Little Penguins (Eudyptula minor)

commonly called ‘fairy penguins‘ due to their small fairy-like size

Arrive ashore after feeding on ‘pelagic’ fish in Bass Strait in southern Australia

 

‘Little Penguins‘, marine birds native to Australia and New Zealand, every day consume about their body weight (~1.2kg).  Their prime food sources are small marine pelagic fish (76%) and squid (24%).    [Source:  ^http://www.graniteisland.com.au/pdf/parks_pdfs_little_penguins.pdf]

Given that the Australian breeding population across coastal southern Australia is estimated to be up to 500,000 individuals (Ross et al.1995), the Australian Little Penguin’s annual dependency on marine pelagic fish would amass over 450,000 kgs.  (Calculation:  500,000 penguins  *  1.2kg each * 76% = 456,000 kg of pelagic fish).

Their numbers are healthy but how vulnerable are they to pelagic overfishing?

.

Australia’s industrial exploitation of Nature

.

“Australia has the worst mammal extinction rate in the world.  The destruction and fragmentation of habitat, particularly as a result of clearance of vegetation for agriculture, and the impact of feral animals and invasive weeds has had a substantial impact on our biodiversity. 

Altogether, 18 mammal species have become extinct since the arrival of European settlers a little more than 200 years ago. Twenty percent of our remaining mammal species are threatened with extinction.”

[Australian Wildlife Conservancy,^http://www.australianwildlife.org/wildlife-and-ecosystems/australias-biodiversity-crisis.aspx]

.

Australia’s states of Tasmania and Queensland, with their renowned parochial politics, hold Australia’s unenviable reputation for the worst industrial exploitation of Nature and  ecological destruction.

In Queensland the extent of recent land clearing is more than 425 000 hectares per year.  Between September 2001 and August 2003, approximately 1 051 000 hectares of
woody vegetation was cleared (Government of Queensland, 2005). If Queensland were a country, it would rank 9th worst in the world in terms of land clearing.  [^CSIRO]

In Tasmania, less than 20% of the original rainforest is left, and the ancient Styx Valley is being clearfelled and incinerated by Forestry Tasmania for loss-making woodchips at the rate of 300 to 600 hectares a year.  [^The Wilderness Society]   Many wild river valleys have been flooded by damned hydro, and vast landscapes scarred by mining and the groundwater toxins and tannins they leave behind. Industrial scale ecological destruction on an industrial scale still continues with parochial government’s short term profit myopia.

Tasmanian politics has a prejudiced record of giving industrialists free reign to plunder the environment, branded ‘primary industry‘:

.

Tasmania’s ‘Primary Industry’ legacy

.

• Since 1803 when the whaling ship Albion took three whales at Great Oyster Bay, colonists started a whaling and fur seal industry based on the Derwent River as well as on Bruny Island and up the east coast of Tasmania to Spring Bay (Triabunna) and Bicheno
• Convict slave labour from 1803 on the Derwent River was put to work deforesting the surrounding countryside
• Convict ‘Piners’ from 1819 who ransacked the extremely rare (endemic) Huon Pine from forests near Macquarie Harbour
• Since 1895, damming of rivers for hydro power and the flooding of many rivers and notably Lake Pedder in 1972 under the Great Lake Scheme, when the Hydro-Electric Commission became an industrial power unto its own from 1929 through to 1998
• Mining since 1820 for coal, tin, copper, gold, lead, zinc, silver and nickel – leaving scarred moonscapes around Mount Lyell, Zeehan, Savage River, Mount Bischoff, along the Ringarooma Valley, Fingal Valley, Beaconsfield and elsewhere.
• Since 1916, the construction of industrial and polluting smelters such as Amalgamated Zinc Company, then in 1921 the Nyrstar Hobart Smelter on the Derwent River, and since 1955 the Bell Bay aluminium smelter on the Tamar River
• The industrial deforestation of Tasmanian forests since convict times, accelerating with the advent of steam and rail from the 1850s.  By 1996, 43% of Tasmania’s original wet
  Eucalyptus forest had been logged and still 64.5% remain open for logging including Eucalyptus regnans —the world’s tallest hardwood trees, many of which are over 400 years old. [Rainforest Action Network, p.8]
• The recent establishment of industrial pulp and timber producer Ta Ann south of Hobart and the current proposed Gunns’ pulp mill which collectively threaten to woodchip most of Tasmania’s remaining unprotected native forests.  The approval process has been plagued by political abuse of due process and special deals for Gunns, lacking independent scrutiny or community support.

Map of 19th Century whaling bases on Tasmania’s coastline

Spring Bay was part of that exploitative legacy

.

So what has this disgraceful legacy got to do with Little Penguins arriving ashore after feeding on pelagic fish in Bass Strait?

.

.

Greedy ‘Seafish Tasmania’ wants Bass Strait ecology

.

Tasmanian-based industrial fishing corporation, SeaFish Tasmania, is set to double its annual fishing catch of pelagic marine fish in Bass Strait from August 2012 from 5,000 tonnes to 10,600 tonnes.  The problem is that such a massive quota risks jeopardising the sustainability of the fish populations and the dependent marine species that depend upon them.

Pelagic marine fish live near the surface of the water and range in size from small coastal forage fish like small herrings and sardines to large apex predator oceanic fishes like Southern Bluefin Tuna and oceanic sharks.  Also feeding on pelagic fish are Little Penguins and Australia Fur Seals.   Pelagic fish habitat stretches from inshore waters to offshore over the Australian Continental Shelf and variable continental slope waters at depths from the surface down to about 500 metres.

Pelagic Pacific Jack Mackerel swim in schools near the sea surface

.

Since 2000 Seafish Tasmania, based on Tasmania’s east coast at Spring Bay (Triabunna), has been the dominant Tasmanian fishing corporation targeting the Small Pelagics Fishery in southern Australian waters.

