Asian nations make plastic oceans promise

Roger Harrabin BBC 8 Jun 17;

Nations responsible for much of the world's ocean plastic pollution have promised to start cleaning up their act.

At a UN oceans summit, delegates from China, Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines said they would work to keep plastics out of the seas.

Some of the promises are not yet formalised and environmentalists say the measures proposed are not nearly urgent enough.

But UN officials praised the statement.

Meeting in New York, they said it was part of a clear international shift against ocean pollution.

Eric Solheim, the UN's environment director, told BBC News: "There are quite encouraging signs, with nations taking the ocean much more seriously. Of course, there is a very long way to go because the problems are huge."

It is estimated that 5-13 million tonnes of plastics flow into the world's oceans annually. Much of it is ingested by birds and fish – and fragments of plastic have even been found in organisms at the bottom of the ocean.

A recent paper said much of the marine plastic often originates far from the sea – especially in countries which have developed consumer economies faster than their ability to manage waste.

The Helmholtz Centre in Leipzig, Germany, estimated that 75% of land-borne marine pollution comes from just 10 rivers, predominantly in Asia.

Reducing the plastic loads in these rivers by 50% would reduce global plastic inputs by 37%, it said.

'Change in attitude'

Tom Dillon from the Pew Charitable Trusts, which campaign on oceans, urged China to move quickly.

He told BBC News: "For thousands of years the Maritime Silk Road was a pathway for export of Chinese culture and influence. Will the ocean be a vehicle for export of Chinese pollution, or a new culture of conservation and sustainability?"

A report to the UN conference from the Thailand government says most marine plastic debris is land-based, caused by inefficient waste management and poor handling of plastic wastes.

In Thailand, the total amount of garbage finding its way into the sea was estimated at 2.83 million tonnes in 2016 - of which 12% was plastic.

The Thai government says the nation has established a 20-year strategy to tackle the problem, including developing financial incentives for keeping plastic out of the sea and encouraging eco-packaging design and eco-friendly substitutes for plastics.

In Indonesia, the government is starting a mass education programme for schoolchildren, and in the Philippines new laws are being developed.

Part of the challenge is finding substitutes for plastics. An international prize for smarter materials and design for packaging was launched recently by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation.

Read more!

Indonesia spots 52 smoldering hotspots in Sumatra

The Jakarta Post 7 Jun 17;

At least 52 hotspots indicating forest fires appeared in satellite images of several locations in Sumatra on Tuesday.

“We spotted [the hotspots] at 7 a.m.,” said Pekanbaru Meteorology, Climatology and Geophysics Agency head Otto Sukisno as quoted by tempo.co.

Jambi has the most hotspots with 17 locations, followed by Bengkulu 12 locations, South Sumatra (seven locations), Lampung (six locations), North Sumatra (three locations), West Sumatra (three locations) and Bangka Belitung (one location).

In Riau, the hotspots were detected in Indragiri Hulu, Rokan Hulu and Rokan Hilir.

In the past three days, hotspots were also detected in Riau’s Kuala Kampar, Pelalawan, Rokan IV Koto, Rokan Hulu and Siak Kecil.

Roesmin Nurjadin Air Force airbase has deployed a Super Puma chopper to monitor the hotspots.

The airbase spokesman Maj. Rizwar said that another chopper carrying four tons of water had also been deployed to conduct ‘water bombing’ in some burning areas in Riau recently.

“[It] conducted 12 water bombings to extinguish fires in Siak Kecil,” Rizwar said. (dmr)

Read more!

30 weeks' jail for man who smuggled 11 puppies into Singapore

Channel NewsAsia 7 Jun 17;

SINGAPORE — A 43-year-old man, Ravichandran Muthusamy, was sentenced to 30 weeks' jail on Wednesday (June 7), after he had tried to smuggle 11 puppies into Singapore in March this year, the Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA) and Immigration & Checkpoints Authority (ICA) said in a statement.

Ravichandran was also jailed for 20 weeks for subjecting the puppies to unnecessary pain or suffering. Both sentences will run concurrently.

