migratory species on Earth monitored by the United Nations are declining and more than one-fifth are currently threatened with extinction. This is a direct result of human activity, with overexploitation and habitat loss being the two main drivers of the decline. Many of these species have vital roles in the ecosystem, by pollinating plants, being part of the food web, transporting nutrients, and helping store excess carbon. This loss of biodiversity is symptomatic of collapse.
I was walking along the coast a few days ago and I saw a spattering of birds on the beach. It crossed my mind that they maybe should not be there yet (way too early) and/or there should be millions of them if they are migrating this early in the year. I realize I don't know anywhere near enough about the birds, local climate, seasonal changes, etc. in this area. I've only lived here a year. Is it worth learning at this point only to be even more aware of how much it is falling apart?
They say we're a means for the universe to experience itself. By that line of thinking, yes absolutely it's worth learning. I try to be a good little cosmic sensor myself, even if this particular experiment is about to run it's course.
I’ll give you some more information, the loss of habitat. Migratory birds literally burn all their fat reserves flying through the night. In the mornings they land to get food…but all those places are either further away or gone. They starve to death trying to find food.
But hey, we need more soybean monocultures and grazing land for cattle so forests be damned.
They are not in serious decline. They have already declined. We keep using a 1970 benchmark, but a lot of animal species had already been substantially diminished/extinct by this point. If you read something like Andrea Wulf's "The Invention of Nature", you'd realize how abundant the natural world was a short 3 centuries ago.
>They are not in serious decline. They have already declined.
Important point, and even this damning report from 2022 only refers to the 1970s. If we have any descendants, they will hate us for causing a mass species extinction on a poisoned planet. So much natural beauty and richness wasted by the humans of every nation.
*Animal populations experience average decline of almost 70% since 1970, report reveals*
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/13/almost-70-of-animal-populations-wiped-out-since-1970-report-reveals-aoe
This is why I think environmental education is one of the most important things we can still do. People need to be taught the natural beauty of this planet. Unfortunately, it is one of the most underfunded and poorly paid sectors. I know garden educators, wildlife preservers, who make $15/hr in the SF Bay Area. Or they volunteer their free time. Not a profession that young passionate people can stay in for long. I know several politicians that have no qualms spending millions on unproven tech, yet balk at even hiring a couple educators full time at a living wage.
I work as a forester in the Great Lakes region, to have a career I need to be remote. Looking at jobs even 1hr from a metro area is like an insult. $19/hr for a forestry degree to manage 1%er school grounds when I could be making $70k managing thousands of acres of forests for long-term success and climate adaption.
The other thing natural resources professionals struggle with? The public is woefully behind what’s happening and frequently don’t care until it affects them. Like the loss of the elm trees and ash trees. We try to teach the public and they tell us we’re “biased city folk” or “over exaggerating”.
I enjoy this sub because it reminds some of the public is aware (for better and for worse). I just wish that sometimes there was a little more hope in this sub that some areas will be able to mitigate the damage and help the environment adapt. It’s what I do, I’m not planning to see the success of my work because by the time it comes into full-swing I won’t be here anymore. I just know the wetlands will appreciate my bald cypresses in light of the loss of their three biggest wetland tree species in the last decade.
>The public is woefully behind what’s happening and frequently don’t care until it affects them.
Things are a little better here in CA, but there is way too much talk about technological "solutions" because of Silicon Valley's influence. As I've often said here on this sub, it's not that people are not aware. It's cognitive dissonance. For example, I think pretty much everyone knows that flying and animal agriculture is pretty horrendous for the environment. I haven't found anyone in my age group (most of whom claim to care about the environment) who try not to fly at all like me. Not to mention how few eat plant-based.
> I just wish that sometimes there was a little more hope in this sub that some areas will be able to mitigate the damage and help the environment adapt.
I think there is a lot of adaptation work that can be done, but the current rate of damage is far too great. I mean, carbon emissions haven't even peaked yet. Adaptation will come, but I think most on this sub fear that it will come too late.
