It's Climate Change I tell'ya!! IT'S CLIMATE CHANGE!!
- Thread starter B00Mer
- Start date
Taking the lead and sulphur out of gasoline didn’t stop the burning of fossil fuels .
A not-entirely-accurate catchall term for coal in its various grades and petroleum products.
The term itself is a fossil from the "enlightenment age" as an extremely dumbed down 17th century way of explaining geologically sourced hydrocarbons which eventually lead to thinking geo-sourced hydrocarbons were from dinosaurs later on in the 19th century which still hasn't been shaken off to this day.
Follow the Science!!!
You’re talking about air toxins and not climate change here. Yes those needed to be addressed as did acid rain, and they were addressed.
Climate change appears to be real. But like every other damn thing these days, the pissing and moaning (and the lawmaking and taxing) have far outrun the research into causes and cures (if we need cures).
But it gives Canadians a reason to exercise their national pastime, pissing and moaning.
There is no cure for a rapidly transiting geomagnetic pole. The sun's energy slams into our magnetosphere and atmosphere in places and ways it didnt just 50 years ago.
The southward drop in the pole and the timeline corelates with "the little ice age".
Its by far the biggest geophysical change to Earth in the past 175 years.
Someone want to take a stab at translating this:
The JTWP is an initiative of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that aims to promote pathways that ensure that the goals of the Paris Agreement are achieved justly and equitably. These pathways cover several dimensions, including social and environmental protection for communities and the environment.
COP30 was yet another “theater of delay” with endless discussions, and the creation of yet more administrative duties, “solely to avoid the actions that matter—committing to a just transition away from fossil fuels and putting money on the table,” he (Harjeet Singh, founding director of the Satat Sampada Climate Foundation in India and strategic advisor to the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative) said?
apple.news
So, what’s happening here?
The most important thing to come out of COP30 is that the climate 'ship' is still afloat.
They are the richest group of nations still in the Paris Agreement but this COP has not been the European Union's finest hour.
The most persistent question asked here at COP30 over the two weeks was about the future of the 'process' itself?
For the first time global trade became one of the key issues at these talks. There was an "orchestrated" effort to raise it in every negotiating room, according to veteran COP-watcher Alden Meyer of the climate think-tank E3G.
The European Union is planning to introduce a border tax on certain high-carbon products like steel, fertiliser, cement, and aluminium and lots of its trading partners – notably China, India and Saudi Arabia aren't happy about it.
The world's two biggest carbon emitters, China and the US, had similar impacts on this COP but achieved them in different ways.
Russia, normally a relatively quiet participant, was to the fore in blocking efforts on roadmaps. And while Saudi Arabia and other major oil producers were predictably hostile to curbing fossil fuels, China stayed quiet and concentrated on doing deals. And ultimately, say experts, the business China is doing will outdo the US and their efforts to sell fossil fuels.
apple.news
The COP31 climate meeting is now expected to be held in Turkey after Australia dropped its bid (?) to host the annual event.
Under the UN rules, the right to host the COP in 2026 falls to a group of countries made up of Western Europe, Australia and others. There will be relief among countries currently meeting at COP30 in the Brazilian city of Belém that a compromise has been reached as the lack of agreement on the venue was becoming an embarrassment for the UN? A pre-COP meeting will be held on a Pacific island, while the main event is held in Turkey. Australia's climate minister Chris Bowen will be its president.
www.bbc.com
The JTWP is an initiative of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that aims to promote pathways that ensure that the goals of the Paris Agreement are achieved justly and equitably. These pathways cover several dimensions, including social and environmental protection for communities and the environment.
COP30 was yet another “theater of delay” with endless discussions, and the creation of yet more administrative duties, “solely to avoid the actions that matter—committing to a just transition away from fossil fuels and putting money on the table,” he (Harjeet Singh, founding director of the Satat Sampada Climate Foundation in India and strategic advisor to the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative) said?
COP30 Backpedals on Climate Action — Inside Climate News
Offering no new plans to cut fossil fuels, the UN’s climate conference failed to produce a roadmap to stop global warming.
The most important thing to come out of COP30 is that the climate 'ship' is still afloat.
