19 Year old Australian driver charged with killing 20 Kangaroos in a 1 hour frenzy on the road.
Read the full story here:
Category: Environmental
Enigmatic oil spill kills animals along the Brazilian coast –
The world sees that the Amazon in Brazil is burning the lungs of our planet. And it’s still burning, but another environmental catastrophe is coming.
Since September 2, 2019, an enigmatic oil spill kills wildlife along the Brazilian coast. Meanwhile, according to the Brazilian Environmental Agency Ibama, beaches along the 3000 km long coast of the Brazilian Northeast are affected.
Recalling “Deepwater Horizon”, 580,000 million liters of oil flowed into the sea, destroying the Gulf of Mexico ecosystem. Even now, many marine animals in Brazil are fighting for survival after the oil spill, including oil-glued birds and poisoned turtles, as contact with oil can cause serious damage to their health.
Tortoises were found dead – photo tipomanaus.com.br
Although there are extensive oil exploration activities off the coast of Brazil, the authorities have excluded this as the cause of the oil spill. That means a 3,000 km coastline is destroyed by an oil spill and nobody knows where this oil comes from (!!!).
It was April 2019 that the Brazilian Environmental Agency approved the exploration of oil in the largest coral reefs in the South Atlantic.
Again and again it comes to bad oil catastrophes, quickly the news disappeared from the media and we rarely learn what damage this disaster has left. And in Brazil nobody wants to have caused the oil spill, even though there are extensive oil exploration activities.
An oil rig in front of Rio de Janeiro. (Image: David Silverman / Getty Images)
The oil spill, first discovered on September 2, 2019, spanned more than 1,500 km and was discovered at 105 locations in eight states that affect wildlife and popular beaches, including Praia do Futuro in Ceará and Maragogi in Alagoas.
According to the latest report from the Brazilian Environmental Institute (Ibama), which was updated on Saturday, September 28, in the state of Alagoas, 11 sites in 9 communities are affected by oil spills. According to Ibama, the crude oil reached 112 locations on the northeast coast. The number of cities affected by oil spills has risen to 53 since the beginning of September. Alagoas is one of 8 states with the same substance.
Whether fish and crayfish stocks are affected by the pollution is not yet known. Meanwhile, many dead turtles have been found on the beaches. Ibama’s recommendation is to bring back living animals, not just cleaned, to the sea. In these cases, the population was asked to visit the competent environmental authorities to have the animals examined before returning to the sea.
Experts are still scratching where the oil actually comes from. But it is certain that the oil comes from one and the same source.
However, one of the environmental protection agencies’ hypotheses is that a ship has drained crude oil on the high seas, because the substance has just been commissioned by Brazil’s largest oil company Petrobras.The state oil company Petrobras confirmed that.
Brazil’s oil giant Petrobras is under criticism for its foul investments. Petrobras is Brazil’s largest company, with a market capitalization of around $ 170 billion. Petrobas promotes the lying under a thick salt crust oil deposits off the coast of Brazil.
And just the oil company Petrobras now checks the cause of the oil spill?
Since the British energy company BP has been forced to pay a record $ 20.8 billion (following the explosion of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico), major oil companies are worried that such sums of money will be due again.
That means – where no plaintiff is not a crime. And unfortunately, the media also play an important role here, because that the huge oil company BP had to pay, is also due to the worldwide protest.
The platform Deepwater Horizon, Mexico, April 21, 2010
Who or what triggered the oil spill is not clear even after almost a month. The beaches were released for swimming despite the oil spill. And so the oil catastrophe should disappear again from the media and the causer remains unrecognized.
https://netzfrauen.org/2019/09/29/brazil-5
My comment: 
…and best regards to all, Venus
‘It is time for a new law on ecocide to go alongside genocide and the other crimes against humanity,’ says Michael Mansfield QC
Eating meat could become illegal due to the ecological damage it does to the planet, a top British barrister has said.
Michael Mansfield QC believes the government should introduce tighter legislation to make activities which destroy the natural world illegal – and in the future this could even include banning the consumption of meat.
