Such a boar
piggy sightings on Chek Jawa on the budak blog
Dark-throated Oriole catching caterpillar
on the Bird Ecology Study Group blog
Whimbrel in record migratory flight distance
on the Bird Ecology Study Group blog
Reef posters for IYOR
on the singapore celebrates our reefs blog
Jean-Christophe Vie, BBC Green Room 15 Jul 08;
Despite our ever-increasing knowledge of the natural world, too many people still see it as just another means to make money, says Jean-Christophe Vie.
In this week's Green Room, he setsout his argument why the planet's rich diversity of life needs to be preserved in its entirety.
In the world of economics, what nature provides for us is often seen in terms of immediate returns.
Forests, for example, are valued for their timber. When a country needs money, the forests can be cut down and the capital immediately released.
This may contribute to the nation's Gross Domestic Product, but in reality, the country has lost resources and becomes poorer.
The rationale for preserving wildlife is based on a variety of societal values including aesthetic, moral and spiritual ones, as well as more practical ones, such as contributing to the economy and human livelihoods.
It is also based on a precautionary approach and, in my view, common sense. If a species is there, I am firmly convinced that it has a good reason to be.
Nature has developed over millions of years to produce the most favourable environment for us to live in. Before attempting to disturb the subtle balance on which we all depend, with unknown consequences, we should look carefully at what we have and know.
In fact, we still know very little of the diversity of life on our planet, but we know enough to get a global view of what is happening.
Almost a century ago, some "visionaries" sounded the first alarm bells. They have long been called "alarmists" but their predictions have slowly become reality.
Even today, when you tell the truth about the environment, many will deny the facts and try to block action; this will inevitably result in a bigger problem in the future.
Out of focus
We spend enormous energy and lose precious time by trying to demonstrate the obvious: wildlife in its integrity is vital for us.
Instead, those who do not believe that, or think human ingenuity will solve all our problems, should be asked to demonstrate that they can live without nature.
For a very long time, conservationists have been portrayed as misanthropists, caring more for animals than other human beings. But human rights and preservation of the environment are complementary.
The environment should always be a key pillar of development aid. Humans and nature go hand in hand.
Nowadays, when the spectrum of an economic recession is looming in various part of the world, the fact that nature can sustain humankind freely is not the least of its benefits, especially for the world's poor.
There is increasing recognition of the services nature provides to us, such as clean water and healthy soils for growing crops. But considering the competition between wild species and humans on a very crowded planet, one can ask if there is there room for both of us?
There is no doubt that nature can survive without humans - and has done so, for the most part, since time began.
Humans surviving without nature is certainly not true so we have no choice but to find enough space for nature.
Despite the very limited knowledge of life on Earth, some people do not hesitate to claim that some species have no interest to humans, that we should sort them out and get rid of "redundant" species and eliminate "pests".
So should nature be preserved in its entirety, meaning all species? I say yes, without any hesitation.
Not a luxury
Almost all countries agreed at the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa, or through the Convention on Biological Diversity, that we should significantly reduce biodiversity loss as a means to fight poverty.
Every day there is a stronger consensus that, without preserving nature, the Millennium Development Goals to eradicate hunger and poverty, provide education, or combat diseases, cannot be achieved.
This is, for me, a clear response. Nature is not a luxury; it should be preserved at all costs. However, we are still losing species, as shown by the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species.
While many are not extinct yet, the Red List shows that many are slipping slowly towards extinction. We are witnessing a collective failure to meet these agreed goals.
In parallel, the good news is that we are documenting more and more conservation successes. It shows that a clear understanding of the problems and taking appropriate collective actions, nature can be preserved.
Increasingly, human overpopulation is recognised as the biggest challenge. The need to feed this growing population is increasing the pressure on nature.
Decisions will continue to be taken in a context of emergency and without appropriate thinking or incorporation of environmental considerations, as has been the case with the uncontrolled development of biofuels.
Our ability to live with nature can also be questioned. We hear that there are too many whales depleting fish stocks, too many elephants destroying farmers' plantations, too many tigers or sharks killing people, too many wolves eating sheep, too many mosquitoes transmitting diseases, too many frogs making noises, too many trees spreading leaves in our gardens; the list could go on forever.
Quantity and quality
The positive side of this is that we still have species to fight against. Once gone, will there be anyone else other than our neighbours to fight with?
Species abundance is also important. We need large quantities of fish if we want to feed the world. We need enough pollinators and soil invertebrates to maintain food production.
We need a healthy population of prey to maintain predator populations. We need a large numbers of wildebeests in the Serengeti to attract tourists and ensure the fertilisation of the savannah.
The same applies to salmon, whose spawning migration is the basis of an entire food chain. Massive animal migrations or congregations of spectacular animals are the guarantee that tourists will see what they have paid to come and watch.
We need enough predators to control herbivore populations; Olive Ridley turtles ensure reproductive success by swarming beaches in mass to lay their eggs.
