| Back |
| Radio isotopes to study Chilka productivity |
The Central Institute of Fishery Research (CIFRI) Barrackpore has been assigned the task to study the productivity of the Chilka Lake using radio isotopes. The lake is to be divided into four ecological sectors and the study will be conducted from 18 stations that will be distributed across these four sectors. The maximum sustainable yield will then be evaluated sector wise as well as for the entire lake. It is hoped that the outcome from the study will help in the long term management of the fisheries resources here.
The study is to be conducted in a participatory manner, with the involvement of the fishermen's federation from the beginning.
The first spell of the study is to be completed by August 2004.
|
FORESTS ALERT: Support Creation of Maine North Woods National Park |
February 8, 2004 OVERVIEW & COMMENTARY by Glen Barry, Ph.D., Forests.org
A message of hope is emerging from Maine's northern forests, as a major new U.S. National Park - Maine North Woods National Park - is proposed for its expansive forests. The window of opportunity in Maine is short and the need to move for strict long-term protection is now. This is why it is so important for you to respond to this alert and urge the National Park Service to begin the process of creating this new National Park. America and other overdeveloped countries have deeply overshot the amount of land that can be developed without adverse ecological impacts - including droughts, soil erosion, increased fire frequency and intensity, increased threat from emergent diseases, and other symptoms of sick land. Over emphasis upon reckless development and intensive management of natural habitats - reducing wild nature to a few small "protected areas" - can and must be stopped and reversed.
There are still opportunities across America and the World to preserve and restore the vast tracts of intact habitat necessary for the sustainable existence of most species including humans. Anyone that drinks water, breathes or eats must acknowledge the importance of large-scale forest protection. The most massive tasks to ever face humanity loom before us - restoring overdeveloped landscapes and finding ways to protect remaining large habitats before they too become fragmented and weak. Increased large and connected protected areas embedded within a framework of productive lands under conservation management are a prerequisite for human survival. Both Muir and Pinchot were correct - we need protected AND conserved lands. However it is clear that protection on the scale necessary to ecologically sustain land has lagged.
Proposals such as a Maine North Woods National Park begin to redress this imbalance. Please request that the National Park Service complete an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the possibility of establishing a new 3.2 million acre Maine Woods National Park and Preserve surrounding Baxter State Park in north-central Maine. This is in support the campaign of RESTORE: The North Woods at http://www.restore.org/ . Please respond to the alert at http://forests.org/emailaction/maine.htm and ask that your friends and associates do so as well. The era of restoration ecology and economy is upon us. It is incumbent upon humanity that the will be found to let major parts of the land rest, and society learn to live as if humanity is forever.
Should a national park that's bigger than Yellowstone and Yosemite combined be established in the eastern United States? The idea has some high-profile supporters-but is it the best option for the future of Maine's storied North Woods? Many don't think so, particularly local residents who have enjoyed hunting and other traditional uses of the forest for generations.
Robert Redford, Harrison Ford, and other Hollywood 'A-listers' are among the big-name supporters of Americans for a Maine Woods National Park, an interest group that also includes scientists, educators, and environmentalists like Jane Goodall and Edward O. Wilson. The committee was founded by RESTORE: The North Woods, a conservation organization that's spearheading a protection plan for an enormous swath of woodlands in the U.S. East. According to 2002 figures from the U.S. Forest Service, over 80 percent of Maine's 21 million acres (8.5 million hectares) is covered by forestland. Over 90 percent of that forestland is privately owned. Maine, nicknamed the Pine Tree State, is witnessing a push by environmentalists, celebrities, and others to protect forestland in the U.S. Northeast, including Maine's North Woods. The proposed national park would encompass 3.2 million acres (1.3 million hectares), an area larger than Yellowstone and Yosemite combined. The woods in question hold a special place in American history. "It's sort of ironic that the national park movement happened and the place that inspired many of those early proponents is not yet one of those protected places," said Jym St. Pierre, Maine Director of RESTORE.
