El Nino odds rising with warming Pacific

Michael Perry, Reuters 28 May 09;

SYDNEY (Reuters) - The chances of a 2009 El Nino, a warming of eastern Pacific waters that often brings drought to Australia's farmlands, has risen and is above a 20 percent probability, the Australian Bureau of Meteorology said on Thursday.

International climate models are now predicting a warming of the Pacific Ocean," said the bureau.

"The average of the forecasts from each of these five models predict El Nino conditions being established by the southern spring, and by mid-winter in four of them," said the bureau in its latest report.

"With this higher predictability and better agreement between the forecasts, the probability of the development of an El Nino event in 2009 is now much higher than one month ago and it is significantly higher than the climatological probability of about 20 percent."

The possibility of a drier spring could reduce estimates of Australia's 2009/10 wheat crop, now being planted.

Current estimates range from 21 million to 23 million tonnes, little changed from the 21.4 million tonnes harvested in 2008/09, which was the best crop in four years following drought-breaking rains in some parts of eastern Australia.

Australia, the world's fourth largest wheat exporter, has been battling its worst drought in 100 years, but rains in 2008 and early 2009 along the northeast coast have eased conditions in parts of the country.

The bureau said the Southern Oscillation Index was neutral but in a "rapidly warming phase." The index measures atmospheric pressure differences between Darwin in northern Australia and Tahiti in the central Pacific.

Sea surface temperatures continued to warm right across the Pacific Ocean and were now about half a degree warmer than average, it said.

"Below the surface, equatorial Pacific Ocean temperatures are warmer than average by 2-3 degree Celsius across much of the basin," said the bureau.

Scientists have linked El Nino events in the Pacific Ocean with Australian droughts. El Nino occurs when the eastern Pacific Ocean heats up, with warmer, moist weather moving toward the east, leaving drier weather in the western Pacific and Australia.

La Nina occurs when the eastern Pacific Ocean cools, leaving the western Pacific warmer and increasing the chance of wetter conditions over Australia.

(Editing by Alex Richardson)

Read more!

Climate-change diasters kill 300,000 a year

Meera Selva, Associated Press Google News 29 May 09;

LONDON (AP) — Climate-change disasters kill around 300,000 people a year and cause about $125 billion in economic losses, mainly from agriculture, a think-tank led by former U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan reported Friday.

The Global Humanitarian Forum also estimated that 325 million people are seriously affected by climate change — a number it says will double by 2030, as more people are hit by natural disasters or suffer environmental degradation caused by climate change.

"Climate change is a silent human crisis," Annan said in a statement. "Yet it is the greatest emerging humanitarian challenge of our time."

The report suggests that rising sea levels, desertification and changing rainfall patterns are reducing many people's access to safe drinking water and food. This in turn increases diarrhea, malaria and malnutrition.

The report said 99 percent of all people who die due to climate-change related causes live in developing countries, even though those countries generate less than 1 percent of total emissions of greenhouse gases responsible for global warming.

The report used existing data on weather-related disasters, population trends and economic forecasts to draw its conclusions. It was released ahead of climate change talks in Bonn, Germany, next week, that are to lead to a possible new global treaty on cutting greenhouse gas emissions in Copenhagen in December.

Climate change kills 300,000 a year: study
Yahoo News 29 May 09;

LONDON (AFP) – Climate change is responsible for the deaths of 300,000 people every year and costs 125 billion dollars (90 billion euros) annually, a new report said Friday.

The study, from the Global Humanitarian Forum, claims to be the first to measure the impact of climate change on people globally -- and says it is 325 million of the poorest who suffer most.

It highlights the plight of people in Bangladesh, where millions face regular flooding and cyclones, Uganda, where farmers are plagued by drought and some Caribbean and Pacific islands facing obliteration due to rising seas.

This is despite the world's 50 least developed countries contributing less than one percent of global carbon emissions.

Speaking at the report's launch in London, ex UN secretary-general Kofi Annan said it showed the need for a "bold, post-Kyoto agreement to protect the world" at crunch international climate change talks in Copenhagen in December.

