PDA

View Full Version : Animals 'hit by global warming'


Pooh_bear
10-10-2005, 04:41 PM
Climate change could lead to the extinction of many animals including migratory birds, says a report commissioned by the UK government.

Melting ice, spreading deserts and the impact of warm seas on the sex of turtles are among threats identified.

The report is being launched at a meeting of EU nature conservation chiefs in Scotland.

It says that warming has already changed the migration routes of some birds and other animals.

The UK's Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) commissioned the research, which was led by the British Trust for Ornithology.

The meeting, in the Scottish holiday resort of Aviemore, was called to discuss ways in which wildlife might be helped to adapt to global warming.

Times already changing

Scientists have already observed a wide range of changes in the migration patterns of birds, fish and turtles, apparently in response to warming which has already taken place.

Some species normally associated with more southerly countries, such as the little egret, the loggerhead turtle, and the red mullet, are increasingly seen in and around the UK.
Wading birds such as the ringed plover are now spending the winter in the east of Britain rather than on the west coast, and chiff-chaffs are remaining in the UK throughout the year rather than migrating south.

While many species have been able to adapt to new conditions simply by moving their ranges further towards the poles, the study warns that this option is not available to other animals, such as polar bears and seals whose habitat is disappearing rapidly with the melting of Arctic sea ice.

Even subtle changes in sea temperature can have dramatic impacts on wildlife with rapid depletion of the tiny plankton organisms which form the base of the food web in the oceans.

This is thought to have contributed to a recent drastic decline in the breeding success of some Scottish seabirds, as the fish on which they depend were suddenly deprived of food.

Some of the other threats from climate change identified in the study include:

Increased storminess damaging the breeding colonies of albatross, already facing heavy pressure from accidental capture on long-line fishing hooks
Sea level rise destroying beach nesting sites for sea turtles - for example, nearly a third of beaches used by turtles in the Caribbean would be lost with the rise anticipated during this century, and seals and wading birds also face destruction of their coastal habitats
Warmer seas could lead to some turtle species becoming entirely female, as water temperature strongly affects the sex ratio of hatchlings
Growing water scarcity in many regions could further destroy the wetland areas on which migrating waterfowl depend.
The spreading extent of the Sahara desert could threaten long-range travellers such as the swallow, as they will be unable to "fuel up" in previously fertile regions on the desert's edge.
"Our changing climate is already affecting a wide range of migratory species," said Humphrey Crick from the British Trust for Ornithology, one of the report's authors.
"They range from the swallow crossing the Sahara to the albatrosses of the southern oceans; but this report shows that the potential impacts are really widespread.

"There is some scope for helping species adapt to climate change, but we need to find global solutions to help animals that swim, fly and walk thousands of miles each year."

Too far, too fast

Nature has always had to adapt to changing climate conditions.

Indeed, it is one of the driving forces behind the process of evolution which has produced the staggering variety of life on Earth.

But the fear is that the changes currently under way are simply too rapid for species to evolve new strategies for survival.

Their options are also being narrowed by the rapid conversion of ecosystems such as the draining of wetlands, felling of forests and development of coastlines - so if their existing habitats are hit by global warming, there is literally no place to go.

The report has important messages for conservation officials gathered in Scotland for this meeting convened by Defra.

They are being urged to make more use of "biological corridors" to widen the options available to migrating species as climate change takes hold.

The whole approach to conservation may have to be radically changed - the most perfectly-protected nature reserve could end up being of little use if the animals breeding there face starvation because they have nowhere to migrate.

I found this on www.bbc.co.uk/news

Pooh_bear
10-10-2005, 04:45 PM
This is so tragic. :( Since reading this article my friends have started to carpool with me. We are trying to cut back on the amount of fumes that are being put out into the environment from our cars. Hopefully more people will start to carpool also :)

geekazoid
10-11-2005, 07:43 AM
the worst thing is these massive jet planes that people use. I read an article about it, so i can't quite remember the exact numbers but i think it was one trip to the us from the uk on a passenger airline releases as much air into the atmosphere as a family 4x4 does in a year

SweetAsCande90
10-11-2005, 02:29 PM
Well if global warming doesn't kill our animals, scientists will. You would not believe all the stuff they do to poor animals. Baby seals are being killed in canada, moneys, cats, dogs, mice, etc. are being tested and their organs are used in transplants. And they dont kill the animals before they cut them open. They're killed alive. They're organs are ripped our while they're still alive. It's awful what's done to animals. Its sooo horrible.

But yea i really think that there is a lot people can do to help animals. Like one, switch to another major fuel supplier. Hello! That would stop a lot. And people also have to stop using animals as test subjects. That so should be stopped. like there isnt even a point at all.

