Best of our wild blogs: 23 Jun 18

Invitation to ask LTA questions on Cross Island MRT Line development
Love our MacRitchie Forest

Life History of the Banded Yeoman
Butterflies of Singapore

Night Walk At Windsor Nature Park (22 Jun 2018)
Beetles@SG BLOG

Read more!

Water pressure: F&B outlets face pushback from customers as more charge for drinking water

CHEN LIN Today Online 22 Jun 18;

SINGAPORE — Dine at an eatery here these days and there could be a chance that you will have to pay for a glass of water to go along with the meal.

Citing rising business costs, some food-and-beverage (F&B) outlets are charging diners as high as S$1 for a glass of plain water.

Responding to TODAY’s queries, the Restaurant Association of Singapore noted that serving free water “used to be the norm several years ago”, but practices may have changed due to the rising cost of operations. It added that typically, the price for a glass of water ranges from 50 to 80 cents.

A random check by TODAY at 13 eateries in VivoCity mall found that eight of them charged between 30 cents and S$1 for a glass of tap water, while one of them sells bottled water at S$1.50 and does not provide drinking water for free.

ADVERTISEMENT

Among the eight who charge for drinking water, six offer refills, while two do not.

At Ion Orchard, Bugis Junction and Plaza Singapura, there was also a mix of F&B establishments which offer free flow of drinking water and those who charged between 50 to 80 cents for it. One eatery, for instance, provides complimentary water with a minimum spending of S$10 per diner, while others do not serve tap water but sell bottled water at S$1.50 to S$1.90 each.

Recently, a customer at Kim Gary Restaurant in VivoCity took to social media to air his grievances about having to pay S$1 for a glass of water.

When contacted by TODAY, businessman Wilson Wong, 49, said that Kim Gary’s service crew told him the price went up because of the water tariff hike.

“To be fair, the staff would usually mention the price when the customer orders a glass of water. Usual price is $0.60,” he said. “I have always been paying that when I dine there, but due to the noisy environment that day, I did not pay attention to the waitress. I thought it was the same old price, until the bill came.”

Mr Wong then tried to argue with the crew that the price increase was excessive in relation to the tariff hike, but he was told that “it was the reason passed down by the management”.

In response to TODAY’s queries, a spokesperson from Kim Gary clarified that the restaurant’s decision to raise the price of drinking water is “certainly” not related to the water tariff hike, even though the price increase was introduced in March 2017 — just a month after the Government’s announcement of the hike during Budget last year.

“The cost of a cup of water is very complicated,” the spokesperson said. “It involves the filter maintenance, manpower, rental, electricity cost, and many more.”

From next month, water prices in Singapore will be raised again, completing a 30 per cent hike that was carried out in two phases. The first round of increase was in July last year.

The Government had warned businesses against profiteering from the move, but eateries interviewed by TODAY insisted that their decision to charge customers for tap water had nothing to do with the tariff increase, and is a matter of business overheads.

Bali Thai restaurant manager Jairus Parreno said that all its outlets serve complimentary water to diners, except the branch at Sentosa, which charges 30 cents due to the high rental cost there.

An owner of an Indonesian eatery in the eastern part of Singapore, who did not want to be named, said that instead of serving complimentary tap water, he started charging S$1.30 for bottled water a month after he took over the business, because he noticed that customers tend to ask for more than what they need, and there is cost to cleaning the cups as well.

“Charging for water has got nothing to do with the water tariff hike… customers have the tendency to abuse that privilege and that's costing manpower and resources,” he added.

‘PUSHED’ TO CHOOSE SOFT DRINKS?

When diners have to pay for tap water, some said that they find it hard to put money down for something so basic and may choose to order other beverages instead, and this would usually be soft drinks.

With the Government driving a campaign to battle the public health problem of diabetes among the population, consumers are pointing the finger at businesses, saying they have a part to play — or at least not discourage customers from drinking water by charging for it.

Mr Koh Liang Lin, 23, student, said: “If water is chargeable at the restaurant, it will push me to top up a dollar more to get a canned drink.”

