News National News Environmental News
Environmental News
Taiji mayor's office says dolphin hunt is part of a long cultural tradition
The Japanese fishing village featured in The Cove, which won an Oscar for best documentary, today defended its practice of hunting dolphins as a part of a long tradition.
The movie, which mixes stunning underwater shots of gliding dolphins with covertly filmed grisly footage of their slaughter, also claims that dolphin meat is laden with toxic mercury.
Taiji, a quiet fishing village on the rocky coast of south-western Japan, kills only a small fraction of the dolphins hunted by the country each year. But it has long been a target of environmentalists and animal lovers because it uses a method called "oikomi", in which the dolphins are chased in to shore, making the hunt more visible.
Though few residents said they had seen the film, there was universal disgust at its portrayal of the town. Taiji proudly bills itself as "Whale Town" and a main bridge is adorned with dolphin statues, but after years of what locals see as unfair treatment by the foreign press, few are willing to talk on the record. One young dolphin trainer turned and ran away when asked for her opinion.
"This is a close-knit group of fishermen. The more they feel squeezed, the more they will close off to outsiders. They won't stop this hunt because of such pressure," said Hisato Ryono, a local councillor who appears in the film.
The mayor's office handed out a statement that said Taiji's dolphin hunt is lawful and argued that the movie contained statements that were not based on science. Otherwise, most town officials refused to talk.
"There are different food traditions within Japan and around the world," the statement read. "It is important to respect and understand regional food cultures, which are based on traditions with long histories."
Director Louie Psihoyos said The Cove was not meant to attack Japan but that it was "a love letter to the Japanese people".
"Our hope is the Japanese people will see this film and decide themselves whether animals should be used for meat and for entertainment," Psihoyos said backstage after receiving the Oscar at the Academy Awards ceremony in Los Angeles.
The town of Taiji kills about 2,000 dolphins every year for their meat. Some are captured and sold to aquariums.
The Japanese government, which allows about 19,000 dolphins to be killed each year, acknowledges that dolphin meat is contaminated with mercury, but says it is not dangerous unless consumed in huge quantities.
In September, amid an international outcry following the screening of The Cove abroad, villagers released several dozen dolphins that had been caught. But locals say they will continue with the hunt.
The film will be shown in Japan from June at 20 to 30 theatres nationwide. It was screened at the Tokyo International film festival in October.
Psihoyos was unable to get permission to enter the cove where the dolphins are killed. Fishermen blocked it with barbed wire and fences. So he and his film team secretly broke into the restricted area – which is in a national park – at night to set up cameras that capture the slaughter.
Japanese government officials have defended the fishermen's right to hunt dolphins and called the film unbalanced.
"There are some countries that eat cows, and there are other countries that eat whales or dolphins," said Yutaka Aoki, fisheries division director at the foreign ministry. "A film about slaughtering cows or pigs might also be unwelcome to workers in that industry."
The level of environmental coverage in Recognise is as flimsy as Rachel McAdams' 'Hollygood' bamboo knickers
I take my hat off to anyone trying to launch a magazine in the current economic environment, particularly the one facing the media industry. But my heart sank when I was recently handed the launch issue of bi-monthly Recognise (with the "eco" in green font), the brand new "socially aware lifestyle magazine for men and women".
I instinctively get the shivers whenever environmentalism and social justice issues are viewed through the prism of celebrity lifestyle and glamour, but I don't think I've ever seen such an unapologetic and extreme case study in action. It's hard to know where to begin, but let's start with the editor's letter:
Welcome to the first ever issue of Recognise magazine brought to you by a team of young, creative and socially aware writers passionate about people, the planet and partying.
Ah, yes, the three Ps. Please continue ...
Bringing you fashion, food and fast cars, we have picked and poked at products that claim to lean to the green or give something back to a charity. Quite frankly, there's nothing better than a one-off vintage fashion find or to drive a supercar that does 0-60mph in under 2.5 seconds that also has an EcoBoost twin-turbo 3.5 litre V-6. Enough said.
Quite. I couldn't agree more – well, with that last sentence. But there's more ...
We're not here to preach or drive the Jeremy Clarksons of the world up the wall, and we don't want to slap the wrists of those allergic to the off button; we're not asking you to walk around in brown sacks, heavens no. Our duty is to offer a little encouragement to giving something back by making smart choices; with new companies surfacing everyday, it means that whatever you enjoy, be it bangers and mash or travelling to luxury holiday resorts, they can still be part of your life.
