Nemo's Notes

Secret Slaughter Film

2008-04-03T05:18:00.016-04:00

Sunday, March 30, 2008
http://rpc.technorati.com/rpc/ping
Secret film will show slaughter to the world
Covert operation finally exposes Taiji's annual dolphin horror

By Boyd Harnell
Special to The Japan Times
For the first time ever, graphic feature-length footage of the annual slaughter of some 2,500 dolphins in Taiji, Wakayama Prefecture, has been captured during a unique yearlong covert operation.

OPS filming team leader Louie Psihoyos (foreground) and assistant director Charles Hambleton in camouflage overlooking Taiji's "killing cove," where whalers (below) haul dolphins aboard their boat from the blood-red sea.

The secret filming by members of the U.S. conservation group Oceanic Preservation Society (OPS) ˜ equipped with state-of-the-art technology is being turned into a major documentary feature film destined for worldwide release this summer (although distribution in Japan is at present not certain).

The story of how this film of the barbaric killing and subsequent butchering of dolphins was made ˜ together with the resulting sale of their meat that massively exceeds Japanese and international limits for mercury content ˜ is told here, exclusively, for the first time anywhere in print.

The footage of the annual seven-month dolphin "drive fisheries" (as they are known in Japan), and of the brutal practices involved in them ˜ as well as the complicity in the killings by various dolphin trainers and officials from Taiji Whale Museum ˜ is sure to shock the world. But whether Japanese people themselves will be able to see the film and arrive at their own conclusions is still by no means certain.

The annual dolphin slaughter at Taiji, a town with a population of some 3,500 in the beautiful Yoshino Kumano Kokuritsu Koen national park, follows a regular pattern.

First, hunter boats from the Taiji Isana Union (numbering at most 13 skiffs, with two crewmen each) head out to sea and surround pods of dolphins or pilot whales (which are actually large dolphins). Then they drive them into a "capture cove" by banging on long metal bell-ended poles placed in the water to disrupt the dolphins' sonar, causing them to become completely disorientated and panic.

After these animals have spent a night supposedly relaxing in the netted-off capture cove (in an attempt by the whalers to make their meat more tender), they are driven to the neighboring "killing cove." There, behind huge blue tarps strung across the cove to keep prying eyes away ˜ in much the same way that Japanese police cordon off crime scenes ˜ the dolphins meet their gruesome predawn end.

It is a gory spectacle that Taiji has long striven to keep anyone from seeing ˜ and one that is crucially fueled by the lucrative, worldwide dolphin captivity and display industry. Aquarium operators, some of whom have claimed to be saving dolphins' lives by selecting a few as performers, pay up to $150,000 per animal.

The brutal selection process, though ˜ as shown in the OPS footage ˜ causes many of these highly intelligent marine mammals to die of shock or drown.

Meanwhile, cruelty apart, the government-sanctioned slaughter is widely condemned by Japanese scientists, activists and a few Taiji officials, who all cite the serious health issues related to consumption of the dolphins' mercury-tainted meat.

A baby dolphin leaps to its death on rocks (above) after its mother is killed, and a whaler (below) hauls in another speared victim. OPS PHOTOS

One of the officials OPS filmed was Taiji City Councilman Junichiro Yamashita, who organized certified tests on local dolphin meat bought from retail outlets in the town. The shocking test results revealed mercury and methylmercury levels that were 30 and 16 times, respectively, above advisory levels set by the Health, Labor and Welfare Ministry. As a result, Yamashita hastily distributed newsletters to Taiji residents warning them to avoid consuming the meat ˜ which he called "toxic waste."

Although a massive blackout of this long-standing butchery of small cetaceans is aided by an apparent self-imposed boycott of the subject by Japan's vernacular and other English-language media, this newspaper has published a 2 1/2-year-long series of exposes that have won it two international press awards from the Humane Society of the United States.

Now, though, the focus is on the meticulously planned $2.5-million covert operation ˜ the cost of which is estimated to double by the time of the film's projected release in June.

From their base in Boulder, Colorado, the OPS group made six trips to Wakayama Prefecture, where they were constantly followed by local police and stalked and harassed by Taiji "whalers." Despite this, their mission was successful. Their high-tech film gear was covertly inserted in the "killing cove" and extracted 16 times thanks to the efforts of the film's assistant director, Charles Hambleton, and three members of the OPS team. Their hidden, high-definition (HD) cameras successfully recorded the horror that unfolded behind Taiji's blue tarps. And what they saw was beyond their belief.

Captured dolphins were filmed writhing in pain as Taiji whalers speared them repeatedly or cracked their spines with spiked weapons. Stricken dolphins are also shown thrashing about wildly, blood pouring from their wounds until they finally succumbed. Meanwhile, a number of dolphin trainers and officials from the Taiji Whale Museum are shown cooperating in the slaughter ˜ some even laughing ˜ as the killing cove's bloodied, ruby-red water swept round into the adjacent capture cove.

But perhaps the most iconic scene is one in which a baby dolphin leaps to its death on the rocks after its mother is killed. This really was a surreal and incredibly sad sight to see.

OPS team leader Louie Psihoyos, a world-renowned photographer formerly with National Geographic Magazine, and members of his group, conducted the extraordinary covert operation with the daring elan and minute precision of a military-style, special-forces mission.

With proper funding the team was able to use the most sophisticated equipment money could buy. Among their weapons of choice were a battery of HD cameras. Some of those cameras were encased in fake rocks sculpted out of high-density foam by movie-model makers with Kerner Optical (formerly George "Star Wars" Lucas' Industrial Light and Magic Shop). These disguised cameras were strat- egically positioned inside the killing cove.

Members of a multi-national pro-surfer group at Taiji last October, where ˜ despite harassment by whalers ˜ they formed a prayer circle of protest in the waters of the "killing cove" where dolphins were being speared. OPS PHOTO

Also included in the formidable lineup of high-tech gear for this covert operation were standard-size HD cameras, $50,000 military-grade HD forward-looking infrared (FLIR) P-645 thermal cameras (to detect anyone the whalers had on lookout); hydrophones and HD underwater cameras (to record the dolphins' underwater throes); unmanned gyro-stabilized helicopters; a number of "shotgun" microphones disguised as tree branches; walkie-talkies; and a host of ancillary equipment.

The mission objective was to produce a well-balanced, full-length documentary feature for general worldwide release encompassing all facets of the Taiji dolphin cull and its health risks.

"We succeeded," Psihoyos said, "but we also came back with an epic horror film resembling a Steven King novel more than a documentary."

Psihoyos emphasized that the film is neither anti-Japanese nor a "Japan-bashing" production.

In fact, the whole OPS Taiji odyssey began in the winter of 2006. Then, Psihoyos says, "My assistant director, Charles Hambleton, and I had a seven-hour meeting at the mayor's office with Taiji town officials about making a movie of their town.

"An official, who represented Mayor Kazutaka Sangen, said they were concerned about Westerners showing blood in the cove ˜ that it gave the town an evil look."

Psihoyos says he told the officials he would not show blood in his film ˜ if they allowed him to position two cameras at the entrance to the cove and to interview the whalers. After mulling it over, though, both officials and whalers cut off contact with Psihoyos and denied him permission to film near the cove. As well, they demanded that he should restrict footage showing blood ˜ apparently fearful that barbarous images may lead to their drive hunts being banned.