"The alternative is mass starvation, mass migration, mass sickness and mass death," Annan, the forum's president, added.

"If political leaders cannot assume responsibility for Copenhagen, they choose instead responsibility for failing humanity."

Annan described climate change as "the greatest emerging humanitarian challenge of our time" and said the world was "at a crossroads" on how to tackle the issue.

The report projects that by 2030, deaths worldwide due to climate change will rise to nearly half a million a year and the cost will hit 300 billion dollars.

It urges developing countries, which account for 99 percent of climate change casualties, to scale up their efforts to adapt for climate change "by a factor of 100."

The vast majority of deaths are caused by gradual environmental degradation which causes problems like malnutrition rather than natural disasters, it said.

The Global Humanitarian Forum was founded in 2007 to work on issues including climate change. The report is also backed by British charity Oxfam.

Climate change causes 315,000 deaths a year
Megan Rowling, Reuters 29 May 09;

LONDON (Reuters) - Climate change kills about 315,000 people a year through hunger, sickness and weather disasters, and the annual death toll is expected to rise to half a million by 2030, a report said on Friday.

The study, commissioned by the Geneva-based Global Humanitarian Forum (GHF), estimates that climate change seriously affects 325 million people every year, a number that will more than double in 20 years to 10 percent of the world's population (now about 6.7 billion).

Economic losses due to global warming amount to over $125 billion annually -- more than the flow of aid from rich to poor nations -- and are expected to rise to $340 billion each year by 2030, according to the report.

"Climate change is the greatest emerging humanitarian challenge of our time, causing suffering to hundreds of millions of people worldwide," Kofi Annan, former U.N. secretary-general and GHF president, said in a statement.

"The first hit and worst affected are the world's poorest groups, and yet they have done least to cause the problem."

The report says developing countries bear more than nine-tenths of the human and economic burden of climate change, while the 50 poorest countries contribute less than 1 percent of the carbon emissions that are heating up the planet.

Annan urged governments due to meet at U.N. talks in Copenhagen in December to agree on an effective, fair and binding global pact to succeed the Kyoto Protocol, the world's main mechanism for tackling global warming.

"Copenhagen needs to be the most ambitious international agreement ever negotiated," he wrote in an introduction to the report. "The alternative is mass starvation, mass migration and mass sickness."

The study warns that the true human impact of global warming is likely to be far more severe than it predicts, because it uses conservative U.N. scenarios. New scientific evidence points to greater and more rapid climate change.

The report calls for a particular focus on the 500 million people it identifies as extremely vulnerable because they live in poor countries most prone to droughts, floods, storms, sea-level rise and creeping deserts.

Africa is the region most at risk from climate change, home to 15 of the 20 most vulnerable countries, the report says. Other areas also facing the highest level of threat include South Asia and small island developing states.

To avoid the worst outcomes, the report says efforts to adapt to the effects of climate change must be scaled up 100 times in developing countries. International funds pledged for this purpose amount to only $400 million, compared with an average estimated cost of $32 billion annually, it notes.

"Funding from rich countries to help the poor and vulnerable adapt to climate change is not even 1 percent of what is needed," said Barbara Stocking, chief executive of Oxfam in Britain and a GHF board member.

"This glaring injustice must be addressed at Copenhagen in December."

(Reporting by Megan Rowling, editing by Tim Pearce)

Read more!

Climate Change Hits Poor Hardest in U.S.

A new study finds that the poor will be disproportionally affected by global warming, even in the U.S

Douglas Fischer, Scientific American 29 May 09;

Climate change is disproportionately affecting the poor and minorities in the United States - a "climate gap" that will grow in coming decades unless policymakers intervene, according to a University of California study.

Everyone, the researchers say, is already starting to feel the effects of a warming planet, via heat waves, increased air pollution, drought, or more intense storms. But the impacts - on health, economics, and overall quality of life - are far more acute on society's disadvantaged, the researchers found.

