Feed aggregator

New life is coming to Washington State's Olympic Peninsula. Two dams along the Elwha River are being removed, bringing a rush of sediment downstream and exposing hundreds of acres of once-submerged land. The dams were built in the early 1900s to power nearby timber mills. But they blocked salmon migration and their power is no longer needed, so they're coming out. This story originated as part of the public media collaboration, EarthFix.

» E-Mail This     » Add to Del.icio.us

Fish are moving away from the equator and toward the poles to maintain their preferred water temperature. That means, for example, that fishermen are seeing swordfish normally found in the Mediterranean swimming near Denmark. But in the tropics, there are no fish to replace the ones that are leaving.

» E-Mail This     » Add to Del.icio.us

Leaked papers show UK rejects proposal to classify oil from tar sands as highly polluting, a label that would deter EU countries from importing it

Britain has given its clearest signal yet that it wants to allow European countries to import carbon-intensive tar sands oil from Canada.

Leaked papers seen by the Guardian show that in EU negotiations on laws intended to encourage the use of low-carbon transport fuels, the UK has rejected language that would class tar sands oil as more polluting than conventional crude or other fuels.

The European commission has proposed labelling the oil as "highly polluting" under its fuel quality directive, a move that would deter countries importing it. Studies suggest that oil from tar sands produces more than one-fifth more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional crude.

But of six options put to EU countries in April on how to implement the proposal, the UK chose the two that would make no differentiation between the carbon content of fuels.

"Based on the findings so far, it seems clear that [these two] seem to meet the policy aims of the directive with the least risks of unexpected consequences," the UK said in the documents. It firmly rejected others that allowed a difference.

Previously the UK left open the possibility that it would abstain.

The papers were released by Greenpeace as Norman Baker, a minister at the Department for Transport, prepared to meet former Nasa climate scientist Jim Hansen in London. Hansen has been an outspoken critic of tar sands, saying last year "it will be game over for the climate if development of the oil sands isn't stopped".

Charlie Kronick, senior climate campaigner at Greenpeace, said: "Labelling oil from tar sands as highly polluting would strongly discourage tar sands imports into the Europe and possibly other markets. It could also discourage planned tar sands extraction projects in other parts of the world, such as Madagascar.

"If you're not serious about keeping tar sands oil out of Europe, then you're not serious about climate change. This could be the biggest decision Norman Baker will make in his entire career, and right now he's on the wrong side of the science and the wrong side of history."

But Baker said: "Our position has not changed, nor have we chosen any options – Greenpeace is simply wrong. We are committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and want the fuel quality directive to be a key tool in achieving this aim. We take the treatment of high-emitting oil sands seriously but we want an effective solution to address the carbon emissions from all highly polluting crudes, not simply those from oil sands.

"We continue to encourage the commission to consider and assess options which account for the carbon intensity of all crude oils, including Canadian oil sands. I take this issue seriously and that is why I have arranged to meet Jim Hansen this week to discuss the matter."

• Oil sands
• Energy
• Fossil fuels
• Oil
• Oil
• Canada
• Americas
• European Union
• Europe
• Energy industry

John Vidal
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

The newly-sequenced scarlet macaw genome will provide many important insights into avian and human biology, behaviours and genetics and will contribute to parrot conservation

After many years of research into the behaviours, diseases, genetics and life history of scarlet macaws, a team of scientists have taken their studies to the next level. Christopher Seabury, an Assistant Professor of Genetics at Texas A&M University's college of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, and Ian Tizard, Director of the Schubot Exotic Bird Health Center and a Professor of Microbiology & Immunology at Texas A&M University's college of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, spearheaded an international collaboration of scientists that sequenced the genome of the scarlet macaw, Ara macao. This work significantly expands the range and depth of research opportunities involving scarlet macaws and other parrots. In addition to important conservation applications, this research may provide insights into the genetics that contribute to key traits of parrots, such as cognitive and speech abilities as well as longevity.

Scarlet macaws are large and showy parrots with brilliant red, yellow and blue plumage and long pointed tails. Endemic to Central and South America, this impressive neotropical parrot occupies a large range from southeastern Mexico throughout the Amazon basin region of Peru, Bolivia and Brazil. Easily trained to do complex tasks and to mimic human speech, wild scarlet macaws have been persecuted by the caged bird trade. Additionally, their preferred habitat of lowland evergreen rainforests makes them vulnerable to deforestation and habitat destruction.

To do this work, Drs Seabury and Tizard and their team obtained a blood sample from an adult female scarlet macaw known as "Neblina" who resides at the Blank Park Zoo in Iowa. A wild-caught parrot from Brazil, Neblina had been seized in 1995 by the US Fish and Wildlife Service after she illegally entered the United States.

Unlike mammals, avian red blood cells are nucleated, so a small sample of whole blood from a bird is an excellent source of DNA for molecular, chromosomal and cytological studies. Some cells were grown in cultures so the intact chromosomes could be harvested and examined whilst DNA was extracted from other cells for sequencing. These gene sequences were then assembled into the complete scarlet macaw genome by Seabury and his team.

