Download Rutgers Model United Nations 4 - Institute for Domestic and

The Institute for Domestic and International Affairs, Inc.
United Nations
Environment Programme
International Protection
of Migratory Species
Director: Lenny Haas
© 2009 Institute for Domestic & International Affairs, Inc. (IDIA)
This document is solely for use in preparation for Rutgers Model
United Nations 2009. Use for other purposes is not permitted
without the express written consent of IDIA. For more
information, please write us at [email protected]
Policy Dilemma ______________________________________________________________ 1
Chronology __________________________________________________________________ 3
1 July 1975: Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES) _________________________________________________________________________ 3
23 June 1979: Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) _________________________________ 3
22 May 1992: Convention on Biological Diversity _______________________________________ 4
1998: Congolese Civil War Endangers Gorillas_________________________________________ 5
December 2004: Moratorium on Wind Power Issued in New Jersey, United States of America _ 5
8 April 2006: World Migratory Bird Day _____________________________________________ 6
2006: “Year of the Turtle” Campaign ________________________________________________ 6
2007: “Year of the Dolphin” Campaign _______________________________________________ 7
August 2008: Brazilian Small Hydroelectric Dams Ban __________________________________ 7
2009: “Year of the Gorilla” Campaign ________________________________________________ 8
Actors and Interests ___________________________________________________________ 9
Conservationist Range States _______________________________________________________ 9
Less Regulatory Range States ______________________________________________________ 10
Conservation Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) _______________________________ 12
Possible Causes _____________________________________________________________ 13
Energy and Resource Priorities_____________________________________________________ 13
Human Population Growth and Development_________________________________________ 14
Lack of Political Will Towards Conservation _________________________________________ 16
Comparison of Causes ____________________________________________________________ 17
Projections and Implications___________________________________________________ 18
Conclusion _________________________________________________________________ 19
Discussion Questions _________________________________________________________ 20
Bibliography ________________________________________________________________ 21
For Further Reading _____________________________________________________________ 21
Works Consulted ________________________________________________________________ 22
Works Referenced _______________________________________________________________ 25
Rutgers Model United Nations
1
Policy Dilemma
Biodiversity is essential for the promotion of human development. The species of
flora and fauna which comprise global biodiversity have serious economic, “esthetic,
ecological, educational, historical, recreational, and scientific value,” as described in the
United State’s Endangered Species Act of 1973.1
All living organisms comprise a
complex intricate biosphere, and the extinction of one organism can have cascading
negative effects on the others. The loss of certain “keystone” species can completely
alter or destabilize necessary ecological processes.2
Migratory animal species are
particularly important to the biosphere and require protection. Of the known animal
species, approximately eight thousand to ten thousand migrate.3 Species are considered
migratory if they live in different places during certain times of the year, require various
resources during different stages of life, or reproduce in a certain region but normally live
elsewhere. It is imperative that biodiversity is preserved for future generations to benefit
from the resources it provides.
Species that migrate from place to place are at a
higher risk than stationary species because of human
activity and development. In the search for food, bycatch and excessive hunting can severely decrease
By-catch 1. The portion of a fishing
catch that is discarded as unwanted
or commercially unusable.
2.
unwanted marine creatures that are
caught in the nets while fishing for
another species;
population size. States developing land and building infrastructure create power lines, oil
spills, and physical barriers, like roads and fences, that can all potentially affect migratory
species in detrimental ways.4
Migratory animals’ territories do not respect state borders, and differing state
regulations and protection mechanisms can have adverse consequences. State borders
also separate cultural values and political priorities, such as the significance of a species
to a religious or indigenous group or the species’ use as a food source. Additionally,
1
Why Save Endangered Species? (Arlington, Virginia: US Fish and Wildlife Service: Endangered Species Program,
2005). 3.
2
Ibid., 6.
3
Muriel M Mannert-Maschke, Convention on Migratory Species Brochure (Bonn: Druckerei Berghoff, 2008). 4.
4
Robert Vagg, CMS Family Guide: Threats and Challenges (Bonn: Terrence Okorougo, 2008).
Rutgers Model United Nations
2
marine migratory species face even greater danger as they traverse through international
waters where there is no national jurisdiction. Migratory species require special attention
for protection and assurance that these valuable components of the biosphere are safe and
survive for future generations.
Migratory species serve a myriad of roles in multiple sectors of a state. Migratory
species spread seeds and pollen as they travel, which is vital to ecosystem structure.
They also provide sustenance for other animals, and regulate the number of species in
ecosystems. These species improve both local and global economies, as they provide
food and income through commercial hunting and fishing. Recreationally, bird watching,
safari trips, and whale watching attract tourism.
Culturally, migratory species have
significance in legends, religions, and customs.5 Finally, migratory species act as a good
indicator of the environment and can alert humans to dangers or problems.6 Despite all
of these vital functions within a state, states do not provide species with the necessary
protective measures.
International collaboration fosters multilateral protection efforts that bridge
international boundaries.
While specific solutions are required for specific species,
general solutions between states can improve the plight of migratory species.
Additionally, researching species and their needs, behavior, habitat, and migratory
patterns is the key to understanding what solutions species require.
Promoting
sustainable development can prevent unsustainable hunting and fishing practices that can
lead to extinction. Greater oversight and regulation of industries and energy can prevent
accidental electrocution, capture, or death. Overall, respecting these species behavior
when applying new human pressures, and acknowledging and mitigating the
consequences of new development or harmful ecological actions can greatly aid in the
protection of migratory species.
5
Muriel M Mannert-Maschke, Convention on Migratory Species Brochure (Bonn: Druckerei Berghoff, 2008). 4.
Why Save Endangered Species? (Arlington, Virginia: US Fish and Wildlife Service: Endangered Species Program,
2005). Why Save Endangered Species? (Arlington, Virginia: US Fish and Wildlife Service: Endangered Species
Program, 2005).
6
Rutgers Model United Nations
3
Chronology
1 July 1975: Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES)
On 1 July 1975, the international community signed the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. This document was
one of the first pieces of international legislation to address the protection of endangered
species.7 While this convention does not specifically address migratory species, they are
a component of its overall scope. International trade of wildlife is a large part of many
states’ economies. Products derived from plants and animals include food, medicines,
and building materials and unsustainable production practices may result in the extinction
of these species.
