Back in 2018, the UK had rather extreme weather. Winter was cold - the ‘beast from the East’, balanced by a very hot summer supposedly the hottest on record. We are told that due to climate change there will be a ‘catastrophic’ effect on wildlife. So I found it interesting to read how this ‘extreme’ year actually affected the wildlife. The Wildlife Trust published a summary of how the weather affected wildlife over the year and assuming their information to be correct, it proved useful in make a rough comparison between ‘extreme’ weather and wildlife. Their summary is available here:
Their introduction gives this sentence:
‘A long harsh winter, the Beast from the East, a mild spring and baking hot summer meant some animals and plants thrived, while others struggled’.
I would say that was accurate - no set of environmental conditions are perfect for all species - when one parameter changes, be it nutrient supply or competition from other species, there will be an effect on the population of other species . From their comment, the weather is no exception. I totally agree, and this statement refutes completely the idea that a change in climate will be only negative.
Here are their comments on the groups of wildlife which they have neatly broken down:
Birds
‘Many birds were caught up in the devastation left by the cold snap at the end of February. Freezing temperatures claimed the lives of many seabirds on the east coast, including guillemot, shag, fulmar and kittiwake.The Beast from the East, which raged across continental Europe at the end of February, saw the arrival of many unusual birds on UK shores. Among the birds forced to leave the continent and travel westwards in February and March were fieldfare, redwing, golden plover, lapwing, snipe, jack snipe and woodcock.A scattering of Arctic redpoll, known for the distinctive red spots on their heads, were also seen in the east of England. And snowy owls, which are usually only found in the Arctic and rarely visit the UK, were seen at Scolt Head Island off the Norfolk coast in February and St David's in Wales in late March. The hawfinch, normally a shy bird that is difficult to spot, was seen in its hundreds in Sussex and Surrey in March. Many of these silver-billed birds came over to the UK from eastern Europe and returned there to breed.’
It is pretty obvious from the text that cold winters have a negative effect on many bird species. In recent decades, winters have on the whole been much milder, something that has been attributed to climate change. So here we have a positive which goes against the gloom and doom that we are being preached. Of the species that left the continent to spend time in the UK, these are partial migrants and will migrate just as far as is necessary to obtain sufficient food. It is an adaption that works. It is amazing how flexible this migration is, it shows the ability of species to adapt to changes in their environment. I am confident that a change of 1C over a hundred years is no problem.Migration does have a detrimental effect on bird species. Whilst being positive in that they can make use of the abundant food available in higher latitudes during summer, migration takes its toll in that it is energy consuming, and there are many perils en route. If the migration covers less distance, such as with partial migrants, this is obviously a bonus, and milder winters should theoretically be an advantage to them rather than a disadvantage.
'The long dry summer was good for bats, including the rare greater and lesser horseshoe bats, as it gave them more time to fatten up on bugs and insects before the autumn.'
I am surprised at the brevity of this section. As this period was dry, I would question the amount of insects available. Often insects are more abundant when the weather is warm and WET.In my experience here in Latvia, at least, that is my observation. Leaving this issue aside, it is clear that they have reported that a warmer, drier summer is good for bats. Again, we are being fed false information by the climate alarmists. And that is what they forecast for the future - dryer and hotter summers.
Butterflies and moths
‘Rare butterflies such as the silver-studded blue, the Adonis and Chalkhill blues had a good year. The mild weather meant that these butterflies had second or third broods into late summer and early autumn in the south west. In late October many striking butterflies were spotted in Dorset, including speckled woods, small tortoiseshells, red admirals and clouded yellows. Butterflies that feed on nettles, such as tortoiseshells, red admirals and commas didn't have an easy time. Pesticides, parasites and climate change are all reasons that could be behind the falling numbers. The migrant silver Y moth was seen in its highest ever numbers at Mount Stewart in Northern Ireland.’
Again, all seems to be well here with the weather ‘extremes’, although reference was given to the mild autumn, which extended the flying season and is also supposedly due to climate change. There is no excuse for mentioning climate change as a possible reason for the low numbers of butterflies whose larvae feed off nettles. As far as I am aware, the nettles themselves never suffered at all. That pesticides is a problem I can understand as the nettle is often found on waste ground, which may be sprayed. Parasites are a possibility also, although one would have to look closely at the relationship for the last few years. What they have not considered is the effect of the cold winter weather. All of the species mentioned overwinter as adults, and their hibernation is precarious during cold winters. It is noticeable here in SW Latvia that these species are few and far between in the spring following cold winters when many of the overwintering butterflies are literally freeze-dried.
Marine life
‘Thousands of shellfish (including lobsters), starfish and fish died and were washed up on the east coast because of the sudden cold snap at the end of February. But the warm weather in June led to bluefin tuna being spotted off Lizard Point in Cornwall, as well as record numbers of Mediterranean gulls.’
