Africa’s rhinos are seriously threatened by poaching, which feeds the demand for rhino horn in Vietnam and China.

Rhino horn is a long-used ingredient in Chinese traditional medicine and is now even more eagerly sought after in Vietnam. It is a lucrative business.

Rhino horn can fetch up to US$60,000 per kg on the illegal market and is worth more by weight than diamonds or cocaine.

Over the past nine years 5,940 African rhinos have been killed for their horns. Massive poaching over decades had reduced the black rhino in Africa from 65,000 in 1970 to 2,300 in 1993.

Anti-poaching and conservation programmes enabled a recovery to a population between 5,042 and 5,455. White rhino rehabilitation was even more dramatic with numbers as low as 50 in the wild in the early 1900s. They are now back up to between 19,682 and 21,077.

They nevertheless remain under serious threat. South Africa, home to the majority of Africa’s white rhino, has borne the brunt of the offensive. It lost at least 5,061 rhinos between 2008 and 2015.

There have been a number of initiatives to protect both black and white rhinos from extinction. These have included:

• a ban on the international trade in rhino horn in 1977. Domestic trade is still legal in many countries;

• attempts to reduce demand in the main east Asian markets;

• costly and increasingly militarised anti-poaching methods; and

• concerted conservation efforts.

In addition to these efforts I believe that there should be space for a legal, regulated trade in rhino horn. Supplies could be harvested, without harm to the animal, from live rhinos’ natural mortality ivory and the large horn stocks held around Africa.

The subject will be hotly debated at the upcoming CITES conference in South Africa, where some countries are expected to apply to be allowed to trade legally in rhino horn. They will argue that the income will be used for conservation funding, anti-poaching measures and community schemes to improve rhino protection.

The case for and against

The countries most affected by this debate are those that are home to most of Africa’s rhinos.

The vast majority of white rhino about 99% are found in Namibia, South Africa, Swaziland and South Africa. South Africa has 90% of the world’s white rhino and 1,700-1,800 black rhino. Both species are also found in Botswana, Namibia, Swaziland and Zimbabwe.

Small black rhino populations can be found in Kenya, Malawi and Zambia. The west African black rhino was declared extinct in 2011.

The idea of lifting the ban is vehemently opposed by wildlife and animal welfare NGOs such as Born Free, the Environmental Investigation Agency and the International Fund for Animal Welfare. It is also opposed by many Western governments, and Kenya, which burned its rhino horn and ivory stocks at a public ceremony at the end of April.

Born Free argues that legal trade would expand demand, lead to increased poaching, and hasten rather than prevent the extinction of the rhino.

Rhino horn stocks

Swaziland has applied to CITES for permission to trade. It will request permission to sell its existing stocks to a small number of licensed retailers in the Far East. It also wants to sell harvested horn, at the rate of 20kg per annum, to these retailers.

Its formal proposal says income from a legal, non-lethal trade would “greatly ease financial pressure at a time when Swaziland’s rhino parks are struggling with the recent surge in rhino protection costs.”

Swaziland has 330kg in stock and can produce at least another 20kg a year. Rhino breeder John Hume told me that South Africa has stocks of 32 tonnes of horn, 22 held by government and the rest by private owners. Namibia and Zimbabwe also have large stocks and the potential to produce horn supplies from dehorned rhino and natural mortality.

The proceeds from the sale of stocks will raise approximately $9.9 million at a wholesale price of $30,000 per kg. That amount will be placed in an endowment fund to yield approximately $600,000 annually. In addition, the proceeds of the annual sale of 20kg will raise a further $600,000 yearly, bringing total recurrent annual revenue from horn to $1.2 million.

If matched by the legalisation over time of sales by other range states, it could help drive out illegal trade. Pelham Jones of the Private Rhino Owners’ Association argues that legal sales set at $10,000 per kg would undercut the illegal market by selling legal horn below the current black market prices.

This would make illegal horn more expensive. It would also be less attractive in terms of potential risk of seizure and prosecution to buyers than legally available horn.

Other trade proponents talk of a central selling organisation for rhino horn, a version of De Beers diamond cartel.

