It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Monday, September 26, 2022
Pope calls for courage in halting use of fossil fuels to protect planet
Pontiff tells young people he is pinning his hopes on their efforts to safeguard environment and help the poor
Pope Francis delivering his address in Assisi, Italy.
Photograph: Tiziana Fabi/AFP/Getty Images
Associated Press in Assisi
Sat 24 Sep 2022 17.41 BST
Pope Francis has called for courage in abandoning fossil fuels and lamented that older generations did not know how to protect the planet and secure peace.
The pope, who was visiting Assisi, the birthplace of his namesake saint who was close to nature, told young people on Saturday that he was pinning his hopes on their efforts in working to save the planet and to make the world’s economy more attentive to the poor.
During his brief visit to the hill town in central Italy, Francis spoke to a gathering of 1,000 young people, some of them young economists. Others are involved in efforts, including start-ups, focused on helping the environment.
The participants came from all over the world. Among them was a woman who recounted to the pope how she and her husband were helped to flee Afghanistan after the takeover of the Taliban last year by an organisation called The Economy of Francis, which is inspired by the life of St Francis, with his attention to the poor and others in need.
The pope said a world economy is needed that expresses “a new vision of the environment and the Earth”.
“There are many people, businesses and institutions that are making an ecological conversion. We need to go forward on this road and do more,” Francis said.
The pontiff cited an urgent need to discuss models of development. “Now is the time for new courage in abandoning fossil fuels to accelerate the development of zero- or positive-impact sources of energy,” Francis said.
He told the young people: “Our generation has left you with a rich heritage, but we have not known how to protect the planet and are not securing peace.”
He lamented a lack of “creativity, optimism, enthusiasm”, and told young people that “we are grateful to God that you are here. Not only will you be there tomorrow, but you are here today.”
Pope Francis: Love for the poor and for the Earth must go hand in hand
Pope Francis reacts as he attends a meeting in Assisi, Italy, Sept. 24, 2022. The pope led a meeting with young economists, entrepreneurs, financial advisers, scholars and scientists who have been working for two years on the Economy of Francesco project.
(CNS photo/Remo Casilli, Reuters)
ROME (CNS) — Acknowledging how young people have been given a world marked by inequality, injustice, war and environmental degradation, Pope Francis urged those looking for solutions to be concrete, to involve the poor, to care for the Earth and to create jobs.
“Our generation has left you with a rich heritage, but we have not known how to protect the planet and are not securing peace,” Pope Francis told some 1,000 young adult economists, entrepreneurs, financial advisers, students, scholars and scientists from 120 countries at the closing session of the Economy of Francesco event in Assisi.
The gathering Sept. 22-24 originally was planned for March 2020 but was postponed because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Instead, the young people spent more than two years working online with older experts, studying agriculture and employment, peace and ecology and finance and development in the search for ways to make the economy better for more people and for the environment.
“Our generation has left you with a rich heritage, but we have not known how to protect the planet and are not securing peace.”
The project is named in honor of St. Francis of Assisi, known for his love of the poor and of creation, and has been supported by the Dicastery for Promoting Integral Human Development.
At the end of the meeting, participants gave Pope Francis a pact, promising to work for “an economy of peace and not of war; an economy that counteracts the proliferation of weapons, especially the most destructive ones; an economy that cares for creation and does not plunder it; an economy at the service of the person, the family and life, respectful of every woman, man, child, the elderly and especially the frail and vulnerable.”
The pope encouraged the young people also to dedicate themselves to preserving and increasing their “spiritual capital,” the faith and values that will give meaning to their studies, their work and, especially, to their lives.
The pope encouraged the young people also to dedicate themselves to preserving and increasing their “spiritual capital.”
After all, he said, “human beings, created in the image and likeness of God, are seekers of meaning before being seekers of material goods,” but the modern world is losing sight of “this essential kind of capital, accumulated over centuries by religions, wise traditions and popular piety.”
Inspired by St. Francis of Assisi, he said, a new economic model must be “an economy of friendship with the earth and an economy of peace. It is a question of transforming an economy that kills into an economy of life, in all its aspects.”
Love for the poor and for the Earth must go hand in hand, he said. But it will require sacrifice and radical change.
“The earth is burning today,” he said. “If we speak of ecological transition but remain in the economic paradigm of the 20th century, which plundered the earth and its natural resources, then the strategies we adopt will always be insufficient.”
“We human beings, in these last two centuries, have grown at the expense of the earth. We have often plundered to increase our own well-being, and not even the well-being of all.”
“We human beings, in these last two centuries, have grown at the expense of the earth. We have often plundered to increase our own well-being, and not even the well-being of all,” Pope Francis told the young people. “Now is the time for new courage in abandoning fossil fuels to accelerate the development of zero- or positive-impact sources of energy.”
When the pope arrived at the gathering, young adults from Italy, Benin, Argentina, Thailand, Kenya, Afghanistan and Poland shared their stories and projects — from creating farms and educating farmers in regenerative agriculture to creating small businesses or rallying other young people to convince companies to stop producing single-use plastic bottles and bags.
Andrea, a young Italian in jail for murder but given permission to attend the Assisi event, spoke about his digital marketing work through a prison-based cooperative, which provides remote workers for companies as well as a workshop for repairing espresso machines for coffee bars.
“People coming out of prison must be changed and transformed from a ‘cost item’ to a ‘resource’ for society.”
“I am not an economist, but it seems quite logical to me to think that prison, in order to be a good investment for society, must achieve concrete results, and these are basically two: security and zero recidivism,” Andrea said. “People coming out of prison must be changed and transformed from a ‘cost item’ to a ‘resource’ for society.”
Concluding his speech with a prayer, Pope Francis asked God to forgive the older generation “for having damaged the earth, for not having respected Indigenous cultures, for not having valued and loved the poorest of the poor, for having created wealth without communion.”
He prayed that the Holy Spirit would continue to inspire the young people and that God would “bless them in their undertakings, studies and dreams.”
“Support their longing for the good and for life, lift them up when facing disappointments due to bad examples, do not let them become discouraged but instead may they continue on their path,” the pope prayed. “You, whose only begotten Son became a carpenter, grant them the joy of transforming the world with love, ingenuity and hands.”
Listen: A young American economist speaks about The Economy of Francesco
Pope Francis Wants Us To Give Up on Fossil Fuels, Says Now's the Time for Eco-Conversion
Back in 2019, Pope Francis intended to give young people who are ready to transform the economy a place to speak their minds, meet others with similar interests, and discuss various opportunities for a fossil fuel-free future. To turn this into reality, the Pontiff supported the creation of the Economy of Francesco (EoF). The name given to this event isn’t related to the Pope but to the Saint Francis of Assisi – the spiritual patron of the Italian city with the same name.
