When speaking to one of my less environmentally inclined
friends about my blog, he declared that he would only read it if there were ‘cute
pictures of ducklings or something’. Far be it from me to put someone off my
blog for lack of some cute animals, so here they are:
 |
|
|
And how exactly can I link ducklings to sea level change? I
was flummoxed too until I came across this article in The Telegraph. Yes, it’s a few years old but
nevertheless a link between ducks and sea level rise in Bangladesh.
In 2009 the UK government pledged £70 million pounds to help
Bangladesh cope with climate change and sea level rise. Part of this money was
to be spent on encouraging people to keep more aquatically inclined poultry, so
it’s ducks in and chickens out. Apparently ducks can even help with rice
farming by fertilizing the land, and acting as a natural fertilizer – they may
even reduce methane emissions from the the paddy fields (ClimateChangeNews) – sounds amazing – why did
anyone ever keep chickens?
A little more research into ducks and Bangladesh ,and turns
out it’s not even conventional ducks. Being able to swim just isn’t enough in
the cut throat world of sea level rise – the normal ducks were getting ill as
groundwater becomes increasingly saline with rising sea levels. So
saline happy Superduck - aka the Campbell duck – to the rescue (ChristianAid). I’m imagining a
duck with a mask, cape and plough so I’m not going to post a picture of the real
Campbell duck because you’ll only be disappointed.
So I've been thinking about this (and trying not to let cute duckings clog my mind), and short-term it does seem like a wonderful idea - as least people won't lose everything when it does flood. I also think ducks would be a great way of coping with sea level rise or just more general flooding, if it was temporary, and seasonal. But it isn't, especially in Bangladesh which, being essentially a floodplain, doesn't have any topographic advantages. Ultimately, while ducks are a nice stop-gap they don't deal with the bigger picture. The groundwater shouldn't be so saline that more conventional poultry can't survive because humans won't survive either. And long- term as the sea levels rise and flooding becomes more common, or permanent, where will all the people and their ducks go? Even ducks like land sometimes.
So I've been thinking about this (and trying not to let cute duckings clog my mind), and short-term it does seem like a wonderful idea - as least people won't lose everything when it does flood. I also think ducks would be a great way of coping with sea level rise or just more general flooding, if it was temporary, and seasonal. But it isn't, especially in Bangladesh which, being essentially a floodplain, doesn't have any topographic advantages. Ultimately, while ducks are a nice stop-gap they don't deal with the bigger picture. The groundwater shouldn't be so saline that more conventional poultry can't survive because humans won't survive either. And long- term as the sea levels rise and flooding becomes more common, or permanent, where will all the people and their ducks go? Even ducks like land sometimes.
I'll admit it - I was shamefully attracted to this post because of the cute duck picture! But this is an interesting idea. While (as you point out) I don't think this is a long-term solution, it demonstrates how we don't always need the help of fancy new technologies when developing mitigation strategies - sometimes a simple, logical idea could be an effective one.
ReplyDelete