On March 23, the 11 puppies were found hidden in a modified fuel tank of a car driven by Ravichandran at Woodlands Checkpoint.

Investigations by AVA revealed that Ravichandran had been commissioned to smuggle the puppies to an unknown person in Singapore.

No food or water was provided for the puppies in the modified compartment of the car, which was cramped.

AVA added that the 11 puppies are being cared for and quarantined at its facilities.

The importation of any animals or live birds without an AVA permit is illegal and carries a maximum penalty of S$10,000, or imprisonment of up to one year, or both.

Read more!

Pet farm owner fined S$180,000 for neglecting dogs’ health

Vanessa Paige Chelvan Channel NewsAsia 7 Jun 17;

SINGAPORE: The owner of Top Breed Pet Farm at Pasir Ris was fined S$180,000 and disqualified from running any animal-related businesses for six months on Wednesday (Jun 7), after he was found guilty of failing to treat eight dogs found in poor health.

Edwin Tan Guowei, 29, was convicted of six of 11 charges for failure in duty of care, breach of farm licensing conditions and operating an unlicensed pet shop. Five other charges were taken into consideration in sentencing.

The dogs were discovered during a surprise inspection by the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore (AVA) on Mar 9 last year. AVA officers found six dogs, including three Shih Tzus, in poor condition. They told Tan to take the dogs to the veterinarian immediately.

According to the vet’s report, five of the dogs suffered from eye problems, including ulcers and swelling. One of the dogs, a husky, had open wounds, and a pomeranian was found to be completely blind.

After a follow-up examination about four months later, the vet noted the conditions of four of the dogs had improved, but not significantly. The other two dogs had died by this time.

The prosecutor said although Tan was aware the six dogs had been in poor health, and tried to treat them, “he did not bring the dogs to the vet … and failed to take reasonable steps to ensure the dogs were protected from, and rapidly diagnosed of any injury or disease”.

AVA also found that the farm did not comply with its pet farm licensing conditions related to housing and animal health, and production records were also found to be inaccurate.

In addition, AVA investigations subsequently found that Tan operated a pet shop at Bukit Merah Central without an AVA licence. Tan was ordered to stop selling animals immediately, it said.

The disqualification order, which will prevent Tan from running any animal-related businesses for six months, will take effect on Aug 7, to give him time to rehome more than 180 dogs still on the farm.

HIGHEST FINE FOR ANIMAL CRUELTY OFFENCES

AVA said in a press release on Wednesday that the fine imposed on Tan was the highest imposed on anyone for committing animal cruelty and welfare-related offences.

The authority pressed for a deterrent sentence and a disqualification in view of the severity of Tan's offences, it said.

This is also the first time a disqualification order has been issued for animal-related businesses, after a 2015 amendment to the Animals and Birds Act to include provisions for disqualification orders and higher penalties for offences committed by those involved in animal related businesses.

For failing to provide proper care of the dogs while conducting an animal-related business, Tan could have been jailed for up to two years, fined up to S$40,000, or both, on each charge.

The maximum sentence for non-compliance with pet farm licensing conditions is a fine of S$10,000 and a one-year jail term for the first conviction, and that for selling pets without a license is a fine of S$5,000.



Pet farm owner fined S$180,000, disqualified from running animal-related business
SIAU MING EN Today Online 7 Jun 17;

SINGAPORE — Questions loom over the fate of some 180 dogs that remain on a Pasir Ris pet farm after the owner was disqualified by a district judge on Wednesday (June 7) from running any animal-related business for six months. He had failed to care for the animals properly.

The disqualification of Edwin Tan Guowei, 29, will kick in two months’ time, but some animal welfare groups TODAY contacted said they have not been approached to render help. It was not known if Tan had sold the pet farm, Top Breed Pet Farm.

Tan was also fined S$180,000 for six counts of failing to take reasonable steps to ensure the animals were protected from and quickly diagnosed of significant injuries or diseases. Another five charges were taken into consideration for sentencing.