At the 2022 edition of EoF, young minds from various parts of the globe met in Italy to discuss environmental-related issues, achievements, and proposals. After listening to everyone, the Pope took the microphone and said some interesting things.
The Pontiff argued that the economy should be taken back to its roots, “to the work done by human beings.” This remark comes in contradiction with the industrial trend that replaces people with robots. But it is a valid statement – the more fairly-paid employees there are, the more money individuals and families will have.A greener future But the most interesting part of the Pope’s statement revolves around the need to ditch fossil fuels. His Holiness said that the world should abandon polluters and concentrate on making energy that has no impact on the environment.
He also argued in favor of moving forward with “an ecological conversion” that should make businesses and people cut down on their carbon footprint and recycle more.
The Pope also admitted that his generation created a rich heritage for today’s youth, but they did not know how “to protect the planet and secure peace.”
But is the Pope right? Should we ditch fossil fuels for good? Let’s find out.Fossil fuels are bad, but we must not forget their role Our world has been powered by fossil fuels for over a century, but the first time someone used coal as a source of energy can be dated back to over 4,000 years ago. People living in the area that’s China today noticed the black like-rock thing that burned easily and started using it. Some archaeologists even claim that cavemen used coal for heating without knowing what exactly it was. But during the 1200s, coal usage spread to Europe and other parts of the world.
However, people kept using coal to ease the process of making things out of metals. That is until the industrial revolution came around and the steam engine was created by James Watt. After the 1700s, coal remained an important resource for the British and helped them develop into an enormous empire.
The U.S. used coal as well. Americans made steel manufacturing easier thanks to coal and powered steam engines with it. But the first time coal was used for electricity can be dated back to the 1880s, according to a study published by the Department of Energy.
Coal isn’t the only fossil fuel we continue to use even today. Gas, natural gas, crude oil, kerosene, petroleum derivatives, and others like them are what made some countries more powerful and transformed our world. But coal was always at the epicenter of many health issues for humans. Burning coal leads to severe air pollution and has been known to cause heart problems, brain damage, asthma, and even cancer.Giving up on gas won’t be easy Similarly, oil and its byproducts have caused many global concerns. On the one hand, producers and refiners have one of the largest carbon footprints worldwide and have been involved in catastrophic natural accidents like Kolva River Spill or the Atlantic Empress Spill when millions of gallons of oil have been into oceans. Most recently, whistleblowers revealed that “bilge dumping” is often happening in the seafaring industry, and toxic liquids are released into the world’s oceans by virtually any diesel-powered vessel.
On the other hand, gas, diesel, kerosene, and other oil byproducts keep us moving and our economies going. We rely heavily on having enough gallons of refined oil, and the best proof comes from this year’s problems – the current U.S. administration was forced to release millions of barrels from the strategic reserve to keep inflation from spiraling out of control.
Even Tesla CEO Elon Musk called twice on the governments to make sure oil prices aren’t going to be artificially increased by decreasing output.
And, on top of all this, automakers like Porsche or Mazda have been noticed on multiple occasions saying that internal combustion engine bans aren’t the right way to move forward. Now, with the price of electricity going up and an unstable international landscape, we can understand why the transition to greener sources of energy can’t happen at once. It’s impossible to do it without hurting many people in the process.
But we must move forward. Battery and fuel cell electric vehicles are the future. Transportation will have to be revamped and it must be among the first things that change because it accounts for 27% of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. In the EU, the European Environment Agency says road transport is responsible for 72% of the total transport greenhouse gas emissions.
Now, the Pope wants us to slowly give up on them all while the young build a new and healthy economy. Will EVs and renewable energy play a major role in this transition? We’ll see. What’s certain now is that a major change awaits us. If it’s going to be for the better, well… That’s up to everyone!
At the end of the day, Pope Francis is right – we must focus on a new, more sustainable, and fossil fuel-free economy. But in doing so, we must not forget who will be hurt by these changes.
Canada’s animal-welfare push is gathering steam. Here’s what’s on the agenda
A parliamentary bill named after Jane Goodall is just the tip of the iceberg; activists have a lot of changes they’d like to see come to Canada, from an end to chickens in cages to a new home for Kiska, the orca at Marineland.
By Elisa Birnbaum
Special to the Star Sat., Sept. 24, 2022
Jane Goodall requires no introduction. And you need not be a heart-on-your-sleeve animal-rights activist to feel tremendous respect for the pioneering animal-behaviour expert and conservationist who gave us a firsthand look into the world of chimpanzees more than 60 years ago.
But for those working in animal welfare, the hope is her name will soon be associated with a groundbreaking law furthering animal rights in Canada.
Senate Bill S-241, also known as the Jane Goodall Act, is intended to protect a host of wild animals from suffering in captivity. Its passing into law could also serve as a testament to the burgeoning animal-rights movement in this country.
The bill was one of many legal developments on the agenda at the annual Canadian Animal Law Conference, which saw more than 200 attendees converge upon the University of Toronto last weekend. “We thought it was important for the community to share its wisdom,” said lawyer Camille Labchuk, executive director of event co-sponsor Animal Justice.
While the U.S. has been running a similar conference for 30 years, animal protection wasn’t even on the radar for the average person in Canada 15 years ago, added Labchuk. But today there’s palpable momentum, with animal welfare a concern for many.
Some believe climate change and the pursuit of a more sustainable lifestyle are encouraging greater compassion for animals. The surge in pet ownership may be a factor, too. Then there’s the growing call for transparency and ethical standards in the products we purchase, including the treatment of animals for consumption.
“Improving the rights and protection of animals is one of the new social justice challenges of our time,” Labchuk said. “We’re already seeing tremendous shifts in people’s attitudes, politicians taking issues more seriously, and people and consumers rising up, demanding better.”
Canada is starting to catch up, possibly even taking the lead in a couple of areas. The passing of Bill S-203 in 2019, for example, saw the end to the captivity of whales and dolphins (animals in concrete tanks don’t thrive as they do in the wild and live half as long, advocates say) and banning performances for entertainment.
In 2015, Ontario passed a law making it illegal to breed, purchase or sell orcas, a law that made it to the news again when Kiska — the last surviving orca at Ontario’s Marineland — was deemed to be suffering in isolation. The laws let Marineland keep the animals it already own, but many were calling for Kiska to be rehomed.
That’s where the proposed Whale Sanctuary Project in Nova Scotia may come in.
Expected to be the first permanent seaside sanctuary in the world for beluga whales and orcas, the sanctuary will offer a home to once-captive animals who are incapable of being released into the ocean for their own safety. With a space 300 times larger than the largest tank at SeaWorld, it will not only be “a place to live but a place to thrive,” according to Lori Marino, president of the project.