Similarly, student Mohammad Taha Irfan, 24, said: “I would rather buy sweet drinks than plain water. It’s not worth it to get plain water if the price of plain water and a sweet drink is about the same.”

He added that most food outlets he patronises sell bottled water instead of serving free water, and each bottle is usually just 20 cents cheaper than canned drinks.

For diabetes sufferer Lee Chon Poh, 68, a human resource manager, he has no choice but to pay for plain water at restaurants even though it is “super not worth it”, he said.

Apart from the water tariff hike, he believes that restaurants are raising the price of drinking water because “they want people to order other drinks” which is “more lucrative” for their earnings.

Mr Lee’s daughter, student Lee Mei Ying, 21, is one of those who would like F&B businesses to join the nationwide effort to fight diabetes.

“For diabetic patients like my dad, it would be a lot more convenient and appreciated if complimentary water is being served at restaurants, especially for those who need to take medication straight after their meals.”

She added: “Providing free water can be a good step to get people to drink more water — at least it’s better than charging a high price for it, which is a turn-off.”

Art teacher Goh Yi Xuan, 22, suggested that more restaurants can have self-service water dispensers on their premises as some have done, to save time and effort.

On this, the Restaurant Association of Singapore acknowledged that businesses have a role to play, and it encourages F&B establishments to “consider making some adjustments” such as lowering sugar content in desserts, and making non-sugary drinks the default beverage at catering events. It reiterated that it “does not encourage (or) discourage” charging for tap water as this is down to the business decisions of each eatery.

Despite the concerns over rising costs, some F&B businesses such as Eighteen Chefs, Swensen’s and Ola Beach Club have no plans to put a price tag on drinking water.

Swensen’s spokesperson said: “We are offering free water because this is what our customers want. Our objective is always to make our customers’ dining experience an enjoyable one.”

At Cedele cafe, a regular patron, who did not want to be identified, noticed that its outlets at Raffles City and Novena Square have stopped providing complimentary water to customers in recent months. A waiter then told her that she would have to buy bottled water sold at the eatery.

When TODAY contacted Cedele, its manager Janice Yong said that it was a “miscommunication” and the waiter got the instructions wrong. Cedele provides bottled water because there are many customers “who prefer bottled water over tap (water)”, she said.

“Should guests decide not to purchase the bottled water, all our stores still offer complimentary water in cups,” Ms Yong added.

Ms Neeta Lachmandas, executive director of the Institute of Service Excellence at Singapore Management University, said that restaurant operators need to be aware that while some customers may not mind paying for water, there may be some who feel that offering complimentary water is “basic hospitality”, especially if this is offered by other restaurants they have visited.

Ms Lachmandas, who has experience in leading service improvement strategies and initiatives, also pointed to the Customer Satisfaction Index of Singapore last year and its third-quarter study on the F&B sector.

She noted that the “ability to accommodate to (customers’) needs” was identified as an important driver of customer loyalty for the restaurants sub-sector.

“In light of this, restaurant operators may wish to assess if offering complimentary water would help them better connect with their customers’ need, thereby building customer loyalty in a competitive F&B landscape.”

Read more!

Malaysia: Sabah drafting law to protect sharks, stingrays

Olivia Miwil New Straits Times 22 Jun 18;

KOTA KINABALU: The state government is drafting fisheries management legislation, with a particular focus on the protection of sharks, stingrays and other endangered marine species.

State Agriculture and Food Industries Minister Junz Wong said his ministry wanted to be the governing body on fisheries.

Speaking at the Sabah Sharks and Rays Forum 2018 here, he said the state’s Park Enactment 1984 and Wildlife Conservation Enactment 1997 did not specifically provide protection for sharks and stingrays, which were in decline.

He said the new legislation would give the state better control on areas such as trade and protection of marine species.

“Should the ministry become the governing body on fisheries, we will work hand-in-hand with the state Tourism, Culture and Environment Ministry to strike a balance (between fisheries and tourism),” he said, adding that he hoped the process, which required the approval of the Attorney-General and collaboration with stakeholders, would not take too much time.

