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
Thirty years ago I never would have dreamed I would or could utter the words of my title. As a left-leaning young ecologist, I hated the way Limbaugh painted all environmentalists as “whackos”! I was a strong believer in the Endangered Species Act as a law that would ensure people stopped to consider win-win solutions for humans and all other species. I believed conservation science could guide us toward wise environmental stewardship, and when married to innovative entrepreneurial endeavors, we could build a better world for all. As director of a university environmental field station, I met people of all political persuasions eager to enjoy and protect the environment, and I believed both the left and right would rally around sound environmental science. So why did Rush label us as whackos? I saw Limbaugh’s polarizing polemics as an attack on the environment. But now I must agree with Rush’s recent view that “Apocalyptic, Fear-Mongering Accelerates the Decline of Our Culture”. In his critique of a newly published paper, “Accelerated modern human–induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction” (hereafter Ceballos and Ehrlich 2015), Rush correctly points out that it is just another example of apocalyptic fear mongering that drives some people into hopeless despair, while forcing others to ignore scientists’ steady drone that the end of the world is before us.
As an ecologist I read several papers a week, looking for pearls of wisdom that would make us better stewards of the environment. But Ceballos and Ehrlich 2015 offered absolutely nothing new and absolutely nothing useful. They simply created a framework that would dramatize their numbers stating, “Our analysis emphasizes that our global society has started to destroy species of other organisms at an accelerating rate, initiating a mass extinction episode unparalleled for 65 million years.” Started to destroy…??? What are we now doing to suddenly promote mass extinctions?
Indeed more species have likely gone extinct in the past 500 years due to habitat loss, overhunting and invasive species than are known to have gone extinct over the past 400 thousand years, despite the extreme climate shifts between the ice age glacials and warm interglacials. But the bulk of those extinctions were the result of past human actions that are now being rectified. At this essay’s conclusion, I added a table for the first 100 of the 140 extinct bird species from the same IUCN database that Ceballos and Ehrlich 2015 used for their paper. Unlike Ceballos and Ehrlich 2015, I included extinction dates and the reason the IUCN has justified their extinction status. Notice that most extinct species inhabited islands where organisms are extremely sensitive to all invasive species. That damage has already been done. So in contrast to claims we are “entering” an era of accelerated mass extinctions, it would be more honest to say humans are now reversing what began 500 years ago.
Most island die-offs began shortly after Columbus’ “discovery” of the New World that encouraged worldwide exploration. Of the 100 extinct birds listed below, three species were extinct in the 1500s, 17 in the 1600s, 18 in the 1700s, 32 in the 1800s, and 30 in the 1900s. Overhunting claimed many island species like the Dodo early on, as hungry sailors and settlers struggled to survive. However a large proportion of recent extinctions happened unintentionally due to introduced rats that stowed away on visiting ships, (or more recently the introduced brown tree snake). Without natural predators, rat populations exploded. So islanders intentionally introduced cats, ferrets and mongoose to kill the rats. But island wildlife had evolved without any threat from land predators, so most species were behaviorally ill adapted to survive the onslaught of these new arrivals. Many island birds evolved flightlessness and explorers reported island species as remarkably tame. Most of the other extinct vertebrate species on the IUCN list suffered a similar fate in the wake of introduced species. Many of the most recent extinctions in the 1900s were simply distressed species succumbing to centuries of depredation from introduced species and lost habitat. Oddly enough, when the Christian Science Monitor hyped Ceballos and Ehrlich 2015 with How To Prevent The Sixth Mass Extinction, their only solution was a cure that is much worse than the disease. They resurrected Camille Parmesan’s pitch for widespread introduction of species into new habitats where climate change is predicted to create a more favorable environment. Not only has that remedy always caused disastrous ecological disruptions, but climate models have been notoriously awful about simulating regional climate changes.
The causes of past extinctions have been noted for decades and centuries. Instead of hammering the public with gloom and doom, Ceballos and Ehrlich 2015 would have served us better by reporting how extensive recent efforts are saving species. Globally people have been diligently working to prevent further island extinctions. For example, the Aleutian Goose was once believed to be extinct until a few individuals were found on a remote island. The goose had disappeared from all its other breeding islands because fur farmers had introduced arctic and red foxes. Recognizing the problem, humans quickly removed the foxes and the species rebounded immediately (as did many other breeding sea birds). The Aleutian Goose is now so abundant it is considered a pest on its wintering grounds. Similarly worldwide efforts to eradicate introduced “pest” species are reporting various levels of success. For a more hopeful outlook, and to appreciate how human efforts are promoting biodiversity, I suggest visiting the websites of organizations like Island Conservation or reading about successful eradications.
Unconscionably, although most past extinctions, as well as presently endangered species, are found on islands, and despite widespread local efforts that are preventing further island extinctions, Ceballos and Ehrlich 2015’s so-called “science” and self-prmoting press releases are only generating horribly despairing and deceptive headlines proclaiming, “Sixth mass extinction is here: Humanity’s existence threatened.”.
Why didn’t Ceballos and Ehrlich 2015 point out productive efforts that are preventing further extinctions? Why not offer real conservation guidance and optimism? It appears they prefer denigrating modern society and promoting apocalyptic fear mongering rather than promoting good conservation and good science. They wrote, “Modern extinction rates have increased sharply over the past 200 years (corresponding to the rise of industrial society) and are considerably higher than background rates”. But suggesting modern industrial society “corresponds” with those extinction is a horrible illusion. A stronger case can be made that industrial society will be wildlife’s savior.
Although the geometric growth of human populations for the past 500 years has undeniably led to increased habitat destruction and overhunting. But population growth may soon plateau and then reverse its growth trend. The “evils” of population growth have been the mainstay of influential apocalyptic predictions from Malthus in the 1700s to Ehrlich in recent decades. In Ehrlich’s 1968 book The Population Bomb, he warned of the mass starvation in the 1970s and 1980s due to overpopulation. But as Limbaugh noted, Ehrlich’s predictions have failed miserably. So perhaps his “new extinction research” is just an attempt to regain some support for his widely criticized “end of the earth” beliefs. But if Ehrlich is suggesting booming human populations will soon cause the Sixth Mass Extinction, then he has failed to report a more optimistic consensus that our modern industrial society is now reducing population pressures.
Ecologists divide animal reproductive strategies in to 2 broad categories. R-selected species provide little parental care and produce abundant young, anticipating high mortality. In contrast K-selected species produce few young but invest a lot of parental care. Modern industrial societies have encouraged humans to evolve from a R-selected to a K-selected species. Where humans once depended on cheap child labor to operate marginal subsistence farms, there was an economic advantage to having many children. In contrast industrial societies demand greater parental investment and more education, so reproduction is delayed and families are smaller. Furthermore mechanization of agriculture has reduced the demand for abundant cheap labor on marginal farms.
Ecologists calculate that human populations require a fertility rate of 2.1 births per female to offset deaths. A fertility rate below 2.1 causes the population to decline, while a higher fertility rate causes population to grow. In the 1950s, the decade of Baby Boomers, the USA had a fertility rate that averaged 3.7. By 1980 the rate dropped to 1.8. Now due largely to immigration, a slightly higher fertility rate stands at 2.0. Worldwide fertility rates similarly dropped from 2.67 in 1950 to 2.02 in 2000. These lower rates suggest the global human population will soon plateau and then decline. Thus decreasing population pressures will not cause an accelerating extinction rate. These decreasing fertility rates should be a cause for optimism. The graph below color-codes the fertility rates of every nation. Only the non-industrial societies are experiencing the high fertility rates (reds and yellows) that could strain the earth’s carrying capacity and diminish local biodiversity. So why does Ceballos and Ehrlich 2015 denigrate modern society?
Habitat loss has indeed been a major cause of local extinctions as burgeoning human populations converted more landscape for agricultural purposes. But better intensive agricultural practices, like mechanization, genetic engineering and other modern techniques, have allowed the world to feed more people on fewer acres. For example according to the USDA since 1950, “the average yield of corn rose from 39 bushels to 153 bushels per acre, and each farmer in 2000 produced on average 12 times as much farm output per hour worked as a farmer did in 1950. Again such improvements should be a cause for pride and optimism, as modern society has increasingly sacrificed less natural habitat for agriculture.