Michael Mansfield QC (pictured) believes the government should introduce tighter legislation to make activities which destroy the natural world illegal ( Getty )
“There are plenty of things that were once commonplace that are now illegal such as smoking inside,” said Mansfield, who will present his ideas at the Labour party conference on Monday.
“We know that the top 3,000 companies in the world are responsible for more than £1.5tn worth of damage to the environment with meat and dairy production high on the list. We know that because the UN has told us so.
“I think when we look at the damage eating meat is doing to the planet it is not preposterous to think that one day it will become illegal,” he said.
Currently 25 per cent of global emissions come from agriculture, with livestock contributing to 80 per cent of that.
Industrial agriculture relies on fossil fuels to create fertilisers and machinery to harvest crops and transport animals. Farmed animals also produce half of the world’s methane emissions. Research last year found that meat and dairy companies could overtake the oil industry as the world’s biggest polluters by 2050.
“It is time for a new law on ecocide to go alongside genocide and the other crimes against humanity,” (Michael Mansfield).
The top QC will be making a speech at the launch of the Vegan Now campaign at the Labour party conference where he will be sitting on a panel of experts debating the damaging effects of livestock farming on biodiversity and climate change.
Juliet Gellatley, director of animal rights group Viva!, who will also be on the panel, said: “Thirty years ago people didn’t bat an eyelid if you lit a cigarette in a pub or restaurant. But now society accepts smoking is harmful and totally unnecessary and so we legislated against it. The same could happen with eating meat.”
Experts behind the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) found red meat had high greenhouse gas footprint because of the emissions livestock give out as well as the impact of land being cleared to grow crops for animal feed.
The report says we should be eating balanced diets with plant-based foods such as grains, vegetables and pulses, and animal-based food produced in sustainable systems.
My comment: 51% of all greenhouse gases emitted worldwide are caused by livestock farming – more than by total worldwide traffic …. A scary fact!
The problem seems so obvious and it would be so easy to solve: Minimize or completely eliminate the consumption of animal products. For this we need a strong campaign against meat consumption, as in the anti-smoking campaign.
Unfortunately, the problem is swept under the table, everything is twisted or downplayed, people are being manipulated, as the reality of climate control would not be accepted. No attempts are made, and if any at all, then the most absurd, and as always at the expense of the animals.
This goes to such perversions that a part of the flank is surgically removed from the cows and replaced by a glass plate just so that one can better observe the processes of methane production.
The fact that humankind’s “enjoyment” of animal products is more important than an intact climate is frightening evidence of the irresponsible and primitive thinking of our species.
My best regards to all, Venus
From the portal http://www.netzfrauen.org
It all started in Thailand. A Thai supermarket had come up with an ingenious way of reducing plastic packaging: instead of using plastic banana leaves.
When the supermarkets in Vietnam found out about this ingenious idea, they too took part. Fruits and vegetables are simply wrapped in a banana leaf and wrapped in a flexible bamboo. Banana leaves are a great alternative to plastic because the leaf is big, thick and supple enough and can be folded. Instead of throwing away the banana leaves, they are now meaningfully used.
How quickly such ideas are implemented, now also show supermarkets in the Philippines. In line with this environmentally friendly trend from Thailand and Vietnam, supermarkets are beginning to use banana leaves instead of plastic as packaging.
Usually in the net photos excite indiscriminately in plastic packed fruits or vegetables, but this time it was the other way around. Instead of throwing away the banana leaves, they are now meaningfully used.
Many countries in Asia have declared war on plastic and also return the plastic waste from Europe to the countries of origin.
It all started in March 2019 after a real estate company in Chiang Mai posted photos on its Facebook page showing the banana leaf packaging. And quickly gained worldwide attention.
Large supermarket chains in Vietnam such as Lotte Mart, Saigon Co.op and Big C have begun to implement the idea of Thai business and also experiment in their banana leaf business as a packaging alternative. According to the United Nations (UNEP), Vietnam ranks fourth in the world in terms of the volume of plastic waste entering the ocean. Increasingly, measures to reduce plastic waste have already been successfully implemented.
