WWF - Conservation and environmental news & publications: Poland

Subsidies contribute to harming Baltic Sea instead of saving it

2009-06-17

The majority of subsidies given to Baltic Sea fisheries and agriculture have a negative impact on the health of the sea, a new WWF report says.

Some 14 billion euros of taxpayers’ money is distributed to these sectors in the region every year. But according to WWF at least 84 percent of this cash pile is being used in an environmentally harmful way or instead of serving the public good is supporting purely profit related activities.

A previous Swedish Environment Protection Agency showed that the minimum cost to reach the environmental targets for eutrophication and fisheries in the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan is calculated to be approximately €2.6 billion per year.

“This shows that we have enough money to save the Baltic Sea,” says Lasse Gustavsson, the CEO of WWF Sweden. “Just the money provided to the agriculture and fisheries sectors in the form of misdirected subsidies equals four times the amount of money needed to save the Baltic Sea.”

Parallel to the report on subsidies, WWF released its vision statements for the future of European agricultural policy and the European fisheries policy.

Both of these documents state that public funding should only be used to pay for those goods and services that benefit us all, but are not paid for by the market; services like the sustainable management of common resources, biodiversity protection or the maintenance of cultural values.

“The distribution of subsidies today reflects the outcome of political negotiations rather than an objective assessment of the needs of these sectors, the appropriate use of public funding in response to these needs, or a consideration of the amount of funding required”, says Lasse Gustavsson.

”Delivering public goods should be the primary purpose of public funding, and this is likely to require substantial investments in the Baltic Sea region also in the future”.

According to WWF the most urgent measure to solve the fisheries crisis is to bring down fishing over-capacity to a sustainable level. Today subsidies are used both to scrap vessels and to support increased fishing. The report shows that the cost to bring down over-capacity would be less than zero – it would be a net gain for society.

In order to put agriculture policy on a more sustainable track the WWF vision states the importance of working in partnership with environmental NGOs, farmers’ representatives and others to develop a new Common Environment and Rural Policy for implementation in 2019.

The full report and the vision papers are available at www.panda.org/baltic

River managers plan a bleak water future for Europe

2009-05-29

Brussels, Belgium: An ambitious European scheme to fix and safeguard its rivers and secure its water future is at risk of being undermined by poor and inadequate plans for water management prepared by EU countries, a new study by WWF and European Environment Bureau (EEB) has found.

The analysis has found none of the draft plans rates well across a range of water safety, conservation and management measures.

"The European Water Framework Directive when adopted in 2000 was far from perfect but it had the makings of a world-leading vision to change the ways we manage, use and value water at a time when the worlds water future looked much more secure than it does today ," said Sergey Moroz, Water Policy Officer at WWF.

Despite increasing water challenges exacerbated by climate change, draft plans developed so far by Member States are generally putting off major and necessary decisions, providing few mechanisms and little funding to achieve good status for water bodies.

"in the interests of agriculture and industry to become less vulnerable"

"These plans dont create an impression that we are finally departing from the unsustainable practices that led us to the current water crisis," said Pieter de Pous, EEB Water Policy Officer." For example, it is in the interests of agriculture and industry to become less vulnerable to increasingly insecure water supplies but there is very little in the plans when it comes to reducing their water consumption."

What future for EUs water? expresses particular concerns with increasingly water scarce Italy and Greece where it is unclear whether they are actually planning to finalise plans even remotely comparable to what the rest of Europe is doing.

Some countries like the Netherlands that have lost much of their natural rivers and waters in the past, are now starting initiatives to give rivers more space for flooding and thus improving their ability to face future climate change impacts. The Netherlands also managed to secure funding for river restoration, although the amounts are still inadequate.

Worrying diverging trends now emerge from Eastern and Southern Europe, like in Czech Republic and Portugal, where rivers continue to be poured into concrete straightjackets for the purpose of navigation, flood defence or hydropower, said de Pous.

In Portugal up to 10 new dams for hydropower are currently proposed for construction without any adequate consideration of the likelihood that there may not be enough water to run them.

"need to be visionary to tackle lasting food and energy security, public health and climate challenges"

Water pollution remains a serious issue also not sufficiently addressed in the majority of plans and large portions of Europes waters remain at risk of becoming unavailable or in need of expensive treatment.

Water efficiency measures were particularly poor in most draft plans. A partial exception was France's Loire Bretagne basin where a water efficiency objective is proposed for drinking water supply for rural and urban areas.

"To tackle Europes water challenges, Member States plans need to be visionary, abandoning a minimalist approach to implementation and becoming the central plank of efforts to tackle lasting food and energy security, public health and climate challenges," said Moroz.

Public consultation on the draft river plans is set to close at the end of June. EU Member States will have to finalise their water plans by the end of the year and send them to the European Commission.

5 years on, EU accession scores some wins for nature conservation

2009-05-01

Five years after the EU’s “big bang” enlargement to the East and South, some wins have been scored for nature conservation in the new member states.

The ten countries that on May 1, 2004 pinned their stars to the EU flag – including the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, Hungary, Slovenia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania as well as Cyprus and Malta – are the EU’s treasure troves of natural wealth, including some of its greatest natural forests, wilderness and cultural landscapes.

Accession to the EU has brought some solid advances for nature protection in the countries, but has not been a panacea for persisting challenges. At the same time, still unreformed EU policies and programmes have brought new threats to the EU’s newest heritage.

EU legislation
Over the last several years, the EU’s Natura 2000 network of specially protected sites – the cornerstone of the EU’s system for nature protection – has been extended to include the new member states. As a result, 142,540 km2 (an area roughly twice the size of Ireland) have been added to the EU’s “safety net for nature”, which now covers some 17% of all EU territory. The protective folds of the network cover plants and animals of European and even global importance, including e.g. the European lynx (Lynx lynx), Brown bears (Ursos arctos) and outstanding sites from the Bialowieza primeval forest in Poland to Triglav National Park in Slovenia.

Some of the EU’s new members have overtaken older member states in implementing the EU nature legislation. Slovenia has designated 35% of its territory as part of the Natura 2000 network. The Czech Republic can serve as an example to other member states for some of its management systems for the new areas.

Many challenges remain. While now on paper, the Natura 2000 network is only gradually being put into actual practice. In Slovakia, for example, many protected areas, like the Tatras National Park, are threatened by development of ski facilities and other tourism infrastructure, despite being part of the Natura 2000 network.