This is the highest fine imposed on an accused person for committing animal cruelty and welfare-related offences. This is also the first time a disqualification order has been issued for animal-related businesses.

In 2015, the Animals and Birds Act was amended to include provisions for disqualification orders and higher penalties for offences committed by persons involved in animal-related businesses.

Tan’s offences came to light after the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) carried out a surprise inspection on March 9 last year at the farm Tan has been running since 2015. Eight breeding dogs, including an unsterilised bulldog, shih tzus, husky and pomeranian, were found in poor physical condition. The farm was also housing more than 100 dogs at that time.

The AVA instructed Tan to take the dogs to the vet for treatment immediately and to produce the vet’s report during their next inspection.

The vet who examined the dogs that day found that they suffered from a range of conditions, such as corneal swelling in the eye, corneal ulcer, loss of hair, scabs and open wounds.

The AVA’s investigations later found that Tan had operated a pet shop at Bukit Merah Central without an AVA licence. Tan was instructed to stop the sale of animals immediately.

A few months later, the AVA found that two dogs — a female shih tzu and a male husky — had died. While some of the dogs’ physical conditions had improved, others continued to suffer from discharge and swelling in their eyes, among other conditions.

Although Tan knew about these problems and had tried to treat the dogs, he did not go to a vet promptly, said Deputy Public Prosecutor Selene Yap. She urged the court to impose a punishment that would “prevent any like-minded pet business owners from engaging in similar activities”.

In sentencing, the district judge said people like Tan had a greater obligation to care for the welfare of animals in his custody, since he ran an animal-related business.

Parliament clearly intended to emphasise that persons like Tan had to ensure that the animals’ welfare was not compromised by the need to make profits, the judge added.

Tan’s disqualification order will start on Aug 7, and the dogs must not be sent to the AVA. The grace period is for Tan to make arrangements to comply with the order, the AVA said.

Contacted by TODAY, animal welfare groups SOSD and Action for Singapore Dogs (ASD) said they have not received any requests to take in dogs from Tan’s farm. In any case, the SOSD can only take in about 10 to 20 dogs should Tan approach them, said president Siew Tuck Wah.

ASD president Ricky Yeo added that more upstream measures should be put in place, such as requiring pet farm owners to place a deposit with the AVA before issuing them a licence.

The deposit could be used to offset the costs of rehoming the dogs in cases where owners are unable to continue with their business, he noted.

Read more!

WWF: Changing the Perception of Seafood Consumption

Changing the perception of seafood consumption
New Straits Times 7 Jun 17;

PETALING JAYA: A blind taste test done by WWF-Malaysia recently showed that a majority of respondents have the perception that texture of wild fish is better than farmed fish.

The survey showed that 77.9 per cent have the perception that the texture of wild caught fish is better than farmed fish but 71 per cent of them found farmed fish to be acceptable after the test.

“The survey result shows that 58.4 per cent of respondents ranked the farmed fish as having better flesh texture than the wild caught fish,” said Sustainable Seafood Manager of WWF-Malaysia, Chitra Devi

“It is great to see that more consumers are willing to support fish farmed in a sustainable manner, as responsibly farmed fish can be a solution to the depleting wild fish stock, she added.

In an attempt to get people to switch to more sustainable seafood products, the blind taste test were carried out using Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC) certified farmed tilapia, Aquaculture Improvement Project (AIP) sea bass and wild caught sea bass during the WWF-Malaysia’s Sustainable Seafood Festival (SSF17) public event at 1Utama Shopping Centre from 24 to 28 May 2017.

During the 5-day event, an estimated 12,000 people were engaged and over 1,300kg of responsibly farmed fish were sold consisting of sea bass, grouper, golden pomfret from AIP Marine Stewardship Council (MSC); and certified cod, ASC certified salmon, and tilapia from responsible seafood partners Goh Siong Tee (GST) Group and Trapia.

According to Food & Agriculture Organization’s 2013 report, Malaysians are the sixth biggest consumer of seafood globally at 56.5kg per capita.

Hence, consumers play an important role in the supply chain as consumer demand drives the seafood industry.