June Wiltshire, a business specialist in favour of the trade, told me she advocated the controversial approach of dealing directly with the current illegal rhino trade kingpins. The major drawback is that they don’t just deal in rhino horn but a range of illegal wildlife products, drugs and people trafficking.

What next?

The Swaziland bid at CITES will be rejected. But the start of a discussion at CITES and the placing of the trade issue on the table internationally could lead to change in the future.

There is a strong possibility that, even after the rejection at CITES of the Swazi plan, the Southern African Development Community would support Swaziland’s position, with the likely abstention or possible opposition of Botswana and South Africa.

A much more coordinated regional plan would be the best way to work towards a regulated, secure and legal trade as part of a range of community and income-generation instruments along with fully funded security measures to protect rhinos in the future.

The way forward won’t be easy.

I strongly believe that the trade ban has not worked and will not work now. Rhino horn is a resource that can be harvested non-lethally and sustainably. It can earn income to encourage breeders, pay rangers and anti-poaching teams realistic salaries, provide sophisticated surveillance and supply benefits that will gain the support of people around parks, reserves and ranches. This will help support conservation because it is in their interests to do so rather than help poachers out of dire need.

But the pro-trade camp needs to get its act together and develop a sophisticated, viable trade scheme that does not appear to reward criminal syndicates and to present their case thoughtfully.

Keith Somerville is Visiting Professor, University of Kent.

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Flooding costs the UK economy more than £1 billion annually, a figure which can rise to nearer £5 billion in a bad year. Traditional approaches to flood defence have focused on managing flood risk using hard defences such as flood walls and river revetments.

While mitigating some of the worst consequences of flooding, these solutions do little to challenge underlying causes and when they fail, the consequences can be devastating. And a growing body of evidence now suggests that managing flood risk naturally, by restoring natural processes, can be cheaper and more sustainable.

As well as being cost effective, rewilding has the additional benefit of creating vibrant natural landscapes, which stimulate tourism and ecological awareness, while also soaking up greater quantities of CO₂, helping bring the economy towards carbon neutrality.

Helen Meech, director at Rewilding Britain, said: “With one in six properties in the UK currently at risk of flooding – a situation likely to be exacerbated by climate change over coming decades – it is time to rethink our approach to managing flood risk.

“Flooding is a natural part of a river’s annual cycle but problems occur when land is overgrazed, rivers are straightened and trees and wildlife removed. Such measures reduce the capacity of the landscape to absorb excess water and slow floodwater flows.

“Our report highlights the ways in which rewilding can substantially reduce flood risk downstream, protecting communities at a fraction of the cost of traditional flood defences. Rewilding also has benefit of improving water quality and stimulating the revival of vibrant ecosystems rich in wildlife.

“With MPs currently consulting on new approaches to management of Britain’s natural environment post-Brexit, we it is time we allowed landscapes the space they need to rewild, creating natural wetlands and bringing back the wildlife that was once common to Britain.”

Examples of rewilding projects which have already significantly reduced flood risk in communities across the UK include:

• Moorland restoration at the Holnicote Estate in West Somerset including the recreation of flood meadows and making woody dams to mimic beaver activity. During winter 2013 unprecedented rainfall there was no flooding in villages that regularly suffered in the past. There was also a 10% reduction in flood peak in late December 2013 on an already saturated catchment containing over 90 properties at risk.

• Uplands Projects: At the headwaters of the River Derwent, on the highest plateau in the Peak District National Park, peat bogs were re-planted with moorland grasses, heathers and other plants. Average peak flows reduced by 30% and average run-off slowed by around 20 minutes.

• Beavers and other wildlife: A beaver reintroduction trial in Devon has seen beavers dramatically alter the landscape, stimulating the revival of a natural wet woodland – home to a diverse range of wildlife. They have significantly increased water storage while slowing the flow of water downstream – valuable services both at times of drought and after storms. During storm events there was on average 30% lower peak volume of water leaving the site, compared with entering, reducing flood risk downstream.

• Sussex Flow Initiative: replicating nature by placing ‘leaky dams’ composed of tree branches and trunks upriver along the River Ouse. Alongside this, floodplain woodlands have been created with the planting of 23,000 trees and 3.5 kilometres of hedgerow. This increases the landscapes natural ability to absorb excess water and reduce flood. Floodplain meadows have become one of Sussex’s most threatened habitats, but left alone can support diverse and dynamic ecosystems and store carbon. Such measures are also substantially cheaper than traditional flood defence schemes.

