Category: Uncategorized

Tigers are in trouble.  The numbers of this charismatic species have declined by more than 95% in a century.  Whether or not the species can survive remains in doubt.  So, the participants at a tiger conservation summit in St. Petersburg, Russia, in 2010 decided that the tiger needed its own day to raise awareness of the animal’s plight.  Since then, International Tiger Day has been held each July 29. 

            The tiger (Panthera tigris) is the world’s largest cat, with males weighing up to 700 pounds.  Tigers are classified in a single species, but with six genetically distinct subspecies across its large range (taxonomists seem to be squabbling about this).  They are primarily solitary, maintaining large home ranges to provide sufficient prey for an appetite that can consume 80 pounds in one meal.  Tigers live up to 20 years in the wild, becoming reproductively mature in 4-5 years. Females have 2-4 cubs every other year. 

            Before humans started changing things, tigers lived throughout a huge range—in far eastern Russia, throughout southeastern Asia and in Malaysia.  Today, wild tigers inhabit only 7% of that former range, almost all in protected preserves.  About 70% of all wild tigers live in India; the other 30% are scattered among 12 other nations.  A century ago, as many as 100,000 tigers roamed freely, but today the population is about 4,000.  Multiple factors have impacted tigers—trophy harvest, habitat conversion, human-animal conflict, harvest for traditional medicines, and illegal poaching.  Ground tiger bone sells for as much as $115 per pound.  The combination of all these forces has led IUCN to classify the tiger as an “endangered species,” and CITES to place it on its Appendix I (no international trade).

            Conservation efforts have expanded since the 2010 tiger summit.  A goal was set then to double the world population of wild tigers—to 6,000 individuals—by 2022, the next Chinese Year of the Tiger.  The chosen strategy is an integrated habitat conservation program working across nations, organizations and local communities.  The biggest success has come from India, where the government has created 50 tiger reserves and whose tiger population has grown to 3,000.  Because populations in those reserves are growing, which forces some individuals into non-protected lands, the government is also working to create habitat corridors between reserves.  With a total worldwide population of about 4,000 wild tigers in 2020, however, reaching the goal of 6,000 by 2022 seems unlikely.

            Conservationists are quick to point out that saving tigers accomplishes so much more than just keeping one species—albeit a beautiful and meaningful one—alive.  Tigers are umbrella species, meaning that protecting their habitat protects a wide range of plants and animals that share their same ecosystem.  Tigers are also top predators, playing an important role in structuring the trophic levels below them.

            But perhaps it is enough to want to save tigers because they are, well, just tigers.

References:

BBC News.  2019.  India tiger census shows rapid population growth.  Available at:  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-49148174.  Accessed April 3, 2020.

IUCN.  2019.  International Tiger Day:  Celebrating an integrated approach for tiger conservation.  Available at:  https://www.iucn.org/news/species/201907/international-tiger-day-celebrating-integrated-approach-tiger-conservation. Accessed April 3, 2020.

IUCN.  Red List – Tiger Panthera tigris.  Available at:  https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/15955/50659951#taxonomy. Accessed April 3, 2020.

US Fish and Wildlife Service.  Tigers.  Available at:  https://www.fws.gov/international/animals/tigers.html. Accessed April 3, 2020.

World Wildlife Fund.  Species—Tiger, Facts.  Available at:  https://www.worldwildlife.org/species/tiger.  Accessed April 3, 2020.

Sagarmatha National Park in Nepal was created on July 19, 1976.  The centerpiece of the park is Mt. Sagarmatha, known to most of the world as Mt. Everest.

            Sagarmatha National Park encompasses 443 square miles of the highest region in the world, the Great Himalayan Range.  The name Sagarmatha comes from the local language, meaning “sky-head.”  Indeed, the region has its head in the sky.  Mt. Everest itself is 29,021 feet above sea level.  Most of the park lies above the tree line, with only lichens and other ground-hugging vegetation covering large expanses, and permanent snow-cover at the highest levels.  Only 3% of the park area is forested.

            The park is also home to the Sherpa people, the Nepali Buddhists known for a culture built around the high peaks.  About 7700 Sherpas live within the park, and preserving their heritage and culture is considered an important element of park management.  The combination of the world’s highest ecosystem and its attendant human culture prompted UNESCO to designate the park a World Heritage Site in 1979.

            The biodiversity of the park is minimal, but it provides habitat for many species uniquely adapted to high altitudes.  The endangered snow leopard, musk deer and red panda all call Sagarmatha home.  Within the park are headwaters of several major rivers and the Gokyo wetlands, a Ramsar designated wetland of international value.

