Turtle tryst?

What the fate of two old turtles says about China's future

Posted by Ashley Braun at 11:30 AM on 10 Dec 2007

Read more about: China | endangered species | wildlife | biodiversity | water pollution

Having spent two summers researching amphibians and reptiles, I have ~~a poster of endangered frogs and salamanders on my wall~~ what one might call a healthy fascination with these endearing ectotherms. Being thus inclined, my eyes lit up when I stumbled on The New York Times' latest feature, "China's Turtles, Emblems of a Crisis." It's part six of their series China: Choking on Growth, in which they "examin[e] the human toll, global impact and political challenge of China's epic pollution crisis."

So, China and pollution, nothing new right? Another species on its way out -- isn't a different one kicking the bucket every 90 minutes or so these days?

Well, this near-bucket-kicking Chinese turtle nearly had Me: Choking on Tears. The scenario: only two, count 'em, two Yangtze giant soft-shell turtles currently exist on this planet. That's it: one female turtle in a zoo in Changsha, China, and one male in a zoo in Suzhou. I know the romantics out there are reaching for their hankies at the unlikely prospects for these pollution-crossed lovers.

Still, you might ask again, so what?

Why care if these turtles never get it on and all-too-soon swim up to that big pond in the sky? Well, let the experts tell you: imminent extinction of a species is nothing to take lightly. Especially when it's an indicator of other, often more far-reaching, problems at hand: unrestricted urban growth and industrial pollution, the rapid conversion of wilderness habitat to city and farmland, and poor or no execution of wildlife conservation programs, for starters.

These last two doomed turtles have me all choked up because of one overarching word: power. The power to decimate entire species, often without ever having known they existed. The power to clear a landscape and repopulate it with tin-roofed shanties powered and powdered by coal dust. The power to choose life or to choose death for entire ecosystems, entire ways of life. The power to affect humans and this planet in ways subtle and sneaky.

"Biodiversity and human well-being just cannot be separated."

Dr. Kaveh Zahedi of the World Conservation Monitoring Centre made this statement two and a half years ago, after the 2005 Millennium Ecosystem Assessment reported that current rates of extinction (which are 100-1000 times the fossil record's normal "background level") would, to put it delicately, screw over the chances of extracting the global poor from their current state.

China undeniably constitutes a substantial portion of the global poor while simultaneously claiming a disproportionately high concentration of biological diversity within its borders (known as "hotspots"), creating a perilous precipice from which the Chinese people could easily plummet if preservation isn't properly practiced (the "p" button on my keyboard must be stuck).

I'm not implying that restoration of a species is a cinch these days -- either ecologically or politically. The U.S.'s current administration boasts the lowest annual rate of listing endangered species (PDF) in the history of the Endangered Species Act (1973). I mean, what a record.

And yet it's so frustrating to care so much about the value of biological diversity, or even the value of a single species, in the face of the massive Chinese economic machine. I recall sitting in class last year while my Aquatic Conservation professor predicted that within the year, the Yangtze River dolphin would be extinct (needless to say, he was dead on). This 20-million-year-old freshwater dolphin, revered as "goddess of the Yangtze" and indicator species of the river's health, couldn't compete with the 6 percent of the world's population dependent upon the Yangtze.

Today, China is betting on two 80-plus-year-old turtles sexing it up to save an entire species. Let's hope for everyone's sake this isn't their long-term conservation plan.

For story: Turtle tryst?
13 Comments | Post a Comment

Nice post

I once pulled a soft shelled turtle out of the Wabash river near Lafayette Indiana. They bite, literally.

In the end, it all comes down to biodiversity. Poison Darts--Protecting the biodiversity of our world

by biodiversivist at 3:08 PM on 10 Dec 2007

Two by two...

There's still two of 'em (a male and female), and therefore there's still hope (genetic diversity and inbreeding not withstanding). If they're careful 'bout it, and luck is on their side, thsi may be one species who just might make it.

by Tasermons Partner at 5:36 PM on 10 Dec 2007

Genetic diversity

I don't see how you can save a species with only one male and female left and avoid having gene problems on down the line. Might be better to let this species go and preserve resources for protecting other turtle species that are still able to be saved from extinction. It's horrible that biologists have to be put in such a situation in the first place.

On another note, I learned a few days ago that the British owned supermarket Tesco is selling live turtles in their Chinese stores. Most of which are imported from North America. It's a shame we allow our native turtles to be so cruelly captured and shipped live to Asia to be sold to consumers who will take them home and kill them in the most brutal of ways-decapitation. You can contact Tesco at customer.service@tesco.co.uk
More info at http://www.viva.org.uk/campaigns/turtle/index.html

by amc89 at 8:56 AM on 11 Dec 2007

The poor aren't the problem

As another huge turtle fan, I was also saddened by the news. I think it's safe to say they're as good as extinct.

I want to raise one small objection to Ashley Braun's piece - the paragraph about how the high population of the poor combined with lots of biodiversity is the problem.

The Asian Turtle Crisis
(http://nytts.org/asianturtlecrisis.html) is a problem of wealth more than poverty. The growing middle class and wealthy can now indulge in expensive delicacies like turtle, which leads to over-collection and extinction. The other contributing factors of pollution and changes in local hydrology are also problems of economic development, not of poverty.

Change the world one lunch at a time. Find out how at www.pbjcampaign.org

by BernardBrown at 9:51 AM on 11 Dec 2007

Wild or turtle farms?

On another note, I learned a few days ago that the British owned supermarket Tesco is selling live turtles in their Chinese stores. Most of which are imported from North America. It's a shame we allow our native turtles to be so cruelly captured and shipped live to Asia to be sold to consumers who will take them home and kill them in the most brutal of ways-decapitation.