Wong said he was also looking forward to the amendment of the national Fisheries (Control of Endangered Species of Fish) Regulations 1999 and Fisheries Act 1985 to allow the state to provide better protection for sharks and stingrays.

Earlier at the forum, state Fisheries Department assistant director (marine resource management) Lawrence Kissol said six species – great hammerhead shark, smooth hammerhead shark, winghead shark, reef manta, giant oceanic manta and oceanic whitetip shark – would be included in the amendments to the federal laws, pending the approval of the Attorney-General by year’s end.

There are 50 shark and 66 stingray species in Sabah waters. Sharks and stingrays are usually caught unintentionally by trawlers, which account for up to 70 per cent of catches, followed by gill nets, longline and handline fishing.

Last year, Lawrence said, 697 metric tonnes of shark (0.43 per cent) and 1,507 metric tonnes of stingray (0.93 per cent) catches were recorded by the department.

“The state government does not allow sharks and stingrays to be listed under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora for export,” he said.

“Since 2000, no new trawling licences have been issued and the government stopped giving fishing licences to vessels from five countries in 2015.”

Sharks are worth more alive than dead, as they contribute RM220mil yearly to Sabah's economy via dive tourism
fatimah zainal The Star 22 Jun 18;

KOTA KINABALU: Sharks are worth more alive than dead as they contribute some RM220mil to Sabah's economy, and traditional eating of shark meat should be balanced with conservation and tourism, a major forum here was told.

Semporna, a town in eastern Sabah, is a world famous diving haven and revenue from diving activities reached about USD55.3mil (RM221.85mil) a year, Dr Johanna Zimmerhackel of the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS) told the Sabah Sharks and Rays Forum 2018 in Kota Kinabalu on Thursday (June 21).

Of this, shark diving made up USD16.6mil (RM66.6mil) and taxes collected from this amounted to USD3.6mil (RM14.44mil), she said.

The balance comes from various economic spin off activities such as hotels, restaurants, transport etc

image: https://content.thestar.com.my/smg/settag/name=lotame/tags=

"Protecting sharks and rays or maintaining their state or increasing them is the key message of the study," said Dr Zimmerhackel.

This was the result of an updated study to assess the current economic value of the shark-diving industry in Semporna, following the 2012 Shark Tourism Economic Valuation Study, that was led by the AIMS.

"There are many different conservation strategies, and setting up a shark sanctuary is one of them," said Dr Zimmerhackel.

She said while a study is needed to see whether a shark sanctuary would be the most feasible conservation strategy for Sabah, it could improve the diving experience of shark divers who are at risk of taking their tourism receipts elsewhere if the shark situation in Sabah continues to dwindle.

However, the situation is not so simple, as sharks and rays are part of the diet of traditional communities around Semporna, and are often the by-catch by fishermen.

Research at Pulau Mabul by Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) found that the Bajau Laut (sea gypsies) traditionally dry shark meat and turn them into salted fish for their own consumption.

UTM tourism research head Prof Amran Hamzah said rays have also been traditionally part of the Suluk community's diet in a dish called tiyula itum (black soup).

"The general reaction from the locals is denial, general apathy, or saying that (killing of sharks and rays) is a 'one-off' spectacle and that it did not involve protected species," said Prof Amran.

He said there is a need to educate local communities on the importance of conserving sharks and rays and also to elevate responsible tourism as an alternative source of income for them.

Other groups at the forum also underlined that the new government should review existing laws on shark protection.

WWF-Malaysia marine policy manager Shantini Guna Rajan said the review could mean regulating sustainable exploitation or completely protecting a species by including it in the list of legislation.

"Most importantly, the federal and Sabah state government must sit together to discuss how to review the regulations," said Shantini at.

The forum saw local, regional and international top campaigners discussing legal advances in protecting these sea creatures plus research and awareness raising efforts in Sabah.