The hope is for the sanctuary to welcome its first residents in late 2023. As for who they expect to greet first, Marino is unequivocal. “We want Kiska there and we will fight hard to get her.”
Other legal developments in Canada include a bill to ban fur farming and the proposed Goodall Act mentioned above. If passed, it has the capacity to restrict the ownership of more than 800 species of wild animals in Canada who don’t do well in captivity, while effectively ending roadside zoos.
“It would go a long way to harmonizing national standards of animals in captivity,” said Labchuk.
The bill was first introduced in the Senate in 2020 by Murray Sinclair, formerly both a senator and chair of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. He said he believed it would help rebalance the relationship with nature, integral to advancing reconciliation with Indigenous peoples. A more comprehensive iteration of the bill — with the same mandate — was put forward by Sen. Marty Klyne this March.
Canada’s zoo industry has come under intense scrutiny. Many argue that confining certain animals in cages is both physically and psychologically harmful. Brittany Semeniuk, a veterinary nurse who specializes in emergency and exotic animal medicine, questioned whether accredited zoos are doing enough to care for their animals. The moose, for instance, is not meant to live in captivity, said Semeniuk, who has seen many suffer out of their natural ecosystem.
And then there are issues with roadside zoos. In May 2019, following a criminal investigation, animal protection officers from the Montreal SPCA seized over 200 animals from the Saint-Édouard Zoo in Quebec (after a protracted legal battle and pandemic delays, the number rose to 300-plus due to multiple births). In what was a first in Canadian history, the zoo owner was arrested and charged with animal cruelty and neglect.
“The current system in Quebec is broken,” said SPCA director of animal advocacy and legal affairs Sophie Gaillard. “Despite documenting years of offences, the government had grounds to act and power to seize, but they didn’t.” Instead, the zoo was reissued its licence. “It fell to us to intervene under the Criminal Code.”
When it comes to companion animals (i.e. pets), progressive legal developments include Ontario’s Animal Welfare Services Act of 2019 and the 2015 Quebec ruling that changed the status of animals to sentient beings from their prior status of property (a viewpoint shared by the Alberta Court of Appeal in 2021). That ruling can have real impact, as sentient beings are embodied with rights and standing that a kitchen table does not.
While family pets have their share of legal challenges, farm animals held court at the conference. For one thing, companion animals have better protections overall. For another, farm animals represent the largest group of animals used in Canadian society, with 851 million killed in 2021 alone. Most significantly, farm animals suffer the worst abuses, making their welfare front and centre.
On this front, our country is lagging behind. Case in point: Canada has the longest transport time in the developed world that animals can be on a truck without food, water, or rest. And while 10 U.S. states have adopted confinement bans (banning animals in cages), Canada has no such law.
In fact, there’s not one single law that regulates animals on farms. “We let the farming industry set its own standards for animal welfare,” said Labchuk. “We don’t oversee companies in industries that use animals, so they are left to their own devices and without government oversight.”
“It’s really regressive and, quite frankly, a national embarrassment,” said Jodi Lazare, assistant professor at the Schulich School of Law at Dalhousie University who teaches animal law, among other courses. The animal agriculture industry is a huge force in Canada, she added, and despite “horrendous” farm conditions, “the industry has managed to convince the government to subsidize it in significant ways and immunize it from public scrutiny.”
To be sure, there have been slow, incremental commitments on the part of industry to improve conditions. Phasing out gestational crates for sows is one. Also, 100 food companies in Canada have committed to phasing out cages for egg-laying hens (more than 2,300 companies have cage-free commitments across the world).
But Canada needs to do more, said PJ Nyman of Mercy for Animals, an international non-profit with a mission of ending industrial animal agriculture through sustainable food systems. In 2021, the organization launched the first Canadian report to rank food companies on their animal-welfare progress. It found that 83 per cent of laying hens in Canada were still in cages in 2021, compared to 35 per cent in the U.K. and 71 per cent in the U.S.
“I used to think that laws are just a reflection of attitudes and, as attitudes change, laws will catch up,” said Labchuk. She now sees a massive disparity between the two, with profit motive the underlying cause. There’s a lot of money to be made exploiting animals, after all.
Still, animal welfare seems to be winning the hearts and courts of public opinion, and advocates are lining up for their chance to make a difference. “The enrolment in my course this year is the highest it’s ever been,” said Lazare. “Canadians should cautiously celebrate the changes that have come but also acknowledge that there is a lot of work to do.”
Labchuk would agree. “Our challenge is to encourage more people to be active and make clear that it’s no longer acceptable for animals to have so few protections in 2022,” she said. “I feel very confident we’ll get there.”
REST IN POWER
‘Eco-warrior’ and Earth First! co-founder Dave Foreman dies September 25, 2022 Dave Foreman, founder of Earth First! poses for a portrait in Juneau, Alaska, on March 10, 1988. Foreman, a self-proclaimed eco-warrior who was a prominent member of the radical environmentalism movement and a co-founder of Earth First!, has died Monday, Sept. 19, 2022, according to New Mexico-based Rewilding Institute. He was 74
. (AP Photo/Suzanne Vlamis, File)
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — Dave Foreman, a self-proclaimed eco-warrior who was a prominent member of the radical environmentalism movement and a co-founder of Earth First!, has died. He was 74.
The New Mexico-based Rewilding Institute, which Foreman founded as a think tank to develop long-term land conservation plans, said on its website that he died peacefully at his home in Albuquerque on Monday.
A cause of death wasn’t immediately released, but friends of Foreman said he had battled a lung illness for several months.
“There will never be another like him. One of the greatest conservationists ever,” the institute said. “He is sorely missed by so many as a dear friend, leader, and mentor.”
John Davis, the institute’s director and an associate of Foreman’s for 37 years, told the Arizona Daily Star that Foreman had remained involved in conservation issues up until his death.
Foreman, who used to live in Tucson, Arizona, helped launch two groundbreaking environmental movements. One is Earth First!, which was launched in 1979 and uses a direct-action approach to draw “attention to the crises facing the natural world,” according to the movement’s website. The other is the “rewilding” movement, which for decades has sought to protect huge expanses of nature for wildlife.
In the 1980s, Foreman was repeatedly accused of engaging in eco-terrorism — including from some mainstream environmentalists — for his advocacy of environmental direct action, going beyond civil disobedience and tree-sitting protests to tree-spiking, cutting down billboards and pouring sand into gas tanks of bulldozers, the Star reported.
Former Earth First! member Kieran Suckling, who now is the director of the Tucson-based Center for Biological Diversity, told the newspaper that Foreman “was deadly serious about the essential importance of wilderness and wildlife to the planet, and to human society, and calling people to defend them as the highest calling in life.”
