WDCS Blog - From the Front Line

In the post festive haze, as we wade through the sea of discarded Christmas presents, it is hard not to recognise that one of the things that sets us humans apart from many other species (but perhaps not quite all species), is our relationship with ‘stuff’. We make it, we buy it, we collect it, we recycle or bin it and then the whole process starts all over again. But this is no surprise, our amazing ability to manipulate ‘stuff’, our ancestry as hunter-gathers and our ability to collect and store the objects vital to our existence has enabled our success, bald apes that we are.

This relationship with the material things around us is one element of our existence which differentiates us from whales and dolphins. Our ability to build cities, write and store religious texts, historical chronicles and technical documents, have local and national government and a global economy and through such commerce fund national education and healthcare, all of this and more make us uniquely special as a species. There can be no doubt that we have extraordinarily complex social systems that differ culturally between geographic regions.

As a result it is perhaps understandable that we have a natural tendency to consider ourselves as the pinnacle of evolution and we tend to measure the ‘success’ of any other species against ourselves. But, this may be one of our grandest follies. Success is a relative concept, if biomass were the indicator then many other species, much less complex beings than ourselves, would be resounding winners in the ‘success’ competition.

But back to the issue of complex species and their relationship with ‘stuff’. Who at times does not envy the liberated existence of a whale, swimming wild, feeding, socialising and going about their daily business without the encumbrance of any ‘stuff’. Perhaps admiration for ‘living free’ (not just wild, but also ‘free’) is one of the appealing factors that send us in our droves to go whale or dolphin watching.

Orcas, for example, are top marine predators, a fact which places them, by our own reckoning, at the apex of evolutionary success. However, their ability to go about their lives so successfully without the need for clothing to keep them warm, cooking utensils, food storage facilities or the possession of trinkets to keep them entertained, surely warrants at least some humble respect from we the collectors.

Over the millions of years of our planet’s history, the single biggest driving force for life on Earth has been evolutionary success. The simple point is that when observing the world through the snap shot of geological time which is the existence of Homo sapiens we must be careful not to use ourselves as the benchmark of success and refinement. There is a bigger picture. Whilst we often feel like it - and perhaps we are even wired this way - it is just possible that our species is not the centre of the universe.

There are ever unfolding revelations about whales and dolphins: their intelligence, their complex brain structure, the possession of spindle cell neurons by some species, their multifaceted relationships with each other and even the revelations that behaviour can vary – like our own - between different cultures. We also now know that bottlenose dolphins can demonstrate a sense of self, by recognising themselves in a mirror. The more we learn, the more questions we have. One particularly intriguing notion is the idea that some whale and dolphin species have such close social bonds - biologically important for ensuring feeding and even survival - that rather than just a sense of ‘I’ they may have a more profound sense of ‘us’, almost a collective consciousness driving certain behaviours.

To ask the question ‘Are they smarter than us?’ is to miss the point. Orca’s and many other cetacean species are certainly ‘smart’ by any definition, they are successful, but they are also very different to us.

Many now recognise that these impressive, cognitive beings are a ‘who’ not a ‘what’. They are not the property of any state, corporation or individual and that the time of keeping these sentient, sapient ocean giants in small tanks for our entertainment is over.

PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) is bringing a controversial court case against SeaWorld in the USA which will challenge the captivity of five orcas, on the grounds that it is an infringement of the 13^th Amendment to the US Constitution which prohibits slavery and involuntary servitude.

The analogy with human slavery is a strong one. There can be little doubt that the orcas in captivity are held involuntarily for our entertainment. These orca’s are not offered a choice about whether they want to live in captivity. But there has also been some sensitivity in the US in comparing the plight of the orcas with that of African American slaves. Perhaps this demonstrates rather well that the initial social and legal hurdle that must first be overcome is that the status of orcas and other cetaceans as non-human persons in their own right must first be recognised. There is a mental journey required to recognise the rights of others, firstly in recognising their status as non-human ‘persons’ we recognise their basic right to life and from there work to recognise the right to various other freedoms and norms. At the time when the 13^th amendment was raised in the US, some challenged the notion that African Americans were equal to whites, indeed some argued that African Americans were not even of the same species. Fortunately, those days of ignorance have largely passed and serve to reminds us what a long way we have come as a species in developing respect and understanding for each other, but, of course, we still have a long way to go.

Nevertheless, the strategy of highlighting the captive orcas’ plight as slavery and against the US Constitution is controversial, even among those who advocate for whale and dolphin rights. Steven Wise, a Law Professor and head of the Non-Human Rights Project (NhRP) is concerned that a judge will simply rule that orcas are not slaves under the Constitution (because they are not recognised as ‘persons’), which will then set a difficult precedent. Wise and colleagues believe that first they need to establish the legal non-human personhood status of cetaceans. This certainly seems a more logical strategy.

Rather extraordinarily, the NhRP has been invited to participate in the orca case on the basis of an ‘amicus curiae’ or ‘Friend of the Court’. This in itself is an interesting development. The NhRP has not sought to appear as an amicus to either PETA or SeaWorld, but instead to work to assist the court in understanding some of the legal and philosophical issues raised within the context of this case and to further the interests of the orcas.

“Our purpose is to ensure that the orcas’ best interests are being properly represented, that their legal status is advanced, and that an unfavourable ruling inflicts the least possible harm on the development of an animal rights jurisprudence” said Wise.

The fact that this expert advice has been sought independently by the court reveals that the issue of animal rights, and in particular the interests of these orcas, is being taken very seriously by a US court. There doesn’t appear to be a similar move to have a ‘Friend of the court’ provide a view on cetacean husbandry or the economics of keeping orcas in captivity from the industry perspective. This is an – albeit tacit – recognition that the interests of the orcas in this case may be more important than the interests of the industry itself. Perhaps some progress.

Wise states: “SeaWorld opposes our request to appear as an amicus because it is confident the Court will rule the orcas are not slaves under the Thirteenth Amendment. PETA apparently opposes our request because it wants the case to ‘go down in history as the first time that a U.S. court considers constitutional rights for animals.’ Winning is beside the point. But losing this case will neither help these orcas nor further any long-term strategy for creating a viable animal rights jurisprudence”.

WDCS is committed to the campaign for the recognition of cetacean rights. The Declaration of Rights for Cetaceans agreed in Helsinki provides a series of profound propositions to challenge the way that we currently perceive and treat whales and dolphins. The road to recognising their rights in national and international legislation will not be easy.

