news20100813gdn1

[News] from [guardian.co.uk]

[guardian.co.uk > Environment > Conservation]

'Crown jewels' of Britain's landscape could be sold off
Key nature reserves could be run by big business
Conservationists split over private sector takeover

John Vidal, Severin Carrell and Juliette Jowit
guardian.co.uk, Friday 13 August 2010 23.11 BST
Article history

{Home to some of Britain’s rarest and most protected wildlife: the rugged Lizard peninsula. Photograph: Peter Horner/Getty}

The Lizard peninsula is one of Britain's romantic and evocative places: home to some of the rarest and most protected wildlife, and dotted with sunken treasure ships and sailors' graves. Its plummeting cliffs, rocky caves and sandy beaches at the southern tip of Britain are owned and managed by the state, for now. But if government plans are pushed through, it could one day theoretically be owned and managed by a big supermarket like Sainsbury's or Tesco, an oil company or a local community.

England has 224 designated national nature reserves, of which the government – via its agency Natural England – owns or manages two thirds; Scotland and Wales have far fewer . A further 1,050 local reserves make up a national collection of beauty spots and sites of special scientific interest that is considered priceless. Covering an area the size of the west Midlands, they include windswept coast, ancient woodlands, flower rich meadows and moor, mountain and bog.

Proposals now being considered in Westminster and Cardiff include selling off the publicly-owned sites, opening them up for more visitors and money-making opportunities or handing them over to charitable trusts and communities. Critics say there is little likelihood of the Lake District being re-branded as British Nuclear Fuels-land, or Snowdon as Mt Sainsbury's, but it could lead to reserves being branded, and funding becoming dependent on the fortunes of multinational companies.

"We thought these places – which are the crown jewels of the landscape – had been saved for the nation, but now it turns out we've got to save them all over again," said Jeremy Biggs, Director of Pond Conservation. "I'm especially worried that this will be another nail in the coffin for wonderful places for freshwater plants and animals like the Pevensey Levels in East Sussex – where the network of clean unpolluted ditches and ponds support spectacular wetland wildlife, equal to our very best salmon rivers, and our most magnificent lakes. Without the protection provided by NNR [national nature reserve] status these fragile sites would have been totally destroyed long ago".

Other conservationists are not overly concerned as long as there are guarantees they will be managed well. They point out that most nature conservation is now part-funded by business, and many nature reserves are already owned by private individuals.

Savage cuts to British conservation could even be financially beneficial, says Morgan Parry, chair of the Countryside council for Wales, the principality's statutory nature advisers: "Possibly things that we have held as sacred will be challenged. We have to ask whether we actually need nature reserves and whether the business sector can come in to provide new revenue streams. Who manages the nature reserves may not matter. We have to look more holistically".

The sell-off plan highlights the extreme lengths being considered to meet the government's demands to slash environmental spending. It is perhaps the most dramatic plan being suggested, but by no means the only one which has created deep concern about the future of the nation's countryside and natural world.

At their last board meeting, the directors of Natural England, which has no remit for the devolved regions, warned that, mostly because of the job and funding cuts, including a freeze already imposed on hiring new staff, advertising and marketing, the outlook for 38 out of 45 of their policies was worse than before, including targets to improve the survival of the most at risk species such as otters and dormice, restoration of wetlands, and projects to introduce one million children into the countryside.

In another possible sign of things to come, the latest strategic plan by the Environment Agency (which covers England and Wales but not Scotland or Northern Ireland) has shifted from a vision which opened with "a better quality of life for people, and an enhanced environment for wildlife" and other commitments, followed by commitments to cleaner air, water and soils, sustainability, climate change adaptation and finally reduced flooding risk. In its place are four much more limited and specific pledges to "clean up rivers, defend more properties against flooding, reduce emissions, discharges and waste from industry, and tackle the causes and consequences of climate change".

Noting the exclusion of biodiversity from this list, Mark Avery, conservation director for the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, warned on his blog this week: "[The] EA does a lot of good for wildlife, but often off the sides of dedicated staff's desks or by clever thinking with non-biodiversity budgets. This good work may disappear now."

Forestry Commission officials in Wales, Scotland and England today confirmed that sales and long leases of national forestry and woodland were being considered as part of a range of options to cut budgets. The commission owns more than 875,000 hectares – mostly in Scotland – but depends on government for grants of more than £70m a year. The Conservative party considered the part-privatisation of the commission in the mid 1990s but was rebuffed by environment groups. Since then it has become more business focused, potentially making a part-privatisation more attractive.

The Welsh government also owns 300,000 acres of forests in Wales, and some of the land is highly valuable because of its potential for wind power. "Everything is being considered, from a complete merger of the organisations to the large scale sell-off of assets and the sharing of resources", said one source.