They are the richest group of nations still in the Paris Agreement but this COP has not been the European Union's finest hour.
The most persistent question asked here at COP30 over the two weeks was about the future of the 'process' itself?
For the first time global trade became one of the key issues at these talks. There was an "orchestrated" effort to raise it in every negotiating room, according to veteran COP-watcher Alden Meyer of the climate think-tank E3G.
The European Union is planning to introduce a border tax on certain high-carbon products like steel, fertiliser, cement, and aluminium and lots of its trading partners – notably China, India and Saudi Arabia aren't happy about it.
The world's two biggest carbon emitters, China and the US, had similar impacts on this COP but achieved them in different ways.
Russia, normally a relatively quiet participant, was to the fore in blocking efforts on roadmaps. And while Saudi Arabia and other major oil producers were predictably hostile to curbing fossil fuels, China stayed quiet and concentrated on doing deals. And ultimately, say experts, the business China is doing will outdo the US and their efforts to sell fossil fuels.
COP30 - Five key takeaways from a deeply divisive climate summit — BBC News
What did we learn from a climate summit that ended in a deal with no new mention of fossil fuels?
Under the UN rules, the right to host the COP in 2026 falls to a group of countries made up of Western Europe, Australia and others. There will be relief among countries currently meeting at COP30 in the Brazilian city of Belém that a compromise has been reached as the lack of agreement on the venue was becoming an embarrassment for the UN? A pre-COP meeting will be held on a Pacific island, while the main event is held in Turkey. Australia's climate minister Chris Bowen will be its president.
Turkey set to host COP31 after reaching compromise with Australia
Australia will now support the Turkish bid to host the climate talks in return for their minister chairing them.
www.bbc.com
Loading…
unfccc.int
A lot of flowery words that say nothing and mean what they say .Someone want to take a stab at translating this:
The JTWP is an initiative of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) that aims to promote pathways that ensure that the goals of the Paris Agreement are achieved justly and equitably. These pathways cover several dimensions, including social and environmental protection for communities and the environment.
View attachment 32109
View attachment 32110
COP30 was yet another “theater of delay” with endless discussions, and the creation of yet more administrative duties, “solely to avoid the actions that matter—committing to a just transition away from fossil fuels and putting money on the table,” he (Harjeet Singh, founding director of the Satat Sampada Climate Foundation in India and strategic advisor to the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative) said?
So, what’s happening here?COP30 Backpedals on Climate Action — Inside Climate News
Offering no new plans to cut fossil fuels, the UN’s climate conference failed to produce a roadmap to stop global warming.
The most important thing to come out of COP30 is that the climate 'ship' is still afloat.
They are the richest group of nations still in the Paris Agreement but this COP has not been the European Union's finest hour.
The most persistent question asked here at COP30 over the two weeks was about the future of the 'process' itself?
For the first time global trade became one of the key issues at these talks. There was an "orchestrated" effort to raise it in every negotiating room, according to veteran COP-watcher Alden Meyer of the climate think-tank E3G.
The European Union is planning to introduce a border tax on certain high-carbon products like steel, fertiliser, cement, and aluminium and lots of its trading partners – notably China, India and Saudi Arabia aren't happy about it.
The world's two biggest carbon emitters, China and the US, had similar impacts on this COP but achieved them in different ways.
Russia, normally a relatively quiet participant, was to the fore in blocking efforts on roadmaps. And while Saudi Arabia and other major oil producers were predictably hostile to curbing fossil fuels, China stayed quiet and concentrated on doing deals. And ultimately, say experts, the business China is doing will outdo the US and their efforts to sell fossil fuels.
The COP31 climate meeting is now expected to be held in Turkey after Australia dropped its bid (?) to host the annual event.COP30 - Five key takeaways from a deeply divisive climate summit — BBC News
What did we learn from a climate summit that ended in a deal with no new mention of fossil fuels?
Under the UN rules, the right to host the COP in 2026 falls to a group of countries made up of Western Europe, Australia and others. There will be relief among countries currently meeting at COP30 in the Brazilian city of Belém that a compromise has been reached as the lack of agreement on the venue was becoming an embarrassment for the UN? A pre-COP meeting will be held on a Pacific island, while the main event is held in Turkey. Australia's climate minister Chris Bowen will be its president.
