This March, McDonald's announced that it would phase out plastic straws in its UK restaurants, The Telegraph reported. But now its board of directors is dragging its feet about doing the same on this side of the pond.
On May 24, McDonald's shareholders will vote on a proposal to launch a study that would consider the "business risks" of continuing to use plastic straws in U.S. restaurants and look into alternatives, The Mercury News reported Monday.
<p>But the chain's board of directors is urging shareholders to vote no, saying the proposal would divert resources from their other environmental initiatives, such as a pledge made in January to source all packaging from renewable or recycled sources by 2025.</p><p>"[T]he requested report is unnecessary, redundant to our current practices and initiatives, and has the potential for a diversion of resources with no corresponding benefit to the company, our customers, and our shareholders, particularly in light of our ongoing packaging sustainability efforts," materials given to shareholders before the vote and reported by The Mercury News read.</p><p>The vote comes as activist group SumOfUs has gathered almost half-a-million signatures on a <a href="https://actions.sumofus.org/a/mcdonalds-is-polluting-our-oceans" target="_blank">petition</a> urging McDonald's to ban plastic straws worldwide. </p><p>"Plastic pollution is one of the biggest threats to our oceans and straws are one of the most common plastic items found in beach cleanups," Sondhya Gupta of SumOfUs told The Mercury News.</p><p>In fact, The Mercury News reported that plastic straws were the fifth most common beach trash item in the U.S., according to data compiled by 5-Gyres Institute. </p><p>The SumOfUs petition praised the UK phase-out, but said it wasn't enough. </p><p>"On 28 March 2018, McDonald's announced it is ditching plastic straws from its UK restaurants, phasing them out from May. This is great news, but we need McDonald's to stop using plastic straws worldwide, so keep signing and sharing!" an update added to the petition said. </p><p>McDonald's in the UK will begin offering paper straws at some restaurants in May, and will keep plastic straws behind the counter, available only upon request. </p><p>"Customers have told us that they don't want to be given a straw and that they want to have to ask for one, so we're acting on that," The Telegraph reported that McDonald's UK chief executive Paul Pomroy told Sky News. </p><p>But U.S. executives seem to have a different view, though they might not have a choice in the matter. </p><p>California is considering legislation that would ban restaurants from offering plastic straws unless specifically requested by the customer, The Mercury News reported. </p><p>McDonald's in the UK acted ahead of the UK government, which <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/uk-plastics-ban-2561478381.html" target="_self">announced plans</a> to ban single-use plastics including straws this April.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="4fcf1" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="SSXP3A1576661772"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="901084051473301504" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">#Seattle to Ban Plastic Straws, Utensils at Restaurants Next Year https://t.co/QWXBAQ8ktw @VanJones68 @greenpeaceusa @GreenpeaceUK @5gyres</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/901084051473301504">1503670153.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
iStock
President Trump has launched the most sweeping industrial assault in history on our oceans, marine life, coasts and all they support, proposing to expose nearly all U.S. waters to the risk of another BP oil spill–style disaster.
In a move that would put every American coastal community at risk, Trump proposed Thursday to hand over vast reaches of waters currently protected from drilling—in the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic oceans—to the oil and gas industry.