Further information about these projects and the impact of rewilding on flood risk is available via Rewilding Britain’s flooding report – downloadable here.

#Rewilding

@RewildingB

Environmental destruction and landgrabs could lead to governments and individuals being prosecuted for crimes against humanity by the international criminal court following a decision to expand its remit.

The UN-backed court, which sits in The Hague, has mostly ruled on cases of genocide and war crimes since it was set up in 2002. It has been criticised for its reluctance to investigate major environmental and cultural crimes, which often happen in peacetime.

In a change of focus, the ICC said on Thursday it would also prioritise crimes that result in the “destruction of the environment”, “exploitation of natural resources” and the “illegal dispossession” of land. It also included an explicit reference to land-grabbing.

The court, which is funded by governments and is regarded as the court of last resort, said it would now take many crimes that have been traditionally under-prosecuted into consideration.

The ICC is not formally extending its jurisdiction, but the court said it would assess existing offences, such as crimes against humanity, in a broader context.

The ICC’s policy paper on case selection and prioritisation declares: “The office [of the prosecutor] will give particular consideration to prosecuting Rome statute crimes that are committed by means of, or that result in, inter alia, the destruction of the environment, the illegal exploitation of natural resources or the illegal dispossession of land.”

Land-grabbing has become increasingly common worldwide, with national and local governments allocating private companies tens of millions of hectares of land in the past 10 years.

The anti-corruption campaigners Global Witness say this has led to many forced evictions, the cultural genocide of indigenous peoples, malnutrition and environmental destruction.

“Land-grabbing is no less harmful than war in terms of negative impacts on civilians”, said Alice Harrison, an adviser at Global Witness. “Today’s announcement should send a warning shot to company executives and investors that the environment is no longer their playground.

“The terrible impacts of land-grabbing and environmental destruction have been acknowledged at the highest level of criminal justice, and private sector actors could now be put on trial for their role in illegally seizing land, flattening rainforests or poisoning water sources.”

Crimes for profit, not just war

International lawyers said broadening the priority cases to include land-grabbing would recognise that mass human rights violations committed during peacetime and in the name of profit could be just as serious as traditional war crimes.

“It will not make land-grabbing per se a crime, but mass forcible evictions that results from land-grabbing may end up being tried as a crime against humanity”, said Richard Rogers, a partner in the international criminal law firm Global Diligence.

Rogers has lodged a case with the ICC on behalf of 10 Cambodians alleging that the country’s ruling elite, including its government and military, has perpetuated mass rights violations since 2002 in pursuit of wealth and power by grabbing land and forcibly evicting up to 350,000 people.

“Cambodia is a perfect example for this new ICC focus. It fits in to the new criteria”, he said.

He predicted it could have a bearing on the way business is done in certain countries. “Companies who want to invest in [some] places risk being complicit in crimes against humanity. Tackling land-grabbing will also help address some of the causes of climate change, since deforestation is very often a result of land-grabbing.”

Assisting states to carry out prosections under national laws

The new ICC focus could also open the door to prosecutions over climate change, Rogers said, because a large percentage of CO₂ emissions had been caused by deforestation as a result of illegal land-grabbing.

The ICC can take action if the crime happens in any of the 124 countries that have ratified the Rome statute, if the perpetrator originates from one of these countries, or if the UN security council refers a case to it. Crimes must have taken place after the Rome statue came into force on 1st July 2002.

Reinhold Gallmetzer, a member of the ICC working group who drew up the policy document, said: “We are exercising our jurisdiction by looking at the broader context in which crimes are committed. We are extending the focus to include Rome statute crimes already in our jurisdiction.

“Forcible transfer [of people] can already be a crime against humanity, so if it is committed by land-grabbing – whether as a result or a precursor – it can be included.”

The ICC paper also lists other crimes, such as arms trafficking, human trafficking, terrorism and financial crimes, in which it intends to provide more help to individual states to carry out national prosecutions.

John Vidal is the Guardian’s environment editor.

