I remember discovering as a child that then-Prince Charles spoke to his plants, and laughing about it with my mum. His courtiers also claimed he gives branches of trees a “friendly shake” to wish them well as he walks by. Even by today’s standards these practices still might seem pretty odd, but lots of Charles’s other “dotty” environmental views over the years have aged well.

Since his 20s, the new king has been banging on about plastic pollution and nature-based solutions. In 1970, he spoke about the “cancerous forms” of pollution – oil at sea, chemicals in rivers, air pollution from factories, cars and aeroplanes. Last year, the Washington Post said he could be the “21st century’s first eco-king”.

More recently, Charles revealed to the BBC he forgoes meat and fish for two days a week, and dairy for one day a week. His 50-year-old Aston Martin runs on surplus English white wine and cheese (no, really). Solar panels are now up on Clarence House, and he’s written a 336-page book in which he makes a “call to revolution”. He must be the first monarch to do so.

Charles has always genuinely taken the climate seriously which is much more than the rest of the royal family can profess to do – even if he does have an astronomical carbon footprint himself, living in mansions and travelling by private jet.

Until now he has shown no sign of slowing down. But now, as king, Charles is obliged to take an oath of silence. Will he continue to speak out on the environment from the throne? “Definitely not,” Jonathon Porritt, the environmentalist and Green politician, who also advised Charles as Prince of Wales, told my colleague Fiona Harvey.

But this green stuff is so ingrained in Charles, it could be hard for him to change the habit of a lifetime. With signs suggesting the UK government is moving in the wrong direction on climate change it might be difficult for him to not be active behind the scenes. He will meet with the prime minister once a week, and this is where King Charles III may have power to hold Liz Truss – or whoever else in the future – to account on the issues he cares about.

Of course, one of the Queen’s strengths was that we rarely knew what she believed in private, so the fact Charles has been so vocal about so many issues could be to his detriment. But equally, it also means the royal family could have an unlikely fanbase. Head cheerleader is my great-aunt Tina, who says she doesn’t really like the monarchy but messaged me this the other day: “King Charles will not like fracking or digging up more oil and gas in the north sea, or stopping the green levies, long live King Charles!!”.

It may seem a bit depressing that the best leadership on the environment is coming from an unelected monarch with questionable views about homeopathy and shaking hands with plants. Many of us are hoping that the green prince becomes a green king, but what a sad state of affairs that you have to rely on the monarchy to speak up for the destruction of the natural world.

Right now it feels like most of the government has a vow of silence on the environment. It would be great if those elected to be in power could speak up about these issues first. Especially when many obligations, such as cutting carbon emissions, are in fact enshrined in law – speaking about many of these issues shouldn’t be controversial.

Regards Mark

Animal Rights ruling against Curaçao Sea Aquarium October 19

WILLEMSTAD – In the lawsuit filed by Animals Rights against Curaçao Sea Aquarium concerning the five dolphins that were transferred to the Fakieh Aquarium in Saudi Arabia in June, the verdict will be handed down on Wednesday 19 October.

Lawyer Bertie Braam stated during the summary proceedings on Wednesday that Animal Rights would like to see a collaboration with Seaquarium.  

Animal Rights started a lawsuit in early June against Seaquarium, the Ministry of Health, Environment and Nature (GMN), and Tursiops, the owner of the dolphins. According to the animal organization, the permit for the transport of the five dolphins should never have been issued.

Last week it was announced that dolphin Mosa has died at the Fakieh Aquarium. Camera images show how the dolphin swims against a wall at high speed. Mosa suffered serious injuries and died as a result of a considerable amount of blood in her lungs. 

According to Braam, animal welfare is a high priority for Animal Rights and therefore a collaboration between the two parties seems to be the best solution. In addition, according to the lawyer, it is also a good time to take a close look at the animal welfare legislation in Curaçao. Braam emphasizes to the local Dutch news site NU.cw that the welfare of dolphins is different on the island than in the Netherlands. “There is no organization here that is concerned with the welfare of the animals, we need Animal Rights from the Netherlands for that.”  

The lawyer sees two possible statements. “The judge can say that the treaty has been tested and that what happened around the case is in accordance with the treaty and then that’s the end of the story,” said Braam. But according to Braam, the judge can also annul the permit. If the permit is annulled, another solution must be sought. Animal Right hopes that the options for moving the animals to another facility will then be looked into. 

Animal Rights ruling against Curaçao Sea Aquarium October 19 – Curaçao Chronicle (curacaochronicle.com)

Regards Mark

European Parliament calls for a more ambitious legislation on imported deforestation

14 September 2022

Press Release

On 13 September, the European Parliament adopted its position on the European Commission’s proposal on deforestation-free products. Eurogroup for Animals welcomes the inclusion of more animal products in the scope of the legislation, but regrets the exclusion of dairy and farmed fish production industries, as well as all other natural ecosystems destroyed by EU-driven deforestation.

Yesterday, the European Parliament (EP) voted for significant improvements of the European Commission’s proposal for a regulation on deforestation-free products. The EC had proposed a prohibition on placing on the EU market a very limited list of deforestation-risk commodities such as palm oil, wood, cocoa, coffee, beef, leather and major soy products. 

The Plenary voted to include more animal products such as the ones derived from cattle, swine, poultry and sheep. The inclusion is key as these animals are most often fed with soy which is the second driver of deforestation and it’s widely produced to serve as animal feed, and they are imported from countries with the highest deforestation rates. 

As trade in animal products fuels deforestation, the EP’s position is promising for the planet and the animals in regions of the world where intensive animal agriculture or economic activities are destroying precious natural ecosystems. Producers intending to export to the EU will be incentivised to switch to more sustainable production systems, less harmful to wild animals and to their habitats.

There is a real urgency for the EU to use unilateral measures to address the significant impact intensive livestock farming has on the planet and on the animals living on these farms and in these ecosystems. The EU must uphold its sustainable agenda and adopt such legislation when necessary

Reineke Hameleers, CEO, Eurogroup for Animals

The EP’s position is a step in the right direction but it failed to include the dairy and farmed fish production industries, as well as all other natural ecosystems destroyed by EU-driven deforestation. While the Report strengthened the EC’s proposal by enlarging the geographical scope to wooded lands, it failed to protect other ecosystems such as grasslands, wetlands, and savannahs, which are also destroyed by the EU’s consumption of soy and of imported animal products derived from soy-fed animals.

Eurogroup for Animals calls on the EC to conduct an impact assessment on the inclusion of wetlands and grasslands as soon as possible to close this loophole. 

All eyes are now on the Council as “trilogue” negotiations will start in the coming weeks. In this context, Eurogroup for Animals urges the Council to uphold the objectives of the Green Deal and thus agree with the European Parliament on a text encompassing a large scope of products including all soy-fed animals and all ecosystems destroyed by EU’s consumption of animal products.

Regards Mark