This convention responded to the potential extinction of various internationally
traded species. Currently, its three appendices protect over thirty thousand species.8 It
implements a series of controls on import and export practices for three groups of
species. The greatest amount of protection is for species threatened with extinction, in
which trade is only permitted in special cases. The next appendix protects species not
threatened with extinction, but trade still needs to be controlled to improve the species’
sustainability. The final appendix protects species that are protected in at least one state
and that state has asked other CITES states for help in its protection.9 Overall, this
legislation is significant as one of the first major international acts dealing with migratory
species.
23 June 1979: Convention on Migratory Species (CMS)
While CITES played an important role in regulating international trade of the
species listed in its appendices, it had no legally binding provisions protecting
endangered species within a country. The Convention on Migratory Species (CMS)
7
CITES Secretariat, What is CITES?, March 25, 2009, http://www.cites.org/eng/disc/what.shtml (accessed March
31, 2009).
8
CMS Secretariat, "CMS Information and Capacity Building," CMS Family Guide, August 2008: 1-20.
9
CITES Secretariat, How CITES Works, March 25, 2009, http://www.cites.org/eng/disc/how.shtml (accessed March
31, 2009).
Rutgers Model United Nations
4
prohibits states from harvesting any endangered migratory species, which are the species
included in CITES Appendix I.10 Migratory species have greater habitat needs because
they require two or more habitats or living conditions depending on their stage of life.
The corridors in which these species travel also pose extra dangers as well. Despite this,
the CMS acknowledges that certain species have various economic, food, and cultural
significance and permits the sustainable use of non-endangered species. The CMS also
focuses on implementing multilateral agreements and Memoranda of Understanding
regarding conservation of certain species.11 States can use the CMS as a tool to base
other treaties or tools that are more regional or state specific.
22 May 1992: Convention on Biological Diversity
Biological diversity (biodiversity) describes the wide range of life on Earth and
how these different varieties of life interact with one another. Biodiversity can range
from specific genetic differences, but can also encompass the variety of ecosystems that
occur in forests, mountains, wetlands, and lakes.
This biodiversity is important to
humans; however, human influence continually disturbs natural biodiversity at an
increasing rate.
In 1992, one hundred and fifty states signed the Convention on Biological
Diversity, in order to have a global agreement on the conservation and sustainable use of
biological diversity. The treaty’s three main goals are to conserve biodiversity, promote
sustainable use of the components of biodiversity, and share the benefits of commercial
use of these species.12 As stated in the convention, biological diversity is “a common
concern of humankind.”13 While humans can benefit from these species and ecosystems,
this convention assures that their use must be sustainable.
10
CMS Secretariat, "CMS History and Structure," CMS Family Guide, September 2008: 1.
Ibid.
12
Hamdallah Zedan, "How the Convention on Biological Diversity promotes nature and human well-being,"
Sustaining Life on Earth, April 2000: 8.
13
Ibid.
11
Rutgers Model United Nations
5
1998: Congolese Civil War Endangers Gorillas
Due to the breakdown of a ceasefire agreement between ethnic groups in the
Democratic Republic of Congo, a civil war broke out near the habitat of critically
endangered mountain gorillas. The fighting between twenty thousand Congolese soldiers
and the four thousand guerilla forces of ex-general Laurent Nkunda, seriously threatened
the mountain gorillas.14
The director of the Virunga National Park Ranger force,
Emmanuel de Merode, stated that “heavy shelling and gunfire were a severe threat to the
animal… gorillas habituated to humans were not known to flee the sounds of war.”15
Soldiers also illegally hunted mountain gorillas for bush-meant and the conflict prevents
wildlife rangers from adequately protecting the gorilla’s habitat. In the last ten years, the
civil war has killed over one hundred and fifty rangers and is further proof that Human
conflicts, like civil wars, can severely affect the surrounding species.16
December 2004: Moratorium on Wind Power Issued in New
Jersey, United States of America
Wind turbines offer an efficient method of sustainable energy. These turbines are
placed on hills, shorelines, and other wind-intensive areas to maximize power. However,
the turbine’s long fiberglass blades threaten birds who fly near them. For instance, in a
fifty square mile site in California, United States of America, a set of four thousand
windmills killed four thousand seven hundred birds according to conservative estimates.17
Additionally, these windmills intersect an international migratory bird route regulated by
the federal government.18 As a result, many authorities changed their policies regarding
windmill usage in the United States. In West Virginia, turbines killed over four thousand
14
Sebastien Berger, Congo Gorillas Threatened by Heavy Fighting, December 4, 2007,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3317086/Congo-gorillas-threatened-by-heavy-fighting.html (accessed
May 1, 2009).
15
Ibid.
16
Paul Eccleston, Renewed Fighting Threatens Congo Gorillas, August 29, 2008,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3350565/Renewed-fighting-threatens-Congo-gorillas.html (accessed
May 1, 2009).
17
John Ritter, Wind Turbines Taking Toll on Birds of Prey, January 5, 2005,
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-04-windmills-usat_x.htm (accessed March 31, 2009).
18
Ibid.
Rutgers Model United Nations
6
bats before the congressmen from that region asked the Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to study the effects of these turbines.
19
Additionally, former Acting
Governor of New Jersey Richard Codey ordered a fifteen-month moratorium on wind
power on the New Jersey shore in order to preserve Atlantic views and shore birds.
20
There are many solutions to these concerns, such as building wind turbines away from
migration paths, replacing older mills with taller ones, and building fewer large capacity
turbines.
8 April 2006: World Migratory Bird Day
The declaration of World Migratory Bird Day aimed to raise global awareness
about bird migration. Bird-themed events took place worldwide to foster a better
understanding about migratory birds, their requirements for survival, and conservation
methods. These events include bird festivals, bird watching trips, art exhibitions, and
education programs. Birds need extra conservation efforts, since they require certain
conditions to raise their young, find food, and cannot survive extreme temperatures.21
Many threats to birds are not natural, such as hunting, pollution, desertification,
deforestation, power lines and wind turbines, and each has a high potential to endanger
birds as they migrate.