"Thoreau didn't go to the Rockies, he came to Katahdin and
wrote about the idea of creating national preserves in the East. Teddy Roosevelt
made many trips into these areas of Northern Maine."
North Woods "For Sale"
In recent years international forestry, paper, and pulp industries have put
up "for sale" signs across the North Woods region. "I think since 1998 about
six million acres (2.4 million hectares) have changed hands across the northern
forest, from northern New York across Vermont and New Hampshire and into Maine,"
said Tom Abello, communications coordinator for the Nature Conservancy's Maine
Chapter. "This presents opportunity as well as some apprehension." Land once
held by giant forest and paper companies is currently in transition. "It's the
more traditional forest land owners that have been putting land up for sale,"
Abello said. "The new owners are generally timber investors, mutual funds, endowments-the
types of investors who have a shorter horizon for management and ownership.
Land will be coming on the market more frequently than in the past." The "land
churn" caused by such short term investment ownership could promote fragmentation
and development, conservationists fear. "Part of the exit strategy when some
of these groups get out of the market, is to cut the timber and sell off some
of the lakefront for developments," Abello said.
So is declaring what's left of the woods a national park the answer? Depends whom you ask. At the core of the debate are economics, ecological protection, and time-honored Maine traditions of recreational land use.
Changing Economics
Park proponents tout the plan's ability to diversify the boom- and-bust local economy-hard hit by cycles in the fortunes of the timber and paper industries. "I think more and more people are recognizing the value of the idea we've put on the table," RESTORE's St. Pierre said. "That's taking advantage of the interest in ecotourism, the service sector jobs, small manufacturing, and moving away from smokestack industries. The trend is clear." But others seek to protect the timber-related jobs that remain. "It's important to remember that communities like Millinocket and Greenville are gateway communities whose economic livelihood depends on what's happening on the lands to the north and west of them," said Tim Glidden, an officer with Land for Maine's Future (LMF), a state government funding group for land conservation.
"Those communities are in very tough economic shape and the uncertainty there raises huge anxiety," Glidden said. "As they wrestle with the future it seems that some economics will be centered on fiber, timber, paper . but not at the scale that it used to be. What's now being explored is what kind of tourism and recreational opportunities they are particularly well situated to provide. There are all sorts of incredible opportunities if the access to the land stays open." While everyone wants access to the land to remain open, some Maine residents are concerned that it won't be under national park status-at least not for their favorite activities. "We all want to be sure it's not fragmented and developed," said George Smith of the Sportsman's Alliance of Maine. "I do give the park proponents some credit for being one of the factors that has encouraged the state's leaders to secure our future in those woods." Smith's organization, wary of federal involvement, has collected over 35,000 signatures against a proposed park study measure. "It would ruin the very things we value by attracting and drawing more people to that part of the state," he said. "Few of us go to Acadia [National Park, in Maine] any more. It's just mobbed. Whatever became park would be land that we're currently enjoying."
"Public recreation-access in Maine is a really big deal," said
Glidden, of the LMF. "In the West there's lots of federal land so people don't
realize that in the Northeast the tradition is public recreational use of private
land for hunting, snowmobiling, sporting camps, things like that." Hunting is
not generally permitted in national parks. Provisions do exist for hunting and
snowmobile use within the proposed park/preserve plan, but sportsmen fear that
they are nonspecific and will ultimately deny them access to much of the land
that they have traditionally enjoyed. Finding a Balance? A different blueprint
for management of the North Woods has surfaced in recent years, utilizing a
blend of land purchases and conservation/recreation easements. Large-scale projects
of this type designate selected wilderness areas within larger tracts of working
forests-all with guaranteed public access. In 1998 the Nature Conservancy was
involved with a 185,000-acre (75,000-hectare) deal along the St. John River
and Canadian Border.
