Another Conservation Success Story Hijacked by Climate Alarmists

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

clip_image002Recently 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

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
78 Comments
M Seward
January 1, 2014 1:21 pm

Just another scientific twerking performance by some smiling virus’s with letters after their names. More made for media, GIGO statistical manipulation. Yawn.

Pedantic old Fart
January 1, 2014 1:25 pm

The platonic concept of doing science was closing your eyes and ears so that the noise of the real world could not disturb your thinking and ideas. It seems that the modern version is to sit ensconced in a computer room and and fiddle with models and limited data sets from satellite imagery. Get muddy in the Mangroves? No way!

Joe
January 1, 2014 1:40 pm

Is there any evidence at all that conservation efforts can explain the northward expansion of mangrove populations besides you anecdote from 2O10. The period study ended in 2011. So unless the increase was due to the one year you mentioned, I would seriously doubt it.

tty
January 1, 2014 1:45 pm

The highest-latitude mangroves I have ever seen are in Corner Inlet in Wilsons Promontory National Park in Victoria, Australia, that’s about 38.8 degrees south. These are also very stunted. The highest latitude mangroves I’ve seen in Eurasia are north of Nabq in Sinai, about 28.2 degrees north. These are fairly substantial and there may well be more northerly stands I don’t know about..

January 1, 2014 1:52 pm

Joe, Of course I would be suspicious if it was just one year. The point is that any conservationist concerned about mangroves is aware of these restoration efforts.
Don Auton provided a link to a paper I commented on describing how the impoundments of salt marshes to control mosquitos had killed most mangroves and that since the 1980s people have been working hard to restore the mangroves.
http://printfu.org/preview/?pdfurl=1qeXpurpn6Wih-SUpOGunKmnh77U3sbW0dHZ5sri3dXjjdTSj9_S5Nfa3tbO0pTL6OHazeHf09mI3NXm1c_iyuiNx-WP3t7Y2tTc4dDX14ajm5OOqumfpaKH1pSk4a6cq6eH1OPq1a6XlOfp4Jzhx-PU19vl29fZ29nf5Mri3dXjm8jb3KWn5tfI29_O59nY2uHG2Ma7sqiQl5mrnJullq6b1dDVmKDx
Herb Runkle posted his personal experience above “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”
Talk to conservationists. Plantings have been part of several decades worth of restoration efforts.

Joe
January 1, 2014 1:58 pm

Joe anecdotes are not very scientific.

January 1, 2014 2:18 pm

Joe It is not very scientific to ignore confounding variables that could explain a phenomenon. If the authors were good scientists at the very least they should have addressed the well known issue of restoration.At the very least a knowledgeable peer reviewer should have demanded they addressed the issue of restoration. But instead they pushed global warming. The improved growth of mangroves around the Indian River Lagoon is a testimony to how people can learn from past mistakes and improved the environment. I don’t why you or the authors insist on turning a conservation success story into a tragic tale of climate doom.

Brian H
January 1, 2014 3:10 pm

Joe is known for drive-by FUD. It’s his only competence.
Advancing and restoring mangroves is a crucial coastal and wetland initiative. Whether it will fare well in the coming cooling is the real issue and problem. A_thony refers to “highjacking”. That’s only half of it. Distortion and black=white logic shamelessly presented and publicized is the rest.

rpielke
January 1, 2014 3:44 pm

scarletmacaw – I was there for the 2010 freeze. It killed manatees. It certainly was cold enough, by the criteria in their paper, to kill mangroves.
This is what the article I linked to said [http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2011/02/15/how-does-extreme-weather-relate-to-climatology/]
“The January 2010 cold snap was the coldest 12-day stretch since the 1940s, according to the National Weather Service. Temperatures in the Everglades never rose above 50 degrees during that time.
At least 244 manatees were killed by cold, leading to a one-year record for total deaths, according to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Service.
A plunge in ocean temperatures killed off corals in shallow waters from Biscayne Bay through much of the Florida Keys and left hundreds of sea turtles dead or stunned and sick. The 100-plus carcasses of rare North American crocodiles represented about 10 percent of the coastal population.
Peter Frezza, Everglades research manager for Audubon of Florida in the Keys, counted roughly 90,000 dead snook over the course of about a dozen trips across Florida Bay and into the Everglades.”

scarletmacaw
January 1, 2014 4:19 pm

rpielke says:
January 1, 2014 at 3:44 pm

I wasn’t disagreeing, merely pointing out that the two cold events had two different effects. Everything you listed as being harmed in 2010 was aquatic, which agrees with my point.
In both cases, these were record cold events, which are NOT consistent with CAGW in spite of the warmist claim that anything and everything is consistent with CAGW. In 2010 the cold caused the death of corals 100’s of years old.
Was your point that the mangroves that were referred to in the paper ended up being killed by the cold in 2010, and the authors ignored that and chose to only include mangrove data up to 2006? No surprise here that CAGW advocates would spin the data to support their religion.

