Baraza

Dear Friends,

We just received this news from The Defenders of Wildlife

The mind boggles that a company can afford to do so much damage and make such payments

This article is in honor of Nosioki and her cub who were poisoned this week with pesticides, possibly Furadan which is manufactured byFMC and yet not permitte dfor use in USA where it is considered too dangerous for users, consumers and the environment. The product is NOT banned in Kenya although FMC claim to have removed the product from the shelves in the country.  It is alleged that the Furadan that was mopped up in Kenya was moved to Tanzania and Uganda from where it returns to Kenya in the boots of cars and on the backs of bicycles.

FMC TO PAY LARGEST RCRA SETTLEMENT IN ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT HISTORY

Even the best conservation efforts by Lion Guardians couldn't prevent Nosioki from being killed with pesticide

WASHINGTON, D.C.–The Department of Justice and the Environmental Protection Agency today announced that FMC Corporation, Inc. has agreed to spend a total of approximately $170 million — including the largest civil penalty ever obtained under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) of $11,864,800 — to settle charges that it repeatedly violated the hazardous waste law at its phosphorus production facility in Pocatello, Idaho.

The government’s claims against FMC include numerous RCRA violations, the most serious of which involve mismanagement of ignitable and reactive phosphorus wastes in ponds. Storage of such hazardous wastes in ponds is prohibited by RCRA because of the potential threat to human health and the environment. The sediments in these ponds burn vigorously and persistently when exposed to the air, and a number of fires have been documented at these ponds in the past. The wastes in these ponds also generate phosphine and hydrogen cyanide, highly toxic gases that can cause serious health and environmental problems. FMC at times has reported elevated levels of phosphine around the ponds, and it is believed that migratory bird deaths in the area also may be attributable to phosphine poisoning.

“Everyone managing hazardous waste should be on notice that the federal government will strongly enforce the nation’s laws to ensure the safe operation of all facilities to protect public health and our environment,” EPA Administrator Carol M. Browner. “The people of Pocatello deserve the clean, healthy air and water this settlement will ensure.”

“FMC for many years operated its hazardous waste ponds in disregard of the law and the people who live in and around Pocatello, Idaho, including members of the Shoshone-Bannock Tribe. The people of this community deserve better than that,” said Lois J. Schiffer, Assistant Attorney General for Environment and Natural Resources. “That’s why today’s announcement is so important. It means cleaner air, cleaner water and healthier communities in the Pocatello region. It also puts industry on notice that the federal government will not tolerate illegal handling of hazardous waste.”

FMC will close surface ponds previously used to store and manage hazardous ignitable and reactive phosphorus wastes. In addition, FMC will construct a $40 million waste treatment plant to deactivate the phosphorus bearing wastes in order to avoid the inherent threats posed by the handling of such hazardous materials. This treatment plant will be subject to interim status and permitting requirements under RCRA, which will include public notice and comment prior to EPA approval. FMC also will implement upgrades to its facility to meet RCRA secondary containment requirements for all pipes, tanks, and other units handling these types of wastes. FMC also will undertake a comprehensive environmental management system to ensure future compliance with the law. Costs associated with all the injunctive relief required under the settlement are expected to exceed $90 million.

FMC is one of the world’s leading producers of chemicals and machinery for industry, government and agriculture. With sales of $4.5 billion to over 100 countries, the company operates 115 manufacturing facilities and mines in 24 countries. FMC’s Idaho facility is the world’s largest producer of elemental phosphorus, which is used in detergents, beverages, foods, synthetic lubricants, and pesticides, and is located on privately owned land within the Shoshone-Bannock Tribe’s Fort Hall Indian reservation. Operating at the present site since 1949, FMC processes about 1.4 million tons of shale ore per year, which produces about 250 million pounds of elemental phosphorus a year. The bulk of the wastes generated from these processes are hazardous wastes regulated under RCRA.

