Renewable Energy: report paints hopeful picture for EU if properly planned

In the U.S., the Thanksgiving holiday is just a few days away. It's a time when we reflect on what we have, despite all the bad news that is swirling around us, and give thanks. It can be an optimistic day as we consider how far we have come as a nation and a people, and we consider a future filled with many more Thanksgivings by resolving to tackle the challenges we face.

That's a recipe for the whole world to follow as we consider our natural resources and the environment, and the threats that beset them.

So, from across the pond, coming from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) in the UK is a report that caught my eye. "Meeting Europe's Renewable Energy Targets in Harmony with Nature" examines the importance of expanding the European Union's renewable energy capabilities and how it can be done without sacrificing nature at the same time. It's a report whose goals and objectives could be applied worldwide.

With renewable energy sources providing EU countries with an average 20% of their energy by the end of the decade as a declared EU goal, the report focuses on the importance of energy sources that have a low impact on nature, such as solar panels, rooftop solar thermal systems and electric vehicles. The report categorizes wind and wave power as medium-risk, while biofuels are placed in a high-risk category.

Martin Harper, RSPB conservation director, said the report was "a call to arms for nature conservation. Climate change is a grave threat to wildlife, and we need ambitious renewable energy targets in order to tackle it. Our study shows that it is possible to meet these targets without putting nature at risk--but there are consequences for nature if we get it wrong."

That, of course, is the trick: avoiding rushing into implementing a particular energy technology without proper planning to consider both short-term and long-term implications. The report reviews many of the issues regarding biofuels, which is an energy source that many feel is a disaster due to the amount of habitat destruction that goes into producing one gallon of fuel. However, the report also brings up the need to, in essence, look into a crystal ball to try to anticipate future issues regarding energy sources. An example from years past would be hydroelectric dams which produced plenty of power but over time severely damaged many rivers, estuaries, and the ecosystems they supported.

Overall, the report lays out a predominantly positive future if we can energize ourselves in committing to renewable energy and if we carry it out carefully and judiciously. "With so much exciting and innovative technology out there from solar arrays and geothermal extraction to electric cars and wave power systems, there is clearly a healthy future for renewable energy and wildlife in the UK and Europe," Harper said.

To download the report, click here.
Learn more from the RSPB website.

Failing Fishery Management: report and video illustrate excesses by EU and Japan

The logic is so simple: if you harvest from a finite resource without giving back then you will deplete it.

But combating that is the economic principal that requires the use of available resources to meet market demand and sustain business growth.

These are the concepts that fishery management has been wrestling with for decades - and it is becoming more and more apparent that economic interests win in the short term and the environment loses in the long term.

I have sited in past postings the European Union's inability to effectively manage its industrial fishing. It has failed to the extant that it moves from one species to another, harvesting until there effectively is no more in their territorial waters. And so they export their trade to other countries, fishing in the territorial waters of developing countries who are lured by the economic gains of providing fishing rights and/or fishing crews to prop up struggling economies - ultimately sacrificing their natural resources for short term gain.

A report recently published by the New Economics Foundation declares that the EU has now basically consumed all of its own fish and must look elsewhere to meet demand. The report says the EU has reached a "fish dependence day" and is now having to live off the rest of the world when it comes to seafood.

The report, Fish Dependence: The Increasing Reliance of the EU on Fish From Elsewhere, states, "In a context of finite resources and growing populations, the current EU model is unsustainable. The EU's increasing fish dependence has implications for the fish stocks in other countries, which are also overfished, and for the communities that depend upon them."

It makes me recall the science fiction film, Independence Day, which portrays an attack on the earth by malevolent aliens that travel the galaxies, plundering all the natural resources of a victim planet before moving on to the next one. We don't need fictional aliens to see that that is exactly what is happening right now in our oceans.

Click here to download a copy of the report.

Also making the rounds of various online forums right now is a startling video from Alex Hofford, showing industrial shark fishing at its most graphic. In the Japanese city of Kesen-numa City, blue sharks and salmon sharks are piled high like cord wood, awaiting processing which includes the removal of their fins and, in the case of the salmon sharks, their hearts. In watching the video I was struck by the methodical way in which the workers went about their business - with gentle musak playing in the background and visitors walking above.

Here are hundreds and hundreds of sharks - animals that, because of their low reproductive rates, can in no way withstand such massive harvesting - all being dispatched like cattle in a slaughterhouse. And to the Japanese, that is exactly what it is. This is something that many western pro-shark advocates fail to appreciate: to the Asian markets, seafood is food, no different than beef or poultry. The butchering of sharks to them is no different than the butchering of cattle or chickens.