WWF-Malaysia hopes to change market demand by empowering the public to become responsible seafood consumers through continuous awareness on how and where they can support sustainable seafood.

Another seafood market survey was also conducted to find out consumers’ seafood consumption preferences and factors influencing them.

The result shows that both freshness and taste factors are critical for the consumers’ enjoyment of seafood, at 56.5 per cent and 43.5 per cent respectively.

“WWF recognises MSC and ASC certified seafood as sustainable seafood. These eco-labels not only help transform the seafood market to becoming more sustainable, but also ensure that the seafood is traceable every step of the way along the supply chain, from fishery to processor to supplier to consumers”, Chitra said.

“This guarantees the seafood is fresh and safe for consumption as consumers cannot track the origin and freshness of non-certified seafood products available in the market. Hence, WWF-Malaysia encourages consumers to look out for the MSC and ASC labelled products,” she added.

WWF-Malaysia said it will continue engaging with businesses such as seafood producers, suppliers, hotels, restaurants to better promote and market sustainable seafood products in Malaysia and to increase accessibility and variety of certified seafood produc¬ts to consumers.

In conjunction with the SSF17, two business events attended by over 55 participants from the local seafood industry were conducted in Kuala Lumpur and Kota Kinabalu and a media trip to responsible aquaculture farms, it said.

WWF-Malaysia is also organising “Happy Ocean Movie Night” on June 17 at Sunway GEO Avenue (opposite Sunway Medical Centre) from 6p.m. onwards.

Admission is free for this event targeted towards family fun.

For more information on activities and R.S.V.P, please visit My Fin My Life Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/sharkhero/.



Changing the Perception of Seafood Consumption
WWF-Malaysia 7 Jun 17;

Petaling Jaya: A blind taste test done by WWF-Malaysia recently shows that 77.9% of the respondents have the perception that the texture of wild caught fish is better than farmed fish but 71% of them found farmed fish to be acceptable after the test.

“The survey result shows that 58.4% of respondents ranked the farmed fish as having better flesh texture than the wild caught fish,” said Ms Chitra Devi, Sustainable Seafood Manager of WWF-Malaysia.

“It is great to see that more consumers are willing to support fish farmed in a sustainable manner, as responsibly farmed fish can be a solution to the depleting wild fish stock,” Ms Chitra added.

In an attempt to get people to switch to more sustainable seafood products, the blind taste test were carried out using Aquaculture Stewardship Council (ASC) certified farmed tilapia, Aquaculture Improvement Project (AIP) sea bass and wild caught sea bass during the WWF-Malaysia’s Sustainable Seafood Festival (SSF17) public event at 1Utama Shopping Centre from 24 to 28 May 2017. During the 5-day event, an estimated 12,000 people were engaged and over 1,300kg of responsibly farmed fish were sold consisting of sea bass, grouper, golden pomfret from AIP Marine Stewardship Council (MSC); as well as certified cod, ASC certified salmon and tilapia from responsible seafood partners Goh Siong Tee (GST) Group and Trapia.

According to Food and Agriculture Organization’s 2013 report, Malaysians are the sixth biggest consumer of seafood globally at 56.5kg per capita. Hence, consumers play an important role in the supply chain as consumer demand drives the seafood industry. WWF-Malaysia hopes to change market demand by empowering the public to become responsible seafood consumers through continuous awareness on how and where they can support sustainable seafood.

Another seafood market survey was also conducted to find out consumers’ seafood consumption preferences and factors influencing them. The result shows that both freshness and taste factors are critical for the consumers’ enjoyment of seafood, at 56.5% and 43.5% respectively.

Ms Chitra said, “WWF recognizes MSC and ASC certified seafood as sustainable seafood. These eco-labels not only help transform the seafood market to becoming more sustainable, but also ensure that the seafood is traceable every step of the way along the supply chain, from fishery to processor to supplier to consumers.”

“This guarantees the seafood is fresh and safe for consumption as consumers cannot track the origin and freshness of non-certified seafood products available in the market. Hence, WWF-Malaysia encourages consumers to look out for the MSC and ASC labelled products.”

