Category Archives: Corpocracy

Headline of the day: Zuckerberg’s rotten riches


From the Intercept, greed trumps decency, or how the rich get richer:

Facebook Allowed Advertisers to Target Users Interested in “White Genocide” — Even in Wake of Pittsburgh Massacre

  • Earlier this week, The Intercept was able to select “white genocide conspiracy theory” as a pre-defined “detailed targeting” criterion on the social network to promote two articles to an interest group that Facebook pegged at 168,000 users large and defined as “people who have expressed an interest or like pages related to White genocide conspiracy theory.”
Advertisements

The world’s last wilderness is rapidly disappearing


We’ve posted extensively about corporate agriculture’s major land granbs in Africa and Latin America’s Amazon Basin, but the sheer scale of land vanishing under the plow and the land developer’s bulldozer is simply astounding, as exemplified in this map just published by Nature:

More from the University of Queensland:

The world’s last wilderness areas are rapidly disappearing, with explicit international conservation targets critically needed, according to University of Queensland-led research.

The international team recently mapped intact ocean ecosystems, complementing a 2016 project [$2.99 for three-hour access] charting remaining terrestrial wilderness.

Professor James Watson, from UQ’s School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, said the two studies provided the first full global picture of how little wilderness remains, and he was alarmed at the results.

“A century ago, only 15 per cent of the Earth’s surface was used by humans to grow crops and raise livestock,” he said.

“Today, more than 77 per cent of land – excluding Antarctica – and 87 per cent of the ocean has been modified by the direct effects of human activities.

“It might be hard to believe, but between 1993 and 2009, an area of terrestrial wilderness larger than India — a staggering 3.3 million square kilometres — was lost to human settlement, farming, mining and other pressures.

“And in the ocean, the only regions that are free of industrial fishing, pollution and shipping are almost completely confined to the polar regions.”

UQ Postdoctoral Research Fellow James R. Allan said the world’s remaining wilderness could only be protected if its importance was recognised in international policy.

“Some wilderness areas are protected under national legislation, but in most nations, these areas are not formally defined, mapped or protected,” he said.

“There is nothing to hold nations, industry, society or communities to account for long-term conservation.

“We need the immediate establishment of bold wilderness targets — specifically those aimed at conserving biodiversity, avoiding dangerous climate change and achieving sustainable development.”

The researchers insist that global policy needs to be translated into local action.

“One obvious intervention these nations can prioritise is establishing protected areas in ways that would slow the impacts of industrial activity on the larger landscape or seascape,” Professor Watson said.

“But we must also stop industrial development to protect indigenous livelihoods, create mechanisms that enable the private sector to protect wilderness, and push the expansion of regional fisheries management organisations.

“We have lost so much already, so we must grasp this opportunity to secure the last remaining wilderness before it disappears forever.”

The article has been published in Nature [open, read-only access].

What’s the best fertilizer? We’re calling bullshit!


And we mean that literally.

The Agronomy Society of America reports on new research certain to put the wind up Big Agra:

In a newly published study, researchers dug into how fertilizing with manure affects soil quality, compared with inorganic fertilizer.

Ekrem Ozlu of the University of Wisconsin-Madison and his team studied two fields in South Dakota. From 2003 to 2015, the research team applied either manure or inorganic fertilizer to field plots growing corn and soybeans. They used low, medium, and high manure levels, and medium and high inorganic fertilizer levels. They also had a control treatment of no soil additives to provide a comparison.

In the summer of 2015, they collected soil samples at a variety of depths using a push probe auger. Then they analyzed the samples.

  • Manure helped keep soil pH—a measure of acidity or alkalinity—in a healthy range for crops. Inorganic fertilizer made the soil more acidic.
  • Manure increased soil organic carbon for all the measured soil depths compared to inorganic fertilizer and control treatments. More carbon means better soil structure.
  • Manure significantly increased total nitrogen compared to fertilizer treatments. Nitrogen is key to plant growth.
  • Manure increased water-stable aggregates. These are groups of soil particles that stick to each other. Increased water-stable aggregates help soil resist water erosion. Inorganic fertilizer application decreased these aggregates.
  • Manure increased soil electrical conductivity at all soil depths in comparison to inorganic fertilizer and control treatments. Higher soil electrical conductivity means higher salt levels in the soil.

Ozlu and his team concluded that long-term annual application of manure improved most soil quality properties compared to inorganic fertilizer. “Increased electrical conductivity is one of the few negative impacts of manure,” Ozlu said.

The team also measured the effects of larger and smaller doses of each treatment at different soil depths. This will provide useful guidance to growers.

So, what could a backyard gardener learn from this study? Ozlu said, “I recommend gardeners use composted manure, especially in solid form, because manure is the fertilizer that supports better soil quality by improving almost all soil properties. Inorganic fertilizer is better in terms of electrical conductivity, but it does not improve other soil properties and crop yields better than manure.”

Ozlu concluded, “If you think of soil as a heart, manure is the lifeblood going through it.”

This is a poetic view of manure, to be sure. But perhaps this humble yet enormously useful substance deserves a little poetry.

The research is published in Soil Science Society of America Journal [$15 for non-subscribers to access]. This research work was partially supported by the Agricultural Experiment Station (AES) of South Dakota State University (SDSU), and the General Directorate of Agricultural Research and Policies, Ministry of Food, Agriculture, and Livestock, Republic of Turkey.

No corporate research funds?

Gee, we wonder why?

Not really.

Is you pet Roundup Ready™? It better be. . .


Roundup™, Monsanto’s best-selling weed-killer has been the keystone of the agricultural giant’s genetically engineered crops,as well as the subject of endless controversies, ranging from the economic power GMO companies have amassed to contamination of other plants, the evolution of superweeds immune to the presticide [leading to an escalation to more dangerous herbicides], and the possible health impacts on animals, including the human kind. [See here for  our extensive collection of previous posts.]

A recent California verdict awarded $289 million to a groundskeeper dying of non-Hodgkin lymphoma who charged that his ailment stemmed directly from exposure to the herbicide, though the judge reduced the total to $78 million.

The company was sold in June to Germany’s Bayer, the German chemical-gint, but the flow of Roundup™ continues

And now comes word that glyphosate, the weedkiller’s active ingredient, is in your pet food.

While the author of the Cornell University study says the amounts are well below  the government’s danger threshhold, he’s stopped feeding the stuff to his own pet.

From Cornell University:

Got glyphosate?

Your pet’s breakfast might.

A new Cornell study published this month in Environmental Pollution finds that glyphosate, the active herbicidal ingredient in widely used weed killers like Roundup, was present at low levels in a variety of dog and cat foods the researchers purchased at stores. Before you go switching Fido or Fluffy’s favorite brand, however, be aware that the amounts of the herbicide found correspond to levels currently considered safe for humans.