But there is one crucial difference: cattle and poultry are breed and raised for consumption; the majority of seafood is not.

The Asian markets may not have developed sizable cattle and poultry operations, and they may never will. But if any society - Asian, European or otherwise - is going to respond to a growing market demand for seafood, then they must make a concerted commitment and effort in developing effective and environmentally-safe aquaculture while also radically changing open-water commercial fishing as we know it today. Unless capable of being successfully grown in an aquaculture environment, some commercial species will need to be severely restricted, if not off limits all together.

The EU report states, "There is only so much fishing that our oceans can sustain. So for fisheries policies to be sustainable, they need to acknowledge and respect the ecological limits of the marine ecosystems on which they depend."

The logic is simple. But the motivation to act in the face of a bleak future is apparently difficult.

Read more about the EU fisheries report in the Guardian.
See the shark fishery video at Alex Hofford Photography.

Canadian Seal Hunt: economic pressure through boycotts and bans

The Canadian baby fur seal hunt has, unfortunately, been taking place in the winter and early spring for many years. Even after extreme efforts over the years from Greenpeace and other hard core conservation groups, the Canadian government has continued to support the fishermen who participate in this hunt during their fishing off-season. For many people, it becomes one of those sad conservation issues whose persistence eventually makes it a lower priority; nothing has changed so we'd rather not think about it. But maybe that's now turning around.

Following on the heels of the European Union's recent decision to ban the commercial trade in seal fur (the U.S. initiated such a ban in the early 70's), The Humane Society International is continuing the strategy of economic pressure by promoting an ongoing ban, extending it to Europe, of Canadian seafood products - products that generate much greater income for Canada and the fishermen involved in the hunt than do seal fur.

The images of big-eyed baby harp seals and hunters wielding clubs or picks has always added to the message that the hunt was cruel in it's execution. Seals could be shot, but bullet holes reduce the value of the seal skin, so clubbing remains the preferred method. Often, the seals are skinned while out on the ice, so in the end it's a pretty grizzly scene (although, I think if we spent a day at a slaughter house or chicken farm, we'd probably all be vegetarians). In the end, the question is whether the seal fur market is worth sustaining, given a shrinking customer base (Canada exports most of its seal product), ecological and conservation implications (Grey seals were nearly wiped out due to over-hunting in the Gulf of St. Lawrence), and the anticipated bad PR and loss of revenue from an extended seafood boycott.

Several commercial food markets and restaurants have joined the Canadian seafood boycott, including Whole Foods Markets, Trader Joe's Food Emporiums, and Jimmy Buffet's Margaritaville Cafes.

According to The Humane Society International:

"With more than 1 million baby seals killed in the past five years alone, Canada's commercial seal kill is the largest slaughter of marine mammals on Earth. The annual slaughter is an off-season activity conducted by commercial fishermen from Canada's East Coast who earn, on average, just a small fraction of their annual income from killing seals.

'Expanding the boycott of Canadian seafood to Europe is a logical next step in our campaign to end Canada's commercial seal slaughter,' said Mark Glover, director of HSI/UK. 'The European Union took the historic step of banning its trade in products of commercial seal hunts. Now, by not purchasing Canadian seafood products, European citizens are showing their support for putting an end to the bloody slaughter of baby seals.'

HSI's American partner, The Humane Society of the United States, launched the Canadian seafood boycott in the U.S. in 2005. To date, the ProtectSeals boycott has gained the support of more than 5,500 establishments and 650,000 individuals. With the help of European establishments, HSI hopes to increase these numbers—as the European Union is the third largest market for Canadian seafood—and bring an end to the inhumane slaughter of innocent seals."

Once again, it would seem that economic power speaks louder than humane actions when it comes to motivating commerce. If you would like to learn more about the hunt, click here. To add your name to the boycott list, click here.

Shark News Bites: some good, some bad

Here's a batch of shark news items, some good, some not so good . . .

Scotland to ban shark finning:
In a bold and welcomed move, Scotland has proposed a total ban on shark finning by Scottish or any other registered vessel operating in Scottish waters. European Union nations constitute the largest exporting group of shark fins to the Asian marketplace and their has been discussion for a new EU policy regarding sharks, but Scotland decided that there's no time like the present.

"As one of Europe's most important fishing nations we have a duty to show that we are serious about protecting the sustainability of our seas, their stocks and the wider marine ecosystem, not just through words but with action," said Rural Affairs Secretary Richard Lochhead.
(BBC News story.)

Shark nets to stay in Queensland:
According to the Brisbane Times, sharks nets in Queensland, Australia will remain for now. There had been discussion about their removal - albeit temporary - due to a higher number of whale calves that have been caught in the nets during the whale's migration season.

