Skip to main content
Geos Institute helps communities build resilience in the face of climate change

Author: eric Gotfrid

Kauri tree

Why Biodiversity is Important to Solving Climate Chaos: Top 10 Reasons

By Dominick DellaSala

Originally published in Island Press Notes: an Island Press blog on September 13, 2013.

Having jump-started my career as a conservation biologist riding the 1980s explosion of scientific and public interest in biodiversity, I have progressively witnessed how biophilia has given way to climate change concerns with the public, decision makers, scientists, and philanthropists (who have increasingly moved funding out of biodiversity and into climate change). In the meantime, we have lost sight of why biodiversity is critical to solving climate chaos. In fact, our biodiversity roots are indeed needed to solve climate chaos as the natural world holds the keys for reaching both a safe climate and living planet. After all, the planet’s life-given atmosphere is a byproduct of billions of years of atmospheric and biological forces in synch with one another and balanced by life on earth. We are poised to change that balance through unprecedented human-caused extinctions interacting with greenhouse gas pollutants, both byproducts of runaway population growth and unsustainable consumption levels.

Simply put, the path we are on today – some call it the “Great Acceleration” – or “Anthropocene” (Age of Humanity) – is triggering the sixth great extinction spasm (aka E.O. Wilson) through unprecedented species losses and a build up of heat-trapping gasses. The path ahead must recognize that we need nature to survive and overcome these dangerous times, lest we live in a world where wild things are pushed to the brink and climate disruptions worsen loses to both nature and people. Here are my top 10 reasons for why reinvigorating biodiversity conservation is critical to both a stable climate and a living planet.

Kauri tree
Massive trees like New Zealand’s Kauri (Agathis australis) not only support unique temperate rainforest communities but are vital in the effort to find a solution to global warming. Bio-diverse temperate rainforests globally absorb the equivalent of over 60 times the world’s annual greenhouse gas pollutants. 

  1. Areas of high ecological integrity (generally intact systems) with full complement of species and processes (biodiverse) are more resilient (capable of rebounding from disturbance) and resistant (capable of withstanding disturbance) to climate change and human disturbances.
  2. High levels of biodiversity are associated with productive ecosystem services, including pollination (in major decline in agriculturally simplified systems), carbon sequestration and long-term storage (highest in old-growth biodiverse forests), nutrient cycling, soil formation, predator-prey dynamics (complex food webs), and provisioning services such as clean air and water, food, timber, and fiber. All of these services are at risk in a changing climate and from their exploitation.
  3. High levels of biodiversity tend to be associated with human-well being (quality of life) and human health, which are at risk from increased air pollution, reduced quality and quantity of clean water, respiratory ailments, and natural disasters exacerbated by climate change. Natural systems and their inherent biodiversity can ameliorate at least some of these ailments as nearly 1 of every 4 medicines was originally synthesized from the world’s tropical rainforests that we also desperately need for a stable climate.
  4. A diverse coastal environment with intact and functional wetlands is best at absorbing increasing storm surges and sea-level rise caused by global warming.
  5. A diverse streamside channel with fully functional and intact riparian areas and wetlands are more capable of ameliorating flood damages and storing water especially if keystone species such as beaver are present.
  6. Biodiversity is a kind of climate change insurance – we humans know very little about how natural systems work and how tipping points can trigger cascading ecological effects. Examples from marine fisheries abound where entire systems have collapsed due to over-fishing of a few commercially valuable fish that limit options for climate change adaptation.
  7. There is magic in wild places; climate change removes that magic as a product of an ever-increasing human footprint – a dangerous feedback loop is being set up where biodiversity is hammered, resulting in diminished ecosystem services, concomitant impacts to humans that then put more pressure on those systems until they are extinguished. Numerous studies have linked poverty to decline in natural capital and this will only worsen as the poor feel climate impacts disproportionately.
  8. Diversity in nature allows for more adaptation options in the future –biodiverse prairies with their full complement of wildflowers, for instance, are more capable of rebounding after disturbance than mega-farms.
  9. Intact and connected landscapes are better able to provide refugia for climate-forced wildlife migrations than fragmented areas with low levels of diversity and artificial barriers to migration.
  10. High levels of genetic diversity allow for greater phenotypic plasticity (i.e., more adaptive responses) than low levels of genetic diversity. Similarly, genetically modified organisms may be maladaptive in a changing climate due to their simplified genetic structure.

