Best of our wild blogs: 12 Mar 10

Red necked stint and Common Redshank
from Mendis' World

Of moths and social media
from The Lazy Lizard's Tales

Opportunistic survey of the bird market in Bali, Indonesia
from Bird Ecology Study Group

Read more!

ASEAN launches International Year of Biodiversity

ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity (ACB) Press Release 11 Mar 10;

Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Deputy Secretary-General Dato’ Misran Karmain today called on ASEAN Member States to exert greater effort in conserving the region’s rich biodiversity. The call was made during the launch of the celebration of the International Year of Biodiversity in Southeast Asia held in Manila on 05 March.

“ASEAN Member States should do more to derive optimum benefits and conserve our natural biological wealth. While we have made some pioneering efforts in the region, we have yet to fully integrate this natural wealth into all aspects of daily life and the economic and social development of our countries,” DSG Karmain told about 100 representatives of national environmental agencies of the 10 ASEAN Member States, the diplomatic community, business, schools, and media who participated in the launch.

Hosted by the ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity (ACB) and the Philippines’ Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), the event is part of the global celebration which is aimed at raising public awareness of the importance of biodiversity and the consequences of its loss. The celebration’s theme is Biodiversity is life. Biodiversity is our life.

Other key speakers were Mr. Demetrio Ignacio, Undersecretary of the Philippines’ Department of Environment and Natural Resources; Mr. Rodrigo U. Fuentes, Executive Director, ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity; H.E. Alistair MacDonald, Head of Delegation, Delegation of the European Union to the Philippines; H.E. Makoto Katsura, Ambassador, Embassy of Japan to the Philippines; Hon. Juan Miguel Zubiri. Senator, Republic of the Philippines (represented by Atty. Dave Torres); Dr. Vann Monyneath, Chairman of the ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity’s Governing Board; and Dr. Filemon Uriarte, Jr., Executive Director of the ASEAN Foundation. A videotaped message Dr. Ban Ki-moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations, was also shown.

According to DSG Karmain, the celebration holds a special significance for ASEAN. “At almost every event pertaining to ASEAN’s natural heritage, we often hear what I would now call the ASEAN 3-20 Endowment, that is, although occupying only three per cent of the earth’s surface, the ASEAN region contains more than 20 per cent of all known plant, animal and marine species, most of which are found nowhere else in the world. The region is home to three mega-diverse countries (Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines), one-third or 284,000 square kilometres of all known coral reefs in the world, 35 per cent of the world’s coastal mangrove forests, among others,” he added.

DSG Karmain highlighted the theme “Green ASEAN” and the region’s efforts at embarking on building one community for all ASEAN Member States through a road map adopted by the ASEAN leaders in 2009. “We expect this theme to lay the basis for an environmentally sustainable ASEAN Community with our rich natural biological diversity leading our quest for sustainable economic growth and social development,” he said.

DSG Karmain also called on the ASEAN Member States to pledge stronger support to the ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity, the intergovernmental organization that facilitates collaboration for biodiversity conservation among the 10 ASEAN countries.

At the launch, the ASEAN Deputy Secretary-General awarded the ASEAN Heritage Parks certificate to the Philippines recognizing the Mount Kitanglad Range Natural Park in Mindanao as the 28th and newest ASEAN Heritage Park in Southeast Asia. The award was received on behalf of the Government of the Philippines by DENR Undersecretary Ignacio.

Undersecretary Ignacio said that “with this recognition, the Philippines is now home to three ASEAN Heritage Parks – Mt. Apo Natural Park in Davao, Mt. Iglit-Baco in Mindoro, and now, Mt. Kitanglad in Bukidnon. This reinforces the fact that despite its relatively small size, our country is home to an astonishing range of biodiversity. The Philippines stands out in the region in terms of richness of biodiversity as it cradles a treasure trove of plant, bird, marine, insect and other animal species. In fact, it is one of the region’s mega-diverse countries, along with Indonesia and Malaysia.”

Ignacio said that award is timely as it was given during the International Year of Biodiversity. He called on all ASEAN citizens to join the world in celebrating life on earth and the value of biodiversity.

The launch of the International Year of Biodiversity also featured the formal call for nominations for ASEAN Champions of Biodiversity – a recognition program that will award outstanding biodiversity conservation and advocacy projects by corporations, youth and media.

ACB and the Protected Areas and Wildlife Bureau presented the ASEAN Regional Clearing-House Mechanism and the Philippine Clearing-House Mechanism, which are both aimed at building strong biodiversity information networks.

A Media Forum on Ecotourism and Biodiversity featuring experts from the ASEAN region capped the launch.

Read more!

Gentle threats won’t save the sea turtles in Malaysia

The Star 12 Mar 10;

THE solution is obvious if we really want to save the turtles from extinction, “WWF: Stop eating turtle eggs to save species from extinction” (The Star, March 11). Hit people where it hurts them most – their pockets. And if they value their physical freedom too, put them behind bars for an appreciable period.

If we simply tell people to stop consuming eggs, will that actually make them do so? No, we are Malaysians. Sometimes our gastronomic pleasures overrule what is right or good for us.

I will be the first to admit that when I was a child, turtle eggs were a delicacy and a trip to the east coast is not complete without buying scores of these eggs for our own consumption or for giving away as presents to other members of the family or friends. Sometimes, we would have relatives who lived near the Perak coastal areas who would visit us and bring these eggs as gifts.

After a long absence, our family has resumed trips to the east coast during the school holidays. These eggs are openly on sale. The sad thing is that the vendors are aware that they are doing something illegal.

In the period between being a child and growing up, I have been made aware about these turtles. They have travelled thousands of miles to lay their eggs on our shores, the survival rates for these eggs is very low and many of these turtles die after being caught in fishing nets and the species is dying out.

When I hear people singing praises about the delicate flavour of these eggs, I am appalled. These people are either unaware of the plight of the turtles or could not be bothered.

Thus, we need to raise awareness about the turtles and other endangered species. We need proper and strict enforcement, which Malaysians know is a terrible failing on our part. I recall an incident in Sarawak where turtle eggs were served at an official function. Despite reports that this was a terrible practice, no one was brought to book.

We need adequate punishment. Impose a fine and imprisonment for selling these eggs and also have a similar fine and jail sentence for those buying them. Do not imagine that kind words and pleas, or gentle threats, will make the Malaysian gourmand alter his eating habits. He won’t, but a hefty punishment will.

MARIAM MOKHTAR,
Ipoh.

Read more!

Philippines coral reefs face new El Nino threat

Ellalyn B. De Vera, Manila Bulletin 11 Mar 10;

An international conservation group warned Thursday that the current El Niño episode may have adverse effects on the recovering corals reefs in the country.

Gregg Yan, information, education and communications officer of the World Wide Fund for Nature Philippines (WWF-Philippines), noted that during the 1997-1998 El Niño event, Apo Reef in Occidental Mindoro suffered heavily from increased sea surface temperatures.

“These coral reefs damaged by bleaching are still recovering, particularly in Apo Reef,” Yan said in an interview.

