Grief and outrage over 17-year-old great ape's death
Many people worldwide already know about the shooting of a 17-year-old male western lowland gorilla named Harambe at the Cincinnati Zoo to save the life of a four-year old child who fell into the gorilla's cage. The boy apparently told his mother he wanted to meet Harambe and crawled under a rail and over the wall of the moat. As usual, my inbox was ringing constantly with different reports of Harambe's killing, some might call it an execution or a murder. Indeed, the title of Peter Holley's essay in the Washington Post is called "‘Shooting an endangered animal is worse than murder’: Grief over gorilla’s death turns to outrage."
Photo by Mark Dumont
Who's to blame and what can be done to avoid such unnecessary killings?
Opinions vary widely about whether or not the boy's parents are to blame and should be charged for negligence, and whether Harambe should have been killed, as there is essentially no evidence that the gorilla was going to harm the child. As I watched footage of the event I was reminded of an incident at Chicago's Brookfield Zoo in which a female western lowland gorilla named Binta Jua rescued a three-year old boy who fell into her enclosure.
We can also ask if the zoo is to blame. Why was the boy able to get under the rail, had zoo workers practiced the sorts of rescues brought on by these events, why wasn't Harambe tranquilized?
Moving forward, caretakers, who are responsible for the day-to-day well-being of the zoo's residents and who form personal relationships with them, must be involved in preparing for emergency situations such as this. It's these people "on the ground" who know the animals the best and who regularly communicate with them. They also could well be the people who could communicate the animal out of danger so it could be a win-win for all involved. Harambe, like all other gorillas and numerous other zoo-ed animals, are highly intelligent and emotional beings who depend on us to respect and value their by Marc Bekoff – May 31, 2016
The iconic Great Barrier Reef is clearly at risk from climate change, so why would Unesco agree to censor its own report?
That quote from Shakespeare’s Hamlet comes to mind: “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”
The lady in question is the Australian government, which some time in early January saw a draft of a report from a United Nations organization.
Photo by Tchami/Flickr
The report, provisionally titled “Destinations at Risk: World Heritage and Tourism in a Changing Climate”, outlined how many world heritage sites around the world were being compromised by the impacts of climate change.
One of the sites highlighted in the draft report was the Great Barrier Reef. The Australian government doth protest, and Unesco obliged.
As Guardian Australia revealed last week, all mentions of Australia, the Great Barrier Reef, the Northern Territory’s glorious Kakadu national park and Tasmania’s forests were then removed from the report.
All this, as the reef’s worst recorded case of mass coral bleaching makes headlines around the world
So why the whitewash?
In a statement to Guardian Australia, the Department of the Environment made two arguments to justify the request for censorship and neither of them makes any sense.
Firstly, the government argued the title of the report “had the potential to cause considerable confusion”.
The title Australia objected to was “Destinations at Risk: World Heritage and Tourism in a Changing Climate”. The report was finally published as World Heritage and Tourism in a Changing Climate.
The department said the UN world heritage committee had only last year agreed not to place the reef on its list of sites “in danger”.
If the reef then appeared as a case study in a UN report about world heritage sites “at risk” this might confuse people, the department claimed.
But the reality is that the reef is both “at risk” and “in danger” from the impacts of climate change – the government’s own science agencies have warned them of this multiple times, not to mention scientists at leading universities around the world.
The only confusing aspect is how a report about world heritage sites and climate change now omits one of the world’s most iconic natural wonders that has become a …more
Lawyer behind youth climate change lawsuit comes from a family that’s championed social and environmental causes for generations
On the morning of March 9 2016, 21 young plaintiffs, aged 8 to 19, crowded into a courtroom in Eugene, Oregon, to sue the United States government for failing to protect their environment by allowing continued fossil fuel development that was leading to potentially catastrophic global warming. Their efforts were set in motion by a law professor whose family has been fighting for social and environmental justice for well over a century.
