: Government officials, civil society representatives, Academicians and farmer representatives from North eastern States today urged the Central Government to create an umbrella policy to subsidize and support ecological fertilization in Agriculture, encompassing all aspects of the same. The consensus demand came out of the Northeast conference deliberations organized by Rashtriya Gramin Vikas Nidhi (RGVN) and Greenpeace India as part of the nationwide “Living Soils” campaign.
The Living Soils campaign aims at promoting ecological farming in the country
On behalf of Smt Pramila Rani Brahma, Minister for Agriculture, Assam, Nilufer Hazarika Secretary-Agriculture inaugurated the conference by reading out a message from the Hon’ble Minister. In the message, the Minister said, “Indiscriminate use of chemical fertilizers has an adverse impact on the life of the soil. Further it leads to its deterioration. Organic biomass in large quantities’ is required to support life in soil and to maintain its structure and texture. Hence generation and application of biomass is critical to ensure soil health. Bringing all the schemes and policies that support ecological fertilization under one umbrella and raising the support for all components of ecological fertilization will not only help to save the soil but also will contribute to the livelihood security of the farmers”.
“A proper research backed scientific approach to promote ecological fertilization supplemented by policy support and incentives by the Central Government and respective State Governments will go a long way in preserving soil health which is crucial in achieving food security without compromise on health and environment. Putting in place an umbrella policy encompassing all aspects of ecological fertilization and soil health will enable us achieve this important objective.”, said Dr Mukul Sangma, Hon’ble Chief Minister of Meghalaya in an official message which was read out at the conference.
“Sikkim has adopted a policy to go completely organic by 2015 and we have already phased out the usage of chemical fertilizers. Improved package of practices are being developed. A support system for ecological fertilization will help the farmers of Sikkim in a big way and will help to ensure food security in the state”, said SK Sinha, Principal Director of Agriculture, Government of Sikkim, in an official message read out at the conference.
Dr Purkaysta, Joint Director-Agriculture who represented the Arunachal Pradesh Government at the conference said, “More than 81% of Arunachal Pradesh is organic by default. A support system for ecological fertilization will contribute to the food security of the state.”
The conference and the demand assumes significance in the context of Central Government acknowledging the problems associated with intensive chemical fertilization and initiating a reform in its fertilizer subsidy policy. But the new Nutrient Based Subsidy (NBS) continue to support only chemical fertilizers. The Central Government also acknowledged the importance of organic matter in the soil and keep on reiterating in the parliament and outside that there are sufficient central schemes to incentivise ecological/organic fertilization. However, a social audit in Darrang district of Assam revealed that there is hardly any support for ecological fertilization in mainstream agriculture. 99% of the surveyed farmers didn’t receive any kind of support for ecological fertilization. An analysis of the published Government data on Central Government schemes in Assam also reveals the fact that the area and the number of farmers covered under the organic fertilization programmes are very minimal.
Dr Amiya Sharma, Executive Director, RGVN, who presided over the inaugural session said,” We cannot continue to tax the environment for satisfying our greed. Protection of soil is important for maintaining life on this earth.”
“Chemical fertilizers degrade our soil, pollute our drinking water and contribute to climate change. So it’s high time we bring in policies to shift from chemical to ecological fertilization. For facilitating this change the first step is to implement an umbrella support system for ecological fertilization,” said Gopikrishna SR, Sustainable Agriculture Campaigner, Greenpeace India.
Civil society delegations from all the north eastern states except Mizoram participated in the conference.
The conference also discussed the prospects and challenges of ecological fertilization in a session chaired by Dr Bhangshi Kalita, Sr Agricultural Development Officer (Organic farming), Assam. The conference signed a charter of demands to the Central Government, the summary of which is as follows:
1. The indiscriminate usage of chemical fertilizers needs to be checked at the earliest through proper policy measures at the Central and State Government level.
2. Central Government should create an umbrella policy to support all components of ecological fertilization which includes:
•Generation of biomass, for bulk addition of organic matter in the soil for maintaining proper soil health: This includes promotion of livestock as integral part of the farm, providing infrastructure facilities to farmers for proper collection and usage of livestock manure. In situ generation of biomass through sole cropping/intercropping/bund cropping of green manure crops, planting of Green manure trees etc.
•Promotion of nutrient intensive ecological fertilizers (such as composts)
•Promotion of bio fertilizers
•Recycling of farm and house hold waste.
•Crop rotations to enrich soil (eg: to include pulses and leguminous crops)
•Eco bonus for maintaining soil health
3. Documentation, Research and promotion of indigenous traditional knowledge to maintain soil health.
4. Promotion of eco-friendly soil amelioration techniques.
5. Convergence of policies in the rural sector: Ecological fertilizer production can open up employment opportunities in rural areas and hence can find synergy with Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme.
