MiddleRiver
Well-known member
I don't disagree with broader picture. And there is the risk of alienating some with mere use of the word 'climate', whereas you could demonize, say, palm-oil industry with lots less push-back. But I do subscribe to science and if ornithologists are correlating temperature shifts with migration etc. then I'm not going to hide my concern. I also thought it was relatively 'balanced' (of course the title is clickbait...):Articles like this are, I believe, quite harmful in that they put almost all the emphasis on climate change and ignore what are far more pressing issues for most species. Using terms like "climate breakdown" (whatever that means) and "climate emergency" are activism, not journalism. What about the poaching emergency, or the palm oil emergency, or the dog-walker emergency, or the domestic cat emergency?
I'm not arguing against the stresses that climate change are putting on ecosystems, but this issue is so highly politicised, it seems to take-up all the oxygen in environmental issues. Ending the capture of wild birds for the cage bird industry, or reduction in the use of palm oil, would be much more achievable goals, and in the foreseeable future would save potentially dozens of birds from extinction.
"The scientists said human activity was likely to be driving the drops in numbers, with changing rainfall patterns, increasing temperatures and deforestation causing stress to bird populations."
Deforestation is likely palm-oil, cattle, or other resource exploitation, and whether it's population growth or climate, at the end of the day, it does seem humans are implicated at one level or another. So yes, capture of birds for pet shops (or even food) plays a big part, but clearly there are larger systemic and global issues that ought to be discussed by anyone who is a birder. YMMV of course ;-)
BTW, I agree with all the other 'emergencies'. Just look at predation by house cats! So yes, by all means, post up!