Thursday, December 31, 2009

12.5% of all Florida manatees killed in 2009 | MNN - Mother Nature Network

12.5% of all Florida manatees killed in 2009 MNN - Mother Nature Network
Contact: Miyoko Sakashita, Center for Biological Diversity, (510) 845-6703
Federal Study: Manatee Death Rate Is Seven Times Sustainable LevelBoat Strikes Are Preventing Species' Recovery
SAN FRANCISCO— The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has finalized new stock assessments for manatees that puts the population of Florida manatees at about 3,800 and a Puerto Rico population at 72. The stock-assessment reports resulted from settlement of a lawsuit brought by the Center for Biological Diversity that sought updated assessments, since the Service had flouted its duty under the Marine Mammal Protection Act to publish yearly reports for more than a decade.
“The Fish and Wildlife Service’s population assessment shows that boats are carelessly killing manatees,” said Miyoko Sakashita, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. “Clearly, far too little is being done to protect these endangered manatees in Florida.”
According to the Service’s stock-assessment report on the Florida manatee population, each year about 87 manatees are killed by humans in the state. This is more than seven times the number of manatees that the Service estimates can be killed without impairing the species’ recovery. Boats are the primary threat to manatees, which are frequently struck and killed, or seriously injured, by speeding vessels. Almost 90 percent of the manatees killed by humans were a result of such boat strikes. Manatees are also threatened by water-diversion structures such as dams and entanglement in marine debris, including derelict fishing gear.
“The one thing everyone should be able to agree on is that manatees in Florida and Puerto Rico need more protection from boat collisions to allow them to survive and recover,” said Sakashita.
Stock assessments are required under the Marine Mammal Protection Act and are meant to be used as the basis for management decisions such as those permitting the killing or harassment of the animals by commercial fisheries, oil and gas exploration, boating and shipping, and military exercises.

Bookmark and Share

Baby the pet Opossum

Wednesday, December 30, 2009

'CERTIFIED' PALM OIL NOT A SOLUTION — Friends of the Earth International

'CERTIFIED' PALM OIL NOT A SOLUTION — Friends of the Earth International

KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA November 3, 2009 -- Certifying palm oil is not a solution to the environmental damage and human rights violations caused by oil palm plantations, said Friends of the Earth International today during the meeting of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO) in Malaysia.

“The certification of palm oil by the RSPO does not halt deforestation, it does not halt the expansion of damaging oil palm plantations and it does not benefit local communities. Basically it fails to deal with the causes of the palm oil problems,” said Friends of the Earth International Agrofuels Campaign Coordinator Torry Kuswardono from Indonesia. Small but quickly growing quantities of palm oil are being certified by the RSPO.

The certification of palm oil is seen by many as a way to make the palm oil industry look 'responsible' or 'sustainable'.

“Certifying palm oil as responsible or sustainable makes consumers feel good and encourages increased consumption, which is precisely the root cause of the problem” added Torry Kuswardono from Indonesia. “Since palm oil has major carbon footprint, any talk of 'certified' palm oil must take this issue seriously, but the RSPO is not doing that. "

Instead of adopting voluntary schemes like the RSPO, national governments should pass and enforce laws to control the damaging expansion of palm oil. They should also critically assess if palm oil can still play a role in current or future poverty alleviation programmes.

We believe it is part of the problem, not the solution," said Teguh Surya, Head of Campaign Department of WALHI/Friends of the Earth Indonesia. “Instead of using the certification smokescreen, stakeholders should address the real problem, which is the increasing and unsustainable demand for palm oil, especially as agrofuel,” he added.

Essentially, RSPO companies are subjected to technical principles and criteria, but social and environmental issues of oil palm cultivation are largely framed within flawed political processes, poor governance and unsustainable market demand. Understood within this context, the RSPO is a voluntary certification process for a market premium and membership that may be able to add a much sought after and totally misleading 'green tag' (aka 'GREENWASHING') to the industry.

Moreover, it provides certification without having to actually address some of the most very basic, structural issues that gave rise to the adverse impacts of oil palm cultivation. Friends of the Earth International therefore does not regard the RSPO as a credible certification process as it is only a limited tool of technicality which is not able to adequately address the horrendous impacts of oil palm cultivation on forests, land and communities.