Notes to the editor:
1. Greenpeace is an independent global campaigning organization that acts to change attitudes and behavior, to protect and conserve the environment and to promote peace. We envision an equitable and sustainable world. To maintain independence, Greenpeace does not accept any donation from any government or corporate. Website: www.greenpeaceindia.org
2. “Living Soils”, a nationwide campaign launched by Greenpeace India aims to critically review the soil health management support systems of Central Government through a participatory approach using social audit as a tool. The Living Soils campaign was launched on 3 August 2010 in Guwahati. More information at: http://www.greenpeace.org/india/assets/binaries/concept-note-living-soils
3. Subsidising Food Crisis – A Greenpeace India report on impact of chemical fertilizer subsidies on environment (soil and climate) can be accessed at: http://www.greenpeace.org/india/press/reports/subsidising-food-crisis
4. Production of synthetic nitrogen fertiliser is a very energy intensive process, and requires large amounts of fossil fuel energy, and hence emits Green House Gases. Application of Nitrogen fertilizers in the fields releases N2O. The concern over N2O emissions arises from its long atmospheric life (166 ± 16 years) and its higher global warming potential (296 times that of CO2).
5. Chemical fertilisers in our water – A recent study by Greenpeace India in the Malwa region of Punjab which has shown that drinking water was heavily contaminated with nitrates. 20 percent of all sampled wells had nitrate levels above the safety limit of 50 mg per litre as established by the World Health Organisation (WHO). The report can be accessed at: http://www.greenpeace.org/india/press/reports/chemical-fertilisers-in-our-wa-2
For more information, please contact:
Gopikrishna SR, Sustainable Agriculture Campaigner, 9900897341, email: gkrishna@greenpeace.org
Dr Amiya Sharma, Executive Director, RGVN, Mob: +91 9435118871
Prarthana Banikya, Greenpeace India, Mob: +91 7399105251
Friday, October 1, 2010
Indian science academies sell science to the highest bidder!
The public sector institutions for science and technology are one of the two institutions in which Indians have great faith. The other one is judiciary. It is this faith in the science and technology institutions that the government is now exploiting to push genetically modified (GM) crops into the country.
This is not news for some of us who have been working on this issue for quite some time. But the Inter- Academy of Sciences, constituted by Jairam Ramesh to give recommendations on GM crops for India, shocked us out of our wits. The Inter-Academy, which consists of 6 national academies of science – the Indian Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Sciences, the Indian National Science Academy, the Indian National Academy of Engineering, the Indian Academy of Medical Science, National Academy of Agriculture Sciences, was given this task following the moratorium on Bt Brinjal. This moratorium was declared after national level public consultations on Bt brinjal showed tremendous opposition from a large cross section of the society.
The Inter-Academy group is supposed to have finished their report and submitted it to the government. While no trace of the report could be found on these respective academy websites, it has been reported by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), the lobby group funded by multinational biotech seed companies.
We happened to get a copy of the report from a scientist friend and what we saw there was the most unscientific report that one can ever imagine. It has no referencing to start with. It is full of sweeping statements and is more of a political position of certain sections of the scientific communities who promote GM crops.
It also comes across as a serious case of plagiarism. A large portion of its section on Bt brinjal is a straight lift from an article by Dr Anandkumar in Bio-tech News, a publication of the Department of Biotechnology. Dr Anandkumar is a Bt brinjal developer himself. Apart from this, the academies have unashamedly taken figures from ISAAA reports without mentioning the source.
They have done everything they could to paint a rosy picture of GM crops. There was not a single mention of the peer reviewed scientific papers on the health and environmental impacts of GM crops. Apart from the fact that there is no ‘terms of reference’ clearly stated, there is also no mention of the process that these esteemed academies put in place to review one of the most serious issues affecting our food safety as individuals and food security as a nation. There is also serious conflict of interests as Dr Ashis Dutta one of the scientists who has signed off the report is a GM crop developer himself.
So basically the government asked the fox to guard the chicken coop. One shouldn’t be surprised at the outcome, but the degree of shoddiness of the report puts every scientist represented by these academies to shame.
As citizens of this country we should be worried because a corrupted scientific community is the greatest danger to our country and human society at large. To regain faith on science we must disown such scientists and scientific institutions.
-Rajesh Krishnan
Sustainable Agriculture
Campaign manager
This is not news for some of us who have been working on this issue for quite some time. But the Inter- Academy of Sciences, constituted by Jairam Ramesh to give recommendations on GM crops for India, shocked us out of our wits. The Inter-Academy, which consists of 6 national academies of science – the Indian Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Sciences, the Indian National Science Academy, the Indian National Academy of Engineering, the Indian Academy of Medical Science, National Academy of Agriculture Sciences, was given this task following the moratorium on Bt Brinjal. This moratorium was declared after national level public consultations on Bt brinjal showed tremendous opposition from a large cross section of the society.
The Inter-Academy group is supposed to have finished their report and submitted it to the government. While no trace of the report could be found on these respective academy websites, it has been reported by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), the lobby group funded by multinational biotech seed companies.
We happened to get a copy of the report from a scientist friend and what we saw there was the most unscientific report that one can ever imagine. It has no referencing to start with. It is full of sweeping statements and is more of a political position of certain sections of the scientific communities who promote GM crops.
It also comes across as a serious case of plagiarism. A large portion of its section on Bt brinjal is a straight lift from an article by Dr Anandkumar in Bio-tech News, a publication of the Department of Biotechnology. Dr Anandkumar is a Bt brinjal developer himself. Apart from this, the academies have unashamedly taken figures from ISAAA reports without mentioning the source.