Shark control program manager Tony Ham says, "The program has been in place since 1962 and in that time we've had one fatal attack on a protected beach, at North Stradbroke island in 2006. There were a number of attacks prior to the program going in - some of those were pretty horrific and fatal. We believe the program does work."

Shark nets have often been controversial because on the one hand, they seem to prevent unwanted shark-human interaction, but on the other hand, it prioritizes the rights of humans to enter the ocean over the rights of sharks to be in their natural habitat.

Spanish supermarkets to no longer sell endangered shark:
Two of Spain's larger supermarket chains, Alcampo and Sabeco, have decided to no longer carry endangered shark meat in their stores, only distributing species that are not threatened (effectively eliminating all commercial shark species). One year ago, the same chains decided to stop selling bluefin tuna, which has been pushed to near extinction in European waters.

The stores are promoting the sale of sustainable or aquafarmed species such as talapia and farmed cod, in addition to working with smaller companies to supply mussels, trout, and salmon. In September, Spain's Ministry of Environment and Rural and marine Affairs initiated a ruling to begin on January 1, 2010 that prohibits Spanish fishing boats from taking thresher and scalloped hammerhead sharks - two species that have suffered major population declines.
(FiS Worldnews story.)

Petition to protect Lemon Sharks:
In the winter, lemon sharks congregate off the east Florida coast and with the demand of shark fins combined with the decrease in numbers of many other commercial sharks like the sandbar shark, the lemon shark is coming under consideration by local fisherman as a way to meet demand.

A coalition of scientists, divers, and shark conservation groups have enlisted the aid of Care2petitionsite.com to help circulate a petition to the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, asking for the commission to take action on behalf of the lemon shark by adding the species to the Prohibited Species List. The coalition is hoping to generate 10,000 signatures and they are currently about a third of the way there. To sign the petition, click here.

European Shark Week 2009: no Jaws hype, just the facts

In the past I have blogged about shark conservation issues that involve the European Union and their regulations regarding commercial shark fishing or the recognition of certain shark species as being threatened. (Most recent post on the subject.)

The Save Our Seas Foundation, a leading ocean conservation group that puts an emphasis on the current fate of sharks worldwide, has been promoting European Shark Week 2009 (no, not the Discovery Channel's) which will take place starting this Saturday. Here's some information about the event from Save Our Seas:

Join us in European Shark Week 2009, 10-18 October 2009

Predator turned prey
Turning the Tide for Sharks
Most European shark populations are declining from overfishing. One-third are threatened with extinction. The EU ban on “finning” – slicing off a shark’s fins and discarding the body at sea – is among the world’s weakest.

Hope lies with the new Shark Plan, adopted by the European Commission thanks in large part to support from many of you. The Plan sets the stage for vast improvements in EU shark policies, including the finning ban. Its success depends on collaboration and action by EU Fisheries Ministers and the European Commission. These fishery managers need encouragement from the European public to follow through on the Plan’s initiatives and truly safeguard sharks.

European Shark Week 2009
This year’s European Shark Week will take place from 10-18 October. It’s a unique opportunity for people across Europe to demonstrate their support for shark conservation and effect change.

What is European Shark Week?
The Shark Alliance has declared one week in October as European Shark Week – a time for enthusiasts to express their fascination and concern for sharks, bring new voices to the debate about their conservation, and encourage policy makers to secure the future health of their populations.

Are there sharks in Europe?
European waters contain a diverse array of about 70 species of sharks, more than 50 species of skates and rays, and seven species of chimaeras. Sharks and rays are found from the cold North Sea to the warmest waters of the Mediterranean Sea, from estuaries to the deep ocean depths, and even in the Baltic and Black Seas.

Isn’t there already a European Union finning ban?
Yes, the EU has banned finning for all its vessels and prohibits generally all removal of fins from sharks on board vessels. However, a derogation to the ban allows the removal of fins from sharks under a “special fishing permit” and uses a complicated and excessive fin-to-carcass ratio to try and ensure no shark carcasses are dumped overboard. This loophole, together with the legal ability for vessels to land shark fins and bodies in separate ports, make the EU ban one of the weakest finning prohibitions in the world.

The Save Our Seas Foundation is working with many organization throughout Europe to help spread the word and educate more and more people regarding the current fate of sharks and the critical role they play in maintaining a healthy marine ecosystem.

SOS . . . keep up the great work!

For the latest news on European Shark Week follow the SOSF European Shark Week Blog

European Union Scorecard: 1 for sharks, 1 against tuna

Following up on two recent posts about the CITES status for Bluefin Tuna and Sharks, there's good news and bad news.