CMS hopes theme days will inspire states to act more
collaboratively towards achieving conservation efforts.
2006: “Year of the Turtle” Campaign
The “Year of the Turtle” campaign aimed to raise awareness about the
conservation needs of marine turtles. This year focused on key issues regarding marine
turtles, including long term survival, sustainability, conserving habitats, reducing
accidental capture in fishing operations, and promoting research.22 Turtles spend most of
their lives in the oceans, however they reproduce and nest on beaches.
19
Erin Sherbert, "Migratory Birds: 1, Windmills: 0," Record Net, July 8, 2005.
John Ritter, Wind Turbines Taking Toll on Birds of Prey, January 5, 2005,
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-04-windmills-usat_x.htm (accessed March 31, 2009).
21
Ibid.
22
CMS Secretariat, "CMS Information and Capacity Building," CMS Family Guide, August 2008: 9.
20
Coastal
Rutgers Model United Nations
7
development and egg harvesting have resulted in the turtles’ endangered status.23 This
theme year was a milestone in the conservation efforts of marine turtles. This special
effort aimed its focus on marine turtles, as six of the seven species of marine turtles are
endangered or critically endangered. Many turtle related events occurred world-wide,
such as training workshops for the fishing industry, beach clean-up days, new research,
and limited edition postage stamps.24
2007: “Year of the Dolphin” Campaign
Similar to the “Year of the Turtle” Campaign, the CMS secretariat established the
“Year of the Dolphin” campaign to educate the public about the plight of wild dolphins.
Many activities supported this theme, ranging from an aggressive education and public
awareness campaign, fundraising for dolphin conservation projects, and the creation of a
special “Dolphin Fund,” which financed public awareness initiatives for dolphins. 25
These initiatives asked museums, hotels, parks, schools, and other institutions to raise
public awareness.
Their efforts were so successful that the “Year of the Dolphin”
continued into the next year. This campaign was particularly significant because it used
new techniques to achieve public awareness and education.
August 2008: Brazilian Small Hydroelectric Dams Ban
Hydroelectric dams are an integral part of Brazil’s energy infrastructure, providing
1,342 megawatts of power. Brazil plans to build approximately 240 small hydroelectric
dams, and currently, eighty-one dams are under construction.26 While these dams have
environmental benefits, like decreasing pollution, they also interfere with the fish
populations of rivers. Fish swim upriver and downriver depending on the breeding
season and dams block fish from completing their migration. If fish cannot reach their
breeding ground, they cannot reproduce and according to Juarez Pezuti, a biologist who
23
Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Bonn Convention - Marine Turtles (Africa & South-East Asia), 2007,
http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-1386 (accessed April 3, 2009).
24
Ibid.
25
Ibid., 10.
26
Mario Osava, Small Hydroelectric Dams Not So Green, August 9, 2008,
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=43508 (accessed March 31, 2009).
Rutgers Model United Nations
8
studies the effects of a small hydroelectric dam on local fish populations, “the dams
reduce the quantity of fish in the rivers because they alter currents and nutrition, in
addition to eliminating migratory species. Attempts to reestablish reproduction have not
been successful.”27 The impact of hydroelectric dams can adversely affect people who
depend on fish as a source of income or food, such as fishermen or indigenous groups.
As a result of migratory concerns, certain towns in Brazil have banned dams and
community organizations have filed lawsuits to block the construction of new ones.
2009: “Year of the Gorilla” Campaign
Gorillas face tremendous threats from war, hunting, disease, and habitat loss.28
Poaching gorillas for food and medicine can provide hunters with a larger income than
they could earn with legal hunting activities. Gorillas do not reproduce quickly and their
population has dwindled as a result.29 Additionally, due to deforestation, excessive
logging, and the need for more agricultural land, humans are usurping gorillas’ habitats,
while many gorillas die in states with unstable political climates and conflicts. Refugees
of these conflicts also impinge on gorilla habitats, as refugees are displaced from their
previous homes. As a result of a decade of civil war, the population size of Eastern
Lowland Gorillas may have plummeted by seventy per cent.30
The CMS secretariat dedicated 2009 to gorillas due to these threats. This year long
campaign spurred the creation of a new legally binding gorilla conservation plan between
the gorilla range states including Angola, Cameroon, Central African Republic,
Democratic Republic of the Congo, Gabon, Equatorial Guinea, Nigeria, Republic of the
Congo, Rwanda, and Uganda.
The plan focuses on community based initiatives to
promote the long-term survival of this endangered species by stabilizing gorilla
populations and the ecosystem services they provide, such as ecotourism.31
27
Ibid.
Daniel Karr, "Year of the Gorilla," CMS Secretariat, 2009: 1-2.
29
Ibid.
30
Ibid.
31
Ibid.
28
Rutgers Model United Nations
9
Actors and Interests
Conservationist Range States
The range of a migratory species refers to “all the areas of land or water that a
migratory species inhabits, stays in temporarily, crosses or overflies at any time on its
normal migration route.”32
Therefore, a range state is any state “that exercises
jurisdiction over any part of the range of [a] migratory species.”33 These states are
interested in protecting these species and maintaining biodiversity within their state and
the world.34
Conservationist range states use many measures to ensure the protection of
migratory species including instituting reserve areas for species, writing legislation to
protect threatened species, regulating commercial hunting and trading of endangered
species, and collaborating with other states to work on a comprehensive plan addressing
specific species.35
The leading cause of species endangerment is habitat loss and,
because migratory species have more than one habitat, many conservationist range states
utilize “habitat-based multi-species planning” to deal with this problem.36
37
States may
also issue sanctions or fines against states and companies that cause harm to migratory
species related to that state. For example, the Atlantic White Marlin is a migratory fish
that traverses United States’ waters and is protected by international regulations, limiting
amount of marlins that can be caught commercially. Under the Fisherman’s Protection
Act of 1967, or Pelly’s Amendment, the United States can take “unilateral trade actions
when nationals of a foreign country… diminish the effectiveness of an international
32
"Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of WIld Animals," (Bonn, 2003), 1.
Ibid.
34
Ibid.
35
Oscar Castillo, et al., "Casting for Conservation Actors: People, Partnerships, and Wildlife," Wildlife
Conservation Society Working Paper Series 28 (November 2006): 13-16.