“It is possible that the bleaching of corals could be repeated because of the current El Niño episode, but this would not be as strong as the impact of the 1997-1998 El Niño. However, the present phenomenon will affect the recovery of the corals that were damaged during the El Niño that happened more than 10 years ago,” he clarified.

Earlier reports showed that the 1997-1998 El Niño caused a decrease in the live coral cover nationwide by about 49 percent due to the coral bleaching event associated with the warming of sea water surface.

Yan explained that the localized rise in oceanic temperatures have a detrimental effect on corals, most of which rely on symbiotic algae, a single-celled organism, living within their tissues that help augment their feeding mechanisms and other processes for their survival.

“This (symbiotic algae) is what gives corals their ‘color’ because save for certain species like organ pipe coral, blue coral, sun coral and some others, most corals are white,” Yan said.

“When water temperatures rise, most corals react by expelling their symbiotic algae—in effect, bleaching themselves,” he added.

He said most "bleached" coral species could survive from several weeks to months, depending on the availability of plankton as their food.

However, with the lack or absence of their nutrients and symbiotes (food), corals eventually wither or die.

“Once this happens, algae can grow on the dead coral skeletons, choking off entire coral heads,” Yan pointed out.

He said a single square kilometer of healthy coral reef can produce approximately 30 to 40 metric tons of seafood annually.

“When the majority of corals die out, this dwindles to 10, five, or three tons, sometimes even less. Again, El Niño can rob us of food and livelihood,” he said.

Based on the 2002 Reefs at Risk in Southeast Asia (RRSEA) report published by the World Resources Institute (WRI), it estimated that the sustainable value of Southeast Asia’s coral reef fisheries is estimated at US$2.4 billion annually.

The Philippines has a total economic value from coral reef fisheries estimated at US$1.1 billion annually. The country ranks second in the region following Indonesia with US$1.6 billion annually.

The report also noted that Indonesia and the Philippines are among the world's largest archipelagos containing 77 percent of the region's coral reefs and nearly 80 percent of all the threatened reefs.

However, the 1997-1998 El Niño episode triggered the largest worldwide coral bleaching occurrence in history.

In Southeast Asia, an estimated 18 percent of the region's coral reefs were damaged or destroyed.

The remaining coral reefs in El Nido in Palawan were down to 5 to 10 percent due to the coral bleaching even in 1997-1998.

Yan explained that colder water surface carries with it nutrients from the depths of the ocean causes a “jump-start” of natural oceanic processes.

“When the warm water shifts to the west, colder water takes its place, re-channeling nutrients in a natural process called ‘upwelling.’”

“But this stops with El Niño — when the shift of warm to cold water weakens immensely. No nutrients means no food for our food - and no income for anyone,” Yan said.

The 27,469-hectare Apo Reef was one of the network of corals that was severely damaged by the El Niño phenomenon in 1998 due to raised ocean temperatures.

In 2007, fishing ban was implemented around Apo Reef, the largest coral reef in the Philippines and the second largest contiguous reef in the world after the Great Barrier Reef.

“WWF has been spearheading initiatives to help local communities adapt to a changing climate. To prepare the residents of Sablayan, Occidental Mindoro for sea level rise, oceanic acidification, salt water intrusion, coral bleaching and other climate effects,” Yan said.

WWF has partnered with Cebu Pacific for the “Bright Skies for Every Juan” program where passengers who book CEB tickets online will be given the option to donate to the WWF-led Mindoro climate adaptation project.

Read more!

Indonesian Ministry Offers Reprieve for Companies Operating Outside Environmental Law

Fidelis E Satriastanti, Jakarta Globe 11 Mar 10;

Those companies that are breaking the law by operating without an environmental assessment audit will be given a second chance to get their documents in order or face legal sanctions under a planned ministerial regulation, an official said on Thursday.

Ilyas Asaad, a deputy to the environment minister for environmental compliance, said a ministerial regulation currently being prepared would target companies that did not possess an environmental impact analysis, better known as an Amdal.

It has been a requirement since the 1990s for all businesses to carry out an environmental impact analysis before applying for a business permit .

“It’s no secret that thousands of companies already operating don’t have an Amdal. The new regulation is needed to fix this mess,” Ilyas said. “Companies that don’t have an Amdal will be required to undergo an audit to obtain their environmental assessment documents.”

The regulation will give companies until Oct. 3, 2011, to submit their Environmental Evaluation or Management Document, which will be based on the results of their environmental audit.

“If the companies do not comply and fail to conduct the audit by that time, their business will be considered illegal and the owners could face criminal charges,” Ilyas said.

Rhino Subagyo, executive director of the Indonesian Center for Environmental Law, said the ministerial regulation would create controversy because an environmental impact analysis should be carried out before a business permit was issued.

“An Amdal should be applied for during the first stage [prior to getting a permit]; that’s the law,” Rhino said. “If not, it means these companies are operating outside the law. So, the right action should be sanctions instead of giving them new documents to fill in.”

The government, he said, should have enforced the environmental audit requirements.

“An Amdal is for measuring environmental impact, it can’t be replaced by these new documents because any damage would have already occurred. So, the best thing is just to go straight to environmental audits and legal sanctions,” he said.

Business Group Backs Green Proposal
Fidelis E Satriastanti, Jakarta Globe 16 Mar 10;

An entrepreneurs’ organization on Tuesday expressed support for the government’s plan to issue a regulation that would strictly enforce compliance with environmental requirements.

The regulation, proposed by the State Ministry for the Environment, is aimed at companies that have already started operating but have not submitted their environmental impact analysis documents (Amdal), which consist of data that measures how much business activities are affecting the environment.

Based on the 1997 Environmental Law, an Amdal is required by the government from anybody starting a business. But the law was poorly carried out, as violators were not legally liable if they failed to comply.

Under the new green law, the 2009 Environmental Protection and Management Law, companies have been given a chance to conduct environmental audits within two years.

“I don’t think that we [entrepreneurs] would have any problems if there are going to be any environmental audits. If it’s the regulation, then we will comply with it,” said Erwin Aksa, chairman of the Indonesian Young Entrepreneurs Association (Hipmi).

Erwin said entrepreneurs were aware that the Amdal was mandatory, but the lack of government monitoring resulted in poor compliance.

“The government should have been very firm,” he said. “Basically, we know the Amdal is mandatory but monitoring is not our role. It’s in the government’s hands, and we just follow it.”

Asep Warlan Yusuf, an environmental law expert from Bandung’s Parahyangan University, said the new green law were not meant to replace the Amdal’s role as an initial requirement for businesses.

“The issue here is that we have plenty of businesses that have started without an Amdal, so we need to require them to undergo an environmental audit in order to see how far their activities have been affecting the environment,” Asep said.

Because the government could not just close down companies that do not have an Amdal, the 2009 law was needed, Asep said.

“Let’s be realistic here. The government could not just shut down all of these companies,” he said.

“They may have broken some procedure, but that does not automatically mean that they have damaged the environment.”

Read more!

