Showing posts sorted by date for query BIRD FLU. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query BIRD FLU. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Tuesday, January 13, 2026

How a Bird Flu Outbreak Wiped Out a Generation of Seals in Patagonia and What It Means for Wildlife Conservation



 January 13, 2026

Photograph Source: Brocken Inaglory – CC BY-SA 3.0

In the spring of 2023, we returned to Península Valdés, a rugged coastal region in Argentine Patagonia, expecting to witness the familiar sights and sounds of southern elephant seals during their breeding season. These massive marine mammals, with males weighing up to 4,000 kilograms, gather in large colonies on the beaches to give birth, nurse their young, and mate. The air usually resonates with the cries of thousands of pups calling out to their mothers, the grunts and bellows of males competing for dominance, and the buzz of life thriving on the rocky shores.

Instead, we were met with an eerie silence and a devastating sight: beaches once bustling with thousands of seals were littered with hundreds of dead pups and adults. The usual cacophony had been replaced by the stench of decay, and the empty spaces where seals should have gathered were painfully obvious. This mass mortality event had unfolded over just a few weeks—a stark and sudden collapse that no one could have predicted with such speed and severity.

Southern elephant seals lead challenging lives. Adult males arrive early in the breeding season and fast for months while defending harems of females. Females give birth to a single pup, nurse it for about a month, and then mate again before returning to the sea, pregnant once more. The pups are entirely dependent on their mothers; without constant nursing, they quickly perish. In 2022, our aerial surveys recorded ca. 18,000 females that gave birth to a pup. In the most crowded areas of the colony, we recorded 4,145 pups alive. But in 2023, in the same crowded areas, the numbers had decreased to 135 pups alive, most of which had died a few weeks later. Many of the mothers were gone. A year later, in 2024, some females returned, but, once again, the numbers were low compared to 2022, a 67 percent decrease in the most important sampled areas of the colony. Many adult seals displayed abnormal behaviors, such as reduced aggression in males and scattered female groups without male attendance.

This tragedy of the 2023 season was not just a population decline; it was a profound disruption of the social fabric that governs elephant seal life. Dominant males, whose fierce competition had long been a defining feature of the breeding grounds, were largely absent. Females were seen isolated or grouped without protection, which likely affected their ability to mate and successfully rear pups. The entire colony was struggling under a shadow of illness and loss.

The Virus and Its Unprecedented Spread

The culprit behind this catastrophe was a highly pathogenic strain of avian influenza virus known as H5N1. First identified in China in 1996, H5N1 emerged in an ecological cycle where viruses move through wild birds, spill into domestic poultry, and then re-enter wild populations, allowing the disease to evolve and spread across continents. The virus has caused massive die-offs in both wild and domestic birds worldwide, and its ability to infect mammals, including humans, has raised significant public health concerns.

What made the outbreak at Península Valdés particularly alarming was the virus’s jump from birds to marine mammals—specifically to southern elephant seals and South American sea lions—and its subsequent spread between seals. This type of mammal-to-mammal transmission, spanning thousands of kilometers along the coast, came as a surprise. Transmission has occurred among elephant seals, but what makes this event especially alarming is the massive die-off—a level of mortality that would not have occurred in this population for at least a century.

This kind of spillover event is rare but increasingly concerning. Viruses like H5N1 continue to evolve, and the interface between wildlife, domestic animals, and humans is expanding due to habitat destruction, climate change, and globalization. These changes facilitate opportunities for viruses to cross species barriers—sometimes with devastating consequences. This growing overlap between humans and animals has already fueled the emergence of several major diseases, including SARS, avian influenza strains such as H5N1 and H7N9, MERS, Nipah virus, Ebola, the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, and, most recently, COVID-19.

For the seals, the timing of the outbreak could not have been worse. The virus struck during their critical breeding season, when the animals congregate densely on beaches, and their immune systems are likely compromised by fasting and reproductive stress. Seal pups are born with surprisingly weak immune defenses—lacking both potent maternal antibodies and the usual innate immune factors that fight infection. Yet they still manage to survive, raising questions about how they cope with disease risk and whether this unusual vulnerability is unique to seals or shared by other marine mammals, such as sea lions, fur seals, and walruses.

