Guest essay by Jim Steele, Director emeritus Sierra Nevada Field Campus, San Francisco State University and author of Landscapes & Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism
Recently advocates of CO2 catastrophic climate change have been trumpeting a new paper in PNAS by Kyle C. Cavanaugh et al :“Poleward expansion of mangroves is a threshold response to decreased frequency of extreme cold events” The authors argue “Our analyses provides evidence for a threshold response, with declining frequency of severe cold winter events allowing for poleward expansion of mangroves. Future warming may result in increases in mangrove cover beyond current latitudinal limits of mangrove forests, thereby altering the structure and function of these important coastal ecosystems.”
The authors, from the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, use a bewildering array of statistics to suggest mangroves are marching march northward along the coast of Florida only because climate change has resulted in just 1.4 fewer days with temperatures falling below -4C between 1984 and 2006. However the authors admitted “decreases in the frequency of extreme cold events was only significant if an extreme cold event was defined as colder than −4 °C; the relationship disappeared when the temperature threshold was raised a small amount” but they later imply this suggests just how sensitive the mangroves are too what most of us would see as an insignificant change.
Their introduction also suggested that the authors were more interested in proving global warming than investigating all the confounding factors that may have also affected the increase in mangroves along their study site of the Indian River Lagoon. I was immediately suspicious because land use changes due to agriculture and urbanization have severely altered Florida’s hydrology and habitat and for decades disappearing mangroves have been a growing concern amongst conservationists. Nonetheless the authors claimed the spread of new mangroves were “uncorrelated with changes in mean annual temperature, mean annual precipitation, and land use.”
However I knew people who participated in Indian River Lagoon Shoreline Restoration Projects – Volunteer Events a few years back. That’s the very area that the authors claimed the expansion of mangroves could only be explained by climate change. Yet these CO2 advocates ignored well-advertised activities such as the “Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s Shoreline Restoration Project” which is working to identify suitable un-vegetated and disturbed shoreline areas to restore fringing mangrove habitats along the Indian River Lagoon. This is accomplished through planting red mangroves (Rhizophora mangle) and associated species, such as marsh grass (Spartina alterniflora).
In April of 2010 there was a call for volunteers “needed to help with plantings, site maintenance, follow-up monitoring, and plant care at the mangrove nursery located on the grounds of the St. Sebastian River Preserve State Park. Planting events will be scheduled in the spring, and follow-up monitoring, site maintenance, and nursery work days are scheduled year round.”
So I sadly present the authors with my “Cheesy Climate Science Award” created in honor of past researchers who lead the way by hijacking conservation success stories and metamorphosing them into a climate catastrophe campaign as done in the IPCC paper here.
Whether climate change is natural or manmade, we can make a more resilient environment by restoring habitat and watersheds. We must demand more critical thinking, so that such frivolous publications stop misrepresenting honest conservation efforts in order to create a picture of climate doom. Trustworthy environmental stewardship must be guided by better science.
Read previous essays at landscapesandcycles.net
Thanks, Jim, for another enlightening article.
Regards
Seems that not too long ago there were quite a few reports of large numbers of invasive species literally falling down dead from trees due to cold snaps in Florida.
National Public Radio carried an extensive story on this paper yesterday morning, including an interview with the lead author. He expressed no doubt at all about the validity of the paper’s conclusion that climate change is responsible.
The state plants a whole bunch of man groves and along comes a scientist, who ignores mans influence and then touts the increase as evidence of CAGW…. ?? And those doing the study couldn’t figure this one out?
NPR’s credibility just took a major hit IMHO, Course they always have been a mouth piece for government propaganda…
Thanks for the article as I spent a few hours last night reviewing this article and looking for data that this article does not have which is pre-1984 mangrove extent. Google “Florida Freezes in the 1980’s” and you will find that that decade had the coldest winter since the 1890’s and wiped out the citrus crop as well as according to one citation “The range of Florida’s mangroves fluctuates with invasions of severe cold weather. For example, the series of devastating freezes of the 1980s that wiped out the citrus industry in north central Florida also killed mangroves as far south as Naples on the Gulf coast and West Palm Beach on the Atlantic coast . Although mangroves have been reported as far north as St. Augustine and Cedar Key, the northern mangroves are stunted and may only be present as a shrub form that sprouts from roots after freeze damage”
This is another example of what happens when we use satellites to measure things that could not be measured in the past. It is amazing that this study is getting so much publicity as it is based on a range of 1984 onwards after a historical era of freezes in Florida in the 1980’s a roughly 100 year event (at least on the several hundred years of data that we have as the previous big freeze as 1894-95). This new paper has no data before 1984 which is when Landsat data became available and makes no attempt to find pre-1980’s sources.
I did find a 1982 paper called “The Ecology of Mangroves of South Florida: A Community Profile” published by the US Fish and Wildlife Service cited a 1974 survey by the Coastal Coordinating Council of Florida of Florida mangrove acreage. That survey had a total coverage of between 162,000 and 219,800 ha in the state and 90% of those were in 4 Southern counties. A large error range of 15% but of course this was before satellites. This new paper shows a growth of “In absolute terms, mangrove area increased by 1,240ha along the east coast of Florida between 1984 and 2011 Regions to the north of 26.75°N increased by a total of 1,700± 130 ha whereas regions to the south decreased by 464± 35 ha.”
So in 1974 there was roughly 16,000 to 22,000ha of mangroves outside of those 4 Southern counties and now we discussing 1,700± 130 ha growth being a big deal? Perhaps this paper should have been titled “Florida Mangroves Recover From 1980’s Freezes in Northern Florida” which still ignores the conservation efforts outlined in this article but that wouldn’t have gotten quotes such as in the NY Time article on the paper:
‘Dr. Gruner said that scientists needed to start considering changes beyond just average temperatures as they analyzed the environmental consequences of climate change. More surprises are likely in store, he said.