Despite reforms in recent years, the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy continues to favour industrial agriculture systems that undermine the rich biological diversity. There are still problems with targeting some of the agri-environmental programmes that are specifically dedicated to promoting nature conservation.

At the same time, EU development funds often serve to undermine natural treasures. EU and national safeguards, like Environmental Impact Assessments, which should ensure that environmental considerations are properly taken into account in planning and project development, are often ineffective or poorly applied in the new member states, providing little more than a green fig leaf.

Despite the challenges, there are clear cases where the application of EU legislation has already made a real difference. EU legislation backed by pressure from the European Commission has saved the Rospuda Valley in northeastern Poland. Bowing to pressure from the European Commission and a case before the European Court of Justice, the Polish government has called off longstanding plans to build a major motorway through the globally important area and is considering alternative routes.

Similar conflicts may be avoided in future as the Polish government has introduced measures to more fully integrate environmental concerns in planning for infrastructure developments before steps are taken toward implementation.

No panacea

“EU legislation and policies provide us with some powerful instruments for promoting nature conservation and the environment in these countries, but not a panacea for all problems – and probably cannot be expected to do so,” said Alberto Arroyo, said WWF’s Natura 2000 coordinator.

Legislation on paper must be applied in practice – and much of this comes down to the efforts not only of authorities and the European Commission, but also and especially citizens and environmental organizations as independent advocates for the preservation of Europe’s riches. Behind the European Commission’s action to save the Rospuda Valley in Poland were thousands of active citizens and organizations that raised public awareness and concern of the issue.

This experience is borne out by the newest EU member states Romania and Bulgaria. In Bulgaria, a growing public movement is actively opposing often illegal construction of ski and tourism facilities in many of the country’s most outstanding protected areas. In January, thousands of Bulgarians took to the streets for a week in the nation’s capital to protest – and ultimately stop – legislation that would have opened loopholes for developers to destroy natural areas throughout the country. According to a recent public opinion survey, 85% of Bulgarians now think that nature conservation and protected areas are a major concern in their country.

Prospects for next members

Many of the countries still waiting at the doorstep to EU accession bring with them a similarly rich dowry in natural wealth. Croatia, a candidate for EU membership, packs an astonishing diversity of natural riches in a relatively small area, from the striking karst landscape of the central part of the country to the marine wonders on the Adriatic coast. Turkey, also a candidate country, is a nature tycoon, boasting as many species of plants and animals as the rest of Europe combined, including many that are unique to the country.

Potential candidate countries in the Western Balkans like Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro host important freshwater ecosystems, including the most extended network of subterranean rivers and lakes in Europe, alluvial forests and wetlands of international importance, such as the Neretva delta (Bosnia and Herzegovina/Croatia), and Skadar/Shkodra Lake (Montenegro/Albania).

Preparation for implementation of EU nature conservation legislation and policies is in full swing in most countries. Croatia is already well on its way to bringing a large part of its natural treasures into the Natura 2000 network, and Serbia is just beginning a major EU-financed project to prepare the country for the legislation.

If the experience of past new member states is an indication, holding onto these treasures will require not only the committed application of key EU legislation, e.g. related to the Natura 2000, but also further reforms of EU policies and programmes, including the Common Agricultural Policy and the Regional Funds.

The best opportunity for implementing these reforms is coming up with the programming for the next financial period, 2013-20, which is already getting underway. It will be essential to ensure that environment and nature conservation are fully and effectively integrated into the new policies – and then also applied in actual practice.

For many of Europe’s greatest natural treasures, the EU still holds much promise – and threat.

Andreas Beckmann is Deputy Director of the WWF Danube-Carpathian Programme

WWF gives Europe a roadmap to Copenhagen

2009-02-27

Brussels, Belgium: With a series of critical European Union meetings on a new global climate deal about to begin, WWF has set out what Europe needs to do to grow in a green way while contributing to helping the world avoid passing the 2 degree threshold of warming that presents unacceptable risks of catastrophic climate change.

“There is a clear link to be made between ambitious climate policies and a new phase of economic growth,” said Stephan Singer, Director of Energy Programme at WWF International.

“The recent financial bailouts prove that when governments decide to fix a problem, money and regulatory instruments are there. There is no excuse to treat the climate crisis with less support and attention.”

The WWF roadmap to a successful new global agreement in Copenhagen in December would see Europe radically strengthen its announced commitments of cutting emissions by just 20 per cent by 2020 and 50 per cent by 2050.

European environment ministers will consider target developed and undeveloped country emissions to take to Copenhagen at Monday’s EU Environment Council meeting in Brussels.

Commit to zero net emissions

Based on various studies, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) scenarios, WWF says that emissions will have to be reduced by at least 80 percent by 2050 globally to keep warming below 2°C. In compliance with its fair share of responsibility, the EU must commit to net zero emissions by 2050.

The IPCC also said that industrial countries will have to reduce their greenhouse gases by between 25 and 40% by 2020. The current EU target is only 20%, with a possibility to increase to 30% if other developed nations will join an international agreement.

These targets are clearly at the lower end of the IPCC scale, and even lower in reality considering that EU countries are allowed to fulfil up to two thirds of their commitment by way of certificates for projects in developing countries (the so-called CDM credits).

At the forthcoming Economic and Financial Affairs Council (Ecofin) meeting on Tuesday March 10, European finance ministers will consider both the plan to boost economic recovery in Europe and financing climate protection measures.

WWF said Ecofin must come to grips with the fact that so far EU countries have failed to seriously face the challenge and to see the opportunities created by a greener economy.

Today, the fossil fuel energy sector in the EU-15 countries still receives about €20 billion of subsidies, equal to 0.2% Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Europe imports about 4.8 billion barrels of oil per year, equal to 3% of GDP. Natural gas imports are another 3% of GDP.

According to the European Commission, between 600,000 and 900,000 jobs can be created by renewable energy by 2020, compared to today’s 150,000 jobs. As a comparison, the cement and the steel sectors – some of those crying wolf about strong climate measure – employ about 60,000 and 300,000 people respectively.

With finance to developing countries being touted as a make or break issue at Copenhagen, WWF is calling for European contributions for clean technology and reduced deforestation in developing countries to
amount to €35 billion per year, in addition to the long-time promised 0.7% GDP for development aid.

Funding of climate protection measures (avoidance, adaptation and forest protection) needs to be sustainable, predictable and controlled in a transparent manner by the international community.