At the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Annual Meeting, scheduled for next month in Vancouver, WDCS CEO Chris Butler-Stroud will be presenting at a symposium titled ‘Declaration of Rights for Cetaceans: ethical and policy implications of intelligence’.

Many still consider the idea of recognising the rights of other highly cognitive mammals as an extremist view point, some even view it as a threat. Certainly it is challenging to the current status quo. The fact that we can now credibly use the emerging scientific understanding of both cetacean intelligence and the social complexity of whales’ and dolphins’ lives to argue for the recognition of cetacean rights in a highly esteemed forum such as the AAAS demonstrates that the scientific community is now taking the proposition of cetacean rights seriously as a topic for debate. Rationalising how cetacean rights, once recognised, will manifest through legal and political structures will be one of the greatest challenges as we work towards fully realising all the rights enshrined in the Declaration of Rights for Cetaceans and this will be the topic of Chris Butler-Stroud’s presentation.

We have the support of philosopher’s such as Thomas I White, we have the support from leading scientist such as Lori Marino and Hal Whitehead and the commitment of lawyers such as Steven Wise who are working to provide the mechanism by which the rights of non-human persons can be first recognised and then protected. A US court has tacitly recognised that cetacean ‘interests’ are a valid part of the debate and through the AAAS the scientific community acknowledges that we must examine the ethical implications of the emerging science on cetacean intelligence. Is it now only a matter time? The question for the orca’s who remain in captivity is just how long this journey will take us.

Find out more about the issues surrounding whales and dolphin rights on our website. Also, have a look at our new book - "Whales and Dolphins: cognition, culture, conservation and human perceptions" which brings together a wide range of experts to look again at our current knowledge of these amazing creatures. Available from the WDCS Shop.

Occasionally accounts come our way of observations on whales that are unusual and very interesting. I recently heard of one such incident and asked the guy who told me the story, Bertie Gregory, who is a student at the University of Bristol, if he would write it up so that we could share it.

He kindly did and here is that account beautifully illustrated by some of his own photographs:

Last summer I visited the west coast of Vancouver Island in Canada, to aid a wildlife tour guide on his boat. The majority of our trips involved searching inlets and sounds for black bears, bald eagles and the mysterious coastal wolf. About once a week however, we’d take guests out to sea to find grey and humpback whales. During the summer months, these two species come in huge numbers to feed on the explosion of aquatic life. The grey whales spend most of their time in shallow water, often less than 20m deep, feeding on mud dwelling invertebrates. The more charismatic humpbacks meanwhile, feed on small fish further offshore.

As a result of their huge numbers, we saw both species on every trip. All the while on the water we’d always be watching out and listening on the radio for orca (killer whales). The pods which visited the waters we searched for were the ‘transient’ variety, they feed on marine mammals and are notoriously hard to find as they’re constantly on the move up and down the coast. For that reason it was common for there to be only one sighting a week by the tour operators. The other variety, known as ‘resident’ killer whales tend to stay around the same area feeding on fish. There is much debate over the taxonomy (evolutionary classification) of killer whales and its generally agreed that there is probably more than one species as the different ‘cultures’ have not interbred for thousands of years.

I was particularly keen on finding them as up to then my sightings were limited to the various BBC landmark series! On one particular afternoon, we had a full boat of 12 guests and decided to make our way to Cow’s bay, an area we had consistently seen grey whales for the past few weeks. Just as we exited the harbour, I heard the boat’s radio crackle briefly; my boss, the boat’s captain, took it off the latch and held it to his ear. After a couple more crackles he turned to me and smiled, ‘the black and whites are out there’, he said. In very good spirit, all the tour companies work together and let each other know where the various animals are. Whenever the possibility of a rarer sighting came up, as with the coastal wolves, we didn’t tell the guests immediately because as quickly as they’re spotted, they may just disappear. My boss changed the course of our 20 foot Boston Whaler away from Cow’s bay, directly out to sea. As we got closer to the GPS coordinates we had been given, more details came through. A voice once again crackled on the radio, ‘there’s more than ten of them’, my ears pricked up. I stood up out my seat and scoured the water ahead of us with my binoculars; 500m ahead was the boat we’d been hearing from. Suddenly, I spotted numerous ejections of water-vapour, firing high up into the air, the tell-tale sign of whales.

Whale watching regulations state that boats aren’t allowed to approach the whales closer than 100m, but the killer whales didn’t know this as all twelve headed towards us. I’m a passionate wildlife photographer but these whales were proving tough to get good pictures of. Their faces were only up for a fraction of a second, followed by their proportionally massive dorsal fin, before they dived back under the surface.

I then heard another pair of exhalations but this time from behind the boat, they sounded deeper and louder to what we’d heard so far that day. I turned to see two adult humpback whale surface 30m from the boat. The killer whales weren’t approaching us, they were approaching the humpbacks, we just happened to be in their way! The killer whales got closer and closer to us, barely 5m away before they dove under our boat towards the humpbacks. Then everything went eerily quiet. All the whales were under the water, the boat engines were long switched off.

The silence was broken by an almighty trumpet from underneath the water; it vibrated our stomachs right down to the core. The sound was made by one of the humpbacks and moments later it surfaced continuing to let out these very elephant like noises. The killer whales then surfaced all around it, rolling on their sides and tail slapping. Never before had any of the guides (some with 30 years experience) seen killer whales attacking adult humpbacks. What’s more, within the pod of orca were a couple of juveniles- signified by their white skin having a yellow tone. These two youngsters were getting stuck in swimming just metres from the humpbacks, as they tried to join in on the action.

After a good half hour of the killer whales tail slapping, harassing and chasing the humpbacks, the tables turned, the 15m long humpback adults had had enough. The next time all the whales surfaced, it was the humpbacks that were doing the chasing.

Unfortunately, our time on the water was up, what should have been a two hour whale watching trip had already become three and an half. I begged my boss to stay but (apparently!) the customer is always right and understandably some of the small children on board were getting very cold. I’ll never know how the story ended. I feel very privileged to have witnessed such an incredibly rare event. I’ll be going back next summer to try my luck again!

Bertie Gregory
Bertiegregoryphotography.com

Charles Dickens had a lot to say about Christmas.

Indeed some suggest that in many ways he invented the Christmas festival that many of us now enjoy in much of the western world and beyond. A Christmas world of snowy streets, jolly family feasting and, of course, a time when charity is also remembered amongst the mid-winter festivities.