'Biodegradable' plastic bags may not be as eco-friendly as thought

"Biodegradable" plastic bags used by major supermarkets do not break down as quickly as believed and may not be as environmentally-friendly as they sound, according to Government-funded research.
The Telegraph 11 Mar 10;

A study into "oxo-degradable" plastics, often labelled as degradable or biodegradable, found there was uncertainty about their impact on the natural environment.

The carrier bags, bin bags and flexible packaging, made from common plastics with small amounts of chemicals to speed up their breakdown, are also not suitable for recycling with other plastics, reuse or composting, the research by Loughborough University found.

In the wake of the study funded by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, ministers called on the industry not to claim the plastics were better for the environment than more conventional ones.

And the Co-operative said it would not be using carrier bags made from that type of plastic in its stores in future.

Oxo-degradable plastics contain additives to help them degrade into smaller pieces more quickly with the help of heat or light.

They then have to biodegrade, a process caused by microbes.

The report said adding the metal compounds to the plastics did not improve their environmental performance and ''potentially gives rise to certain negative effects''.

Researchers said it was hard to estimate how long the plastics would take to degrade, though somewhere between two and five years has been suggested if they are left out in the open UK environment.

But they do not degrade in the absence of oxygen so are unlikely to break down in landfill, where much of the plastic would end up.

And the process of biodegrading, which can only happen once the plastic has initially broken into smaller fragments, takes place slowly – many times slower than for compostable bags.

One of the claims made for oxo-degradable plastics is they reduce litter as they are biodegradable, but the report said they would still be lying around for several years before they broke down in the environment.

And there are concerns about the impact the degraded fragments of plastic could have in the natural world, potentially being consumed and building up in insects, animals and fish.

The report said there was no evidence either way as to whether this posed a problem for wildlife.

The study warned that consumers may be confused by labelling the products as ''biodegradable'' and may put them in with compostable materials – even though they take much longer to break down.

The additives also make the plastics unsuitable for recycling with mainstream plastic packaging and for reuse, particularly for long term storage because they will begin to disintegrate.

The report called for the description of the plastics as ''biodegradable'' to be replaced with a greater explanation of how exactly it will break down, or the correct method of disposal.

Environment minister Dan Norris said: ''The research today clearly shows us that consumers risk being confused by some claims made about oxo-degradable plastics.

''As these plastics cannot be composted, the term 'biodegradable' can cause confusion.

''Incorrect disposal of oxo-degradable plastics has the potential to negatively affect both recycling and composting facilities.

''We hope this research will discourage manufacturers and retailers from claiming that these materials are better for the environment than conventional plastics.''

Iain Ferguson, environment manager for the Co-operative Food, said: ''We have already decided to stop purchasing carrier bags with the oxo-biodegradable additive and with the support of our customers and staff, we have reduced carrier bag numbers by 60% in the last three years.''

Defra said bags and other products made from compostable plastic are tested to make sure they are able to bio-degrade within six months, and are marked with logos showing they are suitable for composting.

Read more!

Endangered listing eyed for US loggerhead turtles

Jay Lindsay, Associated Press Yahoo News 11 Mar 10;

BOSTON – The federal government on Wednesday recommended an endangered-species listing for the loggerhead turtles in U.S. waters, a decision that could lead to tighter restrictions on fishing and other maritime trades.

The massive, nomadic sea turtles have been listed since 1978 as threatened, a step below endangered, but federal scientists proposed ratcheting up the designation after reviewing the state of the species.

Researchers said primary threats to the loggerheads include injury and death from fishing gear and damage to their nesting areas.

The joint proposal by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's fisheries division and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is not a final decision. If approved, it puts loggerheads on track for an endangered listing by the summer of 2011. The proposal now enters a public comment period.

Environmental groups who'd been pushing an endangered listing said the proposal was a "turning point" they hope will lead to greater turtle protections.

"I think it's huge day for loggerhead sea turtles," said Elizabeth Griffin, a marine wildlife scientist at Oceana. "I think it really draws attention to the fact these turtles are not doing well and more needs to be done to protect them."

No one really knows how many loggerheads there are, or how many are being killed by fishing gear or other activities. A species doesn't need falling numbers to be endangered, it can get the listing if it's shown to be threatened by one of five factors, such as disease or "manmade factors affecting its continued existence."

Griffin cites a 40 percent drop in the number of nesting females in Florida over the last decade as evidence of trouble. But the Fisheries Survival Fund, an East Coast scallopers group, said in a letter early this month that nesting beach surveys can't provide good evidence of decline because they measure only mature females, who take at least 30 years to reach breeding age.

Shaun Gehan, an attorney for the Fisheries Survival Fund, said an endangered listing is unneeded for a species there's no evidence is in danger of extinction. If new protections are mandated for the turtle, it could affect not only fishermen, but maritime traffic, coastal development and waterfront use, Gehan said.

"We are extremely disappointed that they've taken this approach," he said.

Loggerheads are named for their large heads, which contain potent jaws that can crush the hard shells of prey such as conch. The turtles are about the size of a fist when they hatch and make a frenzied dash to the surf. But they typically grow to more than three feet in length and 250 pounds. The animal can log thousands of miles as it travels across oceans.

Barbara Schroeder, national sea turtle coordinator for NOAA's fisheries division, said the biggest threats to the North Pacific loggerhead include damage to primary nesting sites, which are mainly in Japan, as well as accidental snaring of the turtles in fishing gear.

Andrea Treece of San Francisco-based Center for Biological Diversity said the turtles get hooked by Hawaiian longline fishermen targeting swordfish and tuna and can be injured or drowned.

On the East Coast, the main threat to turtles is gear from the region's various fisheries, Schroeder said.

Gehan said that scallopers have developed dredges to keep the turtles out with a chain mat that covers the opening. Critics say the dredges keep turtles out, but also crush them, though survival fund officials say there's no evidence of that.

A primary benefit of the endangered status would be increased public pressure on protecting the species, Griffin said. But the government would also have to determine "critical habitats," such as where the turtles reproduce or forage. Such places could be subject to additional protections for the turtles, including restrictions on maritime development or fishing.

A balance needs to be found to help a species Griffin called "the ambassadors of our oceans" because they travel great distances and can be seen up close when they venture on land.

"I think that really gives people an appreciation for our turtles and marine life," she said.

Read more!

48 Hawaii-only species given endangered listing

Audrey McAvoy, Associated Press Google News 11 Mar 10;

HONOLULU — Honeycreeper birds, a fly and several ferns, trees and shrubs found only on a Hawaiian island were among 48 species added Wednesday to the endangered species list, boosting the number of such classifications by the Obama administration from two to 50.

In the decision, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar said the government would also be declaring more than 40 square miles on Kauai as critical habitat for these species, a move that would help the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service adopt a new approach to protecting imperiled species by restoring health to the broad ecosystems they inhabit.

Previously, the service tried to protect endangered species by adopting separate plans to revive their respective habitats. This led to disjointed and overlapping efforts, particularly in Hawaii, which has more endangered species than any other state.

"This is more of holistic approach," said Fish and Wildlife Service spokesman Ken Foote.

