World first

ORIGINAL: Durrell

Incredible, never-seen-before footage of the "miracle birth" of a Sumatran orangutan has been caught on video by Durrell Staff. See an exclusive video below and find out more information on this amazing story.

Click here to adopt baby Kea

The back story... 

“ Dana and her new baby girl are now thriving at Durrell Wildlife Park! ”

Our amazing team of Keepers, Vets and even some of Jersey General Hospital’s Obstetric staff, are proud to be part of the safe arrival of Dana's new baby girl.

This is especially remarkable because Dana's previous pregnancy in 2009 suffered terrible complications that endangered her health sadly resulting in in a stillborn infant.

Dana was left with blocked fallopian tubes, leaving her infertile. However, expert intervention by Jersey General Hospital’s Head Obstetrician, Neil MacLachlan, allowed Dana and 28 year-old dominant male ‘Dagu’ to conceive again against all the odds, in late 2012.

Neil visited Dana throughout her pregnancy working with our team who, using trained behaviour techniques, carried out ultrasound scanning of Dana’s bump. This gave us the best possible chance of a healthy mother and baby.

Our team also worked hard at capturing the events leading up to and during the birth, that led to a BBC documentary to highlight our work with Critically Endangered animals globally and how we continue to save species from extinction.

Earlier this year 30 year-old female ‘Anette’s’ son ‘Jantho’ was born. Jantho is named after the release site for rehabilitated orangutans in Sumatra, where individuals rescued from deforested areas or from the pet trade are reintroduced to relative safety.

The Sumatran orangutan population, classified as Critically Endangered (IUCN Red list of threatened species), is thought to number a mere 6,600 individuals, and reportedly loses 10 to 15% of forest habitat to logging and palm oil plantations every year. Durrell maintain close ties, and share funds collected at the orangutan exhibit with the highly active Sumatran Orangutan Conservation Project (SOCP) which is headed by former Durrell keeper Dr. Ian Singleton.

For media enquires click here

Watch the BBC documentary 'Refugees of the Lost Rainforest' on iPlayer


The orangutan population in Sumatra is spiraling towards the unthinkable - the loss of this species forever.

With your kind help, we can make sure that Dana’s baby and her cousins in the wild have a future... please consider donating any amount you can spare, and in turn we will spare no effort in keeping our friends from the forest from disappearing forever.

Donate

Stanford researchers show oil palm plantations are clearing carbon-rich tropical forests in Borneo

ORIGINAL: Stanford News

By Rob Jordan

Demand for palm oil is driving the deforestation of forests in Borneo, as trees are cleared to make way for the planting of oil farm plantations, which will send carbon dioxide, a global-warming gas, into the atmosphere.

Lian Pin Koh / Creative Commons. An oil palm nursery in Indonesian Borneo. New Stanford research shows that deforestation to make way for oil palm plantations in Borneo is becoming a globally significant source of carbon dioxide emissions.

Expanding production of palm oil, a common ingredient in processed foods, soaps and personal care products, is driving rainforest destruction and massive carbon dioxide emissions, according to a new study led by researchers at Stanford and Yale universities.

The study, published online Oct. 7 in the journal Nature Climate Change, shows that deforestation for the development of oil palm plantations in Indonesian Borneo is becoming a globally significant source of carbon dioxide emissions.

Plantation expansion is projected to contribute more than 558 million metric tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere in 2020 – an amount greater than all of Canada's current fossil fuel emissions.

Indonesia is the leading producer of palm and palm kernel oil, which together account for more than 30 percent of the world's vegetable oil use, and which can be used for biodiesel. Most of Indonesia's oil palm plantation expansion is occurring on the island of Borneo, also known as Kalimantan, which occupies a land area nearly the size California and Florida combined. Plantation leases, covering 32 percent of Kalimantan's lowlands outside of protected areas, represent a major land bank that is slated for development over the next decade, according to the study.

In 2010 alone, land-clearing for oil palm plantations in Kalimantan emitted more than 140 million metric tons of carbon dioxide – an amount equivalent to annual emissions from about 28 million vehicles.

Major emitter of greenhouse gasses
Home to the world's third-largest tropical forest area, Indonesia is also one of the world's largest emitters of greenhouse gasses, due to rapid loss of carbon-rich forests and peatlands. Since 1990, development of oil palm plantations has cleared about 16,000 square kilometers of Kalimantan's primary and logged forested lands – an area about the size of Hawaii. This accounts for 60 percent of Kalimantan's total forest cover loss in that time, according to the study's authors.

"Despite contentious debate over the types and uses of lands slated for oil palm plantations, the sector has grown rapidly over the past 20 years," said project leader Lisa M. Curran, a professor of ecological anthropology at Stanford and a senior fellow at the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment. By combining field measurements with analyses of high-resolution satellite images, the study evaluated lands targeted for plantations and documented their carbon emissions when converted to oil palm.

The study's researchers generated the first comprehensive maps of oil palm plantation expansion from 1990 to 2010. Using cutting-edge classification technology, developed by study co-author Gregory Asner from the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology, researchers quantified the types of land cleared for oil palm plantations, as well as carbon emissions and sequestration from oil palm agriculture.

