WWF: Urgent need for on-the-ground protection for tigers

WWF 15 Jan 09;

Kuala Lumpur – Following the recent seizure of tiger carcasses in Prachuap, Thailand, conservation groups are calling for better legal and on-the-ground protection of Malaysia’s remaining 500 wild tigers.

The Malaysian Nature Society (MNS) , TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, Wildlife Conservation Society (Malaysia Programme) and WWF-Malaysia are alarmed that such a case could occur, especially with the newly launched National Tiger Action Plan for Malaysia to double Malaysia’s tigers.

“Illegal trade is the most urgent and immediate threat to wild tigers, having the greatest potential to do maximum harm in the shortest span of time. With a thriving international market for tiger products, there appears to be a large and very well-connected network of hunters and traders that target tigers in the region,” said Azrina Abdullah, Regional Director of TRAFFIC Southeast Asia.

The carcasses, believed to have been smuggled from Malaysia, were on its way to China, where demand for tiger parts for use in traditional medicine and as an exotic dish is still high.

“Wildlife crime is not considered a priority within Malaysia’s judicial system and penalties for such crimes are often extremely low and therefore do not serve as a deterrent. Time and again wildlife offenders often escape arrest, prosecution and punishment,” said Dr Loh Chi Leong, MNS Executive Director.

In 2005, 23-year old Ang Chun Tan was fined a mere RM7,000 after he was found guilty with a carcass of a tiger cut in four in his fridge, but Malaysia’s Protection of Wild Life Act 1972 listed the punishment for the crime of possessing a tiger with a maximum penalty of RM15,000 fine, or a jail term not exceeding five years.

Out of the 80 actions outlined in the National Tiger Action Plan for Malaysia, 17 are specifically focused on improved intelligence driven anti-poaching patrol of key forests and enforcement of wildlife and wildlife trade laws. This being the largest proportion of actions for an issue within the entire Plan, clearly sends a warning sign on the gravity of the situation where tiger-related crimes are concerned.

According to the CEO of WWF-Malaysia Dato’ Dr. Dionysius Sharma, patrolling and enforcement efforts in our forests, especially at the Malaysia–Thai border, needs to be beefed up urgently.

“With the current economic crisis, more of our natural resources will be smuggled out. Our borders need to be locked down to prevent poachers from entering or exiting with our precious wildlife. Border security could be greatly improved with additional support from the army, police, and maybe even RELA,” he said.

“We urge the authorities to expedite the amendment of the Protection of Wildlife Act 1972, with the aim for improved wildlife protection with a newly reformed legislation to further support and reinforce national conservation efforts,” Dr. Loh said.

This is a joint press release by the Malaysian Nature Society, TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, Wildlife Conservation Society (Malaysia Programme) and WWF-Malaysia.


Read more!

Best of our wild blogs: 15 Jan 09


First look at data on our seagrasses!
on the teamseagrass blog

Frogfish at Pulau Hantu
on the Pulau Hantu blog

Lively Tuas Shore
on the Manta Blog blog

Sentosa with TeamSeagrass
on the teamseagrass blog

Chek Jawa with TeamSeagrass
on the Nature Spies blog

The Seagrass Meadow 'Twix Two Lands
on the MNS Marine Group, Selangor Branch blog shared by budak

An SOS Trip to Remember
on the MNS Marine Group, Selangor Branch blog shared by budak

Distraction tactic of a Red-wattled Lapwing
on the Bird Ecology Study Group blog

Birds along the lower slopes of Mount Faber, Singapore
on the Bird Ecology Study Group blog

Repair to seawall opposite Changi Jetty
on the wild shores of singapore blog

Schizolobium & Musa
on the Garden Voices blog

Copper-cheeked Frog
on the Nature Spies blog


Read more!

Singapore's Last Kampung: 'If it happens, it's just too bad'

Owner glad there's something concrete about development plans

Desmond Ng The New Paper 15 Jan 09;

TIME once stood still for Singapore's sole surviving kampung. Now, the clock has started ticking, and the pendulum looks like a wrecker's ball.

The Government's plan to develop the kampung land will flatten the last 28 houses standing and erase Singapore's rustic past.

The landowner may become a multi-millionaire from the acquisition. So, why is she looking glum?

For Ms Sng Hui Hong, few things have changed since her father bought this village some 53years ago.