As more marginal farms are abandoned and land is returned to the wild, we would expect to see the return of more natural habitat and indeed this was the case for Vermont. In 1900, Vermont was 80% deforested. As marginal farms were abandoned, Vermont became 80% reforested supporting natural biodiversity. Similar patterns have been observed throughout New England. As marginal farmland became reforested moose migrated southward to warmer regions where they had been extirpated by the 1800s in contrast to global warming theory. Similar reversions to natural habitat were observed throughout the Great Plains. Furthermore land managers and private hunting groups like Ducks Unlimited have been improving species prime breeding habitat in the Prairie Potholes, so that in 2014 North American duck populations had increased to record highs, 43% above the 1950-80 average. But that landscape success story is now being threatened. As politicians become increasingly mesmerized by another apocalyptic story regards climate change, governments are subsidizing biofuels that are increasingly destroying habitat and stress groundwater supplies.
A 2013 paper from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science reported, “High corn and soybean prices, prompted largely by demand for biofuel feedstocks, are driving one of the most important land cover/land use change (LCLUC) events in recent US history; the accelerated conversion of grassland to cropland in the US Corn Belt.” Due to government biofuel subsidies, the rate of grassland conversion has accelerated land conversion rates that have not been seen since the Dust Bowl when wheat subsidies similarly encouraged the plowing under of grasslands the size of the state of Ohio. These researchers noted the landscape conversion is “comparable to deforestation rates in Brazil, Malaysia, and Indonesia, countries in which tropical forests were the principal sources of new agricultural land.”
Similarly, tropical deforestation and lost biodiversity has been accelerated by government subsidies for other biofuels. Although palm oil had been chiefly used in foods and cosmetics, the EU began subsidizing palm oil for biofuels in a misguided fight against climate change. European Union subsidies for palm oil raised prices and increased its demand as reported in 2013 in The EU Biofuel Policy And Palm Oil: Cutting Subsidies Or Cutting Rainforest? (see table below). This resulted in widespread deforestation throughout Indonesia that now threatens tropical species like the Orangutans and has been wreaking widespread ecological havoc. Similar subsidies for sugar cane are accelerating deforestation in Brazil.
| EU Palm Oil usage(Metric tones) | 2006 | 2012 – After Subsidies | % increase |
| Used for fuel and electrical generation | 822 | 2459 | 299.0% |
| Used for foods and cosmetics | 3692 | 3925 | 06.3% |
Apocalyptic fear mongering about climate change has similarly convinced politicians that burning trees (again eliminating more habitat) is better than burning coal under the guise of “sustainable fuel production”. Early settlers had decimated Great Britain’s forest thousands of years ago to create grazing land for their sheep. But recent conservation efforts were now making this one of the few nations with increasing forests. Unfortunately government subsidies are not only promoting cutting local forests, but those subsidies were creating a demand to import more trees from America and thus destroying distant habitat. Likewise, Haiti has denuded its landscape as it relies on wood burning. While due to its reliance on a fossil fuel economy, the Dominican Republic has preserved more forest. The difference is readily observed below in NASA’s satellite photo of the Haiti (left) and Dominican (right) border.
Whales, walrus and other marine mammals were nearly hunted to extinction during the Little Ice Age for their blubber. But the advent of the oil industry and modern industrial society provided an alternative energy source that reduced that hunting pressure, and likely prevented the extinction of most marine mammals. Although the disruption of industrial economies by two world wars caused a temporary spike in whaling, the recovery of industrial economies once again has alleviated hunting pressures. Gray Whales are now believed to have returned to their historic numbers (see graph below), Humpback Whales are increasing by about 13% a year, and most other species are steadily recovering but at a lower pace.
In contrast to apocalyptic headlines of climate change disruption, observations of large numbers of walruses hauling out on Alaskan beaches are evidence of conservation success as Pacific walruses have rebounded to equal historic numbers as discussed in Hijacking Successful Walrus Conservation. Indeed modern societies have reduced the extinction threats to most marine mammals that were decimated by overhunting for food and fuel. Again modern industrial society should engender optimism about our environment’s future, not elicit catastrophic predictions of mass extinctions.
Ceballos and Ehrlich 2015 suggest we can avoid a sixth mass extinction by alleviating pressures on stressed populations, caused notably by “habitat loss, over-exploitation for economic gain and climate change”. Yet modern society has been increasingly addressing those first 2 problems and there is no evidence that climate change has caused any extinctions. Contrary to climate change fears, since the Little Ice Age, whether or not warming was caused by rising CO2 or natural climate change, that warming has contributed to longer growing seasons which has only benefited the entire food web for all species including humans. Phytoplankton that form the base of the Arctic food web has increased 3 fold. It is beyond all reason that proponents of a CO2 driven apocalypse would suggest that the 1-degree colder temperatures of the Little Ice Age should be revered as the benchmark against which we evaluate our “optimal” climate. During the Little Ice Age upwelling was reduced lowering ocean productivity, glaciers threatened European villages, tree line dropped, and no new trees grew in several montane regions, and there was widespread starvation that the pope blamed on witches.
In his critique of Ceballos and Ehrlich’s 6th mass extinction madness, Limbaugh’s warns that apocalyptic fear mongering is engendering a lack of faith, and lack of hope in our children, and in our society. In a similar vein, science writer Matt Ridley recently wrote in “Climate Wars’ Damage to Science.” that climate fear mongering is even more damaging, denigrating the very scientific process itself. Most striking to me is the lost trustworthiness of the peer review process regards climate science. It seems as if all one has to do is suggest apocalyptic climate change to get published no matter how much contradictory evidence is known.
A blatant example of such damage to science, was the American Meteorological Society’s publication of Parmesan’s half-truths about climate-caused population extinctions, If she had honestly reported the whole story that only butterflies that had recently and opportunistically colonized a logged area had been extirpated, while just ten feet away in natural communities the same species was thriving, her apocalyptic climate interpretation would have been shunned (details here). Instead her story of half-truths was repeated by our top climate scientists in scientific journals as an example of deadly climate change, and the BAMS editors refused to retract her bogus paper. But this is not an isolated incidence. There is a long list of other apocryphal climate catastrophe publications in peer reviewed science.
Camille Parmesan was also one of the earliest authors to suggest climate change was extirpating populations in Climate and Species Range. However after careful perusal of her claims, I documented several fallacies (here) and then learned that many of her purported extirpated populations have now returned (according to her own research). Yet she has never published those more uplifting observations of natural resiliency. Later in an IPCC publication, she misdiagnosed a species’ range expansion in England due to successful conservation efforts in order to blame climate change (details here). Yet despite all of Parmesan’s bad science, she was honored at the White House and became one of a select few biologists invited to join the IPCC. While promoters of apocalyptic climate change have elevated Parmesan to hero status, the only person that publicly challenged her bad science was Rush Limbaugh.
Similarly J.A. Pounds joined the IPCC after publishing in Nature that climate change was causing extreme heat and dryness, which was killing Costa Rica’s amphibians. But other scientists provided overwhelming evidence that the inadvertent introduction of a chytrid fungus by researchers and the pet trade had caused the recent amphibian extinctions. Intensive laboratory studies then revealed that the deadly fungus could not tolerate extreme warmth or dryness, which contradicted all of Pounds’ earlier interpretations. So Pounds simply reversed his position to maintain his apocalyptic climate story, and he now argued global warming was causing cooler maximum temperatures and a wetter environment and therefore climate change was still the killer by enabling the deadly fungus. The editors at Nature never demanded that Pounds explain his contrary interpretations. As long as apocalyptic climate change was suggested, it got published (details here). While other scientists rallied to save threatened amphibians, Pounds attacked them for not blaming apocalyptic climate change.
Nature published other apocalyptic papers suggesting the imminent extinction of Emperor Penguins. Researchers blamed global warming despite the fact that there had been no warming trend at the site where the population of Emperors had declined. The most likely culprit causing lower Penguin numbers was researcher disturbance during brutal winter conditions (details here), but recent papers continue to suggest global warming was the cause to infer mass extinctions will happen by the turn of the century.
Despite the Inuit insistence that it is the time of the most polar bears, or the fact that researchers have documented increasing populations, polar bears have been elevated to icons of apocalyptic climate change. In another blatant example of editors “looking the other way” and defiling the scientific process, researchers first published that cycles of heavy sea ice in the Beaufort Sea had caused significant drops in ringed seals and polar bears. Then to support the apocalyptic meme, the same researchers published that those same populations declines were due to global warming and less ice (details here).