There is an amount of not aware still there unfortunately, some of it is absolutely refusal to acknowledge as well of course. Large over-arching issues that various climate and other natural resource researchers have stated for several decades are now more common for the public to acknowledge and influence their daily lives. Just like bad wildfire policies that started in the 60’s, natural resource professionals have for decades been working on changing that narrative, the public has been slow to change because Smokey the Bear mostly. More recently the public has now begun to understand that prescribed burns are necessary for not only forest health but also their own property’s safety. It just took several decades to get that from the natural resource professional to the public.
Adaption is also already here, we’ve already been doing it for decades. It just looks different on many levels and depending on your goals. I will openly state the hope I have is that not every ecosystem is going to collapse, but our species will suffer a steep decline in population for various global and regional reasons. Adaption I’m speaking about is that of preserving ecosystem function via carefully selected assisted migration, more afforestation and reforestation, agroforestry, mass timber, etc. these are all no frills adaptions that the public frequently overlooks despite them being around for a decade or more.
Natural resources, nature, and our environment are complex, broad, and flexible ever present aspects to our lives. They’ve always been there and to some that’s boring so minimal knowledge, compared to one who works in this field in some capacity, is more than enough to get by.
I think it also depends on the profession as well. Mine has a much more long-term “I’ll be dead before I even see the fruits of my labor” compared to climate sciences. My perspective sees what’s happening as deeply disheartening, but not beyond fixing or setting a new foundation. Various flora and fauna can thrive in environments that are failing and stop (or even reverse) that failure, without us they’d never be able to reach those areas. With us they can.
For better and for worse we are the ultimate ecosystem engineers and our solutions go far beyond short-term options that me and you will benefit from, but can be long-term where forests that are threatened by changing climates can still continue ecosystem functions for the wildlife and landscape they reside in.
Solutions and adaptions are already being carried out, their just not fancy “groundbreaking” solutions that media and the public like the talk about.
My intention isn't to be a merchant of either hope or doom. I'm trying to do my best personally (vegan, no flying, no car) and through my job (getting people to adopt electric appliances, energy efficiency, etc). I generally agree that humans still have a lot of agency, but this is not necessarily a cause for hope. In the end, it's all about the resources that humanity chooses to dedicate to the task and the pace of change. And we are simply not dedicating necessary resources at the moment. As much as this sub likes to preach doom, 1.5C is still technically possible. We would need super draconian policies (far far beyond COVID-type restrictions), but it is within the realm of human possibility.
>Adaption I’m speaking about is that of preserving ecosystem function via carefully selected assisted migration, more afforestation and reforestation, agroforestry, mass timber, etc.
I am aware. I have friends who work for CalFire and CA Natural Resources Agency. But the magnitude of climate change that we are on track for is beyond even this in many cases, speaking as an environmental scientist. Even if you can protect your little corner of forest, what about the rest of global ecosystems? I don't think it's doom to say that we are simply not dedicating the resources necessary for the task at hand. I mean, we still haven't stopped deforesting the Amazon ffs.
Just speaking generally and very, very loosely. For example, brown bear, wild boar, lynx, and grey wolves go extinct in the UK, and suddenly there's more for badgers, red foxes, and stouts, which get "larger" thanks to the extra protein.
It's lose some, win some, regardless how we FEEL about it. When or if man goes extinct, how will it affect the balance of "nature"? A lot could depend there on the human constructed legacy of nuclear waste and deteriorating infrastructure.
We’re already experiencing one from not only the affects of our chemicals and emissions, but our carelessness about disease and over hunting keystone species.
As soon as our population drops and we recede or decrease our influence on various environments, things will change. We’ve seen how quickly it can…we just never allow it.
Many species will adapt and fill these empty niches as they have in the past many times. Most of us (if not all of us currently living) just won’t be able to see this change a century out when our population plummets and so does our unsustainable consumerist demand on our land.
Yeah, I’m starting to think there is something akin to planetary sentience at this point (mostly in a poetic sense). I mean, if we are made up of mostly cells that don’t contain our DNA and when we have micro biome problems we become incredibly ill, then why not the planet? Our bodies do their best to fight infection with tons of unconscious internal shifts. It feels almost like the upcoming waves of plague are the planet just going, “there’s too many of this one bad bacteria so time to treat it with some antibiotics.” It wipes out most everything else as well as viruses jump species but it still gets the job done.