The same old zinc-roofed huts, surrounded by rambutan, jackfruit and banana trees, are still nestled in a hard-to-find forest clearing.

There're no roads here, just a well-trodden dirt path snaking to this quiet enclave.

The air is fresh. It's so quiet that you can hear the chickens clucking and crickets chirping.

At night, the village descends into almost total darkness with so few street lamps in use.

Life in this last surviving kampung in Singapore still crawls at slow pace.

The friendly folks here keep their doors unlocked. Children run and cycle around freely without fear of traffic. The many stray dogs here bark at every stranger or the occassional snake slithering in the undergrowth.

And tourists and locals hunt down this hamlet every weekend for a taste of the kampung lifestyle - a pecularity in this city state.

But it looks like time's up and the wrecker's ball is a-waiting for Kampung Buangkok.

This kampung will be bulldozed and redeveloped, possibly in the near future.

There are plans for this plot of land, along with its surrounding area, to be comprehensively developed, said the Urban Redvelopment Authority (URA).

In its place will be housing, schools and other neighbourhood facilities supported by a road network, added URA. This land is about the size of three football fields. Under the Master Plan 2008, part of the land has also been earmarked for the development of a major road linking to Buangkok Drive.

URA said that the implementation time frame for these plans has not been firmed up.

This death knell came somewhat as a surprise to the kampung's landowner, Ms Sng, when The New Paper met her yesterday.

Said the 55-year-old in Mandarin: 'I've not heard from the Government or anyone about plans to redevelop this area. This is the first time I am hearing this.'

Normally wary and suspicious of the media, this feisty woman, on hearing about future redevelopment plans, invited this reporter into her house.

She proceeded to ask in great detail about the plans and when it'll take place.

Said Ms Sng with great concern: 'I've been living here for so long and there're always rumours about redevelopment. Finally, there's something concrete.'

Ms Sng's father, a Chinese medicine seller, bought the land in 1956. A few dozen colourful huts now dot the landscape, albeit surrounded by looming cranes waiting by the sidelines.

According to Ms Sng, some 28 families live there and pay her nominal monthly rents ranging from $6.50 to $30. Modern amenities like running water and electricity have been in place at the kampung since 1962, she said.

She's ambivalent about the impending change.

She'll miss the village and the rustic lifestyle, but added that she's resigned to the fact that there's no stopping redevelopment.

Said Ms Sng: 'I kind of expected the redevelopment plans. I just had that feeling, I can't explain it.

'I am not sad, this is just life. If it (the acquisition) happens, that's just too bad.'

She's not counting her millions yet either, because she doesn't know for certain what her land's worth.

Previous news reports had valued the land at about $33 million some two years back.

And since then, people (and property agents) have turned up in droves to look at her land, much to the annoyance of this recluse.

'I will never sell this land,' she said then. 'It was passed down by my father and it's my last remaining memory of my mother.'

'What a pity'

Not that she will have much of a choice when the Government comes a-knocking.

In the event of an acquisition by the Government, the compensation will be based on the prevailing market rate, said Chesterton Suntec International's head of research and consultancy, Mr Colin Tan.

'But nothing blocks the way of development - she (Ms Sng) will have to give up her land then. If the land was zoned for agriculture, the compensation will be much less than if it was zoned for residential,' he added.

Ms Sng said she doesn't know the nitty-gritty details of her land except that it's on a 999-year lease.

We spoke to some villagers there who can't believe that they're living on borrowed time.

Said Mr Jamil Kamsah: 'So sayang! ('What a pity', in Malay). Where am I going to keep my plants? I am going to miss my neighbours and our close friendships.'

Mr Kamsah, 55, a make-up artist, has been living in the kampung with his family for over 40 years. Their first monthly rent then was $2. It's now a princely $15. He said: 'I will miss this kampung atmosphere the most. And so will many people.'

He said that every weekend, there'll be strangers strolling around the estate, soaking in the kampung atmosphere.

Like former MP and artist Ho Kah Leong, who spent hours there painting scenes of the kampung.

He showcased 20 paintings of the kampung in his solo exhibition called, 'The Last Kampung Of Singapore - Lorong Buangkok' two years ago.

For Mr Kamsah, he'll take each day as it comes.

'I don't want to think so far now. I've never lived in a flat before and I can't imagine how it'll feel like,' he said.

Another resident, who only wanted to be known as Mr Wong, said he bought and re-built three huts there for over $10,000 each in the last 10 years. The land on which the houses are built is rented from Ms Sng.