            Visitation to the park continues to rise.  More than 45,000 tourists visit the park annually.  Most visitors are from the U.S., U.K. and Australia.  The biggest reason to visit is, of course, as Sir Edmund Hillary said, “because it is there.”  Climbing Mt. Everest attracts over 600 mountaineers annually.  More than 10,000 climbers and Sherpas have reached the top successfully since Hillary and Tenzing Norgay did so in 1953. A typical climb requires 39 days, allowing the body to adjust gradually to the decreasing oxygen.  In 2018, a record 670 people, climbers and their Sherpas, reached the summit.  Tragically, nearly 300 people have lost their lives pursuing the top of the mountain.

            All these people on the mountain for so long has earned Mt. Everest an unwelcome moniker—the world’s highest garbage dump.  Climbers leave a lot behind—tents, climbing gear, general trash, excrement—and getting it back down is strenuous and dangerous.  One climber remarked, “Everest is no longer a wilderness experience.  It’s a McDonald’s experience.”An annual ascent just to collect garbage began in 2007.  Participants have removed more than 20 tons of trash, but the problem continues.

            Taking pictures and leaving only footprints just doesn’t work on the world’s highest peak.

References:

Alanarnette.com.  Everest by the Numbers:  2019 Edition.  Available at:  https://www.alanarnette.com/blog/2017/12/17/everest-by-the-numbers-2018-edition/.  Accessed April 2, 2020.

Dundruk, Master Krugga.  2020.  Environmental Issues on Mt. Everest.  Tibet Travel, March 31, 2020.  Available at:  https://www.tibettravel.org/tibet-everest-base-camp-tour/everest-environmental-issues.html.  Accessed April 2, 2020.

Government of Nepal.  Sagarmatha National Park.  Available at:  http://www.sagarmathanationalpark.gov.np/. Accessed July 20, 2017.

Sehgal, Jasvinder.  2019.  Cleaning up Mount Everest – the world’s highest rubbish dump.  DW, 20.2.19.  Available at:  https://www.dw.com/en/cleaning-up-mount-everest-the-worlds-highest-rubbish-dump/a-47467115.  Accessed April 2, 2020.

UNESCO.  Sagarmatha National Park.  Available at:  http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/120.  Accessed July 20, 2017.

Among the world’s most interesting paradoxes—military intelligence, jumbo shrimp, Cubs win—are the words and ideas of James Lovelock.  As an environmentalist, he is both a pessimist and an optimist, the strident bearer of bad news and engagingly cheerful, a scientist and a prophet.

            James Ephraim Lovelock was born on July 26, 1919 (correct, he is over 100).  He loved the books of Jules Verne and H. G. Wells as a boy, which may explain his fascination with all things scientific and futuristic.  He received a B.S. in chemistry in 1941, Ph.D. in medicine in 1948, and D.Sc. in biophysics in 1959—and a wall-full of honorary doctorates since (his list of awards and achievements would make this entry unreadable)…  He spent two decades working for the British National Institute for Medical Research and a few years as a professor at Baylor University in Texas, where he did research for NASA and the Jet Propulsion Lab.

            During those years, he invented a number of important scientific instruments; he has applied for about 50 patents.  His most successful invention is the electron capture detector, used to detect the trace presence of chemicals.  The device became a standard tool for finding contaminants in food and the atmosphere.  The machine’s ability to detect DDT, PCBs and CFCs led to regulation of those contaminants, earning Lovelock’s an environmental status often compared to Rachel Carson’s. 

            In 1964, Lovelock quit working for others and became an independent scientist.  He has spent the years since then exploring the complex relationships among the various components of the earth’s ecosystem.  He originated the idea that the earth and its atmosphere comprise one “super-organism” in which the atmosphere, the earth’s physical surface and its biological inhabitants interact to regulate each other.  He called this the Gaia Hypothesis (now more commonly called the Gaia Theory), after the Greek earth goddess.  Once considered merely new-age mysticism, the theory is now a mainstream idea of climate science.  Lovelock defines Gaia as “a complex entity involving the Earth’s biosphere, atmosphere, oceans, and soil; the totality constituting a feedback or cybernetic system which seeks an optimal physical and chemical environment for life on this planet.”

            Lovelock holds strong environmental positions that put him at odds with other environmentalists.  He considers most actions to improve the environment—recycling, banning plastic bags, “ethical consumption”—as useless, except that they make us feel better.  He says, “I get an awful lot of people coming to me saying you can’t say that, because it gives us nothing to do.”  He advocates nuclear energy over other forms of renewable energy, arguing, “You’re never going to get enough energy from wind to run a society such as ours.  Windmills! Oh no.  No way of doing it.  You can cover the whole country with the blasted things, millions of them.  Waste of time.”