Born in Albuquerque in 1947, Foreman worked for the Wilderness Society from 1973-1980. Dissatisfactions with environmental groups led him and other activist friends to form Earth First!.
In 1991, Foreman co-founded the Wildlands Network, which seeks to establish a network of protected wilderness areas across North America. He founded the Rewilding Institute in 2003.
Foreman wrote at least five books from 1991-2014, starting with “Confessions of an Eco-Warrior.”
Flood gardens to combat drought and biodiversity loss, says Natural England
Experts say ditching concrete and creating mini wetlands could help water systems cope better with effects of extreme weather
A pond at Barnsdale Gardens in Rutland.
Those without the space can create a bog-garden or a bucket pond.
The solution to this? People should flood their gardens and create bogs in order to stop the effects of drought and reverse biodiversity loss, according to the head of Natural England.
Tony Juniper, who leads the government quango, said that concreted-over front gardens, and backyards which do not hold much water, could contribute to sewage spills into waterways as surface water runs off the hard or dry surfaces. He recommended that people turn their gardens into wetlands, which can hold water and prevent run-off. This would also create habitats for many creatures.
“I was in a conversation the other day with a couple of colleagues in the water industry,” he told the Gathering nature festival at Wild Ken Hill in Norfolk. “Everyone knows about combined sewage outfalls, with sewage going into the rivers. Part of the problem there is rapid runoff coming off hard surfaces, where you’ve got a lot of water being put into the drains, which also get the sewage, and they overflow.”
He said that one of the measures water companies are now thinking about is catching water in gardens, and part of this could be about creating a miniature wetland in our backyards.
“It’s looking at the extent to which you might be able to interrupt water flow before it gets to the sewage and into the rivers,” said Juniper.
“And that’s an interesting way of engaging people who actually don’t see a connection between their house and the river – by going down this route of making gardens wilder to hold more water.”
Nature organisations agree, recommending that people create “bog gardens” which can help wildlife and store water. This could be a small, flooded corner of a garden in which insects thrive.
Ali Morse, water policy manager at the Wildlife Trusts, told the Observer: “There are 400,000 hectares of domestic gardens in the UK – a vast area covering much more than all the nation’s major nature reserves put together – and they have huge potential to help us tackle the interlinked climate and nature crises.
“Making your garden wilder and wetter will help wildlife and also play an important role in making your garden less prone to drought and in reducing pollution in local rivers.”
“If you’ve no space for a traditional pond, consider a bird bath, a low-level water dish for hedgehogs and other mammals to drink from, a bog garden or a bucket pond, which can be a lifeline for insects such as butterflies and bees. Everything needs water. People are often amazed to discover the huge variety of aquatic wildlife that finds its way to ponds: dragonflies and damselflies, grass snakes, hedgehogs, foxes and birds all need water to survive.”
A spokesperson for the Rivers Trust agreed, adding that England has lost almost all of its wetlands as a result of farming and development.
“Groundwater from aquifers is critical during droughts and will be more so during climate extremes. Many aquifers have their recharge cut-off by impermeable, hard surfaces like roads, driveways and buildings. This means rainwater is diverted into storm water and can cause sewage overspills during heavy downpours. We need to rebuild local water cycles and allow this water to infiltrate and follow its natural path.”
Build back wetter: how to hold water in your garden
Remove hard landscaping to let rain soak away into the soil
Ponds and bog or rain gardens will retain water in times of heavy rain, helping to prevent flooding elsewhere; they also store water in times of drought
Install a water butt for capturing rain to prevent it from adding to the overloaded sewage system. You can also use this to top up your water features
A new species of shark – the Ragged-tooth shark – has “now been officially added to list of fishes found in Bermuda waters.”
In a recent edition of the Envirotalk newsletter, Dr. Joanna Pitt said, “A new species of shark, the Ragged-tooth shark [also known as the Small tooth sand tiger and, scientifically, as Odontaspis ferox], has now been officially added to list of fishes found in Bermuda waters. As often happens, the first encounter with this species was at the end of a fishing line.
“A commercial fishing vessel, captained by Mark Terceira, was fishing in 731 metres [2,400 feet!] of water off the east end of the island on the 19th of August, 2020, using deep set vertical lines to target deepdwelling species such as Wreckfish. The shark did not actually take the bait, but one of the hooks snagged in its dorsal fin. Mr Terceira brought the shark to the surface alongside the vessel, and snapped a few photos before releasing the shark alive. He estimated the total length of the shark to be about 275 cm [9 feet].
Ragged-tooth shark caught in 2020 by commercial fisherman Mr. Mark Terceira and subsequently released
“These photos were shared with DENR’s Marine Resources staff in order to facilitate identification of the shark, and also posted online. The post came to the attention of Dr Jeremy Higgs of the Gulf Coast Research Lab at the University of Southern Mississippi, who has been tracking observations of the Raggedtooth shark, and a flurry of emails ensued. Much of the information that follows comes from the recent article that Dr Higgs published with some colleagues, which constitutes the official record of this species for Bermuda.
“Fortunately, Mr Terceira’s photographs captured all the key identifying features of this species, including the distinctive shape of its head, and the relative size, shape and placement of the fins [Figure 1 a and b]. The flattened head with a long, conical snout, large first dorsal fin compared to the second dorsal, and even grey-brown coloration are important identifiers of the Ragged-tooth shark [Figure 2]. In contrast, the Bigeye sand tiger [Odontaspis noronhai] is dark brown, with a white tip on the dorsal fin, and has a much larger eye – as you might expect from its name. The Sand tiger shark, Carcharias taurus, which has also been encountered in Bermuda waters under similar circumstances, is pale grey with darker blotches and has a very different fin pattern. Of course, you can always examine the teeth of a shark to help confirm its identity, but few people are willing to do this on a live specimen.
“The Ragged-tooth shark is known to inhabit tropical, subtropical and temperate marine waters around the world, and is often associated with the deep shelf or slope habitats of both continents and islands. However, reports of this species are rare, and mostly consist of isolated observations. Captures or sightings from places as distant as the Canary Islands and New Zealand indicate this species inhabits depths as shallow as 1 m and as deep as 928 m [3.5 to 3,000 feet], although shallow encounters are rare. As a result, even shark experts know little about the life cycle of this species because of the small number of specimens that have been examined.