At least three supermarket chains in Vietnam are using banana leaves to wrap vegetables. Photo by VnExpress/Nghe Nguyen
“This is part of our plan to do something about plastic waste, and we hope we can use that idea for fresh meat as well,” said the supermarkets in Vietnam. Customers are excited: “When I see vegetables in these beautiful banana leaves, I’m more willing to buy larger quantities. I think this initiative will help the locals better protect the environment, “says one customer.
The United Nations Environment Program estimates that by 2050, 12 billion tons of plastic will be in landfills, the environment and the oceans. By the way, Coca-Cola alone uses three million tons of plastic packaging in one year and the other companies like Nestlé use millions of tons of plastic every year.
Many consumers here in Europe no longer want plastic packaging. Supermarkets and discounters are currently campaigning with numerous actions against plastic waste. Great!! thinks the consumer, but especially carrots and apples cost unpacked more than the comparison product in plastic packaging.
The use of banana leaves for wrapping food has a long history. In some tropical regions of Mexico tamales are wrapped in banana leaves. Hawaiians also use banana leaves for cooking. They are also used in Southeast Asia to wrap sticky rice.
https://netzfrauen.org/2019/09/28/plastic-13-2/
My comment: Some countries are really doing something to save the climate factually and with simple means! Although they are poor countries and not European.
We do not have bananas in Europe, but we have paper. Paper bags are available in most supermarkets in Germany so the customers can pack their food environmentally friendly.
And here is the problem!
Most do not do, plastic packaging is more comfortable and uncomplicated!
Measures must always come from the top and as a law, not as a voluntary alternative.
Because the climate problem is serious, very serious, and therefore can not be left to the free will of each individual.
So far, and despite 100,000 demonstrators at the strike demonstration in Berlin, we remain patriotic on our German national sport: outrage!
The topic is on everyone’s lips, wich really is nothing other than to speak about FACTS:
Plastic is to blame
Factory farming is to blame,
Cars are to blame
Forest fire is to blame …
and nobody sees himself responsible for at least one climate killer.
An army of propaganda as a climate savior has suddenly appeared.
Some useless politicians think climate rescue is good, and a lot of unsuspecting but enthusiastic demonstrators are hoping this rescue will be through parade demos. Most do not even know what climate is and confuse it with weather.
Mass animal husbandry as a climate killer No. 1 is deliberately not addressed, only these militant vegans do it … bad, right? The outraged environmentalists are currently concerned with the Deus ex machina Greta Thunberg, the icon of the climate hysterics, whether she will finally be pronounced as saints or at least receive the Nobel Prize.
Of course, Greta will get a Nobel Prize.
Even Obama got it.
My best regards to all, Venus
From my collection – Lowland Gorilla 1999.
Regards Mark.
WAV Comment – my (Mark) e mail address does not include ‘Howlingwolf’ for no reason – I just love everything associated with ‘Canidae’ and will always speak out for their protection and better treatment. Here below are a couple of ‘foxy friends’ who I photographed in my garden a few months ago. It is to me, perfection – the ultimate. Here below is a super interview with Chris who tells us all about the love for canids, which I hope everyone will find interesting. Regards and big howls – Mark.
Dear Mark,
Chris Schadler is a wild canid ecologist who has studied and taught wolf and coyote biology and conservation for over 25 years. She has also raised sheep using only non-lethal methods of predator control. A force to be reckoned with, Chris has dedicated her time to Project Coyote as our New Hampshire and Vermont Representative, inspiring people with presentations about coexisting with coyotes and achieving landmark policy changes for wildlife. We are lucky to have such a multidimensional and dynamic woman in our pack!
I hope you enjoy this interview with Chris and feel inspired to share it with others.
For Wild Nature,
Camilla H. Fox
Founder & Executive Director
http://www.projectcoyote.org/
——————————————–
What led you to become a wild canid ecologist?