Meanwhile, adult females and males weakened by the virus were mainly absent from the coast, making them unable to maintain the social structures necessary for breeding success.

Our Long-Term Research and What It Revealed

We have dedicated much of our scientific careers to studying the southern elephant seals of Península Valdés. Beginning with aerial surveys in the early 1980s and continuing through decades of on-the-ground counts and behavioral observations, our work has documented the growth, social behavior, and ecological dynamics of this unique continental colony. This longitudinal dataset was crucial in helping us understand the scale of the crisis in 2023 and assess the likely trajectory for recovery.

Before the outbreak, the colony had experienced steady growth, increasing at about 3.4 percent per year until the early 2000s, then slowing to around 1 percent per year more recently. These trends reflected a population approaching what ecologists call its ‘carrying capacity’—not only the maximum number of individuals the ecological environment can sustain, but also the limits imposed by social factors, such as overcrowding and the structure of the colony, which may affect survival and reproduction in ways we do not yet fully understand. Such slowdowns in growth are typical and not a cause for alarm when balanced by a healthy ecosystem.

However, the mass mortality event triggered by avian influenza abruptly reversed this trend. If the virus had affected only pups—which commonly experience high mortality anyway—the colony might not reach pre-outbreak levels until around 2035, based on a 1 percent recovery rate, with a possible range from 2029 to 2051, reflecting the resilience of surviving adults and new births. But the 2024 breeding season counts revealed a grim reality: reproductive females had declined by approximately two-thirds at some of the most densely populated beaches, suggesting significant adult mortality. Therefore, a fast return supported by an increase in population size of much more than 1 percent seems unlikely. Future counts will allow for improving the estimate.

If indeed half or more of the adult female population perished, and survival of juvenile females does not increase significantly, recovery could take many decades—possibly until the end of the century. This lengthy recovery timeline is especially worrisome because the colony’s social structure, essential for reproductive success, has been disrupted. Dominant males, who defend harems and ensure selective mating, are fewer in number. Females without male protection or access to mates may fail to reproduce successfully. These complex social disruptions add layers of uncertainty to the population’s future.

Unfortunately, once such an epidemic spreads among wild marine mammals, direct interventions, such as vaccination or treatment, are nearly impossible. The logistics and ethics of vaccinating thousands of wild seals scattered across remote beaches are daunting at best. Moreover, culling sick animals in the wild is not just controversial—it is unacceptable. Humans have already driven much of the mortality, and deliberately killing more animals to try to prevent further deaths is ethically indefensible.

Instead, our best hope lies in prevention, monitoring, and mitigating human disturbances that can exacerbate pup mortality. As the colony grew, seals began colonizing new beaches that were previously unused for breeding, some of which are now subject to human activities such as off-road vehicles and sport fishing. These disturbances cause mother-pup separations, almost certainly leading to pup starvation. Protecting every possible breeding site from such disruptions is a vital conservation step.

A Global Wake-Up Call

The catastrophic impact of avian influenza on the Península Valdés seal colony is a stark reminder of how interconnected life on Earth truly is. The virus responsible originated on poultry farms thousands of kilometers away, spread globally through birds, humans, and other species that can carry it, and ultimately adapted to infect marine mammals at the far end of the world. This pathway exemplifies the “One Health” concept—the idea that the health of wildlife, domestic animals, humans, and ecosystems is deeply intertwined.

Climate change, habitat loss, and increased global connectivity accelerate the risks of such spillover events. Warmer temperatures may alter bird migration patterns or stress animal populations, making them more susceptible to disease. Habitat encroachment brings wildlife into closer contact with humans and livestock, creating new pathways for pathogen transmission.

Conservation categories such as the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s “Least Concern” can provide a false sense of security when faced with rapidly changing environmental conditions and emerging diseases. The Península Valdés event teaches us that no population is invulnerable and that continuous monitoring is essential.

As researchers, we remain committed to conducting annual counts and behavioral observations, aiming not only to document the recovery but also to inform global strategies to prevent wildlife diseases. The seals’ story is a cautionary tale—a call to action for greater investment in integrated health approaches that treat wildlife, domestic animals, humans, and the environment as a single system.