Dickens lived when there was much poverty and great suffering in both the expanding cities and the often hostile countryside of Britain, and many children were caught up in this. At the same time there were also a better-off part of society, a burgeoning middle-class and a political system that had it within its power to help. Dickens recognised these things and his stories, at least in part, were morality tales aimed at highlighting and ultimately ending the suffering of people, especially children. Consider the weird and jarring scene in A Christmas Carol when the eponymous miser Scrooge spies a bony claw-like hand under the robes of the jovial and festive figure of the Ghost of Christmas Present?

Here in abbreviated form is the scene:

‘From the foldings of its robe, it brought two children wretched, abject, frightful, hideous, miserable. They knelt down at [the Spirit’s] feet, and clung upon the outside of its garment.’

Scrooge is so dismayed at their appearance that he can only manage to ask the Spirit if the poor children are his.

The resounding and chilling reply comes back ‘They are man’s!’

Then the Spirit adds, ‘This boy is Ignorance. This girl is Want.’

The fact that these figures are portrayed in the company of the third Christmas ghost (the one of the current time) emphasises that Dickens is signposting issues of his day for his devoted readers.

Dickens was very much a social campaigner and active not just in illustrating the pressing issues of the day but also a champion of certain charities. Are there lessons in this for those of us trying to campaign today?

His writings were immensely popular. The books so famous now were equally so when first published and mainly sold in serialised form. They were Victorian soap operas with a keen readership avidly awaiting each chapter and each new series and Dickens himself (something of an actor) would also perform them in modified form to packed theatres.

February 7th 2012 is the bicentenary of Charles Dickens’s birth. We shall be hearing much more about him in the coming year. A new biography reportedly suggests that this great Victorian moralist was a flawed individual himself; eventually abandoning his wife of many years and many children for a younger actress. This bleak interpretation of his character may disappoint his current fans, but what is undeniable about Dickens is the effect of his writings, and our ongoing fascination for him and his stories. Is he the major literary figure in the English language? Is he greater in his influence than Shakespeare? I think he is. He wrote in a way that was accessible to all. His stories grip, entertain and gently educate with a pervasiveness that remains effective today. Adaptations of his stories still abound. We never seem to tire of Dickens. Even as I write, BBC TV is featuring as part of its Christmas season his deeply twisted tale of Great Expectations and the entry to the New Year here in the UK will be marked by something of a festival of films on TV derived from Dickens’ stories.

What would he have made of our modern forms of communications: twittering, tweeting and blogging, films in three dimensions and the live-streaming of You Tube and the rest of the new-dimension of the internet? I think he would have engaged heartily with all of these things as new ways to tell stories, even though he would have had censure his wonderful erudition for the brevity much of this new ‘information highway’ is best suited to.

And what does any of this have to do with whales and dolphins? Well, at the same time that Dickens was trying to open the eyes (and the purses) of those around him to the inhumanity of man to man, so animal suffering was also starting to be recognised and addressed and, in fact, Dickens was again in the vanguard of this reform. In 1824 the Royal Society for the Protection of Animals was formed and Dickens was both a member and a great supporter.

Bill Sykes the principal villain in Oliver Twist is famously cruel to his poor but faithful dog, Bullseye, as well as abusive and bullying to all around him, culminating in the awful murder of his lover, Nancy. Animal cruelty appears again in Great Expectations where the very unpleasant character Bentley Drummle mistreats his horse, an activity that eventually causes his death. Dickens clearly recognised the link between mistreatment of animals and cruelty to people.

For some critics, Dickens’ characters are too simple.  They compare them unfavourably with the better-fleshed out and sophisticated individuals drawn by other later authors; but my goodness he could tell a story. So, one lesson for those of us trying to achieve improved protection of animals that are suffering in a world dangerously overly-burdened by the unsustainable needs of our own expanding and self-obsessed population may be that we too need to use compelling stories. We need to engage the attention of our fellows and show them why they should care.

Fortunately, in the UK we no longer have workhouses and helpings of gruel being doled out, but we did witness terrible things in 2011, including unprecedented civil strife and growing unemployment and, elsewhere in the world, things every bit as terrible as those in the streets of Dickens’s world continue. Against this backdrop of human strife, we have to show people enough about the animals that they will care about them; understand the importance of saving the societies of cetaceans and, ultimately speak out for those beings that – despite their sophistication - cannot do so for themselves.

This is not going to be at all easy (it wasn’t easy before economies started to falter), but through our knowledge of these animals (including our adoption schemes) we have the opportunity for people to learn to know individual animals and their communities and for their very specific stories to be told. Whales and dolphins are also animals that can captivate our attention. Real encounters are rarely forgotten.

We have stories to tell, characters to bring to an eager public and we have a just cause.

Stay tuned.

I know everyone in WDCS would want to join me in wishing all our supporters and friends around the world a very Happy New Year.

 ‘…and it was always said of him, that he knew how to keep Christmas well, if any man alive possessed the knowledge. May that be truly said of us, and all of us! And so, as Tiny Tim observed, God Bless Us, Every One!’

So the Japanese Government has confirmed that its diverting much needed relief monies to help the Antarctic industrial whaling fleet.

The government is using ¥2.3 billion from a supplementary budget for tsunami reconstruction to fund its annual whaling. The Southern whaling expedition left Shimonoseki, Yamaguchi Prefecture, Japan on Tuesday.

I guess if I was any country or individual that has donated money to the disaster relief efforts in Japan, I might wish to ask for my money back. This is putting politics and ideology before rebuilding and possibly misrepresenting what donors meant their monies to go to.

I recently learned about “clearing house’ blog, where you include links to all of your other articles on a given subject…and thought it a perfect thing for something as complex as a the Conference on Migratory Species (CMS). The CMS aims to conserve terrestrial, aquatic and avian migratory species throughout their range – that alone is a huge task. However, that task grows when you consider that 116 member countries have to work together. So what follows is a summary of the first few blogs from our CMS team, the links will take you to the actual in depth blog where you can read more.

This year’s CMS was in Bergen, Norway where sunshine was rare and official papers and badges got stopped by customs. On the agenda is a draft global
work plan for cetaceans, which will hopefully ensure enhanced action on all
species of cetacean currently listed on Appendix I and II of CMS. Appendix I
are endangered species and Appendix II are species with unfavorable conservation status, they include approximately 40 of the 86 species currently recognized by CMS. Other important draft resolutions up for consideration that directly affecting cetaceans concern marine debris, fisheries bycatch, and marine noise.