“The photographs showed that the Bermuda specimen was a male and, based on its size and the length of its claspers, likely mature [Figure 1a]. The largest Ragged-tooth shark on record is a female that was 520 cm long [17 feet], caught in the open waters of the southeastern Atlantic Ocean. This species bears live young, and females become mature at lengths of 300–350 cm [10-12 feet], while males are approximately 200-250 cm [7-8 feet] long when they mature. The pups are approximately 100 cm long [3.3 feet] at birth. Based on the biology of closely related species of lamnid sharks, it is assumed that this species produces only two pups per year
“With this extremely low predicted birth rate and the general paucity of information about the species, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature [IUCN] has assigned a precautionary assessment of “Vulnerable” for the Ragged-tooth shark on their Red List of Threatened Species. The Red List is considered the most comprehensive inventory of the conservation status of animals globally.
“A common feature of the case studies that form the basis of Dr Higgs’ article is that each shark was encountered as a result of fishing in deep waters [>300 m / 990 feet]. As fisheries activities have expanded into deeper water, they have also begun to overlap with the known depth range of the Ragged-tooth shark. As this expansion continues, interactions with the Ragged-tooth shark will likely increase, highlighting the importance of fishery observations to provide insight into the distribution of this species.
“This first record of the Ragged-tooth shark from Bermuda waters is the deepest known capture of this species in the North Atlantic Ocean to date. Previous studies on the deep slope around the Bermuda platform noted Lophelia deepwater corals in the area where Mr Terceira was fishing, and these corals have also been present in conjunction with other observations of Ragged-tooth sharks from the western North Atlantic. Dr Higgs believes that future studies should investigate both deepwater coral habitats and deep slope areas around the region in an effort to further describe the preferred habitat of Ragged-tooth sharks. With a better understanding of their distribution and habitat preferences, it may be possible to adjust fishing practices in order to reduce the chances of capturing this vulnerable species.
“This newly recorded species is automatically protected under the recent legislative amendments that were made to protect and manage sharks in Bermuda waters, which were passed in March of this year. There is now a general prohibition on taking sharks, although commercial fishers may apply for a special licence to catch limited amounts of three common species: the Galapagos shark, Carcharhinus galapagensis [locally called a Dusky shark]; the Smooth dogfish, Mustelus canis [which Bermudians refer to as a Gummy shark]; and the deep-dwelling Six-gill shark, Hexanchus griseus.
“For more information about the Ragged-tooth shark / Smalltooth sand tiger, along with some great photos, see here For the new report of this species in Bermuda waters, refer to Higgs, Hoffmeyer, Driggers, Jones and Hendon [2022], ‘New records of the ragged-tooth shark, Odontaspis ferox, from the western North Atlantic Ocean, with a summary of regional occurrences’, published in volume 98 of the Bulletin of Marine Science. A summary of this paper is available online here, a hard copy is available in the library of the Natural History Museum at BAMZ, or you can request a pdf by emailing fisheries@gov.bm.”
Why Hammerhead Sharks Evolved To Have That Specific Head Shape
SEP 25, 2022
Mother Nature can often seem as random as she is strange, but if we look closely enough, almost everything in nature has an explanation – and that explanation is usually evolution.
Though the hammerhead shark seems like an unwieldy design, scientists believe it does have at least a few evolutionary advantages.
First, their wide-set eyes likely give the sharks a much wider field of vision. They’re able to have a better sense of their surroundings, even though their depth perception is likely lacking.
To make up for that, hammerhead sharks have unique sense organs called Ampullae of Lorenzini. Scattered on the underside of their “hammer,” they actually detect electricity.
Similar to a metal detector, these pore-like organs help the sharks sense and locate prey that’s buried underneath the sand on the ocean floor – and they’re pretty darn accurate, too.
Also, the hammer shape of their heads allow them a sharper turn radius while swimming. Large surfaces tend to be more powerful in motion, so they’re able to switch directions rapidly in pursuit of prey.
It’s difficult for scientists to trace the evolution of modern day hammerhead sharks because almost all shark fossils are teeth and nothing more. Their bodies are made of cartilage, which breaks down more quickly than bone and rarely has a chance to turn into cartilage before it disappears.
That said, there are nine different types of hammerheads in existence today that vary in size and head shape. Many scientists long posited that the sharks have evolved larger hammers over time, which would mean the species with smaller hammerheads are older than their larger-headed counterparts.
When they extracted and studied DNA, however, they found that wasn’t the case at all – the older species had the larger hammerheads instead of the smaller.
So, instead of natural selection working in favor of bigger heads, scientists now think that the larger heads were a genetic defect that worked to the sharks’ advantage, and so those bigger-headed sharks survived to pass that trait down to their offspring.
Meanwhile, natural selection is selecting for smaller hammerheads, as is seen in the DNA studies.
So while there are definite advantages, those sharks with the most pronounced hammers would have been considered deformed by their peers when they first appeared.
Some of the major inclusions in the diamond, including enstatite, ringwoodite, coesite, and possibly perovskite. (Gu et al., Nat. Geosci., 2022)
Deep below the surface of our world, far beyond our feeble reach, enigmatic processes grind and roil.
Every now and then, the Earth disgorges clues to their nature: tiny chthonic diamonds encasing skerricks of rare mineral. From these tiny fragments we can glean tidbits of information about our planet's interior.
A diamond recently unearthed in a diamond mine in Botswana is just such a stone. It's riddled with flaws containing traces of ringwoodite, ferropericlase, enstatite, and other minerals that suggest the diamond formed 660 kilometers (410 miles) below Earth's surface.
Moreover, they suggest that the environment in which they formed – a divide between the upper and lower mantle called the 660-kilometer discontinuity (or, more simply, the transition zone) – is rich in water
"The occurrence of ringwoodite together with the hydrous phases indicate a wet environment at this boundary," write a team of researchers led by mineral physicist Tingting Gu of the Gemological Institute of New York and Purdue University.
Most of Earth's surface is clad in ocean. Yet considering the thousands of kilometers between the surface and the planet's core, they're barely a puddle. Even at its deepest point the ocean is just shy of 11 kilometers (7 miles) thick, from the wave-tops to floor.
But Earth's crust is a cracked and fragmented thing, with separate tectonic plates that grind together and slip under each other's edges. At these subduction zones water seeps deeper into the planet, reaching as far as the lower mantle.
Over time it makes its way back to the surface via volcanic activity. This slurp-down, spew-out cycle is known as the deep water cycle, separate from the water cycle active at the surface. Knowing how it works, and how much water is down there, is also important for understanding the geological activity of our planet. The presence of water can influence the explosiveness of a volcanic eruption, for example, and play a role in seismic activity.
Because we can't get down there, though, we have to wait for evidence of the water to come to us, as it does in the form of diamonds that form crystal cages in the extreme heat and pressure.
Gu and her colleagues recently studied just such a gem in detail, finding 12 mineral inclusions and a milky inclusion cluster. Using micro-Raman spectroscopy and X-ray diffraction, the researchers probed these inclusions to determine their nature.
