6 • 2008–2009 State of the Wild
Source:AlexanderHafemann
“Animals are on the run. Plants are migrating too.”1 I wrote those words in 2006
to draw attention to the fact that climate change was already under way. People
do not notice climate change because it is masked by day-to-day weather fluctuations,
and we reside in comfortable homes. Animals and plants, on the other
hand, can survive only within certain climatic conditions, which are now changing.
The National Arbor Day Foundation had to redraw its maps for the zones in
which tree species can survive, and animals are shifting to new habitats as well.
Are these gradual changes in the wild consistent with dramatic scientific assessments
of a crystallizing planetary emergency? Unfortunately, yes. Present examples
only hint at the scale of the planetary emergency that climate studies reveal
with increasing clarity.
Our home planet is dangerously near a tipping point at which human-made
Tipping Point • 7
PERSPECTIVE OF
A CLIMATOLOGIST
JAMES HANSEN
JAMES HANSEN is director of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Goddard
Institute for Space Studies, but the perspectives here are his own. Hansen is also Adjunct
Professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Columbia University’s Earth Institute,
and he appeared in An Inconvenient Truth. He has also criticized the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change for not adequately addressing the danger of
large sea level rise.
TippingPoi
nt
8 • 2008–2009 State of the Wild
greenhouse gases reach a
level where major climate
changes can proceed mostly
under their own momentum.
Warming will shift climatic
zones by intensifying
the hydrologic cycle, affecting
freshwater availability
and human health. We will see repeated
coastal tragedies associated with
storms and continuously rising sea levels.
The implications are profound,
and the only resolution is for humans
to move to a fundamentally different
energy pathway within a decade. Otherwise,
it will be too late for one-third
of the world’s animal and plant species
and millions of the most vulnerable
members of our own species.
We may be able to preserve the remarkable
planet on which civilization
developed, but it will not be easy: special
interests are resistant to change
and have inordinate power in our governments,
especially in the United
States. Understanding the nature and
causes of climate change is essential to
crafting solutions to our current crisis.
Tipping Point
Earth is heated by sunlight and, in balance,
reaches a temperature such that
an amount of heat equal to the absorbed
solar energy radiates back to
space. Climate forcings are imposed,
temporary changes to Earth’s energy
balance that alter Earth’s mean temperature.
Forcings include changes in
the sun’s brightness, volcanic eruptions
that discharge sunlight-reflecting
particles into the stratosphere, and
long-lived human-made greenhouse
gases that trap heat.
Forcings are amplified or diminished
by other changes within the
climate system, known as feedbacks.
Fast feedbacks—changes that occur
quickly in response to temperature
change—amplify the initial temperature
change, begetting additional
warming. As the planet warms, fast
feedbacks include more water vapor,
which traps additional heat, and less
snow and sea ice, which exposes dark
surfaces that absorb more sunlight.
Slower feedbacks also exist. Due to
warming, forests and shrubs are moving
poleward into tundra regions. Expanding
vegetation, darker than tundra,
absorbs sunlight and warms the
environment. Another slow feedback
is increasing wetness (i.e., darkness) of
the Greenland and West Antarctica ice
sheets in the warm season. Finally, as
tundra melts, methane, a powerful
greenhouse gas, is bubbling out. Paleoclimatic
records confirm that
the long-lived greenhouse gases—
methane, carbon dioxide,
and nitrous oxide—all increase
with the warming of
oceans and land. These positive
feedbacks amplify climate
change over decades,
centuries, and longer.
The predominance of
positive feedbacks explains why
Earth’s climate has historically undergone
large swings: feedbacks work in
both directions, amplifying cooling, as
well as warming, forcings. In the past,
feedbacks have caused Earth to be
whipsawed between colder and
warmer climates, even in response to
weak forcings, such as slight changes
in the tilt of Earth’s axis.2
The second fundamental property
of Earth’s climate system, partnering
with feedbacks, is the great inertia of
oceans and ice sheets. Given the
oceans’ capacity to absorb heat, when
a climate forcing (such as increased
greenhouse gases) impacts global temperature,
even after two or three
decades, only about half of the eventual
surface warming has occurred. Ice
sheets also change slowly, although accumulating
evidence shows that they
can disintegrate within centuries or
perhaps even decades.
