Sprawl! Is Growth of Mega Cities Accelerating the Planet's Biodiversity Crisis?

www.dailygalaxy.com...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/a7e9c7ac8ad6.jpg[/atsimg]
"Every week humans create the equivalent of a city the size of Vancouver."

Quote from source:
A new study outlines the uncomfortable question of what happens to the planet’s biodiversity when cities take over the world. Cities are growing, and they’re growing fast. It is projected that urban growth will create an additional 350,000 square miles of cities roads, buildings and parking lots—covering a combined area the size of Texas—by 2030. Every week humans create the equivalent of a city the size of Vancouver. What will this staggering growth mean for both nature and people?


According to the study, co-authored by Conservancy scientists Robert McDonald and Peter Kareiva McDonald, it means significant species loss and a further decline of natural resources like fresh water. They say we need to prepare—now.

“While the effects of urbanization are very localized, cumulatively it is a big threat to biodiversity,” says McDonald, lead-author of the study. “Our urban footprint covers much of the globe and is coming closer to stomping out many endangered species and posing new risks to protected areas and parks.”

According to McDonald, governments and conservation organizations need to start planning for these trends immediately. Why? Because its a lot easier to design urban growth well in the first place, then it is to try and change it after the infrastructure has already been laid. By then it’s usually too late.

According to the United Nations, humans officially became an urban species in 2007 when a milestone was reached. Over half of the world’s population now live in cities. By 2030, 60 percent of the world’s citizens, including nearly 2 billion from rural migration, will be living in cities.

I hate to be a downer, but really living as we do we are going to run out of resources. Why does it take so much for people to realize this?

I had to add in the last part about by 2030 60% of people will be in cities, in concrete jungles. How is that good for any life on Earth including ours?

I wonder how high asthma levels will be at when we all live in smog.

Any thoughts?

Pred...

[edit on 7-3-2010 by predator0187]

This is very much true.

But there are 2 notable exceptions...

Cockroaches and rats/mice are thriving in urban areas...

reply to post by jjjtir


But nobody wants them around. It is strange to see how some species can flourish in harmful conditions though. But I hate roaches and rats. EWW

Pred...

Originally posted by predator0187
They say we need to prepare—now.
By then it’s usually too late.

I hate to be a downer, but really living as we do we are going to run out of resources. Why does it take so much for people to realize this?

Yes, my thoughts are it's NWO propaganda.
What do they/you mean "by THEN it's usually too late"??
When was it "too late"??? Give me an example.
Always a "crisis" that needs govt planning and intervention.
Always means more control.
We DO need to prepare now -- to keep our freedoms.
Let them worry about their BS studies.

Cities are NOT to blame for sprawl - sub-urban development is. Cities are actually a SOLUTION to the problem.

Sprawl has been created by the flight from cities to the false promise of the 'country side'.

Wkiki highlights the basics: link

I always think of Beck: "there are shopping malls coming out of the walls as we walk out amongst the manure. . .thats why, i pay no mind". . . - mellow gold

The article is also misleading. The cause of the sprawl was the FLIGHT from the cities which we are just now beginning to counter as seen by the 60% now living in cities again. This is a GOOD thing, really.

I have to sit down to dinner with my wife but i would be happy to come back and talk about the issue. I have studied both Community and Regional Planning and Landscape Architecture at the graduate level and am about to go back to school for my next masters degree in Urban Planning because these are issues I am extremely interested in - specifically the recreation of a balanced harmonic between the built human landscape and the natural landscape (human systems and planetary systems). Cities are NOT the anti-thesis to sustainability that they are so often painted to be, quite the contrary.

edit to add:

i just really want to stress that cities are actually a more sustainable form of habitation of this planet. the high density model proves to have a far lighter impact that the low-density development model we saw predominate over the last one hundred or so years with roots all the way back to the 1800s.

the rise of the automobile was really the change that allowed this form of development to happen as it gave people a Mobil freedom unexperienced until this time. with this freedom came the ability to choose to 'leave the city behind' and take up residence in the country side - which i admit even to me sounds appealing.

however this became the norm and our cities emptied out and the surrounding countryside filled up - and sadly the promise of living in the 'open country side' was crushed as EVERYONE moved out there and rather than living in the 'open country' everyone now lives in cookie cutter sub-urban neighborhoods.

this life style creates a massive list of negative impacts to the well being of humans and the planets, as well as massive damage to our cities.

human suffer from rising obesity and all the related health issues because we spend so much more time in our cars because you have to drive EVERYWHERE you go in the sub-urban development paradigm. Very few kids walk to school, very few adults walk to work, very few walk to the grocery store, or the hardware store, or anywhere.

this leads to the need for more road ways which contributes to a phenomenon known as 'habitat fragmentation' which does exactly what it sounds like, chops up natural habitat making it difficult for native species to survive and thrive. the natural environment is also effected by massive habitat loss due to the ever increasing amounts of land consumed to build these cookie cutter neighborhoods on, not even to mention the ever increasing loss of arable land that will undoubtedly be needed to farm food for our ever burgeoning population. in addition there is the over consumption of natural resources of all types to build these communities that sadly are only built with an average expected life span of 50 years. . .

then the cities, where the majority of the worlds population lived for so long were abandoned and their once bustling hearts slowly degraded and fell to pieces. only now are we starting to see the efforts of 'down town revitalization' efforts beginning to pay off. while cities use to be horrible places to live they are now more and more hospitable. thanks to the rise of the profession known as landscape architecture and its forefathers who saw a connection between health and happiness and open spaces and walkable livable cities - the city has become more and more a place one can live in good health and comfort. the density lessens the impacts on the surrounding environment, food can be grown in close proximity or even with in the city, people can walk to where they need to go, everything can be done within the or near the city unlike suburbia. i suggest taking a look at Le Corbusier's The Radiant City which highlights some of these key concepts but is now quite out dated.

This is only a short rant on the topic, but one that is important. I really feel that people need to realize what forms are actually causing problems which which are not. The linked article, or at least the portion quoted is very misleading and tarnishes the image of the city unfairly. If you are interested in the topic of appropriate and sustainable human development and the creation of a balanced harmonic between human and natural systems, look else where.

[edit on 8-3-2010 by Animal]

I also find it funny that cockroaches are developing resistance to the insecticides, all the while humans are throwing new kinds of insecticide, ignoring the cumulative exposure to the current ones.

These insecticides are persistent, with a high half-life. It glues to the floor and difficult to wash out.

The chemical companies admit it themselves in the advertisements, "extended protection" against cockroaches up to a full month, depending on the insecticide brand.

Humans then develop cancers with no clue as to why.

[edit on 7-3-2010 by jjjtir]

Something will happen to thin us out. Maybe nuclear war, maybe a genuine pandemic instead of these media darlings they trot (no pun intended!) out to scare us. Then nature will reclaim the cities, new species will evolve to take advantage of the new situations and perhaps the few Humans that are left will have a different perspective.