WWF Report Blames Human Consumption for Massive Wildlife Losses
Marie Donlon | October 30, 2018
According to a new World Wildlife Fund (WWF) report, "exploding human consumption" is at the heart of a significantly massive reduction in global wildlife populations in recent years.
Between 1970 and 2014, losses in vertebrate species — fish, birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians — averaged around 60%, according to the report.
"Earth is losing biodiversity at a rate seen only during mass extinctions," the WWF's Living Planet Report noted.
As such, the WWF is urging policymakers to establish new goals for sustainable development.
Published every two years, the current edition of the report notes that only one-quarter of the world’s land area is free from human activity and that amount is expected to fall to one-tenth by 2050, driven by increased demand for water, land and energy as well as increasing food production.
"Decision makers at every level need to make the right political, financial and consumer choices to achieve the vision that humanity and nature thrive in harmony on our only planet," the report urges.
To read the report, click here.
Humans EAT three times a day, but most animals only reproduce annually...well, duh!
In reply to #1
Except mice, rabbits and a number of other species that reproduce at the drop of a hat.
..."only one-quarter of the world’s land area is free from human activity"...
What sort of measuring stick was used to determine this....?....from what I've seen people only habituate a very small percentage of the land....
..."The amount of land used to produce all vegetables in the U.S. is less than 3 million acres. Range and Pasture Land- Some 788 million acres, or 41.4 percent of the U. S. excluding Alaska( why exclude Alaska's 375 million acres? What with global warming and all), are grazed by livestock"...
..."The United States is home to over 318 million people and 2.27 billion acres of land. By 2003, we had only developed about 108 million acres, or about 4.47% of the total land area of the United States."...
..."By far the greatest impact on the American landscape comes not from urbanization but rather from agriculture. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, farming and ranching are responsible for 68 percent of all species endangerment in the United States."...
Ah ha,, finally the bottom line....
..."The real message here is that we can afford to restore hundreds of millions of acres in the U.S. if we simply shift our diets away from meat. Many organizations spend their time fighting sprawl and championing agriculture as a benign use of the land. If a similar amount of effort were directed toward reducing agricultural production, we would produce far greater protection and restoration for declining species, endangered ecosystems and ecological processes."...
We just have to stop eating meat....They want us all to become vegetarians...This is the kind of lunacy that drives people to the right....next they will want you to stop eating vegetables....so what will you eat you ask if you can't eat meat or vegetables, something new we like to call, Soylent Green....ahaha
WWF...World Wildlife Fund....Yeah, they wouldn't exaggerate....would they?
..."Even if the recent claim by the WWF, that the world’s animal population has declined by 52% since 1970s, were true, it would be a misleading statistic to report. Masters at fund-raising propaganda, the WWF turned out a gem of quotable nonsense.
If there was a performance bonus for most-improved propaganda, surely the spin doctors at the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) deserve the accolade. They issue The Living Planet Report every two years, and this year, they out-performed the 2012 report by a massive 86%. They produced stunner headlines: WWF: World has lost more than half its wildlife in 40 years.
As the Cape Times put it before reading the report, “We killed 52% animals in 44 years.” (You can tell they didn’t read it, because the data period is still 1970 to 2010, as it was in 2012, and that isn’t “44 years”. In case you noticed this, it is explained in the FAQs on page 140.)"...
https://www.dailymav
https://www.counterp
From 1993...
..."If President Clinton signs the Rio accord to protect rare and endangered species, he will place scientific truth in greater danger than endangered species.
A fair reading of the available data suggests a rate of extinction not even one-thousandth as great as doomsayers claim. If the rate were any lower, evolution itself would need to be questioned.The World Wildlife Fund, the main promulgator of alarm about biodiversity and the extinction of species, frames the issue in the starkest terms: ``Without firing a shot, we may kill one-fifth of all species of life on this planet in the next 10 years.'
This assertion is utterly without scientific underpinning and runs counter to all the existing evidence.
Such apocalyptic claims are used to bludgeon the federal government for money and action. A long-running fund-raising pitch from World Wildlife Fund's president, Russell E. Train, describes how the organization rallied support for reauthorization of the Endangered Species Act by telling Congress that ``some scientists believe that up to one million species of life will become extinct by the end of this century' unless governments ``do something.'
Train added: ``When we talk about the loss of one million species, we are talking about a global loss with consequences that science can scarcely begin to predict. The future of the world could be altered drastically if we allow a million species to disappear by the year 2000.'"...
Link...