Similar to almost all vertebrates, scarlet macaws are diploid; having two copies of each chromosome type, one contributed by each parent. Like all birds except birds of prey (Falconiformes), parrot genomes contain macrochromosomes and a larger number of microchromosomes.

Macrochromosomes are what most people think of when they hear the word "chromosome" and they are the type of chromosomes that are typically found in mammals. Macrochromosomes, which include autosomes and sex chromosomes, are large -- generally more than 40 megabases (Mb) in size (1 megabase is 1,000,000 nucleotide basepairs in length).

Microchromosomes, on the other hand, are very small -- usually less than 20 Mb in size. Due to their small size, microchromosomes are often impossible to distinguish when creating a traditional karyotype, as you see in Figure 1 (larger view):

Scarlet macaws have somewhere between 62 and 64 chromosomes; including 22 macrochromosomes (10 pairs of autosomomes and two sex chromosomes) and between 40 and 42 microchromosomes.

To identify similar regions between scarlet macaw and chicken macrochromosomes, the team used chromosome painting. This method uses fluorescently labeled chromosome-specific DNA probes that hybridise to complementary DNA regions, thereby identifying macaw chromosome regions that are similar to chicken chromosomes (Figure 2; larger view):

As expected, the final completed scarlet macaw genome shows similarities to that of the domestic chicken. However, there are a number of important differences, which are to be expected since parrots and chickens (taxonomic order: Galliformes) diverged approximately 122–125 million years ago. For example, several macaw macrochromosomes (1, 6 & 7) show significant rearrangements. The sex chromosome W shows no similarities at all between chicken and macaw, indicating that this chromosome is changing rapidly and thus, has not been conserved across such a large evolutionary distance.

As typical for other avian genomes studied so far, scarlet macaw genomes are smaller than mammalian genomes.

"The final analysis showed that there are about one billion DNA bases in the genome, which is about one-third of that found in mammals," Dr Tizard explained in a written press release.

"Birds have much less DNA than mammals primarily because they do not possess nearly as much repetitive DNA."

Repetitive DNA has no currently known function. The amount of repetitive DNA varies greatly between taxa: for example, more than 50 percent of the human genome is repetitive DNA [doi:10.1038/nrg3117].

According to Dr Seabury, comparing the scarlet macaw genome to other avian genomes will provide scientists with a better understanding of avian biology.

"The Scarlet Macaw Genome Project opens a variety of doors ranging from modern forensics to determining how the macaws utilize their natural habitat and landscape, as inferred from variable genetic markers," said Dr Seabury in a written press release.

In addition to research into evolution and population genetics, and conservation biology applications, what can we learn from the scarlet macaw's genome? First, even though birds have higher metabolisms than mammals, they enjoy much longer life spans than do mammals with the same body mass. In the case of scarlet macaws, adults weigh somewhere between 1000 and 1200 grams (roughly 2.2 pounds), and they reach sexual maturity at 5 years of age, yet their life span rivals that of humans. By comparing avian genomes to those obtained from other animals, it may be possible to identify which genes contribute to birds' remarkable longevity.

Other genes of interest are those involved in heart and cardiovascular fitness, and those that contribute to the risk for diabetes. But perhaps most interesting are those genes involved with cognition and brain size.

"A preliminary analysis of their genome suggests that [macaws] have a lot of genes involved in brain development", said Dr Tizard in a video press release. "Which fits, knowing how smart they are."

Despite differences from humans in brain development and structure, macaws are much like humans: they are very intelligent and live in highly complex social groups. Additionally, when corrected for differences in body size, macaws' brains are twenty-one percent larger than those of zebra finches, Taeniopygia guttata, which are the model system for vertebrate learning and memory. Thus, comparing the scarlet macaw, zebra finch and human genomes could provide greater insight and understanding into important genetic differences in brain development, structure and volume.

Sources:

Seabury C.M., Dowd S.E., Seabury P.M., Raudsepp T., Brightsmith D.J., Liboriussen P., Halley Y., Fisher C.A., Owens E. & Viswanathan G. & Tizard, I.R. (2013). A Multi-Platform Draft de novo Genome Assembly and Comparative Analysis for the Scarlet Macaw (Ara macao), PLoS ONE, 8 (5) e62415. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0062415.s019

TAMU written and video press releases.

Also cited:

Treangen T.J. & Salzberg S.L. (2012). Repetitive DNA and next-generation sequencing: computational challenges and solutions, Nature Reviews Genetics 13: 36-46. doi:10.1038/nrg3117

Ried T., Schröck E., Ning Y. & Wienberg J. (1998). Chromosome painting: a useful art, Human Molecular Genetics, 7 (10) 1619-1626. doi:10.1093/hmg/7.10.1619 [OA PDF]

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

GrrlScientist is an evolutionary biologist, ornithologist and freelance science writer who writes about the interface between evolution, ethology and ecology, especially in birds. You can follow Grrlscientist's work on her other blog, Maniraptora, and on facebook, Google +, LinkedIn, Pinterest and of course, on twitter: @GrrlScientist

• Genetics
• Birds
• Zoology
• Biology

GrrlScientist
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Comedian opposes Tattingstone solar farm but it's not clear how he'd keep the lights on and tackle climate change

In opposing a solar farm near his home in Suffolk, Griff Rhys-Jones makes the point that the government is struggling with its energy policy, and has made a "willy nilly" decision to allow such developments. I feel like saying to Griff, look we need lots of solar, and it's got to be near someone.