Turkey set to host COP31 after reaching compromise with Australia
Australia will now support the Turkish bid to host the climate talks in return for their minister chairing them.Loading…
unfccc.int
Ottawa wants fewer cow farts, but farmers not blowing hot air
Bovaer, a methane-reducing feed ingredient for cattle, reduces emissions by up to 45% — but no additive works if farmers don't trust it.
Author of the article
r. Sylvain Charlebois
Published Nov 25, 2025 • 3 minute read
Dairy cows on a farm in B.C. on Dec. 19, 2024.
Dairy cows on a farm in B.C. on Dec. 19, 2024.
Canada’s approval of Bovaer earlier in 2024 was hailed as a climate breakthrough. The additive, designed to reduce methane emissions from dairy and beef cattle, was endorsed by Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) after extensive review. For many, it symbolized progress: a clean, simple intervention promising climate benefits without compromising productivity.
But good intentions do not exempt us from vigilance. Over the past few weeks, troubling reports have emerged from parts of Europe. Danish farmers have paused the use of Bovaer after noticing unexplained health issues among their herds. Norway’s largest dairy cooperative has temporarily suspended pilot usage, citing precaution while national authorities investigate. No regulator has established a causal link, and to be clear, the science behind Bovaer remains strong. But the existence of such incidents — however anecdotal — reminds us that real farms are not controlled environments. Biology is rarely linear, and the adoption of new technologies in agriculture often exposes conditions unexpected in laboratory trials.
If we separate the science from the headlines, Bovaer’s mitigation potential is genuine. Controlled studies consistently show that Bovaer can reduce enteric methane emissions by 20% to 30% in dairy cattle, and up to 45% in beef feedlot animals, depending on dose and diet. These reductions are far greater than what most producers can achieve through management changes alone. For a sector responsible for roughly 14% of Canada’s total methane emissions, a tool capable of cutting emissions by a quarter is not trivial. In fact, few other agricultural interventions offer this kind of immediate, measurable impact.
Yet Canada’s picture remains more opaque than it should be. While any dairy or beef producer can use Bovaer today, we do not know how many actually are. Adoption appears minimal, but reliable national data simply do not exist. If we are serious about quantifying environmental benefits — or potential risks — we need to track uptake, monitor animal-health outcomes, and understand real-world performance across diverse production systems. Canada cannot rely on supplier press releases or scattered farmer anecdotes to assess a technology with national implications.
There is, however, a more fundamental question we should ask: Are we introducing climate-focused additives faster than we are improving the baseline economics of Canadian livestock farming?
The Bovaer story also reveals something deeper about the state of agricultural innovation in Canada. Unlike Europe, we have no national methane-reduction mandate for livestock, no dedicated funding stream tied to feed-additive adoption, and no public reporting structure for on-farm results. Approvals have moved forward, but the implementation ecosystem remains largely theoretical. The gap between policy aspiration and practical deployment is widening.
None of this means Bovaer should be abandoned. Far from it. The science behind 3-NOP is strong, and the product demonstrably reduces methane when used appropriately. But enthusiasm must be matched with transparency and caution. Ignoring farmer experiences in other countries would be irresponsible. Pretending Canada is immune to such challenges would be worse.
Agricultural innovation should never be a race. It should be a disciplined, evidence-driven process that integrates farmers’ realities, protects consumers, and strengthens the competitiveness of Canadian food production. The recent reports from Europe are not an indictment — they are a reminder. Climate technologies only work when the people who adopt them are confident, well-supported, and well-informed.
A lack of transparency surrounding the use of 3-NOP and Bovaer will only fuel greater skepticism, both within the industry and among consumers.
Canada now has an opportunity. Instead of rushing toward symbolic wins, we should invest in monitoring, data collection, and communication. We should listen to farmers — not lecture them. And above all, we should anchor every climate intervention in the same principle that guides good food policy: innovation should help producers thrive, not simply help governments hit targets.
