Wednesday, January 9, 2013

New Taiwan Pink Dolphin paper published

A new paper on mark-recapture analysis of the ETS Sousa (aka Taiwan Pink Dolphin) by John Y Wang et al has been published in the Bulletin of Marine Science (Volume 88 Number 4). The abstract is given below. To access the full paper see the Bulletin of Marine Science website or here.


MARK-RECAPTURE ANALYSIS OF THE CRITICALLY ENDANGERED EASTERN TAIWAN STRAIT POPULATION OF INDO-PACIFIC HUMPBACK DOLPHINS (SOUSA CHINENSIS): IMPLICATIONS FOR CONSERVATION. BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE. 88(4):885–902.
 

John Y Wang, Shih Chu Yang, Pedro F Fruet, Fabio G Daura-Jorge, and Eduardo R Secchi.
 
Abstract
 
Accurate and precise estimates of abundance and survival rates are important for assessing the conservation status of cetacean populations. Mark-recapture analysis of photo-identification data of the critically endangered eastern Taiwan Strait (ETS) population of Indo-Pacific humpback dolphin, Sousa chinensis (Osbeck, 1765), was conducted on data collected between 2007 and 2010 to refine a preliminary, and the only available, abundance estimate for this isolated population (n = 99; CV = 51.6%), as well as to provide survival rates. About 14,000 good quality photographs (about 2100–6300 yr−1) were used to estimate both parameters for marked animals under Pollock’s Robust Design model. The total population size (NT) was determined by correcting for the proportion of the population possessing long-lasting marks (i V ). The annual point estimates were lower, varying from 54 to 74, and had much better precision (CV varied from 4% to 13%) than previous estimates, suggesting that mark-recapture is a suitable method for estimating abundance of this population. These estimates also further supported the precarious state of the ETS population under another criterion of the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. As expected for long-lived mammals, annual apparent survival rate was high at 0.985 (95% CI = 0.832–0.998). Continuing to monitor the ETS population of humpback dolphins with such high precision and accuracy will allow examination of the population’s trends over time and to better understand its future persistence.

Friday, October 12, 2012

Fourth-stage expansion of Central Taiwan Science Park permit revoked

Yesterday, the High Administrative Court revoked the development permit issued for the Fourth-stage expansion of the Central Taiwan Science Park for Erlin in Chunghua County. The project threatened the tradition way of life of the rural peoples of Erlin. The project also would cause extremely high levels of pollution and environmental damage. According to the Taipei Times, the court said, “The development [in Erlin Park] will cause serious waste of the nation’s land and resources, compromise food safety and affect the nation’s sustainability.” “Revoking the permit will not contradict the public interest. Rather, the ruling would safeguard a major public interest.”

Read Farmers elated as science park’s permit is revoked in today's Taipei Times:

Tuesday, October 2, 2012

Toxic Cocktail: who's pickin up the tab?

"Taipei Times
Firm under fire over plant blaze

PUBLIC RELATIONS MELTDOWN:Formosa Petrochemical, owner of the Sixth Naphtha Cracker, has faced criticism over suspicious animal deaths after a major fire at the plant"



The headline and plurb kind of just sizzle and pop. There's no real bang in this. It looks a little hot but as soon as you get into the text of the article you soon realise there's no spice in it. Probably just a weak attempt to cover the story without rattling the cage of the corporate ogre in the story. The string of fires down at the Formosa Petrochemical Corp’s Sixth Naphtha Cracker in Mailiao, Yunlin County are no secret but the article just mentions one fire in July 2010. There were two around then actually but I guess our reporter saw fit not to mention the other fire or the ones which came after. The article waffles on about activists and EIAs and dead ducklings but never really gets down to the issue of Formosa Plastics needing to take responsibility for the toxic landscape it's created down in Mailiao.

Just over a week ago we were told that Premier Sean Chen (陳冲) would become involved in the disagreement between the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) and Ministry of Economic Affairs (MOEA) regarding an EPA decision that could lead to Formosa Petrochemical Corp’s withdrawal from an investment project. And what might that mean? Is Premier Chen going to smooth the ruffled feathers of the corporate ogre and insure that it will be business as usual for the petrochemical giant asap?

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that those grey smoke-filled skies around Mailiao aren't healthy. Local folks might lack the funds and resources to prove beyond a shadow of doubt that the sudden deaths of fish, ducklings and other animals following fires at Formosa are a result of the toxic fallout from the fires but that doesn't make Formosa right and excuse what is happening down there.

Lawyers, unethical politicians, rich corporations, corrupt officials. These might keep the debt collector from the door in the short term. But somewhere, sometime in the not too distant future the tab for this toxic cocktail is going to have to be paid! And it will be paid in the currency of poor health, disease and death. It will be paid by the environment and all those who live in it; human and non human. It's legacy will run generations and it will be our legacy.