<p>If Trump gets his way, iconic fishing grounds like George's Bank, treasured recreational waters like the Florida Straits, and critical marine-breeding areas like those off the California coast would be exposed to the dangers of blowouts, explosions, catastrophic spills, seismic blasting and other perils that come with these inherently hazardous industrial operations at sea. We could see drill rigs going up in federal waters off our coasts from Maine to Florida, from California to Alaska, and everywhere in between.</p><p>Trump's proposal comes on the heels of two moves that needlessly increase those dangers. Over the holidays, the Trump administration proposed <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/trump-administration-to-overhaul-safety-monitoring-rules-for-offshore-drilling/2017/12/28/37cb40bc-ec20-11e7-9f92-10a2203f6c8d_story.html?tid=hybrid_collaborative_1_na&utm_term=.5f9d83cc2036" target="_blank">weakening offshore drilling and production safeguards</a> that grew directly from lessons learned from the BP disaster. And earlier in December, <a href="http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=12212017" target="_blank">the administration killed an independent study</a> needed to help modernize and strengthen responsible public oversight of oil and gas operations at sea. This three-front assault on our oceans and coasts is madness—and it's maddening.</p><p>We all remember the 2010 <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/stories/what-we-learned-bp-oil-spill" target="_blank">BP blowout</a> that killed 11 workers, dumped more than 200 million gallons of toxic crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico, and threw scores of thousands of people out of work. Watching oil gush into pristine ocean waters for 87 days while the industry fumbled, unable to stop it. The ghastly pictures of pelicans, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/dolphins">dolphins</a>, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/sea-turtles">turtles</a> and other <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/stories/how-deep-were-impacts-bp-oil-spill" target="_blank">marine life dying and coated in oil</a> that polluted more than 1,100 miles of coast. And the presidential commission that told us what went wrong and what we needed to do to prevent anything like it from happening again.</p><p>Trump wants us to forget all that and let the oil and gas industry have its way with our workers, waters and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildlife">wildlife</a>. Far from protecting us from the next BP-type disaster, he's increasing the odds of another one.</p><p>If Trump gets his way, we'll know less about the dangers of offshore drilling, we'll have fewer tools to reduce those risks, and we'll have more waters and coasts exposed to hazard and harm.</p><p>And for what? </p><p>The U.S. will produce <a href="https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec3_3.pdf" target="_blank">more crude oil today—9.2 million barrels—than at any other time since the early 1970s</a>. When you add natural gas liquids, which are refined much like crude oil, we're up to 12.9 million barrels a day, our highest level ever and up 90 percent over just the past decade. </p><p>To those who think oil is a national security commodity, we now export 6.2 million barrels of crude oil and refined petroleum products each day—up 343 percent since 2008. That's enough to meet a third of our daily demand, but the industry is shipping it overseas.</p><p>This isn't about national security or some speechwriter's pipe dreams of energy "dominance." It's about putting fossil fuel profits first—and putting the rest of us at risk. Its reckless. It's reprehensible. It's wrong.</p><p>There may be nothing more essential to the natural systems that support and sustain all life on earth than <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/issues/oceans" target="_blank">clean and healthy oceans</a>. Oil and gas production at sea puts all that at risk of blowouts, explosions, disastrous spills and the sonic blasts used in exploration that can be dangerous, even lethal, to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/whales">whales</a> and other marine life. Burning oil and gas creates carbon pollution that drives <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/stories/global-climate-change-what-you-need-know" target="_blank">climate change</a>—warming our oceans, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/sea-level-rise">raising sea levels</a>, and threatening our coastal communities. And much of that carbon pollution settles into our oceans, <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/stories/what-you-need-know-about-ocean-acidification?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIjIbm3Ju_2AIV2I-zCh2FYQHcEAAYASAAEgLLFfD_BwE" target="_blank">making our waters more acidic</a> and wreaking havoc on shellfish, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/coral-reefs">coral reefs</a> and other foundational forms of life at sea.</p><p>Protecting the waters that sustain life on our planet begins with ending our reliance on fossil fuels as quickly as possible, by investing in energy efficiency so we do more with less waste; modernizing our transportation systems; and getting more <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/renewable-energy/">clean power</a> from the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wind">wind</a> and <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/solar">sun</a>.</p><p>As we shift away from the dirty fuels of the past toward cleaner, smarter ways to power our future, we must limit, not expand, the waters that are exposed to the hazards of offshore drilling. And we must do everything we can to reduce the risks of what is, by its nature, dangerous work, by strengthening commonsense safeguards, not weakening them.</p><p>Trump is trying to take us in exactly the wrong direction. This, though, is not a done deal—far from it. These are public waters; they belong to you and me, and we have a say in their care. It's time for all of us to join with the <a href="http://usa.oceana.org/climate-and-energy/grassroots-opposition-offshore-drilling-and-exploration-atlantic-ocean-and#toc-municipalities-" target="_blank">hundreds of state, local, and federal elected officials, tens of thousands of business leaders, and half a million fishing families</a> who understand how much healthy oceans mean to us and want to protect these waters and all they support from the hazards and harm of offshore drilling.</p><p>Nobody voted for this reckless assault on our oceans. It's time we stood up to put a stop to it.</p><p><em>Rhea Suh is the president of the <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/" target="_blank">Natural Resources Defense Council</a>.</em><br></p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
The endangered gray wolf. Wikimedia Commons
The Republican-controlled 115th Congress has introduced at least 63 separate pieces of legislation that would strip federal protections for specific threatened species or undermine the U.S. Endangered Species Act, according to a new analysis from the Center for Biological Diversity. That's one such bill every six days in 2017 alone.