"Climate change does not affect everyone equally in the United States," said Rachel Morello-Frosch, associate professor at the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley and lead author of The Climate Gap. "People of color and the poor will be hurt the most - unless elected officials and other policymakers intervene."

Watching this unfold is akin to watching a movie where disparate and seemingly unrelated storylines converge to denouement that is "decidedly tragic," the researchers wrote.

For instance, the report finds that African Americans living in Los Angeles are almost twice as likely to die as other Los Angelenos during a heat wave. Segregated in the inner city, they're more susceptible to the "heat island" effect, where temperatures are magnified by concrete and asphalt. Yet they're less likely to have access to air conditioning or cars.

Similarly, Latinos make up 77 percent of California's agricultural workforce and will likely see economic hardship as climate change reworks the state's highest-value farm products. The dairy industry brings in $3.8 billion of California's $30 billion agriculture income; grapes account for $3.2 billion. Yet climatic troubles are expected to decrease dairy production between 7 percent and 22 percent by century's end, while grapes will have trouble ripening, substantially reducing their value.

Other impacts, according to the researchers: Households in the lowest income bracket spend twice the proportion of their income on electricity than those in the highest income bracket. Any policy that increases the cost of energy will hurt the poor the most.

California industries considered heavy emitters of greenhouse gases have a workforce that is 60 percent minority. Any climate plan that fails to transition those workers to new "green energy" jobs threatens to widen the racial economic divide.

Minorities and the poor already breathe dirtier air than other Americans and are more likely to lack health insurance. As higher temperatures hasten the chemical interactions that produce smog, they're going to feel the most impact.

The findings, the researchers say, underscore the need for policymakers to consider environmental justice when addressing climate. Ignoring the climate gap, they warn, could reinforce and amplify current and future socioeconomic and racial disparities.

"As America takes steps to prevent climate change, closing the climate gap must also be a top priority," said Manuel Pastor, a co-author and director of the Program for Environmental and Regional Equity at the University of Southern California's Center for Sustainable Cities. "If we protect those who are most vulnerable, we will protect all of us."

Read more!

Climate change huge challenge for Africa: minister

Wangui Kanina, Reuters 29 May 09;

NAIROBI (Reuters) - The challenges facing Africa to fight climate change are enormous and costs are huge though hard to quantify, South Africa's environment minister said on Friday.

Minister Buyelwa Sonjica said her peers from more than 30 African countries, meeting in Nairobi, had agreed a joint position on climate change, to be presented at negotiations in Copenhagen this December.

"Increased support to Africa should be based on priorities which include adaptation, capacity building, financing and technology development and transfer," she told a news conference.

The world's poorest continent is expected to be hardest hit by climate change, despite having the lowest emissions of greenhouse gases.

According to the United Nations, between 250 and 750 million people in Africa will face water shortages by 2020, while in some African countries, yields from rain-fed agriculture could be reduced by up to 50 percent by 2020.

"Most of the work remains to be done, particularly with the cost of adaptation in Africa estimated between $1 billion to $50 billion per year," Sonjica said.

Sonjica, who is the president of the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment, urged rich countries not to attach conditions on assistance given to developing countries.

"African governments must commit certain amounts from their budget, but you cannot commit what you don't have. I get a sense that there is a push for us to over-commit," she said.

COSTS

The United Nations has estimated the costs of adapting to rising seas in Africa could amount to at least 5-to-10 percent of gross domestic product toward the end of this century.

It also projects an increase of 5-to-8 percent of arid and semi-arid lands in Africa by 2080.

Africa advocates expansion of categories so that countries can benefit from carbon credits, and other international incentives to include agriculture and forest management.

Yvo de Boer, head of the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat, said bigger countries such as China and Korea had won more funds than Africa from rich nations to help cut greenhouse gases.

Africa has received relatively little aid because the projects available in the continent were much smaller, he told a news conference.

"Because many economies in Africa are very small, not a lot can be done to reduce emissions gases, so reducing emissions in Africa is not as big an opportunity as it is in Asian countries," he said.