The European Commission’s current proposal also fails to address the enormous potential of energy efficiency, with an almost complete lack of concrete proposals for technology co-operation.

WWF says that the EU financing of technology development and research should be increased by a factor of 10 compared to current levels by 2020, particularly for renewable energies, energy efficiency and carbon capture and storage (CCS).

The EU should also promote the setting up of a technology action programme under the UNFCCC to protect intellectual property rights and promote innovation.

Outcomes from the Ecofin and Environment Council meetings are scheduled to be considered by EU Heads of State at a European Council meeting on Thursday 19th and Friday 20th March. Some issues however may carry over to when Sweden assumes the presidency of the EU

Ski champions demand climate action in Poznan

2008-12-05

Poznan, Poland: With snowy winters and ski resorts under threat from climate change, world-famous skiers and snowboarders are calling on governments attending the UN climate talks in Poznan to rapidly reduce global emissions. At a WWF action in Poznan, athletes performed a series of tricks expressing their support for urgent action against rising temperatures.

The skiers - including Olympic and world champions from the US like Ted Ligety and Julia Mancuso as well as world and European champions from Poland like Magdalena Gwizdoń and Tomasz Sikora – have signed onto an urgent appeal by WWF. It addresses Maciej Nowicki, the Polish Environment Minister and President of the Poznan talks, and other Poznan delegates.

“From the European Alps to the Asian Himalayas, the US Rockies and the Central American Andes, global warming means milder winters and less snowfall”, the petition said. “Ice and snow are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of global warming, and as avid skiers and snowboarders we see our beloved sports endangered.”

The signatories demand a new global climate treaty which is ambitious enough to keep global warming below the danger-threshold of 2°C. They urge a peak of global emissions well before 2020 and a reduction of 80% by 2050 compared to 1990 levels. As a crucial first step, they call on industrialized countries to cut their emissions by 25 to 40% by 2020.

“Skiers are first-hand witnesses of the destructive power of climate change, seeing glaciers retreat and snowpack disappear with their own eyes”, says Kim Carstensen, Leader of the WWF Global Climate Initiative. “These massive changes endanger important species and alpine ecosystems and threaten local communities depending on tourism and winter sports.”

According to science, glaciers in the European Alps have decreased by at least 50% since 1850. If climate change intensifies as projected in upcoming decades, the snowline will move from 1200 to 1800 meters above mean sea level, leaving only 44% of existing ski centers with enough snow for the whole season.

Nearly all glaciers surveyed in Alaska are melting, with thinning rates in the last 5 to 7 years rising to more than twice those seen in previous years. Glaciers in the Northern Andes are receding rapidly and losses accelerated in the 1990s. The majority of Himalayan glaciers have also been retreating and thinning over the past 30 years, with accelerated loss in the last and current decade.

Tuna commission comes up with "a disgrace, not a decision"

2008-11-24

Marrakech, Morocco - The commission tasked with preventing a collapse of the Mediterranean bluefin tuna fishery today opted for catch quotas still far higher than its own scientists recommend and leaving industrial fleets free to scoop up tuna at the height of its spawning period.

The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), meeting in Marrakech, Morocco, for the past week, brushed aside its own review’s description of its management of the bluefin fishery as “an international disgrace” to endorse a total allowable catch (TAC) of 22,000 tonnes for next year.

ICCAT’s own scientists had recommended a TAC ranging 8,500 to 15,000 tonnes per year, warning there were real risks of the fishery collapsing otherwise. The scientists also urged a seasonal closure during the fragile spawning months of May and June, while today’s outcome allows industrial fishing in practice up to 20 June.

“This is not a decision, it is a disgrace which leaves WWF little choice but to look elsewhere to save this fishery from itself,” said Dr Sergi Tudela, head of WWF Mediterranean’s fisheries programme, speaking from Marrakech.

“Any alternative is preferable to an organization which boasts of its respect for science but where in a decade catches have gone from twice to four times the scientific recommendations, with massive legal and illegal overfishing. It is clear that the only thing to slow the fishery with ICCAT at the helm is running out of fish.”

The European Union drove today’s decision, supported by Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt and Syria and later joined by Japan.

Japan had initially been party to a US, Canada, Mexico, Norway, Iceland and Brazil proposal, supported by a brace of developing nations, to fix the allowed catch at the upper levels recommended by scientists and closing the fishery for the full spawning period.

The debate has been marred by allegations of the European Commission threatening developing state members with trade retaliations should they support lower catch limits and extended closed seasons, with the names of some nations appearing and disappearing from the more scientifically-based proposals.

“ICCAT’s string of successive failures leaves us little option now but to seek effective remedies through trade measures and extending the boycott of retailers, restaurants, chefs and consumers,” Dr Tudela said.
WWF has been urging a suspension of the out-of-control fishery, an option endorsed by the recent World Conservation Congress and recommended by ICCAT’s own internal high-level review.

The world’s largest bluefin tuna trader, Mitsubishi, signalled earlier in November that it would “reassess” its “involvement in this business” should ICCAT continue to be unable to sustainably manage the fishery.

“WWF will also actively push for a listing under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) in the hope that stringent trade controls tied explicitly to the survival of the species will turn around the half-hearted attempt at fisheries management shown here by ICCAT and especially its European contingent.”

CITES next meets in Doha in January 2010 with submissions on listings required by August 2009.
“Today’s outcome is a recipe for economic as well as biological bankruptcy with the European Union squarely to blame,” said Dr Tudela.

“Bluefin consumption in the main consumer market of Japan is expected to drop from 18,000 tonnes due to the economic crisis, with around 30,000 tonnes of frozen bluefin already in Hong Kong and Japan and additional unknown amounts in other Asian countries and in freezer ships.

“Our industry sources also tell us that there are 7,000 tonnes of illegally fished tuna in fattening cages across the Mediterranean that nobody wants to buy.”

The moratorium option, which the scientific panel said would lead to the quickest recovery in bluefin stock and the best future prospects for fulfilling ICCAT’s charter of delivering a long-term sustainable fishery, was not even given consideration by the commission in Marrakech despite increasing support for this option from European fishermen.

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.

Stronger European climate action could have €25 billion health benefit

2008-10-01

Brussels, Belgium – Health savings of up to €25 billion could be achieved every year in Europe if the European Union immediately opted for stronger climate policies, says a new study published by health and environment NGOs..