Friday, September 14, 2012

Another shocking wounded Pink Dolphin photo!

TW-111, seen on 21st July with a new open wound probably from entanglement in a fishing net.*



Another shocking Taiwan pink dolphin injury photo has been forwarded to us by researchers. The photo shows dolphin (TW-111) photographed on July 21 with a very serious injury. The injury would likely have been caused while pulling itself free from entanglement in a net. The wound is very deep. You can clearly see where the epaxial muscles (lighter colour in this photo) and the blubber layer (the thin darker layer) are separated.

This animal was last photographed on July 6 and did not show the wound at that time so the injury must have been between that date and July 21st.

Another very disturbing thought is the open wound in those nasty waters.

At the 2007 international workshop on the pink dolphins scientists identified five major threats to the Taiwan pink dolphins:
- by-catch in fishing gear;
- reclamation of estuarine and coastal regions for industrial purposes;
- diversion and extraction of freshwater from major river systems of western Taiwan;
- release of industrial, agricultural and municipal effluent into rivers and coastal waters;
- noise and disturbance associated with construction, shipping and military activities

There is overwhelming evidence that by-catch and entanglement are happening. If the issues isn't addressed immediately then it would appear that these critically endangered dolphins are doomed to be lost through by-catch and entanglement within just the next few years.

Also see:
Shocking Truth: The fatal reality of entanglement and bycatch for the Taiwan Pink Dolphins


*Photo courtesy and copyright FormosaCetus.

Tuesday, September 11, 2012

Cancellation of KK gets mention in the IUCN's Species Magazine

The Dacheng Wetlands which was to be the site of the Kuokuang Petrochemical project.


The cancellation of the Kuokuang Petrochemical project in April last year has made it into the the latest edition of the IUCN's bi-annual magazine, Species Magazine issue 54. There is a brief mention in the Cetacean Specialist Group report on page 41. The Kuokuang Petrochemical Project would have seen the Dacheng wetlands (Changhua County) destroyed through a land reclamation project to house the Kuokuang Petrochemical Refinery. The Dacheng Wetlands on the west-central coast are an internationally listed IBA (important bird area). The loss of the wetlands and construction of a petrochemical plant would have effectively divided the habitat of the critically endangered Taiwan Pink Dolphins in two.



Tuesday, July 31, 2012

And the name games continue...

Yesterday, a different version of Friday's post, It's all in a name appeared as a letter in the Taipei Times. A copy of the Taipei Times letter appears below. In Friday's post we pointed out how the media can subtly influence the perception of something by their choice of name. The old story of story of what some call hero others call villain.

On Friday we pointed out how the Taipei Times seems to box anyone who speaks out over, or protests over an issue linked to the environment as an "environmentalist" or "activist" or "conservationist" or some other "ism." Create the impression that just greeny-hippie-bunny-hugger-types are up in arms. The lunatic fringe again! When in fact it is Joe Citizen and it's civic groups, concerned residents, teachers, academics, parents, farmers and so the list could go on. They are people we relate to. They are everyday regular folk. They are us. And they've had enough of polluted skies, fields and waterways. They've had enough of greed and corruption and they want it to stop.

Yet again today we see another Taipei Times article (Petrochemical project slammed by protest group) about a protest over the fourth expansion project at Formosa Plastics Corp’s sixth naphtha cracker complex in Mailiao Township, Yunlin County. And once again we learn that was those pesky "local environmental activists" again. There's that subtle boxing to create the impression it's the lunatic fringe again. Yes, they do name some of the groups represented at the protest. And right at the end, almost as a footnote, we learn that there actually were more than 30 civic groups from across the country. But in those all important opening paragraphs we read "protest" "small" "local environmental activists."

We learn nothing really about what they are protesting about beyond the most obvious. Some of the seemingly dirty underhanded ways the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was passed are touched on but no mention of Formosa Plastics horrendous environmental track record even gets a mention. No mention of all the recent fires. No mention of how they have attacked freedom of speech with their recent SLAPP (strategic lawsuit against public participation) where two Formosa Plastics affiliates filed a lawsuit against Professor Tsuang Ben-jei (莊秉潔) of National Chung Hsing University’s (NCHU) department of environmental engineering because they claim that he said emissions from FPG's sixth naphtha cracker plant in Yunlin County’s Mailiao Township (麥寮) resulted in a higher cancer occurrence rate amongst nearby residents which has injured FPG's reputation. Yeah, the criminal suit brought by two Formosa Plastics affiliates that are also investors in the Mailiao off shore facility has been dismissed – i.e., non indictment. FPG can “appeal.” However, a civil suit is still pending.

