Community networks key to forest reform in Indonesia

Adianto P. Simamora, The Jakarta Post 24 Mar 10;

Communities linked to their own networks and organizations have the best chance of success in community forestry, a research finds.

The three-year research project, conducted by the Center for International Forestry Research (CIFOR), assessed 30 sites in 10 countries across Africa, Asia and Latin America.

“The research focused on communities that had fought for or been granted new statutory rights,” Anne Larson, senior associate at CIFOR said.

The findings were published in a book, Forest for People: Community Rights Forest Tenure Reform, which was launched on Wednesday.

“We aimed at identifying issues and concerns from the perspective of socially and economically vulnerable groups that were seeking tenure reforms,” she said.

Tenure reforms – a change in tenure rights in forested areas – represent a forest reform comparable to widespread agrarian reforms of the mid 20th century.

Although the world’s forests are still primarily public land, more than a quarter of forests in developing countries are now owned by or assigned to communities.

It said that tenure was particularly important in light of the ongoing negotiations on REDD (reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation).

For REDD schemes to be successful, clear ownership of forest resources and carbon pools needs to be established so that payments for carbon sequestration can be made. Without having secure rights and clear ownership over carbon pools, communities and indigenous groups may not be able to claim benefits from REDD schemes, and may even be dispossessed.

This would be to the detriment of efforts both to mitigate climate change and to ensure equity, Anne said.

Read more!

Global Deforestation Slowed Over Last Decade: U.N.

Daniel Flynn, PlanetArk 25 Mar 10;

Deforestation slowed in the last decade, in the first sign that global conservation efforts are bearing fruit, but an area the size of Costa Rica is still being destroyed each year, the United Nations said on Thursday.

A report by the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) found that about 13 million hectares of forest a year were converted to other uses or lost through natural causes in 2000- 2010, down from 16 million a year in the previous decade.

The net loss of forest area slowed to 5.2 million a year between 2000 and 2010. That was still an area the size of Costa Rica, but down from 8.3 million a year in the 1990s thanks largely to ambitious tree planting programs in Asia.

Efforts by major offenders such as Indonesia and Brazil to reduce deforestation also helped reverse the trend.

"For the first time, we are able to show that the rate of deforestation has decreased globally as a result of concerted efforts taken both at local and international level," said Eduardo Rojas, assistant director of FAO's Forestry Department.

The FAO said tougher legislation had helped curb destruction of woodland. Seventy-six countries have issued or updated forest policies since 2000, many of them allocating woodland to local communities for sustainable development.

The proportion of forests contained in national parks and other legally-protected areas has climbed to 13 percent, having risen by 94 million hectares since 1990.

Forests cover just over 4 billion hectares or 31 percent of the world's total land area. They store some 289 gigatons of carbon -- more than all the carbon in the atmosphere -- but this decreased by 0.5 gigatons a year during 2000-2010.

"A lower deforestation rate and the establishment of new forests have helped bring down the high level of carbon emissions from forests caused by deforestation," said Mette Loyche Wilkie, coordinator of FAO's Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010.

BEYOND 2020?

However, Wilkie warned tree planting programs in China, India and Vietnam, accounting for most of the recent gains in forest area, would end by 2020. She urged governments to quickly put in place measures to slow deforestation.

"Without such interventions, we risk a sudden return to high rates of net forest loss and of carbon emissions from forests, which we had in the 1990s," Wilkie said.

Indonesia sharply reduced the speed of its deforestation to 0.5 million hectares a year between 2000 and 2010, versus 1.9 million a year during the previous decade. Brazil lowered its own figure to 2.6 million from 2.9 million hectares.

South America, nonetheless, had the highest regional level of net deforestation at 4 million hectares a year, followed by Africa with 3.4 million hectares.

Asia, by contrast, expanded its forest area by a total of close to 2.2 million hectares a year, thanks to the reforestation in China, India and Vietnam which added 4 million hectares a year of fresh woodland.

In North and Central America, the forest area remained fairly stable, while in Europe it continued to expand, although at a slower rate than previously.

(Editing by Janet Lawrence)

Forest loss slows as China plants
Richard Black, BBC News 25 Mar 10;

The world's net rate of forest loss has slowed markedly in the last decade, with less logging in the Amazon and China planting trees on a grand scale.

Yet forests continue to be lost at "an alarming rate" in some countries, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).

Its Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010 finds the loss of tree cover is most acute in Africa and South America.

But Australia also suffered huge losses because of the recent drought.

"It is good news," said the report's co-ordinator Mette Loyche Wilkie, a senior forestry office with FAO.

"This is the first time we've been able to say that the deforestation rate is going down across the world, and certainly when you look at the net rate that is certainly down.

"But the situation in some countries is still alarming," she told BBC News.

The last decade saw forests being lost or converted at a rate of 13 million hectares per year, compared to 16 million hectares in the 1990s.

However, new forests were being planted to the tune of more than seven million hectares per year; so the net rate of loss since the year 2000 has been 5.2 million hectares per year, compared to 8.3 million in the 1990s.

Globally, forests now cover about 31% of the Earth's land surface.

The biggest losses of forest occurred in Brazil, Indonesia and Australia.

Australia's reduction of half a million hectares per year is principally down to the drought conditions that have covered most of the country in recent years, thought to be a consequence of global climate change.

The Indonesian and Brazilian figures were not such a surprise, with both countries possessing vast tracts of forest and major logging industries; and deforestation is slowing.

"Both Brazil and Indonesia are reporting a significant drop in the loss of forests," said Dr Loyche Wilkie.

"In Brazil it's spectacular, and that's largely because there is a political goal to reduce deforestation by 80% by 2020 and that's supported by the president."

As deforestation has fallen, there has also been an increase in the planting of new forests, particularly in China, leading to a net increase in national forest cover of three million hectares per year.

But the programme - aimed at preventing desertification, reducing flooding and protecting farmland - is due to end in 2020, and if it does, the FAO points out, that will rapidly lead to an increase in the net loss of forest figure.

India and Vietnam have also mounted significant forest-planting programmes, the FAO notes.

UN agencies hope the net rate of loss will be slowed further in coming years if the climate change-related initiative on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD) comes to fruition.

Diverse roots

The Global Forest Resources Assessment is principally based on data submitted by governments.

Details also include how forests are regulated and how they are used; and here, there are also some encouraging trends, according to Eduardo Rojas, assistant director-general of FAO's forestry department.

"Not only have countries improved their forest policies and legislation, they have also allocated forests for use by local communities and indigenous peoples and for the conservation of biological diversity and other environmental functions.," he said.

"However, the rate of deforestation is still very high in many countries and the area of primary forest - forests undisturbed by human activity - continues to decrease, so countries must further strengthen their efforts to better conserve and manage them."

The FAO is conducting another survey using satellite observations that they hope will provide a much more detailed assessment, and should be published at the end of next year.

World deforestation decreases, but remains alarming in many countries
FAO publishes key findings of global forest resources assessment
FAO 25 Mar 10;

25 March 2010, Rome - World deforestation, mainly the conversion of tropical forests to agricultural land, has decreased over the past ten years but continues at an alarmingly high rate in many countries, FAO announced today.

Globally, around 13 million hectares of forests were converted to other uses or lost through natural causes each year between 2000 and 2010 as compared to around 16 million hectares per year during the 1990s, according to key findings of FAO's most comprehensive forest review to date The Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010. The study covers 233 countries and areas.