Owen Bowcott is the Guardian’s legal affairs correspondent.

This article was originally published on the Guardian Environment and is republished here via the Guardian Environment Network.

The Property Care Association’s (PCA) second annual Invasive Weed Conference entitled ‘Risk, Roots and Research’ takes place on November 22 and will include talks on the problems of Japanese Knotweed, aquatic invasive plants, and biocontrol and physiochemical control optimisation.

Professor Max Wade, Chairman of the PCA’s Invasive Weed Control Group, said: “A lack of information is one of the biggest obstacles to achieving the effective management of Japanese knotweed and other non-native invasive plants in the UK. 

“Our intention is to offer a level-headed and evidence-based approach to tackling the issue and create a platform for delegates to access a wide-range of expertise from high calibre, informed sources.”

The fight against non-native species made great strides forward recently when the List of Alien Species of Union Concern finally came into force on August 3, 2016, as part of new EU-wide regulations.

Setting out a clear framework on how to deal with high risk species, the new regulations give a clear large scale approach, but there are worries that in light of Brexit, regulations which deal with these destructive weeds may be taken away.

Dr Mark Fennell, Principal Ecologist at AECOM says: “It is important that this new EU Regulation along with the many other EU-based regulations relevant to UK environments be retained moving forward.”

One of the most well-known non-native invasive weeds is Japanese Knotweed (Fallopia Japonica) which can grow to around two metres tall and was introduced to the UK in 1825. It has been growing ferociously across the UK landscape since 1886.

Both Prof. Wade and Dr Fennell recognise a real need to establish evidence-based risk assessments for this species, so informed decisions can be made on the threat Japanese Knotweed poses to buildings and other structures. 

The role of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) in providing surveyors with appropriate guidance is welcomed by professionals and academics, as is the code of practice, training and certification available through the Property Care Association, for those managing companies and working to control this plant.

It took 130 years for Japanese Knotweed to reach its peak, but the likes of Floating Pennywort took just 20 – this plant arrived on UK soil in the 1980s and was first recorded in the wild in 1990. Floating Pennywort is racing to the top of the list of weeds to watch out for, as it spreads at a staggering rate throughout waterbodies and river systems. The species was banned for sale in 2012 but fears are that this is too little, too late. The species is now well established in many waterways, particularly around London and Manchester, and over the last few years has begun to overrun the Ely Ouse and the Cam in Cambridgeshire where extensive and costly control programmes are underway, made more difficult by a limited selection of chemical controls suitable for aquatic plants. Floating Pennywort can form dense mats, has major ecological impacts and restricts water flow.

Dr Fennell said: “There is an urgent need to keep an eye on the horizon for what might be heading in our direction.  One to watch out for, handkerchief in hand, is Ragweed (Artemisia Artemisiifolia), known from the wild in the UK since 1836.  This plant produces pollen which can cause serious hay fever to the extent that it is considered a serious weed in parts of North America and increasingly so in Europe.”

He said the fear is that there is a trigger which will enable Ragweed to spread just as Japanese Knotweed has. Ragweed is a medium-sized perennial herb reaching up to one metre, with its seeds spread by attaching to fur and clothes.

Another nuisance weed of waterways, parks and farms is Giant Hogweed (Heracleum Mantegazzianum). If the toxic sap of this species gets on your skin, it can result in severe blistering, long-term scarring and sensitivity to sunlight.

This massive and impressive plant, once a favourite in Victorian ornamental gardens is really beginning to make itself known as more injuries from the plant are reported. It’s especially important to alert children to the dangers of this plant, as often they are fascinated by its sheer size.

To date, two of the most significant recent achievements in the fight against non-native invasive plants are the revision of the Invasive Strategy for Great Britain, and the emergence of a trade association for invasive weed control companies.  The GB Strategy is the UK Government’s blueprint for dealing with invasive non-native species and highlights the importance of teaming preventative measures with the ability to mount a rapid response to potentially invasive species.

Prof Wade said: “This strategy has received input from across a range of stakeholders and is fit for the years to come. The Property Care Association has raised the standard of practice in this industry through introducing standards and training, ensuring that the millions of pounds spent on the control of invasive non-native weeds is well spent. 

