Rarely if ever in my life have I found fault with the Union of Concerned Scientists on any point, but in a story their site published today about climate change and the American Pika, I think they tell only half the story — the alarming half. 

In their words: 

Signs of spring are beginning to emerge in many parts of the United
States. After months of darkness, it's a welcome sight. But did you know
that spring arrives distinctly earlier than it did 40 years ago?

Tree budding, the hatching of animal species, earlier blooms, and
other traits of spring show up about 10 days sooner, researchers have
long reported. What's more, the earlier onset of spring has been
directly linked to human-induced climate change.

While a premature spring is embraced by most people, it can be a
mismatch for animals.

All true, and the discussion of phenology deserves attention. The story then transitions to a discussion of the fate of the American Pika, an utterly charming rodent which lives mostly in the mountains of the western United States, and is much beloved by yours truly. 

Let me tell one true story about the pika and me: 

 Once while totally lost in the High Sierra northeast of Pacheco Pass, I wandered on to a rocky ridge, looked down, and saw roughly 11,000 feet below me the asphalt ribbon of Hwy 395, running through the desert. I had to camp on the jagged plates of granite on the ridge, in a wind, with no fire. A miserable night, unsurprisingly. But when I awoke the wind was gone, the sun was out, and as I sat there on the rocks, making my oatmeal, I saw a darting movement behind me, and glimpsed a darling pika, about the size of a hamster, but thinner and cuter, watching me curiously — and fearlessly. 

In other words, I care about this critter. And although it's true that Eric Beever, who is prominently quoted in the UCS story, published studies this past decade suggesting that the American Pika could be perhaps the first animal in the US driven to extinction due to climate change, more recently Beever published results that he himself admitted question his earlier conclusion. 

To quote his Western North American Naturalist study (available on pdf from the site linked above):

Persistence of pikas in the Hays Canyon Range [in the Great Basin] challenges some of the predictions that resulted from the work of Beever et al. (2003), who found that persistence was best explained by a combination of amount of habitat present, a climatic surrogate (i.e., maximum local elevation of talus to which pikas could migrate), and anthropogenic influences (i.e., presence of grazing and proximity to primary roads).

The man, may I say, is a good and honest scientist. The new research he conducted in 2008 leads him to question his earlier conclusions from 2003. He goes on to suggest that many other factors may come into play, and hints that pikas may in some places be able to adapt to rising temperatures. 

This is just what research from another expert in mountain species has concluded. Connie Millar, a biologist who has spent a great deal of her working life in the Sierra, found in recent research that in these mountains the pika are thriving. She suspects that they have adapted by moving into cold-air pools at the base of talus slopes. (For an excellent discussion of the debate, see Kurt Repanach's Is the American Pika Really on the Road to Extinction Due to Climate Change?) 

To be fair, it's true that Beever remains concerned about the fate of the critter in the face of climate change, and Millar in a conversation made clear she respected Beever and his work, which mostly focuses on Nevada, not the Sierra. Both of these scientists stress the research to be done (Millar is launching a survey, and asking the public for help) and not grandiose claims. 

So, if the fate of the Amercan Pika is a matter of dispute, how do we decide? Well, the US Fish and Wildlife Service spent a year doing a biological assessment of this very question, and this February published their results. In their words: 

…we conducted a risk assessment to determine if increased surface temperatures would affect the pika and found that although the American pika could potentially be impacted by climate change, we believe the species as a whole will be able to survive despite higher temperatures in a majority of its range. 

Climate change is a reality and a threat to some populations of the pika, in other words, but not a mortal threat to the species as a whole. 

For the Union of Concerned Scientists to ignore this side of the story really is just not right.