Photo by Viewminder/Flickr
The group behind the current lawsuit, Our Children’s Trust , believes that Earth’s atmosphere is a legacy that each generation must protect for the next, and that the US government must not allow any actions, public or private, that might abuse this common heritage. Specifically, they cite increasing carbon pollution as the greatest threat to our atmospheric trust. Similar lawsuits in Massachusetts and Washington have received favorable rulings in court.
Based on this idea of a trust violated, young activist organizations such as iMatter (which began as Kids vs. Global Warming, a project of Earth Island Institute) have organized demonstrations around the world. They mobilized during the recent Paris climate talks, whose positive steps forward were, in the children’s opinions, far less than what is needed. They want to force the US government, through the courts, to respect their rights to a pollution-free environment.
The concept of an atmospheric trust doctrine, as their legal argument is often called, was the brainchild of Mary Christina Wood, a University of Oregon Environmental Law professor. Wood worked with teams of young Americans to develop the idea, and a strategy for taking it both to the streets and to the courts.
As Mary explained in an interview with Yale Environment 360: “The litigation just takes this well known, ages-old principle that government is trustee of our crucial resources and applies it to the atmosphere and to the climate in particular. The reason it’s important is because the political branches of government are doing next to nothing to address this crisis, which is threatening the future survival and welfare of the youth of this nation and future generations. …more
The inside story of the Arctic 30, life in prison, and what it means to be free
In September 2013, Greenpeace activists made their way toward a giant oil platform in the Russian Arctic, intending to hang a banner highlighting the perils of oil development in the fragile Arctic ecosystem. They were stopped by armed Russian Federal Security Service members. The following day, Russian soldiers boarded the deck of the Greenpeace ship Arctic Sunrise, detaining all 30 people onboard at gunpoint. The 30 crew members and journalists were taken to Murmansk, where they were charged with piracy. (Read the Journal’s article on the Arctic 30 here.) Peter Willcox, Captain of the Arctic Sunrise, was one of the Arctic 30. The following is an excerpt from his new book.
Photo by John Cook
Maggy had been watching a live Greenpeace feed in our home in Maine, anxiously awaiting the moment when my head would pop out from behind the huge prison door. Just before I walked out, the video feed was lost and she missed the big moment. She didn’t know I was out until I called her from the car to tell her I was drinking Alexander’s brandy.
While I was relieved to be out of jail, during the car ride from Kresty Prison to the hotel my joy was tempered by worrying about the reception I would receive there from the Arctic 30 who had been released before me. Would they blame me for their incarceration? I had certainly made decisions that contributed to our arrest and the arrest of the ship, but then again, not one of us had anticipated the muscular response from the Russians. As I exited the car and walked into the lobby of the hotel, my concern grew. Would they vent their anger at me, or would I just get the cold shoulder?
The first people I saw were my shipmates Sini, Camila Speziale, and Alexandra “Alex” Harris. They saw me in the same instant and immediately moved toward me with their arms raised. I realized the three were all opening their arms to me. Seconds later we were in a group hug. Their shoulders were anything but cold. It was the best I had felt …more
Canadian regulators’ OK of the tar sands pipeline expansion draws flack from activists
Environment and Indigenous rights organizations are indicating it’s going to be a long, hot summer of civil disobedience in British Columbia following a National Energy Board report released last week recommending conditional approval of Kinder Morgan’s $5.4 billion Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion project that allow for the transport of nearly a million barrels of bitumen per day from Alberta’s tar sands oil mines.
Photo courtesy of SumOfUs
“All this has accomplished is to escalate this issue and exacerbate an already volatile situation,” says Grand Chief Stewart Phillip of the Union of BC Chiefs. “In many ways, it’s a call to arms for the multitude of Indigenous groups and other interests.”
Phillip was one of 130 people arrested on Burnaby Mountain during a multi-day protest over Kinder Morgan’s plan back in 2014, and he sees more of the same in the coming months. “That was the first of many,” he says. “There’s no question it is going to be a long, hot summer.”
And Phillip is far from the only one who has made such claims. Burnaby mayor Derek Corrigan, has said he is prepared to get arrested to stop the project. Vancouver mayor Gregor Robertson has also said he does not want to see the pipeline approved, going as far as calling the NEB hearings a “sham.”