Brazil and Indonesia, which had the highest loss of forests in the 1990s, have significantly reduced their deforestation rates. In addition, ambitious tree planting programmes in countries such as China, India, the United States and Viet Nam - combined with natural expansion of forests in some regions - have added more than seven million hectares of new forests annually. As a result the net loss of forest area was reduced to 5.2 million hectares per year between 2000 and 2010, down from 8.3 million hectares annually in the 1990s.

The world's total forest area is just over four billion hectares or 31 percent of the total land area. The net annual loss of forests (when the sum of all gains in forest area is smaller than all losses) in 2000-2010 is equivalent to an area about the size of Costa Rica.

Biggest losses in South America, Africa

South America and Africa had the highest net annual loss of forests in 2000-2010, with four and 3.4 million hectares respectively. Oceania also registered a net loss, due partly to severe drought in Australia since 2000.

Asia, on the other hand, registered a net gain of some 2.2 million hectares annually in the last decade, mainly because of large-scale afforestation programmes in China, India and Viet Nam, which have expanded their forest area by a total of close to four million hectares annually in the last five years. However, conversion of forested lands to other uses continued at high rates in many countries.

In North and Central America, the forest area remained fairly stable, while in Europe it continued to expand, although at a slower rate than previously.

"For the first time, we are able to show that the rate of deforestation has decreased globally as a result of concerted efforts taken both at local and international level," said Eduardo Rojas, Assistant Director-General of FAO's Forestry Department.

"Not only have countries improved their forest policies and legislation, they have also allocated forests for use by local communities and indigenous peoples and for the conservation of biological diversity and other environmental functions. This is a very welcoming message in 2010 - the International Year of Biodiversity.

"However, the rate of deforestation is still very high in many countries and the area of primary forest - forests undisturbed by human activity - continues to decrease, so countries must further strengthen their efforts to better conserve and manage them", he added.

Forests and climate change

Forests play an important part in climate change mitigation. Forests store a vast amount of carbon. When a forest is cut down and converted to another use, carbon is released back into the atmosphere.

"A lower deforestation rate and the establishment of new forests have helped bring down the high level of carbon emissions from forests caused by deforestation and forest degradation", said Mette Løyche Wilkie, the Coordinator of the Assessment.

"But we need to look forward because the large tree planting programmes in China, India and Viet Nam, accounting for most of the recent gains in forest area, are scheduled to end by 2020," she added. "That means we have a short window of opportunity to put in place effective and permanent measures to significantly reduce the current rates of deforestation and forest degradation. Without such interventions we risk a sudden return to the high rates of net forest loss and of carbon emissions from forests, which we had in the 1990s," she said.

FAO's Global Forest Resources Assessments are published every five years. More than 900 specialists from 178 countries were involved in the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010. The full report of this Assessment will be released in October 2010.

Key findings

Other key findings in the report included:

* Brazil lost an average of 2.6 million hectares of forest annually in the last ten years as compared with 2.9 million hectares per year in the 1990s while Indonesia's figures were respectively 0.5 and 1.9 million hectares per year.
* Primary forests account for 36 percent of total forest area but have decreased by more than 40 million ha since 2000. This is largely due to reclassification of primary forest to "other naturally regenerated forests" because of selective logging or other human interventions.
* The area of forest in national parks, wilderness areas and other legally protected areas has increased by more than 94 million hectares since 1990 and it now equals 13 percent of the total forest area.
* Forests are among the world's chief carbon sinks. They store some 289 gigatonnes (Gt) of carbon in trees and vegetation. The carbon stored in forest biomass, deadwood, litter and soil together is more than all the carbon in the atmosphere. Globally, carbon stocks in forest biomass decreased by an estimated 0.5 Gt a year in 2000-2010, mainly due to a reduction in total forest area.
* Fires, pests and diseases are causing increased damage to forests in some countries. On average, one percent of all forests was reported to be significantly affected each year by forest fires. Outbreaks of forest insects damage some 35 million hectares of forest annually. Extreme weather events such as storms, blizzards and earthquakes also took a heavy toll in the past decade.
* Seventy-six countries have issued or updated their forest policies since 2000 and 69 countries - primarily in Europe and Africa - have enacted or amended their forest laws since 2005.
* Data collection for the Global Forest Resources Assessment is becoming more comprehensive and precise. New data and additional information on afforestation and on natural expansion of forests for the past 20 years has made it possible to estimate rates of deforestation and loss from natural causes more accurately. The new global estimate for 1990 to 2000 (close to 16 million ha per year) is higher than previously estimated (13 million ha), because it now also includes deforestation within countries that have had an overall net gain in forest area.
* A remote-sensing survey of forests, led by FAO, sampling some 13 500 sites over a period of 15 years, will provide even more accurate data on global and regional rates of deforestation by the end of 2011.

Read more!

U.S. bees in more trouble than ever after bad winter

Garance Burke And Seth Borenstein, Associated Press Yahoo News 24 Mar 10;

MERCED, Calif. – The mysterious 4-year-old crisis of disappearing honeybees is deepening. A quick federal survey indicates a heavy bee die-off this winter, while a new study shows honeybees' pollen and hives laden with pesticides.

Two federal agencies along with regulators in California and Canada are scrambling to figure out what is behind this relatively recent threat, ordering new research on pesticides used in fields and orchards. Federal courts are even weighing in this month, ruling that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency overlooked a requirement when allowing a pesticide on the market.

And on Thursday, chemists at a scientific conference in San Francisco will tackle the issue of chemicals and dwindling bees in response to the new study.

Scientists are concerned because of the vital role bees play in our food supply. About one-third of the human diet is from plants that require pollination from honeybees, which means everything from apples to zucchini.

Bees have been declining over decades from various causes. But in 2006 a new concern, "colony collapse disorder," was blamed for large, inexplicable die-offs. The disorder, which causes adult bees to abandon their hives and fly off to die, is likely a combination of many causes, including parasites, viruses, bacteria, poor nutrition and pesticides, experts say.

"It's just gotten so much worse in the past four years," said Jeff Pettis, research leader of the Department of Agriculture's Bee Research Laboratory in Beltsville, Md. "We're just not keeping bees alive that long."

This year bees seem to be in bigger trouble than normal after a bad winter, according to an informal survey of commercial bee brokers cited in an internal USDA document. One-third of those surveyed had trouble finding enough hives to pollinate California's blossoming nut trees, which grow the bulk of the world's almonds. A more formal survey will be done in April.

"There were a lot of beekeepers scrambling to fill their orders and that implies that mortality was high," said Penn State University bee researcher Dennis vanEngelsdorp, who worked on the USDA snapshot survey.

Beekeeper Zac Browning shipped his hives from Idaho to California to pollinate the blossoming almond groves. He got a shock when he checked on them, finding hundreds of the hives empty, abandoned by the worker bees.

The losses were extreme, three times higher than the previous year.

"It wasn't one load or two loads, but every load we were pulling out that was dead. It got extremely depressing to see a third of my livestock gone," Browning said, standing next to stacks of dead bee colonies in a clearing near Merced, at the center of California's fertile San Joaquin Valley.

Among all the stresses to bee health, it's the pesticides that are attracting scrutiny now. A study published Friday in the scientific journal PLOS (Public Library of Science) One found about three out of five pollen and wax samples from 23 states had at least one systemic pesticide — a chemical designed to spread throughout all parts of a plant.

EPA officials said they are aware of problems involving pesticides and bees and the agency is "very seriously concerned."