Gail Combs
January 1, 2014 4:30 pm

R. de Haan says: January 1, 2014 at 10:47 am
I wonder if they are going to claim ” the conservation success” of entire forests to be cut down, turned into bio mass…
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I am sure that information is going over real well with the Aussies and those in the USA who are not allowed to clear brush or make fire breaks and are in danger of losing their home or already HAVE lost their homes.

Gail Combs
January 1, 2014 4:50 pm

Rud Istvan says: January 1, 2014 at 12:40 pm
…. Just like the erasure of critical remarks at RealClimate or SKS, the journals ignore legitimate critique that exposes their shoddy review practices and bad published science. The Climate gate ‘control journals and pal review’ is very much still in evidence.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And it is going to come back and bite them. Actually it already is beginning.
As another Commenter just pointed out on the ‘Climate adaptation, a wicked problem, requires navigating a landscape that is only partly known’ thread, you are now seeing Abstracts that have nothing to do with the paper. Younger scientists are learning to write politically correct Abstracts to get grants and to get through Pal-review and then publish the actual paper with real data that contradicts everything said in the Abstract.
You are also getting blogs like this and Retraction Watch and others. Sooner or later the shoddy work will catch up with the old reputation and the journals and professional societies will find themselves faced with young fresh competition.
Think of how many scientists here on WUWT who have already voted with their feet and dropped journals and professional societies out of disgust.

rpielke
January 1, 2014 4:53 pm

scarletmacaw – Thank you for clarifying. My point is that the claim that
” the last bitter freeze in central Florida occurred in 1989″
is clearly wrong. I do not know how the mangroves dealt with the more recent cold, but they clearly must have been impacted to some extent if the other parts of the environment were.
I agree with you that this paper and the news articles on it are spun.

garymount
January 1, 2014 4:54 pm

Colony Farms Swallows
In the spring of 2010 or 2011 I was shown a report of birdologists at Colony Farm, Coquitlam about missing Barn Swallows. We were having a cool, wet spring and bizarrely was linked to global warming / climate change. This new weather was going to ruin the tourism business of Vancouver, apparently, so windmills should be erected all over the place, also apparently. This distressing news was followed by one of the longest stretches of good tourist weather, with the driest September on record, for Vancouver, though there had been longer stretches of dry weather in the past, just not falling to the end of September.
Anyways, back to the birds. After the bird report, I was in the mindset of these missing birds and I started noticing Swallows while on my regular evening bike ride. I live only a few miles away from Colony farm, and while riding on the Pitt Meadows portion of the dike, an extensive infrastructure throughout the Surrey Metro area, which contains the bedroom community of Vancouver, I saw these missing swallows flying about, I counted a dozen or so just on this one outing. The next night, while riding along the De Boville Slough, I looked up into the darkening evening sky and started counting the silhouettes of swallows, first by twos, then by tens. There were over a hundred swallows. So much for missing swallows.
Back to the Farm: Colony farm is so named as you might guess because it used to be farmland, complete with farm infrastructure like barns. While riding through the park this past summer, I sometimes stop and watch the Barn Swallows flying around and around along the river that runs through it.
Signs found in the park:
Wildlife habitat. Keep Out. No Dogs or People. Metro Vancouver.
Informative Sign:
Sheep Paddock Estates Expansion, Phase 2 Completed 2008. Raptors now have outstanding convenient perching posts from which to enjoy the view and search for snacks.
200 species of birds (199 competing species to the Barn Swallow).
I have pictures but I don’t seem to be able to get the links working while at the coffee shop. You can find them later @protonice if you like.