(Editing by Michael Roddy)

African ministers take stand on climate change
Yahoo News 29 May 09;

NAIROBI (AFP) – African environment ministers on Friday demanded clear commitment from industrialised countries to fund projects to counter the effects of global warming.

They lamented lack of commitment by developed states to fund projects that will help Africa, the world's lowest polluter, to cope with the effects of climate change.

"There is no commitment that has been made to fund adapation and there are still conditionalities... being pegged," South Africa's Environemnt Minister Buyelwa Sonjica said.

"If anything we would have wanted a stronger leadership from the developed world and I am not sure if it's there. I haven't seen it yet," said Sonjika who heads the African Ministerial Conference on the Environment.

The ministers who gathered in Nairobi also agreed on a common stand on climate change to be presented at the United Nations climate conference in Copenhagen in December.

The agreement calls for more finances and clean energy technology transfer as well as significant carbon emission cuts by developed countries.

The ministers want industrialised nations to cut emissions by 25 to 40 percent by 2020 below the 1990 levels.

They also urged the G8 countries to implement a recommendation to establish a regional centre for climate change in Africa.

"Africa's environment ministers have today signaled their resolve to be part of the solution to the climate change challenge by forging a unified position," said Achim Steiner, the UN Environment Programme chief.

"It is now time for other continents and countries, especially the developed economies, to now seriously shoulder theirs."

French Minister of Environment Jean-Louis Borloo, who attended, pledged Europe's total support for Africa, warning against using the global financial crisis to delay action.

"Europe will do it. We know our American friends started late... but we have to stick to our 25 to 40 percent reduction.

"The (global) crisis should not be used as pretext by industrialised countries to delay," he told AFP.

The African Union commisioner for agriculture Rhoda Tumussime said the contintent has "moral right to demand for compensation from those countries that contribute most of the problem to global warming.

"It is grossly unfair for Africa to suffer from a problem for which it has contributed very minimally," she said.

Kenya's Environment Minister John Michuki said: "African should not be the first to pay the price."

According to UNEP's statistics, between 75 million and 250 million people in Africa may face water shortages by 2020.

It also estimates that up to 50 billion dollars would be needed every year to cope with the effects of climate change in Africa.

Read more!

EU carbon emissions tracked downwards in 2007

Yahoo News 29 May 09;

PARIS (AFP) – Europe's emissions of greenhouse-gas emissions fell in 2007 for the third year running as warmer weather cut into consumption of oil, coal and gas to heat homes, the European Environment Agency (EAA) said on Friday.

Domestic emissions of six greenhouse gases by the 27-nation European Union (EU) fell by 1.2 percent, or the equivalent of 59 million tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2), in 2007 over 2006, the Copenhagen-based agency said.

The EU-27 emitted 9.3 percent less gas than in 1990, the base year for the Kyoto Protocol.

The 15 older members of the EU saw a year-on-year decrease in emissions of 1.6 percent.

Under Kyoto, the EU-15 signed up to an overall reduction of eight percent according to a timeframe of 2008-2012.

By the end of 2007, the Fifteen were 5.0 percent below the 1990 benchmark, the EAA said. The big laggards are Spain, Denmark, Ireland, Austria and Finland.

These figures do not take into account "forest sinks," by which Kyoto signatures can include the carbon-absorbing capacity of woodlands in their emissions targets.

In a press release, EAA Executive Director Jacqueline McGlade said billions of euros (dollars) earmarked to ease the economic crisis in Europe would have a beneficial spin-off in carbon emissions.

The next step is agreement at UN talks in Copenhagen this year that will deepen commitments beyond 2012, when the Kyoto Protocol's provisions expire, McGlade said.

"The economic stimulus packages that governments are currently adopting represent a crucial opportunity to address the climate crisis and the financial crisis simultaneously," she said.

"A strong Copenhagen agreement later this year would drive forward investments vital to our future prosperity."

Read more!

U.S. says rich nations likely to miss carbon targets

Alister Doyle, Reuters 29 May 09;

OSLO (Reuters) - Rich nations as a group are unlikely to reach the deep 2020 cuts in greenhouse gas emissions urged by developing nations as part of a new U.N. climate treaty, the top U.S. climate envoy said on Friday.