The pesticides are not a risk to honey sold to consumers, federal officials say. And the pollen that people eat is probably safe because it is usually from remote areas where pesticides are not used, Pettis said. But the PLOS study found 121 different types of pesticides within 887 wax, pollen, bee and hive samples.

"The pollen is not in good shape," said Chris Mullin of Penn State University, lead author.

None of the chemicals themselves were at high enough levels to kill bees, he said, but it was the combination and variety of them that is worrisome.

University of Illinois entomologist May Berenbaum called the results "kind of alarming."

Despite EPA assurances, environmental groups don't think the EPA is doing enough on pesticides.

Bayer Crop Science started petitioning the agency to approve a new pesticide for sale in 2006. After reviewing the company's studies of its effects on bees, the EPA gave Bayer conditional approval to sell the product two years later, but said it had to carry a label warning that it was "potentially toxic to honey bee larvae through residues in pollen and nectar."

The Natural Resources Defense Council sued, saying the agency failed to give the public timely notice for the new pesticide application. In December, a federal judge in New York agreed, banning the pesticide's sale and earlier this month, two more judges upheld the ruling.

"This court decision is obviously very painful for us right now, and for growers who don't have access to that product," said Jack Boyne, an entomologist and spokesman for Bayer Crop Science. "This product quite frankly is not harmful to honeybees."

Boyne said the pesticide was sold for only about a year and most sales were in California, Arizona and Florida. The product is intended to disrupt the mating patterns of insects that threaten citrus, lettuce and grapes, he said.

Berenbaum's research shows pesticides are not the only problem. She said multiple viruses also are attacking the bees, making it tough to propose a single solution.

"Things are still heading downhill," she said.

For Browning, one of the country's largest commercial beekeepers, the latest woes have led to a $1 million loss this year.

"It's just hard to get past this," he said, watching as workers cleaned honey from empty wooden hives Monday. "I'm going to rebuild, but I have plenty of friends who aren't going to make it."

___

AP Science Writer Seth Borenstein reported from Washington, D.C.

Read more!

Chemical From Plastic Water Bottles Found Throughout Oceans

Brandon Keim Wired 24 Mar 10;

Read More http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/03/ocean-bpa/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+wiredscience+%28Blog+-+Wired+Science%29&utm_content=Google+Reader#ixzz0j9DAEVtu

A survey of 200 sites in 20 countries around the world has found that bisphenol A, a synthetic compound that mimics estrogen and is linked to developmental disorders, is ubiquitous in Earth’s oceans.

Bisphenol A, or BPA, is found mostly in shatter-proof plastics and epoxy resins. Most people have trace amounts in their bodies, likely absorbed from food containers. Its hormone-mimicking properties make it a potent endocrine system disruptor.

In recent years, scientists have moved from studying BPA’s damaging effects in laboratory animals to linking it to heart disease, sterility and altered childhood development in humans. Many questions still remain about dosage effects and the full nature of those links, but in January the U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced that “recent studies provide reason for some concern about the potential effects of BPA on the brain, behavior, and prostate gland of fetuses, infants and children.”

The oceanic BPA survey, presented March 23 at an American Chemical Society meeting in San Francisco, was conducted by Nihon University chemists Katsuhiko Saido and Hideto Sato. At an ACS meeting last year, they described how soft plastic in seawater doesn’t just float or sink intact, but can break down rapidly, releasing toxins. In their new findings, they showed that BPA-containing hard plastics can break down too, and found BPA in ocean water and sand at concentrations ranging from .01 to .50 parts per million.

As for what those numbers mean for public and environmental health, it’s hard to say. BPA can cause reproductive disorders in shellfish and crustaceans, and doses below a single part per trillion can have cell-level effects, but the path from water and sand to ocean animals needs to be studied.

One disturbing possibility is that BPA could bioaccumulate, with animals eating BPA-tainted animals that have eaten BPA-tainted animals, finally reaching high concentrations in top-level ocean predators and the humans who eat them. For that to happen, BPA would have to be stored in fatty tissue, rather than passing quickly through the body.

“That’s a really difficult, unsettled question,” said Shanna Swan, a University of Rochester environmental medicine specialist who wasn’t involved in the survey.

In a 2009 Environmental Health Perspectives study of BPA concentrations in people who had recently fasted, Swan found that BPA levels remained high longer than expected. It’s possible that BPA indeed accumulated in their fat, said Swan. They could also have picked up BPA from as-yet-unappreciated non-dietary sources, such as household dust or leaching from PVC water pipes. Or both scenarios may be true.

The BPA contamination found by Saido and Sato likely comes from a mix of boat paint and plastic. About three million tons of BPA-containing plastics are produced each year. The United Nations estimates that the average square mile of ocean contains 46,000 pieces of plastic trash.

“Marine debris plastic in the ocean will certainly constitute a new global ocean contamination for long into the future,” wrote Saido and Sato in their presentation.

Read more!

Cyclone debris threat to Great Barrier Reef

Peter Michael, The Courier-Mail 24 Mar 10;

THE Great Barrier Reef faces an environmental disaster if marine debris is swept out to sea, turning the cyclone-ravaged Whitsundays into a junkyard.

Volunteers are in a race against time to stop tonnes of toxic debris lining the shores being dumped on fragile coral reef ecosystems in the world-renowned Whitsunday Islands by a high tide.

Experts fear marine life including fish, turtles and dugong could be choked by the vast armada of post-cyclone rubbish.

MASSIVE JOB: Charlotte Belcher, from the UK, helps with the clean-up of cyclone debris on beaches around Airlie Beach. Picture:Rob Maccoll Source: The Courier-Mail

Plastics, fibreglass, oil, diesel, fishing lines, ropes and "millions of shattered pieces" of shipwrecked boats line the high-tide mark on the mainland after Sunday's category-three Cyclone Ului.

But a 4m high tide on Saturday morning threatens to lift rubbish off beaches and breakwaters and sweep it out to sea, trashing the pristine islands and Reef off Airlie Beach.

Eco-warrior Charlotte Belcher, 19, is one of about 80 volunteers in the tourist mecca working against the clock to collect marine debris.

"It is a huge job," said the British backpacker. "There are millions of shattered pieces of junk.

"If this gets dumped on the Reef it will be devastating for marine life."

Authorities are at an impasse over funding of volunteer groups such as Eco-Barge services, headed by Airlie local Libby Edge, to pick up the tonnes of plastic and marine debris.

"It seems like it is too hard for them," Mrs Edge said. "We have got a barge, truck and 80 volunteers ready to go but they are quibbling over whose responsibility this is.

"The council say they will clean up above the high-tide mark, while Commonwealth authorities are thinking about what to do. But we need to get to it before we face an environmental disaster out on the Reef."

Yesterday Maritime Safety Queensland and the Environment Department were undecided about how to tackle any volunteer clean-up effort. Meridien Marine civil project manager Stan Butler said the company would help sponsor a coastal clean-up.

"It needs to be done properly and quickly," he said.

Salvage crews with barges and 220-tonne cranes have been refloating and lifting about 70 shipwrecked vessels off the coast as insurance assessors catalogue the disaster.

But tourist operators are hoping for a busy Easter period to recover from the battering to bookings in the aftermath of Cyclone Ului.

"We are open for business," Tourism Whitsundays chief executive Peter O'Reilly said.

Most island resorts including Daydream, Hamilton, and Hayman islands are operating normally, while power has been restored at Airlie Beach hotels and backpacker hostels.

Read more!