— Sylvain Charlebois is director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University, co-host of The Food Professor Podcast and visiting scholar at McGill University.
irishexaminer.com
bbc.com
dsm-firmenich.com
torontosun.com
Bovaer, a methane-reducing feed ingredient for cattle, reduces emissions by up to 45% — but no additive works if farmers don't trust it.
Author of the article
r. Sylvain CharleboisPublished Nov 25, 2025 • 3 minute read
Dairy cows on a farm in B.C. on Dec. 19, 2024.
Dairy cows on a farm in B.C. on Dec. 19, 2024.
Canada’s approval of Bovaer earlier in 2024 was hailed as a climate breakthrough. The additive, designed to reduce methane emissions from dairy and beef cattle, was endorsed by Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) after extensive review. For many, it symbolized progress: a clean, simple intervention promising climate benefits without compromising productivity.
But good intentions do not exempt us from vigilance. Over the past few weeks, troubling reports have emerged from parts of Europe. Danish farmers have paused the use of Bovaer after noticing unexplained health issues among their herds. Norway’s largest dairy cooperative has temporarily suspended pilot usage, citing precaution while national authorities investigate. No regulator has established a causal link, and to be clear, the science behind Bovaer remains strong. But the existence of such incidents — however anecdotal — reminds us that real farms are not controlled environments. Biology is rarely linear, and the adoption of new technologies in agriculture often exposes conditions unexpected in laboratory trials.
If we separate the science from the headlines, Bovaer’s mitigation potential is genuine. Controlled studies consistently show that Bovaer can reduce enteric methane emissions by 20% to 30% in dairy cattle, and up to 45% in beef feedlot animals, depending on dose and diet. These reductions are far greater than what most producers can achieve through management changes alone. For a sector responsible for roughly 14% of Canada’s total methane emissions, a tool capable of cutting emissions by a quarter is not trivial. In fact, few other agricultural interventions offer this kind of immediate, measurable impact.
Yet Canada’s picture remains more opaque than it should be. While any dairy or beef producer can use Bovaer today, we do not know how many actually are. Adoption appears minimal, but reliable national data simply do not exist. If we are serious about quantifying environmental benefits — or potential risks — we need to track uptake, monitor animal-health outcomes, and understand real-world performance across diverse production systems. Canada cannot rely on supplier press releases or scattered farmer anecdotes to assess a technology with national implications.
There is, however, a more fundamental question we should ask: Are we introducing climate-focused additives faster than we are improving the baseline economics of Canadian livestock farming?
The Bovaer story also reveals something deeper about the state of agricultural innovation in Canada. Unlike Europe, we have no national methane-reduction mandate for livestock, no dedicated funding stream tied to feed-additive adoption, and no public reporting structure for on-farm results. Approvals have moved forward, but the implementation ecosystem remains largely theoretical. The gap between policy aspiration and practical deployment is widening.
None of this means Bovaer should be abandoned. Far from it. The science behind 3-NOP is strong, and the product demonstrably reduces methane when used appropriately. But enthusiasm must be matched with transparency and caution. Ignoring farmer experiences in other countries would be irresponsible. Pretending Canada is immune to such challenges would be worse.
Agricultural innovation should never be a race. It should be a disciplined, evidence-driven process that integrates farmers’ realities, protects consumers, and strengthens the competitiveness of Canadian food production. The recent reports from Europe are not an indictment — they are a reminder. Climate technologies only work when the people who adopt them are confident, well-supported, and well-informed.
A lack of transparency surrounding the use of 3-NOP and Bovaer will only fuel greater skepticism, both within the industry and among consumers.
Canada now has an opportunity. Instead of rushing toward symbolic wins, we should invest in monitoring, data collection, and communication. We should listen to farmers — not lecture them. And above all, we should anchor every climate intervention in the same principle that guides good food policy: innovation should help producers thrive, not simply help governments hit targets.
— Sylvain Charlebois is director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University, co-host of The Food Professor Podcast and visiting scholar at McGill University.
