From Durham University, and the “would you, could you, with a goat” department comes this inanity. They can’t come up with any other explanation, so it must be ‘climate change’. At the rate of observed shrinkage, the goats will be palm sized by the year 2100. Just think of the pet market!
Via Eurekalert:
‘Shrinking goats’ another indicator that climate change affects animal size
Alpine goats appear to be shrinking in size as they react to changes in climate, according to new research from Durham University.
The researchers studied the impacts of changes in temperature on the body size of Alpine Chamois, a species of mountain goat, over the past 30 years.
To their surprise, they discovered that young Chamois now weigh about 25 per cent less than animals of the same age in the 1980s.
In recent years, decreases in body size have been identified in a variety of animal species, and have frequently been linked to the changing climate.
However, the researchers say the decline in size of Chamois observed in this study is striking in its speed and magnitude.
The research, funded by the Natural Environment Research Council is published in the journal Frontiers in Zoology.
Lead author Dr Tom Mason, in the School of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, at Durham University, said: “Body size declines attributed to climate change are widespread in the animal kingdom, with many fish, bird and mammal species getting smaller.
“However the decreases we observe here are astonishing. The impacts on Chamois weight could pose real problems for the survival of these populations.”
The team delved into long-term records of Chamois body weights provided by hunters in the Italian Alps.
IMAGE: This shows a mother and juvenile Chamois in the Italian Alps.
They discovered that the declines were strongly linked to the warming climate in the study region, which became 3-4°C warmer during the 30 years of the study.
To date, most studies have found that animals are getting smaller because the changing climate is reducing the availability or nutritional content of their food.
However, this study found no evidence that the productivity of Alpine meadows grazed by Chamois had been affected by the warming climate. Instead, the team believes that higher temperatures are affecting how chamois behave.
Co-author Dr Stephen Willis, in the School of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, at Durham University, said: “We know that Chamois cope with hot periods by resting more and spending less time searching for food, and this may be restricting their size more than the quality of the vegetation they eat.
“If climate change results in similar behavioural and body mass changes in domestic livestock, this could have impacts on agricultural productivity in coming decades.”
According to the authors, the future plight of the Chamois remains unclear.
Dr Philip Stephens, another co-author on the study, in the School of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, at Durham University, said: “The body mass of juvenile animals is critical to their ability to survive harsh winters.
“However, whether that becomes a problem will depend on the balance of future climate change between the seasons.”
The research suggests that declining body size is a result of changes in both climate and the density of animals.
To counter declining body size in future, the researchers say it might be necessary to maintain Chamois populations at lower densities than occur at present, perhaps through changes in hunting regulations.
Dr Mason added: “This study shows the striking, unforeseen impacts that climate change can have on animal populations.
“It is vital that we continue to study how climate change affects species such as Chamois. Changes in body size could act as early-warning systems for worse impacts to come, such as the collapses of populations.”
###
Time to buy goat milk futures.
Climate change has decimated the unicorns also. Last time I saw a unicorn was back in the 70s staggering home from the pub. I Forget who was staggering, me or the unicorn. Any way. It was before climae change started so it must be the cause!
Hey. this is great! It’s the answer to our problems. If climate change shrinks animals, then it should shrink humans too! By 2100 we will all be of Lilliputian size and use a lot less energy. Literally thousands of people could travel in any one of our present day buses and planes. Hundreds could live in single houses or apartments of today. Our energy needs (hence carbon footprints) will shrink by a factor of a hundred or a thousand and we won’t have to change our lifestyle one iota. Think how much less food we will need. And wow, since plants are getting bigger with more CO2, we could all become vegetarians. Dozens could live for a week off of a single potato. This is just great news.
“Literally thousands of people could travel in any one of our present day buses and planes.”
Yes, but the driver’s feet wouldn’t reach the pedals…
Terry Pratchett has the answer to that in “The Truckers”
Has there been a change in hunting regulations?