36
E.O. Wilson, The Diversity of Life (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1992).
37
R. F. Noss, M. A. O'Connell and D. D, Murphy, The Science of Conservation Planning: Habitat Conservation
under the Endangered Species Act (Washinton DC: Island Press).
33
Rutgers Model United Nations
10
fishery conservation program.”38 Overall, these states want to protect their migratory
species and are willing to ensure their protection through legislation, regulation, and
activism.
These conservationist states argue for the importance of biodiversity as key to
understanding the motivations for protecting migratory species and migratory species
perform important ecological functions and have cultural and aesthetic benefits. 39 States
depend on biological resources for agriculture, industry, food supply, tourism, recreation,
and medicine. For example, in 2001, the international seafood trade market was valued
at approximately $59.4 billion USD.40 It is in the best interest of states exporting goods,
like fish, to ensure that the resource is regulated to protect for future use. On the other
hand, it gives states, like the United States, power to ensure compliance by issuing trade
sanctions against those that do not abide by regulations.
In addition, these states want to protect their own interests, while acknowledging
the rights of other states. Therefore, these states set reasonable international regulations
and limits on the amount of a certain species caught or hunted commercially, aiming to
use migratory species sustainably. Additionally, these states protect migratory species
through collaborative efforts in conserving species’ habitats and keeping migration paths
clear of obstructions. Ultimately, conservationist range states need to work together to
guarantee that species are protected from a variety of outside influences and available for
responsible, sustainable use.
Less Regulatory Range States
Unlike conservationist range states, less regulated range states are typically
interested in the immediate economic benefits of using migratory species. These states
38
Pombo, SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING SANCTIONS ON NATIONS UNDERMINING CONSERVATION
AND MANAGEMENT MEASURES FOR ATLANTIC HIGHLY MIGRATORY SPECIES , Congressional Report
(Washington: Committee on Resource, 2003).
39
Hamdallah Zedan, "How the Convention on Biological Diversity promotes nature and human well-being,"
Sustaining Life on Earth, April 2000: 3-4.
40
Pombo, SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING SANCTIONS ON NATIONS UNDERMINING CONSERVATION
AND MANAGEMENT MEASURES FOR ATLANTIC HIGHLY MIGRATORY SPECIES , Congressional Report
(Washington: Committee on Resource, 2003).
Rutgers Model United Nations
11
also frame the conservation needs of migratory species to be less than the needs framed
by conservationist states.
For example, whales are an endangered species of marine mammal and the
International Whaling Commission banned their hunting in 1963.41 However, whaling is
an important historical and cultural industry for Japan.
As stated by a Japanese
spokesperson, Hideki Moronuki, “Whales are just as important, and no more special, than
any other fish. Minke or humpback, we see whales as a marine resource,” maintaining
their position that whales should not get special treatment for being warm-blooded.42
Since the ban, the humpback whale population rebounded to forty thousand, and has
grown fifteen per cent a year.43 Despite the humpback whale’s near extinction, Japan
feels the population has grown enough to warrant ‘scientific research.’ Using a loophole
in the 1986 International Whaling Commission ban against commercial whaling, which
allows the killing of whales for scientific research, whales are hunted as data is collected
and the whale meat is then packaged and sold for profit. Overall, these states disagree
with conservationist range states on the sustainability of migratory species and intend to
utilize the resources.
These states want reduced regulation on the use of migratory species and argue
that biological resources, like migratory species, need to be used. These states want to
ensure that the resources are available to use economically and food-wise, but their
methods might not be sustainable.44 Optimally, these states would like to conduct what
they believe is sustainable hunting without being persecuted by other states with higher
sustainability standards. It is important to recognize that these practices may only apply
to a couple species. In some cases, less regulatory states may call for less regulation on
one endangered species, and greater regulation for another.
41
Toko Sekiguchi, Why Japan's Whale Hunt Continues, November 20, 2007,
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1686486,00.html (accessed April 8, 2009).
42
Ibid.
43
Ibid,
44
Ibid.
Rutgers Model United Nations
12
Unregulated range states have many reasons for unsustainably pursuing migratory
species.
States like Japan and Iceland have a long-standing cultural and historical
background hunting whales and feel it is part of their national identity. In Japan whaling
has occurred for centuries, leading to the worship of whales, whale songs, dances, and
traditional crafts, and the Japanese feel that whaling is an important part of their culture.45
It is also culturally and nutritionally significant as a source of protein to those that
practice Buddhism and cannot eat meat. According to polls, fifty six per cent of Japanese
support eating whale meat.46 Yet according to a professor at Tohoku University, “Much
of this support isn't because people are pro-whaling or are willing to eat whale meat.
People are against the anti-whalers. They don't like being told what to do by the outside
groups.”47
Despite its stance on whaling, Japan still has conservation stances on other
species. For example, Japanese conservationist groups filed a lawsuit against the United
States because an Air Station in Okinawa threatened the dugong population. In Japan,
the dugong is a cultural icon and is protected as a “cultural monument.”48 One state
might be less regulatory about one species and conservationist on another, as shown by
Japan’s policies with whales and dugongs.
The goal of these states is to lessen the regulations and limitations on hunting
migratory species. They would advocate revisiting previous bans and moratoriums as
new information and migratory species repopulate. Ultimately, they do not want other
states to interfere with their actions.
Conservation Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs)
Conservation NGOs want to protect species of all types and assure their survival.
NGOs, such as the Wildlife Conservation Society, “save wildlife and wildlands…
45
"Whales and Whaling," The Institute of Cetacean Research, 2007: 14.
John M Glionna, "A bitter face-off in Japan over whaling," LA Times, February 14, 2009
47
John M Glionna, "A bitter face-off in Japan over whaling," LA Times, February 14, 2009.
48
Peter Galvin, US & Japanese Conservation Groups Join in Legal Effort to Save Okinawa Dugong from
Extinction, September 25, 2003,
http://www.earthjustice.org/news/press/003/us_japanese_conservation_groups_join_in_legal_effort_to_save_okina
wa_dugong_from_extinction.html (accessed May 1, 2009).