"A major breakthrough occurred when we were able to discern not only forests and non-forested lands, but also logged forests, as well as mosaics of rice fields, rubber stands, fruit gardens and mature secondary forests used by smallholder farmers for their livelihoods," said Kimberly Carlson, a Yale doctoral student and lead author of the study. "With this information, we were able to develop robust carbon bookkeeping accounts to quantify carbon emissions from oil palm development."

The research team gathered oil palm land lease records during interviews with local and regional governmental agencies. These records identify locations that have received approval and are allocated to oil palm companies. The total allocated leases spanned about 120,000 square kilometers, an area slightly smaller than Greece. Most leases in the study occupied more than 100 square kilometers, an area slightly larger than Manhattan.
Tracking the land leases

Using these leases in combination with land cover maps, the team estimated future land-clearing and carbon emissions from plantations. Eighty percent of leases remained unplanted in 2010. If all of these leases were developed, more than a third of Kalimantan's lowlands would be planted with oil palm by 2020.

Despite these large numbers, accurate information about leases is not readily available for public review and oversight, even after the leases are granted. The average Kalimantan resident is unaware of plans for local oil palm development, which can have dramatic effects on residents' livelihoods and environment, Curran said.

"These plantation leases are an unprecedented 'grand-scale experiment' replacing forests with exotic palm monocultures," said Curran. "We may see tipping points in forest conversion where critical biophysical functions are disrupted, leaving the region increasingly vulnerable to droughts, fires and floods."

Combined with results generated from their more detailed district-level study recently published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the researchers emphasize that sustainably producing palm oil – a stated goal of the Indonesian palm oil industry – will require re-evaluation of awarded oil palm plantation leases located on forested lands.

The research study, "Carbon Emissions from Forest Conversion by Kalimantan Oil Palm Plantations," was supported by the NASA Land Cover/Land-Use Change Program, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Santa Fe Institute and the National Science Foundation.

Rob Jordan is the communications writer for the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment.

Media Contact

Lisa Curran, Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment: (203) 606-4513, lmcurran@stanford.edu

Christine Harrison, Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment: (650) 725-8240, christine.harrision@stanford.edu

WWF scandal (part 1): Bears feeding on toxic corporate waste

ORIGINAL: Redd Monitor

By Chris Lang, 27th July 2011

WWF, the world’s biggest environmental organisation, is under fire. On 23 June 2011, the German TV station ARD broadcast a documentary highlighting WWF’s cozy relationship with distinctly unsustainable companies like the genetically modified giant Monsanto and the rainforest destroying palm oil company Wilmar. This week Global Witness published a report criticising WWF’s Global Forest and Trade Network.

The only surprising thing is that it has taken so long for the WWF scandal to become public. The title of this post, “Bears feeding on toxic corporate waste,” is borrowed from an email that was circulated anonymously back in April 2003 (posted in full, for a little light relief, below). Sooner or later, the WWF scandal had to go public.

Today’s post is part 1 of the WWF scandal. It looks at the ARD documentary. Part 2 (coming soon) will look at the Global Witness report investigating WWF’s abysmal failure to rein in the logging industry.

The ARD documentary, “Der Pakt mit dem Panda”, was produced by Wilfried Huismann, a prize winning investigative journalist. It is posted below and can be viewed on ARD’s website(in German).

The film produced shock waves in Germany. But rather than facing up to the fact that these are serious criticisms, WWF Germany responded defensively, producing a “fact check” page on its website and a series of interviews with staff of WWF Germany who, surprise, surprise, tell us that they are doing everything they can to save the planet.

The film focusses in on WWF’s cozy relationships with corporate eco-nasties. Here are two particularly egregious examples, from the palm oil sector in Indonesia and the soy industry in Argentina.

In Indonesia, WWF has a partnership with Wilmar, a company that has converted vast areas of rainforest to monoculture oil palm plantations. WWF is quick to point out that its Memorandum of Understanding with Wilmar is to protect high conservation value forest and that it receives no money from Wilmar under this MoU. But as Nordin, who works with WALHI (Friends of the Earth Indonesia), points out in the film, WWF is in effect helping to greenwash an environmental disgrace:

“WWF says that you can produce palm oil in a sustainable way. Look around. How can that be sustainable? Nothing regrows here. The partnership with Wilmar improves the image of the firm, not their practices. I have no evidence that WWF is corrupt but it helps the industry to expand further.”

Predictably, Wilmar mentions the MoU in its 2007 Corporate Social Responsibility report as an example of how it implements its policies:

Wilmar upholds a policy of enhancing and maintaining flora and fauna species, and uses a flexible menu of conservation practices to protect natural habitats that are found to be rich in biodiversity.

There are two toe-curlingly embarrassing interviews in the documentary with WWF staff. In the first, a WWF Indonesia employee explains that she doesn’t really know what’s happening on the ground in the Wilmar plantation where Huismann filmed. In the second, Dörte Bieler, WWF Germany’s manager for “sustainable biomass”, is interviewed at an industry conference. No other NGOs took part in the conference. She tells Huismann that

“Our work is science-based. We always conduct a study before we have an opinion… And with this science-based evidence we have been able to achieve some things.”