Pika are rabbit like creatures living in the mountainous western USA. Erik Beever published that pika were experiencing accelerated upslope dispersal and extinction due to climate change. But Beever admittedly eliminated all observations of pika moving to lower elevations. Although his statistical tinkering guaranteed “upslope movement” no matter how the climate changed, the editors considered this “good science.” In contrast more extensive surveys by other researchers have shown that 19% of all pika detections have been at lower elevations than first reported in the early 1900s. Nonetheless several papers and websites only report Dr. Beever’s interpretation of climate change, apocalyptically driving pika upwards and into extinction. (more details here)
When Limbaugh argues that apocalyptic fear mongering is the liberal rage, I thought Rush was overreacting via his political ideology. But after reading the conclusions of Ceballos and Ehrlich 2015, I realized Ehrlich’s paper was not about biology or good conservation, but just a vehicle to promote their politics. Ehrlich concluded, “Avoiding a true sixth mass extinction will require rapid, greatly intensified efforts to conserve already threatened species and to alleviate pressures on their populations…. All of these are related to human population size and growth, which increases consumption (especially among the rich), and economic inequity (6). [emphasis added] However, the window of opportunity is rapidly closing.”
That gave me a better understanding of Limbaugh’s perspective. Although I have yet to see Rush take a pro-environmental stance, his arguments are not anti-environment. He is railing against the political corruption of environmental science, something I have sadly observed (see above). He is fighting against those who misuse the Endangered Species Act to promote their politics. He is ranting against apocalyptic fear mongering that robs science of its objectivity and integrity, and robs people of hope in order to promote an agenda.
Yet apocalyptic fear mongering is powerfully persuasive. It has empowered a diverse menagerie of cult leaders through out the ages as those who preach about the apocalypse are eerily seen as humanity’s saviors. Mesmerized followers relinquish there critical thinking powers and anoint their leader as the bearer of all truth. Anyone who thinks for themselves, rejects an inevitable apocalypse, or exposes the bad science of fear mongering, are called deniers by a legion of ignorant but rabid internet stalkers (as exemplified here). I am reminded of the Heaven’s Gate cult that believed the world was coming to an end, and would soon be “recycled”. Several highly intelligent high tech workers embraced their leader’s apocalyptic vision, believing the path to salvation was to castrate themselves and drink the “kool-ade”, so they could be transported by an alien spaceship hiding behind the approaching Hale-Bopp comet and swept away to a “higher level.”
Once you believe the world is coming to an end, once you lose faith in humanity and nature’s resilience, once you lose hope, then like the Heaven’s Gate victims, you become easy prey for the charlatans that inhabit all walks of life, left or right, scientist or layperson. Indeed “Apocalyptic, Fear-Mongering Accelerates the Decline of Our Culture”.
Jim Steele is director emeritus Sierra Nevada Field Campus, San Francisco State University and author of Landscapes & Cycles: An Environmentalist’s Journey to Climate Skepticism
| 100 Extinct Bird Species from Ceballos 2015 | ||||
| Genus | Species | IUCN justification | Extinct Date | |
| 1 | Aegolius | gradyi | This raptor was recently-described from fossil records, and likely accounts for observations of owls on Bermuda in the early 17th century. It is long Extinct. | 1600s |
| 2 | Alectroenas | nitidissimus | This species was found on Mauritius, but it has been hunted to extinction. The last reports date from 1832 and it is thought to have been Extinct a few years later. | 1832 |
| 3 | Alectroenas | payandeei | This newly-recognised Extinct pigeon is known from a single subfossil record. It may have survived into the 17th century but most likely disappeared by the 1690s owing to predation by invasive rats. | 1600s |
| 4 | Alopecoenas | ferrugineus | This species is known from Tanna, Vanuatu, but the only record dates from 1774 and it is now Extinct. Hunting is likely to have been the main cause | 1774 |
| 5 | Alopecoenas | salamonis | This species was known from Makira, Solomon Islands, but is now Extinct as a result of predation by introduced species. The last record is a specimen dating from 1927, and searches in 1995 and more recently failed to find it. | 1927 |
| 6 | Alopochen | kervazoi | This species was endemic to the island of Réunion, but is now Extinct. The last record came from 1671-1672, and it had been lost to hunting by 1710. | 1710 |
| 7 | Alopochen | mauritiana | This species was endemic to Mauritius, but is now Extinct. It was last recorded in 1693, when it was said to be rare, and could not be found in 1698. Hunting is thought to have caused its extinction | 1693 |
| 8 | Amazona | martinicana | This species formerly occurred on Martinique, but it has been driven to extinction by hunting. The last record dates from 1779 and it is thought to have gone Extinct by the end of the 18th century. | 1779 |
| 9 | Amazona | violacea | This species was known from Guadeloupe, but it has been driven Extinct by hunting. The last records date from 1779. | 1779 |
| 10 | Anas | marecula | This species was found on Amsterdam Island, French Southern Territories, but it is now Extinct having not been seen since 1793. Hunting was the main cause of its extinction. | 1793 |
| 11 | Anas | theodori | This species was found on Mauritius, but is now Extinct having not been recorded since 1696. Hunting is likely to have caused its extinction. | 1696 |
| 12 | Anthornis | melanocephala | This species was found in the Chatham Islands, New Zealand, but it is now Extinct, probably mainly as a result of habitat loss. It was last recorded in 1906, and a search for it in 1938 was unsuccessful. | 1906 |
| 13 | Aphanapteryx | bonasia | This species was known from Mauritius, but went Extinct around 1693 due to cat predation and hunting. | 1693 |
| 14 | Aplonis | corvina | This species was known from the island of Kosrae, Micronesia, but it is now Extinct due to overpredation by introduced rats. The last specimens were taken in 1828, and it was absent when the island was next visited in 1880. | 1828 |
| 15 | Aplonis | fusca | This species was formerly found on the Australian islands of Norfolk and Lord Howe, but it is now Extinct owing to black rat predation. The last record was of the nominate subspecies on Norfolk Island in 1923; it was certainly gone by the time the island was visited in 1968. | 1923 |
| 16 | Aplonis | mavornata | This taxon was known from Mauke, Cook Islands, but it is now Extinct due to overpredation by introduced brown rats. The type specimen was taken in 1825, and the species was not found on the next ornithological visit to Mauke in 1975. | 1975? |
| 17 | Ara | tricolor | This species was known from Cuba, but hunting drove the population Extinct. The last reports of the species date from 1885. | 1885 |
| 18 | Atlantisia | podarces | This species was known from St Helena, but is now Extinct. It was presumably driven to extinction by hunting soon after the island was discovered in 1502. | 1502 |
| 19 | Bermuteo | avivorus | This raptor was recently-described from fossil records, and is thought to relate to raptors observed on Bermuda in 1603. It is long Extinct. | 1603 |
| 20 | Bowdleria | rufescens | This species was formerly found on the Chatham Islands, New Zealand, but is thought to have gone Extinct around 1892 when the last specimen was collected. Habitat destruction and invasive species were probably the major causes. | 1892 |
| 21 | Bulweria | bifax | This species was endemic to the island of St Helena, but is thought to have been hunted to extinction shortly after the island’s discovery in 1502. | 1502 |
| 22 | Cabalus | modestus | This species was known from the Chatham Islands, New Zealand, but became Extinct between 1893 and 1895. It is thought that invasive species are responsible, both through direct predation and habitat modification. | 1895 |
| 23 | Caloenas | maculata | The one specimen of this poorly-known species may have come from Tahiti, French Polynesia, but it has not been reported there since 1928, when the only possible sightings of the species were made. It is presumed Extinct, and is likely to have been hunted. | 1928 |
| 24 | Camptorhynchus | labradorius | This species was formerly distributed along the northeast coast of North America, but it is now Extinct as a result of hunting. There are no records since the collection of the last specimen, in 1875. | 1875 |
| 25 | Caracara | lutosa | This species was endemic to Guadalupe Island, Mexico, but has been driven Extinct due to persecution by settlers. It was last recorded in 1903. | 1903 |
