Species’ ingenious survival strategies no match for human destruction, red list reveals

The Guardian

Newly endangered animals include desert frogs and snails in extreme ocean depths, both threatened by mining

Damian Carrington Environment editor

Life has colonised every corner of the planet by evolving ingenious survival strategies but these are increasingly being overwhelmed by destructive human activities, this year’s red list of endangered species has revealed.

Many snails, limpets and clams have adapted to life at crushing depths in the oceans on hydrothermal vents where water temperatures can reach 450C (842F). But an assessment for the red list found that two-thirds of the hundreds of mollusc species found only on deep sea vents were at risk of extinction because of deep-sea mining

Mining for diamonds has put another extraordinary creature at risk of disappearing – the desert rain frog. Most frogs rely on water for survival but the bulbous desert rain frog has evolved to need almost none. It hides from the southern African sun by burying itself deep in the sand, coming out only at night to hunt insects.

However, dwindling species can be saved, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), which produces the red list, said. The new list shows the numbat, a stripy, termite-eating marsupial from Australia, has come back from the brink thanks to protection from feral cats and foxes.

At least five more self-sustaining numbat populations have been established owing to conservation work. Photograph: phototrip/Alamy

“Life on Earth has adapted to survive in the most hostile and unusual habitats [but] as pressures on biodiversity mount across the planet, even the creatures with the most ingenious survival strategies are under threat,” said Dr Grethel Aguilar, the IUCN director general. “But there is a clear path out of the biodiversity crisis: nature conservation works. By protecting the astounding range of biodiversity on this planet, we can preserve a welcoming environment for humans and wildlife alike.”

An IUCN update in April declared emperor penguins officially in danger of extinction owing to the mass drowning of chicks as sea ice is melted by the climate crisis.

More than 200 species of mollusc are known to live only on hydrothermal vents, where water heated by volcanic rocks jets out from the seabed. Many have been discovered only in the last decade but already face extinction.

The exploration and extraction of deep-sea minerals throws up sediments that smother the animals. One snail, Lirapex felix, is classed as critically endangered because of mining activity in the Indian Ocean.

However, more than 30 vent species are not in danger, as they live in marine protected areas where mining is not allowed. These include an ornately shelled snail, Provanna exquisita, that lives only in the Mariana Arc of Fire national wildlife refuge in the Pacific Ocean.

skip past newsletter promotio

after newsletter promotion

The Provanna exquisita snail is not in danger as it lives in a marine protected area. Photograph: Chong Chen

“This global assessment reveals that [vent] molluscs are one of the most highly threatened of all animal groups,” said Prof Julia Sigwart at Senckenberg Nature Research, the IUCN red list partner that coordinated the assessment. “It provides important information as the International Seabed Authority meets in Jamaica this month.” The IUCN voted for a moratorium on deep-sea mining in 2021.

The desert rain frog is classed as vulnerable owing to diamond mining and energy infrastructure expansion into its range along the west coast of South Africa and Namibia. There is further pressure on the frog because of rising demand from the exotic pet trade following a viral video of the species squeaking its distress call.

The good news on the numbat comes after decades of conservation work, which has helped numbers rebound from a low of just 300 in the late 1970s to between 2,000 and 3,000 today. The numbat has moved from endangered to near threatened on the red list.

The impact of feral cats and red foxes has been reduced by baiting and predator-proof fencing, as well as captive breeding at Perth zoo and translocations from healthy groups. As a result, at least five more self-sustaining populations have been established. However, the species occupies only 0.04% of its original range across southern Australia, meaning continuing conservation work is essential, experts said.

Another five Australian marsupials have been confirmed as extinct on the red list, with no sightings for at least 60 years. The crest-tailed, southern, northern and little mulgaras were rat-sized carnivores, while the little bettong was a rabbit-sized jumping marsupial. They are likely to have fallen prey to feral cats and foxes. More than 40 modern mammal extinctions have been recorded in Australia.

And then there were none: Australia’s only shrew declared extinct

John Woinarski

Read more

“The [numbat] assessment shows that long-term conservation effort works; without it, invasive cats and foxes will continue to drive Australia’s small marsupials and native rodents to extinction,” said Prof John Woinarski, co-chair of the IUCN species survival commission group on Australasian marsupials and monotremes.