Field blog picAll species have a right to exist and are a product of eons of evolution at work (many believe a Creator is also at work). We should not have to choose between climate change or biodiversity nor justify biodiversity investments based mainly on Anthropentric views. We owe it to our children to leave both a living planet and a safe climate: the two are woven together like strands in the great web of life and all the strands are important for their own sake as well as ours.  

First Global Assessment of Roadless Areas Presented at International Congress

Contact: Dominick DellaSala, Geos Institute, 541/482-4459 x302

Last July in Baltimore, representatives of the Society for Conservation Biology (SCB) participated in a Roadless Area Symposium at the biennial International Congress for Conservation Biology 2013. Scientists described their research about global and regional perspectives on conserving roadless areas and shared preliminary results from the first global assessment of roadless areas.

Continue reading

Opinion: BLM lands give us clean water

Medford Mail Tribune Opinion by Dominick A. DellaSala

The July 14 guest opinion “Logging didn’t cause water problems” by retired forester Theodore Lorensen digs deep into my report, featured in the Mail Tribune on June 27, to find any contentious points to discredit my message that unlogged Bureau of Land Management lands are important for clean water. Decades of research, and not just modeling studies or one contentious example from Salem that he cites, provide strong evidence that heavily logged and roaded watersheds, most notably those occurring on state and private lands, contribute to significant water quality problems.

It’s simple, really: When you clearcut the trees and bulldoze the ground, heavy rains wash away the soil, leading to more landslides and muddy water. Heavy erosion events stem directly from road-related slope failures. Clearcutting on steep slopes, logging in streamside areas and culvert failures that cumulatively leak sediments into streams are expensive for public water utilities to treat low-quality water, and they damage salmon runs. There are numerous government reports, field studies and water-quality monitoring reports by the Department of Environmental Quality that back my claims. Lorensen is correct that landslides also can occur in healthy watersheds during heavy rains, like the one in Salem years ago, but the evidence is solid that there are many more in logged and roaded watersheds contributing to Oregon’s water quality problems.

On the other hand, well-protected and well-managed watersheds are much better at reducing flood damage and producing clean water, healthy fish and wildlife populations, more resilient local economies and outdoor recreational benefits as fully detailed in my report. Forest thinning, if done judiciously, can also lower fire risks to watersheds by culling overly dense small trees as in the Ashland watershed.

Other restorative actions can put loggers to work removing failing roads and repairing inappropriately sized road culverts. Communities throughout Oregon are doing this right now through Oregon’s Salmon Plan and the restorative work of watershed councils.

I also cite studies documenting the ecosystem benefits of well-managed (unlogged) watersheds that represent an estimated savings to public water utilities and taxpayers in billions of dollars from road-related sediment avoidance costs nationally. From the forest to the faucet, unlogged watersheds are wellsprings of clean water, which will only become increasingly valuable economically and ecologically as many communities in the West struggle with over-allocation of precious water supplies and climate change triggers more intense droughts.

As a conservation scientist, I am inclined to inform the public of what’s at risk to our public lands by using the tools of my trade — computer modeling, literature reviews, fieldwork and publishing in peer-reviewed journals, the gold standard for scientific publication — which I routinely do. Putting all that aside, you only have to look out the window the next time you fly over Oregon’s intensively managed forests to see the maze of roads and shotgun blast of clearcuts, mostly on private lands. In our region alone (Klamath-Siskiyou) there are enough forest roads to drive to Portland and back 50 times. Clearly, this isn’t good for salmon, clean water or wildlife.

It is also my civic duty and responsibility as a parent to advocate for a healthy planet with vibrant salmon runs and clean water and to warn of the dangers of rampant logging as the science clearly shows. Attempting to discredit a solid body of scientific evidence with one contentious finger-pointing episode is not helping. “Get the cut out” forestry myths from decades ago will not give us clean water, healthy wildlife or vibrant communities. They will lead only to more polarization and a return to failed policies of the past.