Wildlife is not just a question of diversity but also of quantity. The collapse of cod stocks in the northern Atlantic is the perfect illustration; cod can still be found but, for unknown reasons, the stock was never able to recover and can no longer sustain an economy.
In 2050 the human population will stand at more than nine billion, with an increased demand for goods, so what does sustainable development really mean?
Can it be achieved without drastic changes? Do we want nature to be confined in zoos and botanic gardens or isolated pockets where rich tourists could go and watch what once covered most of our planet?
Global changes and new emerging threats will not allow us to maintain this static model. Climate change, invasive species and diseases do not stop at the borders of national parks. The risk cannot continue to be evaluated by our decision-makers in terms of success at the next election.
Fortunately, it seems that showing a real commitment to the preservation of our planet is starting to pay off in political terms.
A return to more spiritual values and the findings of a study on the economics of ecosystems and biodiversity might bring the key additional elements needed for a real push in favour of the preservation of the diversity of life and, more broadly, all forms of diversity on our generous planet.
Jean-Christophe Vie is deputy chairman of the IUCN's Species Survival Group, and author of the book Le Jour au L'Abeille Disparaitra...
The Green Room is a series of opinion articles on environmental topics running weekly on the BBC News website
Ronnie Lim, Business Times 16 Jul 08;
THREE contenders have surfaced to bid for a feasibility study on how caverns can be opened up beneath land-scarce Singapore for a wide range of exciting uses - from power stations and water reclamation to wafer fabs and R&D labs.
Geostock, Tritech Consultants and Amberg & TTI Engineering have made submissions to carry out the underground rock cavern (URC) usage study, said a spokeswoman for JTC Corporation, the coordinating government agency for the project.
Due to the specialised nature of the work, the industrial landlord specified in its tender, called in May, that only companies with URC experience and expertise could bid. 'The tender award is likely to be made next month,' the JTC spokeswoman told BT.
In the tender document, other economic possibilities cited for the URCs include using them for data centres, warehouses, and port and airport logistics centres.
Among the contenders, France's Geostock, jointly with Jurong Consultants, is in a consortium that has won the contract to provide the basic engineering design and manage the construction of the $700 million Phase 1 Jurong Rock Cavern oil storage project beneath Jurong Island.
Tenders for the construction proper are being evaluated, with an award expected around the fourth quarter, the JTC spokeswoman said.
Tritech Consultants is a specialist civil and geotechnical consultancy formed by a group of specialist engineers from Singapore, Malaysia, the UK and China.
The third contender, Amberg & TTI Engineering, is a consultancy that focuses on tunnelling and underground infrastructure. The Far East regional office of Switzerland's Amberg Engineering, it has been involved in various MRT projects here.
Because of the wide- ranging usage possibilities, the consultant that wins the tender will have to work with various government agencies. These include the Energy Market Authority on power stations, the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore on airport logistics or the Public Utilities Board on water reclamation.
The consultant will have to study proven URC uses in other countries and determine if they can be applied here.
It will also have to look at the environmental and health aspects and the likely public reaction on issues such as radiation, pollution and damage to existing buildings. The study will also look at the cost of building URCs, including excavation costs, for specific uses.
Over 800 units sold in past 6 months compared to just 34 for whole of 2007
Samuel Ee, Business Times 16 Jul 08;
SALES of CNG cars are continuing to power ahead this year, with the number of such vehicles in the first six months soaring to 804 from a mere 34 for the whole of last year.
According to the Land Transport Authority, there were 1,564 bi-fuel cars on Singapore roads as at end-June. June was also the hottest month in the first half of this year for such cars, with an all-time high of 124 units registered.
Bi-fuel cars can run on both petrol and CNG (compressed natural gas). Mercedes-Benz is the only car maker that offers a CNG model - the E200 NGT (Natural Gas Technology) - direct from the factory. The rest of the petrol-engined cars here have been retrofitted with gas tanks and injectors so that they can also operate on CNG.
As petrol prices soar, more and more buyers of new cars are converting their vehicles to run on CNG, which is less expensive.
Apart from lower running costs, such retrofitted cars also attract a green vehicle rebate, currently set at 40 per cent of OMV (open market value). This means its list price will also be lower, thus outweighing the CNG conversion cost, which can range from $3,400 to $4,500, depending on the size of the gas tank installed.
But the price of CNG is also rising fast because it is pegged to the price of high sulphur fuel oil (HFSO). Last week, it cost $1.59 per kg at Smart Energy, one of two CNG refuelling stations in Singapore. On Monday, the price rose to $1.73.
'The higher cost of CNG will definitely affect the demand for CNG cars because the price difference compared with petrol is reduced,' says Johnny Harjantho, managing director of Smart Energy.
But he says that the mileage gains from CNG versus petrol will continue to make it a popular alternative, 'especially for those who travel a lot'.
