WWF - WWF Japan office

Mediterranean bluefin catches continue to mock quotas and science

2009-11-12

Porto de Galinhas, Brazil: New bluefin tuna catch estimates show Mediterranean fishing fleets continuing to make a mockery of fishing quotas set by the beleaguered Atlantic tuna commission.

The new catch estimates – themselves likely to severely underestimate the effect of continuing rampant illegal fishing – are also around four times the level scientists estimate would give the collapsing tuna population only limited chances of recovery over a time span of more than a decade.

Scientists attached to the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) estimated the 2008 bluefin catch at 34,120 tonnes, well over last year’s quota of 28,500 tonnes set under the discredited 2006 ICCAT “recovery plan”.

Last year, ICCAT set a 22,000-tonne catch quota for 2009 in a controversial response to its scientists’ recommendations for a quota as low as 8,500 tonnes.

The new estimates come as ICCAT considers radical amendments to management measures in the face of rising calls for an international trade ban on Atlantic bluefin tuna and a supporting suspension of the fishery.

“New estimates lodged with ICCAT’s science committee show that one quarter of the latest estimated bluefin tuna catch would give us just a toss of the coin chance of recovering the tuna population by 2023,” said Dr Sergi Tudela, WWF Mediterranean.

Dr Tudela said he believed the latest estimates themselves were well under the real catch.

“To accept these figures at face value we have to accept a huge reduction in the amount of illegal fishing over the previous year,” he said. “I just don’t see the evidence or the reasoning for this miraculous drop in illegal fishing, while there is abundant evidence that pirate fishing remains rampant.”

ICCAT’s scientific committee notes that the estimates take no account of illegal fishing by unregistered boats.

The French navy reported dubious catch data and a lack of observers in intercepted Turkish bluefin boats, investigations are underway into the reflagging of vessels in Algerian waters and a Spanish study revealed laundering of undersize tuna through tuna fattening farms for the Japanese fresh tuna trade.

Opening the ICCAT meeting, chair Dr Fabio Hazin of Brazil said ICCAT had to set up “an efficient mechanism for the monitoring and control of the fishing fleets” and capable of “applying penalties proportional to the infringements detected”.

“We have been very much able to impose sanctions on non-members in the past and time has also come for ICCAT to show it does not have double standards, and that it is equally determined to also impose sanctions on its members in the same way it does with non-members,” he said.

G20 finance ministers fail to reach green on climate financing

2009-11-07

St Andrews, Scotland – Finance ministers of the world’s dominant economies failed to reach agreement on the financing required for a global agreement to stave off catastrophic climate change, WWF said today as the G20 finance ministers meeting here broke up with no resolution to issues dividing developed and emerging economies.

The lack of progress made by the G20 in St. Andrews, follows another week of inconclusive negotiations in UN climate talks in Barcelona as the world heads towards the crucial UN climate conference in Copenhagen in a month’s time.

With the G20 now having considered the climate financing issue three times without reaching common ground, WWF remains sceptical about today's promise to make further progress before Copenhagen.

“The G20 Finance Ministers meeting turned out to be a mostly irrelevant sideshow on the way to the talks in Copenhagen in a months’ time," said Dr Richard Dixon, Director of WWF Scotland.

"Failure to come to agreement here is a major disappointment.

“This is a group that can throw money at collapsing banks but cannot find adequate figures for the far worse challenge to the global economy of a collapsing climate system."

In detail, the G20 ministers acknowledged the need to increase significantly and urgently the scale of funding but failed to make any reference to the sums required, estimated to be around $160bn a year of public financing.

They also failed to agree on new sources of funding for a climate deal, such as auctioning emissions credits and levies on aviation and shipping.

"Talk of a financial transaction tax which has the potential to raise hundreds of billions in new funding every year turned out to be a red herring without solid political support," Dr Dixon said.

The G20 agreed some principals on a mechanism to administer and distribute these funds but failed to turn these into concrete proposals and - despite last week's pledges from Europe - no new money was put on the table to help the most vulnerable countries adapt to a changing climate.

It is estimated the immediate need for the most vulnerable nations is around $10bn a year.

WWF endorsed the G20s continuing professed interest in winding back fossil fuel use subsidies, but said the group needed to focus its main attention on getting an effective global deal on climate.

“If we are to keep the planet below the danger threshold of a 2ºC temperature rise, the rich nations of the world are going to have to help developing countries follow a low-carbon development path and help them cope with the impacts of current and future climate change," Dr Dixon said.

"We wanted to see solid proposals on how the money would be raised, managed and distributed and an indication of how soon the countries most vulnerable to climate change will receive assistance. The G20 has failed to deliver and the real work will now have to be done at Copenhagen.”

Genetic tuna tracking opens new options in race to save fish and fisheries

2009-10-27

Madrid, Spain – A new method that uses gene sequencing to accurately distinguish between tuna species has the potential to support fisheries management and possible trade restrictions for endangered tuna species.

The new method, revealed in a paper published today in PLoS ONE, the online open-access scientific journal, can make an identification from any kind of processed tuna tissue.

The true tunas – from the genus Thunnus – are among the most economically valuable fish in the world and are also among the most endangered of all commercially exploited fish . They are not to be confused with the tuna most commonly tinned, which comes from related families such as mackerel.

The paper, ‘A Validated Methodology for Genetic Identification of Tuna Species (Genus Thunnus)’, co-authored by Dr Jordi Viñas, a fish genetics specialist at Girona University in Spain and Dr Sergi Tudela, Head of Fisheries of WWF Mediterranean, proposes for the first time ever a genetic method for the precise identification of all eight recognized species of tuna.

Northern, southern and Pacific bluefin tuna are among the most stressed fish populations in the world, with the Principality of Monaco having lodged an application before the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) for a trade ban on the Atlantic (Northern) bluefin tuna where several fisheries have collapsed and failed to recover and the Mediterranean bluefin fishery is exhibiting advanced signals of impending collapse in the face of overfishing and decades of poor management.