They have done everything they could to paint a rosy picture of GM crops. There was not a single mention of the peer reviewed scientific papers on the health and environmental impacts of GM crops. Apart from the fact that there is no ‘terms of reference’ clearly stated, there is also no mention of the process that these esteemed academies put in place to review one of the most serious issues affecting our food safety as individuals and food security as a nation. There is also serious conflict of interests as Dr Ashis Dutta one of the scientists who has signed off the report is a GM crop developer himself.
So basically the government asked the fox to guard the chicken coop. One shouldn’t be surprised at the outcome, but the degree of shoddiness of the report puts every scientist represented by these academies to shame.
As citizens of this country we should be worried because a corrupted scientific community is the greatest danger to our country and human society at large. To regain faith on science we must disown such scientists and scientific institutions.
-Rajesh Krishnan
Sustainable Agriculture
Campaign manager
Thursday, September 30, 2010
Wipro marches ahead of Dell and Samsung to the Toxics free punch
In a classis case of David and Goliath, one of India’s biggest IT service provider (but relatively small PC manufacturing company), Wipro, has beaten giants like Dell, Samsung, Lenovo and LGE to the finish line in producing a computer, which is first major electronic product in India, free of worst toxic chemicals. This announcement marks another clear success for our green electronics campaign driving tech companies around the world to clean up their products.
The computer named "Greenware" is completely free of both hazardous PVC (polyvinylchloride) and BFR (brominated flame retardants) including Power Chords, a longtime demand of Greenpeace. Greenware will cover 15% of Wipro’s total PC produtc portfolio.
In the race to produce greener electronic products Wipro joins biggies like Apple, HP and Nokia who are leading the way on eliminating toxic chemicals. It took several years of campaigning for Greenpeace to obtain this result(Greenpeace has been campaigning since the year 2005 for greener electronics), and we are delighted to see that more companies are realising that greener computers are vital.
2010 is the year many electronics companies pledged to remove toxic chemicals like PVC and BFRs. Those that took this pledge to the public seriously such as Apple, HP, Acer and now Wipro are now delivering the same. Other companies that are far bigger than Wipro in the global market such as Dell, Lenovo, Samsung and LGE are failing to deliver what they promised.
Wipro, a rather small electronics manufacturing brand in global market, is therefore doing what industry giants like Dell and Samsung have failed to do - prioritise taking its responsibility for a healthier planet. In the last ranking, Samsung lost points for failing to give a clear timeline for removing toxic chemicals, and so did other giants like Dell. We are thrilled to see there are some leaders in the industry willing to show that tech and toxic don't necessarily go hand in hand.
E-waste in India
Toxic waste is a particular concern in India along with other Asian countries like China as a lot of the waste produced in developed countries ends up being dumped here for crude recycling. Poor regulations and control enable a traffic that is essentially illegal.
http://www.greenpeace.org/india/campaigns/toxics-free-future/hi-tech-highly-toxic/where-does-e-waste-end-up
These toxic chemicals are more often than not handled by children and poor workers who cannot protect themselves.
The current initiative by Wipro will add value to the on-going e-waste law process where Wipro along with other Indian electronic producer HCL are at forefront of leading the industry on their active lobby work for e-waste rule and voluntary action on e-waste management in the country. This new initiative will definitely set the new horizon on toxic free computer manufacturing in Indian and global market.
Now it’s time for Wipro to use its leadership to steer the Industry towards low carbon economy and high efficiency standards
— Greenpeace India
The computer named "Greenware" is completely free of both hazardous PVC (polyvinylchloride) and BFR (brominated flame retardants) including Power Chords, a longtime demand of Greenpeace. Greenware will cover 15% of Wipro’s total PC produtc portfolio.
In the race to produce greener electronic products Wipro joins biggies like Apple, HP and Nokia who are leading the way on eliminating toxic chemicals. It took several years of campaigning for Greenpeace to obtain this result(Greenpeace has been campaigning since the year 2005 for greener electronics), and we are delighted to see that more companies are realising that greener computers are vital.
2010 is the year many electronics companies pledged to remove toxic chemicals like PVC and BFRs. Those that took this pledge to the public seriously such as Apple, HP, Acer and now Wipro are now delivering the same. Other companies that are far bigger than Wipro in the global market such as Dell, Lenovo, Samsung and LGE are failing to deliver what they promised.
Wipro, a rather small electronics manufacturing brand in global market, is therefore doing what industry giants like Dell and Samsung have failed to do - prioritise taking its responsibility for a healthier planet. In the last ranking, Samsung lost points for failing to give a clear timeline for removing toxic chemicals, and so did other giants like Dell. We are thrilled to see there are some leaders in the industry willing to show that tech and toxic don't necessarily go hand in hand.
E-waste in India
Toxic waste is a particular concern in India along with other Asian countries like China as a lot of the waste produced in developed countries ends up being dumped here for crude recycling. Poor regulations and control enable a traffic that is essentially illegal.
http://www.greenpeace.org/india/campaigns/toxics-free-future/hi-tech-highly-toxic/where-does-e-waste-end-up
These toxic chemicals are more often than not handled by children and poor workers who cannot protect themselves.