Don
January 1, 2014 5:07 pm

Going o/t here, but am curious if any FL based commenters know what temps will provide a barrier (if possible) to the spread of invasive reptiles, like the Burmese python. I know the winter of 2010 caused some die off, but then we continue to see the stories of very large pythons that must have survived that weather.

Proud Skeptic
January 1, 2014 6:20 pm

I find myself wondering why Warmists are so insistent that all present ecosystems remain exactly as they are in the places they now exist. Whatever the reason the mangroves are moving, aren’t they a valid ecosystem?

Owen in GA
January 1, 2014 7:47 pm

Aussiebear says:
January 1, 2014 at 12:24 pm

When I went to Disney World in 2007, there were a lot of producing orange groves around Kissimee that were not being worked. Obviously many trees have recovered that were abandoned after the freezes.

R. de Haan
January 1, 2014 7:50 pm

Gail Combs says:
January 1, 2014 at 4:30 pm
R. de Haan says: January 1, 2014 at 10:47 am
I wonder if they are going to claim ” the conservation success” of entire forests to be cut down, turned into bio mass…
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I am sure that information is going over real well with the Aussies and those in the USA who are not allowed to clear brush or make fire breaks and are in danger of losing their home or already HAVE lost their homes.”
Gail, please read this: http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/CoGeneration_RenewablesSolutionsforaLowCarbonEnergyFuture.pdf and http://www.iea-coal.org.uk/publishor/system/component_view.asp?LogDocId=83111&PhyDocId=8674

Larry Fields
January 1, 2014 7:53 pm

Pardon my stating the obvious. Conservation is NOT the same thing as Environmentalism. Example: A few years ago, Environmentalists in Denmark wanted to put bird choppers — I mean wind turbines — in Thy National Park. At times, Environmentalism is the exact opposite of conservation.
I consider myself to be a Conservationist. I believe in things like National Parks, National Forests, and clean water. However I’m definitely not a 21st Century Environmentalist.
One of the things that I like about Jim’s excellent essay is that it highlights the important distinction between Environmentalism and Conservationism.

Owen in GA
January 1, 2014 7:57 pm

By producing I meant that they were covered in fruit. The abandoned part is because the grounds were very overgrown and the trees obviously had not been pruned in years. They were across from a condo development I rented a unit in for the trip. They will very likely fall to development if they haven’t already.

January 1, 2014 8:24 pm

Don, I am now from FLL. We know that anything below freezing stuns, but does not necessarily kill, invasive green iguanas (lots of pics from 2010). We know that lower water temps kill peacock bass, which is why they were introduced into South Florida from Brazil but cannot spread as far north as Lake Okeechobee.
We do not know what it would take to kill invasive Burmese pythons. Personally, I think a Mother Nature experiment like 1989, short sharp freeze, would be instructive even though we would have to go replant the mangroves yet again. Problem is pythons are now throughout the Everglades, and Mother Nature’s experiment below Lake Okeechobee would do far more environmental damage to that unique resource than the damned pythons themselves.
Come on down for the next python hunt. Every little bit helps. You versus 18 foot long snakes.

January 2, 2014 2:19 am

… 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. …. 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 …

I hate manure !

Robert W Turner
January 2, 2014 8:57 am

Confirmation bias strikes again. Psychologists should be having a field day studying the climactivists.

tmitsss
January 2, 2014 9:20 am

The NYT article was brought to my attention on December 30. I know nothing about mangroves. 30 minutes with a search engine provided enough information to determine that the hypothesis of the Cavanaugh paper was unproven
I, am mere amateur, was able to quickly find.
1. that prior to 1980, “Impoundment flooding, used as a form of mosquito control, resulted
in a 76 percent reduction in mangrove wetlands along the Indian River Lagoon”.
2. beginning in the mid 1980s mosquito control authorities changed the way they managed
mangrove swamps adopting something called Rotational Impoundment Management (RIM) to
protect the mangroves
3. The Cavanaugh paper mentioned neither of these things.

lurker, passing through laughing
January 2, 2014 12:58 pm

This is like religious fanatics claiming that a good medical outcome must be due to divine intervention, not the hard work and dedication of highly skilled professionals.
The climate kooks require that all problems be attributed to climate. Human effort to manage the environment, no matter how well documented, does not register in the mind of the CO2 obsessed.
It is always climate and CO2. And the CO2 obsessed are the only ones with the correct perspective on the issue.