            He believes the earth will survive, though, just not the way it is now.  The earth’s ability to self-regulate is vigorous, and the various parts of it will adjust to new conditions.  Humans, however, might not survive, certainly not living the way we do in the numbers we now have.  He has written more than a dozen books about the subject, the most recent of which, Novacene, was published in 2019, when he turned 100.  The book predicts that highly intelligent robots will be able to figure a way out of the climate crisis, perhaps averting a major extinction event afterall.  If so, then “Whatever harm we have done to the Earth, we have, just in time, redeemed ourselves by acting simultaneously as parents and midwives to the cyborgs.”

            In the meantime, the upbeat side of Lovelock emerges.  He says, “Well, I’m cheerful!  I’m an optimist.  It’s going to happen.”  Asked what we should do now, Lovelock smiles, “Enjoy life while you can.  Because if you’re lucky it’s going to be 20 years before it hits the fan.”

References:

Aitkenhead, Decca.  2008.  James Lovelock: ‘Enjoy life while you can: in 20 years global warming will hit the fan.’  The Guardian, 1 Mar 2008.  Available at:  https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/2008/mar/01/scienceofclimatechange.climatechange. Accessed April 2, 2020.

Jameslovelock.com  Curriculum Vitae.  Available at:  http://www.jameslovelock.org/curriculum-vitae/.  Accessed April 2, 2020.

Radford, Tim.  2019.  James Lovelock at 100:  the Gaia saga continues.  Nature 25 June 2019.  Available at:  https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01969-y. Accessed April 2, 2020.

Rafferty, John P.  James Lovelock, English Chemist, Doctor, and Author.  Encyclopedia Britannica.  Available at:  https://www.britannica.com/biography/James-Lovelock. Accessed April 2, 2020.

Most of the articles about Jim Corbett start by emphasizing that one person being both a hunter and a conservationist is rare.  But that’s not true.  As students of conservation know, hunters have always been at the forefront of efforts to sustain wildlife and to protect wild places.  The legendary story of Jim Corbett proves the point.

            Edward James Corbett was born on July 25, 1875, the child of Irish immigrants to India (died 1955).  He lived in the Indian state of Uttarakhand, at the base of the Himalayas, in the far north of the country.  He spent his youth roaming the local forests, observing wildlife and absorbing the lessons of animal behavior.  A friend later wrote of Corbett’s love of nature, noting “that no man with whom I have hunted in any continent better understands the signs of the jungle.”

            As the 20^th Century began, so did the phenomenon of “man-eating tigers.”  More people meant less habitat for tigers and leopards, and more instances of what we today call human-wildlife interactions.  Mostly these interactions were fatal to the big cats, but occasionally they became fatal to humans.  As Corbett wrote, “Human beings are not the natural prey of tigers, and it is only when tigers have been incapacitated through wounds or old age that, in order to survive, they are compelled to take to a diet of human flesh.”

            These predators on rural villagers needed to be removed, and Jim Corbett became the man to do it.  Because of his understanding of the animals and the habitat—along with enduring patience, undaunted courage and good aim—Corbett was able to track and shoot troublesome tigers and leopards better than anyone.  He shot the famous Champawat tigress, estimated to have killed more than 400 humans.  Between 1907 and 1938, he reportedly killed 19 tigers and 14 leopards, all carefully verified by Corbett to be human-eaters.

            He became a legend, and he used his legendary status to protect, rather than exploit, his beloved tigers.  As he watched the increasing amount of hunting, he feared for the survival of the species.  Noting that “wildlife in India is a sinking ship,” he determined to reverse course.  He wrote six books, initially about his experiences as a hunter, using the draw of his adventures to tell a more important story:  “…a tiger is a large-hearted gentleman with boundless courage and when he is exterminated – as exterminated he will be unless public opinion rallies to his support – India will be the poorer by having lost the finest of her fauna.”  He created two nationwide organizations for wildlife protection, and he spent years speaking to school groups about conservation.

            Corbett realized that habitat was the critical need for protecting tigers (the fundamental tenet of conservation).  He used his fame to push for creation of India’s first national park, specifically as tiger habitat.  The park was created in 1936 and we renamed in 1957 in his honor as Jim Corbett National Park.  It holds the largest population of tigers in India, one of only two self-sustaining wild populations in the world.  The park preserves high levels of biodiversity, including 650 bird species of which more than 50 species are raptors, an endemic crocodile, and the Asian elephant.

