Letter to the Editor: Biodiversity Loss A Cause For Alarm

  

LETTER TO THE EDITOR:

BIODIVERSITY LOSS A CAUSE FOR ALARM

 

(Image credits: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-malaysia-palmoil-deforestation-idUSKCN1VD0CR)

The recent report that a total of 567 plant species out of the 1,600 Peninsular Malaysia plant species assessed in the Malaysia Red List have been classified as threatened should be a cause for alarm.

 

Malaysia’s tree cover, which stands at approximately 55.3%, obscures the alarming reality of biodiversity loss in Malaysia, but the fact remains that tree cover is not the same as natural forest cover. Most of Malaysia’s tree cover consists of plantations and degraded forest land. Plantations do not have the same biodiversity value and cannot provide the same ecosystem services as natural forests. Intact and biodiverse forests protect watersheds and water quality, are more resistant to fire and drought, regulate climate and weather patterns, and provide habitat for a wide range of flora and fauna.

 

Biodiversity ensures food security, as a biodiverse ecosystem will provide genetic resources for a variety of food, including those that are resistant to fungi and diseases that may wipe out cultivated strains of crops. Keeping forests intact and biodiverse prevents wild species from crossing into human habitation and spreading both known and new diseases to domestic animals and humans, and thus protect biosecurity. Approximately 50,000 to 70,000 plant species are used by humans for traditional and modern medicine worldwide. Biodiversity loss will limit the discovery of potential new medicines and medical treatments.

 

Humans rely on the ecosystem services such as the supply of clean air and water provided by healthy and biodiverse ecosystems. The National Water Resources Study 2000-2050 warns that Kedah, Kuala Lumpur, Melaka, Penang, Perlis, Putrajaya, and Selangor are at risk of water deficits, partly due to the loss of vital water catchment areas, and partly due to poor water management systems and habits.  

 

The UN FAO reports that only 18.7% of forests in Malaysia is classified as primary forest, the most biologically diverse and carbon-dense ecosystem, and that only 11.6% of the forests in Malaysia is classified as ‘pristine’.

 

Malaysia is rapidly losing forested areas to agriculture and development, and state governments continue to degazette forest reserves and issue logging permits with impunity. The requirement that states gazette replacement sites for degazetted reserves does nothing to turn the tide of biodiversity loss. States are running out of suitable sites to gazette as replacement forest reserves, and further, the gazettement of secondary forests and degraded land cannot be a substitute for the protection of natural and intact forests.

 

Google’s global forest map reveals that between 2000 and 2012, Malaysia had the world’s highest deforestation rate at 14.4%. Satellite data from the Carnegie Landsat Analysis System-lite platform shows that over 80% of the rainforests in East Malaysia have already been logged.

 

Between 2000 and 2009, over 9,000 hectares of Permanent Forest Reserves were degazetted in Malaysia, threatening watersheds and carbon sequesters, and destroying flora and fauna including those classified as Critically Endangered on the IUCN Red List. The degazettement of the Bikam Permanent Forest Reserve in 2013 caused the extinction of the Keruing Paya, a critically endangered hardwood tree, in Peninsular Malaysia.

 

The best way to mitigate biodiversity loss is by protecting existing forests. One of the main problems why forest conservation is so challenging in Malaysia is that the Federal Constitution gives states jurisdiction over their land, water, and forests. Forestry revenue accrues to the state government and not to the federal government, and as such, forests and extraction-based industries such as logging and mining are a major source of revenue for state governments seeking short-term gain.

 

Government agencies set up to manage forests see forests not as sensitive ecosystems to be protected, but as resources for socioeconomic development. However, the economic benefits of logging and mining are short-lived and can sustain only 1-2 generations at most. State governments stand to lose more from the loss of forests and the ecosystem services they provide. Droughts, floods, soil erosion, landslides, and health crises such as dengue and malaria outbreaks will all cost the state and federal governments more in the long run. We need to stop relying on commodity crops and extraction-based industries as our primary source of revenue. If we build a knowledge and skills-based economy and stop relying on monoculture crops and extraction-based industries as our country’s primary source of revenue and jobs, we can find better ways of sustaining our economy.

 

We need to rid ourselves of the mentality that the loss of threatened tree species does not affect us, or that it can be rectified through tree-planting campaigns and gazetting degraded land as replacement forest reserves. Tree-planting campaigns, habitat restoration, the setting up of seed banks, and environmental education for the younger generation, all take time to bear results. And time is a luxury that threatened species do not have. Biodiversity is not merely something that is nice to have, but essential to the survival of humanity and a living planet.