Bleaching leaves Australia's Lord Howe reef 'on knife-edge'

Sarah Clarke, ABC News 24 Mar 10;

Updated March 24, 2010 10:27:00

Parts of the world's most southerly coral reef are under threat after it suffered its largest-recorded bleaching event.

Lord Howe Island is well known for its pristine environment and natural beauty.

The island's isolation has allowed it to develop unique and endemic marine life and the waters contain an unusual mix of tropical, sub-tropical and temperate corals.

But since January the waters around Lord Howe have experienced unusually warmer temperatures. The average rose by two degrees Celsius and the corals are showing the first signs of extensive bleaching.

And unlike the Great Barrier Reef, where corals have been known to recover, the genetically unique reef at Lord Howe could take decades to regenerate.

Peter Harrison from the Southern Cross University says it is the most significant bleaching event ever recorded at Lord Howe Island.

"The significance of this is that Lord Howe Island has the southern-most coral reef, so when that starts to see signs of extensive coral bleaching we know that the climate is definitely changing," he said.

Professor Harrison and a team of scientists have spent the past week diving off Lord Howe Island, assessing the extent of the stress.

In 1998, the reef survived relatively unscathed despite widespread coral bleaching around the world.

This year, not only have the ocean temperatures been higher, but conditions have been unusually calm.

And that has contributed to the significance of the bleaching.

The island's marine park manager, Ian Kerr, says the still conditions meant water was not flushed out of the lagoon.

"So the lagoon especially had higher temperatures than it normally does and higher UV light," he said.

It is not known how much of the reef will recover.

Professor Harrison says some mortality is expected but cooler temperatures over coming months may reduce the stress.

"At the moment we really can't determine whether or not there [will] be serious mortality of corals at some of these sites or not," he said.

"It was personally very upsetting to go back to this absolutely gorgeous reef environment.

"It should be noted that at the moment it is still a beautiful pristine reef environment, but to go back and see so many of these corals bleached was really upsetting to me personally.

"I am hoping that the cooler sea temperatures will allow a decrease in stress and most of these corals come back really quickly and recover fully.

"But at the moment it is on a knife edge."

Coral reef on Lord Howe bleached by summer
Bridie Smith, Sydney Morning Herald 25 Mar 10;

THE world's southernmost coral reef is on a knife edge, according to scientists who say this summer's above-average water temperatures have left Lord Howe Island's unique reef stressed and bleached.

In parts of the reef, especially areas around the island's lagoon, up to 95 per cent of corals have been bleached since January.

''This is a significant bleaching event,'' said Peter Harrison, director of marine studies at Southern Cross University, who has been monitoring the reef since 1993.

Professor Harrison said the situation, caused by warmer-than-usual waters carried south by the currents from the Great Barrier Reef, had been compounded by a period of light winds and little cloud cover.

''That means both increased temperature and increased light penetration into the water, which stressed the symbiotic algae which lives in the corals,'' he said.

It is the first major bleaching of the reef, which is considered globally significant because of its unique combination of tropical, subtropical and temperate species.

Professor Harrison said the bleaching was significant for another reason. This, he said, was evidence that subtropical areas were not immune to the impact of climate change.

''It is a clear warning that changes to climate will impact not only the tropical coral systems but also the subtropical ones,'' he said.

Professor Harrison said there was no guarantee that all damaged corals would recover.

While he stressed that not all the island's 100 coral species had been bleached, he said the recovery of damaged corals could take many months.

Unlike the Great Barrier Reef, the Lord Howe Island corals are geographically and genetically isolated, which makes recovery a much longer process.

''At the moment the corals are really on a knife edge,'' he said. ''Many of the corals are very badly stressed. We're hoping that most will recover, but at the moment we can't tell. So we're going to have to go back in a couple of months to repeat the surveys.''

He said the effect of the water temperature exceeding 26-27 degrees in the past few months had been significant for the crescent-shaped island, which is a World Heritage site in the Tasman Sea, 600 kilometres east of the NSW.

In 1998 Professor Harrison said the maximum temperature recorded in the island's lagoon was just over 27 degrees. This year it passed 28 degrees, more than two degrees above normal summer water temperatures.

Monthly temperatures are just as revealing. Last March the sea water temperature was 22 degrees, compared with 26 recorded this month.

''The stress largely happened when it peaked at 28 degrees in February,'' he said. ''It only takes a few weeks of above-normal sea temperatures to make the difference for these corals.''

Climate change puts Australian reef on 'knife edge'
Yahoo News 24 Mar 10;

SYDNEY (AFP) – The world's southernmost coral reef is on a "knife-edge" after warmer seas blamed on climate change bleached large parts of it for the first time, an Australian scientist warned on Wednesday.

Peter Harrison, who has been monitoring the world heritage-listed Lord Howe Island since 1993, said a two degrees Celsius (four Fahrenheit) rise in sea temperatures had drained much of the reef of its distinctive colours.

"We're hoping the vast majority of these corals will be able to recover, but at the moment this whole system is on a knife-edge and we don't know what's going to happen," Harrison told AFP.

Harrison, whose Southern Cross University team surveyed the reef about 600 kilometres (370 miles) east of Sydney this month, said the unusually warm water had travelled down from tropical seas around Australia's Great Barrier Reef.

He blamed the warmer seas on climate change and said the reef could face "an even more severe event" in the future.

"It's exactly what you predict from warming seas," Harrison said. "This is a warning of likely future increases of stress on this world's southernmost reef."

Harrison said the reef will survive if the seas return to their normal temperatures quickly enough, but could take decades to recover from a severe bleaching.

He added that the damage was also affecting other marine life, including a type of anemone which provides a home for a rare type of fish.

Bleaching occurs when overheated corals expel crucial algae that give them their colour.

Warm waters bleach corals
Southern Cross University, Science Alert 26 Mar 10;

Above average sea temperatures throughout the early part of 2010 have led to the first recorded major coral bleaching event at Lord Howe Island, the world’s southern-most coral reef.

Water temperatures have exceeded 26-27 degrees over the last few months, which is a couple of degrees warmer than the usual summer sea temperature, leading to mild to moderate bleaching in some parts of the reef system and almost total coral bleaching in other areas.

The reef lies within the Lord Howe Island Marine Park and is part of the Lord Howe Island World Heritage site.

Southern Cross University researchers have mapped the extent of the bleaching and damage to the corals at the request of the Marine Parks Authority and will return to assess the rate of recovery.

Professor Peter Harrison, from the University’s School of Environmental Science and Management, has been monitoring the coral reefs off Lord Howe Island since 1993. He is leading a team of researchers including Steve Dalton and Andrew Carroll from the National Marine Science Centre.

"This is the southern-most coral reef in the world with a unique mixture of tropical, subtropical and temperate species,” Professor Harrison said. “This is a significant bleaching event, which is likely to lead to some mortality of these corals.

"This unusual bleaching event is further evidence that climate change is having a very real impact and that even the cooler water, sub-tropical reef systems are not immune to these changes."

Professor Harrison said the danger for these reefs was that, unlike the Great Barrier Reef, they were geographically and genetically isolated making recovery a much longer process.

"This coral reef is globally significant but largely isolated from potential source reefs that might serve to replenish populations damaged by severe disturbances, and would take decades to recover from a severe disturbance" he said.

Professor Harrison said two of the major sites affected by the bleaching were within sanctuary zones within the marine park, and noted that research from other tropical reefs showed that areas protected from fishing had better recovery rates from severe coral bleaching episodes.

