Latest news with #coastalcommunities
Daily Mail
4 days ago
- General
- Daily Mail
Time to tackle the scourge of Scotland's seagulls...before somebody is killed
Many people find it tempting to dismiss the threat posed by gulls as comic, or to make flippant comparisons with Hitchcock's thriller The Birds. But not the increasing number of those who, from direct experience, know there is nothing funny about the menace that gulls now pose, not only in coastal communities, but in the centre of our largest towns and cities. There's no question that these birds have become ever bolder, and that they pose a very serious risk of injury, particularly to the elderly, the vulnerable and young children. Sooner or later, swooping attacks from gulls will cause serious injury or even fatalities. We, and many of our colleagues in parliament, have been inundated with complaints from constituents who have had to deal with this scourge. We've heard from people who have required medical attention, and in some cases even hospitalisation, because of attacks by birds. The elderly are particularly at risk from injuries as a result of falls. Toddlers face serious damage if they ingest guano – the highly toxic droppings – which may land on them or in their prams or buggies. And everyone is inconvenienced and intimidated by the sheer number of these creatures, who face little or no deterrent for their increasingly aggressive attacks. It is having a significant effect on businesses, particularly in the hospitality sector, and has left some people in the worst affected areas anxious about stepping out in public. There may be several factors behind the rise in this problem, including the failure to keep on top of basic tasks such as refuse collection and changes to the birds' natural habitat, whether man-made or climate-related, but the chief reason is undoubtedly the reluctance of the authorities to take active steps to control the problem with effective deterrents. When quizzed on the matter at Holyrood, ministers have been inclined to minimise the issue and tend to turn instead to the question of conservation and the declining number of seabirds. Everyone is in favour of protecting genuinely endangered species, but it is an absurd state of affairs when government disregards a clear and present danger to the public in favour of a theoretical risk to creatures that are clearly thriving in, and indeed dominating, populated areas that are not their natural territory. Those skewed priorities are a direct consequence of the role played by NatureScot, the Scottish government arms-length body which is responsible for protecting bird numbers in Scotland, but is also the authority responsible for approving or rejecting licences to control them. That creates a clear conflict of interest and – judging by their actions – NatureScot have come down firmly on the side of the gulls, rather than the people whose lives are being made a misery by their behaviour. Last year, without any warning and without any explanation, NatureScot stopped issuing licences for the control of gulls altogether. When we both raised the matter and pressured them for action, they were belatedly embarrassed into granting limited permissions. Many colleagues across the political divide have told us that their constituents have raised similar concerns, which is why the debate this week has attracted cross-party support. But NatureScot's instinct is clearly to oppose any effective means to deal with the problem. In Eyemouth, after a series of gull attacks, they made the preposterous suggestion that dogs should be employed to scare birds away. That is, frankly, bonkers. The sheer impracticality of this suggestion is an indication that this unaccountable quango is failing to take the problem seriously. When they do not dismiss it or prioritise hypothetical benefits for seabirds over real improvements for people, their proposed solutions are increasingly bizarre and unrealistic. They impose significant costs – in some instances running into six figures – on businesses. And they've been encouraged in this intransigent and unreasonable position by government ministers to whom, in theory, they are accountable. Yet when questioned, those same ministers seem happy to parrot the lines produced by the apparatchiks at NatureScot. People are sick and tired of the failure of the government to act to deal with what has become a serious threat to public safety, as well as a blight on our villages, towns and cities. MSPs have an opportunity to correct that this week, and produce an effective means to tackle this menace.
BBC News
5 days ago
- Business
- BBC News
Are traditional fish and chips at risk?