He said he bought the houses for his children.

Said Mr Wong in Mandarin: 'I will miss this place but it's not just me alone. There're many residents who've lived here much, much longer.'

Singapore's Last Kampung: Kampung life can still live on
Ng Wan Ching, The New Paper 15 Jan 09;

AS THE last kampung in Singapore looks set to bite the dust, Mr L T Toh, 62, can't help but remember his own kampung days.

His family lived in the Wu Lin San (Boo Lim Cemetery) kampung.

'Those days, to rent a house in the kampung was very cheap, something like $2 a month.

'We had lots of space to breed chickens, pigs, goats and grow our own vegetables. Water came from wells. If you lost your job, you won't starve. You can live off the land in the village,' said the retiree who is now a freelance hawker.

Now, things are very different for him.

'In a Housing Board flat, there are also conservancy fees and electricity bills to pay. If you lose your job, you'll need help. Kampung life was much simpler,' he said in Mandarin.

He regrets that soon there may be no more kampungs left to show the younger generations what life was like then.

'Young people will not feel any loss or regret because they don't know the difference. But older people like me who have lived in kampungs would like to have some left as a reminder of our past,' he said.

But all may not be lost even if there are no kampungs left. As Singapore Environment Council executive director Howard Shaw puts it, there's nothing to prevent the kampung spirit from enduring.

Said Mr Shaw: 'It will benefit all of us to cultivate certain aspects of the kampung spirit.

'The open way of life, with much sharing and trust among each other. The way things are used again and again, that's very environmentally friendly. All these aspects can live on without the traditional way a kampung is set up.'

The challenges for any government will always be to house Singapore's population, he said.

'What has to be weighed is a sense of nostalgia against the benefit to the greater population,' said Mr Shaw.

There are also other ways to retain aspects of Singapore's heritage such as in the archives or in the way heritage shophouses have been re-developed to retain their character while modernising the interiors.

Best solution

'There is no solution that will please every one, so we must aim for the solution that will please or benefit the most people,' said Mr Shaw.

But there is one thing that the Government must always show in the acquisition of private land, said Singapore Heritage Society president Dr Kevin Tan.

It must show that it is necessary, he said.

He also cautioned against rebuilding everything that is 30 years old.

'If everything gets rebuilt every 30 years or so, there would be no sense of familiarity.

'If the landscape that people grew up with changes all the time, then there will be nothing to bind them to the land.

'There would be no sense of belonging,' he said.


Read more!

Animals sold by Singapore poachers as delicacies


Victoria Barker, my paper 13 Jan 09 on www.soshiok.com

Animals popular with poachers include pythons, soft-shell turtles and monitor lizards.

Singapore, January 13, 2009 - POACHING in densely-populated Singapore? You bet.

Every day, Nature Trekker Singapore, a nature-appreciation group, receives at least one call about animals trapped in pockets of vegetation all over the island.

While the group pointed out that not all of these trapped animals had been poached, its founder, Mr Ben Lee, believes that poaching is “prevalent”.

Figures from the Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority reveal that there were two cases of poaching last year. There were five in 2007 and one in 2006.

The latest case was discovered on Sunday, when a Malayan Water Monitor was found trapped and bound in a bush at Changi Village.

Mr Lee told my paper: “The lizard was found in some bushes near a carpark. It could have been dumped there so that the poacher could return to pick it up later.”

The animal was eventually untied and set free by policemen, who released it at the edge of a canal nearby.

“Incidents such as this are just the tip of the iceberg,” he said, adding that “animals such as the monitor lizard usually end up on the black market, where they are sold as delicacies”.

Other animals popular with poachers include pythons and soft-shell turtles.

“Sometimes, members of the public may be mistaken, but we always tell them it is better to make sure, and they are doing the right thing by calling,” said Mr Lee.

But not all would know who to turn to even if they come across such incidents.

Animal lover Ryan Siew, 28, said: “I don’t think it’s that common here... but most Singaporeans won’t know who to call.”


Read more!

Bird enthusiast calls for lifting of import ban on ornamental birds

Ease up on import of ornamental birds
Straits Times Forum 15 Jan 09;

AS A bird enthusiast, I am disappointed with the actions taken by the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) as the regulatory body in the import of animals and birds.