"That was really our first foray into large-scale conservation in the northern
forest," the Nature Conservancy's Abello said. "There we've set aside 45,000
acres (18,000 hectares) to be managed as eco-reserves, wilderness areas, and
the balance is being managed for sustainable timber." In January Maine Governor
John Baldacci announced the completion of the West Branch Project, a U.S. $31.8
million deal that prevents development across 329,000 acres (133,000 hectares)
of Maine's North Woods. The land in play had been owned for nearly a century
by industry giant Great Northern Paper Co. Now, 47,000 acres (19,000 hectares)
are owned by the state of Maine. The balance remains privately owned, but recreational
access has been protected by easements acquired by the Forest Society of Maine.
Federal funds nearing $20 million were contributed by the U.S. Forest Service's
Forest Legacy Program. Similar projects in the sprawling North Woods have approached
the million-acre (400,000- hectare) mark. "Our goals are to try to balance economic
and ecological concerns, and we think that the model for the northern forest,
ecological reserves embedded within larger working forest landscape, achieves
that," Abello said. Glidden is also working to preserve the undeveloped Maine
land base for both fiber production industries and natural resource- based tourism.
"Which will have more emphasis 50 to 100 years from now," he asked.
"I don't know, but we believe that we need to have the land in place. You have
to hold on to those kind of properties." Park proponents, however, push for
the increased and permanent ecological protection that national park status
would offer the unique area of the North Woods. Many are wary of deals that
leave land in private hands, which could rely on other persons or organizations
to hold up their end of the bargain. St. Pierre believes that balance is built
into the park proposal.
"It would improve the balance in the Maine woods much more than any other conservation
idea being pursued in terms of public/private ownership, managed/wild lands,
motorized/non- motorized recreation, and extractive/non extractive economic
uses," he said. Over 100,000 people have signed RESTORE's petitions encouraging
Congress to authorize a public park feasibility study. "The window on wilderness
is closing fast in this country," Harvard University scholar and Pulitzer Prize
winning author E.O. Wilson wrote for RESTORE. "What we secure now will be in
a sense a final bequest to all future generations. That is why the Maine Woods
National Park is so important."
"I don't know of any other place where we'd have the opportunity to create an
Alaskan scale national park, in the 21st century, in the backyard of the East
Coast megalopolis, without having to move out a single town or kick out a single
person," said St. Pierre. "We can do it at wholesale pricing on the open market.
It's a very, very unusual situation and the window of course won't stay open."
Mr. Deepak Apte, Conservation Officer, Bombay Natural History
Society was asked to visit the site and also the public hearing. His report
is available to anyone who wishes to see it. He strongly advised against giving
this permission for the uranium prospecting.
The detailed report was made available to the Ministry of Environment long before
they took their decision. The BNHS advice was pointedly ignored. In fact the
Society was soon thrown off the National Board, which it had helped create.
Incidentally, the BNHS report was also made available to Mrs. Dilnavaz Variava,
Vice President, BNHS and Mr. Ravi Singh, CEO, WWF-India, who were appointed
in their personal capacity to the National Board for Wildlife and its Standing
Committee. Though we have not heard from them in this conection, one must suppose
they opposed this lethal project when it came up before the Standing Committee
recently.
Mining in the proximity of this tiger reserve is a crime against the tiger and
against future generations. It is downright unsafe, because this is the watershed
that supplies humans with their prime source of water. This is precisely why
the Pollution Control Board refused permission.
Someone on this list should visit, or write, to Dr. Sukumar to ask him to explain
his reason for recommending clearance for this project in the first place. Dr.
Rajesh Gopal, being a government servant, was probably not in a position to
put his foot down. Perhaps other field biologists, who are being unfairly tarred
with the same brush of complicity may wish to meet Sukumar and obtain a written
response. Till we hear from him, however, it would be unfair to cast any aspersions
on his or any other individual's character or purpose.
Dated 9/2/2004
Prerna Singh Bindra/ New Delhi
Tiger Reserves are created to protect endangered Royal Bengal tigers? Right? Wrong. If Saturday's shocking incident is to be believed, tiger reserves are an ideal site for wild parties, bonfires and barbecues, as illustrated by Jaisal Singh, nephew of India's most noted tiger expert Valmik Thapar.
