Fish at Belize Barrier Reef
Sometimes it's brutally obvious that immediate action is needed, as in saving 125 historic world heritage sites at risk from climate change. So it beggars belief that UNESCO's World Heritage Committee (WHC) is failing to adequately protect these sites, even when possible solutions are presented.
Meeting in Vilnius, Lithunia this week, the WHC has already rejected plans to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Further, the WHC has dismissed scientists' recommendations about environmental guidelines for assessing sites in potential danger, due to climate change.
Environmental groups say the WHC is concerned more about politics than about protecting natural and manmade sites including Mount Everest, Australia's Great Barrier Reef and the Tower of London. Several groups have lodged petitions with UNESCO urging action to combat problems created by greenhouse gas emissions.
The sites most in danger include the Belize Barrier Reef, Huascaran National Park in Peru, the Sagarmatha National Park in the Himalayas and the Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park on the United States/Canada border. Coral, glaciers and wildlife in these areas are threatened by rising temperatures and ocean acidification.
To read more about this situation, go here or to the World Heritage Committee's website. You can find related information at Climate Justice and Friends of the Earth International websites.
Why is this stuff not important to large countries? Must these treasures be gone to get anyone's attention? Do they even care? I don't think they do :(
Posted by: Tammy | 13 July 2006 at 16:52
Really, no committee of the United Nations can do much until the United States leads the way. Small countries like New Zealand can sign the Kyoto protocol, and try to cut emissions, but if the large countries don't do their share then the contributions from the small countries are a drop in the bucket. Some Pacific Island nations face disappearing completely if the oceans rise.
Posted by: catherine | 12 July 2006 at 08:15
The Peter Principal at work again. Will it ever end?
Posted by: Annieelf | 11 July 2006 at 18:49
I wonder why the WHC even exists! It's disgusting, they are disgusting. And I'm sure they're highly paid too.
I hope the environmental groups pound them until they get some sense into their heads.
Posted by: Colette | 11 July 2006 at 18:15
It just makes me so angry when I hear about people who have the power to save this earth engaging in political backslapping while treasures go unprotected.
Posted by: deirdre | 11 July 2006 at 18:09
The emissions are staggering especially when confronted with a government that chooses to believe that global warming and the destruction of the planet isn't a reality.
Posted by: kristen | 11 July 2006 at 16:44
Thank you for all this information Tara!
Posted by: Catalina | 11 July 2006 at 15:39
What can they be thinking? World Heritage Committee, indeed! There won't be much of a heritage left if they can't even agree to cut emissions...Thanks, Tara for keeping us informed on important news stories.
Posted by: tinker | 11 July 2006 at 15:35