The global outbreak of avian flu has led to extra precautionary measures by the AVA with regard to the import of ornamental birds and poultry. However, its actions, although well intended, have led to declining numbers of ornamental birds available in the market now.

Ever since the recent outbreak of the H5N2 virus in Kaohsiung, Taiwan, there has been no import of ornamental birds from any other country, including Malaysia and Indonesia.

Ornamental birds have been slapped with an import suspension by the AVA since early 2006.

The Animals and Birds Act states that as long as a country is free from avian flu for six months, imports can resume, yet the director-general of the AVA has suspended imports for a year in the case of Taiwan.

Furthermore, the ban on imports from Malaysia should be lifted, since it has been more than six months since any incident has been reported there. Can the AVA look into this? Its lack of action is surprising; not a single country has had its suspension lifted since the AVA first acted in 2005.

I fail to understand the need for a ban by the AVA, since it quarantines any imports and makes numerous checks before it releases the birds to importers, and subsequently to pet-shop owners.

If the AVA has to ensure that the birds are completely virus-free, then what is the purpose of having import fees, quarantines and checks?

It is not a matter of taking risks or 'protecting Singaporeans from a possible nationwide epidemic', but whether such procedures are made futile because of the ban.

Or does the AVA want to get rid of the hobby of rearing birds among Singaporeans?

I seek clarification and further action from the AVA regarding this matter.

Lim Zi Xun


Read more!

Why Bring Your Own Bag Day must stay voluntary

Why green scheme must stay voluntary
Straits Times Forum 15 Jan 09;

I THANK Ms Cindy Tan for her letter, 'What's happened to Bring Your Own Bag Day in supermarkets?' (Jan 6).

When the Bring Your Own Bag scheme started in April 2007, it was a monthly affair. Its goal was to drum up awareness that an excessive number of plastic bags were handed out free and tossed out every day.

As Singaporeans have long been accustomed to the idea that plastic shopping bags are handed out free, the Singapore Environment Council (SEC) and the National Environment Agency anticipate the process of changing consumer habits to take some time.

We hope that Bring Your Own Bag Day will continue to be a solely voluntary programme, with retailers taking the lead. It has indeed been suggested to us to implement the scheme daily. However, we feel that, if shoppers manage to remember to bring their own bags on Wednesdays, the other days of the week should not pose a problem.

Ms Tan's observation that some cashiers have bagged groceries as usual on Wednesdays has not escaped us. We are also aware that cashiers face a tough job asking for donations from customers who take plastic bags. They are sometimes reprimanded and even verbally abused.

Retailers face a challenge training their cashiers, especially new staff and part-timers. Hence, the SEC will continue to work with them to improve on staff knowledge and awareness levels. The funds that have been raised will be used to further bolster the effectiveness of the programme.

On a positive note, additional sectors have come forward voluntarily to implement Bring Your Own Bag Day in their stores. Most recently, a small chain of florist shops and video stores have pledged their support.

The SEC views Bring Your Own Bag Day as a good opportunity for Singaporeans to demonstrate that they do not need legislation or draconian actions by the authorities in order to achieve positive results. In the meantime, we will look further into ways of raising shoppers' awareness and transforming this awareness into action. If shoppers can grasp the importance of reducing waste, they can go to any store and remember to bring their own bag, whether or not the store has a policy of charging for plastic bags.

Once again, the SEC would like to thank Ms Tan for her invaluable feedback and we welcome any further questions or comments.

Esther Tan (Ms)
Projects Manager
Singapore Environment Council


Read more!

CapitaLand saves $1.5m with green initiatives

Keith Chee, Business Times 15 Jan 09;

(SINGAPORE) CapitaLand said yesterday it saved about $1.5 million last year through green initiatives.

The initiatives were introduced as part of the group's ISO certification for environmental management, which it obtained for its Singapore operations in 2007.

In the first 11 months of 2008, CapitaLand reduced electricity and water consumption by 4 and 5 per cent respectively for 23 properties in Singapore.

In doing so, it achieved its overall aim of reducing electricity and water consumption by 2 per cent in 2008 from 2007.

According to president and chief executive Liew Mun Leong, CapitaLand surpassed its targets by 'creating an environmentally aware mindset throughout the company and implementing various green initiatives to reduce, reuse and recycle'.

It was able to make savings by taking a holistic approach to developing and managing its projects, properties and office operations.

One of the systems it has in place is an online environmental tracking program that monitors about 150 of its properties in 60 cities worldwide.