FMC also has committed to over a dozen Supplemental Environmental Projects (“SEPs”) with a capital cost of $63 million, which will significantly improve air quality in the Pocatello region through a reduction of approximately 436 tons of particulate matter per year in emissions of dust and soot at the facility. As a final SEP, FMC will conduct a $1.65 million public health assessment and education program to investigate the effects of contaminants generated by FMC on human health and the environment, particularly within nearby tribal lands.

Total injunctive relief costs of approximately $93 million, SEP costs of approximately $65 million, and a penalty of nearly $12 million will result in a total cost to FMC of approximately $170 million.

EPA Regional Administrator for Region 10, Chuck Clark, said, “The injunctive relief required under the settlement is sorely needed, both to bring the facility into RCRA compliance, and to protect the tribal members and surrounding community.”

“I applaud this settlement as one of the most significant environmental results in our state,” said Betty Richardson, U.S. Attorney for the District of Idaho. “We have major industries which rely upon extraction and use of natural resources in Idaho. The message to timber, mining, ranching the manufacturing companies is that they must comply with environmental laws. I commend FMC’s decision to face up to their violations and commit to a more environmentally responsible future.

” The settlement has been codified in a Consent Decree that will be made available for public notice and comment for a period of thirty days. EPA will conduct two public availability sessions in Pocatello, Idaho within this time frame.

You can get the original article here

Dear Friends Lions, wildebeest and many other animals are disappearing Africa. Here is why

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

This was the  talk that Paula Kahumbu gave during the Explorers week at National Geographic when she was awarded status as a National Geographic Emerging Explorer and is a recipient of funds from the National Geographic Big Cats Initiative.

Please share and send us your comments

Thank you Paolo Torchio for several photographs used in this presentation

Fewer than 35,000 lions remain in Africa and they are declining rapidly.

This is why world renown film makers from Botswana Derek and Beverly Joubert made The Last Lions which just won the Jackson Hole film Festival.

This is perhaps the best wildlife Documentary that I have ever seen. Watch the trailer and support the Natioal Geographics Big Cats Initiative

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

It is with enormous sadness that we accept the passing of the great Wangari Maathai Kenya’s eco warrior who passed away on the 25th September of cancer in Nairobi.

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direkt

Wangari Maathai is a role model for millions of women around the world for her tireless fight for environmental protection and her fight against the plundering of the earth, corruption and destruction of green spaces around Nairobi.

RIP Wangari, your spirit burns in an army of your followers.

Press Release

6th September 2011,

CONSERVATIONISTS, LAND OWNERS AND COMMUNITIES SAY “NO” TO WILDLIFE MINISTER ON RUSHED PROCESS FOR NEW WILDLIFE POLICY AND BILL

More time is needed in finalizing the wildlife policy and bill to allow for legitimate stakeholder consultation and harmonization of Forestry Act and EMCA which are under review.

Conservationists, land owners and communities have sent a letter to the Ministry of Forestry and Wildlife objecting to a Ministry deadline to submit comments on the Wildlife Policy and Bill by the September 5th. Seventeen individuals including two former Directors of the KWS, Dr Richard Leakey and Michael Wamithi, have objected to the process which they have said lacks transparency and legitimate stakeholder consultation. They have said that they will not legitimize the process by sending in comments and have written to ask the PS for Forestry and Wildlife, Mr. Mohammed Wa-Mwachai for more time to ensure that Wildlife Policy and Bill are progressive and address the broad principles in the new Constitution, namely environmental sustainability and devolved environmental governance.

On August 29th the Ministry of Forestry and Wildlife held a stakeholders conference at the Intercontinental Hotel to hear stakeholders comments on the draft Wildlife Policy and Wildlife Bill, a meeting that many described as a rubber stamping exercise. Many participants had not digested the documents or consulted stakeholders because they were given less than one week to review and comment on these two key pieces of new legislation that will impact on tens of millions of Kenyans who are affected by wildlife which includes animals, plants, fish and even insects. It is just not enough time to get reasonable comments from all corners of the country.

The Commission for the Implementation of the Constitution (CIC) should delay completion of the process and demand that adequate time is provided for legitimate stakeholder participation and input as well as harmonization with the Forestry Act and Environmental Management and Conservation Acts which are under review.