46
Rutgers Model United Nations
13
through careful science, international conservation, education, and management.”49 They
provide working papers on topics, run educational programs, and even have wildlife
parks to promote wildlife conservation and protection. Other NGOs, such as Greenpeace,
campaign for the environment with “non-violent confrontation to raise the level and
quality of public debate.”50 These types of NGOs use confrontation as a method of
exposing environmental threats, in addition to offering solutions. These organizations do
not have the economic motives that states do; they simply aim to protect the planet,
environment and animals. While a healthy environment and ecosystem benefits the
members of these organizations, they are more interested in promoting their ideology and
their “fight to save the planet.”51
The optimal outcome for these organizations would be to completely end all
threats to the environment. In terms of migratory species, these organizations would like
to end unsustainable practices of commercial hunting, and guarantee that these animals
will survive for future generations. They would like to see protected zones for migratory
species, better technology, and increased regulations to hold industries accountable that
take advantage of these species.52 These organizations would like to see a greater
international awareness of environmental issues and look favorably upon governments
that take manage their states in an environmentally friendly manner.
Possible Causes
Energy and Resource Priorities
Migratory species face many obstacles like man-made structures, by-catch, and
over-hunting, greatly increasing their endangered status. When migratory bird species
travel, for example, electrical power lines can obstruct flight paths, posing a great risk for
electrocution. As early as 1913, electrocution has been recognized as a serious threat to
49
Our Mission, 2008, http://www.wcs.org/sw-our_mission (accessed April 8, 2009).
About Us, 2009, http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/about (accessed April 8, 2009).
51
Ibid.
52
Oceans, 2009, http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/campaigns/oceans (accessed April 8, 2009).
50
Rutgers Model United Nations
14
birds.53 Electrocution can result in either paralysis or death for the birds and one nature
reserve in Kazakhstan, had two hundred kestrels, forty-eight Steepe Eagles, two Easter
Imperial Eagles, one White-tailed Eagle, and one Black Vulture die by electrocution from
an eleven kilometer long, medium voltage power line in one month.54 Laying power lines
underground and constructing safer poles can prevent these accidental electrocutions.
Wind turbines and hydroelectric dams pose similar problems by obstructing
migratory paths. Wind turbines, a popular method of alternative energy, achieve their
full potential in windy areas, which birds also use for migration purposes.
Small
increases in mortality rates can greatly affect a breeding population and limit progeny. 55
Hydroelectric dams can prevent some fish from reaching their desired mating location.
For instance, a hydroelectric dam planned for the Mekong River “will be an ecological
disaster for fish migration routes between Cambodia and Laos. Over 300 species of fish
would be adversely affected,” according to a fisheries expert.56
In terms of resource priorities, obtaining food and animal by-products is often
complicated by by-catch and over-hunting.57 Large nets do not discriminate between the
intended target fish and other animals that happen to become entangled. Many birds,
including the Wandering Island Albatross and the Amsterdam Albatross face near
extinction because of by-catch incidents. Conservation states feel that the by-catch is a
greater concern than the profit-impeding regulations necessary to prevent it, but less
regulatory states do not hold the same opinion. Finally, over- and commercial hunting
can greatly decrease a species’ population size and endanger their survival.
Human Population Growth and Development
Habitat loss is one of the greatest threats for all species, especially migratory
species. This trend “affects eighty six per cent of all threatened birds, eighty six per cent
53
Ibid.
CMS Secretariat, "Threats and Challenges," CMS Family Guide, 2008: 1-9.
55
Ibid.
56
Tom Fawthrop, Mekong river hydroelectric dam threatens livelihoods and endangered species in landlocked
Laos, March 13, 2009, http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/13/laos-hydroelectric-dam (accessed May
1, 2009).
57
Ibid.
54
Rutgers Model United Nations
15
of mammals, and eighty eight percent of threatened amphibians.”58 There are many types
of habitat loss. By segmenting wetlands, forests, coral reefs, and other ecosystems, the
size of a species’ home is separated into disconnected pockets. Decreasing the size of
these ecosystems reduces the area for established ecological and biological cycles and
processes to occur. Forests are essential ecosystems for migratory species biodiversity,
however approximately forty five per cent of Earth’s original forests have been cleared.59
A similar trend can be seen in marine ecosystems, where ten per cent of coral reefs have
been destroyed, a percentage that is likely to increase.60 With less space available for
their natural habitat, animals may exhibit abnormal migratory or reproductive behavior.
Climate change is also playing a large role in habitat loss, especially in arctic
habitats.
As the ice caps melt, the hunting grounds for polar bears decrease.
Additionally, cold-water species will face more competition for food as their preferred
habitat shrinks, forcing arctic species into other habitats.61 This creates a cascading,
negative effect on the livelihood of myriads of species. Desertification also plays a
tremendous role in endangering the lives of migratory birds. As birds migrate, they need
to build up food supplies for their long journeys over terrain like deserts. The expansion
of the Sahara Desert prevents birds from finding the food necessary to make the journey
across.62 Increased desertification also decreases the amount of rest sites for birds to
refuel during their trip.
Migrant birds that travel between Africa and Europe for
reproductive or lifestyle needs are not able to migrate and reproduce, causing a
significant reduction in population size.63
Finally, human pressure also plays a direct role in habitat loss. As the human
population grows, more land is needed to sustain them, both spatially and resource-wise.
The world’s population is expected to reach nine billion by 2040 and, as cities expand,
58
Species Extinction, Brief (IUCN and SSC, 2004).
Hamdallah Zedan, "How the Convention on Biological Diversity promotes nature and human well-being,"
Sustaining Life on Earth, April 2000: 1-14.
60
Ibid.
61
CMS Secretariat, "Threats and Challenges," CMS Family Guide, 2008: 1-9.
62
Ibid.
63
CMS Secretariat, "Migratory Species and Climate Change," CMS Family Guide, 2006: 1-68.
59
Rutgers Model United Nations
16
species will be displaced and their populations decrease.64 Resource-wise, land is needed
for agricultural. In addition the use of fertilizers and pesticides exacerbates species
displacement by poisoning food and water resources and animals directly. Some species
can adapt to these habitat changes, but others cannot.
Lack of Political Will Towards Conservation
The lack of funding for conservation efforts poses an indirect threat to endangered
migratory species.