“This development is particularly timely now that government agencies in England do not provide guidance, as exemplified by the removal of the Environment Agency’s widely consulted Knotweed Code of Practice (now on the NNSS website). 

“The PCA has been filling part of this gap for invasive weeds.  As a member of the Non-Native Species England Working Group, the PCA needs to sustain its support of the GB Strategy, and why not build on its success by taking on the mantle of invasive non-native pests, and bring a more coordinated approach to the likes of Asiatic Clams, Asian Hornet and Asian Tiger Mosquito to the table nationally?”

Identification of plants and other invasive non-native species is covered by the Field Guide to Invasive Plants and Animals on Britain and the identification sheets on the NNSS’s website.

• The trade body PCA has existed for more than 85 years and represents a number of UK structural bodies, including flood protecting and invasive weed control industries.

• The Invasive Weed Control Group was set up in 2012 by the PCA together with the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) and invasive weed control companies operating within the UK.

Laura Briggs is the Ecologist’s UK-based news reporter

Follow her here: @WordsbyBriggs

For decades factory farmers have been pumping antibiotics into livestock to compensate for inhumane and disease-inducing conditions. Now, bacteria are fighting back.

A new ground-breaking study of factory farmed UK supermarket pork and chicken has found that 71% of the samples were contaminated with antibiotic-resistant E. coli bacteria that cause life-threatening kidney infections and blood poisoning. The figure for just pork was alarmingly 63%.

Pigs in factory farms are so overcrowded, stressed and unhealthy they have to be routinely given antibiotics even when no disease has been diagnosed in any of the animals. What’s more, drugs classed as ‘critically important’ for people may be used.

In the EU, from where 54% of the pork consumed in the UK is imported, factory pig farms can keep pregnant mother pigs confined in steel cages for 20 weeks a year. In UK low welfare farms, including Red Tractor, this is allowed for 11 weeks a year when she is feeding her piglets.

The high levels of stress from having to endure weeks of this torture makes her vulnerable to injuries and disease.

To achieve maximum weight gain piglets in factory farms can be taken away from their mothers when they are only 21 days old, too early for their immune systems to develop properly. This means they have to be routinely given antibiotics as an integral part of the production cycle.

Intensive farms ‘breeding’ antibiotic-resistant bacteria

Just as doctors strive to reduce antibiotic use in the surgery, so farm use is increasing. Around a quarter of all antibiotics prescribed in the UK are given to pigs in factory farms. This routine misuse of antibiotics means that bacteria become resistant, bringing us closer to the end of antibiotics as a cure for an increasing number of human diseases.

The study, commissioned by the Alliance to Save our Antibiotics and conducted by Dr Mark Holmes from Cambridge University, is the first study to examine UK-origin retail meat for resistance to a wide range of key antibiotics for treating dangerous E. coli urinary-tract and blood-poisoning infections in people.

The study tested 189 samples of low welfare, UK-origin pork and chicken meat from the seven largest supermarkets from across the UK (ASDA, Aldi, Coop, Morrisons, Sainsbury’s, Tesco and Waitrose).

Across factory farmed pig and chicken meat from all these supermarkets, the study found E.coli bacteria resistant to three highly important antibiotics for treating E.coli infections in people.

The research found soaring levels of resistance in chicken meat, with a staggering 24% of chicken samples testing positive for ESBL E. coli, a type of E. coli which is resistant to a family of antibiotics classed as ‘critically important’ for people (the cephalosporins). These antibiotics are widely used for treating life-threatening E. coli blood poisoning in humans.

On 19% of pig and chicken meat, E. coli bacteria showed high levels of resistance to the antibiotic Gentamicin, which is of vital importance in treating serious urinary tract infections in people. Resistance to another essential antibiotic, Trimethoprim (which is the most widely used drug for treating lower urinary-tract infections in people) was found on 51% of pork & chicken samples.

The findings provide further evidence that the overuse of antibiotics on British farms is undermining the treatment of dangerous E. coli infections in humans.

Exposing humans to potentially fatal infections

This is of huge concern, as the number of serious E. coli infections is at a record high and increasing every year. E.coli is by far the most common cause of urinary tract and dangerous blood poisoning in humans, and can also cause meningitis. These kinds of infections can be fatal if they do not respond to antibiotics.