Mr Harjantho says that on average, a 2.0-litre car can travel about 250km on 18kg of CNG, for a cost per km number of 12.5 cents. For that same distance, the 2.0-litre car will need an average of 27.78 litres of petrol, or 23.4 cents per km using the cheapest fuel grade at $2.102 per litre.
One parallel importer also believes the popularity of CNG cars will remain strong.
'Current demand is overwhelming,' he says. 'For every 10 enquiries about new cars, six or seven are for CNG models.'
He adds that the waiting time for the installation of a CNG kit used to take two weeks two months ago. 'Now, the queue time is two months,' he notes. 'Look at it this way - one full tank of petrol for a 1.8-litre MPV costs $80 to $90. With CNG, it's about $40 or half the price. So, of course, you will go CNG.'
Stefan Lovgren, National Geographic News 15 Jul 08;
Part eight of a continuing series on the Megafishes Project.
Standing on the shores of Thailand's Lake Monster, angler Brendan O'Sullivan knew there were endangered giants lurking near his baited hook—and that conservationists were happy to have him score a rare catch.
The 7-acre (2.8-hectare) lake is one of several created in recent years near Bangkok for anglers who want to hook some of the world's most exotic fish.
Lake Monster alone boasts roughly two dozen types of freshwater fish, many of them threatened with extinction.
While this might seem like a conservationist's nightmare, some praise the operation as an example of a burgeoning partnership between anglers and biologists who hope that catch-and-release sportfishing could help save at-risk animals.
"This is allowing anglers to catch rare species without having to go into the wild and try to remove a very rare fish from its natural habitat," said Zeb Hogan, a fisheries biologist at the University of Reno in Nevada.
As head of the National Geographic Society's Megafishes Project, Hogan is leading efforts to find, study, and preserve the world's largest freshwater fish, some of which are highly endangered but poorly understood, compared to ocean going behemoths. (National Geographic News is part of the National Geographic Society.)
Part of the project is to analyze catch records to learn more about population trends. The data provide valuable information on the animals' abundance, size, and movements, Hogan said.
"It's become more common for me to team up with recreational fishers who share the same goal. That is, to catch these fish but also to release them," he added. "What we should do is minimize the harm to the fish and maximize the information we're gaining in order to protect them."
Evolving Partnership
In some cases, artificial lakes and breeding centers can be the only places where experts can study rare species in the flesh.
At I.T. Lake Monster—the lake's official name—Hogan recently had the chance to examine a dog-eating catfish caught by anglers. The massive predator—named for stories of fishers luring it with dog meat—has almost disappeared from Southeast Asia's Mekong River.
"I've never seen one in the wild," Hogan said, "so this is pretty exciting for me."
For now, however, one of the chief concerns among conservationists like Hogan is the well-being of fish living in sport lakes.
Caught by hook over and over again, the fish can, in extreme cases, sustain irreparable damage to their mouths or gills.
"I always feel a little uneasy about working with recreational fishers, who, some say, are hurting fish for fun," Hogan said.
On the other hand, he noted, it's in everyone's interest to ensure that these fish don't die out.
"And there are quite a few positive impacts of recreational fishing," he said. "Not only do the anglers release the fish they catch, they also bring in money to local economies that need it."
Lake Full of Giants
Many fish from other tropical countries thrive in Thai lakes, and in recent years the country has become a breeding center for exotic species.
Lake Monster's owner, Ittiporn Parnitpechedpong, says he began stocking it two years ago so his friends could fish for fun. But what started as a hobby has grown into an increasingly lucrative business.
"People want to come and fish for these big fish, especially because many of these exotic species are new for Asia," Parnitpechedpong said.
Lake Monster is now a haven for the Mekong giant catfish, a Southeast Asian beast that has seen its wild population drop by about 95 percent over the past century.
At 9 feet (2.7 meters) long and 646 pounds (293 kilograms), a Mekong giant catfish currently holds the record for the largest freshwater fish ever caught (see photos).
Lake Monster also hosts alligator gar, which can grow as long as 10 feet (3 meters) and weigh 300 pounds (135 kilograms).
These North American giants are not listed as endangered, but habitat loss and overfishing have taken a toll on the species' preferred spawning habitats, contributing to significant population declines.
Conservationists are also concerned about another giant inhabitant of Lake Monster, the arapaima, which is becoming increasingly rare in its native Amazonian habitat.
Arapaima can grow more than 10 feet (3 meters) long and 400 pounds (180 kilograms). As an air breather, the species is vulnerable to hunters with harpoons when it surfaces for air every 10 to 20 minutes.
Care and Respect
A recent four-hour visit to Lake Monster yielded about 20 catches for angler O'Sullivan and a friend.
"You can talk about the purists who want to go and fish on the [native] waters, but the Amazon is a mighty big river, and the chance of catching anything there is minimal," O'Sullivan said. "Here you're ensured of a good day."
Rick Humphreys, who co-owns a Thai sportfishing outfitter called FishSiam, added that while he and other anglers enjoy the sport, they are also committed to conservation.
