The U.S. Geological Survey said on Tuesday in Johannesburg that 5.3 magnitude earthquake has hit central South Africa killing one man.
It said the man died when a wall collapsed on top of him.
It said the tremor was centered in Orkney, a town around 120 km (70 miles) southwest of Johannesburg, an area with a high concentration of deep gold mines.
Werner Vermaak, spokesman for South Africa Emergency Service Provider ER24, said the buildings collapsed on the man believed to be in his 30s.
He there was nothing the paramedics could do for him when they arrived.
ER24 and South African rescue services confirmed that no miners were trapped underground, alleviating earlier concerns that workers were stuck in shafts.
Phoka Sefali, a Receptionist at a hospital in Orkney, confirmed that three people were hurt when the quake damaged a training center at a mine.
“The roof fell on them, but they haven’t got serious injuries’’, he said.
Sefali said the hospital staff members were on standby, awaiting the outcome of safety checks on miners who were underground at the time of the earthquake.
Lindy Sirayi, a guesthouse owner in Orkney, said the tremor, which lasted about a minute, broke glass lampshades and cracked walls.
Officials at AngloGold Ashanti, Harmony Gold, Gold Fields and Sibanye Gold said they had felt the tremors in their headquarters but had so far received no reports of anything untoward in their mines.
They said the area around Johannesburg was not prone to seismic activity “but it is home to some of the deepest gold mines in the world.’’
The officials said the quake was the largest in the southern Africa region since a 7.0 tremor in Zimbabwe in 2006, as it was also felt in Pretoria, the South African capital, and Hartbeespoort, a nearby resort town. (Reuters)
One of the medical officers that attended to late Ebola victim, Liberian-born Patrick Sawyer, has died after she became infected with the virus.
The nurse came into direct contact with the late Liberian-American man, according to officials of the Federal Government.
At a press briefing held today, Minister of Health, Onyebuchi Chukwu, confirmed that six other people have tested positive to the ravaging virus.
Chukwu said all the six people who tested positive to the Ebhola virus had primary contact with the Liberian-American, Sawyer, who died in a Lagos hospital last month July after arriving for an ECOWAS conference billed for Calabar, Cross River State.
Chukwu further urged state governments to open up more isolation sites so as to contain people who might need to be treated or isolated in the event that more people are infected of the quick-killing virus.
Although her case is not the first domesticated case of the Ebola virus in the country, she is the first Nigerian to die from dreaded disease.
Following the reported cases, the Nigerian government has made an urgent request for the experimental drug in possession of the U.S. Centre for Disease Control.
The drug, although only experimental, is being used in the treatment of the two American doctors infected in the West African nation of Liberia and with both said to be responding to treatments, hope is rising that a drug for the dreaded virus which has killed almost 900 people is now in existence.
The final report of the National Conference is ready and will be debated by delegates on Aug. 13 in Abuja, Assistant Secretary, Media and Communications of the conference, Mr James Akpandem, has said.
Akpandem told the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) on Wednesday in Abuja that the report of the conference was already being reproduced to meet the required number of the delegates.
Mr. James Akpandem
He expressed the hope that the required copies would be ready before the resumption of plenary on Aug. 11.
The media officer said: “The report is ready and is being reproduced.
“It is hoped that before the scheduled date, the required number in the produced volumes will be available.”
Akpandem, however, said that copies of the report would not be given out to delegates ahead of the resumption date.
According to him, however, each delegate will only be given copies on resumption.
The media officer explained that delegates, after collecting the reports, would be expected to study them in two days ahead of the final discussion.
NAN reports that the conference Chairman, Justice Idris Kutigi (rtd), had on July 14, adjourned plenary until Aug. 4 and subsequently to Aug. 11 for adoption of the final report. (NAN)
Executive Director of Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth Nigeria (ERA/FoEN), Dr. Godwin Uyi Ojo, reflects on the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Assessment on Ogoniland, three year after its release
Ojo
I draw our collective attention to the blood stained banner of ecological catastrophe hanging over Ogoniland, which has been acclaimed globally as one of the most horrendous in human history. It is on a sad note that we mark the third year of the release of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) Assessment on Ogoniland. Since the release of the report, neither Shell which is the chief polluter, nor the Nigerian government which is the supposed regulator of oil companies’ operations, has done anything significant to implement the UNEP report recommendations.
The ERA/FoE Nigeria, Friends of Earth International, Amnesty International, Platform and the Centre for Environment, Human Rights and Development (CEHRD) have released a report showing the lack of progress in implementing the UNEP recommendations. The report highlights evidence gathered by numerous experts, who show that Shell manipulates information and avoids accountability for old and leaking pipes. The pipes are so old that the company will feel ashamed to disclose their age or integrity status publicly.
On 4 August 2011 the UNEP published a scientific study on Ogoniland which showed Shell’s environmental atrocity on the Ogoni people and their environment through frequent oil spills and gas flaring that ruined the environment and rural livelihoods. The report findings from three years of intense investigation showed hydrocarbon pollution in surface water throughout the creeks of Ogoniland and up to 8cm in groundwater that feed drinking wells. Soils were found to have been polluted with hydrocarbons up to a depth of five metres in 49 observed sites, while benzene, a known cancer-causing chemical was found in drinking water at a level 900 times above World Health Organisation (WHO) acceptable levels.
The UNEP study also documented that fisheries have been destroyed and that wetlands around Ogoniland are highly degraded.