Entrails and internal organs of dolphins killed in "drive fisheries" and then brought to land for butchering lie unsuccessfully hidden from view on the floor of the slaughterhouse in Taiji adjacent to the "killing cove" there. BOYD HARNELL PHOTO

In this volatile atmosphere, local police warned the whalers and their supporters off any repeat of violence or threats of violence such as had happened before. In fact, Nigel Barker, a former Australian resident in Taiji, says he was threatened with bodily harm for providing The Japan Times with details of the whalers' brutal methods. In another incident, Psihoyos said he, too, was threatened by whalers, who said, "We will kill you."

Amazingly, though, after their talks broke down and the OPS people were leaving their final meeting with Taiji town officials, they were given a detailed map of Taiji, red-lining areas where filming was restricted. This map became a precious tool for planning the group's covert ops over the next year.

Now the gloves were off. No agreement had been made with the officials and Psihoyos immediately planned a thorough reconnaissance of the Taiji area. Precise vantage points were selected to position their cameras. Several camouflaged camera blinds were set up on the headland adjacent to the Whale Museum that overlooks the killing cove. But their major challenge was figuring out how to insert and extract their "rock cameras," underwater cameras, hydrophones and hidden microphones without being detected.

Psihoyos contacted Ric O'Barry, who captured and trained dolphins for the 1960s TV series "Flipper," asking for his help in detailing the whalers' routine during drive hunts.

O'Barry, head of the international Save Japan Dolphins coalition, had monitored the drives in Taiji for more than five years, and he agreed to be the point man for OPS. O'Barry was already hated by the whalers for his activities, including bringing the media to Taiji to film the brutal drives. In fact, he tells how whalers greet him with throat-cutting gestures when they see him there.

Following O'Barry's advice, the OPS group implemented their high-risk strategy for filming the covert mission. As the two headlands overlooking the killing cove were constantly monitored by whalers, members faced the loss of expensive gear and possible arrest. That was despite Japanese attorneys telling them that the legality of blocking access to a national park was questionable. They said, though, that police "made up their own rules" in enforcing the blockade.

Ric O'Barry, trainer of the dolphins for the 1960s TV series "Flipper," and head of the Save Japan Dolphins coalition, wears a video-vest in Tokyo's hip Shibuya district showing graphic images of dolphins being killed in Taiji.

The OPS group was headquartered in hotel rooms in the area, where their missions were planned and piles of pricey equipment occupied most of the space. Two vans were rented to haul their weighty gear to their target locations. Another small, unobtrusive rental car driven by OPS member Joe Chisholm was used for scouting ˜ mostly for monitoring the Taiji harbor area to check if drive boats were out. Chisholm also kept an eye on the roads to detect whether police were following the group. Altogether, the incredible challenges of making this film elevated it to a major undertaking on a scale never before attempted.

Throughout this buildup period, drive fisheries were being conducted during daylight. If the whalers were successful, captured dolphins would be trapped in the holding cove sealed off with nets. Before daybreak the next day, men in motorboats would herd the panicked animals into the killing cove of no return.

The horror of the dolphins' final moments there were recorded not only by the "rock cameras" above the waterline, but also from below by using underwater microphones and an underwater "blood-cam" HD camera devised by OPS high-tech guru Simon Hutchins, which yielded graphic footage of the sea slowly turning red as the killings continued.

To make this possible, OPS called on Mandy-Rae Cruickshank, a seven-time world free-diving champion, and her famed coach and husband, Kirk Krack, to plant the devices. (Cruikshank recently broke her own world record by free-diving down to 88 meters and back in 2 min. 48 sec.) Both eagerly accepted the risky challenge.

"Good to go Mandy," crackled through the two-way. It was 3 a.m. The OPS support group on land had just completed a thermal-imaging sweep of the capture and killing coves. No security was detected. As the OPS van dropped the two off above the holding cove's small beach, and sped away, the free-diving pair, clad in wet suits, entered the water. The moon was full, helping them to see obstacles.

"Tensions were high . . . we had to get around a barbed-wire fence and hike down over some boulders to get into the water," Mandy said. "Then we swam around to the killing cove. It was about 40 feet (12 meters) deep. We had an underwater camera and hydrophone, and we used a flashlight to get a reference point so we knew where to retrieve them from after we made a reconnaissance, but we had to turn it on and off quickly to escape detection. Then Kirk and I put down the devices fairly easily."

On their return to the beach in the holding cove, Cruickshank said, "We saw a car going into the parking lot, so we hid in bushes until they left and then we waited for the van to pick us up."

Before that mission and again afterward, she said, "We were constantly monitored by police."

A few days later, Cruikshank said that from that same beach in the capture cove they saw a pod of 40 herded round to the killing cove, where the slaughter began. "They had separated the babies, some only as big as my arm, and then the emerald water in front of us began to turn red and you could hear the dolphins screaming. One stabbed dolphin tried to escape, and it made it over two nets from the killing cove and was heading toward the beach in the capture cove with blood streaming from it. We saw the last two breaths it took ˜ it was impossible not to cry.

"The babies were led out to sea and were either killed or set free to die of starvation," she said.

Meanwhile, Psihoyos' team was embedded in their camera blinds on overlooking hillsides, sometimes for as long as 17 hours a day. Dressed in full camouflage gear and wearing face paint, they looked like military sniper teams. Black masking tape covered reflective surfaces on their cameras to avoid detection. For over 3 1/2 weeks, the OPS team survived on a daily ration of 3 hours' sleep. When filming from the camera blinds, they subsisted on energy bars and water. Whaler security men, always wary of outsiders monitoring their hunts, constantly scanned the high terrain, the bushes and undergrowth surrounding the two coves, their flashlights searching for intruders.

Fake rocks to disguise hidden cameras are sculpted out of foam (top) at Kerner Optical in California (formerly George "Star Wars" Lucas' Industrial Light and Magic Shop); world free-diving champion Mandy-Rae Cruickshank (above), who, together with her husband Kirk Krack (below, in thermal-image photo) secretly positioned many of the high-tech devices to record what happens in Taiji's "killing cove," OPS PHOTOS

Psihoyos recounted his attempt in setting up the initial camera blind in a spot overlooking the killing cove.

"It was a moonless night and I had a full-size def (HD) camera in tow with a large tripod. I scaled a cliff and descended on a rope and perched on a shelf as big as an average office desk ˜ but at a slope of about 30 degrees.

"I braced my feet against a small tree and didn't move them for the next 15 1/2 hours," he said, adding, "the lagoon was filled with pilot whales ˜ they made a protective circle around their young. I shot frantic clips from my unstable perch as I saw whales killed and dragged away."

Reacting to these brutal scenes, Psihoyos recalled thinking, "If there's a god, don't let their lives be wasted in vain."

Originally, OPS's hidden rock cameras focused on the killing cove from surrounding headlands could only film for three hours, but a high-tech piece of kit they acquired "turbocharged" the batteries to allow them to film for 11 hours continuously, ensuring they would capture all facets of the cull.

The hidden microphones revealed startling comments from whalers in the killing cove, including one during the cleanup after a killing session, when a dead calf was on the beach in the killing cove. Countering the whalers' contention they never harmed a mother or its calf, one was heard saying: "Hey, that guy over there saw the dead calf, didn't he? Is it a problem?" His friend responded, "He came from the [whalers'] union ˜ it's not a problem."