"I have no wish to kill any [endangered] fish," Humphreys said. "Every time I catch a fish, I try to treat it with the utmost care and respect."
Fisheries biologist Hogan said he sees opportunities for conservationists and anglers to work together in wild settings, too.
In April, Humphreys and his FishSiam team called on Hogan to join them on Thailand's Bang Pakong River to examine giant freshwater stingrays. The anglers had caught several of the rare rays, included a pregnant female, which gave birth while being held by the fishers.
According to Humphreys, the event was a sign of the partnership emerging between conservationists and anglers.
"We can help each other learn more about understudied creatures."
Brian Handwerk, National Geographic News 14 Jul 08;
Coral reefs in the United States and the Caribbean may be under siege—from a surprising source half a world away.
Scientists say tons of dust from Africa's arid Sahara and Sahel regions could be polluting oceans in the Caribbean and southeastern U.S.
The dusty clouds carry contaminants like metals, pesticides and microorganisms—potentially disastrous news for coral reefs and other marine animals already stressed by warming waters.
"We're trying to actually look at what is in these African dust air masses when the get over to the Caribbean," said Virginia "Ginger" Garrison, an ecologist with the U.S. Geological Survey in St. Petersburg, Florida, who studies how the dust travels.
"We're at the baby-step stages of trying to see how this dust and this stew of things may be affecting organisms—including humans—in downwind areas."
Something in the Air
Air-quality data from a network of sampling sites have revealed intriguing results, Garrison and colleagues said recently at the International Coral Reef Symposium in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
For instance, Caribbean air samples during African dust events may hold two to three times as many microorganisms, such as bacteria and fungi, as samples taken from the same spot during other periods.
In Florida the Africa-influenced air conditions sometimes deteriorate below U.S. air-quality standards.
Air-quality testing in Mali, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Trinidad and Tobago has also revealed traces of pesticides, including DDE—a breakdown product of DDT, which is still used as an insecticide in some African countries.
Pesticides are of particular concern to coral reefs because they can interfere with the tiny animals' reproduction, fertilization, or immune function.
These contaminants were highest in Mali and lower in the downwind areas of the Americas. Six pesticides were found at each one of the test sites, Garrison said.
"And there's been very, very little work that has been done on the concentrations of any of these pesticides or PCBs [and how] that would impair coral or coral reef organisms," she added.
Andrew Negri, of the Australian Institute of Marine Science in Townsville, co-authored one of the few previous studies on pesticides and coral.
"The pesticides associated with African dust are primarily insecticides. These can affect the coral host directly," Negri said.
"We have found that two of the identified insecticides, chlorpyrifos and endosulfan, can reduce the settlement and attachment of coral larvae to the ocean floor at very low concentrations.
"I would be particularly concerned if storms containing insecticide-contaminated dust were to occur upwind of coral reefs around spawning time," he said.
Winds of Change
Atmospheric systems such as the Africa-Americas pathway have functioned for thousands of years.
A similar system delivers Asian dust to the western United States, where it accounts for up to an estimated 40 percent of local air particles.
In recent times, however, humans have caused some significant changes.
Desertification and changing land-use patterns can put more dust into the air. Industrialization, pesticide use, waste burning, and other practices have produced air pollutants that ride with that dust to far-flung locales.
But the question of just where air "originates" is tricky, experts say. Traceable substances such as pollen can provide clues to where contaminants come from.
But in Garrison's view, mass mixing around the globe means that we all experience a single, large air system.
"I can watch a dust air mass [via] satellite coming out of Africa, across the Caribbean, and into the eastern U.S., and all of a sudden it peters out," she explained.
"But the air mass is still moving with some dust into the northeast[ern] U.S., where it mixes with a pollution cloud. Then it goes over the North Atlantic to Europe, picks up a bit of their pollution cloud, and then goes back to Africa. So where did this stuff come from?"
Garrison believes that while certain contaminants may be linked to specific areas, such as the African pesticides, no one region is entirely to blame for air-quality issues.
"We're all responsible," she said. "We all have to watch what we're putting into the air."
LiveScience.com Yahoo News 15 Jul 08;
An annual dead zone that develops in the Gulf of Mexico could be larger than ever this summer, scientists said today.
The region, largely devoid of life, develops when an overgrowth of algae, fueled in part by agricultural runoff, robs the sea of oxygen, and other organisms can't survive.
The researchers are predicting the area could measure a record 8,800 square miles, or roughly the size of New Jersey. In 2007, the dead zone was 7,903 square miles. The largest dead zone on record was in 2002, when it measured 8,481 square miles. Researchers began taking regular measurements of the dead zone in 1985.
"The prediction of a large dead zone this summer is due to a combination of large influx of nitrogen and exceptionally high flows from the Mississippi and Atchafalaya rivers," said Louisiana State University scientist R. Eugene Turner.
