If you've ever been to Yellowstone or other parks in the U.S., you've seen the signs telling visitors to keep their distance from wild animals. In Yellowstone, park authorities warn visitors to remain within 25 yards of bison and other large animals—and within 100 yards of bears and wolves. And yet, plenty of people just don't seem to listen.
The #BisonSelfie is really a thing and it’s terrifying. http://t.co/zynqrY7AgQ http://t.co/SWkNrAq2Ip— KPAX Missoula News (@KPAX Missoula News)1440020114.0
In July, a woman and her daughter attempted to snap a selfie about six yards away from a bison. The bison charged, lifting the woman up and tossing her with its head. Fortunately, she only sustained minor injuries. The woman was "the fifth person injured after approaching a bison in Yellowstone so far this season—and the third whose dangerous encounter resulted from photo-taking," reports CNN.
Though Yellowstone and other parks have come to feel like giant zoos with many lamenting the "Disneyfication" of our national parks, many visitors seem to have forgotten that wild animals are unpredictable and potentially dangerous.
"The family said they read the warnings in both the park literature and the signage, but saw other people close to the bison, so they thought it would be OK," Park Ranger Colleen Rawlings said to CNN about the attack in July. "People need to recognize that Yellowstone wildlife is wild, even though they seem docile. This woman was lucky that her injuries were not more severe."
Another example of some brazen stupidity is in this YouTube video:
If you're thinking these are isolated incidents, think again. Waterton Canyon, a recreation and hiking area in Denver, Colorado, announced that it would close to the public because too many hikers "are trying to take selfies with bears," according to The Guardian. Initially, the park announced that it would close on Aug. 28 “due to increased bear activity in the canyon.” But a Denver Water blogpost on Sept. 4 revealed that the real reason is because "hundreds, if not thousands of visitors a day are looking for that perfect wildlife shot. That’s asking for trouble."
“We’ve actually seen people using selfie sticks to try and get as close to the bears as possible, sometimes within 10 feet of wild bears,” said Brandon Ransom, Denver Water’s manager of recreation. “The current situation is not conducive for the safety of our visitors or the well-being of the wildlife.”
Lake Tahoe park officials have warned hikers to stop taking selfies with bears, as well:
Read page 1
A simple search on Twitter and Instagram reveals how common it is (it's even got its own hashtag):
My first #bearselfie of 2015 & hopefully not last! #alaska #bristolbay #katmai http://t.co/ty2BoVzPG3— Louisa Chu (@Louisa Chu)1435881596.0
Great trip to Black Bear Island #bearselfie #BeAlive http://t.co/oYSoHi4wF3— Chris Keefer (@Chris Keefer)1432561090.0
Love me a good #selfie #RT 🐼 #bearselfie #smokey #chipinque http://t.co/6lUPLtgNrc— Aaron Berkowitz (@Aaron Berkowitz)1428367932.0
"@alramirezUSA #naturalselection #nature will sift out those as dumb as these pl http://t.co/G1yGOOsedz #bearselfie http://t.co/hobZwSRlS0""— DIANAETERNO111111111 (@DIANAETERNO111111111)1416249536.0
Read page 1
National Geographic just published this week: How to Not Get Attacked by a Bear. Bears are making a comeback across the country "thanks to regulated hunting and increased habitat," says National Geographic. And more and more humans are living in bear territory. So bear encounters are increasing dramatically.
Just last month, a man was killed by a bear in Yellowstone. Bear attacks are still quite rare—and fatalities even rarer. Still, it's important to know what to do when you encounter a bear (hint: whipping out your camera is not step one). I highly recommend reading the National Geographic article, especially if you plan to be hiking in an area that bears frequent. And for God's sake, please stop getting so close to bears just for the sake of some likes on Facebook or Instagram.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Massive Earthquake Triggers Tsunami, Claims Lives in Chile
True Blood and 30 Rock Actors Sail to Greenland to Film Funny or Die Series to ‘Save the Arctic’
Arctic Warming Produces Mosquito Swarms Large Enough to Kill Baby Caribou
Though made in large part of plastic, glass, ceramics, gold and copper, they also contain critical resources. The gallium used for LEDs and the camera flash, the tantalum in capacitors and indium that powers the display were all pulled from the ground — at a price for nature and people.
"Mining raw materials is always problematic, both with regard to human rights and ecology," said Melanie Müller, raw materials expert of the German think tank SWP. "Their production process is pretty toxic."
The gallium and indium in many phones comes from China or South Korea, the tantalum from the Democratic Republic of Congo or Rwanda. All in, such materials comprise less than ten grams of a phone's weight. But these grams finance an international mining industry that causes radioactive earth dumps, poisoned groundwater and Indigenous population displacement.
Environmental Damage: 'Nature Has Been Overexploited'
The problem is that modern technologies don't work without what are known as critical raw materials. Collectively, solar panels, drones, 3D printers and smartphone contain as many as 30 of these different elements sourced from around the globe. A prime example is lithium from Chile, which is essential in the manufacture of batteries for electric vehicles.