 

WONG EE LYNN

PETALING JAYA, SELANGOR

 

 

 

Getting to know MY Bee Saviors - Penyelamat Lebah Malaysia

­PENCINTA ALAM APRIL 2019

GREEN LIVING COLUMN

GETTING TO KNOW MY BEE SAVIORS – PENYELAMAT LEBAH MALAYSIA

By Wong Ee Lynn <wongeelynn@yahoo.com / gl.mnselangor@yahoo.com>

All photo credits: From MY Bee Saviors – Penyelamat Lebah Malaysia’s Facebook page.

We all know that honey bees are the most important pollinator of food crops. It is estimated that one third of the food that we consume each day relies on pollination mostly by bees, but also by other insects, birds and bats. Even for crops that are not directly pollinated by honey bees, the crop still benefits indirectly from being in an environment in which honey bees are found, due to the increased biodiversity in the area which stimulates the crop.

Bees pollinate not only food crops consumed by humans, but also other plants eaten by other animals and birds, so they play a vital role in the entire food chain. They pollinate wild flowers, thus enhancing biodiversity. Bee populations – whether healthy or declining – tell us about the health of the wider environment.

Unfortunately, bee populations worldwide are facing serious threats. Habitat loss and fragmentation, pesticides, climate change, diseases and parasites and invasive plant species have all contributed to the  decline in bee populations.

The global scientific and environmental community has been working hard to protect and restore bee populations by calling on governments to ban pesticides linked to declines in bee populations. In April 2018, European Union member states agreed to ban the outdoor use of neonicotinoid pesticides. France has gone one step further, banning 5 types of pesticides linked to bee deaths both for outdoor and indoor use. The US Donald Trump administration has, unfortunately, lifted an Obama-era ban on the use of bee-killing pesticides.

While Malaysia has made no such declaration on the use of bee-killing pesticides, one volunteer-run organisation has been quietly and heroically saving bees, one hive at a time.

MY Bee Savior / Penyelamat Lebah Malaysia is a group founded in January 2015 by Haji Musa Yaacob, a retired MARDI (Malaysian Agricultural Research and Development Institute) researcher and Encik Izatul Lail Bin Mohd Yasar, another MARDI researcher.

As the group started growing and increasing its reach, MARDI decided to adopt the group as a Corporate Social Responsibility project in January 2017. As of March 2019, the group has almost 200 registered volunteers nationwide.

Volunteer registration is available online for members of the public who are interested in saving bees. Interested individuals can contact the group, and the administrators of the group will then ask the prospective volunteers a few questions to determine their suitability and readiness before registering them. Upon registration, volunteers will be given an e-book on how to relocate bees, and some video files on the bee relocation process. New volunteers will be invited to join senior volunteers on bee relocation operations in the areas nearest to them. New volunteers who are experienced beekeepers are permitted to undertake the relocation process themselves without the presence of senior volunteers. Active MY Bee Savior volunteers are given a protective beekeeping suit each, or may purchase their own beekeeping suits. Some tools and equipment may be used depending on the complexity of the operations, location or position of the bee hive, and species of bees. MNS members who have engaged the services of these helpful volunteers, though, report that the volunteers mostly use just a cardboard box and tape!

MY Bee Savior volunteers do not charge homeowners or property managers for their bee relocation services, as their goals are public outreach and education, preventing the killing and poisoning of bees, protecting and increasing bee populations and encouraging sustainable beekeeping and honey harvesting practices. The bee hives and colonies are usually relocated to sustainable bee farms, for example, the one in Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM). If there is honey collected during the relocation operation, the homeowner may share it with the volunteers. If the homeowner is interested in keeping the bees for honey production purposes, he or she may request that the volunteers bring or construct a hive box for a specified fee. MY Bee Savior accepts donations whether for the transport expenses of individual volunteers, or larger sums to enable the organisation to purchase more beekeeping suits and equipment.

In the event you find a bee colony on or around your premises, please do not smoke the bees out or spray them with insecticides. Instead, contact MY Bee Savior at 019 664 8081 and they will get one of their volunteers to contact you as soon as one is available. MNS members have reported that MY Bee Savior volunteers usually show up within 24 to 48 hours and the relocation is done efficiently without harming the bees.

To find them on Facebook, visit: https://www.facebook.com/penyelamatlebah/?ref=br_rs

What's the problem with monoculture crops?

PENCINTA ALAM APRIL 2018

GREEN LIVING COLUMN

WHAT’S THE PROBLEM WITH MONOCULTURE CROPS?