It's a typically British tradition, especially if you go to the seaside, but some chip shop owners say the future of fish and chips is at risk. It's because cod and other seafood is getting more expensive. One chip shop owner told the BBC that just five years ago his regular cod and chips cost £8 but it's now £ National Federation of Fish Friers said the price rises were due to tight quotas, which are rules about the amount of fish allowed to be caught. The government said changes in food prices were "driven by a number of factors". Andrew Crook, president of the National Federation of Fish Friers, said: "We are in a situation currently where the price we need to sell fish and chips for needs to increase just as consumers have less money in their pockets."Fish and chips still compares well to other food options out there," he added.A government spokesperson said it was "backing coastal communities and the fishing industry by investing £360m, helping to secure the future for the next generation of fishers"."Changes in food prices are driven by a number of factors such as import prices, manufacturing costs and exchange rates, and we closely monitor this."
Yahoo
20-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
US homeowners struggle with troubling catch-22 as insurance crisis grows: 'It is not worth the cost'
Homeowners are facing a troubling catch-22 when it comes to property insurance. Rising costs are making the safeguard too expensive for many people, leaving their dwellings unprotected from the severe storms that are driving up the premiums, according to The Daily Jeffersonian. Intense and more frequent extreme weather events are wreaking havoc on storm-prone areas across the country. A combination of increasing premiums and nonrenewals is leaving property owners in those areas with few options. The Federal Reserve said that 7% of homeowners surveyed last year went without insurance because "it is not worth the cost," according to 19% of respondents. It's a problem that has been years in the making. The Consumer Federation of America reported that rates rose 8.7% faster than inflation from 2018 to 2022. Coincidentally, home values in coastal communities are dropping as premiums rise. However, coverage nonrenewal rates are 80% higher in areas hit hardest by extreme weather, per the findings. The issue isn't limited to the seaboards, as premiums jumped in 95% of ZIP codes in recent years. A "typical" homeowner with property carrying a $350,000 replacement value pays about $275 a month for insurance — an amount that's growing. Rising rates are particularly felt by lower-income households, according to the CFA. "Homeowners earning under $50,000 per year are twice as likely to lack insurance compared to homeowners in general," per the data. The rising prices are evidence of how our planet's overheating is impacting almost everyone, either with unhealthy air, lighter pocketbooks, or both. A Zillow survey from 2023 found that 80% of respondents consider climate risks when buying a home. The National Centers for Environmental Information reported that the number of storms causing at least $1 billion in damage has been increasing since the 1980s, a decade that produced 33 of them. There were 115 in the last five years alone, with values adjusted for inflation. Increased use and availability of federally subsidized insurance for disasters such as floods can provide vital protection in areas where other providers are not active anymore, according to CBS News. It's important for anyone considering a move to stay informed on climate topics to prevent a relocation into a dangerous area, such as the expanding Tornado Alley. Do you think your energy bills are too high? Always Usually Only in certain months Never Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Surprisingly, Bloomberg reported that more Americans are moving into danger zones because of the cheaper home prices. Using your voice and vote to let lawmakers know that keeping agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Weather Service fully staffed can ensure that residents have updated data and services to make educated decisions, including about where to live. The agencies were part of the federal budget and staff cuts earlier this year, according to The New York Times and other reports. The Times reported that the NWS has rehired for some positions. Join our free newsletter for easy tips to save more and waste less, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
BBC News
19-06-2025
- Science
- BBC News
Three years left to limit warming to 1.5C, leading scientists warn
