WDCS Blog - From the Front Line

'Rust and Bone' to open at Cannes Film Festival

nospam@example.com (Courtney Vail) — Wed, 09 May 2012 21:37:01 +0100

As filmmakers and celebrities prepare to flock to the south of France for this year’s Cannes Film Festival (May 16-27^th), among the films to make their debut at the 65^th annual 12-day event is ‘Rust and Bone.’ The film is an adaptation of ‘Rocket Ride,’ one of the stories found within Craig Davidson’s 2005 short-story anthology, also titled ‘Rust and Bones’. In the story a young man loses his leg to the orca he performs with and tries to rebuild his life through amputee-support groups and other therapy, ‘Rust and Bone’s’ storyline unfortunately is closer to fact than fiction and serves as a reminder of the unfortunate risks inherent to holding these huge, socially complex marine mammals in captivity.

Although WDCS is unable to review the film prior to the festival's opening, the film’s general storyline as reported in the media involves a female orca trainer (Marion Cotillard) who loses her legs in a horrific accident involving the whales. Scenes for the movies were filmed at Marineland Antibes (France), a captive facility currently holding five orcas, including one wild orca captured in 1982 from Iceland. Another Marineland orca, Shouka, remains isolated and alone at Six Flags Discovery Kingdom in Vallejo, California.

We expect this film to stir public emotion and generate comparisons and renewed attention to the tragic and violent deaths of Dawn Brancheau and Alexis Martinez that occurred just over two years ago. Both trainers were killed by the orcas they worked with at SeaWorld Florida and Loro Parque on Tenerife in the Canary Islands, respectively, within just a few months of each other. Although I am not certain how the trainer and her relationship with the orcas is depicted within the film, if it is anything like ‘real life’, the job of a trainer will be portrayed as glamorous, dazzling, and exciting, suggesting trainers benefit from a privileged and reciprocal relationship with these huge, attractive and awesome animals. Or, perhaps the silver screen will reflect the truer image of this profession, telling a different story where trainers can be injured or killed, and where ruined lives, both human and orca, are the real drama behind the shows.

Whether it intends to or not, this film serves to further highlight the uncomfortable realities associated with the capture, confinement and exploitation of these magnificent creatures for our entertainment. Because regardless of the nature of the event causing injury and death, whether from orcas attacking their trainers or loss of limb during performances or other accidents, all result from the unnatural confinement of these large, intelligent and powerful animals. This practice is dangerous and deadly to both the orcas and the humans working with them. The Occupational Health and Safety Administration (OSHA) has even found this to be true, citing and fining SeaWorld in August 2010 for knowingly and irresponsibly exposing its trainers to known safety hazards (orcas) that could result in injury or death.

As WDCS awaits the judge’s decision in the OSHA vs. SeaWorld hearing that concluded in November 2011 where SeaWorld contested OSHA’s citation, ‘Rust and Bone’ is an unfortunate reminder of the true costs of captivity to both humans and whales.

Irrespective of this film, and considering the sordid realities of captivity and the more recent tragedies that have unfolded, it is difficult to understand how anyone can have a clear conscience about captivity. WDCS opposes the confinement of whales and dolphins in captivity, and is committed to exposing and sharing the truth. If you care about whales and dolphins, question the culture of captivity and take the pledge not to buy a ticket to zoos, aquaria or marine parks that profit from the exploitation of whales and dolphins.

Who is eating the dolphins in the Channel?

nospam@example.com (Chris Butler-Stroud) — Tue, 08 May 2012 12:58:51 +0100

Its all well and good the British blaming the French for, well everything, but can the British actually believe that French fishermen are eating dolphins? Well it seems the media think so. The UK's press ran articles a few days ago trailing that 'dolphins had been filleted'. And this is not the first time this has happened. In the past French fishermen had quite a taste for dolphin.

As can be seen here on this old cigarette card (from 1928) the hunting of dolphins was more widespread than we would have liked to have believed. The card is too small to read here, but it actually says,

'Dolphins often appear in the Channel and off the Cornish coast, where they are sometimes caught in nets...In France their flesh was formerly esteemed a luxury, and under the impression that it was fish, was allowed on fast days!. Dolphins, like Whales are not fishes, but mammals.'

But the question is why is it happening again? Is it just some cruel individuals, or is austerity meaning that people are doing the unthinkable or is it something else?

