Wildlife Declines: environmentalists will press issue at RIO+20 conference

In June, the RIO+20 conference will be held in Rio de Janeiro.  This conference name is more of a nickname, as it is officially the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development.  

Many of the issues discussed revolve around land use and crop yields in addition to water usage and availability.  The goal is to be able to provide for human populations in a responsible manner that can guarantee available resources for generations to come.

None of this can be accomplished without considering the impact mankind is having on nature and wildlife in general.  The BBC recently reported that environmentalists will be pressuring government leaders at the conference to make a more concerted effort to protect nature as a critical component of any sustainable development policy.

 "The Rio+20 conference is an opportunity for the world to get serious about the need for development to be made sustainable," said David Nussbaum, CEO of World Wildlife Fund-UK.  "We need to elevate the sense of urgency, and I think this is ultimately not only about our lives but the legacy we leave for future generations."  

Environmentalist will be doing more than just talking a good game.  They will be arming themselves with new data to emphasize the importance of nature conservation.  The Living Planet Report has recently issued need data based on analysis of trends seen in over 9,000 animal populations compiled by the Zoological Society of London.  The report confirms an overall 30% decline in wildlife since 1970.  Wildlife in tropical areas, particularly in tropical lakes and rivers, showed the greatest decline of as much as 60%.

The Global Footprint Network is also conducting analysis of our global footprint - our impact based on a composite measure of our use of fossil fuels, cropland for food production, wood consumption, and wild-caught fish.  In areas of the world where there is high development in lands that harbor harsh environments, our impact is most noticeable.  The Persian Gulf emerges as the region with the highest per-capita ecological footprint, with Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates topping the list of the least sustainable nations.  But developed nations like the United States, Denmark, Belgium, and Australia are not far behind.

However, there are some rays of hope.  In Pakistan, a program has proved successful in reducing water consumption and pesticide and fertilizer use in growing cotton, while still producing the same yield.  It just takes initiative and an understanding that it is a global issue, not confined to one nation or one region of the world.

"We need to address this with the same urgency and determination with which we tackled the systemic financial crisis globally," said Nussbaum in describing how it is not too late to turn existing negative trends around. 

Source: BBC News             
                    

Ocean Strategy: UN groups issue report as framework for international ocean conservation efforts

Four United Nations organizations jointly released a report recently that outlined 10 general steps as part of an overall ocean conservation strategy. The four groups - the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission, UN Development Programme, International Maritime Organization, and United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization - released the report, Blueprint for Ocean and Coastal Sustainability, as a means to lay down a unifying framework for international efforts.

Formal adoption of the report's recommendations is anticipated during the next United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (RIO+20) in June of 2012. The 10 steps are broad in scope, lacking in details or specifics. And that can always be a problem because once you wade into an issue, issues of cost or economic impact can raise their heads and that always seems to attract the lobbyists and industry-supporting diplomats. Backroom deals are cut and often the end result can be good intentions but little or no action.

Here are the ten measures listed in the report:

1. Create a global market for ‘blue carbon’ or carbon dioxide stored in the oceans;
2. Correct problems in governance on the management of the high seas by strengthening the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea;
3. Support the development of a green economy in small island developing states;
4. Encourage research on ocean acidification to adapt to it and mitigate it;
5. Increase institutional capacities for scientific observation of the oceans and coastal areas;
6. Reform and strengthen regional organizations in the management of ocean resources;
7. Promote responsible fishing and aquaculture in the context of a green economy;
8. Strengthen the legal frameworks to address the problem of invasive aquatic species;
9. Green' the economy of nutrients to reduce hypoxia in the oceans and promote food security;
10. Strengthen coordination, coherence and effectiveness of the United Nations in all activities related to oceans.

South America's MercoPress reported, According to the authors of the report, 'the full realization of many of the goals and objectives will require increased efforts by states, intergovernmental organizations and the international community.' Their goal will be successful if responsible policies and effective institutional arrangements are adopted, 'which will require a greater degree of commitment and funding from the international community, and also from the nations and the business world.'”

That's quite a handful, but with quantifiable deterioration of 60% of the planet's marine ecosystems in addition to nations and their citizens continuing to abuse natural resources rather than conserve and sustain them, let's hope that with a defined general framework of ocean conservation measures as a starting point, we will be able to fill in the blanks and accomplish needed specific objectives on an international level.

Download the Blueprint for Ocean and Coastal Sustainability in PDF.
Read more about the 10 measures in the MercoPress.