This recent bleaching event, caused by warm seawater carried south on the East Australian Current, is much larger than the minor coral bleaching event that took place at Lord Howe Island in 1998. The 1998 mass coral bleaching event severely damaged many coral reefs around the world, whereas at Lord Howe Island relatively new coral species became bleached and most corals recovered after the 1998 bleaching period.

Lord Howe Island Marine Park manager Ian Kerr said while some mortality was expected he was hopeful of a good recovery with many of the most severely affected sites within sanctuary zones in the marine park. He said the Marine Parks Authority would continue to do everything to monitor and assess the situation.

"I've seen aerial photographs and I’m pleased to report the beauty and uniqueness of the reef is still intact, we remain very concerned about this event and will continue to facilitate the research and monitoring that needs to continue,” Mr Kerr said.

We don't expect a full picture to emerge for a while yet, and possibly not for another year. While there's no doubt sea surface temperatures contributed to this bleaching, local weather in January was unprecedented. It was the hottest, driest, most cloudless January ever recorded. There was also very little ocean swell which led to poor mixing and thus hotter lagoon temperatures.

"Since 2004 no trawling, long-lining or any netting has been allowed in the marine park with nearly 30 per cent of the system protected in sanctuary zones.

"These events show how important marine protected areas are as climate change takes hold and affects the marine environment. The integrity of sanctuaries is very important in the recovery and resilience of these fragile and beautiful reef systems," Mr Kerr said.

Professor Harrison said his team planned to return to Lord Howe in a few months to complete further surveys and assess the extent of coral and reef community recovery.

Read more!

Wet areas turning dry and combustible

Stephen Then, The Star 25 Mar 10;

MIRI: The underground water table has sunk to new depths in more regions in northern Sarawak, turning once wet and swampy areas into dry and highly combustible ones.

The authorities have noticed these changes following the quick spread of wildfires in interior districts of Lawas and Limbang and the Sarawak-Brunei border over the past week.

Most of these areas were once very wet and forested but now many of these are on fire as the El Nino weather phenomenon takes its toll on more areas in the state.

It was reported that as much as 2,500ha of forests in the Limbang division had been razed by fires.

Limbang Division Fire and Rescue Department chief Mohd Hilmi Abu Hussein said yesterday the wildfires started a week ago.

“We have deployed our men to as many of the fire sites as possible to contain the fires,” he said.

Deputy Chief Minister and State Disaster Relief Committee chairman Tan Sri Dr George Chan said wildfires were becoming a problem in the north.

“Miri is now okay, the Fire and Rescue Department has contained the wildfires.

“The problem in Limbang is that it is too hot and too dry.

“I have ordered cloud-seeding to be carried out to help douse the flames but was told there was not enough clouds over Limbang,” he added.

State Natural Resources and Environment Board Miri regional enforcement chief Michael Tinggan said his men had detected four hotspots in Lawas on Tuesday.

“The fires are being fanned by strong winds,” he said.

Read more!

Disputed Bay of Bengal island 'vanishes' say scientists

BBC News 24 Mar 10;

A tiny island claimed for years by India and Bangladesh in the Bay of Bengal has disappeared beneath the rising seas, scientists in India say.

The uninhabited territory south of the Hariabhanga river was known as New Moore Island to the Indians and South Talpatti Island to the Bangladeshis.

Recent satellites images show the whole island under water, says the School of Oceanographic Studies in Calcutta.

Its scientists say other nearby islands could also vanish as sea levels rise.

Beneath the waves

The BBC's Chris Morris in Delhi says there has never been a permanent settlement on the now-vanished island, which even in its heyday was never more than two metres (about six feet) above sea level.

In the past, however, the territorial dispute led to visits by Indian naval vessels and the temporary deployment of a contingent from the country's Border Security Force.

"What these two countries could not achieve from years of talking, has been resolved by global warming," said Professor Sugata Hazra of the School of Oceanographic Studies at Jadavpur University in Calcutta.

Anyone wishing to visit now, he observed, would have to think of travelling by submarine.

Professor Hazra said his studies revealed that sea levels in this part of the Bay of Bengal have risen much faster over the past decade than they had done in the previous 15 years.

And he predicts that in the coming decade other islands in the Sundarbans delta region will follow New Moore, or South Talpatti, beneath the waves.

"We will have ever larger numbers of people displaced from the Sunderbans as more island areas come under water," Prof Hazra said.

Disputed isle in Bay of Bengal disappears into sea
Nirmala George, Associated Press Yahoo News 24 Mar 10;

NEW DELHI – For nearly 30 years, India and Bangladesh have argued over control of a tiny rock island in the Bay of Bengal. Now rising sea levels have resolved the dispute for them: the island's gone.

New Moore Island in the Sunderbans has been completely submerged, said oceanographer Sugata Hazra, a professor at Jadavpur University in Calcutta. Its disappearance has been confirmed by satellite imagery and sea patrols, he said.

"What these two countries could not achieve from years of talking, has been resolved by global warming," said Hazra.

Scientists at the School of Oceanographic Studies at the university have noted an alarming increase in the rate at which sea levels have risen over the past decade in the Bay of Bengal.

Until 2000, the sea levels rose about 3 millimeters (0.12 inches) a year, but over the last decade they have been rising about 5 millimeters (0.2 inches) annually, he said.

Another nearby island, Lohachara, was submerged in 1996, forcing its inhabitants to move to the mainland, while almost half the land of Ghoramara island was underwater, he said. At least 10 other islands in the area were at risk as well, Hazra said.

"We will have ever larger numbers of people displaced from the Sunderbans as more island areas come under water," he said.

Bangladesh, a low-lying delta nation of 150 million people, is one of the countries worst-affected by global warming. Officials estimate 18 percent of Bangladesh's coastal area will be underwater and 20 million people will be displaced if sea levels rise 1 meter (3.3 feet) by 2050 as projected by some climate models.

India and Bangladesh both claimed the empty New Moore Island, which is about 3.5 kilometers (2 miles) long and 3 kilometers (1.5 miles) wide. Bangladesh referred to the island as South Talpatti.

There were no permanent structures on New Moore, but India sent some paramilitary soldiers to its rocky shores in 1981 to hoist its national flag.

The demarcation of the maritime boundary — and who controls the remaining islands — remains an open issue between the two South Asian neighbors, despite the disappearance of New Moore, said an official in India's foreign ministry, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak on international disputes.

Bangladesh officials were not available for comment Wednesday.

Read more!

Ships Can Cut CO2 By Slowing Down: Study

Jonathan Saul, PlanetArk 25 Mar 10;

Merchant ships can cut their carbon emissions by as much as 30 percent over the next three years by traveling more slowly, a Brussels-based environmental group said on Wednesday.

The shipping sector accounts for nearly 3 percent of global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions and pressure has grown for cuts.

A study commissioned by Seas at Risk found that by slow steaming, vessels can reduce their fuel consumption and cut CO2.

The study, conducted by Dutch consultancy group CE Delft, showed current oversupply in the shipping industry provided opportunities for ships to slow down.

"From 2010 through 2012, emission reductions in the order of 30 percent are maximally achievable without the need for retrofitting slow-steaming equipment," the study said.

Seas at Risk said the study evaluated tankers, container ships and bulk carriers.

"The emission reductions are most pronounced in the case of bulk carriers circa 40 percent," it said.

Seas at Risk said the sector has had to deal with oversupply and a global economic downturn, which has hit shipping hard.

"There are several ways in which the industry can deal with the oversupply of ships. One is to decrease the amount of cargo carried per ship, another is to idle ships, and a third is to sail at lower speeds," it said.