To date, Seafish Tasmania has relied upon its own purse seine trawler, the 800 tonne ‘Ellidi’ as well as two smaller contract vessels, to trawl for pelagic fish on the Continental Shelf off Tasmania.  At its Triabunna factory, Seafish Tasmania converts its pelagic fish catches into a range of frozen seafood products for human consumption.both for domestic and export markets.

Seafish Tasmania also produces frozen Redbait specifically for the commercial Long-Line Fishing industry in Indonesia, the Pacific and Indian oceans.

Long Line Fishing is indiscriminate

.

But Long line Fishing is cruel and indiscriminate.  It is criticized worldwide for the merciless death of species such as sharks, turtles and seabirds, all caught unwanted as by-catch.

Trapped Humpback whale

Caught in a Long Line Fishing net off Tonga in the Pacific in 2009

 

Seafish Tasmania targets the following pelagic marine fish species in Australia’s southern Small Pelagic Fishery – Eastern sub-area for its chosen seafood markets:

• Jack Mackerel
• Blue Mackerel
• Redbait

.

However, this Small Pelagic Fishery (including eastern Bass Strait) provides a marine habitat to many diverse species of pelagic fish, which raises the question of the impact of non-targeted fish being caught as unwanted ‘bycatch‘?

Bass Strait lies between the Victorian coastline and the island of Tasmania, and the targeted Small Pelagics Fishery stretches eastward into the Tasman Sea.  Its pelagic marine fish typically comprise Pilchards, Barracuda, Common Jack Mackerel (Trachurus declivis), Blue Mackerel (Scomber australasicus),  Redbait (Emmelichthys nitidus), and Yellowtail Scad (Trachurus novaezelandiae).  These attracts larger predators such as shark species preferring shallower depths such as Mako Sharks (Isurus oxyrinchus), Blue Sharks (Prionace glauca) and the Great White Shark (Carcharodon carcharias) which is listed by CITES as a protected species and similarly classified by the IUCN has having a ‘Vulnerable‘ status’.

But back in 1995, the marine health of Bass Strait was put into question when a 20-nautical-mile slick of dead pilchards was discovered off Devonport. The slick was thought to be caused by a mysterious deadly virus or toxin.

Tens of millions of pilchards were found floating dead in waters from Western Australia to Victoria.  A merchant seaman had said that his cargo ship had sailed through 20 nautical miles of dead pilchards in Bass Strait.  Mr Hamish Macadie, first mate on the Searoad Mersey, said he saw the fish about six nautical miles from the Devonport coast..

“They were floating on the water and were really thick in some areas. We sailed through about 20 miles of dead pilcards“, Mr Macadie said.

[Source: ‘Mystery Pilchard Deaths Cause Bass Strait `slick”, by Caroline Milburn, The Age, 19950509, ^http://www.toxin.com.au/toxin-articles/1995/5/9/mystery-pilchard-deaths-cause-bass-strait-slick/]

.

Australia’s coastal small pelagic fishes, which are often surface-schooling, includes several families which are often each represented by several species (see Allen 1997, Randall et al. 1997, Gomon et al. 2008), including the Clupeidae (sardines, herrings and sprats), Engraulidae (anchovies), Carangidae (scads, jack mackerel), Scombridae (short mackerels), Atherinidae (hardyheads, silversides), Arripidae (Australian herring) and Emelichthidae (redbait).  [‘Pelagic Fishes and Sharks‘ by Hobday, Griffiths,Ward 2009 : 4]. Other fish species of Bass Strait include Majo Sharks, Gummy Sharks, Threshers, Yellowtail Kingfish and Snapper.

The Small Pelagic Fishery of the Eastern sub-area…’is just the beginning’

But Seafish Australia’s utilisation of a factory trawler won’t be limited to just 10,600 tonnes of pelagic fish p.a.

It has in its sights the entire Small Pelagic Fishery across to Perth.

This will deplete the fish stocks of the protected Great White Shark, so lookout surfers at Ceduna!!

[Source: ^http://www.afma.gov.au/managing-our-fisheries/fisheries-a-to-z-index/small-pelagic-fishery/maps/]

.

Commonwealth Marine Reserves – Flinders and Freycinet Sanctuary Zones

.

The Small Pelagic Fishery set by the Australian Fisheries Management Authority ignores the marine ecologiccal values of the two delineated Sanctuary Zones of Australia’s  South-east Commonwealth Marine Reserve Network.  This includes the Flinders Commonwealth Marine Reserve and the Freycinet Commonwealth Marine Reserve (See green-shaded areas below).

Yet the Australian Fisheries Management Authority’s (AFMA) map invades two IUCN Sanctuary Zones

i.e.  the top two green shaded areas ‘Flinders’ and ‘Freycinet’

.

This South-east Commonwealth Marine Reserve Network has been designed to contribute to the National Representative System of Marine Protected Areas (NRSMPA).  The aim of NRSMPA continues to be to protect and conserve important habitats which represent all of Australia’s major ecological regions and the communities of marine plants and animals they contain.

Both the Flinders and Freycinet Commonwealth Marine Reserves were nationally proclaimed in 2007

March 2012:  Tasmania’s parochialism again?

.

In Tasmania, when it comes to industrial exploitation, the old parochial adage still prevails – ‘it’s not what you know, but who you know‘.

Director of Seafish Tasmania, Gerry Geen, is:

“Advisor to Australia and international governments on fisheries management and fisheries economics.”

[Source: Seafish Tasmania website, ^http://www.seafish.com.au/_content/board.htm]

.

