Tragedy of the day: 1 in 10 animals unable to outrun climate change

From the University of Washington, via Eurekalert, sympathy for snails, turtles, sloths, slow moving howler monkeys, shrews and moles and other slow moving critters that will apparently bake in place due to the 0.7C temperature rise of the past century. They just can’t move fast enough it seems. No mention of adaptation either. Why oh why did nature equip them so poorly? /sarc

Gotta love this reasoning:

Only climate change was considered and not other factors that cause animals to disperse, such as competition from other species.

The natural world doesn’t work that way. You can’t just turn off all the other variables and make projections using only one (unless of course you are doing climate science).

Nearly one-tenth of hemisphere’s mammals unlikely to outrun climate change

A safe haven could be out of reach for 9 percent of the Western Hemisphere’s mammals, and as much as 40 percent in certain regions, because the animals just won’t move swiftly enough to outpace climate change. For the past decade scientists have outlined new areas suitable for mammals likely to be displaced as climate change first makes their current habitat inhospitable, then unlivable. For the first time a new study considers whether mammals will actually be able to move to those new areas before they are overrun by climate change. Carrie Schloss, University of Washington research analyst in environmental and forest sciences, is lead author of the paper out online the week of May 14 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

“We underestimate the vulnerability of mammals to climate change when we look at projections of areas with suitable climate but we don’t also include the ability of mammals to move, or disperse, to the new areas,” Schloss said.

Indeed, more than half of the species scientists have in the past projected could expand their ranges in the face of climate change will, instead, see their ranges contract because the animals won’t be able to expand into new areas fast enough, said co-author Josh Lawler, UW associate professor of environmental and forest sciences.

In particular, many of the hemisphere’s species of primates – including tamarins, spider monkeys, marmosets and howler monkeys, some of which are already considered threatened or endangered – will be hard-pressed to outpace climate change, as are the group of species that includes shrews and moles. Winners of the climate change race are likely to come from carnivores like coyotes and wolves, the group that includes deer and caribou, and one that includes armadillos and anteaters.

The analysis looked at 493 mammals in the Western Hemisphere ranging from a moose that weighs 1,800 pounds to a shrew that weighs less than a dime. Only climate change was considered and not other factors that cause animals to disperse, such as competition from other species.

To determine how quickly species must move to new ranges to outpace climate change, UW researchers used previous work by Lawler that reveals areas with climates needed by each species, along with how fast climate change might occur based on 10 global climate models and a mid-high greenhouse gas emission scenario developed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

The UW researchers coupled how swiftly a species is able to disperse across the landscape with how often its members make such a move. In this case, the scientists assumed animals dispersed once a generation.

It’s understandable, for example, that a mouse might not get too far because of its size. But if there are many generations born each a year, then that mouse is on the move regularly compared to a mammal that stays several years with its parents in one place before being old enough to reproduce and strike out for new territory.

Western Hemisphere primates, for example, take several years before they are sexually mature. That contributes to their low-dispersal rate and is one reason they look especially vulnerable to climate change, Schloss said. Another reason is that the territory with suitable climate is expected to shrink and so to reach the new areas animals in the tropics must generally go farther than in mountainous regions, where animals can more quickly move to a different elevation and a climate that suits them.

Those factors mean that nearly all the hemisphere’s primates will experience severe reductions in their ranges, Schloss said, on average about 75 percent. At the same time species with high dispersal rates that face slower-paced climate change are expected to expand their ranges.

“Our figures are a fairly conservative – even optimistic – view of what could happen because our approach assumes that animals always go in the direction needed to avoid climate change and at the maximum rate possible for them,” Lawler said.

The researchers were also conservative, he said, in taking into account human-made obstacles such as cities and crop lands that animals encounter. For the overall analysis they used a previously developed formula of “average human influence” that highlights regions where animals are likely to encounter intense human development. It doesn’t take into account transit time if animals must go completely around human-dominated landscapes.

“I think it’s important to point out that in the past when climates have changed – between glacial and interglacial periods when species ranges contracted and expanded – the landscape wasn’t covered with agricultural fields, four-lane highways and parking lots, so species could move much more freely across the landscape,” Lawler said.

“Conservation planners could help some species keep pace with climate change by focusing on connectivity – on linking together areas that could serve as pathways to new territories, particularly where animals will encounter human-land development,” Schloss said. “For species unable to keep pace, reducing non-climate-related stressors could help make populations more resilient, but ultimately reducing emissions, and therefore reducing the pace of climate change, may be the only certain method to make sure species are able to keep pace with climate change.”