Indeed, contrary to their statements, the Taiji whalers seem unconcerned about killing female dolphins and their calves ˜ as is graphically depicted in one of the film's sequences.

However, along with the film's horrific images, Psihoyos also interviews on camera Japanese scientists and others involved in the mercury health issues surrounding dolphin meat.

Dr. Shigeo Ekino, a prominent researcher from Kumamoto University's Graduate School of Medical Sciences in Kyushu, compared the high mercury levels found in contaminated fish in Minamata, Japan, in the 1950s during the world's worst mercury-pollution disaster, to levels of mercury currently found in dolphin meat.

Ekino, who was filmed holding a tested sample of Taiji dolphin meat, said: "This dolphin meat is 98.9 ppm (parts per million of total mercury) ˜ which is higher than the level (of the fish and shellfish) in Minamata Bay. It's a clear danger!"

His sample was 247.25 times the Japanese health ministry's advisory level of 0.4 ppm for total mercury.

Tetsuya Endo, a professor at Hokkaido's Health Science University, also conducted mercury tests on dolphin meat, and his results were published in 2005. In a filmed OPS interview, he said: "I found 100 ppm of total mercury in . . . bottlenose dolphin and 2,000 ppm of total mercury in the liver of an unknown (dolphin) species. All of it was toxic." In fact, the higher figure was 5,000 times the health ministry's advisory level for mercury.

In another OPS interview, Psihoyos asked Hideki Moronuki, deputy director of the Far Seas Fisheries Division of the central government's Fisheries Agency, "How are the dolphins killed now? . . . and are the dolphins being dragged around by their tails during the selection process for captive specimens?"

Assistant director Charles Hambleton fits an HD camera into a fake rock set to capture the "killing cove" killings. OPS PHOTO

Moronuki is filmed replying, "Fishermen are using specifically made knife (sic), and put it through the spine . . . most of the animals are killed instantly." As for allegations of them being dragged by their tails, he says, "That's not happening anymore."

When Psihoyos showed Moronuki a film clip of the inhumane, random spearing of dolphins while others were dragged by their tails ˜ all filmed recently ˜ he froze and told Psihoyos: "I have to instruct them again. They are using inappropriate method to treat dolphin."

At Psihoyos' request, Moronuki gave him a hair sample to be tested for mercury. The result: a readout of 5.874 ppm of total mercury, which is 14.68 times the health ministry's advisory level.

Moronuki's response was peculiar: "I was very happier to know that I have eaten so much fish which make me much healthier than meat-eating peoples."

Another dramatic highlight of the footage shows a surfer invasion in Taiji last October led by legendary Australian pro surfer Dave Rastovich, along with a few TV celebrities and some surfer buddies. They paddled into the cove where dolphins were being slaughtered and formed a prayer circle. Shocked by the atrocity, they finally retreated when whalers in skiffs came and prodded them with poles and sharp-hooked gaffs.

Producers of the OPS documentary are aiming for a worldwide release in June, including a special Japanese version creatively marketed and circulated to ensure maximum viewing even if major distributors turn it down. The film's narrator will be an actor selected from Hollywood's "A list," they said.

Referring to his hopes the film will benefit the dolphins, Psihoyos said: "Dolphins are the only wild animals known to rescue humans. With this film, we'd like to come to their rescue and, in the process, save ourselves."

Pointedly, just months before the surfers went into the killing cove at Taiji, their leader Dave Rastovich had survived a shark attack in Australia when a dolphin swam between him and the shark and allowed him to escape.

Five Makah whalers charged

2007-10-05T17:47:00.000-04:00

Thursday, October 5, 2007 12:15 PM
By Lynda V. Mapes
Seattle Times staff reporter

A federal indictment says this gray whale was illegally harpooned, shot and killed by five Makah tribal whalers in early September.

A federal grand jury returned misdemeanor indictments Thursday against all five men arrested in the killing of a gray whale in early September.

According to the indictment, the whalers sought weapons and ammunition from the Makah Tribe the day before the hunt, claiming they wanted them for practice. The whalers also got permission to get a 12-foot boat from the tribe and obtained a large buoy from a Makah tribal employee.

The next morning the five men set out in two boats, encountered a gray whale and struck it with at least four harpoons, the indictment said. They then attached four buoys to the whale and shot it at least 16 times with high-powered weapons obtained from the Makah Whaling Commission.

According to the indictment, the fatally injured whale swam nine miles. About 12 hours after it was struck, it died and sank in about 700 feet of water.

The five men have been summoned to appear in federal court in Tacoma Oct. 12.

The men charged are: Frankie Gonzales, Wayne Johnson, Andrew Noel, Theron Parker and William Secor. All are charged with conspiracy, unlawful taking of a marine mammal and unauthorized whaling.

"The charges brought today are the most serious available to the government in this case," U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sullivan said in a prepared statement.

Said Naomi Rose, marine-mammal scientist for the Humane Society of the United States: "We welcome these charges; we think they are what should have happened. These are strong charges, with the maximum penalty the law allows. What we need to do now is wait and see what happens."

The federal prosecution does not take the place of tribal action against the whalers, said John Arum, an attorney for the tribe. "The tribe has promised prosecution to the fullest extent of the law, and it intends to do that," Arum said.

If convicted under federal law, the whalers could face up to a year in jail and a fine of up to $100,000. Under tribal law, the whalers could serve up to a year in jail, pay up to a $5,000 fine and face suspension of their treaty right to fish for up to three years.

Makah Tribal Council member Micah McCarty said tribal authorities are eager to get on with trying the case, but they have been held up, waiting for federal officials to finish their work. Federal authorities have all the most pertinent evidence in the case and won't turn it over to the tribe until the federal case is concluded.

Key dates in Makah whaling

"Any jury of their peers would say, 'OK, where is the evidence?' " McCarty said. "We are patiently waiting. Our timelines are connected at the hip with the federal timelines. Initially, we thought we would be in lock-step cooperation and it became a one-way street pretty quickly. The tribal prosecution doesn't have the strongest case without the evidence they are holding.

"We are kind of in a Catch-22 situation."

Jim Oesterle, assistant U.S. attorney for environmental crimes, said the investigation is continuing, and he was not sure when it would conclude.

Tribal leaders have been impatient to get on with the case, McCarty said, because of pressure in Washington, D.C., from anti-whaling interests arguing the tribe isn't really going to prosecute its own.

The tribe needs political support in Washington, where it is seeking a federal waiver from the Marine Mammal Protection Act to allow legal hunts in the future. The illegal hunt has set that effort back, Arum said. Vicki Nomura, special agent in charge of the National Marine Fisheries Service, confirmed the rogue hunt could delay the tribe's press for a waiver, in the works for years.

"This just puts further pressure for holding a treaty right hostage until these five Makah men see their day in court," McCarty said. "It reflects on the integrity of the U.S. trust responsibility. This just wraps a whole people in a situation that shouldn't have had to come to this."

The tribe has a right to whale, guaranteed in its treaty of 1855 with the U.S. government. Whaler Wayne Johnson has said he was tired of waiting for thewaiver, and decided to go out and hunt a whale, as his ancestors always had, and as the treaty allows.

Johnson has said repeatedly since the hunt that he didn't regret his actions. But he was more circumspect Thursday.

"I got three counts against me," Johnson said. "I'm a little worried, of course."

