WildFact
›
Nature & Conservation
›
Human & Nature
Let's Talk: Climate Change & Its Impact on Wildlife
Let's Talk: Climate Change & Its Impact on Wildlife
|
Let's Talk: Climate Change & Its Impact on Wildlife
|
Hey Everyone,
I hope you're all doing well! As a community that cherishes wildlife and the incredible creatures we share this planet with, I think it's time we dive into a topic that's close to all our hearts: Climate Change. You might have heard about climate change in the news or seen its effects in our own backyards. But how is it impacting the wildlife we love so much? And more importantly, what can we do about it? Why Climate Change Matters Climate change is more than just a buzzword; it's a reality that's affecting ecosystems around the globe. From melting ice caps to rising sea levels, and from extreme weather events to changing habitats – the effects are wide-ranging and profound. For the animals, this means disrupted habitats, altered food sources, and sometimes, the struggle for survival. Polar bears are losing their icy homes, coral reefs are bleaching and dying, and migratory patterns of birds are shifting unpredictably. Every species, big or small, is feeling the heat (quite literally). Our Role as a Community As people who deeply care about wildlife, we have a unique role to play. Here's how we can contribute:
Let's Get Talking! I’d love to hear your thoughts on this. How have you seen climate change affecting wildlife in your area? What steps are you taking to make a difference? Share your stories, tips, and ideas. Together, we can make a positive impact! Looking forward to a lively and inspiring discussion. 
I believe this is an important conversation to have, as it is something that is not only affecting these wonderful creatures we all love so much, but it is directly affecting each and every one of us, individually.
Climate change is alarmingly affecting the fragile ecosystem of the Himalayas.
Its terrifying effect is seen in the rapid decline of some endangered species in spite of intense conservation bids. The loss of habitat and nesting grounds severely threatened their existence. Erosion caused by rampant extension of road and concrete establishment and over exploitation of the forest resources for industrial purposes are also adding to their habitat loss. Red Panda and Gharial crocodiles are a couple of wildlife species Nepal is struggling to preserve in its natural habitat. There are about 1,000 red panda in Nepal out of their global population of 10,000 The increasing average global temperature is impacting the red panda's habitat in the Himalayas, which is limited to a narrow temperature range within the forests. As temperatures continue to rise, the red panda will be forced to relocate to higher elevations in order to survive and adjust to the shifting climate conditions.  *This image is copyright of its original author Similarly, Gharial crocodiles have declined in the wild by 98 % since 1940. Their world population is estimated to be between 300 - 900 only. The loss of riverine habitat due to climate change and human interference is irreversible. This has had significant consequences on wetland habitats, leading to the loss of nearly double the number of freshwater and terrestrial species in Nepal over the past five decades. The population of these species in Nepal now stands at less than 200 individuals.  *This image is copyright of its original author
Good post @iTourNepal
I have read similar population decline for Gharial in India. They are rapidly disappearing from Indian subcontinent. 
