| Extinction is a natural event and, from a geological perspective, routine. 
 We now know that most species that have ever lived have gone extinct. 
 The average rate over the past 200 million years is 1-2 species per million 
 species present per year. The average duration of a species is 1-10 million 
 years (based on the last 200 million years). There have also been several 
 episodes of mass extinction, when many taxa representing a wide array 
 of life forms have gone extinct in the same blink of geological time. In the modern era, due to human actions, species and ecosystems are threatened 
 with destruction to an extent rarely seen in Earth history. Probably only 
 during the handful of mass extinction events have so many species been 
 threatened, in so short a time.
 What are these human actions that threaten biodiversity? There are many 
 ways to conceive of these; let's consider two.
 First, we can attribute the loss of species and ecosystems to the accelerating 
 transformation of the Earth by a growing human population. As the human 
 population passes the 6 billion mark, we have transformed, degraded or 
 destroyed roughly half of the word's forests. We appropriate roughly half 
 of the world's net primary productivity for human use. We appropriate 
 most available fresh water, and we harvest virtually all of the available 
 productivity of the oceans. It is little wonder that species are disappearing 
 and ecosystems are being destroyed.
 Second, we can examine six specific types of human actions that threaten species and ecosystems--the "sinister sextet."
 Over-hunting
 Over-hunting has been a significant cause of the extinction of hundreds 
 of species and the endangerment of many more, such as whales and many 
 African large mammals. Most extinctions over the past several hundred 
 years are mainly due to over-harvesting for food, fashion, and profit. 
 Commercial hunting, both legal and illegal (poaching), is the principal 
 threat. The snowy egret, passenger pigeon, and heath hen are US examples. 
 At US $16,000 per pound, and US $40,000 to US $100,000 per horn, it is 
 little wonder that some rhino species are down to only a few thousand 
 individuals, with only a slim hope of survival in the wild. The recent 
 expansion of road networks into previously remote tropical forests enables 
 the bushmeat trade, resulting in what some conservationsist describe as 
 "empty forests" as more and more wild animals are shot for food.
 The pet and decorative plant trade falls within this commercial hunting 
 category, and includes a mix of legal and illegal activities. The annual 
 trade is estimated to be at least US $5 billion, with perhaps one-quarter 
 to one-third of it illegal. Sport or recreational hunting causes no endangerment 
 of species where it is well regulated, and may help to bring back a species 
 from the edge of extinction. Many wildlife managers view sport hunting 
 as the principal basis for protection of wildlife.
 While over-hunting, particularly illegal poaching, remains a serious 
 threat to certain species, for the future, it is globally less important 
 than other factors mentioned next.
 Habitat loss, degradation, fragmentation
 Habitat loss, degradation, and fragmentation are important causes of 
 known extinctions. As deforestation proceeds in tropical forests, this 
 promises to become the main cause of mass extinctions caused by human activity.
 All species have specific food and habitat needs. The more specific these 
 needs and localized the habitat, the greater the vulnerability of species 
 to loss of habitat to agricultural land, livestock, roads and cities. 
 In the future, the only species that survive are likely to be those whose 
 habitats are highly protected, or whose habitat corresponds to the degraded 
 state associated with human activity (human commensals).
 Habitat damage, especially the conversion of forested land to agriculture 
 (and, often, subsequent abandonment as marginal land), has a long human 
 history. It began in China about 4,000 years ago, was largely completed 
 in Europe by about 400 years ago, and swept across the US over the past 
 200 years or so. Viewed in this historical context, we are now mopping 
 up the last forests of the Pacific Northwest.
 
 
 
In the New World tropics, lowland, seasonal, deciduous forests began 
 to disappear after 1500 with Spanish and Portuguese colonization of the 
 New World. These were the forested regions most easily converted to agriculture, 
 and with a more welcoming climate. The more forbidding, tropical humid 
 forests came under attack mainly in twentieth century, under the combined 
 influences of population growth, inequitable land and income distribution, 
 and development policies that targeted rain forests as the new frontier 
 to colonize. 
   |  |   
   
   |  | Thinking Point |  |   
   |  | The 
 destruction of tropical rainforests in economically developing countries 
 may well have serious worldwide ramifications (e.g., loss of species, 
 global warming). How might foreign policy in first world nations be 
 guided to support economic growth in rainforest states while fostering 
 a sustainable environment? |  |   
   |  |  Tropical forests are so important because they harbor at least 50 percent, 
 and perhaps more, of the world's biodiversity. Direct observations, reinforced 
 by satellite data, document that these forests are declining. The original 
 extent of tropical rain forests was 15 million square km. Now there remains 
 about 7.5-8 million square km, so half is gone. The current rate of loss 
 is estimated at near 2 percent annually (100,000 square km destroyed, 
 another 100,000 square km degraded). While there is uncertainty regarding 
 the rate of loss, and what it will be in future, the likelihood is that 
 tropical forests will be reduced to 10-25 percent of their original extent 
 by late twenty-first century.
 