| 26 | Chaetoptila | angustipluma | This species was known from the Hawaiian Islands, USA, but it has not been recorded since a specimen was collected in 1859. It was driven Extinct by the logging of its forest habitat. | 1859 |
| 27 | Chaunoproctus | ferreorostris | This species was known from Japan’s Ogasawara Islands, but it is now Extinct and has not been certainly reported since 1828. Forest destruction and predation by introduced species are thought to have been responsible. | 1828 |
| 28 | Chenonetta | finschi | This Extinct species is now thought to have survived beyond the year 1500 and has thus been assessed for the first time. | 1500 |
| 29 | Chloridops | kona | This species was known from the Hawaiian island of Lana’i, USA, but it has not been recorded since 1894 and is now Extinct. Logging of its forest habitat is likely to have been the primary cause. | 1894 |
| 30 | Chlorostilbon | bracei | This species is known from the island of New Providence, Bahamas, but has been driven to extinction by human disturbance. A specimen was taken in 1877 and it was probably Extinct soon afterwards: subsequent collectors found no trace of it. | 1877 |
| 31 | Chlorostilbon | elegans | This taxon is known from one specimen, probably from Jamaica, taken in 1860. It is now Extinct, likely due to deforestation or predation by introduced species. | 1860 |
| 32 | Ciridops | anna | This species is known from Hawaii’s Big Island, USA, but it is now Extinct due to logging of its forest habitat. The last confirmed records date from 1892. | 1892 |
| 33 | Coenocorypha | barrierensis | This species was extirpated from its historic range by introduced mammalian predators; it was last recorded in 1870 and is classified as Extinct. | 1870 |
| 34 | Coenocorypha | iredalei | This species has been extirpated from its historic range in New Zealand by introduced mammalian predators; it was last recorded in 1964 and is classified as Extinct. | 1964 |
| 35 | Colaptes | oceanicus | This woodpecker was recently-described from subfossil remains. It is likely to have persisted into the 17th century, but is long Extinct. | 1600s |
| 36 | Columba | jouyi | This species was formerly found in Japan’s Ryukyu Islands, but it has not been recorded since 1936 and is now Extinct. The reasons for this are unknown. | 1936 |
| 37 | Columba | thiriouxi | This Extinct species has been newly-described from subfossil remains. It is little-known but probably became extinct around 1730 as a result of overhunting, predation by rats, and deforestation. | 1730 |
| 38 | Columba | versicolor | This species was found in Japan’s Ogasawara Islands, but it has not been recorded since 1889 and is now Extinct. Habitat clearance is likely to have been the major factor driving its extinction. | 1889 |
| 39 | Conuropsis | carolinensis | This species formerly occurred in southeastern USA, but it is now Extinct, primarily as a result of persecution. The last wild records are of the subspecies ludoviciana in 1910. | 1910 |
| 40 | Coturnix | novaezelandiae | This species formerly occurred on New Zealand’s South Island, but is now Extinct, probably due to diseases spread by introduced game birds. A bird that died in 1875 is thought to represent the last individual of the species. | 1875 |
| 41 | Coua | delalandei | This species was endemic to Madagascar, but is now Extinct. It has not been reported since 1834 and likely succumbed to the complete destruction of its native forest. | 1834 |
| 42 | Cyanoramphus | ulietanus | This species was known from the island of Raiatea, French Polynesia, but it is now Extinct, probably as a result of habitat clearance or the action of invasive species. Two specimens were collected in 1773 and its extinction likely followed | 1793 |
| 43 | Cyanoramphus | zealandicus | This species was known from Tahiti, French Polynesia, but it has not been recorded since 1844 and is now Extinct. Possible causes include deforestation, hunting and predation by introduced species. | 1844 |
| 44 | Diaphorapteryx | hawkinsi | This species was known from the Chatham Islands, New Zealand, but is now Extinct as a result of hunting. It is thought to have persisted until at least 1895, when it was described in a letter. | 1895 |
| 45 | Drepanis | funerea | This species is known from the Hawaiian island of Lana’i, USA, but it has not been recorded since 1907 and is now Extinct. Predation and habitat destruction by invasive species were the major factors causing its extinction. | 1907 |
| 46 | Drepanis | pacifica | This species is known from the Hawaiian Islands, USA, but it has not been recorded since 1898 and is now Extinct. Habitat destruction was probably the major cause of its extinction. | 1898 |
| 47 | Dromaius | baudinianus | This species was formerly found on Kangaroo Island, Australia, but is now considered Extinct. It has not been recorded since its collection in 1802, and is thought to have succumbed to hunting pressure some years before the arrival of permanent settlers in 1836. | 1836 |
| 48 | Dromaius | minor | This species was formerly found on King Island, Australia, but is now considered Extinct. It was last recorded in 1802, and had been exterminated through hunting by 1805. | 1805 |
| 49 | Dryolimnas | augusti | This recently-described, probably flightless rail was likely driven Extinct in the late 17th century as a result of hunting pressure and predation by introduced rats and cats.
his recently-described, probably flightless rail was likely driven Extinct in the late 17th century as a result of hunting pressure and predation by introduced rats and cats |
1600s |
| 50 | Dysmorodrepanis | munroi | This species is known from the Hawaiian island of Lana’i, USA, but it has not been recorded since 1918 and is now Extinct. Habitat clearance and introduced predators were responsible for its decline. | 1918 |
| 51 | Eclectus | infectus | This recently-described parrot may have survived as recently as the late 18th century, but became Extinct most likely as a result of over-hunting and predation by invasive mammals. | 1700s |
| 52 | Ectopistes | migratorius | his species was formerly distributed across North America, but is now Extinct as a result of habitat clearance and hunting. The last reliable wild record dates from 1900, and a search beginning in 1910 failed to find it. | 1890s |
| 53 | Erythromachus | leguati | This species was endemic to the island of Rodrigues, Mauritius, but is now Extinct as a result of hunting. It was last recorded in 1726, and its absence was noted in 1761 | 1761 |
| 54 | Falco | duboisi | his species was endemic to the island of Réunion, but is now Extinct and has not been recorded since 1671-1672. Persecution is likely to have driven its decline. | 1672 |
| 55 | Fregilupus | varius | This species was known from the island of Réunion, but it became Extinct in the 1850s. Introduced disease and various forms of human disturbance are likely to have contributed to its decline. | 1850s |
| 56 | Fulica | newtonii | This species was found in the Mascarene Islands, but it has not been recorded since 1693 and is now Extinct. Hunting was the major cause of its decline. | 1693 |
| 57 | Gallinula | nesiotis | This species is likely to have become Extinct in the late 19th century as a result of predation by rats, though this may have been in combination with feral cat and pig predation, habitat destruction and hunting by islanders. | 1800s |
| 58 | Gerygone | insularis | This species was endemic to Lord Howe Island, Australia, but was driven Extinct by the depredations of introduced rats. It was last recorded in 1928, with none found on a survey in 1936. | 1936 |
| 59 | Haematopus | meadewaldoi | This species was found in the eastern Canary Islands, but is now Extinct due to overharvesting of its invertebrate prey. It was last collected in 1913, and locally reported to be absent by the 1940s | 1940s |
| 60 | Hemignathus | ellisianus | This species was found in the Hawaiian Islands, USA, but it is now Extinct as a result of forest clearance and introduced disease. The last report was of the subspecies stejnegeri on Kaua’i in 1969 | 1969 |
| 61 | Hemignathus | obscurus | This species was known from Hawaii’s Big Island, USA, but it has not been reported since 1940 and is now Extinct. Deforestation and introduced diseases are likely to have been responsible | 1940 |
| 62 | Hemignathus | sagittirostris | This species is known from Hawaii’s Big Island, USA, but it has not been recorded since 1901 and is now Extinct. Most of its habitat was cleared for agriculture, which is likely to have caused the extinction. | 1901 |
| 63 | Heteralocha | acutirostris | This species is known from New Zealand’s North Island, but it was last recorded in 1907 and is now Extinct. Habitat loss, hunting and disease have all been implicated in its decline. | 1907 |
| 64 | Hypotaenidia | dieffenbachii | This species was found on the Chatham Islands, New Zealand, but was driven to extinction by the depredations of introduced species. The type material was collected in 1840, and it was Extinct by 1872. | 1872 |