            The park is also the original site for Project Tiger, the Indian government’s program to sustain the tiger.  Begun in 1973, the program now includes 50 reserves covering 2% of India’s land.  Tiger populations in the reserves continue to grow, reaching nearly 3000 in the 2018 census.

            Whether or not tigers can survive in nature is still in doubt.  But it is clear that India’s most famous tiger hunter is the person who set the stage for the glorious animal’s recovery.  He loved nature and encouraged others to love it, too:

“The book of nature has no beginning as it has no end. Open the book where you will, and at any period of your life, and If you have the desire to acquire knowledge, you will find it of immense interest and no matter how long or how intently you study the pages your interest will not flag for in nature there is no finality.”

References:

Buncombe, Andrew.  2007.  Hunter who turned to conservation:  The remarkable legacy of Tiger Jim.  The Independent, 1 November 2007.  Available at:  https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/hunter-who-turned-to-conservation-the-remarkable-legacy-of-tiger-jim-398493.html. Accessed April 1, 2020.

Corbett National Park.  About Jim Corbett National Park.  Available at:  https://www.corbettnationalpark.in/. Accessed April 1, 2020.

Kumar, Taruni.  2019.  Jim Corbett:  The Hunter, the Conservationist, the Legend.  The Quint, 07.08.19.  Available at:  https://www.thequint.com/news/world/jim-corbett-the-hunter-the-conservationist-the-legend. Accessed April 1, 2020.

National Tiger Conservation Authority.  Details of Tiger estimation for the year 2006, 2010, 2014, and 2018.  Available at:  https://projecttiger.nic.in/content/39_1_Reports.aspx.  Accessed April 1, 2020.

The Logical Indian.  2017.  Jim Corbett:  From a Hunter To A Conservationist, The Man Behind India’s Oldest National Park.  Available at:  https://thelogicalindian.com/rewind/jim-corbett-from-a-hunter-to-a-conservationist-the-man-behind-indias-oldest-national-park/?infinitescroll=1. Accessed April 1, 2020.

Whales are among the world’s most beloved animals.  They are large mammals whose complex social behavior enthralls humans.  We love to watch them, listen to them, draw them and cuddle with stuffed resemblances.  And, for most of history, we loved to capture them, eat their flesh and use their body oils for energy.

            That all changed with a decision by the International Whaling Commission (IWC) on July 23, 1982.  The IWC’s members voted to enact a moratorium on commercial whaling to begin in 1986 and continue indefinitely.  The rule affected the “schedule,” which is the allowable catch of whales, broken down by species, stock and location.  A table that had filled many pages with numbers could now be reduced to just one number—0.  The decision stated that “Notwithstanding the other provisions of paragraph 10, catch limits for the killing for commercial purposes of whales from all stocks for the 1986 coastal and the 1985/86 pelagic seasons and thereafter shall be zero.”  Every two years, the IWC meets to update the schedule (and do much other work to conserve whales and their relatives), and at every meeting since 1982, the organization has maintained the moratorium.

            But it isn’t quite that simple because small amounts of whaling continue.  First, member nations can file an “objection” to the ban, making them exempt from following it.  Norway has done so since the beginning, and it conducts commercial whaling for minke whales along its coast.  Second, a nation can simply withdraw from the IWC.  Iceland did so for about a decade in the 1990s, but it has since rejoined—but with an objection that allows the country to continue hunting whales.  Third, the prohibition on commercial whaling still allows whale harvest by aboriginal peoples in Alaska, Canada and Russia.

            The real controversy in the moratorium (in the general IWC rules, actually), however, has been the provision for “scientific whaling.”  A member nation can capture and kill whales, if necessary, to improve understanding of whale population dynamics—rates of reproduction, paths of migration, rates of growth, overall health of the animals.  Japan conducted such scientific whaling since the beginning of the moratorium, which has always been a source of diplomatic stress and some violent confrontations.  In 2018, Japan withdrew from the IWC and has now resumed whaling around its coasts.

            Without question, however, the IWC in general and the moratorium in particular have been successful.  The killing of whales has declined precipitously; more than 2 million whales were killed in the century before the moratorium, a small fraction of that since.  The reduced hunting pressure has allowed stocks of m0st whale species to rebound.  The western South Atlantic stock of humpback whales, for example, has increased from 1,000 to nearly 25,000 over the course of the moratorium. 

            As has been the story with species after species of wild animals, when hunting pressure drops, a species can recover.  And when the world comes together for the cause of conservation, conservation even the most critical cases can recover, too.

References:

Greenpeace.  International Whaling Commission.  https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/oceans/save-the-whales/international-whaling-commission/.  Accessed March 31, 2020.