Do the local hunters care about hunting regulations?
“body weights provided by hunters in the Italian Alps” – who might have a problem if they record weights that are below the legal minimum?
I had to stop reading at this point “The team delved into long-term records of Chamois body weights provided by hunters in the Italian Alps.”
Come on Guys…they got all the big ones.
Yes Jeff and the hunters of course were much more reliable, positively scientific, than those old timers who took temperature records in the 1800’s.
No doubt; “they couldn’t think of any other explanation”.
I cannot follow their logic – perhaps they are displaying a lack of it.
This study seems to be discussing the rate of weight gain during young goats’ first year, not the ultimate size of adult goats:
“they discovered that young Chamois now weigh about 25 per cent less than animals of the same age in the 1980s.”
They say:
“To counter declining body size in future, the researchers say it might be necessary to maintain Chamois populations at lower densities than occur at present, perhaps through changes in hunting regulations.”
This might be logical if the sustaining ability of the chamois goats’ habitat was being reduced, but they say:
“However, this study found no evidence that the productivity of Alpine meadows grazed by Chamois had been affected by the warming climate.”
If there is no shortage of forage, why the need to reduce the goat population?
They also say:
“We know that Chamois cope with hot periods by resting more and spending less time searching for food, and this may be restricting their size…”
And:
“The body mass of juvenile animals is critical to their ability to survive harsh winters.”
What seems to me to be the logical conclusion:
If the climate had warmed by the claimed 4 degrees C during the interval of declining juvenile goat size the winters would be survivable by smaller goats. If the smaller goats are the lazy eaters, more would survive their 1st winter, living to reproduce. The following goat generations would contain greater numbers of the lazy eaters, and thus smaller, juvenile goats. This would be a classic display of natural selection at work on the goat gene pool.
The herd would still contain heavy eaters. Their relative numbers would increase when harsher winters return to reduce the number of lazy eaters.
I also think the concept that hunters had harvested many of the larger juveniles, removing hearty eating genes from the gene pool, is a likely contributing explanation for reduced average size of juveniles.
(That behavioral characteristics are inheritable is a basic tenant of dog breeding efforts.)
SR
I noticed the same thing – very non sequitur. I haven’t read the study (because I can already tell it will annoy me) – but the hunting explanation is a more sound theory than magic shrinking goats.
Were the goats measured with or without their Golden Fleece?
Couldn’t have anything to do with the breeding stock could it?
Your tax dollars at work.
If you really want to know how the “global warming” scam has modified goats, Google: “Goat of Mendes Eliphas Levi”. Curious resemblance to a certain, high-profile, hive-hero collector of disappearing Himalayan glacier fantasies, who, as well, currently guides the destiny of the eco-parasite’s leading boondoggle–don’t you think?
It is well known that they were as large as moose at the nadir of the little ice age. It’s just serendipitous that the moose don’t lay around like the chamois when it gets hot.
Maybe chamois are getting smaller because our cars have gotten smaller. LOL.
So if it continues to warm, some animals will get smaller. Which means if things cool down, some animals will get taller! Hope springs eternal for me!
Looks like Micro-Goat inhabits the current low carbon earth, while Macro-Goat inhabits the ancient high carbon Earth. Somehow, the University has taken a Macro-Goat photo from the ancient past, maybe its temporal photography, what a break through! Why aren’t they celebrating that, surely there’s a nobel prize in there some where.
Hell, if they can snap the past, they could show us the future too!
Time could run a front page of the Giant Andes Megalodon Goat from 2100, stands as tall as a giraffe, can bunt a commercial truck 1/6th of a Foot Ball field.
Can eat almost anything, mostly Giant Condors, as they glide by.
The article is a classic example of horrible science reporting. It makes no mention of one key finding – namely that the reduction in body mass of the goats is highly correlated in increased goat populations. It only mentions climate change as the potential cause.