| 65 | Hypotaenidia | pacifica | This species was known from the Society Islands, French Polynesia, but has been driven Extinct by cat and rat predation. It was last recorded on Mehetia in the 1930s | 1930s |
| 66 | Hypotaenidia | poeciloptera | This species was found in Fiji, but it has not been recorded since 1973 and is now Extinct. Predation by introduced cats and mongooses is thought to have been responsible for its decline. | 1973 |
| 67 | Hypotaenidia | wakensis | This species was known from Wake Island in the United States Minor Outlying Islands, but went Extinct in the mid-1940s, being last recorded in 1945 and never seen by an observer who took up residence in 1946. It is thought to have been hunted to extinction by Japanese soldiers that were stranded on the island. | 1945 |
| 68 | Ixobrychus | novaezelandiae | This species was known from New Zealand’s South Island, but became Extinct for unknown reasons some time in the 1890s. | 1890s |
| 69 | Lophopsittacus | bensoni | This species was known from Mauritius, but hunting has driven it Extinct. It was last reported in 1764. | 1764 |
| 70 | Lophopsittacus | mauritianus | This species is known from Mauritius, but has been driven Extinct by hunting pressure. The last records date from 1673-1675, and it was absent in 1693. | 1693 |
| 71 | Mascarenotus | grucheti | This species formerly occurred on the island of Réunion. It was probably driven Extinct after the island was colonised in the early 17th century, as a result of habitat loss, hunting or predation by invasive species. | 1600s |
| 72 | Mascarenotus | murivorus | This species was endemic to the island of Rodrigues, Mauritius, but is now Extinct due to logging of its habitat. It was last recorded in 1726. | 1726 |
| 73 | Mascarenotus | sauzieri | This species was formerly found on Mauritius, but the logging of its forest habitat has driven it to extinction. It was last recorded in 1837, and certainly Extinct by 1859. | 1837 |
| 74 | Mascarinus | mascarin | This species was known from the island of Réunion, but it has gone Extinct as a result of hunting pressure. The last record of wild birds dates from 1775, and none were observed on a visit in 1804. | 1804 |
| 75 | Mergus | australis | This species was formerly found on the Auckland Islands, New Zealand, but it is now Extinct, primarily due to hunting. It was last recorded in 1902, and had been lost by the time a reserve was set up on the islands in 1910. | 1902 |
| 76 | Microgoura | meeki | This species is known from Choiseul, Solomon Islands, but it has not been recorded since 1904 and is now Extinct. It is likely to have been heavily predated by introduced dogs and cats. | 1904 |
| 77 | Moho | apicalis | This species is known from the Hawaiian island of O’ahu, USA, but is now Extinct as a result of habitat loss and introduced disease. The last record dates from 1837, and it was not found by the collectors that visited the island in the 1890s | 1837 |
| 78 | Moho | bishopi | This species was formerly found in the Hawaiian Islands, USA, but it has not been recorded since 1981 and is now considered Extinct. Habitat loss was probably the primary cause of its decline. | 1981 |
| 79 | Moho | braccatus | This species is known from the Hawaiian island of Kaua’i, USA, but it is now Extinct having been last recorded in 1987. Habitat destruction and invasive species were the major causes. | 1987 |
| 80 | Moho | nobilis | This species is known from the Hawaiian island of Kaua’i, USA, but it is now Extinct having been last recorded in 1987. Habitat destruction and invasive species were the major causes. | 1987 |
| 81 | Mundia | elpenor | This species was known from Ascension Island, St Helena, but is now Extinct. The only record of the species comes from 1656 and it is thought to have succumbed to predation by introduced rats and cats. | 1656 |
| 82 | Myadestes | myadestinus | This species formerly occurred on the Hawaiian island of Kaua’i, USA, but the multitude of threats in the region have driven it Extinct. The last definite record dates from 1985 and targeted searches in 1995 and 1997 yielded no confirmed reports. | 1995 |
| 83 | Myadestes | woahensis | This species is known from the Hawaiian island of O’ahu, USA, but it was driven Extinct by the logging of its forest habitat. The only record is that of the type specimen, collected in 1825. | 1825 |
| 84 | Myiagra | freycineti | This species formerly occurred on Guam, but became Extinct in 1983. Predation by the introduced brown tree-snake was the cause of its extinction. | 1983 |
| 85 | Nannococcyx | psix | This species was formerly found on St Helena. It is now Extinct, presumably as a result of island deforestation in the 18th century. | 1700s |
| 86 | Necropsar | rodericanus | This species was endemic to the island of Rodrigues, Mauritius, but is now Extinct, probably due to a combination of hunting, habitat loss and the action of invasive species. The last records date from 1726, and the species was not found on a visit in 1761. | 1761 |
| 87 | Necropsittacus | rodricanus | This species was endemic to the island of Rodrigues, Mauritius, but is now Extinct. It was last reported in 1761 and presumably hunted to extinction soon after. | 1761 |
| 88 | Nesillas | aldabrana | This species was formerly found on Aldabra, Seychelles, but it is now Extinct due to predation and habitat alteration by invasive species. It was last recorded in 1983, and searches in 1986 confirmed its extinction. | 1983 |
| 89 | Nesoenas | cicur | This Extinct species has been newly-described from subfossil remains. It is little-known but probably became extinct around 1730 as a result of overhunting, predation by rats, and deforestation. | 1730 |
| 90 | Nesoenas | duboisi | This species was found on the island of Réunion, but it was last recorded in 1674 and is thought to have been Extinct since the early 18th century. Predation by introduced cats and rats is likely to have been the primary cause of its extinction. | 1674 |
| 91 | Nesoenas | rodericanus | This Extinct species has been newly-described from subfossil remains. It is little-known but probably became extinct during the 18th century as a result of overhunting and predation by rats. | 1700s |
| 92 | Nestor | productus | This species was known from Norfolk Island, but went Extinct in the mid-late 1800s. Habitat clearance and hunting are thought to have been the major drivers. | 1850s |
| 93 | Nyctanassa | carcinocatactes | This species is known only from subfossil remains. It likely became Extinct during the early 17th century as a result of invasive predators and hunting for food by human settlers. | 1600s |
| 94 | Nycticorax | duboisi | This species was endemic to the island of Réunion. It was last recorded in 1674, and was probably driven Extinct by hunters before 1700. | 1674 |
| 95 | Nycticorax | mauritianus | This species is known from the mainland of Mauritius. It was last recorded in 1693, and was probably driven Extinct by hunters before 1700. | 1693 |
| 96 | Nycticorax | megacephalus | This species was endemic to the island of Rodrigues, Mauritius, but is now Extinct having been last recorded in 1726, and mentioned as absent in 1761. Hunting was the cause of its extinction. | 1761 |
| 97 | Paroreomyza | flammea | This species is known from the Hawaiian island of Lana’i, USA, but is now Extinct, probably as a result of habitat destruction and introduced diseases. The last records date from 1961-1963, and a survey in 1979 failed to find the species. | 1961 |
| 98 | Pezophaps | solitaria | This species was endemic to the island of Rodrigues, Mauritius, but was hunted to extinction in the 18th century. It was reported in 1761, but had become Extinct by 1778. | 1778 |
| 99 | Phalacrocorax | perspicillatus | This species was known from Russia’s Komandorski Islands, but is now Extinct: the last records date from the 1940s and the species is thought to have been lost by the early 1950s. Hunting was the primary cause of its extinction. | 1950s |
| 100 | Pinguinus | impennis | This species was formerly distributed across the north Atlantic, but is now Extinct as a result of hunting pressure. The last live bird was seen in 1852. | 1852 |
I emailed this story to Rush. (I copied the link from here….I hope that was okay). I doubt it will go far…but ya never know. I also mentioned Anthony and Roy Spencer. If you listen to Rush you would know that he has called out Spencer several times on his show.
Absolutely OK. Thanks!
A stronger case can be made that industrial society will be wildlife’s savior.
====================
it has been shown that within just a few generations, “domestic” or “tame” versions of wild animals can be bred, similar to day’s dogs, horses, cattle, sheep, etc.
this process is happening naturally, where many previously wild species are migrating to cities. free from hunting pressure from humans, they successfully co-exist with modern industrial society.
in the poor countries this cannot happen, because the wild animals represent much needed income and food. they have no opportunity to domesticate naturally. if they stray near to civilization, they are killed. leaving only the wildest, least tame individuals to survive.