WDCS attended CMS’s Scientific Council meeting where our Director of Science, Mark Simmonds, tell about the importance of CMS. The primary and most important mechanism CMS uses to help all species is independent regional agreements that relevant countries join. For the whales and dolphins CMS has established one regional agreement for the North Atlantic (ASCOBANS) and another for the Mediterranean and Black seas and contiguous Atlantic area (ACCOBAMS). There is also a memorandum of understanding (MOU) for cetaceans off West Africa and another for cetaceans in the vast Pacific Ocean.

After the Scientific Council, begins the Conference of Parties (COP ) which takes place every three years. This year’s grand opening ceremony was wonderful, full of inspiring words. Words like: wildlife belongs to all of us
and we belong to it and we are allowing erosion of biodiversity at a time when our dependence on biological services and diversity is increasing rapidly. The opening ceremony speeches also highlighted successes (the recovering Saiga Antelope in Russia), the importance of not only working together, but also working with other multilateral conventions and treaties (like CITIES), and the importance of single decisions like Tanzania’s recent decision not to build a road through the migratory route of many wild animals across the Serengeti. All of this is necessary to restore the ecological infrastructure on the planet. It is not so strong now, but will be important for adaptation to climate change.

In this grand opening it is pointed out that it is no coincidence it is being held in Bergen, the most international place in Norway. And Norway is built on migratory species. People followed reindeer, and then moved from southern France, once they discovered the migratory salmon (once common and huge). And still today Norwegians take their migratory species seriously. The most popular song in Norway is about migratory birds. To me, the most inspiring speech relayed by our CMS COP team in this grand opening blog was the idea that we need people to understand the beauty of nature and not impair it with jargon. We need people to understand the ecosystems argument - destroying one species can have enormous impacts on the rest, and the economic argument – healthy species population have economic potential and not just for tourism. The environment is most important thing; it is holy, our life, our home, our food, we are part of it.

So this is just a summary of the first few blogs from our CMS COP team. The best is yet to come….

For those of us based in Europe these are difficult days. The Euro crisis is not only incapacitating the EU in implementing EU environmental legislation (see the recent web postings on Morgan), but it’s also allowing what may appear to some as ideological attacks against this very same EU law and policy to go unchecked.

In the UK, the Coalition Government has put us on notice that it will not allow EU wildlife legislation to stand in the way of economic development. Gone are the days of the UK’s Prime Minister cuddling huskies and now in comes the might of the Treasury with a flame-thrower to the very protective measures that have brought some respite to our increasingly devastated oceans and wildlife.

We are, to say the least, in shock that the Coalition Government is considering reviewing the implementation of the EU Birds and Habitats Directives in England simply to create less of a burden on new developments. It is almost as if some ideologues are taking this period of uncertainty and austerity to pull down all the legislation that they have felt stood in the way of exploiting the marine environment for the last few decades.

In his Autumn Statement the UK’s Chancellor stated  “If we burden [British businesses] with endless social and environmental goals – however worthy in their own right – then not only will we not achieve those goals, but the businesses will fail, jobs will be lost, and our country will be poorer."

The Chancellor denounced the burden of 'endless social and environmental goals' on industry and went onto say, "we will make sure that gold plating of EU rules on things like Habitats aren’t placing ridiculous costs on British businesses."

The UK’s Habitats Regulations, which implement the EU’s Habitats and Species Directive, were brought into place by a Conservative Government in 1994 and have been a foundation stone on which protection for whales and dolphins and other marine life has depended. The UK is already the most lax implementer of the Directive and any dilution of the current law can only mean more loss of marine habitat and the diminishing number of whales and dolphins around the coast.

But maybe we should have seen this coming. A few weeks ago we saw the Liberal Democrat Minister Chris Huhne give permission for the start of exploratory drilling in the Atlantic Frontier, despite the fact that the EU has suggested that stricter environmental controls should be considered after the spill in the Gulf.

WDCS understands that Defra are now to undertake a review of the Habitat Regulations but we are greatly concerned that this will allow for every Tom, Dick and Harry with a grudge to bear to get their knives into the legislation. At a time when oil companies and other developers are arguing that they should not be facing restrictions, this will be a field day for their lobbyists.

WDCS believes that Defra now have a responsibility to champion the environment and show that the long term value of protecting our marine and natural environment is as important as the short term gains that come from opening up these last few frontiers to exploitation.

Link to the Defra review

Stand by...

Friday afternoon. The final session:

So this morning we saw the following species added to the appendices:

Red-footed Falcon
Far-eastern Curlew
Bristle-thighed Curlew
Manta Ray
Argali (a species of sheep)
The Bobolink (now clarified as being a bird)

And a plan of action identified for the handsome Saker falcon.

In addition Norway removed some reservations on marine species.

Lunchtime bore witness to another onslaught of fine (and free) Norwegian food and a presentation entitled ‘Redd+ and Biodiversity’ about the orang-utan and where Heidi Sorensen, the Norwegian State Secretary was speaking.

Many delegates wonder around Bergen in the rain saying good bye to the streets and shops and the views although it grew gradually darker as they walked.

So there are a whole slew of resolutions now to be given their final approval – or not – as the case may be. Have we mentioned that ticking clock again yet?

Left on the table are inter alia (!) just a few resolutions:

Res.10.1 21b Financial and Administrative Matters and Terms of Reference for the Administration of the Trust Fund
Res.10.2 19c Modus Operandi for Conservation Emergencies
Res.10.3.Rev.1 19a The Role of Ecological Networks in the Conservation of Migratory Species
Res.10.4 19 e vi Marine Debris
Res.10.5. Rev 1 18a CMS Strategic Plan 2015–2020
Res.10.6 18a Capacity Building Strategy (2012-14)
Res.10.7 18d Outreach and Communications Issues
Res.10.8 12c Cooperation between the Inter-governmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services
(IPBES) and CMS
Res.10.9 9/13a Future Structure and Strategies of the CMS and CMS Family
UNEP/CMS/ Res.10.10 19 f i Guidance on Global Flyway Conservation and Options for Policy Arrangements
Res.10.11 19 b Power Lines and Migratory Species
Res.10.12 19 e i Migratory Freshwater Fish
Res.10.13 19 f iv Standardized Nomenclature of Birds Listed on the CMS Appendices
Res.10.14 19 e ii Bycatch of CMS-listed Species in Gillnet Fisheries
Res.10.15 19 e iv Global Programme of Work for Cetaceans
Res.10.16 16 a Priorities for CMS Agreements
Res.10.18.Rev.1 12b Guidelines on the Integration of Migratory Species into National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs)
and Other Outcomes from CBD COP10
Res.10.19 19d Migratory Species Conservation in the Light of Climate Change
Res.10.20.Rev.1 28 Arrangements for Hosting the Tenth and Eleventh Meetings of the Conference of the Parties
Res.10.21 12 a Synergies and Partnerships
Res.10.22 19 i Wildlife Disease and Migratory Species
Res.10.23 15a Concerted and Cooperative Actions
Res.10.24 19 e v Further Steps to Abate Underwater Noise Pollution for the Protection of Cetaceans and Other Biota
Res.10.25 21d Enhancing Engagement with the Global Environment Facility
Res.10.26 19 f iii Minimizing the Risk of Poisoning to Migratory Birds
Res.10.27 19 f ii Improving the Conservation Status of Migratory Landbirds in the African Eurasian Region