The low oxygen, or hypoxic, area is primarily caused by high nutrient levels, which stimulates an overgrowth of algae that sinks and decomposes. The decomposition process in turn depletes dissolved oxygen in the water. The dead zone is of particular concern because it threatens valuable commercial and recreational Gulf fisheries.
Research indicates that the nearly tripling of nitrogen levels into the Gulf over the past 50 years from human activities has led to a dramatic increase in the size of the dead zone, according to a statement released today by NOAA, parent of the National Weather Service.
"The strong link between nutrients and the dead zone indicates that excess nutrients from the Mississippi River watershed during the spring are the primary human-influenced factor behind the expansion of the dead zone," said Rob Magnien, director of the NOAA Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research. "This analysis will greatly inform the development of federal, state and local efforts to reduce the dead zone's size."
Laura MacInnis, PlanetArk 16 Jul 08;
GENEVA - China won the right at a UN wildlife meeting on Tuesday to import elephant ivory from Africa under strict conditions, a UN spokesman said.
Four countries -- Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe -- are permitted under a deal reached at The Hague last year to make one-off sales of registered ivory stocks.
"China was accepted as a trading partner to import ivory from the four authorised countries in southern Africa," said Juan Carlos Vasquez of CITES, or the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.
To gain permission, Beijing had to prove it had the capacity to fight illegal domestic trade in ivory, which is used mainly in jewellery and carvings.
The CITES committee agreed that the four countries would be allowed to sell a combined total of 108 tonnes of the raw ivory, which comes from elephants that died from natural causes or were killed in population-management programmes.
"That is the total that the four can sell, and they can sell that ivory to Japan or to China," Vasquez said, noting CITES members briefly considered then set aside the idea of reviewing Zimbabwe's allocation given the recent political turmoil there.
Japan had been previously approved as an importer of ivory from those government stockpiles.
Populations of elephants, the world's largest land mammals, are under pressure in many parts of Africa from poaching, loss of habitats to farms and towns, pollution and climate change.
But Botswana, Namibia, Zimbabwe and South Africa all say they have rising elephant populations, causing increasing conflicts with people in rural areas.
Under the CITES deal struck last year, the four are allowed to sell ivory from stockpiles that were registered on Jan. 31, 2007, and then are barred from seeking exports for nine years. The cash raised is used for conservation and local communities.
China has invested heavily in oil- and mineral-producing African countries in past years as its economic might has grown, and many Chinese companies are active on the continent.
Conservation groups WWF and TRAFFIC said China should pair its purchases with conservation awareness programmes to let Chinese nationals abroad know that it is illegal to buy and bring home ivory from Africa.
"The sight of ivory openly and illegally on sale in many African cities is likely to be a far more powerful encouragement to those contemplating poaching and smuggling, than a strictly controlled one-off sale," Susan Lieberman, director of WWF International's species programme, said in a statement.
"The only way to end elephant poaching is through an effective clampdown on illegal domestic ivory markets."
China gets ivory imports go-ahead
BBC News 15 Jul 08;
The UN has given China the green light to bid in a one-off sale of ivory.
The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites) voted in favour of China's request during a meeting being held in Geneva.
China joins Japan as approved buyers of government-owned ivory from South Africa, Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe.
In 2007, Cites authorised the four nations to sell off stockpiles of legally held elephant ivory.
In order to gain approval, China had to present evidence to members of the Cites standing committee that it had put in place measures to tackle any illegal domestic sales of ivory.
"China has acted rather successfully against its own illegal domestic ivory market," said Tom Milliken, a director for Traffic, the wildlife trade monitoring network.
"Now China should help other countries to do the same, especially in central Africa where elephant poaching is rampant."
But Robbie Marsland, UK director for the International Fund for Animal Welfare (Ifaw), condemned the decision, saying it could prove disastrous for the world's elephant populations.
"We are deeply disappointed that Cites has backed China as an ivory buyer, a decision that plays Russian roulette with wild elephants.
"Allowing new ivory to be imported into China will stimulate demand and create a smokescreen for illegal ivory to be laundered into the legal market, to be sold in stores or online to Chinese citizens or foreigners."
However, Mr Milliken said Cites monitoring systems would track whether the sale would lead to an increase in illegal ivory.
"Following the last one-off ivory sale under CITES in 1999, it is encouraging to note that the illicit trade in ivory progressively declined over the next five years," he explained.
"We hope a similar result is achieved this time."
Under an agreement reached in 2007, Cites gave permission for the four nations to make a single sale of all government-owned stocks of ivory that have been registered by January of that year.
South Africa declared the largest amount, making 51 tonnes available, while Botswana's stockpile was almost 44 tonnes. The other two countries declared much smaller amounts; Namibia total was just under 10 tonnes, and Zimbabwe stockpile was almost four tonnes.
In March and April, the Cites secretariat conducted audits in each of the four nations to ensure the ivory had been properly registered and had been obtained legally.