The good news: The European Union countries have agreed on a German proposal to submit two species of shark to CITES for consideration as an Appendix II listed endangered species. The two species are Porbeagle sharks, a deep water species in the North Atlantic that reaches a length of 10 feet; and the Spurdog, or Spiny Dogfish, a small 3-foot variety. Both have been heavily fished for their meat to satisfy European market demand and their populations have declined worldwide. An Appendix II listing would require close fishery management of their catches by all CITES member nations.

The bad news: The EU countries also rejected support of a Monaco proposal to place the Bluefin Tuna in an Appendix I status. This would ban all international trade in this species. The proposal was strongly opposed by Mediterranean countries, who have substantial tuna fleets and would, it seems, prefer to continue supporting those fleets with fishery management policies that have, to date, failed to produce a sustainable population. In fact, at today's catch rate, the species is bound for extinction in the eyes of many scientific and research experts.

Perhaps the conservation-minded Monaco will still continue with their proposal to protect Bluefin Tuna, when the CITES members meet in March of next year.

Common Fisheries Policy & World Aquaculture 2009: charting new courses in commercial fishing

On a similar note to Monday's post, there is a push to revise the European Union's overall fisheries management and an important conference coming up this month regarding aquaculture.

In the 70's, EU fishermen began working together to determine fishing ground rights and levels of equal access. Out of that came the Common Fisheries Policy in 1983 which was supposed to conserve marine resources to, both, protect the environment and sustain the EU commercial fishing industry. Unfortunately, even with several revisions, it has failed to live up to its expectations and populations of popular commercial seafood like cod, sole, and other species are in rapid decline.

So, another reformation of the policy is being considered by the European Commission, following the release of a critical report, Green Paper on a reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. The key challenge: too many boats, too little fish. To meet demand, the fishing industry expanded capacity (more boats), but without sensible catch limits in place or enforced, then this expanded capacity has greatly reduced the population of many commercial species. Rather than reduce capacity, the industry was subsidized - which means the expanded fleet was able to continue overfishing a dwindling population since their lost revenue was being covered by the government. That may have made business sense, but from a conservation point of view it meant a grim future for many marine species.

To provide any future for the various marine species and the commercial fishing industry as well, there will have to be some tough decisions that will have to be made regarding an industry that has expanded itself to the point of collapse.

And this is where the next bit of news comes in. Perhaps those in the commercial fishing industry who are faced with a loss of business can consider making a transition into aquaculture (aquafarming). There will be a major conference on aquaculture on September 25-29. Sponsored by the World Aquaculture Society, World Aquaculture 2009 will be held in Veracruz, Mexico. Kind of an industry convention for aquaculture, the event will include speakers, panels, and symposiums along with displays from various suppliers in the industry.

As a proponent of aquaculture but one who also recognizes that it is in its infancy and has some major environmental hurdles to overcome, I hope there will be some good that comes out of the event. In my mind, aquaculture is the only viable option that we have in supplying seafood products without damaging the ocean populations and the supporting ecosystems. Unfortunately, I believe that "sustainable seafood" is only a stop gap measure - placing a finger in the dike, as it were - and to make any truly sustainable effort to meet demand, aquafarming must be aggressively pursued and all its technological and environmental issues must be addressed and solved.

Bluefin Tuna: CITES endangered status could be its last hope

Some time ago, I posted information about actions taken by the ICCAT (International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna) regarding acceptable levels of commercially-caught Bluefin Tuna. The organization, which is supposed to be in charge of managing the fishery for much of the EU and the Mediteranean, settled on catch levels far above the recommendations of their scientific advisors. The Bluefin Tuna's future did not look good.

And apparently it hasn't gotten any better.

Monaco has proposed to CITES (International Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species) to list the bluefin tuna in their Appendix I of endangered species. In so doing, it would completely ban the international trade in Bluefin Tuna by CITES member nations. With commercial levels set above recommended levels of sustainability, combined with poor fishery management and illegal fishing, the Monaco proposal would seem to be a last and final step in trying to save the Bluefin Tuna.

Oceana's European office has sent a letter to several members of the European Commission's environmental and maritime branches to support the Monaco proposal. Hopefully, a CITES Appendix I listing will provide the Bluefin Tuna with the opportunity to replenish its numbers - if it's not too late.

Sharks On The Agenda: international RFMO consider better management

A recent meeting held in San Sebastian, Spain by the Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMO) produced some consensus on the need to control and better manage shark fisheries. The RFMOs are an international matrix of regional territories, each territory including certain key countries, with the responsibility of managing fisheries to not only insure their commercial future but the conservation of the species involved ranging from tuna to sharks to turtles to sea birds.