The upshot of the combination of
inertia and feedbacks is that additional
climate change is already “in the
pipeline”: even if we stop increasing
greenhouse gases today, more warming
will occur. This is sobering when
We are at the tipping point because
the climate state includes large,
ready positive feedbacks provided
by the Arctic sea ice, the West
Antarctic ice sheet, and much
of Greenland’s ice.
Tipping Point • 9
one considers the present status of
Earth’s climate. Human civilization
developed during the Holocene (the
past 12,000 years). It has been warm
enough to keep ice sheets off North
America and Europe, but cool enough
for ice sheets to remain on Greenland
and Antarctica. With rapid warming
of 0.6°C in the past 30 years, global
temperature is at its warmest level in
the Holocene.3
The warming that has already occurred,
the positive feedbacks that
have been set in motion, and the additional
warming in the pipeline together
have brought us to the precipice of
a planetary tipping point. We are at
the tipping point because the climate
state includes large, ready positive
feedbacks provided by the Arctic sea
ice, the West Antarctic ice sheet, and
much of Greenland’s ice. Little additional
forcing is needed to trigger
these feedbacks and magnify global
warming. If we go over the edge, we
will transition to an environment far
outside the range that has been experienced
by humanity, and there will be
no return within any foreseeable future
generation. Casualties would include
more than the loss of indigenous
ways of life in the Arctic and
swamping of coastal cities. An intensified
hydrologic cycle will produce
both greater floods and greater
droughts. In the US, the semiarid
states from central Texas through Oklahoma
and both Dakotas would become
more drought-prone and ill suited
for agriculture, people, and current
wildlife. Africa would see a great expansion
of dry areas, particularly
southern Africa. Large populations in
Asia and South America would lose
their primary dry season freshwater
source as glaciers disappear. A major
casualty in all this will be wildlife.
State of the Wild
Climate change is emerging while the
wild is stressed by other pressures—
habitat loss, overhunting, pollution,
and invasive species—and it will magnify
these stresses.
Species will respond to warming at
differing paces, affecting many others
through the web of ecological interactions.
Phenological events, which are
timed events in the life cycle that are
usually tied to seasons, may be disrupted.
Examples of phenological
events include when leaves and flowers
emerge and when animals depart
for migration, breed, or hibernate. If
species depend on each other during
those times—for pollination or food—
the pace at which they respond to
warmer weather or precipitation
changes may cause unraveling, cascading
effects within ecosystems.
Animals and plants respond to climate
changes by expanding, contracting,
or shifting their ranges. Isotherms,
lines of a specific average temperature,
are moving poleward by approximately
thirty-five miles (56 km) per
Brünnich’s guillemot (Uria lomvia), an Arctic seabird, has advanced its egg-laying date at
its southern boundary, a phenological change due to global warming.
Source:TomVezo/naturepl.com.
decade, meaning many species ranges
may in turn shift at that pace.4 Some
already are: the red fox is moving into
Arctic fox territory, and ecologists have
observed that 943 species across all
taxa and ecosystems have exhibited
measurable changes in their phenologies
and/or distribution over the past
several decades.5 However, their potential
routes and habitat will be limited
by geographic or human-made obstacles,
and other species’ territories.
Continued business-as-usual greenhouse
gas emissions threaten many
ecosystems, which together form the
fabric of life on Earth and provide a
wide range of services to humanity.
Some species face extinction. The following
examples represent a handful.
Of particular concern are polar species,
because they are being pushed off the
planet. In Antarctica, Adelie and emperor
penguins are in decline, as
shrinking sea ice has reduced the abundance
of krill, their food source.6 Arctic
polar bears already contend with
melting sea ice, from which they hunt
seals in colder months. As sea ice recedes
earlier each year, populations of
polar bears in Canada have declined by
about 20 percent, with the weight of
females and the number of surviving
cubs decreasing a similar amount. As
of this writing, the US Fish and
Wildlife Service is still considering protecting
polar bears, but only after it
was taken to court for failure to act on
the mounting evidence that polar bears
will suffer greatly due to global warm-
ing.7
Life in many biologically diverse
alpine regions is similarly in danger of
being pushed off the planet. When a
given temperature range moves up a
mountain, the area with those climatic
conditions becomes smaller and
rockier, and the air thinner, resulting
in a struggle for survival for some
alpine species.