We have recently seen a spread of marine bush-meat consumption across parts of the world as people hoover up remaining fish stocks, but its been a while since fishermen turned back the years in Europe. Around fifteen years ago dolphins were washed up on the Cornish coast with similar injuries. Questions were asked then of why would someone do such a thing.

Well it's illegal and it's immoral, and the sooner it's stopped the better. At the same time Europe has to address the source of this problem which is the bycatch of these creatures in fishing nets. It's no good governments saying its terrible that dolphins are dying when consumed whilst not also condemning the slaughter of these remarkable cetaceans in fishing nets.

Yes, if its proven its terrible that someone has eaten dolphin, but why were they caught in the first place?

Why did the two dolphins die in Switzerland?

nospam@example.com (Chris Butler-Stroud) — Mon, 07 May 2012 12:33:54 +0100

So the Conneyland dolphins died because of an opiate overdose, that some idiot gave them during a rave. 'Zoo dolphins deaths 'Caused by Party Drugs'

We need to ask why the dolphinarium ever allowed the rave to take place so close to the dolphins in the first place?

The dolphin captive display industry tell us that dolphins are held so we can learn more about conservation, but maybe all that we learn is how to squeeze more money out of these amazing creatures.

Whales and dolphins are highly intelligent animals who need to live in complex social groups. In captivity they will usually have been separated from their families, sometimes being captured in cruel hunts. A concrete tank can never replace their ocean home or their families.

We have no right to put these amazing creatures in captivity. Captive whale and dolphin shows are not educational, nor are they ‘conservation’.

As this case proves, the dolphin display industry is about making money out of these creatures – but it’s often the dolphins that pay the ultimate price.

European Cetacean Society Conservation Award 2012

nospam@example.com (Mark Simmonds) — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 16:18:19 +0100

At the 2012 annual meeting of the European Cetacean Society (ECS) in Galway, Ireland in March, the annual Conservation Award – which is part-sponsored by WDCS - was given to Dr Peter Evans.

Mark Simmonds, the WDCS International Director of Science, helped to celebrate this event with a speech which is reproduced below virtually verbatim (give or take some adlibbing indicated by square brackets). It is important to note that Dr Evans later disputed some of the ‘history’ recounted here and that he was walking with the aid of a stick after he broke his leg in a fall in an icy marina in Wales a few months back. BDMLR is British Divers Marine Life Rescue.

Ladies and gentlemen, it gives me great personal pleasure to now address the ECS with my short paper entitled:

The Natural History of Peter Evans

By Mark Peter Simmonds.

.. And whilst the sample size is certainly not large, I hope that you will agree that it is significant!

My study period covers only the last two decades, but there are earlier sightings records that have been carefully verified based on some quite distinctive and long-lasting markings. [Reference was made here to Peter’s distinctive shock of hair and a comparison drawn with the hair styles of currently-popular boy band One Direction].

There is also a general agreement that at some unknown point that Peter must have been born. And the earlier hypothesis of Donovan, Hammond, Foot and Rogan that he was cloned has largely been discredited on the simple grounds that he is truly unique.

Ethically-conducted genetic sampling reveals Peter to be of both English and Welsh stock. His early academic ‘prey’ seems to have been largely avian [for this cetacean-orientated gathering, I note that this refers to birds] and it is believed that he played a role in the infamous exploding starling incident in Oxford (which you may like to ask him about later).

Indeed, around the time that he surfaced in marine mammal matters for me, his distribution was in fact centred around Oxford – although all tagging attempts have to date failed. He famously held meetings of the great and the good (including the JNCC) in his Oxford bedroom, which was allegedly also the location of the new legendary sub-mattress data-storage cache.

There is evidences of some regular seasonal long distance movements to the Caribbean [where for all we know he may have a second life as a pirate] and this seems to be something to do with birds again [allegedly a parrot], and also shorter on- and off-shore movements along the coasts of Western Scotland, where this highly-social animal is well known in many local bars. This range at one time almost certainly extended to Ireland, where romantic behaviour has also been suggested.

[It is not entirely clear if this romantic behaviour was focused on his beloved seabirds, his first whale sighting (which was indeed in Ireland) or as the ‘Berrow Theory’ has it, that this involved a “flame-haired, green-eyed, Kerry girl”.]

Oddly enough the relevant copy of the ECS Journal on this topic was never published.

I will not elaborate further on breeding behaviour as others are better qualified, but I believe it involves some well-rehearsed dance steps as frequently seen at ECS meetings.

