Why should we should give a fig? Due to ignorrance or lack of interest by the "sod it and see" or "whatevs" school of thought, a mass extinction is currently under way. Human activity, not natural phenomenon, is the difference between this extinction and the five previous big extinctions that have occurred in Earth's history - I'm sure Ziwa or Axean can expand on those.
The current extinction is driven by habitat loss, overexploitation of species, invasive species and pollution and all of these, the result of humans - either what they do do or what they chose not to do! The notion that biodiversity only counts if it's in a large enough place ie it only matters in the sea or the oceans not a lake in a park, is also fundamentaly flawed and has contributed to current crisis.
Nice. Should I bite now? As has been mentioned things can co-exist. Shall we exclude the boats because of breeding grounds ? No. Just realised I've just bitten. Nice provoking thread though that really could have gone on the original thread really.
Hook, line and sinker SLR. You forgot the smiley winkey thingey.
Spent a week in the “Bio diversity capital of the world” (not CP Park) which was a pretty amazing experience, and where I was introduced to the local pastime of piranha baiting - they bite too! Nothing exciting to talk about taste wise though.
Tricky to reply without bringing up the other thread. I'll reply separately to that next year. The issue is worthy of a separate thread, even if it might not belong in the news section of the VN
I happy to accept arguments that planet is going through it's sixth mass extinction event. The stats provided on the IUCN's website are fairly clear. A major issue is that this extinction event is being hidden behind the current fetish with climate change. This podcast from a couple of years ago explains that issue [link]
Unfortunately attempts to promote the issues use the same highly emotive tactic's used by climate change campaigners. While I agree with the main message of the video below, I fear the emotive side of it can lead to people being cynical about truth of the video.
I've always had an interest in "biodiversity" in our area and have habitually observed and recorded species data over the last 25 years. Many species populations common in our area in the late 80's can now be considered locally extinct and many existing species populations are clearly heading for local extinction. Increases for some species do not compensate for the loss. What's frustrating is that much of this species loss doesn't need to happen. Actions that would maintain or even increase population levels are often trivial (eg swift boxes in new blocks of flats). Unfortunately although there are statuary duties placed on local authorities to maintain and improve Biodiversity there is absolutely no means of enforcing these duties. In fact many councils no longer have an ecology officer. If councils are faced with a "biodiversity" situation that might cause problems they'll simply pay an expert to state there are no "significant" issue.
One example of habitat loss is the insidious loss of 'long grass' (there are many more, but I had a nice picture below for this one) The steep grassed embankments of the upper terrace have, because of their steepness, always been managed as meadow or irregularly cut 'long grass'. With the availability of modern petrol 'strimmer' Bromley now has these grass banks regularly cut. The picture below shows one of the first cutting of these banks during the summer in 2007. It was an unnecessary loss of habitat. Small actions like loosing areas of 'long grass' may seem trivial but they all add up. Modern machinery allows nearly all grass to be easily cut, and it's cheaper to cut the grass very short, so we have seen the loss of huge areas of 'long grass' in recent decades Remember the ability to routinely cut grass short is very recent, and throughout much of the parks history was not possible. The well maintained CP grounds would have had large areas of short mown grass (lawns) but these would have been the results of significant cost & effort. Ironically as Bromley was introducing the this cleansing of 'long grass' they were at the same time supporting the 'Masterplan' for CP Park stated that much of the grassland would be managed as meadow.
I wash my underwear using one bio tablet and one colour tablet. I didn't think I could get more diverse than that!
Behind the heavily-marketed 'whiter than white' and 'fresh smelling' language of the big-brand laundry detergents lurks a dubious cocktail of chemicals that have been linked to hormone disruption and liver damage.
Phthalates, used to make a fragrance last, are considered to be widespread contaminants linked to hormone disruption, birth defects, kidney, liver and testiculardamage (it's not a load of bollacks after all - not if you want to look after them that is) and it's hard to avoid using products containing both phthalates and artificial musks cos they don't have to be listed on the label.
Detergents can also contain alkylphenols which can affect fertility, damage the immune system and increase likelihood of genetic abnormalities during pregnancy - it's enough to make ya laugh yer socks off
Once down the drain these toxins are absorbed into the environment disrupting ecosystems and spreading the lurve You only have to look at say soil for example to see how a finely tuned chain of events can be messed up:
A major issue is that this extinction event is being hidden behind the current fetish with climate change. This podcast from a couple of years ago explains that issue [link]
Interesting podcast. Not sure if everyone would describe concerns about the climate change as a fetish though.
I like Wilson's Law of Applied Ecology " If you can save the living environment you will automatically save the physical environment."
Given the unusually warm autumn and the proliferation of second flowerings, I was wondering what impact this has, if any, on ecology and biodiversity?
Behind the heavily-marketed 'whiter than white' and 'fresh smelling' language of the big-brand laundry detergents lurks a dubious cocktail of chemicals that have been linked to hormone disruption and liver damage.
Phthalates, used to make a fragrance last, are considered to be widespread contaminants linked to hormone disruption, birth defects, kidney, liver and testiculardamage (it's not a load of bollacks after all - not if you want to look after them that is) and it's hard to avoid using products containing both phthalates and artificial musks cos they don't have to be listed on the label.
Detergents can also contain alkylphenols which can affect fertility, damage the immune system and increase likelihood of genetic abnormalities during pregnancy - it's enough to make ya laugh yer socks off
Once down the drain these toxins are absorbed into the environment disrupting ecosystems and spreading the lurve You only have to look at say soil for example to see how a finely tuned chain of events can be messed up:
Trouble is that many of these claims are based on experiments using huge quantities of chemicals on mice and other organisms ie not on quantities that are likely to be encountered in practice. Pregnant women need have no fear of laundry detergents. The chemical industry is highly regulated and in my opinion Unilever is a very responsible organisation. Not sure what your nitrogen cycle is meant to illustrate but I think alkyl phenols and phthalates should be relatively easily be broken down in soil without disrupting the nitrogen cycle.
That's why we wash our clothes with soap nuts (just as good as washing powder), or use ecover (just as good as Fairy) or bicarbonate of soda as a stain remover/overnight soaker (deoderises too), or use an ecloth for general cleaning. If we need a fragrance we use natural oils that work wonders.
All of these are better for the environment and cheaper than using 'wot you can get in the supermarkit'.
Be wary of some own brand so called 'eco products', read the back label, they aren't all what they appear to be, Tesco were particularly bad with their 'naturally range' a year or so ago.