The study grew out of a larger interdisciplinary research project led by Brian Richards, senior research associate in biological and environmental engineering, and supported by the Atkinson Center for a Sustainable Future’s Academic Venture Fund, which sought to reassess glyphosate mobility and impacts in several contexts: movement from crop fields in surface water, impacts on soils and on animals consuming it in their feed.

Richard’s co-investigators Anthony Hay, associate professor of microbiology, and Kenneth Simpson, professor of small-animal medicine, visited a pet store and a retail outlet, where they selected multiple bags of cat and dog foods from major brands. The 18 feeds were all mixtures of vegetable and meat ingredients, and one product was certified GMO-free. Analyses conducted by postdoctoral researcher and lead author Jiang Zhao in Hay’s lab, and research support specialist Steve Pacenka, found that all of the products contained glyphosate at concentrations ranging from approximately 80 to 2,000 micrograms of glyphosate per kilogram.

Since there is not enough data available to determine what effect – if any – low-dose glyphosate exposure has on domestic animals, the researchers used human acceptable daily intake guidelines to put these findings in context, according to Hay. The researchers estimated that the median dog exposure would amount to only 0.7 percent of the U.S. glyphosate limit set for humans.

“While the levels of glyphosate in pet foods surprised us, if a human ate it every day, their glyphosate exposure would still be well below the limits currently deemed safe,” Hay said.

“Even the most contaminated feed they studied had thousands of times less glyphosate than levels that were shown to have no adverse effects on dogs in the U.S. EPA’s Draft Risk Assessment for glyphosate” said Dan Wixted, a pesticide educator with Cornell Cooperative Extension who was not involved in the study.

While unable to pinpoint the exact product or crops that were the source of the glyphosate, Hay’s team did find a correlation with fiber, suggesting a plant-based origin.

“We know that glyphosate is only certified for spraying on crops, and it does not bio-accumulate in animals, so we would not expect it to come from feed animals that are the main protein sources in some of the products,” Hay said. “Our evidence suggests that it’s coming from plant material.”

One surprising finding of the study: Glyphosate was detected in the one GMO-free product the researchers analyzed at levels higher than those of several other processed feeds. This suggests that keeping feed stocks uncontaminated is a challenge even in the GMO-free market.

What is a pet owner to do with this information?

“Glyphosate is out there in our pets’ food, and while there doesn’t appear to be any immediate risk, there is still uncertainty about the chronic impact of low doses like these,” Hay said. “It’s hard to find a product that doesn’t have glyphosate in it, so we included the exposure assessment to provide some context. The old adage ‘dose determines the poison’ is good to keep in mind: While it’s possible that these animals might respond differently than humans, the numbers are still within a range that would be deemed safe for humans.”

Hay, for his part, has stopped feeding chow found to be high in glyphosate to his own dog, a pug beagle mix, but he hasn’t seen any changes in her health.

“She’s more cat than dog to be honest,” he said. “She sits on the bed and won’t go outside when it rains. But I can now confirm that her laziness has nothing to do with her feed.”

Charts of the day: Billionaire wealth soars again


UBS Group AG, together with Credit Suisse, hold a legal monopoly on all private banking in Switzerland, and is one of the leading global players in private banking for much of the world’s elite.

Every year the bank issues a fascinating document called the UBS PwC Billionaires Report, detailing the growth of the fortunes of the global financial elite.

This year’s report reveals the the rich are getting richer at an accelerating rate, as exemplified in this graphic charting the growing wealth of billionaires, as comparing that acceleration with the MSCI World Index, a measure of global stock market capitalization:

From the report summary:

Billionaire wealth returned to growth in 2016 after falling the year before.

  • Billionaire wealth expanded in 2016. Globally, the total wealth of billionaires rose by 17 percent to USD 6.0 trillion, double the rate of the MSCI World Index.
  • For the first time, Asian billionaires outnumbered their US counterparts. On average, a new billionaire was created in Asia every two days, with the total number of Asian billionaires rising by almost a quarter to 637, compared to 563 in the US and 342 in Europe. The US still retains the greatest concentration of wealth, growing by 15 percent from USD 2.4 trillion to USD 2.8 trillion, driven by technological innovation, financial services and materials.

Josef Stadler, Head Global Ultra High Net Worth, UBS, said: “This year we have seen not only a return to growth for billionaire wealth, but also a significant shift in its geographic dimensions. Dramatic growth in Asian wealth shows it could overtake the US in just four years.”

But what about the rest of us?

While the rich are getting richer, the rest of us, at least in the U.S., are struggling to break even, as illustrated in this graphic from the Pew Research Center:

From the accompanying report:

The disconnect between the job market and workers’ paychecks has fueled much of the recent activism in states and cities around raising minimum wages, and it also has become a factor in at least some of this year’s congressional campaigns.

Average hourly earnings for non-management private-sector workers in July were $22.65, up 3 cents from June and 2.7% above the average wage from a year earlier, according to data from the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics. That’s in line with average wage growth over the past five years: Year-over-year growth has mostly ranged between 2% and 3% since the beginning of 2013. But in the years just before the 2007-08 financial collapse, average hourly earnings often increased by around 4% year-over-year. And during the high-inflation years of the 1970s and early 1980s, average wages commonly jumped 7%, 8% or even 9% year-over-year.

After adjusting for inflation, however, today’s average hourly wage has just about the same purchasing power it did in 1978, following a long slide in the 1980s and early 1990s and bumpy, inconsistent growth since then. In fact, in real terms average hourly earnings peaked more than 45 years ago: The $4.03-an-hour rate recorded in January 1973 had the same purchasing power that $23.68 would today.

Charts of the day: The secret of Trump’s success


We begin with a question and answer from Martin Longman, writing in the Washington Monthly:

How do you say that someone is a billionaire but he’s not an elite?

Well, you can say that if the billionaire talks at your level and your level is not elite. Many people might not realize that Trump is resonating with them in large part because he doesn’t use any hifalutin language that makes them feel inadequate in some way, but at least some of them are aware of this and don’t mind mentioning it as one of things about Trump that they find appealing.

Strangely, it makes them want to have a beer with him even though he doesn’t drink beer and claims to have never touched a drop of alcohol in his life. It makes them think that he understands and cares about their problems even though Trump was a millionaire by the time he was eight years old and has shown no sincere signs of caring about anyone but himself in his entire life.

It might be exasperating for college graduates, but Trump’s mangling of the English language and his fifth grade way of expressing himself has helped him form a strong bond with a lot of people who actually want a president that doesn’t challenge them intellectually.