Over the now many years that I have known Peter and had the privilege of often working with him in tandem on issues, his influence on European cetacean conservation across Europe has simply been enormous. He occupies a niche that can only be described as uniquely Peter Evans-shaped. He brings a widely-respected integrity to all his work and somehow manages to span the weird divides between academe and NGOs and science and conservation policy. The fact that he does most of this from a small NGO-platform, I think makes this all the more remarkable.

Peter’s publications range from high-impact journals to the famous UK cetacean Atlases (based in part on that fabled sub-mattress data cache). There are also many Evans’ books and many of us always keep a copy of his 1897 classic “The Natural History of Whales and Dolphins” at hand at all times.

Peter is also outstanding in the sphere of education. For many of us he has been a mentor; even if in some cases he did not know it.

He birthed the Sea Watch Foundation in 1991 and more to the point here [at the ECS annual conference], he was fundamental in the founding of the European Cetacean Society; once there were five (he was the first Secretary) and now we are almost five hundred. For many years he was also, of course, the essential ECS editor, churning out those distinctive volumes and putting us all through our paces.

If Peter Evan’s is not the Father of the ECS, he is at the least our beloved Dancing Uncle.

Peter’s home territory has now moved to his beloved North Wales and many of your will have noticed evidence of a recent stranding event in Pwllheli Harbour. Fortunately Peter was successfully refloated (and my suspicion is that he may need to be refloated again later tonight – so BDMLR please go on standby) – and unfortunately we will not be treated to those famous dance moves this year.

Ladies and Gentlemen, it was of course only a question of ‘when’ and ‘how long’ we would make Peter wait - rather than ‘if’ we would pass this award to Peter. He epitomises in his career to date all that is appropriate in terms of moving science into conservation action, and he does this with energy, enthusiasm and modesty. To steal a comment from Greg Donovan [who gave a key note speech earlier]: he is “humility mixed with knowledge”.

Please now prepare to again make a loud noise for our

‘Small Celtic Giant’,

‘Our ECS Dancing Uncle’,

the Inspiration that is the unique and remarkable Dr Peter Evans.

[Rapturous applause and a standing ovation followed.]

Peter receives his award.

It's Time to Get Honest About Captivity

nospam@example.com (Courtney Vail) — Fri, 30 Mar 2012 23:18:45 +0100

It is no secret that many of us want to be close to whales and dolphins. The honest truth is that most of us want to be close, sometimes at any cost. Until we know the truth, we might even feel entitled to it. We have a natural affinity for these animals that extends back centuries into the cultural heritage of our modern civilizations, and it is undeniable. Past public opinion polls have recognized this desire, including a fairly recent BBC poll identifying the number one activity that people wanted to do before they died: swim with dolphins. Captive facilities have catered to and exploited our love for these animals by packaging an experience that appears to be made from heaven—an opportunity to get up close and personal with these animals in a blatantly unnatural, but seemingly attractive and controlled, setting. As a society, we have been seduced by the lights, the shows, the spectacular tricks, and the glamorous and intimate relationships between whales and humans that are manufactured for our consumption.

Now, the Alliance of Marine Mammal Parks and Aquaria have released a new Harris Poll that indicates the public endorses captive facilities, and believes them to be more educational than even the classroom. And it also seems to support the BBC poll’s conclusions that swimming with dolphins is high on the public’s list of things to do. However, the poll leaves out a lot of important points, and is merely reflective of a public that only knows one side of the story. The poll asks no questions about seeing marine mammals in the wild, or questions that might suggest there are other ways to learn about and experience marine mammals outside the confines of a facility. Many of the questions are leading or flawed in producing a predetermined positive conclusion that captivity is the best or only way to appreciate marine mammals and learn about them. The poll’s first question leads the responder to necessarily support captivity because it suggests that this might be the only way a child might see them in his or her lifetime (“aquariums are important because children might not get to see them in the wild”). More realistically, if the public can afford travel to SeaWorld or most other aquaria, they have traveled far enough to see these animals in the wild. Many of these facilities are located on or near the coast, oftentimes just yards away from where these animals swim free within their family groups. Furthermore, ‘seeing’ these animals in person is certainly not a prerequisite for loving them or being concerned about their wellbeing and protection.