Lynda V. Mapes: 206-464-2736 or lmapes@seattletimes.com

Copyright © 2007 The Seattle Times Company

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003926767_whale05m.html

http://rpc.technorati.com/rpc/ping

Just an amazing picture...

2007-09-14T21:22:00.001-04:00

wow, thanks Eric

Will São Tomé and Príncipe sell their Whales..?

2007-08-25T19:32:00.000-04:00

Seems Japan will keep exploring all avenues from Small Developing nations in order to gain access to whale meat. In this part of the world Japan seems to have been very generous, practicaly all these nations support Japans twisted logic to justify their whaling and fisheries agenda.

While poaching fish from its neighbor ! Russia....

"Kamchatka’s Environmental Prosecutor’s Office has passed to the court a criminal case against the captain of the Japanese fishing vessel, the Hoshinmaru 88.............The vessel, owned and operated by Ikeda Suisan company, was seized by Russian marine border guards with a crew of 17 off Kamchatka’s eastern coast on June 1 carrying a catch exceeding by 14 tons the documented payload, with sockeye salmon instead of the chum salmon declared. The boat was later escorted to the port of Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky."

And now making overtures to the small and vulnerable island nation of São Tomé and Principe.

No doubt a result of the recent dynamics at both the annual International Whaling Commission(IWC) and CITIES (Convention on International Trade in endangered species).

©Eli FullerWintering Humpback

Japan had sought a revue of whale abundance estimates from CITIES, due to the impasse the IWC finds its self after years of disregard for resolutions affecting "scientific" whaling, while all manner of twists and turn are applied in order to further the request, promoting questionable science methodologies that is not required by the IWC scientific committee, though admittedly helpful, but not required...oooky!
Breaching Sperm Whale ©www.joaoquarema.com
CITIES responded by denying the request and adding that the IWC was the appropriate body for such research. This also went to reinforce the ban on trade in whale meat currently in place.

Also reinforcing the "market based" decision taken by Iceland recently not to issue quotas for whale hunting next year due to a surplus of stock and no export market.

Ooh, BTW, Japans many years of research has still not provided any abundance numbers according to the the scientific committee report of the IWC 59 meeting.

This article seems to be the only reference to the whaling question, however Japan has graciously given food aid and a grant to construct the infamous "fishery facility". This will also make a neat geographical plus, certainly in the realms of food security.

Japans success at this courtship will be the fruit of the long worn battle.

Next will be representation at the IWC, perhaps!

Japan wants to hunt whales in Sao Tome’s waters [ 2007-08-09 ]

Sao Tome, Sao Tome and Principe, 9 Aug - Japan has presented proposals to Sao Tome’s fisheries authorities aimed to open the archipelago’s territorial waters to Japanese commercial whaling, officials said.

Sao Tome’s fisheries minister, Cristina Dias, said Wednesday that she considered the Japanese proposals “interesting”, noting that before Sao Tome gives approval for this type of fishing it would carry out economic and environmental studies and also sign up to an international convention on whaling.

Besides discussing financial compensation for whale fishing in its waters, Sao Tome would also discuss job creation prospects related to the whaling proposals with the Japanese authorities, added the minister.

Dias was speaking after a fisheries conference in Sao Tome, which was attended by a Tokyo delegation headed by Japanese MP Tadahiko Ito, who is to deliver an invitation to President Fradique de Menezes for the Japan-Africa summit next year.

Japan made US$ 6.9 million available to Sao Tome less than a month ago for fisheries development as part of Tokyo’s bilateral cooperation with the islands.

Japan is one of Sao Tome’s main cooperation partners in the fisheries sector. Tokyo sends annual food donations of rice to the islands worth around US$ 1.3 million. (macauhub)

So should you want to drop the good Minister a note

Hon.Cristina Maria
ambassade.sao.tome(AT)scarlet.be

Ministre de l'Economie S.E. Cristina Maria Fernandes Dias
Government of Sao Tome and Principe

Cradle 2 Cradle an imperitive for humanities future !

2007-08-18T10:13:00.000-04:00

Truely a great foundation to understand why all of humanity to have a major shift in so many ways, the Cradle 2 Cradle discipline is definably, a route toward that future.

From a leading designers prospective...

Perhaps this is a crucial foundation point for developing countries to use as a king plank for the new millennium and the future.

It's a dirty World...kills 40%

2007-08-15T08:36:00.000-04:00

Aug. 2, 2007
Water, air and soil pollution causes 40 percent of deaths worldwide, Cornell research survey finds
By Susan Lang

About 40 percent of deaths worldwide are caused by water, air and soil pollution, concludes a Cornell researcher. Such environmental degradation, coupled with the growth in world population, are major causes behind the rapid increase in human diseases, which the World Health Organization has recently reported. Both factors contribute to the malnourishment and disease susceptibility of 3.7 billion people, he says.

David Pimentel, Cornell professor of ecology and agricultural sciences, and a team of Cornell graduate students examined data from more than 120 published papers on the effects of population growth, malnutrition and various kinds of environmental degradation on human diseases. Their report is published in the online version of the journal Human Ecology (available at http://www.springerlink.com/content/101592/, to be published in the December print issue).

"We have serious environmental resource problems of water, land and energy, and these are now coming to bear on food production, malnutrition and the incidence of diseases," said Pimentel.

Of the world population of about 6.5 billion, 57 percent is malnourished, compared with 20 percent of a world population of 2.5 billion in 1950, said Pimentel. Malnutrition is not only the direct cause of 6 million children's deaths each year but also makes millions of people much more susceptible to such killers as acute respiratory infections, malaria and a host of other life-threatening diseases, according to the research.

Among the study's other main points:

* Nearly half the world's people are crowded into urban areas, often without adequate sanitation, and are exposed to epidemics of such diseases as measles and flu.
* With 1.2 billion people lacking clean water, waterborne infections account for 80 percent of all infectious diseases. Increased water pollution creates breeding grounds for malaria-carrying mosquitoes, killing 1.2 million to 2.7 million people a year, and air pollution kills about 3 million people a year. Unsanitary living conditions account for more than 5 million deaths each year, of which more than half are children.
* Air pollution from smoke and various chemicals kills 3 million people a year. In the United States alone about 3 million tons of toxic chemicals are released into the environment -- contributing to cancer, birth defects, immune system defects and many other serious health problems.
* Soil is contaminated by many chemicals and pathogens, which are passed on to humans through direct contact or via food and water. Increased soil erosion worldwide not only results in more soil being blown but spreading of disease microbes and various toxins.

At the same time, more microbes are becoming increasingly drug-resistant. And global warming, together with changes in biological diversity, influence parasite evolution and the ability of exotic species to invade new areas. As a result, such diseases as tuberculosis and influenza are re-emerging as major threats, while new threats -- including West Nile virus and Lyme disease -- have developed.

"A growing number of people lack basic needs, like pure water and ample food. They become more susceptible to diseases driven by malnourishment, and air, water and soil pollutants," Pimentel concludes. He and his co-authors call for comprehensive and fair population policies and more conservation of environmental resources that support human life.

"Relying on increasing diseases and malnutrition to limit human numbers in the world diminishes the quality of life for all humans and is a high-risk policy," the researchers conclude.