The report. The Co-benefits to Health of a Strong EU Climate Change Policy, analyses the health benefits of reduced climate pollution if the EU increased its 2020 target for domestic greenhouse gas emission cuts from 20 to 30 per cent without any delay.

The study was commissioned by the Health and Environment Alliance (HEAL), Climate Action Network Europe (CAN-E) and WWF.

The findings show that raising the target to 30 per cent, in line with recommendations of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), would produce savings resulting from better health valued at between €6.5-25 billion per year.

The estimates are based on economic evaluations of loss of life and health, working days lost and hospital costs. The findings show reductions in hospital admissions of 8,000 per year, and two million fewer work days lost per year by moving to the higher 30 per cent target.

These health savings are over and above the benefits of the EU’s existing scenario of a 20 per cent target. The report shows that raising the target to 30 per cent would increase the savings by €25 billion, or 48 per cent, from €51-76 billion.

“Until now the discussion on climate change has been all about costs to industry and the economy, while costs of climate pollution to society have largely been neglected,” said Delia Villagrasa, Senior Advisor to WWF’s European Policy Office.

“It is essential to see that measures to promote cleaner sources of energy and reduce fossil fuel consumption will not only contribute to control climate change but will also cut air pollution and improve quality of life for European citizens.”

Baltic states failing to protect most damaged sea

2008-08-27

Nine Baltic sea states all scored failing grades in an annual WWF evaluation of their performance in protecting and restoring the world’s most damaged sea.

The assessment, presented today at the Baltic Sea Festival, graded the countries on how well they are doing in six separate areas - biodiversity, fisheries, hazardous substances, marine transport and eutrophication - and on how they have succeeded in developing an integrated sea-use management system.

The best grade (an F for just 46 per cent) was received by Germany, followed by Denmark (41 per cent) and the worst were Poland (25 per cent) and Russia (26 per cent).

“It is a shame no country could be given a satisfactory total score,” said Lasse Gustavsson, CEO of WWF Sweden. “The Baltic Sea is influenced by a multitude of human activities, regulated by a patchwork of international and national regulations and authorities.

“What the Baltic Sea needs now is political leadership that can look beyond national or sectoral interests and take an integrated approach to solving the problems.”

Behind the bad overall scores there were some rays of hope. Germany received an A on the biodiversity score for their protection of marine areas with around 40 per cent of the country’s sea areas protected.

Latvia and Lithuania have taken measures to combat illegal fishing of cod, partly by giving inspectors the mandate to impose sanctions on site. Estonia has a narrow lead in lowering the impact of hazardous substances.

Also at the festival WWF awarded Tarja Halonen, president of the Republic of Finland, with the Baltic Sea Leadership Award for “her persistent efforts to unite groups and encourage cross-border discussions on the future of the Baltic Sea”.

Finland is the only country in the region that has developed a cross-sectoral marine policy and several other countries are now taking steps to review their marine management.

“We now have an opportunity in the area of sea-use management with two current processes on the European level,” said Vicki Lee Wallgren, programme manager for WWF’s Baltic Ecoregion Programme.

She said initiatives such as the EU’s Maritime Policy and the EU Baltic Sea Strategy meant that “there is hope for the Baltic Sea”.

The poor state of the Baltic Sea environment has received attention this summer because of the extensive algal blooms caused by eutrophication and for recent scientific reports on the vast “dead zones” on the sea bottom. Seven of the world’s 10 biggest dead zones, where nothing can survive due to lack of oxygen, are found in the Baltic Sea.

International cruise ships are feeding the algal blooms in the Baltic Sea

2008-07-08

A majority of the international cruise ships visiting the Baltic Sea continue to discharge their sewage straight into the sea. A plea by WWF to the cruise ship companies to stop their discharges of waste water has been met with refusal by most companies.

Already last year WWF contacted the ferry lines and cruise ship companies that are sailing in the Baltic Sea, asking for a voluntary ban on waste-water discharge. So far, most of the ferry lines have responded positively, but only three of the international cruising lines have signed up. The remaining 17 cruising lines that were contacted answered through their umbrella organization CLIA (Cruise Lines International Association) by saying: “at this moment signing the WWF petition without sensitivity to understand the variety of waste streams, port reception facilities, and environmental equipment would be premature”.

“We think it must be the responsibility of anyone operating a ship in the Baltic Sea to take care of their own wastes in a responsible manner and stop polluting the sea”, says Mats Abrahamsson, Program Director of the WWF Baltic Ecoregion Program. “If some companies can sign our agreement, why can’t the others?”

The Baltic Sea receives between 250 and 300 cruise ships each year. The waste-water produced in these vessels is currently estimated to contain 113 tons of nitrogen and 38 tons of phosphorus, substances that add to the eutrophication of the sea. Most of this is still discharged into the Baltic Sea, mainly in international waters. In addition to excess nutrients, the waste water also contains bacteria, viruses and other pathogens, as well as heavy metals.

Eutrophication is considered by many the main environmental problem of the Baltic Sea, causing both biological and economic damage to marine environment and coastal areas. It is caused by an overload of nutrients, such as phosphorus and nitrogen, into the ecosystem. Eutrophication causes many problems, including unusually strong and frequent blooms of algae such as the toxic cyanobacteria (also called “blue-green algae”).

“The international cruise ship industry claims that one of their biggest problems is the insufficient reception facilities in the ports receiving cruising ships. We know that there are improvements needed in many ports, and we have offered to work together with the cruising companies to demand better facilities. Still, there is no excuse for dumping the sewage in the sea”, says Dr. Anita Mäkinen, Head of Marine Programme for WWF Finland, who has been coordinating the WWF project.

“All ports have some sort of facility to receive ship sewage. Some big cruise ships are treating their waste waters onboard, but only according to the Alaska regulations, which do not regulate nutrients but only bacteria and organic content of the waste water. They don’t seem to understand that this is not enough in the Baltic Sea”, continues Dr. Mäkinen.