The government is indeed struggling with its energy policy. So are most if not all other governments. Many countries live with the threat of their lights going out. All countries live with the threat of unchecked climate change. For we are en route both to recurrent energy crisis and to six degrees of global warming, unless we accelerate the deployment of low carbon technologies like solar.

One of the reasons governments are struggling so badly is that there are no free lunches with energy. All forms of energy have downsides, somewhere. All of them have their opponents, as well as their supporters.

We know that the lights will start going out in Britain in 2016, unless new electricity generation comes onstream. It can't be coal. That much most of us agree on, if not because of the emissions, then because the EU has already made the decision, in its Large Combustion Plants Directive and other climate commitments.

Could it be gas? In principle yes. But increasingly we'd have to rely on overseas favour, because anyone outside the Treasury who knows what happens in a Texan shale-gas fracking operation knows in their hearts that – whatever we might feel about the desirability of gas – there would be civil war in rural England if there are attempts to produce it on land at any scale here.

So maybe nuclear. But even if you could tolerate a nuclear power plant or two in Suffolk, just check the builders' track record in recent years, and how much taxpayers' money would be needed to underwrite their ten-year – if they are lucky – build cycle.

That leaves renewable energy. Wind has largely been driven offshore in the UK, unlike Germany. A marked minority in the population is succeeding, in that regard, in imposing their preferences on a consistent majority, so polls on the issue tell us.

So what are we left with? Solar. That's it. Biomass and marine renewables are in their infancy in the UK still, long held back by the conventional-energy incumbency. Hydro power has limited additional potential.

I have said that all forms of energy have their downsides. Solar's are that it doesn't work at night, and yes, can be a bit on eyesore if you don't like blue or black marble. But solar sits low to the ground, can be surrounded by hedges and screened from view, can be mixed-use land with sheep grazing, plants growing, biodiversity thriving between the rows of panels.

Most forms of energy also have upsides, and in the case of solar, these greatly outweigh the downsides. They start with the fact that solar is set on becoming the cheapest option, within a few years. Many analysts forecast that solar electricity will cost less than any other form in multiple countries by 2015, or not long thereafter. It works really well when mixed in strategic harness with otherforms of renewable energy, as experience in Germany is showing.

And it offers hope, amid all the gloom about the future.

Griff should visit one of the hundreds of solar schools around the country, and talk to the kids about it. He should check out what solar can do for developing countries, where it is way cheaper than extending the grids, and as such is often the only option.

The more solar we do in cloudy Britain, the easier it becomes for developing countries – often sunny places – to believe it can work for them, and not replicate the same mistakes we have made with conventional energy.

• Solar power
• Energy
• Renewable energy
• Rhys Jones

Jeremy Leggett
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Waste and recycling handlers in Portland, Ore., say they're seeing an unfortunate side effect of the city's reduction in garbage pickups: 120 pounds of dirty diapers a day, tucked into recycling bins.

» E-Mail This     » Add to Del.icio.us

Readers answer other readers' questions on subjects ranging from trivial flights of fancy to profound scientific concepts

How big would Noah's ark need to have been? Wouldn't it be possible to get two of every species on a ship such as MS Oasis of the Seas?

Simon Wright, Sheffield

• Post questions and answers below or email them to nq@guardian.co.uk. Please include name, address and phone number

• The Bible
• Cruises
• Wildlife
• Oceans

guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Warmer temperatures, heavy rain, flooding, sea-level rise and retreating sea ice are stealing the ground from beneath Alaskans' feet

Guardian US interactive teamGreg ChenGabriel DanceFeilding CageSuzanne Goldenberg

Tensions are running high in an Alaskan village immediately threatened by climate change

Guardian US interactive teamGabriel DanceFeilding CageRichard SprengerSuzanne Goldenberg

A debate over food standards with the largest US trading partner could affect what Americans are eating for dinner

As President Obama and Prime Minister David Cameron stood smiling for the cameras at a press conference on free trade this week, a secret lurked behind them: the average American couldn't care less about whether the US has a good trade deal with Europe, or whether Europeans buy our products or we buy theirs. With over 12 million unemployed people at home, no one's worried about whether we have enough ripe cheese from France or beer from Germany.

Yet a confluence of events over the past week shows that Cameron's visit is important to Americans. One of the things he and other leaders will be negotiating are what kinds of American food they want brought into their countries cheaply.

Here's why what Europe wants matters: the EU, which loathes American food safety practices, could, by exerting pressure on the negotiations, actually end up improving the quality or variety of food available to Americans.

Right now, the American food supply is an issue of perpetual controversy. Hormones in meat and milk have many families – at least those who can afford organic options – rushing to pay more for a sense of safety.