The other tuna species are yellowfin, blackfin, longtail, bigeye and albacore tuna. Identification of traded forms of the fish, which can be dressed, gilled and gutted, or loin and belly meat, and either fresh or frozen – is a highly complex process, which has hampered conservation efforts and was a potential limitation to the imposition of trade controls.

The analysis of the DNA sequence variability of two unlinked genetic markers, one a hypervariable segment of the mitochondrial genome and the other a nuclear gene, enables full discrimination between all the tuna species.

"..findings are particularly relevant"

“This methodology will allow the identification of tuna species of any kind of tissue or type or presentation – including sushi and sashimi,” said Dr Jordi Viñas of Girona University. “The differentiation between different tunas, even those with highly similar genes, is now possible.”

“Our findings are particularly relevant for the highly overfished, overtraded – and hence endangered Atlantic bluefin tuna, for which there is a growing campaign to impose a temporary ban on international commercial trade,” added co-author Dr Sergi Tudela of WWF. “There will now be no trace of doubt when seeking to identify chilled or frozen tuna flesh at port or point of sale.”

The paper will remain available to download for free from the website of PLoS ONE and will be submitted to the relevant tuna fishing and trade management and control authorities.

(PLoS ONE is the first journal of primary research from all areas of science to employ a combination of peer review and post-publication rating and commenting, to maximize the impact of every report it publishes. PLoS ONE is published by the Public Library of Science (PLoS), the open-access publisher whose goal is to make the world’s scientific and medical literature a public resource.)

New emissions goal could make Japan climate leader

2009-09-07

WWF welcomes today’s announcement by incoming Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama to strengthen the country’s emission reduction target, aiming at 25% cuts from 1990 levels by 2020.

According to the global conservation organization, one of the major industrialized countries raising its ambitions is an important signal at this crucial stage of the international climate negotiations. So far, targets set by the developed world have failed to reach the ambitious levels necessary to protect people and nature from runaway climate change.

“The decision by an important player such as Japan to do more and get serious about low carbon future can help break the deadlock between developed and developing countries,” said Kim Carstensen, the leader of the WWF Global Climate Initiative.

“The climate negotiations are at a critical point and we need urgent progress to get a fair, ambitious and binding deal in Copenhagen this December”,

“Japan has now come into the range of reductions by 25-40% as recommended by the IPCC.”

Hatoyama, Japan’s Prime Minister elect since a landslide victory in the August elections, announced Japan’s new midterm target at a Climate Symposium in Tokyo, in front of Rajendra Pachauri, the 2007 Nobel laureate and Chairman of the IPCC, and Yvo de Boer, Executive Director of the UNFCCC.

The incoming leader further stated that he would confirm his country’s stronger target in his speech at the United Nations General Assembly in New York on 22 September.

“Japan used to be the country driven by industry groups, but now we see a new Prime Minister with true leadership”, said Takamasa Higuchi, CEO of WWF Japan.

“We welcome the courage of Yukio Hatoyama and believe he has the strength to set Japan on track for a low carbon future which will benefit people and nature, both in Japan and worldwide.”

Taro Aso, the outgoing Prime Minister from the LDP, announced a 15% reduction target by 2020 compared to 2005 levels in June 2009, a mere 8% cut compared to 1990 levels. At the time, WWF sharply criticized this weak target.

Now WWF expects the winning DPJ to realize its promises from the election manifesto, including the 25% cut from 1990 levels by 2020. Today’s announcement indicates that the incoming Prime Minister keeps his word.

Norway, Japan prop up whaling industry with taxpayer money

2009-06-19

Economics and Subsidies to Whaling found that Norway and Japan provide commercial whalers with huge government subsidies—even though killing whales is unlikely to ever be profitable without taxpayer support.

“In this time of global economic crisis, the use of valuable tax dollars to prop up what is basically an economically unviable industry, is neither strategic, sustainable, nor an appropriate use of limited government funds,” said Dr Susan Lieberman, Species Programme Director, WWF International.

The analysis considers a range of direct and indirect costs associated with whaling and the processing and marketing of whale products, such as whale meat. Researchers conclude that these costs, combined with declining demand for whale meat and the risk of negative impacts such as trade or tourism boycotts, make commercial whaling unlikely to produce benefits for either country’s economies or taxpayers.

In Norway, for example, the government since 1992 has spent more than US$4.9 million on public information, public relations, and lobbying campaigns to garner support for its whaling and seal hunting industries, according to the report. In addition, government subsidies for the whaling industry have equalled almost half of the gross value of all whale meat landings made through the Rafisklaget, the Norwegian Fishermen’s Sales Organisation.

The report notes similar use of taxpayer funds by Japan. During the 2008-09 season, the Japanese whaling industry, for example, needed US$12 million in taxpayer money just to break even. Overall, Japanese subsidies for whaling amount to US$164 million since 1988.

Other major findings in the report include:

Wholesale prices of whale meat per kg in Japan have been falling since 1994, starting at just over $30/kg in 1994, and declining to $16.40 in 2006.
Norway has spent an additional US$10.5 million covering the costs of an inspection programme from 1993 until 2006, when it was scrapped due to the losses it was causing the country’s whalers.

Exploiting loopholes to continue whaling

Japan and Norway, in defiance of the International Whaling Commission’s moratorium on commercial whaling, kill up to 2,000 whales a year, exploiting loopholes in the IWC’s founding treaty that allow whaling under ‘objection’ to management decisions (Norway) and “scientific” whaling for research purposes (Japan).

Ahead of the 61st IWC meeting next week, researchers point out that killing more whales likely would hurt whale-watching and tourism, trade, and the international image of Norway and Japan – impacts which would far outweigh any economic benefits of whaling.

“It is clear that whaling is heavily subsidised at present,” the report states. “In both Japan and Norway, substantial funds are made available to prop up an operation which would otherwise be commercially marginal at best, and most likely loss making.”

“Norway and Japan are hurting tourism, a potential growth industry in both countries in order to spend millions of dollars obtaining whale meat, the sale of which makes no profit,” said Sue Fisher, WDCS US Policy Director. “How much longer are they going to keep wasting their taxpayer’s money?”

The analysis was conducted by independent economists eftec and commissioned by WWF and the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society.