I really cannot understand this - how does a snap of cold weather or warm weather affect species living on the sea floor? I can understand weather being influenced by wind direction which in turn is associated with warmer/cooler water being transferred from other regions. But so extreme? Anyway, as far as the report relates to climate change, it is clear that the cold winter had a greater negative effect on marine life than the hot summer. Does the sighting of blue-fin tuna relate to warm June weather? As they live in the ocean I would have thought if they move relative to temperature it would be that of the water!
Seals
‘Atlantic grey seal pups at Blakeney Point in Norfolk and the Farne Islands off the coast of Northumberland have flourished this year.
In January 2019, rangers at Blakeney Point confirmed that seal pup numbers at the reserve exceeded 3,000 for the first time since records began. The seal colony, now the largest in England, has thrived in the remote and peaceful surroundings of the reserve.
On the Farne Islands the number of pups has increased by 50 per cent in five years. Our rangers counted 2,602 pups in 2018, compared to 1,740 in 2014. A large amount of sand eels (the seals' favourite food) and few predators are thought to be behind the increase in numbers. ’
So if climate change has had any effect it has been positive!
Goats
‘Goat numbers were down on Cheddar Gorge because so few of the kids, born between January and March, survived the Beast from the East.’
So climate change here must have a positive effect as the winters are much milder now
Toads
Natterjack toads, known for their loud croak and distinctive markings, had a tough time during the summer. The heat dried out the pools they live in, and in some cases claimed areas of water they have relied on for ten years. But the heat also led to a fall in predators, such as dragonfly larvae, which feed on toads' eggs and tadpoles.
The heat did not dry out the pools, it was lack of rain! Nevertheless, on balance it would appear that there are always pros and cons, so a neutral effect through climate change?
Trees, meadows and moorland
Many fruit trees managed to make it through the cold long winter and sprang into life on the late arrival of spring. The moisture in the air stood the fruit trees in good stead for the baking hot summer, leading to a glut of apples, brambles, damson, pears, figs and sloes.
However, many of the places we look after found signs of the disease Ash dieback, caused by a fungus, on both young and old trees.
The hot summer wasn't kind to the fields and meadows, which became scorched and dried up around the country. There wasn't enough lush grass for grazing animals so farmers had to supplement their feed with hay and silage from earlier harvests.
But the grasses turned green again during a 'second spring' in the the autumn, and we saw the return of spring blooms such as violets and primrose.
Wild fires on Saddleworth Moor in Greater Manchester and Winter Hill in Lancashire ripped through moorland and bracken, destroying areas home to groundnesting birds and reptiles. Ancient peatland and large areas of heather were also destroyed.
Despite the dry summer, the meadows recovered! Fruit trees did well, and we know that fire is part of nature and in the UK lack of management and human intrusion is probably the trigger to most of the destruction. I cannot see much of climate change here, only effects of a dry summer which will occur even without a warming climate.
In conclusion, there seems to be a much larger negative influence from the cold winter than the hot summer. That flies in the face of any attempt to blame climate change for any negative effects, here we have exactly the opposite, with climate change bringing a beneficial climate for nearly all wildlife.
‘David Bullock, head of species and habitat conservation at the National Trust, says: 'This year's unusual weather does give us some indication of how climate change could look and feel, irrespective of whether this year's was linked to climate change.
'It's becoming less predictable every year to gauge what weather we are likely to experience, and what this means for our wildlife.
'We need to ensure that we continue to look after the land in our care and work with others to create a joined up areas of the countryside, in effect nature corridors, to enable wildlife to move around easily if needed, to survive any type of weather.''
What a load of crap! The first paragraph suggests that climate change has a negative effect, yet the indication from the report is that it has a mostly positive effect. That is, if one assumes that the year has been so different from the average. Why the second paragraph I do not know - despite the met office attempts, prediction of weather the following year has never been accurate. Why it should be less predictable in the future is pure nonsense. The dynamics of ecosystems are too complex to predict how weather will effect them other than generalities, which gives an average, which masks the individual responses which are broken down in this report.
The third paragraph is equally untrue, other than with more joined up areas the wildlife may be more robust and therefore cope better with any negative aspects of the weather.Having said that, how do they expect to make these corridors? And how does this work? With the marine environment it is already joined up to an extent that human interference will have no effect whatsoever. The goats are living in specific areas, with no way to join up the reserves. Bats will get around anyway, as will the birds. Flowers will depend on pollen dispersal and soils will be determined by the geology. It all seems like a PR job with little hope of any success.
As a report on the state of change in species over the last year it does what it says. But it links this to the effect of climate change on species,subtly suggesting that this will be negative. The report when broken down suggests the opposite, that the ‘extreme’ weather of 2018 has actually benefited wildlife overall but cold winters having a negative effect.
But the report draws no conclusion,an omission that is totally dishonest. I guess that their hope is that, in order to adhere to the climate change narrative, they have avoided clashing with the climate alarmists so that their funding will continue.
Add comment
Comments