Hunting, properly managed, has been the savior of some of our game animals in the US. When I was a kid we rarely saw a deer back in Ohio. More recently the state has needed to issue more licenses due to vehicle/deer collisions, prompted, of course by the insurance lobby. Have not lived there for quite some time so one can only hope that this is not overdone.
Here in WY, there is concern about the sage grouse, while raptors are fully protected while they eat a great number of sage grouse. It’s hard to find a tree, pole or wire that does not have a hawk, owl or eagle perched upon it. Sage grouse will do their mating dance right under a drilling rig. During mating season the rigs are shut down to not disturb nesting of the raptors so they perch on the rigs and eat the sage grouse. Go figure.
Jim G1, You are absolutely correct. I too grew up in Ohio and a deer was a rare thing indeed. If anyone hunted deer they had to go to Pennsylvania or West Virginia. As you know, many things have changed and I can say the forest has returned to the southern part of the state. There is abundant wildlife; deer, turkeys, and even bears are now back in Ohio, and I believe bobcats are suspected too. With so many deer can it be very long before someone finds a mountain lion? It really has changed for the better. Conservation has worked thanks to the resources obtained from hunters and hunting ethic. I too have moved to the West and you are right about the sage grouse. Predators are a very big factor. This has been proven repeatedly that ground nesting game birds can be severely impacted by predators. I dare say the up tick in raptors may be related to the Greater Sage Grouse decline.
Well written paper! Unfortunately so many humans live in metropolitan areas, who never see the “wild” long term. Thus their influence is to vote for over-controlling the fast empty spaces, even to take their neighbors home in the name of saving the planet. I fortunately have several properties. One is very remote in NE Washington, where wolves have in recent years migrated to. Setting aside the variety of views on wolves, it’s been very interesting to watch them and see the changes in animal habitat with the wolf presence. One change being my own behavior. I do engage in self preservation, so if a time were to come where the grocery store is no longer viable, well, God’s critters will look good on my plate. But I will say, the wolves have depleted the mule dear population, killed off many coyotes, helped themselves to turkey dinners. Infact they will kill just for the sport, leaving behind the kill for the ravens and scavengers etc.
As it has cooled in the last decade I have seen many little birds enjoying the property, which the other birds of prey get a few extra meals. Rabbits have also appeared with the coyotes missing, which the eagles, large owls and hawks have for breakfast. Chipmunks have also appeared.
All in all, the eco-nazis have had no hand in the goings on, except in the notion to reintroduced the wolf, which now has created a storm with other ranchers of cattle, sheep, goats, and pets. Also, the state under-reports the numbers of wolf population….interesting.
I used to own a property on San Juan Island. Land of what seemed like millions of rabbits. Similar to the examples in the written article above, a rabbit hungry critter was introduced to the island. bye bye rabbits, chickens, kitty cats and other small animals. Have not heard the outcome of that. At least the lettuce grows well without the rabbit having salad every night.
There have been many atrocities to nature by the hand of mankind, but in the end, for the lack of wisdom, sometimes mankind is their own worst enemy. The world is not the garden of Eden, but by comparison, it is a garden compared to Venus or Mars…so far.
Utterly terrifying that we have sunk so low as to make that drugged out blowhard Rush look like a voice of reason. Terrific article, though the mere mention of Rush scare off the people that need to read it.
That’s quite an ad hom, “Doug”.
How would a reader describe you in similar tone; gutless liar hiding behind an anonymous screen name?
That wouldn’t encourage much discussion, would it? Was that your point- to discourage discussion?
That might be a fair description of me, but I frequently testify in a community full of educated liberals, and if they can google up my views on CAGW they would just dismiss what I say. As it is, I provide a voice of reason without being labeled a right wing nut job.
Rush, on the other hand, is instant poison to any credibility among a large swath of the nation. He does well preaching to the choir but has absolutely no effect on those who might benefit from some of his views
.
“In fact, according to a recent Pew survey, Limbaugh was found to be the least trustworthy “news entity” among a long list of various sources such as Fox News, CNN, Buzzfeed and The Daily Show. Coming in at 39 percent, Limbaugh barely edged out Fox News (37 percent) for the top overall spot and was a full 17 points ahead of the highest liberal source in this study, MSNBC (22 percent). But not only that, according to Politifact, 82 percent of the comments they’ve investigated from Limbaugh have been rated as Mostly False, False or Pants on Fire.
http://www.forwardprogressives.com/new-pew-poll-exposes-rush-limbaugh-propaganda-pusher/
This would be a good time to remind you of the first rule of holes…
typical low info type
probably doesn’t even listen to the radio
and someone told him what to think…
Doug
June 25, 2015 at 7:11 am
“Utterly terrifying that we have sunk so low as to make that drugged out blowhard Rush look like a voice of reason. Terrific article, though the mere mention of Rush scare off the people that need to read it.”
Leftists will use any excuse to ignore what they want to ignore. You prefer to play by their rules? Note that they change them at a whim all of the time. Good Luck. Make sure you shun all the people the Left wants you to shun, or you will become one of them.
Argument Ad hominem. He has had Dr. Roy Spencer on his program numerous times to provide his insights. I guess you should also label Dr. Spencer with your slurs. Strange that you would use the source of the argument as an attempt to refute a logical argument.
This is a wonderful, wonderful article. I can so relate to the author. I wish everyone could learn and remember this information, kind of like a vaccination.
Once you believe the world is coming to an end, once you lose faith in humanity and nature’s resilience, once you lose hope, then like the Heaven’s Gate victims, you become easy prey for the charlatans that inhabit all walks of life, left or right, scientist or layperson. Indeed “Apocalyptic, Fear-Mongering Accelerates the Decline of Our Culture”.
“(LIA) widespread starvation that the pope blamed on witches.”
And now he’s putting his weight behind another witch hunt. I think his flock is smarter than he is now if the polls are any sign.
A legalistic quibble, But a “Sixth Mass Extinction Event” is not very likely, Mass extinction events are defined by the loss of marine invertebrate species. That’s because the vast majority of fossils are marine invertebrates and the fossil record is what you look at to identify past extinction events. But the species eliminated in recent centuries by human activity are overwhelmingly terrestrial vertebrates and secondarily terrestrial invertebrates as well as, one supposes, a few plants. The marine invertebrates are, by and large, doing just fine. Ergo — probably no “extinction event” by the rules that identify the historic KT, P-Tr etc events.
The most noteworthy thing to me about this argument (acknowledging the terrific data in the piece) is that it bleeds into comparison with religion and apocalyptic cults. It is this morphing of the rules of science into the rules of religion that gets us every time. The essence of a political party, especially in a forced binary system, is to find a core belief that can trump dissenting opinions and weld the believers into a minority. The essence of science is to attack the unknown, or the “known but mistaken” on a minority but experimental basis, and demonstrate a result. Gaia & the isms is the choir of the new left religion, and it is hard to deal with on any other terms– reason has clearly failed among all but the committed skeptics, who too often find themselves stuck in the middle of the road with out of control vehicles coming from both directions.
Thirty years ago I never would have dreamed I would or could utter the words of my title. As a left-leaning young ecologist, I hated the way Limbaugh painted all environmentalists as “whackos”!
It’s always interesting to hear one person say one thing and another interpret it as something else. Rush, as I’ve heard him, has never labeled all environmentalists as “whackos.” Although he never says this, the whackos are the one who have adopted environmentalism as a religion and left the science behind.
Unfortunately the only environmentalists that make the news are the whackos. The science based environmentalists trying to strike a balance and do good things are seldom heard from.
Somehow the major proponent of doom is not even mentioned, Obama himself. He has managed to direct the CAGW scare with manipulation of “science” and goes unmarked into more and more control.
The problem of lying apocalyptic “environmentalists” predates Obama by decades.
Re-introduced or newly introduced species are indeed fraught with wrong-headed thinking. Salmon and other river fish species suffered tremendously from wrong headed thinking in Wallowa County. Here’s why:
The approximate 60 year fisheries cycle was unknown to extend into rivers. Since then of course, fish counting has confirmed not only that cycle in rivers, but subcycles as well. But the damage was already set into motion when a diminution of river fish was responded to with poor attempts to force a return of abundant river fish species.