The majority of these bills were introduced by Republicans, the Center for Biological Diversity noted. Gray wolves, greater sage grouse and elephants were targeted the most.
<p>
“Republicans in Congress continue to attack the Endangered Species Act despite overwhelming support from Americans of all political stripes for this landmark conservation law," said Brett Hartl, government affairs director with the Center for Biological Diversity. “These attacks are designed to reward special interests that would plunder our natural resources even if it causes wildlife to go extinct."
</p><p>
Unfortunately, with
<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/" target="_blank">President Trump</a> in the White House, "these types of attacks are more likely to become law, severely harming our nation's imperiled wildlife," the Center for Biological Diversity warned.
</p><p>
In October, the Trump administration declined to list 25 species as endangered, noting that extra protection "is not warranted at this time." Environmental groups were <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/arctic-sea-ice-walrus-2474014630.html" target="_blank">particularly worried</a> for the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/pacific-walrus" target="_blank">Pacific walrus</a>—which has seen a dramatic loss of its Arctic sea ice habitat due to <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/" target="_blank">climate change</a>—being denied a listing.
</p><p>
The Endangered Species Act, passed by Congress four decades ago, is the nation's safety net for fish, plants and wildlife on the brink of extinction. More than 99 percent of species that have been designated for federal protection continue to exist in the wild today, including the bald eagle, grizzly bear, the leatherback <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/sea-turtles">sea turtle</a> and the Florida manatee.
</p><p>
<span></span>Nine out of 10 Americans support the Endangered Species Act and want it either strengthened or left unchanged by Congress.
</p><p>
<span></span>But a fervent group of Congress members have made it a priority to weaken or undermine this crucial conservation law. <a href="https://earthjustice.org/" target="_blank">Earthjustice</a> found that these lawmakers have all taken significant money from <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/endangered-species-act-2462536171.html" target="_blank">extractive industries</a> that have been frustrated by the law's protection of critical habitat for endangered species.
</p><p>
The Center of Biological Diversity keeps a <a href="http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/campaigns/esa_attacks/trumptable.html" target="_blank">running list</a> of legislative attacks against the Endangered Species Act and individual species. There have been 300 such pieces of legislation since 2011, when the Republicans took control of the House of Representatives.
</p><p>
"These radical attempts to gut the Endangered Species Act are totally out of step with what the American people want," said Hartl. "They want our government to do more to help species recover, not speed up their path to extinction."
</p><p>
<span></span>According to the conservation group, the most recent measure came on Dec. 18 and was tucked into an emergency funding bill designed to address damage from this year's devastating <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/hurricanes">hurricanes</a> and <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wildfires">wildfires</a>.
</p><p>
<span></span><a href="https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hr4667/BILLS-115hr4667ih.xml" target="_blank">Section 2029 of H.R. 4667</a>, introduced by Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen (R-N.J.), would exempt the Federal Emergency Management Agency from the Endangered Species Act, and "would allow it to approve risky developments in flood-prone areas even if it destroys critical habitat or kills endangered species like sea turtles, Pacific salmon and Florida Key deer," the Center for Biological Diversity said.
</p>
From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Support Ecowatch
Lawsuit Launched Against Trump EPA for Approving Fracking Waste Dumping Into Gulf of Mexico
08 December 2017
Popular
Bottlenose dolphins in the Gulf of Mexico. pmarkham / Flickr
The Center for Biological Diversity filed on Thursday a formal notice of intent to sue the Trump administration for allowing oil companies to dump waste from fracking and drilling into the Gulf of Mexico without evaluating the dangers to sea turtles, whales or other imperiled marine life.
In September the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized a Clean Water Act permit for new and existing offshore oil and gas platforms operating in federal waters off the coasts of Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. The permit allows oil companies to dump unlimited amounts of waste fluid, including chemicals involved in fracking, into the Gulf of Mexico.