The UNEP study also documented that fisheries have been destroyed and that wetlands around Ogoniland are highly degraded. These combined, have led to irreparable loss of livelihoods and will take 30 years to remediate. Besides, the report recommended a high level Ogoni Environmental Restoration Authority, and a Clean up and Restoration fund of $1 billion. Shell and the Nigerian government have done little that depicts action but are mere fig leafs for business as usual. For example, the erection of warning signposts beside polluted water bodies and contaminated soil without the provision of alternatives has yielded poor result. It is heart rending that government is complicit in the plot to deny environmental justice to the Ogonis.
Shell for over 50 years has dolled out baskets of lies and deception in oil extraction activities. Recently, but diabolically Shell blamed the Nigerian government for not putting in place the requisite framework to make the company to commit funds into remediation. It is vexing that the accused which is the Nigerian government is maintaining sealed lips and, like Shell, not making any commitment. In the face of such provocation and impunity, the Nigerian government is unable to bring Shell to order. The lack of meaningful action gives the impression that Shell is able to get away with the environmental and human rights abuses in the Niger Delta. Clearly, the shame of a nation lies in the fact that Shell the regulated has become the regulator, and the regulator has become the regulated.
Since the UNEP report, Shell has disputed some of its findings – but without providing any scientific basis for its claims. Shell has defended its clean up methodology – which the UN said should never be used because it is outdated, not appropriate for such areas, and thus ineffective. Shell would not obey the laws of Nigeria and would not accede to the implementation of UNEP report recommendations.
We re-iterate our demands, among others, that the Ogonis in collaboration with other Niger Delta communities and civil society approach the United Nations to appoint a Niger Delta Reconciliation and Restoration Commission with autonomy and authority to do so. We are not only demanding $1 billion for the Ogoni environment restoration but the sum of $100 billion restoration fund for the Niger Delta to address clean up, restoration and compensation. We also recommend that HYPREP be scrapped forthwith since it is a mere administrative unit under the Federal Ministry of Petroleum and not statutorily set up by law. Rather than HYPREP to usurp the functions of a rather weak NOSDRA, the agency should be strengthened and empowered with adequate resources for them to conduct their statutory duties.
We hereby declare Ogoniland as ecological disaster zone and urge the Federal Government to do same by declaring Ogoniland as a national ecological tragedy. Ogoniland is a crime scene from ecological and human rights violations or ecocide which the oil companies and their CEOs must be held accountable. CEOs that persistently take decisions that consistently lead to destruction of livelihoods, human rights violations and death should be held accountable for the crime of ecocide.
Doubtless, ecological devastation is the root of the state of conflicts engulfing the nation. While oil extraction has destroyed rural livelihoods in the Niger Delta, northern Nigeria is faced with deadly desertification that is similar to the pains and misery of the Niger Delta. The west is faced with deforestation while the east is ravaged by gully erosion. Thus, rural people throughout Nigeria have been impoverished. Our position is: rather than amnesty to select few we submit that a social security in the form of National Basic Income Scheme (NaBIS) of about N10,000 for all Nigerians who are unemployed is the solution to the spate of violence. Such social security will account for all unemployed in Nigeria including old age poverty. For our nation, a NaBIS is long overdue and has the potency to unlock creative potentials, reduce crime rates and promote peace and harmony in our society.
Civil society, lawyers, policy makers, community-based groups including representatives of the Ogoni communities will look at the issues thus far and come out with concrete ideas to compel Shell and the Nigerian government to act on this damning report.
A man who became ill on a flight from Liberia to Lagos has raised alarms for public-health officials after he later died of the virus. The Ebola outbreak has so led to more than 800 deaths in West Africa.
A Nigerian female doctor that treated a victim is said to be infected.
Liberia has closed most of its borders, and airports in Nigeria are now screening passengers arriving from foreign countries for Ebola’s symptoms, which include fever, headache, joint pain, lack of appetite, difficult breathing and sore throat. In its advanced stages, Ebola leads to diarrhoea, vomiting and internal bleeding. While the airport screenings are meant to ease travellers’ minds, the reality is that the Ebola virus can’t be detected soon after infection — the first signs of the virus are red eyes and a rash, which could be caused by many different things. Plus, outgoing flyers are not being tested and it’s unclear at this point if over countries will follow suit. People have recovered from infection with the virus, but the mortality rate ranges from 50 percent to 90 percent.
Who can spread the virus?
The virus takes anywhere from two to 21 days to incubate and start causing symptoms, but Dr Stephan Monroe, deputy director of the National Centre for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases at the U.S. Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), said during a tele-briefing last Monday that infected patients only spread the disease when they have symptoms. Because the virus is transmitted through direct contact with fluids like saliva or blood from infected patients, airport officials are essentially looking for passengers who might have severe vomiting, diarrhoea or other bodily secretions that could reach other travellers.
Are Nigeria’s airport screenings enough?
Nigeria is screening incoming passengers for such symptoms and may also take passengers’ temperature. Nigerian officials have also created holding rooms to isolate patients or passengers who are suspected of being infected, so they can be triaged to further medical care.
But because some of the early symptoms of Ebola mirror those of other ailments, including malaria, CDC officials say the strongest way to contain spread of infectious diseases is by instituting travel restrictions at the source. That’s why Liberia has closed all its borders except for three land crossings where travellers can be screened and treatment services provided if needed.