In the Southwest US, the endemic
Mount Graham red squirrel survives
on a single Arizona mountain, an “island
in the sky,” an isolated green spot
in the desert. The squirrels, protected
as an endangered species, had rebounded
to a population of over 500,
but their numbers have since declined
to between 100 and 200 animals.8 Loss
of the red squirrel will alter the forest
because its middens are a source of
food and habitat for chipmunks, voles,
and mice.
A new stress on Graham red
squirrels is climatic: increased heat,
drought, and fires. Heat-stressed
forests are vulnerable to prolonged
beetle infestation and catastrophic
fires. Rainfall still occurs, but it is erratic
and heavy, and dry periods are more
intense. The resulting forest fires burn
hotter, and the lower reaches of the
forest cannot recover.
10 • 2008–2009 State of the Wild
The Mount Graham red squirrel (Tamiasciurus hudsonicus grahamensis) survives on a
single mountain in Arizona. “Green islands” on mountains, and the species that live on
them, are pushed higher as temperatures rise, and will be pushed off the planet if global
warming continues.
Source:ClaireA.Zugmeyer.
Tipping Point • 11
In the marine world, loggerhead
turtles are also suffering. These great
creatures return to beaches every two
to three years to bury a clutch of eggs.
Hatchlings emerge after two months
and head precariously to the sea to
face a myriad of predators. Years of
conservation efforts to protect loggerhead
turtles on their largest nesting
area in the US, stretching over 20 miles
of Florida coastline, seemed to be stabilizing
the South Florida subpopulation.9
Now climate change places a
new stress on these turtles. Florida
beaches are increasingly lined with sea
walls to protect against rising seas and
storms. Sandy beaches
seaward of the walls are limited
and may be lost if the sea level rises
substantially.
Some creatures seem more adaptable
to climate change. The armadillo,
a prehistoric critter that has been
around for over 50 million years, is likely
to extend its range northward in the
US. But the underlying cause of the
climatic threat to the Graham red
squirrel and other species—from grizzlies,
whose springtime food sources
may shift, to the isolated
snow vole in the mountains
of southern Spain—is
“business-as-usual” use of
fossil fuels. Predicted
warming of several degrees
Celsius would surely
cause mass extinctions.
Prior major warmings in
Earth’s history, the most recent occurring
55 million years ago with the release
of large amounts of Arctic
methane hydrates,10 resulted in the extinction
of half or more of
the species then on the
planet.
Might the Graham red
squirrel and snow vole be
“saved” if we transplant
them to higher mountains?
They would have to
compete for new niches—
and there is a tangled web
of interactions that has
evolved among species
and ecosystems. What is
the prospect that we
could understand, let
alone reproduce, these
complex interactions that
create ecological stability?
“Assisted migration” is
thus an uncertain prospect.11
The best chance for all species
is a conscious choice by humans to
pursue an alternative energy scenario
to stabilize the climate.
State of the Planet
There is a huge gap between what is
understood about global warming—
by the scientific community—and
what is known about global warming
—by those who need to know: the
public and policymakers.
The crystallizing science points to
an imminent planetary emergency.
The dangerous level of carbon dioxide,
at which we will set in motion unstoppable
changes, is at most 450 parts
per million (ppm), but it may be less.12
Carbon dioxide has already increased
from a preindustrial level of 280 ppm
to 383 ppm in 2007, and it is now increasing
by about 2 ppm per year. We
Loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta) hatchling emerging
from egg. Loggerhead decline has been arrested by the
protection of nesting areas on Florida beaches and other
measures, but these areas will be threatened by rising
sea level.
Prior major warmings in
Earth’s history, the most
recent occurring 55 million
years ago . . . resulted in
the extinction of half or
more of the species then
on the planet.
Source:TurtleTime,Inc.
12 • 2008–2009 State of the Wild
must make significant changes within
a decade to avoid setting in motion
unstoppable climatic change.