Protecting Corals and Island Nations: conservation group and the President of Palau both speak out

The Center for Biological Diversity is blowing its environmental horn not only to draw attention to its own actions but those of other nations concerned with the fate of marine ecosystems and the forces that impact them worldwide:

Settlement Requires Protecting 82 Corals
"On Tuesday the Center for Biological Diversity and the [U.S.] National Marine Fisheries Service reached an important agreement that will move 82 species of coral closer to protection. The agreement, following a 2009 petition and two notices of intent to sue by the Center, requires the Service to make decisions on protecting 82 U.S. corals -- including the mountainous star coral, blue rice coral and several Acropora corals -- under the Endangered Species Act by April 15, 2012. The Center has already earned protection for elkhorn (another Acorpora species) and staghorn corals."

As reported in the Houston Chronicle, "Unless we protect them right now, coral reefs will be lost within decades, and our grandchildren will never see these colorful underwater forests teeming with life," Miyoko Sakashita, the director of the organization's oceans program, said in a statement.

Currently, only reef-building staghorn and elkhorn corals are listed as threatened under the federal Endangered Species Act. Of the species under review, 75 are found in the Pacific. Nine exist in Hawaii waters, including ringed rice coral, which sometimes has a purple hue but is other times rust orange or brown. It's a candidate for listing because it's only found in the Hawaiian islands. This makes the species vulnerable to being wiped out if there's a heat wave or an invasive species infiltrates its habitat. Protection under the Endangered Species Act could put fishing, dumping, dredging, offshore oil development and other activities under stricter regulatory scrutiny.

Palau Speaks Out Against Climate Change
"The Pacific island nation of Palau has announced it will urgently seek an "advisory opinion" from the United Nations on whether some polluting countries have a legal responsibility to ensure that their greenhouse gases don't harm other countries. Under international law, Palau points out, states are required to take all necessary measures to stop their activities from harming other states. Despite mounting evidence that the climate crisis is only deepening, the U.S. has failed to make significant strides in reducing carbon dioxide emissions and, in fact, some in Congress are pushing to weaken the Clean Air Act rather than harness it to do what's needed to reduce greenhouse pollution and avert the worst effects of the global climate crisis."

Palau President Johnson Toribiong told the General Assembly’s annual general debate that, along with the Marshall Islands, Palau will call on the 193-member Assembly to urgently seek an advisory opinion – which would be non-binding – from the International Court of Justice (ICJ), also known as the World Court. Palau is one of several Pacific island countries that have repeatedly spoken out at the General Assembly about the impact of climate change, with rising sea levels resulting from the emissions of greenhouse gases threatening to swamp their islands.

"Article 194(2) of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea provides that States shall take all measures necessary to ensure that activities under their jurisdiction or control do not spread and do not cause damage by pollution to other States. It is time we determine what the international rule of law means in the context of climate change,” the president was quoted as saying in the UN News Centre.

In today's difficult economic climate, we see the impact of globalization; that our economic health can not be isolated or immune from the financial conditions being experienced by other nations. The same is certainly true for the environment - we're all in this together.

Watch a video of President Toribiong speaking to the General Assembly.

Oceans On the Edge of Extinction: international scientific panel issues report that demands our attention

A story is moving quickly through the news media like an Arizona wildfire - from England to India, from the New York Times to Al Jazeera. It's not the latest scandal by a self-indulgent politician or the embarrassment of a foul-mouthed entertainer. It's something that many of us who love and respect the oceans have been wrestling with for some time: multiple man-made stresses on the oceans are threatening marine life with inevitable extinction.

The International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO) has released a summary of a study undertaken by a group of world renown scientists who examined all of the solid data on the condition of the oceans. Presented at the United Nations on June 20th, the summary's conclusions have been picked up by hundreds of media outlets and for good reason: the prognosis does not look good if things continue as they currently are, with a "high risk of entering a phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history."

"The findings are shocking,"" said Alex Rogers, scientific director of IPSO. "As we considered the cumulative effect of what humankind does to the ocean, the implications became far worse than we had individually realised. This is a very serious situation demanding unequivocal action at every level. We are looking at consequences for humankind that will impact in our lifetime, and worse, our children's and generations beyond that."

The summary report concludes with four case studies that focus on several of the key issues. Climate change and acidification, loss of coral reefs, pollution, and overfishing are highlighted not only as activities that are threatening the oceans but also activities that mankind can actually do something about.