International Whaling Commission.  History and purpose.  Available at:  https://iwc.int/history-and-purpose. Accessed March 31, 2020.

Whiting, Kate.  2019.  This is how humans have affected whale populations over the years.  World Economic Forum, 26 Oct 2019.  Available at:  https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/10/whales-endangered-species-conservation-whaling/. Accessed March 31, 2020.

World Wildlife Fund.  2005.  The History of Whaling and the International Whaling Commission (IWC).  Available at:  https://wwf.panda.org/?13796/The-History-of-Whaling-and-the-International-Whaling-Commission-IWC.  Accessed March 31, 2020.

Today commemorates the day when the Pied Piper of Hamelin performed his evil plot to lure the children away from their homes.  Historians vacillate between two possible dates, but July 22, 1376, seems to hold the advantage.  Hamelin is a town in Germany, where they call this tale the “Ratcatcher of Hamelin.”  The day has evolved to the charming cause of celebrating the hard work of pest exterminators.

            As you’ll remember, before the Pied Piper took the children away, he was called in to get rid of the city’s rats.  He did so—by playing magical music on his flute—but then the fine folks of Hamelin refused to pay.  So, he used his magic on the town’s children.  But let’s focus on his ability to get rid of the rats.  And that brings us to today’s topic—wildlife damage management.

            Wildlife damage management (WDM) is an important part of conservation.  It isn’t the first thing that conservation students think of as a career option, but it is where many find themselves later.  Wildlife can be like the definition of a weed—a plant where it isn’t wanted—because sometimes humans and wildlife don’t mix well.  As a consequence, the conflict needs to be handled.  The definition of wildlife damage management is “an activity that tries to balance the needs of humans with the needs of wildlife, to the enhancement of both.”

            While we praise the value of wildlife, our beloved animals also exact a cost on human needs for food, shelter and transportation. The federal agency in charge of WDM is the Wildlife Service branch of the Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS).  That agency estimated in 2001 that wildlife caused $944 million in damage to agricultural crops, so the figure is surely over $1 billion by now.  More than half of all farmers and ranchers reported losses from wildlife.  Most of that damage is caused by animals eating crops—a totally natural thing for both herbivores and carnivores to do.

            A more specific and particular aspect of negative human-wildlife interaction is the car-animal collision, mostly involving deer.  The National Highway Safety Administration estimates that about 1.5 million deer-related accidents occur annually, causing 175-200 human deaths, more than 10,000 injuries and over $1 billion in property damage.  The highest frequency of animal-vehicle collisions is in West Virginia, where 1 in 38 drivers is likely to hit a deer every year.  Montana, Pennsylvania, South Dakota and Iowa round out the top five.

            WDM experts work mostly to reduce impacts in and around our homes.  The Wisconsin Extension Service recommends several strategies, most of which do not involve killing animals.   First, they suggest installing barriers to keep unwanted animals out—caps on chimneys, wire skirts around elevated decks, netting over berry patches.  Second, if necessary, hire a WDM expert to capture a troublesome animal and relocate it elsewhere.  Third, use repellents that animals don’t like to smell or taste, like hydrogen sulfide sprays for shrubs and flowers, or place objects outside to scare animals away. 

            But the more effective strategies are to change the way you interact with animals.  Assess your property and remove items that attract animals, like brush piles, standing water, firewood stacked against a wall, trash containers where animals can find a meal.  Plant flowers and shrubs that animals won’t eat (many lists are available).  Don’t feed animals, intentionally (e.g., putting out food for those cute furry squirrels or chipmunks) or unintentionally (using bird feeders that other animals can get into, or putting bowls of pet food outside). 

            But always remember this—if you do engage a WDM professional, the modern day Pied Piper of Hamelin, be sure to pay her!

References:

Caryl-Sue.  2014.  Jul 22, 1376 CE:  Ratcatcher’s Day.  National Geographic Resource Library.  Available at:  https://www.nationalgeographic.org/thisday/jul22/ratcatchers-day/.  Accessed March 30, 2020. 

Craven, Scott and David Drake.  2012.  An Introduction to Wildlife Damage Management.  Wisconsin Extension Service.  Available at:  http://wildlifedamage.uwex.edu/pdf/Introduction.pdf.  Accessed March 30, 2020. 

Dalbey, Beth.  2019.  Deer Collisions Across The U.S.:  The Odds of Hitting Animals.  Patch, Oct 3, 2019.  Available at:  https://patch.com/us/across-america/deer-collisions-across-u-s-odds-hitting-animals. Accessed March 30, 2020. 