The US food supply lacks variety: only a few crops dominate and major companies determine the extent and quality of the food supply – and they often prefer genetically modified seeds, bred to withstand herbicides but not fully tested in their long-term effect on human health. As the Guardian reported: "three big companies now control more than half of the global seed market.. … the average cost of planting an acre of soybeans had risen 325% between 1995 and 2011."

Not surprisingly, this corporate pressure has induced American agriculture to favor the kind of crops that corporations can best control: genetically modified crops. About 93% of the soybean seeds in the United States are genetically modified, along with 88% of corn, 94% of cotton and 90% of sugarbeets, which provide about 54% of the sugar sold in America, as the HuffPo's blog has pointed out. McDonald's, one of the biggest buyers of potatoes, has an outsize influence on the shape of the US potato supply. This week, one of its major potato processors, JR Simplot, raised the possibility of growing genetically modified potatoes again.

A lot is at stake: the EU is a powerful economic force and the US's most important trading partner, and this potential trade deal is an important one. It is worth at least $97bn to the United States and as much as $132bn to the rest of the world.

The sheer dollar value of a trade agreement – think of all those lovely dollars that we could use to boost our anemic GDP – means that the EU has financial clout in the US.

In fact, the EU has enough clout to finally convince the US government to clean up America's food supply, long given over to factory farming and the economic demands of agribusiness. If America wants to export more beef, chicken and crops to the European Union, it will have to make better products. The EU won't stand for the ones we're peddling now.

The EU looks down on American food safety and production practices, and with good reason. American meat production is heavily reliant on chemicals, from hormones to chlorine-bleach baths, and European officials and consumers largely reject these treatments and standards.

American farmers and food industry officials find this European exactitude on food practices bewildering, as captured in the comment of Ron Frye, the marketing manager for a Montana ranch, when talking with the Financial Times: "If it's good enough for us it ought to be good enough for them."

The US government is friendly to agribusiness interests; from the supreme court to the State Department, it's hard to find a government department hostile to corporate interests like those of, say, Monsanto. Yesterday, Monsanto won a supreme court case that allowed it to claim a patent on its genetically modified seeds no matter how farmers came by them. The justices ruled that whether farmers come across Monsanto seeds in grain silos, as useless among feed, or from third parties, the company must be paid for its patented seeds.

Monsanto also spurred a legislative provision preventing the government from taking action to stop genetically modified seeds, even if they were found to be harmful to the health of consumers. The GM giant's influence also seems to reach into the State Department, where officials travel the world singing the praises of genetically modified crops.

As Wenonah Hauter, the head of Food and Water Watch, wrote for the Guardian this week:

"We have spent months looking at the extent to which the US State Department is working on behalf of the GM seed industry to make sure that biotech crops are served up abroad whether the world wants them or not."

Her organization, scanning 900 diplomatic cables, found the State Department encouraging US embassies across the world to "pursue an active biotech agenda" and "encourage the use of agricultural biotechnology."

With the support of the government, Monsanto is a key force in American agriculture. Its sells a popular and powerful herbicide, Roundup, alongside the only seeds that are really resistant to it: soybeans named Roundup Ready, for which it charges twice the price of normal seeds. Strong herbicide has led, predictably, to stronger superweeds; now Monsanto is creating seeds that are resistant to even more powerful weedkillers.

The US Department of Agriculture dealt Monsanto a rare blow merely by insisting that its new seeds – the ones resistant to powerful herbicides – require at least another year of examination for safety. The delay was met with surprise.

In the US, Big Agriculture calls the shots; the European Union argues that it shouldn't. A trade deal would be the testing ground for a battle over food standards to play out.

The EU has little love for Monsanto or other chemical companies with a stake in agribusiness, like Germany's BASF. The EU has approved only two genetically modified crops – corn from Monsanto and potatoes from BASF. Even those modest approvals have met cultural roadblocks. Around eight EU, including France, Italy and Poland, have taken steps to ban Monsanto's GM corn. BASF, after seeking approvals for three of its potato varieties in Europe, gave up trying after a regulatory quest that took nearly four years.

All of which tells us that if the US wants to export more agricultural products through its trade agreement with the EU, things are probably going to have to change here, as well.

• GM
• United States
• Farming
• European Union
• US politics
• US supreme court
• Agriculture
• Food & drink industry

Heidi Moore
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Green campaigners disappointed as ministers agree on phased in 5% discard rate from 2015, with exemptions on some species

Fisheries ministers from across Europe came to an agreement on a sweeping reform of fisheries policies early on Wednesday morning, but fell short of the most ambitious changes that green campaigners had demanded.

They agreed to ban the wasteful practice of discarding healthy fish at sea, but most of the ban will be phased in from 2015 instead of this year as had been proposed, and there are significant caveats for some species. Fish quotas will be based on scientific advice on what is the "maximum sustainable yield" for each stock, but there is no date on when stock levels must be restored, to the deep disappointment of greens for whom this was a central issue. Key aspects of the management of stocks will be devolved to member states instead of decided centrally in Brussels.