Concern over major fish stocks like tuna had preoccupied the RFMOs for some time but now concern has been raised regarding shark populations and the taking of sharks either deliberately or as accidental bycatch.

In a recent press release from Oceana:

Fishing Nations Seek Cooperative Action to Manage Shark Fisheries Worldwide

Washington -- Oceana issued the following statement from senior vice president for North America and chief scientist Dr. Michael F. Hirshfield in response to decisions made today in San Sebastian to manage shark fisheries worldwide.

"Oceana is encouraged by the language adopted today in San Sebastian concerning sharks and is pleased that fishing nations have included commitments for cooperative actions and concrete measures to regulate shark fisheries. These vulnerable species have suffered a lack of attention for far too long, and we now hope to see precautionary and ecosystem-based management implemented for sharks worldwide.

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas seeks the cooperative management for 72 shark species, but today scientific advice only exists for two of them. Oceana shows that there is need to establish precautionary fishing limits for shark species caught in international waters.

Oceana would like to commend the United States delegation, with additional efforts by the European Union, for their persistence and commitment to ensuring that action-forcing language was adopted at the meeting,

Sharks are no longer ‘off the books' for the world's RFMOs. The world's regional tuna fishery management organizations are now on notice that they need to take specific, concrete steps to conserve sharks as soon as possible. We look forward to working with fishery managers to ensure that commitments made today result in true, in-the-water protections for sharks."

Good news but it will take continued vigilance to insure that their actions are sufficient and that there is the proper observance and enforcement to make it stick.

Teeth & Tuna: ICCAT and EU consider tuna and shark limits

In past postings I have mentioned the International Commission for Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT). It is the primary organization responsible for setting regulations regarding the taking of Bluefin Tuna in the Atlantic. That population is very close to reaching the classic "tipping point", where declining populations will suddenly plummet as the biological reproductive infrastructure collapses due to over-fishing. Already the population figures are showing staggering declines.

On a positive note, the ICCAT is meeting in Morocco and many of the participants, including representatives from the European Union and the United States, are feeling the heat from conservation organizations armed with not just "tree hugger" rhetoric but solid scientific data. There are several proposals on the table - from reduced catches to complete moratoriums, particularly in Atlanctic breeding grounds. (Read Oceana press release.)

Oceana also has announced that the European Union is seriously considering several regulations regarding the commercial taking of several pelagic shark species, all of which having been adversely impacted either as bycatch from longline fishing for tuna or by being specifically sought after. Included for discussion are thresher, hammerhead, mako, and blue sharks. (Read Oceana press release.)

“The EU plays an important role in shark fisheries in the Atlantic, and I’m glad to see them take this strong and positive stance to lead sustainable fishing for these species. If the rest of the ICCAT parties follow this lead, we will make a huge advancement in securing the future of these vulnerable animals,” declared Ricardo Aguilar, Director of Research for Oceana in Europe.

Since I have started this blog, I have watched Oceana.org grow as an international marine conservation organization with a particularly proactive stance: a growing force to be reckoned with. Let's wish them continued success.

Commercial Fishing By-Catch: discarding up to 80% in EU

In commercial fishing, "by-catch" has come to mean any sealife that is unintentionally caught. Depending on the fishing or netting techniques used, this can include a wide variety of sealife - from non-commercial species to prohibited or endangered species to commercial species that do not have a lucrative enough sales value (known as "highgrading").

By-catch is typically discarded and that discarded percentage of the boat's total catch can range from 4% to a staggering 80%, depending on the prevailing regulations for a particular country's territorial waters. As an example, Norway has regulations in place that favor the lower percentages and generally induces fisherman to better utilize their catch commercially or use more effective netting techniques to reduce the overall level of by-catch.

However, the European Union (EU) has less restrictive regulations, allowing fisherman to dump enormous percentages of their catch - as much as 80% has been recorded (see video) - with very little chance of survival for the discarded animals. In fact, due to co-operative fishing rights, UE fisherman can fish in Norwegian waters, then sail back into UE waters and dump their by-catch!

Organizations like Oceana.org are pressuring EU governments to adopt regulations like Norway's but are getting resistance from the EU commercial fishing industry. The fact that Norway's regulations are effective and help support the conservation of commercially viable species, thereby protecting the longevity of the Norwegian fishing industry, seems to escape the EU's abilities of comprehension. According to Ricardo Aguilar, Oceana Europe's Research Director, "Wasting fishing resources is a global problem. However, the magnitude it reaches in European waters is unacceptable, especially when 88% of EU stocks are overfished."

Read Oceana.org press release.