"The latter option has the advantage that fuel is saved and emissions are reduced."

The study was presented at a meeting this week of United Nations shipping agency the International Maritime Organization (IMO), which will examine measures aimed at cutting CO2.

"The industry has to some extent already started slow steaming, but the potential for GHG (greenhouse gas) emission reductions is huge," John Maggs, policy advisor with Seas At Risk, said.

"The development of measures to encourage and facilitate the shift should be a priority for the IMO."

(Editing by Amanda Cooper)

Read more!

Best of our wild blogs: 24 Mar 10

Wildlife Reserves Singapore Conservation Fund - Award of Grants
from ecotax at Yahoo! Groups

Green Drinks & Young NTUC present HOME by Yann Arthus-Bertrand from Green Drinks Singapore

New book: Trees of Tropical Asia
from Flying Fish Friends

First Reef Survey For 2010
from colourful clouds

Stargazing at Pulau Semakau
from Nature's Wonders

Blog Log: 7 March 2010
from Pulau Hantu

Findings by the Stream
from Creatures in the Wild

行动中的寄居蟹 hermit crab action
from PurpleMangrove

Collared Kingfisher feeding chick
from Bird Ecology Study Group

Wildlife for sale at Malaysia zoos
from Bornean Sun Bear Conservation

Read more!

Contractor to pay Acres damages for shelter project gone awry

This area is not fit for animals
Land filled with woodchips: contaminated soil, polluted groundwater
K.C. Vijayan Straits Times 24 Mar 10;

AN ANIMAL rights group paid some $500,000 to a contractor to level up a plot of land in Choa Chu Kang and build an animal shelter on it.

What the Animal Concerns Research and Education Society (Acres) got instead stank to high heaven when the contractor filled the land with woodchips that rotted and contaminated the soil and discharged brackish water.

Now, not only has ANA Contractor been ordered by the High Court to pay damages to Acres, but it also faces charges of polluting the Kranji Reservoir, brought against it by the National Environment Agency (NEA).

The area, which comprises two-thirds of the Acres site, is unusable.

Speaking to The Straits Times yesterday, Acres director Louis Ng said he was 'disappointed and devastated' when he realised what had happened shortly after the structures were completed in 2007.

He said: 'We were nearing the final step of opening the shelter and then we had to take 10 steps back.'

In September 2006, Acres engaged ANA to build the shelter on a plot of land measuring about 200m by 100m - about the size of two football fields - that it had leased from the state for six years.

As the land was on a slope, soil had to be brought in to level it first.

The contractor brought in a subcontractor, Lok Sheng Enterprises, for the purpose, but shortly after the land was filled, the area was plagued by a foul stench and brackish water started to seep through the surface.

This drew the attention of the NEA, which discovered that the land had been filled with decomposing woodchips that polluted the groundwater. The discharge polluted the Kranji Reservoir and its environment.

Acres, through lawyers S. Suresh and M. Rajaram from Allen and Gledhill, took the case to the High Court when the project had to be delayed.

Justice Kan Ting Chiu held ANA liable for the delay in a judgment released on Monday and ordered it to pay damages.

Professor Wang Jing Yuan, a specialist in solid waste resource management from the School of Civil and Environmental Engineering in Nanyang Technological University, told the court that the soil used had been unsuitable for levelling the land.

It is understood that if clean woodchips such as those from trees, as opposed to contaminated woodchips from furniture with its additives, had been used, it would have made a difference.

Justice Kan ordered a separate hearing before the Registrar to assess the amount of damages ANA should pay Acres. ANA is defended by lawyer Leong Kwok Weng.

Mr Ng told The Straits Times that the shelter was to have housed 400 wild animals like star tortoises and primates rescued from the illegal wildlife trade or found injured.

They would be quarantined there for a spell and then released here or overseas.

He said the project would resume in about nine months, starting with the land being cleared.

An NEA spokesman said yesterday that ANA faces 33 charges under the Environmental Public Health Act. Anyone found guilty could be fined up to $10,000 or jailed up to 12 months or both.

ANA also faces another charge of failing to comply with a notice to remove and clean up the woodchips at the site, which can draw a fine of up to $50,000.

Read more!

Hammerhead sharks lose fight at UN meeting

Michael Casey Associated Press Google News 23 Mar 10;

Singapore among those voting against regulating trade in hammerheads.

DOHA, Qatar — A U.S.-backed proposal to protect the heavily fished hammerhead sharks was narrowly rejected Tuesday over concerns by Asia nations that regulating the booming trade in shark fins could hurt poor nations.

Tom Strickland, the U.S. Assistant Interior Secretary for Fish, Wildlife and Parks, said regional fisheries bodies have done nothing to regulate the trade in endangered scalloped hammerhead, great hammerhead as well as the threatened smooth hammerhead, and their numbers have dropped by as much as 85 percent.

"The greatest threat to the hammerhead is from harvest for the international fin trade and the fin of the species is among highly valued of the trade," Strickland said. Shark fin soup is a much prized delicacy in China.

The measure was only narrowly rejected, failing by five votes to take the necessary two-thirds of the 175-nation Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species to pass.

The tiny Pacific nation of Palau, which last year created the first ever shark sanctuary, joined the Americans in introducing the proposal. It called on countries to protect the species so they can be fished well into the future.

"We must preserve for our children these amazing species," said Palau's Ministry of Natural Resources, Environment & Tourism Harry R. Fritz, adding that his country supports the protection of other shark species as well.

Japan, which successfully campaigned against an export ban on Atlantic bluefin tuna and regulations on the coral trade, led the opposition to the shark proposal. It argued that better enforcement, not trade restrictions was the answer. It also complained it would be difficult to differentiate the hammerheads from other species and would deprive poor fishing nations of much needed income.

They were joined by other countries dependent on the trade, including Singapore and Indonesia which catches the most sharks.

CITES was due to take up similar proposals to protect the oceanic whitetip shark which is also used in the fin trade, the porbeagle shark which is also killed for its meat and the spiny dogfish shark — a chief ingredient of fish and chips and fish sticks.

Conservationist were outrage and disappointed by the ruling, since it came after a string of defeats on marine species including a proposal last week on a shark conservation plan. Japan and China led efforts to kill that proposal, as well.

Hammerheads, more than any other shark species, are killed for their fins and are the most threatened. Fishermen, both industrial and small-scale and many operating illegally, slice off the fins and throw the carcasses back in the ocean and there are as many as 2.7 million hammerheads are caught annually.

Shark fin soup has long played central part in traditional Chinese culture, often being served at weddings and banquets. Demand for the soup has surged as increasing numbers of Chinese middle class family become wealthier.

Protection for 2 shark species fails at UN meeting
Michael Casey, Associated Press 23 Mar 10;

DOHA, Qatar – Japan and China on Tuesday torpedoed proposals to protect hammerhead and oceanic whitetip sharks — heavily sought for their prized fins — in the latest victory of fishing interests over global conservation efforts.

The defeat of the U.S.-backed measures was part of an aggressive campaign by the Asian nations to oppose all marine proposals at the 175-nation Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. They also defeated an export ban on Atlantic bluefin tuna, a proposal to regulate the coral trade and a separate shark conservation plan.

Critics accused the countries of putting business and politics ahead of efforts to protect the sharks, which are often fished only for their fins, with their carcasses discarded.

The issue has taken on more urgency due to an increasing demand for shark fin soup as increasing numbers of Chinese middle class families become wealthier. The soup has long played central part in traditional Chinese culture, often served at weddings and banquets.

