chess online
| From | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
 TerribleBy JACOB HERIN | Associated Press – 6 hrs agoEmailtweetShare10PrintRelated In this May 15, 2010, a Pinnate … KOMODO ISLAND, Indonesia (AP) — Coral gardens that were among Asia's most spectacular, teeming with colorful sea life just a few months ago, have been transformed into desolate gray moonscapes by illegal fishermen who use explosives or cyanide to kill or stun their prey. The site is among several to have been hit inside Komodo National Park, a 500,000-acre reserve in eastern Indonesia that spans several dusty, tan-colored volcanic islands. The area is most famous for its Komodo dragons — the world's largest lizards — and its remote and hard-to-reach waters also burst with staggering levels of diversity, from corals in fluorescent reds and yellows to octopuses with lime-green banded eyes to black-and-blue sea snakes. Dive operators and conservationists say Indonesia's government is not doing enough to keep illegal fishermen out of the boundaries of the national park, a U.N. World Heritage site. They say enforcement declined greatly following the exit two years ago of a U.S.-based environmental group that helped fight destructive fishing practices. Local officials disagree, pointing to dozens of arrests and several deadly gunbattles with suspects. Michael Ishak, a scuba instructor and professional underwater photographer who has made hundreds of trips to the area, said he's seen more illegal fishermen than ever this year. The pictures, he said, speak for themselves. When Ishak returned last month to one of his favorite spots, Tatawa Besar, known for its colorful clouds of damselfish, basslets and hawksbill sea turtles, he found that a 500-square-meter (600-square-yard) section of the reef had been obliterated. Many smaller patches were destroyed elsewhere at the site. "At first I thought, 'This can't be right. I must have jumped in the wrong place,'" he said, adding he swam back and forth to make sure he hadn't made a mistake. "But it was true. All the hard coral had just been blasted, ripped off, turned upside down. Some of it was still alive. I've never seen anything like it." The national park's corals are supposed to be protected, but fishermen are drawn there by locally popular fish like fusiliers and high-value export species like groupers and snappers. Fishermen can be seen in small wooden boats, some using traditional nets or lines. Others are blasting sites with "bombs" — fertilizer and kerosene mixed in beer bottles. Breathing through tubes connected to air compressors at the surface, young men plunge to the bottom and use squeeze bottles to squirt cyanide into the coral to stun and capture fish. Dive operators are increasingly seeing dead fish on the sea floor or floating on the surface. "The biggest problem is that fishermen seem to be free to come into Komodo, completely ignoring the zoning and resource use regulations," said Jos Pet, a fisheries scientist who has worked with numerous marine conservation groups in the area in recent years. He said they are "quite simply fishing empty this World Heritage Site." Sustyo Iriyono, the head of the park, said problems are being exaggerated and denied claims of lax enforcement. He said rangers have arrested more than 60 fishermen over the past two years, including a group of young men captured last month after they were seen bombing fish in waters in the western part of the park. One of the suspects was shot and killed after the fishermen tried to escape by throwing fish bombs at the rangers, Iriyono said. Three others, including a 13-year-old, were slightly injured. "You see?" said Iriyono. "No one can say I'm not acting firmly against those who are destroying the dive spots!" He added that the park is one of the few places where fish bombing is monitored with any regularity in Indonesia, a Southeast Asian nation of more than 17,000 islands. Divers, however, say enforcement has dropped dramatically since 2010, when the government reclaimed sole control of operations. For two decades before that, The Nature Conservancy, a U.S.-based nonprofit, had helped the government confront destructive fishing practices there. "No-take zones" were created, protecting spawning areas, and coastal areas also were put off limits. Patrols using park rangers, navy personnel and local police were key to enforcement. In 2005, the government gave a 30-year permit to Putri Naga Komodo, a nonprofit joint venture company partially funded by The Nature Conservancy and the World Bank to operate tourist facilities in hopes of eventually making the park financially self-sustaining. Entrance and conservation fees — just a few dollars at the time — went up several tenfold for foreign tourists. With around 30,000 local and international visitors annually at the time, that would have given the park a budget of well over $1 million, but outraged government officials demanded that the funds go directly into the state budget. The deal collapsed in 2010, when Putri Naga Komodo's permit was yanked. "They had no right to directly collect the entrance fees from the tourists," said Novianto Bambang, a Forestry Ministry official. Dive operators and underwater photographers have asked The Nature Conservancy and similar organizations like WWF Indonesia, to return to Komodo and help with conservation efforts there. Nature Conservancy representative Arwandridja Rukma did not address that possibility, saying even though it was heartwarming to see so much concern about this "national treasure," it only takes part in projects at the invitation of the government. |
||
|
horrible |
||
|
Jeff |
||
|
zor-n-jeff |
||
|
onerous as those for murder of a human! |
||
|
dmaestro 20-Apr-12, 18:47 |