Back in the 1970s I had an opportunity to volunteer at the North American Wildlife Park Foundation, known as Wolf Park, in Battleground, Indiana. Dr. Erich Klinghammer, an ethologist, founded Wolf Park to study wolf behavior (back before scientists used radio telemetry to capture a pack and observe). My job was to spend a month socializing a wolf pup to humans so that, when he was reintroduced into the pack, he would not be aggressive to veterinarians and other handlers. I learned a great deal about wolf behavior from this experience. When I began graduate study at Antioch in New Hampshire, my thesis focused on the failures of wolf reintroduction in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan and the benefits of natural reintroduction when wolves wandered onto the Peninsula from Wisconsin. Concurrently, I was learning to live with coyotes while I farmed sheep in southern New Hampshire.
As Project Coyote’s New Hampshire and Vermont Representative, you frequently give presentations titled, “Becoming Wolf: Eastern Coyote in New England.” Please tell us what you mean by this and what you see happening with wild canids like coyotes on the East Coast.
On its most granular level, the eastern coyote has wolf DNA (and often some dog DNA), which gives the species more options than its western cousin. Habitat here is prime for a top predator (of deer and moose). Even though the eastern coyote still depends upon rodents, the larger the coyote becomes the better it is at hunting larger prey. The eastern coyote appears to be evolving and adapting to take advantage of the east’s coast abundant larger prey. With every deer taken down by a pack, the definition between coyote and wolf blurs. Will we better tolerate a wild canid with the name “wolf” than one called “coyote”? Some have suggested we call the eastern coyote “coywolf” and many canid researchers are debating this issue as we watch this incredibly adaptable and intelligent wild canid continue to evolve in an ever-changing landscape.
You have raised sheep in a region with abundant predators. How do you protect your livestock from predators and do you have any lessons you’d like to share with other New England ranchers?
The farm I bought had lost many sheep to coyotes. I wanted to see if I could change the culture of the pack to no longer recognize sheep as its primary source of food. The average lifespan of our coyotes is about 3-4 years so I dedicated myself to intensive hazing (using harmless scare tactics to encourage wariness of humans) and protection of my flock. I never left the sheep out at night; they lambed in the barn, and their waste was buried and limed. I only used 4’ livestock fencing with no electric, but I checked the fencing every day and my dogs marked the perimeter of our property. If I saw a coyote anywhere nearby, I would haze and chase them until they stopped looking back at me. While my chosen hazing techniques were initially labor-intensive, I haven’t lost a sheep in 20 years. Within 4 years, the coyote young and yearlings were preying on rodents and also deer and carrion (animal carcasses) in the winter.
You were involved in the 2016 effort to ensure that the New Hampshire Fish and Game Department’s proposal to open a bobcat baiting, hounding and trapping season did not pass. Please tell us about this successful campaign and the coalition you co-founded as a result of it.
My writer friend John Harrigan and I had been talking about the problems with the Fish & Game Commission and we were fed up with having no voice in how wildlife was “managed” in the state. Essentially, non-consumptive users of wildlife are not well represented on the Commission. Our F&G is tasked with more than their dwindling budget can support so they had begun dipping into the General Fund to keep the Department going—which is basically “taxation (on the general public) without representation (on the Commission).” An earlier audit of the Department had recommended broadening the base of representation on the Commission which, they thought, would open “doors” for more money from the public.
Then came the bobcat debate. We worked with Voices of Wildlife to broadcast how the bobcat, with protection under the law, was beginning to make a comeback and how the F&G Commission, bowing under pressure from a few trappers, proposed opening a bobcat hunting season. It inflamed the public. A flurry of letters to the editor, op-eds, and calls and emails to the legislature by thousands of citizens in response to the possibility of a bobcat hunt seemed to shake the legislature and they shot the proposal down.
Buoyed by the public response, we wanted to push further for broadening decision-making responsibility on the Commission and finding sustainable funding for the Department so that the agency would no longer be beholden to trophy hunting and trapping groups. We founded the New Hampshire Wildlife Coalition as a vehicle by which to accomplish this goal, and are working hard to that end.
Can you share a bit about the mission and priorities of the New Hampshire Wildlife Coalition and your efforts to reform state wildlife agency governance?
Go to www.nhwildlifecoalition.org to check out who we are and what we’re about. Our efforts to reform state wildlife governance got off to a great start when the bill we generated passed through the legislature. The bill was for a Governor’s Study Commission to examine the recommendations of an audit done on NH Fish & Game in 2008. The audit recommended broadening the base of the F&G Commission to include members of the general public so that funding from the public, now represented in wildlife decision-making, would be forthcoming.