EPA The Earth could be doomed to breach the symbolic 1.5C warming limit in as little as three years at current levels of carbon dioxide emissions. That's the stark warning from more than 60 of the world's leading climate scientists in the most up-to-date assessment of the state of global warming. Nearly 200 countries agreed to try to limit global temperature rises to 1.5C above levels of the late 1800s in a landmark agreement in 2015, with the aim of avoiding some of the worst impacts of climate change. But countries have continued to burn record amounts of coal, oil and gas and chop down carbon-rich forests - leaving that international goal in peril. Climate change has already worsened many weather extremes - such as the UK's 40C heat in July 2022 - and has rapidly raised global sea levels, threatening coastal communities. "Things are all moving in the wrong direction," said lead author Prof Piers Forster, director of the Priestley Centre for Climate Futures at the University of Leeds. "We're seeing some unprecedented changes and we're also seeing the heating of the Earth and sea-level rise accelerating as well." These changes "have been predicted for some time and we can directly place them back to the very high level of emissions", he added. At the beginning of 2020, scientists estimated that humanity could only emit 500 billion more tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) - the most important planet-warming gas - for a 50% chance of keeping warming to 1.5C. But by the start of 2025 this so-called "carbon budget" had shrunk to 130 billion tonnes, according to the new study. That reduction is largely due to continued record emissions of CO2 and other planet-warming greenhouse gases like methane, but also improvements in the scientific estimates. If global CO2 emissions stay at their current highs of about 40 billion tonnes a year, 130 billion tonnes gives the world roughly three years until that carbon budget is exhausted. This could commit the world to breaching the target set by the Paris agreement, the researchers say, though the planet would probably not pass 1.5C of human-caused warming until a few years later. Last year was the first on record when global average air temperatures were more than 1.5C above those of the late 1800s. A single 12-month period isn't considered a breach of the Paris agreement, however, with the record heat of 2024 given an extra boost by natural weather patterns. But human-caused warming was by far the main reason for last year's high temperatures, reaching 1.36C above pre-industrial levels, the researchers estimate. This current rate of warming is about 0.27C per decade – much faster than anything in the geological record. And if emissions stay high, the planet is on track to reach 1.5C of warming on that metric around the year 2030. After this point, long-term warming could, in theory, be brought back down by sucking large quantities of CO2 back out of the atmosphere. But the authors urge caution on relying on these ambitious technologies serving as a get-out-of-jail card. "For larger exceedance [of 1.5C], it becomes less likely that removals [of CO2] will perfectly reverse the warming caused by today's emissions," warned Joeri Rogelj, professor of climate science and policy at Imperial College London. 'Every fraction of warming' matters The study is filled with striking statistics highlighting the magnitude of the climate change that has already happened. Perhaps the most notable is the rate at which extra heat is accumulating in the Earth's climate system, known as "Earth's energy imbalance" in scientific jargon. Over the past decade or so, this rate of heating has been more than double that of the 1970s and 1980s and an estimated 25% higher than the late 2000s and 2010s. "That's a really large number, a very worrying number" over such a short period, said Dr Matthew Palmer of the UK Met Office, and associate professor at the University of Bristol. The recent uptick is fundamentally due to greenhouse gas emissions, but a reduction in the cooling effect from small particles called aerosols has also played a role. This extra energy has to go somewhere. Some goes into warming the land, raising air temperatures, and melting the world's ice. But about 90% of the excess heat is taken up by the oceans. That not only means disruption to marine life but also higher sea levels: warmer ocean waters take up more space, in addition to the extra water that melting glaciers are adding to our seas. The rate of global sea-level rise has doubled since the 1990s, raising the risks of flooding for millions of people living in coastal areas worldwide. PA Media While this all paints a bleak picture, the authors note that the rate of emissions increases appears to be slowing as clean technologies are rolled out. They argue that "rapid and stringent" emissions cuts are more important than ever. The Paris target is based on very strong scientific evidence that the impacts of climate change would be far greater at 2C of warming than at 1.5C. That has often been oversimplified as meaning below 1.5C of warming is "safe" and above 1.5C "dangerous". In reality, every extra bit of warming increases the severity of many weather extremes, ice melt and sea-level rise. "Reductions in emissions over the next decade can critically change the rate of warming," said Prof Rogelj. "Every fraction of warming that we can avoid will result in less harm and less suffering of particularly poor and vulnerable populations and less challenges for our societies to live the lives that we desire," he added. Sign up for our Future Earth newsletter to keep up with the latest climate and environment stories with the BBC's Justin Rowlatt. Outside the UK? Sign up to our international newsletter here.
