Conserving The Crocs: Columbia's proactive approach with villagers to protect threatened reptile

I was watching a re-run of the PBS program series, Nature, and there was an interesting episode on monster crocodiles. The researcher was traveling the world in search of 20-foot+ crocs, most of which having been hunted over decades either as trophies, for their hides, or in defense of cattle and, in some cases, local villagers. The net effect was that these super-size reptiles were becoming a rarity, if not all together extinct.

Then today I read an interesting follow-up on the Conservation International (CI) web site. CI has been involved in working with government officials in Columbia and members of the IUCN in getting local villagers to help conserve remaining populations of American crocodiles that inhabit Columbian wetlands and mangroves. Although illegal to catch, subsistence-level villagers are enticed to catch crocodiles and sell them on the black market.

"Within the mangrove wetlands, the crocodile is an important umbrella species which helps to sustain the functioning of the ecosystem; among other benefits, crocodiles often eat dead fish, keeping the water clean for the other species that rely on it – including humans."

With the new government-sponsored approach, by locating crocodile egg nests, retrieving the eggs, incubating and raising them in a hatchery for the first year or so, then releasing them later into the wild, the hunters-turned-conservationists are improving the odds for the survival of the crocodiles, compared to how their dwindling numbers would survive on their own. Maintaining a healthier balance in the wetland/mangrove ecosystem means allowing nature's predators and scavengers to thrive, producing a stronger and healthier population of fish and better water quality - which benefits both the ecosystem and man.

Much like what happens when sharks are protected, rather than hunted, in reef areas, local villagers benefit from a healthier ecosystem that is a food source and there is also the ancillary economic benefit derived from ecotourism - crocodile tours have sprung up in Columbia.

Once again, protecting the environment pays off in more ways than one.

Read the entire Conservation International article.

U.S. Salmon Policy for Columbia River: top scientist says it comes up short

It's one year into the new U.S. administration and scorecards are flying about, tallying up the highs and lows of the Obama administration as the President prepares for a State of the Union address this week.

Some people are noting that the "change" that was a centerpiece of the Obama campaign has not materialized. Others have said that much has been accomplished in the form of small steps that don't necessarily get a lot of attention. For conservationists, there were many hopeful signs at the outset, but there has been many areas of concern as the administration makes decisions that many see as counter-productive and reminiscent of the former administration's anti-environment/pro-business approach.

Case in point: Dr. Carl Safina, head of the Blue Ocean Institute, had an op-ed piece printed in the Los Angeles Times on Sunday that calls attention to the administration's adoption of a policy regarding Pacific Northwest wild salmon in the Columbia/Snake River system. The policy is the same as one proposed by the prior administration and looks to hold the line on the current levels of wild salmon - levels that already border on extinction for many salmon species that travel these inland waterways.

According to Dr. Safina, the annual migration of wild salmon through these rivers provides critical food source and nutrients for bears, wolves, orcas, and even the plants and trees in the area. Dr. Jane Lubchenco, the head of NOAA and administration point person on this issue states that the policy is intended to "prevent further declines." However, Dr. Safina comments on that approach:

"Keeping salmon in a coma and on life support does not heal them, nor help the other species, including people, that depend on them. The likeliest outcome of a salmon strategy based on just avoiding extinction will be extinction -- and not only of salmon."

The current administration is learning the harsh realities of turning campaign rhetoric into actionable leadership. When to play politics and run down the middle or when to take a stand based on sound scientific research seems to be a difficult balancing act for most governments. As supporters of ocean conservation, we need to make sure our voices are heard by our elected officials and that environmental decisions are made based on scientific research and in the best long-term interests of the animals and the environment. Because, regardless of what administration is in power, when they are gone, they are gone.

Read Dr. Safina's entire op-ed article.