The current initiative by Wipro will add value to the on-going e-waste law process where Wipro along with other Indian electronic producer HCL are at forefront of leading the industry on their active lobby work for e-waste rule and voluntary action on e-waste management in the country. This new initiative will definitely set the new horizon on toxic free computer manufacturing in Indian and global market.
Now it’s time for Wipro to use its leadership to steer the Industry towards low carbon economy and high efficiency standards
— Greenpeace India
Greenpeace challenges political parties to fight elections on development plank
Greenpeace today called upon political parties to focus on people's issues in the elections instead of jeering at each other.The past few days have seen political parties and key leaders targeting each other through poetic mudslinging.
Bihar is in the thick of political activity and parties are busy working on their strategy. Leaders are busy changing their position, party and ideology. Media space is being overtaken by issues related to political dynasty, attacks and counter attacks, poetic renditions, corruption charges, caste, class and religion. As is the case generally in elections, all political parties have forgotten the main issues of development, which should be fundamental to their election.
“Before the election dates were announced, there was optimism in Bihar that the transformation will continue and elections will be fought on issues of development. This hope has been replaced with despair with the return of identity politics, and political mockery. This melodrama needs to be stop and be replaced with political consensus for development”, said Ramapati Kumar, campaigner, Greenpeace India.
Many issues are plaguing Bihar – lack of electricity being the foremost. There have been constant protests all over the state for better supply of energy. So much so that the state government is even purchasing electricity from other states at higher rates. But that also is not helping. A recent report by Assocham says that Bihar has the highest peak deficit at -33.7 per cent.
In spite of such pressing issues, not a single party until now has come forward to present their vision on how the state could become self reliant in terms of energy.
“Bihar Renewable Energy Development Support Network has been demanding political parties to espouse renewable energy to empower Bihar and illuminate the lives of millions still living in darkness. There is an opportunity for Bihar to choose an alternative energy path which will take the state in the direction of sustainable and inclusive development,” said Ramapati Kumar.
To compel parties to focus again on development issues during elections, Greenpeace along with civil society network is going to launch a campaign to advocate decentralized renewable energy as the solution for the energy needs of the state. The campaign will reach out to lakhs of people and political leaders to make sure that development remains the centre stage of elections. Notes to Editor
1. The Bihar Renewable Energy Development Support Network (BREDSN) is a network of civil society organisations, academicians, intellectuals, renewable energy entrepreneurs working in the state of Bihar.
Vision, video, photos, report information
Ramapati Kumar, Greenpeace India, +91 98455 35414, ramapati.kumar@greenpeace.org Shashwat Raj, Greenpeace India, +91 96868 61974, shashwat.raj@greenpeace.org Shachi Chaturvedi, Greenpeace India, +91 98187 50007, shachi.chaturvedi@greenpeace.org
PrintSend Search
Search this site Search Greenpeace Worldwide
Websites worldwideSelect other Greenpeace websites worldwide Websites worldwide International Argentina Australia Austria Belgium Brazil Canada Chile China Czech Republic Denmark Fiji Finland France Germany Greece Hungary India International Israel Italy Japan Lebanon Luxembourg Malta Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Pacific Papua New Guinea Philippines Poland Russia Slovakia Spain Sweden Switzerland Thailand Turkey United Kingdom USA
Bihar is in the thick of political activity and parties are busy working on their strategy. Leaders are busy changing their position, party and ideology. Media space is being overtaken by issues related to political dynasty, attacks and counter attacks, poetic renditions, corruption charges, caste, class and religion. As is the case generally in elections, all political parties have forgotten the main issues of development, which should be fundamental to their election.
“Before the election dates were announced, there was optimism in Bihar that the transformation will continue and elections will be fought on issues of development. This hope has been replaced with despair with the return of identity politics, and political mockery. This melodrama needs to be stop and be replaced with political consensus for development”, said Ramapati Kumar, campaigner, Greenpeace India.
Many issues are plaguing Bihar – lack of electricity being the foremost. There have been constant protests all over the state for better supply of energy. So much so that the state government is even purchasing electricity from other states at higher rates. But that also is not helping. A recent report by Assocham says that Bihar has the highest peak deficit at -33.7 per cent.
In spite of such pressing issues, not a single party until now has come forward to present their vision on how the state could become self reliant in terms of energy.
“Bihar Renewable Energy Development Support Network has been demanding political parties to espouse renewable energy to empower Bihar and illuminate the lives of millions still living in darkness. There is an opportunity for Bihar to choose an alternative energy path which will take the state in the direction of sustainable and inclusive development,” said Ramapati Kumar.
To compel parties to focus again on development issues during elections, Greenpeace along with civil society network is going to launch a campaign to advocate decentralized renewable energy as the solution for the energy needs of the state. The campaign will reach out to lakhs of people and political leaders to make sure that development remains the centre stage of elections. Notes to Editor
1. The Bihar Renewable Energy Development Support Network (BREDSN) is a network of civil society organisations, academicians, intellectuals, renewable energy entrepreneurs working in the state of Bihar.