But she is unable to point to a single thing that WWF has achieved through its cooperation with corporations. What’s important for WWF, according to Bieler, is that the NGO is “not just ridiculed, but accepted as a competent discussion partner.”

In Argentina, Huismann looks at WWF’s relationship with soy companies. The film includes an interview with Dr Hector Laurence,[*] the personification of the WWF scandal. In a World Business Council for Sustainable Development brochure he is quoted as saying,

“I am surprised to find that some people consider that if NGOs work with business they risk loosing [sic] objectivity. Efficient and transparent collaboration between these sectors is precisely the way to overcome this prejudice.”

We shouldn’t be surprised by this, since Laurence’s career included being head of a conservation organisation called Fundación Vida Silvestre Argentina (WWF’s associate in Argentina), President of the Argentinean Asociation of Agrobusiness; and Vice-president of Pioneer Overseas Corporation, part of Dupont.

Laurence’s position on pesticides and GM soy is identical to that of the agribusinesses who have planted millions of hectares of GM soy in Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil.

WWF’s response to the interview with Hector Laurence is particularly odious:

Hector Laurence was never with WWF, instead he worked with the associated partner organisation Fundación Vida Silvestre Argentina (FVSA) until 2008.

In fact, the panda is very cuddly with FVSA. WWF’s website, under the headline “WWF-Argentina: Our solutions”, states that

Together, [WWF and FVSA] held joint campaigns, arrange global actions and receive financial backup for executing programs and projects.

The layout of FVSA’s website design is very similar to a previous WWF layout (WWF’s website has since been re-designed). FVSA’s url even includes the magic letters wwf and panda.org:

WWF-Argentina: wwfar.panda.org 

WWF-International: wwf.panda.org

WWF was one of the founders of the Round Table on Responsible Soy. But the issue of genetically modified soy is not part of RTRS discussions. Members of the RTRS can use as much GM soy as they wish. WWF denies that it promotes GM crops, arguing that it remains in the Round Table on Responsible Soy in order to reduce the amount of GM soy planted. But the reality, whether WWF likes it or not, is that its presence in the RTRS is lending legitimacy to RTRS and thus to GM soy, monocultures and agribusiness. WWF knows this – it’s beenpointed out to them many times.

Jason Clay of WWF-US [*] declined Huisman’s request for an interview. Instead the documentary included a 2010 presentation that Clay gave to the Global Harvest Initiative, an agribusiness lobbying initiative set up by Archer Daniels Midland, DuPont, John Deere and Monsanto. Among GHI’s consultative partners are Conservation International, The Nature Conservancy and WWF. “We need to freeze the footprint of agriculture,” Clay says in his presentation. He explains that WWF is suggesting seven or eight things we need to work on to achieve this. “One is genetics, we have got to produce more with less,” he says, sounding just like an GM agribusiness lobbyist.

“It takes 15 years, at least and maybe longer as we go along, to bring a genetically engineered product to market. If we don’t start today, we’re already at 2025. The clock is ticking. We need to get moving. There is a sense of urgency.”

WWF’s response? “WWF Germany disagrees.” But the programme is not about WWF Germany. It is about WWF. And WWF admitted to the Süddeutsche newspaper that it has accepted money from Monsanto. Meanwhile, Jason Clay is not a paper pusher in some neglected outpost of the WWF empire. He is Senior Vice President for Market Transformation at WWF-US.

Not everything in Huismann documentary hits the target. A handful of WWF’s rebuttals appear plausible. But that does not make WWF’s response either acceptable or adequate. The documentary raises important issues about WWF’s cozy relationship with massive, destructive corporations. That WWF is not even interested in an intelligent and open discussion of these issues, let alone changing the way it works with destructive corporations, is a disgrace.
UPDATE and APOLOGY – 30 July 2011: I have deleted the descriptions of Hector Laurence and Jason Clay. Thanks to everyone who pointed out that the way these people look has nothing to do with the argument. I apologise for causing any offense to anyone and promise not to do that again.

Here, for the record, is Jason Clay’s presentation in full to the Global Harvest Initiative:

Global Harvest Initiative Symposium – Clay from Global Harvest Initiative on Vimeo.

Return to text: Laurence ^^; Clay ^^.

Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2003 06:04:32 -0800 (PST)

From: Panda Person

Subject: Bears feeding on toxic corporate waste

Leading ecologists call for an ‘Urgent Global Coalition to save the Panda’

Grass roots environmental groups around the world must unite to save the Giant Panda (Wufwuf martinensis) from imminent extinction, say some of the world’s top ecological experts. The Giant Panda’s habitat (most of which is found near Gland, Switzerland) is being invaded by rapacious multinational companies intent on gaining control of this crucial environmental area. Recent reports indicate that the Giant Panda’s territory is now completely surrounded and heavily infiltrated by mining, logging, chemical and drug corporations.

Some scientists believe that, because of the ecological impacts caused by these companies, only a few Giant Pandas are likely to remain within a few years. As their native habitat has been destroyed, the bears have increasingly become dependent on scraps of food found at the corporations’ waste dumps. This change of diet causes Pandas to become bloated and listless, and also impairs their sight and hearing.