Internet Center for Wildlife Damage Management.  What is Wildlife Damage Management (WDM)?  Available at:  http://icwdm.org/. Accessed March 30, 2020. 

US Department of Agriculture.  2012.  Managing Wildlife Damage to Crops and Aquaculture.  Available at:  https://www.aphis.usda.gov/wildlife_damage/informational_notebooks/2012/Protecting_Agriculture_combined.pdf. Accessed March 30, 2020. 

            The man often called “the first ecologist” is Gilbert White, British clergyman, gardener and naturalist, born July 18, 1720 (died 1793).  White lived most of his adult life in the English village of Selborne in the county of Hampshire, about an hour south of London.  He was educated at Oxford and was ordained in 1749, soon to become the vicar of Selborne.

            White was an ardent gardener and gained an early reputation as a keen observer of the environmental factors that impacted cultivated crops.  He published a calendar of his observations that became a guide for farmers and gardeners in the region.  He loved animals and kept a menagerie, including a pet tortoise named Timothy.

            His true legacy, however, has come from his similar keen observations of nature itself.  Unlike naturalists of his time, who mostly examined dead specimens of animals in order to describe their appearance, White focused on living animals and their interactions with others and their environment—hence his recognition as the first ecologist.  For example, he differentiated three species of birds based on their songs and behavior, presaging the work of Charles Darwin in the next century.  Despite being a clergyman, he didn’t shrink from the realities of the natural world:

“As the swift or black-martin is the largest of the British hirundines, so is it undoubtedly the latest comer. For I remember but one instance of its appearing before the last week in April: and in some of our late frosty, harsh springs, it has not been seen till the beginning of May. This species usually arrives in pairs…. If any person would watch these birds of a fine morning in May, as they are sailing round at a great height from the ground, he would see, every now and then, one drop on the back of another, and both of them sink down together for many fathoms with a loud piercing shriek. This I take to be the juncture when the business of generation is carrying on.”

            Over a period of twenty years, he recorded his observations in a series of letters to fellow naturalists.  With the help of his brother, he compiled 110 of those letters into a book, The Natural History and Antiquities of Selborne, published in 1789.  The book instantly became a classic of natural history.  It has remained in print continuously since then, in more than 300 editions, and is said to be the fourth most published book in England (after The Bible, The Complete Works of Shakespeare and The Pilgrim’s Progress)

            White’s home in Selborne, The Wakes, is now a National Trust Property in England.

References:

Come Step Back In Time (blog).  2013.  Gilbert White—The Parson Naturalist of Selborne, Hampshire.  Available at:  https://comestepbackintime.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/gilbert-white-the-parson-naturalist-of-selborne-hampshire/.  Accessed July 18, 2017.

Encyclopedia Britannica.  Gilbert White, English Naturalist and Clergyman.  Available at:  https://www.britannica.com/biography/Gilbert-White-English-naturalist-and-clergyman. Accessed July 18, 2017.

Gilbert White House & The Oates Collection.  The Reverend Gilbert White 1720-1793.  Available at:  http://gilbertwhiteshouse.org.uk/Gilbert-White/. Accessed July 18, 2017.

If the game show Family Feud asked contestants which species of wild animals Americans most loved and hated, I’m sure that the giant panda and sharks would make the list.  Fortunately, they both made a much more important list on this date in 2006—the list of World Heritage Sites.

            UNESCO (the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization; learn more about UNESCO here) maintains a list of unique areas around the world that should be preserved for their cultural or natural heritage.  About half those sites are recognized for their natural features.  Each year, UNESCO reviews and makes changes to the list.  At the 2006 meeting, on July 16, only two sites were added to the list, both for their natural heritage—the Malpelo Fauna and Flora Sanctuary in Colombia and the Sichuan Giant Panda Sanctuaries in China.

            The Malpelo Sanctuary is a small island (about 800 acres) about 300 miles off the coast of Colombia.  The land area is important, but the surrounding marine reserve is massive, covering nearly 2 million acres.  This “marine wilderness”  is remote and largely unaffected by human modification. The water is deep, with rugged underwater canyons, cliffs, walls and other features.  Several currents converge there, funneling richly nutritious water into the area.  Consequently, the density and diversity of marine organisms is exceptional, especially for shark species and other top predators.  The sanctuary is also home to 17 marine mammals, 7 marine reptiles, nearly 400 fish species and more than 300 mollusks.