A recent article on the subject: =========================== The rich really are different from the rest of us, scientists have found - they are more likely to commit unethical acts because they are more motivated by greed. People driving expensive cars were more likely than other motorists to cut off drivers and pedestrians at a four-way-stop intersection in the San Francisco Bay Area, researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, observed. Those findings led to a series of experiments that revealed that people of higher socioeconomic status were also more likely to cheat to win a prize, take candy from children and say they would pocket extra change handed to them in error rather than give it back. Because rich people have more financial resources, they're less dependent on social bonds for survival, the researchers reported Monday in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. As a result, their self-interest reigns and they have fewer qualms about breaking the rules. "If you occupy a more insular world, you're less likely to be sensitive to the needs of others," said study lead author Paul Piff, who is studying for a doctorate in psychology. But before those in the so-called 99 percent start feeling ethically superior, consider this: Piff and his colleagues also discovered that anyone's ethical standards could be prone to slip if they suddenly won the lottery and joined the top 1 percent. "There is a strong notion that when people don't have much, they're really looking out for themselves and they might act unethically," said Scott Wiltermuth, who researches social status at USC's Marshall School of Business and wasn't involved in the study. "But actually, it's the upper-class people that are less likely to see that people around them need help - and therefore act unethically." In earlier studies, Piff documented that wealthy people were less likely to act generously than relatively impoverished people. With this research, he hoped to find out whether wealthy people would also prioritize self-interest if it meant breaking the rules. Help us speak truth to power. Donate what you can afford to support NationofChange. The driving experiments offered a way to test the hypothesis "naturalistically," he said. Trained observers hid near a downtown Berkeley intersection and noted the makes, model years and conditions of bypassing cars. Then they recorded whether drivers waited their turn. It turned out that people behind the wheels of the priciest cars were four times as likely as drivers of the least expensive cars to enter the intersection when they didn't have the right of way. The discrepancy was even greater when it came to a pedestrian trying to exercise a right of way. There is a significant correlation between the price of a car and the social class of its driver, Piff said. Still, how fancy a car looks isn't a perfect indicator of wealth. So back in the laboratory, Piff and his colleagues conducted five more tests to measure unethical behavior - and to connect that behavior to underlying attitudes toward greed. For example, the team used a standard questionnaire to get college students to assess their own socioeconomic status and asked how likely subjects were to behave unethically in eight different scenarios. In one of the quandaries, students were asked to imagine that they bought coffee and a muffin with a $10 bill but were handed change for a $20. Would they keep the money? In another hypothetical scenario, students realized their professor made a mistake in grading an exam and gave them an A instead of the B they deserved. Would they ask for a grade change? The patterns from the road held true in the lab - those most willing to engage in unethical behavior were the ones with the highest social status. One possible explanation was that wealthy people are simply more willing to acknowledge their selfish sides. But that wasn't the issue here. When test subjects of any status were asked to imagine themselves at a high social rank, they helped themselves to more candies from a jar they were told was meant for children in another lab. Another experiment recruited people from Craigslist to play a "game of chance" that the researchers had rigged. People who reported higher social class were more likely to have favorable attitudes toward greed - and were more likely to cheat at the game. "The patterns were just so consistent," Piff said. "It was very, very compelling." Piff, who is writing a paper about attitudes toward the Occupy movement, said that his team had been accused of waging class warfare from time to time. "Berkeley has a certain reputation, so yeah, we get that," he said. But rather than vilify the wealthy, Piff said, he hopes his work leads to policies that help bridge the gap between the haves and have-nots. Acts as simple as watching a movie about childhood poverty seem to encourage people of all classes to help others in need, he said. |
||
|
greed furthermore, weren't they just doing what capitalist corporations have been doing for centuries? raping the earth for profit? how is this different from mountain top coal mining in the appalachians, clear cutting the amazon, drift netting the oceans, clubbing seals, strip mining lithium in congo, dumping nuclear and chemical waste in mine shafts or into the deep ocean, or any one of thousands of atrocious environmental acts that capitalist corporations commit every day in the name of economic growth and profit? it is not, except that it was done by, most likely, small time, poor fishermen rather than halliburton, dole, shell, or at&t. wake up. this is what capitalism demands. and gets. and why we are doomed. |
||
|
dmaestro 20-Apr-12, 19:15 |
Well... The Indonesian government is pocketing the money from tourists but not adequately policing the area. And the fishermen do what they can to make a good living, criminal or not. Corporations would do the same thing in a heartbeat if they think they can get away with it. Profits all around. |