Norwegian co-op pauses use of Bovaer with suppliers
It follows claims from Danish farmers that using the methane-reducing supplement has caused adverse side-effects on their herds
irishexaminer.com
Bovaer: Methane-cutting cow feed trials on Arla dairy farms end
The UK's largest dairy co-operative is now reviewing the results of the tests of Bovaer on 30 farms.
bbc.com
Canada approves Bovaer® as first feed ingredient to reduce methane emissions from cattle
The Canadian authorities today granted market authorization for Bovaer®, a methane reducing feed ingredient for cattle, which enables dairy and beef farmers to substantially lower their carbon footprint.
dsm-firmenich.com
CHARLEBOIS: Ottawa wants fewer cow farts, but farmers not blowing hot air
Canada’s approval of Bovaer earlier in 2024 was hailed as a climate breakthrough. Read more from Dr. Sylvain Charlebois.
Here's the scoop. The high end finishing lots are already feeding beef with remainders of ethanol production which is high protein and low carbs reducing farts.Ottawa wants fewer cow farts, but farmers not blowing hot air
Bovaer, a methane-reducing feed ingredient for cattle, reduces emissions by up to 45% — but no additive works if farmers don't trust it.
Author of the article
Published Nov 25, 2025 • 3 minute read
Dairy cows on a farm in B.C. on Dec. 19, 2024.
Dairy cows on a farm in B.C. on Dec. 19, 2024.
Canada’s approval of Bovaer earlier in 2024 was hailed as a climate breakthrough. The additive, designed to reduce methane emissions from dairy and beef cattle, was endorsed by Health Canada and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) after extensive review. For many, it symbolized progress: a clean, simple intervention promising climate benefits without compromising productivity.
But good intentions do not exempt us from vigilance. Over the past few weeks, troubling reports have emerged from parts of Europe. Danish farmers have paused the use of Bovaer after noticing unexplained health issues among their herds. Norway’s largest dairy cooperative has temporarily suspended pilot usage, citing precaution while national authorities investigate. No regulator has established a causal link, and to be clear, the science behind Bovaer remains strong. But the existence of such incidents — however anecdotal — reminds us that real farms are not controlled environments. Biology is rarely linear, and the adoption of new technologies in agriculture often exposes conditions unexpected in laboratory trials.
If we separate the science from the headlines, Bovaer’s mitigation potential is genuine. Controlled studies consistently show that Bovaer can reduce enteric methane emissions by 20% to 30% in dairy cattle, and up to 45% in beef feedlot animals, depending on dose and diet. These reductions are far greater than what most producers can achieve through management changes alone. For a sector responsible for roughly 14% of Canada’s total methane emissions, a tool capable of cutting emissions by a quarter is not trivial. In fact, few other agricultural interventions offer this kind of immediate, measurable impact.
Yet Canada’s picture remains more opaque than it should be. While any dairy or beef producer can use Bovaer today, we do not know how many actually are. Adoption appears minimal, but reliable national data simply do not exist. If we are serious about quantifying environmental benefits — or potential risks — we need to track uptake, monitor animal-health outcomes, and understand real-world performance across diverse production systems. Canada cannot rely on supplier press releases or scattered farmer anecdotes to assess a technology with national implications.
There is, however, a more fundamental question we should ask: Are we introducing climate-focused additives faster than we are improving the baseline economics of Canadian livestock farming?
The Bovaer story also reveals something deeper about the state of agricultural innovation in Canada. Unlike Europe, we have no national methane-reduction mandate for livestock, no dedicated funding stream tied to feed-additive adoption, and no public reporting structure for on-farm results. Approvals have moved forward, but the implementation ecosystem remains largely theoretical. The gap between policy aspiration and practical deployment is widening.
None of this means Bovaer should be abandoned. Far from it. The science behind 3-NOP is strong, and the product demonstrably reduces methane when used appropriately. But enthusiasm must be matched with transparency and caution. Ignoring farmer experiences in other countries would be irresponsible. Pretending Canada is immune to such challenges would be worse.
Agricultural innovation should never be a race. It should be a disciplined, evidence-driven process that integrates farmers’ realities, protects consumers, and strengthens the competitiveness of Canadian food production. The recent reports from Europe are not an indictment — they are a reminder. Climate technologies only work when the people who adopt them are confident, well-supported, and well-informed.