The secret may be that Donald Trump is a man of few words, words he pounds out in endless streams of intolerance, resentment and sheer malice.

The numbers tell an interesting tale

Consider the Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease Formula, and the associated Automated Readability Index and the Fog Count.

Back in the 1970s, the U.S. Navy grew concerned that technical manuals used to train sailors were too complex for trainees, so they looked for ways to evaluate texts. They took the three measures and modified them after evaluating the accessibility of existing texts based on tests of recruits at four naval training facilities.

The tests went on to become so popular that they’re now integrated into software programs like Microsoft Word.

Basically, the test focus on two areas, the was actually developed for the military in the 1970s as a way to check that training materials were appropriate and could be understood by its personnel. It is used as a measurement in legislation to ensure documents such as insurance policies can be understood.

There are a number of competing algorithms. They use different approaches, but all try to do one of two things, measuring the text according to the educational grade level needed to grasp the content of a text, and a second measure, reading ease. Which sets the grade level according to nationwide statistics.

Factba.se is the free consumer version of commercial software developed by FactSquared designed to process texts, PDFs, video, and audio to and anaylze the resulting data.

They turned their skills on the verbal output of Trump and his nine memediate predecessors and discovered that Agent Orange is unique, speaking at the lowest grade level, using both the smallest vocabulary and words of the fewest syllables:

In terms of word diversity and structure, Trump averages 1.33 syllables per word, which all others average 1.42 – 1.57 words. In terms of variety of vocabulary, in the 30,000-word sample, Trump was at the bottom, with 2,605 unique words in that sample while all others averaged 3,068 – 3,869. The exception: Bill Clinton, who clocked in at 2,752 words in our unique sample.

The following graphics from the Factba.se report tell the tale.

First up, the grade level attainment needed to understand the pronouncements of fifteen consecutive Chief Executives [click on the images to enlarge]:

And next, two charts reflecting [top] the average number of syllables in words employed presidentially and [bottom] the size of the vocabularies deployed:

Our final graphic comes from Branding in a Digital Age, a presentation by Marshall Kingston, Senior Brand Manager at Tetley, the British-born, Indian owned global tea giant:

Kingston writes:

If you think that’s his natural vocabulary you’re wrong, Trump uses repetition, short sentences, he repeats himself constantly ad uses the most basic form of a word instead of nuances. Our tendency is to think that consumers are becoming more. . .well read and want the cold hard facts. But simplicity is actually more memorable, more comprehendible and more compelling to the decision processing part of our brain.

In other words, Trump is following a rule also developed, like those used to create those charts we’ve just seen, by the U.S. Navy, and more than a decade earlier, the KISS Principle, for “Keep It Simple, Stupid.”

Some observations from academia

Then consider this, from a 7 January 2017 Washington Post story:

Trump is a “unique” politician because he doesn’t speak like one, according to Jennifer Sclafani, an associate teaching professor in Georgetown University’s Department of Linguistics.

“He is interesting to me linguistically because he speaks like everybody else,” said Sclafani, who has studied Trump’s language for the past two years. “And we’re not used to hearing that from a president. We’re used to hearing somebody speak who sounds much more educated, much smarter, much more refined than your everyday American.”

>snip<

Sclafani, who recently wrote a book set to publish this fall titled “Talking Donald Trump: A Sociolinguistic Study of Style, Metadiscourse, and Political Identity,” said Trump has used language to “create a brand” as a politician.

“President Trump creates a spectacle in the way that he speaks,” she said. “So it creates a feeling of strength for the nation, or it creates a sense of determination, a sense that he can get the job done through his use of hyperbole and directness.”

Ruth Ben-Ghiat, an American-born Professor of History and Italian Studies at New York University, is an expert on bombastic authoritarianism, evident in countless academic papers and a shelf full of books on the subject [including the forthcoming Strongmen: How The Rise, Why They Succeed, How They Fall].

In a 4 November 2016 New Yorker interview, she compared Trump to Benito Mussolini, the vigorously verbose Il Duce:

“These people are mass marketers. They pick up what’s in the air,” Ben-Ghiat said. The film reel was to Mussolini as Twitter is to Trump. “They give the impression of talking directly to the people,” she said. They can be portentous and relentlessly self-assertive. In a way, authoritarians have to be, Ben-Ghiat explained, since they’re selling a paradox: a savior fashioned as the truest, most authentic expression of the masses. Trump summed it up baldly at the Convention: “I am your voice. I alone can fix it.” The authoritarian makes the contradiction fall away, like an optical illusion.

She expanded on her views in an 10 August 2016 essay she wrote for the Atlantic

Italians learned in the 1920s what Americans are learning in 2016: Charismatic authoritarians seeking political office cannot be understood through the framework of traditional politics. They lack interest in, and patience for, established protocols. They often trust few outside of their own families, or those they already control, making collaboration and relationship building difficult. They work from a different playbook, and so must those who intend to confront them.

The authoritarian playbook is defined by the particular relationship such individuals have with their followers. It’s an attachment based on submission to the authority of one individual who stands above the party, even in a regime. Mussolini, a journalist by training, used the media brilliantly to cultivate a direct bond with Italians that confounded political parties and other authority structures and lasted for 18 years.

Trump also cultivates a personalized bond with voters, treating loyalty to the Republican Party almost as an afterthought. It’s why he emphasizes the emotional content of his events—he “feels the love,” or fends off “the haters.” Early on, he introduced a campaign ritual more common in dictatorships than democracies: an oath pledging support to his person, complete with a straight-armed salute. Securing this personal bond is a necessary condition for the success of future authoritarian actions, since it allows the leader to claim, as does Trump, that he embodies the voice and will of the people.

Mussolini’s rise to power also exemplifies another authoritarian trait America has seen during this campaign: The charismatic leader who tests the limits of what the public, press, and political class will tolerate. This exploration begins early and is accomplished through controversial actions and threatening or humiliating remarks toward groups or individuals. It’s designed to gauge the collective appetite and permission for verbal and physical violence and the use of extralegal methods in policing and other realms. The way elites and the press respond to each example of boundary-pushing sets the tone for the leader’s future behavior—and that of his followers.

Implications and lessons learned

As President with strong Congressional support and a stacked Supreme Court, the real estate developer and pop culture figure has used his ill-gotten gains to forge a populist cultural phenomenon.

He grasps the art of the unifying message, spelled out in visceral barroom language, rather than the bureaucrat phrases so often mouthed by his opponents.

Trump wasn’t going to do a restructuring of the roles and hierarchies of federal agencies. No, he was vowing to drain the swap, three short syllables that were o so memorable.