“Continued management is vital not only to maintain the numbat’s unique evolutionary line as the last surviving member of the Myrmecobiidae family, but also to support its role in maintaining a healthy ecosystem, as digging for the termites it eats increases rain penetration into the soil, helping protect woodlands,” he said.

The IUCN red list includes 175,909 species of which 49,505 are threatened with extinction, although many species have yet to be formally assessed.

New study finds clear‑cut logging can dramatically increase flood risk.

The Conversation

In the past 30 years, floods have affected more than 2.8 billion people worldwide and caused over 500,000 deaths. In Canada, flooding has caused significant damage and disruption to communities across the country. The 2021 floods in British Columbia’s Fraser Valley cost an estimated $14 billion in damages.

Torrential rain sweeps away a railway trestle near Roblin, Manitoba, leaving rails and ties suspended high in the air (below). Photos by Richard Suidak.
July, 2026.

Story here.

Roundup - Miracle Product or Public Menace? -

 by Larry Powell

circa 2010

Despite copious evidence that the globally-popular weed-killer may be harmful to crops, livestock and humans, the Government of Canada seems in no hurry to act. Last June, Health Canada (which regulates pesticides) announced it was aware of such evidence, but, that, "It did not raise immediate risk concerns that would have triggered regulatory action." Then, in November, the Federal Court ordered the Minister of Health, Leona Aglukkaq, to reconsider a decision she had made in August, 2009. That's when she turned down a citizen's request for a "special" review of the product. The Minister settled instead for a longer-range, routine re-evaluation. That didn't begin until some two years later and won't be finished for about another two. That court order came down some 10 weeks ago. As this story goes to press, the Minister is still "reconsidering" the matter. 

Ask most conventional farmers about Roundup, they'll tell you. It's a chemical they spray regularly on their canola, soybeans or corn, just after they come up, to get rid of weeds. Sometimes, they also apply it in the fall to cereal crops like wheat and barley as a "desiccant," to dry them out, in preparation for harvest. 

The seeds used to grow the crops have been altered to resist Roundup, by adding a gene from another species. It’s called genetic modification (GM) or transgenics. These "genetically-modified organisms," (GMOs) allow the Roundup to kill the weeds, but spare the crops. Hence the term, "Roundup-Ready" (RR).

In addition to food crops, forestry companies use Roundup (and similar formulations) to keep down unwanted weed growth which would otherwise smother re-plantings after clear-cutting. 

Then, there is its so-called "cosmetic use" on lawns and gardens to keep them free of such nuisance weeds as dandelions. Use of Roundup for these purposes has now been restricted in Quebec and Ontario. Manitoba is now considering a similar ban. While these "cosmetic uses" are coming under increasing regulatory scrutiny, use of the product in agriculture and forestry is largely uncontrolled.

Roundup has, for years, been the top-selling herbicide for the company that makes it, US-based Monsanto, and a key to its enormous commercial success. Monsanto is also a world leader in the production of GMOs. There are now almost 200 "copy-cat" formulations of Roundup under different brand names on the market. But Roundup, first registered in 1976, still dominates.

And, it works. "RR" crops are, for the most part, clean and weed-free. 

But an examination of the research done into the safety of Roundup over the years, offers many disturbing glimpses into a product which achieves such pristine monocultures. 

Soy Story - The Argentine Experience

Argentina has seen an explosion in plantings of "Roundup-Ready" soybeans in the past decade or so; 19 million hectares (47 million acres) in 2009 alone. This has meant a corresponding spike in the use of Roundup, to an estimated 200 million litres a year. 

Other countries in South America, including Brazil, have experienced similar upward spirals in soy production. 

Well over 90 percent of soybean crops have been genetically-modified and therefore require Roundup to succeed.

Just over a year ago, a team of international experts published what was (for a scientific research paper), a surprisingly damning indictment, not only of glyphosate, but of the very wisdom and sustainability of government ventures into vastly-expanded soybean production. 