Compiled and edited by Wong Ee Lynn

 

European lawmakers recently approved a plan to meet climate goals, which includes a ban on the use of palm oil, including palm oil from Malaysia, in motor fuels from 2021.

 

This move has a significant negative impact on Malaysia’s economy because from the 2 million tonnes of palm oil Malaysia exports to Europe, over 30% is used for biodiesel.

 

The reason for this proposed ban is because large areas of tropical forests, wildlife habitats and other ecosystems with high conservation value have been cleared to make room for oil palm plantations.

 

One of the reasons why conventional oil palm cultivation is so destructive to rainforests, wildlife populations and the climate is because it is a monoculture crop. Although this is not the only reason oil palm is environmentally problematic, there are certainly many environmental problems associated with monoculture, i.e. the growing of only one type of crop in a given area at the same time.

 

Oil palm isn’t the only monoculture crop. Modern commercial agriculture often seeks to increase yield – and so profits – by cultivating a single type of plant. The farmer only needs to provide for the needs of a single species in order to grow a successful crop, and this means increased savings and hence increased profits for the farmer. Corn, barley, wheat, soybean and similar crops are mostly cultivated as monoculture crops as well.

 

Monoculture agriculture may be more efficient and inexpensive for farmer, but it has significant negative impacts on the environment, some of which are identified below:

 

Eliminates Biological Controls

In a monoculture system, there is no range of insect species in a location to ensure that a single population does not get too large and damage too many plants. There are no varieties of plant that naturally provide nutrients to the soil, such as nitrogen-fixing legumes, or ground cover crops that can be slashed and left to improve the nutrient content of the topsoil, or a variety of plants with different root depths to reduce erosion. There are fewer species of microorganism and bacteria on the soil as there are fewer nutrients available for them to survive on.

 

More Synthetic Material Use

A diverse ecosystem provides natural checks-and-balances to keep the soil and plants healthy. A monoculture production has to use large quantities of synthetic herbicides, insecticides, bactericides and fertilizers to replicate some of these ways nature uses to protect crops.

 

Changing Organism Resistance

Nature is adaptable, and this means organisms are evolving resistance to these artificial insecticides and herbicides. Of course, the farmers want to continue to protect their crops, so new inorganic methods are continually being developed to kill pests, fungus and weeds. More and more chemicals are being applied to monoculture crops and, in turn, adversely affecting natural ecosystems and human health.

 

 

Soil Degradation

In monoculture plantations, ground cover crops are eliminated, meaning there is no natural protection for the soil from erosion by wind and rain. Degraded soil becomes unusable for agriculture after a few years. In some countries, forests are then cleared to provide new agricultural land, starting the damaging cycle all over again.

 

Water Use

With no ground cover plants to help improve moisture retention in the soil, and the tendency for land planted with a monoculture to lack topsoil, which serves to increase rain runoff, modern monoculture agriculture requires huge amounts of water to irrigate the crops. This means water is being pumped from lakes, rivers and reservoirs at great rates, depleting this natural resource and affecting those aquatic ecosystems. This is on top of the pollution of water sources by agricultural chemicals.

 

Fossil Fuels

Due to their scale, harvesting of crops in monoculture farms is generally performed by machines. Large amounts of fossil fuels are required to sort, pack and transport the crops.

 

In combination with the chemical fertilisers and pesticides, the industrialised mode of food production is a major contributor to climate change. It is also an incredibly inefficient way of using energy to produce food, taking an estimated 10 calories of fossil-fuel energy to produce just a single calorie of food energy.

 

 

Q: I’m Not a Farmer, So What Can I Do?

 

For starters, you can try:

·        Reading your labels and buying fewer or no products originating from monoculture crops. This will often mean buying organic cocoa and coffee grown in bird-friendly plantations (these plantations have a diversity of trees and plants to provide bird and wildlife habitats), buying organic products that are certified sustainable, and buying fewer or no processed food items such as instant noodles and biscuits, as these often contain vegetable oil from crops grown on monoculture farms.

·        Eating less or no meat so the demand for grain crops (mostly corn and soy) for animal feed will decrease and the need for monoculture will decrease as well. More than 60% of crops, particularly soy and corn, is used to feed animals, not people. It would take less land, water and soil to grow enough crops for human consumption, than to grow crops as animal feed so that the animals can in turn be consumed by humans.

·        Buying from farms that are known to practice crop rotation, or which grow a variety of crops.

·        Purchasing locally-grown produce, especially from small organic farms, edible gardens, cooperatives and indigenous communities, instead of crops from big agricultural companies.