The International Whaling Commission's 61st meeting is being held in Madeira, Portugal, from 22-26 June. Learn about WWF's work with governments to find the best possible solutions for the conservation of whales, dolphins and porpoises.

Japan’s emissions target: far too little, far too late

2009-06-10

Prime Minister Taro Aso has been delaying the announcement of his country’s midterm target, confusing and holding up other countries which are trying to set an overall goal for greenhouse gas emissions of industrialized states.

What he offers now is simply not enough and puts the world in great danger, according to WWF.

“We have waited a long time for Japan to finally inform the world about its emissions plans; and today we were presented something dangerously lacking any level of ambition,” said Kim Carstensen, the leader of WWF’s Climate Initiative.

“The Japanese target translates to a reduction of only 2 percent below what Japan committed to in the Kyoto Protocol. This is a great shame, and it sets the wrong tone for the negotiations here in Bonn. Aso’s decision, influenced by polluters rather than the public, makes reaching a good deal even harder.”

In Bonn, delegates from around the world are negotiating a treaty to replace the commitments agreed to in the Kyoto Protocol, which is expiring in 2012.

Japan’s government announced its goal as a reduction of greenhouse gases by 15 percent by 2020, but this would translate into a drop of only 8 percent below 1990 levels and only 2 percent below Japan’s Kyoto target for 2008-2012.

The country has used 2005 as its base year, rather than 1990, which is the baseline year in the UN negotiations. The reason why Japan is doing this is because it has increased its emission by more than 7 percent instead of reducing it since 1990. This hides the lack of real action in Japan to implement the Kyoto Protocol

Scientists say industrialized countries as a whole need to reduce the emission by 25 to 40 percent compared to 1990 level by 2020, in order to prevent the world from overheating to dangerous levels, resulting in catastrophic impacts.

Japan argues that an 8 percent reduction would be ambitious given that Japan’s economy is relatively energy and carbon efficient. In WWF’s view, this is not a strong argument.

“It is true that Japan’s energy efficiency improved in the 1980s, during the oil crisis. Unfortunately, since 1990 most of the sector’s energy efficiency either stagnated or declined,” Carstensen said.

Japan also seems to believe that it’s 8 percent reduction target is much more ambitious than the other industrialized countries such as EU and the US, using cost analysis as a sole indicator for comparable effort.

WWF argues that the effort sharing should be based on capacity to act (with a criteria such as GDP/capita) and responsibility (current and historic emissions par capita) as well as cost analysis. According to all these criteria, Japan should contribute much more to the emission reduction range required from industrialized countries.

In WWF ‘s view, Aso should have listened to Japanese people’s voice who favoured a more ambitious target, such as a 25 percent reduction.

The poll conducted by internationally renowned polling firm Greenberg Quinlan Rosner in May revealed that 60 percent Japanese favour a stronger target such as -25% .

“Aso should change his mind immediately and rise as a true leader by setting more than 25 percent reduction target towards the successful Copenhagen deal."

Japanese government misleads public with biased emission cuts figures - WWF

2009-05-13

Tokyo, Japan - The Japanese government is misleading the public by presenting biased figures on Japan’s 2020 target for emission cuts, WWF said ahead of the country’s last public hearing on the issue.

The global conservation organisation also points out that the government’s position wrongly focuses on potential burdens for households, while ignoring the financial benefits of a low carbon future.

“Japan pretends to aim at ambition levels and emission cuts similar to those in the EU and US, but the method applied to compare efforts by different countries is misleading”, says Kim Carstensen, Leader of the WWF Global Climate Initiative.

“Ill-informed Japanese citizens are at risk of being talked into a high emission future – bad for the people, bad for the economy, and bad for nature.”

The target options currently debated range from an increase of 4% to a decrease of 25% by 2020 compared to 1990 levels. The Aso government says the weakest option, +4% by 2020, is comparable to the EU’s goal of cutting emissions 20% by 2020, as well as to the US goal of returning to 1990 levels by 2020.

According to WWF, this is a case of serious public misinformation.

The method applied by the Japanese government is biased, because “Marginal Abatement Costs” – the extra costs a country must incur to reduce one more unit of pollution – are used as the sole indicator to compare country efforts, while other more important indicators such as ability to pay and historical responsibility are completely ignored.

”To create cost curves for marginal abatement you need detailed country data, and different organizations release different cost curves, so the government’s cost curve is neither an objective indicator nor the ultimate truth”, says Carstensen. “Picking just one indicator which is also advantageous for Japan and presenting it as if it was the only indicator to assess comparability is misleading.”

The government’s announcement about economic consequences related to the various target options is also distorted. Targets such as -15% or -25% are described as a heavy burden for households, highlighting only estimated decreases in job numbers, income levels and GDP growth. Positive economic effects of strong targets and the opportunity to create green jobs are concealed.

“While countries such as Australia are raising the ambition level, Japan proposes smaller efforts to tackle climate change, frozen in fear of economic burden while not seeing the benefits of a low carbon future”, said Carstensen. “Instead of depressing citizens with loss and decline messages, the Aso government must go for a strong target to leave future generations a safe environment.”

In WWF’s view, a responsible and capable country like Japan must contribute its fair share to the global effort and aim at emission cuts of 25% to 40% by 2020, as shown by the IPCC. If Japan were to choose a weak target, it would seriously discourage efforts by other countries, resulting in a major blow for international hopes to agree a new global climate treaty this year.

The Japanese government announced the six target options on 27 March. After the announcement, the government has held five public hearings in major cities across the country. The sixth and last hearing is held today in Tokyo. In parallel, the government is calling for public comments on the proposed target options until 16 May. Taking into account the results of these processes and internal discussion within the government, Prime Minister Aso is expected to announce his final decision on the mid-term target sometime in June.

Too much to whalers and not enough to conservation in IWC proposals on Japanese whaling: WWF

2009-02-02

Gland, Switzerland – Two “compromise packages” to end the deadlock on so-called scientific whaling are too much of a compromise according to WWF.