Ultimately, protecting biodiversity is about preserving species for their own sake, which requires safeguarding the delicate balances that sustain life on our planet. The 2023 epidemic made this painfully clear: a virus that originated in birds spread globally and adapted to infect elephant seals in Patagonia. Conservation today is profoundly complex—some battles may already be lost, and environmental movements must take epidemics seriously. Humanity must adopt and invest in the One Health concept, recognizing that our welfare is inseparable from the health of all life. This may seem like common knowledge, but it bears constant reminding. The epidemic was a shock, yet we will work relentlessly to help this population recover. We believe the seals are resilient. It will take time, but they must come back.

[Authors’ Note: We are thankful to Dr. Burney Le Boeuf and Marcela Uhart, DVM, for their comments on several drafts of the original article, and to Reynard Loki, for his editorial guidance on this updated version.]

This article was produced by Earth | Food \ Life, a project of the Independent Media Institute. 

Claudio Campagna is a Senior Marine Conservation Consultant for the Argentina program at WCS (Wildlife Conservation Society). Valeria Falabella is the Marine Conservation Director for the WCS Argentinaprogram. Julieta Campagna is the Península Valdés landscape conservation coordinator for the WCS Argentina program.

Monday, January 05, 2026



‘None of This Is Legal... Trump Should Be Impeached’: Will Congress Act Against Trump Lawlessness?

“Congress must do the right thing by voting to stop this obvious catastrophe.”



A man’s hand holds a plaque reading “No War for Oil” in front of the U.S. Embassy in Dublin on January 4, 2026 in Dublin, Ireland.
(Photo by Natalia Campos/Getty Images)

Brad Reed
Jan 05, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

President Donald Trump’s invasion of Venezuela is generating fresh calls for his impeachment and removal from office.

Shortly after the US military bombed the Venezuelan capital of Caracas and abducted Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, many experts on international law argued that the president’s actions were completely illegal.

In an interview with the New Yorker’s Isaac Chotiner, Yale Law School professor Oona Hathaway said that she didn’t believe there “is a legal basis for what we’re seeing in Venezuela,” while adding that the arguments the Trump administration will likely make simply “don’t hold water.”

For instance, Hathaway noted that while the United Nations charter allows nations to use military force in self-defense against military aggression, the administration’s claims that attacking Maduro was a defensive measure intended to stop the flow of illegal drugs into the US was completely outside the scope of traditional self-defense.

“If drug trafficking is a reasonable justification, then a whole range of possible arguments can be made that basically mean that self-defense is no longer a real exception,” she argued. “It’s the new rule. Why couldn’t you make the same argument about communicable diseases? There’s bird flu coming from a country, and therefore we have a legal justification for the use of military force. Once we start going down that road, the idea that there’s any limit evaporates.”

Hathaway also said that Trump’s militaristic ambitions seem to have grown throughout his second term, and she warned they could lead to a long and bloody US military occupation of Venezuela.

“In his press conference, Trump said that the United States would ‘run the country,’” she said. “And he made it clear that he was not ‘afraid’ to put boots on the ground—for years, if necessary... it’s nothing like anything Trump has done before today. His previous illegal uses of force were all over shortly after they began. The scale of the operation that will be required is massive, and it means putting US soldiers at long-term risk.”

Harvard Law School professor Jack Goldsmith wrote a lengthy analysis after the attack on Venezuela and also concluded that it violated the UN charter. What’s more, Goldsmith argued that Trump’s state plan to seize Venezuela’s oil would likely run afoul of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which limits actions that occupying powers can take on the countries they are overseeing.

“There are a lot of international law rules and restrictions that purport to govern what the United States can do as an occupying power,” he explained. “I don’t have space here to review them, but suffice it to say that these rules will touch on President Trump’s stated aim of ‘tak[ing] back the oil’ and ‘get[ting] reimbursed.’ We will see if the administration takes these rules seriously.”

Many Trump critics also argued that, legality aside, toppling a foreign head of state and vowing to seize their nation’s natural resources was morally wrong and deserving of impeachment.