But details of the deal were still sketchy on Wednesday morning as the full results of the negotiations had not yet been officially released. The ministers' meeting is also not the final stage of the process – their document will be discussed by the European parliament and commission before the end deal is reached, which could take months.

Maria Damanaki, the EU fisheries commissioner, said: "[This is] a good step forward. We need a fast deal and this can give the opportunity to the commission to focus on issues relating to the implementation. We need to solve the practicalities and at the same time we need to help our fishermen to adjust to the new situation, because this is a radical change for the way we fish. We have to give all possible support to our fisheries sector and our administrations. We have positive news this morning and I hope that in the coming weeks we can work we can work together with the parliament and the council to facilitate the procedure to come to a deal."

Fleets would still be able to discard 5% of their catch under the council of ministers' plans, because ministers argued that some inadvertent catch was unavoidable, and there are exemptions covering some species, such as sea bass, and mixed fisheries, where several species inhabit the same area. The 5% level was regarded by many as the best that could be done – some member states wanted a discard rate of 10%, which greens rejected as too high. Sweden was unhappy about the compromise, however, having pushed for a zero limit.

However, the compromise means that those member states which were trying to scupper the ban altogether have effectively been thwarted.

The parliament and commission will now use the draft document from the council of ministers to come up with a further compromise position which will be thrashed out in the coming months.

"We are hoping to see something stronger than what was produced last night. We welcome it but it has not gone far enough. We think there can still be more ambition – that is possible in the next round of negotiations and a proper compromise can be achieved," said Ian Campbell, senior associate of the Pew Trusts Environment Programme.

Under the text agreed, if it is passed by the parliament, a ban on discards of pelagic fish such as mackerel and herring would come into force in 2015, and for other fisheries from 2016. Some had been hoping that a ban on mackerel and herring discards could be brought in at the end of this year.

There was also disappointment at the lack of a firm date for moving to a scientifically set maximum sustainable yield for fish quotas, which would be based on the need to restore stocks. A date of 2020 for a legally binding requirement to this effect had been proposed.

Richard Benyon, UK fisheries minister, said: "This package of reforms fulfils our promise to make discards a thing of the past and ensure sustainable fishing for future generations. The next step is for the European parliament to agree these reforms which are set to bring about real benefits for our fishermen and the marine environment for years to come. We have worked hard on these negotiations, and I hope that parliament supports our agreement and brings negotiations to a swift conclusion. The wait is nearly over."

Saskia Richartz, fisheries policy adviser at Greenpeace, said that with a 5% discard rate allowed and with exemptions in some cases the restrictions on discards could not be regarded as an outright ban. "This has pushed the door open enough to a better agreement – it is not a failure, but it depends on finding common ground on the detail, and that remains a challenge for the coming weeks," she said. "This is ultimately a decision for the parliament, to see how far they compromise or stick to their position."

She said EU citizens should write to their MEPs as soon as possible on the issue to urge them to go for a strong deal to protect Europe's dwindling fish stocks, emphasising a deadline for stock recovery. "The message of reform must be sent to the parliament. We are now in the end game and the next few weeks will be critical," she said.

Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall, the chef who has spearheaded a campaign to ban discards, told the Guardian: "It's been a long grind to get to this point, but the news this morning is broadly good. There will be a discards ban – and that is a vindication of the huge public support for our Fish Fight campaign to end this disgraceful waste of good fish. It's a credit to our fisheries minister Richard Benyon that he and his allies managed to largely restrict attempts by the French and Spanish to water down the ban and create easy loopholes for their fishermen. There's still scope to improve on the details of the ban in the final negotiations with MEPs, who are rightly pushing for even tougher measures against discards. We'd really like to see that happen. It's also great news that the revised CFP will commit to ending overfishing and restoring fish stocks – but we still need to see hard dates to make that sticks, and that it applies across all fisheries. If we get that in the next few weeks then we should see the signing of a new CFP that can finally put European fishing on a sustainable track."

The exhaustive process of fisheries reform – the biggest shake-up of fishing in the EU for four decades – has taken more than two years of close negotiations.

• Fishing
• Food
• Wildlife
• Conservation
• Animals
• Marine life
• Fish
• Food & drink
• Seafood
• European commission
• European Union
• Europe

Fiona Harvey
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Spraying of west Berkshire woodland to kill oak processionary moth could affect local allotments and other species

A helicopter will spray insecticide on woodland in west Berkshire on Wednesday in a bid to destroy an infestation of pest caterpillars, despite complaints that not enough has been done to consult local residents.

After 1pm, if the weather is suitable, a Forestry Commission team will spend 10-15 minutes using aerial spraying to eradicate the caterpillars of the oak processionary moth (Thaumetopoea processionea), which defoliates oaks and whose thousands of hairs cause itchy rashes upon contact with people. The insecticide is a widely used toxin produced by a bacteria that occurs naturally in soil called Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), which could kill other species of butterflies and moths known to inhabit the site.