I could go on detailing the findings of the IPSO but, instead, I would suggest you read the report yourself - it's available in a long version and shorter version. And I would recommend you read through the IPSO website as it discusses the findings and includes several enlightening videos from many of the scientists involved in the study. These are not just names on a document, hiding behind pronouncements that were destined for oblivion on a library shelf; these are concerned individuals willing to be front and center in announcing that things must change for the better and they must change right now if we expect to have any kind of natural marine resource left for future generations. Visit the State of the Ocean.org website.
Dan Laffoley, of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), said, "The world's leading experts on oceans are surprised by the rate and magnitude of changes we are seeing. The challenges for the future of the oceans are vast, but unlike previous generations we know what now needs to happen. The time to protect the blue heart of our planet is now, today and urgent."

Read about the report at State of the Ocean.org.

World Ocean Day: today is the day - what you can do

It's Wednesday, June 8, 2011 - World Ocean Day. And while I'm laying about , nursing a sore throat and cold, I'll still do my part to commemorate this international recognition of the world's oceans. And you can too.

World Ocean Day began in 1992 by Canada, following an ocean summit held in Brazil. It was recognized by the United Nations in 2008 and has since been coordinated by The Ocean Project and the World Ocean Network. There are many activities taking place worldwide today on behalf of the oceans, but if it's a little late in the game for you to personally participate, never fear. You can still do your part.

Sustainable Seafood - If going to a restaurant or supermarket with seafood on your mind, make sure it is considered part of the sustainable seafood group that provides as little of an impact as possible to depleted fish stocks. Don't know what to choose? Then check out the sustainable seafood listings from the Blue Ocean Institute or the Monterey Bay Aquarium. Or better still, no seafood consumed today.

No Plastic Bags - The infamous, single-use disposable plastic bag has, rightfully, become a target of municipal legislation as these throwaway items do considerable harm when they end up in the sea and are biodegradable if only disposed of in the right set of circumstances (a delicate combination of heat, light, and microbes - and still it takes many years). If you're doing any shopping then insist on a paper bag made from recycled paper or, better still, carry your own bag or bags. There are bags now available in many stores, made of recycled material and at a very reasonable cost.

Don't Spew the Fossil Fuel - Carbon dioxide that makes its way into the oceans can generate acidification - what is being recognized as one of the greatest threats the world's oceans face. Minimize your carbon footprint today by driving as little as possible - whether you are driving a gas hog, hybrid, or even an all-electric (there's carbon produced in the making of those batteries). If possible, hit the road on a bicycle or by foot. A little exercise - your heart will thank you for it.

Support Your Ocean Organizations - Even in these difficult economic times, today would be a great day to donate to the ocean conservation organization of your choice, whether it be a local group or a major international effort. But be sure to look into what the organization has accomplished. It's results that you are looking for to ensure that your donation will be well-spent. So, take that $10 you might have spent on a Big Mac Meal with fries - following your arduous bike ride around town - and put it where it will do some good on behalf of the oceans.

Simple. Just a few steps in the right direction that can have an impact, particularly if multiplied by millions across the globe. And, hey, I've got a crazy idea: after doing your part to help the oceans today - let's do it tomorrow! And the day after. And the day after that. And so on.

Crazy radicalism, but the oceans will thank you for it.

Learn more about World Ocean Day at:
The Ocean Project
World Ocean Network

Rising Sea Levels: some nations are already seeing waters at their doorstep

Human populations have an economic attraction to the water. Whether it be oceans, lakes, or rivers - these bodies of water can prove to be effective points of transportation, and that leads to trade and commerce. Just look at the location of many of the major cities worldwide and you will typically find a water connection.

So, with the slow but study increase in sea level being brought about by climate change, particularly the effects of global warming on the Arctic and Antarctic regions, there are some very serious economic and socio-political issues that will be brought to the forefront in the next couple of decades.

Tropical regions, like the low-lying Maldives, are having to wrestle with the reality of someday being totally submerged - it's people becoming immigrants from a nation that literally no longer exists. But rising seas levels will impact more than a handful of tropical islands. As reported in the May issue of National Geographic, the heavily populated nation of Bangladesh is already feeling the effects of rising sea levels with high tides that are now bringing a foot of water into coastal homes, rising levels of salinity which impact aquifers, and river flooding becoming more destructive (three major rivers come together in Bangladesh to form the Ganges River Delta).

Bangladesh is a country with one of the highest population densities - more than half of its 164 million population live in an area smaller than the US state of Utah. As sea levels continue to rise, where these people are supposed to go and what economic infrastructure can travel with them is a big question. And if they are forced to immigrate, in that particular part of the world, who is prepared to take them in?