For 2009, CapitaLand aims to cut utility consumption 3 per cent at about 150 Singapore and overseas properties, saving about $3.5 million in the process.


Read more!

Mangrove Loss in Jakarta May Result in Flooding

Jakarta Globe 15 Jan 09;

Destruction of Jakarta’s mangrove population might be the cause of massive floods in the city’s coastal areas, environmental activists said on Wednesday.

Slamet Daryoni, the executive director of the Jakarta chapter of the Indonesian Forum for Environment, or Walhi, said that in 20 years the city's mangrove areas had been reduced from 1,400 hectares to just 45 hectares, a mere dot in Jakarta’s total area of 661 square kilometers.

“Originally, most of the Jakarta Bay area was covered with mangroves,” he said. “Now, almost all of the mangrove areas have had to make way for housing, commercial and industrial areas."

Research by the Bandung Institute of Technology, or ITB, in 2002 warned that the disappearance of mangroves would increase flooding danger, but the warning seemed to fall on deaf ears.

“Not until there was a massive development project around the Jakarta Bay area in the 1980s did Jakarta begin to experience massive floods like the ones we see today,” Slamet said.

“Jakarta must evaluate such projects and rethink its master plan.”

Mangroves offer a natural buffer to rising sea levels, protecting surrounding areas from floods.

Pollution and poor waste management have also been a blight on the mangrove population, with new trees dying within weeks of their planting, said Hendra Michael Aquan, coordinator of a volunteer group that seeks to safeguard Jakarta’s remaining wetlands.

“Because of the plastic and liquid waste, efforts to reintroduce mangroves into the area have been fruitless.”


Read more!

US Navy Allowed to Kill Whales in Hawaii During Sonar Training

Environment News Service 12 Jan 09;

WASHINGTON, DC, January 12, 2009 (ENS) - The federal government today issued authorization to the U.S. Navy to impact whales and dolphins while conducting sonar training exercises around the main Hawaiian Islands for the next five years. The letter of authorization and accompanying rules allow for injury or death of up to 10 animals of each of 11 species over the five years covered by the regulations.

The Navy requested authorization under the Marine Mammal Protection Act because the mid-frequency sound generated by tactical active sonar, and the sound and pressure generated by detonating explosives, may affect the behavior of some marine mammals or cause what the Navy calls "a temporary loss of their hearing."

Mid-frequency sonar can emit continuous sound well above 235 decibels, an intensity roughly comparable to a rocket at blastoff across hundreds of miles of ocean to reveal objects, such as submarines, underwater.

NOAA's Fisheries Service, which issued the authorization says serious injury or death to marine mammals is not expected as a result of the exercises. But the agency acknowledges that exposure to sonar has been associated with the stranding of some marine mammals, and some injury or death could occur.

The Fisheries Service has determined that these effects would have "a negligible effect on the species or stocks involved."

Protective measures outlined by NOAA require the Navy to establish marine mammal safety zones around each vessel using sonar and shut down sonar operations if marine mammals are seen within designated safety zones.

The Navy must use exclusion zones to ensure that explosives are not detonated when animals are detected within a certain distance.

The Navy must implement a stranding response plan that includes a training shutdown provision in certain circumstances and a memorandum of agreement to allow the Navy to contribute in-kind services to NOAA's Fisheries Service if the agency has to conduct a stranding response and investigation.

The regulations establish an area of extra caution in the Maui Basin because of its high density of humpback whales. The Hawaiian Islands National Marine Sanctuary covers the four island area of Maui; Penguin Bank; and extends off the north shore of Kauai, the north and south shores of Oahu, and the north Kona and Kohala coasts of the Big Island.

Hawaii is the only place in the United States where humpbacks breed, calve, and nurse their young. Approximately 4,000-5,000 whales migrate to the Hawaiian Islands each winter. Although the population of humpbacks is increasing, these whales remain endangered.

NOAA Fisheries Service said in a statement today that these measures "should minimize the potential for injury or death and significantly reduce the number of marine mammals exposed to levels of sound likely to cause temporary loss of hearing."

But environmentalists disagree.

"The role of the National Marine Fisheries Service is to protect the health and welfare of marine mammals and they are abdicating their duty with this authorization," said Taryn Kiekow, marine mammal staff attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council. The nonprofit organization has fought a series of legal battles against the Navy's use of sonar due to its adverse effects on whales and dolphins.