We need to address carbon dioxide
emissions immediately. Global industrialization,
powered first by coal, and
later by oil and gas, resulted in fossil
fuel pollutants that choked London on
smog, set a river on fire in the US, and
damaged forests by acid rain. We are
solving those pollution problems, but
we did not address them until they hit
us with full force. That approach, to
wait and see and clean up the mess
post facto, will not work in the case of
carbon dioxide emissions and climate
change because of inertial effects,
warming already in the pipeline, and
tipping points. On the contrary, ignoring
emissions would lock in catastrophic
climatic change.
Instead, we must resolve to move
rapidly to the next phase of the industrial
revolution—expanding the benefits
of advanced technology to help
maintain the atmosphere, and consequently
the wonders of the natural
world. A review of basic fossil fuel
facts reveals why the shift must be
made soon. Based on the estimated
amount of carbon dioxide locked in
each remaining fossil fuel reservoir—
including oil, gas, coal, and unconventional
fossil fuels (tar sands, tar shale,
heavy oil, methane hydrates)13—burning
readily available oil and gas resources
alone will take atmospheric
carbon dioxide to levels near 450 ppm.
Burning coal and unconventional fossil
fuels, which energy companies are
now exploring, could take atmospheric
carbon dioxide to far greater levels.
To understand the limits on future
Carbon dioxide contained in fossil fuel reservoirs, (a) the dark areas being the portion
already used; (b, c) cumulative fossil fuel carbon dioxide emissions by different countries
as a percent of global total; (d) per capita emissions for the 10 largest emitters of fossil fuel
carbon dioxide.
Tipping Point • 13
use of fossil fuels, an awareness of the
carbon cycle is critical. In this cycle,
the ocean quickly takes up a fraction
of carbon dioxide emissions, but uptake
slows as carbon dioxide added to
the ocean exerts a “back pressure.”
Further uptake depends upon carbon
dioxide mixing into the deep ocean
and precipitating out of ocean water
via carbonate sediments. This means
that about one-third of carbon dioxide
emissions remain in the atmosphere
after 100 years and one-quarter still remain
after 500 years. Indeed, carbon
dioxide from the Industrial Revolution
still around today implies heavy responsibilities
for Europe and the US.
Carbon reservoirs and the ocean’s
pace of removing carbon dioxide are
important boundary conditions in
framing solutions to the climate crisis.
We can avert planetary transformation
—eventual disintegration of ice sheets
and massive extinctions—
only if the planetary energy
balance is restored at an
acceptable global temperature.
Temperature fluctuates
from year to year,
but it is increasing by
about 0.2°C per decade.
Although estimates of
permissible warming
must be refined as knowledge
advances, the upshot
of crystallizing science is
that the “safe” global temperature
level is, at most,
about 1°C greater than the year 2000
global temperature.
This 1°C limit on additional global
warming implies the aforementioned
carbon dioxide ceiling of about 450
ppm.14 Pinpointing this carbon dioxide
ceiling is complicated due to other
human-made forcings, especially
methane, nitrous oxide, and “black
soot.” For example, an alternative scenario
allows carbon dioxide levels to
peak at 475 ppm because it assumes a
large reduction of methane.15 However,
human-made sulfate aerosols
(reflective particles that have a cooling
effect) are likely to decrease, neutralizing
these potential reductions in
methane. Therefore 450 ppm is a
good comprehensive estimate of the
maximum allowable carbon dioxide.
Indeed, if recent ice loss from
Antarctica is a sign, it may be
that even 450 ppm is excessive.
Since we could reach 450 ppm
within two to three decades, we
should be inspired now to change our
energy systems. Based on the preceding
boundary conditions, the following
is a four-point strategy to avoid
dangerous climate change.
1. Coal and unconventional fossil
fuels must be curtailed and
used only with capture and
sequestration of the carbon
dioxide underground. Existing
coal-fired power plants should
be phased out over the next few
decades.
2. Carbon price and efficiency
standards must be implemented.
Recognizing the unusual
energy concentration and mobility
of fossil fuels—with
which little else can currently
compete—the practical way to
transition to a postpetroleum
era is to impose a moderate but
continually rising carbon price.
The price can be via a tax on
fossil fuels, a ration-and-trade
system that limits impacts on
people least able to afford an
energy tax, or a combination of
methods. This will make fossil
fuels pay for environmental
damage while stretching remaining
oil and gas to accommodate
sustainable economic
growth. The certainty of a
rising price will inspire indusIn
my view, special interests
have undue sway with our
governments and have
effectively promoted
minimalist actions and
growth in fossil fuels, rather
than making the scale of
investments necessary.
tries to innovate and will reduce
the incentive to exploit
unconventional fossil fuels with
high carbon dioxide emissions,
such as tar shale.