The study, called, "GM Soy. Sustainable? Responsible?" not only published results of research done by team members themselves, but summarized research done elsewhere. And it documented the findings of a commission conducted by the central Argentinian State of Chaco in 2010. 

The Commission found that, from 2000 to 2009, childhood cancer rates tripled in the town of La Leonesa and birth defects increased almost fourfold over the entire state. Those results corresponded with greatly increased spraying of glyphosate and other agrochemicals in the region during that period. 

Scientific studies referred to in the paper, cite an association between glyphosate and at least two kinds of cancer, multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, (NHL), a cancer of the blood. An increased rate of NHL had been repeatedly observed among farmers for years, suggesting an association between use of pesticides, including glyphosate and the risk of the disease.

In laboratory tests, one team member, Andrés Carrasco of the University of Buenos Aires, found that glyphosate causes malformations in frog & chicken embryos similar to those in humans, at one-tenth the rate allowed in Argentina.

In an obvious attempt to counter critics who claim that lab tests are really "engineered" scenarios which don't truly replicate real situations, Prof. Carrasco noted that "experimental animals share similar developmental mechanisms with humans."

Many authors have reported that in the past 30 years there has been a significant decline in amphibian populations in several different parts of the world. 

In 2005, a researcher at the University of Pittsburgh, Rick Relyea, carried out seemingly-convincing research which pointed the finger directly at Roundup. He concluded that Roundup "Can cause extremely high rates of mortality to amphibians that could lead to population declines."  Prof. Relyea, of the University's Department of Biological Sciences, noted that earlier tests in the laboratory had already shown that the herbicide may be highly lethal to North American tadpoles. So he set up tests exposing three species of frogs, both larvae and juveniles, to Roundup, outdoors, in what he called "more natural conditions. After a single day, "the Roundup had killed up to 86% of the juveniles and, in three weeks, up to 100% of the larvae." 

The Canadian reaction

While Canadian plantings of soybeans pale in comparison to Argentina's, they are growing rapidly. According to the Canadian Soybean Council, overall soybean production reached a new high of 1.5 million hectares (3.7 million acres) in 2010, an 8-fold increase over 1973.

Even if one removes the soybean sector from the equation, Roundup use on GM canola (oilseed) crops in Canada is massive and has been growing since that crop came into widespread use on the prairies. Actual figures on the use of Roundup itself are hard to come by. But, according to the Canola Council of Canada, seeded acreage grew, from 4% of total canola acreage in 1996 to 70% in 2000! And the Council hopes to boost canola production by 65%, to 15 million tonnes by 2015.

Yet Canadian farmers don't seem to be buying into the horror stories emerging out of Argentina. 

Take Ron Gendzelevich, for example. He owns "Quarry Seed" on a 4,000-acre farm near Stonewall, Manitoba, north of Winnipeg. He describes his farm as an "experimental ground" where he sources hardy varieties of edible soybeans for northern climates and sells them. He also conducts workshops, advising other growers on best varieties, application rates and other planting tips. While he handles conventional (non GM) soy, he says 80% of it is "Roundup Ready."

Gendzelevich says, "I'm probably the first one to defend the environment." But, "For the most part, urban people just don't understand. You look at every crop out there, wheat, oats, beans, it's been genetically modified of some format. GM has been given a monster terminology that just isn't justified in most cases. Given the number of people we have to feed, we've got to make and grow as much as we can. The bigger issue is world population. If we are going to allow it to grow unchecked, we have to boost production because, which is better, to have a slightly safer world, with people starving, or a very small degree of risk with people being fed? That's the bigger question."

Gendzelevich adds, other farmers are using chemicals on other crops which are even more toxic than Roundup, including 2-4-D. "When I went to convert soybeans to RR, my Roundup use went up massively but my overall herbicide use went down dramatically. That's because you're dealing with a product that has the ability to kill weeds a little bit better. Before, you had to use 3 or 4 herbicides to do the overall same job as one can do and I think what you're finding is, you were putting a substantial amount more herbicides or chemicals on the ground in the olden days than today."