With my greenwash detector now sounding loudly inside my head I proceeded to the magazine's "media pack" for clues as to who they might be aiming this magazine. My worst fears were quickly realised ...
Reader profile: ABC1 Men & Women. Aged 22-50. 90% of our targeted audience have a fairly disposable income. Have a willingness to spend on eco and ethical products. Have a desire to be stylish and fashionable. 25,000 copies of launch issue printed, distributed in the following places. UK: 127 WH Smith stores nationwide displaying at till point. Hotels, airlines, gyms and health clubs, corporate receptions and private member's clubs. International: UAE, Hong Kong, New York and Cote D'Azur.
It seems as if Recognise is being written for people so far removed from what the editor says are the issues at hand – environmental stewardship and social responsibility – that they may as well have printed their articles on the fur of clubbed seal pups rather than FSC-certified, mixed-source paper, as it states next to the editor's letter. Surely, anyone who spends their time flitting between their health club and Cote D'Azur has a somewhat different set of priorities?
Or maybe I've misjudged this magazine. Perhaps this is a cunning, covert way to turn the world's least likely candidates into passionate environmentalists and champions of social justice? Let's face it: how else can you turn the heads of the have-it-all generation without luring them in with teasing talk of luxury, celebrities and the jet-set lifestyle?
Look here at how the magazine's PR company is selling it:
Recognise is a new type of magazine aimed at a new type of social demographic – think Zac Goldsmith. These inspiring people still want to go out, look good, drive exciting cars and enjoy great holidays … but are also smart about making a positive change in the world.
I hope they manage to persuade this "new type of social demographic" they say they've identified. I really do. But when the first article I happen to chance upon is a paean to "HollyGood planet-conscious" stars – including Rachel McAdams for wearing a pair of "eco-friendly bamboo knickers" – then I really do wonder how seriously they are taking the issues they claim are so close to their hearts.
The head of the International Monetary Fund says countries should adopt a quota system to raise money needed to adapt to climate change
The head of the International Monetary Fund has proposed a plan for the world's governments to pool together to raise money needed to adapt to climate change, a rare step for an organisation that normally does not develop environmental policies.
The IMF managing director, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, said the fund is concerned by the huge amount of money needed and the effect this will have on the global economy. He added that the proposal may help efforts to reach a binding agreement on climate change this year.
Strauss-Kahn proposed that countries adopt a quota system similar to the one the fund uses to raise its own money, which could bring in money faster than proposals to increase carbon taxes or other fundraising methods. He only provided a broad outline of the plan, as the organisation will release a paper this week with full details. It is unclear how the proposal will be received.
The IMF raises funds from its 185 members mainly through a quota system that is based broadly on each country's economic size. The United States is currently the largest shareholder.
"We all know that [carbon taxes and other fundraising methods] will take time and we don't have this time. So we need something which looks like an interim solution, which will bridge the gap between now and the time when those carbon taxes will be big enough to solve the problem," Strauss-Kahn said. "And that is exactly what the IMF proposal is dealing with."
He said a climate change accord reached last December estimated $100bn a year will be needed by 2020 to fund programs, including those to help poor nations deal with droughts, flooding and food shortages expected to be caused by climate change.
Nations failed to reach a binding deal in Copenhagen in December, but agreed on a voluntary plan to control greenhouse gas emissions which are blamed for the gradual heating of the Earth that scientists predict will worsen weather-related disasters. The accord, however, included collective commitments by rich countries to provide billions of dollars to help poor countries adapt to climate change, a major demand the poor nations had made.
The more than 190 nations will reconvene in Cancun, Mexico, later this year for another attempt to reach a binding agreement to replace the Kyoto protocol, which sets emissions targets for industrial countries and expires in 2012.
The killing of a SeaWorld trainer by an orca ought to make us rethink keeping animals in captivity for human amusement
Last month, at the SeaWorld amusement park in Florida, a whale grabbed a trainer, Dawn Brancheau, pulled her underwater and thrashed about with her. By the time rescuers arrived, Brancheau was dead.
The death of the trainer is a tragedy, and one can only have sympathy for her family. But the incident raises broader questions: was the attack deliberate? Did the whale, an orca named Tilikum and nicknamed Tilly, act out of stress at being held captive in a sterile concrete tank? Was he tired of being forced to perform to amuse the crowds? Is it right to keep such large animals in close confinement?