Like 20th Century fascist leaders, he flies across the realm, holding rallies, selling uniforms to make his followers readily recognizable — both to themselves and to others. Instead of Hitler’s Brown Shirts and Mussolini’s Black Shirts, TrumpTrolls sport red MAGA hats. But the leaders of all three groups hail followers who beat journalists.

In a system already rigged against folks who feel power should be based in the people, rather than in corporations and financial giants and the plutocrats who reap all those ever-grander and increasingly offshored profits.

To combat Trump and the system that put him in office, the Left needs a unifying, simply yet powerfully expressed message: Public good trumps private profit, and the Americans whose labor produce so much of that wealth are entitle to a greater share.

We need to recognize that soaring economic disparities create anger and uncertainty, states of arousal that make us vulnerable to manipulation, a task made easy by website cookies, email records, telephone tracking, television sets with embedded systems to spy on viewers, omnipresent surveillance cameras — just of tools available to governments, politicians, lobbyists, and others eager to find ways to identifying and manipulating our vulnerabilities for the private profit of the privileged phew.

As skilled general and rulers of old lined realized, your worst enemy is the best teacher, and Donald J. Trump is a pedagogical prodigy for those who would only listen and learn.

How about a first simple message to Dirty Don:

Kick Him Out!

Trump fiddles while the world drowns and burns


the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] has warned that we have 12 years to  act of climate change before the globe hits a critical tipping point.

From the Independent:

Greenhouse gas emissions must be cut almost in half by 2030 to avert global environmental catastrophe, including the total loss of every coral reef, the disappearance of Arctic ice and the destruction of island communities, a landmark UN report has concluded.

Drawing on more than 6,000 scientific studies and compiled over two years, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) findings, released this morning, warn enormous and rapid changes to the way everyone on Earth eats, travels and produces energy need to be brought in immediately.

Though the scientists behind the report said there is cause for optimism, they recognised the grim reality that nations are currently nowhere near on track to avert disaster.

Yet the scientists are also clear that we can still hold the line on further damaging change – if we’re prepared to act fast and invest a great deal of money. By reducing CO2 emissions by nearly half from their 2010 levels, we could give ourselves a fighting chance; by planting millions of trees and using technology to further capture carbon dioxide too, we might just do it.

But in all honesty it is hard to feel optimistic about the world’s ability to make that happen. The World Wildlife Fund’s lead climate change scientist, Chris Weber, says “the difference between possibility and impossibility is political will”, which in present circumstances is unnerving, to say the least.

The only way to avoid the coming catastrophe would be a 40 to 50 percent reduction in global carbon dioxide emissions by 2030, followed by a complete cap on net CO2 emissions by 2050.

And that’s highly unlikely, given the intransigence of the Trump administration, as the Smithsonian reports [emphasis added]:

Currently, a few experimental methods exist that can snatch carbon dioxide directly out of the air, but at up to $1,000 per ton of carbon dioxide, the price tag of such carbon capture is staggering—and billions of tons await extraction.

“The best way to remove carbon dioxide from the air,” explains MIT engineer Howard Herzog in his book Carbon Capture, is “to not release it into the air in the first place,” Joyce reports.

But the hurdles to clear aren’t just technological. As Davenport reports, the new study’s authors have already conceded that dampening the rise in temperature is probably “politically unlikely.” President Donald Trump announced intent to withdraw from the United States from the Paris agreement in 2017; it is now the only country publically opposing the accord. A recent U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration report estimated that maintaining the administration’s current course will yield a 4-degree Celsius (7-degree Fahrenheit) rise in temperature for the planet as a whole by the end of the current century. The report explicitly acknowledges the human impact on climate, but instead uses the data to justify continued non-action. In other words, the administration is arguing that our “fate is already sealed,” reports The Washington Post.

While Donald Trump portrays climate scientists as political hacks, the sheer scope of input to the IPCC report belies his hucksterism. As the Union of Concerned Scientists notes, the report was compiled by experts from 80 counties over the course of six years, with no fewer than 830 acknowledged scientific experts drawing on the work of more than a thousand other scientists, and 2,000 more experts who reviewed more than 140,000 comments by still more experts.

A telling graphic from the IPCC report charts the observed rise in global temperatures from 1850 to 2015, with the broad orange band depicting the change already directly attributable to human activity:

But the IPCC report may, in fact, be overly optimistic, as the guardian notes:

Tipping points merit only a few mentions in the IPCC report. Durwood Zaelke, founder of the Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development, said: “The IPCC report fails to focus on the weakest link in the climate chain: the self-reinforcing feedbacks which, if allowed to continue, will accelerate warming and risk cascading climate tipping points and runaway warming.”

He pointed to water vapour in the air, which traps heat in the atmosphere, as well as the loss of polar ice, the collapse of permafrost, and the migration of tropical clouds towards the poles.

Ice melting at the poles is known to be of particular danger. The Earth’s ice caps act as reflectors, sending some of the sun’s rays back into space and cooling the planet. When sea ice melts, it reveals dark water underneath, which absorbs more heat and in turn triggers greater warming, in a constant feedback loop.

Ice on land, such as in Greenland and under much of the Antarctic, may contain yet another feedback loop; when the ice melts, water percolates to the land below where it lubricates the slide of ice over rock and could accelerate the collapse of glaciers into the surrounding sea.

Given the critical threshold at hand, we thought we’d post a collection of recent scientific reports outlining the extent of damage already caused as well as some ominous predictions for what lies ahead.

New study highlights extent of sea level rises

And it’s even worse than expected.

From Rutgers University:

Global average sea-level could rise by nearly 8 feet by 2100 and 50 feet by 2300 if greenhouse gas emissions remain high and humanity proves unlucky, according to a review of sea-level change and projections by Rutgers and other scientists.

Since the start of the century, global average sea-level has risen by about 0.2 feet. Under moderate emissions, central estimates of global average sea-level from different analyses range from 1.4 to 2.8 more feet by 2100, 2.8 to 5.4 more feet by 2150 and 6 to 14 feet by 2300, according to the study, published in Annual Review of Environment and Resources [$32 to read].

And with 11 percent of the world’s 7.6 billion people living in areas less than 33 feet above sea level, rising seas pose a major risk to coastal populations, economies, infrastructure and ecosystems around the world, the study says.

Sea-level rise varies over location and time, and scientists have developed a range of methods to reconstruct past changes and project future ones. But despite the differing approaches, a clear story is emerging regarding the coming decades: From 2000 to 2050, global average sea-level will most likely rise about 6 to 10 inches, but is extremely unlikely to rise by more than 18 inches. Beyond 2050, projections are more sensitive to changes in greenhouse gas emissions and to the approaches for projecting sea-level change.