The fishing quota limits (Total Allowable Catch) for this Small Pelagic Fishery are periodically assessed and determined by the committee of Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA), which takes advice specifically from the South East Management Advisory Committee (MAC).    The  fishing quota for this Small Pelagic Fishery for 2012-13 was agreed at a recent teleconference by the South East MAC on 26 March 2012, based upon the advise from the Small Pelagic Fishery (SPF) Resource Assessment Group (RAG).

Of note, two out of the ten members of the SPF RAG have pecuniary interests specifically in this Small Pelagic Fishery.  Denis Brown has commercial fishing permits including in SPF zones A, B, C, and D and controls a Pelagic Fish Processors plant at Eden on the New South Wales south coast.   While director of Seafish Tasmania, Gerry Geen, holds a Zone A purse-seine SPF Permit, four Tasmanian purse-seine Jack Mackerel Permits, a Southern and Eastern Scalefish and Shark Trawl Boat SFR permits.

The reported minutes of the South East MAC on 26 March 2012 teleconference included Total Allocable Catch Declarations as follows:

.

Recommended Total Allowable Catches for Blue Mackerel, Redbait and Yellowtail Scad for 2012/13 in the Eastern Zone

~ by the Small Pelagic Fishery (SPF) Resource Assessment Group (RAG)

 

Total Allowable Catch Recommendation #1:

• “Blue Mackerel    2,600  (Tier 2)
• Redbait    6,900      (Tier 1)
• Australian Sardine    200  (Tier 2)”

.

Total Allowable Catch Recommendation #3:

• “Increase the Jack Mackerel (east) Recommended Biological Catches (RBC)  from 5,000 tonnes to 10,600 tonnes, subject to conditional support from the RAG’s conservation member and the RAG’s recreational member.”

.

[Source: ‘South East MAC Chair’s Summary from 26 March 2012 Teleconference – Small Pelagic Fishery Total Allowable Catch (TAC) Recommendations for 2012/13’, AFMA, ^http://www.afma.gov.au/managing-our-fisheries/consultation/management-advisory-committees/south-east-mac/south-east-mac-chairs-summary-from-26-march-2012-teleconference/]

.

Strangely enough, this teleconference dealt with the relevance of a ‘Factory Freezer Vessel‘ on the total allowable catch (TAC).

[Sources: ^http://www.theadvocate.com.au/news/local/news/general/company-partner-declared-conflict-in-catch-discussion/2586769.aspx, ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-01/fishing-authority-denies-conflict-of-interest/4046334]

.

June 2012:   Factory Freezer Vessel (FV Magiris) chartered by Seafish Tasmania

 

10,000 tonne Lithuanian-owned  Factory Fishing Vessel ‘FV Margiris’

Recently contracted by Seafish Tasmania to trawl the Small Pelagic Fishery off  Tasmania’s north east coast

Its draft of 5.5 metres is too deep for Spring Bay, so it must be operated out of Devonport

[Source: ^http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=1220863]

.

‘Super trawler operator Seafish Tasmania yesterday indicated it had begun the process of having the Lithuanian vessel Margiris registered as Australian.

Director Gerry Geen said the company aimed to start fishing in Australian waters (the Small Pelagic Fishery) by August 2012…

[Source:  ‘Trawler approval begins’, 20120627, The Mercury (Hobart), ^http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2012/06/27/340551_tasmania-news.html]

.

The company has been granted an 18,000 tonne annual quota.    Greens Leader Nick McKim told parliament the increase had been allowed because of the super trawler, Margiris.

“The Commonwealth quota for jack mackeral will be doubled” he said.  “Now this makes a mockery of claims that it is science underpinning these decisions because, of course, the doubling has only occurred because this super trawler has applied to come down and work in Australian Commonwealth waters.”

[Source: ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-21/greens-step-up-pressure-over-super-trawler/4084658?section=tas]

 

.

‘Supertrawler brings global problem to Australian waters’

[Source: ‘Supertrawler brings global problem to Australian waters‘, by Andrew Darby, Hobart correspondent for Fairfax Media, 20120611, ^http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/supertrawler-brings-global-problem-to-australian-waters-20120611-205b7.html]

.

Vast swathe … the Margiris supertrawler. Photo: Greenpeace

.

‘Say hello to our fishing future. It’s called Margiris. If ever Australians needed convincing that the global appetite for fish is our problem too, this supertrawler is it.   Twice the size of the previous largest vessel ever to fish our Commonwealth waters, it measures 142 metres in length and weighs 9,600 tonnes.  Its Dutch owners are changing its flag of registration from Lithuanian to Australian.

By August, it is scheduled to be roaming between the Tasman Sea and Western Australia in pursuit of 17,500 tonnes a year of small pelagic fish.

Tagged … Greenpeace activists write on the side of the Margiris in the Atlantic off Mauritania in 2011

(Photo by Greenpeace, March 2011)

.

But it’s not simply the size of FV Margiris that brings home the issue of rising industrial pressure on fish stocks. It’s the stark story of seafood market forces.  Last March, in the Atlantic off Mauritania, Greenpeace activists wrote “plunder” on the side of the Margiris. They are campaigning against European operators who are taking West Africa’s fish, leaving locals catchless.

In Australia, the Margiris is set to catch the same sort of fish – jack mackerel, blue mackerel and redbait – and freeze them into blocks for export.

The destination of the catch?  “The large majority will go to West Africa for human consumption, as frozen whole fish,” said Seafish Tasmania director Gerry Geen.

Australian fishers have long sought to exploit the country’s so-called “small pelagics”, which are prey for bigger fish such as tuna and marlin. Seafish Tasmania is partnering with ship owners Parlevliet & Van der Plas to do this on a scale previously unseen.

Alarms have been raised in other global fisheries about these mainly Europe-based small-pelagic hunters.

.

According to The New York Times, stocks of Jack Mackerel have dropped from an estimated 30 million metric tons to less than a tenth of that amount in just two decades.

.