Suzanne Case, Hawaii executive director for The Nature Conservancy, commended the ecosystem approach, saying it would enable officials to focus on battling large scale threats like weeds and feral pigs.

Two honeycreeper birds, a fly, and 45 ferns, trees and shrubs were given federal protections Wednesday.

The Interior Department announced preliminary plans in October 2008 to list the 48 species and establish critical habitat for them. In the interim, it collected public comment and prepared to make the rule final.

The Center for Biological Diversity called the classification long overdue, noting some of the species have been candidates for listing for more than 20 years. The Tucson, Ariz.-based environmentalist group filed a petition to list the 48 Kauai species in 2004 and then followed with a lawsuit two years later.

WildEarth Guardians, a Santa Fe, N.M.-based group, filed its own lawsuit in January because the federal government was taking longer than the law required to issue a decision.

Like many of Hawaii's endangered species, birds, insects and plants on Kauai — a mostly rural island northwest of Honolulu — are under threat from invasive species infiltrating their habitats.

Feral pigs burrow holes in the forest while looking for food, creating places for still water where mosquitoes breed and spread diseases that kill native birds. Sheep devour native forest trees that rare birds rely on for food.

Lacking natural predators, populations of these mammals have exploded around the islands. Invasive weeds are also edging out native plants.

One of the newly listed birds is the akikiki or Kauai creeper, a small, dark gray and olive honeycreeper in the Alakai Wilderness Preserve that eats insects and spiders. Only some 1,300 of the birds left, down 80 percent compared to the 1960s. Its listing partner, the green and yellow-feathered Kauai akepa, or akekee, numbers just 3,500, down from 8,000 in 2000.

Almost all — or 98 percent — of the land designated as critical habitat is already categorized as such for other endangered or threatened species. Most of the land is owned by the state.

The Interior Department isn't designating a critical habitat for the loulu palm because the plant is popular among collectors and officials did not want to reveal the location of its habitat.

Read more!

Japan to fight global trade ban on Atlantic bluefin tuna

Kyoko Hasegawa Yahoo News 11 Mar 10;

TOKYO (AFP) – Japan vowed Thursday to fight a global trade ban on Atlantic bluefin tuna, the pricey mainstay of sushi and sashimi, as Europe and the United States step up moves to protect the species.

The world's largest consumer of bluefin said it would ignore a global trade ban that could be decided this month on the species, which marine ecologists say faces the threat of extinction after decades of industrial-scale fishing.

Washington and Brussels have pledged to back a vote to list the ocean predator as endangered, alongside the panda, tiger and great apes, under the UN Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).

Japan said Thursday it will hold firm to its position and take a "reservation," or opt out of the CITES, or Washington Convention, listing of the species as it has done for humpback and minke whales in the past.

"Basically, the Washington Convention's purpose is to protect endangered species from extinction, but I don't think bluefin tuna faces such a situation," said top government spokesman Hirofumi Hirano.

"Japan will claim its unchanged position that resource control should take place" instead of a trade ban, he said ahead of the meeting of 175 CITES member countries from Saturday until March 25 in Doha, Qatar.

Last week the Japanese vice fisheries minister, Masahiko Yamada, said that "Japan will inevitably have to take a reservation".

Under CITES rules, a country that takes a reservation on a species within 90 days of its listing "shall be treated as a state not a party to the present convention with respect to trade in the species concerned."

Elsewhere in Tokyo, at the huge Tsukiji Fish Market, Japanese tuna traders also voiced their opposition to the looming trade ban, which will require the support of two-thirds of CITES member countries.

"Protect tuna in the markets!" and "We oppose a decision at the Washington Convention" yelled fishmongers with blue headbands, punching the air with their fists, at the world's largest fish market, on Tokyo Bay.

"I don't think it's appropriate to discuss bluefin tuna in the forum for endangered species, because you can preserve the species with appropriate resource control," said Tadao Ban, president of the tuna traders' association at Tsukiji market, which moves more than 2,000 tons of seafood a day.

Bluefin tuna has sold here for as much as 175,000 dollars for a 232 kilogram (511 pound) fish. A small serving of "otoro" or fatty underbelly tuna meat can cost 2,000 yen (22 dollars) at high-end Tokyo restaurants.

Japan has argued that tuna fishing should be regulated through quotas set by other international bodies such as the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission and the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission.

"Japan has accepted cuts in its quota for the catches. It's unfair to introduce a trade ban," Ban said.

Environmentalists argue that quota limits have been systematically exceeded as high-tech fishing fleets, using spotter aircraft and giant freezer ships, have reduced East Atlantic and Mediterranean bluefin stocks by 80 percent.

The Japanese tuna traders fired back and charged that the bigger threats to fish stocks are general overfishing by fleets using so-called encircling nets that indiscriminately destroy marine life.

"What's more important is to ban overfishing and the bycatch of tuna by large scale fishing vessels with encircling nets, run mostly by Chinese and Taiwanese fishermen," Ban said.

"We, the traders and the fishermen, all suffer from overfishing.

"European and American people should know that the canned tuna they consume on a daily basis comes from overfishing by these encircling net vessels for bonito. It's said that 20 to 30 percent of their haul are young tuna fish."

Read more!

Sushi Chef, Restaurant Charged With Serving Endangered Whale

Jeremy Pelofsky, PlanetArk 12 Mar 10;

A California sushi chef and the restaurant in which he worked have been charged with illegally serving meat from an endangered Sei whale, the Justice Department said on Thursday.

Kiyoshiro Yamamoto, 45, and the parent company of the popular restaurant The Hump in Santa Monica were charged late on Wednesday with violating the Marine Mammal Protection Act which makes it illegal to sell any kind of whale meat.

The case stemmed from informants who ordered whale meat at the restaurant in October 2009 and evolved into a sting operation by U.S. wildlife and customs officials who observed whale meat being served at the restaurant last week.

"Someone should not be able to walk into a restaurant and order a plate of an endangered species," U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. said in a statement.

According to an affidavit filed with the criminal complaint, two confidential informants last week ordered whale meat during a sting operation while wildlife and customs officers sat at the sushi bar observing.

The sushi chef went to a car in the parking lot and brought a package of meat back into the restaurant where he opened it at the sushi bar and sliced the meat to serve, according to the document.

After initially ignoring questions from a customer at the sushi bar about the meat, "a customer to the right of the (official) then asked the sushi chef about the meat product, and the sushi chef quietly said that it was 'whale,'" the affidavit said.

The plate of whale meat was then delivered to the two informants' table.

A lawyer for the restaurant and chef was not immediately available for comment.

The charge carries a penalty of up to one year in prison and fines of up to $100,000 for individuals and $200,000 for organizations.

The case is USA v. Typhoon Restaurant dba The Hump Restaurant and Kiyoshiro Yamamoto, Central District of California.

(Editing by Sandra Maler)

Read more!