The Giant Panda’s population has actually been increasing in recent years, and the beasts have been seen roaming in areas where they have never previously been encountered. This has caused problems in itself. One leading bear expert has said that “The Pandas seem disorientated, lost. They’ve been stumbling around and trampling all over the habitat of other species. They’re constantly hungry and have eaten all the food needed by other, smaller, bears. Giant Pandas are lovable creatures in the right place but, to be honest, they’ve become a real pest. Ideally, they should be rounded up and put back into National Parks, where they will be less of a danger to themselves and others. Some people now feel that, if the rogue bears can’t be got rid of in any other way, then we may have to start shooting them.”

Increasingly, the Pandas are finding themselves in mortal battles with other species of bear. One renowned ecologist has reported that “The Giant Panda’s favourite tactic is to use its horribly distended size simply to crush other smaller bears to death. In some cases, the Pandas rip out the brains of the other bears and eat them. Very few smaller bears have been able to defend themselves so far, and mostly they just have to run away and hide. However, these kinds of ‘bear against bear’ clashes are likely to become more frequent and more bloody.”

Many scientists now believe that the Giant Panda’s recent population explosion will inevitably be followed by an equally dramatic, and possibly terminal, population crash. One expert (who wished to remain anonymous for fear of reprisals) has said that “The Pandas appear to have lost the ability to feed themselves with fresh food in their own natural habitat. If the corporations decide to stop leaving their waste around for the bears to eat, as they eventually will, then the Panda population will plummet. This is the kind of phenomenon observed in some small-brained creatures such as lemmings, but never before with species that are supposedly as intelligent as Giant Pandas.”

Other sub-species of the Panda around the world are equally threatened. The population of the South African Panda, for example, is being held in captivity by the country’s two largest plantation companies, one of which is a world leader in the development of genetically modified ‘Frankenstein trees’. Some observers believe that it is only a matter of time before the companies slay the South African Pandas for their precious skins, which corporate executives value highly for use as camouflage when hunting down local environmentalists. Others believe that sinister experiments are underway in which the captive bears are also being genetically modified such that, in future, they would become dependent on leaves from the company’s bio-engineered eucalyptus trees.

In Canada and Sweden, some of the most controversial logging companies have been seen feeding the local Pandas. There is widespread speculation that the food is either laced with poison or possibly with a strong tranquillising drug which will render the Pandas helpless and immobile. Canadian corporate executives regularly force captive Pandas to perform humiliating and degrading dances at international events, just for the sake of public entertainment.

In Australia, the huge Vino Tinto mining company has bought the entire local population of Pandas. It has been reported that Tinto has also been feeding the Australian Pandas with huge quantities of food spiked with a highly addictive drug, and has set the doped animals to work in guarding the company’s mines.

In the US, corporate executives have successfully disguised themselves as Pandas in order to infiltrate the local population of bears. Some local observers see this as part of a cunning long-term plan to ensure that future generations of Pandas never learn from their parents how to use either their teeth or claws.

Ecologists believe that these problems are part of a worldwide pattern. However, the fate of other Panda sub-species is not entirely known. A spokeswoman for the newly formed ‘Save the Panda Coalition’ said “We suspect that Pandas from Japan to Brazil, and Germany to Indonesia may have already been captured by multinational corporations, and are being forced-fed with contaminated food. We urgently need more research on this by local experts.”

Summing up the tragic situation, a bear expert has said that “Some Pandas seem to have escaped the clutches of the big industrialists but, really, there’s nowhere else for them to go. They will probably just die of starvation. We need a global effort to get the corporations out of the Giant Panda’s habitat, and to free all the sub-species now being held in captivity. This has to be a top priority for the world environment and conservation movement. Any genetically modified and mutant Pandas will probably have to be destroyed, along with those that have become totally dependent on corporate waste, but this is a price worth paying if it helps to protect the species as a whole.”

Biofuels' Environmental Impact May Be Greater Than Previously Thought, Swiss Researchers Say

ORIGINAL: Huffington Post

From Earth Techling's Pete Danko:

09/27/2012

Biofuels were under the microscope all summer in the U.S. due to drought-prompted concerns about the bite they can take out of food supplies. Now they’re under assault by the Swiss Federal Laboratories for Materials Science and Technology (EMPA), who’ve made the blunt assessment that “most biofuels are not green.”

The researchers there say they studied the full life-cycle impact of biofuels – looking at what the fuels consume, what they produce and what they cause, a concept Europeans call “ecobalance” – and found “only a few biofuels (have) an overall better ecobalance than petrol.”

The problems are manifold and not unfamiliar: fertilizers used to grow the crops end up in lakes and rivers; soil acidities rise. “Most biofuels … just deflect the environmental impact: fewer greenhouse gases, thus more growth-related pollution for land used for agriculture,” researcher Rainer Zah says in a statement.

Biogas from “residues and waste materials” fare best in this study, an update and expansion on a 2007 report by EMPA, done in collaboration with Agroscope Reckenholz-Tankion and the Paul Scherrer Institute. Depending on the precise source material, biogas can have about half the impact on the environment that petrol does, the researchers say.