WWF-Malaysia will continue engaging with businesses such as seafood producers, suppliers, hotels, restaurants to better promote and market sustainable seafood products in Malaysia and to increase accessibility and variety of certified seafood produc­ts to consumers. In conjunction with the SSF17, two business events attended by over 55 participants from the local seafood industry were conducted in Kuala Lumpur and Kota Kinabalu and a media trip to responsible aquaculture farms.

WWF-Malaysia is organizing “Happy Ocean Movie Night” on 17 June 2017 at Sunway GEO Avenue (opposite Sunway Medical Centre) from 6p.m. onwards. Admission is free for this event targeted towards family fun. For more information on activities and R.S.V.P., please visit My Fin My Life Facebook page at https://www.facebook.com/sharkhero/.

Read more!

Interview with Terry Hughes on mass coral bleaching

Turning point: Reef inspector
Virginia Gewin Nature 7 JUn 17;

Since 2015, Terry Hughes has monitored coral bleaching — a result of rising ocean temperatures — at Australia's Great Barrier Reef. When reefs bleach, they expel crucial algae and can die. Hughes describes how, as director of the Australian Research Council's Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies in Townsville, he is trying to save the reef, vital for marine life.

What have the past two years been like?

ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies/Andrew Rankin
It's been a whirlwind. The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Australian Bureau of Meteorology have each developed near-real-time maps to forecast the likelihood of mass bleaching. We saw it in 1998 and 2002. We knew by May 2015 that there could be a third event. The National Coral Bleaching task force — consisting of 300 researchers from universities and government agencies — formed in November 2015 to coordinate research into a potential third mass bleaching. We booked research stations, vessels and aeroplanes. I spent March to April 2016 and this past March aerially surveying the bleaching along the Great Barrier Reef.

Was aerial surveillance a risky approach?

Yes. That's why we also put 100 divers in the water in March and April 2016, who confirmed that our scoring of the extent of bleaching was highly accurate. We published a paper on that data — featured on the cover of the 16 March Nature issue (T. P. Hughes et al. Nature 543, 373–377; 2017) — and then, two days after its publication, we boarded an aeroplane to assess coral bleaching for the second year in a row.

Can you publish findings before the next field season?

No. The back-to-back bleaching we are now seeing has overtaken our capacity to keep up.

What is the most difficult part of the research?

The uncertainty. We hoped that a bleaching event wouldn't happen, and there was a period in 2015 when the forecast said that it was unlikely. But that was followed by a period of rapid heating, so we had warning of only 2–3 weeks before we needed to conduct reef-bleaching surveys. Luckily, I had kept the bookings for the boats, so it was easy to fire up again.

How do you have such flexibility?

I direct a Centre of Excellence, a consortium of four universities funded by the Australian Research Council, equivalent to the US National Science Foundation. Our graduate programme has 210 PhD students. Because we have a seven-year block of funding, we can set up ambitious projects.

What was your best move as director?

Since 2005, when we established the centre, I've hired more than 100 postdocs. And I've hired more social scientists and people who work on the dynamics of institutions, governance, legal frameworks and international treaties. Knowing everything about the biology of coral reefs won't improve their governance.

Does the dire situation affect student interest?

Most of our PhD students and postdocs come from abroad. People are galvanized by this problem and the urgent need to address it. Still, it has the potential to be overwhelming. Many PhD projects have been disrupted by the heavy reef mortality.

Is there an upside?

It is, dare I say it, a research opportunity. I don't want to come across as taking advantage of ecological disaster, but we are learning a lot. In Australia, we have a lot of science around bleaching events but lack science-based policy responses. The elephant in the room is climate change.

Do you focus more on outreach to the public or to policymakers?

Both. We routinely give government briefings. In addition, when the National Coral Bleaching task force that I formed began gathering data, we put out press releases and blogposts about bleaching. We've taken some flak over releasing findings that haven't yet been peer reviewed. But we will continue to put out important preliminary results that we feel the government or the public should know about.

Read more!