And missing are the questions regarding the unspoken conflict between what is best for us, and what is best for them. These misleading figures reflect the responses of a propagandized and programmed public, spoon-fed from birth that it is acceptable and ‘normal’ to see these animals confined in a zoo or aquarium. We have been pre-programmed to believe that it is natural to seek entertainment and an escape to a place where these animals are accessible and willing to interact with us, and where we have been told they are happy, content, and even better off than if they were in the wild. We are so accustomed to these messages generated by SeaWorld and other marine parks’ public relations machines that our perceptions and beliefs have been shaped without our active participation. The seduction even greets us at the airport baggage claim of many major tourist destinations through attractive advertisements for captive facilities where you can swim with the dolphins. Through no fault of its own, the public has been denied the truth and has been swayed by the alluring messages of a multi-billion dollar commercial enterprise capitalizing on our love for these animals.

My four plus decades of life have provided me an opportunity to not only walk the varied paths of a dolphin lover and advocate, but to encounter many others along the way that have shared stories about their affinity for these animals, their feelings about captivity, and the rationalized choices that they make for themselves and their families. Growing up, I was lured and drawn in, like many, by the opportunity of SeaWorld, a logical destination for many families in the United States. It was here that I met my first dolphins ‘in the flesh’ at the petting pool at SeaWorld California when I was just eight years old. I left there wanting to be a trainer, believing this would be the best way to get close to these animals. But the catch is that I loved these animals before I ever set foot in SeaWorld. Through a lifetime of encountering these animals in the wild, education and an inborn passion to seek out what is best for these animals, I quickly abandoned my support of what I now see as selfish and indulgent entertainment. Now, I work to shut down those very same pools where I first encountered dolphins in person. Is this a natural progression for most people who encounter whales and dolphins in captivity? If people are given the truth about captivity, will they make the right choice--a choice in the best interest of dolphins?

Although I have come to know the backstory of captivity over time and work to expose and share it, the truth is that I was always conflicted. Long before I witnessed the drive hunts in Taiji, exposed the conditions at the dolphin petting pools, or reeled with the news of Alexis Martinez and Dawn Brancheau’s deaths, I knew there was something not quite right about SeaWorld and the stories they, and other captive facilities, told. With new truths about captivity surfacing daily, I am not the only one that feels this way. Truths of sordid dealings, brutal captures, and the incredibly deprived lives of the perpetually medicated and stressed animals are starting to sink in. However, it is the demand of the ticket counter that has facilities laboring to stock their pools and continue the revolving door of death.

After trainers Dawn Brancheau and Alexis Martinez's deaths, and a quick succession of orca deaths in several SeaWorld facilities, a congressional hearing investigated the educational value of captivity. At that hearing, then-representative Carol Shea-Porter indicated she needed help and more information to make sense of her personal conflict between what captive facilities claim to offer, and her sense of discomfort in seeing whales and dolphins in captivity. Former SeaWorld trainers have also stepped forward with their clarion call to expose the truths behind captivity and reveal their change of heart. And I think that if you search the hearts of most people, you will find a conflict between a self-interested desire to be close to these animals and the discomfort in witnessing these magnificent creatures torn from the wild ocean for our entertainment.

A few facilities are already turning away from traditional whale and dolphins shows, and questioning the sourcing of these animals from the wild. We applaud their movement in a positive direction, and encourage them to continue to phase out their collection of captive whales and dolphins.

It is time to get honest about captivity, and what motivates us. I believe those who attend these marine parks, spending almost any amount of money to flock to SeaWorld on family vacations, do so because they love these animals and because they do not know any other story. In other words, the public goes to marine parks because they love these animals; they do not love these animals because of marine parks. They go because they believe in what they have been told. The public does not know the story behind the individual lives in those barren and shallow aquamarine pools, and more importantly, many may not want to. But once you do know the story, it is hard to turn back, and to see these shows for other than what they really are. You don’t have to dig very deep, I promise. As modern day circuses have fallen out of favor, so too shall marine parks that rely upon the confinement of whales and dolphins for their profits. But there is another story, and there will be many more that will continue to reveal the real truth and face of captivity—a truth that will help to reconcile that personal discomfort and conflict that so many have shared with me when they speak of captivity.

It comes down to one simple choice to set you, and eventually the dolphins, free: Don't buy a ticket. We go to these parks like SeaWorld because we love the animals, but it is the very same reason why we shouldn't. It is time that we embrace the truth, and the conflict, and question our culture of captivity. And with time, I believe those public opinion polls will reflect a different set of beliefs--one that finds the imprisonment of beings so very much like our own an abhorrent and archaic trend of the past.

