Look to the sun and save lives
It is impossible to forget the anxiety I felt for the safety of my family when 'supertyphoon' Haiyan, possibly the most powerful ever to hit land, struck the Philippines with an unprecedented ferocity last November.
Leaving a path of destruction, Haiyan left 8,000 people dead or missing and devastated communities as millions of people lost their homes and livelihoods. Thousands of Filipinos are still grieving for the death of their loved ones.
It is a sadness I can share. My father-in-law died during Typhoon Conson in 2010 when a flash flood swept away his car as he was crossing a bridge on his way home. Fortunately, my family was luckier during Typhoon Haiyan and all survived. They were likewise spared during typhoons Washi and Bopha, which were in the area where they lived.
But in the wake of Haiyan, communities are struggling to recover and I remain fearful for the future of my beloved country. Typhoons are common in the Philippines, but it is fightening to think that the destructive power of typhoons will increase with global warming.
This is why I am in Japan this week on behalf of Greenpeace, attending a meeting of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as it prepares to deliver its latest, and perhaps most dire, assessment on the impacts of climate change.
Here at the IPCC meeting in Yokohama, the world's leading climate scientists will say that the future is grim if governments fail to to take approriate action. I bring a message of urgency.
More than four months after Haiyan struck, a national survey revealed that 3.9 million families have experienced involuntary hunger in the last quarter of 2013. Families are also going to extraordinary lengths to obtain clean water as safe drinking water is desperately scarce in the storm-ravaged portion of the central Philippines.
Yeb Sano, lead negotiator for the Philippines at the annual UN climate talks, also points out that more than 1 million farming households and 20,000 fishing households are struggling to pick up the pieces. Overall losses in the agriculture sector could come …more
What’s in a word?
In his now-classic essay, “Politics and the English Language,” George Orwell warned: “Political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. … But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought. A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation even among people who should and do know better.”
Orwell’s insights are as true today as they were in 1946, when he wrote the piece. Calculated euphemisms clutter our political conversation, making it hard for citizens to winnow fact from fantasy. Take, as just one example, the jargon that infuses environmental debates.
Corporate polluters and government bureaucracies have done an excellent job at creating a raft of words that cover up – or at least distance and distract us from – environmental abuses. Technical-sounding phrases disguise the daily destruction of wild nature. A clear-cut is called a “timber harvest.” Sewage goes by the name “bio-solids.” Soil is referred to as “overburden.”
Such terms confuse rather than clarify. And that, of course, is the point. If we can’t talk straight about environmental degradation, we won’t be able to think straight about it, either.
So here’s a short decoder list of commonly used environmental jargon and euphemisms, as gleaned by some members of the Society of Environmental Journalists. A hat tip to Peter Dykstra, publisher of Environmental Health News, who kicked off this collection and did a similar rundown of euphemisms on PRI’s “Living on Earth” last week.
- Beneficial Reuse: In short, the recycling and/or reclamation of dangerous waste. In general, this can be a good thing. But the term elides the possible hazards involved.
- Biosolids: Aka, human excrement. This is the waste disposal industry’s term of art for treated sewage, which is often spread on farm fields and pastures. Here’s one recent headline using the term: “Plans for biosolids concern residents of Spotsylvania.” It might not be fit to print, but perhaps the headline writer could have been more to the point: “Plans for spreading shit concern residents of Spotsylvania.”
- Bycatch: All of the fish …more
New, on-location footage
Bunker Seyfert, videography coordinator for Project Survival Media, an Earth Island Institute project, was traveling through Texas and stopped by at Galveston to document the oil spill in Galveston Bay. A barge ship carrying nearly a million gallons of marine fuel oil collided with a ship in Bay, spilling more than 168,000 gallons of bunker fuel oil and halting shipping in one of the busiest ports in the United States. Experts say the sticky, viscous oil, that's used to propel oceangoing vessels, is going to be harder to remove than the Deepwater Horizon oil that was a lighter crude. The spill is also quite close to sensitive wildlife estuaries. Check out Seyfert’s short video, that was filmed three-and-a-half miles from the actual spill location.