            UNESCO also added the Sichuan Giant Panda Sanctuaries in 2006.  These sanctuaries provide the largest contiguous area of giant panda habitat remaining in China (which also means in the world).  Giant pandas once lived over a much larger portion of China, but now are restricted to a series of mountain ranges in the southwestern province of Sichuan.  The sanctuaries, which encompass a number of separate nature reserves and parks, cover about 2 million acres and another 1.2 million acres of buffer zones.

            The sanctuaries are home to 30% of all giant pandas living in the wild (the total is getting close to 2,000 individuals).   The ecosystem is described as a relict of tropical forests that existed millions of years ago during the Tertiary.  It has exceptionally high plant diversity for a temperate region, with nearly 6,000 described species.  Hundreds of traditional Chinese medicinal plants grow there, making the sanctuaries especially important as a refuge from overharvest.  The diverse flora supports a similarly diverse fauna.  Over 100 mammal species live there (20% of all Chinese mammals), including the red panda, snow leopard and clouded leopard.  Bird species number over 300, including many endemic species. 

            The Chinese government’s efforts to conserve the giant panda have worked well.  These large sanctuaries have been accompanied by reforestation of buffer zones and establishment of travel corridors between preserves, extending the available habitat for wild giant pandas.  Captive breeding at several research centers has produced hundreds of young available for re-introduction into natural habitats.  The success is real:  In the 1980s, IUCN assessed the giant panda as rare; in the 1990s, its status was upgraded to endangered; and in 2016, its status was upgraded again, to vulnerable. 

References:

IUCN.  Red list – Giant Panda, Ailuropoda melanolecua.  Available at:    https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/712/121745669#assessment-information.  Accessed March 27, 2020.

UNESCO World Heritage Centre.  Malpelo Fauna and Flora Sanctuary.  Available at:  https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1216/.  Accessed March 27, 2020.

UNESCO World Heritage Centre.  Sichuan Giant Panda Sanctuaries—Wolong, Mt Siguniang and Jiajin Mountains.  Available at:  https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1213/.  Accessed March 27, 2020.

“Votes for Women” was the battle cry of the suffragette movement during the last decades of the 19^th Century and the first decades of the 20^th Century.  The most famous—and fearsome—leader of that movement in England was Emmeline Pankhuurst, born on this day in 1858.  Mrs. Pankhurst was not an environmentalist, but her demands for equality for women provide an opportunity to talk about the same issue about the environment (want to read about a woman who was both a conservationist and a suffragette? read about Rosalie Edge here).

            Although Pankhurst achieved her goal of gaining votes for women in 1918, (and the same occurred in the U.S. in 1920), we still struggle to accept women as full and equal participants in all aspects of modern life. Consider, for example, that despite my best efforts, men appear in these calendar listings much more frequently than women. This is especially true in developing countries and distressingly true for matters affecting the environment and sustainable development. 

            We know that the best strategy for reducing population growth and expanding environmental consciousness is to educate girls and women.  This was a fundamental goal of the Millennium Declaration, and occurs throughout the 17 Sustainable Development Goals.  One goal (Goal 5) is devoted entirely to Gender Equality.  Although progress is being made, women still hold only 25% of parliamentary seats and 27% of managerial positions worldwide.  And the U.S. has yet to have a woman president.

            Agenda 21 of the UN Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 (UNCED, or the Rio Conference) devoted an entire chapter (24) to “Global Action for Women Towards Sustainable and Equitable Development.”  It specifically called on governments “to increase the proportion of women involved as decision makers, planners, managers, scientists and technical advisers in the design, development and implementation of policies and programmes for sustainable development.”  It lists goals to eliminate female illiteracy, improve women’s reproductive health, establish women’s rights to own land, and many other specifics.  Because environmental impacts (climate change, pollution, land-use changes) tend to harm women and children disproportionately, Agenda 21 considered gender equality an urgent imperative.

            The Convention on Biological Diversity has taken a leadership role in developing an action plan for enhancing gender equality.  The program acknowledges that women throughout the developing world have the closest relationship with the environment—gathering wood and water, tending subsistence farms, and managing households.  These roles make their knowledge and participation essential to better place-based decisions about sustainability.

            The IUCN has developed an “Environment and Gender Information” project that examines the gender equality of environmental programs around the world.  The EGI uses keyword analysis to examine how programs incorporate gender in their published documents.  The results vary, of course, but in general about 1 in 3 recognize the importance of gender-specific ideas and actions.

Today there are many websites dedicated to telling the stories of women involved in conservation and the environment. Too many, fortunately, for me to list, but you all know how to search the Internet better than I do–so do it!

            If we wish for our world to be sustainable, then we should add a few more slogans to Mrs. Pankhurst’s “Votes for Women.”  Let our signs today say, “Education for Women,” “Decisions by Women,” and “Leadership by Women!”