“There’s much that’s known about past and future sea-level change, and much that is uncertain. But uncertainty isn’t a reason to ignore the challenge,” said study co-author Robert E. Kopp, a professor in the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Rutgers University–New Brunswick and director of Rutgers’ Institute of Earth, Ocean, and Atmospheric Sciences. “Carefully characterizing what’s known and what’s uncertain is crucial to managing the risks sea-level rise poses to coasts around the world.”

Scientists used case studies from Atlantic City, New Jersey, and from Singapore to discuss how current methods for reconstructing past sea-level change can constrain future global and local projections. They also discussed approaches for using scientific sea-level projections and how accurate projections can lead to new sea-level research questions.

A large portion of sea-level rise in the 20th century, including most of the global rise since 1975, is tied to human-caused global warming, the study says.

Kopp led the review with Benjamin P. Horton, a former Rutgers professor now at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore. Co-authors include Andra J. Garner, an assistant research professor in Rutgers’ Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, and other scientists at Boston College and Nanyang Technological University.

Consider, for example, the impacts of an eight-foot increase in sea level on two major metropolitan regions, via NOAA’s Sea Level Rise Viewer:

First, a look at the New York City metro area [or “Bye-Bye Bayonne”]:

And a look at the San Francisco Bay Area [or “Do You Know the Way to San Jose?”, first get a canoe]:

If you live in any U.S. city with more than 100,000 inhabitants, you ca access a new — and free — University of Notre Dame database for you can get a more detailed look at climate impacts on your community, including, as the university reports:

  • A rich, open-source dataset covering more than 40 indicators for over 270 cities.
  • Risk and readiness scores for each city in the event of flooding, extreme heat, extreme cold, sea-level rise and drought.
  • Projected cost and probability of climate-related hazards in 2040.
  • Assessment of risks due to climate-related hazards.
  • Evaluations of readiness to implement adaptation measures.

California impacts may slash state’s agricultural water

California agriculture accounts for the largest single sector in the Golden State’s economy. with annual sales of more than $50 billion. And, yes, the state’s most lucrative crop is cannabis, at an estimated $7.7 billion in green for the green [both legal and illegal], followed by dairy products, nuts and grapes — all heavily dependent on abundant water supplies.

And California is by far the country’s leading agricultural producer, easily leading all those Midwestern states most folks think of when it comes to growing things for the table.

But with climate change now posing a major threat to the state’s already imperiled water supply, that may soon change.

From the University of California, Irvine:

An estimated three-quarters of the water used by farms, ranches and dairies in California originates as snow in the Sierra Nevada mountain range, but the future viability of that resource is projected to be at heightened risk due to global climate change.

In a study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences [$10 to read], University of California, Irvine researchers argue that a 1.0 degree Celsius increase in the global average winter temperature will lead to a 20 percent jump in the likelihood of below-average snow accumulation in the high country, resulting in lower spring runoff. In this article, the authors describe how snow water equivalent, an important measure of water availability, and the elevation of the snowpack respond to different levels of warming.

The scientists from UCI’s Henry Samueli School of Engineering said that historically, 2.0 degrees of average winter warming can cause the probability of below-average snow water equivalent to climb to 40 percent.

“Changes in average temperature around the world will have an impact on how widespread and long lasting the seasonal mountain snowpack will be,” said lead author Laurie Huning, UCI postdoctoral scholar in civil & environmental engineering. “In general, we have found that warmer conditions will decrease the amount of water stored in the mountain snowpack, forcing its center of mass to higher elevations.”

The researchers analyzed historical data to quantify the volume and the extent of the Sierra snowpack, finding that warmer temperatures should cause the bulk to gradually shrink and be concentrated at higher elevations over time. For example, under a 1.5 degree Celsius temperature increase, there is a nearly 80 percent likelihood that the center of mass of the mountain snowpack will inch above 8,300 feet in elevation; the probability goes to 90 percent with 2.0 degrees of heating.

“The Paris Agreement calls for nations to band together to keep this century’s temperature increases within a global 2 degree Celsius threshold above pre-industrial levels,” said Huning. “Our results show that even a change in the Sierra Nevada’s winter temperature from 1.0 to 1.5 degrees Celsius can threaten the natural water storage capability of the range. Similar responses may also been seen in other mountain ranges that provide melt runoff to much of the western United States.”

The researchers said the impact will vary depending on what sector of the Sierra Nevada range is being observed, identifying the northwestern quarter to be most threatened.

“In addition to the resources used in the state’s agricultural sector, the Sierra Nevada snowpack also provides about 60 percent of the water supply for the people of Southern California,” said co-author Amir AghaKouchak, associate professor of civil & environmental engineering, and Earth system science. “Our study has shown that this important natural water storage mechanism that supports our economy and the lives of millions is highly sensitive to change from global warming.”

This project was supported by the National Science Foundation, NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the California Energy Commission.

And lack of snow spells increased water pollution

While decreased snowfall spells major trouble for America’s  West and Southwest , what water remains becomes more polluted, spelling further woes for both urban dwellers and farmers, according to new research {$10 to read] published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by scientists from Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory:

One in 10 Americans depends on the Colorado River for bathing and drinking. Last fall’s record-high temperatures reduced Colorado snowpack in winter 2018 to 66 percent of normal, sparking concern over water shortages downstream and leaving water managers fearful of a repeat.

Diminishing snowpack isn’t all that affects water reserves. At many sites across the West where the federal Natural Resources Conservation Service measures the amount of water contained within snow, this snow-water equivalent was less than half of median values from 1981 to 2010. At the same time, snow is melting near the Colorado River’s headwaters almost a month earlier than it did 25 years ago. This earlier melt alone has caused shifts in plant communities that function to absorb nutrients, process pollutants, and filter sediment as water moves downstream – increasing the odds that water quality, not just water supply, will be put at risk by a warming atmosphere.

Hydrological science expert and geochemist Bhavna Arora is part of a team at the Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) studying the changes to these plant communities in a research area along the East River catchment near the Upper Colorado River headwaters. The team’s studies, part of the Watershed Function Scientific Focus Area (SFA) program, are useful for predicting how disturbances to mountainous watersheds – like floods, drought, changing snowpack and earlier snowmelt – impact the downstream delivery of water, nutrients, carbon, and metals.

Q. Does anything concern you about what your team is observing at the East River watershed?

A. Snow is melting an average of 26 days earlier than it did 25 years ago – a phenomenon that’s forced a dramatic shift in plant communities in and around the Upper Colorado River. When snow melts far sooner than expected, nitrates produced naturally beneath snow can be released much earlier in the watershed. Regional plants that historically functioned synchronously within the ecosystem to absorb nutrients from water within snowmelt have been replaced or risk being replaced by more drought-resistant plants that may not be so adept at taking up nitrogen.