"They are recycling protections for sensitive marine mammal species and habitat near Hawaii that courts have repeatedly found inadequate," Keikow said.

The Navy has been conducting training exercises, including the use of mid-frequency sonar, in the Hawaiian Islands for more than 40 years.

Exercises range from large multi-national, month-long training exercises using multiple submarines, ships, and aircraft conducted every other year, known as Pacific Rim Training Exercises, to two- to three-day exercises to test the readiness of battle groups, known as Undersea Warfare Exercises, and shorter exercises that last less than a day.

NOAA's Fisheries Service and the Navy have developed a monitoring plan to use independent, experienced aerial and vessel-based marine mammal observers as well as Navy watch standers, passive acoustic monitoring, and tagging to better understand how marine mammals respond to various levels of sound and to assess the effectiveness of mitigation measures.

The implementation of this monitoring plan is included as a requirement of the regulations and the letter of authorization.

The letter of authorization, which is required for the Navy to legally conduct sonar activities, is issued annually, provided the Navy abides by the terms and conditions of the letter, submits the required annual reports, and shows their activities do not result in more numerous effects or more severe harm to marine mammals than were originally analyzed or authorized.


Read more!

Where should the elephants go?

Amirtharaj Christy Williams, BBC News 14 Jan 09;

There are no winners when elephants and humans compete for the same resources, says Christy Williams. But, he argues, intelligent buying by western consumers, and informed policies from governments in areas where elephants occur, could reduce the problem.

As night fell over the southern islands, I worked fast to fix a collar around an elephant's neck.

She had just sent me on an undignified flight through the air with a swish of her trunk - and this when she had been almost fully sedated.

To avoid a second hit, I crouched under the belly of a big camp tusker standing alongside her. An experienced veteran vital to our task of tranquillising and collaring wild elephants, this large male remained unruffled.

But I was still disconcerted and nervous with the angry trumpeting of her family herd from just beyond the surrounding bushes.

This lot was being kept at bay by another camp tusker and his mahout who used mock charges and shouting to dissuade the distressed elephants.

By the time we finished, it was pitch black. Exhausted, we hit the sack.

That was November 2006.

We were in an illegal coffee plantation inside the Bukit Barisan Selatan (BBS) National Park in Sumatra, Indonesia. My WWF colleagues and Indonesian government partners had summoned me because villagers were threatening to kill the small "problem" herd.

The BBS herd had already suffered at the hands of humans, and their number was down from more than 30 in the year 2000 to six by June 2006.

Our solution was to create an early-warning system involving a Global Positioning System (GPS) collar fixed on one of the elephants in this herd.

The GPS location data from the transmitter on the collar - beamed via satellite to a website - enabled us to follow the herd and warn villagers ahead of the approaching elephants.

Tough choices

In the more than 15 years I have been involved in elephant conservation and research, the storyline of the Asian elephant is depressingly similar.

The country, the people, the language or the retribution are different, but the cause for elephant-human conflict remains the same - humans displacing elephants from their natural habitat.

Twelve years ago, I trekked to a remote village in the Garo Hills in north-east India to investigate the death of a two-month old human infant, killed by an elephant.

A bull elephant had entered the village - a cluster of bamboo huts on stilts - in search of food.

During the commotion a couple rushed out in panic and left their sleeping infant inside their tiny hut. Before they could turn back, the elephant had pushed the hut down, crushing the baby to death.

It broke my heart to see the mother's raw pain and her tired and resigned eyes as she narrated the incident.

She asked why I was there and I told her I was doing a survey of elephants and elephant-human conflict.

With a sudden fire in her eyes, she said that if people like me were so interested in conserving elephants, we should take the elephants with us and tie them in our backyards.

That comment stayed in my mind; but the significance of the words came to haunt me when I was doing my PhD fieldwork on elephants in Rajaji National Park four years later.

In 1998, I lived in a small field camp, and elephants would sometimes come to our camp and sniff about for the pinches of cooking salt we would strategically leave for them under a tree.

One night, a herd of pachyderms smashed my kitchen, took a bag of salt and spread it around the field camp.

For the next two months, elephants visited every night looking for salt in the soil around the camp.

It was a nightmarish experience. And I was living in a solid concrete building!

Imagine the psychological impact of elephant raids on villagers living in fragile mud and bamboo huts.