Daily Mail
11-06-2025
- Science
- Daily Mail
'Silent' crisis that threatens to wipe out $300 billion coastal industry
Scientists have warned of an environmental crisis threatening to destroy a $300billion global industry critical to coastal communities worldwide. A new study revealed that ocean acidification has already crossed a global tipping point. This occurs when the ocean absorbs excessive carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, making it more acidic and corrosive to marine organisms. Since the Industrial Revolution, burning fossil fuels has sent massive amounts of carbon dioxide into the air, increasing the ocean's acidity. Scientists revealed that oceans crossed a critical limit for acidification as early as 2000, with 60 percent of deeper waters now beyond the danger zone. The study found that the damage has already led to the loss of 43 percent of coral reef habitat, 61 percent of sea butterfly habitat, and 13 percent of suitable environment for shellfish like oysters and mussels. When the ocean becomes more acidic, it eats away at the building blocks these animals need to grow their shells. This change could push the global seafood industry, worth multi billions toward collapse. The US, with an $11 billion seafood market, is the world's second biggest market and could face serious consequences. 'It is not just an environmental issue anymore,' said Professor Steve Widdicombe, director of science at Plymouth Marine Laboratory and a leading global voice on ocean acidification. 'We are gambling with biodiversity and with billions in economic value every day that action is delayed.' Researchers say ocean acidification is undermining the survival of 'calcifying species' marine organisms that depend on calcium carbonate to form their shells and skeleton. 'Ocean acidification can severely affect marine organisms through its direct impact on physiology, growth, survival and reproduction,' researchers said in the study published in Global Change Biology. Shellfish farming alone contributes billions annually, supporting over 600 million people in coastal communities. Researchers said that by 2020, the ocean's water had already changed enough to go past the safe limit, scientists set to protect sea life from harm caused by too much acidity. In other words, the ocean became too acidic for many marine animals to stay healthy. That line was drawn at a 20 percent reduction in calcium carbonate compared to pre-industrial levels and US West Coast is among the worst affected. But this study suggests that even 10 percent deviation from pre-industrial conditions is enough to push marine ecosystems into danger. The maps highlight areas where conditions are just barely okay for corals, marked by a line called the 3.5 contour. Purple dots show where coral reefs are found. The maps compare four different times: (a) before big human impacts, (b) in 2020, (c) after a 10 percent drop from the old healthy level, and (d) after a 20 percent drop from the old healthy level. The Pacific oyster, a key part of US seafood farming, struggles to survive when ocean water gets too acidic. In the early 2010s, oyster hatcheries in the US Pacific Northwest almost shut down because the seawater became too acidic. To fix this, hatcheries started using sensors to monitor the water and added chemicals to keep it safe for oysters. However, many smaller or remote hatcheries often can not afford these fixes, and the same problem is now showing up along the Gulf and East coasts. However, many coastal areas around the world still do not have the tools or government help to deal with this problem. The damage is not limited to oysters. Tiny sea creatures called pteropods, a major food source for fish like salmon and mackerel, are already being hit hard by acidifying waters. By 2020, more than half of their polar habitat was damaged, with marine life struggling to survive. If they disappear, it could shake the entire ocean food chain. Coral reefs, though less common in US waters, are also at risk, putting coastal protection and young fish habitats in danger. As the ocean condition worsen, the sector is impacting both livelihoods and economy of US seafood industry. According to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the US marine industry supported 2.3 million jobs and generated $321 billion in sales in 2022. In addition to this, a report funded by the National Sea Grant Program found that US aquaculture, adds about $4 billion to the economy each year and supports over 22,000 employment. In the Pacific Northwest, where commercial shellfish farms thrive, corrosive seawater has already crossed the danger threshold. Despite growing evidence, the crisis remains largely unseen. 'There's no smoking gun,' said Professor Steve Widdicombe of Plymouth Marine Laboratory to The Guardians. 'It is tough to convince policymakers when the water looks fine from the beach.' International goals exist, like the UN's Sustainable Development Goal 14 and the Global Biodiversity Framework, but few governments, including the US, have laid out aggressive national plans specifically targeting acidification. 'Ocean acidification is a crisis we cannot see,' said Professor Helen Findlay, the lead author of the study. 'But its fingerprints are all over our coastlines, hatcheries and ecosystems. And unless we act now, the losses will keep mounting.'