Rwanda's Fidele Ruzigandekwe, who supported the shark listing, said afterward that "science had been set aside for politics."

"It's proven that shark populations have diminished and they warrant protection," Ruzigandekwe said. "Yet, most proposals were rejected. People are not properly informed and the information is being distorted because of commercial interests."

China, Indonesia and other nations that benefit from the trade in shark fins joined the Japanese-led opposition to the proposals arguing that trade restrictions were not the answer and would be difficult to apply. The shark proposals would have for the first time regulated the trade, requiring nations to among other things track their imports and exports and the amounts they catch.

"This is not about trade issues but fisheries enforcement," Masanori Miyahara, chief counselor of the Fisheries Agency of Japan, told delegates. "Poaching is a big problem. Small-scale long liners are chasing sharks all over the world."

China said it opposed the proposals because it would be "impossible" to differentiate between regulated and unregulated shark species. It never mentioned the growing demand for shark fin soup but said the ruling would put an unnecessary burden on customs officials.

Hisashi Endo, the director of the Ecosystem and Conservation Office in the Fisheries Agency of Japan, said Tokyo was already working to protect marine species but wanted the matter to be addressed by regional fishing commissions, rather than CITES.

"We are just saying that CITES is not a good place for the conservation of marine resources," said Endo. "We already are making progress on conserving marine species."

The United States, supported by Europe, Australia and many Arab countries, said regional fisheries bodies had failed the sharks with a lack of protective measures.

Widespread illegal fishing and caused populations of the endangered scalloped hammerhead, great hammerhead and the threatened smooth hammerhead to plummet by as much as 85 percent. Oceanic whitetip sharks face similar threats and their numbers are down 60 percent to 70 percent.

The hammerhead measure was only narrowly rejected by the U.N. committee, failing by five votes to take the necessary two-thirds of majority. The whitetip proposal fell nine votes short of approval.

Tom Strickland, the head of the U.S. delegation, said it was possible they would try and revive the proposals at the larger, plenary meeting, which begins Wednesday.

"It's disappointing we didn't get the two-thirds but that is the way the rules are set up," Strickland said. "We are going to continue our efforts both here and going forward to put the necessary protection in place for these shark species."

The tiny Pacific nation of Palau, which last year created the first ever shark sanctuary, joined the Americans in introducing the shark proposals. It called on countries to protect the species so they can be fished well into the future.

"Millions of sharks are killed each year to support the global fin trade, while a significant percentage of the world's sharks are threatened or near threatened with extinction," said Palau's Ministry of Natural Resources, Environment & Tourism Harry R. Fritz, adding that his country supports the protection of other shark species as well.

Conservationists were outraged by the rulings. The meeting also defeated controls for the spiny dogfish shark, a key ingredient in European fish and chips though it did approve regulations on the trade in the porbeagle shark, which is prized mostly by Europe for its high-valued meat.

"Today is a huge loss for the oceans. This is a case of politics prevailing over science," Oceana's Fisheries Campaign Manager Elizabeth Griffin said. "The world failed to stand up today to protect some of the ocean's top predators."

Jupp Baron Kerckerinck zur Borg, president of the Shark Research Institute based in Millbrook, N.Y., acknowledged he was "very disappointed and frustrated right now."

"Japan has been voting the shark proposals down because they are catching them, Singapore voted them down because they make money selling the fins and China makes money because they eat them," he said. "How can we win?"

The Pew Environmental Group said the sharks are especially vulnerable to overfishing because they are slow growing and have low reproductive rates. Fishermen, both industrial and small-scale and many operating illegally, slice off the fins and throw the carcasses back in the ocean.

One Shark Species Wins U.N. Protection While Others Fail
Regan Doherty, PlanetArk 24 Mar 10;

A U.N. wildlife conference placed one shark species on a protective list on Tuesday but blocked efforts to do the same for other types hunted to meet mounting Asian demand for shark fin soup.

Conservationists welcomed the new protection for porbeagle sharks, which are about 2.5 meters (8 ft) long and hit by overfishing in the Atlantic and Mediterranean.

But they criticized delegates at the 175-nation Convention on International trade in Endangered Species (CITES) for failing to restrict trade in several other sharks.

"Politics and economics trumped science, especially on marine conservation issues," said Matt Rand, director of global shark conservation at Pew Environment Group.

The global shark product trade was worth $310 million in 2005, according to Traffic, a wildlife trade monitoring group. Shark populations are dwindling as a result of overfishing.

The conference rejected greater trade protection for the oceanic whitetip, scalloped hammerhead, great, smooth and dusky hammerhead, sandbar and spiny dogfish sharks.

The March 13-25 conference in Doha, Qatar, previously denied bluefin tuna and red and pink coral more protective listings. A protective listing requires a two-thirds majority.

"Once again CITES has failed to listen to the scientists. The decision not to list these sharks today is a conservation catastrophe for these species," said Glenn Sant, global marine programme coordinator for Traffic.

COSTLY SOUP

One of the world's most expensive food products, a bowl of shark fin soup can cost $100, with a single fin worth more than $1,300. Up to 10 million kg of shark fin is exported annually to Hong Kong by nearly 87 countries, according to Oceana, a marine conservation group.

Demand for the soup has exploded in Asia, where an expanding middle class can now more easily afford a delicacy once reserved for the wealthy. Japan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Taiwan, Thailand and China are big shark fin consumers.

The porbeagle proposal was made by the European Union and Palau. Voting was by secret ballot but South American, European and North American nations are believed to have been in favor with many Asian nations against.

Nations exporting porbeagle meat and fins will have to ensure trade is legal and sustainable.

"Some of the biggest players are supporting a protective listing because in the end, it's not advantageous for them to oppose measures that will help preserve the species," said Anne Schroeer, economist at Oceana.

Some of the votes, including for scalloped hammerhead sharks, came close to mustering the two-thirds majority needed for protection. Supporters of a ban might try to have a repeat vote on the conference's final day, allowed under CITES rules.

Up to 73 million sharks are killed each year, primarily for their fins, according to environmental organization Greenpeace. Sharks are especially vulnerable to over-fishing because they are late to mature, long-lived and produce few young.

(Editing by Alister Doyle)

UN body rejects protection for shark species
Marlowe Hood Yahoo News 23 Mar 10;

DOHA (AFP) – The UN wildlife trade body slapped down a trio of proposals Tuesday to oversee cross-border commerce for sharks threatened with extinction through overfishing, sparking anger from conservationists.

The only marine species granted protection at a meeting of the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) was the temperate zone porbeagle, a shark fished for its meat.

Earlier, bids to impose a global trade ban on Atlantic bluefin tuna and to require export monitoring for seven species of precious coral both fell well short of the required two-thirds majority.

The shark species left exposed to globally unregulated commerce were the scalloped hammerhead, the oceanic white tip and the spiny dogfish.

Millions of hammerhead and whitetip are extracted from seas each year, mainly to satisfy a burgeoning appetite for sharkfin soup, a prestige food in Chinese communities around the world.

The US proposals were rejected by a narrow margin, opening the possibility that one or both could get a second hearing on Thursday when the 13-day conference ends.

Only decades ago, the two species were among the most common of the semi-coastal and open-water sharks.

But incidental catch and demand for fins has slashed populations by 90 percent in several regions.

The fish are often tossed back into the water after their precious fins have been sliced away.

The scalloped hammerhead is listed by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) as "vulnerable" globally, while the whitetip is "critically endangered" in the northwestern Atlantic, and "vulnerable" elsewhere.