Vision, video, photos, report information
Ramapati Kumar, Greenpeace India, +91 98455 35414, ramapati.kumar@greenpeace.org Shashwat Raj, Greenpeace India, +91 96868 61974, shashwat.raj@greenpeace.org Shachi Chaturvedi, Greenpeace India, +91 98187 50007, shachi.chaturvedi@greenpeace.org
PrintSend Search
Search this site Search Greenpeace Worldwide
Websites worldwideSelect other Greenpeace websites worldwide Websites worldwide International Argentina Australia Austria Belgium Brazil Canada Chile China Czech Republic Denmark Fiji Finland France Germany Greece Hungary India International Israel Italy Japan Lebanon Luxembourg Malta Mexico Netherlands New Zealand Norway Pacific Papua New Guinea Philippines Poland Russia Slovakia Spain Sweden Switzerland Thailand Turkey United Kingdom USA
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
A greener Lucknow is just a call away!
You are just a phone call away from turning your surroundings lush green, thanks to a helpline jointly launched by medical students, school children and scientists here for making Lucknow greener.
Under the banner of the Sky Foundation — an NGO working in the field of environment here, people from all walks of life have started the "On Call Plantation Scheme" (OCPS).
"Those interested to get saplings planted at their doors or in their vicinity, just need to call 9452415725 or 9616511633, and within 24 hours the green job would be done," Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, senior assistant director of the Central Drug Research Institute (CDRI), who is also involved with the OCPS, said.
"Though under the aegis of Sky Foundation, we have been taking up environmental issues for the last several months, we decided to offer the OCPS facility from this month to widen our reach... Now people from various localities and colonies approach us for planting saplings and get associated with us," he added.
Since the start of this month, around 50 saplings have been planted on calls made by residents of different localities of the city, reports IANS.
"All those associated with the plantation scheme are also involved in its promotion. They tell their relatives, friends, neighbours, who then get to know about our joint initiative and call us for carrying out the plantation," Srivastava said.
The Sky Foundation is not charging any fee for the sapling plantation now, but its members feel that with an increase in the demand of saplings they might have to opt for a price tag for the saplings.
"Let's see what happen in future... As far as possible we will try to continue OCPS free-of-cost... But at the same time, you should also keep it in mind that the saplings under the OCPS are being managed by us," said Bhupendra Singh, an MBBS student enrolled with the Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj Medical University (CSMMU), who is also involved with OCPS.
be a member of greenpeace movement, support us for a noble cause
Under the banner of the Sky Foundation — an NGO working in the field of environment here, people from all walks of life have started the "On Call Plantation Scheme" (OCPS).
"Those interested to get saplings planted at their doors or in their vicinity, just need to call 9452415725 or 9616511633, and within 24 hours the green job would be done," Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, senior assistant director of the Central Drug Research Institute (CDRI), who is also involved with the OCPS, said.
"Though under the aegis of Sky Foundation, we have been taking up environmental issues for the last several months, we decided to offer the OCPS facility from this month to widen our reach... Now people from various localities and colonies approach us for planting saplings and get associated with us," he added.
Since the start of this month, around 50 saplings have been planted on calls made by residents of different localities of the city, reports IANS.
"All those associated with the plantation scheme are also involved in its promotion. They tell their relatives, friends, neighbours, who then get to know about our joint initiative and call us for carrying out the plantation," Srivastava said.
The Sky Foundation is not charging any fee for the sapling plantation now, but its members feel that with an increase in the demand of saplings they might have to opt for a price tag for the saplings.
"Let's see what happen in future... As far as possible we will try to continue OCPS free-of-cost... But at the same time, you should also keep it in mind that the saplings under the OCPS are being managed by us," said Bhupendra Singh, an MBBS student enrolled with the Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj Medical University (CSMMU), who is also involved with OCPS.
be a member of greenpeace movement, support us for a noble cause
Barack Obama under fire for grossly underestimating Gulf oil spill
House commission finds that administration lost public trust and may have sabotaged clean-up operations
The Obama administration lost the public trust and may have sabotaged clean-up operations in the Gulf of Mexico by grossly underestimating the amount of oil gushing from BP's broken Macondo well, according to a White House commission appointed to investigate the spill.
In a scathing critique of the administration's handling of the disaster, the two co-chairs of the commission yesterday said government officials made a serious blunder by releasing early estimates of the spill that were about 60 times too low.
"It's a little bit like Custer underestimating the number of Indians on the other side of the hill and paying a price for that," Bob Graham, a former Democratic senator from Florida, told reporters.
Government agencies have come under sustained assault from independent scientists for initial estimates that put the size of the spill as low as 1,000 barrels a day – even as footage from the ocean floor showed a huge cloud of oil and gas billowing out of the BP well. A team of scientific experts assembled by the government eventually raised the estimate to more than 60,000 barrels a day.
In testimony yesterday, the coast guard commander Admiral Thad Allen insisted the underestimates had had no effect on the response. "The answer is no," Allen said. "We assumed at the outset this would be a catastrophic event."
But Allen's assertion made little headway with the other co-chair of the commission. "I would assume that it's common sense that a flow rate will determine how many skimmers you think you need, how many thousand feet of boom you bring into the area, what you are going to do with respect to dispersants," said William Reilly, who served as chairman of the Environmental Protection Agency under the first President Bush. "How do you deploy your resources if you don't know how serious the threat is?"
The low estimate may also have encouraged BP to take the ultimately unsuccessful step of attempting to cap the well with a giant dome. "I think it did have an impact … on the issue of the containment technology," Graham said.