Kinder Morgan, the largest energy infrastructure company in North America headquartered in Houston, Texas, is proposing to expand the existing Trans Mountain capacity to 890,000 barrels per day by twinning the pipeline, reactivating 193 km of existing pipeline and adding new and modified facilities, including an expanded marine terminal in Burnaby. If approved, the project would increase tanker traffic in the Burrard Inlet seven-fold.
The 533-page report detailing the NEB recommendation follows 686 days of public hearings on the proposal. The recommendation comes with a list of 157 conditions that must be met prior to approval. The government has seven months to reach a final decision.
“Taking into account all the evidence, considering all relevant factors, and given that there are considerable benefits nationally, regionally and to some …more
Death of Yellowstone bison calf draws attention to perils of non-expert interference with wildlife
The public was outraged last week after learning that two visitors to Yellowstone National Park had placed a bison calf in their car and delivered it to rangers, saying it seemed to be without the protection of its herd. Rangers spent two days trying to return the calf to the herd, which rejected it. Park officials said it appeared to have imprinted on people and cars, as it kept approaching visitors and vehicles along the roadway. Believing it would not survive in the wild, they euthanized it.
Photo by Yellowstone National Park
Was the calf imprinting on people because of its car ride? Or had that process already begun for the calf living one of America’s most visited national parks? The answer is unclear, but the incident remains a high-profile example of a common problem: People loving nature too much to leave it alone.
Sometimes the toll for human interference is paid by the animal lovers, sometimes by the animals, and sometimes by both. Timothy Treadwell, a naturalist who spent long periods of time with Alaskan grizzly bears and claimed to have a relationship of mutual respect and understanding with them, was killed in 2003 by at least one grizzly. A large male bear found protecting the campsite afterward was shot and killed.
Six years later, a Colorado woman who fed black bears through a fence, saying she considered them her pets, was killed by one of them. It swiped at her through the fence, and then dragged her under it.
Jeff Olson, spokesman for the National Park Service, said his agency kills a handful of bears every year because, despite park rules and warnings, people have fed them often enough that the bears have come to expect it, making them a danger to visitors.
Recently, the selfie culture has also encouraged tourists to place themselves in unsafe proximity to wild animals.
“In a recent viral video, a visitor approached within an arm's length of an adult bison in the Old Faithful area,” the National Park Service said in a press release last week. “Another video featured visitors posing for pictures with bison at extremely unsafe and illegal …more
New research links exposure to these toxic chemicals to thyroid problems, especially in post-menopausal women
Exposure to flame retardant chemicals has become nearly ubiquitous in the United States thanks to fire safety standards that, until recently, could rarely be met without their use. This has meant that furniture foams, mattress and carpet padding, and numerous other consumer products and building materials are loaded up with flame retardants. Now a new study published in the journal Environmental Health suggests that exposure to one of the most widely used class of flame retardants, called polybrominated diphenyl ethers or PBDEs, may increase the risk of thyroid hormone problems for women, especially post-menopausal women.
Photo by Susanne Nilsson
PBDEs are among the most widely used flame retardants that are known to migrate out of products. They have been found in household dust, food, in animals and nearly everywhere else scientists have looked. PBDEs have previously raised health concerns because of their environmental persistence, their ability to build up in fat tissue and because some have been linked to cancer in animal studies. Additional studies have shown PBDEs to interfere with endocrine hormones, including thyroid hormones.
While many studies have looked at the effects of early life exposure to PBDEs, this new study, led by researchers at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, is the first to look at how these chemicals affect people who are exposed to it later in life.
And the researchers’ findings have potentially significant public health implications given that more women than men suffer from thyroid disorders, and because rates of thyroid cancer — which disproportionately afflict older women — are also on the rise.
“Fifty percent of post-menopausal women will have thyroid disease at some point,” explained study author R. Thomas Zoeller, a biology professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. “I think it’s a mistake if we ignore this data.”
The researchers measured levels of four different PBDEs in blood samples from about 2,500 people across the United States, gathered as part of the US Centers for Disease …more