Many treaties address migratory species, biodiversity, and
conservation, such as CITES and CMS, however the enforcement mechanisms in these
treaties require money to fund the protection measures. Any species can be placed on an
endangered or at risk list, but that does not guarantee protection.
These lists only
increase public awareness and the ability for NGOs to seek more funding towards
conservation and protection.65 For instance, funding is needed to protect species from
poachers who either hunt for meat or profit.
Without the proper funding and
determination to prevent poaching, people will pursue these acts for money at the
expense of the species.
Additionally, once laws are established, funding does not necessarily “keep pace
with the rate of increase in listed species; moreover, money is most directed at a few
charismatic species, or those in worse shape, at the expense of larger numbers of species
whose further declines have more realistic chances of being prevented.”66 In many cases,
the inability to fund legislation to protect species inhibits the protection legislation to
begin with.67 Having legislation to protect species and having the financial means and
drive to support and back up that legislation are two very separate measures necessary to
protect migratory species.
64
US Census Bureau, Table 094, 2009, http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbagg (accessed May 1, 2009).
Dawn M Smith, Treaties without Teeth, January 3, 2007,
http://www.suite101.com/blog/dmsvn/treaties_without_teeth (accessed April 14, 2009).
66
Justina C Ray and Joshua R Ginsberg, "Endangered Species Legislation Beyond the Borders of the United
States," Conservational Biology 13, no. 5 (October 1999): 956-958.
67
Ibid.
65
Rutgers Model United Nations
17
Comparison of Causes
Migratory species have habitat, migratory, and reproductive needs that can be
inhibited or eliminated by differing energy and resource priorities between states, habitat
loss, and the lack of political will to protect these species. These causes result in a
decrease in population size of a species, either by directly killing the species through
electrocution or poaching, or indirectly by prohibiting species from reaching their desired
mating grounds. Species that cannot recover from these decreases in population size
become endangered and require protection.
Humans encroaching on species’ territory or altering it to better suit their own
needs cause habitat loss. The energy and resources derived only benefit humans, and
therefore funding is needed to protect species from humans wishing to take advantage of
species and their habitats. In reality, human interference is the overall problem regarding
the protection of migratory species. Carefully balancing the needs of both humans and
migratory species is necessary in order to best protect them. States need to compare the
benefits of protecting migratory species with the economic and resource costs and having
little or no protection or regulation to determine appropriate policies. Conservationist
states care more about the benefits of protection over the costs regulation, while the
opposite is true for less regulatory states.
However, differing legislation between conservationist states and less regulatory
states that share common migratory species can adversely affect both parties and the
species. One state’s actions to prevent the extinction of one species may be hindered
when that species migrates to another state with less protective measures.
The
conservation actions of one state are useless if the species faces habitat, migratory, or
reproductive threats elsewhere.
For a species to survive, all states involved must
cooperate despite of differing priorities.
Rutgers Model United Nations
18
Projections and Implications
If migratory species are not adequately protected, their population size will
continue to decrease to the point of extinction. The extinction of one species would have
overwhelming consequences for states that depend on that species for cultural, medicinal,
or economic uses. Significantly decreasing biodiversity on a global scale can also greatly
harm the global biosphere because the extinction of one species can throw the entire
system into chaos and it is impossible to recover a species that has become extinct.
Additionally, the security of the world’s food supply will be endangered if species
continue to be over-hunted. About hundred million metric tons of aquatic organisms are
fished or harvested each year, and decreasing this supply source can have a detrimental
effect on the availability of food around the world.68
Furthermore, meat-providing
animals are a large source of food for many areas, particularly in areas with high levels of
food insecurity and poverty. Overall, the extinction of one species can affect all areas of
a state, in both the short term and long term.
In terms of interstate relations, if states do not begin to collaborate on these
protective measures then conflicting measures, interests, and policies will worsen the
situation. This issue cannot be solved without governmental collaboration between the
states because species do not recognize state boundaries. Additionally, states focusing
solely on the protecting the species itself and not other compounding factors, such as
protecting their habitats, travel routes, and other potential endangering threats, can leave
species vulnerable to further trouble.
68
Anna Knee and Andrew McMullin, Species Extinction, Brief (IUCN and SSC, 2004).
Rutgers Model United Nations
19
Conclusion
Migratory species are an important part of the biosphere and have greater habitat
and sustainability needs due to that migratory behavior. This migratory pattern can
cause problems for species, as there are different levels of regulation and protection that
can conflict with one another when they travel from state to state. For over three
decades, international treaties and activities have addressed the issues of preserving
biodiversity and recognized the importance of protecting migratory species. States either
support enhanced protection of species, despite potential economic consequences, or
states are more concerned with the economic benefits of the species, over the possibility
that their overuse might be extinct. By not addressing this issue adequately, there is a
great chance that species may become extinct, creating havoc for the biosphere and all
that live in it, including humans.
Rutgers Model United Nations
20
Discussion Questions
• How can the loss of one species completely disturb the balance of the biosphere?
• Why do species migrate? How does reproduction relate to migratory behavior?
Why are migratory species at greater risk for extinction than non-migratory
species?
• What are some threats to migratory species? How can these threats be avoided?
• What is the issue with states having different rules and regulations regarding the
protection of migratory species? How do areas under no national jurisdiction
present a unique concern for species that migrate through these areas?
• What are some solutions to preventing the extinction of migratory species?
• Why is CITES an important treaty relating to migratory species? What does
CITES accomplish? What is unique about CMS and why was it needed when
CITES was available?
• What are Appendix I species, according to CMS? What can you do with them?
• What are the three main goals of the Convention on Biological Diversity?
• What measures has New Jersey done to deal with the turbine dilemma?
• Why were hydroelectric dams banned in Brazil? How do dams decrease fish
population size?
• Why do Gorillas need particular attention? What factors contribute to the
endangerment of gorillas?
• What are the primary motivations for Conservationist Range States? What are
some examples of measures taken by conservationist range states?
• What are the primary motivations of Less Regulatory States?
• How do energy needs result in the decrease in population size of migratory
species? What are some examples of utilities that can endanger migratory species?
•
How are migratory species used as resources and how can their use be sustained
over time?