###

The third co-author of the paper is Tristan Nuñez, now at University of California, Berkeley. Both Schloss and Nuñez worked with Lawler while earning their master’s degrees. Lawler did this work with support from the UW School of Environmental and Forest Sciences using, in part, models he previously developed with funding from the Nature Conservancy and the Cedar Tree Foundation.

For more information: Schloss, cell 440-666-6389, cschloss@uw.edu Lawler, 206-685-4367, jlawler@u.washington.edu (Note: Lawler is away from the office the week of May 14 but will check for messages once or twice a day)

===========================================================

It is just too bad those poor animals can’t get out of the way. It reminds me of this:

Get notified when a new post is published.
Subscribe today!
0 0 votes
Article Rating
135 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
May 14, 2012 5:39 pm

In their paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences, Carrie A. Schloss, Tristan A. Nuñez, and Joshua J. Lawler assert – http://tinyurl.com/clpk84s :
“Because climate change will likely outpace the response capacity of many mammals, mammalian vulnerability to climate change may be more extensive than previously anticipated.”
And yet, John A. Finarelli and Catherine Badgley in an April 2010 paper entitled, “Diversity dynamics of Miocene mammals in relation to the history of tectonism and climate” and published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society assert – http://tinyurl.com/6wf5ts3 :
“Although diversification histories differed between the two regions, species richness, origination rate and extinction rate per million years were not systematically different over the 20 Myr interval. In the tectonically active region, the greatest increase in originations coincided with a Middle Miocene episode of intensified tectonic activity and global warming. During subsequent global cooling, species richness declined in the montane region and increased on the Great Plains. These results suggest that interactions between tectonic activity and climate change stimulate diversification in mammals.”
Not surprisingly, Schloss, Nuñez, and Lawler seemingly do not reference Finarelli and Badgley’s work – http://tinyurl.com/cb5sfye . When backcasted, the IPCC climate models utilized by Schloss, Nuñez, and Lawler are woefully inaccurate – http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/13592/2/MPRA_paper_13592.pdf . At 5-25 million years before present and given today’s “unprecedented rapidity of projected climatic changes” alleged by the authors (via Hansen, of course), the Miocene must have been far too timid a time period for their consideration.

May 14, 2012 5:42 pm

Interesting they would include snails and turtles in this foolishness, as both animals trace their lineage back over 100 million years. You would have thought they would have seen everything by now.
As to Bullwinkle, you’ve never lived until you see one clear a six foot high fence on a single leap to get to the other side. While Moose do not sit at the very tip of the food chain, they are very well equipped and have the disposition to do quite well for themselves in Interesting Times. Cheers –

May 14, 2012 6:13 pm

rudkinsm@yahoo.com says:
May 14, 2012 at 3:17 pm
Moron: snails and turtles are not mammals. And the article DID mention adaptation. I’m astounded by the lack of concern for the world we will be leaving to our children and grand children. It ‘s okay as long as WE don’t have to deal with the problem….let the future generations deal with our mess.
===============================================================
I certainly hope that future generations won’t have to pay for Mann’s mess. That’s one reason I like this site.

May 14, 2012 6:17 pm

Gail Combs says:
May 14, 2012 at 4:11 pm
Joachim Seifert says:
May 14, 2012 at 3:26 pm
It happened to the Trilobites some time ago….
_______________________________
They did not do too badly…the trilobite lineage persisted for some 300 million years before finally becoming extinct at the end of the Permian Period. And you can not blame their extinction on mankind unless we develop time machines in the future.
===============================================
I don’t know, Gail. If those time machines emitted CO2 ………

Kaboom
May 14, 2012 6:25 pm

That’s like observing suburban housing under the exclusive parameter of rainfall and ignoring the economic crisis and then coming up with a hare brained theory how wet springs and dry falls cause McMansions to go into foreclosure.

Mac the Knife
May 14, 2012 6:31 pm

Luther Wu says:
May 14, 2012 at 4:33 pm
“Why did the Lesser Prairie Chicken cross….”
Schweet!
Q: Why did the punk rocker cross the road?
A: He had to – He was stapled to the chicken!

Billy Liar
May 14, 2012 6:42 pm

I hope I’m not saying what someone has already mentioned above but …
surely the animals would have to wait 30 years to find out whether their climate had changed and which way to go?

Gail Combs
May 14, 2012 6:43 pm

Gail Combs says:
May 14, 2012 at 4:11 pm
And you can not blame their extinction on mankind unless we develop time machines in the future.
===============================================
Gunga Din says:
May 14, 2012 at 6:17 pm
I don’t know, Gail. If those time machines emitted CO2 ………
==============================================
Darn it now I have to clean off the screen again…
Hey maybe that is why there is such a high spike in the level of CO2 all the way up to about 7000 ppm in the Cambrian. http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/PageMill_Images/image277.gif

Mac the Knife
May 14, 2012 6:43 pm

The plethora of really bad ‘climate science’ coming out of the University of Washington is simultaneously embarrassing and a source of real despair, for the local demise of rigorous science. My tax dollars at work – ugh!