Licensed pest control operators will still be allowed to use rodenticides that kill wildlife and pets
Reckitt Benckiser, the maker of d-Con rat poison, has held the US EPA hostage for the past several years, keeping it from implementing stricter rules about the use of dangerous rat poisons—the products that are killing pets and wildlife. But on March 18, after several years of pressure from Earth Island project Raptors Are The Solution (RATS) and many other groups, as well as from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation took a giant leadership step by making these “second generation anticoagulants” harder for consumers to use.
Photo by Grendl on Flickr
The Department of Pesticide Regulation is banning direct over-the-counter sales to consumers of the deadly second generation anticoagulant rodenticides (SGARs) that have killed thousands of birds of prey as well as predatory mammals like foxes, mountain lions, bobcats, and the endangered California fisher.
The new regulations take effect on July 1, and will prevent consumers from purchasing these compounds (many under the brand name d-Con) from hardware, convenience, grocery, and other stores. The active ingredients in SGARS are Brodifacoum, Bromadiolone, Difenacoum, and Difethialone. DPR’s review of these products is available here.
While RATS and its partners are thrilled that DPR has taken the critical step of banning over-the-counter sales of these poisons, many threats remain to California wildlife and pets from rodenticides.
Unfortunately, the new regs do not apply to pest control companies, which will still be allowed to use SGARs. As I’ve written before, innocuous looking silver-and-black “bait boxes” containing SGARs can be found all around cities and suburbs. You’ve probably seen the big pest control company trucks in your neighborhood. They place the tidy little boxes around houses and businesses — and it’s “out of sight, out of mind.” But bait boxes are not like the roach “motels,” where the bugs “check in and don’t check out.” With bait boxes, rodents check in, eat the poisoned bait, and then “check out” again, like little toxic time bombs. The poisoned rodents can then be eaten by other animals and end up poisoning other animals and birds farther up the food chain, including pets like …more
Senate ag committee introduces amendment that would penalize whistleblowers and undercover investigators at factory farms
Industrial Ag interests are at it again, trying to block public scrutiny of their operations in Kentucky this time. I just learned that the Kentucky state senate is using a popular animal welfare bill as a cover to quietly slip through an “ag-gag” stipulation that would criminalize independent, undercover investigations of factory farming facilities.
The original intent of HB 222 (Word doc), introduced by House Democrat Joanie Jenkins earlier this month, was to set euthanasia standards, such as restricted use of gunshots and a ban on using gas chambers, for animal shelters in the state.
Photo courtesy Farm Sanctuary
However, on Monday, after the bill had made it through the House, the Senate Agricultural Committee tagged on an amendment that would penalize whistleblowers and undercover investigators at factory farms. The amendment stipulates that any person who commits “agricultural operation interference” such as getting a job at a facility using a false identity or taking photos and videos without the owner’s consent, can be charged with “criminal trespass” and considered guilty of a Class B misdemeanor.
The amended bill isn’t available online yet, but you can read a version here (pdf). The amendment is added on at the end, beginning with page 5. (Representative Jenkins is reportedly unhappy with the amendment, but hasn't yet responded to my requests for comment.)
The amendment was approved by the Senate Ag Committee yesterday and will likely be sent to the full Kentucky Senate tomorrow (Thursday). If the Senate passes it, it will go back to the House for approval, but there will be no debate on the added ag-gag provision. Basically, the committee is trying to rush the bill through at the end of the session, that’s likely to end this week, without much public scrutiny.