The 2007 agreement also stipulated that once the one-off sale had been completed, no further sales from these countries would be considered during a "resting period" of nine years that would begin as soon as the new sales had been completed.
China allowed to buy ivory from Africa
Paul Eccleston, The Telegraph 15 Jul 08;
China is to be allowed to buy ivory from African countries in a move which has infuriated conservation groups.
They say granting China permission to import ivory amounted to a death sentence on African elephants because it would fuel demand and encourage poaching.
The UN Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) meeting in Geneva voted in favour of China becoming a licensed importer. Britain was one of nine countries which supported the move.
It will allow China to bid for more than 100 tonnes of ivory stockpiled in Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe through culling and natural deaths.
The African states say they need to sell the stockpiles to finance the conservation and management of their elephant populations but critics say it will give illegal traders the opportunity to launder poached ivory.
The trade in ivory was banned by CITES after poachers decimated African elephant populations by more than half - from 1.3m to 625,000 - in 10 years.
But the block on trade was partially lifted in 1999 when the four countries were allowed to auction tusks from elephants that had died of natural causes.
However only Japan was given partner status and allowed to buy ivory because it was deemed to have enough safeguards in place to prevent illegal trading.
Now, with a second auction sanctioned, China will be allowed to bid against Japan after CITES decided that she had sufficiently tightened trading rules.
China has the world's largest illegal ivory market, and is the single major destination for illegal ivory, mostly from elephants slaughtered in Africa.
The growing demand for ivory has driven up black market prices from $200 per kilo to $850 per kilo in the past four years providing a big financial incentive for poachers.
The International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) said the amount of ivory on sale represented the deaths of more than 10,000 African elephants.
UK Director Robbie Marsland said: "We are deeply disappointed that CITES has backed China as an ivory buyer, a decision that plays Russian roulette with wild elephants.
"Allowing new ivory to be imported into China will stimulate demand and create a smokescreen for illegal ivory to be laundered into the legal market, to be sold in stores or online to Chinese citizens or foreigners."
IFAW said China's ivory trade controls and enforcement were woefully inadequate to police the ever-growing trade within its borders and that 110 tonnes of their legal stockpile has been "lost" indicating it was sold on illegal ivory markets.
Michael Wamithi, programme director for IFAW's global elephants programme, and former director of the Kenya Wildlife Service, said: "An estimated 20,000 elephants are slaughtered annually for the trade in their tusks.
"Many African elephant range states clearly do not have the capacity or resources to combat these massive attacks on their countries' wildlife heritage and the burgeoning markets in China are only fuelling these attacks."
The Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA) which exposes environmental crimes, said CITES had ignored appeals from other African nations not to increase pressures on their elephant populations which were already struggling with wars, instability, droughts and poverty.
EIA chairman Allan Thornton said: "We are stunned that the UK and EU have voted to risk the future of the world's elephant populations to garner favour with China.
"Responsibility for the poaching of 20,000 elephants in Africa each year will now lie with those who supported China obtaining legal ivory trade even though they continue to be the world's biggest destination for poached ivory."
Raymond Colitt, PlanetArk 15 Jul 08;
BRASILIA - With Amazon deforestation accelerating, Brazilian politicians and senior officials are increasingly portraying foreign groups working in the forest as a threat to national security that need to be reined in.
Invading armies, theft of medicinal plants, spying and land grabs are among the specters being raised by officials in Brasilia to justify tougher measures such as limits on land ownership and restrictions on environmental groups' activities.
Nationalists, especially in military and intelligence circles, have long harbored conspiracy theories that foreigners are scheming to take Amazon resources.
But in recent months -- a period that has coincided with a spike in destruction of the world's largest forest -- they have become louder and more public.
Some legislators are concerned about foreign businesses buying land in the Amazon.
"The growing acquisition of land by foreigners in the Amazon is a threat to our national security, we need to impose restrictions now," Sen. Joao Pedro told Reuters.
The government accuses some non-governmental organizations of biopiracy -- stealing medicinal plants for pharmaceutical purposes -- but has provided little evidence.
The government said this month it could shut down foreign NGOs that fail to provide detailed accounts of their operations. They must register with half a dozen authorities, including the Federal Police, and reveal the qualifications and residence of their directors.
"We want to separate the wheat from the chaff," said Secretary of Justice Romeu Tuma Junior.
"The state has the right to demand that those wanting to operate in an area of national interest open their books publicly," said Tuma.
Conservationists say they are being scapegoated and worry about potential censorship.
"It's a first step toward ideological control of foreigners acting here," said Raul Telles do Valle of the social and environmental think tank ISA.
"These non-government organizations are sometimes a front for economic interests of hegemonic nations. They are predators and spies, seeking the biodiversity of our Amazon," retired Col. Manoel Soriano Neto, a former Army intelligence officer, told the government news agency.
DEFORESTATION RATE RISING
Critics say the growing opposition to foreign influence is a reaction to calls for more international intervention to combat deforestation.