<p style="">"The Trump administration is letting the oil industry turn our <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/oceans">oceans</a> into toxic-waste dumps. The EPA's supposed to protect water quality, not help pollute the Gulf," said Kristen Monsell, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. "It's time for the courts to remind this agency that its mission is to safeguard the environment and public health."</p><p style="">Thursday's notice letter highlighted the fact that the agency's approval of the permit without studying risks to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/endangered-species">imperiled species</a> in the Gulf of Mexico is a violation of the federal Endangered Species Act.</p><p style="">Fracking chemicals and other contaminants in produced water raise grave ecological concerns because the Gulf of Mexico provides important habitat for whales, sea turtles and fish—as well as being federally designated critical habitat for imperiled loggerhead sea turtles. <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/dolphins">Dolphins</a> and other species in the Gulf are still suffering the lingering destructive effects of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill.</p><p style="">Federal waters off Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi host the largest concentration of offshore oil and gas drilling activities in the country. Previous records requests revealed that oil companies dumped more than 75 billion gallons of <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/wastewater">wastewater</a> into these waters in 2014 alone. Records also show that fracking has been on the rise in the Gulf of Mexico, and the EPA has failed to conduct any meaningful review of the environmental impacts of dumping fracking waste into the water.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="cdc96" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="B1E2ZU1576663085"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="885981022248194048" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Stop Dumping Offshore Fracking Waste Into Gulf of Mexico https://t.co/CqOVFWkVQn @Frack_Off @FrackAction</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/885981022248194048">1500069311.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p>
<p>In October the Trump administration announced plans to auction off more than 76 million acres of Gulf of Mexico waters to oil companies. That lease sale, which is scheduled for March 2018, will be the largest oil sale in U.S. history. It includes federal waters off the coasts of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and Florida and could vastly expand drilling and fracking in the Gulf.</p><p>"Only the courts can stop Trump's assault on our oceans," Monsell said. "Oil-industry pollution was already a problem in the Gulf, but this administration isn't even trying to protect wildlife from fracking chemicals. We need to fight back on behalf of marine wildlife."</p><p style="">At least 10 fracking chemicals routinely used in offshore fracking could kill or harm a broad variety of marine species, including marine mammals and fish, Center for Biological Diversity scientists have <a href="https://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2014/fracking-09-11-2014.html" target="_blank">found</a>. The California Council on Science and Technology has identified some common fracking chemicals to be among the most <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/toxics">toxic</a> in the world to marine animals.</p><p style="">Today's 60-day notice of intent to sue is required before a lawsuit can be filed to compel the federal government to comply with the Endangered Species Act.</p>
Read More
Show Less
Trending
Lobster With Pepsi Can 'Tattoo' Embodies Fears About Ocean Waste: Here Are 5 More Examples
01 December 2017
Animals
Karissa Lindstrand
By Joe McCarthy
It's safe to say that lobsters aren't a budding new demographic for soda companies.
So why did a lobster recently caught in the waters off Grand Manan, New Brunswick, have part of a Pepsi logo tattooed on its claw?