The minutes of an Australian Fisheries Management Authority advisory committee show serious debate about the introduction of the Margiris.  They reveal that Mr Geen, who was on the committee, gave “background” input.  But because of his conflict of interest, he did not contribute to a recommendation to double the Australian eastern jack mackerel catch to 10,000 tonnes.

This has given the single greatest fillip to the Margiris venture.  Mr Geen told the National Times the Margiris would take less than 5% of the total stock of small pelagics, as measured by surveys of egg production by the target species.

“I think people are worried about the size of the vessel, but that is really irrelevant,” he said. “It’s the size of the total allowable catch that counts.”

Other advisory committee members pointed to the ecological impact on existing fishers of taking so much of the small pelagics, even though these catches are outside state waters.

A coalition of global, national and state environment groups has written to Fisheries Minister Joe Ludwig, calling for the Margiris to be banned.

Right now it’s moored in the Netherlands, and Greenpeace is keeping an eye on its movements.  Watch this space.’

.

..didn’t have to wait long..

Greenpeace in The Netherlands:  ‘Stop Exporting Overcapacity’

.

On 28th June 2012, Greenpeace activists in the Netherlands attached themselves to the mooring ropes and chained the ship’s propellers of the super trawler FV Margiris, to delay its journey to Australia to serve Seafish Tasmania’s plans to overfish 18,000 toinnes of pelagic fish.

Greenpeace spokesman Nathanial Pelle said:

“Really this is to demonstrate that the European Commission, which has committed to reducing its capacity, shouldn’t be allowed to ship its oversized fleet off to other fisheries around the world and that goes for Australia as well.”

[Source: ‘Greenpeace protest delays super trawler’, 20120628, ABC, ^http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-06-28/greenpeace-protest-delays-super-trawler/4098672]

.

“The MAC noted some concerns raised in relation to the proposed TAC for jack mackerel (east) suggested that a super trawler might also have differential impacts on the stock and ecosystem.”

~ South East Management Advisory Committee (MAC) Chairman Steve McCormack noted.

.

Of Course the Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) celebrated Seafish Australia’s strategy as “A Shot In The Arm For Tassie Economy” , given that the MUA is only narrowly self-interested in its members.  MUA Assistant National Secretary, Ian Bray, said the news of new jobs was welcome.

“This initiative is welcome news for Tasmania’s seafarers and maritime workers”, Mr Bray said. “This is just the kind of development the Tasmanian economy needs. We’re pleased that there will be new jobs for Tasmanians”, Mr Hill said.

[Source:  ‘ “A Shot In The Arm For Tassie Economy”, MUA Media Release, 20120605, The Maritime Union of Australia (MUA), ^http://mua.org.au/news/seafish-tasmania-announcement-a-shot-in-the-arm-fo/]

.

 

Footnote

 

Super Trawler: AFMA did not follow the law

[Source: ‘Super Trawler: AFMA did not follow the law’ , by Andrew Wilkie MP,

Independent Member for Denison MR, 20130115, Tasmanian Times,

^http://tasmaniantimes.com/index.php?/weblog/article/super-trawler/]

The Commonwealth Ombudsman has written to me outlining his findings in response to my complaint that the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) erred when setting the quota relevant to the super trawler Margiris.

The Ombudsman found that AFMA did not follow the law when the South East Management Advisory Committee finalised its recommendation for the quota relevant to the super trawler.

In particular the Ombudsman found that one of the members of that committee had a financial conflict of interest but was allowed to remain in, and contribute to, discussions about the quota.

As a direct result of the Ombudsman’s investigation AFMA has undertaken remedial and corrective steps to address the substantive issues arising from my complaint.

The Ombudsman has also forwarded material to the Federal Government’s review of fisheries legislation.

Seafish Tasmania has responded by attacking the Ombudsman which is clearly a case of attacking the messenger who found very serious problems with fisheries management in Australia.

Seafish claims the Ombudsman “had completed the investigation and found nothing to report’’. In fact the Ombudsman’s letter to me of 18 December 2012 outlining the results of the inquiry runs to four pages and includes the findings “processes relating to a scheduled meeting of the South East Management Advisory Committee  (SEMAC) on 26 March 2012 were not in accordance with legislative requirement’’ and that the “conflicted SPFRAG [Small Pelagic Fishery Resource Assessment Group] members did not seek approval to remain at, and participate in, group deliberations after declaring the conflict [of interest]’’.

In other words my complaint to the Ombudsman that AFMA did not follow proper process when it set the quota relevant to the Margiris has been upheld.
Seafish claims I didn’t release the letter because it didn’t suit my “agenda’’. In fact I decided not to release the letter during the Christmas/New Year holiday period because it was simply too important a document to bury during the holiday period and subsequent bushfire emergency. Moreover I did hand the letter to the Mercury newspaper this morning, well before Seafish issued its media release.

Seafish notes the Ombudsman’s report (which it claims to have not seen) offers no comment on Director Gerry Geen or Seafish itself. But in fact Mr Geen is well known as being the relevant member of SEMAC and SPFRAG.

Seafish claims my comments last year about the Ombudsman investigating “other matters’’ was some kind of beat up. But in fact it was the Ombudsman who

referred to other matters being under investigation and the Ombudsman’s letter to me does in fact address other issues, and in particular the conflict of interest and communications difficulties associated with the SPFRAG.

Seafish Tasmania claims there is now no question mark over the quota relevant to the Margiris. But in fact all the Ombudsman says is that “it does not necessarily follow that errors in the SEMAC process operate to invalidate the TAC [Total Allowable Catch]’’ and goes on to note the review of fisheries legislation which is still ongoing.

That there were at least very serious problems within AFMA is beyond question for all, it seems, other than Seafish Tasmania. The Federal Government has already identified the need for a roots and branch review of fisheries legislation and the Ombudsman’s letter to me lists 11 AFMA actions as a result of my complaint.