Messy habitat helps city frogs

University of Melbourne, Science Alert 12 Mar 10;

A new study has revealed that lizard, snake and frog populations in Melbourne have declined dramatically since human settlement, and in order to conserve our reptiles and amphibians it is the quality, and not just the quantity of habitat that will help maintain biodiversity in our cities.

The findings coincide with the UN's year of biodiversity in 2010, with lead author Dr Andrew Hamer, based at the University of Melbourne, stressing that reptile and frog habitats need be conserved in residential areas by keeping them as natural as possible, even if they are only small areas.

The study analyzed Melbourne's lizard and frog populations from Victorian Government databases, extending almost as far back as European settlement. The work was undertaken by Dr Andrew Hamer and Assoc Prof Mark McDonnell from the Australian Research Centre for Urban Ecology (ARCUE) based at the Royal Botanic Gardens Melbourne and School of Botany, University of Melbourne.

They predicted which species would survive in the greater Melbourne metropolitan area, in order to identify those most sensitive to the creation of urban infrastructure and increases in human population size (urbanization), and therefore potentially at greater risk from future development.

They found that throughout greater Melbourne (up to a 60km radius from the city centre), 81 per cent of the frog species observed in 1850 had a high probability (greater than or equal to 95 per cent) of surviving until 2006. However, only 56 per cent of the reptile species had a high probability of survival. The year 2006 was chosen as the last entry in databases, but researchers note that the trends would be applicable in 2010, if not worse.

Within 10km of Melbourne, populations of reptiles declined further with only 46 per cent of species examined having a high probability of surviving, with frogs doing much better at 86 per cent of species surviving. For example, 53 per cent of skink species have a low probability of surviving because they require natural habitats such as native grassland and rock outcrops.

"Our research suggests that many reptile and frog species have been negatively affected by urbanization,” says Dr Hamer.

“It is essential to keep some native remnant areas which are as structurally complex as possible. This allows small mammals, frogs, lizards and snakes access to fallen logs and vegetation that they need to complete their daily and seasonal activities such as basking, foraging, predator avoidance and nesting.”

Assoc Prof McDonnell notes that large lizards and snakes may be more severely impacted as they require larger areas, encountering road traffic or houses where they may be killed by people or their pets.

“Implementation of the recommendations of the recently published government white paper entitled ‘Securing Our Natural Future’ would assist in slowing the further loss of reptile and frog species. To effectively conserve reptiles and frogs in cities and towns we need to protect remaining habitats and link them with corridors of native vegetation.”

Read more!

UN Year of the Gorilla boosts conservation of the world's most endangered great apes

UNEP 11 Mar 10;

Bonn, 11 March 2010 - The plight of gorillas in danger was brought home to millions through hundreds of Year of the Gorilla articles, interviews, lectures, conferences and films last year - more than through any similar global species campaign. In addition, the UN Year of the Gorilla 2009, generated ? 100,000 for field projects to prevent critically endangered gorilla species from going extinct. The educational and awareness raising campaign was led by the UNEP Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (UNEP/CMS). Member states to the Convention, members of the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA), the Great Apes Survival Partnership (GRASP), conservation bodies, individuals at grass root level and online donations helped to raise these funds,

Elizabeth Mrema, UNEP/CMS Executive Secretary said: "With the support of innovative gorilla projects the UN Year of the Gorilla has created a permanent legacy. Conserving gorillas not only helps safeguarding their habitat, which is shared by us, but it also addresses the major challenges of climate change and poverty."

Protection of gorilla species that face serious risks and their vulnerable ecosystems cannot be achieved without the active involvement of people on the ground. Therefore, the main focus is being placed on the participation of local communities that share gorilla habitat. Improving protection by involving communities and providing staff training, supporting the enforcement of wildlife law, preventing illegal logging and reducing the use of firewood and charcoal are vital to reduce threats to the remaining populations of gorillas in the wild.

Gorillas are threatened with extinction due to habitat destruction through agricultural expansion, mining activities and the exploitation of natural resources, armed conflicts and hunting.

Ian Redmond said: "We depend on gorillas, elephants and other fruit-eating animals to sustain the African rainforests by planting the next generation of trees. Sustainable management of wildlife and other natural resources not only preserves gorilla habitat, but it provides long term livelihoods for people and helps secure the future of the planet."

The ongoing civil war in the Democratic Republic of Congo has caused rural and urban communities to be highly dependent on firewood and charcoal, resulting in the continuous degradation of vegetation and gorilla habitat. As the situation has deteriorated, the more than 500,000 refuges in North Kivu rely heavily on firewood primarily removed from the Virunga National Park, a world heritage site home to the highly endangered mountain gorillas. Only 700 Mountain Gorillas remain in the world, roughly half of them in the Virunga Mountains on the border between Rwanda, Uganda and the Democratic Republic of Congo. A mountain gorilla census is being conducted to obtain accurate data on the current population.

The use of fuel-efficient stoves, sustainably harvested timber and briquettes has helped to contain the damage to the environment. At the same time, tree nurseries have been developed and the trees are being planted in buffer zones around the parks to protect gorilla habitat. Funds raised during a lecture tour in the United States by the UN Ambassador of the Year of the Gorilla, Ian Redmond, will enable the project, run by the Gorilla Organization, to continue through 2010 to combat the loss of important gorilla habitat.

In addition, a campaign helped to reduce illegal charcoal trafficking significantly by use of aerial monitoring of camps for internally displaced people in the war torn Eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. Emergency aid enabled park rangers to continue daily monitoring of gorillas, ensure their protection and remove snares in gorilla habitat. The project is being implemented by the Frankfurt Zoological Society and ICCN, the Congolese park authority.

The Cross River Gorilla, with only 250-300 individuals remaining in the Mbe Mountains, Cross River and Takamanda National Parks on the border between Nigeria and Cameroon, is critically endangered according to the IUCN Red List and one of the 25 most endangered primates on earth. Hunting for bushmeat, expanding infrastructure and demand for farmland have pushed this rarest gorilla sub-species to the brink of extinction.

A community-based anti-poaching project in this region led by the Wildlife Conservation Society has promoted training opportunities of government staff and biologists to help establish and successfully manage new protected areas for Cross River Gorillas. By enforcing existing regulations concerning wildlife management in the mountain range, the presence of park rangers also acts to deter poaching.

The UK based Aspinall Foundation runs two rehabilitation and reintroduction project for Western Lowland Gorillas that have been orphaned through illegal hunting for bushmeat and wildlife trafficking in the Republic of Congo and Gabon. In order to fight commercial poaching and trade in endangered species, government authorities in cooperation with the Aspinall Foundation will strive to increase effectiveness of wildlife law enforcement. The Year of the Gorilla supports the "Project to Apply the Law on Fauna" to reduce the overall level of illegal hunting and trade in the Republic of Congo.

During the Year of the Gorilla, governments, NGOs, zoos, wildlife agencies and individuals staged events in the African range stages, Europe, the Americas, Asia and Australia to educate the wider public on gorillas and the threats they face.

As part of the awareness element of the campaign Ian Redmond visited 10 gorilla range states and reported on the status of the gorilla. A gorilla rapid assessment report, currently prepared by the United Nations Environment Programme , will look more closely into the threats to gorilla populations and will be launched at the CITES conference in Doha, Qatar, on 24 March .

