Kenyan elephant numbers plummet by 1000 in four years

IT'S a case of up then down for Kenya's second largest population of elephants. After a promising growth spurt, the elephants are now dying faster than they are being born. The decline is being blamed on illegal poaching, driven by Asia's demand for ivory.

The Kenya Wildlife Service recently conducted a census of the Samburu/Laikipia population, the country's second largest. It found that the population lost over 1000 elephants in just four years, and now stands at 6361. Previous censuses in 1992, 1998, 2002 and 2008 had revealed a growing population, which appears to have peaked at 7415 in 2008.

Poaching is suspected. A July report by three conservation groups found that it has been on the rise across Africa since 2006. Poaching is also spreading eastwards from central Africa into countries like Kenya, says Richard Thomas of TRAFFIC in Cambridge, UK, one of the three groups that drafted the report. The July report found that more than half of all elephants found dead in Africa in 2011 had been illegally killed.

The rise in poaching appears to be driven by increasing affluence in China and Thailand, where ivory is often used to make religious sculptures and other decorations.

Organised criminal gangs have capitalised on this increased demand. "If it's worth someone's while to smuggle the ivory, they'll take the risk," Thomas says. There is evidence that gangs are moving into Kenya to hunt elephants.

If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.

All comments should respect the New Scientist House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please use the "Report" link in that comment to report it to us.

If you are having a technical problem posting a comment, please contact technical support.

Read More..

Storm Bopha returns to Philippines

MANILA: Heavy rain brought flooding fears in the north of the storm-battered Philippines as Typhoon Bopha returned Sunday, days after slamming into the south of the country and leaving almost 1,400 dead or missing.

While the powerful typhoon had weakened to a tropical storm, it was still causing downpours in the north even as hundreds in the south struggled to recover from its fury, said civil defence chief Benito Ramos.

"It will bring rain, not so much wind. We anticipate flash floods and landslides. We expect low-lying areas to be flooded again," Ramos told AFP.

Local relief and rescue teams along with the military were already in position while residents were on alert for rising waters.

Officials said 548 people are confirmed dead after Botha struck last week. The National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council said 827 are missing, a sharp rise on earlier estimates of about 500 unaccounted for.

Most of the deaths were in the southern island of Mindanao where mountainous gold-rush sites were hit hard. Almost 178,000 people were still huddled in crowded government evacuation centres after their homes were destroyed.

Ramos said the massive death toll in Mindanao had made residents in the north more cautious.

"They are more alert now. They were watching developments in the south where we incurred a substantial number of casualties and they were alarmed," he said.

Despite Bopha's weakening, the second-level of a three-step storm alert was raised over three northern provinces. Lower alerts were hoisted over surrounding areas, the government weather station said.

Bopha struck the southern Philippines last week, wiping whole towns off the map with its 210-kilometre (130-mile) per hour winds and heavy rains.

The strongest typhoon to hit the country this year cut through the central islands and was heading out to the South China Sea when it made a U-turn towards the north this weekend.

Early Sunday Bopha was just off the northern city of Laoag, packing gusts of 120 kilometres per hour as it moved east at 15 kilometres per hour, the weather station said.

- AFP/ir

Read More..

Chavez says his cancer is back, talks of a successor

From Patrick Oppmann, CNN

updated 11:37 PM EST, Sat December 8, 2012

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• "An operation like this, an illness like this, always carries risk," says Hugo Chavez


• He says his vice president should succeed him if his health worsens


• Chavez, who won reelection this year, will return to Cuba for the operation

Havana (CNN) -- Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez announced late Saturday that his cancer has returned and that he will go to Cuba to undergo surgery.

Speaking during a televised address from the presidential palace, he said that if his health were to worsen, Vice President Nicolas Maduro should replace him.

It was the first time Chavez spoke publicly about the possibility of a successor -- a shocking admission from a man who looms larger than life in Venezuela and in Latin American politics.

"It's absolutely necessary, absolutely vital that I undergo a new operation," said Chavez.

As he spoke, he repeatedly kissed a cross and at one point broke out into song.

"An operation like this, an illness like this, always carries risk," he said. "If something were to happen that would incapacitate me, Nicholas Maduro should not only finish my term as the constitution requires ... You should also elect Nicholas Maduro to be president."

Just this week, Chavez returned from Cuba after receiving medical treatment. He said doctors detected malignant cells and that he expects to undergo surgery in the coming days.

The president has repeatedly spoken publicly about his cancer battle, but has never specified what type he has.

Chavez, who had surgery in 2011 to remove a cancerous tumor, has undergone further operations and radiation therapy in Cuba since then. He declared himself cancer-free in July.

The government has released few specifics, fueling widespread speculation about his health and political future.

Health rumors dogged Chavez on the campaign trail this year, but didn't stop him from winning reelection in October.

Details of his health, however, have been a closely held secret, and some people who claim to have insider knowledge say the president is in much worse condition than he publicly lets on.