Being at the receiving end certainly helped me have a deeper understanding of what this conflict really meant.

Understanding the threats

In India, Nepal and Bangladesh, humans encroach on elephant habitats, which are further fragmented by roads, canals, dams, mines.

Across South East Asia, forest loss has been largely fuelled by legal (and illegal) conversion of elephant habitat to oil palm and other plantation crops including acacia, rubber, coffee and tea.

All these factors combine to worsen human-animal conflicts, and it is vital that any solutions we seek are based on our understanding of the behaviour of these intelligent animals.

Findings of studies across India, Sri Lanka and Malaysia reveal some general patterns that might help us to avoid the worst conflicts.

Generally, elephants need about 200 sq km of forest home range.

A female elephant will almost always live and die inside the home range where she was born. Males disperse from their family groups when about 10 years and eventually find their own home range.

In large forest areas where all the elephant home ranges are contained within forested habitat, there is very little conflict.

As more humans move into forested habitats, elephant-human conflicts are born.

The encroachers, lacking technical help and access to effective and humane mitigation methods, retaliate by throwing burning tyres, shooting at the beasts with sharpened nails, even by laying out foods laced with killer pesticides.

In 2001, more than 15 elephants were killed in one incident near the Nameri Tiger Reserve when elephants ate pumpkins laced with Dimecron, a pesticide that is banned in Assam, but easily available nonetheless.

But more wholesale damage is caused by sanctioned habitat clearing at the hands of short-sighted government officials who encourage large areas to be set aside for monoculture cash-crop plantations or infrastructural and development projects.

Elephants are virtually led to the slaughter by the very governments mandated to protect them.

In India, we have seen this with the collusion of corrupt officials and academics writing fake Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) designed to serve the interest of a small group of politicians, industrialists or contractors who profit from the untruths.

"Mitigation" measures most often ignore elephant behaviour or ecology, since the teams that conduct the EIAs lack the expertise to deal with such delicate issues.

The brunt of the resulting conflict is borne by local communities and the beleaguered giants who stand no chance against the destructive power of humans.

No winners

Two months ago, I received word that the herd in BBS whose matriarch we had collared had killed a human mother and child in an illegal settlement within the park.

They were the only two who had not moved from the settlement despite being warned by our field team.

A few days later, I was sent images of two elephants that were killed in retaliation.

As an elephant biologist, I was filled with utter despair for the fate of the pachyderms.

As a father of two young children, I was wracked by the human tragedy that had unfolded, and remembered my own time in that dark forest building, as marauding elephants milled around me.

A dreadful realisation struck me - there are no winners when elephants and humans clash. Everyone loses.

What can we do?

Today, our receipts can be almost as important as our vote.

To ensure elephant habitat isn't needlessly destroyed, buy Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certified timber and certified coffee; and if you aren't sure whether a product has been sustainably sourced or not, then ask.

Amirtharaj Christy Williams is a biologist with WWF's Asian elephant and rhino programme

The Green Room is a series of opinion articles on environmental topics running weekly on the BBC News website


Read more!

New Survey Finds More than 600 Asian Elephants

livescience.com Yahoo News 14 Jan 09;

A new survey of dung has revealed a population of hundreds of endangered Asian elephants living in a Malaysian park. The animals could be the largest-known set of these pachyderms in Southeast Asia.

The researchers counted dung piles to estimate that there are 631 Asian elephants living in Taman Negara National Park - a 4,343 square kilometer (1,676 square mile) protected area in the center of Peninsular Malaysia. This result confirms the largest-known population of elephants remaining in this part of the world, according to the New York-based Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and Malaysia's Department of Wildlife and National Parks (DWNP), which partnered to study the elephants.

Asian elephants are endangered due to habitat loss and poaching; between 30,000 and 50,000 may remain in 13 Asian countries. The Asian elephant is listed on the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species and has seen a drastic reduction in total population across its range as a result of illegal poaching, increased human-wildlife conflict and other threats.

Elephants: the big picture

There are two distinct species of living elephants, the African elephant (Loxodonta africana) and the Asian elephant (Elephas maximus). The difference:

  • African elephant: weighs 8,000 to 14,000 pounds, deeply wrinkled skin, trunk tip with two finger-like projections
  • Asian elephant: weighs 6,000 to 12,000 pounds, lightly wrinkled skin, trunk tip with one finger-like projection


The African elephants are further subdivided into two subspecies:

  • Savanna elephant (Loxodonta africana africana): larger than forest elephants and sport tusks that curve outwards.
  • Forest elephant (Loxodonta africana cyclotis): smaller in size, have downward-pointing tusks that are relatively straight and more oval-shaped ears than the savanna subspecies.