But rising sea levels is not an issue confined to lower income or developing nations. Major cities like Miami and New York would also have to contend with this problem. Would they need to prepare themselves, like New Orleans, with dikes and levies? We have seen the impact of walls that fail with the destruction in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina in 2005. What will it take to protect a city like London when the Thames River overflows its banks, which some have predicted as early as 2025?
Within the scientific community, the vast majority do not dispute the reality of climate change and the impact of global warming. International organizations like the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are wrestling with the social, political, and economic implications. Perhaps it will be those issues, more so than purely environmental implications, that will drive nations to take action. The challenge is that it is an insidious, incremental, and long-term threat. Cities won't be swallowed up whole immediately and, as a species, we seem to react better to immediate threats. But if we wait until water floods Piccadilly or we find ourselves rowing a canoe to work in Times Square, it may very well be too late.

COP 10: Biodiversity conference off to a bold start with alarming study

In Nagoya, Japan, the opening to the 10th Conference of Parties (COP 10) to the Convention on Biological Diversities took off with a bold start, announcing a study that confirms that one-fifth of the world's vertebrates are faced with extinction.

The comprehensive study, combining the efforts of 174 authors, 115 academic and research institutions from 38 countries, worked with data covering 25,000 different species from the IUCN's Red List of Threatened Species. The results show that human expansion, logging, and over-hunting are moving 50 species of mammals, birds, and amphibians, on average, closer to extinction each year. According to renown Harvard University Professor Edward Wilson, "The 'backbone' of biodiversity is being eroded."

But a unique feature of the study - and one that should catch the attention of the COP 10 policy- and decision-makers - is that the study also analyzed and confirmed the positive effects of conservation, that the efforts of nation's to protect worldwide biodiversity can have a demonstrable effect. The study's results show that without the current level of conservation that has taken place, biodiversity would have declined by another 20 percent.

"History has shown us that conservation can achieve the impossible, as anyone who knows the story of the White Rhinoceros in southern Africa knows," Dr Simon Stuart, Chair of IUCN's Species Survival Commission and an author on the study was quoted in Science Daily. "But this is the first time we can demonstrate the aggregated positive impact of these successes on the state of the environment."

This is a much better start to this conference than the COP 15 climate conference in 2009 or the CITES conference in March of this year, where political and economic lobbying ran roughshod over important conservation and environmental initiatives. For COP 10, this is a good step forward and the nations involved appear to be on board with the study's findings. Now the question is, what will be the final results of the conference in terms of policy and commitment? Lip service or definitive, lasting action?

Read more about the COP10 study in Science Daily.

Conservation: friend or foe to developing nations?

Conservation. The word has different meanings and consequences in different parts of the world. In many developed countries it serves as a means to protect natural resources for future generations to see and enjoy. Global implications might enter into the picture, promoting conservation so as not to disrupt large-scale ecosystems. Or perhaps it's a cause du jour; it's just good manners.

But in underdeveloped or developing countries, conservation can be an intimate matter of life and death, having a profound impact on poverty. But a good or a bad impact? Does conservation help to eliminate poverty or exacerbate it? Or are the two not linked at all in any way?

To the conservationist, it would seem an obvious benefit and many worldwide organizations - like the United Nation's Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) - have adopted that position. But studies to date have not yet provided a clear path to that conclusion. According to Nature.com's NatureNews, past small scale studies were inconclusive, "Many studies have simply shown that poverty frequently overlaps with areas that are a high priority for biodiversity conservation."

With the U.N. coming up short in its two goals of stemming the loss of biological diversity by 2010 and lifting at least half of the world's poorest out of poverty by 2015, considerable attention is being drawn to upcoming CBD meetings later this month. Convention members will be turning to research studies for answers and there have been a few large scale studies that provide an indication that a connection does exist between conservation and the reduction of poverty.

Conservation International conducted a massive global study of a group of ecosystems including water from rivers and streams. Using data and maps from sources ranging from the World Wildlife Fund to NASA, Conservation International combined that with population and human distribution data derived from LandScan data from the U.S. Department of Energy to determine whether any relationships exist between areas of poverty and possible biological diversity conservation efforts.

NatureNews reported, "The study, as yet unpublished, showed that water conservation projects could aid poverty alleviation. The 16 other ecosystem services they assessed, including crop pollination by insects and waste treatment, showed similar results. 'This suggests we should continue to push for biodiversity conservation and sustainable development where these synergies exist,' says [Conservation International researcher Will] Turner."

All well and good, but another study from a London-based research group brought up an important issue when conservation measures are initiated in countries as an economic stimulus to eliminate poverty, IE: eco-tourism. The study by the International Institute for Environment and Development questioned whether the economic benefits were actually reaching those in greatest need. As an anecdote to this study, I was reading about efforts to improve the controlled hunting of lions in African reserves. At issue was that, while considerable fees were being charged to the trophy hunters, local villagers who staffed the park reserve were still drastically underpaid.