The Natural Resources Conservation Service, an agency of the USDA, monitors snowpack and related climatic data at more than 700 sites in 11 western states. This snow map shows how snow depth in January 2018 across the West compared to median snow depth values recorded during January from 1981 to 2010 at these sites. (Photo Courtesy of USDA NRCS)

At the East River, Colorado, catchment site that is the project test bed, a community of deep-rooted shrubs has replaced grasses and wildflowers, which rapidly take up nitrogen and other elements from water within snowmelt. It’s not yet clear if these new plants can quickly assume the roles of their predecessors and prevent nitrates or other elements from entering the river and traveling downstream.

In just under two short years since our team began studying there, we’ve witnessed earlier snowmelt accompanied by the diminished snowpack that has become so familiar across entire regions of the mountainous West. We wanted to quantify the influence of changes in snowmelt timing and snowpack depth on nitrogen fluxes and plant phenology at our study site.

We’re using remote sensing and wells that penetrate deep into the bedrock to continuously monitor vegetation, seasonal soil temperatures, water availability, and chemistry throughout the soil and subsurface at the East River site. Our observations and computer simulations show that an earlier and larger nitrate peak occurs with early snowmelt in comparison to a normal snowmelt scenario. We also found that differences in snowpack depths change the under-snow nutrient buffer and ammonia concentration. In both scenarios of early snowmelt and decreased snowpack, shrubs have replaced grasses and wildflowers as the dominant vegetation.

Although much more study needs to be done, this is an excellent example of the complexity of nature.

Q: Do these observations spell trouble for the water that ends up as irrigation water for crops or as drinking water for residents downstream?

A. Headwaters catchments like the East River represent a section of river that has not been impacted by land use changes such as agriculture. What’s troubling is not the concentrations we’re seeing at these pristine research sites but what that means for water as it moves downstream. The peaks in nitrates after a long, extended drought are particularly worrisome because the risks of excess nitrates to human health are well-known and worthy of our attention. Intense rainfall like we’ve experienced leads to excess nitrates being leached into the river, which could put downstream water supplies at risk.

Without investigating many more sites over multiple years, it’s far too soon to say how increased nitrate concentration in headwater catchments could impact runoff as it moves downstream. But it’s reasonable to believe that it could. Take agricultural regions, for example. Historically we’ve added nitrogen to farmland soils as fertilizer. As a result, there’s been a build-up of groundwater nitrates and nitrous oxide emissions to the air across major agricultural regions. So, while excess nitrates in the water near our remote research site might not pose a significant threat to human health, we can’t be sure that the same is true downstream in waters in and around lands that are intensively used.

Q. We started out discussing the record drought and heat in Colorado and across the Western U.S. If summer temperatures and lack of precipitation are any indication, it seems unlikely that we can expect fall and winter to be more in keeping with the historic norm. Are these erratic patterns of concern?

A. Snowmelt timing is critical to plant growth and growing season duration, setting the starting point for when plants emerge from their winter dormancy and begin to grow. The exact timing of snowmelt is also critical to our work as it represents one of the most important and dynamic times of the year – a period when there’s a lot to study and understand.

Geochemical modelers like me benefit from having access to quality data about snow patterns, temperature, humidity, and other factors likely to cause changes within mountainous watersheds. For decades, hydrologists could time their field observations according to the relatively predictable timing of snowmelt and depth of snowpack based on historic patterns. Relative consistency in precipitation and temperature also allows us to predict future watershed response to these factors based on previous trends, in addition to current observations.

Huge fluctuations in snow accumulation and melt have required us to develop a network of sensors that autonomously measure soil temperature and soil water and continuously capture video of the surface of the snow. In this way we can “observe” the start of snowmelt through changes in water and temperature and predict the likely date range of snow-free conditions a week or two in advance. Then we mobilize our teams and equipment and get out there!

With shifts in plant communities due to early snowmelt, we don’t yet know how well those new plant communities will work together to absorb nitrogen and other nutrients. Since those new plant communities may take years to become established, we need to use computer models to predict what might happen. With the shift in snowmelt timing from historic trends – and in flux even from year to year, it becomes even more difficult to predict what changes in temperature and precipitation patterns will mean for the water supply in two years, much less 10 or 50 years.

Our best hope is to build the best computer models possible that can numerically explore all of these factors (snowmelt timing, drought, monsoons, plant species, etc.) combined, and test those models with data from the field. In this way we hope to predict the future quantity and quality of our water as it flows downstream and impacts users and ecosystems far removed from its origin in the Upper Colorado River.

Warming accelerates ominous trends in the Arctic

We’ve posted extensively about the radical loss of Arctic sea ice, and things are no better this year, according to NASA’s Earth Observatory, and the news this year is of no consolation:

From the report:

Arctic sea ice likely reached its annual minimum extent on September 19 and again on September 23, 2018, according to researchers at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) and NASA. Analyses of satellite data showed that the Arctic ice cap shrank to 4.59 million square kilometers (1.77 million square miles), tied for the sixth lowest summertime minimum on record. Researchers at NSIDC noted that the estimate is preliminary, and it is still possible (but not likely) that changing winds could push the ice extent lower.

Arctic sea ice follows seasonal patterns of growth and decay. It thickens and spreads during the fall and winter and thins and shrinks during the spring and summer. But in recent decades, increasing temperatures have led to significant decreases in summer and winter sea ice extents. The decline in Arctic ice cover will ultimately affect the planet’s weather patterns and the circulation of the oceans.

The map above shows the extent of Arctic sea ice as measured by satellites on September 19, 2018. Extent is defined as the total area in which the ice concentration is at least 15 percent. The yellow outline shows the median September sea ice extent from 1981–2010. The second image is a mosaic that was compiled by the Canadian Ice Service using data collected between September 18 and 24 by the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) instruments on NASA’s Aqua and Terra satellites.

The 2018 minimum is 1.63 million square kilometers (629,000 square miles) below the 1981–2010 average ice minimum. NASA scientists Claire Parkinson and Nick DiGirolamo have calculated that Arctic sea ice has lost roughly 54,000 square kilometers (21,000 square miles) of ice for each year since the late 1970s—equivalent to losing a chunk of sea ice the size of Maryland and New Jersey for every year.

Collapse of Arctic sea ice may also mean the collapse of the region’s Polar Bear population, massive, regal critters who stand at the apex of the food chain on the land and the ice, according to a new study $6 for 48-hour access] published in Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. According to the university:

Polar bears likely survived past warm periods in the Arctic, when sea ice cover was low, by scavenging on the carcasses of stranded large whales. This food source sustained the bears when they were largely restricted to land, unable to roam the ice in search of seals to hunt.