Turns out that stricter hunting regulations over the study period resulted in pronounced increases in the goat populations. Three populations were studied and the population increases among them seem to range between a 50% and 75% increases in population. If I assume (finger in the wind) an average population increase of 60% what we actually have is a 20% increase in total goat mass. My bet is that this increase is also highly correlated to climate change in the area. So climate change is highly correlated with total goat mass production.
We have a clear problem with correlation and causation in the study. The authors readily admit that the increased population is surely one cause of the reduced average body mass of the goats. They provide an possible explanation of how the change in climate might change foraging habits and hence body masses. That’s certainly a reasonably hypothesis IMO. But what I didn’t see in the study was any testing of the hypothesis. So basically you have two things highly correlated to the change in body mass but that’s about it. Causation is not well established for either the population increase or the climate increase.
You can find the actual study here: http://www.frontiersinzoology.com/content/11/1/69
Don’t call it “climate change” when it is clearly attributed to anthropogenic global warming, where global cooling is no longer a factor, you sound so silly when you do that. Let them be the silly ones.
Actually, I don’t recall the writers of the paper making that clear connection. But be that as it may, it seems that sounding silly is the main point of replies on this topic. So I’m in good company.
Bingo
I had a quick read through the comments, I’m pretty sure no one has said, Baaaaaaaaaaaaah or posted this yet.
Does this happen retroactively?
I’m an old goat (67) and need to know.
“To counter declining body size in future, the researchers say it might be necessary to maintain Chamois populations at lower densities than occur at present, perhaps through changes in hunting regulations.”
Look at the bright side! At least they did not call for carbon taxes!
… and they didn’t say that goat shrinkage was “unprecedented” and that “we have to act NOW!”
I sense that these scientific papers have been really improving of late…
Think about it! If reduced populations would counteract declining body size, it has to be a food supply issue. Why would size increase with lower numbers if global warming is causing the original reduction?
If rising temperatures mean shrinking, then explain the worldwide obesity phenomenon…http://www.worldobesity.org/aboutobesity/world-map-obesity/
This is a very bizarre study complete with it’s own assumptions.
Hunting for chamois is not a normal venture for us common folk; hunts are tightly controlled and very expensive. Adult chamois males are the target where the preference is for the oldest bugger with the largest headgear the hunting party (guides and hunters) can locate.
Bothering the juveniles or does is frowned upon and willful harassment of the juveniles and females can lead to discipline, such as cancelling the hunt and banned from future hunts.
Just how did these ‘hunters’ weigh the young chamois?
I’m curious about how temperatures related to the chamois hunting was collected. For a very odd reason I also wonder just how much ‘time of observation’ added any adjustments since hunters are so active hunting at mid day (usually not).
Chamois hunts are normally conducted during the November timeframe; leaving us wondering where the researchers maintained their field bases. Local ski lodges perhaps?
Just how did these ‘hunters’ weigh the young chamois?…
They based their sample from the taking of the big ones, in filled data for the smaller, younger ones and un-characteristically (for climate researchers) adjusted the mean downwards…
“un-characteristically”? Don’t they do that with past temperatures?
Global warming on a much more massive scale allowed the largest animals to ever walk the earth – the dinosaurs – so the irony here is bemusing at best. Do these so-called ‘scientists’ ever take into consideration a big picture approach to their published studies before submission? If this is evidence of the process, I highly doubt it.
Did the article say they relied on hunters estimates for past data? We are known for stretching the truth in that area. The deer I shot last year was 25% bigger then what’s running around this year. At least that much.
So they say
“However the decreases we observe here are astonishing. The impacts on Chamois weight could pose real problems for the survival of these populations.”
and later
“To counter declining body size in future, the researchers say it might be necessary to maintain Chamois populations at lower densities than occur at present, perhaps through changes in hunting regulations.”
Thats hilarious!
If they manage to ban cars who needs a chamois anyway?
Hunters probably target the largest male goats, leaving the smaller ones to reproduce. Rinse and repeat.