“This is the behavior of a mob boss—but with nuclear weapons and the world’s strongest military,” argued Zeteo editor-in-chief Medhi Hassan. “None of this is legal. Trump should be impeached by Congress and indicted at The Hague.”

Leah Greenberg, co-founder and co-executive director of Indivisible, denounced Trump’s attack on Venezuela as “wildly illegal, immoral, and irresponsible,” and urged the US Congress to exercise its powers to stop the president from further escalation.

“The power to declare war belongs to Congress and the American people,” Greenberg said. “Trump has once again taken power that’s not his. He is attempting to drag the country into war by decree, all while treating the presidency like a throne. Congress must act immediately to stop these illegal strikes and hold the Trump regime accountable. No Kings, No War.”

Cavan Kharrazian, senior policy adviser for Demand Progress, demanded congressional action to “stop this reckless, unconstitutional act of war.”

“We have seen what happens when the White House invents a pretext to launch a regime change war with an oil-rich nation: disaster and suffering for innocent civilians, our troops and their families, all while costing the American taxpayer a fortune as well,” said Kharrazian. “Congress must do the right thing by voting to stop this obvious catastrophe.”

Kat Abughazaleh, a Democratic candidate for US Congress in Illinois, wrote on Bluesky that the time for Democratic politicians to issue mealy-mouthed statements about Trump’s actions was over.

“Democrats need to grow a fucking spine,” she wrote. “No more strongly worded letters. It’s time to draft articles of impeachment. Impeach. Convict. Remove.”

Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) also demanded that members of his party take a strong stance against Trump’s illegal Venezuela attack.

“The silence from many media-hyped 2028 contenders today is shocking,” he wrote on X. “If you cannot oppose this regime change war for oil, you don’t have the moral clarity or guts to lead our party or nation.”

Trump shocks as he reveals who he first told of Venezuela attack: 'Can’t tell you how insane'

IT WASN'T CONGRESS


Alexander Willis
January 5, 2026
RAW STORY


U.S. President Donald Trump pauses before answering a reporter’s question aboard Air Force One en route from Florida to Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, U.S., January 4, 2026. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

President Donald Trump is facing renewed calls for impeachment over his unprecedented attack on Venezuela and failure to notify Congress in advance, but while aboard Air Force One Sunday night he made a startling admission about which group he did inform ahead of the operation.


Trump admitted that he had told oil companies of the operation in advance, and championed them for wanting to “go in” to Venezuela and “do a great job” with securing Venezuela’s oil reserves, the single-largest proven oil reserves on earth.

With Trump having not only not informed Congress of the attack beforehand, including the “Gang of Eight” congressional leaders who are traditionally told of such operations, critics, such as Democratic congressional candidate Fred Wellman, were left floored by the admission.

“I can’t begin to tell you how insane this is,” Wellman, who also hosts the “On Democracy” podcast, wrote Sunday night in a social media post on X to his more than 356,000 followers.

“He did not inform Congress but he’s saying he informed the oil companies. Keep in mind who he means. The billionaire mega donor that just got control of Citgo. Our service members were used directly to move the interests of Trump’s donors.”

Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-AZ) was also shocked by Trump’s startling admission, calling it an indication that his administration now closely resembles an "authoritarian regime.”

“The oil companies were informed about an act of war before it happened, Congress was not,” Ansari wrote Sunday in a social media post on X. “That, my friends, is what an authoritarian regime run by oligarchs looks like.”

Trump has already made clear that he anticipates the United States benefitting economically from having unchallenged access to Venezuela's vast oil reserves, and the stock values of American oil companies have already surged in the wake of the U.S. attack and subsequent takeover of Venezuela.The Texas-based oil giant Chevron – the lone American oil company to currently have a presence in Venezuela – has already vowed
to work with the Trump administration in its hostile takeover of the South American nation, and cheered what it hoped would be a “peaceful” transfer of power facilitated by the United States.



‘What an Authoritarian Oligarchy Looks Like’: Trump Says Oil Execs Tipped Off About Venezuela Attack

“I can’t begin to tell you how insane this is,” said one critic. “He did not inform Congress but he’s saying he informed the oil companies.”