In addition, we need real
efficiency standards, for vehicles,
buildings, and lighting. We
must remove barriers to energy
efficiency, such as the policy of
most utility companies to promote
energy consumption
rather than conservation.
3. We must take steps to draw
down atmospheric carbon
dioxide. Farming and forestry
practices that enhance carbon
retention in the soil and biosphere
must be supported. Biofuel
power plants with carbon
sequestration can draw down
atmospheric carbon dioxide,16
putting anthropogenic carbon
dioxide back underground.
Carbon dioxide can be
sequestered beneath ocean
sediments17 and in other safe
geologic sites.
4. We must take steps to reduce
other, non–carbon dioxide
forcings, especially black soot,
methane, and ground-level
ozone via stricter regulations.
International implementation of
these steps requires recognition of responsibilities.
Because of the long lifetime
of carbon dioxide already emitted,
Europe bears a large responsibility.
But the responsibility of the US is
more than three times that of any
other nation, and it will continue to be
the largest for at least several decades,
even though China will exceed the US
in new emissions within a year or two.
Sadly, the requirements to avoid
global disasters are not yet widely recognized:
Germany intends to replace
nuclear power plants with coal. But
Europe, the US, and other developed
countries should place a moratorium
on new coal-fired power plants until
carbon capture and sequestration are
in place. This cannot wait until similar
restrictions are practical in China and
India. National responsibilities for climate
change and per capita emissions
are an order of magnitude greater in
the US, Canada, and Australia than in
India and China, and define moral ob-
ligations.
At the same time, China and developing
countries should bulldoze oldtechnology
coal power plants and
build new coal power plants with only
the latest technology. Storms and
floods attending climate change will
hit developing countries hardest because
most megacities near sea level
are in those countries. This should
provide incentive for China and India
to address climate change.
Efficiency of future vehicle power
is also vital. California’s requirement
for 30 percent efficiency improvement
has great value. In contrast, a proposed
national energy plan for 20 percent
ethanol in vehicle fuels, derived in
large part from corn, does more harm
than good. It will do little to reduce
emissions—because producing ethanol
currently requires a lot of energy
—and it would degrade carbon retention
in soils. There are ways that renewable
or other carbon dioxide–free
energies may eventually power vehicles,
but half-measures should not be
dictated without sufficient scientific
input to balance vested agribusiness
interests.
That said, biofuels can play a major
part in our energy future. As a native
Iowan, I like to imagine that the Midwest
will rescue compatriots threatened
by rising seas. Native grasses, appropriately
cultivated, and perhaps
with improved varieties, can draw
down atmospheric carbon dioxide.
The prairies may contribute, if we get
on with solving the climate problem
before superdrought hits them. Biofuel
investment should proceed with
input from scientists and conservationists,
because some industry and
government biofuel production plans
would clear more forest for plantations
of oil palm and soy with consequences
for wildlife and wildlands.
A Final Picture
Earth’s paleoclimatic record tells us
that atmospheric greenhouse gases are
now near the dangerous level where
tipping points become unavoidable.
14 • 2008–2009 State of the Wild
We can choose a course to reverse
greenhouse gas growth and promptly
change our energy strategy. A step in
the right direction was the April 2007
decision by the US Supreme Court that
the Environmental Protection Agency
can and should regulate greenhouse
gas emissions. However, much more is
needed.
In my view, special interests have
undue sway with our governments
and have effectively promoted minimalist
actions and growth in fossil
fuels, rather than making the scale of
investments necessary.
US government complicity with
special interests was clear when, at a
practice press conference held by
NASA on Arctic sea ice, a member of
my group suggested that a reduction
in greenhouse gas emissions could
stem sea ice loss. His suggestion
prompted a government “minder” to
proclaim “that’s unacceptable,” on the
grounds that it was a policy statement,
when in fact it was scientifically based.
While making policy is the right of
our elected representatives, scientists
had connected the dots of climate research
and were prevented from communicating
that information. In this
case, vested interests posed a threat to
our home planet and the fabric of life
upon it.