||
|
zero be "any raping the earth for profit, or mountain top coal mining in the appalachians, or clear cutting the amazon, or drift netting the oceans, or clubbing seals, or strip mining lithium in congo, or dumping nuclear and chemical waste in mine shafts or into the deep ocean, or any one of thousands of other atrocious environmental acts"? In your socialist utopia, people will be rich, well feed, never or hardly ever sick, have plenty of heating oil & gasoline, grocery store shelves will always be fully stocked, people will work only 20 hours per week, have 6 months of vacation, and get paid an 80% of highest salary for a retirement pension at age 55. Somehow your socialist heaven will be clear, clean, and renewable? How is that possible? Will you just "poof" your magic wand and it will be so? To see how stupid that is, just compare Eastern Europe during the Soviet Union occupation with Western Europe, or compare North Korea with South Korea. Please explain how socialism is better than capitalism for the environment, human freedom & liberty, or living standards for the public. The difference is that capitalists realize they need to protect and preserve their resources for the long term whereas totalitarian governments do not believe such. In capitalistic countries we do have environmental protection laws (some very strict) which have come a long way to protecting and healing the environment. It is the same philosophy as with sport hunters and fishers... some of the best protectors of our wildlife. What you are promoting does sound good. Too bad it is not true and will never work. Look at Greece and look at Spain as examples of socialism that doesn't work. |
||
|
softy nice straw man though. set 'em up, knock 'em down - so much easier than thinking. <capitalists realize they need to protect and preserve their resources for the long term> did you really say this? <Look at Greece and look at Spain as examples of socialism that doesn't work.> these are capitalist countries, btw. softy - really - i cannot argue with you any more. you do not understand anything about the way the world works, your knowledge of history is nil, and your pre-conceived notions borrowed from newsmax and faux news make it impossible for you to think. i know you are a good person, but expecting logic or reality based argument from you is just silly. have a nice day. |
||
|
Jeff |
||
|
stinky A growing number of people are recognizing that in order to secure the clean air, water and food that we need to healthfully survive, we must become guardians of the places where we live. People sense the loss in not knowing our neighbors and natural surroundings, and are discovering that the best way to take care of ourselves and to get to know our neighbors is to protect and restore our bioregion. Bioregionalism recognizes, nurtures, sustains and celebrates our local connections with: Land, Plants and Animals, Springs, Rivers, Lakes, Groundwater & Oceans, Air, Families, Friends, Neighbors, Community, Native Traditions and Indigenous Systems of Production & Trade. It is taking the time to learn the possibilities of place. It is a mindfulness of local environment, history, and community aspirations that leads to a sustainable future. It relies on safe and renewable sources of food and energy. It ensures employment by supplying a rich diversity of services within the community, by recycling our resources, and by exchanging prudent surpluses with other regions. Bioregionalism is working to satisfy basic needs locally, such as education, health care and self-governance. The bioregional perspective recreates a widely-shared sense of regional identity founded upon a renewed critical awareness of and respect for the integrity of our ecological communities. People are joining with neighbors to discuss ways we can work together to: 1. Learn what our special local resources are 2. Plan how to best protect and use those natural and cultural resources 3. Exchange our time and energy to best meet our daily and long-term needs 4. Enrich our children’s local and planetary knowledge wp.bioregionalcongress.net |
||
|
... second, most folks are much more pessimistic about humankind's collective ability to cooperate on such measures and considerations. Who would police it? Which country's premises would prevail? How would "penalties" be enforced? Would there be agreement upon virtually ANY plan that would be presented? |
||
|
chaz |
||
|
FANTASTIC IDEA, Jeff |
||
|
The problem soft Zor: It looks to me like this Bioregional Congress organization if full of a bunch of talented teachers who are well versed in the art of developing a really good learning atmosphere. They appear to be politically aspired and I was happy to see that their arguments are not always bio-"environmentally" driven. They certainly sound worthy of listening to. |
||
|
Jeff |
||
|
stinky Wendell Berry, American Hero By MARK BITTMAN The sensibility of Wendell Berry, who is sometimes described as a modern day Thoreau but who I’d call the soul of the real food movement, leads people like me on a path to the door of the hillside house he shares with his wife, Tanya, outside of Port Royal, Ky. Everything is as the pilgrim would have it: Wendell (he’s a one-name icon, like Madonna, but probably in that respect only) is kind and welcoming, all smiles. He quotes Pope (“Consult the genius of the place in all”), Spenser, Milton and Stegner, and answers every question patiently and articulately. He doesn’t patronize. We sit alone, uninterrupted through the morning, for two or three hours. Tanya is at church; when it’s time, he turns on the oven, as she requested before leaving. He seems positively yogic, or maybe it’s just this: How often do I sit in long, quiet conversation? Wendell has this effect. Tanya returns around noon, and their daughter, Mary, arrives shortly thereafter. (Mary