Not So Many Wings, Need a Lot More Prayers

The decline in the North American bird population is staggering but is highly reflective of avian life the world over. A study published in Science in mid-September, based on detailed analyses of bird surveys, radar data and other empirical studies conducted since 1970, presented the bad news. Simply put, the North American bird population has declined by 2.9 billion, across 529 bird species. While biologists suspected significant declines in bird population, the sheer number caught the scientific community by surprise. Overall, a 29% decline.

Amina Khan, writing for the September 21^st Los Angeles Times, grapples with the ramification of such a steep reduction in our avian population: “‘Three billion was a pretty astounding number for us,’ said lead author Kenneth Rosenberg, a conservation scientist at Cornell University and the American Bird Conservancy… Steven Beissinger, a conservation biologist at UC Berkeley, called the results and their implications ‘dizzying.’… ‘I was pretty surprised,’ said Beissinger, who was not involved in the study. ‘We don’t usually think in billions of birds.’

“Of those lost birds, 90% came from just 12 bird families that include common and widespread species such as sparrows, swallows, warblers and finches… Declines in the abundance of common species may not seem as dramatic as the endangerment of rare ones, but it is a very serious form of ecosystem erosion, the scientists said.

“That’s because abundant species often play important roles in their biomes, whether they control pests, pollinate flowers, disperse seeds, provide food for other animals and even contribute to the natural beauty of an area that draws tourists who support local economies… ‘When you’re losing abundance, you’re losing the fabric of the food chains, the fabric of the ecosystems — more perhaps than losing one rare species,’ Rosenberg said.

“It’s hard to say what ecosystem services have been lost or degraded because of the loss of birds over the last half-century, Beissinger said. For example, if there were more birds around to eat bugs, farmers might be using less pesticide.

“Other formerly common species have fallen from mere loss of abundance to elimination… Rosenberg pointed to the example of the passenger pigeon. Once it was probably the most abundant bird on the planet, but it was hunted into extinction by 1914. He added that the trend line of passenger pigeons’ losses looks similar to the trend seen in the new study [noted above], according to work by one of his coauthors, Jessica Stanton of the U.S. Geological Survey.

“‘Nobody ever thought the passenger pigeon would go extinct — and it did in a relatively short period,’ Rosenberg said. ‘We’re not saying these other birds are on their way to extinction, but it certainly should give us pause.’

“Across ecosystems, grassland birds — a group that includes sparrows and meadowlarks — were hit the hardest, the researchers said. Since 1970, their numbers have fallen by more than 720 million, representing 53% of the initial population.

“Taken together, more than 1 billion birds have been lost from all forest biomes. Shorebirds, long threatened by the draining of coastal wetlands and urbanization, saw declines of more than 37%. Even the 10 nonnative species counted in the paper experienced a population loss of 63%.

“The researchers did not weigh in on specific causes for these declines. But Rosenberg said other work has pointed to habitat loss, pollution, pesticides, and the intensification and expansion of agriculture as likely culprits.

“There were a few success stories in the data that could offer a road map for aiding other bird populations, Rosenberg said. Wetland birds, such as ducks and geese, have increased, primarily because of conservation efforts that protected wetland habitats over the last few decades. (Much of that conservation was driven by hunters, who wanted to maintain healthy populations, he added.)”

As major gatherings of younger people the world over, millions of those concerned, mounted the largest climate change protest in history, as they raised their voices to let their elders know that it would be they who would suffer the most from the escalating environmental damage, the litany of bad news – from species loss, climate change, pollution and deforestation – suggested that the majority of the earth’s future population would live on a seriously environmentally degraded planet. This is the legacy of failed leadership, greedy corporations, unsustainable contributions to greenhouse gasses and contracting forests, jungles and undersea plant life. 

No one on earth typifies the disdain for the required responsibility to restore a livable planet than Donald Trump. His legacy is one of climate change denial, withdrawal from international treaties focused on the reduction of greenhouse gasses, opening of national parks and off-shore tracts to raw exploitation with the accompanying environmental degradation, encouraging greater usage of fossil fuels, granting permission for industrial polluters to dump their effluents into the atmosphere, public waterways and onto public lands, and desperately fighting environmental programs – like California’s 50-year practice of imposing increasing restrictions on cars, fuel efficiency and permitted levels of greenhouse gasses. Clearly, history will depict his policies and practices in the unkindest light.  But exactly what will life be like in 50 or 100 years?

              I’m Peter Dekom, and the canary in the coal mine died a while ago… but why we still have coal mines is difficult to comprehend in 2019.