A lack of transparency surrounding the use of 3-NOP and Bovaer will only fuel greater skepticism, both within the industry and among consumers.
Canada now has an opportunity. Instead of rushing toward symbolic wins, we should invest in monitoring, data collection, and communication. We should listen to farmers — not lecture them. And above all, we should anchor every climate intervention in the same principle that guides good food policy: innovation should help producers thrive, not simply help governments hit targets.
— Sylvain Charlebois is director of the Agri-Food Analytics Lab at Dalhousie University, co-host of The Food Professor Podcast and visiting scholar at McGill University.
Norwegian co-op pauses use of Bovaer with suppliers
It follows claims from Danish farmers that using the methane-reducing supplement has caused adverse side-effects on their herdsBovaer: Methane-cutting cow feed trials on Arla dairy farms end
The UK's largest dairy co-operative is now reviewing the results of the tests of Bovaer on 30 farms.Canada approves Bovaer® as first feed ingredient to reduce methane emissions from cattle
The Canadian authorities today granted market authorization for Bovaer®, a methane reducing feed ingredient for cattle, which enables dairy and beef farmers to substantially lower their carbon footprint.CHARLEBOIS: Ottawa wants fewer cow farts, but farmers not blowing hot air
Canada’s approval of Bovaer earlier in 2024 was hailed as a climate breakthrough. Read more from Dr. Sylvain Charlebois.
What caused a massive die-off of penguins off the South African coast?
There are fewer than 10,000 breeding pairs of African penguins left today, down from an estimated 141,000 in 1956 and potentially millions at the end of the 19th century.
Author of the article:Washington Post
Washington Post
Brady Dennis
Published Dec 05, 2025 • 5 minute read
African Penguins on Sandy Beach at Boulders Bay, South Africa
Group of African penguins relaxing on a white sandy beach near turquoise water in Boulders Bay, South Africa.
The penguins perished by the thousands for a simple, agonizing reason: a lack of food.
In two key colonies off the coast of South Africa, the vast majority of the breeding birds probably starved to death over an eight-year period because of a collapse of their food supplies, according to a study published Thursday.
The findings by a team of researchers from the South African government, the University of Exeter and other universities adds to the growing body of evidence about a central threat to the survival of African penguins, which have seen their numbers plummet and are now considered “critically” endangered.
Scientists focused on Dassen Island and Robben Island, where populations of the small bird, with its braying calls and distinctive black-and-white tuxedo markings, were decimated between 2004 and 2011 as the stock of sardines they depend upon fell drastically – leading to a loss of an estimated 62,000 breeding individuals during that period.
Richard Sherley, a co-author and conservation biologist at the University of Exeter, said in a statement that efforts to restore and maintain a reliable food supply for the birds in foraging areas “would seem to be essential for their long-term survival.”
There are fewer than 10,000 breeding pairs of African penguins left today, down from an estimated 141,000 in 1956 and potentially millions at the end of the 19th century. The birds, which grow only to about 2 feet tall, are the only penguin species native to South Africa, and largely inhabit small islands off the coasts of that nation and nearby Namibia.
Many factors behind decline
Myriad factors have fueled their precipitous decline, including the harvesting of guano, which the penguins historically used to develop suitable nests. But few perils loom as large as a scarcity of sardines and anchovies they feed upon – the supplies of which face impacts from both climate change and commercial fishing.
Each year, African penguins moult, which involves shedding and replacing weatherworn feathers to maintain warmth and waterproofing. But during the several weeks that process takes, the birds must remain on land and are unable to hunt.
Typically, they would feast to prepare for such a trying stretch.
“They are evolved to build up fat and then to fast whilst their body metabolizes those reserves,” Sherley said. “They then need to be able to regain body condition rapidly afterwards. … So, essentially, if food is too hard to find before they moult or immediately afterwards, they will have insufficient reserves to survive the fast.”
That, the researchers found, is a predicament that most likely fueled a mass die-off documented in the years after 2004, when the birds’ core food source consistently fell to less than a quarter of its peak levels.
The study’s authors compared an index of available food supply in the region over time with the proportion of breeding penguins that failed to return to their colonies to moult. A clear picture emerged.