Resolution on emergencies comes first and the EU has a couple of amendments; New Zealand has another. Then it is passed.

We will not cover the passage of all the resolutions here but pick up where there are problems and where resolutions that are of particular importance to marine interests are dealt with.

Marine Debris floats in after a while. Barry reminds us that it is important. There are no comments. The Chair agrees it is important and the gavel importantly comes down on it (which means its is passed.)

The strategic plan wanders in. Chairman Storkerson looks around. There are a few comments and the gavel falls.

The resolution for ‘capacity building’ follows. There seems to be a problem with what is posted on the web with this document.

Incidentally our old friend Rhingo the gorilla has left the stage at the front of the room (his image that is). A reindeer now adorns the banner on the left side of the stage. This is presumably because Rhingo is needed somewhere else (there is a two day gorilla meeting after the CoP closes) and possibly because the reindeer is slightly more Christmassy. Certainly we noted over lunch that the town itself is now increasingly embracing Christmas and decorated fir trees and other seasonal adornments have sprouted in many corners.

A journalist outside is shouting into her phone – ‘This is going to take xxxxxxx ages; I thought we would have been out of here much earlier….’.

Back in plenary the resolution addressing power lines is having some problems and, after a while, some helpful guidelines are inserted and it buzzes through.

Time drifts by, and then Zeb Hogan, the Councillor for Fish, tells us about the migratory fish resolution. The EU tweaks him {editor – no, tweaks the resolution – pay attention and stop sneaking out looking for cake}.

Resolution 10.13 looks at bird taxonomy. The retiring John O’Sullivan (Councillor for Birds) takes the congregation calmly through the text.

A gavel falls.

Bycatch Resolution 10.14 arises. Barrington Baker presents and flash bulbs pop around him. The Chairman himself adds a comment and he looks to the floor. The EU takes the floor and makes and withdraws a comment in the same intervention.

Ecuador agrees with 10.14 but notes that is mucho importivo that a change is made in document 10.40 (the bycatch review). This sounds very much like an intervention she made a couple of days ago. She asks for the information about Ecuador to be withdrawn and Ecuador will provide new information.

The Chairman says that is acceptable to the secretariat and as we agree with the resolution… but Barry is waving a flag. Did you say document is withdrawn? No says chairman Storkerson, we will add their information as an annex. Ecuador says we do want the report deleted just additional information to be recorded. The text with respect to Ecuador should be modified. The gavel is poised and… bang.

We then come to 10.15 rev 1 – THE GLOBAL PLAN OF ACTION FOR CETACEANS. Barrington explains that this resolution seeks support for a work plan for cetaceans. He repeats again that many editorial changes were made and calls for the resolution to be supported.

The Chairman looks to plenary, can we adopt as it stands?

Norway takes to the floor and she repeats that Norway has removed reservations – because best available science can be used … NAMMCO the marine mammal commission – she lists its members, provides this. The Commission’s work meets high scholarly standards and NAMMCO appears to us as a natural coordination partner. (This is doubly interesting as the resolution specifically makes no mention of NAMMCO.)

South Africa says that she was waiting for the EU to make a comment and this is to do with the period that it applies to. The EU asks for consistency check across all reservations to make sure that dates are correct. The gavel falls but Denmark dramatically calls for the floor and notes that both the Denmark and … the Faroe Island have accepted the resolution. There is much murmuring of surprise, but it is done.

We move on to the important climate change resolution. The EU has several changes. The chair repeats them and one encourages the assistance of the energy sector. There are no other changes and the resolution is adopted.

Here is a little excerpt from the resolution for your interest:

‘Requests Parties and the Scientific Council, and encourages the scientific community, IUCN and other relevant organizations to:

a) identify and promote a standardized methodology for evaluating the susceptibility of species to climate change;

b) identify those Appendix I and II listed species, as well as other migratory species on the IUCN Red List, that are most susceptible to climate change, such as the polar bear, and subsequently consider whether these should be listed or uplisted on the CMS Appendices, as appropriate…’

(That should keep the newly-appointed climate change councillor busy and good to see a precise mention of another marine mammal – the polar bear – in there!)

A little later the important marine noise pollution thunders in. The EU wants to delete the UN… presumably just in the context of this resolution … and has some other minor technical issues.

We note that most members of the CMS Secretariat have been allowed out of the basement today for prolonged periods of time. Aline in particular seems to have been trapped continuously on stage oscillating from hiding behind the chairman to the front desk and with occasional visits from Melanie Virtue and others. Heidrun (of marine resolutions fame) is believed – just a little earlier after the marine resolutions were agreed - to have donned her yellow sou’wester and run laughing from the building out into the tempest. Hopefully she will be retrieved later.

The afternoon moves on… at one point an EU official is jumping high into the air and waving an invisible lasso in the air as he calls an emergency coordination of the European nations. In due course, they are corralled and herded off stage left.

A little later central African elephants come to an agreement [Editor: no – an agreement will be developed for them; I know it's late but please concentrate.]

As we leave Norway we would like to extend our thanks and congratulations to many people – including our good hardworking and dedicated friends in the Secretariat who we hope will not mind our blogging about them too much; the remarkable and small band of CMS scientific experts including Col, Colin, John, Bill and Barry; thank you also all you conservation-minded countries and all those delegates who care about the animals that have been considered here. Good luck fellow NGOs here who we have been working closely with including The Migratory Wildlife Network, Birdlife International and HSI. Remember that you can find a much fuller and more sensible coverage of the COP on the pages of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin. Don’t forget the bobolink; good luck gorillas for your meeting at the weekend and goodbye.