Today officials insisted that no detailed plans had been made. "We expect to play our part in the Government's efforts to reduce the budget deficit, but we won't know what specific impacts this will have on us until we know the outcome of the public spending review in the autumn", said a Forestry Commission spokesman. Where environmental spending is devolved, a similar trend is emerging as those governments are also forced to demand severe funding cuts - sometimes with national if not international impacts where rare habitats and species are involved.

The Defra cuts are also expected to affect scientific research into inland water quality, the health of soils and upland areas such as the Peak District, Lake District and the Highlands. These UK-wide surveys are carried out by Scottish Natural Heritage, which already plans to lay-off staff on these projects.

Forestry Commission officials in Scotland expect to sell off some forests but face far less severe cuts than commission operations in England, of around 10% next year, because their funding comes from the Scottish government not Defra.

Forestry Commission Scotland executives also believe that buoyant timber prices will help them absorb the worst funding cuts.

Other Scottish environment agencies will not learn about the scale of their cuts until November, but they are planning for a 20% fall in spending next year and up to 10% a year for the next two years.

In Wales, conservationists expected extra funding three months ago to address the alarming deterioration of the principality's wildlife and to help them set up new marine nature reserves. This week they are contemplating multi-million pound cuts and the dismemberment of many services.

No decisions have been made but the Assembly government, which depends on money from Westminster for nature protection, is expected to slash budgets and has hinted it will merge the Welsh Environment agency, the Forestry Commission and the independent Countryside Council for Wales advisory body to save money.

According to sources in the government, "everything" is being considered for possible cuts, or its potential to raise money.

If the 40% overall Defra cuts are reflected in Wales, it could mean nature protection being reduced to just what the government is legally obliged to do.

"We've made little progress in 10 years so if we cut more there is no hope we will improve. It would mean cutting nature protection to the bone. There is little left to cut. It means we will miss targets", said Ann Meikle, director of WWF Wales.

"Nature protection will be severely reduced. Jobs will be lost and environment protection will undoubtedly be weaker", said Gordon James, director of Friends of the Earth Cymru. "We are very concerned that the voice of the CCW, which often challenges other agencies and provides independent advice, will be muted."

Back on the national stage, the Met Office, which comes under the Ministry of Defence, was identified as a possible candidate for privatisation by defence secretary Liam Fox before the election. Tonight a ministry spokesman said: "Everything, including the Met Office, is being looked at under the strategic defence and security review which will report after the summer".

news20100813gdn2

[News] from [guardian.co.uk]

[guardian.co.uk > News > World news > Pakistan]

Pakistan flood response prompts rising anti-government resentment
Under fire president Asif Ali Zardari tries to ease public anger amid fears he could be overthrown

Saeed Shah in Islamabad
guardian.co.uk, Friday 13 August 2010 21.56 BST
Article history

{Flood-hit women stretch their shawls to receive food from Pakistani troops in Muzaffargarh, near Multan. Photograph: K.M. Chaudary/AP}

Pakistan's government faces the threat of social unrest or even military takeover after its shambolic response to the floods that have devastated the country, leaving 1,600 people dead and 2 million homeless, say analysts.

Fears that Asif Ali Zardari, the president, could be overthrown – possibly through an intervention by the army – have grown as the government's failure to adequately tackle the crisis has fuelled long-held grievances.

"The powers that be, that is the military and bureaucratic establishment, are mulling the formation of a national government, with or without the PPP [the ruling Pakistan People's party]," said Najam Sethi, editor of the weekly Friday Times. "I know this is definitely being discussed. There is a perception in the army that you need good governance to get out of the economic crisis and there is no good governance."

Rescuers are struggling to help the 14 million people affected across the country, with fresh flood warnings today forcing even more to flee the city of Jacobabad. But the impact of the disaster will be felt throughout Pakistan's 170m population.

The agricultural heartland has been wiped out, which will cause spiralling food prices and shortages. Many roads and irrigation canals have been destroyed, along with electricity supply infrastructure.

"The immediate risk is one of food riots," said Marie Lall, an Asia expert at Chatham House. "There is already great resentment in Swat and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province where people had to be cleared during the government offensive. Now there is the threat of social unrest as various factions, families and ethnic groups compete with each other in the event of a breakdown in government."

The World Bank estimates that crops worth $1bn (£640m) have been ruined and the Pakistani finance secretary warned today that the disaster would cut the country's growth in half.

The government may have to spend $1.7bn on reconstruction, and has said it will have to divert expenditure from badly needed development programmes.

With the economy currently surviving on an IMF bailout, experts predict that another may be necessary. Experts believe that the floods could now knock 2 percentage points off projected economic growth for this year.