Among the inclusions they found an assemblage of ringwoodite (magnesium silicate) in contact with ferropericlase (magnesium/iron oxide) and enstatite (another magnesium silicate with a different composition).
At the high pressures at the transition zone, ringwoodite decomposes into ferropericlase, as well as another mineral called bridgmanite. At lower pressures closer to the surface, bridgmanite becomes enstatite. Their presence in the diamond tells a story of a journey, indicating the stone formed at depth before making its way back up to the crust.
That wasn't all. The ringwoodite in particular had features suggesting it is hydrous in nature – a mineral that forms in the presence of water. Meanwhile, other minerals found in the diamond, such as brucite, are also hydrous. These clues suggest that the environment in which the diamond formed was pretty danged wet. Evidence of water at the transition zone has been found before, but this evidence hasn't been sufficient to gauge how much water is down there. Was it a chance inclusion from a small, localized pocket of water, or is it positively sloshy down there? The work of Gu and her team points more towards sloshiness.
"Although the formation of upper-mantle diamonds is often associated with the presence of fluids, super-deep diamonds with similar retrogressed mineral assemblages rarely have been observed accompanied with hydrous minerals," they write in their paper.
"Even though a local H2O enrichment was suggested for the mantle transition zone based on the previous ringwoodite finding, the ringwoodite with hydrous phases, reported here – representative of a hydrous peridotitic environment at the transition zone boundary – indicates a more broadly hydrated transition zone down to and cross the 660-kilometer discontinuity." Previous research has found that Earth is sucking down way more water than we had thought prior. This could finally give us an answer as to where it's all going.
When the first spindly, armour-clad carcass was spotted in the fast-flowing Nechako River in early September, Nikolaus Gantner and two colleagues scrambled out on a jet boat, braving strong currents to investigate the grim discovery.
Days later, the remains of 10 others were spotted floating along a 100km stretch of the river in western Canada.
In total, 11 endangered white sturgeon have mysteriously died in a short period of time, blindsiding biologists, who are trying to save a fish teetering towards extinction.
The species has remained relatively unchanged in 200m years: toothless apex hunters that glide gracefully in a handful of British Columbia’s rivers. To navigate the murky waters, sturgeon gently brush whisker-like barbels that hang from their snout along the gravelly bottom. White sturgeon, with a torso clad in five distinct bony plates called scutes, look every inch a prehistoric fish. The largest ever recorded reached 20ft long and another, believed to be 104 years old, weighed nearly 1,800 lbs.
The Nechako River, where the sturgeon population has dropped from 5,000 to 500 in the past century. Photograph: Fernando Lessa/Alamy
“When you see a massive head appearing through the murky water and the eyes look at you, it’s just incredible to see this majestic animal alive,” said Gantner, a senior fisheries biologist with the British Columbia government. “And you gain respect for it, knowing that most fish we see are older than us.” The rapid succession of deaths has taken an unexpected emotional toll on Gantner and his colleagues.
“I’m deeply saddened. These last couple of weeks, I feel like I’m going through grief,” he said. Each time he and colleagues tenderly move the hulking carcasses of the fish from the shore to the freezer and on to the necropsy table, he feels a pang of sorrow. “I don’t think I felt like that from other fish that I’ve worked with.”
So far, there are no obvious answers. The team hasn’t found any sign of trauma nor evidence of chemical exposure, disease, or angling-induced death. “Whatever it is, it affects larger sturgeon, not other species. It’s constrained to a place in time and space. So that gives us some clues,” said Steve McAdam, a biologist with the province’s ministry of land, water and resource stewardship. “In a way, it’s easier to rule a bunch of stuff out than to rule some things in.” The deaths in the Nechako are particularly painful for McAdam, who studied a similar die-off in the lower Fraser River in 1993 and 1994, when the region lost 36 fish in two years.
A battery of tests that followed that die-off was inconclusive, said McAdam; the events occurred in differing ecosystems, hundreds of kilometres apart, offering limited clues to investigators.
Because the team investigating the current episode has a narrow window of time to recover dead sturgeon before decomposition sets in and destroys valuable clues, they have appealed to the public for help. In a region where the fish have deep cultural ties to First Nations and are part of the curriculum in local schools, residents have paid close attention to the phenomenon.
A range of theories have been suggested, including a belief that elevated water temperatures are to blame. But McAdam said previous hot summers had not triggered similar die-offs.
“There’s no end to the ideas. There are some partial explanations, but we’re really trying to keep an open mind and not veer too far down one path,” he said.
To navigate in murky waters, sturgeon gently brush whisker-like barbels that hang from their snouts along the gravelly bottom.
Photograph: Minden Pictures/Alamy
Before the mysterious die-offs, white sturgeon, which are listed as a federal species at risk, were already in trouble.
Over the last century, the numbers in the Nechako River have dropped from more than 5,000 to only 500. Soon after a dam was built on the Nechako River in 1957, the species experienced what biologists call “recruitment failure” – new fish weren’t being added to the population.
It is from within that ageing population, already missing an entire generation of fish, that the 11 have died.
Overfishing, drainage projects and dam construction have all contributed to the collapse. On all the rivers in the province where sturgeon once thrived, dams have crushed their populations. Only the Fraser River, the largest without a dam, has a relatively healthy sturgeon population in the tens of thousands.
British Columbia has worked since 2001 to help the species recover, drawing teams of provincial and federal biologists, First Nations groups and the industries tied to sturgeon habitat loss, like hydroelectric dam operators.
Efforts include using hatcheries, a “stopgap measure” to help the population recover, as well a longer-term goal of restoring habitat.
But the sudden death of 11 members of a species already spiralling towards demise mirrors a trend all over the world: sturgeon have become the most threatened genus of fish.
All of the 26 remaining species of sturgeon are now at risk of extinction. They are the victims of overfishing; in some species, like beluga sturgeon, the roe is prized as caviar. And the habitats they have persisted in are disappearing.
“They are a quite a charismatic species and it’s a fish that has been around for millions of years. So you don’t take it lightly when it’s in danger,” McAdam said. The abruptness with which the fish have died has puzzled biologists in part because white sturgeon have been closely studied and monitored for the last three decades, precisely because of their precarious situation.
“And then within a week, this happens. We have a new huge question mark,” said Gantner. “It’s really blindsided us.”
Both Gantner and McAdam were hopeful that the deaths will serve a broader end, providing valuable insight to biologists into what might have happened – and how a similar outcome can be prevented in the future.
Because the other option – that they have already reached some kind of a tipping point – is too bleak to consider.
“We’ve never done the experiment of eliminating them fully and seeing how truly important sturgeon are to an ecosystem,” said McAdam. “And personally, I don’t think we ever want to.”