Ethanol-based fuels (corn and sugar cane are the most common inputs) generally have a better ecobalance than do oil-based fuels (think: soybean or palm oil), EMPA says. This is in line with European Commission data that came out earlier this year, which showed palm oil and soybean-derived fuels having a carbon footprint nearly as large as the notorious tar sands oil.

The worst-case biofuel scenario is when rain forests are felled to make way for crops that get channeled to making fuel. Biofuels produced from these lands are the ones that “usually emit more greenhouse gases than fossil fuels,” according to the researchers. This can happen even when the deforested land doesn’t move directly to biofuel crop production; using existing ag land to grow crops for biofuels can lead to other forested areas being cleared to make up for the lost food production. That’s the pernicious indirect land use change phenomenon.

The researchers aren’t without any hope for biofuels, however. They don’t really endorse them, but they do allow that thoughtful management can make a valuable difference. For example, even palm oil cultivation, if done on unused grazing land in Columbia, can increase the carbon content of soil. This points to how highly variable the ecobalance calculation can be, depending on precise locations and practices.

The biofuels industry, as you might imagine, sees things rather differently than EMPA. The key indirect land use change argument is largely dismissed by the industry. For instance, the group Growth Energy, which promotes ethanol, calls it a theory that is “flawed, speculative and withstands no credible scrutiny.” The group notes: ”According to the National Institute of Space Research, deforestation in the Amazon has declined sharply just as American biofuels production doubled. In 2004, 10,588 square miles of the Amazon was deforested and in 2009/10, that number dropped to 2,490.7 square miles. Meanwhile, U.S. ethanol production has gone from approximately 3 billion gallons in 2004 to approximately 13.23 billion gallons in 2010.”

Burnt orangutan tragically loses fight for life

ORIGINAL: International Animal Rescue

The burnt orangutan is rescued

The orangutan in West Borneo that was burnt when villagers tried to smoke him out of a fruit tree has sadly died. The injured animal was being transported to IAR's clinic in Ketapang for treatment when he passed away.

His death has devastated the entire rescue team as it was very sudden and it had appeared that the orangutan's condition was improving.

IAR vet Dr Siffa was accompanying the orangutan on the long journey from Pontianak to the clinic and has been particularly badly affected by the animal's death. As the orangutan was confined to a transport crate in Pontianak, it had been impossible for Dr Siffa to carry out any medical tests or diagnostic procedures in order to make a proper assessment of his condition. It was therefore decided to move him to IAR's clinic where the facilities would enable him to be examined thoroughly and given appropriate treatment.

An autopsy is currently being carried out.

At the time of the rescue, Karmele Llano Sanchez, Executive and Veterinary Director of International Animal Rescue Indonesia, said: "Although much blame is being attached to the villagers for their misguided actions, once again the real culprit in the story is the palm oil industry which is destroying the forest and leaving no food or shelter for orangutans and other wildlife. The orangutans are having to venture into agricultural land in search of food which brings them into conflict with local people – often, as in this instance, with tragic consequences."

---

ORIGINAL: Daily Mail

By EMMA REYNOLDS

PUBLISHED: 15:56 GMT, 28 August 2012 | UPDATED: 14:36 GMT, 29 August 2012

Indonesian villagers accidentally burn orangutan they were trying to smoke out of fruit tree

They were frightened it would destroy their crops

Luckily, conservationists intervened and the animal will make full recovery

Villagers trying to smoke an orangutan out of a fruit tree where he was sheltering accidentally set him on fire.

The distressed animal had been hiding in the leaves above the village of Lower Wajok in West Kalimantan, Indonesia, because its habitat had been disturbed, wildlife experts said.

Locals concerned that it would eat the fruit from the rambutan tree and destroying their crops tried to make it move on by lighting a fire under it on Sunday.

Injured creature: Villagers said they had simply been trying to persuade the animal to move away and not eat their fruit

Worrying development: The orangutan had strayed from the jungle into a rambutan tree

Close call: Locals feared the animal would devastate crops and attempted to force it to flee by setting fire to trees

Experts had initially tried to give it a tranquilliser but their efforts had failed.

The flames were lifted by the wind, however, and set light to the poor creature's fur.

Villagers fought to put out the fire, but fortunately the orangutan fell out of the tree and a rescue team from International Animal Rescue was able to treat its burns.

The charity is now caring for the animals and it is expected to make a full recovery in three to four days.

Head of the Natural Resources Conservation Center (BKSDA) in West Kalimantan told BBC Indonesia that the orangutan went to the village because its habitat had been disturbed.

The animal is wild, not a pet, so it does not need to be rehabilitated, and its vet said it will now be returned to the jungle.

On fire: This is the dramatic moment the orangutan was accidentally set alight during a bungled rescue attempt that went terribly wrong

Safety: Rescuers put the orangutan in a box for transportation - but vets said it would recover in days 

Badly burned: The wounded orangutan was treated by environmental activists after the fire was put out and it was rescued from the tree

Bizarre occurrence: There are thousands of orangutans in West Kalimantan but none have ever been set on fire before

One local, Ali Zakaria, said: 'It's been 60 years I've lived here. This is just the first time it has happened in the village. Yesterday he made a nest in the palm trees.'