Once the highest level of biomass in the Gulf of Mexico, the whitetip is 99 percent depleted there today, according to marine biologist Julia Baum.

Japan led opposition to the four measures, arguing that management of shark populations should be left to regional fisheries groups, not CITES.

Conservationists counter that fishing for sharks is currently unregulated.

"The problem today is not there is serious mismanagement of trade in sharks, as for tuna, but that there is no management at all," said Sue Lieberman, policy director for the Washington-based Pew Environment Group.

The proposals called for listing on CITES' Appendix II, which requires countries to monitor exports and demonstrate that fishing is done in a sustainable manner.

The scientific panel of the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) recommend protection for all the species except the spiny dogfish which, along with the porbeagle, was also voted down at the last CITES meeting in 2007.

Fished for its meat not its fins, stocks of porbeagle -- which gestates for nine months and can live up to 65 years -- have collapsed to about 10 percent of historic levels in the Mediterranean and the northeast Atlantic.

Conservation groups reacted angrily to the three "no" votes.

"It appears that science no longer matters," said Elizabeth Griffin of wildlife conservation group Oceana, based in Washington. "CITES is not fulfilling its obligation to protect species threatened by international trade."

Gus Sant, a shark expert at wildlife monitoring group TRAFFIC said: "The decision not to list all of these sharks is a conservation catastrophe. The current level of trade in these species is simply not sustainable."

Many NGOs said that intensive lobbying by Japan played a critical role in the measures being shot down.

"We see clearly now the Japanese motivation for opposing all these marine species proposals," said Anne Schroeer, a Madrid-based economist with Oceana.

"For the whales, they say we are catching it traditionally. For the bluefin tuna, they say we are eating it. But for the sharks, there is nothing but pure economic interest."

All told, a third of the world's 64 species of pelagic, or open water, sharks face extinction, according to a report issued last June by the IUCN's Shark Specialist Group.

Mixed fortunes for sharks at CITES
TRAFFIC 23 Mar 10;

Doha, Qatar, 23 March 2010 – Governments at a United Nations meeting on wildlife trade today voted against better international trade controls for five shark species, which are in severe decline because of overfishing for their high-value fins and meat.

The Convention on International Trade and Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) governments voted against proposals to list three hammerhead sharks (Scalloped, Great and Smooth), the Oceanic Whitetip and the Spiny Dogfish in Appendix II of the Convention, which would enforce better management of the fisheries for international commercial trade and allow their declining populations to recover.

However, governments did vote to include the Porbeagle Shark – overfished primarily for its meat and fins – in Appendix II.

“Once again CITES has failed to listen to the scientists. The decision not to list all of these sharks today is a conservation catastrophe for these species,” said Glenn Sant, Global Marine Programme Co-ordinator for TRAFFIC.

“Populations of these sharks have declined by more than 90% in some areas, many of them caught illegally and destined to end up in the shark-fin trade. They are targeted because of their high value.”

“The current level of trade in these species is simply not sustainable.”

The rejection of three of the four sharks proposals follows the failure of other marine proposals at CITES last week to introduce stronger trade restrictions for Red and Pink corals, and an outright ban on the international commercial trade of Atlantic Bluefin Tuna – both despite overwhelming scientific evidence that additional protection for these species is needed.

“These marine species are in dire need of stronger trade protections and sound management. We will continue to fight for this,” said Carlos Drews, Director, Species Programme, WWF International.

“The vitality of our oceans upon which millions of people depend, relies on healthy populations of species such as sharks and corals.”

The sharks discussed at today’s meeting are particularly vulnerable to overfishing because they are all slow growing, late to mature, long-living and produce few young, which means it is difficult for populations to recover from overfishing.

CITES turns down most bids to reel in shark overfishing
WWF 23 Mar 10;

Doha, Qatar – Governments of a United Nations meeting on wildlife trade today voted against better international trade controls for five shark species, which are in severe decline because of overfishing for their high-value fins and meat.

The Convention on International Trade and Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) governments voted against proposals to list three hammerhead sharks (scalloped, great and smooth), the oceanic whitetip and the spiny dogfish on Appendix II of the Convention, which would enforce better management of the fishery for international commercial trade and allow their declining populations to recover.

However, governments did vote to include the porbeagle shark – overfished primarily for its meat and fins – on Appendix II.

“Once again CITES has failed to listen to the scientists. The decision not to list all of these sharks today is a conservation catastrophe for these species,” said Glenn Sant, Global Marine Programme Co-ordinator for TRAFFIC.

“Populations of these sharks have declined by more than 90% in some areas, many of them caught illegally and destined to end up in the shark-fin trade. They are targeted because of their high value.”

“The current level of trade in these species is simply not sustainable.”

The proposals’ rejection follows the failure of other proposals at CITES last week to introduce stronger trade restrictions for red and pink corals, and an outright ban on the international commercial trade of Atlantic bluefin tuna – both despite overwhelming scientific evidence that additional protection for these species is needed.

“These marine species are in dire need of stronger trade protections and sound management. We will continue to fight for this,” said Carlos Drews, Director, Species Programme, WWF International. “The vitality of our oceans upon which millions of people depend, relies on healthy populations of species such as sharks and corals.”

The sharks discussed at today’s meeting are particularly vulnerable to overfishing because they are all slow growing, late to mature, long-living and produce few young, which means it is difficult for populations to recover from overfishing.

TRAFFIC, the wildlife trade monitoring network, is a joint program of WWF and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).

The 15th meeting of CITES governments began March 13 and ends on Thursday, and will consider proposals related to dozens of species and species trade issues.

Only one in four shark proposals adopted at CITES
IUCN 23 Mar 10;

Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) voted in favour of only one of four proposals to list shark species under CITES Appendix II, which requires international trade to be monitored and regulated.

A European Union proposal to list the porbeagle shark – a close relative of the great white shark – on Appendix II was adopted by a 67 per cent majority with 86 Parties in favour and 42 opposed. Proposals to list hammerhead, oceanic whitetip, and spiny dogfish sharks failed to achieve the required two-thirds majority of votes.

“The porbeagle shark is in demand for its high value meat, which is particularly popular in Europe - both meat and fins are traded internationally,” says Sonja Fordham, Deputy Chair of IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group. “Fisheries statistics and stock assessments show marked declines or complete population collapses in all areas where the data is available.”

Unsustainable fishing and population collapses of porbeagle are particularly well documented for the North Atlantic. Declining population trends have also been demonstrated for the Southern hemisphere.

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ classifies the Porbeagle Shark as Vulnerable globally, Critically Endangered in the Northeast Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea, Endangered in the Northwest Atlantic and Near Threatened in the Southern Ocean.

“All of the shark species proposed for listing at this Conference are exceptionally vulnerable to overexploitation due to life history characteristics - such as slow growth, late maturity, and small number of young - and yet are subject to few fishing restrictions,” adds Fordham.

Analyses by IUCN and TRAFFIC concluded that all of the shark species proposed for listing at this Conference of the Parties meet the criteria for listing under Appendix II.

The Conference of the Parties concludes on Thursday. Decisions made in Committee can be revisited during the final Plenary sessions.

The proposals for porbeagle and spiny dogfish shark were developed by the EU while the hammerhead and oceanic whitetip shark proposals were offered by the US. Palau co-sponsored both proposals.

The IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group has held 13 regional and thematic workshops around the world in order to assess the threat status of more than 1,000 sharks and their relatives using the IUCN Red List Criteria and Categories.

Read more!