Below are links to stories on Biodiversity, especially relating to aviation and airports.
Environmental Audit Cttee inquiry into environmental damage of tourism (in UK and by Brits abroad)
Holidaymakers’ responsibility for foul beaches, overcrowding, traffic, plane carbon emissions, harm done by cruises and other environmental impacts will come under parliamentary scrutiny. The Commons Environmental Audit Committee (chaired by the remarkable Mary Creagh) has an inquiry to address problems caused by tourism, including aviation emissions, pollution, habitat damage etc in UK and abroad. Deadline for comments 13th September. It will look at whether the UK government should play a greater role in offsetting the waste and damage caused by the tens of millions of Britons who go on holiday overseas each year - and of the impact on domestic tourism in the UK. The Committee says global tourism is responsible for 5% of greenhouse gas emissions. People do not often consider the environmental, and climate, impacts of their holidays. “While there are some sustainable practices, we want to look closely at the government’s actions to ensure the economic, social and environmental impacts of tourism are minimised.” Due to ever cheaper flights, and zero tax on aviation fuel, the holiday business is one of the world’s fastest-growing industries and accounts for more than 10% of global GDP. Many countries have had to take strict measure to prevent serious damage done by excessive tourism, eg in Philippines, or Venice or Thailand. Or US hiking trails.
IPBES report on global biodiversity loss. Comment on impact of tourism
The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) has published a report on the serious global loss of biodiversity. IPBES says: "Long-distance transportation of goods and people, including for tourism, have grown dramatically in the past 20 years with negative consequences for nature overall. The rise in airborne and seaborne transportation of both goods and people, including a threefold increase in travel from developed and developing countries in particular, has increased pollution and significantly raised invasive alien species... Between 2009 and 2013, the carbon footprint from tourism rose 40% to 4.5 gigatons of carbon dioxide and overall 8% of the total greenhouse-gas emissions are from transport and food consumption that are related to tourism. The demand for nature-based tourism, or ecotourism, also has risen, with mixed effects on nature and local communities, including some potential for contributions to local conservation in particular when carried out at smaller scales."
Warning at UN Biodiversity Conference that humanity’s rush into biofuels/biomass will devastate global biodiversity
Growing enough plants to provide biomass and biofuels, that are meant to slow climate change (climate breakdown) compared to burning fossil fuels, will need a biofuel land grab: a 10 to 30-fold rise in land devoted to these crops from the level now. This means the destruction of the habitats for plants and animals, seriously undermining the essential global biodiversity. This warning was spelt out at the UN Biodiversity Conference in Egypt by Anne Larigauderie, executive secretary of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, IPBES. The latest IPCC report, on limiting climate warming to 1.5°C, had given “a sense of extreme urgency" for ways to cut CO2 emissions, fast. But this mean "tradeoffs and synergies between climate, biodiversity and land degradation.” More land would be used for monocultures of plants like maize. Perhaps by 2050 up to 724 million hectares, an area almost the size of Australia, might be used for biofuel crops - compared to perhaps 15 to 30m ha now. There is very little "marginal land" that could be used for these crops (they need water etc, and decent soils). This use of biomass will inevitably have "negative consequences for biodiversity.” By contrast, reforestation and forest protection helps reduce carbon more effectively.
Report finds widespread wildlife trafficking at airports across 114 countries, including Heathrow
In June 2016 officials discovered 142 kg of ivory in six suitcases in Charles de Gaulle Airport. All six bags belonged to one passenger who was traveling from Angola to Vietnam through Paris. A new analysis - by C4ADS - of global airport wildlife seizure and trafficking data reveals that criminals are exploiting air transport to smuggle protected and endangered animals and animal products on commercial flights. The report, “Flying Under the Radar: Wildlife Trafficking in the Air Transport Sector,” analyses airport seizures of ivory, rhino horn, birds and reptiles from January 2009 to August 2016. Wildlife traffickers moving ivory, rhino horn, reptiles and birds by air tend to rely on large hub airports all over the world. Overall, 114 countries had at least one instance of wildlife trafficking in the air transport sector during the period covered by the report. Some of these, especially of reptiles and birds, involve European airports. The report says creating awareness among personnel and passengers, training air industry staff, strengthening enforcement seizure protocols and reporting and sharing seizure information, could cut the numbers. In the UK, Heathrow is the main place that illegally trafficked wildlife products travel through. The illegal trade seriously threatens many species, and is a high profit enterprise.