China, India and other developing nations say the rich must do most to fight global warming to encourage developing countries to sign up for more action as part of a new U.N. climate pact due to be agreed in Copenhagen in December.

"We...have been engaged in conversations with our European friends about how you might express an aggregate kind of goal," U.S. Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern said in a telephone briefing before a round of U.N. talks in Bonn from June 1-12.

"I don't think you are going to see a 25-to-40 percent aggregate number" for cuts by rich nations below 1990 levels by 2020, he said, adding: "It's possible when you add everything up that you won't be that far away from it."

In 2007, the U.N.'s Climate Panel outlined cuts by developed nations of between 25 and 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 as a scenario to avoid the worst of climate changes such as floods, droughts, more powerful storms and rising ocean levels.

France suggested this week that developed nations as a group should work out a way to guarantee overall cuts of 25-40 percent. Washington says such a goal is out of reach for its domestic emissions.

INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION

But China, India and others say the rich have benefited from use of fossil fuels since the industrial revolution and should cut by at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020. They say the poor still need to use more energy to end poverty.

A key U.S. Congressional panel last week approved a plan that would cut U.S. emissions by 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and by 83 percent by 2050.

U.S. emissions have risen sharply in recent years so the 2020 goal works out as only a 4 percent cut relative to 1990. This week, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged the United States to do more.

The European Union has promised to cut emissions by 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, and by 30 percent if others rich nations follow suit.

EU emissions have fallen since 1990 so, expressed as cuts from 2005, the EU's 2020 goals work out as reductions of 14 and 24 percent respectively. Stern said that made the EU's planned effort comparable to that of the United States

He also said China, which has overtaken the United States as top emitter in recent years, and other developing antions would have to step up actions. "They are going to need to do more," he said.

(Editing by Michael Roddy)

Read more!

Best of our wild blogs: 30 May 09

300 entangled horseshoe crabs rescued at Mandai Besar mangrove
on the Habitatnews blog

First public intertidal walk at St. John's island
on the Urban Forest blog and the wonderful creation blog

Lush seagrass meadows of Paris Ris
on the wild shores of singapore blog and Bruguiera hainesii and other surprises

White-bellied Sea Eagle: Nesting
on the Bird Ecology Study Group blog

Chestnut-headed Bee-eater catching insects
on the Bird Ecology Study Group blog

Saving Gaia is Back
on AsiaIsGreen

Read more!

Best of our wild blogs: 29 May 09

Job opportunity - TMSI, NUS: Outreach officer
deadline 04 Jul 2009 on ecotax

Solo at Changi
on the Psychedelic Nature blog

Of hermit and feather
on the wonderful creation blog

More on hornbills locking bills
on the Bird Ecology Study Group blog

Crows robbing grains from lorry
on the Bird Ecology Study Group blog

Creatures of the night
on talfryn.net

So many things to see at Kranji Reservoir Park!
on the Lazy Lizard's Tales blog

Mottephobia
on the Urban Forest blog

Putting garbage in the ocean on purpose?
on blogfish

Read more!

Unfair to compare disparity in fines: some lawyers say

For first-time offenders who feed monkeys
Andre Yeo, The New Paper 29 May 09;

FEED monkeys and you could be fined $3,000 - even if it's your first time.

Drink and drive, and if you're a first-time offender, you could be fined $1,000.

Why the disparity? Why is the seemingly lesser offence drawing a heavier fine?

Mr Wilson Choo, 53, wrote to The Straits Times Forum page on 15 May, pointing this out. He was referring to the recent case of a housewife, who was fined $3,000 for feeding sweets to monkeys at Old Upper Thomson Road last February.

But four of the five lawyers The New Paper spoke to said making such a comparison may be simplistic and unfair as the offences are different.

Feeding monkeys comes under the Parks & Trees Act with a maximum fine of $50,000 and a jail term of up to six months.