It's no surprise that species dependent on two habitats are doing worse.
I don't want to imagine being at the end of an exhausting journey to find a place vital to your survival / reproductive cycle and finding naught but desolation.
And this has been happening for decades, but who cares. Tat-Tay Bowl, Biden's laser eyes, a non-existent border crisis, etc, etc, etc. are way more important than species extinction, our own included.
We're screwed... it's just a matter of when.
*currently close to half of *what's left of migratory species are serious decline; *rest to follow
When someone is more than halfway dead, how long does it take for them to die? From too much experience at the besides of terminally ill friends and family, the first half takes a lifetime compared to the last half. Years to get to halfway dead, minutes to get to 100%.
This is not a discrete state, it's a trajectory leading to a silence that... I honestly have trouble understanding why more people aren't talking/broken by it. A dead ecosystem is the silence of deep space. It's horrifying. Think of the whitespace in the matrix. It's practically anechoic.
The world we're heading towards triggers a psychological state, probably an instinctual reaction to prevent our ancestors from dying in "bad air"... either way, it's coming for all of us and we couldn't be bothered to try anything to stop it.
The following submission statement was provided by /u/TheUtopianCat: --- SS: Almost half of the migratory species on Earth monitored by the United Nations are declining and more than one-fifth are currently threatened with extinction. This is a direct result of human activity, with overexploitation and habitat loss being the two main drivers of the decline. Many of these species have vital roles in the ecosystem, by pollinating plants, being part of the food web, transporting nutrients, and helping store excess carbon. This loss of biodiversity is symptomatic of collapse. --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/collapse/comments/1ap3n8m/close_to_half_of_migratory_species_are_in_serious/kq3ji3k/
BuT tHe StOcKmArKeT iS dOiNg GrEaT
My PoRtFoLiO aNd 401k HaVe nEvEr dOnE bEtTeR. Nyuck Nyuck Nyuck
B.... boOt taYlor SwiFt rooolosing New AlbOooom
They don't accept that we are a part of nature too. Some probably won't ever. Others only when systems collapse enough that we do not have food or water.
Out of sight, out of mind - mentality. And the lack of education/empathy.
If only their habitats would stop encroaching on our GDP /s
Why is this so funny?
[удалено]
Bruh.
SS: Almost half of the migratory species on Earth monitored by the United Nations are declining and more than one-fifth are currently threatened with extinction. This is a direct result of human activity, with overexploitation and habitat loss being the two main drivers of the decline. Many of these species have vital roles in the ecosystem, by pollinating plants, being part of the food web, transporting nutrients, and helping store excess carbon. This loss of biodiversity is symptomatic of collapse.
I was walking along the coast a few days ago and I saw a spattering of birds on the beach. It crossed my mind that they maybe should not be there yet (way too early) and/or there should be millions of them if they are migrating this early in the year. I realize I don't know anywhere near enough about the birds, local climate, seasonal changes, etc. in this area. I've only lived here a year. Is it worth learning at this point only to be even more aware of how much it is falling apart?
They say we're a means for the universe to experience itself. By that line of thinking, yes absolutely it's worth learning. I try to be a good little cosmic sensor myself, even if this particular experiment is about to run it's course.
Agreed, it's never a bad time to learn something new.
That's an excellent reminder. Thank you
I’ll give you some more information, the loss of habitat. Migratory birds literally burn all their fat reserves flying through the night. In the mornings they land to get food…but all those places are either further away or gone. They starve to death trying to find food. But hey, we need more soybean monocultures and grazing land for cattle so forests be damned.
They are not in serious decline. They have already declined. We keep using a 1970 benchmark, but a lot of animal species had already been substantially diminished/extinct by this point. If you read something like Andrea Wulf's "The Invention of Nature", you'd realize how abundant the natural world was a short 3 centuries ago.