More intelligent approaches, understanding bird psychology, help cut risk of bird strikes
Safety fears have led to mass culls of birds near airports. But are such drastic measures necessary? It appears that about 70,000 gulls, starlings, geese and other birds have been killed around New York airports since since 2009. They have been killed by shooting, trapping, and sometimes gassing. The CAA say that the number of confirmed bird strikes rose from 1,496 to 1,665 between 2011 and 2015. Only in 6% of cases did it have some kind of operational effect on an aircraft. In many of these incidents, planes aborted take-off, returned to the airport, or diverted to another. According to Natural England, 12,956 birds were culled in 2015-16. Rooks, crows and pigeons made up the largest number. Bird conservation organisations wan airports to use less barbaric ways of reduce the risk of bird strikes. There are various technological solutions that may be effective. One bird ecology professor at Exeter university said that it is necessary to understanding of the birds’ point of view. A "sonic net" can be used, which is a noise played across areas to be protected. It needs to be at the same pitch as the alarm calls of birds, or predator noises that they are listening out for. “When birds experience this they either leave the area or their vigilance goes up because they can’t hear each other’s alert calls or a predator coming.” So the birds move away, as it is too risky to stay.
‘Miracle on the Hudson’ 2009 legacy: 70,000 birds killed around New York airports since then
On 15th January 2009 a US Airways Flight took off from New York's LaGuardia, soon hit a flock of big Canada geese, lost both engines - but almost miraculously landed safely on the Hudson River. All 155 people on board survived. Birds took the blame for the incident, and have been paying for it with their lives ever since. An Associated Press analysis of bird-killing programs at the New York City area's 3 major airports found that nearly 70,000 gulls, starling, geese and other birds have been slaughtered, mostly by shooting and trapping, since the 2009 accident, and it is not clear whether those killings have made the skies safer. Advocates for the birds say officials should find other, more effective ways to protect aircraft. Between January 2009 and October 2016, of the 70,000 birds killed, there were 28,000 seagulls, followed by about 16,800 European starlings, nearly 6,000 brown-headed cowbirds and about 4,500 mourning doves, and 1,830 Canada geese. The FAA say of the known birds that caused damage to planes, in 249 incidents, 2009 - 2016, 54 were seagulls, 12 were osprey, 11 were double-crested cormorants and 30 were geese; 69 unknown. Airport officials try to keep birds out of a 5-mile radius around the airports' runways.
Heathrow hopes to pay homeowners to get access to their properties, in order to do required surveys, to speed runway
Bloomberg reports that Heathrow is offering homeowners cash to take part in a nature study. This is to get studies on local biodiversity done fast, so Heathrow can get its dreamed of 3rd runway through quickly. Heathrow is apparently offering hundreds of homeowners a £1,000 reward if they take part in environmental studies, needed for its runway planning. The letter from Nigel Milton says "This may require a visit from our team..." The legal position is that Heathrow has no right of entry on to anyone's property without their consent. Local campaign SHE is concerned some householders may feel pressured into giving Heathrow access. The owners of houses and farmland where the 3rd runway would be built will apparently qualify for the payment in return for agreeing to several visits over about two years, to assess biodiversity. Heathrow will soon be knocking on doors, hoping people will agree to the "free" cash. [Getting this access from people overcomes the problems of getting onto private land - which otherwise could take time, and hold back the runway plans]. Heathrow have to get enough owners to sign up, to get enough information on bats, newts etc. Agricultural land and rivers must also be surveyed. Normally some fairly inadequate mitigation measure is put in place, if wildlife habitat is destroyed. Heathrow will be hoping no wildlife or other biodiversity issue causes them any delays.