PS: Looking for that perfect Christmas gift? WDCS recommends: Whales and Dolphins - Culture, Cognition and Human Perceptions edited by Philiipa Brakes and Mark Simmonds and with contributions from all around the world. Want to know more about these animals and our interactions with them? Then get this book. Details: here

But what of the Bobolink?

It is tense in the big meeting hall. There are rumours that parties may have been looking at the wrong versions of revised resolutions. There are rumours that something has gone wrong down in the dungeon in document control or on the website. There are rumours that some parties will be unhappy and this will block things from going forward at this last and final stage. Marine debris in particular has got clogged up somewhere and, presumably, as the stuff just won’t degrade, this could be highly ensnaring.

Meanwhile the rain is hammering down outside, the skies are dark and a storm may be gathering.

A frazzled European delegate passes by noting that he has been up all night firstly dealing with financial issues and then the Future Shape resolution re-write. (He seems to be in pretty good shape given the marathon session.)

The plenary is slow to start. Presumably correct versions of resolutions are being run to ground and scattered sleepy and bedraggled delegates are being retrieved from the city’s drains.

The Norwegian Secretary of State now addresses the meeting. She is very pleased to be here. Seeing so many people collected together makes her an optimist. You have not had an easy task she adds. Being an environmentalist is not easy (much nodding on the NGO benches). I became involved because of the love of animals, she adds. My colleagues (the other Norwegian Minister) told you how much we Norwegians love the migratory species and he told you what the Spring means to us, and hence how many Norwegians are born in January. However, he came from the south of Norway, I am from the middle, so I was born in February. Gentle laughter follows.

She continues: The lesser white-fronted goose a hundred years ago was numerous. Now they are so rare that the researchers know them all by name. We now work with all the countries on their migration route.

Wetlands are the most productive habitat on earth and she is pleased to see synergies being developed between conventions. Yesterday she attended the workshop on electrocution and collision with power lines. Millions of birds are being killed. It is good to see that people are becoming engaged. The work in Germany is impressive and inspiring.

Climate change and biodiversity loss are the biggest threat to humanity. And she then tells us a joke that she was ‘surprised’ to hear from a climate scientist:

One planet talks to another. The first planet says I am not well; I have homo sapiens! The other says don’t worry it will not last for long.

We need to send a strong message to the climate change meeting. The polar bear is an important indicator species. The situation for the little auk is similar. It has a very stressful life and it brings back food to [its] small children. As it becomes warmer so there is a prey change and this now threatens nesting success.

We must obtain climate change safeguards including protection for migratory species.

State Secretary Heidi Sørensen then goes on to say the following: “I am pleased to announce that Norway has decided to repeal the reservations of all species of whales and sharks on CMS Appendix II and the Great White shark on CMS Appendix I. This includes following different species of cetaceans: White-beaked dolphin, Atlantic white-sided dolphin, Killer whale, Narwhal, Pygmy right whale, Antarctic minke whale, Bryde’s whale, Fin whale, Sei whale, Sperm whale in addition to the Great white shark and Basking Shark. All these species will benefit from international collaboration for their management and conservation. We already cooperate with other countries on small cetaceans, for instance when it comes to bycatch in fisheries.”

The newly appointed chairman Dr Spina is now called to address the congregation. He is delighted to have been appointed and looks forward to his future work; he thanks his predecessor.

A list of distinguished scientists who are the appointed experts for the Scientific Council are now identified. This includes Bill Perrin for Aquatic Mammals and Barrington Baker for Bycatch. That rare old bird John O’Sullivan (the bird expert) is sadly retiring after 18 years.

Is there applause? No [shame there should have been for the retiring councillors] but we move swiftly on

The retiring Scientific Council Chair, John, reminds the congregation that it has been recommended that they should appoint a new councillor for climate change. (A proposal that originated in the Scientific Council and originally made we believe by the observer there for Luxembourg.)

Chairman Storkerson says that he understands that there has been discussion. Has anyone been identified?

The Secretariat says that there has been a climate change working group and the Chair person is Dr Colin Galbraith. A man with great expertise and it would seem to make good sense to designate him as the councillor.

Storkerson agrees. Colin is a ‘good guy’ and his promotion is acknowledged by applause. Some happy NGO-types celebrate this development with a subtle hand-shake.

The credentials committee chair from New Zealand then gives a long report on which credentials are in order. She adds that only Heads of States, Secretaries of States and foreign ministers are usually allowed to sign credentials and this is currently ambiguous at CMS and should be clarified and brought into line with international law. (So delegates if your credentials were signed this year by your environment or other minister that may not be acceptable next year.) Credentials signed by Ambassadors will also not be acceptable (the credentials committee previously were mistaken in this and apologise)

We now turn to the reports from the four in-session working groups.

Barry reports in very swiftly on the marine working group. The Committee of the Whole has agreed them says Barrington Baker and they were placed on the website reviewed over-night.

That is brief says the Chair thank you.

The newly-appointed climate change councillor Colin Galbraith (now wearing an old hat) reports in on the ongoing discussions on the Saker Falcon. They have agreed that concerted actions should begin for this bird immediately

The strategic plan working group has agreed a resolution text says the EU.

The bleary-eyed joint group on Budget and Future shape now reports in. This is the group that had no sleep. Their chairman Alfred carefully gives the groups detailed report. There is of course concern about costs.

The Chair thanks Alfred for his report and says that we must show the world that we mean business!

Clarification: here is the list of Norway’s reservations as recorded on the CMS website:

White-beaked dolphin Lagenorhynchus albirostris and
Atlantic white-sided dolphin Lagenorhynchus acutus (Appendix II): 12.1.89
Orca Orcinus orca and
Narwhal Monodon monoceros
(Appendix II): 11.12.91

Letter from Norway’s foreign minister to FRG
dated 20.12.02:
Formal reservation lodged against inclusion of:
Antarctic minke whale Balaenoptera bonaerensis (Appendix II),

Bryde’s whale B.edeni (App. II),
Fin whale B. physalus (App. 1+II),

Sei whale B.borealis (App. I+II),
Pygmy right whale Carpera marginata (App.II),
Sperm whale Physeter macrocephalus (App. I+II),
Orca Orcinus orca (App. II),
Great white shark Carcharodon carcharias (App. I+II)


Note verbale from the Royal Norwegian Embassy to the German Foreign Office dated
24 February 2006 entered a reservation against the inclusion of the Basking Shark (Cethorhinus maximus) in Appendices I and II.