The F&G Commission ignored the audit and our bill forced a reckoning with it. However, lawmakers changed the bill language to focus only on the financial aspect—how to get more dollars into the F&G budget. They stacked the Commission with hunters, and there was only one of us on the Commission pushing for a look at broadening public input.
If it didn’t hurt so much to do it, I would be laughing at the sham process of it all. We believe we were successful in protecting the bobcat because of the grassroots efforts of the citizenry; we don’t think there is a legislative solution here because of the entrenchment of our 400 representatives.
Vermont banned coyote killing contests in 2018, becoming the second state in the nation to do so. Do you think a similar ban is possible in New Hampshire and, if so, what are the necessary steps to get there?
I think it’s possible but would be a heavy lift in this “Live Free or Die” state. Coyotes are despised in New Hampshire, not just by the hunting group (although not all hunters hate them) but also by many citizens. There is substantial fear and misunderstanding surrounding the coyote—I blame NH Fish & Game for this. When you send out the message that coyotes “waste” deer and offer them for slaughter 365 days a year, people come to think of them as cockroaches with fur.
We face the same battles as Vermont, though, and the Coalition is beginning a grassroots effort to engage the public using Project Coyote’s documentary KILLING GAMES ~ Wildlife In The Crosshairs (tentatively beginning this fall). We can use all the hands we can get! We are proposing a ban on killing contests involving all furbearers and birds and we plan to approach this from an ethical standpoint. It should be a no-brainer to disallow killing animals just for the fun of it.
Above – Chris speaking at Fox Forest Lecture Series, Henniker NH.
Do you see public attitudes changing on the East Coast with regard to predators and the concept of coexisting with them?
Yes. Now, let me remove my rose-colored glasses for a minute. I’ve been giving talks for 30 years and sometimes I wonder if we are any further along than we were back when I started. Actually, I would say the hill has become even steeper to climb. More people are growing chickens and other vulnerable stock and most folks don’t know how to protect them, or feel they don’t need to. The inevitable occurs and the coyote is always to blame. I’m so glad I have those 20 years of sheep farming to talk about.
On a brighter note, educators on every level are tuning into the important role of predators in natural ecosystems and more young kids “get it” than ever before. That’s encouraging. Also, after my talks there are always people who come up and tell me they’ve learned something and that they’ll spread the word. That keeps me going.
Above – Eastern Coyote (CC BY SA 3.0 Forest Wander)
Why did you decide to dedicate your time to Project Coyote?
I can’t quite remember how my relationship with Project Coyote started. Camilla has a great memory so she can fill us in on that! I know that she put me through some amazing interviews before she felt comfortable with me (I’m assuming she’s comfortable with me now!). During that process, I was struck by her seriousness, knowledge and commitment to change this situation for predators—how could I not be inspired to join her pack? Plus, knowing what I do now, I am honored to be among such imminent scientists and so many hard-working, dedicated, articulate and passionate people. The mission of Project Coyote has been my mission through my adult life. I only wish I had more time to give.
Mark — America’s bee crisis is getting worse.
Our nation’s beekeepers recently reported the largest recorded winter losses of pollinating honeybees ever — nearly 40 percent. Why are these once-thriving insects dying at some of the highest rates?
A catastrophic flood of highly toxic pesticides — neonicotinoids or “neonics” — pushed by Big Ag is a leading cause of this collapse. Studies show that neonics sicken and kill bees. Reckless use of these poisons threaten our food supply — and possibly even our health. We need to put a stop to it, and together we will.
NRDC is currently waging a courtroom battle against Trump’s EPA that aims to restrict the use of bee-killing neonic products that also threaten endangered species. But to save our pollinators, we need to stop bee-killing uses of neonics on all fronts — so we’re putting the pressure on the world’s largest manufacturer of these toxic chemicals, Bayer-Monsanto.
Why is the decline of honeybees causing so much alarm? Well, the future of our food supply is at stake. In fact, 70 percent of the world’s major food crops rely on bees.