Dr Marty Cetrone, director of the division of global migration and quarantine at the CDC, said during the briefing that officials can also try to contain the outbreak by using questionnaires asking travellers at these checkpoints about their recent travel history as well as their potential exposure to the virus through friends or other close contacts.
How did this outbreak get so bad?
Health officials aren’t sure why this particular outbreak has led to a historic number of deaths, but note that social and cultural practices may be driving spread of the virus. In many of the communities where the virus remains active, there is still denial about the disease, and stigma associated with getting ill, which discourages patients from getting early hydration and nutrition that can help them to overcome the infection. While there is no treatment for the virus, these measures can lower the death rate for some. Funeral practices that involve touching the deceased may also help the virus move from host to host.
How at-risk are Americans?
Monroe says the risk of Ebola for U.S. citizens who haven’t travelled to West Africa remains low. There are no restrictions on travellers entering the U.S., but the CDC has issued a Level 2 travel advisory for people traveling to Guinea, Liberia or Sierra Leone, recommending that they avoid contact with blood or other bodily fluids that might contain the virus, and use the proper protective equipment to avoid infection. The advisory applies mostly to health care or humanitarian aid workers, who so far make up the largest group of people affected by Ebola. “(Transmission) involves not only touching the contaminated body fluid but introducing it through some mucous membrane or cut on the skin,” said Monroe.
For anyone who has recently travelled to those countries or might have been exposed to someone who was ill in that area, health officials are advising a 21-day fever watch to ensure that no active infection is occurring.
What if an infected person flies into the U.S.?
The CDC is also preparing for the remote possibility that a passenger from the region who is ill boards a plane and lands in the U.S. and starts infecting residents. The agency is informing its network of physicians in state and local public-health facilities about how to look for signs of Ebola. “We are sending Health Alert Network notices about the importance of taking steps to prevent spread of the virus,” said Monroe. That includes procedures on asking patients about their recent travel history, as well as using the proper personal protective equipment, such as masks, gloves and gowns if they suspect an Ebola infection.
They’re confident that these measures will be effective, since infection with a virus related to Ebola, Marburg, was successfully contained in the Netherlands with isolation and barrier procedures. No health care workers contracted the virus from that patient. Health officials hope that with the proper preparation and education, that record can apply to Ebola as well, if it makes it beyond the heavily affected countries in West Africa.
As the debate on genetically-modified organisms (GMOs) hots up in the country, EnviroNews Nigeria presents views of the pro- and anti-GMO crusaders, who of recent in various forums sought to enlighten the public on issues therein. While a government agency official on one hand makes a case for the concept to receive legal backing, a civil society activist, on the other, calls for caution
‘Need for Biosafety Law for adoption of biotechnology’
Prof. Lucy Ogbadu, Director-General/CEO of National Biotechnology Development Agency and Chair, Open Forum on Agricultural Biotechnology in Africa (OFAB) (Nigeria Chapter), clamours for the adoption of a biosafety law in the country
Prof. Lucy Ogbadu
As in all times, there has been a continuous change in technology from the chemical era (Chemistry) to the Physical Era (Physics) to Information Era (Info-Tech). These had always necessitated changes in investment and opportunities. Now, there is one that combines the biological potentials with physical and chemical possibilities, an-all-encompassing approach with a deep root in life and computer science i.e. Biotechnology. Biotechnology is taking mankind beyond ever known depths of understanding chemical and physical basis of life and matter to molecular basis of creation.
The Federal Government of Nigeria is convinced of the science of biotechnology which is a global train that Nigeria cannot be left out which led to the establishment of the National Biotechnology Development Agency in 2001 after the approval of the Biotechnology Policy by the Federal Executive Council with the mandate to promote, coordinate and deploy this cutting-edge technology research and development processes and products for the socio-economic well-being of the nation. This technology is a technology of the 21st century.
Expressed fears
There is misinformation by those that want Africa to remain backward, with misguided anti-technology views, which we have to overcome, Nigeria needs to use biotechnology to create wealth in the country and eradication of poverty in the country. We are not saying Biotechnology can do all but it can contribute immensely to agricultural productivity, affordable health care delivery services, sustainable environment and industrial growth.
According to the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development, Dr. Akinwumi Adesina recently, on the ministry’s website responding to an article in The Guardian written by Gbadebo Rhodes-Vivour onMonsanto, Genetically Modified Foods and why Nigerians should worry. I quote the minister: “You can travel by plane or donkey. The former generates C02, but everyone uses it to travel. Why not try traveling to Europe by donkey?
“Nigeria is putting in place bio safety laws to regulate the practice of modern biotechnology. Consumer and environmental safety are priority for us. But we must develop and we must use new technologies. Responsible use of technologies, while managing and preserving biodiversity and the environment and consumer safety is the role of government.”
Importance of Biotechnology in Nigeria
Increase in food supply with less farmland requirement and
The discovery and delivery of new medicines and vaccines diagnosis in some diseases such as Alzheimer, cystic fibrosis, cancer and HIV/AIDS and better understanding of genetic basis of diseases.
Clean up of oil spills, prevention of deforestation, provision of eco-friendly materials (e.g. bioplastics and alternative energy, e.g. biofuels)
Job and wealth creation, industrial growth leading to improved economy.
History of Modern Biotechnology Regulation
Nigeria signed and ratified an international treaty known as the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety in 2000 and 2003 respectively. Nigeria has equally signed the Nagoya Kuala Lumpur Supplementary protocol on Liability and Redress to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety in 2012, The Biosafety Protocol is meant to give adequate protection to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in the practice of modern biotechnology and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Parties to the Protocol are required to domesticate it through legal and administrative frameworks.
