Slashdot Mirror


Insect Collapse: 'We Are Destroying Our Life Support Systems' (theguardian.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Scientist Brad Lister returned to Puerto Rican rainforest after 35 years to find 98% of ground insects had vanished. His return to the Luquillo rainforest in Puerto Rico after 35 years was to reveal an appalling discovery. The insect population that once provided plentiful food for birds throughout the mountainous national park had collapsed. On the ground, 98% had gone. Up in the leafy canopy, 80% had vanished. The most likely culprit by far is global warming. "It was just astonishing," Lister said. "Before, both the sticky ground plates and canopy plates would be covered with insects. You'd be there for hours picking them off the plates at night. But now the plates would come down after 12 hours in the tropical forest with a couple of lonely insects trapped or none at all."

"We are essentially destroying the very life support systems that allow us to sustain our existence on the planet, along with all the other life on the planet," Lister said. "It is just horrifying to watch us decimate the natural world like this." Lister calls these impacts a "bottom-up trophic cascade", in which the knock-on effects of the insect collapse surge up through the food chain. "I don't think most people have a systems view of the natural world," he said. "But it's all connected and when the invertebrates are declining the entire food web is going to suffer and degrade. It is a system-wide effect." To understand the global scale of an insect collapse that has so far only been glimpsed, Lister says, there is an urgent need for much more research in many more habitats. "More data, that is my mantra," he said.

15 of 401 comments (clear)

  1. Total agreement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    5 step plan to fixing this, fast.

    1. Remove 2 billion people from the planet.

    2. HVDC lines built to all major deserts.

    3. All major deserts covered in as much solar power as we can build.

    4. LFTR reactor research funded to pre-Jimmy-Carter levels.

    5. Ban coal power outright.

    Keep in mind that if we want to reverse the damage, we need to build excess power capacity (a lot of it) to pull CO2 out of the air as a feedstock for hydrocarbons or some other sequestration.

    1. Re:Total agreement by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 2, Interesting

      6. Escalating taxes on fossil fools for transportation use. The aim should be to phase them out for ground transport within 20 years, worldwide.

      7. Ban all unnecessary use of pesticides and herbicides. Agriculture is a valid use if used in moderation; so is disease control. Having a perfect, green lawn in your boring shithole of a suburb is NOT a valid use.

    2. Re:Total agreement by flink · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Remove 2 billion people from the planet.

      There is really no need for that. We have basically got population growth under control, with the fertility rate being around static (2.2) in most places. Yes, even third world countries.

      The population is still growing because people are living longer. But it's levelling off, and at a level which is sustainable with modern farming methods and renewable energy.

      In the longer term, past 2100, the population will probably fall as the fertility rate continues to decline

      Modern farming techniques aren't sustainable. Modern farming relies on tapping fossil water (aquifers), mining phosphorus, and petro chemicals. All of these are exhaustible resources. And beyond that fertilizer runoff in waterways, excessive antibiotics used to raise livestock, and pesticides are all ecological disasters in their own right.

      I'm not saying that we should just stop all those things now and let a bunch of people starve, but we need to realize we are drawing down resources in decades that were built up over millions of years. We should do our best to improve these practices, figure out how many people actually sustainable agriculture and industry can support, and work on getting our birthrate down below replacement until we hit that number.

      And of course, we'd have to come up with an economic system that isn't predicated on constant growth. Right now several countries that have flat or negative growth rates are running PR campaigns and social programs to incentivize people to have more children to stave off economic repercussions of a shrinking population.

  2. monocropping annuls & ecosystem destruction by js290 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "Name one ecosystem that is better off for having agriculture moved into it?" Toby Hemenway http://bit.ly/1pnapoW

    --
    "Tempers are wearing thin. Let's just hope some robot doesn't kill everybody." --Bender
  3. Deja Propaganda narrative, yours. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    You danced, did you prove anything? no. All you did is "re-convince" yourself that no change was needed on your part. How convenient that you come to that conclusion every time, without any expertise or data. Interesting.

  4. 6th mass extinction event by ihaveamo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    We are in the midst of a huge mass extinction event. It's up to us, our generation, to save what little we can for future generations. If humanity gets through this.. it will be our time RIGHT NOW that will be judged harshly. Grow plants, create pools for insects in your yard. Do whatever you can. At least, lucky for us, we have strong leaders who want to do something about it.