The packages, announced today by IWC Chairman William Hogarth, would either phase out Japan’s scientific whaling programme in the Southern Ocean in exchange for Japan being allowed to take a unspecified number of minke whales off its coast in the North Pacific or would allow Japan’s scientific whaling programme to continue in the Southern Ocean if it adheres to annual limits set by the IWC’s Scientific Committee.

“WWF is glad to see the IWC taking steps toward ending the deadlock on commercial whaling, and to ending commercial whaling under the guise of science once and for all, but these compromise packages give too much to the whalers and not enough to whale conservation,” said Dr. Susan Lieberman, director of WWF International’s Species Programme.

“What is needed is a plan to put an immediate halt to all scientific whaling, which simply has no place in the 21st Century,” added Lieberman.

The package makes no mention of other whaling nations Iceland and Norway, which whale under objection to the IWC’s commercial whaling moratorium. Iceland recently announced a quota of 100 fin whales – an endangered species – which is a dramatic increase its original self-assigned quota of nine. They also almost doubled their quota of minke whales.

“No package will heal the IWC if it deals exclusively with one whaling nation and ignores the rest,” added Lieberman. “The world’s whales will not be saved until all governments commit to their conservation together. It is time to bring the IWC into the 21st century—as a whale conservation organization”

The current membership of the IWC is approximately evenly divided between whaling and non-whaling nations, resulting in a political deadlock which makes it impossible to secure the ¾ majority of votes needed to make major changes such as putting an end to Japan’s scientific whaling.

Another fisheries commission throws the science overboard

2008-12-12

Pusan, South Korea - The Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) today over-rode the advice of its science committee and rejected the recommendations of its chair in choosing only minor reductions in catch for bigeye and yellowfin tuna and watering down or deferring most measures for achieving reduced catches.

The decision comes just a fortnight after the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) and the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC) both also rejected their own scientists pleas for significant cuts to catches in the face of collapsing or falling tuna populations.

Measures adopted by the WCPFC will see a catch reduction of less than seven per cent for 2009 on WWF estimations, well down on a recommendation of a 30 percent cut which it was conceded would still not have eliminated overfishing. Among the discarded, delayed or reduced measures were high seas fishing closures, restrictions on gear types, and important initiatives to better record and verify catches and crack down on rampant illegal fishing.

It is an especially galling rebuff for WCPFC chair Glenn Hurry, who earlier this year chaired the independent review of ICCAT that found that body’s management of the Mediterranean bluefin tuna fishery “an international disgrace”. WWF commends Mr Hurry, also Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Fisheries Management Authority, for his efforts worldwide to promote scientifically based fisheries management.

“Disappearing, collapsing and declining bluefin tuna fisheries world wide for the high value sushi market are increasing demand for bigeye and yellowfin tuna,” said WWF’S Peter Trott, who attended the Pusan meeting.

“What we are seeing now is an international tragedy where the failure of one fishery adds to the pressure on others, while some fisheries nations use their weight to subvert virtually the entire international system for long term sustainable fisheries management.”

WCPFC’s failures will have severe impacts on Pacific island states where foreign fishing fleets are having catastrophic impacts on the viability of their fishers and coastal communities, a point underlined at the meeting when Papua New Guinea announced its intention of denying access to its waters for fishing vessels from nations not subscribing to high seas closures.

“In the equatorial Pacific we can see the crash coming and a block of major fishing nations seem determined to fish their way into it,” said Trott. “The implications are disastrous for the small island communities in the region , where millions of people depend on healthy tuna stocks for food and livelihoods.”

Pacific tuna face risky fisheries meeting

2008-11-27

Yellowfin tuna and bigeye tuna fisheries in the western and central Pacific also face collapse if a forthcoming management meeting doesn't dramatically change the way they are harvested, WWF warned today.

The call follows this week's disastrous decision by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) which discarded recommendations from its own scientists and a high level internal review to continue with what the review labelled “a travesty of fisheries management” widely regarded as “an international disgrace”.

“We have to face the possibility that fishing nations will drive the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC) will come up with a similar outcome when it meets in Busan, Korea, in December,” said Peter Trott, Fisheries Program Manager for WWF-Australia.

“With tuna, it seems we are just not learning – we have lost the fisheries of the North Sea bluefin, the southern Bluefin, the West Atlantic bluefin collapsed and is failing to recover and the Mediterranean Bluefin is now well on its way to collapse with rampant legal and illegal overfishing allowed to go on.”

In 2006 scientists estimated that overfishing of bigeye tuna, on the IUCN Red List as “vulnerable” since 1996, was occurring in the western and central Pacific, with a high probability it had been occurring since 1997. They have also warned that urgent action needed to be taken on overfishing of yellowfin tuna in the region.

“This is not just a warm and fuzzy call to preserve a magnificent open ocean species, it’s about preserving the world’s most valuable tuna fisheries with a landed value of close to US$4 billion in 2007 and a market value of US$6-8 billion every year,” said Trott.

“It’s a fishery that adds considerably to the economies of many of the developing Pacific Island nations in the region and to the livelihoods of millions in the region known as the Coral Triangle.”

The future of the tuna fisheries in the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries will be decided at its commission meeting during December 8 -12 this year.

For the first time the commission will seriously consider management measures to reduce the take of bigeye and yellowfin tuna by 30 per cent. These measures include closing large parts of the fishery to purse seiners and the banning of fish attractant devices from July to September every year.

“It’s a reflection of how dramatic the situation has become that the Commission has got to this point,” Mr Trott said.

“It’s beyond environmental concerns, it is about commercial self-preservation.”

WWF-Australia strongly supports the call for these closures from July to September but also wants the commission to ramp up catch documentation methods.

“Scientists have been calling for large reductions in bigeye tuna catch for over a decade,” Mr Trott said.

“But on past performance the Commission is, at best, slow to respond to such advice and at worst shows little spine when it comes to standing up to the pressure from fishing nations who continue to decimate tuna stocks.”

“Such wavering could lead to the commercial extinction of the bigeye and yellowfin tuna fishery in the Western and Central Pacific if effective management action isn’t adopted at this year’s Commission meeting.”

Improved catch documentation can also identify the size of the illegal tuna catch in the region which is estimated to in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Timely documentation of the legal catch can be measured against fish sold at markets and used to determine how much illegal tuna is being taken.