The charges that government officials badly misjudged or misrepresented the gravity of the spill are extremely sensitive for the Obama administration, which claims repeatedly that its environmental policies are rooted in sound science.
Graham and Reilly said the disconnect between official assertions and the footage from the sea bed badly undermined public confidence in the oil spill response.
"I think it set a context for public scepticism about future information," said Graham.That scepticism rose again last month when government agencies produced a report saying about 75% of the oil had been captured, burned, dissolved or dispersed.
Bill Lehr, a senior scientist for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, stood by the report yesterday.
The authority of that report was also challenged when a leading oceanographer told the commission that more than half of the oil that spilled into the Gulf was now buried along the coast or on the sea floor.
"Over 50% of the total discharge is a highly durable material that resists further dissipation," Ian MacDonald, a scientist at Florida State University told the commission.
"Much of it is now buried in marine and coastal sediments. There is scant evidence for bacterial degradation of this material prior to burial."
The Obama administration lost the public trust and may have sabotaged clean-up operations in the Gulf of Mexico by grossly underestimating the amount of oil gushing from BP's broken Macondo well, according to a White House commission appointed to investigate the spill.
In a scathing critique of the administration's handling of the disaster, the two co-chairs of the commission yesterday said government officials made a serious blunder by releasing early estimates of the spill that were about 60 times too low.
"It's a little bit like Custer underestimating the number of Indians on the other side of the hill and paying a price for that," Bob Graham, a former Democratic senator from Florida, told reporters.
Government agencies have come under sustained assault from independent scientists for initial estimates that put the size of the spill as low as 1,000 barrels a day – even as footage from the ocean floor showed a huge cloud of oil and gas billowing out of the BP well. A team of scientific experts assembled by the government eventually raised the estimate to more than 60,000 barrels a day.
In testimony yesterday, the coast guard commander Admiral Thad Allen insisted the underestimates had had no effect on the response. "The answer is no," Allen said. "We assumed at the outset this would be a catastrophic event."
But Allen's assertion made little headway with the other co-chair of the commission. "I would assume that it's common sense that a flow rate will determine how many skimmers you think you need, how many thousand feet of boom you bring into the area, what you are going to do with respect to dispersants," said William Reilly, who served as chairman of the Environmental Protection Agency under the first President Bush. "How do you deploy your resources if you don't know how serious the threat is?"
The low estimate may also have encouraged BP to take the ultimately unsuccessful step of attempting to cap the well with a giant dome. "I think it did have an impact … on the issue of the containment technology," Graham said.
The charges that government officials badly misjudged or misrepresented the gravity of the spill are extremely sensitive for the Obama administration, which claims repeatedly that its environmental policies are rooted in sound science.
Graham and Reilly said the disconnect between official assertions and the footage from the sea bed badly undermined public confidence in the oil spill response.
"I think it set a context for public scepticism about future information," said Graham.That scepticism rose again last month when government agencies produced a report saying about 75% of the oil had been captured, burned, dissolved or dispersed.
Bill Lehr, a senior scientist for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, stood by the report yesterday.
The authority of that report was also challenged when a leading oceanographer told the commission that more than half of the oil that spilled into the Gulf was now buried along the coast or on the sea floor.
"Over 50% of the total discharge is a highly durable material that resists further dissipation," Ian MacDonald, a scientist at Florida State University told the commission.
"Much of it is now buried in marine and coastal sediments. There is scant evidence for bacterial degradation of this material prior to burial."
Monday, September 27, 2010
Emergency Funds Sent To Aid Confiscated Congo Parrots
International groups rally to aid 500 African Grey parrots seized by government officials in first crackdown of illegal parrot trade.
KAVUMU, DRC. Sept. 27, 2010 –
On September 18, 523 African Grey Parrots were confiscated by authorities in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in central Africa and sent to the Lwiro Primate Sanctuary. Funding from international wildlife groups is being urgently summoned to assist the sanctuary in dealing with the birds. The first of its kind in the DRC, this confiscation represents an important step towards permanently ending the wildlife trade for this imperiled species, threatened by decades of unsustainable levels of trade.
The shipment of Grey Parrots (Psittacus erithacus) was bound for Singapore and seized by government officials at a regional airport in Kavumu in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The birds were taken to Lwiro Sanctuary, which is run by three partners : Intitut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature ICCN, Centre de Recherches en Sciences Naturelles, CRSN and a team of international NGOs led by Coopera. Lwiro is a primate rescue center which houses over 100 orphaned chimpanzees and monkeys, with no existing facilities for birds. The arrival of these parrots to the rescue has caused tremendous strain on staff and reserves, necessitating an appeal for help. “We cannot do this alone,” said Carmen Vidal, manager of Lwiro Sanctuary. “We didn’t have much warning. We were just told these parrots are coming on Saturday and then they were here. We are doing the best we can. The government institutions, ICCN and CRSN, are doing a great job on law enforcement and the efforts of the DRC government authorities are commendable; we are very pleased that they are taking this strong stand on behalf of wildlife! ”
The confiscation came too late for twenty-nine of the Greys: the birds were found dead in their crates or died afterward. Some of the nearly 500 remaining birds were found to be tied to one another by one wing. They also had no food or water for an unknown period of time. Their situation requires immediate stabilization.