·        Growing your own vegetables and herbs, which is good for your health and finances as well as the environment!

 

(Environmental issues specific to conventional oil palm cultivation will be discussed in the May 2018 Green Living Column.)

 

 

Green Living Advocacy: Trade Ban On Pangolins Only As Effective As Its Enforcement

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

TRADE BAN ON PANGOLINS ONLY AS EFFECTIVE AS ITS ENFORCEMENT

 

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES)’s recent worldwide ban on all 8 species of pangolins has brought cheer to the conservation community.

 

Pangolins face grave threats to their survival not only from the illegal wildlife trade, but also from habitat loss and a low reproductive rate. Female pangolins produce only one offspring a year. Pangolins play an important role in the ecosystem, as their diet consists of ants and termites, and they thus provide biological pest control. It is estimated that a single pangolin consumes over 70 million ants and termites a year, and from this fact, one can imagine the role of pangolins as nature’s pest controllers and soil caretakers.

 

Pangolins, including the Sunda / Malayan Pangolin (Manis javanica) are considered the world’s most trafficked mammal and are at risk of extinction due to relentless hunting and poaching, especially for the China and Vietnam markets, where pangolin meat is considered a delicacy and a status symbol.

 

Pangolin foetus soup ostensibly improves male virility, while pangolin scales are ground into powder and used to treat rheumatism and skin disease, although like rhino horns, the scales are made of keratin, the same protein that forms human hair and fingernails, and there is no scientific or medical evidence to support the claim that it has any healing or beneficial properties.

 

It is hoped that the CITES trade ban will not only eradicate legal trade in pangolins but also reduce illegal trade by influencing consumer behaviour.

 

However, a trade ban is only as effective as its enforcement. According to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), numbers of wild Sunda pangolins have decreased by half in the last 15 years.

 

Studies by TRAFFIC, the wildlife trade monitoring network, reveal that as pangolin populations are depleted in Indochina, wildlife dealers currently source pangolins from Malaysia and Indonesia. Its studies also found that the pangolin trade has spread to Sabah and Sarawak due to the decline in the pangolin population in Peninsular Malaysia.

 

According to the report by TRAFFIC, interviews with pangolin hunters in Sabah reveal that the hunters are aware of the illegality of hunting pangolins, and the critically endangered status of pangolins. However, the hunters admitted that the lucrative price made it difficult for them to stop hunting pangolins.

 

In order for the pangolin trade ban to be effective, enforcement agencies must treat wildlife trade as a serious international crime that threatens not only wildlife populations and the natural environment, but also ultimately human survival. Wildlife law enforcement agencies and prosecution bodies must cooperate with environmental organisations and monitoring bodies to eradicate corruption, stop wildlife trade, incapacitate wildlife trafficking syndicates and mete out the most severe punishments possible for wildlife offenders.

 

There are reports that live pangolins confiscated by enforcement agencies are frequently released in their weakened state without planning or monitoring, and this jeopardises their chances of survival. Thus efforts to ensure the survival of pangolins should also encompass the rehabilitation, management and subsequent release of confiscated pangolins.   

 

The international trade ban and enforcement of anti-wildlife trafficking laws must necessarily be complemented by public education and awareness efforts in order to succeed. This is where members of the public come in.

 

We can all play a role in phasing out and ending wildlife trade and preventing the extinction of pangolins. As conscientious and informed members of society, we must speak out and use our persuasive powers to influence others to reduce the consumer demand for pangolins and other wildlife. Even those of us who are not educators or volunteers can speak to others, including the younger generation, rural and indigenous communities and senior citizens who believe in the curative powers of wildlife-based traditional medicine, and educate them not only of the role of pangolins in the ecosystem, but also of the fact that the entire wildlife-based traditional medicine industry is a sham designed to enrich a few profiteers and impoverish the gullible. This is why measures such as captive breeding and farming wildlife and creating biotech substitutes for wildlife products such as rhino horns and bear bile are ineffective in ending wildlife crime – because they continue to reinforce the belief that there are curative properties to pangolin scales, rhino horn, bear bile and other wildlife products. To end the exploitation of and illegal trade in wildlife, we must be unequivocal in educating wildlife consumers that there are no benefits to consuming wildlife parts, and there is no such thing as legal or sustainable trade in wildlife.   