“If the Commission doesn’t move fast on restoring stocks and preventing illegal and unregulated fishing, it will directly impact the viability of the region’s tuna fisheries, the economies of developing countries and the cost and availability of tuna for every consumer in the very near future,” Mr Trott said.

www.panda.org/media for latest news and media resources

Europe sits on damning bluefin tuna report

2008-11-14

Barcelona, Spain: A European fisheries report demonstrating continuing widespread infringements by bluefin tuna fleets despite increased fleet surveillance in the Mediterranean has been delayed until after the conclusion of next week's key international tuna commission meeting to decide on a new management regime for the fishery.

The existence of the report, revealed today by The Economist, undermines Europe's promise of support for strong action possibly including temporary closure of the fishery at the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) meeting in Marrakech, Morocco.

It also undermines European claims that it is bringing rampant bluefin overfishing under control, with a summary hurriedly produced after repeated demands from the European Parliament noting that extensive consultations with fishers and improved surveillance and inspections had little effect on the low priority industry gave to ICCAT rules.

“After decades of ignoring the science, ICCAT and member states are now trying to outdo each other in rhetoric about how much the science must matter,” said Dr Sergi Tudela, Fisheries director for WWF Mediterranean.

“The information gathered by Europe’s Community Fisheries Control Agency provides unprecedented data on the Mediterranean bluefin tuna fishery that would have been extremely precious for ICCAT scientists to make appropriate management recommendations.

“Shockingly, this valuable information has been kept hidden from scientists, thus undermining the quality of fisheries management advice – and the European Community, representing all EU Members States at ICCAT, must be held responsible for this.”

Earlier this year, WWF welcomed Europe's promise of vastly improved inspection and surveillance of the bluefin fleet and fattening farms by the CFCA, based in Vigo, Spain.

The Economist claims that a comprehensive CFCA report - the product of a €20 million investment in seeking to reign in the bluefin fishery - went to the European Commission in August and that an abbreviated version only was provided to the European Parliament’s Fisheries Commission earlier this month.

The abbreviated version is alarming enough, noting that “the level of apparent infringements detected in the tugs and the purse seiner fleet is considerable”, “the (illegal) use of spotter planes for searching bluefin tuna concentrations is still wide spread” and “as regards the recording and reporting of bluefin tuna catches . . . the ICCAT rules have not been generally respected”.

European Fisheries Commissioner Joe Borg has said that the last management rules for this beleaguered fishery – agreed at a previous ICCAT meeting in Dubrovnik in 2006 – would work, as long as there was compliance with the rules.

“This latest evidence of widespread non-compliance, information that has been hidden from ICCAT scientists and decision-makers, should be case enough that the only solution now is to close the Mediterranean bluefin tuna fishery – pending a complete overhaul of the fiasco,” Dr Tudela said.

Spain, Japan back bluefin tuna ban

2008-10-13

Barcelona, Spain: Key fishing state Spain and key tuna market Japan joined with a majority of other countries to back closing the Mediterranean Bluefin Tuna fishery until it can be brought under control and establishing protected areas in the main breeding grounds.

The surprise vote tonight, by government and NGO members of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) at the World Conservation Congress in Barcelona, also calls for catch quotas to be nearly halved in line with scientific advice and for permanent fishing bans for May and June covering the entire spawning season.

“We didn't know this would pass, let alone pass so overwhelmingly,” said Dr Sergi Tudela, Head of Fisheries in WWF’s Mediterranean office. “Common sense is now promising to bring an end to the real shame in the international system of fisheries management .

“The message that we need to close the fishery now or have few fish and no fishery into the future is now coming from scientists, from consumers, from communities and from countries.”

The motion adds considerably to the pressure on International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT) which decides on the future of the fishery in November, within two months of its own internal expert review labelling the management of the Mediterranean bluefin tuna fishery “an international disgrace”.

It also follows a WWF report earlier this year that the tuna fishing capacity was at twice quota levels and a further report last week that Italy's largely unregulated fleet was in flagrant violation of the fishery rules.

Last month, ICCAT scientists also warned the Mediterranean Bluefin Tuna population was on the brink of collapse. A retailers' boycott of Mediterranean Bluefin Tuna, supported by WWF, is spreading throughout Europe.

The tuna motion, initially bitterly opposed by some countries that later voted for it, was put up by WWF, Ecologistas en Acción, GOB, SEO/Birdlife and the Government of the Baleric Islands, which is proposed as one of the bluefin tuna sanctuaries.

“ICCAT needs to heed the claim from the international community to save the Mediterannean Bluefin Tuna,” Dr Tudela said.

“This year's meeting will be the last real chance for ICCAT to show to the world it deserves the mandate given by society to manage this fisheries and avoid the collapse of the species.”

Collapsing fishery gets tuna commission a blast from own review

2008-09-12

Rome, Italy – Calling the management of the Mediterranean bluefin tuna fishery “an international disgrace”, a high level review has called for an immediate suspension of fishing.

The still confidential review, commissioned last November by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), says the suspension should remain in force until the fishing nations that make up the members of ICCAT show that they “can control and report on their catch”.

Failing that, the ICCAT Performance Review recommends that ICCAT's own secretariat take over the responsibility for catch auditing and inspection.

The fishing ban should cover tuna caught for fattening in farms and ICCAT should consider “an immediate closure of all known spawning grounds at least during known spawning periods”, the review said.

The review was chaired by Glenn Hurry, Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Fisheries Management Authority and current Chair of the Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission.
Moritaka Hayashi, Professor Emeritus of International Law at Japan’s Waseda University, and Canadian international fisheries scientist Jean-Jacques Maguire, were the other members of the “independent” review established to follow “transparent procedures” in reviewing ICCAT.

Mr Hurry and his fellow commissioners noted that “the judgement of the international community will be based largely on how ICCAT manages fisheries on bluefin tuna” and concluded that “the international community which has entrusted the management of this iconic species to ICCAT deserves better performance from ICCAT than it has received to date”.