In response to this emergency the World Parrot Trust (WPT) is providing technical guidance and initial funding to support the birds’ first aid needs and coordinating activities with the Pan African Sanctuary Alliance (PASA) to get further support to Lwiro Sanctuary as quickly as possible.
"We're thrilled that the authorities seized this illegal shipment of grey parrots,” stated Dr. James Gilardi, Executive Director of WPT. “This effort sends a powerful signal that they are serious about protecting these birds from trapping. With adequate support, our partners in the DRC should be able to successfully release these birds back to the wild where they belong."
The initial aid will cover the short-term needs of the parrots, and in the coming weeks the birds will need intensive rehabilitation to ready them for release back into the wild. Many of the birds had their wings damaged by being tied to one another to prevent them flying, and as a result they will require assistance to re-grow lost feathers. Other support will be needed including veterinary assistance, proper nutrition, and the construction of large flights to encourage exercise. Public support will be sought through the WPT’s FlyFree program (http://www.parrots.org/flyfree).
Although this is the first such confiscation in the DRC, in recent years, similar illegal shipments have been confiscated several times in West Africa. Over a three-year period over 2796 Grey Parrots have been taken from traders, rehabilitated at the Limbe Wildlife Centre in Cameroon, and most of them released back to the wild. Grey Parrot shipments have also been seized recently in Kenya and Bulgaria.
The trade in great apes and parrots is seen by some experts as linked to one another: parrot traders selling apes and vice versa, dealers using established ape trading routes – which adds to the urgency that the trade must be stopped. According to CITES (the international convention monitoring global trade in endangered species), the DRC allows for the legal exportation of 5000 Grey Parrots each year. However, recent figures by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) estimate that almost one-quarter of existing Grey Parrot populations are being trapped for the trade each year – making Greys one of the most heavily traded parrots on the international market (1).
The trade for the wild-caught birds is driven by demand from international pet markets, principally in Asia and the Middle East. Although commonly bred in captivity, wild-caught birds are often sought as a cheaper alternative by bird traders. Population declines have been noted in Burundi, Cameroon, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria, Rwanda, São Tomé and Príncipe, Sierra Leone, Togo, Uganda and parts of Congo and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (2)
In an effort to further understand the impact of the wild parrot trade WPT is supporting a survey of bais (clearings) in the DRC, the TL2 Project, by Drs. John and Terese Hart. The study will address the usage of these types of areas by Grey Parrot populations and will determine how much local trapping of these parrots is occurring, working toward long-term protection of these sites in Africa.
Sources:
(1) BirdLife International: 2010 IUCN Red List http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/species/index.html?action=SpcHTMDetails.asp&sid=1496&m=0
(2) Pilgrim et al. (in prep.)
Press contacts:
USA/WORLD
James D. Gilardi, Ph.D.
Director, World Parrot Trust
725 Peach Place
Davis, CA 95616
Voice/Fax +1 (530) 756-6340
Email: gilardi@worldparrottrust.org
UNITED KINGDOM
Alison Hales
Chairman, World Parrot Trust
Hayle, Cornwall TR27 4HB
Voice +44 (0) 1736 751026
Fax +44 (0) 1736 751028
Email: uk@worldparrottrust.org
ITALY & EU (European Union)
Cristiana Senni
Trustee, World Parrot Trust Italy
Voice +39-06-503-4575
Email: italy@worldparrottrrust.org
CANADA
Steve Milpacher
Director of Development, World Parrot Trust
Voice +1 (250) 766 9363
Email: smilpacher@worldparrottrust.org
About the World Parrot Trust:
Founded in 1989, the World Parrot Trust (WPT) works to conserve wild parrots and aid the welfare of captive parrots worldwide. Though field research and direct conservation, advocacy, education, and awareness programs, the WPT has aided 47 species of parrots in 30 countries.
More information:
1. Confiscated Grey parrots (photos): http://www.parrots.org/flyfree/congo500_photos.html
2. World Parrot Trust: http://www.parrots.org
3. Pan African Sanctuary Alliance: http://pasaprimates.org
4. Lwiro Primate Sanctuary: http://www.lwiro.blogspot.com/
5. TL2 Project: http://www.bonoboincongo.com/2010/05/20/cleaning-congo’s-parrots-out-of-congo/
6. International wild-caught bird trade information: http://www.parrots.org/flyfree/about-the-wild-bird-trade.html
KAVUMU, DRC. Sept. 27, 2010 –
On September 18, 523 African Grey Parrots were confiscated by authorities in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) in central Africa and sent to the Lwiro Primate Sanctuary. Funding from international wildlife groups is being urgently summoned to assist the sanctuary in dealing with the birds. The first of its kind in the DRC, this confiscation represents an important step towards permanently ending the wildlife trade for this imperiled species, threatened by decades of unsustainable levels of trade.