The Deforestry Paradox of Kyoto

2007-08-13T22:56:00.000-04:00

This is a great study as it allows for what should have been done orginally with Kyoto etc, this gets the attention needed and the "trade not aid" debate can be given a better context, one that brings the wider financial mechanisms of development for the developing world, while slowing global ecological destruction.
Nemo

Carbon Market Encourages Chopping Forests - Study

WASHINGTON - The current carbon market actually encourages cutting down some of the world's biggest forests, which would unleash tonnes of climate-warming carbon into the atmosphere, a new study reported on Monday.

Under the Kyoto Protocol aimed at stemming climate change, there is no profitable reason for the 10 countries and one French territory with 20 percent of Earth's intact tropical forest to maintain this resource, according to a study in the journal Public Library of Science Biology.

The Kyoto treaty and other talks on global warming focus on so-called carbon credits for countries and companies that plant new trees where forests have been destroyed. Trees and other plants absorb carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas emitted by petroleum-fueled vehicles, coal-fired power plants and humans.

At this point, there is no credit for countries that keep the forests they have, the study said.

"The countries that haven't really been the target of deforestation have nothing to sell because they haven't deforested anything," said Gustavo Fonseca, one of the study's authors.

PERVERSE INCENTIVE

"So that creates a perverse incentive for them to actually start deforesting, so that in the future, they might be allowed to actually cap-and-trade, as they call it: you put a cap on your deforestation and you trade that piece that hasn't been deforested," Fonseca said in a telephone interview.

The countries most at risk for this kind of deforestation, because they all have more than half their original forests intact, are Panama, Colombia, Democratic Republic of Congo, Peru, Belize, Gabon, Guyana, Suriname, Bhutan and Zambia, along with the French territory of French Guiana.

These places need a system of credits to involve them in the "global deforestation avoidance market," said Fonseca, of the World Bank's Global Environment Facility.

Under this kind of system, these countries could agree to keep deforestation rates below the global average and get credit for how much below the average they are, Fonseca said.

These market mechanisms are still being worked out and are likely to be debated at a series of international meetings on climate change this year at the United Nations, in Washington and in Bali, Indonesia.

Besides curbing greenhouse gas emissions, this system could offer other benefits that intact forests provide, according to Russell Mittermeier, a study co-author and president of the environmental group Conservation International.

Intact forests protect watersheds, encourage pollination and preserve biodiversity, Mittermeier said by telephone.

Mittermeier said perhaps 20 to 25 percent of world carbon emissions come from the destruction of tropical forest, but this issue is not at the center of the global warming discussion.

"People are talking a lot about vehicle emissions, industrial emissions, biofuels and recycling," Mittermeier said. "Forests were barely in there and yet forests are ... perhaps the major contributor" to global climate change.

Story by Deborah Zabarenko
Story Date: 14/8/2007
© Reuters News Service 2007
Check out Planet Ark on the web at www.planetark.com

Fortunatly this is gaining traction, there is very significant funds to be gained to assist in the building of what could be a great world, it is possible. Thats the rebel in me !

The World Bank is one of the main players in carbon financing, and estimates the value of carbon traded in 2005 to be about $10bn.

It believes the carbon market has the potential to bring more than $25bn (£14bn) in new financing for sustainable development to the poorest countries and the developing world.
Nemo

The truth about recycling

2007-07-09T10:02:00.000-04:00

http://economist.co.uk/PrinterFriendly.cfm?story_id=9249262

Economist.com

The truth about recycling
Jun 7th 2007
From The Economist print edition

Reuters

As the importance of recycling becomes more apparent, questions about it linger. Is it worth the effort? How does it work? Is recycling waste just going into a landfill in China? Here are some answers

IT IS an awful lot of rubbish. Since 1960 the amount of municipal waste being collected in America has nearly tripled, reaching 245m tonnes in 2005. According to European Union statistics, the amount of municipal waste produced in western Europe increased by 23% between 1995 and 2003, to reach 577kg per person. (So much for the plan to reduce waste per person to 300kg by 2000.) As the volume of waste has increased, so have recycling efforts. In 1980 America recycled only 9.6% of its municipal rubbish; today the rate stands at 32%. A similar trend can be seen in Europe, where some countries, such as Austria and the Netherlands, now recycle 60% or more of their municipal waste. Britain's recycling rate, at 27%, is low, but it is improving fast, having nearly doubled in the past three years.

Even so, when a city introduces a kerbside recycling programme, the sight of all those recycling lorries trundling around can raise doubts about whether the collection and transportation of waste materials requires more energy than it saves. “We are constantly being asked: Is recycling worth doing on environmental grounds?” says Julian Parfitt, principal analyst at Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP), a non-profit British company that encourages recycling and develops markets for recycled materials.

Studies that look at the entire life cycle of a particular material can shed light on this question in a particular case, but WRAP decided to take a broader look. It asked the Technical University of Denmark and the Danish Topic Centre on Waste to conduct a review of 55 life-cycle analyses, all of which were selected because of their rigorous methodology. The researchers then looked at more than 200 scenarios, comparing the impact of recycling with that of burying or burning particular types of waste material. They found that in 83% of all scenarios that included recycling, it was indeed better for the environment.

Based on this study, WRAP calculated that Britain's recycling efforts reduce its carbon-dioxide emissions by 10m-15m tonnes per year. That is equivalent to a 10% reduction in Britain's annual carbon-dioxide emissions from transport, or roughly equivalent to taking 3.5m cars off the roads. Similarly, America's Environmental Protection Agency estimates that recycling reduced the country's carbon emissions by 49m tonnes in 2005.

Recycling has many other benefits, too. It conserves natural resources. It also reduces the amount of waste that is buried or burnt, hardly ideal ways to get rid of the stuff. (Landfills take up valuable space and emit methane, a potent greenhouse gas; and although incinerators are not as polluting as they once were, they still produce noxious emissions, so people dislike having them around.) But perhaps the most valuable benefit of recycling is the saving in energy and the reduction in greenhouse gases and pollution that result when scrap materials are substituted for virgin feedstock. “If you can use recycled materials, you don't have to mine ores, cut trees and drill for oil as much,” says Jeffrey Morris of Sound Resource Management, a consulting firm based in Olympia, Washington.

Extracting metals from ore, in particular, is extremely energy-intensive. Recycling aluminium, for example, can reduce energy consumption by as much as 95%. Savings for other materials are lower but still substantial: about 70% for plastics, 60% for steel, 40% for paper and 30% for glass. Recycling also reduces emissions of pollutants that can cause smog, acid rain and the contamination of waterways.

A brief history of recycling

The virtue of recycling has been appreciated for centuries. For thousands of years metal items have been recycled by melting and reforming them into new weapons or tools. It is said that the broken pieces of the Colossus of Rhodes, a statue deemed one of the seven wonders of the ancient world, were recycled for scrap. During the industrial revolution, recyclers began to form businesses and later trade associations, dealing in the collection, trade and processing of metals and paper. America's Institute of Scrap Recycling Industries (ISRI), a trade association with more than 1,400 member companies, traces its roots back to one such organisation founded in 1913. In the 1930s many people survived the Great Depression by peddling scraps of metal, rags and other items. In those days reuse and recycling were often economic necessities. Recycling also played an important role during the second world war, when scrap metal was turned into weapons.

As industrial societies began to produce ever-growing quantities of garbage, recycling took on a new meaning. Rather than recycling materials for purely economic reasons, communities began to think about how to reduce the waste flow to landfills and incinerators. Around 1970 the environmental movement sparked the creation of America's first kerbside collection schemes, though it was another 20 years before such programmes really took off.