“The draft bill is full of inconsistencies and errors that make it unworkable. We can’t afford to rush this process or we will get it wrong and risk losing Kenya’s most important assets, our spectacular wildlife treasures and the tourism industry that depends on it. Who will take responsibility for that?” asked Dr. Paula Kahumbu (Kenya Land Conservation Trust), on behalf of the group.

Others who signed onto the letter include Allan Earnshaw (Trustee of the Kenya Wildlife Trust), James Isiche (Regional Director International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW)), Michael Mbithi (Land owner Lisa Ranch), Dr. Melita Semoilys (Coastal Oceans Research Development – Indian Ocean CORDIO), Nickson Parmisa (Kitengela Ilparakuo Land Owners Association (KILA)), David Sorimpan (Manager Olerai Conservancy Kipeto), Stephen Itela (Executive Director Youth for Conservaiton), Onesmas Kahindi (Executive Director Ecotourism Kenya), Judy Kepher-Gona (CEO and Programs Director, Basecamp Foundation), Dickson Kaelo (Naboisho Conservancy), Paul Matiku (Executive Director, Nature Kenya), Ambrose Njagih (Nakuru Wildlife Conservancy), and Hadley Becha (Executive Director, Community Action for Nature Conservation (CANCO)).

Kenya is currently operating on a rather prehistoric Wildlife Act that has been under review since 2007.

The Ministry of Forestry & Wildlife in collaboration with stakeholders in the wildlife and related sectors has prepared the draft Wildlife Policy & Bill. They state that the drafts are based on expert opinion obtained through an all inclusive consultation process involving all stakeholders, public, private sector, community based organizations and civil society organizations.

After aligning the draft policy and bill with the new constitution, the Ministry shared the outcomes of the review process with stakeholders on the ministry’s website http://www.forestryandwildlife.go.ke on the 22nd  of August. 

In the exercise of the freedom of expression enshrined in the constitution, members of the public were then invited to make comments on the Policy & Bill and send them to wildlifebill@forestryandwildlife.go.ke

Then, exactly a week later, on Monday 29^th August an historic stakeholders meeting took place at the Intercontinental Hotel in Nairobi to discuss the draft Bill which had been made available online only one week earlier.

Some NGO’s published their comments online before the stakeholders meeting in an attempt to rouse public interest.

On Monday, stakeholders from every corner of the country congratulated the technical team for the hard work that has already gone into the preparation of the Wildlife Policy and Bill. However, they unanimously complained about the limited amount of time they had to review the document.

The stages of policy development in Kenya, as defined in the new constitution, involve cooperation amongst all the stakeholders, but many stakeholders did not feel involved in the preparation of this Policy or Bill. They felt rushed and noted that the internet was slow or not even available in some places, and there simply wasn’t enough time to read, understand, deliberate on and discuss in the counties before coming to Nairobi to represent their constituents. Many of the participants had not read the document when they arrived for the meeting.

Never mind that many did not get a chance to comment during the short plenary session,  participants of the stakeholders forum were given one additional week to submit any further comments. Nobody asked why there was such a hurry and members rushed off to start drafting comments to meet the deadline of Monday the 5^th September.

So what is the big hurry? The Wildlife Bill requires substantial restructuring and participants recognized this. They made several requests regarding the process :

1.       The Ministry provides more time for stakeholder comment – one week is simply not enough.

2.       Delay in the process to allow a progressive Policy and Bill that address the broad principles in the Constitution, namely environmental sustainability and devolved environmental governance.

3.       Time for legitimate stakeholder participation through involvement, understanding and communication of the process in every region of the country.

4.       Time to tackle the really sticky issues like compensation and incentives.

5.       Time to re-structure the document to group and fully develop the issues of incentives, benefit sharing and rewards which many felt were inconsistent through the document.

6.       Time for professional lawmakers to read and advise stakeholders on the sticky issues in the Bill and to address inconsistencies.

Richard Leakey, WildlifeDirect and a group of wildlife stakeholders are calling for a postponement to allow the Policy and Bill to be properly developed with legitimate stakeholder participation.