A coffee break now occurs.

Chair Storkerson is now waving his gavel in the air. He means to take all listing proposals in a block. The bobolink is now mentioned. We have not heard of it for several days and feared it had become extinct.

There is one exception – the Saker Falcon.

The Chairman now wields his ‘hammer or whatever you call it in English’ and all species but this poor little falcon are listed.

Uzbekistan is now given the floor and talks about the Saker Falcon proposal. There was evidently much debate and a complex resolution has been passed forward which details future work.

The Migratory Wildlife Network notes quietly to surrounding NGO-types that the Saker Falcon may be too beautiful for its own good. (The WDCS delegation knows how this feels.)

The Swiss delegation calls for precision from the chairman. We need to know exactly what resolutions we are dealing with. (Things probably need to work like clockwork.)

Chairman Storkerson smiles kindly back at Switzerland and notes the number of the relevant resolution. He also notes that we will not come to the other resolutions until this afternoon. The plan for the Saker is approved.

We move to the resolution for the repeal of previous resolutions introduced by Robert Ragg of the Secretariat recently ejected from mission control in the basement for this purpose. Recommendations include that resolutions should be time-limited and they should be consolidated, but not always.

The EU (in the form of the distinguished lawyer from DEFRA) thinks more work needs to be done on this. Some resolutions referred to have already been retired others proposed for retirement have not in fact been concluded. Hence, more time needs to be spent to sort this out.

Chairman Storkeson concludes that this resolution is not ready for adopted and sees some nodding (possibly those people who were up all night). We move on to relations with process of the appointment of the new CMS Executive Secretary (the reader will recall that the news that the current incumbent, Elizabeth, is retiring broke earlier in the week).

Monaco now signs the MoU on raptors and sharks and is applauded.

The end of the Whole.

After the final meeting of the marine working group over lunch and swift ingestion of too many calories, we return to the meeting of the CMS Whole.

There are some important bird matters being discussed…. Please ask BirdLife International what they were.

Finally the Cetacean Work Programme wrapped in its resolution unfurls in the Meeting in the Whole.

Professor Bill Perrin, the CMS appointed expert on marine mammals is on stage: In 2005 CoP 8 passed resolution 8.22 on human impacts on cetaceans. This called for various things including the development of a work programme. This identified various bodies for liaison – and he lists them, including, for example, the IWC and its scientific committee.

8.22 also identified particular threats including ship-strikes, bycatch and marine noise. Whaling and the issue of marine bushmeat was included in the review but not Res. 8.22 and whaling is acknowledged to be in the domain of the IWC and is therefore not considered in the recommendations here. Marine bushmeat is an emerging and critical issue for many cetaceans and it is included here. The work is considered in a regional context and from the review a global programme of work was developed.

The resolution enshrining this has been through various reviews. The CMS Scientific Committee was particularly grateful to the cetacean specialist group of the IUCN and various others. There are two sections – an expanded role for the aquatic mammals working group and the second more substantive section, covers the work plan across regions and species. The key MEAS (Multinational Environmental Agreements) for collaboration are also covered here.

Bill hands over to Heidi who now goes through the changes on the big screen, she is flanked by the redoubtable Barry Baker who now comments: “As Chair of the Marine Working Group there have been protracted discussions and in finalising this there has been patience and understanding from various parties and NGOs who have differing views. There has been a good spirit of cooperation. This is a long document, some 20 pages. We cannot go through it paragraph by paragraph but it will be made available. If you have any points please bring them to me or the Secretariat.”

Heidi adds that you will see lots of tracked changes. Many are ‘purely editorial’ and where we have just moved paragraphs. She goes on to broadly describe other changes.

Many avian-orientated delegates are taking tea. Marine delegates are glued to their seats.

The Chair of the Whole says I have sought your indulgence to submit comments to the Secretariat and I now want to move this document to the plenary. No flags are raised and it is so decided… no Egypt decides on a last minute flag-raising.

Egypt: this is very interesting but there will be costs and this will be huge.

Heidi replies: This is a very important point. The way that it is drafted, all the work will be done by the Scientific Council and the Secretariat – no actions are required by the Parties; so whilst additional resources would help, we believe much can be implemented with the resources as they are

Egypt: but when we come to implementation, the whole issue of capacity building will be crucial. In Egypt we are doing as much as we can; for example we are trying to hire a boat and I think again and again resources need to be considered.

[Pause and we move into underwater noise.]

Germany (Oliver) now introduces the marine noise resolution, noting the threat to cetaceans and other species and explains that this new resolution introduces the issue of noise related to marine wind parks. He notes that there are a range of things that can be done to reduce noise and disturbance from these developments and Heidi is next called on to roll the text around on the big screen. She notes a new paragraph on Marine Protected Areas.

Egypt takes to the floor again. This is a very important issue. I am not sure about shipping; but you have oil and gas exploration in many places. They do the best that they can to reduce the issue by very simple techniques. It is fine to introduce this nice resolution but again and again we need the resources.

Argentina thanks Heidi and Barry and congratulates the rest of the group for accommodating her as a one person delegation. Although a paragraph was agreed, in principle the Parties agreed that in addition to paragraph 6 we should mention UNCLOS – if anyone disagrees we can discuss outside the plenary.

The Chairman likes this idea and now tells us that we have reviewed all the resolutions that we were meant to review.

Agenda items 18(b) and 18(c) are now touched on. Melanie Virtue opens up these issues which relate to the annual year of the campaigns – so we have had ‘Year of the Dolphin’ and ‘Year of the Gorilla’. She shows us some pictures of CMS Ambassador Ian Redmond OBE and Jane Goodall, the famous primate scientist.

More photographs of gorillas and Ian follow. Some skating gorillas are also featured.

2011-12 has been the two Years of the Bat.

A short film about gorillas follows and some well-earned applause for the gorilla ambassador.

Egypt wants to celebrate his bats but he has a problem because unlike Europeans, people in his country do not like them and cultural issues need to be considered. Have you evaluated how effective these ‘year of the XXX’ have been, he asks.

The USA now takes to the floor to note the number of people killed in defending the gorillas and speaks of their work to support the widows of those who have lost their lives in these efforts.

Melanie Virtue thanks parties for their support and explains to Egypt than an evaluation of the Year Of initiatives has been made.