.

This article provides an extract summary of the IUCN website – Editor.

.

‘Eyes in the oasis’

© Lee Slabber, (South Africa), 2009 Wildlife Photographer of the Year

.

‘Every morning, Lee would drive 50 kilometres (32 miles) across the Kalahari Desert dunes that separated two dry riverbeds in the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park, South Africa. The only sign of life – or rather, death – was near a small pan, a mini-oasis in the middle of the dunes, where oryx bones lay scattered all about in various states of decay. One day, Lee stopped to photograph the bones. As he did so, he sensed that he wasn’t alone. ‘I got the feeling I was being watched,’ he said. ‘I slowly turned to face a most beautiful young male leopard, looking intently at me from behind a small bush. I could see how the deep-red dunes would be perfect camouflage for him.’ A moment later, the leopard fled, ‘obviously as shocked to see me as I was to see him.’

[Camera equipment used:  Canon EOS-1D Mark III + Canon EF 600mm lens; 1/250 sec at f5.7; ISO 200.]This photograph is available to buy as a print.

http://australianmuseum.net.au/image/Eyes-in-the-Oasis/

.

The United Nations (UN) has declared 2010 the International Year of Biodiversity.

Why?

• To seek to significantly reduce the rate of biodiversity loss by the end of 2010
• To celebrate and promote biological diversity – the variety of life on Earth
• To boost awareness of how important biodiversity is for humanity
• To highlight how seriously biodiversity and nonhuman species are threatened with extinction, and the implications for human wellbeing.

The UN’s Approach to Protecting Biodiversity

• Sound management of natural resources to support peaceful communities
• Encouraging well-balanced economic growth
• Reducing poverty

.

IUCN

The IUCN, the International Union for Conservation of Nature, is the world’s oldest and largest global environmental network – a democratic membership union with more than 1,000 government and NGO member organizations, and almost 11,000 volunteer scientists in more than 160 countries.

The IUCN helps the world find pragmatic solutions to our most pressing environment and development challenges. It supports scientific research, manages field projects all over the world and brings governments, non-government organizations, United Nations agencies, companies and local communities together to develop and implement policy, laws and best practice.

The IUCN posits 5 sound reasons why humans need to maintain health biodiversity

1. To maintain food sources
2. For medicinal benefits associated with diverse plant and animal life
3. To mitigate the effects of climate change
4. To provide employment
5. To enable peoples vulnerable to the effects of climate change improve their livelihoods and increase their resilience to climate change impacts.

.

The Importance of Biodiversity for its own sake   [posited by Editor]

• To respect natures processes and ecosystems
• To prevent continuing extinctions
• To prevent extreme climate change

.

To boost global awareness of the importance of biodiversity for humanity

‘The IUCN together with its Members and partners wants to see biodiversity at the top of the global agenda, leading to stronger action from all sectors of society including government and industry to safeguard it.’ ‘Humans are an integral part of biodiversity and have the power to protect or destroy it.’ ‘In the western world, we have become so far removed from biodiversity that we’ve forgotten how much we use it in our daily lives from the food we eat to the clothes we wear to the medicines we use.’

When we Bluefin tuna, we rarely think of the species that the tuna depends on to thrive, or that this species is a serious risk of being fished into extinction.  When forestry agencies fell a mature tree to make a table or woodchips, mammalian habitat is lost.

.

To highlight how seriously biodiversity is threatened

Human activities continue to destroy the natural world at an unprecedented rate through habitat destruction, over-harvesting, pollution, poaching, and induced climate change.  We’re facing a global species extinction crisis.  We need to do better at making the scientific, social, economic and cultural case for keeping diversity, and show just how much it supports nearly every aspect of human life and progress. Through our International Year of Biodiversity focus, we’ll be doing just that, starting with a look at IUCN’s projects relating to forest biodiversity in February.

.

Risks to Biodiversity, Ecosystems and nonhumans species is at crisis point

• ‘The escalating extinction crisis shows that the diversity of nature cannot support the current pressure that humanity is placing on the planet.’

•  ‘Every day biodiversity is being lost at up to 1,000 times the natural rate. The extinction of individual species, but also habitat destruction, land conversion for agriculture and development, climate change, pollution and the spread of invasive species are only some of the threats responsible for today’s crisis.’

• ‘Coral reefs provide food, storm protection, jobs, recreation and other income sources for more than 500 million people worldwide yet 70% of coral reefs are threatened or destroyed.’

•  ‘17,291 species out of 47,677 assessed so far are threatened with extinction.’

•  ‘Of the world’s 5,490 mammals, 79 are Extinct or Extinct in the Wild, with 188 Critically Endangered, 449 Endangered and 505 Vulnerable.’

•  ‘1,895 of the planet’s 6,285 amphibians are in danger of extinction, making them the most threatened group of species known to date.’

•  ‘With the current biodiversity loss, we are witnessing the greatest extinction crisis since dinosaurs disappeared from our planet 65 million years ago. Not only are these extinctions irreversible, but they also pose a serious threat to our health and wellbeing.’

•  ‘From time immemorial, nature has fed us, cured us, and protected us. But today the roles have switched. We need to feed nature, we need to cure it and protect it if we want to secure a healthy and prosperous future for our children.’

• ‘Climate change is set to be one of the major drivers of species extinctions in the 21st century: approximately 20 to 30 per cent of plant and animal species are likely to be at increasingly high risk as global mean temperatures rise.’

.

IUCN Species Most Vulnerable to ‘Climate Change Extinction’

A recent IUCN report identifies the following 10 species are most vulnerable to ‘climate change extinction‘.