Since August, the rate of deforestation has risen sharply after three years of declines. Figures released on Tuesday showed 423 square miles (1,096 square km) of forest were lost in May.
"There are cycles of xenophobia in Brazil; this one follows a new international spotlight on the Amazon," said Adrian Garda, Amazon program director with Conservation International.
"I've heard many accusations of biopiracy but seen no proof," said Garda, adding that his group won't follow the government's foreign NGO registration request because it considers itself Brazilian.
Brazil considers a large-scale foreign invasion of the Amazon as a possible, albeit remote, security threat, Defense Minister Nelson Jobim said in April.
In May, the Army chief for the Amazon warned that Brazil's borders were vulnerable to foreign incursions through tribal Indian territories, which harbored foreign aid workers.
President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said that foreign concerns over Amazon destruction from beef, soybean and ethanol production were attempts by rivals to undermine Brazilian exports.
Blaming foreigners may stem from frustration with Brazil's inability to control vast areas of its territory, some say.
"It's a scandal that foreigners can buy land in the Amazon without any state control," said Sen. Jose Nery of the northeastern Amapa state.
Critics say a nationalistic stance is good for politicians' poll numbers too.
"They're being populists, that wins votes," Valle said.
(Editing by Eric Beech)
Arable land will be destroyed, roads congested, say villagers
Mark Rice-Oxley, Straits Times 16 Jul 08;
IN LONDON - AN UNPRECEDENTED British project to build 10 'eco-towns' in rural settings across England over the next decade is running into vehement opposition from thousands of villagers who live close to the sites earmarked for construction.
Beset by a chronic housing shortage and a growing population, the government has signalled it wants to build the first new towns in Britain in 40 years to create up to 100,000 new homes by 2020.
Yet, mindful of the perennial controversy of despoiling pristine countryside with bricks and mortar, it has stipulated that developments must be carbon-neutral. Futuristic development plans include windmills and solar power, biomass heating facilities, car-free streets, and subterranean recycling chutes.
These, however, have not been enough to assuage the ire of rural dwellers who warn that the new towns will increase congestion on country roads, cover green arable land with concrete and struggle to attract homebuyers because of their remote location.
'This is completely the wrong site,' says Mr Pete Seaward of Weston, a village in Oxfordshire that has been shortlisted for an eco-town. He holds up a scenic picture of a local lake. 'If they're saying that it is 'eco' to build on and fill in a lake like that, they are dreaming.'
Mr Ron Field, the chairman of the parish council at Ford, another site on the shortlist, adds there is a huge local concern that this is just another ruse to allow developers to make money. 'They're building it on 242ha of greenfield land which is used for growing food crops to feed the people who live in our area, and it's all done as far as we can see for money.'
MPs opposed to eco-towns say such towns will situate people in remote areas far from their place of work, meaning commuter miles will shoot up - hardly very 'eco'. They add that communities will take a long time to become self-sustaining, as developers build the houses first but take much longer to add the schools, shops and other infrastructure.
They also warn that legal challenges will mount up, slamming the brakes on the schemes.
'My view is that one or two should be built as pilot projects to see what lessons can be learned,' says Mr Peter Luff, a Conservative MP.
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown's eco-town plan is perhaps his boldest, most original domestic policy since coming to office last summer.
Britain not only has a population that is growing once again; it has more single-occupancy households. House prices have soared in the past decade, and though the market is currently falling, prices are still well beyond the budget of most first-time buyers.
The hope is that by expanding supply, a new stock of affordable housing will become available. At least 30 per cent of eco-town housing must be offered at 'affordable' prices.
'There is a fundamental mismatch between supply and demand in the housing market, and the government is committed to addressing this in the long term by building more homes,' said a government spokesman.
Andrea Thompson, LiveScience.com Yahoo News 15 Jul 08;
Rock Port, Mo. has an unusual crop: wind turbines.
The four turbines that supply electricity to the small town of 1,300 residents make it the first community in the United States to operate solely on wind power.
"That's something to be very proud of, especially in a rural area like this - that we're doing our part for the environment," said Jim Crawford, a natural resource engineer at the University of Missouri Extension in Columbia.
A map published by the U.S. Department of Energy indicates that northwest Missouri has the state's highest concentrations of wind resources and contains a number of locations that are potentially suitable for utility-scale wind development. The four turbines that power Rock Port are part of a larger set of 75 turbines across three counties that are used to harvest the power of wind.
"We're farming the wind, which is something that we have up here," Crawford said. "The payback on a per-acre basis is generally quite good when compared to a lot of other crops, and it's as simple as getting a cup of coffee and watching the blades spin."
And the turbines have another benefit besides produces clean energy: MU Extension specialists said that the Missouri wind farms will bring in more than $1.1 million annually in county real estate taxes, to be paid by Wind Capital Group, a wind energy developer based in St. Louis.