Niken wuri Handayani, Coordinator of Forest Ecosystem Operator BKSDA in West Kalimantan, said: 'Our focus is on evacuation.'

The rehabilitation process is only conducted by the conservation centre if orangutans are living as domestic animals. The nest has been cut down so it will not return.

BKSDA said villagers are educated to not hurt orangutans and report to the organisation if they need help moving the orangutans.

In West Kalimantan, there are about 4,500 to 5,000 orangutans under the watch of the centre, and this is the first time one had been set on fire.

Experts had initially tried to give it a tranquilliser but their efforts had failed

See you later! The animal should not need rehab because it is a wild creature and was never domestic

Dove Onslaught(er)

ORIGINAL: Dove Onslaught(er) 

You talked to Dove now talk to Nestlé. Ask them to stop using palm oil from forest destruction.

UPDATE: Thanks to the staggering public support for our international Dove campaign in April 2008, Unilever has now agreed to play their part in saving the Paradise Forests of South East Asia. As the biggest single buyer of palm oil in the world, Unilever has a special responsibility to help clean up the industry that's behind so much forest destruction.

They have agreed to support the call by Greenpeace for an immediate moratorium on deforestation for palm oil plantations. They have also agreed to urgently contact other major companies calling on them to support the moratorium.

This is the first success in a broader campaign to secure real change on the ground in South East Asia -- to stop the palm oil industry from destroying the Paradise Forests. Greenpeace campaigners will work with Unilever for th next six months (starting May 2008) to bring together a major coalition of companies to make the moratorium a reality. We will see at the end of this period how things are progressing and if we need to change our campaign approach.

About the music:

The song's called "There They Go". It was made specifically for the Greenpeace video by a Czech band called Ohm Square.http://www.myspace.com/ohmsquare

Face to Face with a South American Jaguar in Colombia

ORIGINAL: Ecocentric (Time Blog)

By BRYAN WALSH | @bryanrwalsh | 

June 11, 2012

PANTHERA. A jaguar captured up close by a camera trap. The near threatened species is the only panther found in the Americas.

The near-threatened jaguar is the only big cat found in the Americas, and they’re usually quite shy. They have good reason—jaguars are hunted for their skins, and their jungle habitat is being cleared for agriculture. And now the cats face a new threat—growing plantations of oil palm, a commercial species that’s being raised chiefly for biofuels. Planting oil palm—which is becoming increasingly common in South America and Asia— involves clearing native jungle, and while the resulting plantations might resemble forests, the habitat is utterly changed. That can mean real trouble for the jaguars and other species that depend on the forest.

Now the conservation group Panthera has found photographic evidence that jaguars are willing to move through oil palm plantations—which could mean that the cats will be able to better adapt to the change in their environment. Panthera put camera traps—cameras that automatically photograph any animals that come near it—in an oil palm plantation in Colombia. You can see the results above: jaguars, both adults and cubs, living in the oil palm plantation. You can see more of the photos here.

A jaguar mother with her two cubs in a Colombian oil palm plantation. Photo: Panthera.

A jaguar cub grooms itself in a Colombian oil palm plantation. Photo: Panthera

"A jaguar cub inspects Panthera’s camera trap in a Colombian oil palm plantation while its sibling looks on. Photo: Panthera"

"A jaguar mother with her two cubs in a Colombian oil palm plantation. Photo: Panthera"

"A jaguar cub grooms itself in a Colombian oil palm plantation. Photo: Panthera"

"A jaguar mother with cub behind her in a Colombian oil palm plantation. Photo: Panthera"

"A jaguar mother and cub in a Colombian oil palm plantation.. Photo: Panthera"

"A jaguar cub grooms itself in a Colombian oil palm plantation. Photo: Panthera"

"A jaguar cub inspects Panthera's camera trap in a Colombian oil palm plantation. Photo: Panthera"

"A male jaguar walking through a Colombian oil palm plantation. Until now, scientists did not have photographic evidence that jaguars were using oil palm plantations as passageways in the region. Photo: Panthera"

"A male jaguar walks past Panthera’s camera trap in a Colombian oil palm plantation."

"The same male jaguar walking past Panthera’s camera trap in a Colombian oil palm plantation. Photo: Panthera "

"A male jaguar walks through an oil palm plantation in Colombia’s Magdalena river valley. Photo: Panthera"

"The same male jaguar walks past a Panthera camera trap in a Colombian oil palm plantation. Photo: Panthera"

"Male jaguar travelling through a Colombian oil palm plantation. Photo: Panthera"

"A male jaguar walks through a Colombian oil palm plantation. Photo: Panthera"

"Distant camera trap photo of a male jaguar in an oil palm plantation, Colombia. Photo: Panthera"

"A wild cougar walking through a Colombian oil palm plantation. Photo: Panthera"

"An ocelot walks past a Panthera camera trap in an oil palm plantation in Colombia’s Magdalena river valley. Along with jaguars, smaller wild cats and jaguar prey species were documented moving through this plantation. Photo: Panthera"

"A jaguarandi moving through an oil palm plantation, Colombia. Photo: Panthera"

"A cougar moving through an oil palm plantation, Colombia. Photo: Panthera"

As more and more native forest is lost, the challenge for conservationists is ensuring that endangered species still have enough room to roam. And for big cats that can be especially difficult—the species tends to have a large land range. Panthera is moving ahead with its Jaguar Corridor Initiative, which seeks to connect and protect jaguar populations from Mexico to Argentina. Colombia—where the jaguar photos were taken—is especially important, as the country forms the gateway for jaguars to move from Central America to South America.

