Greetings from Day 3 at COP26. It’s like the blind man and the elephant—we are perceiving a lot, but there’s lots that is unseen. With that in mind, here’s what we are not seeing.
Our goal here is to represent agriculture, livestock, grazing and the nexus with conservation. COP26 is an attempt by most governments around the world to contain rising average temperatures to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius, using 1850 (pre-industrialization) as a baseline. We are already at about 1 degree increase. Sometimes extreme weather—hurricanes, flooding, drought, derechos—are a result. While one can argue specifics—where is this taking place, how is it measured, etc.—we are all experiencing the results.
Part of our ranching operation lies in Colorado’s Moffat County, which is one of the world’s “hot spots.” Northwest Colorado’s temperatures have increased 2C or more already. In Moffat County, it is 2.1C. We are seeing, on the ground, in our lives, extreme drought which stresses vegetation, wildlife, livestock and people. You can call it “Global Weirding” but it is affecting us, without doubt.
While countries have delegations showcasing their assets and their concerns, an even bigger presence are the NGO’s (non-governmental organizations)—everyone from World Wildlife to the Amazon Alliance to the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition to the Farm Bureau. Nature Conservancy has its own center. Thousands of “Observers,” including Pat, Ray and me for Solutions from the Land, are at COP26.
While high level meetings are taking place to try to hammer out agreements to reach the goal of reduction in global warming, or Zero, as they call it, a literal babble of voices try to make themselves heard. China and Russia, two of the world’s biggest emitters of greenhouse gases, stayed home. It was a huge announcement yesterday when the Biden administration announced that a climate agreement had been reached with China.
What we don’t hear is a lot of practical solutions. While the high-level talkers are more sophisticated than the tens of thousands of demonstrators (WE WANT ACTION NOW!), I haven’t heard viable plans.
Lots of talk is about the “rich” countries–the biggest emitters–funding projects in affected “poor” countries to mitigate the environmental and economic consequences. What would this look like? How would the donators ensure that the money went to actually helping? And the first-world countries have problems of their own and don’t seem to have much appetite for sending billions.
Two “solutions” thrown around a lot are eliminating beef and grazing animals, and eliminating driving cars. Glasgow has a great public transportation system, but Wyoming does not. Many COP26 attendees celebrate indigenous cultures, but see everything through an urban lens.
In our community, and the larger food and forestry community, we do have solutions which will make a real impact. We have programs, such as the Fish and Wildlife Service’s Partners for Fish and Wildlife that get real work done on the ground, in the landscape. Ray Gaesser’s Iowa farm is a showcase for the world on how to produce crops at scale while improving soil and resources. The people on the land offer actual solutions.
This is the message we are conveying at this conference.