Consequently the Federal Government through the Federal Ministry of Environment developed a National Biosafety Bill in collaboration with the Nigerian Customs Service, Nigeria Veterinary Research Institute and Federal Ministries of Justice, Health (NAFDAC), Agriculture and Rural Development, Science and Technology (National Biotechnology Development Agency), Foreign Affairs and Education, Federal Ministry of industry, trade and investment (Consumer Protection Council). This is with a view for Nigeria to legally adopt modern biotechnology and Genetically Modified Organisms to derive the benefits associated with the technology in the areas of Agricultural biotechnology, industrial growth, health improvement, environmental sustainability, job and wealth creation. The Bill is therefore, intended to domesticate the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety.
The Biosafety Bill was initially passed by the 6th National Assembly (NASS) in 2011 but was not assented to by the president and it became time barred. The Bill is back to the National Assembly. It has passed through all the readings in the House of Representatives.
The Bill when enacted into law:
Shall apply to safety administration of any activity of importing, exporting, transmitting genetically modified organisms and the products derived thereof into and out of Nigeria
Shall also address important issues concerning food security, health issues/medicine including but\ not restricted to diagnostic, environmental problems like desertification, soil erosion etc.
Shall address the issue of job/ wealth creation through waste management and allied products; research with the prospects of genetic improvement of crops like maize, cow pea, cassava, sorghum, etc. and integrated soil fertility management.
Intendment of the Bill
It prescribes procedure for the application of the technology, risk assessment before the adoption and use of any genetically modified organisms and penalties for contravening the Biosafety Act. The Biosafety Act is therefore a safety valve for harnessing the potentials of modern biotechnology. This Bill seeks to:
Provide derived benefits from modern biotechnology under a legal framework for economic growth, improved agriculture, job and wealth creation, industry growth and sustainable environment,
Minimise risks to human health.
Confirm and harness the potentials of modern biotechnology.
Protect and guard against any adverse effect of GMOs on biological Diversity and the environment.
Guard against any socio-economic consequences.
Give confidence in the practice of modern biotechnology, use and handling of GMOs and products thereof.
Reaffirm Nigeria’s commitment to the principles of International agreements, treaties (CBD and in particular the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB).
Determine in advance when hazards to human health and natural systems will result if any particular GMO is released into the environment amongst others.
Passage of the biosafety bill will allow proper regulation of imported GM products, so Nigeria will not be a dumping ground.
The absence of a Biosafety Law has greatly hampered research and development in modern biotechnology in Nigeria, a biosafety law will therefore enable our research institutes to carry out their statutory functions. The Federal Ministry of Environment, which is the National Focal Point and Competent National Authority on Biosafety in Nigeria and other major stakeholders, are currently handicapped in the effective management of biosafety in the Country because of lack of biosafety law. The International community and Nigerian biotechnology industry in general are also handicapped by the absence of a biosafety law.
Of the four major economies in Africa, which are South Africa, Nigeria, Egypt and Kenya, it is only Nigeria that does not have a Biosafety law. The advantage of a Biosafety Law for each of these countries is described below:
South Africa is the first country in Africa to have a Biosafety Law (1989) and the introduction of GM crops has made the country a significant exporter of GM products. The South African Biosafety Law was passed several years ago and has in fact been reviewed.
Egypt passed their Biosafety law in 1995; 23 Permits for field trial have been granted, with three commercial releases of GM Crops. Egypt produces the best GM cotton which is sought after worldwide. Egypt has also been producing GM corn for its own local consumption.
Kenya passed its Biosafety law in 2009 and is now a hub of commercialisation and investments on GM Crops/GMOs in Sub Saharan Africa.
ECOWAS: In the sub-region where Nigeria is an undisputed leader, the following countries have Biosafety laws Agencies: Burkina Faso (2008), Burkina Faso’ farmers in the country are growing GM cotton for the world market with well-documented economic benefits to farmers; Mali, Togo, and Ghana (2011). Furthermore, the sub-regional body is currently in the process of developing a common biosafety regulation to assist member countries to carry out risk assessment on GMOs before adoption in the region in view of ECOWAS’ free trade policy.
With respect to the safety of GM crops and foods, United Nations Organisations, regional and advanced countries food safety authorities, have this to say:
The World Health Organisation (WHO) has not found any risks associated with the consumption of GM foods. According to WHO, GM foods currently on the international market have passed risk assessments and are not likely to present risks for human health. In addition, the general population in the countries where they have been approved has shown no negative effects on human health as a result of the consumption of such foods.
The certification of safety of GM food types as contained in the report of 28th April 2006 of European Food Safety Agency (EFSA) is as a result of rigorous food and feed certification procedures that such foods have to go through.
Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO) has stated categorically that no adverse impact on human health have been shown as a result of the consumption of GM foods by the general population in the countries where they have been approved.
African Union (AU) and NEPAD:A body known as African Biosafety Network of Expertise (ABNE) has been established under the AU-NEPAD to assist member countries to develop the right biosafety expertise to effectively carry out biosafety regulation. This is to balance the adoption of biotechnology as a tool to advance the Continent by AU. Working under the UN, 54 African nations have signed the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, which requires countries to domesticate the Cartagena Protocol having their own respective Biosafety Laws.