In 1991 Germany made history when it passed an ordinance shifting responsibility for the entire life cycle of packaging to producers. In response, the industry created Duales System Deutschland (DSD), a company that organises a separate waste-management system that exists alongside public rubbish-collection. By charging a licensing fee for its “green dot” trademark, DSD pays for the collection, sorting and recycling of packaging materials. Although the system turned out to be expensive, it has been highly influential. Many European countries later adopted their own recycling initiatives incorporating some degree of producer responsibility.

In 1987 a rubbish-laden barge cruised up and down America's East Coast looking for a place to unload, sparking a public discussion about waste management and serving as a catalyst for the country's growing recycling movement. By the early 1990s so many American cities had established recycling programmes that the resulting glut of materials caused the market price for kerbside recyclables to fall from around $50 per ton to about $30, says Dr Morris, who has been tracking prices for recyclables in the Pacific Northwest since the mid-1980s. As with all commodities, costs for recyclables fluctuate. But the average price for kerbside materials has since slowly increased to about $90 per ton.

Even so, most kerbside recycling programmes are not financially self-sustaining. The cost of collecting, transporting and sorting materials generally exceeds the revenues generated by selling the recyclables, and is also greater than the disposal costs. Exceptions do exist, says Dr Morris, largely near ports in dense urban areas that charge high fees for landfill disposal and enjoy good market conditions for the sale of recyclables.

Sorting things out

Originally kerbside programmes asked people to put paper, glass and cans into separate bins. But now the trend is toward co-mingled or “single stream” collection. About 700 of America's 10,000 kerbside programmes now use this approach, says Kate Krebs, executive director of America's National Recycling Coalition. But the switch can make people suspicious: if there is no longer any need to separate different materials, people may conclude that the waste is simply being buried or burned. In fact, the switch towards single-stream collection is being driven by new technologies that can identify and sort the various materials with little or no human intervention. Single-stream collection makes it more convenient for householders to recycle, and means that more materials are diverted from the waste stream.

San Francisco, which changed from multi to single-stream collection a few years ago, now boasts a recycling rate of 69%—one of the highest in America. With the exception of garden and food waste, all the city's kerbside recyclables are sorted in a 200,000-square-foot facility that combines machines with the manpower of 155 employees. The $38m plant, next to the San Francisco Bay, opened in 2003. Operated by Norcal Waste Systems, it processes an average of 750 tons of paper, plastic, glass and metals a day.

The process begins when a truck arrives and dumps its load of recyclables at one end of the building. The materials are then piled on to large conveyer belts that transport them to a manual sorting station. There, workers sift through everything, taking out plastic bags, large pieces of cardboard and other items that could damage or obstruct the sorting machines. Plastic bags are especially troublesome as they tend to get caught in the spinning-disk screens that send weightier materials, such as bottles and cans, down in one direction and the paper up in another.

Corrugated cardboard is separated from mixed paper, both of which are then baled and sold. Plastic bottles and cartons are plucked out by hand. The most common types, PET (type 1) and HDPE (type 2), are collected separately; the rest go into a mixed-plastics bin.

Next, a magnet pulls out any ferrous metals, typically tin-plated or steel cans, while the non-ferrous metals, mostly aluminium cans, are ejected by eddy current. Eddy-current separators, in use since the early 1990s, consist of a rapidly revolving magnetic rotor inside a long, cylindrical drum that rotates at a slower speed. As the aluminium cans are carried over this drum by a conveyer belt, the magnetic field from the rotor induces circulating electric currents, called eddy currents, within them. This creates a secondary magnetic field around the cans that is repelled by the magnetic field of the rotor, literally ejecting the aluminium cans from the other waste materials.

Finally, the glass is separated by hand into clear, brown, amber and green glass. For each load, the entire sorting process from start to finish takes about an hour, says Bob Besso, Norcal's recycling-programme manager for San Francisco.

Although all recycling facilities still employ people, investment is increasing in optical sorting technologies that can separate different types of paper and plastic. Development of the first near-infra-red-based waste-sorting systems began in the early 1990s. At the time Elopak, a Norwegian producer of drink cartons made of plastic-laminated cardboard, worried that it would have to pay a considerable fee to meet its producer responsibilities in Germany and other European countries. To reduce the overall life-cycle costs associated with its products, Elopak set out to find a way to automate the sorting of its cartons. The company teamed up with SINTEF, a Norwegian research centre, and in 1996 sold its first unit in Germany. The technology was later spun off into a company now called TiTech.

TiTech's systems—more than 1,000 of which are now installed worldwide—rely on spectroscopy to identify different materials. Paper and plastic items are spread out on a conveyor belt in a single layer. When illuminated by a halogen lamp, each type of material reflects a unique combination of wavelengths in the infra-red spectrum that can be identified, much like a fingerprint. By analysing data from a sensor that detects light in both the visible and the near-infra-red spectrum, a computer is able to determine the colour, type, shape and position of each item. Air jets are then activated to push particular items from one conveyor belt to another, or into a bin. Numerous types of paper, plastic or combinations thereof can thus be sorted with up to 98% accuracy.

For many materials the process of turning them back into useful raw materials is straightforward: metals are shredded into pieces, paper is reduced to pulp and glass is crushed into cullet. Metals and glass can be remelted almost indefinitely without any loss in quality, while paper can be recycled up to six times. (As it goes through the process, its fibres get shorter and the quality deteriorates.)

Plastics, which are made from fossil fuels, are somewhat different. Although they have many useful properties—they are flexible, lightweight and can be shaped into any form—there are many different types, most of which need to be processed separately. In 2005 less than 6% of the plastic from America's municipal waste stream was recovered. And of that small fraction, the only two types recycled in significant quantities were PET and HDPE. For PET, food-grade bottle-to-bottle recycling exists. But plastic is often “down-cycled” into other products such as plastic lumber (used in place of wood), drain pipes and carpet fibres, which tend to end up in landfills or incinerators at the end of their useful lives.

Even so, plastics are being used more and more, not just for packaging, but also in consumer goods such as cars, televisions and personal computers. Because such products are made of a variety of materials and can contain multiple types of plastic, metals (some of them toxic), and glass, they are especially difficult and expensive to dismantle and recycle.

Europe and Japan have initiated “take back” laws that require electronics manufacturers to recycle their products. But in America only a handful of states have passed such legislation. That has caused problems for companies that specialise in recycling plastics from complex waste streams and depend on take-back laws for getting the necessary feedstock. Michael Biddle, the boss of MBA Polymers, says the lack of such laws is one of the reasons why his company operates only a pilot plant in America and has its main facilities in China and Austria.

Much recyclable material can be processed locally, but ever more is being shipped to developing nations, especially China. The country has a large appetite for raw materials and that includes scrap metals, waste paper and plastics, all of which can be cheaper than virgin materials. In most cases, these waste materials are recycled into consumer goods or packaging and returned to Europe and America via container ships. With its hunger for resources and the availability of cheap labour, China has become the largest importer of recyclable materials in the world.

The China question

But the practice of shipping recyclables to China is controversial. Especially in Britain, politicians have voiced the concern that some of those exports may end up in landfills. Many experts disagree. According to Pieter van Beukering, an economist who has studied the trade of waste paper to India and waste plastics to China: “as soon as somebody is paying for the material, you bet it will be recycled.”