A new study led by the University of Washington found that although dead whales are still valuable sources of fat and protein for some polar bears, this resource will likely not be enough to sustain most bear populations in the future when the Arctic becomes ice-free in summers, which is likely to occur by 2040 due to climate change. The results were published online Oct. 9 in the journal Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment.

“If the rate of sea ice loss and warming continues unmitigated, what is going to happen to polar bear habitat will exceed anything documented over the last million years. The extremely rapid pace of this change makes it almost impossible for us to use history to predict the future,” said lead author Kristin Laidre, a marine biologist at the UW’s Polar Science Center and associate professor in the School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences.

Read the rest. . .

But wait! It’s even worse than you thought

Consider the findings of yet another new study [open access], this one by scientists from Los Alamos National Laboratory published in Environmental Research Letters and reported by the lab:

A new collaborative study has investigated Arctic shrub-snow interactions to obtain a better understanding of the far north’s tundra and vast permafrost system. Incorporating extensive in situ observations, Los Alamos National Laboratory scientists tested their theories with a novel 3D computer model and confirmed that shrubs can lead to significant degradation of the permafrost layer that has remained frozen for tens of thousands of years. These interactions are driving increases in discharges of fresh water into rivers, lakes and oceans.

“The Arctic is actively greening, and shrubs are flourishing across the tundra. As insulating snow accumulates atop tall shrubs, it boosts significant ground warming,” said Cathy Wilson, Los Alamos scientist on the project. “If the trend of increasing vegetation across the Arctic continues, we’re likely to see a strong increase in permafrost degradation.”

The team investigated interactions among shrubs, permafrost, and subsurface areas called taliks. Taliks are unfrozen ground near permafrost caused by a thermal or hydrological anomaly. Some tunnel-like taliks called “through taliks” extend over thick permafrost layers.

Results of the Los Alamos study published in Environmental Research Letters this week revealed that through taliks developed where snow was trapped, warmed the ground and created a pathway for water to flow through deep permafrost, significantly driving thawing and likely increasing water and dissolved carbon flow to rivers, lakes and the ocean. Computer simulations also demonstrated that the thawed active layer was abnormally deeper near these through taliks, and that increased shrub growth exacerbates these impacts. Notably, the team subtracted warming trends from the weather data used to drive simulations, thereby confirming that the shrub-snow interactions were causing degradation even in the absence of warming.

The Los Alamos team and collaborators from the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science’s Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments Arctic program, which funds this project, used a new Los Alamos-developed fine-scale model, the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS). It incorporates soil physics and captures permafrost dynamics. The team repeatedly tested results against experimental data from Alaska’s Seward Peninsula.

“These simulations of through talik formation provide clues as to why we’re seeing an increase in winter discharge in the Arctic,” said Los Alamos postdoctoral research associate Elchin Jafarov, first author on the paper.

This model is the first to show how snow and vegetation interact to impact permafrost hydrology with through talik formation on a slope—prevalent across Alaskan terrain. The team, including collaborators from Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the University of Alaska, investigated how quickly through taliks developed at different permafrost depths, their impact on hydrology and how they interrupted and altered continuous permafrost.

The fire next time?

Given that the Grand Old Party has laid claim to the allegiance of he nation’s Christian Fundamentalists , it’s hardly surprising that the White House and the Orange Crusher keep focusing on the claim that the world is actually growing colder, given a key New Testament passage, II Peter, verse 3, describing the Apocalypse:

[T]he day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

And according to California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment, a report from the state’s Office of Planning and Research, the Natural Resources Agency, and the California Energy Commission, fire may pose as extreme a danger as coastal flooding and agricultural impacts as rising temperatures lead to ever-greater conflagrations in California’s mountains and drylands.

Consider this graphic from the report and the probability of more and vaster fires in years to come:

Global warming wipes out Puerto Rico’s insects

Life for for humans and four-legged critters depends to a great extent on critters with four legs, species which play a vital role in everything from pollination of the food we eat to the breakdown of biological waste.

As a major study [open access] reported in the open access scientific journal PLOS One last year:

Loss of insects is certain to have adverse effects on ecosystem functioning, as insects play a central role in a variety of processes, including pollination, herbivory and detrivory, nutrient cycling and providing a food source for higher trophic levels such as birds, mammals and amphibians. For example, 80% of wild plants are estimated to depend on insects for pollination, while 60% of birds rely on insects as a food source. The ecosystem services provided by wild insects have been estimated at $57 billion annually in the USA. Clearly, preserving insect abundance and diversity should constitute a prime conservation priority.

That study, which looked at declines in insect populations in Germany, came to an alarming conclusion:

[W]e used a standardized protocol to measure total insect biomass using Malaise traps, deployed over 27 years in 63 nature protection areas in Germany (96 unique location-year combinations) to infer on the status and trend of local entomofauna. Our analysis estimates a seasonal decline of 76%, and mid-summer decline of 82% in flying insect biomass over the 27 years of study. We show that this decline is apparent regardless of habitat type, while changes in weather, land use, and habitat characteristics cannot explain this overall decline. This yet unrecognized loss of insect biomass must be taken into account in evaluating declines in abundance of species depending on insects as a food source, and ecosystem functioning in the European landscape.

One graphic from the study shows why scientists are alarmed:

Temporal distribution of insect biomass at selected locations.
(A) Daily biomass (mean ±1 se) across 26 locations sampled in multiple years (see S4 Fig for seasonal distributions). (B) Distribution of mean annual rate of decline as estimated based on plot specific log-linear models (annual trend coefficient = −0.053, sd = 0.002, i.e. 5.2% annual decline).

Insect decline soars as Puerto Rico grows hotter

Another study [open access], this one published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and reported by Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute charts the decline in an American territory already ravaged by a massive hurricane that left thousands dead in its wake [despite the claims of the hubristic Orange Crusher]:

While temperatures in the tropical forests of northeastern Puerto Rico have climbed two degrees Celsius since the mid-1970s, the biomass of arthropods – invertebrate animals such as insects, millipedes, and sowbugs – has declined by as much as 60-fold, according to new findings published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

The finding supports the recent United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warnings of severe environmental threats given a 2.0 degree Celsius elevation in global temperature. Like some other tropical locations, the study area in the Luquillo rainforest has already reached or exceeded a 2.0 degree Celsius rise in average temperature, and the study finds that the consequences are potentially catastrophic.

“Our results suggest that the effects of climate warming in tropical forests may be even greater than anticipated,” said Brad Lister, lead author of the study and a faculty member in the Department of Biological Sciences at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. “The insect populations in the Luquillo forest are crashing, and once that begins, the animals that eat the insects have insufficient food, which results in decreased reproduction and survivorship and consequent declines in abundance.”