FOR MORE INFORMATION: IN MALAYSIA Torry Kuswardono, Friends of the Earth International Agrofuels Campaign Coordinator and Friends of the Earth Indonesia (WALHI); tel: +62- 811 383 270 (Indonesia mobile number) or email torry@walhi.or.id or torry@walhi.or.id

IN INDONESIA Teguh Surya, Head of Campaign Department of WALHI / Friends of the Earth Indonesia Tel: +62-811 820 4362 (Indonesia mobile number) or email teguh.surya@gmail.com

IN EUROPE Adrian Bebb, Friends of the Earth Europe agrofuels Campaigner: Tel: +49-1609 49 01 163 (german mobile number) or email adrian.bebb@foeeurope.org

Friends of the Earth International is the world's largest grassroots environmental federation with 77 national member groups in 77 countries and more than 2 million individual members and supporters.


* * BACKGROUND INFORMATION * *

1 } The problems of "certification" of palm oil

Certification as a means to make the palm oil industry sustainable fails to deal with the root causes of the problem.

The destruction caused by the expansion of palm oil is caused by the excessive and irrational use of vegetable oil, either as a foodstuff, industrial oil or agrofuel.

Sustainable production can only be achieved by halting the increased demand and over-consumption in order to create sustainable levels of demand.

Some of the biggest environmental and social problems are caused by the actual expansions of palm plantations.

No certification scheme has so far come up with a solution to the deforestation, habitat loss and social conflicts caused by displacing agricultural activities elsewhere from these expansions. It is likely that this will never be solved by certification.

Wider societal problems created by the expansions fall outside of certification schemes and need to be addressed urgently.

Rising land prices as a result of the expansions cause great harm, as does the rising price of food as a result of the displacement of local food production.

In many producer countries there are high levels of corruption, weak governance, little land use planning or formal land ownership and a disregard to the right of local and indigenous peoples. Within a context of little transparency and likely ineffective monitoring it is highly unlikely that certification schemes will be fully implemented and there is big potential for fraud.

Certification schemes are mainly developed to please consumer markets in the North. These schemes therefore run the danger of persuading the public that palm oil is sustainably produced, therefore giving support to their continued use and deflecting from the real causes of the problems.

Likewise they can be used by industry to fend off criticism without them addressing the unsustainable nature of their business.

Voluntary market-based mechanisms are no replacement for strict legislation and will not be able to fully influence the behaviour of the global oil palm market.

The lack of political will to strictly regulate the oil palm commodity market allows companies to “pick and mix” whether they participate and can manage certified estates at the same time as being involved in uncertified estates. They can also be minor shareholders in estates involved in malpractices.


*2. The RSPO is full of loopholes*

The full implementation of the RSPO will not guarantee sustainability and it's unlikely that a certification scheme can be comprehensive enough to deal with the issues at stake.


For example, with the RSPO:

* There is no credible verification process and plantations have already been certified despite serious breaches of RSPO Principles and Criteria.

* Most palm oil is produced by large corporate groups that own hundreds of thousands of hectares of oil palm plantations. RSPO does not require all producers to get the entirety of their estate certified at once.

* Companies need to have a 'realistic and adequately' ambitious plan for certifying their other plantations, if they have ownership of more than 51% of that plantation, but since RSPO has not set a timeline for this, RSPO members can avoid taking any steps towards the certification of their land.

* The already weak criteria adopted by the RSPO membership in November 2005 have since been significantly watered down in the national interpretation processes, such as on matters pertaining Free, Prior and Informed Consent and Social Impact Assessments.

* All plantations established before 2007 can now become certified, even though they have been grown on previous forest lands.

* RSPO has also failed to come up with appropriate standards for greenhouse gas emissions associated with plantation development and management. In addition, RSPO has failed to undertake a study on alternatives for the toxic pesticide paraquat used all to commonly in plantations.

* It will be possible for companies to expand with unsustainable large-scale monocultures, as long as there are no High Conservation Value Forest (HCVF) areas converted after 2007.

* The RSPO does not have any sanctions against violations of the criteria at the plantation level.

* There is no permanent monitoring body. Only when there is a written complaint a grievance panel is established to conduct investigative research and provide recommendations for action by the RSPO.

* The Grievance Panel is composed of Executive Board members who are stakeholders rather than mediators or arbiters. The capacity of NGOs and local communities to respond to failures of the RSPO would be crucial when there are environmental or social problems at a plantation. But their capacity is limited.

