The 13th First Climate Refugees – Watts Up With That?

Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

Every few years, we get another piece of media about the “first climate refugees”. I’ve written about the latest one below.

These are the first through sixth climate refugees, and the seventh, ninth, and eleventh first climate refugees. Where are the eighth climate refugees? There are no clues, it’s hard to keep track of everything. Oh, and this is the twelfth climate refugee.

So where are the 13th climate refugees? They are some of the Ancients (or Guna). He lives in Panama, on a small island called Gardi Sugdub. And by small, I mean minuscule. It is approximately 1200 feet (366 meters) long and 450 feet (137 meters) wide. A media piece about it is called “Panama prepares to evacuate first island in face of rising sea levels”. Inter alia said:

Gunas Gardi Sugdub is the first of 63 communities along Panama’s Caribbean and Pacific coasts that government officials and scientists expect will be forced to relocate by rising sea levels in the coming decades.

and

Steven Paton, director of the Smithsonian Institution’s physical monitoring program in Panama, said the upcoming move “is a direct consequence of climate change through sea level rise.”

Note that the commenter works at the Smithsonian Institute, which will be of interest later.

And here is the view of the island.

Figure 1. Google Earth view of Gardi Sugdub. The word “overpopulation” comes to mind…

So… is “climate change” the reason why the island will be abandoned? Are we humans really to blame?

Well… yes, humans are to blame, but not the consequences “climate change”. From the Smithsonian Institute, you know, the Institute that Steven Paton quoted above works, I found the following (emphasis mine):

Natural Disturbance and Mining of Panama’s Coral Reefs by Indigenous Peoples

HÉCTOR M. GUZMÁN,* CARLOS GUEVARA, AND ARCADIO CASTILLO
Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute

Abstract: Prior to the 1980s, coral reefs were considered relatively stable and healthy in Kuna-Yala, Caribbean Panama. But in the 1980s, several natural disturbances changed the structure of coral communities. We evaluate historical changes in coral cover and for the first time provide quantitative evidence of a coral reef degradation process on a large scale.

This process began long before the disruption occurred as a result of demographic growth and the traditional practices of the Ancients. Live coral cover has declined by 79% in 30 years (1970–2001) while the indigenous population increased by 62%. We measured 20 km of seawall built with mined coral (16,000 m3) and increased the surface area of ​​the island by 6.23 ha caused by coral land filling. Consequently, coastal erosion has increased as a result of the lack of a protective natural barrier and 2.0 cm / year local increase in the sea. The practice of coral mining and land filling to accommodate population expansion and mismanagement of resources has altered the reef ecosystem significantly and will have serious long-term consequences.

So no, the problem is not “climate change” or “sea level rise”. Overpopulation leads to coral mining, landfilling, and coral destruction that forces migration. There are more good things in learning, interesting reading.

And in any case, how does “climate change” increase sea level trends in the region? Well… not at all. This is the closest station with data so far. In the last 100 years, sea levels have risen by 137 mm (more than five inches).

Figure 2. Sea level in Balboa, Panama. Note that there has been no apparent acceleration in sea level rise from the start of the record in 1910 to the present.

I’ve written before that if you destroy the reef, you destroy the island. This is discussed in a piece called Floating Islands and another called Why The Parrotfish Should Be Our National Bird. If you are interested in preserving coral atolls, you can read this post.

w.

PS: Yes, I’ve heard it before– when you comment please quote the words being discussed. Avoid endless misunderstandings. And if you want to point out that I’ve made some mistakes, read this short thread on How to Prove Willis Wrong

Related