The shipment of Grey Parrots (Psittacus erithacus) was bound for Singapore and seized by government officials at a regional airport in Kavumu in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The birds were taken to Lwiro Sanctuary, which is run by three partners : Intitut Congolais pour la Conservation de la Nature ICCN, Centre de Recherches en Sciences Naturelles, CRSN and a team of international NGOs led by Coopera. Lwiro is a primate rescue center which houses over 100 orphaned chimpanzees and monkeys, with no existing facilities for birds. The arrival of these parrots to the rescue has caused tremendous strain on staff and reserves, necessitating an appeal for help. “We cannot do this alone,” said Carmen Vidal, manager of Lwiro Sanctuary. “We didn’t have much warning. We were just told these parrots are coming on Saturday and then they were here. We are doing the best we can. The government institutions, ICCN and CRSN, are doing a great job on law enforcement and the efforts of the DRC government authorities are commendable; we are very pleased that they are taking this strong stand on behalf of wildlife! ”
The confiscation came too late for twenty-nine of the Greys: the birds were found dead in their crates or died afterward. Some of the nearly 500 remaining birds were found to be tied to one another by one wing. They also had no food or water for an unknown period of time. Their situation requires immediate stabilization.
In response to this emergency the World Parrot Trust (WPT) is providing technical guidance and initial funding to support the birds’ first aid needs and coordinating activities with the Pan African Sanctuary Alliance (PASA) to get further support to Lwiro Sanctuary as quickly as possible.
"We're thrilled that the authorities seized this illegal shipment of grey parrots,” stated Dr. James Gilardi, Executive Director of WPT. “This effort sends a powerful signal that they are serious about protecting these birds from trapping. With adequate support, our partners in the DRC should be able to successfully release these birds back to the wild where they belong."
The initial aid will cover the short-term needs of the parrots, and in the coming weeks the birds will need intensive rehabilitation to ready them for release back into the wild. Many of the birds had their wings damaged by being tied to one another to prevent them flying, and as a result they will require assistance to re-grow lost feathers. Other support will be needed including veterinary assistance, proper nutrition, and the construction of large flights to encourage exercise. Public support will be sought through the WPT’s FlyFree program (http://www.parrots.org/flyfree).
Although this is the first such confiscation in the DRC, in recent years, similar illegal shipments have been confiscated several times in West Africa. Over a three-year period over 2796 Grey Parrots have been taken from traders, rehabilitated at the Limbe Wildlife Centre in Cameroon, and most of them released back to the wild. Grey Parrot shipments have also been seized recently in Kenya and Bulgaria.
The trade in great apes and parrots is seen by some experts as linked to one another: parrot traders selling apes and vice versa, dealers using established ape trading routes – which adds to the urgency that the trade must be stopped. According to CITES (the international convention monitoring global trade in endangered species), the DRC allows for the legal exportation of 5000 Grey Parrots each year. However, recent figures by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) estimate that almost one-quarter of existing Grey Parrot populations are being trapped for the trade each year – making Greys one of the most heavily traded parrots on the international market (1).
The trade for the wild-caught birds is driven by demand from international pet markets, principally in Asia and the Middle East. Although commonly bred in captivity, wild-caught birds are often sought as a cheaper alternative by bird traders. Population declines have been noted in Burundi, Cameroon, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Liberia, Nigeria, Rwanda, São Tomé and Príncipe, Sierra Leone, Togo, Uganda and parts of Congo and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (2)
In an effort to further understand the impact of the wild parrot trade WPT is supporting a survey of bais (clearings) in the DRC, the TL2 Project, by Drs. John and Terese Hart. The study will address the usage of these types of areas by Grey Parrot populations and will determine how much local trapping of these parrots is occurring, working toward long-term protection of these sites in Africa.
Sources:
(1) BirdLife International: 2010 IUCN Red List http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/species/index.html?action=SpcHTMDetails.asp&sid=1496&m=0
(2) Pilgrim et al. (in prep.)
Press contacts:
USA/WORLD
James D. Gilardi, Ph.D.
Director, World Parrot Trust
725 Peach Place
Davis, CA 95616
Voice/Fax +1 (530) 756-6340
Email: gilardi@worldparrottrust.org
UNITED KINGDOM
Alison Hales
Chairman, World Parrot Trust
Hayle, Cornwall TR27 4HB
Voice +44 (0) 1736 751026
Fax +44 (0) 1736 751028
Email: uk@worldparrottrust.org
ITALY & EU (European Union)
Cristiana Senni
Trustee, World Parrot Trust Italy
Voice +39-06-503-4575
Email: italy@worldparrottrrust.org
CANADA
Steve Milpacher
Director of Development, World Parrot Trust
Voice +1 (250) 766 9363
Email: smilpacher@worldparrottrust.org
About the World Parrot Trust:
Founded in 1989, the World Parrot Trust (WPT) works to conserve wild parrots and aid the welfare of captive parrots worldwide. Though field research and direct conservation, advocacy, education, and awareness programs, the WPT has aided 47 species of parrots in 30 countries.
More information:
1. Confiscated Grey parrots (photos): http://www.parrots.org/flyfree/congo500_photos.html
2. World Parrot Trust: http://www.parrots.org
3. Pan African Sanctuary Alliance: http://pasaprimates.org
4. Lwiro Primate Sanctuary: http://www.lwiro.blogspot.com/
5. TL2 Project: http://www.bonoboincongo.com/2010/05/20/cleaning-congo’s-parrots-out-of-congo/
6. International wild-caught bird trade information: http://www.parrots.org/flyfree/about-the-wild-bird-trade.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)