* RSPO will allow its certified palm oil to be traded through different chains of custody schemes, from “identify preserved” to “book and claim”. This means that RSPO certified palm oil will be mixed with palm oil from other sources, making it virtually impossible for a purchaser to be sure that the palm oil is not linked to rainforest destruction or any other environmental degradation and social conflict.


Ultimately, RSPO will be endorsing as sustainable the cultivation of vast areas of oil palm monocultures from recently converted natural forests, even where they encroach into local communities customary land and forests, isolating them into small enclaves.

In effect, any forest is allowed to be converted into oil palm plantation under the process so long it is not defined as a High Conservation Value Forest (HCVF), despite the fact that such forests have regeneration potential or that communities claim customary rights over them.



*3. Impacts of oil palm on people and the environment *

Oil palm expansion occurs throughout the tropics at unprecedented rates. Asia is aiming for around 30 million hectares of palm monocultures (compared to approximately 12 million at present). There are also plans for large-scale expansions in Central and East Africa (for instance in Congo: 3 million hectares) and in Latin America (for instance in Columbia: 3.5 million hectares).

The emergence of palm oil for the production of agrofuels (for transport and power generation) further promotes the expansion of the palm oil industry. Expanding the area dedicated to palm oil plantations creates enormous problems that threaten biodiversity, forests, climate, the environment and communities.

* Impacts on people *
Large areas of land are appropriated from communities by private corporations backed up by a lack of transparency, corruption and other unlawful activities in the licensing and development of oil palm plantations;

* Land prices increase due to the expansions resulting in land being unaffordable for most people;

* Large monocultures have adverse impacts on local natural water cycles and can cause severe pollution of water sources, increasing the likelihood of fires and floods and limiting the access to clean water for local communities;

* In many cases, oil palm monocultures are converted from logged over forests as a result of unsustainable logging practices that have earlier caused the depletion in timber resources. Such forests however still contain valuable resources to local communities who claim customary rights over them and with a proper conservation strategy is able to self-regenerate;

* A general failure to recognize and respect the right of indigenous and local peoples.

* Food sovereignty is undermined by occupying land that has been used to grow food for local consumption and diverting it to grow crops for export.

* Poor working and living conditions for plantations workers as well as small holders, and enormous vulnerability to price fluctuations.

* While the palm oil industry prides itself for providing employment and producing an important world commodity, far more people are likely to be adversely affected by its expansion, from indigenous and rural communities, plantation workers, smallholder farmers to other stakeholders who are confronted by environmental degradation, increases in food prices and the decline in their nation’s agricultural output, to name only a few. I


* Impacts on the environment *

* Widespread deforestation is destroying biodiversity and pushing some species to the brink of extinction.

* Huge levels of greenhouse gas emissions are released from deforestation and draining of peatlands.

* Unsustainable monoculture farming leading to the destruction of biodiversity and pollution of the environment through the use of dangerous pesticides and other agrochemicals such as paraquat.

* Environmental undervaluation of forests and peat lands.



*4. Solutions advocated*

Friends of the Earth International (FOEI) is calling for wider policy mechanisms that control demand and encourage a more sustainable use of land that guarantees food sovereignty and the protection of natural resources. FOEI does not support the use of palm oil as a fuel and either transport or energy production. In addition FOEI calls for Governments to adopt concrete and consistent policies and legal reforms in order for them to address effectively the sustainability challenges of the oil palm industry.

Wider policy mechanisms that go beyond certification are needed that control demand, especially where it depends increasingly on resources based in developing countries, and encourages a more sustainable use of land that guarantees food sovereignty and the protection of natural resources.

Real solutions to the energy and climate crisis need to be introduced that reduce the demand for fuel such as a modal shift to public transport, cleaner cars and energy efficient electricity production and use. Palm oil as an energy or transport fuel must be banned.

Friends of the Earth International believes governments are key to creating the solutions and should be made accountable to adopt concrete and consistent policies and legal reforms in order for them to address effectively the sustainability challenges of the oil palm industry.