And the neonic pesticides made by Bayer-Monsanto are poisons designed to kill insects — and are so toxic that, even in minute doses, they weaken the immune and navigation systems of bees, as well as their stamina and memory, making them less likely to survive.
The European Union and Canada have already restricted use of these toxic chemicals, but Trump’s EPA has opened the floodgates for agrichemical giants like Bayer-Monsanto to make millions off this assault on our pollinators.
Toxic neonic pesticides aren’t only harming bees — they could be harming us, too. Neonic residues are found in 86% of our honey, as well as on apples, cherries, strawberries, and can even be found in baby food. Federally-funded research suggests that exposure to neonics in the womb and by children could increase the risk of developmental defects, autism, heart deformations, memory loss, and muscle tremors.
But instead of protecting pollinators and our food supply, the Trump administration and his EPA are coddling big chemical companies and ignoring critical information about honeybee losses. The EPA approved continued use of these bee-killing neonic pesticides, which are already used on 190 million acres of crops, and the administration reversed bans on using neonics in all national wildlife refuges.
So while NRDC takes on Trump’s EPA and neonics in court, we need to also build public pressure on Bayer-Monsanto.
Thanks for taking on this agrichemical behemoth with us. Your voice is critical to our success.
Sincerely,
Mitch Bernard
President/Chief Counsel, NRDC
Greta Thunberg: ‘Leaders failed us on climate change’
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-49795270
Swedish campaigner Greta Thunberg has made a passionate speech to world leaders at the UN, accusing them of failing to act on climate change.
“You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words,” she told a UN climate summit in New York.
About 60 world leaders are taking part in the one-day meeting organised by UN Secretary General António Guterres.
He earlier said countries could only speak at the summit if they came with action plans to cut carbon emissions.
US President Donald Trump, a climate change sceptic, had not been expected at the meeting – but he was briefly spotted in the audience.
- Greta Thunberg: The Swedish teen inspiring climate strikes
- Climate change ‘accelerating’, say scientists
- Climate change food calculator: What’s your diet’s carbon footprint?
Brazil and Saudi Arabia are among the countries staying away.
What did Greta Thunberg say?
In an emotional speech, she said: “This is all wrong. I shouldn’t be up here. I should be back in school on the other side of the ocean, yet you all come to us young people for hope. How dare you?
“You have stolen my dreams and my childhood with your empty words,” the 16-year-old said.
And she urged world leaders to act urgently, saying: “We will be watching you.”
What did world leaders say?
Mr Guterres, who organised the meeting, said the world was “in a deep climate hole” and that urgent action was needed.
“Time is running out, but it’s not too late,” he said.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel said her country would double to €4bn (£3.5bn; $4.4bn) it financial commitment to fight global warming.
French President Emmanuel Macron said international organisations had pledged to release $500m in additional aid to protect tropical forests.
New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said things “are starting to turn around” in the country.
“Our gross emissions peaked in 2006, over 80% of our electricity already comes from renewable hydro and wind, and we have begun an ambitious agenda.
“We have introduced in parliament the zero carbon bill, the purpose of which is to ensure New Zealand lives within the threshold of 1.5C of global warming necessary to avoid catastrophic weather events for our Pacific neighbours.”
Scientists’ warning
The summit comes days after several million people took part in a global climate strike led by youth activists.
Ahead of the meeting, scientists warned the signs and impacts of global warming were speeding up.
The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) said the amount of carbon dioxide going into the atmosphere between 2015 and 2019 had grown by 20% compared with the previous five years.
“We should listen to the loud cry coming from the schoolchildren,” said Professor Brian Hoskins, chair of the Grantham Institute, Imperial College London, and professor of meteorology at the University of Reading.
“There is an emergency – one for action in both rapidly reducing our greenhouse gas emissions towards zero and adapting to the inevitable changes in climate,” he said.
Scientists plead with politicians
By Roger Harrabin, BBC environment analyst
As the dangers of climate heating become ever more apparent, so does the absence of collective will to tackle the issue.
In 2015 in Paris, all the world’s leaders sounded their determination to curb the emissions that were heating the climate.
The summit will see a host of initiatives from businesses and small- and medium-sized nations.