They have questioned the rush to complete these two pieces of legislation, after all, the Forestry and Environment Act  (EMCA) are both under review and are  time bound as part of the Commission for the Implementation of the Constitution (CIC) under Land and Environment. The Wildlife Bill is not in this process and therefore is not time bound. If it is passed before the review of these other Acts, the Wildlife Bill will be subservient to them as there is much overlap in wildlife, environment, water, forestry and land.

So what’s the reason for a rush with the Wildlife Policy and Bill?

We asked the question but it hasn’t been answered satisfactorily.

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube Direktvultures

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube DirektWildlifeDirect ivory burn

In an article titled “Another inconvenient truth” (a convenient title I must admit), Elizabeth Bennet states that “A continuing global failure to crack down on a booming trade in body parts from endangered animals could soon cause some species – including rhinos and tigers — to “wink out” of existence. We have been saying in WildlifeDirect that elephants and rhino’s are particularly vulnerable.

But a couple of recent developments, including a recent United Nations decision to make combating wildlife crime a core concern, and a “potentially powerful” new International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC) – could spur needed action.

Bennet says that wildlife criminals are getting away with murder, and she’s right. Stories of illegal traders getting light penalties for killing, transpoting, tradeing and buying illegal species abound including hollywood suppliers , US businesses, veterinarians in South Africa, and even government officials.

Now governments are saying that they are going to get serious about this and bring an end to the illegal trade and threats to endangered species through, wait for it, yes, MORE ENFORCEMENT. Is a new International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC) really what we need now that species are on the brink of extinction?

well, I disagree! I just witnessed the burning of 5 tons of contraband ivory from Zambia and Malawi in Kenya that was seized in Singapore in 2002. The scary thing was that this ivory came from government stockpiles that had been raided! Secondly, it was headed for China and Japan, both countries are authorized by CITES to trade in ivory because they can “control the illegal trade”. This was the 19th shipment from southern Africa. The solution demands that Africa invests in high tech enforcement to save species that are in demand in China and Japan. It is garbage that the revenues raised from legal sales through CITES ‘help’ to conserve these charismatic species. In fact, the legal trade triggers demand and leads to unmanageable illegal trade. With China’s growing status in Africa, we know that regardless of penalties in Africa, Chinese nationals are getting off scot free. The solution is not greater enforcement – that is just driving up an arms race that African countries simply can’t win. So long as there is a demand for trade in those countries elephants and rhino’s will continue to die. The solution is to destroy the trade, remove China and Japan as trading partners for ivory, destroy the supply, and kill the demand by changing cultures in China and Japan. We all know that these two countries can do it but they simply don’t have the will.

I was interviewed on national television after last weeks ivory burn when local journalists began to ask the question – why was no Kenyan ivory burned on the 22nd of July along with the contraband Zambian and Malawian ivory?

This piece aired on Saturday and it obviously raised some ugly discussions – I had to explain my statements (don’t ask to whom but know it’s someone big?). I stand by my statement that legal ivory trade has triggered illegal ivory trade and killing of elephants leading. The trading status of China and Japan should be revoked, and Kenya should have burned at least 5 tons of ivory along with the Zambian/Malawian stocks.

embedded by Embedded Video

YouTube DirektIVory burned in Kenya

I asked the KWS Director why not a gram of Kenyan ivory was burned he said that the Kenyan Government recognizes the Kenyan stockpile as an asset and the process of destroying is rather bureaucratic. Mr Kipngetich said he does not see it being destroyed within the next 18 months. What a lost opportunity for us. A massive shame on all of us for failing to use the opportunity to make a much more dramatic statement.

PS. The day after the ivory was burned, KWS pilot Lelesit lost his life after conducting a patrol – his plane crash landed and he died on the spot. I met him in Galana when we rescued a shot elephant Akili a few weeks ago.  Lelesit was one of Kenya’s top conservation pilots and his death is a massive loss to conservation. We send our  heartfelt condolences to his family and friends.