Nigeria has been gearing up to take advantage of the clear benefits of GM technology that includes: environmentally friendly control of pests and diseases (fewer chemical sprays), environmentally friendly farming methods (minimum and zero tillage from round-up ready crops), increased productivity, improved nutrition, and drought resistance (to combat climate change), to mention a few.
The absence of a biosafety law has made it difficult for the National Biotechnology Development Agency to effectively perform its statutory functions. Other Research Institutions and Universities that have competence to carry out modern biotechnology practice have also been hampered by the absence of a biosafety law. The Federal Ministry of Environment has also not been able to effectively carry out its biosafety functions due to lack of a biosafety law. The absence of biosafety law might make Nigeria a consumer nation of foreign GMO foods, particularly maize products, instead of a producer, thereby holding our farmers hostage to those of other countries. For example, the Agricultural Transformation Agenda of the Federal Government calls for the development of GM Cotton to make Nigeria cotton competitive in the local and export markets; a Biosafety law will make GM cotton for Nigeria a reality and help to revamp Nigeria collapsed textile industry.
Level of Preparedness of implementing the Bill when it becomes an Act
Presently there is a Biosafety Unit in the Federal Ministry of Environment that manages National Biosafety matters with well-trained staff nationally and internationally and the following regulatory instruments have been developed: Nigeria Biosafety Application Administration Guidelines Biosafety Bill; Biosafety Policy; Biosafety Guidelines; Biosafety application form; Biosafety Containment Facilities Guidelines; Accreditation of Institute application form; Certification of Biosafety containment Facility form Confined Field Trial Monitoring and Inspection Manual; GMOs import/shipment form; National Biosafety Risk Analysis Framework; Nigeria Biosafety Socio-economic Consideration Guidelines Decision document; Draft Biosafety regulation on GMOs import and Export; Draft Biosafety Regulation on Labelling, Packaging and transport; Draft Biosafety Regulation on GMOs Commercialisation; National Guidelines on Biosafety Emergency Response.
A biosafety laboratory has also been established for Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) detection and analysis.
‘GMOs are not Silver Bullets’
But Nnimmo Bassey, Director, Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF), argues that the road towards making a Nigerian Biosafety Law has not been transparent as Prof Ogbadu paints it. He insists that science and technology must not be anti-people.
Nnimmo Bassey
The technology by which living organisms are genetically modified for agricultural purposes has been presented as a cure all for African agricultural and food problems. The promoters of modern agricultural biotechnology are no longer able to hide their desperate need to open up the Nigerian and African environment for their products. This desperation is driven by the profit motive and not benevolence. Africa is the last frontier for the biotech businesses and Nigeria is their biggest single untapped market on the continent.
The road towards making a Nigerian Biosafety law has been one bedevilled by hide-and-seek tactics. It has not been a transparent road. The notice of the Public Hearing of 2009 was so short that one could not expect critical participants like farmers and community groups to adequately prepare and submit their memoranda. At the public hearing itself farmers, civil society and community groups were given about a minute apiece to present their views while pro-biotech agencies had all the time to lecture the gathering on the benefits of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). It is worrisome that leaders who should protect our environment, agriculture and general patrimony are at the forefront of promoting and plotting to ambush Nigerians into accepting a technology that portends more harm than good.
Scaremongering?
Opponents of the technology have been characterised variously as ignorant, scaremongers, or wishing to keep poor farmers poor. The picture being painted at times is that those who demand caution in the introduction of irreversible genetic and ecological tinkering with our environment are presented as anti-science or anti-innovation. All these, just like the promises of modern biotechnology, are simply false. Opponents are not averse to science or to technology; we are averse to the hijacking of the scientific agenda by a small-clique of extremely powerful corporate actors. We demand that science and technology must be taken back for the service of humanity, support our peoples and must not be anti-people.
Promoters of the technology have tried many tactics in their effort to sell their suspect products. First they claimed that Africa had a burgeoning population of starving people. Now the argument is that we are not only starving, but that our children are malnourished, stunted and are going blind. And is the solution for all these GMOs?
The starvation kite was to be solved with food aid made up of GM products. The nutrition kite is to be solved by making GM crops with enhanced levels of vitamin A and others. We are also told that only genetic engineering can give us crops that will withstand the coming climate catastrophe. Assuming that the diagnoses were right, we must be humble enough to agree that there are verifiable and safe solutions other than modern biotechnology.
Modern biotechnology thrives on myths. One of the commonly sold myths is that GM crops yield much higher than normal crops. Hans Herren who worked for 27 years in Africa as Director General of International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology (ICIPE) and Director of the Plant Health Division at the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), attests that local research and development has “developed and disseminated successful sustainable technologies that have not only increased the yields by 200 to 300 per cent (dwarfing the expected 25 per cent) – as proven in the case of maize using the Push-Pull, or SRI for rice technologies in Eastern Africa, or permanently controlled pest such as the cassava mealy bug with natural methods across the continent – but also continuously adapted them to new local challenges, including climate change.”
Herren, a winner of the Right Livelihood Award in 2013 for his work in promoting agro-ecological agriculture notes that the challenge in Africa is that “public agricultural research continues to be stifled by low funding.” Our government and our scientists have the task of charting a path for, and investing in, sustainable agro-ecological agriculture that builds on local knowledge and crop varieties and not persist in what present themselves as shortcuts simply because philanthropic capitalists and the biotech industry are happy to fund such endeavours.