SweetAsCande90
10-11-2005, 04:28 PM
While I agree science has much to answer for in its treatment of members of the animal kingdom, let us keep a few things in perspective. First, baby seals are clubbed for their fur which in turn is worn by fashion mavens who care little for where the fur came from. As many cats and dogs are slaughtered and skinned to line the fur-lined gloves you will wear this winter - China and Korea are amongst the worst offenders of this trade. Minks and others will sacrifice their fur for the odd stole or coat those who can afford them will wear, more to show off ostentatious wealth than anything else. Your shoes, jackets and let's not forget leather pants and skirts come from cows. Suede shoes, and other products come from foals slaughtered as a by product of forceably impregnated mares in the making of Premerin, for which there is a synthetic drug available doctors will not voluntarily tell you about. Farm owners are not necessarily scientists, they just make considerable money feeding the scientific machine. There is far more than science to blame here - greed, avarice, and utter indifference to pain and suffering of animals comes to mind.

That's extremely true! But there is a lot people can do to avoid buying some products like that to boycott and help prevent that from happening in the future. Like buying faux fur, fake leather, cotton clothing. Always check tags before you buy coats, jackets, sweaters, pants, etc.

I think people need to really step it up and stop buying that stuff just to be greedy. I bought real leather boots once and i returned them cause i didn't realize they were real. Besides, who cares if its fake or real? its just really important to help innocent animals who can't help themselves.

As much as people are to blame as you mentioned Kathy, i still think the field of science reserch on animals is so cruel. i looked at this one webpage with pictures. I just cried looking at the pictures. It was so horrible. Atleast the clothes line keeps you warm but doing animal testings is just wrong. NOTHIING good comes from that. So i do feel its the biggest contributor to human abuse to animals. I mean really. why put a box of radiation attached to a live kittens brain to study the kitten? and thats just one example. thousands of monkeys are being studied and there organs are used in transplants. And when they use there organs, they kill the animal to get the organs. It isnt like humans where you use a dead humans organs, or you use ones the person can live withought. Its just horrible. I've e-mailed so many people in japan about it but they don't care. its just really upsetting.

Back to global effects on animals, people can help that too. it all comes back to fossil fuels. We have to use other resources. Tigers will be extinct in my life time along with hundreds of other species. The thought of it is horrible and it can all be prevented but tell me whose listening? most people are...but who is whilling to act? yea thats the problem. not enough people.

geekazoid
10-12-2005, 11:49 AM
like there isnt even a point at all.

the point is to save a life. i will gladly sacrifice an animal's organs to help a human. i totally disagree with using animals for cosmetic purposes but my mum wouldn't be here if scientists didn't test on animals

SweetAsCande90
10-12-2005, 03:09 PM
the point is to save a life. i will gladly sacrifice an animal's organs to help a human. i totally disagree with using animals for cosmetic purposes but my mum wouldn't be here if scientists didn't test on animals

As much as i have to agree and i know its always good to hear there was a life saved, i still think the cost is too high. Animals, yes i know they arn't as important as people, but I'll never agree with it being okay. If it was my mom, i wouldn't let them use an animals organs to save her life. I'm sorry, but i wouldn't do it. Everyone has there own opinion and thats just mine. i love animals too much. yes i love my mom too, but why loose one life to save another? it isn't right.

geekazoid
10-13-2005, 06:39 AM
As much as i have to agree and i know its always good to hear there was a life saved, i still think the cost is too high. Animals, yes i know they arn't as important as people, but I'll never agree with it being okay. If it was my mom, i wouldn't let them use an animals organs to save her life. I'm sorry, but i wouldn't do it. Everyone has there own opinion and thats just mine. i love animals too much. yes i love my mom too, but why loose one life to save another? it isn't right.

so you would die to save a pig's life? i'm just quite surprised because that is very against human nature, which is the desire to survive. did you refuse the meningitis jab? or the TB jab? the only reason we have those is through testing on animals

SweetAsCande90
10-13-2005, 07:49 AM
I don't know about a pig, but a cat...yes, i honestly would.

If anyone were to run over my cat, accident or no, they'd die.
I don't think it would get that far though, my kitty doesn't run into the street, so its all good. :)

geekazoid
11-05-2005, 12:31 PM
I don't know about a pig, but a cat...yes, i honestly would.

If anyone were to run over my cat, accident or no, they'd die.


so are you saying you would sacrifice a member of your family to save a cat's life but not a pig's? that immediately destroys your entire aregument, you said a life is a life no matter what, surely that extends to animals who aren't cuddly and cute?

as to the second part of the quote *runs away*