The Convention on Migratory Species organizes annual campaigns to raise awareness of highly endangered flagship species and their habitats while promoting conservation projects at the same time. In 2010, CMS has joined the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) as an official partner of the International Year of Biodiversity declared by the UN General Assembly, to highlight the importance of biodiversity on a global scale. CMS, which has been recognized as CBD's lead partner on issues regarding migratory species, continues to take steps to stress the importance of biodiversity for human well-being and enhance efforts to reduce the current rate of biodiversity loss.

Notes to Editors:

CMS

The Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, also known as the Bonn Convention works for the conservation of a wide array of endangered migratory animals worldwide through the negotiation and implementation of agreements and species action plans. With currently 113 member countries, many of them in Africa, CMS is a fast-growing convention with special importance due to its expertise in the field of migratory species.

More information is available at: www.cms.int

Year of the Gorilla

The Convention declared 2009 the Year of the Gorilla. Partners in this campaign included the Great Apes Survival Partnership (GRASP), in cooperation with UNEP and UNESCO, and the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums (WAZA). 109 out of 116 gorilla keeping zoos world-wide participated in the campaign. The initiative was part of the United Nations Decade of Education for Sustainable Development. Its main objective was to raise awareness and political will to implement the CMS Agreement on the Conservation of Gorillas and their Habitats, a legally binding treaty between gorilla range states.

More information and a selection of videos on this topic on the Year of the Gorilla are available at: www.yog2009.org and www.waza.org/en/site/conservation/2009-year-of-the-gorilla

GRASP

The Great Apes Survival Partnership (GRASP) is an innovative and ambitious project of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) with an immediate challenge - to lift the threat of imminent extinction faced by gorillas, chimpanzees , bonobos and orangutans across their ranges in equatorial Africa and south-east Asia. Partners include great ape range state governments, donor governments, UN agencies, NGOs and the private sector.

www.unep.org/grasp

WAZA

WAZA, the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums, has a mission to guide, encourage and support the zoos, aquariums, and like-minded organizations of the world in animal care and welfare, environmental education, wildlife conservation and environmental research.

The World Association of Zoos and Aquariums is the "unifying" organization for the world zoo and aquarium community. Its members include leading zoos and aquariums, and regional and national Associations of Zoos and Aquariums, as well as some affiliate organizations, such as zoo veterinarians or zoo educators, from all around the world. Together they are 'United for Conservation'.

www.waza.org

Read more!

Meeting on deforestation boosts morale, budget

Elaine Ganley, Associated Press Yahoo News 11 Mar 10;

PARIS – A conference bringing together more than 60 nations Thursday added $1 billion to the fight against deforestation and boosted the morale of those hoping to save the world's forests — a key defense against global warming.

Three months after a morose ending to climate change talks in Copenhagen, the one-day ministerial meeting in Paris attended by heavily forested countries such as Indonesia and those in the Amazon and Congo basins amounted to a confidence-builder for nations wondering what comes next in the battle against deforestation, many delegates said.

"We entered the meeting with $3.5 billion. It went to $4.5 billion (here) and we want to arrive in Oslo with $6 billion," Brazilian Environment Minister Carlos Minc said after the closed-door talks.

A follow-up to the Paris meeting is planned in Oslo, Norway, in May.

Brice Lalonde, who heads climate negotiations for France, said: "We must go on. ... There is a post-Copenhagen landscape where we will be more pragmatic."

The 64 nations agreed to create a core structure of some 10 countries to work on the mechanics of equitably distributing funds and other issues. The idea is to arrive at the U.N. climate talks in Cancun, Mexico, in December with a concrete plan devoted specifically to the critical issue of deforestation.

Efforts to halt that culprit in climate change have bogged down along with the wider goal of reaching a legally binding global agreement to limit greenhouse gas emissions while helping poor nations adapt to, and cope with, climate change.

Thursday's meeting focused on an aspect of a forest program — Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation, or REDD — that was approved at the Copenhagen conference.

REDD Plus, discussed in Paris, is an incentive program based on providing funds to nations working to reduce emissions through good forest governance and protecting biological diversity and the rights of indigenous people.

Reclaiming the forest in many cases entails retraining people whose livelihoods are linked to the forest — or its destruction.

Deforestation — the burning of woodlands or the rotting of felled trees — is thought to account for up to 20 percent of C02 released into the atmosphere — as much as that emitted by all the world's cars, trucks, trains, planes and ships combined.

Due to deforestation from logging, crop-growing and cattle grazing, Indonesia and Brazil have become the world's third- and fourth-largest carbon emitters, after China and the U.S.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy, opening the conference, said defending the world's forests demanded more aggressive funding.

"Those who don't want to do anything are those who don't want to pay," he said. He reiterated his appeal for a tax on financial market transactions worldwide that could be earmarked for a global climate fund.

"Together, we will demonstrate that it is possible to achieve concrete and measurable results, as of this year, starting with ... the fight against deforestation," Sarkozy said. He called the Copenhagen conference "frustrating."

France, Norway and four other countries pledged an initial $3.5 billion to REDD Plus through 2012. The core coordination group established in Paris will, among other things, see where the funds are spent and ensure it is done fairly.

Minc, the Brazilian minister, said: if "we will arrive in Cancun with things that work, we won't repeat the problems of Copenhagen."

Many delegations were seeking a share of the funds and guidance about how to obtain them.

"What we need here are step-by-step guidelines to be followed to access funding," said Wandoso Sisnanto, an adviser for Indonesia's Forest Ministry.

"After Copenhagen, we have had no chance to talk ... and now we can work with each other, coordinate. It's really worthwhile to again build trust among us," he said.

Many funding programs are in the works, and individual countries are moving ahead with their own programs to fight deforestation and educate local populations who live off forests — estimated at more than 1 billion worldwide — to do so in a sustainable way.

Progress seen on forest scheme, Germany to join
Richard Ingham Yahoo News 11 Mar 10;

PARIS (AFP) – Around 60 countries pushed ahead on Thursday with a multi-billion-dollar scheme to reduce climate-changing emissions from deforestation, to which Germany added its support, British minister Joan Ruddock said on Thursday.

"There was a tremendous mood of determination to get things done. I regard this as quite a breakthrough, actually," Ruddock, who is secretary of state for energy and climate change, told AFP in a phone interview.

Around 60 countries, gathering donor economies and poor countries with large tropical forests, met for the one-day conference in Paris.

It aimed at fleshing out an initiative launched on the sidelines of the UN climate summit in December.

Between 12-20 percent of worldwide carbon emissions come from loss of trees and conversion of forest land to agriculture.

The scheme was launched in Copenhagen by Australia, Britain, France, Japan, Norway and the United States, which pledged a total of 3.5 billion dollars from 2010 to 2012.

Under it, poor tropical countries would be financially rewarded for preserving their forests, rather than chopping them down for logging or farming.

