A Trick, No Treat For Bats: white-nose syndrome hits hard

Halloween's approaching and for those who celebrate "All Hallowed Eve" there's candy, costumes, and images of all things spooky - like zombies, witches, and bats. What would the world be like without those things that go bump in the night? Well, we could do without the zombies, I think. And perhaps witches, both the green Wizard of Oz kind and the ones running for political office.

Then there's bats. What would the world be without bats? As it turns out, it would be a world nearly overrun with bugs. Bats are one of the planet's great equalizers, feeding on insects and helping to keep the populations in balance. While not exactly an "apex predator" like sharks, bats serve a very similar role. Sharks and other large predators that reside at the top of the predator-prey pyramid are kept in check by a slow reproductive rate. Not so for the bat, but then it's feeding on insects that can number in the millions.

So, bats, those spooky little critters of Dracula movie fame that can congregate in caves by the thousands and make us run for cover lest we get one in our hair, are actually very important to maintaining a healthy ecosystem.

But in the eastern United States, parts of Canada, and even France, we are losing vast numbers of bats to a disease: white-nose syndrome. This syndrome manifests itself as patches of white fungus on the nose and wings of the bat. There are several suspected fungi thought to be possibly involved, although Geomyces destructans is considered the most likely culprit. It is a cold-temperature fungus that can flourish in the caves that bats inhabit. The white-nose syndrome disrupts the bats normal winter hibernation cycle and produces behaviors, like flying, that can lead to the bat's death, often from starvation (due to a combination of excessive activity combined with the winter's lack of food).

No more ugly little bats. Big deal, right? So what if there's a few more insects, right? We'll just use a rolled up newspaper or get out the bug zapper. Oh, were it that simple.

Actually, the loss of bats in the northeast all the way to the Mississippi poses a tremendous economic threat to agriculture, as bats act as a very important insecticide control agent. Without bats, insects would ravage more crops, more pesticides would have to be used (with their own inherent problems), and food prices would soar. The timber industry would also be effected.

Scientists who have been studying the condition are not exactly sure as to how it is transmitted over such a wide area. To rule out any human involvement, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has strictly limited access to known caves where large number of bats live. But the condition appears to be continuing to spread, having first been reported in 2006 and now affecting 9 different bat species. Research has found that the fungus reacts to some human anti-fungal treatments but how those can be applied practically has yet to be determined.

The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) is running a campaign to get the attention of U.S. Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar to devote serious effort to the issue. Whatever initiatives and small cost that might be required (CBD suggested $10 million), that would easily be offset by the multi-million dollar savings to agriculture and the consumer.

Trick or treat. Looks like it's a trick for the bat this year.

Support the Center for Biological Diversity's petition campaign to save U.S. bats.

Polar Bears: Interior secretary leaves them in peril

Recently, despite a strong response from supporters and pressure from several leading conservation groups, Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar chose to let stand the 11th hour ruling handed down during the Bush administration that limited protections for the polar bear under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

The basic crux of the problem is that by listing the polar bear as endangered (as opposed to threatened), the ESA requires that the circumstances or causes of the endangerment must be corrected. That would mean correcting global warming (previous post).

While the incremental progress of the political process can eventually get things done - as in the case of the recent developments regarding the Canadian seal hunt (previous post), in this case this is where the wheels fall off the bureaucratic wagon. It's one thing to deny a power plant that threatens an isolated butterfly or restructure a dam project because it could wipe out a small minnow - that's treating a specific endangered species with a specific contained solution. But in the case of the polar bear, to address the issues that have put the animal in peril require such a monumental societal and commercial paradigm shift that it's just too big to handle.

It was said that the ESA was not the appropriate vehicle for addressing global warming. Then what is? The Clean Air Act has been used to push forward major commercial and societal change. What legal avenue can put global warming on the front burner? With the best of intentions, we can talk about the moral imperative of climate change, talking ourselves right into extinction, but it will be the rule of law that actually gets the job done - if only we have the courage to use it.

Endangered Species Act: government feet-dragging over critical corrections

The issue of overturning many of the 11th hour steps taken by the previous U.S. administration that weakened environmental protections and regulations have been addressed several times in this blog in the past (Click here and here). But one of the big challenges we face is the tendency for government to procrastinate, stall, or stonewall acting on environmental or conservation issues until it is more convenient or financial feasible (as if nature is listening to our endless stream of rationales).

The Center for Biological Diversity(CBD) is focused on an upcoming deadline regarding a procedural process to undo crippling changes to the Endangered Species Act(ESA):

Dear Richard,

A crucial deadline is looming: By May 9, the Obama administration has to seize its opportunity to overturn last-minute Bush administration regulations that gut the Endangered Species Act, or it will miss the chance. The Bush rules exempt thousands of federal activities from review under the Endangered Species Act, and specifically exclude greenhouse gas emissions from regulation. If this administration doesn't withdraw those "extinction rules" by May 9, they will stay in effect -- a disaster for endangered species.

Congress specifically empowered Obama's secretaries of Commerce and Interior with the authority to overturn the Bush extinction regulations with the stroke of a pen. The secretaries of Commerce and Interior jointly administer the Endangered Species Act, with the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration (under Commerce) responsible for marine species such as whales and sea turtles, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (in Interior) responsible for species such as wolves and polar bears.

While more than 80,000 people have written to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar demanding he revoke the Bush rules, Gary Locke has only recently been confirmed as secretary of Commerce and has yet to take a position on the issue. Similarly, Dr. Jane Lubchenco, the new head of the National Ocean Atmospheric Administration, has failed to take a public position on rescinding the extinction rules. Please contact Secretary Locke and Dr. Lubchenco and urge them to immediately revoke the Bush extinction regulations.

The Endangered Species Act has served nature well for 35 years. And it's more important today than ever. Here's a link to a CBD web page where you can add your voice. Click here.