<p style="">That's a question that baffled Karissa Lindstrand, the fisherman who spotted the uncanny image during a lobster haul, <a href="https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/david-attenborough-blue-planet-ii-litter-ocean/" target="_blank">according to the Guardian</a>. Lindstrand happens to drink up to a dozen Pepsi sodas a day, but she was struck by the image's unusual dimensions.</p><p style="">It was pixelated, she told the Guardian, and far too big to be seen on a soda can—theoretically debunking claims that the lobster grew up in a can. She's not the only one to question how the logo got there. Since the image went viral, it's sparked a debate on how a lobster became an unwitting mascot of a soda giant, the Guardian noted.</p><p>Lindstrand, for example, thinks that ink from a piece of paper somehow fused to the lobster's claw.</p><p style="">One thing, however, is clear to everyone—<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/plastics">plastic</a> pollution in the world's <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/oceans">oceans</a> has reached a crisis level.</p><p style="">Each year, an estimated <a href="https://www.plasticoceans.org/the-facts/" target="_blank">eight million metric tons</a> of plastic enter the oceans each year, which is like emptying a garbage truck of plastic into an ocean every minute.</p><p style="">This pollution affects <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/marine-life">marine life</a> in a number of ways, <a href="https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/photos-plastic-pollution-caribbean-sea/" target="_blank">according to experts</a>, by poisoning animals, choking them, entangling them, causing deformities, and through other consequences.</p><p>Because these problems are taking place in the oceans, they're largely out-of-sight. Until, that is, a strange or grotesque image that distills the issue goes viral.</p><p style="">That's what happened with the Pepsi lobster. And that's what happened to these other animals.</p><p style=""><strong>1. Turtle With Straw Stuck in Its Nose</strong></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-youtube">
<span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="4c966e89f42450e9ee99a422fc5b9c46"><iframe type="lazy-iframe" data-runner-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4MPHbpmP6_I?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
</p><p style="">Billions of plastic straws are used each day and the vast majority are thrown away, never to be reused. A lot of this waste gets washed into the oceans, where it threatens marine life.<br></p><p style="">One of these straws got stuck in a <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/sea-turtles">sea turtle</a>'s nose, causing pain and impairing its breathing.</p><p style=""><strong>2. Otter With a Cable Tie Around Its Neck</strong></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="71528" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="FNEJT61576663880"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="934809659768213504" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">This #otter was spotted in a #Dorset river yesterday - the cable tie is not a fashion accessory. Discarded waste ca… https://t.co/7jaOPEQoxk</div> — UK Wild Otter Trust (@UK Wild Otter Trust)<a href="https://twitter.com/WildOtterTrust/statuses/934809659768213504">1511710965.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p style="">Cable ties can be hard to loosen if you don't have the right tools or the right knowledge. Otters are probably not savvy enough to manipulate cable ties, so when <a href="https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/otter-plastic-cable-tie-neck-uk/" target="_blank">this otter was spotted with one tied around its neck</a>, it caused concern that the creature was endangered. People feared that either the cable tie could get stuck on something, causing the otter to drown, or it could unintentionally tighten, causing the otter to suffocate.</p><p style="">Either way, the cable tie should never have been in Britain's River Stour in the first place. </p><p style=""><strong>3. Turtle Tangled in a Net</strong></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image" style="">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xNjE5NjI4MC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxODI3Njk1N30.KopKybk5dePFmcwG7BEH6Qocj7PHnu6Ixj2yyGh2UBM/img.png?width=980" id="b23e6" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="c9826462298ed1ac1f16bf4016a2a9ab" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">WWF / Michael Gunther</small></p><p style="">When fishing nets are discarded in oceans, they don't stop catching creatures. In fact, up to 300,000 small <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/whales">whales</a>, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/dolphins">dolphins</a>, and porpoises <a href="https://www.worldwildlife.org/threats/bycatch" target="_blank">get entangled and killed</a> by discarded nets each year. The single biggest threat to sea turtles, <a href="https://www.worldwildlife.org/threats/bycatch" target="_blank">according to the World Wildlife Fund</a>, is bycatch, including discarded nets. </p><p style="">Many creatures get entangled in nets while they're young and become deformed or injured as the net constrains their growth later in life.</p><p style="">This turtle was severely entangled but was lucky enough to be cut free. </p><p style=""><strong>4. Birds Feeding on Plastic Waste</strong></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image" style="">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xNjE5NjkzNS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyODU2NTg4Mn0.4MIoU5BxEVDVTLtUntpci3gGKbIMqoFAZHsn1dSUK1U/img.jpg?width=980" id="ba533" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8ccac5e5e4d3122d897b576340678dad" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
<small class="image-media media-photo-credit" placeholder="add photo credit...">Greenpeace UK</small></p><p>As the world's oceans get simultaneously <a href="https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/this-un-proposal-could-save-the-fishing-industry-b/" target="_blank">plumbed of fish</a> and filled with plastic, many creatures that depend on oceans for food eat plastic waste by mistake.</p><p style="">While David Attenborough's "Blue Planet II" team was filming, <a href="https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/david-attenborough-blue-planet-ii-litter-ocean/" target="_blank">they captured a sad sight</a>—a bird feeding its young a piece of plastic.</p><p style="">Birds throughout the world die from consuming plastic because it can clog their stomachs or leach <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/toxics">poisons</a> into their bodies.</p><p style=""><strong>5. Whale With Plastic Bags in Its Stomach</strong></p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8xNjE5NzExMC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwNjYzNzA1NX0.KTvtxUkwJ8Yhd_RmFwqB-Ijkd8w1Q6NxZ8JubTlsoY8/img.jpg?width=980" id="8922c" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="542deafaaa13c730288d1ab0c2e1c786" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image">
</p><p style="">Creatures of all sizes can accidentally ingest plastic as they search for food. When a <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/whale-dead-plastic-bags-2242936742.html">dying and emaciated whale was found off the coast of Norway</a>, scientists and locals were shocked but not surprised to find more than 30 <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/plastic-bags">plastic bags</a> in the whale's stomachs. The bags were thought to have obstructed the whale's digestive system, causing it to starve. <br></p>
Read More
Show Less
Mexico Creates Vast Marine Sanctuary Around 'Galápagos Islands of North America'
27 November 2017
Animals
Mexico has created North America's largest marine park—the size of Illinois—in the Pacific Ocean to protect hundreds of species including rays, whales and sea turtles, an area referred as the Galápagos Islands of North America.