Ferry companies that have signed WWF’s voluntary agreement:
Birka Line (Finland)
Bornholmstrafiken (Denmark)
Colorline (Norway)
Eckerö Line (Finland)
Molslinien (Denmark)
Nordic Jetline (Finland)
Rederi AB Gotland and Destination Gotland (Sweden)
Seawind Line (Finland)
Tallink (Estonia)
Tallink-Silja Line (Finland)
Viking Line ABP (Finland)

Cruise ship companies that have signed WWF’s voluntary agreement:
Aida (Germany)
Hurtigruten (Norway)
Peter Deilmann Reederei (Germany)

For more information, please contact:

Mats Abrahamsson, Program Director, WWF Baltic Ecoregion Program, +46 705 821 499

Dr. Anita Mäkinen, Head of Marine Programme, WWF-Finland, +358-40 52 714 25

See also

the original WWF petition letter (pdf 48KB)
a report by Finnish consultancy firm VTT on “Estimated nutrient load from waste waters originating from ships in the Baltic Sea area” (pdf 1,13MB)

Notes to editors:

Facts about the international cruise ships

A cruise ship with 1,100 crew members and more than 3,000 passengers produce altogether 1,000 m³ grey and black water per day. The amount of black water produced per day is 25 m³. (Black water is term used to describe water containing fecal matter and urine, while gray water refers to wastewater generated from processes such as dish washing, laundry and bathing)
This size of a ship can store waste waters for 4 days.
The American owned ships are following the Alaska discharge requirement which regulate TSS (Total Suspended Solids), BOD (Biochemical/biological Oxygen Demand), pH, residual chlorine and fecal coliform bacteria (FCB). The Alaska requirements for these parameters are higher than IMO requirements; however, they don’t regulate nutrients at all.

Facts about sewage water regulations in the Baltic Sea
According to the international convention MARPOL 73/78 and its Annex IV which is regulating discharge of sewage waters, ships are allowed to discharge black waters beyond 12 nautical miles from the shore line and grey waters beyond 3 nautical miles from the shore line.

The Baltic Sea states have agreed in the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) “to have in 2009 a joint submission by HELCOM Contracting States to IMO in order to elaborate relevant new regulations for ships covered by the existing Annex IV to MARPOL 73/78, including further consideration of designation of the Baltic Sea as a special area, with the aim to eliminate the discharge of sewage from ships, especially from passenger ships and ferries”. They further agreed “to encourage voluntary activities in ports and shipping companies to dispose of sewage to the port reception facilities and to undertake all the necessary improvements in the availability of these port reception facilities”.

No more EU-trophication! How CAP reform can save the Baltic Sea

2008-07-08

In the last 150 years, the Baltic Sea has developed from a pristine, nutrient-poor, clear water sea to permanent eutrophic conditions. A key factor in the environmental degradation of the BalticSea is the intensification of agriculture – much of it in the last 50 years – in the surrounding drainage basin.

Large amounts of nutrients, mainly nitrogen and phosphorus, are released into the Baltic Sea each year as a result of modern farming practices such as the useof artificial fertilisers.

A key component in solving the problemof eutrophication lies on the land and in the promotion of more sustainable farming and land management practices.

Successive reforms of EU’s CommonAgricultural Policy (CAP) have started the process of putting agriculture on a more sustainable footing but much remains to be done.

Putting an end to eutrophication of the Baltic Sea, and to a wide range of other environmental problems associated with European agriculture, demands further, progressive reform of the CAP.

The time is now ripe to consider what changes are needed in agriculture policy over the coming decade or more.

WWF, in seeking to address eutrophication of the Baltic Sea, presents a vision for policy reform that reaches far beyond the Baltic Sea States.

Time must not be wasted in moving towards a new vision for rural Europe.

In this paper, WWF outlines a vision for a new Common Environment and Rural Policy (CERP) and argues that steps must be taken now to make that vision a reality.

Carpathian biodiversity protocol signed

2008-06-26

The rich natural heritage of the Carpathian Mountains, including many of Europe's greatest natural treasures, received additional support on June 19 with the signing of the Protocol on Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biological and Landscape Diversity to the Framework Convention on the Protection and Sustainable Development of the Carpathians.

The protocol was signed by all 7 countries that are a party to the Carpathian Convention -- the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia and Ukraine -- during the second Conference of the Parties to the Carpathian Convention, which took place June 17-19 in Bucuresti.

"WWF welcomes the signing of the Biodiversity Protocol to the Carpathian Convention, which comes none too soon as the region and its natural treasures are facing growing pressure from a range of threats, from construction of motorways to ski facilities, not to mention illegal construction and logging in many protected areas", said Michael Baltzer, director of the WWF Danube-Carpathian Programme. "The key priority now is to ensure that what has been signed on paper is enforced in practice," he added.

Red lists and ecological networks
The biodiversity protocol commits signatory countries to harmonise and coordinate their efforts to enhance the conservation, restoration and sustainable use of biological and landscape diversity of the Carpathians, for the benefit of both present and future generations. The countries should work together for the conservation, maintenance and sustainable use of natural and semi-natural habitats, and securing their continuity and connectivity; restoration of degraded habitats; conservation and sustainable use of species of flora and fauna characteristic to the Carpathians, in particular on conservation of endangered or endemic species and large carnivores.

The Parties should also apply the precaution and prevention principles by assessing and taking into consideration possible direct or indirect, short- or long-term influence, including cumulative effects of the projects and activities. These are important provisions in a region that is undergoing rapid development, with major potential threats to nature from infrastructure and other projects.

Network of protected areas
Measures on which the countries should cooperate include drawing up a list of Carpathian Red List of Habitats and Species; establishing an ecological network in the Carpathians, composed of protected areas and other areas significant for biological and landscape diversity of the Carpathians and for coherence of the network. Each Party should also take measures in its national territory with the objective to prevent introduction or release of harmful invasive species.

A key provision is support for and cooperation under the Carpathian Network of Protected Areas, which brings together protected area administrations from across the region. Many of the greatest natural treasures in the Carpathians already enjoy some form of protection, but in most cases this protection is mostly on paper and very limited in actual practice, with significant problems e.g. with illegal construction and logging in national parks and other protected areas across the region. The protocol also calls for development and implementation of management plans for protected areas across the region.

WWF's work for the Carpathians
A major focus for WWF's work in the region, supported by the MAVA Foundation, has been strengthening of protected area management, including the Carpathian Network of Protected Areas. The ProPark Foundation, co-founded by WWF in May 2008, is dedicated to capacity building and training related to protected area management.

WWF has been a driving force for the protection of the Carpathian ecoregion. The Danube-Carpathian Summit organised in 2001 by WWF and the Romanian Government eventually led to the establishment of the Carpathian Convention, which formally came into force in 2007. In 2001, WWF and partners in the Carpathian Ecoregion Initiative also undertook the first comprehensive assessment of environment and social and economic impacts in the Carpathians.