References:

Convention on Biological Diversity.  2015-2020 Gender Plan of Action.  Available at:  https://www.cbd.int/gender/action-plan/. Accessed March 26, 2020

Global Development Research Center.  Agenda 21, Chapter 24.  Available at:  http://www.gdrc.org/ngo/agenda21/ch-24.html. Accessed March 26, 2020

IUCN.  Environment and Gender Information platform.  Available at:  https://genderandenvironment.org/egi/.  Accessed March 26, 2020.

Purvis, June.  Pankhurst (nee Goulden), Emmeline.  Oxford Dictionary of National Biography.  Available at:  https://www.oxforddnb.com/view/10.1093/ref:odnb/9780198614128.001.0001/odnb-9780198614128-e-35376. Accessed March 26, 2020

UN Women.  Progress on the Sustainable Development Goals, The Gender Snapshot 2019.  Available at:  https://www.unwomen.org/-/media/headquarters/attachments/sections/library/publications/2019/progress-on-the-sdgs-the-gender-snapshot-2019-two-page-spreads-en.pdf?la=en&vs=5814. Accessed March 26, 2020

A calendar entry that unites the qualities of water with the qualities of art always seems appropriate, even though picking a particular day to honor this relationship is a bit problematic.  Water symbolizes so much—tranquility or excitement, beauty or terror, peacefulness or power. I can imagine no one who doesn’t think fondly of the rejuvenating experience of a day on, in, under, or near the water.  Water is the inspiration for art, poetry and music.  And, so, symbolically, I have chosen today to represent the link between water and art—July 17, 1717, when composer George Frideric Handel first performed the pieces we now call Water Music.

            Handel was a classical composer of the Baroque age and style—lots of ornate music played with lots of instruments and lots of gusto.  He was born in 1685 in Germany and by age 25 had earned a reputation as one of the great young composers of operatic music in Europe.  His continuing fame stems mostly from his masterpiece, Messiah, the towering composition usually played at Christmas or Easter to celebrate the life of Jesus of Nazareth.

            Water Music is an entirely different sort of composition, for a very different sort of occasion and purpose.  Handel had moved to London in the early 1700s, given permission for a short stay by his patron, the German Elector of Hanover.  However, Handel stayed much longer than his patron expected and took up permanent residence in London.  Unfortunately for Handel, the vagaries of royalty caused a bizarre succession of power, and his patron became King George I of England in 1714. Handel worried what would happen when he and the King met again.

            But, by 1717, King George was suffering a lack of popularity.  His advisors came up with an idea to change his reputation:  Have a big boating party on the River Thames.  King George agreed, and added that he wanted new music for the trip.  The idea was for the king and his friends to float upstream with the tide on a “barge” (think luxury yacht, not a coal-ferrying bathtub) from the government docks in central London upstream to Chelsea, where they would have dinner and float back down after the tide changed.  Handel was secretly given the musical task:  Write and conduct a composition to be played on an accompanying barge to entertain the king and his guests.

            The boating party was a huge success, with many other boats accompanying the king’s barge.  “…so great a Number of Boats, that the whole River in a manner was cover’d,” wrote a contemporary reporter.  Handel composed a large number of individual pieces (somewhere between 13 and 20, reports vary), some quite loud to be played when the barges drifted apart, some softer for when the barges drifted together.  Today the individual pieces are usually played in three “suites,” but the order of their performance on the original trip is unknown.

            King George loved it!  So much so that he made the performers play over and over on the trip upstream and again downstream, in the early hours of the next day.  Again, reports differ but probably the entire set was played through at least three times, perhaps as many as six times.  Handel’s patronage was restored—only now he was the composer to the Court of the King of England!

            One final piece of mystical musical history.  The date of the event and the music’s premier performance was 7-17-1717, a palindrome to make numerologists salivate.  Go sit by some water and mediate on that.

References:

Classical notes.  George Frideric Handel—Water Music and The Music for the Royal Fireworks.  Available at:  http://www.classicalnotes.net/classics/watermusic.html.  Accessed July 17, 2017.

GFHandel.org.  George Frideric Handel, 1685-1759.  Available at:  http://gfhandel.org/index.html. Accessed July 17, 2017.

Kramer, J. D.  1988.  Listen to the Music.  A Self-Guided Tour Through the Orchestral Repertoire.  Schrimer Books, New York.  816 pages.

Schwarm, Betsy.  Water Music.  Encyclopedia Britannica.  Available at:  https://www.britannica.com/topic/Water-Music. Accessed July 17, 2017.