The effects of modern war and military activities on biodiversity and the environment

Abstract

Abstract:War is an ever-present force that has the potential to alter the biosphere. Here we review the potential consequences of modern war and military activities on ecosystem structure and function. We focus on the effects of direct conflict, nuclear weapons, military training, and military produced contaminants. Overall, the aforementioned activities were found to have overwhelmingly negative effects on ecosystem structure and function. Dramatic habitat alteration, environmental pollution, and disturbance contributed to population declines and biodiversity losses arising from both acute and chronic effects in both terrestrial and aquatic systems. In some instances, even in the face of massive alterations to ecosystem structure, recovery was possible. Interestingly, military activity was beneficial under specific conditions, such as when an exclusion zone was generated that generally resulted in population increases and (or) population recovery; an observation noted in both terrestrial and aquatic systems. Additionally, military technological advances (e.g., GPS technology, drone technology, biotelemetry) have provided conservation scientists with novel tools for research. Because of the challenges associated with conducting research in areas with military activities (e.g., restricted access, hazardous conditions), information pertaining to military impacts on the environment are relatively scarce and are often studied years after military activities have ceased and with no knowledge of baseline conditions. Additional research would help to elucidate the environmental consequences (positive and negative) and thus reveal opportunities for mitigating negative effects while informing the development of optimal strategies for rehabilitation and recovery.Key words: war, biodiversity, ecosystem structure, conflict, military activities, environment, conservation biology.Résumé : La guerre est une force omniprésente ayant le potentiel d'altérer l'atmosphère. Les auteurs passent en revue les conséquences potentielles des activités guerrières et militaires modernes sur la structure et le fonctionnement des écosystèmes. On met l'accent sur les effets directs et indirects des conflits, des armes nucléaires, des entrainements militaires et des contaminants des produits militaires. Dans l'ensemble, on constate que les activités préalablement mentionnées ont des effets négatifs écrasants sur la structure et le fonctionnement des écosystèmes. Avec des altérations dramatiques des habitats, la pollution et les perturbations environnementales contribuent au déclin des populations et aux pertes de biodiversité provenant des effets aigus et chroniques sur les systèmes terrestres aussi bien qu'aquatiques. Tout de même dans certains cas, en présence d'altérations massives de la structure des écosystèmes, la récupération s'est avérée possible. Il est intéressant de noter qu'une activité militaire fut bénéfique sous des conditions spécifiques telles que la création d'une zone d'exclusion, en générant des augmentations générales des p...

Biodiversity conservation and armed conflict: a warfare ecology perspective

“…This review confirms earlier assertions that the consequences of armed conflict for biodiversity conservation are predominantly negative, produced by direct and indirect battlefield impacts, as well as the general breakdown of social, economic, and governance systems during wartime. Certain conservation opportunities do occur, however, particularly on lands set aside for training exercises, buffer zones, and peace parks.…”

“…Ecotourism and sustainable development activities are also often suspended, and there can be a near or complete breakdown in local governance. This instability combines with the direct effects of combat and campaign logistics to produce a host of negative consequences for biodiversity, although limited conservation opportunities may also arise …”

“…The battlefield impacts of war on biodiversity reflect the disturbances associated with military training. For small conflicts where fighting is sporadic, the magnitude may be similar, but the sustained fronts and massive energy flows associated with larger wars can broaden those impacts to a regional scale . The best‐known example comes from the Vietnam War, when U.S. forces applied Agent Orange and other aerial defoliants to more than 2.6 million hectares of forests and coastal mangroves, a tactic with assumed but largely unexamined consequences for a wide range of associated taxa .…”

“…Further limitations to the study of conflict and biodiversity lie in the sheer complexity of warfare, and how its effects on natural and human systems are closely intertwined . It goes without saying that humanitarian concerns take precedence over environmental issues during wars.…”

Baleen whale cortisol levels reveal a physiological response to 20th century whaling

“…Therefore, we surmise that wartime activities (e.g., underwater detonation of ordinance, naval battles including ships, planes, and submarines), as well as increased vessel numbers, contributed to increased baseline-corrected cortisol concentrations during this period of reduced whaling. With the extensive migration patterns of baleen whales, interaction with widespread wartime activities would seem plausible and deleterious to baleen whales 27–29 .

Fig. 3Whale cortisol relationship with whaling numbers and sea-surface temperature.

…”