Semporna is the most important hotbed in Sabah for both tourism and fishing of sharks, and the east coast district has been a focal point for researchers and campaigners.

Youth NGO Green Semporna co-founder Adzmin Fatta said it is crucial to empower the youth to change the culture in their communities.

"This doesn't mean banning eating shark meat entirely but there needs to be a balance between conservation, livelihood and culture.

"Green Semporna has been doing awareness raising work and shark education projects in Semporna.

"We have appointed 32 young shark ambassadors from secondary schools there to promote shark conservation among their peers and communities," said Adzmin.

The forum happening on June 21 and June 22 in Kota Kinabalu carries the theme "Exploring Synergies between Fisheries, Conservation and Tourism".

It is jointly organised by Land Empowerment Animals People (Leap), WWF-Malaysia and Sabah Sharks Protection Association (SSPA).

It is supported by the Sabah Tourism, Culture and Environment Ministry, Sabah Fisheries Department and Kota Kinabalu City Hall.


Review of laws needed to protect sharks in Sabah
fatimah zainal The Star 23 Jun 18;

KOTA KINABALU: There is a need for the new government to review existing laws on shark protection as they are an important capital, say top campaigners.

WWF-Malaysia marine policy manager Shantini Guna Rajan said the review could mean regulating sustainable exploitation or completely protecting a species.

“Most importantly, the Federal and Sabah governments must sit down together to discuss how to review the regulations,” said Shantini at the Sabah Sharks and Rays Forum 2018 on Thursday.

The forum saw local, regional and international top campaigners discussing legal advances in protecting these sea creatures plus research and raising of awareness efforts in Sabah.

Semporna is the most important hotbed in Sabah for both tourism and fishing of sharks, and the east coast district has been a focal point for researchers and campaigners.

Semporna is a world-famous diving haven and revenue from diving activities reached about USD55.3mil (RM221.85mil) a year, said Dr Johanna Zimmerhackel of Aims.

Of this, shark diving made up USD16.6mil (RM66.6mil) and taxes collected from this amounted to USD3.6mil (RM14.44mil), she said.

“Protecting sharks and rays is the key message of the study.

“There are many different conservation strategies, and having a shark sanctuary is one of them,” said Dr Zimmerhackel.

She said while a study was needed to see whether a shark sanctuary would be the most feasible conservation strategy for Sabah, it could improve the diving experience of shark divers who are at risk of taking their tourism receipts elsewhere if the shark situation in Sabah continues to dwindle.

The forum also called for new methods of managing sharks that become by-catch by fishermen, noting that Semporna residents traditionally consumed shark meat.

A research concluded in March this year at Pulau Mabul by Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) found that the Bajau Laut (sea gypsies) traditionally dried shark meat and turn them into salted fish for their own consumption.

Meanwhile, UTM tourism research head Prof Amran Hamzah said rays had been traditionally part of the Suluk community’s diet, which uses its meat in a dish called tiyula itum (black soup).

“The general reaction from the locals is denial, general apathy, or saying that it did not involve protected species,” said Prof Amran.

He said calls to action included interventions to elevate the role of responsible tourism as an alternative source of income and educating local communities on the importance of shark and rays conservation.

Youth NGO Green Semporna co-founder Adzmin Fatta said towards this end, it was crucial to empower the youth to change the culture in their communities.

“This does not mean banning eating shark meat entirely but there needs to be a balance between conservation, livelihood and culture.

“Green Semporna has been doing awareness-raising work and shark education projects in Semporna.

“We have appointed 32 young shark ambassadors from secondary schools there to promote shark conservation among their peers and communities,” said Adzmin.

The forum, which ended yesterday in Kota Kinabalu, carried the theme “Exploring Synergies between Fisheries, Conservation and Tourism”, and was jointly organised by Land Empowerment Animals People (Leap), WWF-Malaysia and Sabah Sharks Protection Association (SSPA).

It is supported by the Sabah Tourism, Culture and Environment Ministry, Sabah Fisheries Department and Kota Kinabalu City Hall.

Read more!