Contact:
David Strobel, WWF Danube-Carpathian Programme

Marine dead zones – a growing problem globally and in the Baltic Sea

2008-06-09

The global science community is watching the problem of oxygen depletion in marine and coastal areas with growing concern.

Over the last few years the number of known dead zones globally has increased from 44 in 1995 to 169 according to a recent report from the World Resource Institute (WRI). Another 246 areas are considered “vulnerable”.

The report also concludes that there is still insufficient information available to determine the real extent of the problem in many parts of the world.

WWF notes that together with overfishing and climate change, the growing number of dead zones is among the biggest threats to the world’s oceans in the 21st century.

Marine dead zones are caused by eutrophication – a process where bodies of water receive excess nutrients, mainly nitrogen and phosphorus. Dissolved in the water, the nutrients act as fertilisers and thereby enhance plant growth.

The dead zones occur when algae and other organisms die, sink to the bottom, and are decomposed by bacteria, using the available oxygen. Agriculture, human sewage, urban runoff, industrial effluent, and fossil fuel combustion are the most common sources of nutrients delivered to coastal systems.

“The situation is alarming - but a complete picture may be even worse”, says Jochen Lamp of WWF Germany, author of the briefing paper.

“Eutrophication is an issue that requires greater attention by governments and society in general. Left untouched, it may have dire consequences for many ecosystems, the food webs that they support, and the livelihoods of the populations that depend on them.”

According to one of the WRI scientists, Robert Diaz, 7 of the 10 largest dead zones recorded in their latest report are found in the Baltic Sea.

An assessment made by the Helsinki Commission (HELCOM) estimates these to cover an area of 42,000 km².

In some periods they can easily reach up to 90.000 km².

Other hotspots of oxygen depletion are found in the Gulf of Mexico, the Black Sea and the Adriatic Sea.

Around 4/5ths of the US coast and 2/3rds of Europe’s coasts are now faced with excessive eutrophication. Experts also believe that there are numbers of yet unexplored dead zones in the coastal waters of China and Southeast Asia.

Dead zones can also further add to the problem of eutrophication in the Baltic Sea in a vicious circle. Normally, phosphorus slowly binds to the sediments on the sea bottom and is thereby removed from the water. When there is no oxygen left in the sediments, these compounds are transformed and the phosphorus is released back into the water.

“Most people now connect eutrophication with the yearly algal blooms that we are now used to seeing each summer”, says Mats Abrahamsson from WWF. “For the Baltic Sea, these dead zones are an invisible but even larger problem over the longer term. Dead zones can lead to the collapse of whole ecosystems as bottom-dwelling organisms die and more phosphorus is released into the water.”

WWF believes that governments must take the consequences of eutrophication seriously.

As agriculture contributes to about 50% of the excess nutrients in the Baltic Sea, WWF advocates a reform of agriculture policy to curb these emissions.

For more information, please contact:

Mats Abrahamsson, WWF Baltic Ecoregion Programme, Programme Director, tel: +46 705 821 499

Jochen Lamp, WWF Germany, Head of Baltic Sea Project Office leader, tel: +49 3831 297 018

Addressing threats to nature in the Carpathians

2008-04-10

The handbook Addressing Threats to Nature in the Carpathians and related materials provide an introduction and overview of some of the legal tools available for addressing conflicts between infrastructure and nature conservation and protected areas in the Carpathian Mountains.

Much to hold onto

The greatest advantage of the Carpathian region compared to many others is the rich natural treasures and resources of the area, which are unparalleled in Europe. The best long-term prospects for development of the region therefore must be based on preserving while using this natural capital rather than squandering it for short-term gain.

At least on paper and in principle, the EU and Carpathian countries already have relatively good frameworks and some powerful tools in place for ensuring smart development – for ensuring that infrastructure development takes into account different interests, including that of conservation, and thus contributes to something approaching long-term sustainable development in the Carpathians.

The legal and administrative tools described in the handbook should help to prevent such conflicts from happening in the first place and, where they do occur, to help address them in the interest of long-term sustainable development in the Carpathians.

The handbook is intended for all stewards of high nature value areas, including Protected Area managers, NGOs and local communities and interested stakeholders. While it is intended expressly for audiences in the Carpathian Mountains, many of the tools described are relevant in other areas as well.

Structure

The handbook provides an overview of selected tools available in international and EU legislation across different Carpathian countries, featuring simple fact sheets on each of the instruments. References and links to further information are included throughout the document.

A presentation (powerpoint) on legal and administrative instruments available for use and adaptation e.g. in trainings on the subject.

Country reports provide an overview of legislation and administrative instruments that are specific to each of the Carpathian countries, i.e. those that transpose the international and EU legislation as well as other national instruments that may be of use. Country reports are initially available for the Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia and Hungary; further reports for Romania, Ukraine and Serbia will be added later, resources permitting.

Click here to access all of the above materials.

This publication has been produced by the Carpathian Project under the INTERREG III B CADSES Neighbourhood Programme and co-financed by the European Union as well as the MAVA Fondation pour la Protection de la Nature as part of the WWF Protected Areas for a Living Planet Carpathian Ecoregion Project.

Bloated Mediterranean tuna fleet in race for the last bluefin

2008-03-12

Rome, Italy – The most comprehensive analysis yet of the Mediterranean bluefin tuna fleet shows it conservatively having twice the fishing capacity of current quotas and more than three and a half times the catch levels recommended by scientists to avoid stock collapse.

The fleet is so bloated that just covering its costs implies that a third of its fishing would be illegal, with the worst over-capacity culprits being Turkey, Italy, Croatia, Libya, France and Spain.

The new WWF report, Race for the last bluefin, "uncovers the absurdity of a system long out of control, where hundreds of hi-tech boats are racing to catch a handful of fish,” said Dr Sergi Tudela, Head of Fisheries at WWF Mediterranean.

“The failure of international fisheries management has allowed a monster to thrive in the Mediterranean. Decision-makers must be bold if the bluefin is to be saved from a sorry fate – and for any chance of a future for Mediterranean tuna fishermen.”

To keep fishing capacity within the 2008 legal catch limits imposed by the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT), the Mediterranean fleet would need to shed 229 vessels – almost a third of the current 617-vessel fleet.

Reducing fishing effort to scientifically recommended levels, meanwhile, would require decommissioning 283 vessels, including 58 in European Union Member States.