Rutgers Model United Nations
21
Bibliography
For Further Reading
CMS Secretariat, CMS Family Guide: The Encyclopedia of the Convention on the
Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, 2004,
http://www.cms.int/publications/cms_guide.htm (accessed April 22, 2009).
This website contains the CMS Family Guide. The CMS Family Guide has
an abundant amount of information on the protection of migratory species,
the history of the CMS, and threats and challenges to migratory species.
Additionally, it also has lists and information on endangered migratory
species and agreements created regarding migratory species. This will be
very helpful as a starting point for research.
Zedan, Hamdallah. "How the Convention on Biological Diversity promotes nature and
human well-being." Sustaining Life on Earth, April 2000: 1-14.
This article goes into great detail about biodiversity and its importance. It
discusses the economic, cultural, and resource ramifications of decreasing
biodiveristy and how this effects humans on a global level. By discussing
the value of biodiversity, the threats facing biodiveristy, examples of these
topics, and possible solutions, this article is very helpful for understanding
why the protection of migratory species needs to be addressed on a global
scale.
Rutgers Model United Nations
22
Works Consulted
Berger, Sebastien. Congo Gorillas Threatened by Heavy Fighting, December 4, 2007,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3317086/Congo-gorillas-threatened-byheavy-fighting.html (accessed May 1, 2009).
Castillo, Oscar, et al. "Casting for Conservation Actors: People, Partnerships, and Wildlife."
Wildlife Conservation Society Working Paper Series 28 (November 2006): 13-16.
CITES Secretariat. How CITES Works. March 25, 2009.
http://www.cites.org/eng/disc/how.shtml (accessed March 31, 2009).
CMS Secretariat. "CMS History and Structure." CMS Family Guide, September 2008: 1-18.
CMS Secretariat. "CMS Information and Capacity Building." CMS Family Guide, August 2008:
1-20.
CMS Secretariat. "Migratory Species and Climate Change." CMS Family Guide, 2006: 1-68.
CMS Secretariat. "Threats and Challenges." CMS Family Guide, 2008: 1-9.
"Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of WIld Animals." Bonn, 2003, 1.
Eccleston, Paul. Renewed Fighting Threatens Congo Gorillas, August 29, 2008,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3350565/Renewed-fighting-threatensCongo-gorillas.html (accessed May 1, 2009).
Fawthrop, Tom. Mekong river hydroelectric dam threatens livelihoods and endangered species
in landlocked Laos, March 13, 2009,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/13/laos-hydroelectric-dam (accessed
May 1, 2009).
Galvin, Peter. US & Japanese Conservation Groups Join in Legal Effort to Save Okinawa
Dugong from Extinction, September 25, 2003,
http://www.earthjustice.org/news/press/003/us_japanese_conservation_groups_join_in_le
gal_effort_to_save_okinawa_dugong_from_extinction.html (accessed May 1, 2009).
Glionna, John M. "A bitter face-off in Japan over whaling." LA Times, February 14, 2009.
Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Bonn Convention - Marine Turtles (Africa & South-East
Asia). 2007. http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-1386 (accessed April 3, 2009).
Karr, Daniel. "Year of the Gorilla." CMS Secretariat, 2009: 1-2.
Knee, Anna, and Andrew McMullin. Species Extinction. Brief, IUCN and SSC, 2004.
Rutgers Model United Nations
23
Mannert-Maschke, Muriel M. Convention on Migratory Species Brochure. Bonn: Druckerei
Berghoff, 2008.
Noss, R. F., M. A. O'Connell, and D. D, Murphy. The Science of Conservation Planning:
Habitat Conservation under the Endangered Species Act. Washinton DC: Island Press.
Osava, Mario. Small Hydroelectric Dams Not So Green. August 9, 2008.
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=43508 (accessed March 31, 2009).
Pombo. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING SANCTIONS ON NATIONS UNDERMINING
CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT MEASURES FOR ATLANTIC HIGHLY
MIGRATORY SPECIES . Congressional Report, Washington: Committee on Resource,
2003.
Rahall, Nick J, and Don Young. "Endangered Species Act Implemenation: Science or Politics."
Oversight Hearing before the Committee on Natural Resources US House of
Representatives. Washington: Committee on Natural Resources, 2007.
Ray, Justina C, and Joshua R Ginsberg. "Endangered Species Legislation Beyond the Borders of
the United States." Conservational Biology 13, no. 5 (October 1999): 956-958.
Ritter, John. Wind Turbines Taking Toll on Birds of Prey. January 5, 2005.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-04-windmills-usat_x.htm (accessed
March 31, 2009).
Sekiguchi, Toko. Why Japan's Whale Hunt Continues. November 20, 2007.
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1686486,00.html (accessed April 8,
2009).
Sherbert, Erin. "Migratory Birds: 1, Windmills: 0." Record Net, July 8, 2005.
Smith, Dawn M. Treaties without Teeth. January 3, 2007.
http://www.suite101.com/blog/dmsvn/treaties_without_teeth (accessed April 14, 2009).
US Census Bureau, Table 094, 2009, http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbagg (accessed May
1, 2009).
Vagg, Robert. CMS Family Guide: Threats and Challenges. Bonn: Terrence Okorougo, 2008.
"Whales and Whaling." The Institute of Cetacean Research, 2007: 14.
What is CITES? March 25, 2009. http://www.cites.org/eng/disc/what.shtml (accessed March 31,
2009).
Why Save Endangered Species? Arlington, Virginia: US Fish and Wildlife Service: Endangered
Species Program, 2005.
Rutgers Model United Nations
24
Wilson, E.O. The Diversity of Life. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1992.
Zedan, Hamdallah. "How the Convention on Biological Diversity promotes nature and human
well-being." Sustaining Life on Earth, April 2000: 1-14.
Rutgers Model United Nations
25
Works Referenced
Berger, Sebastien. Congo Gorillas Threatened by Heavy Fighting, December 4, 2007,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3317086/Congo-gorillas-threatened-byheavy-fighting.html (accessed May 1, 2009).
Boxer. Asian Elephant Conservation Act of 2007. Legislation, Committee on Environment and
Public Works, Washington DC: US Congress, 2007.