There was little room for doubt about the reaction to the prime minister’s plans to scrap environmental regulations this weekend. “Make no mistake, we are angry. This government has today launched an attack on nature,” tweeted the RSPB, its most forceful political intervention in recent memory.
Liz Truss’s proposals to create investment zones, where green rules on nature protection would in effect be suspended, represented a step too far for some of Britain’s biggest environment charities. “As of today, from Cornwall to Cumbria, Norfolk to Nottingham, wildlife is facing one of the greatest threats it’s faced in decades,” the RSPB went on.
Swiftly after came the Wildlife Trust, representing another million members and also “incredibly angry … at the unprecedented attack on nature”, and the National Trust, with more than 5 million members.
For veteran green campaigners, the strength and speed of the intervention was striking. “It’s a very strong reaction,” said Tom Burke, co-founder of the green thinktank E3G, and a veteran adviser to governments. “The government cannot have been expecting this strong a reaction.”
The list of anti-green policies from a cabinet just a few weeks old is already extensive:
New investment zones threaten a regulatory vacuum where developers can ignore rules on water quality, species conservation and space for nature.
A bonfire of EU regulations could put paid to more than 500 rules protecting the natural world, from wildlife habitats to water quality.
Fracking has been given the green light, and more than 100 new licences for oil and gas drilling will be granted in the North Sea.
The environmental land management contracts for farmers are being reviewed. Championed as a “Brexit dividend”, Elms were meant to reward farmers for protecting nature, offering “public money for providing public goods”. Scrapping them would return the UK to subsidising intensive agricultural production at the expense of nature.
There has also been little engagement from the cabinet with key stakeholders, including green groups and farming leaders apart from the National Farmers’ Union, a supporter of scrapping Elms. Ranil Jayawardena, the secretary of state for environment, food and rural affairs, has not yet met with green groups and stakeholders, a failure that Shaun Spiers, the executive director of the Green Alliance thinktank, described as “unprecedented”.
The government is still nominally committed to the UK’s legally binding net zero emissions target, and Truss had made senior appointments – including the levelling up secretary, Simon Clarke, and minister Graham Stuart – with green credentials. But green Tories are increasingly concerned.
Ben Goldsmith, the investor and chair of the Conservative Environment Network, said: “There are worrying rumours that the new Conservative ministerial team at Defra are toying with the idea of delaying or derailing the brilliant, groundbreaking new environmental land management scheme, which will link all taxpayer-funded farm payments to the stewardship and restoration of soil and nature. Losing this would of course be a disastrous backwards step, so we must hope that they are only rumours.”
On environmental policy, from fracking to farming, new “clear green water” appears to be opening up between the UK’s two main parties. Spiers warned: “We have been very proud in this country of keeping environmental issues mainstream. This should not be a culture war issue. Conservative voters in middle England don’t want to trash the countryside.”
Despite the furious reaction from mainstream green organisations, which has rattled some backbench and green Tory MPs, Truss seems prepared to double down on her liberalisation agenda even if that means antagonising them further. The Guardian understands that a mooted mollifying statement from No 10, aimed at reassuring voters and MPs in marginal seats, was ditched.
Veteran green experts warned that Truss had misjudged the public mood in her haste to forge a new rightwing radical position. “There is a giant gulf between where Liz Truss thinks the British people are, and where the British people really are,” said Burke.
But he added that green campaigners should not assume that Labour would ride to their rescue. “What parties say in opposition is not always what they do in government. There will need to be firm commitments from Labour that they will restore what the Tories are destroying.”
Doug Parr, policy director of Greenpeace, called on Truss to change course. “[Her] government has launched an indiscriminate attack on environmental rules ignoring both their own manifesto commitments and very strong public concerns about nature,” he warned. Government poised to scrap nature ‘Brexit bonus’ for farmers
“Voters understand that we need tougher laws to protect the living world. They see water firms getting away with pumping tonnes of raw sewage into our rivers and seas while raking in huge profits, supermarkets flooding our homes with throwaway plastic, and destructive fishing plundering our marine protected areas with impunity. They can tell the difference between so-called red tape and vital rules to stop pollution and environmental harm.”
For Labour, he added, the challenge was to match a strong slate of low-carbon policies with new proposals on nature and the countryside. “This should be a political open goal for Labour. They should get their act together, seize the opportunity and make their nature protection policy as strong as their climate ones.”
Farmers threaten to quit NFU as leader backs scrapping of nature subsidies
Prominent members of farmers’ union express dismay after comments by Minette Batters
Minette Batters said she believed private money should be used to pay farmers for wildlife recovery, rather than public funds.
Farmers are threatening to quit the National Farmers’ Union after its leader said she supported the UK government’s apparent move to scrap post-Brexit nature subsidies.
Instead of the environmental land management scheme (Elms), Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) sources disclosed, they are considering paying landowners a yearly set sum for each acre of land they own, which would be similar to the much-maligned EU basic payments scheme of the common agricultural policy.
Minette Batters, the president of the NFU, said she welcomed the departure from Elms. “My absolute priority is ensuring that farmers can continue to produce the nation’s food – so I do support maintaining direct payments in order to build a scheme that really will deliver for food production and the environment,” she said.
She later doubled down on this point, telling the BBC that she believed private money should be used to pay farmers for wildlife recovery, rather than public funds. She said: “We have got literally billions and billions of pounds in green finance that is looking to invest in wild environments. We should be making the private sector work effectively.”
Prominent members of the NFU have spoken to the Guardian, saying they were minded to quit if the leadership failed to clarify its position and support payments for environmental protections.
Jake Freestone, a regenerative farmer and Worcestershire county chairman for the union, has won awards for his soil quality after practicing nature-friendly farming. While he said he is not yet at the point of quitting, he appeared disappointed with the NFU’s apparent views on Elms.
“We do need to focus on the environment as well as food production and what does worry me is if we are going to throw out a lot of environmental protection on the basis of food security. But we are quite happily farming productively here and also providing good environmental protection – if you don’t have wildlife and pollinators and farmland birds, what do you have?” he said.
“The challenge we have is the NFU have a lot of diversified members with a lot of different interests.”
Martin Lines, the chair of the Nature Friendly Farming Network (NFFN), said many of his fellow farmers were leaving the NFU over its perceived anti-nature stance.
“I know of lots of NFU members who are very unhappy or have already left,” he said. “Unfortunately many farmers are members because they feel there hasn’t been any other farming body in the past that is a voice for farming. I know many farmers who are leaving the NFU and joining organisations like the Country Land and Business Association (CLA), NFFN and others, as the NFU doesn’t represent their views or voice.
“Many farmers are starting to realise the NFU does not represent or champion their voice or farming system.”