    1. Re:6th mass extinction event by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

      > We are in the midst of a huge mass extinction event.

      The world needs less people (the cause of this catastrophe). I, for one, welcome the less populated earth.

      Fuck them all.

    2. Re:6th mass extinction event by Gilgaron · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There's not enough time to recycle for another species to take over. When the huge coal seams and oil were buried in the carboniferous period, there were not microbes that could digest lignin. So, no successor of ours will ever get as much fossil fuel to jump start their development. If the insect population truly and irreversibly collapses, there won't be any vertebrates left anyway.

  5. It's a rainforest without rain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's a rainforest, didn't you even read the summary? I mean I get it, it's nice to see you're trying a *deflection* instead of a flat out "no global warming", but you might at least try something closer to Puerto Rico's rainforest. e.g. blame hurricanes or brown people or something.

    https://19january2017snapshot.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-09/documents/climate-change-pr.pdf

    It seems to have faced a 2.5 F degree rise in sea temperature since 1900 with a loss or rainfall and 4 inch rise in sea level since the 1960s. So the rainfall is likely to be the cause. So yeh, Global Warming.

    1. Re:It's a rainforest without rain by Luckyo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This is the new narrative among those pushing the most catastrophist view of global warming.

      As usual with such views, they ignore all of the obvious elephants in the room, such as massive escalation of war on malaria which is purposefully designed to destroy as much insect habitat as possible to save tens to hundreds of millions of human lives, or significant increase in agricultural efficiency due to insecticide usage having spread to developing counties and spreading of farmlands into rainforest areas. None of these things that are literally targeting insect populations are relevant, nope. It's the global warming.

  6. Might want to re-read your PDF by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's a rainforest, didn't you even read the summary?

    Pretty amusing coming from someone who did not even read the PDF he posted...

    It seems to have faced a 2.5 F degree rise in sea temperature since 1900 with a loss or rainfall

    We aren't talking about sea insects, now are we? Your OWN PDF states PR has seen a 1*F* (not even C) increase in land temperatures since mid 20th century... vastly less than seasonal variation.

    Furthermore the paper speculated rainfall MIGHT lower, based on... nothing at all.

    In reality rainfall has been cyclical but remained fairly steady (click on "MAX" below the chart).

    This would be obvious to anyone who understands the effect of heat on large bodies of water, which surround PR.... A warmer climate means MORE RAINFALL which I cannot believe how few people, even now, understand.

    Sorry to disturb your manufactured panic with actual real data... carry on.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  7. Most likely cause? by bobstreo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    After not being bothered to check on the insect count for 35 years, is it a coincidence this count occurred a little more than a year after Hurricane Maria?

    I'm guessing a category 4 hurricane doesn't do insect populations any favors.

  8. Re:Not just the rain forest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes. I "hear" that silence here in France too. That silence is frightening me. Nobody under 20 would understand and the others mostly don't care or don't notice

    Another german study on insect collapse https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-017-04774-7

  9. More than a rainforest without rain by budha_burger · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's not just the rainforest. In the Catskills and Hudson Valley of New York, the insect population has been devastated. There were practically no crickets or katydids in Kingston in September and October. It was wierd. The zombies living around me scarcely noticed. People are oblivious or in deep denial. There's been no sudden deforestation, uptick in heavy industry...hell we even cleaned up a few Superfund sites. And except for some drought in the late 90's or early 2000's the climate has not been exceptionally hot, cold or dry. Just damn irregular. Something else is going on -- or we reached a global ticking point. Personally I find it hard to imagine that so many species, especially hardy ones with plenty of food like crickets, katydids and moths, suddenly reached a tipping point due to our local climate change. "Chemtrails" perhaps? Who the fuck knows.

  10. Re:AGW by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This sort of shrill hyperbolic alarmism is counterproductive to getting people to take climate change seriously.

    I keep saying that.

    If anybody's wondering why folks like me are skeptical, it's because of decades of shrill alarmism.

    If you were trying to make skeptics, you couldn't have done a better job.