The Paris talks were the first step towards deciding how to disburse the money -- a process fraught with questions as to how to determine which forests deserved to be protected, how they would be conserved and how to enforce transparency, help indigenous forest dwellers and battle corruption.

Countries agreed on Thursday to set up a steering committee of four developing and four developed countries and establish a "very slim" secretariat, said Ruddock.

They also determined to get an overview of what is already happening in this realm to avoid overlap with existing bilateral or multilateral help.

A further meeting will be held in Oslo in May to assess progress.

Germany also announced it would join the aid effort, she said.

"Germany said they would also be joining and would be providing 20-30 percent of their fast-start money for forestry," she said, adding that the amount was not specified as the German government was "in the middle of a budget process."

"Fast-start money" refers to funding for 2010 to 2012, pledged by rich countries under the so-called Copenhagen Accord to assist poor nations fighting climate change.

Around 30 billion dollars was promised in total under "fast start," with a vaguer goal of mustering around 100 billion dollars annually by the decade's end.

Although it was launched at the Copenhagen summit, the forestry initiative technically lies outside the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the much-troubled arena for dealing with global warming and its impacts.

This means the scheme can be administered without the need for consensus under the 192-nation UNFCCC, an issue that has bedevilled efforts to build a worldwide treaty on climate change after 2012.

In a welcoming speech at the conference, President Nicolas Sarkozy spoke bitterly of the Copenhagen summit as "an example of bad management" and said the process of negotiating the envisioned treaty had to change.

More than 120 heads of state or government, arriving for the meeting's climax, were handed a draft text that Sarkozy likened to "volapuk," an invented 19th-century language translatable as "gobbledegook."

With fiasco looming, around two dozen countries haggled through the final night to craft a compromise, touted as a platform for action.

The Copenhagen Accord would limit warming to two degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) but does not detail when or how this goal should be achieved nor commit signatories to binding pledges. Nor has it been endorsed by a plenary of UNFCCC members.

Sarkozy admitted the outcome was "frustrating" but argued that the rapid progress yielded by a small group in the space of a few concentrated hours was revealing.

"These working methods have to change... who can believe that this can work?" he said, calling for a "representative" group of countries to do the essential haggling before the global forum becomes involved.

Forest and donor countries stump up to reduce emissions
WWF 11 Mar 10;

Paris, France: Forest and donor countries have kicked off an important joint process which could speed up action to reduce the 20 per cent of global carbon emissions linked to deforestation and forest degradation.

Despite no formal agreement to achieve Reduced Emissions from forest Degradation and Deforestation (REDD) being reached at the United Nations conference on climate change last December, key nations met yesterday in Paris in a process being called the REDD+ Partnership Process.

The initiative, which brings together major forest countries and donor nations, is hosted by Norway and France. Broad agreement has already been reached on principles and safeguards of REDD+ and according to WWF, the initiative represents a critical opportunity to mobilise early action and financing for national REDD+ programmes.

“Slowing deforestation would help the world significantly cut global emissions,” said WWF Forest Carbon Initiative Leader Chris Elliott.

“That’s an opportunity we simply cannot ignore as any delay in reducing emissions only makes it more difficult to limit global warming to well below 2 degrees C.”

“The REDD+ Partnership process must build real momentum for countries to move ahead with REDD+,” said Elliott, “It is important this remains an open and inclusive process.”

Countries have signalled their commitment to REDD+, with many developing countries, including Brazil and Indonesia, announcing targets for reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation. In Copenhagen, $3.5 billion was pledged for REDD+ by Australia, France, Japan, Norway, the UK and the US.

“With funding already flowing for REDD+, it is vital that benefits for people and biodiversity are a fundamental part of this effort to integrate forests into the climate change solution,” said Elliott. “REDD+ is not only about the carbon stored in forests and so we must ensure there are positive social and environmental impacts as REDD+ becomes a reality.”

Read more!

Forest project first hailed as REDD model now considered 'carbon scam'

Noel Kempff project is 'saving the forest' by forcing destruction elsewhere
Forest conservation project in Bolivia proves that unless a nation as a whole cuts deforestation, individual carbon offset schemes are worthless
Fred Pearce, guardian.co.uk 11 Mar 10;

It is the ultimate greenwash nightmare. A tough international deal to curb emissions of greenhouse gases is passed in Mexico later this year. Companies then meet their targets not by cutting their own pollution but by buying into hundreds of forest "conservation" projects round the world. But those projects then fail to deliver real benefits for forests or staunch the flow of carbon into the atmosphere.

Some big-time green groups prosper but the planet burns.

Exhibit A in this doomsday scenario is a 14-year-old forest conservation project in Bolivia called the Noel Kempff Climate Action Project, one of the world's largest schemes to fix carbon in protected forests. It is the brainchild of the US green group The Nature Conservancy and industrial partners, including the oil company BP and America's largest burner of coal, American Electric Power.

The Noel Kempff project is hailed by The Nature Conservancy as a model for the operation of Redd (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation) – the international plan to allow countries and companies to offset their carbon emissions by investing in preventing the destruction of forests.

Like much else, negotiations on Redd stalled in Copenhagen last December. But it is still on the agenda for agreement when talks resume in Cancun next December.

Some think such projects could scupper Redd though. Last autumn Greenpeace dubbed the Neol Kempff project a "carbon scam".

The $10m project, launched back in 1996, doubled the size of an existing national park and sought to project more than 800,000 hectares of forest, while testing the idea of running a forest as a verifiable carbon sink. It currently employs 27 rangers. With deforestation thought responsible for an estimate 17% of carbon emissions, the stakes are high.

The problem, however, is summed up in one word: leakage. That is jargon for what happens when the loggers put their chainsaws in the back of a pickup, drive down the road to the next forest, and resume activities. In other words, can protecting one place prevent the forces of forest destruction from simply moving elsewhere?

This is hard to do. Since the start of the Noel Kempff project, deforestation rates in Bolivia have gone up. So the argument is that one-off carbon offsetting projects do not deliver real benefits to the atmosphere unless governments undertake much wider efforts to curb deforestation.

For this reason Greenpeace is not alone in believing that Redd should only compensate at the national level. No awarding of carbon credits for "sub-national" projects like Noel Kempff. In other words: unless a nation as a whole cuts deforestation, then nobody gets any carbon credits. Only that way can you stop leakage wrecking it.

But groups such as the Nature Conservancy strongly disagree. They have a clear institutional interest. Their main activity is buying or managing land for conservation. It says there are good reasons for backing sub-national projects and has lobbied hard to ensure they stay in the UN's plans.

The Nature Conservancy says "national-scale accounting is the ultimate goal" of Redd. "However, a transition period should be allowed in which sub-national or project-scale activities can generate credits for sale in compliance markets."

It adds that "this type of activity will need to be accomplished at a much larger scale to make a significant difference to greenhouse gas emissions". And that is where the difference arises. The Nature Conservancy thinks sub-national projects will result in "learning by doing"; its critics think they will fatally undermine the whole enterprise.