In fact, Dr van Beukering argues that by importing waste materials, recycling firms in developing countries are able to build larger factories and achieve economies of scale, recycling materials more efficiently and at lower environmental cost. He has witnessed as much in India, he says, where dozens of inefficient, polluting paper mills near Mumbai were transformed into a smaller number of far more productive and environmentally friendly factories within a few years.

Still, compared with Western countries, factories in developing nations may be less tightly regulated, and the recycling industry is no exception. China especially has been plagued by countless illegal-waste imports, many of which are processed by poor migrants in China's coastal regions. They dismantle and recycle anything from plastic to electronic waste without any protection for themselves or the environment.

The Chinese government has banned such practices, but migrant workers have spawned a mobile cottage industry that is difficult to wipe out, says Aya Yoshida, a researcher at Japan's National Institute for Environmental Studies who has studied Chinese waste imports and recycling practices. Because this type of industry operates largely under the radar, it is difficult to assess its overall impact. But it is clear that processing plastic and electronic waste in a crude manner releases toxic chemicals, harming people and the environment—the opposite of what recycling is supposed to achieve.

Under pressure from environmental groups, such as the Silicon Valley Toxics Coalition, some computer-makers have established rules to ensure that their products are recycled in a responsible way. Hewlett-Packard has been a leader in this and even operates its own recycling factories in California and Tennessee. Dell, which was once criticised for using prison labour to recycle its machines, now takes back its old computers for no charge. And last month Steve Jobs detailed Apple's plans to eliminate the use of toxic substances in its products.

Far less controversial is the recycling of glass—except, that is, in places where there is no market for it. Britain, for example, is struggling with a mountain of green glass. It is the largest importer of wine in the world, bringing in more than 1 billion litres every year, much of it in green glass bottles. But with only a tiny wine industry of its own, there is little demand for the resulting glass. Instead what is needed is clear glass, which is turned into bottles for spirits, and often exported to other countries. As a result, says Andy Dawe, WRAP's glass-technology manager, Britain is in the “peculiar situation” of having more green glass than it has production capacity for.

Britain's bottle-makers already use as much recycled green glass as they can in their furnaces to produce new bottles. So some of the surplus glass is down-cycled into construction aggregates or sand for filtration systems. But WRAP's own analysis reveals that the energy savings for both appear to be “marginal or even disadvantageous”. Working with industry, WRAP has started a new programme called GlassRite Wine, in an effort to right the imbalance. Instead of being bottled at source, some wine is now imported in 24,000-litre containers and then bottled in Britain. This may dismay some wine connoisseurs, but it solves two problems, says Mr Dawe: it reduces the amount of green glass that is imported and puts what is imported to good use. It can also cut shipping costs by up to 40%.

The future of recycling

This is an unusual case, however. More generally, one of the biggest barriers to more efficient recycling is that most products were not designed with recycling in mind. Remedying this problem may require a complete rethinking of industrial processes, says William McDonough, an architect and the co-author of a book published in 2002 called “Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things”. Along with Michael Braungart, his fellow author and a chemist, he lays out a vision for establishing “closed-loop” cycles where there is no waste. Recycling should be taken into account at the design stage, they argue, and all materials should either be able to return to the soil safely or be recycled indefinitely. This may sound like wishful thinking, but Mr McDonough has a good pedigree. Over the years he has worked with companies including Ford and Google.

An outgrowth of “Cradle to Cradle” is the Sustainable Packaging Coalition, a non-profit working group that has developed guidelines that look beyond the traditional benchmarks of packaging design to emphasise the use of renewable, recycled and non-toxic source materials, among other things. Founded in 2003 with just nine members, the group now boasts nearly 100 members, including Target, Starbucks and Estée Lauder, some of which have already begun to change the design of their packaging.

Sustainable packaging not only benefits the environment but can also cut costs. Last year Wal-Mart, the world's biggest retailer, announced that it wanted to reduce the amount of packaging it uses by 5% by 2013, which could save the company as much as $3.4 billion and reduce carbon-dioxide emissions by 667,000 tonnes. As well as trying to reduce the amount of packaging, Wal-Mart also wants to recycle more of it. Two years ago the company began to use an unusual process, called the “sandwich bale”, to collect waste material at its stores and distribution centres for recycling. It involves putting a layer of cardboard at the bottom of a rubbish compactor before filling it with waste material, and then putting another layer of cardboard on top. The compactor then produces a “sandwich” which is easier to handle and transport, says Jeff Ashby of Rocky Mountain Recycling, who invented the process for Wal-Mart. As well as avoiding disposal costs for materials it previously sent to landfill, the company now makes money by selling waste at market prices.
EPA
It does get recycled, honest

Evidently there is plenty of scope for further innovation in recycling. New ideas and approaches will be needed, since many communities and organisations have set high targets for recycling. Europe's packaging directive requires member states to recycle 60% of their glass and paper, 50% of metals and 22.5% of plastic packaging by the end of 2008. Earlier this year the European Parliament voted to increase recycling rates by 2020 to 50% of municipal waste and 70% of industrial waste. Recycling rates can be boosted by charging households and businesses more if they produce more rubbish, and by reducing the frequency of rubbish collections while increasing that of recycling collections.

Meanwhile a number of cities and firms (including Wal-Mart, Toyota and Nike) have adopted zero-waste targets. This may be unrealistic but Matt Hale, director of the office of solid waste at America's Environmental Protection Agency, says it is a worthy goal and can help companies think about better ways to manage materials. It forces people to look at the entire life-cycle of a product, says Dr Hale, and ask questions: Can you reduce the amount of material to begin with? Can you design the product to make recycling easier?

If done right, there is no doubt that recycling saves energy and raw materials, and reduces pollution. But as well as trying to recycle more, it is also important to try to recycle better. As technologies and materials evolve, there is room for improvement and cause for optimism. In the end, says Ms Krebs, “waste is really a design flaw.”
Copyright © 2007 The Economist Newspaper and The Economist Group. All rights reserved.

Wake up folks. Lend a hand !

2007-07-08T22:49:00.000-04:00

It is the elixir of many a morning and the finale of a sumptuous meal.

Yet like much of the bountiful food on our supermarket shelves those that produce it do not receive a fair wage for fair days work that many of us would rather not do.

I liked the logo, but you can stay right here and watch the trailer below.

Of course this is only one example of many resources that are consumed by many due to our modern economy that leaves room for people in power to exploit the situation of the detriment local peoples who are quite happy living their life.

Yet many feel these peoples are dragged into the modern age in the name of development and civilization. So thousands of years of indigenous culture are moved out of the area to be exploited for timber, gold, diamonds, and a multitude of other demands of the consume society that makes growth, the yard stick of progress.

Surely this is wrong and needs to be re-examined and other options to be seriously considered.

Antigua, my home.

2007-07-07T17:33:00.000-04:00

Antigua is a wonderful island.
Truly a world class cricketing nation and one that is struggling with the wide variety of issues that come to the for from development, particularly due to coastal and tourism development.
Sadly with weak legislation enforcement and statuary bodies that are less than inclusive in public consultation, which drives a top down decision making process.

Who losses out, as usual the folks at the bottom of the pecking order, primary education is sadly poor and the drive towards a consumer, celebrity society doe little for people to understand the true long term costs of todays development.

Thankfully some folks are able to use our mistakes for their study, while we welcome them I also hope that their observations can be used to enhance our own understanding and capacity.