We urge those who think that modern biotechnology is the solution to the food challenges in Nigeria and elsewhere to take a look at the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) report(s) of 2008. The report titled Agriculture at a Crossroads written by about 400 scientists and experts and endorsed by 58 countries on the day of its adoption clearly show that the place of modern biotechnology in future food delivery is indeed very slim.
GM Myths go burst
We have already noted that these crops do not necessarily yield as much as normal crops and neither do the yield more than those bred conventionally.
Most genetically modified crops are either modified to resist certain herbicides produced by the seed companies or they are modified to kill target pests – the crops becoming pesticides themselves. The myths by which crops with these traits have been promoted are that they will require less herbicides and pesticides. But nature has responded to these traits in the form of superweeds that have become resistant to these herbicides, and what may be termed superbugs, which have become resistant to GM insecticide producing crops.
The problem of superweeds has reached epidemic proportions in the United States, where the US Department of Agriculture says over 28 million ha of farmland is now infested. The biotechnology industry’s ‘solution’ to this is the creation of GM crops resistant to toxic cocktails of multiple herbicides, many of which are banned in several countries or regions around the world. The idea of herbicide resistant crops is fallout of experiences some of the companies have had in defoliating chemicals they made for biological warfare in Vietnam, for example. The scars of those atrocities remain to this day.
In South Africa, Monsanto has been forced to remove its first GM insect resistant maize variety, MON810, after massive outbreaks of superbugs rendered the technology obsolete. Under the ruse of its ‘drought tolerant’ GM maize varieties being developed for Africa, Monsanto now plans to force this failed insect resistant technology on small-scale farmers across the continent.
The drive for lax biosafety law
A technology that thrives on lax and often illogical laws cannot be trusted. We use this opportunity to once more call on the National Assembly and our President not to yield to pressure to foist a week biosafety law on Nigeria. The bill that policy makers present as key to opening our environment for invasion by GMOs does not have the teeth to protect our biodiversity and environmental health. The bill has no provisions for strict liability and does not have a mechanism for redress once contamination has occurred.
The fact that some genetically modified products have entered our market shelves illegally should elicit a different response than to open up the market to be flooded with more of such products
Finally, we, together with nearly 300 global scientists who signed a statement to the effect, believe that since there is no scientific consensus on the safety of genetically modified foods this in itself should be enough reason to evoke the precautionary principle. We will not stand idly by and see Nigerians turned into guinea pigs without their consent. Our nation is wracked by violence of various varieties including those that come through bombs and environmental degradation. We certainly do not wish to open another battlefield through our stomachs.
Monday August 4th, 2014 marks the 3rd year anniversary of the damning report of the assessment of Ogoni environment conducted by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) at the request of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The comprehensive report unambiguously confirmed fears and anxiety that Ogoniland is a ticking ecological bomb.
In a reaction, Nnimmo Bassey, the director of Health of Mother Earth Foundation (HOMEF), regrets that after three years a situation that required the declaration of environmental emergency was yet to elicit any serious response.
“We are deeply shocked that we are marking three years of inaction on a report that clearly showed that our peoples are walking and living in the valley of the shadow of death. We are scandalised that we are not marking three years of concrete actions to salvage what is left of the Ogoni environment,” Bassey says.
Oluwafunmilayo Oyatogun, media officer of HOMEF, declares in a statement that Ogoniland has become a metaphor for unconscionable ecological ruination that petroleum resource extraction has wreaked on the Niger Delta. “Despite the fact that oil extraction activities was forced to halt in Ogoniland in 1993 following the expulsion of Shell by the Ogonis people under the leadership of the late Ken Saro-Wiwa, Ogoniland remains arguably one of the most polluted areas of the world,” she emphasises.
“There are no tenable reasons for government and Shell to fold their arms and watch our people wallow in a chronically polluted environment all through their lives. Why should anyone have to drink water containing benzene, a known carcinogen, at levels over 900 times above the World Health Organisation (WHO) guideline and 1000 times above Nigerian drinking water standards?” Bassey wonders.
“The Niger Delta is tragically the most severely petroleum-impacted ecosystem I have seen anywhere in the world – and I have seen many. The extraordinary environmental and social damage has continued for over 50 years now, and continues to this day. As has been said by many, Nigeria is an iconic example of the oil curse”, says Professor Richard Steiner, a conservation biologist with the Oasis Earth in Anchorage Alaska.
According to Oyatogun, the peaceful but consistent cries of the Ogoni people against the destruction of their environment have gone unheard by Shell and the Nigerian government.
She adds: “We recall that Ogoni people issued the Ogoni Bill of Rights in 1990 and categorically demanded for environmental, political and socio-economic justice and protection. Regrettably, despite a formal presentation of the document to the government nothing have been said or done by the way of response or engagement.
“It is unacceptable that three years after the UNEP report was released, no structure has been set up that would indicate any serious process for transparently tackling the ecocide that has been visited on the Ogoni environment.”
“It is regrettable that rather than setting up a process of remediation with full popular participation in setting goals and targets, the best we have are politics of pollution signposts from the government and arguments by Shell over who should warehouse $1 billion they are allegedly ready to place on the table for the clean-up,” notes Celestine Akpobari of the Ogoni Solidarity Forum.
The demands made by HOMEF at the second anniversary of the UNEP report remains appropriate one year after, recalls Bassey, listing these to include:
Declare Ogoni land an ecological disaster zone and invest resources to tackle the deep environmental disaster here.
Urgently provide potable drinking water to the people across Ogoniland.