The soybean producer admits he doesn't know a lot about the Argentine experience. But, "I see a person swigging whisky and smoking, talking about how farmers are poisoning the world, I don't take 'em with any respect. Whether it's detergents, to all the different chemicals that you have from your furniture to your desktops to all kinds of stuff like that, and to associate birth defects with Roundup? I don't get it. I'm not implying Roundup is safe, just implying that there are so many different chemicals used in the environment today, the jacket you wear…and to say that Roundup is the cause, I'd like to see the evidence." 

The evidence.

A body of research done here in Canada more than a decade ago, pointed to a somewhat different conclusion and, at the same time, seemed to counter claims by its maker, Monsanto, that Roundup is safe.

In 1997, The Ontario Farm Family Health Study surveyed almost 19 hundred male farmers in Ontario who'd been exposed to several chemicals, including glyphosate in their faming activities. It concluded that their partners were "more than twice as likely" to miscarry or give birth, prematurely.

In 2,001 another phase of the same study, surveyed almost 4 thousand pregnant farm women in the same province. All had been involved in farming activities, milking cows, cultivating or seeding the fields and sometimes helping their partners mix and apply the herbicides. 395 of those women experienced miscarriages. All had been exposed to a variety of pesticides, including glyphosate. 

In the words of the study, "Among older women (over 34) exposed to glyphosate, the risk of miscarriage was three times that for women of the same age who were not exposed to this active ingredient."

The French connection

In 2009 (and earlier), laboratory findings by a leading French researcher, Gilles-Eric Séralini, proved consistent with that Canadian research. In his lab at the University of Caen, the molecular biologist demonstrated that, within 24 hours, the active ingredient in Roundup, glyphosate, was totally lethal to three different kinds of human cells (umbilical, embryonic and placental), at just a fraction of the concentrations used in agriculture and equal to those found in human and animal feed! 

 

Séralini was "surprised" to also discover that other ingredients in Roundup, besides glyphosate, were not the harmless substances the public had been led to believe. On the contrary, Roundup, as a mixture, was, in every test, always twice as deadly  as glyphosate alone! One of those other ingredients (polyoxyethylene tallow amines, POEA), stated the researcher, has been clinically shown to cause "high mortality in fish and amphibians." Regulators had been legally classifying  "POEA" as simply "inert."

He also concluded, "Its residues may thus enter the food chain, and glyphosate is found as a contaminant in rivers."

Séralini also concluded glyphosate is probably an "endocrine disruptor." That means it can affect the human brain, nervous and reproductive systems, even blood sugar levels by disrupting the normal functioning of hormones in the human body, including estrogen and testosterone.

Can Roundup (glyphosate) actually damage crops?

Extensive, multi-year research by an Agriculture Canada team led by Miriam Fernandez, published some two years ago, showed that use of glyphosate was actually a significant factor in the incidence of Fusarium head blight (FHB) and Common root rot (CRR) in wheat and barley crops planted up to 18 months after such application. Both FHB and CRR are considered serious diseases in these important cereal crops in places like eastern Saskatchewan, where the trials were conducted. The study appeared in the European Journal of Agronomy in 2009. While tillage practices were also found to have some effect, the team concluded, "Previous glyphosate use was consistently associated with higher FHB levels" … and "significantly increased" risk of the plant diseases. 

The court ruling 

In November, the Federal Court of Canada heard a complaint launched by Josette Wier, an environmental activist from the north-central BC town of Smithers. She was the same person who had been turned down after requesting the Minister to conduct a special review. Under Canada's Pest Control Products Act, anyone may ask for such a review, which the Minister "shall perform, unless there is reasonable certainty that no harm will result from exposure to the pesticide." 

Ms. Wier, the "applicant," had grown concerned that herbicides similar to Roundup, which logging companies were spraying on forests near her home, were harmful to human health and the environment. (The two products were "Vision," by Monsanto and "Vantage" by DowAgro. Both contain that suspect ingredient mentioned earlier, POEA. It apparently allows the glyphosate to spread more evenly on the waxy surface of leaves.) 

The applicant cited several studies already mentioned in this story, in documents she presented to the court. But during the proceedings, the judge, Mr. Justice Kelen, narrowed the case down to this: were those herbicides, "Vision" and "Vantage," harming frogs and salamanders in "transitory wetlands" (ones which come and go), in clear cut areas where the forest has been directly sprayed and replanted. He found that there wasn't enough information on this potential aspect and that the Minister's 2009 decision was neither "transparent or intelligible" in this regard. 