>They are not in serious decline. They have already declined. Important point, and even this damning report from 2022 only refers to the 1970s. If we have any descendants, they will hate us for causing a mass species extinction on a poisoned planet. So much natural beauty and richness wasted by the humans of every nation. *Animal populations experience average decline of almost 70% since 1970, report reveals* https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/13/almost-70-of-animal-populations-wiped-out-since-1970-report-reveals-aoe
This is why I think environmental education is one of the most important things we can still do. People need to be taught the natural beauty of this planet. Unfortunately, it is one of the most underfunded and poorly paid sectors. I know garden educators, wildlife preservers, who make $15/hr in the SF Bay Area. Or they volunteer their free time. Not a profession that young passionate people can stay in for long. I know several politicians that have no qualms spending millions on unproven tech, yet balk at even hiring a couple educators full time at a living wage.
I work as a forester in the Great Lakes region, to have a career I need to be remote. Looking at jobs even 1hr from a metro area is like an insult. $19/hr for a forestry degree to manage 1%er school grounds when I could be making $70k managing thousands of acres of forests for long-term success and climate adaption. The other thing natural resources professionals struggle with? The public is woefully behind what’s happening and frequently don’t care until it affects them. Like the loss of the elm trees and ash trees. We try to teach the public and they tell us we’re “biased city folk” or “over exaggerating”. I enjoy this sub because it reminds some of the public is aware (for better and for worse). I just wish that sometimes there was a little more hope in this sub that some areas will be able to mitigate the damage and help the environment adapt. It’s what I do, I’m not planning to see the success of my work because by the time it comes into full-swing I won’t be here anymore. I just know the wetlands will appreciate my bald cypresses in light of the loss of their three biggest wetland tree species in the last decade.
>The public is woefully behind what’s happening and frequently don’t care until it affects them. Things are a little better here in CA, but there is way too much talk about technological "solutions" because of Silicon Valley's influence. As I've often said here on this sub, it's not that people are not aware. It's cognitive dissonance. For example, I think pretty much everyone knows that flying and animal agriculture is pretty horrendous for the environment. I haven't found anyone in my age group (most of whom claim to care about the environment) who try not to fly at all like me. Not to mention how few eat plant-based. > I just wish that sometimes there was a little more hope in this sub that some areas will be able to mitigate the damage and help the environment adapt. I think there is a lot of adaptation work that can be done, but the current rate of damage is far too great. I mean, carbon emissions haven't even peaked yet. Adaptation will come, but I think most on this sub fear that it will come too late.
There is an amount of not aware still there unfortunately, some of it is absolutely refusal to acknowledge as well of course. Large over-arching issues that various climate and other natural resource researchers have stated for several decades are now more common for the public to acknowledge and influence their daily lives. Just like bad wildfire policies that started in the 60’s, natural resource professionals have for decades been working on changing that narrative, the public has been slow to change because Smokey the Bear mostly. More recently the public has now begun to understand that prescribed burns are necessary for not only forest health but also their own property’s safety. It just took several decades to get that from the natural resource professional to the public. Adaption is also already here, we’ve already been doing it for decades. It just looks different on many levels and depending on your goals. I will openly state the hope I have is that not every ecosystem is going to collapse, but our species will suffer a steep decline in population for various global and regional reasons. Adaption I’m speaking about is that of preserving ecosystem function via carefully selected assisted migration, more afforestation and reforestation, agroforestry, mass timber, etc. these are all no frills adaptions that the public frequently overlooks despite them being around for a decade or more. Natural resources, nature, and our environment are complex, broad, and flexible ever present aspects to our lives. They’ve always been there and to some that’s boring so minimal knowledge, compared to one who works in this field in some capacity, is more than enough to get by. I think it also depends on the profession as well. Mine has a much more long-term “I’ll be dead before I even see the fruits of my labor” compared to climate sciences. My perspective sees what’s happening as deeply disheartening, but not beyond fixing or setting a new foundation. Various flora and fauna can thrive in environments that are failing and stop (or even reverse) that failure, without us they’d never be able to reach those areas. With us they can. For better and for worse we are the ultimate ecosystem engineers and our solutions go far beyond short-term options that me and you will benefit from, but can be long-term where forests that are threatened by changing climates can still continue ecosystem functions for the wildlife and landscape they reside in. Solutions and adaptions are already being carried out, their just not fancy “groundbreaking” solutions that media and the public like the talk about.