GLOBAL WARMING - THE ARCTIC AND EASTERN SIBERIA
Here's a link to an interesting video and a link to a recent publication (from Copernicus): Video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpvd9FensT8 Article - https://atmosphere.copernicus.eu/coperni...-june-2024 The bottom line of both the article and the video is climate change is very real. And here to stay. When did humans become aware of subtle changes in weather patterns? What I read suggests the point of no return was reached about half a century ago. In the seventies of the previous century, scientists made it very clear humans had to adapt quickly. Initially, their appeal seemed to have an effect. Back then, climate change was considered a priority by many. Those able to effect the political agenda, however, had a different opinion. Most unfortunately, they took over (referring to politics). A pity, as things really seemed to have changed after World War Two. Many political parties (referring to Europe in particular), in order to prevent a repetition of the events witnessed in the period 1914-1945, were in favour of a more active state and more opportunities for more people. The result was political parties attracted able people determined to base their choices on science and common sense. Within a decade, the result was prosperity for many. The private sector, not prepared to take it lying down, waited for the opportunity to counter. They didn't have to wait long. In the late sixties and early seventies, not a few leaders of Labourlike parties in particular (...) decided to get rid of old transport systems in urban regions. They said trams, and not cars (...), were responsible for congestion and decided for buses. And, of course, cars. Was it cars all along then? No question. Anyhow. The result was large cities doubled or tripled in size in a few decades only. In the Anglosaxon part of the world in particular, people often had no option but to buy a car to get a job or to buy a house. The result was congestion, air pollution and health problems for hundreds of millions. When it was clear different choices had to be made, Labourlike parties didn't profit for the reason mentioned above. Neo-liberals did. A result of a well designed campaign. They quickly seized the opportunity to change rules installed in the period 1950-1970. The inevitable result was state organisations and institutions started implementing views embraced by liberals. And big corporations. It resulted in prosperity for a large minority. Most people, however, had to work harder for a similar salary. Societies, like before the two wars, started to fragment again. On top of that, independent newspapers and public media (radio and television) were bought by large corporations. Those running them made very different choices. In the end, they had a profound effect on society. Not a few assume misinformation is a result of social media and the new platforms. Not so. It started in the last decades of the previous century, when 'human' interest, sports, gossip and crap replaced serious topics. Topics that had to be discussed. The result was the liberal agenda was executed in no time. Public services were privatized. Those who profited moved to 'affluent neighbourhoods'. Those who paid for them were left behind. And issues that affected all? They moved to obscure magazins ignored by nearly all. One result was societies started to fragment. Every specific group is represented by a specific political party. As most parties no longer try to get to a deal, extremism, once again, erupted. Meaning it, once again, didn't start on the street or in the minds of those left behind. It was a result of a deliberate choice made by those who profited. Today, at least over here (referring to northwestern Europe in particular), a large minority feels alienated, neglected, run over and powerless. They're no longer represented and the result was a lack of trust in politics. That and anger. Public anger? Not quite, as anger had been privatised as well. The result? Fragmentation, extremism and a lack of unity. Was it visible in the world of politics? To a degree, as many turned their back on politics. Those who voted distanced themselves from the 'old' parties. Like in the decades before and between both world wars, rightwing parties profited. The result is ever more conflicts. What I'm saying is the world didn't respond to the warning of scientists in the seventies of the previous century. The only ones who understood what was happening were those who opposed the views of scientist, as it would result in a severe limitations and a loss of wealth. They had a sitdown and decided for a campaign to regain what was lost in the fifties and sixties. The campaign was simple, but effective and the execution flawless. So much so, they're still in the driving seat. And then, out of nowhere, things started to change. Weather anomalies were more often seen. The oceans started to warm. Excessive precipitation was seen in ever more regions. Summers started to become hot. Heatwaves tormented ever more regions and the arctic in particular. The ice started to melt. Permafrost started to disappear. Forest fires were more often seen in the northern hemisphere. Floodings and landslides became more devastating. Winters were replaced by autumns. The average temperatures keep rising. The speed of the changes increased. In spite of what was happening, humans didn't act. Today, what we do or don't do doesn't seem to make a difference anymore. The planet seems to be burning and raging and one can only watch in astonishment. I'm not saying everything we see today is a direct result of human decisions only, but one could conclude humans didn't treat the natural world with the respect it deserves and be close. Although it seems to be out of our hands, it would help if we let go of the nonsense we see everyday and decide for an organisation addressing the issues that need to be addressed. While we still can. Before politics, there's fundamentals. Most of those who know agree the planet is overcrowded, overused and treated with disdain. In the end, humans are mammals and in mammals it's about being able to adapt to ever changing ciircumstances. A post with the character of a political pamphlet on a public forum? Not quite. It's a post about climate change and responsability. If the causes of the changes seen everywhere are discussed, chances are the problem can be identified. It's impossible to say we could make a difference, but we have no option but to give it a try and hope for the best. You never know. |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 2 Guest(s) |