 

Given the popularity of travel to other East Asian and Southeast Asian countries, travellers can do their part not only by not consuming or purchasing pangolin wine, meat, scales or other wildlife products, but actively speaking up and informing tour operators and fellow travellers that they refuse to enter any establishment that offers pangolin products, bushmeat, exotic pets or other wildlife products. Travellers must vote with their money and their voice by writing in to tour agencies, national wildlife enforcement agencies, wildlife monitoring bodies and animal welfare and conservation NGOs operating in the relevant countries to complain about and report wildlife crimes. It is helpful to take photos as evidence and compile as much useful information as possible, including locations, dates and other information that will aid in tracking down and identifying wildlife offenders.

 

Crimes, including suspected crimes (e.g. a restaurant offering ‘special meat’ and ‘special dishes’) against pangolins and other wildlife in Malaysia can be reported to the 24-hour MYCAT Wildlife Crime Hotline at 019 356 4194 or report@malayantiger.net.

 

Everyone should participate in efforts and organisations that create, fund and support initiatives to not merely educate, but also empower and provide alternative and sustainable livelihoods for rural and indigenous communities to reduce and eventually eliminate their need for poaching and hunting. The fact remains that in many parts of the world, indigenous communities are forced off their ancestral lands and denied the opportunity for meaningful participation in the natural resource economy, thus driving them to hunt and poach wildlife for their economic survival. We cannot effectively protect wildlife and habitats without considering the human factor. This is where the rest of us come in as consumers, travellers, donors, sponsors, volunteers, advocates, social media users and supporters.

    

Protecting endangered species is not the role of the Department of Wildlife and National Parks (PERHILITAN) or conservation NGOs and experts alone, and the environmental responsibility of ordinary citizens and consumers goes beyond merely recycling our bottles and having shorter showers. Species conservation is our shared duty and responsibility, and pangolins and other wildlife need us as their defenders and protectors now more than ever.

 

WONG EE LYNN

COORDINATOR,
GREEN LIVING SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP,
MALAYSIAN NATURE SOCIETY

 (Photo credits: Wikipedia)

Letter to the Editor: Shark Fishing Neither Accidental Nor Negligible

LETTER TO THE EDITOR:

SHARK FISHING NEITHER ACCIDENTAL NOR NEGLIGIBLE

It is with incredulity that Malaysians responded to the Agriculture and Agro-Based Industry Minister Dato’ Seri Ahmad Shabery Cheek’s statements that there was no necessity for a ban on shark finning in Malaysia as it is not a domestic industry, and that sharks were not caught on purpose (Oct6).

This flies in the face of statistics supplied by wildlife conservation organization, TRAFFIC, which reports that Malaysia has the eight highest rate of shark catch in the world, with 231,212 tons caught from 2002 until 2011. For an ‘industry that doesn’t exist’, this number is alarmingly high.

For an ‘industry that doesn’t exist’ in Malaysia, finding sharks and shark fins being sold openly also seems to be a worryingly common sight. In fact, a feature story in The Star in Oct 2014 even tries to pass off the sale of a juvenile shark as ‘ecotourism’.

To conclude that there is no need for a ban on shark finning because ‘sharks are not caught on purpose’ shows a grave lack of awareness on the Minister’s part on environmental issues in Malaysia. Once this excuse is made on behalf of poachers and fishermen, there will be no shortage of individuals catching endangered species for profit and consumption and claiming that sharks, turtles and other protected species were accidental by-catch.

 

There is also no logic to the argument that there should not be a ban or restriction on a destructive activity simply because it was unintentional. Whether the sharks were caught by fishermen on purpose does not detract from the fact that shark populations in Malaysia are under threat.

 

A 2014 study published in conservation journal eLife reports that 25% of all shark species are under threat of extinction. Blacktip reef sharks and spot-tail sharks, found in Malaysia and frequently sold and consumed, are listed as near-threatened on the IUCN Red List.

 

Despite being portrayed in popular culture as merciless killers, sharks actually have a vital role to play in the marine ecosystem as top predators at the pinnacle of the marine food pyramid. As sharks usually hunt old, weak or sick prey, they help to keep the prey population healthy and strong, enabling these more naturally fit animals to reproduce and pass on their genes. Sharks also trim down many populations of marine animals to the right size, and therefore mitigate the harm these species cause to the marine ecosystem through overpopulation. Sharks regulate the behaviour of prey species, and prevent them from over-grazing vital habitats.  The effects of removing sharks from ocean ecosystems, although complex and rather unpredictable, are very likely to be ecologically and economically damaging.

Sharks are an incredibly fragile 'keystone species', partly due to the fact that sharks are slow-growing animals that mature late, live long, and have a low reproduction rate. The depletion of shark populations may cause the entire marine food web to collapse, resulting in the loss of commercially important fish and shellfish species as well.