<p style="">The announcement on Friday by Mexico's president Enrique Peña Nieto fulfilled an October promise to transform a 57,000-square mile swath of ocean holding four islands into a protected area. Mexico's National Commission of Protected Natural Areas took the largely uninhabited, volcanic islands 240 miles southwest of Baja California, and expanded a small reserve that extended six miles off their shores. The expansion came one year after the vast rectangular territory was declared a <a href="http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1510/" target="_blank">UNESCO world heritage</a> site. </p><p style="">Previously, the six-mile strip of protection didn't offer sanctuary to a variety of species in the path of fishers, leaving sharks, rays and whales as either commercial fishing bycatch or targets of illegal fishing. Friday's announcement means all fishing activities will be banned within the protected expanse.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="b5936" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="GMH22G1576663973"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="934218187624689664" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Con el Decreto del Parque Nacional Revillagigedo, el @gobmx reafirma su compromiso con la conservación del patrimon… https://t.co/JAlEWIiMwi</div> — Enrique Peña Nieto (@Enrique Peña Nieto)<a href="https://twitter.com/EPN/statuses/934218187624689664">1511569947.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p style="">On shore, the Mexican president's decree will ban the extraction of natural resources and construction of hotel infrastructure on all four islands. The Mexican Navy will maintain a small presence on the islands.</p><p style="">The Environment Ministry and Navy "will carry out surveillance, equipment and training activities that will include remote monitoring in real time, environmental education directed at fishermen and sanctions against offenders," <a href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-42120610" target="_blank">said President Peña Nieto in his announcement</a>.</p><p style="">The move was described as an "important precedent" by María José Villanueva, the director of conservation of WWF in Mexico, <a href="http://noticieros.televisa.com/ultimas-noticias/nacional/2017-11-24/reto-parque-nacional-revillagigedo-es-operacion-efectiva-wwf/" target="_blank">according to local media</a>. </p><p style=""> "With the goal of guaranteeing maximum protection of this World Heritage Site, our national legislation's strongest conservation category will be used, and all forms of fishing will be prohibited," Alejandro Del Mazo Maza, a representative of Mexico's National Commission of Protected Natural Areas, <a href="https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/10/mexico-revillagigedo-oceans-pristine-seas-conservation-environment-spd/" target="_blank">said in an October statement</a>. </p><p style=""> Commercial fishing interests met the statement with criticism given that the expansion will affect seven percent of the Mexico tuna fleet's Pacific range. </p><p style="">But there is a flip side for commercial fishing. Since the waters lie on the convergence of two ocean currents, the islands' waters are a gathering point for migratory species. It is hoped that the newly afforded status will help populations recover from commercial and illegal fishing's damage. This will mean an increase in fish stocks. The growing fish populations will likely spill over into commercial waters—in effect mimicking what happened in Galápagos when the Ecuadorian government enacted a similar ban on fishing in 1998, turning adversaries into supporters.</p><p style="">The protection status is also <a href="https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2017/10/mexico-revillagigedo-oceans-pristine-seas-conservation-environment-spd/" target="_blank">expected</a> to boost the dive industry, already worth an annual $15 million.</p>
Read More
Show Less
Zinke Recommends Opening Up Pacific National Monuments to Commercial Fishing
07 November 2017
Popular
The Trump administration is considering cutting protections for two national monuments lying south of Hawaii in the central Pacific. The decision, scientists warn, will threaten reefs across the Pacific.