A first-time drink driver can be fined between $1,000 and $5,000 or be jailed up to six months. He would also be disqualified from driving all classes of vehicles for at least a year, which would mean he will have to re-take for his driver's licence.

But Mr Lim Kia Tong, 57, a lawyer for 29 years, said that under the Parks and Trees Act, the $50,000 fine for feeding monkeys is a maximum sum. Depending on the judge, a person can actually be fined only $1.

Mr Lim said that the range of punishment for each offence had already been legislated, taking into account factors like the harm the offence could cause to others.

He said it was up to the judge to exercise his discretion to impose the fine that fit the offence.

Referring to another monkey-feeding case, Appeals Judge V K Rajah had said there was a need to send a clear message that feeding monkeys increased the risk of them behaving aggressively. He also said the fines could go higher or lower, depending on the circumstances of each case.

Lawyer Dennis Singham also pointed out that a first-time drink driving offender who injures or kills someone would not be charged with drink driving, but with dangerous driving.

That offence carries stiffer penalties including a fine of up to $3,000, and a jail sentence of up to a year.

Repeat offenders can be fined up to $5,000 and also be jailed up to two years. Anyone convicted of causing death by dangerous driving could be jailed up to five years.

Too easy on drink drivers

Lawyer Gloria James, 41, however, felt that a driver who kills someone might get off lightly if charged with causing death through a negligent or rash act under Section 304A of the Penal Code.

She said the offender would usually get a fine of $6,000 to $10,000 and would be disqualified from driving for three to five years.

She added: 'Here, a life is lost because of the offender's negligence and a fine seems too lenient to compensate the family. Though the offender would also be slapped with a civil suit (fatal accident claim), this payout is usually by the insurance company and the punishment would appear to be too lenient.'

Mr Choo told The New Paper he wrote to the media as he felt the punishments for drink driving were not effective.

In his letter, he had suggested confiscating the driver's vehicle, imposing a fine 10 times the list price of the car involved in the offence, immediate jail time until the case was heard in court, and a life ban on driving.

He also suggested increasing the prison term to a minimum of five years.

He said: 'If a person can buy a car for $50,000, what's a $5,000 fine for a third offence? There are more drink drivers than people feeding monkeys, so they should get a heavier fine.'

When asked about the perceived disparity between the punishments for drink driving and feeding monkeys, and to comment on Mr Choo's suggestions, all the Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) would say was that sentencing was a prerogative of the courts.

Said a spokesman: 'The maximum is set by Parliament. Within the range set out in a statute, the trial judge has a discretion.'

Lawyer Mark Goh, 42, however, suggested the law may have to be reviewed. A lawyer for 15 years, he said drink driving offences were common in court and the tariffs and fines were reviewed very frequently.

But the monkeys were a separate matter.

He said: 'The feeding monkey legislation may be an old piece of law and may not have been reviewed recently. This was probably a case which came up suddenly and AGC did not review it to see how it compares with other statutes.'

He said there could be instances where crimes were not only found in the Penal Code but in obscure or little-used acts like the Parks and Trees Act, which could contain legislation which are not in sync with modern times.

He added: 'This is quite normal and that is why we have reviews to update these odd pieces of legislation.'

DIFFERENCES IN FINES

FEEDING MONKEYS

# $3,000 fine (starting point)

# 154 fined in '08

# 31 fined, so far, this year

DRINK DRIVING

# $1,000 min fine

# 3,586 arrested in '08

# 1,141 caught so far, this year

Read more!

NEA getting tougher on litterbugs

Stiffer penalties and more enforcement in place; public campaign to get message across
Amresh Gunasingham, Straits Times 29 May 09;

ENFORCEMENT is being stepped up here to tackle the rising problem of litterbugs.

The National Environment Agency (NEA), in a drive to improve public cleanliness standards here, has increased the number of man hours dedicated to targeting littering 'hot spots' by 150 per cent.

The worst spots are shopping malls, bus interchanges and popular food centres.

With more eyes in search of offenders, a record 4,463 litterbugs were nabbed by NEA enforcement officers last month, 33 per cent higher than the average of 3,363 recorded for each of the first three months of this year.