It is clear to anyone from the high rates of shark fishing in Malaysia that sharks are a targeted and not accidental catch, and that there is a market in Malaysia for shark meat and shark fins. A ban on shark fishing would therefore go a long way towards protecting shark populations. From a human health point of view, heavy metals and other environmental toxins accumulate in plant and animal tissues through the well-documented process of bioaccumulation. Sharks are prone to bioaccumulation through diet, as they incorporate metals very efficiently and eliminate them slowly. Eating shark meat exposes the consumer to these potentially dangerous toxins, in particular, high levels of the methyl mercury. While a certain amount of mercury in the environment is natural, growing worldwide pollution of our oceans is increasing the risk of high mercury levels in the fish we eat, particularly fish at the top of the food chain like sharks. Consuming sharks will increase the level of mercury one ingests, which will in turn increase one's risk of neurological disorders, coronary heart disease and other serious health issues.

 

It is critical that there is legislation to monitor fishing vessels and their fishing methods to prevent overfishing, and to ban shark fishing and enforce penalties for the capture of and trade in sharks. Apart from targeted fishing, sharks are also threatened by pollution and habitat destruction. As such, marine protected areas must be established to protect marine ecosystems and habitats to mitigate the effects of pollution and habitat loss to shark populations.

 

As a concerned citizen, I hope that our ministers will demonstrate clear thinking and good judgement in addressing environmental and other issues, and work together with credible advocacy groups, including conservation organisations, to obtain verifiable data and information that will assist them in making the best decisions for the country.

 

WONG EE LYNN

COORDINATOR,

GREEN LIVING SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP,

MALAYSIAN NATURE SOCIETY, SELANGOR

 

 

Letter to the Editor: Trading In Coral Reef Products Will Cause Irreparable Harm

LETTER TO THE EDITOR: TRADING IN CORAL REEF PRODUCTS WILL CAUSE IRREPARABLE HARM

 

It is with alarm that Malaysians learned of the Minister of Agriculture and Agro-based Industries' plan to increase the export of coral reefs (Bernama News, April 24, 2015). The fact that there is "high interest abroad" for Malaysian coral reef is all the more reason for us to protect our coral reefs against poaching, plundering and destruction. The very suggestion that the Ministry wishes to exploit and trade in our local coral reefs for profit is tantamount to a breach of duty by those tasked with the responsibility of protecting our marine resources.

 

It has often been said that coral reefs are the rainforests of the oceans. Coral reefs cover less than 0.1% of the Earth's surface, yet over 25% of all marine life exists in coral ecosystems. Coral reefs provide a variety of ecosystem services, including as a nursery ground and source of food and shelter to fish and invertebrates. Coral reefs also act as natural wave breakers that protect coasts from wave erosion.

 

From an anthropocentric and economic point of view, coral reefs have more value intact than degraded and destroyed for trade. Scientific estimates put the value of coral reefs at USD115,740 per hectare annually. This means that Malaysia’s coral reefs, with a cover of approximately 4,000 square kilometres, would be valued at RM145 billion per year. Coral reefs form the foundation of a significant percentage of Malaysia’s tourism industry and are a more sustainable source of income for locals if protected and kept intact, than if traded and exported.

 

Properly-managed coral reefs can yield an average of 15 tonnes of fish and other seafood per square kilometre each year. It is estimated that coral reef-related businesses in Malaysia, namely, food, fisheries, tourism and pharmaceuticals, is worth approximately USD365 million annually.

 

A World Resources Institute report in 2012 found that over 85% of the coral reefs in the ‘Coral Triangle’ (which includes Malaysia, Indonesia and the Philippines) are threatened by both natural phenomena and human activity. This is substantially more than the global average of 60%.

 

According to Reef Check Malaysia, coastal development, destructive fishing practices, overexploitation of resources for fishing, increasing coastal populations, poor land use practices, runoff of pollutants, sediments, disease outbreaks associated with poor water quality and pollutants, coral bleaching associated with rising sea temperatures and the destruction of coastal mangrove forests have caused grave degradation and damage to our coral reefs.

 

Just because Indonesia, the Philippines and Vietnam control most of the world's coral reef exports does not mean that this is a race Malaysia has to participate in. It would be foolhardy and naive to believe that once trade in coral reefs and organisms is opened up, it could be efficiently and adequately regulated and monitored. Malaysia already has a global reputation as a hub for the illegal wildlife trade. Opening up trade in corals would only reinforce this reputation.