Commission an assessment of the entire Niger Delta environment. An assessment or audit of the environment of the entire nation should equally be on the cards urgently. As recommended by the UNEP report, establish a Centre of Excellence for Environmental Restoration in Ogoniland for learning on pollution and clean up actions across the Niger Delta.
Ensure that those who have committed crimes against the people and the environment are brought to book and made to pay for their misdeeds. Blame for oil thefts must go beyond the diversionary focus on the miniscule volumes taken up by bush refiners. The major crude oil stealing mafias must be uncovered. Crude oil and gas volumes must also be metered as a basic requirement for transparency and accountability.
Engage in dialogue with the Ogoni people as to the time-scale and scope of actions to be taken to restore the environment. Issues highlighted in the Ogoni Bills of Rights and the UNEP report provides good bases for dialogue. This should be extended to the whole of Niger Delta.
Ensure that the actions to tackle the ecological disaster in the Niger Delta is not use as a job patronage for cronies or the boys; rather the UNEP should play a principal oversight role in area of finance, ensure quality, build confidence in the process and most importantly tackle corruption.
Scrap HYPREP and set up an Ogoniland Environmental Restoration Agency to be domiciled in the Ministry of Environment and should not by any means be under the polluting Petroleum Resources Ministry. Equally set up an Environmental Restoration Fund for Ogoniland, as recommended by the UNEP report.
Order Shell to urgently dismantle whatever remains of their facilities in Ogoniland along with toxic wastes dump in the territory.
Order Shell to replace the Trans Niger Delta pipeline that carries crude oil from other parts of the region across Ogoni territory.
In the bid to ensure effective land administration process, easy access to land and to meet acceptable global standards, the Ogun State Government has acquired the Continuously Operation Reference System (CORS) station network through the Bureau of Lands and Survey. The station will also monitor land transactions in the state and address the activities of land speculators popularly called omo onile.
Special Adviser/Director-General of the Bureau, Adewale Oshinowo, made the disclosure recently in Abeokuta, adding that state has successfully acquired Very High Resolution Satellite Imagery which has been installed on high development areas of the state.
Oshinowo, in a statement signed by the Bureau’s Information Officer, Ademola Orunbon, added that equipment like 3D Stereo and 50 Cm Imagery have been installed along Lagos-Ogun border areas, adding that settlements such Abeokuta, Ifo, Ijebu-Ode, Ilaro-Ofada and Sagamu are benefitting from the scheme.
He pointed out that this would allow surveyors in the state, government agencies and the general public to have access to data through Radio Satellites, Direct Global Positioning System (DGPS) and the internet system at their comfort as well.
“This would produce high accuracy maps of the state and Global Positioning System (GPS) navigation projects, stating that the development of the CORS Station network was a proceeding process and it would be commissioned by November this year,” he added.
The DG said the CORS stations project were already built in Abeokuta, Sagamu, Ijebu-Ode and Agbara while other CORS stations would be completed during the second phase of the project so as to ensure 100 percent coverage of the entire state.
He said that the ultra-high resolution ortho-rectified satellite imagery in towns would boost the economic interest of investors who intends to acquire land for businesses, pointing out that regular acquisitions of satellite imagery of aerial photo using Unattended Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) to update the Ogun State base map would be guaranteed.
He said that database backup and disaster recovery systems to ensure that business processes are not severely impacted and resume in the minimum time possible in the event of any disaster, adding that establishment of controls for surveys and identify the state borders was also established.
He stated that the network of three CORS stations for higher precision and faster surveys was first of its kind in the Country, assuring the investors not to panic of their investment in the state and the lands being acquired through the present government that it’s saved.
Vultures scavenging on a carcass. Photo courtesy: www.maxwaugh.com
BirdLife International, the world’s largest nature conservation Partnership with over 120 partners worldwide, is worried about the precarious state of vulture population in Nigeria. In a recent correspondence to concerned Nigerian authorities, the UK-based bird preservation group raises concern on the gravity of the situation and its significance to public health
Mrs Lawrentia L Mallam,
Honourable Minister of Environment,
Federal Ministry of Environment Headquarters
Block C, Mabuchi, FCT, Abuja
Nigeria
Persecution of Vultures in Nigeria and West Africa
I write on behalf of BirdLife International to seek your support on a matter that is causing concern among environmentalists globally ie widespread persecution of African vultures in Nigeria (and other countries). The African continent supports eleven species of vulture, of which eight are endemic to the continent. All of them are declining, but especially rapidly in West Africa. Nigeria hosts six vulture species, five of which are threatened by extinction. As you are aware, vultures play an extremely important role in nature. They are nature’s cleaners of the environment, keeping both natural and man-made habitats free of carcasses and wastes that can cause health hazards. This way, they limit the spread of diseases such as anthrax and botulism, the latter a rare disease that causes paralysis. In Africa, they are also of cultural value to many communities, and they have an important eco-tourism value.
Research by the Nigerian Conservation Foundation (BirdLife in Nigeria) and the AP Leventis Ornithology Research Institute at the University of Jos has found that, currently, vultures in Nigeria are mainly seen dead, being sold in markets, rather than alive in the wild. It is reported that most of the vulture parts are subsequently used in fortune-telling and divination. A dried one in a market goes for Naira 7,000. Some are also sold alive, and may fetch Naira 20-25,000 each. Furthermore, the market for vultures and their part in Nigeria seems to be driving their capture and slaughter in surrounding countries. Some of the vultures in Nigerian markets are said to have been imported from both Chad and Niger Republic.