But the last 25 years has seen a steady increase in resistance to some of the most important remaining antibiotics which can treat these infections. No new antibiotics for treating E. coli infections have been discovered for over 35 years.

Increasing resistance is leading to record levels of E. coli blood poisoning. Figures we have assembled show that in 2015 there were over 45,000 E. coli blood poisoning infections in the UK.

The number of blood-poisoning infections has increased every year since 2000 (when it stood at about 12,000 or so), and is increasing by about 2,000 each year now. E. coli is by far the most common cause of blood poisoning nowadays, causing more blood poisoning than the next four bacterial causes of blood poisoning combined.

Meanwhile, many important antibiotics – including a number of those examined in the study – are used in far greater quantities in livestock farming than in human medicine, often given to whole groups of (mostly healthy) animals.

This systematic overuse of antibiotics in factory farms is fuelling the emergence of resistant bacteria. These superbugs can then pass to humans through the environment, or via meat that we buy in the supermarket.

The antibiotic resistance crisis is predicted to kill one person every 3 seconds by 2050. Over a third of these deaths will be caused by drug-resistant E. coli. This catastrophe is now unfolding before us.

The silience of the supermarkets

Supermarkets have remained too silent on this issue. While our vital drugs fail, they continue to permit unacceptable antibiotic use in their supply chains.

Supermarkets must now take share the responsibility for tackling this crisis by banning the routine preventative mass medication of groups of animals, dramatically curbing farm-use of the ‘critically important’ antibiotics in their supply chains, and setting specifications around good animal husbandry.

Animals should – and can – be kept healthy through good husbandry and welfare, not through routine medication. It’s time to stop sacrificing our animals – and our antibiotics – for cheap meat.

As farmers strive to compete with cheap imported pork, many farmers break EU and the UK regulations by depriving the growing pigs of straw (or other bedding material) to reduce labour costs. Crammed into small pens without the ability to express their natural instincts to root in straw for food and play with, pigs are stressed and fight thus increasing their vulnerability to disease.

Without straw the pig waste can more easily drop through the concrete floor slats into tanks underneath. The effluent is spread onto fields, sickening local residents with a toxic stench of ammonia and a cocktail of other gases and disease-causing bio aerosols.

This effluent inevitably leaks into watercourses, killing fish and other wildlife in rivers and the sea. In contrast, pig waste on outdoor farms, whose certification system demands limited pig numbers, nourishes the soil and forms part of the crop cycle that grows the pig feed.

Competing with imports is driving UK farmers in to a downward spiral where farms have to consolidate and reduce labour or go bankrupt. In the past 15 years the UK pig herd has dropped by half, while 70% of the imports have been raised in conditions that are illegal in the UK.

Join the growing movement for high-welfare farming!

The good news is that conscientious consumers are buying pork from high welfare farms. Today 25% of UK pork has been raised either outdoors, or indoors with plenty of straw and space to move around, where the pigs are happy and healthy and rarely, if ever, need antibiotics.

The solution? Of course we must back today’s UN initiative to tackle the problem of microbial resistance on a global level. But we can also act closer to home and join the growing movement against factory farming by only buying meat from high welfare farms.

How? In supermarkets, only buy pork with the labels RSPCA Assured, Outdoor Bred, Free Range or best of all, Organic. Ask for high welfare pork in butchers, farmers’ markets or online.

It doesn’t cost much more – four sausages from a factory pig farm cost the same as three sausages from a real farm where pigs are healthy and free to move around. Reducing our meat intake also helps avoid obesity, diabetes, heart disease and certain types of cancer.

We can all give up half a sausage and help bring an end to pig factories, for our health and humanity’s sake.

Alastair Kenneil is a campaigner with Pig Pledge, a project of Farms not Factories. As a former hill farmer raising sheep in Argyll, he became aware that animals thrive out of doors in a natural environment, and committed to the virtues of sustainable farming. He later became a film-maker, working on TV documentaries about remote communities around the world and their distinctive cultures for the BBC, Channel 4 and Discovery.

Take the Pig Pledge now!

Petition:  Jeremy Hunt MP, Secretary of State for Health: Please save our antibiotics! (38 Degrees)