Burke, Caitlin A, and Thomas M Franklin. "National petroleum reserve…Endangered species…
Migratory birds…Conservation funding." Wildlife Society News 32, no. 3 (2004): 964968.
Castillo, Oscar, et al. "Casting for Conservation Actors: People, Partnerships, and Wildlife."
Wildlife Conservation Society Working Paper Series 28 (November 2006): 13-16.
CITES Secretariat. How CITES Works. March 25, 2009.
http://www.cites.org/eng/disc/how.shtml (accessed March 31, 2009).
What is CITES? March 25, 2009. http://www.cites.org/eng/disc/what.shtml (accessed March 31,
2009).
CMS Secretariat. "Agreements and MoUs." CMS Family Guide, Septmeber 2008: 1-31.
CMS Secretariat. "CMS History and Structure." CMS Family Guide, September 2008: 1-18.
CMS Secretariat. "CMS Information and Capacity Building." CMS Family Guide, August 2008:
1-20.
CMS Secretariat. "CMS Species." CMS Family Guide, 2008: 1-27.
CMS Secretariat. "Migratory Species and Climate Change." CMS Family Guide, 2006: 1-68.
CMS Secretariat. "Resolutions and Recommendations." CMS Family Guide, September 2008: 17.
CMS Secretariat. "Threats and Challenges." CMS Family Guide, 2008: 1-9.
"Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of WIld Animals." Bonn, 2003, 1.
Eccleston, Paul. Renewed Fighting Threatens Congo Gorillas, August 29, 2008,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3350565/Renewed-fighting-threatensCongo-gorillas.html (accessed May 1, 2009).
Fawthrop, Tom. Mekong river hydroelectric dam threatens livelihoods and endangered species
in landlocked Laos, March 13, 2009,
Rutgers Model United Nations
26
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/13/laos-hydroelectric-dam (accessed
May 1, 2009).
Frisch, Heidrun. "Migratory Species and Climate Change: Impacts of a Changing Environment
on Wild Animals." 2006: 1-68.
Galvin, Peter. US & Japanese Conservation Groups Join in Legal Effort to Save Okinawa
Dugong from Extinction, September 25, 2003,
http://www.earthjustice.org/news/press/003/us_japanese_conservation_groups_join_in_le
gal_effort_to_save_okinawa_dugong_from_extinction.html (accessed May 1, 2009).
Garnett, Stephen T, and Les Christidis. "Implications of changing species definitions for
conservation purposes." Bird Conservation International 17 (2007): 187-195.
Glionna, John M. "A bitter face-off in Japan over whaling." LA Times, February 14, 2009.
Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Bonn Convention - Marine Turtles (Africa & South-East
Asia). 2007. http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-1386 (accessed April 3, 2009).
Karr, Daniel. "Year of the Gorilla." CMS Secretariat, 2009: 1-2.
Knee, Anna, and Andrew McMullin. Species Extinction. Brief, IUCN and SSC, 2004.
Mannert-Maschke, Muriel M. Convention on Migratory Species Brochure. Bonn: Druckerei
Berghoff, 2008.
Marzluff, John M, and Marco Restani. "Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political
Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species Recovery." BioScience
52, no. 2 (Februrary 2002): 169-177.
Melnick, Don, Jeffrey McNeely, Yolanda Kakabadse, Guido Schmidt-Taub, and Robin R Sears.
"Environment and Human Wellbeing: A Practical Strategy." UN Millenium Taskforce
Project on Environmental Sustainability, 2005: 1-160.
Noss, R. F., M. A. O'Connell, and D. D, Murphy. The Science of Conservation Planning:
Habitat Conservation under the Endangered Species Act. Washinton DC: Island Press.
Osava, Mario. Small Hydroelectric Dams Not So Green. August 9, 2008.
http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=43508 (accessed March 31, 2009).
Pisupati, Balakrishna, and Emilie Warner. "Biodiversity and the Millenium Development
Goals." IUCN Regional Biodiversity Programme, November 2003.
Pombo. SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING SANCTIONS ON NATIONS UNDERMINING
CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT MEASURES FOR ATLANTIC HIGHLY
Rutgers Model United Nations
27
MIGRATORY SPECIES . Congressional Report, Washington: Committee on Resource,
2003.
Rahall, Nick J, and Don Young. "Endangered Species Act Implemenation: Science or Politics."
Oversight Hearing before the Committee on Natural Resources US House of
Representatives. Washington: Committee on Natural Resources, 2007.
Ray, Justina C, and Joshua R Ginsberg. "Endangered Species Legislation Beyond the Borders of
the United States." Conservational Biology 13, no. 5 (October 1999): 956-958.
Restani, Marco, and John M Marzluff. "Funding Extinction? Biological Needs and Political
Realities in the Allocation of Resources to Endangered Species Recovery." BioScience
52, no. 2 (February 2002): 169-177.
Ritter, John. Wind Turbines Taking Toll on Birds of Prey. January 5, 2005.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-04-windmills-usat_x.htm (accessed
March 31, 2009).
Sekiguchi, Toko. Why Japan's Whale Hunt Continues. November 20, 2007.
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1686486,00.html (accessed April 8,
2009).
Sherbert, Erin. "Migratory Birds: 1, Windmills: 0." Record Net, July 8, 2005.
Smith, Dawn M. Treaties without Teeth. January 3, 2007.
http://www.suite101.com/blog/dmsvn/treaties_without_teeth (accessed April 14, 2009).
The Institute of Cetacean Research. Why Whale Research? Tokyo: Toyomi Shinko, 2002.
US Census Bureau, Table 094, 2009, http://www.census.gov/cgi-bin/ipc/idbagg (accessed May
1, 2009).
Vagg, Robert. CMS Family Guide: Threats and Challenges. Bonn: Terrence Okorougo, 2008.
"Whales and Whaling." The Institute of Cetacean Research, 2007: 14.
Why Save Endangered Species? Arlington, Virginia: US Fish and Wildlife Service: Endangered
Species Program, 2005.
Wilson, E.O. The Diversity of Life. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1992.
Zedan, Hamdallah. "How the Convention on Biological Diversity promotes nature and human
well-being." Sustaining Life on Earth, April 2000: 1-14.