Do we know for sure that it's turtles captured in the wild? Or are they turtles that are grown on turtle farms?

by Tasermons Partner at 9:55 AM on 11 Dec 2007

so sad

this is so sad. i follow environment news all the time, from many sources, and what China is doing to destroy biodiversity and the environment makes for really depressing reading.

meanwhile, at the Bali Climate talks, the US is refusing to sign on to any concrete percentage caps on pollution, and even though i think that is the WRONG move - we should be the leaders here, not the idiots who don't have a clue - i think i agree with my current government on this issue.

(no doubt, most Grist readers will yell at me for saying this....)

NOT because it's not the smart thing to do, but because China, Indonesia and India are being let of the hook once again from any efforts towards responsible environmental management (not so much India, mostly various parts of Asia).

In fact, just over the past 2 months i could site dozens of articles describing one environmental catasrophe after another that are occurring in Asia. not to mention that the Chinese growing wealth is doing much damage to endangered species worldwide. rich Asians provide a new and growing market for elephant ivory, tiger body parts, endangered hardwoods, etc.

i was just reading the BBC coverage of the Bali talks and China is requesting that developed nations do more to control their greenhouse gas emmissions. thanks China, so glad that you care so much.

by mat at 12:29 PM on 11 Dec 2007

footnote to my post above -

in fact, here's one article from Save the Elephants Foundation about consumption of endangered species in China-

http://www.savetheelephants.org/newsPress.asp?linkID=34

by mat at 12:37 PM on 11 Dec 2007

dolphins; turtles; the Chinese

Modern dolphins seem to have appeared in the late Oligocene and early Miocene epochs, the latter of which began ca. 25 million years BP. If the now extinct Baiji (Yangtze River dolphin) is said to be 20 million years old, then it must have preserved features found in some of the earliest dolphins. That loss of a window into life history is just one kind of loss that the biodiversity crisis is bringing with it.

As for the turtles: Turtles are some of the most successful survivers of all living creatures, and it would not surprise me if a new population can be raised from a single pair of ancestors, sort of a new Adam and Eve. I.e., genetic variability might appear, quickly and with beneficial effect, in a way that would not happen in other vertebrates. Presumably, though, the new population would have to be designated formally as a subspecies.

As for the Chinese, and their traditional practices and attitudes, and their new Western-influenced ones, and their wealth: Good luck, Mat; the matter has indeed been raised more than once before.

Chickens deserve our true friendship! So do fish! So do other sentient beings! Let us learn to be kind.

by caniscandida at 6:14 PM on 11 Dec 2007

The New Deniers

Having failed in their attempts to convince people that global warming is occurring and caused by human beings, the new deniers have come up with other approaches.

First they deny that anything can be done to stop it.

Then they deny that anything needs to be done by arguing that it won't be so bad.

Third, they say it is too expensive.

Fourth, they say that the US shouldn't do anything as long as China and India don't do even more (per capita).

This fourth argument appeals to American nationalism, xenophobia, anti-communism and heck, just downright fear of China (especially, with India being saved as a backup, perhaps).

However, note, that people who say do nothing because of China and India are using one of George W Bush's talking points.

Their call to do nothing (which is not the same as being critical of some actions of other governments) puts them in the same boat as climate change deniers, opposing any changes which might prevent global warming.

They should apply to Exxon-Mobil for grants!

patrick in Beijing

by bookerly at 11:48 PM on 11 Dec 2007

a 'denier'

to patrick in bejing...as a 'denier' i have to defend my view that global warming is in fact happening but you 'humanitarians' and 'high-minded thinkers' out there who spend money supporting propaganda machines like grist are hypocrites because if you took the ten bucks you sent to this magazine and spent it on a malaria net for someone in the tropics and got five people you know to do the same, you could prevent all of the supposedly 'devastating human impacts' from global warming that, in fact, already impact hundreds of millions of people and, in fact, we could already fix if we so chose. cheers.

by dooby at 10:17 AM on 30 Dec 2007

It's not that simple

I hate to tell you this, dooby, but no amount of mosquito netting is going to keep the people of Tuvalu from losing their home. Happy New Year!

Let the jaguars return!

by Storm Dragon at 3:07 PM on 31 Dec 2007
[ Parent ]

ok, here's my thought about tuvalu...

(let's not forget that Tuvalu's own government is not even worried about global warming, and that a small group of ~11k people will probably be able to adapt over the course of a few hundred years...like i was saying...you could spend trillions of dollars trying to reduce greenhouse gases by amounts that scientists even say won't change anything a whole lot at this point, or you could spend a few million dollars on preventing and curing treatable diseases in the third world that already kill more people around the world every month than global warming EVER will, AND for a fraction of the human and capital cost it would take to 'prevent' global warming we could provide universal healthcare and education worldwide for many many generations. In your own words, it's not that simple. every decision comes with an opportunity cost.

by dooby at 4:41 PM on 03 Jan 2008

a clarification...

while tuvalu has argued for climate change action, what i meant by the fact that they're not concerned is that their own prime minister does not believe the prospect of rising sea level even merits official 'priority' for the government, in the form of organizing possible relocation for their entire country. recognizing the principle of opportunity cost, they know that the threat is not considerable enough to merit investment in action. they prefer to spend their money on important things like lobbying for the hunting of endangered whale species in the south pacific. (why should we be worried if they're apparently not that worried either?)

by dooby at 5:23 PM on 03 Jan 2008
[ Parent ]

ADVERTISING POLICY

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.