US and European diplomats are gravely concerned about the situation, as Pakistan is crucial in the fight against al-Qaida and the war in neighbouring Afghanistan.

Cathy Ashton, EU foreign policy chief, said the west could not afford to abandon the country: "Pakistan is faced with so many issues, not just floods, terror, development, India. It's in the EU's interest to have a stable and prosperous Pakistan."

Zardari, who left the country after the floods began and continued on his trip to France and Britain even when the scale of the disaster became apparent, is the focus of much of the anger. Despite the outcry, he is to go ahead with a visit to a regional summit in Russia next week. A spokesman said the president had cut the planned two-day trip to "a couple of hours". Only the courts could legally dismiss him but, as his PPP is a minority government reliant on coalition partners, behind-the-scenes military pressure on those partners could bring it down, while keeping parliament in place, said Sethi.

With the government overwhelmed by the scale of the disaster, Islamic groups, including extremist organisations such as Jamaat-ud-Dawa, have stepped into the gap. The military has also distributed aid in areas where locals complain that government help is almost entirely absent.

"If the military takes over now, I can assure you that it will be the end of Pakistan, an end which will be punctuated by a very bloody civil war," said Asad Sayeed, an analyst based in Karachi. "Pakistan is a very divided country right now."

Pakistan has lurched from crisis to crisis in its 63-year history. The break-up of the country in 1971 can be linked to another natural disaster, when authorities responded slowly to a devastating cyclone. A secessionist movement in East Pakistan capitalised on public anger to successfully fight for independence as Bangladesh.

In the flood-hit areas, people are bewildered by the government's response, with accusations and conspiracy theories abounding. At the side of the Indus river in Sukkur town, Sindh province, shopowner Ali Sher gave a scathing reaction to promises of aid.

"They [the government] want to drown Sukkur," he said. "They want to show some bodies, so they can ask for more aid from other countries. They are after dollars."


[guardian.co.uk > Environment > BP oil spill]

Deepwater Horizon crisis 'may be over'
Fishing port reacts with suspicion to claims that engineers could have sealed off the gusher for good

Suzanne Goldenberg in Venice, Louisiana
guardian.co.uk, Friday 13 August 2010 19.30 BST
Article history

{A family strolls along an oil-soaked public beach in Gulf Shores, Alabama. Photograph: Dan Anderson/EPA}

Scientists pored over a series of pressure tests from BP's well in the Gulf of Mexico today, trying to discover whether engineers had unknowingly already sealed off the gusher for good.

The tests could decide whether the official epitaph for the Macondo is written tomorrow or sometime next week, when crews were scheduled to complete two relief wells that officials have described as the last step in permanently securing the BP well.

A decision to stop work on the relief wells would bring an unexpected conclusion to the Deepwater Horizon crisis in the Gulf, which has devastated the local economy and environment, cost BP billions, and shaken confidence in Barack Obama's leadership.

It might also be a hard sell to a public which has been told repeatedly that the relief wells are the only sure way of plugging the well for good.

In Venice, a fishing port which saw some of the worst oil slicks, the prospect of Obama administration officials and BP executives declaring an early end to the well was greeted with suspicion. "There's plenty of oil still out there," said one of the airboat operators who have been collecting tar balls from the marshes.

News that the well may have already been blocked came as the state of Alabama announced that it is suing BP, and its partners on the Deepwater well, Transocean and Halliburton, for the "catastrophic harm" caused by the spill.

The attorney general Troy King declined to specify a figure for damages, telling Reuters: "We are suing them for the amount it will take to make Alabama whole."

There was also anger at a report in the Times-Picayune newspaper that BP had ordered claims adjusters to halve payments in August to those who lost business or income because of the spill.

The newspaper said it had obtained an internal BP email ordering the cuts. BP told the paper it was halving payments because the Obama administration was due to take over claims on 15 August. That takeover is now delayed.

The Obama administration's lead official for the oil spill, Thad Allen, said today that crews may have inadvertently sealed off any escape routes for oil when they pumped in mud and cement in the "static kill" operation earlier this month.

BP said it was reviewing data collected from four hours of testing on the well on Thursday before making its recommendations. Executives have said repeatedly in recent days that they saw no need to carry on drilling two relief wells.

But Allen had resisted until today when he told a briefing that the cement that entered the well from the top in the static kill may have sealed it off for good. "We may be the victims of our own success here. A bottom kill finishes this well. The question is whether it's already been done with the static kill," he said.

Allen warned that there was a small chance that cement pumped in during the static kill had travelled down to the reservoir and then back up in the outer casing, sealing the well from both ends.

Pumping more cement and mud in from the relief well could raise the pressure to dangerous levels, Allen said. But if BP and Allen do decide to go ahead, drilling on the relief wells will resume on Sunday, with the final kill complete in about four days.