Also introduced last month, fines for first-time offenders who failed to dispose of small items such as cigarette butts, sweet wrappers and parking coupon tabs in litter bins were increased to $300 - a rise of $100.

And repeat offenders now get harsher penalties. In addition to serving Corrective Work Orders (CWO), they can also be hit with fines of up to $5,000.

Under the CWO scheme, which was introduced in November 1992, littering offenders can be made to complete up to 12 hours picking up rubbish, with each session capped at three hours. These are normally held at parks, beaches, town centres, shopping malls and around HDB estates.

The revisions are the first made in the past decade.

An NEA spokesman said the majority of litterbugs are male smokers aged between 21 and 30 years. Of the number caught this year, 4.5 per cent - or 655 - were repeat offenders.

NEA is also tackling the litter issue through a public education campaign that targets schools, businesses, grassroots organisations and major outdoor events such as the National Day Parade.

The effort will be given a boost later this year when a new national cleanliness campaign is launched to promote a cleaner living environment.

But Mr Wilson Ang, founder of environmental group Eco Singapore, which promotes more sustainable lifestyles among youth here, feels harsher penalties for littering will bring about only 'short-term success'.

'As with any habit, it takes an individual time to change a personal habit,' he said.

He added that the key to bringing about change to this perennial problem starts in school: 'Education is the long-term strategy to groom Singapore into being a more socially gracious society.'

He said more people need to take ownership of their environment.

NEA said it was too early to judge whether the increase in fines last month has had the desired effect of cleaning up the mess.

'We believe that penalties such as fines are strong deterrents against littering and are still necessary against the minority who continue to litter,' the spokesman said.

But ultimately, it is personal responsibility that matters when it comes to keeping Singapore clean and litter free, she added.

Laws a must to curb littering: Expert
WHO adviser lauds Singapore's efforts but notes problems with smokers, foreign workers
Maria Almenoar, Straits Times 29 May 09;

SINGAPORE'S ongoing issue with litter was openly debated at a liveable cities forum hosted by Singapore's Centre for Liveable Cities (CLC) yesterday.

The event, attended by 200 guests at the Suntec convention centre, was organised by the CLC as well as the Health Promotion Board and the National Environment Agency (NEA).

Dr Everold Hosein, senior communication adviser-consultant with the World Health Organisation (WHO), spoke on social change and community engagement for health and liveable cities.

He said education and persuasion alone are not enough when it comes to changing people's mindsets about health and cleanliness.

'Enforcement and coercion are key to getting people to be better behaved,' he said.

The question of Singapore's own battle with cleanliness was raised during Dr Hosein's talk. He said Singapore had done a 'spectacular job' in curbing the problem and said it was a good example for other cities.

'When you have 80per cent of your population following the rules and the country looks this clean, that is a good job,' he said.

But Singapore could still work on some 'problem areas' - among them, Little India and getting Singaporeans to stop throwing their cigarette butts on the floor.

Dr Hosein has been working with the NEA since last month on a study about Singapore's litter issue. He likened Little India to New Year's Eve in New York - only in Singapore it is a weekly affair in which foreign workers come to enjoy the 'carnival' in Serangoon Road.

'To put it bluntly, you cannot expect people who have been living around a mess for 10, 15 years of their life, to come here for two years to work and change their mentality,' he said.

He added that when it comes to foreign workers, enforcement is the only way to make sure cleanliness is adhered to.

'Even if you are not meting out a fine, you must have officers patrolling the area to give the appearance of enforcement,' he said.

As for cigarette butts, he said Singaporeans tended to give the excuse that there were not enough rubbish bins in sight.

In Japan, however, smokers carry a container in which to put their cigarette stubs before emptying them into a dustbin.

One audience member asked if Singaporeans tended to litter because they are used to maids cleaning up after them.

Dr Geh Min, former Nature Society president and a panellist at the event, related a story about a mother who wanted her son taken out of a school project which involved weighing the amount of litter the school produced. 'She offered her maid to do her son's part,' she said.