More large-scale studies are taking place, but a final, definitive conclusion will be a difficult goal to achieve as there are so many variables at work in any particular situation. Population sizes, what specific ecosystems or natural resources would be conserved, what species are at risk, what economic benefits can be derived - all play a role and all can be different from place to place, situation to situation.

In the next few weeks, the United Nations will be struggling with strategies that can hopefully both lift the poverty levels of needy nations through economic development while preserving natural resources and enhancing biodiversity. It is a difficult tightrope to walk. Wrestling with finding solutions that will prevent conservation from being at odds with the reduction of poverty, Bill Adams from the University of Cambridge observed, "Maybe we can't stop biodiversity loss and lift people out of poverty at the same time, but we have to try to make it work."

Read article in NatureNews.
Visit the Convention on Biological Diversity website.

UN Proposes End To Fishing Subsidies: restructuring could avoid collapse of fish stocks

Throughout many fisheries worldwide, overfishing has greatly reduced fish stocks and the response of some governments has been the subsidization of fleet expansion - more vessels, more nets and related equipment - so as to maintain or increase catch levels of a dwindling resource. Unfortunately, while this logic may make some sort of economic sense, it also most certainly hastens the inevitable collapse of the species and the industry itself - a sort of Band-Aid solution for a festering, terminal wound.

In a recent report put out by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), a drastic reduction in commercial fishing subsidies is being proposed as a way to save both the fishing industry and fish populations. The report recognizes that approximately 20 percent of the world population depends on seafood as a primary food source and that there are over 170 million people involved in commercial fishing and processing. But the report also recognized that by 2003 , 27 percent of the world's marine fisheries had collapsed. And without a major restructuring of how this marine resource is utilized, that number was bound to increase.

According to UNEP, $27 billion (USD) is being spent each year as subsidies - $8 billion of which is earmarked for managing marine protected areas, but the rest is being spent on propping up fishing fleets to maintain or expand fishing capacity when that capacity already exceeds what is sustainable. UNEP proposes a systematic restructuring in subsidies, focusing more on buying up excess vessels and retraining fishermen, thereby reducing commercial fishing to a level that would be more in line with enabling fish populations to provide their "maximum sustainable yield."

Would this allow commercial fisheries to meet increasing demand from an ever-growing human population? Probably not, but it would forestall the total elimination of one fishery after another, while alternatives are developed such as aquaculture. Others have indicated that taking any food from the sea will lead to its eventual elimination, that "sustainable fishing" is a myth. Whether that is true or not, it must be recognized that a demand for seafood will always exists and so steps must be taken to best preserve what is most certainly not an endless resource.

Some have also suggested that the economic rationale that supports farm subsidies - where, instead of expansion, productive farmland sits idle for the purpose of maintaining stable prices - may need to be re-examined in the face of the moral dilemma of developing nations in need of food staples for an undernourished populace.

You can read more about UNEP's commercial fishing subsidy proposals - part of an overall strategy for a "Greener Economy" - by clicking here (PDF download) or reading UNEP's latest press release.

Information source: SeaWeb.org.

Biodiversity Yin-Yang: sobering UN report and more tigers in India

Yin-Yang news about biodiversity: the United Nation's Convention on Biological Diversity recently released its third Global Biodiveristy Outlook report and the results were not good. Eight years ago, targets were set to improve both plant and animal biodiversity and not only were those targets not met, but the report determined that the rate of extinction of plant and animal life is happening 1000 times faster than expected.

The report examines global biodiversity which includes ecosystems such as coral reefs, tropical rainforests, and other ecosystems in addition to specific threatened plant and animal life.

But on a more positive note and speaking of threatened animal life, a recent field study of tigers in the Kaziranga National park in northeast India revealed the largest concentration of these highly endangered cats. Using camera traps, the study, conducted in the first quarter of 2009, photographed tigers at a rate of 32 per 100 sq. km - that's compared to the rate of 3-12 tigers found throughout India's reserve parks and nearly twice that of the previous record of 19.6 tigers found in another reserve.

The success of the tiger population in this one reserve is being attributed to the reserve's grassland features and available food sources like deer and wild boar. Hopefully, the reserve's ability to resist poaching is also playing a role. Unfortunately, tigers are illegally hunted for their hides and, in particular, for their genitals - a homeopathic freeze-dried aphrodisiac that commands a high price in many Asian countries.

Read about the biodiversity report in the Guardian.co.uk.
Read about the tiger study (with pictures) in the BBC Earth News.