It really is a very simple step to resolve the conflict between our self-interested love for dolphins, and the love and appreciation that is in their best interest. It truly isn't counterculture or heretical to question SeaWorld, or the 'state of the art' Georgia Aquarium, or any of the other captive facilities that thrive on tourist dollars, however sacrilegious it might seem for those of us that have grown up with it.

Wild orca Morgan's shocking new wounds at Loro Parque

nospam@example.com (Colin Patching) — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 11:17:11 +0000

Morgan's deep laceration wounds.

Shocking new images are coming out of Tenerife’s Loro Parque showing Morgan, the wild Norwegian orca ‘rescued’ from the Wadden Sea in 2010, getting repeatedly rammed and bitten by the other animals held there. Her body now has deep laceration wounds as other orcas in her tank show dominance over her.

Morgan spends a lot of her time in a shallow side pool with Adan, a hand-reared two year old, and away from the other animals - a sign that she has not been accepted by the other orcas. Adan’s mother, who was made pregnant at just seven years of age, is now expecting another calf later this year. This new addition to Loro Parque, if it survives, will bring the total number of orcas held to seven and concern remains as to what will happen to Morgan and Adan as ‘their’ small, medical pool will be needed for the new mother. In the wild, incidentally, a female’s first calf is usually born at around 13 years.

While the four original orcas (Kohana, Keto, Tekoa, Skyla) sent to Loro Parque in 2006 all belong to Sea World, questions still remain as to who ‘owns’ Adan and Morgan and this issue will be key if Loro Parque or Sea World ever try to relocate them.

In February Morgan debuted in her first circus-style show performing tricks for the paying public. So much for education, science and natural behaviour!

So, to Dutch State Secretary, Henk Bleker, Dutch Appeal Judge, M. de Rooij and other members of the Dutch judiciary who thought sending Morgan to live in a concrete tank with this highly unstable, dysfunctional group of orcas was her best option rather than be given a chance to return to the wild, SHAME ON YOU!

Good to see the UK standing firm on fish disgards - shame that the Chancellor is threatening to steamroller over the rest of our wildlife

nospam@example.com (Chris Butler-Stroud) — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 14:53:08 +0000

The Guardian is reporting that the 'UK vowed to hold firm against plans to continue the wasteful practice of throwing away edible fish at sea, at a meeting in Brussels on Monday. France and Spain have written a "joint declaration" to be discussed at today's all-day meeting of fisheries ministers in Brussels, the Guardian revealed last week, which if adopted would mean the proposed ban on discarding healthy fish at sea would be lost.'

WDCS takes it's hat off to the UK Minister, Richard Benyon MP, for fighting to conserve fish.

Meanwhile the UK's Chancellor has appeared to have declared war on the rest of our wildlife.

In April 2011, the UK Government’s Cabinet Office launched its ‘Red Tape Challenge’. This means, the Government publishes regulations online every few weeks according to a specific theme. They are asking the public for comments on the impacts of regulations and possible improvements. The Red Tape Challenge website states that ‘the default presumption will be that burdensome regulations will go. If Ministers want to keep them, they have to make a very good case for them to stay.’ This means, unless there is a positive position taken by the public and Ministers, the regulation should be scrapped.

What appears to be a positive method of public consultation could, however, be turning into a nightmare for nature and biodiversity conservation, as well as a method for Government to avoid its own declared aims on climate change.

Throughout the process the Government publishes the general regulations that cross all sectors. These six cross-cutting themes (Equalities, Environment, Employment Related Law, Company and Commercial Law, Pensions) will be open for comment throughout the Red Tape Challenge process, but every few weeks the Government publishes the regulations affecting one specific sector or industry. For each of these there will be a ‘spotlight’ window for users to submit views. Interested businesses, individuals and organisations are asked to comment on which regulations could be improved or redesigned, which should be got rid of, or which should be kept.

The regulations under the Environment Theme aim to promote sustainable development and protect the environment. There are 278 regulations that relate to the environment, for ease of commenting, the Government has broken them into the following seven areas:

Air quality

Biodiversity, wildlife management, landscape, countryside and recreation

Energy labelling and sustainable products

Industrial emissions and carbon reductions

Noise and nuisance

Waste

Environmental permits, information and damage

The regulations under the Biodiversity, wildlife management, landscape, countryside and recreation area for example aim to conserve vulnerable or rare species, habitats and wildlife sites. They also control access to footpaths and national parks.