Officials have previously reassured residents that Bt poses no risk to human or animal health. But a spokesman said they would not spray between 3 and 4.30pm because school-run traffic could be on the road through the 25-hectare woodlands, Herridge's Copse and Broom Copse, which are south-east of Pangbourne.

If delayed by bad weather, another attempt will be made on Thursday, with a second bout of spraying later this month under the terms of the licence issued by the regulator, Natural England. The site is the only location outside of London where the moth has taken hold, and tree experts are determined to stop the species from spreading throughout the UK. An extra £1.5m of government funding was announced last week to step up spraying to eradicate the moth.

But local residents and environmentalists have raised concerns over the impact of the aerial spraying, on both local allotments and other butterfly and moth species in the woods.

Green party member Jenny Hicks, who lives in Reading, said the "major concern is whether this spraying will affect allotments". Antoinette Earl, who lives nearby, said she is "very concerned" at the impact on her allotment 500 yards from site, which is designated as a site of special scientific interest. "I am aware of the toxic nature of the caterpillars, but also aware that previous control methods have reduced the number of caterpillar nests from several dozen in 2011 to only three last year. The aerial spraying approach feels like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut," said Earl.

Other species of butterflies and moths at the site include the silver-washed fritillary (Argynnis paphia), white admiral (Limenitis camilla), and the scarlet tiger moth (Callimorpha dominula).

Labour's parliamentary candidate for Reading West, Victoria Groulef, said the commission had not done enough to communicate with residents.

"Residents say that a short article in the local newsletter and a few scattered posters have said that spraying will take place, but have not indicated when it will happen, what the impact will be, or who to contact if you have concerns. Despite leaving messages on the Forestry Commission's own help line, nobody has called residents back. This is totally unacceptable.

"Residents are being very reasonable. They understand that the oak processionary moth caterpillars, a native of southern and central Europe can cause health problems. But likewise they want reassurances that the spraying will not have an impact on human health or on the local environment," she said.

• Insects
• Wildlife
• Animals
• Invasive species
• Conservation
• Trees and forests

Adam Vaughan
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Cycling experts offer Peter Kimpton training advice on how to become a rider capable of John O'Groats to Land's End

It's good to face a challenge. I cycle to work each day, five miles each way. For that I reward myself with a daily coffee and a Danish.

In June however, I'm going to ride 960 miles in just nine days across the backbone of Scotland and England. From the rocky cliffs of John O'Groats to Land's End I'll ascend peaks from Glen Coe and Shap Fell. Then on the final day – toughest of all apparently – I'll traverse the endless undulations of Cornwall. I'm expecting a non-stop prevailing wind and constant rain. In total I'm going to climb around 15,000 metres, which is a bit like going up Alpe d'Huez 13 times. That's an awful lot of Danish.

This is either a fantastic challenge, or very foolhardy. In any case I'm doing this organised ride – the Deloitte Ride Across Britain (RAB) – for good causes. And at least it's green travel. Gary Barlow, Chris Evans, Dr Brian Cox, and James May did their own version over 24 hours in a pink Rolls Royce.

I've never ridden anything like 100 miles on one day, let alone nine consecutive days, so how do you prepare for such an event when time is short? Is it the equivalent of running nine consecutive marathons? As for training, I barely have an hour spare each day, and perhaps only one day a week. I decide to consult a cycling expert and a celebrity athlete on this. But first I look at ways to transform myself.

My first priority, I feel, is to look like a Ride Across Britain cyclist. Bradley Wiggins is a hero of mine, but the only thing I really share with him is taste in music, and hairstyle. I'm what you might call a nippy urban rider. I've only lived in cities - Manchester, Cambridge, Glasgow and London. Primarily I treat the bicycle as a way to get between social and cultural events quickly and cheaply. I am neither waterproofed high-vis man nor moustachioed hipster with fixie. I ride a standard hybrid. I go to gigs. I wear jeans and a leather jacket.

So when the going gets tough, I decided the tough must surely go shopping. Fortunately I'd picked up a good basic road bike in a sale last year but now spend hours in shops looking at tops. This seems far more important than training. I buy cleat pedals and shoes – they feel odd at first until I work out how to unclip the left leg at traffic lights. Having fallen over a few times I begin wearing a helmet – for the first time ever in decades of cycling.

I look in the mirror in full kit. I've become a 6'3'' luminous alien - all legs and a massive shiny head. I also seem to have adopted a colour combination of yellow and black (shades of danger in nature). I am half-man, half-wasp on wheels.

But what about training? I go running. I ride a bit faster to work. Is this enough? Andy Cook, the RAB route director and super-fit cyclist who has spend months researching and planning the route, gave this advice:

A 10- to 15-minute warmup followed by a 'brisk- 30- to 40-minute session followed and warm down twice a week will certainly make a difference. Two of these sessions a week followed by a longer ride at the weekend will provide a sound base for an endurance event.

This is what I'm trying to do. I'm also riding to work on the big front chainring to replicate steep hills. I'm carrying full panniers on my heavier bike. I've worked out a 20-mile urban route featuring some of north London's steepest hills – Highgate and Muswell Hill. Is this like running in hobnail boots before you slip into featherweight slippers for the main event? Not really - the endurance isn't there - you have to stop at traffic lights all the time.