In Italy – worst culprit among EU countries – the fleet should be reduced by over 30 vessels to respect scientific recommendations, or 17 just to stay within the law. The WWF report indicates that high levels of under-reporting by Italy are also likely, as its reported catches have dramatically decreased since 1997 – yet during the past decade the Italian fleet has increased considerably in size and power. Croatia, Spain and Libya are also under the spotlight for under-reporting.

At a minimum, the report shows Mediterranean fleets would have to fish 42,000 tonnes of tuna just to cover costs – implying some 13,000 tonnes of illegal catch. This calculation considers only the more technically advanced vessels built in the past decade – the full picture will be much worse yet.

“It is crazy – the numerous new fleets are so modern and costly that fishermen are forced to fish illegally just to survive – and worse still they are fishing themselves out of a job,” added Dr Tudela.

WWF is calling on concerned countries to dramatically reduce capacity in this fishery as a matter of urgency ahead of the 2008 fishing season that starts end-April. WWF also urges ICCAT, the body tasked with sustainably managing the fishery, to take a lead in proposing radical solutions. Until the fishery is under control and sustainably managed, WWF continues to advocate a fishing ban – and to applaud responsible retailers, restaurants, chefs and consumer groups who are boycotting Mediterranean bluefin in increasing numbers.

“The fishery is unsustainable in every way – economically, socially, and ecologically. The time to act is now – while there are still bluefin tuna to save in the Mediterranean,” Dr Tudela said.

In spite of the overcapacity of fleets, at least 25 new purse seine vessels were still being constructed at time of going to press.

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

Protecting old-growth forests in Poland

2007-12-05

Warsaw, Poland – Over 100,000 signatures have been forwarded to the Polish government, calling for the protection of Europe’s last remaining stands of natural forests.

The signature drive is part of a WWF campaign to safeguard ancient woodlands in Poland’s Bialowieza Primaeval Forest from logging and other unsustainable forest activities.

In February 2007, a report by Poland’s public audit body, the Supreme Chamber of Control, exposed inadequacies concerning forest management in the country’s most valuable forest areas. In October 2007, the Council of Europe suspended the European Diploma of Protected Areas awarded to the Bialowieza National Park because of lack of sufficient protection.

Also in 2007, the Forest Stewardship Council — an international, non-profit organization dedicated to ensuring environmentally responsible forest management — suspended certification for this region for similar reasons.

“For years, Polish politicians have been passively looking on as the degradation of this unique woodland continued,” said Ireneusz Chojnacki, WWF-Poland’s Programme Director. “Today, they may well have a one-time opportunity to do something about it.”

A special task force set up by Poland’s President, Lech Kaczynski has already drafted legislation to ensure protection of the forest, including extending the Bialowieza National Forest to encompass currently unprotected ancient forest strands. As part of the legislation, a special socio-economic programme has been planned to promote sustainable tourism for local communities living near the forest.

“Over 100,000 people demand that this legislative initiative be accepted by the president and then voted upon by the Polish Parliament,” added Chojnacki.

Home to lynx, wolves and other wildlife, the Bialowieza Forest is the last natural forest on the Central European lowland. Although it is listed as a UNESCO World Heritage site, together with the Belovezhskaya Pushcha National Park on the Belarus side, only 17% of the Polish area of the forest is protected as a national park.

The WWF campaign is aimed at improving the level of protection of the old-growth, primeval forests in and around the park.

“We cannot allow a further degradation of the natural heritage of Poland, as well as the entire European continent,” Chojnacki said.

For further information:
Stefan Jakimiuk, Bialowieza National Park Project Manager
WWF-Poland
Tel: +48 606 856 777
E-mail: sjakimiuk@wwf.pl

Anna Piekut, Press Officer
WWF-Poland
Tel: +48 608 322 153
E-mail: apiekut@wwf.pl

EU economies living beyond ecological means

2007-11-19

Brussels, Belgium – The growing economic strength of the European Union has doubled the ecological pressure on the planet in the past 30 years, according to a WWF report.

Despite technological advances, environmental pressure has been growing at a faster rate than the European population, creating a deficit of natural resources for the rest of the world and for future generations.

“Just a generation ago much of Europe was an ecological creditor, using fewer resources than it had,” said Tony Long, Director of WWF’s European Policy Office.

“But today Europe lives beyond its means. If the world’s citizens lived as Europeans, we would need 2.6 planets to provide the necessary resources and absorb the waste.”

In the report, Europe 2007 - Gross Domestic Product and Ecological Footprint, WWF has compared the performance of EU countries in three key areas since 1971: economic growth measured by Gross Domestic Product (GDP), pressure on natural resources measured by Ecological Footprint, and human development measured by the UN’s Human Development Index.

“What we currently measure as development is a long way away from the EU and world’s stated aim of sustainable development," said WWF International President Chief Emeka Anyaoku. "This is because economic decisions routinely ignore natural capital expenditure.”

“Economic indicators are essential, but without natural resource accounting, ecological deficits will go unnoticed and ignored," he added. "It is as if we spent our money without realizing that we are liquidating the planet’s capital.”

Ecological deficit
All but three EU Members — Finland, Latvia and Sweden — run an ecological deficit. Though these three countries have greater ecological reserves than others, they do not necessarily manage their assets well. Finland’s pressure on environment, for example, has grown by 70% since 1975 and is now the highest among EU countries.

Germany, together with Bulgaria and Latvia, managed to reduce their ecological footprint in the past three decades while growing in human development. Nevertheless, its footprint is two-and-a-half times its natural resources and remains more than double the world average per person.

On the other hand, Greece and Spain are still expanding in both economic and consumption terms. Greece has experienced the highest growth of ecological footprint, accompanied by a limited growth in terms of human development.

France parallels the general EU trend. With improved technology, its resource availability is increasing but is outpaced by growth of consumption, with the largest component being energy.

Among Eastern European countries, Hungary’s footprint — as other former centrally planned European economies — has fallen since 1991, mainly because of economic shifts resulting from the ending of the Soviet era. Back in 1995, Slovenian citizens were practising, in global terms, sustainable development, but in 2003 Slovenia’s ecological footprint per capita had more than doubled while the development level rose by less than 5%. Romania has the lowest ecological footprint in the EU-27, yet it remains an ecological debtor.

“Countries are increasingly realizing the significance of ecological assets for economic competitiveness, national security and social justice,” said Tony Long.

“Development has to be redefined. Improving the quality of life for hundreds of millions of people will have to be separated from ever growing material consumption and waste.”