They include provisions on fishing activities; invasive non-native species; protection of native species; traps; trade in endangered species; zoo licensing; dangerous wild animals; game; selling dead wild birds; registering and ringing captive birds; wildfowling restrictions; national park authorities; common land; rights of way; areas of outstanding beauty; and pest control.

You can find all 163 regulations that relate to biodiversity, wildlife management, landscape, countryside and recreation on the left here.

The Government wants to hear the public’s views on how they could reduce regulatory burdens, and improve implementation of these regulations; to ensure that they can deliver their policy aims and protect the environment in the most effective way. They specifically want to know:

Should they be scrapped altogether?

Could their purpose be achieved in a non-regulatory way (eg through a voluntary code?) How?

Could they be reformed, simplified or merged? How?

Can their bureaucracy be reduced through better implementation? How?

Can their enforcement be made less burdensome? How?

Should they be left as they are?

WDCS wants to make sure that the Government takes their duties to protect the environment and species within seriously and therefore, we ask you to visit the above websites and submit a comment urging the government to safeguard the future of our vital environmental legislation. It only takes two minutes. Without it our wildlife and special places will be at the mercy of unrestrained human activity and ever more severe climate change.

Scraping them would also make a mockery of the Coalition Government's ambitions to be the ‘greenest government ever’.

Here are some particular points that you could raise:

Regulations designed to conserve species and protect the natural environment are of great importance and should not be removed;

We need more and better protection for wildlife and habitats, not less, specifically ‘recklessness’ needs to be reinstated into the Habitats Regulations and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, to make it an offence again to deliberately or ‘recklessly’ capture, kill, disturb, or trade in an animal of European protected species which includes all dolphins, whales and porpoises;

Urgent measures are required to prevent disturbance, protect breeding and resting places, control noise, and ensure cross-sectoral planning and zoning of activities and this will require a better legal definition of ‘disturbance’;

A definition of ‘breeding and resting places’ is required for mobile marine species within the Habitats Regulations;

Changes are also required within the Habitats Regulations to allow the prohibition of the deterioration or destruction of breeding and resting sites to be defined and enforced with regard to mobile marine species;

Where offences are created, meaningful penalties need to be applied;

There needs to be better coordination of planning across all regions and all industry sectors throughout the UK. Overall spatial planning, licensing and enforcement needs to be separated from those bodies promoting industry sectors to ensure the process is unbiased and transparent, whilst independence needs to be sought across all oversight

Strategic Environmental Assessments and Environmental Impact Assessments need to be carried out that do not pre-suppose that development is inevitable;

Codes of Conduct should be made legally enforceable across all sectors with a lead organisation made responsible for enforcement. Impact studies should be undertaken in areas where recreational and commercial pressures may exist;

Effective methods and incentives that promote compliance with laws need to be introduced, including via the appointment of marine wildlife tourism officers located in areas of high marine tourism activity and/or areas which are particularly vulnerable;

Government needs to make a firm public commitment to cetacean protection so that it is clear to all sectors that activities at sea should take this into account.

Cetacean rights and the wider debate of animal entitlement

nospam@example.com (Chris Butler-Stroud) — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 12:28:07 +0000

I thought it was worth pointing you to a very interesting posting by Catherine Warren at the Huffington Post.

Catherine takes us through some recent history regarding how animals are treated in law is changing, and notes the recent change in US law in 2010 when the U.S. House of Representatives reclassified dogs from "equipment" to "combatants" in US military service.

The examples of online campaigning are also worth reading.

Orca rights: stuff and nonsense?

nospam@example.com (Philippa Brakes) — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 14:45:15 +0000

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.

Orcas versus humpbacks

nospam@example.com (Mark Simmonds) — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 10:16:01 +0000

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 at the turning of the year

nospam@example.com (Mark Simmonds) — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 08:09:39 +0000

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!’

Japan diverts Tsunami monies to whaling

nospam@example.com (Chris Butler-Stroud) — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 08:32:10 +0000

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.

Summary of WDCS's time at the Conference on Migratory Species (part 1)

nospam@example.com (Sue Rocca) — Fri, 09 Dec 2011 13:37:39 +0000

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….

A step backwards for the UK’s whales and dolphins?

nospam@example.com (Chris Butler-Stroud) — Wed, 30 Nov 2011 10:04:01 +0000

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

CMS COP 10 The final curtain

nospam@example.com (WDCS at CMS COP10) — Fri, 25 Nov 2011 14:05:12 +0000

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.

Nicolas Entrup of the Migratory Wildlife Network.

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.

Farewell Bergen

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