"No one, not even within the industry, would deny that mining lithium causes enormous environmental damage," Müller explained, in reference to the artificial lakes companies create when flushing the metal out of underground brine reservoirs. "The process uses vast amounts of water, so you end up with these huge flooded areas where the lithium settles."
This means of extraction results in the destruction and contamination of the natural water system. Unique plants and animals lose access to groundwater and watering holes. There have also been reports of freshwater becoming salinated due to extensive acidic waste water during lithium mining.
But lithium is not the only raw material that causes damage. Securing just one ton of rare earth elements produces 2,000 tons of toxic waste, and has devastated large regions of China, said Günther Hilpert, head of the Asia Research Division of the German think tank SWP.
He says companies there have adopted a process of spraying acid over the mining areas in order to separate the rare earths from other ores, and that mined areas are often abandoned after excavation.
"They are no longer viable for agricultural use," Hilpert said. "Nature has been overexploited."
China is not the only country with low environmental mining standards and poor resource governance. In Madagascar, for example, a thriving illegal gem and metal mining sector has been linked to rainforest depletion and destruction of natural lemur habitats.
States like Madagascar, Rwanda and the DRC score poorly on the Environmental Performance Index that ranks 180 countries for their effort on factors including conservation, air quality, waste management and emissions. Environmentalists are therefore particularly concerned that these countries are mining highly toxic materials like beryllium, tantalum and cobalt.
But it is not only nature that suffers from the extraction of high-demand critical raw materials.
"It is a dirty, toxic, partly radioactive industry," Hilpert said. "China, for example, has never really cared about human rights when it comes to achieving production targets."
Dirty, Toxic, Radioactive: Working in the Mining Sector
One of the most extreme examples is Baotou, a Chinese city in Inner Mongolia, where rare earth mining poisoned surrounding farms and nearby villages, causing thousands of people to leave the area.
In 2012, The Guardian described a toxic lake created in conjunction with rare earth mining as "a murky expanse of water, in which no fish or algae can survive. The shore is coated with a black crust, so thick you can walk on it. Into this huge, 10 sq km tailings pond nearby factories discharge water loaded with chemicals used to process the 17 most sought after minerals in the world."
Local residents reported health issues including aching legs, diabetes, osteoporosis and chest problems, The Guardian wrote.
South Africa has also been held up for turning a blind eye to the health impacts of mining.
"The platinum sector in South Africa has been criticized for performing very poorly on human rights — even within the raw materials sector," Müller said.
In 2012, security forces killed 34 miners who had been protesting poor working conditions and low wages at a mine owned by the British company Lonmin. What became known as the "Marikana massacre" triggered several spontaneous strikes across the country's mining sector.
Müller says miners can still face exposure to acid drainage — a frequent byproduct of platinum mining — that can cause chemical burns and severe lung damage. Though this can be prevented by a careful waste system.
Some progress was made in 2016 when the South African government announced plans to make mining companies pay $800 million (€679 million) for recycling acid mine water. But they didn't all comply. In 2020, activists sued Australian-owned mining company Mintails and the government to cover the cost of environmental cleanup.
Another massive issue around mining is water consumption. Since the extraction of critical raw materials is very water intensive, drought prone countries such as South Africa, have witnessed an increase in conflicts over supply.
For years, industry, government and the South African public debated – without a clear agreement – whether companies should get privileged access to water and how much the population may suffer from shortages.
Mining in Brazil: Replacing Nature, People, Land Rights
Beyond the direct health and environmental impact of mining toxic substances, quarrying critical raw materials destroys livelihoods, as developments in Brazil demonstrate.
"Brazil is the major worldwide niobium producer and reserves in [the state of] Minas Gerais would last more than 200 years [at the current rate of demand]," said Juliana Siqueira-Gay, environmental engineer and Ph.D. student at the University of São Paulo.
While the overall number of niobium mining requests is stagnating, the share of claims for Indigenous land has skyrocketed from 3 to 36 percent within one year. If granted, 23 percent of the Amazon forest and the homeland of 222 Indigenous groups could fall victim to deforestation in the name of mining, a study by Siqueira-Gay finds.
In early 2020, Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro signed a bill which would allow corporations to develop areas populated by Indigenous communities in the future. The law has not yet entered into force, but "this policy could have long-lasting negative effects on Brazil's socio-biodiversity," said Siqueira-Gay.
One example are the niobium reserves in Seis Lagos, in Brazil's northeast, which could be quarried to build electrolytic capacitors for smartphones.
"They overlap the Balaio Indigenous land and it would cause major impacts in Indigenous communities by clearing forests responsible for providing food, raw materials and regulating the local climate," Siqueira-Gay explained.
She says scientific good practice guidelines offer a blueprint for sustainable mining that adheres to human rights and protects forests. Quarries in South America — and especially Brazil — funded by multilaterial banks like the International Finance Corporation of the World Bank Group have to follow these guidelines, Siqueira-Gay said.
They force companies to develop sustainable water supply, minimize acid exposure and re-vegetate mined surfaces. "First, negative impacts must be avoided, then minimized and at last compensated — not the other way around."
Reposted with permission from DW.