Could there be a greater risk to wildlife than climate change? According to one study, over-exploitation and agricultural activity posed a much greater risk to threatened species.

Busy? Try the speed read.

The report: A 2016 study of over 8,000 threatened or near-threatened species found that over-exploitation and agricultural activity posed a much greater threat to biodiversity than climate change.

Why it matters: Climate change is long-term and abstract. But it also gets all the breaking news coverage. In reality, harsh trends like deforestation and poaching pose immediate threats to wildlife. They need urgent attention, too.

These tangible problems deserve similar attention to carbon emissions. Most ESG funds pour cash into (trendy) clean energy while critical species face extinction from other causes.

Sustainable suggestion: Environmental solutions should be more well-rounded. How can we work more cooperatively with intersecting threats like wildfire risk mitigation and ecological restoration, for example.

A forestry organization may want to clean-up deadwood to prevent harsher wildfires, but a conservation group will sue them for cutting down a sacred forest. A conservation group may want to support hunting an invasive species , but an animal rights group will publicly condemn them.

Organizations with differing philosophies should work more closely through coalitions and associations to understand their perspectives.

Bottom line: Climate change is important, and intersects with basically every ecological issue. Not arguing we should take it less seriously. But that behemoth threat will be much easier to manage if we knock off smaller issues that we see, touch and feel.

We need smarter farming, more responsible animal agriculture, accountability for commercial hunting, fishing and logging. We need more stringent land protection in sensitive areas of the developing world. It’s as important as climate change.

Dig deeper → 3 min

Risks beyond climate change

For the past few weeks, I’ve been jogging around my hometown. With less people commuting to work, the streets are generally quieter in this buzzing NYC-NJ suburb. Still, never in my life have I noticed more roadkill. I see mostly squirrels and deer.

Here’s my non-scientific theory based on the oh-so-unreliable anecdotal evidence:

These cute deciduous creatures are more active in the Springtime. They are mating and interacting more than any other time of year. In the process of gathering, they cross more roads than usual to conduct their instinctual flower-blooming business.

With concrete yellow lines standing where trees stood just a geological millisecond ago, animals willingly put themselves in regular danger without realizing the harm. How can evolutionary instinct catch up with such unprecedented changes to natural habitats?

The result? Me wincing on my run once a day with a renewed frustration for the human race. We need to build higher fences around forests that intersect major highways or SOMETHING.

Going beyond climate change

So, why am I talking about about my two-mile trying-to-stay-sane exercise? Climate change didn’t kill those squirrels and deer. The cause is something simpler and more tangible. And the solution is right in our face.

According to this 2016 study of over 8,000 threatened or near-threatened species, I was surprised to find out what monster-in-the-closet posed the greatest risk to Earth’s biodiversity. The first thing that came to mind, like it always does, was the Big Bertha. The world’s Goliath. Climate Change.

Climate change didn’t kill those squirrels and deer, the cause is something simpler and more tangible. And the solution is right in our face.

Based on an analysis of IUCN Red List data by Sean Maxwell of the University of Queensland, the impact of climate change on the world’s biodiversity doesn’t come close to the impact of over-exploitation and agricultural activity.

The researchers noted that “the basic message emerging from these data is that whatever the threat category or species group, over-exploitation and agriculture have the greatest current impact on biodiversity (see ‘Big killers’). Of the species listed as threatened or near-threatened, 72% (6,241) are being over-exploited for commerce, recreation or subsistence.”

Placing immediate priorities first

This finding does not suddenly nullify global efforts aimed at mitigating anthropogenic climate change. Nor does it deny the real impact of rising temperatures and frequent droughts on wildlife.

Rather, the research suggests there are more immediate threats testing the survival of the world’s flora and fauna. To be clear, anthropogenic climate change is impacting 19% of the species used in this study.

However, we need to address tangible issues first when we talk about cutting carbon emissions at round tables in fancy suits.

Fixing fishing and farming

Which activities hurt biodiversity most?

Over-exploitation and agriculture accounts for hunting and fishing, logging, pesticide-use, livestock farming and aquaculture.

Many factors involving over-exploitation and agriculture also increase carbon emissions, ultimately contributing to the overarching impact of climate change. So like most subjects of study, it’s complicated to point to one cause or factor.

More importantly, this study sheds light on the required immediacy of action for attainable goals like more sustainable agricultural standards, or more robust environmental protection laws for forestry services.

How can we make intersecting subtopics in climate mitigation efforts more cooperative?

Combining climate change with conservation

Too often, I see contradictory efforts in the environmental space.

A forestry organization may want to clean-up deadwood to prevent harsher wildfires, but a conservation group will sue them for cutting down a sacred forest. A conservation group may want to support hunting an invasive species , but an animal rights group will publicly condemn them.

We need to approach the climate conversation in a way that works cooperatively with intersecting threats like wildfire risk mitigation or ecological restoration, not against them.

There is a lot of work to be done, we all know that. But if we can start tackling things that we can see, touch and feel, it will make a fickle future a lot easier to manage. There are more immediate risks than climate change, after all.

Do you like Jared Wolf's articles? Follow on social!
No Comments
Comments to: Climate change risk isn’t the greatest threat to wildlife
With so much climate change coverage, there are still more immediate ecological issues to tackle.

Unlock our weekly newsletter

By subscribing you agree to our Privacy Policy.





Top Posts

Better brands: Is Beyond Meat Sustainable?
3 clear reasons why overpopulation is a myth
Better brands: Is Starbucks sustainable?
The truth about the environmental impact of takeout food

Latest

Sustainable Review is copyright material. All rights reserved.
X

Login

Welcome to SR.

Like, comment, discuss, follow your favorite stories.
Become an Eco-Warrior.
Registration is closed.
Close Bitnami banner
Bitnami