"collapse could be a real possibility"

ICCAT also drew criticism for “how little information and data are available” on bluefin tuna with the independent review nevertheless saying that despite the missing information “there are indications that collapse could be a real possibility in the foreseeable future, particularly in the East Atlantic and Mediterranean.”

“Such staggering conclusions from independent experts only reinforce what WWF has been saying for years – this is a fishery grossly out of control,” said Dr Sergi Tudela, Head of Fisheries at WWF Mediterranean.

The report cites the “the under-reporting, mis-reporting and non-reporting” by Contracting Parties of Mediterranean catches, large takes of juvenile fish and large spawning tuna, the fishing in former refuges and the continued expansion of the industrial fishing fleet.

“ICCAT Contracting Parties’ performance in managing fisheries on bluefin tuna, particularly in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea, is widely regarded as an international disgrace,” states the review.
It notes an estimated 2007 catch of up to 60,000 tonnes, more than double the legal catch of 29,500 tonnes and disastrously more than the scientific assessment of a sustainable catch of no more than 15,000 tonnes, saying “It is difficult to describe this as responsible fisheries management.”

The review panel justified its draconian recommendations saying that “with the fishing activity largely unregulated, the stock possibly at the point of collapse and (Contracting Parties) either unable or unwilling to force their industries to comply, few options for recommendations were available”.

ICCAT Chair Fabio Hazin has urged parties to “be prepared” to discuss the report at ICCAT's forthcoming meeting in Marrakech in November.

Further information, gparkes@wwfmedpo.org

G8 nations lagging in climate change race

2008-07-03

None of the leading industrialized nations are currently on target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions enough to avoid the threshold level for unacceptable risk of catastrophic climate change, according to new research into national policies and performance.

The G8 Climate Scorecards 2008, compiled by climate consultancy Ecofys on a joint commission from environmental organization WWF and international financial services provider Allianz, was released four days prior to the G8 summit in Japan.

Leading the race is the UK, which is projected to reach its Kyoto target and has introduced innovative policies such as the Climate Change Bill. France lies in second place just ahead of Germany, which performs best on renewable energy, but all three are at best half as far along the road as they should be, with the use of coal still a major problem.

Italy, Japan and Russia are firmly entrenched in mid-table, while bringing up the rear are Canada and the USA which, according to the report, “is no surprise given rising emissions and energy-intensive economies and their failure to realize the full potential of energy efficiency improvements”.

“Time is running out,” said Regine Günther, Director of the WWF Climate Change Programme in Germany. “We have 10 to 15 years left in which the global emissions have to peak and decline. The world is at a crossroads where decisive action now could translate into economic success.”

The scorecards rank the G8 countries according to nine quantitative indicators, including past emission trends since 1990 and progress against the country’s Kyoto target. It also scores performance on three specific policy areas - energy efficiency, renewable energy, and development of carbon markets.

Click to enlarge (© WWF/Meike Naumann)

The report analyzed the policies of emerging economies Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa and, while noting that they cannot be measured by the same criteria, stressed that the question of how industrialized countries will assist these five countries remains key.

Dr. Joachim Faber, holding board member of Allianz SE, said: “The G8 countries have a responsibility to be high achievers in the race against climate change. They need to be role models trail-blazing the way to steer the world towards a low carbon, clean energy economy.”

Leaders at next week’s summit in Japan should commit to a binding long-term target for emission reductions of 80% by 2050, and as close as possible to 40% by 2020, the report states. “We expect the Japanese Presidency of the Hokkaido Summit to commit the G8 countries to significant and binding emission reduction targets,” said Günther.

“The G8 should pledge financial and technology support for low carbon development and for adaptation measures in developing countries that are measurable, reportable and verifiable.”

APP irregularities threaten massive climate and tiger impact

2008-03-25

Pekanbaru, INDONESIA – One of the world’s biggest carbon stores and a key tiger habitat are threatened by a new logging road in Riau Province, Sumatra, according to a new investigative report published today.

An absence of permits and other irregularities suggest that the new road cutting into Kampar peninsula is likely to be illegal, says Riau’s Eyes on the Forest group, a coalition of local NGO network Jikalahari, Walhi Riau, and WWF-Indonesia.

The road, like another exposed in January threatening indigenous peoples, elephants, orangutans and tigers in Sumatra’s Bukit Tigapuluh forest landscape, has been constructed by companies linked to controversial conglomerate Asia Pulp and Paper (APP).

“It is morally reprehensible for one of the world’s largest paper companies to so brazenly ignore Indonesian laws and destroy the natural resources that belong to the people of Riau,” said Teguh Surya of Walhi Riau.

“We strongly urge APP to join the ranks of responsible businesses and conduct its operations within the law. Until that time, the world’s paper buyers and investors should stop doing business with APP.”

Kampar peninsula can be considered a single hydro-ecological system, consisting entirely of a single dome of peat at depths mostly over 10 meters – extremely deep for a peatland, with an enormous store of carbon.

Drainage and plantation development activities on the top of the Kampar peat dome could cause the dome to collapse and emit large amounts of carbon, according to Eyes on the Forest.

Last month, a report [PDF - 5.3MB] by WWF, Remote Sensing Solution GmbH and Hokkaido University found that deforestation, peat decomposition and forest fires in Riau Province resulted in annual carbon emissions equivalent to 122 percent of the Netherlands total annual emissions, 58 percent of Australia's annual emissions, 39 per cent of annual UK emissions and 26 per cent of annual German emissions.

That report also found that the province had Indonesia’s highest deforestation rates, substantially driven by the operations of global paper giants APP and competitor Asia Pacific Resources International Holdings Limited (APRIL).

Until 2002, the 700,000 ha of Kampar peninsular were still fully covered by by natural forest, but clearing for APP and APRIL pulp mills and related plantation development has been the major factor in cover being reduced to 400,000 ha by 2007

The Kampar peninsula area is also considered one of the last havens for critically endangered Sumatran tigers, whose wild population is estimated to be down to just 400-500. It is feared that Sumatran tigers may be on course to follow Indonesia’s Java and Bali tigers into extinction.