Relating her own experience at home, panellist and guest of honour Dr Amy Khor, Senior Parliamentary Secretary (Environment and Water Resources), said: 'When my family eats, everyone just gets up and leaves the table without clearing the table unless I remind them. I can only imagine when I'm not at home.'

Other panellists said that while some parents were not good role models for their children, there were occasions when children managed to convince their parents to change their bad behaviour.

Read more!

Don’t Despair, Repair

Nature recovers from damage sooner than expected
Journal Watch Online 29 May 09;

Be skeptical of frequent claims that humans are doing irreparable harm to our environment that will take centuries or millennia to repair. Two Yale University researchers compiled 240 independent studies of polluted or damaged ecosystems and came to what they call a startling conclusion: once humans committed to their restoration, most ecosystems healed within a matter of decades.

Eighty-three of the ecosystems analyzed by these studies showed full recovery for variables representing ecosystem function, animal community and plant community health; 90 had mixed results, 67 showed no recovery, the PLoS ONE study found.

Forests took the longest to recover, an average of 42 years, while many aquatic systems needed between 10 and 20 years. Meanwhile around a half a century was needed to mend ecosystems harmed by agriculture or a multiplicity of threats, whereas the effects of oil spills, trawling, invasive species, and mining were reversed in less than a decade.

The authors say their study redeems the value of restoration to those who would monger visions of doom and insist on chronicling ecosystem destruction in hopes of banning all human activity in “natural” areas. “Our results are not intended to give license to exploit ecosystems without regard to sustainability,” they write. “The message of our paper is that recovery is possible and can be rapid for many ecosystems, giving much hope for humankind to transition to sustainable management of global ecosystems.” – Jessica Leber

Source: Jones, H.P. and Schmitz, O.J. et al. 2009. Rapid Recovery of Damaged Ecosystems. PLoS ONE DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005653

Read more!

Call for support to end wildlife trade in Malaysia

Letter to the editor: More support needed from other agencies to prevent poaching and end wildlife trade
WWF 29 May 09;

TRAFFIC Southeast Asia and WWF-Malaysia applaud the Department of Wildlife and National Parks (DWNP), particularly the enforcement team in Perak, for nabbing poachers in the Bintang Hijau Forest Reserve in Perak (Poachers Nabbed in Perak Reserve, May 25).

Their efforts to safeguard protected areas and wildlife against poachers, is a clear commitment to tackling a problem that is an increasing concern for Malaysia.

Poaching is the first step in the chain of illegal wildlife trade and consumption that could leave us with empty forests one day. Areas like the Bintang Hijau Forest Reserve where the Cambodian poachers were nabbed are home to many threatened species such as the Sumatran rhinoceros, clouded leopard and Sambar deer. It is also an important tiger landscape as outlined in the National Tiger Action Plan.

As previous enforcement actions have shown, it is not the only area under threat.

WWF-Malaysia has also found signs of local and foreign encroachment and poaching along the Grik-Jeli highway which provides the access points into the Belum-Temengor forest complex. In these areas, some animals are specifically targeted by poachers, others are killed opportunistically by poachers searching for non-timber forest products such as gaharu (agarwood).

Therefore the department’s move to step up enforcement efforts in the Hulu Perak district, including the Gerik-Jeli highway, is an excellent and timely move.

TRAFFIC and WWF-Malaysia urge the department to continue its good work and not to stop at nabbing poachers, but to further follow the trail of the illegal wildlife traders they supply.

Stopping armed poachers is dangerous and difficult work that needs the support of many agencies. TRAFFIC and WWF-Malaysia call on other national enforcement agencies including the police, army, Customs Department and Forestry Department to join in the fight to stamp out poaching and cross-border encroachment.

The public can do their part by reporting wildlife crime to the Wildlife Crime Hotline, via SMS to
019-3564194.

From: Dato' Dr. Dionysius S.K. Sharma D.P.M.P., Executive Director/CEO, WWF-Malaysia and Noorainie Awang Anak, Senior Programme Officer, TRAFFIC Southeast Asia

Read more!