To that effect, we call for policies and laws to:

* Prevent expansions of oil palm plantations that involve forest conversions, violations of local community rights, affect food sovereignty and other forms of environmental degradations, human rights abuse and economic and social injustices;

* End poor governance through serious improvements in public accountability, transparency in decision-making and eliminate inconsistencies and contradictions in policy and law. Reform must be initiated in favour of environmental and social sustainability, including ensuring that rights of communities and labourers are well-protected;

* Ensure that full legal recognition is given to indigenous communities through policy and land reform initiatives which must be able to address concerns on reparative mechanisms;

*Ratify and nationally implement all existing international conventions, treaties, declarations and other international laws on indigenous peoples, biodiversity, forests, climates, labour and hazardous toxics ;

* Introduce strict laws on the use of pesticides and waste management;

* Reject incentives and targets that promote large scale agrofuel production as a solution to the climate change problem. Such incentives must instead be diverted to research and produce genuinely renewable, efficient and sustainable energy sources;

* Promote a sustainable agricultural policy that encourages environmentally-friendly farming practices, increases agricultural diversity and the consumption of local production instead for export. Increase government support for practises such as diversification of production and stimulation of local production for local markets that contribute to food security and food sovereignty in producer and consumer countries.


Bookmark and Share

Copenhagen: A disaster for the world's poorest — Friends of the Earth International

Copenhagen: A disaster for the world's poorest — Friends of the Earth International

COPENHAGEN, DENMARK -- Commenting on the failure of rich country governments to secure a strong and fair UN agreement to tackle climate change in Copenhagen, Nnimmo Bassey, Chair of Friends of the Earth International, said:

“Copenhagen has been an abject failure. Justice has not been done. By delaying action, rich countries have condemned millions of the world’s poorest people to hunger, suffering and loss of life as climate change accelerates. The blame for this disastrous outcome is squarely on the developed nations.

“We are disgusted by the failure of rich countries to commit to the emissions reductions they know are needed, especially the US, which is the world's largest historical emitter of greenhouse gases. In contrast African nations, China and others in the developing world deserve praise for their progressive positions and constructive approach. Major developing countries cannot be blamed for the failure of rich industrialised countries.”

A confidential United Nations paper leaked on December 17 predicts that average temperatures rise will far exceed the 2 degree threshold set by the UN even if current international pledges are fully implemented. This is effectively a death sentence for many in some of the world’s most vulnerable countries, including small island states, who had demanded a limit of 1.5 degrees.

Bookmark and Share

Biophile Magazine -- » Whale Wars and Dangerous Vegans

Biophile Magazine -- » Whale Wars and Dangerous Vegans

“Sometimes, when people do not see the path through enlightenment,
you must scare the hell out of them first”.

--- The Dalai Lama, speaking to the crew of the Farley Mowat.

Bookmark and Share

GM Crops Implicated in Honeybee Colony Collapse

Biophile Magazine -- » GM Crops Implicated in Honeybee Colony Collapse

As the disappearance of honeybees continues, researchers are trying desperately to discover the cause of Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD). General concensus at this point is that there is more than once cause and the latest culprit may be genetically modified crops. This is one area of research being neglected as mainstream scientists insist GM crops are safe.

For the last 100 years, beekeepers have experienced colony losses from bacteria, (foulbrood), mites (varroa and tracheal) and other pathogens. These problems are dealt with by using antibiotics, miticides and and other methods of pest management. Losses are slow and expected and beekeepers know how to limit the destruction. This new mass die-off is different in that it is virtually instantaneous with no warning of the impending collapse.

John McDonald, a bee keeper in Pennsyvania with a background in biology, speculated that genetically modified crops could play a role in CCD. Although the government constantly reassures us that these genetic manipulations are safe for both humans and the environment, his hope is that looking more closely at these issues might raise

Bookmark and Share

Monday, December 28, 2009

Wasting Away - The Center for Public Integrity

                                           

The Center for Public Integrity is dedicated to producing original investigative journalism about significant public issues to make institutional power more transparent and accountable.


   
                                 
WASHINGTON, April 19, 2007 — By the Environmental Protection Agency’s accounting, the Superfund hazardous waste site program has cleaned up only 319 of the 1,564 sites ever listed to the point where they can be deleted from the list.


An additional 61 sites are proposed to be added, bringing the total Superfund list of sites to 1,623.





Search Superfund Sites by State - Easy to search by 'Click on a state' to find status of sites, maps of locations and other details.  http://projects.publicintegrity.org/Superfund/






Bookmark and Share