1. Efforts were made to introduce additional fish species into area rivers. Unfortunately the order in which they were introduced made it very difficult for rainbow trout to survive. Bull, brown, and brook trout are all aggressive fish compared to rainbow. Brook trout are especially aggressive and can out-do any trout species in the fight for food, though they be much smaller than other species. In any event, the resulting fight for food keeps all species in an attenuated condition from this mishmash approach.
2. Wallowa County used to be a swampy place with streams crisscrossing across the valley as a result of constant runoff from the surrounding Swiss-like mountains. Settlers decided to use those streams by turning them into irrigation ditches. Then someone upstream, in their desire to save fish, decided we should dry up some of those ditches and use a controlled cross-country canal, built in the early 1900’s. Continued efforts were then made to keep fish out of these streams-turned-irrigation ditches by putting up fish screens all over the place. Re-introduced and new species were forced to compete in just the rivers. In addition to increased competition for food, unfortunately that stopped all the fish from going into their preferred spawning grounds (all those streams and ditches) away from the fast running main rivers. Streams and ditches once filled with salmon and trout disappeared along with the fish. All because someone thought they could save fish.
This story is never told by conservationists and Indian Tribe groups involved in fisheries. They think they have done it all correctly in attempting to return the rivers to what they were before settlers used the many side streams for crop irrigation. But all you have to do is look at the valley from a satellite perspective. You will see the bones of the once criss-crossed streams, now dry, and without fish.
I have had these thoughts for years and you have affirmed my concern. The satellite images have been ignored and most (all) of the corrective actions have caused more harm and not corrected or mitigated the problem.
Jim, I’ve thought for some time now that we need some upbeat choices for readers, telling them things like you have up above and the fact that technology has ALWAYS come to the fore to resolve problems. We are a remarkable species and we should rejoice and trust in the its genius and bountifulness. As you point out, degrading science has a huge impact on our present and future wellbeing. I think a good book should survey the doomsters of the past and write a give framework for recognizing this ever-renewing burdensome tax on human progress. We need inspirational speakers to bring this message. Today’s society has been depressed by the constant onslaught of this misanthopist juggernaut. These ill-minded malthusians will step up their campaigns over the next decades because they know once population reaches its peak of ~9B (almost there!) by mid century (earlier if we could get cheap energy to the poor) their game is over. They also know, by keeping it up and dismantling civilization they will create a much higher population.
Mr. Steele, thank you for the very informative article. I have a comment on the chart of gray whale populations: the chart shows conflicting scales on the two y-axes. I found the same graph on the OceanLink website http://oceanlink.info/biodiversity/graywhale/graywhale.html evidently written by a student. What you have done is possibly pulled statistics from it, claiming a 13% increase in population per annum. I’m not sure that is correct if the data are not clearly plotted on the source chart.
CoonAZ,
The 13% refers to Humpbacks and was from references sighted in Ainley, D., et al., (2010) Impacts of cetaceans on the structure of Southern Ocean food webs. Marine Mammal Science, vo. 26, p. 482-498.
The Gray whale graph was simply pulled from the internet with out further investigation of its source, but based on numerous other reports and papers the graph accurately depicted the trends over the past 100 years.
One species that is truly endangered and possibly extinct are the Lesser Naugas. Some claim that they are merely hiding from man. But, if that is truly the case, then where do Naugas hide?
Bruce Cobb
In Ricardo Estebans Old Monte Carlo?
Nope…That was Corinthian Leather.
Ricardo Montalban and the Chrysler Cordoba.
Not just Corinthian Leather. Rich Corinthian Leather.
This is a great effort, Mr. Steele, thank you. On a related note, in the mid-1980s, the federal government embarked on the conservation reserve program which paid farmers to retire cropland. I am not generally a fan of Ag programs, but CRP worked pretty well and turned lots of marginal wheat and corn cropland into prairie. I still farmed in SE Wyoming in the early 1990s and we were over run by wildlife by then because there was now so much habitat on those CRP acres. Promoting biofuels has undone much of the good of that CRP, although I don’t have figures to report.
Steele writes: “That gave me a better understanding of Limbaugh’s perspective. Although I have yet to see Rush take a pro-environmental stance, his arguments are not anti-environment. He is railing against the political corruption of environmental science, something I have sadly observed (see above). He is fighting against those who misuse the Endangered Species Act to promote their politics. He is ranting against apocalyptic fear mongering that robs science of its objectivity and integrity, and robs people of hope in order to promote an agenda.”
As a person who comes at the debate from a political/economics perspective, I have been skeptical of the global warming alarmists from the outset, for the simple reason that it looked like an excellent vehicle to gain political and economic power over others. I’m no scientist, and don’t pretend to understand the ins and outs of the CO2 debate from a scientific viewpoint. I do, however, believe that I understand the debate from a political power viewpoint.
Steele says he’s “yet to see Rush take a pro-environmental stance.” While that might be true, I would submit that Rush’s, and my own, views on the matter are strongly “pro-environmental.” Taking just the last, and most important, part of the quote above, for example (“and robs people of hope in order to promote and agenda”), l would submit that the environment we all now live in has, in countless ways, been severely polluted by global warming alarmists and that the political environment our children are now growing up in has been degraded to the point that many are left feeling some combination of fearfulness, helplessness, and even hopelessness. That is an environment created by the fear-mongering alarmists so aptly portrayed in this article by Mr. Steele, and is an environment that would be much improved would people listen closely, and come to understand, what Rush Limbaugh is saying.
Incidentally, my vote for a Presidential candidate in 2016 will hinge very much on whether the candidate feels the need to pay homage to the global warming alarmist viewpoint (as the Bushes seem so wont to do, for example), or whether instead he (or she) is willing to take a stand much as Mr. Steele has taken here. A smart candidate would simply ask Mr. Steele if he might use it as a position paper on the matter. That would settle it for me.
I will say, Carly Fiorina is the only one I’ve seen so far willing to confront the talking points on AGW/Climate Change: https://youtu.be/ZZ6t7m5RlnQ
If things go as they usually do, we will probably have to choose the lesser of two evils. So if, say, confronted with a choice between Bush Lightest and Clinton, well we’ll just have to hold our noses, won’t we?
First, thanks Jim Steele.
I would avoid the AGW meme – no votes there – and instead insist the hopefuls state their positions on providing us abundant, baseload, and reliable energy.
+1
Why didn’t Ceballos and Ehrlich 2015 point out productive efforts that are preventing further extinctions? Why not offer real conservation guidance and optimism? It appears they prefer denigrating modern society and promoting apocalyptic fear mongering rather than promoting good conservation and good science.
This is simply more evidence that Ceballos and Ehrlich don’t practice science but are members of the Church of Environmentalism. Religions are famous for making apocalyptic predictions. Once you realize that environmentalism is their religion, the apocalyptic predictions make perfect sense and you can and should ignore them.
You’re never going to eradicate this kind of thinking. It’s always been with us and always will be with us. But it must be marginalized and driven to the fringes so as not to have much influence on public policy much as most other extreme religious beliefs have been in this country.
A problem we have today though is that much of the mainstream news media are either members of the
Church of Environmentalism themselves or are sympathetic towards it. That’s why all these alarmist stories get air time almost daily. You never hear stories from the MSM that treat traditional religious stories seriously. When such stories do make it into the MSM they are often ridiculed. There’s not much difference in believing that the mothership will descend from Comet Hale Bopp to take you away than there is from believing in end of the human race in 100 years except in the way the MSM presented each story.
Somehow we need to separate the science of environmentalism from the Church of Environmentalism to get better environmental public policy decisions. If there was ever a need for a “campaign of awareness” this is it.
Nice presentation, Dr Steele- many thanks. Can’t take serious issue with any of it.
There’s an extension to this debate about which I’d like to be a little bit more provocative. That is, the manner in which all participants worship the importance of what we call ‘biodiversity’.
Well, like many of you here, I’m in awe of the natural world – it’s a consuming passion for me, and of course I would like to see the preservation of all the ecosystems and all the species that we currently have around us. It’s what makes me tick. But we are in the very small minority : though many will SAY how much they value it, in practice the vast bulk of the population take no interest and couldn’t really care less. In the UK we have – quite arbitrarily- enacted legislation which visits onerous and sometimes very expensive duties on all landowners, and even houseowners, to protect BATS. Not particular, endangered species of bats, but ALL of our 17 or 18 species, include the common ones, and a small industry of bat ‘experts’ has grown up to help such owners, expensively and laboriously, to discharge their legal duties. The bats’ close relatives -rats and mice – have not been afforded any such protection (except for the (cuddiy) Dormouse). Similarly, the seriously endangered Great Crested Newt is being found in hundreds of localities all over the couintry where development projects must as a consequence be delayed, modified, or shelved Of course, there are experts on hand to help you through this – at a price! Some creatures have lobby groups, some don’t!
