this post was submitted on 02 Mar 2026
15 points (100.0% liked)

collapse

343 readers
124 users here now

Placeholder for time being, moving from lemm.ee

founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
 

cross-posted from: https://news.abolish.capital/post/32115

In December 2024, Rachel Graham, executive director of the Belize-based marine nonprofit MarAlliance, posted on LinkedIn that she knew “5 wildlife & conservation scientists who have taken their lives this year so far.” She called it a “crisis” that needed tackling. The post went viral, garnering about 18,000 impressions and 45 comments. “I’m seeing a true crisis in the conservation community,” Graham tells Mongabay. People become conservationists because they care, Graham says, but that can also lead to huge mental health problems in an age of biodiversity decline, climate change and environmental distress. Add to that the perils of the sector — often low wages, poor job security, overworking, dependence on fickle grants and burnout — and you have a ripe recipe for mental health issues. “If your identity is inextricably linked [to a mission], then when this is imperiled, the threat becomes very personal,” Graham says. “That, to me, I think, is really one of the biggest cruxes of the problem that we’re seeing right now in conservation.” Dr. Rachel Graham is a marine conservation scientist and founder of the international nonprofit MarAlliance. Based in Central America for three decades, she works across sectors to advance conservation of threatened marine wildlife while supporting sustainable fisheries and coastal livelihoods. Partnering with fishers, she has helped pioneer co-created shark research and management approaches that strengthen policy, local stewardship, and income opportunities. Her demand- and management-driven research on sharks, rays, and finfish has informed protected area designations, species protections, and fisheries policy…This article was originally published on Mongabay


From Conservation news via This RSS Feed.

top 1 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] rekabis@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 1 hour ago)

I know of younger climate scientists who are - beyond the economic reasons - giving up on the idea of having children. That to bring children into today’s world is to doom them to a brutal and early death in the latter half of this century.

Many of them are even calling themselves “climate pathologists”, in that they are documenting the death of the planetary climate as we know it. And more importantly, the death of a climate in which humanity can survive in.

I have seen some of this pre-published data that they are working on. Take the most nightmarish projections spouted by the media, and those are the best-case scenarios. That the future that they are seeing in the data they are collecting makes civilization unlikely past the 2050s, and human existence itself largely unlikely past 2100.

Collapse is increasingly looking to be terminal in nature.