lives nearby, runs a winery, and is engaged in enough food and farm justice issues to impress Wendell Berry.) We eat. It’s all local, food they or their neighbors or friends or family have grown or raised, food that Tanya has cooked. There’s little fuss about any of that, only enjoyment and good eating. I note that I can’t stop devouring the corn bread, and that the potatoes have the kind of taste of the earth that floors you. And we chat, and then Wendell takes me for a drive around the countryside he was born in and where he’s lived for most of his life. As he waves to just about every driver on the road, he explains that the land was once home to scores of tobacco farmers, and now has patches of forest, acres of commodity crops and farms where people do what the land tells them to. That’s one of Wendell’s recurring themes: Listen to the land. There really is not that much to see until I try to see it through Wendell’s eyes, and then every bit of erosion becomes a tiny tragedy — or at least a human’s mistake — and every bit of forest floor becomes a bit of the genius of nature. (If you imitate nature, he’s said, you’ll use the land wisely.) He knows the land the way I know the stops on the Lexington Avenue subway line and, predictably, I begin feeling like the fairly techie city person I am and wonder if it could have been otherwise. I have friends who back-to-the-landed it in the late ’60s and early ’70s, and a couple of them stuck it out. Although one of them seems to have disappeared somewhere near Leadville, Colo., another — urban as he was in the beginning — has gained the same kind of wisdom Wendell has, a sense of patience and understanding, a kind of calm despite full awareness of the storm. Genuine and as much of a product of place as Wendell is, he’s not a full-time farmer and never was, but a farm-raised intellectual and even a man of the world. I’d never heard of him the first time I read his work — probably in Harper’s, probably in the ’80s — but his words have changed my life. As the years have gone by, I’ve watched his stature change. If he’s not a leader then he’s an inspiration to those who are. In any case, he’s in Port Royal now, and has been for decades (his family has been here for 200 years), and there is something about his attachment to nature — it’s not just the land but everything on the land — that is so profound that his observations and his judgments (Wendell is a kind but very judgmental man) can be jaw-dropping. If you read or listen to Wendell and aren’t filled with admiration and respect, it’s hard to believe that you might admire and respect the land or nature, or even humanity. In Washington this past Monday, Wendell delivered the 2012 Jefferson Lecture, the highest honor the federal government has for “distinguished intellectual achievement” in the humanities. He titled the talk “It All Turns on Affection.” When I visited him last month he told me that preparing the talk “taxed him greatly,” and I can see why. It’s incredibly ambitious, tying together E.M. Forster’s “Howard’s End,” the history of his family and the country around it, and — to summarize it rather crudely — the costs of capitalism’s abuse of humans and land. I doubt there is a more quotable man in the United States. (You can readily see this by reading the text of the talk, or by visiting this lovely page of Wendell Berry quotes.) Monday, he spoke of the “mechanical indifference” of a financial trust, that it had the “indifference of a grinder to what it grinds,” saying, “It did not intend to victimize its victims. It simply followed its single purpose of the highest possible profit, and ignored the ‘side effects.’” This from a poet and an essayist who, by following his love of the land and its people, describes the current state of affairs as accurately and succinctly as anyone on earth: “The two great aims of industrialism — replacement of people by technology and concentration of wealth into the hands of a small plutocracy — seem close to fulfillment.” I knew that Wendell and I agreed on these things when I went to visit him. Oddly, I felt, as I imagine others have in making the same trip, as if I were seeking wisdom. Indeed, Wendell’s thoughtfulness and perception, combined with his outside-ness and demeanor (if anyone could persuade me to start worshiping, it would be Wendell), makes this only natural. We spoke, as I said, for hours, and my two big questions for him were, essentially, “How are we going to change this?” and “What can city people do?” He makes it clear that he doesn’t think anything is going to happen quickly, except perhaps the possible catastrophe that lurks in the minds of everyone who believes the earth to be overstressed. “You can describe the predicament that we’re in as an emergency,” he says, “and your trial is to learn to be patient in an emergency.” Change, he says, is going to come from “people at the bottom” doing things differently. “[N]o great feat is going to happen to change all this; you’re going to have to humble yourself to be willing to do it one little bit at a time. You can’t make people do this. What you have to do is notice that they’re already doing it.” Then he takes me to the barn, where there are seven newborn lambs. And he says, “When you are new at sheep-raising and your ewe has a lamb, your impulse is to stay there and help it nurse and see to it and all. After a while you know that the best thing you can do is walk out of the barn.” We walk out of the barn, and say goodbye. Three hours later, my phone rings. (Wendell, famously, does not own a computer.) “Mark,” he says. “I’ve been thinking about that question about what city people can do. The main thing is to realize that country people can’t invent a better agriculture by ourselves. Industrial agriculture wasn’t invented by us, and we can’t uninvent it. We’ll need some help with that.” |
Log in 