“Adult survival, principally through the crucial annual moult, was strongly related to prey availability,” Sherley said.
The sites studied by the researchers represent “two of the most important breeding colonies historically,” according to co-author Azwianewi Makhado, of South Africa’s Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment.
But, the researchers added, the losses are not confined to those islands. “These declines are mirrored elsewhere,” Sherley said, noting that the species has endured nearly an 80 percent population decline over the past three decades.
Thursday’s paper comes on the heels of another study last month, which found that during years of scarce fish supply, African penguins tend to crowd into the same areas as commercial fishing boats, creating intense competition for a dwindling supply of prey.
Those findings, published in the Journal of Applied Ecology, also used tracking information from Dassen and Robben islands to document this “overlap intensity.”
In 2016, a year marked by low stocks of sardines and anchovies, about 20 percent of penguins were feeding in the same regions as active fishing vessels, according to scientists’ analysis. In years with more robust fish stocks, that figure dropped to about 4 percent.
The deepening research into the availability of food for African penguins is helping to shape management and conservation efforts around a problem that has been a focus for decades.
Fishing restrictions imposed in some areas
In recent years, the South African government has imposed “interim” fishing restrictions, declaring some areas around major penguin colonies closed to commercial anchovy and sardine fishing.
And this year, a settlement between conservation groups and the fishing industry led a high court in South Africa to bar commercial fishing over the next decade near a half-dozen sites critical to breeding colonies of African penguins.
The no-go zones, intended to prevent the presence of vessels that use “purse seine” nets to create a wall of netting that encircle fish, include breeding areas of Dassen Island, Robben Island, Stony Point, Dyer Island, St. Croix Island and Bird Island.
The authors of Thursday’s paper said they hope the new restrictions will help slow the loss of African penguins. “However,” they write, “in the face of the ongoing impact of climate change on the abundance and distribution of their key prey, other interventions are likely to be needed.”
In its most recent assessment of the species last year, the International Union for Conservation of Nature found that African penguins are “undergoing an extremely rapid population decline” and that the current population counts “show an alarming acceleration in the rate of decline.”
“This trend,” the organization wrote, “currently shows no sign of reversing, and immediate conservation action is required.”
Sherley, the Exeter researcher, hopes the latest findings on prey availability help to hammer home the urgency around the protection of the penguins – in part, he told the publication Mongabay last year, because their loss offers a glimpse at a much broader potential loss.
“Despite being well-known and studied, these penguins are still facing extinction, showing just how severe the damage to our ecosystems has become,” Sherley said.
“If a species as iconic as the African penguin is struggling to survive,” he said, “it raises the question of how many other species are disappearing without us even noticing.”
torontosun.com
There are fewer than 10,000 breeding pairs of African penguins left today, down from an estimated 141,000 in 1956 and potentially millions at the end of the 19th century.
Author of the article:Washington Post
Washington Post
Brady Dennis
Published Dec 05, 2025 • 5 minute read
African Penguins on Sandy Beach at Boulders Bay, South Africa
Group of African penguins relaxing on a white sandy beach near turquoise water in Boulders Bay, South Africa.
The penguins perished by the thousands for a simple, agonizing reason: a lack of food.
In two key colonies off the coast of South Africa, the vast majority of the breeding birds probably starved to death over an eight-year period because of a collapse of their food supplies, according to a study published Thursday.
The findings by a team of researchers from the South African government, the University of Exeter and other universities adds to the growing body of evidence about a central threat to the survival of African penguins, which have seen their numbers plummet and are now considered “critically” endangered.
Scientists focused on Dassen Island and Robben Island, where populations of the small bird, with its braying calls and distinctive black-and-white tuxedo markings, were decimated between 2004 and 2011 as the stock of sardines they depend upon fell drastically – leading to a loss of an estimated 62,000 breeding individuals during that period.
Richard Sherley, a co-author and conservation biologist at the University of Exeter, said in a statement that efforts to restore and maintain a reliable food supply for the birds in foraging areas “would seem to be essential for their long-term survival.”