"This is a unique situation because in rural areas it is quite uncommon to have this increase in taxation revenues," said Jerry Baker, and MU Extension community development specialist.
Landowners can also benefit by leasing part of their property for wind turbines.
The turbines will also provide savings to rural electric companies and will provide electric service for at least 20 years, the anticipated lifetime of the turbines.
"Anybody who is currently using Rock Port utilities can expect no increase in rates for the next 15 to 20 years," Crawford said.
Baker added that the turbines could also attract tourists to the area.
Paul Simons, Times Online 16 Jul 08;
Climate change is having some unexpected consequences all over the world. In the Arctic, Inuit communities are seeing their first wasps, and radio broadcasts have been needed to caution about the hazards of trying to touch the wasps, which are flying farther north as the Arctic warms.
European brewers are facing a crisis as their traditional hops are wilting from drought and heat, and a programme has begun to make them more drought-tolerant.
The famous geysers of Yellowstone Park, Wyoming, are slowing down; Old Faithful’s regular eruptions have shifted by an extra 16 minutes in eight years. The reason is that the geysers’ water supplies are dwindling as the climate turns drier.
Perhaps the most unexpected impact of global warming is a rise in the number of kidney stones. These painful stones result from salts crystallising in the kidneys, often caused by dehydration.
The hotter the climate, the more cases of kidney stones occur and the southern US regions get around 50 per cent more cases than northern states. The number of cases has been rising since temperatures began to warm noticeably from the late 1970s. As the climate warms, the zone of high risk for kidney stones is expected to push northwards, and by 2050 an estimated 1.6 million new cases are predicted.
Climate change: Warming may cause increase in kidney stone cases, say US scientists
Elana Schor, The Guardian 15 Jul 08;
Endangered species. Economic decay. Extreme weather. The list of climate change's destructive costs is long, but US scientists today proposed adding one more: millions of new kidney stone cases.
The proven link between kidney stones and warm temperatures means that climate change could dramatically increase the number of US cases in the coming years, according to a study published today in the renowned journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The increased risk of kidney stones -- which come from painful mineral deposits in the urine -- could lead to as much as $1.3bn in increased medical bills by the year 2050, the team of Texas urologists behind the study estimated.
The study used two competing models to estimate the reach of new kidney stones brought on by global warming, using data from the UN intergovernmental panel on climate change (IPCC).
One model predicted a steady growth in new cases as global temperatures rise, and another predicted that new cases would plateau after temperatures reached 15 degrees Celsius.
The first model projected that stones would become more prevalent in the states of Texas, Florida, California, and the east coast of the US. The second model yielded the bulk of its new cases in the mid-west US, including 100,000 in Chicago alone.
The US would experience between 1.6m and 2.2m new kidney stone afflictions by 2050 under both scenarios.
Kidney stones will afflict 10% to 15% of the US population at a total treatment cost of about $2bn per year, according to previous scientific studies. Nearly double that number of cases has been reported in the Middle East, where temperatures are uniformly balmy.
The famously unbearable pain caused by passing a kidney stone through the body can cause nausea, vomiting, and blood in the urine.
But there is an easy way to decrease the risk of climate-induced stones, according to Dr Mark Litwin, a professor of urology and public health at the University of California in Los Angeles.
"The irony is, the cure is fairly simple," Litwin told Science News magazine. "Just drink more water."
Climate change to cause rise in kidney stones
Catherine Elsworth, The Telegraph 15 Jul 08;
Global warming could lay waste to vast tracts of the earth - and may also lead to more Americans suffering kidney stones, scientists have warned.
Kidney stones, which can be extremely painful, are often caused by dehydration as the body is unable to flush minerals out of the system.
Researchers say that as temperatures rise, the driest parts of the US could see a 30 per cent increase in kidney stone disease.
The study by University of Texas researchers predicts that warmer temperatures could extend America's existing "kidney stone belt", an area of the South East where men have been found to be twice as likely to develop kidney stones as in the North East.
The claims, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, are based on existing data on kidney stone incidence and climate change projections made by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in 2007.
The increase would represent between 1.6 million and 2.2 million cases by 2050, according to the study, potentially pushing annual treatment costs up to around one billion dollars.
"This study is one of the first examples of global warming causing a direct medical consequence for humans," said Margaret Pearle, professor of urology at University of Texas Southwestern and senior author of the paper.
"When people relocate from areas of moderate temperature to areas with warmer climates, a rapid increase in stone risk has been observed. This has been shown in military deployments to the Middle East for instance."
Tom Brikowski, the study's lead author, compared kidney stone rates with UN forecasts of temperature increases and created two mathematical models to predict the impact on future populations.
According to one set of data, the existing "kidney stone belt" comprising southeastern states such as Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee would grow to encompass over half the US population by 2050.
The other model predicts the increase would be concentrated in the upper Midwest.
The study adds that "similar climate-related changes in the prevalence of kidney-stone disease can be expected in other stone belts worldwide."
Posts
visitors since Nov 07