I go to the gym and spend an intense 20 minutes on a machine. But I also find this intensely boring. I can only do it when there is football on the telly above my head. But whenever there's a goal chance my feet instinctively kick out of the straps or I head an imaginary ball. Surely only the mountains, only the sea, can inspire me.

I'm not alone. Kelly Sotherton – multi-medal winning heptathlete, including bronze at the 2004 Olympics – is another coming on the ride. She tells me she's only just started training (four times a week though) and is a bit afraid of falling off her bike. I'm not afraid for her. She's run this year's London Marathon. And she's Kelly Sotherton.

But what about diet? I'm trying to drink less alcohol, and eat healthier, but is that enough? Here's Cook's tip:

A good balance of carbohydrates, proteins and nutrients should suffice. Be mindful to replenish fuel within the magic 20-minute window majoring on carbs and protein to replace the all important glycogen stores and rebuild muscle fibre. A good quality specific sports recovery product will do this but equally good and a lot cheaper would be a cheese and ham sandwich.

Training and diet are all important, but for me the mental challenge is the biggest thing. I need to get used to riding all day. I've joined the British Cycling Association. I'm using their online maps and going to go riding for a couple of days with some friends. I'm riding the second day of the MITIE London Revolution (84 miles) this weekend and hope to be pulled along in the fun of a mass ride.

I'm also beginning to realise endurance is down to the joy of repetition and the trick of memory. Aside from muscle memory, cycling over 100 miles a day perhaps also requires the art of forgetting you are tired – by being continuously inspired. It reminds me of being 10 years old, kicking a football all day long in the street. That ball, like nearly being at the top of a hill, is always just ahead, waiting for another kick.

Alongside my charitable obligations and the presence of others, I hope that will be my trick. That, and the pull of the mountains, and the welcome descent to the sea.

• Cycling

Peter Kimpton
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Economists discuss ways of funding green investment at the Transforming Finance conference

Review of more than 900 cables reveals campaign to break down resistance to GM products in Europe and other countries

American diplomats lobbied aggressively overseas to promote genetically modified (GM) food crops such as soy beans, an analysis of official cable traffic revealed on Tuesday.

The review of more than 900 diplomatic cables by the campaign group Food and Water Watch showed a carefully crafted campaign to break down resistance to GM products in Europe and other countries, and so help promote the bottom line of big American agricultural businesses.

The cables, which first surfaced with the Wikileaks disclosures two years ago, described a series of separate public relations strategies, unrolled at dozens of press junkets and biotech conferences, aimed at convincing scientists, media, industry, farmers, elected officials and others of the safety and benefits of GM products.

The report offers a further glimpse of the power of the agricultural and biotech industries in America, after the supreme court came down on the side of Monsanto in its effort to enforce its patented GM soybeans.

The court ruled on Monday that an Indiana farmer had to buy new seeds directly from Monsanto every time he planted the GM Roundup Ready soybeans.

The public relations effort unrolled by the State Department also ventured into legal terrain, according to the report. US officials stationed overseas opposed GM food labelling laws as well as rules blocking the import of GM foods.

The report notes that some of the lobbying effort had direct benefits. About 7% of the cables mentioned specific companies, and 6% mentioned Monsanto. "This corporate diplomacy was nearly twice as common as diplomatic efforts on food aid," the report said.

Wenonah Hauter, the executive director of Food and Water Watch, said it was unsettling to see the State Department investing so much effort into promoting industry. "I'm especially concerned to see how much of the cables have to do with changing laws and regulations of many of those countries," she said. "Instead of focusing on security and promoting democracy, they are focusing on pressuring foreign governments."

In some instances, there was little pretence at hiding that resort to pressure – at least within US government circles. In a 2007 cable, released during the earlier Wikileaks disclosures, Craig Stapleton, a friend and former business partner of George Bush, advised Washington to draw up a target list in Europe in response to a move by France to ban a variety of GM Monsanto corn.

"Country team Paris recommends that we calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU since this is a collective responsibility, but that also focuses in part on the worst culprits," Stapleton wrote at the time.

"The list should be measured rather than vicious and must be sustainable over the long term, since we should not expect an early victory. Moving to retaliation will make clear that the current path has real costs to EU interests and could help strengthen European pro-biotech voices," he wrote.

• GM
• Farming
• US political lobbying
• US politics
• United States

Suzanne Goldenberg
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Householders are being 'unfairly blamed' for the UK's food waste when the industry generates half of the annual 20m tonnes

The food industry should be forced to audit its supply chains regularly to cut down on the amount of food being thrown away, according to waste campaigners.

The group This is Rubbish (TiR) called for more transparency in the system, claiming that householders are being unfairly blamed for the UK's food waste when the industry generates over half of the 18-20m tonnes food wasted every year. An estimate in January by the UK's Institution of Mechanical Engineers put the amount of food wasted worldwide each year at up to 2bn tonnes, or half of what is produced.