President Donald Trump, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick (L) and U.S. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) (C) speak to the media aboard Air Force One en route to Washington, DC on January 04, 2026.
(Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images)


Jon Queally
Jan 05, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

President Donald Trump on Sunday told reporters that the heads of American oil companies were informed of the US military’s attack on Venezuela—described as “brazenly illegal” by scholars and experts—even before it took place.

Trump’s admission, a renowned liar, sparked condemnation because the administration refused to consult with US lawmakers about the operation, citing fears of a leak that would compromise operational security.

“Before and after,” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One on Sunday when asked if he’d spoken with oil executives or perhaps “tipped them off” about the operation. “They want to go in, and they’re going to do a great job for the people of Venezuela.”



Trump’s remarks were condemned by those critical of the president’s actions in recent days, including his failure to consult with or seek authorization from Congress.

“I can’t begin to tell you how insane this is,” said Fred Wellman, an Army combat veteran now running for Congress as a Democrat in Missouri. “He did not inform Congress, but he’s saying he informed the oil companies.”

“Keep in mind who he means,” Wellman added. “The billionaire mega donor that just got control of Citgo. Our service members were used directly to move the interests of Trump’s donors.”

“The oil companies were notified before Congress,” said Melanie D’Arrigo, executive director of the Campaign for New York Health. “This is what an authoritarian oligarchy looks like.”

Rep. Yassamin Ansari (D-Ariz.) echoed that statement. “The oil companies were informed about an act of war before it happened, Congress was not. That, my friends, is what an authoritarian regime run by oligarchs looks like.”

Asked repeatedly during his exchange with reporters about whether “free and fair” elections were a priority for Venezuela, Trump said the country was a “mess”—calling it a “dead country”—and that priority would be on getting the oil flowing.

“We’re gonna have the big oil companies go in, and they’re gonna fix the infrastructure, and they’re going to invest money. We’re not going to invest anything; we’re gonna just take care of the country,” Trump said. “We’re gonna cherish the country.”

When asked which oil companies he spoke with, Trump said, “All of them, basically,” though he did not mention which ones specifically by name.

“They want to go in so badly,” the president claimed.

Despite Trump’s remarks, oil industry experts have said it’s not nearly so clear-cut that oil majors in the US will want to re-enter the Venezuela oil market—or be tasked with funding a significant rebuild of the nation’s oil infrastructure—given the political uncertainty unleashed by Trump’s unlawful military operation and the kidnapping of Venezuela President Nicolas Maduro.

“The issue is not just that the infrastructure is in bad shape, but it’s mostly about how do you get foreign companies to start pouring money in before they have a clear perspective on the political stability, the contract situation, and the like,” Francisco Monaldi, director of the Latin American energy program at Rice University, told NPR.



The infrastructure investments alone are huge, even under normal political circumstances.

“The estimate is that in order for Venezuela to increase from one million barrels per day—that is what it produces today—to four million barrels, it will take about a decade and about a hundred billion dollars of investment,” Monaldi said.

In an interview with The New Yorker over the weekend, Oona Hathaway, a professor at Yale Law School and the director of its Center for Global Legal Challenges, said there is absolutely no legal justification for Trump’s assault on Venezuela or the kidnapping of Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores.

“I don’t think there is a legal basis for what we’re seeing in Venezuela,” Hathaway said. “There are certainly legal arguments that the Administration is going to make, but all the arguments that I’ve heard so far don’t hold water. None of them really justify what the President seems to have ordered to take place in Venezuela.”

In a statement on Saturday, Elizabeth Bast, executive director of Oil Change International, said Trump’s assault on Venezuela “defies the US Constitution’s delegation of Congress’s war-making authority and disregards international rules that prevent acts of war without debate or authorization. The US must stop treating Latin America as a resource colony. The Venezuelan people, not US oil executives, must shape their country’s future.”

As Trump and other members of the administration continued to threaten other countries in the region—including Mexico, Colombia, and Cuba—Zeteo editor-in-chief Mehdi Hasan said, “This is the behavior of a mob boss—but with nuclear weapons and the world’s strongest military. None of this is legal. Trump should be impeached by Congress and indicted at The Hague.”