For most folk, it really doesn’t matter whether we have many bats or newts, or few. For our kids, then? Will it make a difference if we have 15 million species to describe and study, or 12 million? If we turn a large area of rainforest into a parking lot, we’ll undoubtedly lose some species (though fewer than most imagine) many of which are undescribed and therefore, we’ll never know. But does it actually matter? Will we lose the possibility to find some cures for cancer in those unknown species? Just possibly, but I’m very sceptical that anything truly unique of this kind will be irretrievably lost.
Now, I’m not advocating the abandonment of conservation measures- I’ve always been a conservationist in the local and personal sense. And, like you, I don’t think that biodiversity is as easily compromised as we normally assume. But I want to make the point that it’s a life and societal choice to preserve these ecosystems, not a world-saving must. We should understand conservation for what it is – a hobby or an amusement, like art, or music, or stamp collecting, or trainspotting – very valuable to its adherents, but not in itself, fundamental.
Anybody feel provoked?
I don’t know about provoked. But I would like to see some reasonable attempt at evaluating the worth of efforts to prevent certain species’ extinction.
How much human misery has really been caused by the extinction of the Dodo? Would life as we know it cease if pandas became extinct? And whose parent is being saved from Alzheimer’s because we’ve preserved the snail darter?
No, I wouldn’t want to be the one to decide to let a certain species go extinct. If I were forced to make the decision, though, I’ll bet the evidence would in many cases lead me to decide that efforts to preserve the species in question are not worth the cost.
Hi Mothcatcher,
The “commandment” about “biodiversity” comes from the modern Darwinist Religious synthesis:
e.g. see comments re E.O. Wilson upthread.
“The northern spotted owl is the wildlife species of choice to act as a surrogate for old-growth forest protection,” explained Andy Stahl, staff forester for the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund, at a 1988 law clinic for other environmentalists. “Thank goodness the spotted owl evolved in the Pacific Northwest,” he joked, “for if it hadn’t, we’d have to genetically engineer it.” Andy Stahl at a 1988 law clinic for environmentalists, staff forester, Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1838857/posts
Green bigots vs. human beings
The red-legged frog is only the latest of many supposedly endangered species whose habitats may be kept off-limits to human beings, even if that means stopping the building of much-needed housing. We have grown so used to having the interests of millions of human beings sacrificed for some allegedly endangered species that we no longer stop and think about how outrageous that is.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2001/may/27/20010527-023324-7532r/
Jefferson Salamander is sort of the eastern North American… spotted owl eg
Tunnel vision ‘protection’ for salamander
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/tunnel-vision-protection-for-salamander/article757852/
The game that is played is finding some non-human animal or insect, declare it to be sacred to the “alleged fragile web of life”, and human activity must be restricted under the PC “biodiversity” dogma.
In you want to dig deeper into the ideology behind all this, try this author eg
Smith’s latest book is The War on Humans (Discovery Institute Press, 2014) in which he investigates the views of anti-human activists who want to grant legal rights to animals, plants, and “Mother Earth,” and who want to reduce the human population by up to 90 percent.
His previous book was A Rat is a Pig is a Dog is a Boy: The Human Cost of the Animal Rights Movement, a searing critique of the ideology and tactics of the animal liberation movement and a rousing defense of the unique importance of human exceptionalism.
http://www.nationalreview.com/author/wesley-j-smith
http://www.waronhumans.com/
Ehrlich’s has been wrong since his 1968 book The Population Bomb proved to be the dumb-ass unsupported doom prophecy that it was. He will continue to be wrong and yet news media reacts to his every new announcement like it is important.
Maybe the news media feels compelled to follow a continually proven wrong author, thinking that even a stopped clock is right once a day, and reporting nonsense is more acceptable than missing a scoop on the potential end of the world. Or maybe the media is stupid beyond the pale.
Fantastic article, Jim. Thank you.
I’ve listened to Rush now and then over the years and he spends a great deal of time ridiculing liberal zealots. He recognized long ago that left wing ideologues naturally were attracted to the ecology movement as a way to promote their socialist/communist and sometimes anarchist views.
Cute polar bears, penguins and and dangerous man made things lurking everywhere tugs on heart strings and freightens people.
Deceiving people is apparently ok if you are working toward the common good.
Deceiving people is apparently ok if you are working toward the common good.
————————————————————————————————————————–
Deceiving people is apparently ok if you Believe or claim you are working toward the common good.
Way, way back in the 80s, my required high school reading list included “The Fate of the Earth”, and “Entropy”, etc. It was strongly suggested we watch movies like “The Day After”, about nuclear war.
In short, the belief was that we were in the End Times, an ideal that my “progressive” secular-humanist teachers shared with the “regressive” born-again Christians who were (at the time) my social group. Basically, my entire world-view was pretty pessimistic.
My long journey from True Believer/Chicken Little to rationalistic “show me the stats” started when we had a full-school debate about just how bad things really were. I had been given the (to my then-mind) impossible task of showing that, hey, things aren’t THAT bad.
One of my opponents was a local peacenik who spent 20 minutes creating a prop consisting of a huge cardboard circle with a tiny paper circle in the middle. The paper represented how many nukes it would take to wipe out the earth, the cardboard was the number of nukes on the planet. Scary stuff. Not a great prop, though, as the cardboard fell over during his presentation. All I had to say was “your argument takes as long to get out as it did to make your prop, and its even easier to blow down”. I got a ton of laffs, a sitting ovation and a C- (see: “progressive” teachers above).
(Relevant to this thread: we also discussed extinction, and I asked simply “how many species are at risk?”. When I received numerous answers that proved that the estimates were basically useless I brought out my own prop (an elastic band) and stretched it out until it broke and said “when numbers are this elastic, the argument will snap like this”.
Which, come to think of it, probably did more to earn that C- than anything.
Sadly, Facebook is suppressing the sharing of articles like this one into ‘news-feed’. I clicked on the link to share, but it did not appear in my news feed. It is however on my timeline, but how many people are going to divert from news-feed in order to look at an individual’s time line? This has happened with some other articles(that do not tow the line of the climate changers mantras) I have tried to share. I wonder if there is a way to get around fb’s censorship? well, I just requested to join WUWT closed group on fb, so maybe that will make a difference? Probably not, as relates to news feed, but at least I won’t miss postings from WUWT. BTW, a terrifically great article!
What effect does the mass deforestation of the hard woods and their replacement with fast growing soft woods have on the elimination and extinction species that relied upon the habitat provided by the hard wood forests? This has been going on in the US since ship first hit the shores. Ships were made from the hardwoods and the stripped land was replanted with fast growing pines and other soft woods. In the north areas that had pine trees were cleared for farms or replanted with hard woods needed in shipbuilding. No regard was taken for the birds and other animals whose life depended upon the nuts and seeds of the trees that were destroyed, yet now we ask why aren’t there as many of these species as there were 300, 200 years ago. What doers the removal of these species also do to the numbers of fleas and ticks that cause harm to man?
Look here http://www.ancientforests.us/OGIntro.htm
Excellent survey of the misuse of scientific data and statistical analysis in service to a fanatical agenda.
(Note: third line of penultimate paragraph: “there” should be “their.”)
FURTHER READING:
SHORT AND DIRECT: Transcript of the late Michael Crichton’s speech to the Commonwealth Club on September 15, 2003. Subject: Modern Environmentalism as a Religion. https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~kw/crichton.html
BOOK LENGTH PHILOSOPHICAL ARGUMENT: “The Fanaticism of the Apocalypse: Save the Earth, Punish Human Beings” by French philosopher Pascal Bruckner, translated by Steven Rendall.
Highly recommended.
I’ve always wondered why people like Ehrlich refuse to do their part in the over population problem. Guy is in his eighties and still drawing breath. If all the people claiming over population will doom mankind or push the argument of “carrying capacity” really had the courage of their convictions, hey would voluntarily remov themselves.
As a problem lessens, extremists on the problem become more extreme.