The landscape was designated a “regional priority” tiger conservation landscape by the world’s leading tiger scientists in 2006. A preliminary estimate by WWF-Indonesia shows that a well-managed Kampar peninsula could be home to as many as 60 tigers.

“Even as our investigators were out surveying the site last month, they came across tiger tracks walking along the APP logging road,” said Nursamsu of WWF-Indonesia and Eyes on the Forest coordinator.

“But the tigers of Kampar don’t stand a chance once APP begins logging full-scale and the poachers discover there’s easy access to this critical tiger habitat.”

Local NGO network Jikalahari and WWF have formally proposed that the Ministry of Forestry protect the natural forest of Kampar. Jikalahari also jointly signed an MoU with Siak and Pelalawan District Administrations at the UN Climate Change Conference in Bali last year.

APP told Eyes of the Forest that the Siak district government had granted the company permission to build the highway to connect the two remote villages of Teluk Lanus and Sungai Rawa. But satellite images show that the road was not built anywhere close to the two villages, but does connect to two new logging concessions affiliated with APP.

”APP claimed that it was building this state-of-the-art, paved highway for the benefit of the local communities,” said Susanto Kurniawan of Jikalahari.

“It’s shameful to see a multibillion-dollar enterprise hiding behind the needs of desperately poor, isolated villagers, who will receive absolutely no benefit from this road but will likely suffer the consequences of APP’s activities.”

The logging concessions also suffer from irregularities, not least being an apparent contravention on clearing natural forest in good condition for plantation development or clearing on deep peat soils. Both concessions are based on licenses issued by District heads, who are not supposed to issue such licenses, according to Eyes on the Forest.

As well as Bukit Tigapuluh, APP also is currently threatening the Senepis and Kerumutan peatland forests in central Sumatra, Eyes on the Forest said.

Emission trading can boost Japan’s economy and credibility as a global leader - WWF

2008-03-13

Tokyo - Ahead of the G20 meeting in Chiba this week, a WWF report shows how setting up a domestic emissions trading scheme (ETS) could turn Japan into a credible leader in the global fight against climate change and bring massive benefits for the country’s flagging economy.

Being the country’s first report of its kind, "Decarbonizing Japan" finds that the mid-term and long-term benefits of implementing an ETS are much bigger than the costs. While in the absence of international trading the costs in 2010 may outweigh the immediate benefits of an ETS somewhat, by 2015 the economic merits from nurturing green industries already amount to 14 trillion Yen (US$ 137 billion / Euro 89 billion). These benefits make domestic policy measures to cut climate pollution while boosting the economy and creating new jobs a far cheaper strategy than Japan’s current approach of buying up emission reduction credits abroad.

“Japan is far from reaching the emission cuts pledged under the Kyoto Protocol and currently lacks credibility when it proclaims itself a leader in the fight against climate change,” said Hans Verolme, Director of WWF’s Global Climate Programme. “If Japan were to establish an emissions trading scheme it would signal to the world it is indeed serious about avoiding dangerous climate change and that this government is aiming for a successful G8 Summit.”

In WWF’s view, the government’s current Kyoto Achievement Plan fails to deliver due to a lack of overarching policies and its heavy reliance on voluntary action. According to the report, however, an ETS would guarantee certainty of achieving the Kyoto target and cost-efficiency in doing so. As the centerpiece of a broader policy package, including enhanced energy efficiency standards or a carbon tax for sectors not covered by the ETS, it would also drive the decarbonization of the whole society.

Proposing the design of an environmentally effective and economically efficient ETS for Japan, the report describes emission trading as an effective approach to cutting the country’s dependence on primary energy imports, down to 73% by 2015 with an ETS as compared to 82% without ETS. The scheme could even reduce unemployment, to 4% by 2015 as compared to 6.3% under a business as usual scenario without emission trading.

“After many years of stalling by industry, the debate about emissions trading in Japan gained real momentum recently, with the Japanese cabinet, the Ministry of Economy, the Ministry of Environment, and many parliamentarians now actively considering such a scheme,” said Hans Verolme. “If Japan wants to be considered a climate leader at the G8 Summit in Toyako in July, the creation of an emissions trading scheme will be an essential component of the climate solutions package it presents.”

Further information:
Christian Teriete, WWF International, t: +852-9310-6805, e: cteriete@wwf.org.hk
Naoyuki Yamagishi, WWF Japan, t: +81-90-6471-1432, e: yamagishi@wwf.or.jp

Notes to the editor:

1) The report Decarbonizing Japan – Proposal for a Domestic Emission Trading Scheme was first published in 2007 – in Japanese language only. This is the first time the report is published in English language. The press release, the full report and a summary document can be found online at: http://www.panda.org/climate and http://www.wwf.or.jp/climate

2) The initial intention of the report was to function as a counter-proposal to the government’s Kyoto Target Achievement Plan, outlining why and how emission trading is cheaper and more effective in achieving what the government plan aims for. In addition and beyond this target, the report highlights the manifold benefits of emission trading for the Japanese economy and society in an increasingly carbon-constrained world.

3) To propose an ETS for Japan which is environmentally effective and economically efficient, the report recommends to establish a downstream cap and trade scheme which covers carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from the energy conversion sector, the industry sector and the industrial process sector (representing 64% of Japan’s total CO2 emissions and 60% of Japan’s total greenhouse gas emissions). In this scheme, a cap needs to be set in accordance with the government’s plan to achieve the emission reduction target it committed to under the Kyoto Protocol. For the sake of an early start within the first Kyoto commitment period (2008 to 2012), the proposed scheme adopts grandfathering for initial allocation of emission allowances. This means that the distribution of allowances among companies falling under the scheme is free of charge. However, given the lessons learnt from European Union Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS), the report advocates for gradually shifting towards benchmarking and auctioning where companies have to buy allowances. More details about the concrete outline of the domestic emission trading scheme for Japan can be found

Decarbonizing Japan - Summary of proposal for emission trading scheme

2008-03-13

SUMMARY VERSION
WWF report showing how setting up a domestic emissions trading scheme (ETS) could turn Japan into a credible leader in the global fight against climate change and bring massive benefits for the country’s flagging economy.