TiR's report, published on Tuesday, Counting What Matters, said there is more support for audits from the industry than previously believed, although there were concerns about who would bear the cost, and about practicalities. Food industry experts and insiders interviewed by the authors mostly cited increased efficiency a the benefit of such audits.

TiR co-director Caitlin Shepherd said: "We know the food industry has a big problem with waste, one that comes with significant environmental, social and economic costs. Despite this, food waste is not widely monitored or reported even among large businesses, meaning the problem stays largely hidden."

In the UK, the voluntary Courtauld Commitment and Hospitality and Food Service Agreement require signatories to report waste data annually. It is held in confidence by the government's waste advisory body, Wrap, and aggregated to provide an assessment of how the sector is performing against agreed targets.

British Retail Consortium director of food and sustainability, Andrew Opie, said: "Retailers already audit the food waste they're responsible for. They rely on the independent resource-efficiency body WRAP to co-ordinate industry-wide food waste reduction figures. Let's not distract from what will win us the greatest gains. That is getting consumers to think harder about what they waste."

• Food
• Waste

Rebecca Smithers
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

Fired up the micro mini for the first time today.  From a stone cold start, it takes all of 5 minutes to get yellow hot and melt the silver.  Had trouble with the first five pours - didn't fill the mold even though there was still melted silver in the top.  Suddenly something Canvasman34 said to me in an email popped into my head after my first success with the mold and that fork I cut up..."That is great that the mold worked with so little silver. Normally it needs twice the ingot volume to get a full pour."  I guess I got lucky with that first pour I did in my makeshift brick oven.  Added more silver and got 3 good pours in a row.  I was only using about 35grams for the failed attempts.  55 grams seems to work well. Turned my partial ingots back into nuggets and pickled the batch.

Got rain this afternoon!  60,95,62, .4",W,0

 

 

Crop Mob at Community Farm
1829 San Ysidro Crossing, Santa Fe, NM 87507
Sunday, May 19th
1pm – 4pm

Please RSVP for Event

What is a crop mob?  It began in 2008 in North Carolina to grow sweet potatoes (which is great that we are starting at the community farm that had sweet potatoes last year).  A few times per year they come to help farms with planting.  We would like to have 20+ people volunteer at the community farm to help plant the items in the greenhouse.  We will go to other farms and large gardens to help this season.  Look at the COMMUNITY CALENDAR for updates.

Here is a great quote from the main website: “We work together in the spirit of mutual aid and any crop mobber can call a crop mob to do the kind of work it takes a community to do. We work together, share a meal, play, talk, and make music. No money is exchanged. This is the stuff that communities are made of.” 

Come join us this weekend to help.  Volunteering on this day will show you the farm and introduce you to Lois Harvie, Volunteer Coordinator and Linda Marple, Executive Director.

Contact 473-1403 or homegrownnewmexico@gmail.com with questions.

Wenlock Edge: Do peregrine falcons, sparrowhawks, kestrels and tawny owls join in with this collective expression of bird-ness? Or do they see it as an act of their prey's resistance?

Cuck-oo … cuck-oo, unmistakable sounds follow first light through a gap in the curtains. But maybe I am mistaken. Maybe I'm crafting cuckoo song out of the louder fragments of a woodpigeon's call? No, it's a cuckoo, the first I've heard for years so close to home. That would mean the world's all right; that those forces corroding seasonal certainties were weakening; that the spirit of spring has returned, alive and well? The harder I listen, the further I fall into the realisation that my desire to delude myself is stronger than my need to face up to the truth. It's a bloody wood pigeon.

I go outside, step into the dawn chorus. The air is cool and damp. The soft green light is like peering into a pond and the birdsong sounds as if it's coming from underwater. Birds are singing together and their communal power feels greater than individual, clan or tribal identities. Before this changes again and their personal characters return to them, I wonder what effect their chorus has on birds of prey. Do peregrine falcons, sparrowhawks, kestrels and tawny owls join in with this collective expression of bird-ness, irrespective that their manners are, as Ted Hughes said, "tearing off heads"? Or do they see it as an act of their prey's resistance, in defiance of their predatory power?

Maybe the chorus is like a village uprising, shouting at the gates of the murderous feudal landlord – a warning that together they could overpower their oppressor. I suspect the answering glare from treetop or cliff ledge betrays not a jot of intimidation. Nevertheless, there's a reckless kind of confidence in the songbirds that persists through the day. Out in the woods this confidence has an echo in the trees and the late sputtering of wild garlic and bluebells – even flowers of early purple orchid, stubby as betting-shop pencils, struggle through regardless of the colder weather. Spring has its own fierce truth, no matter what we try to make of it.

• Rural affairs
• Birds
• Wildlife
• Animals
• Spring

Paul Evans
guardian.co.uk © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved. | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions | More Feeds

By the end of the century, ocean levels could rise by 2 or 3 feet. That's enough to flood the colonists' first settlement at Jamestown, Va. And it's putting pressure on archaeologists to get as many artifacts out of the ground as quickly as possible — before it's too late.

» E-Mail This     » Add to Del.icio.us