It is worth imagining how our
grandchildren will look back on us.
The picture that I fear has the polluters,
the utilities, and automakers
standing in court demanding the
right to continue to emit carbon dioxide
for the sake of short-term profits.
The disturbing part is that we,
through our national government,
are standing alongside the polluters,
officially as a hulking amicus curiae
(friend of the court), arguing against
limitations on emissions. Is this the
picture of our generation that we
want to be remembered by?
We live in a democracy, and policies
represent our collective will. If we
allow the planet to pass tipping points,
it will be hard to defend our role. The
state of the wild is in our hands, and
we can still preserve creation and serve
humanity worldwide. A drive for energy
efficiency and clean energy sources
will produce high-tech jobs. Restoration
of clean air will be universally beneficial.
Rural life and the planet can
benefit from intelligent development
of biofuels and renewable energy.
At the front lines, observing the
changes in the wild, conservationists
serve as a voice for the plants and animals
that have already started reacting
to climate warming. To conserve as
much biodiversity as we can, conservationists
must unite with many others
to push for a far more radical reduction
in carbon dioxide emissions
than has hitherto been considered
practical. Otherwise, alpine and polar
species, coral reefs, and species living
in areas that become arid will be lost
over the next century. n
Tipping Point • 15
Yellow-bellied marmots (Marmota flaviventris) advanced their emergence from hibernation
by 23 days in the Rocky Mountains, presumably due to global warming.
Source:PhilippeClement/naturepl.com.
16. Anon. 2003; M. Fenton et al., “Linking bats to emerging diseases,” Science
311(2006): 1098–99.
17. J. Newcomb, “Thinking ahead: The business significance of an avian influenza
pandemic,” Bio Economic Research Associates, 2006; Original source, J. Pritchett et al.,
“Animal disease economic impacts: A survey of literature and typology of research
approaches,” International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 8(2005).
18. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dvbid/
westnile/surv&controlCaseCount07_detailed.htm.
19. Tasmania Department of Primary Industries and Water, www.dpiw.tas.gov.au
/inter.nsf/WebPages/LBUN-5QF86G?open; J. Bunce, “Tassie devil tumour breakthrough,”
The Australian, Oct. 3, 2007.
20. G. Vogel, “Tracking Ebola’s deadly march among wild apes,” Science 314(2006):
1522–23; World Health Organization www.who.int/csr/don/2007_10_03a/
en/index.html.
21. Whirling Disease Initiative, http://whirlingdisease.montana.edu.
22. “Trans-boundary diseases hamper livestock development,” Botswana Press
Agency, June 27, 2005, www.gov.bw/cgi-bin/news.cgi?d=200506278:=Trans-boundary
_diseases_hamper_livestock_development.
Introduction: Future States of the Wild by Kent H. Redford
1. J. Marshall, “Future Recall: Your Mind Can Slip through Time,” New Scientist,
March 24, 2007.
Part I: State of the Wild
Tipping Point: Perspective of a Climatologist by James Hansen
1. J. Hansen, “The Threat to the Planet,” New York Review of Books,, July 13, 2006.
2. J. Hansen et al., “Climate Change and Trace Gases,” Philosophical Transaction of
the Royal Society A 365 (2007): 1925–1954.
3. J. Hansen et al., “Global Temperature Change,” Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences. 103 (2006): 14288–93.
4. C. Parmesan, “Ecological and Evolutionary Response to Recent Climate
Change,” Annual Review of Ecology and Evolution of Systems 37 (2006): 637–69.
5. C. Parmesan, “Ecological and Evolutionary Response,” 2006.
6. L. Gross, “As the Antarctic Ice Pack Recedes, a Fragile Ecosystem Hangs in the
Balance,” PLoS Biol 3, no. 4 (2005): e127.
7. E. Pennisi, “U.S. Weighs Protection for Polar Bears,” Science 315 (2007): 25.
8. C. Jordan, “Computers May Help Save Mount Graham Red Squirrel,” Univ.
Arizona News, April 27, 2006; T. Egan, “Heat Invades Cool Heights over Arizona
Desert,” New York Times, March 27, 2007.