On behalf of BirdLife International, I urge the persecution of vultures in Nigeria is halted as it contravenes Nigerian Endangered Species Law. As five of these species are globally-threatened, the practice also contravenes the Convention on Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), which Nigeria has signed.
Activities that would make a difference include raising awareness of the value of vultures in the ecosystem and the illegality of hunting them or selling their parts, patrolling the juju markets and closing down those that sell vultures and vulture parts as they contravene Decree No. 11 of 1985 which stipulates that there should be no trade at all in vultures as they are Schedule 1 species, and prosecuting the people who hunt the birds and/or trade in their parts. BirdLife International is willing to work with you and with the relevant structures of your government to enhance their capacity and raise awareness to achieve this goal.
Your consideration of this matter would be greatly appreciated.
This expose is to call attention of the government and the governed in Nigeria to our “variant” urban planning practice which, in the main, has caused so much ruination to our urbanism as a way of life. Therefore, there is need for constant advocacy on the ways our cities are planned and managed. Any work of advocacy involves noise-making either verbally or in writing until you can make a difference on whatever your work of advocacy is all about. As an advocate, you must be zealously committed to a cause, tenacious, unrelenting and uncompromising.
Abiodun
Of all areas of specialisation in urban planning, this writer’s primary concern and special interest is Advocacy Planning. The choice is borne out of patriotism and a seeming lacuna of the citizens’ understanding of what is planning, what planners do, the import of plans and the participatory role expected of the citizenry in the planning process.
It may be uncharitable to say that, in this era of Urban Millennium and Globalisation, Nigerian cities are lagging behind mainly because our planning practice is less proactive. The crop of urban planning practitioners in both the public and private sectors that government depends upon to effect a positive change so that Nigerian cities are more livable, sustainable, investment-friendly and attractive to international tourism through solution- based participatory planning, have not rendered acceptable level of professional service.
Garba Shehu, a columnist with the Nigerian Tribune in the July 16, 2014 edition of the newspaper, wrote an article titled Polio won’t go,this is why. He has this to say: “Urban Planning has been abandoned…. That is why every rainy season comes with accompanying tragedies occasioned by floods.” It is an unassailable indictment on the part of government in Nigeria, which pays lip-service to urban planning.
Regrettably too, a few bad eggs in the urban planning profession are found wanting for unethical professional practice. They tarnish the reputation of some scrupulous planning practitioners before members of the public who loathe with passion, the excesses and over-bearing attitude often exhibited by town planners under the guise of enforcing development control regulations, which they grossly abuse.
Everywhere you turn to in our cities, you immediately and clearly notice the handiwork of planners and iron-clad evidence of arbitrariness in change of use, wanton zoning violations and incompatible land uses in all ramifications. Hardly there is a city in Nigeria which is under the full protection of zoning regulations. To the best of this writer’s knowledge as an urban planner and with due respect, I would say none and I stand to be corrected. Even Abuja as a new city has fallen victim of serious zoning violations. The sum total is that we operate a variant urban planning practice because it does not conform to globally acceptable standard. It is open to abuse, man-know-man, impunity, constant interference, manipulation and unhealthy inter-governmental rivalry. It is also less participatory and not exploratory enough to break new grounds in innovative planning practice that could fast-track the regeneration of our older and ailing cities, while creating new communities of lasting value.
Abuja is fast becoming chaotic. Photo courtesy: gbemigaolamikan.blogspot.com
Are there solutions to these suffocating problems plaguing our country? I would say yes! All we need to do is for the government and the governed to have the collective will to play by the rules. Government should implement and comply with the provisions of its urban development policy and make it to endure for a reasonable period of time. Where it is necessary, policy review should be the norm. The frequency of our policy somersault in any spheres of governance is a national malady hindering our progress as a country, to the detriment of the citizenry. Government should dwell more on the facilitation and development of people-friendly cities and cut down on the frequency of holding urban planning forum, conferences, summits and similar talk shops, which usually end up with repetitive recommendations and common ideas about how to solve our recurring urban planning problems. We are not short of ideas; but oftentimes, government lacks the political will to implement the provisions of its policy on urban development thereby failing to achieve the nation’s ultimate urban development goal.
Secondly, the regulatory bodies of different hues should enforce their prescribed rules and regulations on environment/urban planning while the citizens should comply with the law, particularly those laws that have direct bearing on our lives and living environment. Public interest should take precedence over any individual interests. Public officials should think of duty first before perks of office. In the spirit of advocacy planning, our planners should make sure that the processes by which plans are created ought to embody the values of transparency, inclusiveness and probity. In the same vain, the citizenry should have the courage to stand up for their rights and cry aloud that: Anything about us, without us, is not for us! Meaning: You cannot plan for us without our input.
Lastly, our effort at planning advocacy and moral rectitude among the citizenry of this country can only succeed when we begin to emulate examples of good governance and best practices around the globe. The sole aim of using best practices from other shores more often in the course of advocacy planning is to “ear-lift” our planners to reinvent planning; and to demonstrate to our compatriots that Nigerian cities could look attractive if we genuinely practice planning without our practitioners being compromised or willfully engage in deliberate violation of set rules.
By Yacoob Abiodun (Urban Planner and former Secretary, Housing Policy Council of Nigeria) in Hayward, California, USA
The U.S. Geological Survey said on Tuesday in Johannesburg that 5.3 magnitude earthquake has hit central South Africa killing one man.
