Congratulations to Sea Shepherd!

I couldn’t be writing my second blog post with better news: Japan’s government has decided to suspend their annual Antarctic whale hunt, possibly for the rest of the season. This is mainly due to pressure from the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, who have thoroughly earned this victory. From following them avidly on Facebook and their website ( http://www.seashepherd.org/ ) it is obvious how hard they have worked – from physically tracking down the whaling fleet to ‘sailing’ their campaign straight into Time Square.
According to reports, whalers have cited “harassment” as to why they have suspended the hunt, and have said it is only temporary until safety measures are put in place. But how exactly can you stop an environmental group blocking your loading ramps or simply ‘being’ in the same waters as you? Rumours are that they may try to take out an injunction against the Sea Shepherds, but a Japanese Fisheries Agency official has said they are “studying the situation, including the possibility of cutting the mission early”. If so, around 900 whales are saved for another year – fantastic.

Moving on to smaller issues, I am to give a brief talk tomorrow on the reintroduction of the Eurasion Beaver. This got me thinking – who decides which species are allowed to effectly ‘return from the dead’? The Eurasian Beaver has been extinct in our country for centuries as it was hunted for meat, pelt and a secretion called castoreum that was believed to have medicinal properties. Now, the reasons for reintroducing the beaver in Scotland are that it is a keystone species in forest and riverbank biotopes as it has unique coppicing, foraging and damming behaviour. Not that I don’t support beaver reintroduction, but surely any organisms brings benefits to an environment? Why are certain species favoured over others?
Most reintroduced species are birds and mammals, even though invertebrates are vital and connected to most species’ survival. Reasoning for introduction always seems to be random – the species could look pretty (flagship species) or mean something to people’s culture. Surely enough campaigning can get any species introduced?
“So what about the depressed river mussel?”, one of my lecturers always says.
I believe a better system needs to be brought about to decide which species are prioritised. There has been little research on the benefits of insects or amphibians as keystone species, and they are also some of the most ignored groups when it comes to conservation and reintroduction. Maybe the less informed public needs to take a step back when we make these decisions - after all, how much money has been wasted on the unsuccessful breeding of Giant Pandas?

Finally, a news story that almost beggars belief… http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12471079
After a 2 year investigation, The Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution have decided that:
1. One person living in a house on their own is less energy efficient than many people sharing a property.
2. The government needs to deal with energy problems
… and a lot of other wishy-washy statements with no constructive comments on how we can deal with these problems, just basically DO IT.
No wonder they're the latest victim of spending cuts.