9. Fish and Wildlife Service, Loggerhead Sea Turtle, www.fws.gov/northflorida
/SeaTurtles%Factsheets/loggerheadsea-turtle.htm.
10. D. Archer, “Methane Hydrates and Anthropogenic Climate Change,”
Biogeosciences Discussion 4 (2007): 521–44.
11. C. Zimmer, “A Radical Step to Preserve a Species: Assisted Migration,” New York
Times, January 23, 2007.
12. J. Hansen et al., “Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate: A GISS
model Study,” Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussion 7 (2007): 2287–312.
258 • Notes
13. Proven and anticipated reserves are based on Energy Information
Administration estimates. Other experts estimate higher or lower reserves, but the
uncertainties do not alter our conclusions.
14. J. Hansen, “Dangerous Human-Made Interference with Climate,” 2007.
15. J. Hansen et al., “Global Warming in the Twenty-First Century: An Alternative
Scenario,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 97 (2000): 9875–80.
16. J. Hansen, Political Interference with Government Climate Change Science. Submitted
text accompanying oral testimony given March 19, 2007 during hearings on
“Political Interference with Science: Global Warming, Part II” of the Committee on Oversight
and Government Reform of the U.S. House of Representatives. www.columbia.edu
/~jeh1/20070319105800-43018.pdf; http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=1214
17. K. Z. House et al., “Permanent Carbon Dioxide Storage in Deep-Sea
Sediments,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103 (2006): 12291–95.
Discoveries by Margaret Kinnaird
1. B. M. Beehler et al., “A New Species of Smoky Honeyeater (Meliphagidae:
Melipotes) from Western New Guinea,” Auk 124 (2007): 1000–9.
2. E. Kranz, “Scientists Believe Bird’s Head Seascape Is Richest on Earth,”
www.conservation.org/xp/frontlines/2006/09180601.xml.
3. A. Singa et al. “Macaca Munzala: A New Species from Western Arunachal
Pradesh, Northeastern India,” International Journal of Primatology 26 (2005): 977–89.
4. R. H. Bain et al., “Three New Indochinese Species of Cascade Frogs (Amphibia:
Ranidae) Allied to Rana Archotaphus,” Copeia 1 (2006): 43–59.
5. Bulletin of the British Ornithologists Club, Vol. 126 (June 2006).
6. K. A. Raskoff and G. I. Matsumoto, “Stellamedusa ventana, a New Mesopelagic
Scyphomedusa from the Eastern Pacific Representing a New Subfamily, the
Stellamedusinae,” Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the UK 84 (2004): 37–42.
7. E. Macpherson, W. Jones, and M. Segonzac, “A New Squat Lobster Family of
Galatheoidea (Crustacea, Decapoda, Anomura) from the Hydrothermal Vents of the
Pacific–Antarctic Ridge,” Zoosystema 24 (2005): 709–23.
8. P. Tyson, “Living at Extremes,” Public Broadcasting Service, July 1998,
www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/abyss/.
9. P. M. Kappeler et al., “Morphology, Behvaiour and Molecular Evolution of Giant
Mouse Lemurs (Mirza spp.) Gray, 1870, with Description of a New Species,” Primate
Report 71: 3–26.
10. T. Cucchi et al., “A New Endemic Species of the Subgenus Mus (Rodentia,
Mammalia) on the Island of Cyprus,” Zootaxa 1241 (2006): 1–36.
11. R. Athreya, “A New Species of Liocichla (Aves: Timaliidae) from Eaglenest
Wildlife Sanctuary, Arunachal Pradesh, India,” Indian Birds 2 (2006): 86–94.
12. T. Jones et al., “The Highland Mangabey Lophocebus kipunji: a New Species of
African Monkey,” Science 308 (2005): 1161–64.
13. T. Davenport et al., “A New Genus of African Monkey, Rungwecebus:
Morphology, Ecology, and Molecular Phylogenetics,” Science 312 (2006): 1378–81.
The Rarest of the Rare: Some of the World’s Most Endangered Animals
by Catherine Grippo, Taylor H. Ricketts, and Jonathan Hoekstra
1. “Extinction crisis escalates: Red List shows apes, corals, vultures, dolphins all in
danger,” www.iucn.org/en/news/archive/2007/09/12_pr_redlist.htm.
Notes • 259