Madame Figaro
.
– How did the WWF arrive at this shocking figure for the decline of wild vertebrate populations?
Véronique Andrieux.–
The Living Planet Index (LPI) is calculated with the Zoological Society of London from scientific data collected on 32,000 populations of more than 5,230 species of wild vertebrates.
It is an indicator of population abundance, ie the number of individuals.
It is very useful to reflect the state of ecological health of the planet.
However, this is dramatic and worsens over the course of our Living Planet reports, published every two years.
The 2016 edition noted a 58% decline in wild vertebrate populations since 1970. Six years later, we are at 69%.
There is a red alert.
On video, Sophie Marceau's punchy video against climate inaction
Can you cite examples?
In thirty years, we have lost about 80% of the number of lowland gorillas in the Democratic Republic of Congo, and 86% of African forest elephants.
For these species, the main causes are poaching and illegal trade.
In New Caledonia, the dugong, a peaceful marine mammal, has lost half of its numbers in ten years.
It is threatened by poaching, incidental captures in fishing nets, pollution and collisions with boats.
But also by global warming, because it threatens the seagrasses on which it feeds.
In Guyana, the situation of the leatherback turtle, the largest turtle in the world, is terrible: we have lost more than 95% in twenty years.
Due to illegal fishing, untargeted catches, habitat loss and degradation, hunting and poaching,
but also climate change.
In addition to accelerating the erosion of the beaches, where the adults come to lay eggs, this increases the temperature of the sand.
This has a direct effect on the sex of individuals: almost only females are born, which makes it difficult to reproduce the species.
I would also mention sharks and rays, whose global abundance has decreased by 71% since 1970. Mainly due to overfishing: in fifty years, fishing pressure has been multiplied by 18 worldwide.
Another example: in mainland France, green tree frog populations have been falling for several years.
almost only females are born, which makes it difficult for the species to reproduce.
I would also mention sharks and rays, whose global abundance has decreased by 71% since 1970. Mainly due to overfishing: in fifty years, fishing pressure has been multiplied by 18 worldwide.
Another example: in mainland France, green tree frog populations have been falling for several years.
almost only females are born, which makes it difficult for the species to reproduce.
I would also mention sharks and rays, whose global abundance has decreased by 71% since 1970. Mainly due to overfishing: in fifty years, fishing pressure has been multiplied by 18 worldwide.
Another example: in mainland France, green tree frog populations have been falling for several years.
It is possible to return to the good ecological health of the environments
Veronique Andrieux
Why ?
This is linked to what remains the primary cause of biodiversity loss: land use change, for industrial agriculture (soya, palm oil, corn, cattle, etc.), urban sprawl or megaprojects. infrastructure.
This destroys or fragments natural habitats, including wetlands.
These have suffered the most since 1970, with an alarming 83% drop in populations of freshwater species globally.
In the order of causes of biodiversity loss, come next overexploitation (overfishing, poaching, etc.), climate change, air, water and soil pollution (due to pesticides, nitrogen fertilizers, plastics, etc.) and invasive alien species (e.g. rabbitfish in the Mediterranean).
But if we don't limit warming to 1.5°C, climate change will become the main cause of biodiversity loss.
There is urgency, because the Earth has already warmed up by 1.2°C since the end of the 19th century.
How is humanity threatened by this collapse in biodiversity?
We think a tiger or a lowland gorilla is far away.
Yet the decline of these and other species concerns us.
Because, if they are going so badly, it is because the natural environments are going badly.
However, healthy forests, peat bogs, prairies or oceans are essential to us.
They bring us free food, water, energy, raw materials and protect us from zoonoses, diseases transmitted by animals.
Ecosystems also play a phenomenal role in protecting us from climate change as they store carbon.
So if humanity destroys nature, of which it is a part and depends, it saws off the branch on which it sits, it puts itself in danger.
Do we still have a chance to act?
Yes !
It is possible to return to the good ecological health of the environments.
The solutions are known.
The first lever of action is to protect more and better.
For example, in the regional natural park of Brenne, in Indre, we protect the wetland and the species that depend on it, pond turtle, bittern, dragonflies, etc.
The second lever is to restore nature.
European legislation currently being adopted aims to restore 20% of terrestrial and marine ecosystems in the Union by 2030. This would be major.
And during the UN COP 15 on biodiversity, which will take place in December in Montreal, it will be a question of protecting 30% of terrestrial and marine ecosystems in the world by 2030, i.e. almost double compared to today.
But if we only do that,
70% of natural environments will remain unprotected.
To stop the destruction of nature, we must therefore also transform our modes of production and consumption.
This is the third lever.
Concretely, what does that mean?
Take the example of agribusiness.
Europe is in the process of adopting legislation which will prohibit the placing on the European market of products resulting from deforestation.
That is to say, products such as soy intended to feed our farm animals, the cultivation of which is ravaging the natural environments of Latin America.
Or palm oil, widely used as agrofuel.
This is important, because the European Union is the world's second largest importer, behind China.
Read alsoBruno Latour: “The health crisis is a matter of life or death, ecological change too”
What can we do individually?
The most important thing is to reduce meat consumption.
To eat less, but better.
To favor short local circuits and if possible organic farming, without pesticides.
And to be more interested in vegetable proteins, such as legumes (lentils, chickpeas, beans or beans).
It's better for your health and the planet.
And it doesn't cost more.
Some species are doing better, like the lynx in France…
It's a great story.
In 1970, there was no longer a single one in mainland France.
Thanks to conservation efforts, there are now nearly 200. There are other examples of species that are doing better, such as the otter or common crane in the UK.
It is a sign of hope.