 

With so much effort being poured into protecting coral reefs and banning or restricting the sale of corals by the international conservation community, exporting and trading in corals would only fuel demand, both for legally farmed and illegally harvested corals. DNA markers can only be used to trace where the corals originate from if there is sufficient documented data. This requires a lot of work and research funds. A successful coral farm would first have to be established and a database created for all cultured coral, and all such corals can then be certified farmed and sustainable. However, the question that remains is whether the importers and purchasers care enough to implement such measures and seek certification. This technology is expensive, not easily available and not a legal requirement by most importing and exporting countries. It stands to reason that those in the aquarium trade would not voluntarily opt to have the DNA testing performed. Most of the people in Southeast Asia who harvest corals are the poor in coastal communities who do not have the capital or knowledge to set up a sustainable coral farm, while those who purchase corals from the poor are unlikely to be concerned about sustainability.

 

Like many concerned Malaysians, I would like to know if a feasibility study has been conducted on this coral farming and exporting venture. Coral farming is often a difficult, long and unsuccessful process, and it could take decades before there is any return on investment. The rate of coral growth depends on the species. Even acropora coral, which is recognised to be a fast-growing species, grows at most only one inch a year. Coral breeding has proven unsuccessful in many countries and most corals would not grow on artificial reefs. In order to start a coral farming programme, one still has to break off live coral to use as starters, and this causes damage to existing reefs and marine ecosystems.

 

The claims that coral farming is profitable and sustainable are usually made only by those involved in the coral trade, rarely ever by conservation groups and scientific bodies. It is almost impossible to succeed in the coral trade by coral farming alone, and most traders end up harvesting and poaching corals from the wild to satisfy consumer demand. A significant percentage of the corals used in the aquarium trade are inaccurately passed off as farmed or sustainably harvested.

 

It seems strange that the Malaysian government, which has expressed its fears that foreign researchers would conduct bioprospecting on and patent Malaysia’s natural resources, would want to leave our corals vulnerable to the same by exporting them and opening the doors wide to bioprospectors. There is a very real risk that once our corals are freely traded and available all over the world, bioprospectors would develop and commercialise products based on our corals and we would lose the intellectual property rights to the same.

 

Enforcement-wise, the weak knowledge of our customs officers of corals and the lack of political will means that regulation and enforcement exists only on paper. There are too many loopholes in our laws, and based on observation of the current state of Malaysian coral reefs and the wildlife trade, our customs and enforcement agencies are not prepared for the duty of protecting coral reefs from overharvesting and exploitation.

 

The coral reef and aquarium trade appears superficially lucrative, but it remains unclear what economic benefit flows to the exporting country. In Fiji, the economic benefits of the coral and aquarium fish trades were limited to a few villages, while the rest of the local fishing community suffered losses due to the decline in fisheries. Mozambique had to finally impose a complete ban on the export of coral and coral fishes in 1999 due to the destruction wreaked on coral reefs, despite the existence of a licensing and enforcement system. Caribbean coral reefs are now in danger of disappearing altogether within the next 20 years due to overfishing, pollution and fish and coral trade and exports.

 

It is not too late for the Malaysian government to reconsider this project, which has unclear beneficiaries and which would lead to irreparable damage to marine ecosystems. Instead of spending RM2.7 million of taxpayers' money on such a dubious venture, the government should instead invest in gazetting more sensitive and biologically-diverse marine areas and improving the current management of reefs and marine parks.

 

 

WONG EE LYNN

COORDINATOR, GREEN LIVING SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP

MALAYSIAN NATURE SOCIETY (MNS)

Taking Action for Biodiversity, Part 2

PENCINTA ALAM JULY 2012
GREEN LIVING COLUMN

TAKING ACTION FOR BIODIVERSITY, PART 2
(Edited and compiled by Wong Ee Lynn
gl.mnselangor@yahoo.com)



1. Water is indispensable to the health of the Planet and that of its occupants, whether they are animals or plants. There is enough water for everyone and everything but, unfortunately, it is badly distributed and often badly managed. Here in Malaysia, we often use potable water indiscriminately and excessively.
Here is how you can save drinking water: water your plants with rainwater,
preferably at the end of the day (to avoid evaporation), recover grey water
(dishwater, bathwater, shower water) and use it for flushing the toilet and cleaning floors with.

2. Some local authorities are now making an effort to plan and manage roadsides and road dividers as a way of promoting biodiversity.
If this is not yet the case in your area, you might suggest that the department concerned try these easy-to-apply principles: plant only local species, replace chemical pesticides and fertilisers with ecological equivalents, use mulch and groundcover to limit the growth of
undesirable plants and to reduce watering, compost green waste and
use the compost to feed the soil in the dry season, practise late mowing, and keep some refuge areas.