The court also found that Ms. Aglukkaq "erred in law" by arguing that a "special review" was not needed because a routine re-evaluation is underway. The judge found that it does not have to be one or the other - both are allowed to "co-exist" under the legislation. He found further that a special review could be both "targeted and possibly quicker" than the re-evaluation.

 

So just how binding is the ruling?

Despite its seemingly stern tone, the ruling isn't really binding at all. As Andrew Baumberge of the Federal Court of Canada explains, "The courts should not interfere with the exercise of a discretion by a statutory authority merely because the court might have exercised the discretion in a different manner… The Court is not meant to make the decision in the place of the federal government office/official"

At the time of this writing, some ten weeks after the judgement, a spokesperson at Health Canada says the Minister is still "reconsidering" the matter.

Any Lessons Learned?

If there are lessons to be learned from all of this, it's not clear just what they are. Soy, for example, is still being hailed at Canadian agricultural gatherings as the "Cinderella" crop of the future. And public discourse on the downsides of GM crops ranges from little to none.

Reaction to the court ruling

The individual who started it all, Ms. Wier, refuses to accept it as a defeat. "The ruling is only a small victory, but a victory, nevertheless. I truly feel that I am doing the job of government and that government has become the enemy.  Scientific facts mean nothing, as they are so embedded with industry and Monsanto, Dow Chemicals etc... are so powerful.

 

"So only what is left is this awful job going through the court and wasting enormous amounts of time and money.  I guess if changes are to happen, one should not expect any result soon, even in one's lifetime but what counts is to keep the flow going."

-30-

Few Creatures Big or Small, Escape the Ravages of a Warming Planet

The Plight of the "Red Mason"

By Larry Powell

  The red mason bee above (osmia bicornis), is considered 

an important wild pollinator. Public domain photo by Bemma.

    In a study released today, scientists in Poland reveal some, if not surprising, certainly disturbing discoveries. 

    When exposed to even short periods of extreme heat in a lab (the kind that's increasing globally due to manmade climate change), larvae of one of several species of red mason bees (osmia bicornis) emerged as smaller adults with reduced wing size. It was harder for them to take off and, when they did, they flew more slowly and for shorter distances. 

    The research team ominously concludes: "As climate change intensifies heatwaves, such carry-over effects may reduce pollinator mobility, foraging efficiency, and ecosystem services."

     The osmia bicornis is found in Europe, North Africa, and parts of western and northern Asia. It was introduced to North America and has now been recorded in Ontario and Nova Scotia. Other kinds of red masons are considered invasive species in North America. No such designation  seems to have been attached to the osmia bicornis so far.

As a matter-of-fact, the "Bumblebee Conservation Trust (UK), has nothing but praise for that particular bee. "The osmia bicornis are approachable and docile little bees which aren't given to stinging and so are safe around children and pets. Like all bees it is only the females that carry a sting and it's been said that the only way a female red mason will sting you is if you roll her between your fingers! 

    "They're hugely beneficial to our gardens and crops as they're excellent pollinators of fruit trees, together with a wide range of wildflowers. A single female red mason bee can do the work of 120 honeybees and may in the future be commercially reared to pollinate fruit orchards in the U.K."

    The study has just been published by The Royal Society.

Carney government faces first lawsuit over its climate policies

CANADA'S NATIONAL OBSERVER

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s government is staring down a legal challenge after his government spent more than a year unraveling Canadian climate policy. Story here.

Carney government passes law allowing authorization of banned pesticides

CBC NEWS  

A "disease detective" investigates a suspected pesticide poisoning in Bangladesh.
Photo credit: Samsad Rabbani Khan

Bill C-30 gives cabinet power to greenlight use for economic or food security reasons. Story here.  

Mangrove forests are healing after decades of human destruction

The BBC

A mangrove swamp in Indonesia.
Photo by Adnankasogi.

The world's coastal mangrove forests, which protect millions of people from storms - and soak up vast amounts of planet-warming gases - are staging an unexpected comeback, scientists find. Story here.