The move, according to a memo from Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke obtained by the Washington Post in September, would "allow commercial fishing" in the Pacific Remote Islands National Marine Monument and the Rose Atoll National Marine Monument.
<p>The monuments, both created by former president Bush, protect the waters of a scattering of mostly uninhabited Islands south of Hawaii. </p><p>Although the shore reefs of these islands have long enjoyed protection from commercial fishing, the monument designations extended that protection between 50 and 200 miles from shore.</p><p>For marine biologists, these marine reserves are among the last untouched, vibrant ecosystems where scientists can study the effects of climate change without the interference of variables such as fishing and pollution.</p><p>But this hasn't stopped the fishing industry from pursuing a drastic change to the two monuments. An obscure, quasi-governmental, Honolulu-based organization called the <a href="Western%2520Pacific%2520Fishery%2520Management%2520Council" target="_blank">Western Pacific Fishery Management Council</a>, or Wespac, is influencing the administration's reconsideration of the monuments' protections.</p><p>Over the years, Wespac has opposed the creation and expansion of marine monuments. Instead, the group has argued that limits on catch, gear and fishing seasons are the best regulatory tools to ensure the maximum sustainable yields.</p><p>In 2017, Wespac unveiled a new <a href="http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/management/councils/ccc/2017/feb/tab8-marine-monuments-fishing-restrictions-acc.pdf" target="_blank">slogan</a>: "Make America Great Again: Return U.S. fisherman to U.S. waters." In a <a href="http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/sfa/management/councils/ccc/2017/feb/tab8-marine-monuments-fishing-restrictions-acc.pdf" target="_blank">presentation</a> to other fishery councils in February, Wespac officials claimed the monuments "compromised national food security." </p><p>The New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/30/science/trump-zinke-pacific-marine-reserves.html" target="_blank">noted</a> that the Hawaii fishing fleet's catch has doubled since 2006.</p><p>Many <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/shrink-at-least-4-national-monuments-and-modify-a-half-dozen-others-zinke-tells-trump/2017/09/17/a0df45cc-9b48-11e7-82e4-f1076f6d6152_story.html?utm_term=.304da320370d" target="_blank">scientists</a> see marine reserves as crucial to the health of surrounding waters, giving fishing populations the space they need to grow. </p><p>The consideration to remove the monuments' protections came just weeks before scientists from the <a href="https://www.nature.org/" target="_blank">Nature Conservancy</a> briefed Hawaii <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwimrqf936zXAhWI1IMKHWMyACkQFggrMAE&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.voanews.com%2Fa%2Fhawaii-coral-reef-bleaching%2F4099707.html&usg=AOvVaw3sd5swunVxRmJfvwMuY4p7" target="_blank">lawmakers</a> on the unprecedented state of Hawaii's <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/marine-life">ocean life</a>. The briefing, given last Thursday, noted that nearly half of Hawaii's coral reefs were <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/coral-bleaching">bleached</a> between 2014 and 2015, while fisheries experienced a 90 percent decline in overall catch from the last 100 years, a decline partly attributed to overfishing.</p><p>Coral reefs, while occupying less than 0.2 percent of the world's oceans, host more than 35 percent of all known marine <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-017-08729-w" target="_blank">species</a>. </p><p>These fragile ecosystems already face serious threats from destructive fishing activities and water pollution. </p><p>Recent years have thrown their fragility into relief. An <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwin5c6I4azXAhUG04MKHRLTA7MQFgg3MAM&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.noaa.gov%2Fmedia-release%2Fglobal-coral-bleaching-event-likely-ending&usg=AOvVaw1xGYD5_hkgqPZZ_71mZ1W2" target="_blank">estimated 70 percent of coral reefs</a> around the globe experienced prolonged high temperatures that can lead to bleaching events.</p><div class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="88e97f69c0dca2b39a8911c91bbc8393"><div class="fb-video" data-href="https://www.facebook.com/USFWSPacific/videos/507017269662895/" data-allowfullscreen="true"></div></div>
Read More
Show Less