There are fewer than 10,000 breeding pairs of African penguins left today, down from an estimated 141,000 in 1956 and potentially millions at the end of the 19th century. The birds, which grow only to about 2 feet tall, are the only penguin species native to South Africa, and largely inhabit small islands off the coasts of that nation and nearby Namibia.
Many factors behind decline
Myriad factors have fueled their precipitous decline, including the harvesting of guano, which the penguins historically used to develop suitable nests. But few perils loom as large as a scarcity of sardines and anchovies they feed upon – the supplies of which face impacts from both climate change and commercial fishing.
Each year, African penguins moult, which involves shedding and replacing weatherworn feathers to maintain warmth and waterproofing. But during the several weeks that process takes, the birds must remain on land and are unable to hunt.
Typically, they would feast to prepare for such a trying stretch.
“They are evolved to build up fat and then to fast whilst their body metabolizes those reserves,” Sherley said. “They then need to be able to regain body condition rapidly afterwards. … So, essentially, if food is too hard to find before they moult or immediately afterwards, they will have insufficient reserves to survive the fast.”
That, the researchers found, is a predicament that most likely fueled a mass die-off documented in the years after 2004, when the birds’ core food source consistently fell to less than a quarter of its peak levels.
The study’s authors compared an index of available food supply in the region over time with the proportion of breeding penguins that failed to return to their colonies to moult. A clear picture emerged.
“Adult survival, principally through the crucial annual moult, was strongly related to prey availability,” Sherley said.
The sites studied by the researchers represent “two of the most important breeding colonies historically,” according to co-author Azwianewi Makhado, of South Africa’s Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment.
But, the researchers added, the losses are not confined to those islands. “These declines are mirrored elsewhere,” Sherley said, noting that the species has endured nearly an 80 percent population decline over the past three decades.
Thursday’s paper comes on the heels of another study last month, which found that during years of scarce fish supply, African penguins tend to crowd into the same areas as commercial fishing boats, creating intense competition for a dwindling supply of prey.
Those findings, published in the Journal of Applied Ecology, also used tracking information from Dassen and Robben islands to document this “overlap intensity.”
In 2016, a year marked by low stocks of sardines and anchovies, about 20 percent of penguins were feeding in the same regions as active fishing vessels, according to scientists’ analysis. In years with more robust fish stocks, that figure dropped to about 4 percent.
The deepening research into the availability of food for African penguins is helping to shape management and conservation efforts around a problem that has been a focus for decades.
Fishing restrictions imposed in some areas
In recent years, the South African government has imposed “interim” fishing restrictions, declaring some areas around major penguin colonies closed to commercial anchovy and sardine fishing.
And this year, a settlement between conservation groups and the fishing industry led a high court in South Africa to bar commercial fishing over the next decade near a half-dozen sites critical to breeding colonies of African penguins.
The no-go zones, intended to prevent the presence of vessels that use “purse seine” nets to create a wall of netting that encircle fish, include breeding areas of Dassen Island, Robben Island, Stony Point, Dyer Island, St. Croix Island and Bird Island.
The authors of Thursday’s paper said they hope the new restrictions will help slow the loss of African penguins. “However,” they write, “in the face of the ongoing impact of climate change on the abundance and distribution of their key prey, other interventions are likely to be needed.”
In its most recent assessment of the species last year, the International Union for Conservation of Nature found that African penguins are “undergoing an extremely rapid population decline” and that the current population counts “show an alarming acceleration in the rate of decline.”
“This trend,” the organization wrote, “currently shows no sign of reversing, and immediate conservation action is required.”
Sherley, the Exeter researcher, hopes the latest findings on prey availability help to hammer home the urgency around the protection of the penguins – in part, he told the publication Mongabay last year, because their loss offers a glimpse at a much broader potential loss.
“Despite being well-known and studied, these penguins are still facing extinction, showing just how severe the damage to our ecosystems has become,” Sherley said.
“If a species as iconic as the African penguin is struggling to survive,” he said, “it raises the question of how many other species are disappearing without us even noticing.”
What caused a massive die-off of penguins off the South African coast?
The penguins perished by the thousands for a simple, agonizing reason: a lack of food.