None of this makes it into the article. No mention of the threats that the likes of the Mailiao plant pose to local residents both human and non human like the critically endangered Taiwan pink dolphins.

Why? Why is the article so selective in what it reports? It's obvious that the protesters aren't getting a boost from the media for their cause. So who is?


Taipei Times letter- July 30, 2012.
It’s all in the name

What one calls a terrorist another calls a liberator. It is all in the name; how those who hold power or desire power wish the masses to perceive something. The media obviously plays its part in all this.

Take the Taipei Times article “Environmentalists protest over EIA” (July 26, page 3). Environmentalists? Images of long-haired hippie types stuck in a 1960s mindset rambling on about free love and Mother Earth come to mind. And I am pretty sure that is just what some politicians, developers and corporations want you to think. “Yeah, the lunatic fringe up in arms again causing disruptions!”

The first paragraph of the article read as follows:

“Environmentalists yesterday protested against an environmental impact assessment (EIA) for an expansion project at a naphtha cracker complex that failed to include fine particles.”

You would be forgiven for thinking it was just those pesky environmentalists that have a problem with an environmental impact assessment for the fourth phase expansion project at Formosa Plastics Corp’s sixth naphtha cracker complex in Yunlin County’s Mailiao Township (麥寮). Some group of crazy green bunny-huggers whining about fine particles not being listed.

Now, let us delete “environmentalists” and give a more accurate description of those that typically are present at these protests against the expansion projects down in Mailao:

“Concerned local residents, civic groups, fishers, farmers, workers, teachers, academics, parents, lawyers, doctors, conservation and environmental groups yesterday protested against an EIA for an expansion project at a naphtha cracker complex that failed to include fine particles.”

OK, it is a bit long, but you get the point. It sounds different, doesn’t it? It changes things. We relate to these people. They are us. They do not sound so loony.

However, the Taipei Times so often boxes these regular folks and organizations as “environmentalists” or “activists” or some other “ism.” I am sure the so-called developers must smile at this subtle eroding of Joe Citizen’s image and credibility.

You see. It is not just environmentalists that are pissed off with Formosa Plastics and its toxic hell down in Mailiao. After all the pollution, fires, greed and lack of ethics, after soaring cancer rates, dirty air and smokey gray skies, people have had enough. They want to know why the Environmental Protection Agency allows this toxic nightmare to continue.

However, others would have you believe it is just some nutty environmentalists who have a problem with it.

T.W. Sousa, Yunlin County

Thursday, July 26, 2012

It's all in a name

Formosa Plastics at Mailiao in Yunlin County in all its toxic glory.


To the Nazis they were terrorists, subversives and a host of other evil sounding names. The Allies called them resistance fighters, partisans, patriots and freedom fighters. And so often through history what one calls a terrorist the other calls liberator. It's all in the name; how those that hold power or desire power wish the masses to perceive something. The media obviously plays its part in all this.

Take this story from today's Taipei Times. The headline reads "Environmentalists protest over EIA." Environmentalists? Images of long-haired-hippy-types stuck in a 60s mindset rambling on about free love and Mother Earth come to mind. And I'm pretty sure that that is just what they want you to think. Yeah, the lunatic fringe up in arms again causing disruptions.

The first three paragraphs of the Taipei Times article read as follows:
"Environmentalists yesterday protested against an environmental impact assessment (EIA) for an expansion project at a naphtha cracker complex that failed to include fine particles.

The EIA for the fourth expansion project at Formosa Plastics Corp’s sixth naphtha cracker complex in Yunlin County’s Mailiao Township (麥寮) did not list PM2.5 (fine particles less than 2.5 micrometers) as an item in the evaluation.

Before the impact assessment meeting, environmentalists gathered in front of the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) and called on committee members to reject a proposal to once again expand the plant
."

You're to be forgiven for thinking it was just those pesky environmentalists that have a problem with an environmental impact assessment for the fourth phase expansion project at Formosa Plastics Corp’s sixth naphtha cracker complex. Some group of crazy bunny-huggers on about fine particles not being listed.

Now, if you would allow me, let's change a few words in just the first paragraph of the article to read:
"Concerned local residents, civic groups, fishers, farmers, teachers, parents, lawyers, doctors and conservation and environmental groups yesterday protested against an environmental impact assessment (EIA) for an expansion project at a naphtha cracker complex that failed to include fine particles."
Sounds different doesn't it. It changes things. We relate to these people. They are us. They don't sound so looney.

You see. It's not environmentalists that are pissed off with Formosa Plastics and its toxic hell at Mailiao in Yunlin County. After all the pollution, fires, greed and lack of ethics. After soaring cancer rates, dirty air and smokey grey skies people have had enough. They want to know why the EPA keeps allowing this toxic nightmare to continue. But others would have you believe it was just some nutty environmentalists who have a problem with it.