Said Panthera Jaguar Program Executive Director Howard Quigley in a statement:

"Human development in the shape of large monocultures, like oil palm plantations, are drastically changing the face of the planet, creating refugees out of wild cats by breaking up their habitats and forcing them to live within smaller, often degraded, and more isolated pockets of land. Data collected through Panthera’s Jaguar Corridor Initiative are critical for oil palm growers, national policy makers and local governments in their decision making so they can account for the needs of jaguars across their range and minimize impacts on wildlife."

See more of Panthera’s jaguar photos here.

Bryan Walsh is a senior editor at TIME. Find him on Twitter at @bryanrwalsh. You can also continue the discussion on TIME’s Facebook page and on Twitter at @TIME.

The true story behind world's greed for palm oil

ORIGINAL: Occupy The Environment

Orangutans are being wiped out today, right now. We unwittingly buy packaged foods, body products, even 'vegan' alternatives, many with palm oil in them. Giant American, European and Asian corporations ply us with junk food, lotions, shampoo, toothpaste, cooking oil, drinks, ice cream, cosmetics ... products with a mostly unseen story.

Watch the VIDEO from which this screen capture was taken

If we don't speak for Orangutans (and Sumatran tigers and pygmy elephants) being burnt, poisoned, shot and hacked to death, with infants torn away from the mothers' dead bodies to be sold off as pets...who will?

For what? A cheap, unhealthy oil that fills our food supply and daily products thanks to morally bankrupt men and women at egregious corporations with dollar signs in their eyes.

We have ALL been made complicit in an insane rampage of murder, unthinkable torture and ecological destruction ... without our knowledge or consent.

Change starts with you. Become aware of this crop. It's in the toothpaste you used this morning, and the lunch you had later. Spread knowledge. And one day the governments and corporations of the world will have to listen to the higher morals of a conscious world.

See another poster here, for the 30 or so names palm oil masquerades under on our grocery and fashion products.

(Click para ampliar)

RESOURCES

What happens to orangutans when the forest is taken away from them? -- Sumatran Orangutan Conservation Programme (SOCP)

http://www.sumatranorangutan.org/webautor-data/56/What-happens_latest-compressed-latest-April-23-smaller.pdf

Products that use palm oil

http://www.saynotopalmoil.com/palm-oil.php

Problem with Palm Oil - RAN factsheet

http://ran.org/problem-palm-oil-factsheet

.............................................................

The Bornean and Sumatran Orangutan .. is the face of the demise we are bringing upon our planet.

Corporations don't listen. Governments don't listen. Money is king. However, never underestimate the power of a citizenry's heart. It can't let Orangutans be tortured, murdered, and extinguished in this smart age we live in, for it is, and will be, a colossal indictment of the human spirit. 

We have made the mistake of buying products from mega giant corporations ... without knowledge of the unseen horror. We have been made complicit in this mass murder ... secretly. We are emasculated and impotent at the feet of the rich and powerful. We have not petitioned our governments. We've been asleep. We can't turn a blind eye anymore to this genocide in the 21st century.

Willie Smits restores a rainforest

ORIGINAL: TED

By piecing together a complex ecological puzzle, biologist Willie Smits has found a way to re-grow clearcut rainforest in Borneo, saving local orangutans -- and creating a thrilling blueprint for restoring fragile ecosystems.

Willie Smits has devoted his life to saving the forest habitat of orangutans, the "thinkers of the jungle." As towns, farms and wars encroach on native forests, Smits works to save what is left.

"A natural forest is multilayered. Both in the ground and above the ground it can make better use of the available light, it can store more carbon in the system, it can provide more functions.” (Willie Smits)"

"Willie Smits has devoted his life to saving the forest habitat of orangutans, the "thinkers of the jungle." As towns, farms and wars encroach on native forests, Smits works to save what is left."

Why you should listen to him:

Willie Smits works at the complicated intersection of humankind, the animal world and our green planet. In his early work as a forester in Indonesia, he came to a deep understanding of that triple relationship, as he watched the growing population of Sulawesi move into (or burn for fuel) forests that are home to the orangutan. These intelligent animals were being killed for food, traded as pets or simply failing to thrive as their forest home degraded.

Smits believes that to rebuild orangutan populations, we must first rebuild their forest habitat -- which means helping local people find options other than the short-term fix of harvesting forests to survive. His Masarang Foundation raises money and awareness to restore habitat forests around the world -- and to empower local people. In 2007, Masarang opened a palm-sugar factory that uses thermal energy to turn sugar palms (fast-growing trees that thrive in degraded soils) into sugar and even ethanol, returning cash and power to the community and, with luck, starting the cycle toward a better future for people, trees and orangs.