According to sources in the Forest Department, Jaisal was arrested on Saturday night for unlawful entry and misconduct in the buffer area of the Ranthambhore Tiger Reserve. Sources say that Jaisal, along with three foreign tourists was partying - with full arrangements of food, liquor and folk music, at Aamghati area, which falls within the sanctuary. To fight the winter chill, the party-goers had a bonfire going, another serious violation as there is the danger of a devastating fire spreading in the reserve. Ranthambhore is a dry, deciduous thorn forest, and at this time of the year is especially vulnerable to fires.
The party was on full swing when light and music attracted the forest officials and those present were taken for questioning. According to a senior forest official, Jaisal was arrested late on Saturday night, detained at the chowki of the Forest Department and booked under the Rajasthan Forest Act for unlawful entry and lighting fire in the forest, and later released on bail. No case was filed against the tourists.
Jaisal runs Sherbagh, a luxury resort bordering Ranthambhor Tiger Reserve and attracts a huge number of foreign tourists. Jaisal is a polo player, a conversationist and something of a Page 3 personality on the Delhi circuit, mainly during the polo season. But this is one wild party that went sour.
Valmik Thapar was also in Ranthambhor on Saturday, though he was not present at the party. Thapar is a renowned tiger expert and has authored a number of books on the tiger. He has also presented films on tigers, mainly based in Ranthambhor, and is responsible for putting the reserve in the world tourist map.
In fact Thapar was in Ranthambhor to release the second edition of a guidebook to Ranthmabhor which he has co-authored with his wife, Sanjana Kapoor. But tourism has become a bane, not a boon for the reserve. Forest officials say that tourism pressure and misbehaviour of VIP operators is one of the most serious threats that the park is facing.
It is learnt that there is a tremendous pressure to hush up the case and withdraw charges. Ranthambhor has a population of about 30 tigers.
February 2004
Parties to the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) are convening for their
seventh Conference (COP-7) from 9 to 20 February in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
The packed agenda includes issues covering various trade-related aspects, including
discussions on the transfer of technology; invasive alien species; access and
benefit-sharing related to genetic resources; measures to address perverse incentives;
and draft principles and guidelines for the sustainable use of biodiversity.
The transfer of technology is one of the three priority areas of COP-7, along
with mountain biological diversity and protected areas. The draft decision under
this agenda item puts forward elements of a work programme on facilitating the
transfer of and access to technology. The elements stress the need to create
enabling environments, including appropriate IPR regimes, for the transfer as
well as absorption, adaptation and diffusion of technologies.
While not explicitly referring to biotechnology, the suggested activities include
an analysis of potential benefits, risks and associated costs related to the
introduction of technologies, "including new technologies"; the promotion and
advancement of priority access to results and benefits arising from technologies
based upon genetic resources; and the encouragement of joint research programmes
with associated jointly held patents or other IPR protection as well as other
mechanisms to facilitate transfer of genetic resources-based technologies.
Invasive alien species and trade
Discussions on alien species had proven highly contentious at the last meeting
of the COP when Australia, supported by some other Parties, had rejected the
Guiding Principles for the prevention, introduction and mitigation of the impacts
of alien species at the last minute over trade concerns (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes,
2 May 2002). The Principles were nevertheless adopted with Australia registering
its formal objection. Since then, the issue has arisen during various biodiversity-related
negotiations and is expected to again come up at COP-7, in particular given
the extensive references to the WTO in the draft decision to be considered by
the Parties. In particular, the draft decision invites the WTO and its bodies
to consider the risks arising from invasive alien species in their deliberations
and asks Parties to take into account the risks in their bilateral and regional
trade arrangements. Furthermore, it requests the CBD Executive Secretary to
collaborate with the WTO on!
Alien invasive species will also be in the spotlight at the UN International Maritime Organisation (IMO)'s International Conference on Ballast Water Management from 9 to 13 February, which is expected to adopt a new international convention to prevent the potentially devastating effect of the spread of harmful aquatic organisms carried in ships' ballast water.