She next tells us about the CMS Ambassadors, Kookie, Peter, Stanley and Ian.

She asks delegates to suggest ways in which the Ambassadors can be of use.

Finally we move to small grants and out for a cup of tea, which Team WDCS has failed to return with.

The Chairman of the Whole raises his gavel – his gives a remarkably long list of things that have been agreed and then closes the meeting.

Plenary tomorrow – the final hurdle.

For a more sensible report on the CoP please look at the Earth Negotiations Bulletin: http://www.iisd.ca/cms/cop10/

Moving towards conclusion.

Hail hammered on the roof of the WDCS attic rooms last night and our dreams were not so sweet but, come the morning, we enter the Meeting of the Whole and the Chair seeks interventions on the climate change resolution.

Various countries speak of their support. Norway indicates that it is ‘broadly supportive’ and willing to discuss any new elements further with others.

WCS supports the application of a standardised methodology and calls for impacts on marine species to be given adequate attention. The resolution now passes through the Whole and will appear again in plenary tomorrow.

Nigel of Australia is now on the stage. He had a lovely reception last night at a ‘very interesting venue’ (that would be Bergen Aquarium). He moves from the gastronomic success of his evening to the matter in hand – Marine Debris. There is a resolution and the efforts on this topic, of Barry Baker and his Marine Working Group are noted.

60-80% of marine debris is plastics; 80% is land-sourced. Climate change will only exacerbate things further explains Nigel using a powerful power-point.

The famous Honolulu Declaration on marine debris is referenced and has been used to inform the Resolution about Debris. This resolution was previously considered in the Marine Working Group and now passes seamlessly through the Whole on its way to approval at the final plenary tomorrow.

Now some fish swim in.

The CMS Scientific Council’s fish councillor now takes to the stage. He reports on progress of a review on migratory fish. Species of concern include several species of sturgeons and the Mekong catfish.

The IUCN (World Conservation Union) thanks the fish expert and mentions work that they have been conducting. He has a list of migratory species at risk and would like to have IUCN mentioned in the preambular paragraph of the relevant resolution.

Next, Aline of the Secretariat is again released from the basement and tells us about emergencies, she notes outbreaks of avian influenza which were widely reported and a variety of other unexplained mortalities. Photographs of dead antelopes are shown.

The resolution (10.2 for those following the paper-work) would establish a flexible response mechanism for emergencies and a small fund.

The EU however does not want to use central resources for this. The advent of emergencies is relatively one-off he adds. Uruguay diplomatically thanks the Secretariat and seeks some small amendments to the resolution.

IUCN takes to the floor again (does he want to be included in the preambular paragraphs?) – no he already has an emergency fund that can be used.

We now enjoy a report from the avian task force and then the EU takes the floor (James of the UK speaking clearly and carefully) to offer several amendments.

Norway makes some amendments and then calls on delegates to please stop downloading films and music (‘heavy stuff’), so the internet provision does not get overloaded in the hall. He has asked the hotel to increase the bandwidth but delegates can help by their behaviour.

Is that the Migratory Wildlife Network looking guilty?

FAO waves a flag. Does he wish to speak on live-streaming? No he comments on emergency responses. He speaks at length of the need to improve coordination.

Meanwhile a large pile of cakes and a big fruit platter are calling.

The Chair calls for WDCS… and the WDCS delegates fall off their chairs as they were not intending to say anything on this matter (whilst being ‘broadly supportive’ of the resolution obviously).

Fortunately WCS (the Wildlife Conservation Society – no relation) takes the floor and talks of their work in this area. They call for an amendment to allow civil society to take part in the process. (Well said.)

Suddenly we are talking about bycatch and the redoubtable Barry Baker the Bycatch Councillor describes the desk-top study that he worked on and then details the changes made to the resolution in his Marine Working Group.

The Chair opens the resolution for discussion.

Ecuador calls for a change to report 10.30 (not the resolution but the review). She wants reality to be reflected.

The EU thinks bycatch is a ‘pressure’ on many migratory species and is ‘broadly supportive’ of the resolution. They have some concerns about the application to sharks listed in Appendix II – they speak of ‘sound exploitation’ and will propose further changes to the resolution.

Barry says that the report on bycatch will be reviewed intercessional and changes will be made – he hopes this is an adequate reply to Ecuador and others with any similar concerns.

However, ACCOBAMS says there are some mistakes in her (Mediterranean) region.

The Chair now tries to move to the famous resolution on the cetacean work plan but Barry intervenes to say that we are not ready yet.

Tick…tick…tick…

The Chair says can we move to underwater noise?

Barry says that is not ready yet either and so instead African-Eurasian land birds fly in. They are widely appreciated.

A 10 minute tea break sees hungry NGOs sprinting out through the side doors and pushing national delegates out of the way in search of cake. A major coffee spill results and mops are urgently deployed.

Ten minutes later the Chair strictly calls for the doors to be locked and for the meeting to resume and we are now back to poisoning birds. This is not recommended and Birdlife International now speaks up for the relevant resolution. This is a major problem and they identify rodenticides, heavy metals and persistent organochlorines amongst the problems. They have an indicative list of the species affected and note that the poisoning of migratory species can also affect humans who eat them. They call on Parties to support resolution 10.26 and financially support it.

The EU is again ‘broadly supportive’ – they would like to alleviate poisoning but think that the role of the working group should be better described. New Zealand has some changes too. Other countries offer support and seemingly minor changes. It seems a working group may be needed.

Taxonomic issues now canter in and the Marine Mammal Councillor speaks about the finless porpoise and recent changes to its classification. CITES now speaks up on the nomenclature. ‘It is hard for us to work together if we do not use the same names… and this may make us look disorganised by our partners in other sectors’. He notes the comments on the finless porpoise and he will recommend to the relevant CITES body that CITES follows CMS in this regard.

The distinguished CMS councillor for birds, John O’Sullivan of BirdLife, says there are several important things missing from the nomenclature resolution which do not reflect what was agreed in the Scientific Council! Australia agrees and a lunchtime summit will follow.

We move on. Another member of the Secretariat staff is released from the dungeon and ascends to the stage to take us (in Spanish) through the strategy and plans for capacity building.

(Meanwhile, in the background of course, high-level consultations on the marine resolutions continue. Will the EU sign or will they be ‘broadly supportive’? Will Norway sign? How is Australia feeling? That clock is ticking so loudly now that we can scarcely hear the other important discussions here.)