1. ^Arctic Foxes
2. ^Clownfish
3. ^Koalas
4. ^Emperor Penguins
5. ^Leatherback Turtles
6. ^Staghorn Corals
7. ^Ringed Seals
8. ^Quiver Trees
9. ^Salmon
10. ^Beluga Whales

.

Arctic Foxes

The Arctic Fox [Alopex lagopus or Vulpes lagopus]

Also known as the White Fox, Polar Fox or Snow Fox.

The total population estimate for 1997 is around 60 adults in Sweden, 11 adults in Finland and 50 in Norway.

[Source: Tannerfeldt, M. (1997). Population fluctuations and life history consequences

in the Arctic fox.. Stockholm, Sweden: Dissertation, Stockholm University].

 

• The Arctic Fox is one of the top land-dwelling predators of the Arctic region. It is thought to be one of the first mammals to have colonised Sweden and Finland following the last ice-age.
• As the Arctic region warms, tundra habitat may slowly be replaced by boreal forest from the South. Forest habitat is unsuitable for Arctic Foxes.
• Red Foxes prey on and are superior hunters to Arctic Foxes. Northward encroachment of Red Foxes into the Arctic Fox’s range has already been documented and is likely to continue as the tundra warms.
• Arctic Foxes prey largely on lemmings and voles. Milder and shorter winters are predicted to cause declines in the regularity of these rodents’ population cycles, as well as decreases in their overall numbers.
• These factors are likely to cause declines in Arctic Fox numbers and range size. Arctic Foxes highlight the impacts of climate change on the ways that species interact with each other, both through competition and via changes in predator-prey relationships.

.

Koalas

The koala (Phascolarctos cinereus)

is an arboreal herbivorous marsupial native to Australia.

According to the IUCN, as CO2 levels increase, the nutritional quality of eucalyptus leaves

is declining and the koala faces malnutrition and ultimate starvation.

 

[Editor: What Australian would have thought our precious and assumed plentiful Koalas could be threatened?  Well the Tasmanian Tiger was once plentiful across Tasmania.  None of us should take our wildlife for granted]

• ‘Koalas are iconic animals native to Australia. They are true habitat and food specialists, only ever inhabiting forests and woodlands where Eucalyptus trees are present.’
• ‘Increasing atmospheric CO2 levels will reduce the nutritional quality of Eucalyptus leaves, causing nutrient shortages in the species that forage on them. As a result, Koalas may no longer be able to meet their nutritional demands, resulting in malnutrition and starvation.’
• ‘Increasing frequency and intensity of droughts can force Koalas to descend from trees in search of water or new habitats. This makes them particularly vulnerable to wild and domestic predators, as well as to road traffic.’
• ‘Koala populations are reported to be declining due to malnutrition, the sexually-transmitted disease chlamydia, and habitat destruction.’
• ‘Koalas have very limited capability to adapt to rapid, human-induced climate change, making them very vulnerable to its negative impacts.’

.

Emperor Penguins

The Emperor Penguin (Aptenodytes forsteri)

The tallest and heaviest of all living penguin species and is endemic to Antarctica.

• For much of the year, Emperor Penguins live on thick sea ice in the Antarctic, which they use for mating, chick rearing and moulting.
• In some regions of the Antarctic, seasonal sea ice extent and thickness have reduced in recent decades following climate change. Continued warming will lead to further reductions in sea ice, impacting Emperor Penguins, with more northerly colonies being most at risk.
• The biomass of Antarctic krill has decreased in recent decades correlating with decreases in sea ice. Changes in krill abundance are likely to negatively affect Emperor Penguins and many other Antarctic species.
• Emperor Penguins highlight the possible impacts of rising sea temperatures and melting sea ice due to climate change. These changes directly or indirectly affect many other species in the Antarctic marine  ecosystem.

.

Ringed Seals

The ringed seal (Pusa hispida), also known as the jar seal

Ringed seals are slaughtered by Artic natives [Inuit] and often killed by the fishing gear of commercial trawlers.

Now climate change is a serious threat to their extence because much of their habitat is dependent upon pack ice.

• ‘Ringed Seals live primarily in the high Arctic and are heavily dependent on Arctic ice, almost never coming onto land.’
• ‘Warming spring temperatures and early ice breakup are causing nursing young to be prematurely separated from their mothers and to be exposed both to the elements and to predators.’
• ‘To cope with global warming, Ringed Seals will need to shift their territories to track suitable ice conditions. Increases in disease and disturbance by humans are also likely challenges.’
• ‘Marked decreases in Ringed Seal abundance are likely to have cascading effects in Arctic food webs. They are the most important species in the diet of Polar Bears.’
• ‘Ringed Seals highlight the direct impacts of climate change on polar habitats, including the effects ice loss has on other ice-adapted species.’

.

---

.

IUCN participation and Goals for 2010

.

Failure of the 2010 Biodiversity Target

Adopted in May 2002 during the sixth Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, the 2010 Biodiversity Target aimed to achieve, by 2010:

‘a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution to poverty alleviation and to the benefit of all life on earth’.

Unfortunately, we now know that this aim is far from being met. As we are facing an ever-increasing biodiversity crisis, we need a new, clear and realistic target to respond to it.

Negotiations on the new post-2010 framework will be taking place throughout this year, paving the way for the 10th Meeting of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity in October.

 .

1.     2010 Convention on Biological Diversity  [Japan]

To follow up on the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro where world leaders adopted the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).  The Convention has three main objectives:

1. To conserve biological diversity
2. To use biological diversity in a sustainable way
3. To share the benefits of biological diversity fairly and equitably.

The Tenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity will take place from 18 to 29 October 2010 in Nagoya, Japan.

.

This meeting is set to be a milestone for the Convention. It is during this event that the Parties of the Convention are expected to adopt a new set of post-2010 biodiversity targets. They will also agree upon an international regime to regulate access to genetic resources and the sharing of benefits that we gain from their use.