END NOTES:

• The Europe 2007 - Gross Domestic Product and Ecological Footprint report was produced as a contribution to the “Beyond GDP” conference, organized by the European Parliament, European Commission, OECD, WWF and the Club of Rome in Brussels, Belgium, from 19 to 20 November 2007. WWF co-sponsored the conference with the expectation that it will lead to an action plan to reform Europe’s accounting procedures so that natural resources are considered when accounting for economic growth and progress.

• The Ecological Footprint measures humanity’s demand on the biosphere in terms of the area of biologically productive land and sea required to provide the resources we use and to absorb our waste. The footprint of a country includes the cropland, grazing land, forest and fishing grounds required to produce the food, fibre and timber it consumes and absorb the waste it emits. Biocapacity is the total supply of productive area. The difference between Ecological Footprint and Biocapacity shows whether countries are ecological creditors or debtors.

• The EU is home to 7.7% of the global population and 9.5% of the world’s biocapacity. The EU is also responsible for 16% of the global ecological footprint. Europe’s shares have diminished since 1971, largely as a result of increase in global population.

For further information:
Claudia Delpero, Communications Manager
WWF European Policy Office
Tel: +32 2 740 09 25
E-mail: cdelpero@wwfepo.org

Baltic Sea action plan short on actions

2007-11-15

Krakow, Poland – A plan to achieve a good ecological status of the Baltic Sea lacks strong commitments to protect one of the world’s most threatened marine ecosystems, says WWF.

The Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP), intended to ‘drastically reduce pollution to the Baltic Sea and restore its good ecological status by 2021’ was adopted today by Ministers of the Environment and Senior Government Officials from the Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission (HELCOM) Member States and the European Community in Krakow, Poland.

According to WWF, the BSAP plan being celebrated today falls far short of its lofty ambitions.

“Originally, the proposed text of the plan did indeed include many of the ambitious actions and tough decisions that are so urgently needed. Over time, however, the plan has been successively weakened due to political and economic disagreements between HELCOM governments and the European Community,” said Pauli Merriman of WWF.

“Instead, the BSAP is now high on rhetoric but devoid of the very actions and commitments which were the reason the BSAP was originally conceived. What is left is yet another declaration which promises to ‘save the Baltic’ but offers little in the way of binding commitments” says Pauli Merriman of WWF.

According to WWF, the BSAP rarely steps beyond actions which have already been agreed and negotiated in other fora. In some cases, it is even weaker than previously negotiated texts.

In their position statement WWF outlined what they believed to be some of the major failures of the plan and traced these failures to the lack of political will and leadership of the governments.

“Without the support of the highest level of government of each Baltic Sea state the environmental challenges of the Baltic Sea cannot be tackled by the BSAP in a comprehensive and integrated way. Ministers from Denmark, Germany, and Latvia didn’t even attend the meeting, indicating just how prioritized this process is for their governments” said Jochen Lamp from WWF.

Despite the plans overall shortcomings, WWF maintains that the original intention of the BSAP remains valid and urges Prime Ministers/Presidents around the region to take responsibility to initiate a process to actually deliver what was originally promised by their governments – to take dramatic action to save the Baltic.” says Jochen Lamp from WWF.

For further information:

Jochen Lamp, Tel. +49 162 29 144 27, lamp@wwf.de
Pauli Merriman, Tel. +46 70 105 30 54, pauli.merriman@wwf.se

Notes to the editors:

HELCOM launched the Baltic Sea Action Plan (BSAP) process nearly two years ago and WWF has been an active participant in the ongoing stakeholder process to develop the plan. WWF participated as an official observer to the Ministerial meeting today, in a statement made on behalf of the environmental NGOS, stated its concern that this plan lacks the very tough actions and commitments which are needed to achieve its objectives.
WWF’s position statement on the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan is available on: www.panda.org/balticmarinerescue
For more detail on the background, goals and objectives of the HELCOM Baltic Sea Action Plan please visit: http://www.helcom.fi/BSAP/en_GB/About_BSAP/

Conservation network expands throughout Europe

2007-11-14

Brussels, Belgium – The European Commission has approved the extension of protected sites throughout Europe, a move that environmental groups believe will improve conservation efforts to protect the continent's most seriously threatened habitats and species.

The 4,225 newly designated Natura 2000 sites of specially protected areas cover about 90,000km² — an area roughly the size of Portugal — within four bio-geographical regions.

Sites were added in: the boreal region, which includes Finland, Sweden and the Baltic countries; the continental region, covering much of central Europe, including the Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Italy, Germany and Poland; and the Atlantic seaboard region.

The pannonian region, which includes parts of the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary, is a completely new addition to the network. Further updates to the Alpine region, including the Carpathian areas of Slovakia and Poland, plus an update of the Mediterranean region, are due later this year.

“We are extremely pleased by the European Commission’s decision to extend the Natura 2000 network,” said Andreas Beckmann, Deputy Director for WWF’s Danube-Carpathian Programme.

“This marks a major milestone for nature protection in Europe and is an achievement for WWF, which has been working for several years to support preparations for introducing Natura 2000 to new EU member states.”

WWF and its partners also played an important role in identifying and designating future Natura 2000 sites, as well as building capacity for their effective protection and management.

EU-wide protection and beyond
Natura 2000 is an EU-wide network of specially protected areas intended to ensure the long-term survival of Europe’s most valuable habitats and species, while supporting a healthy environment for EU citizens. It currently covers about 20% of the land territory of the EU’s older member states, and is in the process of being extended to its newest members in Central and Eastern Europe and the Mediterranean.

Natura 2000 is also expanding the network in marine areas, and even non-EU countries, including those in the Dinaric Arc and Turkey, are starting to follow similar conservation approaches as part of their efforts towards EU accession.

“The decision to extend Natura 2000 for the first time to Central and Eastern Europe, where much of the EU's greatest natural wealth lies, comes none too soon,” Beckmann added.

“The additional protection will help save many of these areas against mounting pressure from unsustainable development.”

The establishment of the Natura 2000 network also fulfills part of the obligations of the EU and its member states under the UN Convention on Biological Diversity.

For further information:
Alberto Arroyo Schnell, Natura 2000 Coordinator
WWF International
Tel: +36 70 61 38 269
E-mail: alberto.arroyo@wwf.at

Andreas Beckmann, Deputy Director
WWF Danube-Carpathian Programme
Tel: +43 1 524 54 70 17
E-mail: abeckmann@wwfdcp.org