But President Trump is encouraging fossil fuel use in every way he can.
And China – in spite of its trend-setting commitment to solar and wind power – is still building new coal-fired power stations.
Even the UK, a global leader in climate policy-making, is veering away from its own medium-term targets to cut emissions.
The government is still aiming to expand Heathrow airport and increase the road network in a way that will increase emissions in those sectors.
Politicians appear to believe climate change can be challenged with a version of economic business as usual.
Their scientists are telling them with increasing desperation that we humans are facing an unprecedented threat in need of an unprecedented response.
Need proof ? – see:
Pizol glacier: Swiss hold funeral for ice lost to global warming
A Swiss glacier lost to global warming has been commemorated at a memorial service in the Alps.
Dozens of people took part in Sunday’s “funeral march” to mark the disappearance of the Pizol glacier.
The glacier, in the Glarus Alps of northeastern Switzerland, has shrunk to a tiny fraction of its original size.
Scientists say the glacier has lost at least 80% of its volume just since 2006, a trend accelerated by rising global temperatures.
As mourners gathered in the Swiss Alps, youth activists and world leaders are in New York to discuss climate change action at the UN.
- Marches worldwide against global warming
- In pictures: Global climate strike
- What is climate change?
- Climate protest: A very different kind of school trip
Saturday’s UN youth summit came a day after millions of people around the world held a global climate strike, inspired by 16-year-old activist Greta Thunberg.
Yet despite what action humans take now, a study by Swiss researchers suggests that, by 2050, at least half of Switzerland’s glaciers could vanish.
The Pizol has diminished to such an extent, “from a scientific perspective it is no longer a glacier”, Alessandra Degiacomi, a Swiss climate campaigner, told AFP news agency.
Now reduced to just a few frozen lumps, the glacier was to be declared dead at the ceremony, the BBC’s Geneva correspondent, Imogen Foulkes, said.
Locals, hikers and environmental campaigners, some dressed in black clothes, trekked up the mountain to pay their respects to the glacier’s remnants, situated at an altitude of around 2,700m (8,850ft), near the Liechtenstein and Austrian borders.
At the ceremony, sombre speeches were to be delivered by a chaplain and scientists and a wreath was to be laid in remembrance of the glacier.
- Iceland’s Okjokull glacier commemorated with plaque
- Climate change action: Your choices have a ripple effect
- Half a degree: Why it matters
The event was organised by the Swiss Association for Climate Protection (SACP), an initiative calling for carbon dioxide emissions in Switzerland to be reduced to zero by 2050.
A similar ceremony was held in Iceland last month to commemorate Okjokull, a 700-year-old glacier declared dead in 2014.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-49788483
WAV Comment – thank god we have these researchers. Who would guess that eating crude oil is bad for birds, or that birds don’t like captivity – I would never have deduced that. Louisiana State University is obviously at the cutting edge of research when it comes to findings such as this. How much is this so called ‘research’ costing, we ask ? – I think we knew that oil was bad for birds !
Serial bird tormenter Christine Lattin—whose twisted experiments have uncovered such Earth-shattering discoveries as “eating crude oil is bad for birds”—has brought forth another major advancement in human understanding: Birds don’t like captivity.
Lattin, whose ongoing illumination of the obvious is unsurpassed, recently published a paper describing an experiment that she performed while at Yale University. She captured 21 songbirds and subjected them to both acute and long-term trauma.
The birds, who are naturally highly social, were housed alone in cages, restrained in cloth bags for 30 minutes at a time to induce acute stress, and held in captivity for at least eight weeks before being killed. Some were also given painful injections and further stressed when forced to undergo anesthesia, which involved additional restraint and injections. Wild animals, who are unused to handling, are particularly sensitive to the distressing and disorienting effects of anesthetics.
Lattin’s main conclusion? Wild birds don’t adjust well to captivity.
This groundbreaking discovery, on par with “water is wet,” makes her once again the winner of today’s “No Duh” Award.
Take action below to urge Louisiana State University, where Lattin now works, to stop her from continuing these twisted and useless experiments on its campus:
ACTION
World Animals Voice 