Mark Tufnell, the chair of the CLA, which represents 30,000 landowners, said he hoped the government would stick with Elms. He said: “There is concern that there might be a change in direction, it’s harsh to come in at a very early stage and say it isn’t working as it hasn’t been given a chance.”
On the NFU’s policy, he said: “You would have to ask the NFU. We have actively stated since about 2017 that we have always felt it is very difficult to justify a flat-rate payment to farmers and landowners just for the sake of owning land. The benefit of Elms is the more public goods you provide, the more you get paid, and you can stack the amounts you do in the public scheme with the private element.”
The NFU has been lobbied by some influential voices who are against Elms. Celebrities including the TV presenter Jeremy Clarkson, former Undertones singer Feargal Sharkey and former cricketers Ian Botham and David Gower have written to the government asking them to scrap environmental regulations.
Writing as “rural voices” who do “real work” that includes “cultivating the soil, looking after sick animals and bringing in the harvest”, they said environmental regulations on farmers “seek to appease the insatiable demands of a few self-righteous campaigners”.
On Monday, Batters said: “We’re pleased the government is reviewing the framework for future farming regulation to help ensure farm businesses are supported through the current economic challenges and can make progressive decisions to boost growth and farming’s contribution to the nation.
“The NFU has always supported the ‘public money for public goods’ policy but we have called for a delay as the scheme was not fit for purpose and ready to roll out in its current form.”
This dash for growth represents the death of green Toryism
Boris Johnson was far more eco-conscious than recent Conservative predecessors. But this mini-budget is a reversion to type
Kwasi Kwarteng: no mention of net zero.
Photograph: Jessica Taylor/House of Commons/Reuters
The dash for growth by Kwasi Kwarteng means unshackling City bankers and property developers from the taxes and regulations that prevent them from paving over what’s left of Britain’s green and pleasant land.
The humble concrete mixer will be elevated to exalted status. There will be more executive homes built on greenfield sites. More distribution sheds dotted along busy A-roads. And more urban renewal of the kind that involves tearing down buildings in a plume of dust and carbon emissions to replace them with something not much better, at least not in environmental terms.
At no point in the chancellor’s speech on Friday did he mention the need to reach net zero, or how his plans would help our ailing planet while doling out billions of pounds in tax cuts to richer households and businesses.
Boris Johnson’s administration at least put in place plans for achieving net zero, and Michael Gove considered ways of reversing 70 or more years of severe biodiversity loss.
As Fiona Harvey has documented in the Guardian, Johnson’s premiership brought “more major environmental legislation and arguably greater progress on tackling the climate and nature crises than either of his Conservative predecessors in the past decade”. That’s a low bar when David Cameron and his chancellor George Osborne did their best to kick almost all green initiatives into the long grass, but Johnson did put in place the Agriculture Act, the Fisheries Act, and the Environment Act, coupled with plans to phase out petrol and diesel cars, create a boom in offshore wind, and protect a third of the UK’s land and seas.
Johnson’s legacy, though, is largely rhetoric and very little action. That’s the message from those who attended committee meetings to put meat on the bones of his “10-point plan for a green industrial revolution” only to find themselves in nothing more than a talking shop. One member of Johnson’s Green Jobs Delivery Group, who preferred to remain nameless, said that if the discussion had ever broadened beyond how many millions of trees could be planted in the UK, a strategy might have emerged.
It didn’t seem to matter that senior executives from Siemens, BMW and E.ON were sitting around the table with the head of England’s further education colleges and representatives of the major industrial lobby groups – the discussion still didn’t go anywhere.
By the time Liz Truss sacked the minister in charge who chaired the delivery group, Greg Hands – whose green credentials were burnished when he resigned from a ministerial post in 2018 over plans to expand Heathrow – the group appears to have achieved nothing but an agenda for the next meeting.
Tree planting is indeed an important issue facing urban landscapes, as well as a countryside plagued by drought. Economically, there is also a good reason to talk about the subject: the UK imports 80% of the wood needed for items ranging from toilet paper to construction timber when well-managed forests could fill the gap.
A junior climate minister – well-meaning and well-connected though he is – is clearly only window dressing in a government that wants to bring back fracking
Still, it was one initiative among many, and a change that was poised to spread across major industrial and commercial sectors could not happen while the political focus lay elsewhere.
Green Tories want us to think the party still cares after Truss appointed Graham Stuart as junior minister for climate change. Stuart was one of the leading voices urging Theresa May to enshrine the net zero target in law. He has also been involved in the Globe group of legislators who push for laws mandating climate action to be passed by national parliaments.
But a junior minister – well-meaning and well-connected though he is – is clearly only window dressing in a government that wants to bring back fracking, produce more North Sea oil and rip up planning laws.
Maybe Truss will reveal herself as a champion of green policies: she spoke several times about the need to act on the climate crisis during her leadership campaign and has committed herself to attending Cop27 in Egypt and the 15th biodiversity Cop in Canada.
Except that the new prime minister, as environment secretary, cut subsidies to solar farms. She has also shown little appetite for accelerating an upgrade of the electricity grid to accommodate more renewable energy providers, or supporting major manufacturing industries as they transition to net zero.
Without a prime minister and cabinet that understands the risk of a dash for growth – one that generates yet more carbon – it will fall to fracking protesters and nimbys to prevent the UK going backwards. They will need to be on the streets in force to block what in most cases will be disastrous and unjustified initiatives.
WORST HURRICANE IN CANADIAN HISTORY
Meteorologist reacts to Fiona: 'Like nothing I've ever seen'
NTV News' Chief Meteorologist Eddie Sheerr offered a grim account of the impact post-tropical storm Fiona had on the southern part of Newfoundland and Labrador.
"The power of the ocean was just relentless." Sheerr said Sunday. "The toll that this storm surge took on the southern part of this island is like nothing I've ever seen."
According to the meteorologist, when Fiona hit Port aux Basques, the area became "ground zero" for a storm surge what was made worse because of "tidal run up" a phenomenon that causes low tides and high tides to get successively higher.
"What transpired was significantly worse than I even thought it would be," Sheerr said on Sunday. "The reason for that was the water levels were just so high."
Fiona descended on Port aux Basques on Saturday as a post-tropical storm that,in addition to the catastrophic storm surge, was also churning out 130-kilometre-per-hour wind gusts.
Mayor Brian Button said the damage to the town of 4,000 has been devastating and the cleanup won't be quick.
"This is going to take days, could take weeks, could take months in some places.".
With files from Michael Tutton in Sydney, N.S., Hina Alam in Covehead, P.E.I., Morgan Lowrie in Montreal, Amy Smart in Vancouver and Lee Berthiaume in Ottawa
Watch Eddie Sheerr's full analysis by clicking on the video