“I don’t like to think about it, quite frankly,” he said. “It’s a little scary.” ‘
Forget the tiny potential contribution from temperature change and very short time frame.
While the focus is on this, the empirical data shows that the irrefutable law of photosynthesis is having a positive effect several orders of magnitude greater.
As a result, earth’s biosphere and vegetative health is booming. Plant growth(especially woody stemmed) is benefitting greatly.
I am not a geologist but fancy this sort of stuff… The geologic record proves this planet warms and cools in natural cycles – something these climate change nuts ignore. So ridiculous.
Mike Maguire says:
January 1, 2014 at 8:39 am
“As a result, earth’s biosphere and vegetative health is booming. Plant growth(especially woody stemmed) is benefitting greatly.”
Well, if it were actually warming, which it doesn’t for 17 years now, that would also benefit the biosphere; as biodiversity tends to be higher the higher the average temperature is. If UNEP finally drops the CO2AGW scare and switches to the biodiversity scare we can demand more Global Warming because that helps biodiversity. Maybe they already recognized that and therefore don’t start their biodiversity campaign on a grand scale.
One warmist crap strory after another. I’m really getting boared.
This is kind of funny–I lived in the Daytona Beach/New Smyrna area from 1984 to 2000 and after a big freeze in the 80’s I helped some conservation groups replant mangroves along the Halifax River to restore habitat. I thought we were doing a good thing but there you go!!
DAN AUTON, 8.33am
(Dr Gruner) says “I don’t like to think about it, quite frankly. It’s a little scary.”
Not as scary as Dr Gruner!
Give me a call when we have mangroves growing in Winnipeg:
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/01/01/as-predicted-by-arrhenius-climate-refugees-from-the-overheated-us-are-streaming-into-winnipeg/
A fraud. A fraud by the Smithsonian.
I feel a need for a special stupidity descriptor for this type of non-sense. Perhaps ‘G-WS’ for ‘Grant-Whore Stupid’. This is really getting to be too much.
I love their use of words,
so for the seas becoming “less base” changes to seas becoming “Acidic”
“Mangroves heading polewards”, a quick newspaper article will result in the impression of ……
Now let me see, “increase of Antarctic ice heading to tropical waters as more ships become marooned”
Thank you, Mr Steele, for the article, and Mr Auton for the comment.
I read this article and the first thing that came to mind is “so what else is new?”. It seems that people with an axe to grind always carefully edit out anything that doesn’t fit into their storyline. The example that came to mind as I read this piece concerned a book that came out several years back, “The Great Lakes Triangle” in which the authors tried to tell you that the ships that disappeared on the lakes did so for mysterious reasons. They even edited out the storm which caused the loss of the “Edmund Fitzgerald” because the storm wouldn’t explain the loss of a giant ore carrier, now would it??
It comes as no surprise, therefore, the AGW alarmists will edit out any explanation which doesn’t fit their theory or would allow for alternative explanations to an event other than their theory.
The alarmist eco-fascist camp will do anything to keep their green agenda alive and moving forward,
so lets look at the details, when and where do they start monitoring the mangroves, are the mangroves just recovering from past loss.
THREATS TO MANGROVES
LARGE HURRICANES
Hurricane Donna, in 1960, damaged an area of 100,000 acres of the Mangrove zone of South Florida. Loss of trees ranged from 25% to 100% from shearing the trunks above ground, complete overwash of islands and prop root damage from marl and fine organic matter coating the roots.
SHORELINE DEVELOPMENT has replaced Mangroves with marinas, dredged channels, airports, filled lots, seawalls and other commercial and residential construction. 60 percent of shallow water open Mangroves in the Upper Keys were lost between 1965 and 1985. 40 percent of that was due to dredging and filling of Mangroves.
Photo by Curtis Kruer, Florida Keys
This loss is not restricted to the Florida Keys — other areas, such as Tampa Bay, Marco Island and the lower coast of Florida, have lost mangroves. Approximately 11,000 acres were lost between 1943 and 1970 in Collier, Monroe and Dade counties alone, of a total of 430,000-500,000 acres in all of Florida. While not overwhelming, losses at specific locations have been substantial.
Mangroves have been lost due to shrimp farming throughout the Phillippines and other parts of Asia.
OTHER THREATS are illegal dumping, beach renourishment, oil spill, agricultural run-off that contains herbicides, pesticides, and sugar cane wastes. Man-made canal systems have altered fresh water run-off in the Florida Everglades, dramatically changing salinity levels and lowering the water table.
Jim Steele
Thanks for the chuckle. I highly recommend that you submit this case for an Ignoble Prize in Climate Science of anthropogenic warming or ecology etc.
To nominate:
there was a massive die back of mangroves in the northern region Florida in the 1980’s, they are just recovering so you will see areas that were once devoid of mangroves growing back.
Paul in Sweden says: @ur momisugly January 1, 2014 at 8:23 am
Seems that not too long ago there were quite a few reports of large numbers of invasive species literally falling down dead from trees due to cold snaps in Florida.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
They seem to think we have no memory beyond a week ago.
Freeze may take heavy toll on Florida citrus – January 11, 2010 Not to mention the deaths of the seagoing Manatees Mysterious Manatee and Dolphin Deaths in Florida Confound Scientists
2010 wasn’t that long ago! Why it was just yesterday wasn’t it….
I wonder if they are going to claim ” the conservation success” of entire forests to be cut down, turned into bio mass, transported to Europe and to be burned up in coal plants to fight AGW?
The warmists and their policies have become a menace for the entire world, man and nature.
I read of this article in the NYTimes, and was immediately skeptical. “Scary” that mangroves are recovering? I did some research too: thanks for the additional pointers.