German study indicates plane noise near Tegel airport has an impact on acoustic communication by birds
Scientists from the Max Planck Institute for Ornithology in Seewiesen in Germany have found that birds near Berlin's Tegel airport, one of Europe's largest, start singing significantly earlier in the morning than their counterparts at quieter locations. What's more, they discovered that chaffinches stop singing when the noise from air traffic exceeds a threshold of 78 decibels (A). The two most important functions of birdsong are territorial defence and the attraction of a mating partner, and so disturbances to birdsong by noise can impair the birds' reproductive success. The scientists selected the Jungfernheide forest, immediately adjacent to the airport, with a similar area of forest 4 kilometres away, the Tegeler forest - where the noise was on average 30 decibels lower. Berlin-Tegel airport operates between 06.00 and 23.00, with a plane taking off or landing about every two minutes. with noise levels of up to 87 dB(A) during take-offs and landings. The birds near the airport were found to start singing a bit earlier. This may be to make up for time lost during the day, when they stop singing if the noise gets too loud. The noise of each flight lasts for perhaps 30 seconds, every 2 minutes, So the birds are losing about a quarter of their available communication time while flights are operating. So starting to sing earlier in the morning is clearly worthwhile.
GACC research studies show hugely negative impact of 2nd runway on urbanisation, habitats and wildlife
As part of the extensive series of research studies that GACC has produced, there are papers on the problems that a 2nd runway would do in urbanising the Crawley area, and the problems for local habitat and wildlife. "The Urbanisation of Crawley" by scientist Peter Jordan, shows how the future would be at risk. Peter says: "Crawley and the surrounding towns already have severe problems of congestion on inadequate road and rail links. A 2nd runway could only make these problems worse, without any realistic plan to address them." The airport boundary would be just a hundred yards from the nearest residential area of Crawley. "The Gatwick Landscape" by naturalist and author, David Bangs, draws attention to the hitherto largely unrecognised landscape wealth of history. Dr Tony Whitbread CEO of the Sussex Wildlife Trust, says: "A 2nd runway at Gatwick would require 577 ha of land for the construction of the runway, terminal, car parks and new on-airport roads. Rather than dismissing this [as Gatwick airport does] as “a few fields”, Dave Bangs has made a careful study of this area. His emotive account is the perspective of an expert who loves every aspect of nature. He reveals the hidden riches of a place which could be bulldozed into oblivion." With tragic loss of natural landscape and wildlife habitats.
Heathrow try to dress up the damage its runway would do to Colne Valley park as a huge bonus
Finding that a runway decision by the government is probably still months away, Heathrow is scraping around to find some bits of PR it can use to promote its runway plans. The planned runway would cut into the Colne Valley Regional Park, taking out a chunk of it. The park is already seriously affected by Heathrow, being just to the west of it. In 2013 Colne Valley said the runway would wipe out parts of the park. It would hit Colnbrook hardest, and see Lakeside Education Centre lost along with nearly all of the Green Belt north of the by-pass to Sutton Lane. Colnbrook West and Orlitts Lake would be filled in, while the Colne Brook would be culverted or diverted along with three other rivers locally. And so on. But Heathrow is now proud to produce its plans for a lovely new park, with a lot of new improvements - but these would ONLY be made if it gets its runway. Not otherwise - other than the £5,000 it gives each year. Nothing in the carefully written "doublespeak" from Heathrow, describing the park, reveals just how much damage the runway would in fact do to the park. The board of the Colne Valley Park CIC (Community Interest Company) remain "opposed to the building of the third runway due to the detrimental impact this will have upon the Regional Park." If the runway is allowed, they will have to work with Heathrow to ensure the rest of the park continues to benefit wildlife, and local communities.