There are about half a million African elephants in the wild, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources.

Counting dung piles

Counts of elephant dung piles to estimate population size are a scientifically proven technique that produces accurate figures. There were no previous scientific population surveys for Asian elephants in Taman Negara National Park, the researchers said.

"The surveys reveal the importance of Taman Negara in protecting wildlife especially those species that need large home ranges. DWNP will continue to safeguard this national park, which is the crown jewel of Malaysia's protected areas system. The numbers of elephants is testament to the importance of the park in protecting wildlife," said Dato' Rasid, director-general of the Department of Wildlife and National Parks.

Researchers were unsure of how many elephants lived in the park before this survey, although there were good reasons to think that the population was substantial, said Melvin Gumal, director of the WCS's conservation programs in Malaysia.

The park, which contains one of the world's oldest rainforests, dating back 130 million years, also supports tigers, leopards, dholes, numerous monkey species and 350 types of birds.


Read more!

Mystery of the British penguins that are marching towards oblivion

Lewis Smith, Times Online 14 Jan 09;

An endangered species of penguin is mysteriously disappearing from a remote British island in the South Atlantic at a rate of 100 birds every day. About two million northern rockhopper penguins have vanished from Tristan da Cunha and Gough Island, part of the British overseas territory of St Helena, in half a century.

The once huge penguin populations on the islands have dwindled so dramatically that they are now threatened with extinction, and the British Government was accused yesterday of contributing to the decline.

A 90 per cent slump has been observed in both areas but on Tristan it took 130 years whereas it took just 45 years on Gough, where northern rockhopper penguins, Eudyptes moseleyi, have vanished at a rate of 100 a day.

The islands, which lie 230 miles apart, are the penguin's stronghold, with more than 80 per cent of the world population being found there. The remaining population is on two French-administered islands, St Paul and Amsterdam in the Indian Ocean, and are declining just as rapidly.

Southern rockhopper penguins, Eudyptes chrysocome, which are found on the Falklands and in South America, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand, are also in decline but they are found in greater numbers than their sister species.

Trevor Glass, the conservation officer on Tristan da Cunha, carries out frequent counts of the penguins and has been alarmed at the fall.

“Rockies are one of Tristan's most charismatic birds and a bird we are used to seeing in good numbers on all the islands,” he said. “These unexplained declines are really worrying and we'll do everything we can to understand what is going on.”

Climate change and overfishing are among the possible causes but ornithologists are baffled by the fall and are anxious for a research project to be conducted to identify whatever is killing the penguins.

There is concern among environmentalists, however, that the British Government “cannot be bothered” to put any great effort or resources into wildlife conservation on the overseas territories. A meeting is being held today between ministers from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, and the Department for International Development to try to reach agreement.

Preparatory meetings held between civil servants to try to reach an accord are thought to have been inconclusive.

“They are completely disinterested,” Sarah Sanders, the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds' (RSPB) overseas territories officer, said. “It's ridiculous and embarrassing. We are meant to be world leaders in biodiversity conservation and we can't even decide who is responsible for the overseas territories.”

She said it appeared that the inertia was partly driven by embarrassment within Whitehall and Westminster that they still had to take responsibility for the remnants of Britain's Empire.

British overseas territories boast several species of wildlife found nowhere else in the world and are home to 32 species of birds at risk of extinction.

Richard Cuthbert, of the RSPB, was one of the authors of a report published in the journal Bird Conservation International on northern rockhopper penguins, one of four species of penguin listed as endangered.

He concluded: “The declines on Gough since the 1950s are equivalent to losing 100 birds every day for the last 50 years. With more than half the world's penguins facing varying degrees of extinction, it is imperative that we establish the exact reason why the northern rockhopper penguin is sliding towards oblivion.”

The northern rockhopper population on Gough is estimated at 32,000 to 65,000 pairs. On Tristan it is 40,000 to 50,000 pairs.

Geoff Hilton, a conservation biologist who has studied the rockhopper penguins, added: “Millions of pairs have disappeared. We really don't understand the causes, but we suspect that a major change is taking place in the marine ecosystem.”


Read more!