"This man has dedicated his life to saving the world, and for this he earns our deepest respect." Jean Kern, Ode

Quotes by Willie Smits

“A natural forest is multilayered. Both in the ground and above the ground it can make better use of the a vailable light, it can store more carbon in the system, it can provide more functions.”

The EPA’s most important decision this year could be over... vegetable oil?

ORIGINAL: Washington Post

by Brad Plume

04/27/2012

Okay, quick quiz: Which country is the world’s third-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, after the United States and China?

There are around 6,600 orangutans on Indonesia’s Sumatra island, but more than two-thirds of the area has been divided up into palm oil concessions. (Reuters)

The answer, at least in some recent years, has been Indonesia. That’s surprising. It’s not the world’s third-largest economy. It’s not an industrial powerhouse. But Indonesia has been clearing its vast rain forests and burning through its peatlands of late, releasing huge stores of carbon into the air. One of the big culprits here has been the country’s fast-growing production of palm oil, an edible vegetable oil that’s increasingly being harvested to make biodiesel fuel for cars and trucks in Europe and elsewhere.

This isn’t just a bit of environmental trivia. Currently, there’s a fierce battle in the United States over whether the Environmental Protection Agency should allow more diesel made from palm oil to be used by U.S. refineries. Agribusiness groups are lobbying for its use. Environmentalists are trying to block it — with some saying this could be the EPA’s most important climate-change decision of the year.

Here’s the backstory: In 2007, Congress expanded a requirement for U.S. refineries to blend a certain amount of “renewable fuel” in with their gasoline. Ethanol or biofuels could count. They just had to be 20 percent cleaner than traditional fossil fuels. And, in January, the EPA released a preliminary analysis suggesting that biodiesel and renewable diesel made from palm oil didn’t quite make the cut, thanks in part to the deforestation effect. (Over the course of their lifecycle, the EPA found, palm-oil fuels emitted between 11 percent to 17 percent fewer greenhouse gases than regular gasoline.)

But the EPA hasn’t fully made up its mind yet. The agency is gathering comments on its analysis until Friday, April 27. And industry groups from Indonesia, Malaysia, and the United States have sharply criticized the agency’s analysis, with the American Palm Oil Council claiming that the EPA’s conclusion was “based on faulty data and erroneous assumptions.”

What do they mean? Robert Shapiro, a former Clinton administration economist who now does analysis for business groups, argued in his comment that it’s “highly speculative” to calculate how, exactly, the production of biofuels will drive deforestation. Efforts to figure out how biofuels indirectly affect land use — by, say, displacing cooking-oil production elsewhere — are still a relatively new area of science. If you remove this from the analysis, Shapiro argued, then palm-oil fuels look considerably cleaner and easily qualify as a renewable fuel. What’s more, he noted, palm-oil producers will likely increase their yields on existing lands in the future, which means they’ll cut down fewer forests.

Palm-oil skeptics aren’t buying it. In a conference call with reporters on Thursday, Jeremy Martin, a biofuels expert at the Union of Concerned Scientists, argued that the EPA’s analysis actually understimates the destructive impact of palm-oil production in Indonesia and Malaysia. His group’s comments to the EPA can be found here.

For one thing, Martin explained, much of the forest area that’s being cleared for palm oil is peatland, whose soils store considerable amounts of methane, a potent greenhouse gas. The EPA assumed that only around 9 to 13 percent of future palm-oil production would occur on peatland, whereas a new study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found the number was already above 50 percent. And, Martin said, the EPA was too optimistic about the ability of countries like Indonesia to enforce their forestry laws.

When all of these factors are taken into account, said Martin, “the emissions of palm oil based biofuels substantially exceed the emissions from conventional petroleum diesel.”

There’s a lot at stake in getting this right. Palm oil is a potentially lucrative industry for developing countries like Indonesia and Malaysia. But Indonesia’s peatlands also contain an enormous amount of carbon-dioxide. (To get a sense for the scale here, one particularly large peatland fire in Kalimantan in 1997 released more total greenhouse-gas emissions than the entire United States over that period.) And, according to the PNAS study, peatland emissions from palm-oil production are expected to surge in the years ahead. Palm-oil producers are also razing habitats for elephants, tigers, rhinos, and orangutans on various islands in Southeast Asia.

Some green activists have placed their hopes in sustainable palm-oil production to navigate these concerns — after all, poorer communities in Southeast Asia aren’t just going to agree to an outright ban. But, increasingly, attention has shifted toward wealthy countries that are artificially inflating palm-oil production with government mandates on biofuels.

The EPA decision will help determine whether the United States becomes a major buyer. But, for now, the biggest market for palm-oil based fuels is still the European Union, which has a law requiring 10 percent of all transportation fuel to come from renewable sources by 2020. The problem with this rule, said Chris Malins of the International Council on Clean Transportation, is that the European Union never considered the indirect deforestation effects from biofuels. The science on this only really emerged in 2008 or so, after the E.U. law was largely crafted.

“What Europe did was basically consistent with the best life-cycle emissions analyses of the past,” said Malins. “But,” he added, “Europe recognizes that there’s an issue here, and there’s an ongoing process to change that.”

Which means that the EPA’s decision here in the United States could very well influence how governments around the world think about palm oil. In a quiet year for climate policy, that could stand out as a major move.