 
 
Habitat fragmentation is a further aspect of habitat loss that often 
 goes unrecognized. The forest, meadow, or other habitat that remains generally 
 is in small, isolated bits rather than in large, intact units. Each is 
 a tiny island that can at best maintain a very small population. Environmental 
 fluctuations, disease, and other chance factors make such small isolates 
 highly vulnerable to extinction. Any species that requires a large home 
 range, such as a grizzly bear, will not survive if the area is too small. 
 Finally, we know that small land units are strongly affected by their 
 surroundings, in terms of climate, dispersing species, etc. As a consequence, 
 the ecology of a small isolate may differ from that of a similar ecosystem 
 on a larger scale.|  |  
  
 |  | Discussion |  |  
 |  | {Dis: Deforestation in the Pacific Northwest is a volatile topic.} Discuss arguments for forest harvesting (e.g., supporting the local economy, demand for wood
  and paper, rotational harvest, tradition) and arguments against doing so (e.g., soil
  erosion, habitat loss, threat to species including salmon). What types of conciliatory
  approaches might be taken?
 |  |  |  |  For the future, habitat loss, degradation, and fragmentation combined 
 is the single most important factor in the projected extinction crisis.
 
 
 
Invasion of non-native species 
   |  |   
   
   |  | Thinking  Point |  |   
   |  | In 
 Chicago, an infestation of Asian longhorned beetles in 1998--introduced 
 inadvertently through packing crates imported from China--forced the 
 destruction of hundreds of trees to control its spread. Create a list 
 of introduced non-native species you know of, and how they impacted 
 the environment. |  |   
   |  |  Invasion of non-native species is an important and often overlooked cause of extinctions. The
  African Great Lakes--Victoria, Malawi and Tanganyika--are famous for their great diversity of
  endemic species, termed "species flocks," of cichlid fishes. In Lake Victoria, a single,
  exotic species, the Nile Perch, has become established and may cause the extinction of most of the
  native species, by simply eating them all. It was a purposeful introduction for subsistence and
  sports fishing, and a great disaster.
 Of all documented extinctions since 1600, introduced species appear to have played a role in
      at least half. The clue is the disproportionate number of species lost from islands: some 93
      percent of 30 documented extinctions of species and sub-species of amphibians and reptiles, 93
      percent of 176 species and sub-species of land and freshwater birds, but only 27 percent of
      114 species and subspecies of mammals. Why are island species so vulnerable, and why is this
      evidence of the role of non-indigenous species? Islands are laboratories for evolution.
 Domino effects
 Domino effects occur when the removal of one species (an extinction event) 
 or the addition of one species (an invasion event) affects the entire 
 biological system. Domino effects are especially likely when two or more 
 species are highly interdependent, or when the affected species is a "keystone" 
 species, meaning that it has strong connections to many other species.
 A keystone species is one whose influence on others is disproportionately great. A seminal study of
  marine invertebrates in the rocky intertidal region of Washington State found that the top predator,
  a starfish, facilitated the coexistence of many other invertebrates by selectively consuming
  mussels, which otherwise would crowd out other organisms. Thus a keystone species is one whose
  presence or absence both directly and indirectly influences other species through food web
  connectivity. Contrary to what some may think, not all species are "keystones", and it requires
  careful experimental studies to identify keystone species.
 Pollution
 Pollution from chemical contaminants certainly poses a further threat 
 to species and ecosystems. While not commonly a cause of extinction, it 
 likely can be for species whose range is extremely small, and threatened 
 by contamination. Several species of desert pupfish, occurring in small 
 isolated pools in the US Southwest, are examples.
 Climate change
 A changing global climate threatens species and ecosystems. The distribution 
 of species (biogeography) is largely determined by climate, as is the 
 distribution of ecosystems and plant vegetation zones (biomes). Climate 
 change may simply shift these distributions but, for a number of reasons, 
 plants and animals may not be able to adjust. The pace of climate change 
 almost certainly will be more rapid than most plants are able to migrate.
 The presence of roads, cities, and other barriers associated with human 
 presence may provide no opportunity for distributional shifts. Parks and 
 nature reserves are fixed locations. The climate that characterizes present-day 
 Yellowstone Park will shift several hundred miles northward. The park 
 itself is a fixed location. For these reasons, some species and ecosystems 
 are likely to be eliminated by climate change. Mountaintop species are 
 especially vulnerable. The plants and animals found on high mountains 
 of the American West include many remnants of a Pleistocene fauna that 
 long ago was displaced toward the arctic, or upslope. With further warming, 
 many of these mountaintop species likely will be eliminated.
 A changing climate will have many other effects. The southern extent 
 of the Everglades, today the site of the most ambitious and expensive 
 restoration project ever undertaken, may be underwater, along with significant 
 areas of human habitation. Agricultural production likely will show regional 
 variation in gains and losses, depending upon crops and climate. Some 
 coral reefs will expand, and others will contract or die off. Ecological 
 changes due to an altered climate are difficult to forecast, but expected 
 to be serious.
 As a consequence of these multiple forces, many scientists fear that by 
 end of next century, perhaps 25 percent of existing species will be lost.
 
 | 
No comments:
Post a Comment