Tilly had been involved in two previous human deaths. In one episode, a trainer fell into the pool and Tilly and two other whales drowned him. In another, a man who appears to have entered the enclosure at night, when Sea World was closed, was found dead in the pool with Tilly. An autopsy showed that he had a bite mark. One of Tilly's offspring, sold to an amusement park in Spain, has also killed a trainer, as have orcas in other parks.
Richard Ellis, a marine conservationist at the American Museum of Natural History, believes that orcas are smart and would not do such a thing purely on impulse. "This was premeditated," he told the Associated Press.
We will never know exactly what was going on in Tilly's mind, but we do know that he has been in captivity since he was about two years old – he was captured off the coast of Iceland in 1983. Orcas are social mammals, and he would have been living with his mother and other relatives in a pod. It is reasonable to suppose that the sudden separation was traumatic for Tilly.
Moreover, the degree of confinement in an aquarium is extreme, for no tank, no matter how large, can come close to meeting the needs of animals who spend their lives in social groups swimming long distances in the ocean. Joyce Tischler, of the Animal Legal Defense Fund, described keeping a six-tonne orca in Sea World's tanks as akin to keeping a human in a bathtub for his entire life. David Phillips, director of the International Marine Mammal Project for the Earth Island Institute, which led the efforts to rehabilitate the orca Keiko – made famous by the movie Free Willy – said: "Orcas deserve a better fate than living in cramped pools."
But if we are pointing the finger at SeaWorld for what it does to its captive animals, we should also look more broadly at the way we confine performing animals. In most countries, it is possible to visit zoos and see bored animals pacing back and forth in cages, with nothing to do but wait for the next meal.
Circuses are even worse places for animals. Their living conditions are deplorable, especially in travelling circuses where cages have to be small so that they can go on the road. Training animals to perform tricks often involves starvation and cruelty. Undercover investigations have repeatedly shown animals being beaten and given electric shocks.
Several countries – among them Austria, Costa Rica, Denmark, Finland, India, Israel and Sweden – ban or severely restrict the use of wild animals in circuses. In Brazil, a movement to ban wild animals from circuses started after hungry lions managed to grab and devour a small boy.
Several major cities and many local governments around the world do not permit circuses with wild animals. Last year, Bolivia became the first country to ban all animals, wild or domestic, from circuses. That decision followed an undercover investigation by Animal Defenders International, which exposed shocking abuse of circus animals. Now the British government is holding a public online consultation on the use of animals in circuses. Many hope it will be a first step towards a ban.
Attempts to defend amusement parks and circuses on the grounds that they "educate" people about animals should not be taken seriously. Such enterprises are part of the commercial entertainment industry. The most important lesson they teach impressionable young minds is that it is acceptable to keep animals in captivity for human amusement. That is the opposite of the ethical attitude to animals that we should be seeking to impart to children.
Nor should we be swayed by the argument that circuses provide employment. The human slave trade also provided employment, but that was no argument for perpetuating it. In any case, in many countries that have restrictions or bans on circuses with animals, human-only circuses have flourished.
There is no excuse for keeping wild animals in amusement parks or circuses. Until our governments take action, we should avoid supporting places where captive wild animals perform for our amusement. If the public will not pay to see them, the businesses that profit from keeping animals captive will not be able to continue. When our children ask us to take them to the circus, we should find out if the circus uses wild animals. If it does, we should explain to our children why we will not take them there, and offer to take them to a circus that does not.
• Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2010
Nokia will be online this week to discuss its environmental track record – post your questions in the comments below
Want to know how green the average Nokia phone is? For this week's You ask, they answer, the Finnish mobile phone giant joins us to discuss its environmental track record and efforts, so start posting your questions below.
From humble beginnings as a wood pulp mill back in 1865, Nokia is now the world's number one mobile phone company, with 37% of the global market share. Yet despite its size, the firm enjoys a good record with Greenpeace, holding the top-spot in the Greenpeace Guide to Greener Electronics. However, Nokia lost points this year for failing to do "proactive lobbying" for the revised RoHS (Restriction of Hazardous Substances in electronics) directive.
Nokia has also highlighted the potential for mobile phones to collect real-time information about pollution and other local environmental data. Henry Tirri, head of Nokia's research centre, has cited pollution as an area for which "killer" eco-apps might be created. "The things people don't usually think about with location-based systems are aggregate things like traffic information, and collective information about air pollution and other environmental data," he said.
Nokia is online from Monday to Friday this week to answer your environment questions – please post yours below.
More Articles...