3. Would you like to take advantage of your vacation to protect biodiversity? Then why not become an eco-volunteer!
By discovering places inaccessible to ordinary tourists, you can actively help nature protection associations by participating in research and conservation projects.
And you do not need to be an expert in biology or environmental sciences – anyone can take part in the activities proposed. You can volunteer with the Borneo Sun Bear Conservation Centre in Sabah (http://sunbears.wildlifedirect.org/), the Turtle Conservation Society in Terengganu (http://www.turtleconservationsociety.org.my/) and the Malaysian Conservation Alliance for Tigers (http://malayantiger.net/v4/mycat).

4. How does one transform a garden – your own, the garden at your children’s school or on your company’s premises – into a natural refuge for biodiversity? Refuse to use chemical pesticides and fertilisers.
Help spontaneous vegetation grow in a corner of the garden and practise late mowing which makes it possible for plant species to reproduce and
diversify and creates a shelter for many animals. Set up a pond or preserve a dead tree (its cavities can host a variety of animals), leave a log pile or a pile of stones for small mammals, amphibians and various invertebrates. Diversify a hedge with indigenous species. Plant bee-foraging plants which attract large numbers of insects as well as bees.

5. Like detergents, most cosmetics sold today contain chemical products (preservatives, synthetic perfumes, surfactants, etc.) which are not biodegradable and are therefore harmful to biodiversity, particularly the aquatic environments into which they are carried by waste water.
Use eco-cosmetics: wash with Marseilles (Castile) soap, perfume your
bath with a few drops of essential oil of lavender, clean your skin
with an extraction of camomile or blueberry, exfoliate it with
wheat- or oat bran, nourish it with sunflower or olive oil.

6. Contrary to what you might think, there is often more biodiversity in the city than in the country (where monocultures prevail, in both fields and plantations). Surprisingly, there is a great variety of biotypes in the city. Public and private gardens, ponds, parks, forests, streets and avenues, vacant land, wasteland, railway sidings, water-course embankments and even balconies. Even small cracks in sidewalks, at the base of buildings or in walls are colonised by a multitude of wild plants.
But this biodiversity is vulnerable: it is not strong enough to withstand cement mixers and steamrollers.

7. The intensive growing of traditional cotton uses only 3% of cultivable surface area but 25% of the insecticides sold around the world. Soil exhaustion, deforestation, massive irrigation, pollution of free groundwater, exposure of agricultural workers and local species to toxic substances... intensive cotton farming is particularly harmful both to the environment and to human beings.
On the other hand, extensive growing of eco-cotton, with natural fertilisers and pesticides, requires less water, preserves soil fertility (because it is alternated with other crops), and produces cotton that has softer, more resistant fibres. In addition, eco-cotton is hypoallergenic because it is not chemically treated when made into clothing.

8. When you eat local products where they are grown and produced, you are supporting the farmers who grow indigenous species and thus limiting the pollution caused by transport. This is good for both the local economy and for biodiversity. Always refuse dishes made from threatened species (turtle steak, red-tuna sushi, sea cucumber, bush meat, etc.) or those whose production has a negative impact on local biodiversity (fishing or hunting without respect for minimum sizes or quotas, cultivation that requires deforestation of a large area, etc.) Neither should you accept traditional remedies and cosmetics based on rhinoceros horn, elephant tusk, tiger meat or bone, the musk from musk deer, etc.
A list of threatened species is available at: www.cites.org and
www.iucnredlist.org

9. Wood has at least two advantages: it is more resistant than plastic and it is not derived from oil. Make sure you choose only FSC- or PEFC-certified furniture. This means that the wood from which it is made comes from sustainably managed forests To treat the wood, choose natural products based on linseed oil, beeswax or vegetable oil.
For more information about these labels, look up:
www.fsc.org and www.pefc.org.

10. Reduce your consumption of meat. In order to raise livestock, it is necessary to have pastures or to produce forage (soy, corn, beets, colza, etc.), all of which requires a very large surface area, often carved out at the expense of forests. In addition, it takes an enormous amount of
water and pesticides to grow forage crops, resulting in the exhaustion and pollution of free groundwater. And that is not all! When ruminants digest, they produce vast quantities of methane, one of the most potent greenhouse gases, particularly when they are fed with protein crops, such as soy.
Finally, too much meat is not good for us (hypocholesterolaemia, cancer, diabetes, etc.). Instead, eat lentils, eggs, cheese, legumes or fruit several times a week.