A review of recent studies into noise pollution and biodiversity has concluded that noise is becoming a major threat, interfering with the way species communicate, mate and hunt. The authors found that man-made noise is already creating a host of problems, and worry that noise pollution is so ubiquitous that it may be a factor in some large-scale declines in biodiversity.

Many species have evolved hearing sensitive enough to take account of the quietest conditions, so noise can significantly impact how they communicate. Great tits (Parsus major) sing at higher frequencies in response to urban noise, so they are better able to hear each other. Other species have not shown a similar ability to adapt their calling habits, with female grey tree frogs (Hyla chrysoscelis) exposed to the sounds of passing traffic taking longer to locate and find calling males, and European tree frogs (Hyla arborea) calling less overall. This may potentially compromise their ability to reproduce.

Noise pollution can also effect the hunting ability of many species. One gleaning bat species, the Bechstein’s bat (Myotis bechsteinii), is less likely to cross roads than other bat species that forage in open areas, suggesting the noise of the traffic could fragment their hunting grounds. In the Amazon, terrestrial insectivores, which also hunt using sound, especially avoid areas where roads are being constructed.

The problem appears to be getting worse. In the US alone, road and air traffic more than tripled between 1970 and today. Shipping noise has similarly increased, with worrying implications for marine mammals. Systematic monitoring by the Natural Sounds Program, a research exercise carried out by the US National Park Service, confirms the extent of the noise intrusion. Noise is audible during more than one quarter of daylight hours at more than half of 55 sites in 14 National Parks studied to date. At 12 sites, anthropogenic noise can be heard more than half the time.

The authors argue that much more needs to be done to mitigate the problem, using techniques such as quieter road surfaces, noise barriers, and restriction of motorised travel in protected natural areas.

For more information, see ‘The costs of chronic noise exposure for terrestrial organisms’
J.R. Barber, K.R. Crooks & K.M. Fristrup, Trends in Ecology & Evolution.

Articles in this week’s editions of Science and Nature explore the use of science by policy-makers in the Obama administration. An editorial piece in Nature contrasts the use of ‘common sense on scientific matters’ with the attitude shown by President George W Bush and advisors in the previous US Government.

Early August saw the first meeting of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), whilst White House advisor John Holdren and the Director of the White House Office of Management and Budget, Peter Orszag, signed a memorandum outlining the administration’s priorities in advance of budget requests for the 2011 financial year. The memorandum featured the key phrase, “sound science should inform policy decisions”, emphasising the role of science and technology in informing the Government’s priorities.

At the meeting of PCAST, Holdren said that the council’s speedy formation was a clear signal that Obama thinks science and technology are crucial in addressing global challenges. At the meeting, the members of the Committee outlined future priorities for scrutiny. Suggestions included influencing the research agenda of the as yet unfunded ‘National Institute for Food and Agriculture’, cancer research and national strategies for research into adaptation to climate change.

www.nature.com
www.sciencemag.org

Barack Obama may be forced to delay signing up to a new international agreement on climate change in Copenhagen in December 2009, due to the level of opposition in the US Congress. The Copenhagen Summit is a crucial date for the international community. The talks are expected to determine the future possibilities of global cooperation against climate change and produce the successor to the Kyoto Protocol.

Unfortunately, senior figures in the Obama administration are warning that the president may need at least another six months to win domestic support for any new proposal regarding climate change. This delay could prevent a global agreement being reached in time for countries and economies to adopt it before the Kyoto treaty runs out in 2012. The Obama administration is reluctant to sign any international agreement without the support of Congress, fearing that it will result in a serious domestic backlash.

Stephen Byers, co-chairman of the International Climate Change Taskforce, and former cabinet minister said: “The timing couldn’t really be worse for the Obama administration… If need be, we should be prepared to give them more time – not to let them off the hook and escape their responsibilities, but ensure they are politically able to sign up to effective international action which reflects the scale of the challenge we face.” “A delay (into 2010) would be a price worth paying to bring the United States into the global effort to tackle climate change.” He added.

However, it has been reported that the opposition within America is potentially substantial, and there is, of course, the possibility that this opposition might become hardened over time, making it increasingly difficult for Obama to secure support in the future.

Read more about this story on the Guardian News Website

Last night saw the Policy Team attend a discussion organised by the Science Policy Centre at the Royal Society, bringing together: Prof. Harold Varmus, Nobel Prize winner and Co-Chair of President Obama’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST); Dr Mark Walport, Head of the Wellcome Trust, and Prof. John Beddington, Chief Scientific Advisor to the UK Government. The event was chaired by Susan Watts, Science Editor for the BBC’s ‘Newsnight’.