Beyond the beach......

2007-04-30T17:58:00.000-04:00

Once again the light of the World is upon us, overlapping some of the very best attractions of the Caribbean, those being Cricket and Yachting, visitors from all over the world come to the region for both these and other activities. The economic engine of Tourism has been ticking over pretty well recently. Displaying growth and substantial long term investment in room stock and other infrastructure needs.

Lamentable, is the critical eye on the geopolitical region of the OECS islands, the Organization of the Eastern Caribbean States, being. Antigua and Barbuda, St.Kitts and Nevis, Dominica, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, St.Lucia and Grenada. Surrounded by allegations of vote buying, questionable science, political largess and a closed door attitude to views and concerns, local or otherwise.

Beneath our tropical sun, the glaring robust support for the resumption of commercial whaling. Led by Japan, with Norway and Iceland actively participating in this iconic and synonymous battle over the largest species to have ever lived on Earth. The divided International Whaling Commission (IWC) annual meeting is under away.

Positions are held here for a multitude of reasons, well informed or otherwise, it’s the result that counts. Science and politics add to the heady mix of the dynamics involved.

Irie breezes, are swept away by the “intellectual honesty” employed in this complex and questionable endeavor. A classic example of Newton's law of reciprocal actions, “all forces occur in pairs, and these two forces are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction”, one of the first laws of science we are taught. Yet within the IWC from the pro-whaling bloc comes an attitude and strategy reminiscent of a “Big Lie Strategy”, employed in perpetuating some of the most evil crimes of modern humanity.

Growing numbers of todays consumer have become; and are increasingly more aware of the strength of the their dollar, pound, rand or peso to generate change. Supporting what is seen as “good”, with drawing support for negative practices and activities, usually in the common interest. Business has responded favorably and to their unexpected delights many are finding unintended benefits, apart from the traditional clear profit aspect. When desired alternatives are provided to a hungry market, success is nearly guaranteed.

This widening trend has become wider in acceptance and practice. Voting with one’s dollar is powerful, consumers are understanding they can directly assist in relieving poverty, increase equity and fair compensation to primary producers. The Fair Trade label is one of the better examples of this new trend. A private and public partnership that goes toward solving many of the current concerns of poverty reduction and related environmental concerns.

In this communication age, news, opinions and actions develop rapidly, hence the demand of transparency, accountability and best practice governance in democratic systems of government. A recent survey reveals 40% of travelers are environmentally concerned, the majority willing to pay a premium for positive sound ecological practices. To economies focused on tourism, this would seem particularly significant. While also being beneficial for the wider society of the country concerned.

Currently Whale Watching is attracting a dichotomy for the region, shown to be a popular activity sought by our guests, influencing destination choices, indeed for many remembered as a “life time experience”. The potential guests may go else where to enjoy the same activity. Yet the OECS countries support the Government of Japan’s position at every turn.

The iconic value of Whales as a species is priceless, as is every “thing” on this planet, woven together in an intricate pattern that results in life its self and the elements of clean air and water providing nourishment to sustain it. Often referred to as ecosystem services and considered to be a common resource and deemed a basic Human right. Our current knowledge strongly suggests we need to make many changes in attitudes and practices in order to safe guard these common resources.

Support for sustainable development is a global norm in theory, the goals of poverty alleviation and positive environmental practices are central themes to ensure a quality of life for future generations. Yet in practice many areas are found wanting. Failure to genuinely engage and include civil society in all decision making being a fundamental flaw, displayed by inappropriate civil consultations, when ignoring public opinion, society is alienated and sentiments of displacement are fueled, needlessly.

Added competition, new concerns and changing trends within our traditional tourism market places of Europe and North America must be considered in order to maintain the hard won positive reputation as a vacation destination. The threat of carbon offsets increasing costs of travel oblige us to seek nearby markets, not ones on the other side of the planet, the same is true for export markets.

The benefits to trade over aid are well known, economic equity, increased independence and reduced demands on government and an increase of taxable incomes. As opposed aid grants, that potentially supplicate the recipient nation.

So when our costly tourism marketing drives have to overcome negative facts, illustrated at the recent "Beneath the Sea" trade show of the dive industry, established for 31 years attracting many visitors and regarded as the foremost show of this market, sharing very similar demographics as our marketing drives target.

When Deep Sea Detectives , John Chatterton and Richie Kohler submitted to the Underwater Film Festival a film about diving with whales in Dominica had the audience mentally booking dive holidays to experience what they had just seen for themselves. To their dismay during after the showing the subject of Japans influence in the area caused much dismay and shock to those unaware of the support Dominica and the wider OECS give for the return of commercial whaling.

Many want to visit the region, however they question rewarding such positions they fail to agree with. Finding alternatives, such as Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic or Tobago, long advocates and practitioners of conservation based tourism, leaders in this pioneering tourism offering.

While boycotts exist, they fail to account for the moderate majority, exercising their freedom of choice and just go elsewhere. Indeed boycotts are an indicator, though I would suggest naturally downplaying the real figures of those who may vacation elsewhere.

Such responses are deemed emotional decisions and therefore not valid ! Yet these are the same emotions that drive a decision to travel to a destination to relax and let worries fall away and batteries recharge, while spending their hard earned money for the privilege.

One has to wonder why, in this very competitive market place, sensitive to these issues one would engage in this unwavering support for a concept that is outdated, based on an argument that under scrutiny remains inconclusive and lacking in hard quality assessments, yet pedaled with the certainty of a religion and strategies employed by some of the most evil acts of modern history.

While no fair minded person would deny sustainable use in theory is great, sadly history suggests great caution to the practice must be exercised. Greed and avarice are key players to derailing the process, while state sovereignty and independence is compromised.

To date the converts remain limited in number and their motive questionable.

Looking at some numbers we find of the 73 IWC member countries, 15 represent the World’s top 25 spending tourists nationalities, rooted pro-conservation members and traditional visitors to the region. While 5 pro-whaling countries are included and indeed are nations less likely to visit our shores. The remaining five are either non-members or have a hunt allocation under the Aboriginal subsistence whaling scheme.

The last IWC meeting held in St.Kitts and Nevis resulted in a one vote “victory” for the pro-whaling bloc in the form of the St.Kitts and Nevis declaration, calling for a resumption of commercial hunting of abundant species, yet agreement on abundance is under review, early indications this is likely to be revised downwards.

Clearly the OECS finds itself in an awkward position, while digging in of heels seems contrary to the aspirations and opinions held within the region and internationally. When this "blows" as indeed it will, I wonder what "they" will proffer as an excuse ?

Antigua and Barbuda will shake their heads again after the decades of government abuse, the election results of 2004 were to make what was wrong right, yet still Antigua and Barbuda staunchly support Japans goal and the strategies employed to achieve them.

The recent experience of the Cricket World Cup further displays a clear need for a wide ranging rethink on the regional negotiations, especially in the light of climate change concerns and consumer trends. A genuine conversation with all of civil society and openness of debate will surely provide some valuable options to address this worrying paradox. The slosh and wailings of babies and bath water resound !

The Caribbean is a region of huge talent, human energy and natural beauty, stymied like most countries by governments that fail to hear their people ! Come to the Caribbean, register your concerns(pm at ab.gov.ag) and enjoy yourself, we, the people welcome you.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Other aspects of this enormous and synonomous topic to come..........