Sen. Ron Wyden can create a legacy for Oregonians if he protects our remaining mature forests and watersheds for their drinking water, outstanding fish and wildlife habitat and scenic beauty.

———-
Dominick A. DellaSala is chief scientist for the Geos Institute and author of the award-winning book “Temperate and Boreal Rainforests of the World: Ecology and Conservation.” Read more online at ipfieldnotes.org/author/dominickdellasala/

 

 

 

Timber bill could pollute drinking water, study warns

by Paul Fattig, Medford Mail Tribune

An environmental group warns that a substantial portion of the drinking water for some 1.5 million Oregonians could be at risk if a proposed bill to create a timber trust on federal forestlands in Western Oregon becomes law.  The computerized study by the Ashland-based Geos Institute released Thursday concluded that nearly 80 communities, including Medford, Rogue River and Grants Pass, could have their drinking water sources polluted by logging sediment if the O&C Trust, Conservation and Jobs Act is approved. READ MORE>

Drinking Water for Over 1.5 Million Oregonians At-Risk If Logging Increased on BLM Holdings

To Us, Every Day is Earth Day

Medford Mail Tribune

Guest Opinion by Dominick DellaSala and Ed Begley, Jr. 

One of us is an actor who has devoted much of his life to developing a “low impact” lifestyle and teaching others how to do so. The other is a conservation scientist who works to protect rainforests around the world. The daily work that feeds our passions could hardly be more different — yet we are each responding to the same challenge. What can we do so that Earth Day remains an American legacy to clean air, wild rivers, ancient forests and a stable climate because, after all, aren’t we all in this together?

At the top of our Earth Day agenda is the climate. Nearly a century ago, the downtown Grants Pass sign — “It’s the Climate” — first welcomed tourists to the beauty of our region. But the sign needs a facelift and should read,”The climate is becoming unsafe, so what are you going to do about it?”

Continue reading

A 21st Century Blueprint for Saving Oregon Species from Climate Change

Guest Opinion by Bill Bradbury

OregonLive.com        click here 

You don’t have to leave western Oregon to witness the escalating impacts of climate change .

On Mount Hood, river-feeding glaciers thousands of years old have shrunk by as much as 60 percent in the past 100 years.

In the often water-starved Klamath Basin, average summer temperatures are projected to increase by more than 10 degrees by 2075, with surrounding snowpack levels expected to decrease by as much as 90 percent.

In the Columbia River, average August and September water temperatures are already pushing levels that disrupt salmon migration, and they’re projected to rise another 4 degrees by midcentury.

Given those pressing realities, I read with great interest the plan just released by the Obama administration to help America’s wildlife adapt to the rapid habitat changes caused by global warming. Much of the plan’s focus is on plants and animals protected under the Endangered Species Act . The act, which turns 40 this year, is not without its critics, and I can be frustrated by how long it can take to get protection for critically imperiled species and, once they’re listed, how long it can take to get a recovery plan in place.

Yet, when we use it as intended, the law can have a tremendous impact. More than 90 percent of the species it protects have been saved from extinction, and hundreds are on the road to recovery. Here in Oregon, some of our most cherished species — from coho salmon to gray whales and bald eagles — owe their existence to the Endangered Species Act.

But as we move through the climate-fueled challenges of the 21st century, we’re entering uncharted waters in the battle to preserve the broad diversity of life critical to our planet’s future.

The Obama administration’s new plan includes a series of mitigation measures for wildlife, including protecting corridors that allow animals to move to more suitable habitat as climate change alters ecosystems. It’s an intriguing idea, but will it be enough? Or is it simply an incremental step in a much longer journey we’ve yet to commit to?
We’re entering uncharted waters in the battle to preserve the broad diversity of life critical to our planet’s future.

What “corridor,” for example, can help coho salmon escape the ever more heated Columbia River? And consider the plight of Oregon’s fast-disappearing wolverines. Scientists have known for some time now that wolverines require at least 5 feet of spring snowpack in the high-mountain terrain where they dig protective dens.