To keep up to date visit:  http://www.cbd.int/cop10/

COP10 [Nagoya] Issues for in-depth consideration

• Inland waters biodiversity
• Marine and coastal biodiversity
• Mountain biodiversity
• Protected areas
• Sustainable use of biodiversity
• Biodiversity and climate change

.

2.  COP10 Meeting of the Access and Benefit Sharing Working Group     [Colombia]

From 22-28 March 2010, around 600 delegates representing Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), non-governmental and international organizations, and partners, gathered in Cali in Colombia to give the final push to the negotiations on the international regime to regulate access to genetic resources and the distribution of the benefits derived from their use.

This is the ninth and final meeting of the Ad Hoc Open-ended Working Group on Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) before the tenth Conference of the Parties of the Convention (COP10). The Working Group has been mandated to finalize its work and deliver an ABS international regime to be adopted at COP10 in Nagoya, Japan later this year. The clock is thus ticking but despite the pressure, delegates seem positive about a favourable outcome of the meeting.

http://www.iucn.org/cbd/?4972/Final-Meeting-of-the-ABS-Working-Group-kicks-off-in-Colombia

.

3.   Million-dollar boost to people and biodiversity   [West Africa]

Part of the IUCN Forest Conservation Programme this IUCN initiative works to improve the livelihoods of people in West Africa receiving a major boost in the form of a CHF 1.9 million grant from Switzerland’s State Secretariat for Economic Affairs (SECO).’

http://www.iucn.org/iyb/iucn_action_22/around_the_world/?4787/Million-dollar-boost-to-the-people-and-biodiversity-of-West-Africa

.

4.   The Satoyama Initiative      [Japan]

‘Led by IUCN Member the Ministry of the Environment of Japan and the United Nations University Institute of Advanced Studies, the Satoyama Initiative focuses on conserving villages and farmlands, together with the sustainable practices and traditional knowledge that they represent.’

http://www.iucn.org/iyb/iucn_action_22/around_the_world/?4699/People-and-nature

.

5.   Protecting life-saving knowledge     [Bangladesh]

‘In the remote area of south-east Bangladesh, known as the Chittagong Hill Tracts, IUCN Bangladesh is making sure that traditional health knowledge and practices are revived and secured for future generations.’

http://www.iucn.org/iyb/iucn_action_22/around_the_world/?4703/protecting-knowledge

.

6.    Guggul Tree Conservation   [India]

IUCN’s biologist Vineet Soni has enlisting the help of tribespeople of the arid regions of Gujarat and Rajasthan, in India to secure the rare ‘Guggul Tree’ [Commiphora wighii], at risk due to overharvesting. Its resin has been a key component in the ancient Indian Ayurvedic system of medicine as an effective treatment for bone fractures, arthritis, inflammation and obesity, and is now widely used in modern medicine for heart problems.  Vineet has led a group of friends have founded the Indian Council for Plant Conservation to conserve threatened plant species of Rajasthan through community involvement, running workshops to help make local people aware of the importance and conservation of plants.

http://www.iucn.org/iyb/iucn_action_22/around_the_world/?4702/People-for-plants

.

7.   Elephant Foster Parents    [Sri Lanka]

‘In Sri Lanka, three elephants are killed every week as a result of human-elephant conflict, leaving behind defenceless orphans. To address this, IUCN State Member The Department of Wildlife Conservation has launched a novel foster parent scheme, where contributions from donors are used to shelter helpless young elephants in a transit home until they have reached an appropriate age to be released into the wild.’

http://www.iucn.org/iyb/iucn_action_22/around_the_world/?4511/Elephant-foster-parents-in-Sri-Lanka

.

8.   A future for Wild Cats   [Colombia]

Colombia has six native wild cat species including the jaguar, puma, and ocelot. As in many other countries, the species are threatened by habitat loss, loss of prey and killing by livestock farmers. Lack of information on their populations, their prey and ecosystems have until now prevented the design of effective conservation strategies.

But thanks to multi-stakeholder efforts, the National Conservation Programme for Felids in Colombia is now underway. This has established conservation guidelines for all species by region and aims to form an integrated nationwide initiative to establish the abundance and distribution of these species and their prey, and how to tackle conflicts between the wild cats and farmers.

Ocelot (Leopardus pardalis)

http://www.iucn.org/iyb/iucn_action_22/success/?4512/A-future-for-Colombias-wild-cats

.

9.   CoP15 to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES)

.

At Doha, Qatar, 25 March 2010 regulatory bodies from around the world met to discuss agreeing on conventions to ensure the continued survival of species threatened by wildlife trade.

Trade regulation for bluefin tuna, African elephants, tigers, sharks, polar bears and coral have all been under discussion in Doha.

During the conference, IUCN called for a more holistic approach to elephant conservation, urging Parties to rise above divisive issues raised at this meeting in favour of more decisive action on the known problems facing African elephants in many parts of their range including decreasing habitat as a result of the needs of growing human populations and managing human-elephant conflict.

Before the next conference in 2013 in Thailand, CITES has a huge challenge to meet in specifically addressing the key challenges and gaps identified at this conference so that discussions at CoP16 can truly support sustainable trade in all wild species.

http://www.iucn.org/iyb/resources/news/?4979/Time-for-closer-collaboration-on-wildlife-trade

.

10.    Talks to dismantle trade in tiger poaching   [Southern Asia]

Tigers are listed in CITES Appendix I, which includes species threatened with extinction and allows non-commercial trade only in exceptional circumstances, such as for research.  Globally, on a species level, tigers are listed as Endangered on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™.

At COP15, poaching and illegal trade in tigers was discussed with countries being asked to provide information to the CITES Secretariat and Interpol to help develop anti-poaching strategies.