This time, world should heed OECD call to action on environment

2008-03-05

Paris: The OECD’s Environment Outlook to 2030, issued today, was welcomed by WWF as yet another compelling argument that the costs of inaction on the environment will far exceed the costs of action.

The OECD Outlook is the latest - and at 520 pages one of the weightiest - in a run of reports from prominent economic institutions and commissions calling on governments and international institutions to face up to the seriousness and immediacy of global environmental problems.

“When a body such as the OECD says that on a range of environmental issues we need to act globally and we need to act now, then it is clear that as communities, countries and companies we need to roll up our collective sleeves and get on with it,” said WWF International Director General James Leape.

“It is sobering to think how much better off we would be today if the world, the wealthy world in particular, had heeded OECD's 2001 call to take action on many of these same issues. We should not make the same mistake again.”

James Leape said the OECD outlook should be commended for looking beyond the urgent challenge of climate change to other urgent issues of biodiversity loss, mismanagment of water resources and escalating health threats. WWF also welcomed OECD’s call to prioritise action in the key sectors of energy, transport, agriculture and fisheries.

“The OECD outlook underlines both the magnitude of the largely self-inflicted threats we face and the urgency of acting effectively on them,” said James Leape. “It is rapidly becoming the case that it will be as hard to find a sceptical economist as it is now to find a sceptical scientist."

While generally supporting market liberalisation, the OECD noted that in the absence of “sound environmental policy and institutional frameworks” globalisation “can amplify market and policy failures and intensify environmental pressures”.

The OECD repeated its 2001 call for the removal of subsidies to environmentally harmful activities, with special mention of subsidies to fossil fuel use, agricultural production subsidies, fishing overcapacity subsidies and the subsidy and underpricing of damaging transport modes.

The OECD also repeated that environment policy should not be just a concern of environment ministers, but has to be elevated into being a priority of central and economic policy making in particular.

“There is now no reason not to act," said James Leape. "The OECD outlook is emphatic that the policies and technologies to address urgent environment issues are available and affordable, that taking them will increase efficiencies and reduce costs and that the earlier we take action, the better the cost-benefit equation will be.”

Media release and contact details

Lethal whale "research" programmes produce meat, not answers: WWF

2008-03-05

Japan would do better whale research by not killing whales, said WWF on the eve of a key International Whaling Commission planning meeting.

WWF delegation head, International Species Programme Director Dr Susan Lieberman, called on Japan in particular to recognise that science had moved a long way since a provision allowing governments to issue lethal research permits was written into the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW).

The 61 year old provision is the basis of Japan's so-called scientific whaling programme, which “produces meat but not answers,” Dr Lieberman said.

“At that time, killing whales was the only way to learn some of the most basic biological information, some of which was then used to set catch quotas,” Dr Lieberman said. “Today, much more plentiful and reliable information is available using the many better new ways of collecting whale data rather than much the same old ways of killing them.

“What sort of scientific enterprise is it that uses the most outdated methodologies to produce little published data, few insights into whales and negligible useful whale management information?”

For the International Whaling Commission Intersessional meeting, starting in London tomorrow (March 6), WWF is calling on Japan “to stop abusing the special whaling permit provision of the ICRW by conducting commercial whaling under the guise of research”.

“The Contracting Governments of the IWC must ensure that IWC-related research meets modern accepted scientific techniques, so that the IWC’s credibility on this issue is maintained,” Dr Lieberman said. “The continued abuses of Japan’s whaling programme are an affront to legitimate science.”

Look at non-whaling threats to whales

In its statement to the meeting, WWF is also urging contracting governments to “look more closely and consistently at the non-whaling threats to whales”.

Whales face general threats from habitat degradation and climate change, as well as more specific challenges such as being deafened or displaced by the operations of the oil and gas exploration and development industry, or being caught up and discarded as bycatch by the fishing industry.

“The greatest threat to many cetacean species is bycatch, with estimates showing that more than 300,000 whales and dolphins are killed in fishing gear each year,” Dr Lieberman said. “Only through swift and cooperative international action to reduce bycatch will some critically endangered cetacean populations be saved.”

WWF's new bycatch initiative is highlighting the existence of practical, innovative fishing gear designs to reduce bycatch.

Populations of nearly all the great whales remain at depressed levels, a legacy of the unsustainable whaling during the last two centuries.

As long-lived mammals with slow reproductive cycles whales inevitably take several decades or more to recover from population depletion while some populations still survive as a few hundred individuals at the brink of extinction.

WWF’s goal is to ensure that viable populations of all cetacean species occupy their historical range, and fulfill their role in maintaining the integrity of ocean ecosystems.

A new platform to start changing the world

2008-03-04

Forget Facebook, MySpace or You Tube: here comes connect2earth, a new online community where young people can upload videos, pictures and comments about the environment.

On www.connect2earth.org, users and visitors will be able to write, speak, illustrate and video present their concerns on subjects important to them, and share environmental ideas and solutions.

Each month, users will vote for a winner who will receive a Nokia mobile phone.

“Connect2earth is a truly global space for young people to connect, share, express their concerns and hopes about the environment online – and win some prizes in the process”, said James Leape, Director General of WWF International.

“This new community allows them to tell the world why they care about the environment and why it should be protected.”

Julia Marton-Lefèvre, Director General of the World Conservation Union (IUCN) said: “We live on an amazing planet – we need to protect it. We want to encourage young people to be involved in environmental issues and take action.”

A panel of prominent conservationists will elect an overall winner who will get the chance to participate in the IUCN World Conservation Congress in Barcelona next October.

She or he will have the opportunity to present some ideas directly to leaders from around the world.

“Young people feel increasingly strongly about protecting the environment because, for them, it represents their future”, said Kirsi Sormunen, Vice President of Environmental Affairs at Nokia.

And how do you connect to earth through connect2earth? The site, not surprisingly, is particularly suited to uploading short films, photos and comments from mobile phones.

For further information:

Sarah Halls, IUCN Media Relations Officer, tel. +41 22 999 01 27; sarah.halls@iucn.org
Moira O’Brien-Malone, Head of Media Relations, WWF International, tel. +41 22 364 95 50; mobrien@wwfint.org