Dana Ford contributed to this report from Atlanta.

Read More..

Venezuela's Chavez says cancer back, plans surgery

CARACAS, Venezuela Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez announced Saturday night that his cancer has returned and that he will undergo another surgery in Cuba.

Chavez, who won re-election on Oct. 7, also said for the first time that if his health were to worsen, his successor would be Vice President Nicolas Maduro.

"We should guarantee the advance of the Bolivarian Revolution," Chavez said on television, seated at the presidential palace with Maduro and other aides.

The president said that tests had shown a return of some cancerous cells and that he would return to Cuba on Sunday for the surgery, his third operation to remove cancerous tissue in about a year and a half.

He called it a "new battle."

The 58-year-old president first underwent cancer surgery for an unspecified type of pelvic cancer in Cuba in June 2011 and had another surgery last February after a tumor appeared in the same area. He has also undergone chemotherapy and radiation treatments.

Chavez made his most recent trip to Cuba on the night of Nov. 27, saying he would receive hyperbaric oxygen treatment. Such treatment is regularly used to help heal tissues damaged by radiation treatment.

Chavez said he has been coping with pain. He said that he was requesting permission from lawmakers to travel and that he hoped to have good news after the surgery.

Read More..

Gay Marriage: Will Justices Follow Popular Opinion?

The Supreme Court's announcement that it would hear two cases challenging laws prohibiting same-sex marriage has reinvigorated one of the most hotly contentious social debates in American history, a debate that has been fueled by a dramatic change in attitudes.

With some states taking significant steps towards legalizing gay marriage, the hearings come at a critical moment.

This week in Washington State, hundreds of same-sex couples lined up to collect marriage licenses after Gov. Christine Gregoire announced the passing of a voter-approved law legalizing gay marriage.

"For the past 20 years we've been saying just one more step. Just one more fight. Just one more law. But now we can stop saying 'Just one more.' This is it. We are here. We did it," Gregoire told a group of Referendum 74 supporters during the law's certification.

Washington is just the most recent of several states to pass legislation legalizing same-sex marriage, signifying a significant departure from previous thinking on the controversial subject.

READ: Court to Take Up Same-Sex Marriage

A study by the Pew Research Center on changing attitudes on gay marriage showed that in 2001 57 percent of Americans opposed same-sex marriage, while 35 percent of Americans supported it.

The same poll shows that today opinions have greatly shifted to reflect slightly more support for same-sex marriage than opposition -- with 48 percent of Americans in favor and 43 percent opposed.

In fact, just two years ago, 48 percent of Americans opposed same-sex marriage while only 42 percent supported it -- indicating that opinions have changed dramatically in the last couple of years alone.

David Paul Morris/Getty Images

Supreme Court Set to Tackle Same-Sex Marriage Watch Video

Gay Marriage: Supreme Court to Examine Marriage Equality Watch Video

Marijuana, Gay Marriage Win in 2012 Election Results Watch Video

Check Out Same-Sex Marriage Status in the U.S. State By State

It's hard to imagine that only 16 years ago, the fervent gay marriage debate led to the conception of the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as a union solely held between a man and a woman.

While debating the Defense of Marriage Act in September 1996, former Sen. Robert Byrd said: "If same-sex marriage is accepted, then the announcement will be official: America will have said that children do not need a mother and a father. Two mothers or two fathers will be OK. It'll be just as good. This would be a catastrophe."

Even a few short years ago a newly-elected President Obama did not support the legalization of gay marriage. It wasn't until earlier this year, at the end of hiss first term and with the impending election in sight, that the president told ABC's Robin Roberts the he'd "been going through an evolution on this issue."

Obama went on to attribute his shift in stance to the influence of his daughters.

"You know, Malia and Sasha, they've got friends whose parents are same-sex couples. It wouldn't dawn on them that somehow their friends' parents would be treated differently," he said. "That's the kind of thing that prompts -- a change in perspective."

Obama isn't the only one to experience an evolution in thinking on the matter of gay marriage. Attitudes towards same-sex marriage have shifted dramatically over the past decade across the board, particularly in the past few years.

Gone are the days when a majority of people opposed same-sex marriage; the days when gay politicians and supporters of same-sex marriage could not get elected.

Get more pure politics at ABCNews.com/Politics and a lighter take on the news at OTUSNews.com

Today, nine states and the District of Columbia allow same-sex unions -- a number likely considered inconceivable just a few short years ago. And yet, the same-sex marriage debate still begs for the answering of a question: Will this newfound public opinion, largely driven by young people, women and Democrats, have an effect on the Supreme Court's ultimate decision on the matter?

"I think (gay marriage is) just not a big deal for a lot of young people," Elizabeth Wydra of the Constitutional Accountability Center says. "The justices are human beings so they're not completely immune to public opinion. ... I think the real question for them is going to be do they want to be on the wrong side of history?"

Read More..