Access and benefit-sharing
Also on the agenda are discussions on the mandate of the World Summit on Sustainable Development to negotiate an international regime on access and benefit-sharing in the context of the CBD. The heavily bracketed draft decision highlights the key divisions among Parties regarding the nature, scope and elements of the regime and the timeframe of negotiations. Many developing countries, in particular those from the Like-minded Group of Mega-diverse Countries, are likely to renew their calls for a legally binding regime, pitching them against several developed countries, in particular the US. The timeframe of the negotiations is also likely to be contentious which in the draft decision ranges from "as soon as possible" to a more cautious "need for further analysis" of existing legal instruments and regimes, as advocated by several developed countries, including Canada, Japan, Norway and Switzerland (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 3 April 2003).
Regarding the scope of the agreement, Parties can be expected to focus on whether the regime should also cover the products of genetic resources and their derivatives as well as associated traditional knowledge, innovations and practices. Parties will also need to consider how the regime will relate to and integrate existing instruments and processes, including at the WTO, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) and the International Convention for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV), as repeatedly stressed by a number of countries, including Canada, Australia and the EU.
Of particular interest from a trade perspective will be debates on the inclusion of requirements to disclose the origin of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge in applications for intellectual property rights (IPRs). This issue is likely to arise both in discussions on the international regime as well as on measures to ensure compliance with prior informed consent (PIC) and mutually agreed terms (MAT) provisions of the Bonn Guidelines (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 18 April 2002). The inclusion of such a requirement, together with evidence of PIC and benefit-sharing, continues to be strongly advocated by a number of developing countries -- led by Brazil and India -- in the WTO Council for Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 13 June 2003).
Addressing perverse incentives
The draft decision on removing and mitigating perverse incentives -- ie policies or practices that encourage resource uses leading to the degradation and loss of biodiversity -- sets out a number of principles and guidelines for the identification and reform of such policies as well as the monitoring and enforcement of the reforms. Often mentioned in this context are agricultural subsidies, which have been cited as a major contributing factor for biodiversity loss (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 22 January 2004). The study by the CBD Secretariat on Domestic Support Measures and their Effects on Agricultural Biological Diversity, concludes that reducing trade-distorting subsidies at the WTO could help to achieve the CBD's objective to conserve and sustainably use biological diversity. Nevertheless, the study notes that "unfettered market forces cannot be expected to automatically give rise to biodiversity-friendly agricultural production systems", and that therefore "well-designed!
Specifically, in the case of production-linked (Amber Box) subsidies, the overall effects of removing these clearly-trade distortive subsidies would likely be positive for biodiversity in the subsidising countries of the North, given that agricultural land could be expected to contract as a result. However, the corresponding expansion of farming in most non-subsidising countries could be expected to have negative impacts on agro-biodiversity, the extent of which would depend on various regulatory and socio-economic factors. At the same time, carefully targeted, designed and implemented agri-environmental programmes under the Green Box (decoupled and only minimally trade distorting payments) were found to potentially constitute positive incentives for conservation and sustainable use of agricultural biodiversity. Regarding Blue Box payments (partly decoupled support under production-limiting programmes), which are less distorting than Amber Box measures, the study identified !
Sustainable use of biological resources
At the centre of the debate under this agenda item will be the draft Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines for Sustainable Use of Biodiversity. Acknowledging the potential of sustainable use as an effective tool to combat poverty and achieve sustainable development, the draft Principles provide a framework for governments, resource managers and other stakeholders to ensure that the use of biodiversity components will not result in a long-term decline of biological diversity. A number of principles are of particular interest from a trade perspective. Specifically, Principle 3 calls for the identification and removal of market-distorting policies, laws and regulations at the national and international levels that provide perverse incentives undermining biodiversity conservation and use (see also above). Principle 10 acknowledges the need for national and international policies to better reflect the current and potential values derived from the use of biological resources, encouraging this information to be incorporated in policy- and decision-making processes, including in trade and development policies. Principle 13 stresses the importance of also internalising the costs of management, encouraging governments to, inter alia, provide economic incentives for managers, such as tax incentives and/or the promotion of "green" labels.
| Back |