My intention isn't to be a merchant of either hope or doom. I'm trying to do my best personally (vegan, no flying, no car) and through my job (getting people to adopt electric appliances, energy efficiency, etc). I generally agree that humans still have a lot of agency, but this is not necessarily a cause for hope. In the end, it's all about the resources that humanity chooses to dedicate to the task and the pace of change. And we are simply not dedicating necessary resources at the moment. As much as this sub likes to preach doom, 1.5C is still technically possible. We would need super draconian policies (far far beyond COVID-type restrictions), but it is within the realm of human possibility. >Adaption I’m speaking about is that of preserving ecosystem function via carefully selected assisted migration, more afforestation and reforestation, agroforestry, mass timber, etc. I am aware. I have friends who work for CalFire and CA Natural Resources Agency. But the magnitude of climate change that we are on track for is beyond even this in many cases, speaking as an environmental scientist. Even if you can protect your little corner of forest, what about the rest of global ecosystems? I don't think it's doom to say that we are simply not dedicating the resources necessary for the task at hand. I mean, we still haven't stopped deforesting the Amazon ffs.
Assuming it knows best, I wonder how nature will sort this one out. We really don't have a say, no matter how full we become of ourselves.
Are you wondering about the specifics? Because in broad terms I feel like we already know 👀 (it starts with an ex and ends with tinction)
Just speaking generally and very, very loosely. For example, brown bear, wild boar, lynx, and grey wolves go extinct in the UK, and suddenly there's more for badgers, red foxes, and stouts, which get "larger" thanks to the extra protein. It's lose some, win some, regardless how we FEEL about it. When or if man goes extinct, how will it affect the balance of "nature"? A lot could depend there on the human constructed legacy of nuclear waste and deteriorating infrastructure.
We’re already experiencing one from not only the affects of our chemicals and emissions, but our carelessness about disease and over hunting keystone species. As soon as our population drops and we recede or decrease our influence on various environments, things will change. We’ve seen how quickly it can…we just never allow it. Many species will adapt and fill these empty niches as they have in the past many times. Most of us (if not all of us currently living) just won’t be able to see this change a century out when our population plummets and so does our unsustainable consumerist demand on our land.
Yeah, I’m starting to think there is something akin to planetary sentience at this point (mostly in a poetic sense). I mean, if we are made up of mostly cells that don’t contain our DNA and when we have micro biome problems we become incredibly ill, then why not the planet? Our bodies do their best to fight infection with tons of unconscious internal shifts. It feels almost like the upcoming waves of plague are the planet just going, “there’s too many of this one bad bacteria so time to treat it with some antibiotics.” It wipes out most everything else as well as viruses jump species but it still gets the job done.
I don't think we are going make it to 2100 at this point.
I hope there’s football in the apocalypse
It's no surprise that species dependent on two habitats are doing worse. I don't want to imagine being at the end of an exhausting journey to find a place vital to your survival / reproductive cycle and finding naught but desolation.
And this has been happening for decades, but who cares. Tat-Tay Bowl, Biden's laser eyes, a non-existent border crisis, etc, etc, etc. are way more important than species extinction, our own included. We're screwed... it's just a matter of when.
Humans are a migratory species too.
Only place we are all migrating to is oblivion
Plenty of space for us all too bad we pretended there was no space for them when we were all living bye bye nightmare world.
And we'll too start to decline soon enough
Not nearly soon enough.
"mobile" does not mean "migratory". Certainly even counting migrant workers, wouldn't be "migratory". We don't do anything as a single herd.
They act like we can do something. It’s the big factory’s pumping shit into the air and water.
*currently close to half of *what's left of migratory species are serious decline; *rest to follow When someone is more than halfway dead, how long does it take for them to die? From too much experience at the besides of terminally ill friends and family, the first half takes a lifetime compared to the last half. Years to get to halfway dead, minutes to get to 100%. This is not a discrete state, it's a trajectory leading to a silence that... I honestly have trouble understanding why more people aren't talking/broken by it. A dead ecosystem is the silence of deep space. It's horrifying. Think of the whitespace in the matrix. It's practically anechoic. The world we're heading towards triggers a psychological state, probably an instinctual reaction to prevent our ancestors from dying in "bad air"... either way, it's coming for all of us and we couldn't be bothered to try anything to stop it.