While hailed as a model, the Noel Kempff project does not augur well for being able to measure carbon in forests. By 2004, the corporate partners in the project had reported offsets of 7.4m tonnes of CO2. But in 2005 a new evaluation cut that figure to just over 1m.

But even this could turn out to be an over-estimate. The 2005 audit shaved 16% off claimed offsets to account for leakage. Greenpeace cites a report from Winrock International, a non-profit consultancy, saying the long-term leakage figure could be much higher.

How would this play out in the carbon markets? Under the Noel Kempff plan, 51% of the emissions reductions achieved by the project can be claimed as offsets by corporate partners like AEP and BP. The remaining 49% goes to the Bolivian government. The original plan was to sell the emissions reductions on the Chicago Climate Exchange, which trades in voluntary carbon offsets.

Both AEP and BP told the Guardian this week that they had not offset any of their emissions as a result of the Noel Kempff project. BP said: "The project has not yet generated any carbon credits and BP has received no credits from it."

AEP, which burns 77m tonnes of coal annually in the US, uses the project to burnish its environmental image. It advertises its support for the Noel Kempff project on its website as part of its corporate citizenship activities.

It says that the company is "committed to combating tropical deforestation and putting in place criteria to ensure that forest offsets can be part of the toolkit for addressing global climate change". Both BP and AEP referred questions about the progress of the project to The Nature Conservancy.

It says Greenpeace's description of the Noel Kempff project as a scam was "an attempt to discredit emissions offsets that businesses might claim by supporting such efforts in the future". Rather, it says, the project was a pioneering activity from which much has been learned. AEP agrees. It says: "The reduction in the offsets from the project should be viewed as a validation, not criticism, of the project as it demonstrates that [The Nature Conservancy] and the project funders were willing to adjust the offset amounts based on improved science."

But have the right lessons been learned? Better carbon accounting is of course a good thing. But if the Noel Kempff project is truly a model for a future world of carbon markets rooting in rainforest conservation projects, it suggests real problems ahead. If companies with environmental reputations to defend can become bogged down in charges of greenwash, what about the bad guys?

Read more!

More Americans Say Global Warming Exaggerated: Poll

Richard Cowan, PlanetArk 12 Mar 10;

A growing number of Americans, nearly half the country, think global warming worries are exaggerated, as more people also doubt that scientific warnings of severe environmental fallout will ever occur, according to a new Gallup poll.

The new doubts come as President Barack Obama is pressuring the Congress to produce legislation significantly cutting smokestack emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases blamed for climate change problems.

With congressional elections less than eight months away, many lawmakers are hesitant to take on a controversial energy and environment bill, especially if voter interest is waning.

Amid eroding public sentiment and in response to escalating attacks from global warming skeptics, the Union of Concerned Scientists on Thursday released a letter they said was signed by more than 2,000 climate scientists and economists, including some Nobel prize winners, urging the Senate to pass a bill.

"The strength of the science on climate change compels us to warn the nation about the growing risk of irreversible consequences ... as temperatures rise further, the scope and severity of global warming impacts will continue to accelerate," they wrote.

The Gallup poll, conducted March 4-7, indicates a reversal in public sentiment on an issue that not only involves the environment, but also economic and national security concerns.

Forty-eight percent of Americans now believe that the seriousness of global warming is exaggerated, up from 41 percent last year and 31 percent in 1997, when Gallup first asked the question.

The result comes on the heels of well-publicized reports that some of the details of scientific findings that went into international global warming reports were either flawed or exaggerated.

But supporters of an aggressive global effort to keep the Earth's temperatures from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial levels argue that while scientists need to be more fastidious in their research, the overwhelming evidence supports the theory that a warming planet will lead to dangerous ice melting, flooding, drought, refugee problems and the spread of disease.

The United States has made a non-binding pledge to the world to seek a 17 percent reduction in carbon emissions by 2020, from 2005 levels, mostly by switching to more expensive alternative energy, such as wind and solar power.

But without legislation from Congress, that goal is unlikely to be met.

The Gallup poll of slightly more than 1,014 adults has a sampling error margin of plus or minus 4 percent.

A majority still believes global warming is real but that percentage is falling, with the average American now less convinced than at any time since 1997.

Thirty-five percent said in the latest poll that the effects of global warming either will never happen (19 percent) or will not happen in their lifetimes (16 percent). The 19 percent figure is more than double from 1997, Gallup said.

A growing number of Americans are doubting that global warming is related to human activities: 50 percent now blame human activities and 46 percent blame natural changes in the environment, such as fluctuations in the sun's intensity or the fallout from volcanic eruptions.

That compares with 61 percent and 33 percent respectively in 2003, Gallup said.

(Editing by Anthony Boadle)

Nearly half of Americans believe climate change threat is exaggerated
US belief in climate science lowest since polling began 13 years ago, with 31% saying the threat is 'definitely' a reality
Suzanne Goldenberg, guardian.co.uk 11 Mar 10;

Public belief in climate science has seen a precipitous slide in the US, according to new polling that suggests fewer Americans are concerned about the threat posed by global warming.

Nearly half of Americans – 48% – now believe the threat of global warming has been exaggerated, the highest level since polling began 13 years ago, the poll published today by Gallup said.

It directly linked the decline in concern to the controversies about media coverage of stolen emails from the University of East Anglia climate research unit and a mistake about the Himalayan glaciers melting by 2035 in the UN's authoritative report on global warming.

"These news reports may well have caused some Americans to re-evaluate the scientific consensus on global warming," Gallup said.

Half of Americans now believe there is a scientific consensus on climate change. Some 46% believe scientists are unsure about global warming, or that they believe it is not occurring. A UK poll last month showed adults who believe climate change is "definitely" a reality had dropped from 44% to 31% over the past year.

"The last two years have marked a general reversal in the trend of Americans' attitudes about global warming," Gallup said. "It may be that the continuing doubts about global warming put forth by conservatives and others are having an effect."

The poll feeds into fears among some environmentalists that the furore over the hacked emails has given new fuel to opponents of action on climate change, and stopped short the momentum in Congress for passage of a clean energy law.

A troika of Senators trying to draft a compromise climate bill that could get broad support said this week they may not be able to produce a draft until after the Easter recess, further reducing the chances of enacting legislation in 2010.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration faces lawsuits from Virginia, Texas, Alabama and a dozen business lobbies challenging its authority to act on greenhouse gas emissions through the Environmental Protection Agency.

Tim Wirth, a former Colorado senator who led the campaign against acid rain, told a conference call the science squabbles resembled a re-run of efforts to discredit that earlier effort for an environmental clean-up.

He said the scientists who worked on the IPCC report were woefully outmanoeuvred in PR by business groups which have the funds to employ legions of lobbyists and communications experts. "It's not a fair fight," he said. "The IPCC is just a tiny secretariat next to this giant denier machine."

A majority of Americans continues to believe that climate change is real, but they are less convinced of its urgency. Only 32% believe they will be directly affected by the consequences of a warming atmosphere, despite a major report by the Obama administration last year that climate change could bring flooding, heat waves, drought and loss of wildlife to the US.

Read more!