So it was hardly surprising that when proposing Endangered Species Act protections for wolverines earlier this year, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service scientists cited climate change as the greatest threat to the 300 or so of the solitary predators that remain from Oregon and Washington to the northern Rockies. Unchecked, temperature increases could very likely wipe out wolverines in the Lower 48 before the end of this century.

Yet, just as was the case when polar bears were listed as “threatened” in 2008, federal wildlife managers declared that any protections extended to the wolverine would not include regulation of greenhouse gas pollution — the leading driver of rising global temperatures that are threatening wolverines and degrading the planet we all share. That troubling dichotomy reflects the need for a dramatic change in our current political climate, one in which elected officials can be far too quick to trade critically important long-term conservation and economic benefits for the exaggerated benefits of short-term economic gain.

Whenever we’re ready, even the most challenging policy solutions are within reach. We need only glance back at the confident steps taken to preserve the national bird we now routinely see soaring above the Willamette River for a model of how to move forward. We not only used the Endangered Species Act to protect bald eagles from being killed and captured — much as we’re proposing to do with the wolverine — but we also banned pesticides such as DDT. In the process of protecting the eagle’s habitat, as required by the Endangered Species Act, we cleaned up the waterways critical to our own health and economic stability.

The sooner we realize that protecting our environment and our economy is not an “either-or” proposition, the more quickly we can get down to the work of building a sustainable bridge to the future that’s anchored in the reality of our times.

Only then will we have a real shot at protecting Oregon’s irreplaceable ecosystems, from the high-mountain home of wolverines and our winter sports industries to the rivers critical to the future of our salmon runs, as well as our commercial and recreational fishing interests.

 Bill Bradbury,
 former Oregon Secretary of State, is a member of the NW Power and Conservation Council and is on the board of the Oregon Environmental Council and Geos Institute. 

Defazio Logging Trust Proposal – More Harm than Good

CONTACT: Randi Spivak, Vice President of Government Affairs, Geos Institute (310) 779-4894

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Three proposals to address payments to counties were considered today at a hearing of the Public Lands and Environmental Regulation Subcommittee of the House Natural Resources Committee, including H.R. ____, “Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act” (Hastings); and H.R. ____, “O&C Trust, Conservation, and Jobs Act” (DeFazio, Walden, Schrader); and H.R. 1294, “Self-Sufficient Community Lands Act of 2013” (Labrador).

All three would effectively privatize federal public forestlands by creating legally binding fiduciary trusts for the sole purpose of providing revenues to counties, resulting in industrialized clearcuts across the landscape. The DeFazio-Walden-Schrader proposal would effectively privatize 1.5 million acres of public forests Western Oregon.

Continue reading

Lawmakers like plan to revamp O & C lands

Co-authors of the O&C Trust Conservation and Jobs Act say it will help former timber receipt beneficiaries.

by Paul Fattig, Medford Mail Tribune

A trio of Oregon congressmen expressed optimism over a plan to revamp management of the O&C lands in Western Oregon, following a House Natural Resources subcommittee hearing Thursday morning.  read more >

Study: Bark beetle outbreak not the culprit in recent rash of western fires

CONTACTS:
Scott Black, Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation; (503) 449-3792, sblack@xerces.org
Dominik Kulakowski, Clark University; (508) 793-7383, dkulakowski@clark.edu 
Barry Noon, Colorado State University; (970) 491-7905, brnoon@warnercnr.colostate.edu
Dominick DellaSala, Chief Scientist and President of Geos Institute (541) 621-7223

PORTLAND, Ore.—A new paper published today in the Natural Areas Journal (click here for the full text) indicates that bark beetle outbreaks that have turned millions of acres of forests in the Inter-mountain West a noticeable red coloration (from tree death) do not substantially increase the risk of active crown fire in lodgepole pine and spruce forests as commonly assumed. Instead, “Do Bark Beetle Outbreaks Increase Wildfire Risks in the Central U.S. Rocky Mountains? Implications from Recent Research” documents evidence that active crown fires in these forest types are primarily triggered by dry conditions exacerbated by climate change.

Continue reading