Estimates from 2007 indicated that there were as few as 3,400 tigers in the wild throughout Asia. Numbers have decreased since then. In the early 1900s there were more than 100,000. Tigers are primarily poached for their skins with other body parts being used for decorative purposes or for traditional medicines.

“If we use tiger numbers as a performance indicator then we must admit that we have failed miserably and that we are continuing to fail. How have we let this happen?” says CITES Secretary-General Willem Wijnstekers. “Although the tiger has been prized throughout history, and is a symbol of incredible importance in many cultures and religions, it is now literally on the verge of extinction.

2010 is the Chinese Year of the Tiger and the International Year of Biodiversity; this must be the year in which we reverse the trend. If we don’t, it will be to our everlasting shame.”

http://www.iucn.org/iyb/resources/news/?4923/Talks-to-dismantle-trade-in-tiger-poaching

.

11.    Call for Post-2010 Strategic Plan on Biodiversity

 

The IUCN is calling for a clear post-2010 Strategic Plan on Biodiversity.

 

We have failed to meet the target adopted through the Convention on Biological Diversity to reduce the rate of biodiversity loss by 2010.

 

According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 60% of ecosystem services worldwide have become degraded in the past 50 years, and the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species™ gives us alarming facts on species extinction rates, which are increasing continuously.

 

IUCN is calling for a short, focused and action-oriented Strategic Plan to be adopted at the meeting of the Convention on Biological Diversity in Nagoya, Japan, in October.

 

“Simply aiming at halting biodiversity loss is no longer sufficient; we also need to restore and maintain the populations, habitats and ecological cycles that enable biodiversity and ecosystem services – such as food, water or medicine – to persist “ says Jane Smart, Director of IUCN’s Biodiversity Conservation Group. “To achieve this, we need engagement on all possible levels, with the economic sector, the development community through to the public sector and civil society. It is critical that the role of biodiversity as the foundation of life, livelihoods and development is understood by all.”

 

To meet these goals, perverse incentives, like subsidies that harm biodiversity, need to be removed and new regulations and financial incentives need to be put in place, clearly reflecting the value of natural resources. Greater interaction between science and policy, and cohesion between multilateral environmental agreements and other organizations are also essential for the implementation of the new biodiversity targets, according to IUCN experts.’

http://www.iucn.org/iyb/resources/news/?4962/Healthy-biodiversity-is-no-luxury—its-the-foundation-of-all-life-on-earth

.

12.    Bringing the Bison Back      [North America]

The next 10 to 20 years could be extremely significant for restoring wild populations of American bison to their original roaming grounds. But for this to happen, more land must be made available for herds to roam free, government policies must be updated and the public must change its attitude towards bison.

A new publication by IUCN, American Bison: Status Survey and Conservation Guidelines 2010, reports on the current status of American bison, in the wild and in conservation herds, and makes recommendations on how to ensure that the species is conserved for the future.

“Although the effort to restore bison to the plains of North America is considered to be one of the most ambitious and complex undertakings in species conservation efforts in North America, it will only succeed if legislation is introduced at a local and national level, with significant funding and a shift in attitude towards the animal,” says Dr Simon Stuart, Chair of IUCN’s Species Survival Commission.

Five hundred years ago, tens of millions of American bison roamed free on the plains of North America, from Alaska to northern Mexico. Now the American bison – which includes both plains and wood bison – is listed as Near Threatened on IUCN’s Red List of Threatened Species™. As of 2008, there were approximately 400,000 bison in commercial herds in North America, some 93 percent of the continental population. But little progress has been made in recent decades to increase the number of animals in conservation herds, which are managed carefully for their genetic diversity and ecological roles. In 2008, there were 61 plains bison conservation herds in North America containing about 20,500 animals, and 11 conservation herds of wood bison, containing nearly 11,000 animals.

“While substantial progress in saving bison from extinction was made in the 20th century, much work remains to restore conservation herds throughout their vast geographical range,” says University of Calgary Environmental Design Professor and co-editor of the study, Dr Cormack Gates, who is also co-Chair of the IUCN Bison Specialist Group. “The key is recognition that the bison is a wildlife species and to be conserved as wildlife, it needs land and supportive government policies.”

The survival of bison populations is affected by many factors, including limited habitat and severe winters. Yet the greatest challenge is to overcome the common perception that the bison, which has had a profound influence on the human history of North America, socially, culturally and ecologically, no longer belongs on the landscape.

“The decimation of the American bison in the late 1800s inspired the first recovery of bison and an entire conservation movement that protected wildlife and wild places across North America,” says Keith Aune, Senior Conservation Scientist, Wildlife Conservation Society. “The IUCN Status Survey and Conservation Guidelines provide a new framework for inspiring a second recovery of bison and restoring functional grassland ecosystems.”

Bison have the best chance of full recovery as wildlife by being allowed to roam freely across hundreds of thousands or even millions of hectares. Making this possible poses one of the biggest challenges for restoring bison herds as both public and private landowners will need to give their support.

“The bison is the largest land mammal in North America, and yet it is perhaps the most neglected icon,” says Steve Forrest, WWF Northern Great Plains Manager for Conservation Science. “These guidelines provide a roadmap for bringing the bison back to its rightful place as a keystone of the great plains.

http://www.iucn.org/iyb/resources/news/?4750/Bringing-Bison-Back-to-North-America

Bison on the American Prairie Reserve

Photo: Steve Zack, Wildlife Conservation Society

.

Further Reading

.

http://www.iucn.org/iyb/

http://www.iucn.org/iyb/resources/news/

http://www.cbd.int/2010/welcome/

http://www.countdown2010.net/year-biodiversity

http://www.unep.org/iyb/

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/

http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/strategy/draft-strategy.html

http://www.healthyparkshealthypeoplecongress.org/

.