Some rare good climate news: the fossil fuel industry is weaker than ever

From Wall Street to the pope, many increasingly see fossil fuels as anything but a sure bet. That gives us reason to hope
Bill McKibben The Guardian 21 Jun 18;

If you’re looking for good news on the climate front, don’t look to the Antarctic. Last week’s spate of studies documenting that its melt rates had tripled is precisely the kind of data that underscores the almost impossible urgency of the moment.

And don’t look to Washington DC, where the unlikely survival of the EPA administrator, Scott Pruitt, continues to prove the political power of the fossil fuel industry. It’s as if he’s on a reality show where the premise is to see how much petty corruption one man can get away with.

But from somewhat less likely quarters, there’s been reason this month for hope – reason, at least, to think that the basic trajectory of the world away from coal and gas and oil is firmly under way.

At the Vatican, the pope faced down a conference full of oil industry executives – the basic argument that fossil fuel reserves must be kept underground has apparently percolated to the top of the world’s biggest organization.

And from Wall Street came welcome word that market perceptions haven’t really changed: even in the age of Trump, the fossil fuel industry has gone from the world’s surest bet to an increasingly challenged enterprise. Researchers at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis minced no words: “In the past several years, oil industry financial statements have revealed significant signs of strain: Profits have dropped, cash flow is down, balance sheets are deteriorating and capital spending is falling. The stock market has recognized the sector’s overall weakness, punishing oil and gas shares over the past five years even as the market as a whole has soared.”

The IEEFA report labeled the industry “weaker than it has been in decades” and laid out its basic frailties, the first of which is paradoxical. Fracking has produced a sudden surge of gas and oil into the market, lowering prices – which means many older investments (Canada’s tar sands, for instance) no longer make economic sense. Fossil fuel has been transformed into a pure commodity business, and since the margins on fracking are narrow at best, its financial performance has been woeful. The IEEFA describes investors as “shell-shocked” by poor returns.

The second weakness is more obvious: the sudden rise of a competitor that seems able to deliver the same product – energy – with cheaper, cleaner, better technologies. Tesla, sure – but Volkswagen, having come clean about the dirtiness of diesel, is going to spend $84bn on electric drivetrains. China seems bent on converting its entire bus fleet to electric power. Every week seems to bring a new record-low price for clean energy: the most recent being a Nevada solar plant clocking in at 2.3 cents per kilowatt hour, even with Trump’s tariffs on Chinese panels.

And the third problem for the fossil fuel industry? According to IEEFA, that would be the climate movement – a material financial risk to oil and gas companies. “In addition to traditional lobbying and direct-action campaigns, climate activists have joined with an increasingly diverse set of allies – particularly the indigenous-rights movement – to put financial pressure on oil and gas companies through divestment campaigns, corporate accountability efforts, and targeting of banks and financial institutions. These campaigns threaten not only to undercut financing for particular projects, but also to raise financing costs for oil and gas companies across the board.”

Hey, the movement against Kinder Morgan’s pipeline got so big, the Canadian government had to literally buy the thing in order to try and ram it through. Protesters will die, a former Bank of Canada governor predicted this week – though he added the country will have to muster the “fortitude” to kill them and get the pipeline built.

For activists, the best part of the IEEFA report is a series of recommendations for precisely how to hurt the industry the most, from creating delays that “turn a marginal project into a cancelled one” to “strategic litigation” to “changing the narrative”.

The report’s authors write: “The financial world is just beginning to understand the fundamental weakness of the fossil fuel sector, and barely acknowledges the global climate movement’s growing power and reach. This has created a powerful opportunity to develop and foster a new storyline on Wall Street: that the oil and gas industry is an unstable financial partner just as it faces its greatest test.”

That’s work we’re capable of. If a few years of campaigning is enough to convince the pope we need to keep fossil fuels in the ground, a few more quarters might finally persuade the suits that there’s more money to be made elsewhere. But speed is clearly of the essence. If massive losses of money loom over Wall Street, massive losses of polar ice loom over us all.

Read more!