May 14, 2012 6:46 pm

I can outrun an armadillo, so I’m cool.

pet
May 14, 2012 6:53 pm

OH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The HUGE MANATEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HAHAHAHA

Jeff Alberts
May 14, 2012 6:58 pm

Considering how cold it’s been in Western Washington (Yew Dub’s home area) the last three summers in particular, it must have been very difficult keeping a straight face while doing this research.

dp
May 14, 2012 7:08 pm

Isn’t it a marvelous thing that no matter where animals thrive, weather has adapted to support them. The world is a marvelous mysterious place.
/sarc

May 14, 2012 7:27 pm

“In this case, the scientists assumed animals dispersed once a generation.”
Well there you go. Since they don’t have any actual data, they’ll just assume it. Because, ya know, if a species is going to be threatened with extinction, it’s crazy that they’d be CONSTANTLY moving to find new sources of food. Naw.. animals are really lazy, and have a deathwish in these scientist’s models…

ScottR
May 14, 2012 7:30 pm

When Lewis and Clark explored what is now Montana and Idaho, all of the large animals were found in the plains along the rivers. There were virtually no large animals such as deer or grizzly bears in the mountains. But within a few decades, the influx of trappers and hunters had pushed most of the wildlife into the mountains. This is a large change, driven by a real cause. And the animals survived, in a completely new environment A tiny global-warming temperature change is nothing in comparison.

May 14, 2012 7:32 pm

Decimated. I’d say. They’re all going to be toast!
Can’t migrate or adapt to a change of 0.7 °C/century.
Of course this could be explained if climate had been constant since the universe was created 6500 years ago with almost all the species we see today in place. (The delicious falling prey to the injudicious top-predator; humans who’ve been responsible for the extenction of all species not alive today.) All frolicked in their ideal, unform habitats until dirty fossil-fuellers punctured and despoiled Gaia. There have only been daily temperature fluctuations of up to 70°C since Gaia has been in pain as a result of us feeding on her flesh.
Repent now: Buy Panasonic.

SteveSadlov
May 14, 2012 7:34 pm

Jeff Alberts says:
May 14, 2012 at 6:58 pm
I wonder if the Cordilleran Ice Mass is making a comeback and further wonder if that mass is a sort of “tipping point” in the grand scheme of repeated interglacial endings.

May 14, 2012 8:14 pm

Bernd Felsche says:
May 14, 2012 at 7:32 pm
Decimated. I’d say. They’re all going to be toast!
=====================================================
No need to cook our food. No CO2 emitted. WE’RE SAVED!!!!

alan
May 14, 2012 8:24 pm

“…based on 10 global climate models and a mid-high greenhouse gas emission scenario developed by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”
Models and scenarios developed by the IPCC! I quit reading right there!

May 14, 2012 8:40 pm

I like that they mentioned moose. Before 1980 there were no moose in Massachusetts. Since then they have been migrating south and the Quabbin Reservoir area now hosts 1000 of these “sub-arctic” critters. There biiggest danger is getting hit on the Mass pike.

May 14, 2012 8:54 pm

For the first time a new study considers whether mammals will actually be able to move to those new areas before they are overrun by climate change.
They’re more likely to be overrun by semis before any climate change kicks in.
Just what we need — another animal-movement study based on models rather than observation done by people who are clueless about animals and their movement.

May 14, 2012 8:59 pm

Bernd Felsche says:
May 14, 2012 at 7:32 pm
The delicious falling prey to the injudicious top-predator; humans who’ve been responsible for the extenction of all species not alive today.

That’s the real reason dinosaurs are no longer around — they tasted like chicken…

thisisnotgoodtogo
May 14, 2012 9:41 pm

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/334/6059/1148.abstract
They should consider what scientists have to say about populations on the move

jorgekafkazar
May 14, 2012 11:15 pm

Pseudoscientific drivel. I see dud people.

May 15, 2012 12:44 am

In particular, many of the hemisphere’s species of primates … will be hard-pressed to outpace climate change, as are the group of species that includes shrews and moles.
Unless climate change can move faster than a pouncing housecat, shrews and moles will be able to outpace it quite nicely, thanks.
Gail Combs says:
May 14, 2012 at 4:11 pm
They did not do too badly…the trilobite lineage persisted for some 300 million years before finally becoming extinct at the end of the Permian Period. And you can not blame their extinction on mankind unless we develop time machines in the future.

Honest, that trilobite was already dead when I stepped on it!