“It’s a sneaky way to pass legislation…. [What the ag committee did] is not surprising, but disturbing,” says Matthew Dominguez, public policy manager for farm animal protection at the Humane Society of the United States, that had initially supported the bill. Dominguez says the animal welfare group, that had been watching the bill closely, had been “a little concerned” about its fate all along since HSUS …more
New Environment Superintendent cracking down on domestic and foreign operations
Chile’s new office of the Environment Superintendent was only five months old when, last May, it took the country by surprise: It slammed the largest gold-mining company in the world, the Canada-based Barrick Gold Corporation, with a $16 million fine for water pollution and other environmental violations at its open-pit gold mine Pascua Lama. In response, Barrick Gold indefinitely suspended operations at the mine, which had cost $5 billion to construct. “Companies didn’t realize that the Superintendent was going to be so rigorous in its inspections,” says Ana Lya Uriarte, who was Chile’s environment minister when the law creating the Environment Superintendent was passed.
This month, the country’s equally young Environmental Court of Santiago caused another big sensation. The court was initially put in place to protect companies, which wanted a way to challenge the fines imposed by the superintendent. But, instead of protecting Barrick Gold, the court ruled that the $16 million fine was inadequate given the magnitude of the company’s environmental violations. It ordered the superintendent to review its process and return to the mine for another inspection.
The tough attitude toward the mining industry marks a major departure from the past. The Chilean government has long prioritized economic growth above environmental protection, especially since the Pinochet dictatorship’s neoliberal reforms. Now, it seems the government is finally cracking down on the environmental damage and public health risks associated with the country’s mining industry.
Mining is a bedrock of the Chilean economy. Copper alone represents one third of the country’s exports. Before the creation of the Environment Superintendent, mining companies operated with very little regard for the environment, and the government didn’t intervene much. “Everyone did whatever they wanted,” says Fernando Dougnac, a Chilean environmental lawyer. There was an agency responsible for making companies toe the line: the National Environment Commission, or CONAMA, which was created in 1997. But CONAMA had limited power to investigate environmental violations, and the maximum fine it could levy was only about $3,000. Now, the much stronger Environment Superintendent can levy a maximum fine of about $16 million for each infraction it finds.
The more rigorous investigations and higher fines aren’t intended to be punitive, says former environment minister Uriarte. Instead, …more
Effort could save 30 million young salmon, but may impact Chinook spawning patterns
Every year between late March and early June, roughly 30 million Chinook salmon make their way from five Central Valley hatcheries to the Pacific Ocean. This year, however, these young salmon, called smolts, face a perilous journey due to California’s enduring drought.
Photo by Roger Tabor/USFWS
In order to ensure that the Chinook make it all the way to the sea, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) have adopted a drought contingency plan to transport salmon smolts closer to the Pacific Ocean in tanker trucks. Trucking operations will begin this week.
“If you are a baby salmon, the name of the game is to get from the river where you were born to the ocean,” explains John McManus, executive director of the Golden Gate Salmon Association, an organization that aims to protect and restore California’s Central Valley salmon habitat. “Well, these fish are not great swimmers when they are four inches long, so the way they have evolved in nature is they get flushed out to the ocean. How do they get flushed? They get flushed from the rainfall or the snow melt.”
Unfortunately, drought conditions in California mean that there isn’t much rainfall or snowmelt to convey young salmon to the ocean. The drought also means less sedimentation in the rivers. Salmon rely on the murky water caused by sedimentation for camouflage and protection, and are left vulnerable to predation by larger fish and birds in clear water. According to McManus, these factors combine to create extremely hostile conditions in the river.
CDFW and USFWS, which, combined, run five hatcheries for fall-run Chinook, will try to circumvent this hostile environment by loading young salmon into tankers and trucking them several hours downriver. This is not unprecedented for CDFW — the state agency trucks between 8 million and 14 million fish on an average year — but this year CDFW will truck an estimated 18.4 million fish. (The USFWS will truck another 12 million.)
“It has been done before,” says Harry Morse, an information officer with the CDFW. “The state Department of Fish and Wildlife has trucked up to 18 million or more [salmon] several times over the …more