Climate Driven Declines in Arthropod Abundance Restructure a Rainforest Food Web” is based on data collected between 1976 and 2013 by the authors and the Luquillo Long Term Ecological Research program at three mid-elevation habitats in Puerto Rico’s protected Luquillo rainforest. During this time, mean maximum temperatures have risen by 2.0 degrees Celsius.

Major findings include:

  • Sticky traps used to sample arthropods on the ground and in the forest canopy were indicative of a collapse in forest arthropods, with biomass catch rates falling up to 60-fold between 1976 and 2013.
  • The biomass of arthropods collected by ground-level sweep netting also declined as much as eightfold from 1976 to 2013.
  • As arthropods declined, simultaneous decreases occurred in Luquillo’s insectivorous lizards, frogs, and birds.
  • The authors also compared estimates of arthropod abundance they made in the 1980s in the Chamela-Cuixmala Biosphere Reserve in western Mexico with estimates from 2014. Over this time period, mean temperature increased 2.4 Celsius and arthropod biomass declined eightfold.

Cold-blooded animals living in tropical climates are particularly vulnerable to climate warming since they are adapted to relatively stable year-round temperatures. Given their analyses of the data, which included new techniques to assess causality, the authors conclude that climate warming is the major driver of reductions in arthropod abundance in the Luquillo forest. These reductions have precipitated a major bottom-up trophic cascade and consequent collapse of the forest food web.

Given that tropical forests harbor two thirds of the Earth’s species, these results have profound implications for the future stability and biodiversity of rainforest ecosystems, as well as conservation efforts aimed at mitigating the effects of climate forcing.

Andres Garcia, of the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, was co-author on the study, which was funded by the National Science Foundation.

If a picture is worth a thousand words, this graphic from the study is worth many, many more:

Mean dry-weight arthropod biomass per 100 sweeps taken in the same sample area in the Luquillo rainforest during July 1976, January 1977, July 2011, and January 2013. One SE around the mean biomass is shown for each bar. Total sweeps taken in each period was 800, except for July 1976, when 700 sweeps were taken.

While most die, some thrive, catastrophically

From the University of New Hampshire:

As winter in New England seems to get warmer, fall lingers longer and spring comes into bloom earlier, areas like northern New Hampshire and western Maine are seeing an unusual continued increase in winter ticks which are endangering the moose population. Researchers at the University of New Hampshire have found that the swell of infestations of this parasite, which attaches itself to moose during the fall and feeds throughout the winter, is the primary cause of an unprecedented 70 percent death rate of calves over a three-year period.

“The iconic moose is rapidly becoming the new poster child for climate change in parts of the Northeast,” said Pete Pekins, professor of wildlife ecology. “Normally anything over a 50 percent death rate would concern us, but at 70 percent, we are looking at a real problem in the moose population.”

In the study, published in the Canadian Journal of Zoology, researchers outline the screening of 179 radio-marked moose calves (age nine to 10 months) for physical condition and parasites in the month of January over three consecutive years from 2014 to 2016. They tracked new calves for four months each winter and found that a total of 125 calves died over the three-year period. A high infestation of winter ticks was found on each calf (an average of 47,371 per moose) causing emaciation and severe metabolic imbalance from blood loss, which was the primary cause of death.

Most adult moose survived but were still severely compromised. They were thin and anemic from losing so much blood. The ticks appear to be harming reproductive health so there is also less breeding.

The researchers say winter tick epidemics typically last one to two years. But, five of the last 10 years has shown a rare frequency of tick infestations which reflects the influence of climate change. They point out that right now these issues are mostly appearing in southern moose populations, but as climate change progresses they anticipate this issue to reach farther north.

“We’re sitting on a powder keg,” said Pekins. “The changing environmental conditions associated with climate change are increasing and are favorable for winter ticks, specifically later-starting winters that lengthen the autumnal questing period for ticks.”

Fall is considered “questing” season for winter ticks. They climb up vegetation and look to attach to a host. Once they attach, they go through three active life stages (larvae, nymph, and adult) by taking a blood meal and feeding on the same animal. The ticks will feed and remain on one host during their subsequent molts until spring when adult females detach and drop to the ground. Their preferred hosts are moose and other mammals, including deer, elk, caribou, and occasionally horses and cattle. Winter ticks rarely bite and feed on humans.

Co-authors include Henry Jones and Daniel Ellingwood both of UNH, Lee Kantar and Matthew O’Neal of the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, Inga Sidor of New Hampshire Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory at UNH, and Anne Lichtenwalner of the University of Maine Animal Health Laboratory.

Funding was provided through New Hampshire Fish and Game and Maine Inland Fisheries and Wildlife in cooperation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Division of Wildlife and Sportfish Restoration, UNH and the Safari Club International Foundation.

Here’s a video report on the UNH research:

 

Program notes:

The iconic moose, driver of hunting and tourism economies in New Hampshire’s North Country, is in decline, due to a tiny tick that infests them by the tens of thousands. University of New Hampshire professor Pete Pekins leads a team of undergraduate and graduate students as they track radio-collared moose and their calves to chart their survival.

Special thanks to Jay Lamell for all calf and mother footage.

But, hey, it’s all fake news, right?

After all, that’s what our Fearless Leader says:

Trump altered his tune during a 60 Minutes interview Sunday night, as BBC News reports:

During Sunday’s interview, Mr Trump cast doubt on making any changes, saying the scientists “have a very big political agenda”.

“I don’t think it’s a hoax, I think there’s probably a difference,” he told journalist Lesley Stahl.

“But I don’t know that it’s manmade. I will say this. I don’t want to give trillions and trillions of dollars. I don’t want to lose millions and millions of jobs. I don’t want to be put at a disadvantage.”

Mr Trump added that temperatures “could very well go back” – although he did not say how.

Feel better?

And a warning to the Trump base. . .

Given the images we’ve seen from Trump rallies, we suspect that apart from the occasional cup of tea,

Now consider this stunning graphic from Decreases in global beer supply due to extreme drought and heat, a new study [open access] published in Nature Plants looking at the range of beer price increase scenarios projected under a variety of climate change regimes from 2010 to 2099 based on degree of political will of nations to implement mitigation measures.

One thing is certain, according to two University of California, Irvine researchers who participated in the multinational investigation: Prices will rise as drought and heat waves parch the lands currently yielding the wheat and barley used to whip up all those tasty barrels, bottles, and cans.

The prices in the chart look at projected rises in European nations, Canada, and Japan:

Maybe that’ll motivate some of the MAGA crowd to rethink that whole climate change thing. . .