During the course of a very interesting 90 minutes, Professor Varmus spoke on the theme of ‘restoring science to its rightful place’, contrasting the approach of the new Obama administration with that of President George W. Bush. Obama has made it clear, from his inagural address to his willingness to meet with Professor Varmus and others, to his appointment of key scientific figures to his team, that science and technology will be at the heart of his term of office.

President Obama wants to make PCAST an integral part of the process whereby he receives information aboutt key issues in science and technology. He has produced a series of directives setting out how scientific advice to the US Government should proceed in the future; from the selection of advisors based on their scientific competence, to protection from reprisal for whistleblowers and the transparent publication of documents into the public domain, without tampering from policy-makers. All this has contributed to a positive and optimistic feeling amongst the scientific community in the States.

However, threats remain. As part of the President’s fiscal stiumulus package, designed to lift the US out of recession and combat the global economic downturn, the National Institutes of Health has been awarded 29 billion dollars, which must be spent quickly.

Mark Walport signalled his concern over such a short, sharp injection of funding, saying that science must be funded in a sustainable way over the long-term, and that researchers should not see such a boom, as has been experienced in the UK, with the doubling of science spend in the past 10 years, as an inalienable right. The successes experienced due to an increase in the public funding for science should lead scientists to recognise their responsibility to communicate the results of their research to society. Equally, the case for sustained funding must still be made to government.

Professor Beddington signalled that the UK Government is keen to put science, engineering and technology at the heart of plans for economic recovery on this side of the Atlantic. He said that although it could not be guaranteed that the science and technology allocation would be secure in the next budget, he very much hoped it would be and it was his view that the Government was taking science and technology seriously as a foundation on which economic recovery could be built, given that financial services could no longer remain this cornerstone.

Professor Beddington also highlighted his concerns that science advice to the European Commission remains sorely lacking. Of 27 member states, only the UK and Northern Ireland have a Chief Scientific Advisor. A lack of scientific advice at the European level is a hindrance to sensible, progressive and evidence-based policy-making, and as such will ultimately effect the ability of the EU to compete with North America in science and innovation.

Find further details about the work of the Royal Society’s Science Policy Centre online.

Scientists have high expectations for future scientific and environmental policy as President-elect Barack Obama is sworn in as America’s 44th president later today.

The Bush administration has had a somewhat turbulent relationship with the scientific community over the last eight years, attracting serious criticisms for restricting federal funding for research and their decisions regarding global warming and stem cell research. Obama, on the other hand, has put scientific and environmental issues at the top of his agenda.

In a weekly radio and video address he stated that science “holds the key to our survival as a planet, and our security and prosperity as a nation… It’s time we… worked to restore America’s place as the world leader in science and technology.” Since then, he has pledged to reverse Bush’s funding limits, and appointed a team of well respected scientists, which has heightened expectations for what actions he will take once he is sworn into office.

Undoubtedly, one of the biggest changes will be the United States policy on climate change. Since his election, Obama has repeatedly indicated he wants to fulfill his campaign promise to create a low-carbon economy and create jobs by investing in renewable energy.

In a speech made at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, Obama said his administration hoped to double the production of renewable energy over the next three years while boosting energy efficiency in 10 million homes (1.6% of US housing) and more than 75% of federal buildings. This will require a well-organized, massive injection of funds. Hopefully, worries that America will not be able to afford to convert their promises into a reality in the prevailing economic climate will remain unfounded.

George Bush was expected to announce yesterday that he will designate nearly 200,000 square miles of the Pacific Ocean as conservation areas. This announcement will make the US President the leader who has protected a greater area of the oceans than anyone else in the world.

Areas to be designated as marine reserves are the Mariana islands in the Western Pacific, a chain of remote islands in the central Pacific and the Rose Atoll off American Samoa. The Marianas Marine National Monument will protect the Mariana Trench: as deep as Everest is tall. The area is home to a wide variety of species, including many species of corals and some of the most diverse fish populations to be found in the Mariana islands. Other species to be protected by the three conservation areas include sharks, turtles, petrels and the Micronesian megapode; a bird which uses heat from volcanic vents to incubate its eggs.

Commercial fishing, mining and energy exploration will be banned within the protected areas. Recreational fishing will be allowed, but only by permit, with the number of permits to be limited.

Although excited by the proposals, conservationists are disappointed that protection will only extend to a distance of 50 miles from the islands: scientists had recommended a protection zone extending up to 200 nautical miles.

Guardian, 6 January 2009: Bush designates ocean conservation areas in final weeks as President.