Latest news with #MinistryoftheEnvironment
Japan Forward
2 days ago
- General
- Japan Forward
How to Reduce Bear Attacks? First, Know the Numbers
このページを 日本語 で読む Bear sightings and attacks on people have been occurring one after another from Hokkaido to Hiroshima Prefecture. Moreover, many have resulted in serious injuries in 2025. From April to the end of June alone, there were 37 victims. This figure is comparable to the same period in Fiscal Year 2023, when there were 219 bear attack victims. It was the highest number of victims for any single year since statistics first became available in FY2006. In 2025, severe beech nut crop failure is predicted for the mountainous areas of the Tohoku region. Beech nuts ( buna no mi ) are a primary food source for Asiatic black bears. This, too, is similar to 2023, which also had an extremely poor harvest. Consequently, humans need to be on high alert everywhere for the appearance of bears as we head into the autumn. In the fall of 2023, a shortage of beech nuts led to mass hunger among bear populations, resulting in a series of human injuries caused by "urban bears" invading densely populated areas. Although it would be best to avoid a repeat of this situation, the circumstances are extremely difficult to manage. Beech nuts were plentiful in Tohoku region forests in 2024, so there should be even more bear cubs in 2025. That could further exacerbate the expected food shortage, making it more likely for bears to come down from the mountains. Police officers patrol the golf course at the Meiji Yasuda Ladies Golf Tournament, where a bear was spotted, on July 16. Tomiya, Miyagi Prefecture (©Getty via Kyodo) In the past, farming and mountain villages located in the satoyama, the area between mountains and urban areas, helped bears distinguish the extent of their habitat. However, due to the aging of society, population decline, and the abandonment of farmland, the functionality of the satoyama is declining. Now, once a bear leaves the mountains, it must be bewildered to find itself almost immediately in an urban setting. To stem the increase in injuries from bear attacks, the Ministry of the Environment designated bears as a managed category of wildlife in early 2025. As a result, the national government will now cover the costs for hunting or capturing bears for the prefectures. Furthermore, starting from September, the revised Wildlife Protection, Control, and Hunting Management Act will permit the use of hunting rifles in urban areas at the discretion of city and town mayors. However, these measures are merely responses to problems bears are causing in human habitats. They are unlikely to provide fundamental solutions. To implement scientific management, it is essential to know the number of bears living throughout Japan. That is data on which we currently have no firm grasp. An Asiatic black bear spotted in Nara Prefecture. (Photo provided by Nara Prefecture) The Ministry of the Environment roughly estimates the present Asiatic black bear population at 42,000. However, that estimate lacks precision. Indeed, estimates range from 22,000 to 55,000. In FY2023 alone, approximately 7,700 bears were captured or killed. Without better data, there is a constant risk of over-culling that could lead to extinction. As a first step to address the problem, funds should be allocated for an accurate survey of Japan's bear populations. That would provide the foundation for other measures. After all, due to excessive hunting pressure, bears have become extinct in Kyushu and are on the verge of extinction in Shikoku. We must not repeat past mistakes. Bears living in the deep mountains play a key role in preserving a healthy ecosystem. Author: Editorial Board, The Sankei Shimbun このページを 日本語 で読む
The Mainichi
3 days ago
- Climate
- The Mainichi
Over 200 observation points in Japan record 35 C-plus temps for 6th straight day
TOKYO -- More than 200 observation spots across Japan recorded an "extremely hot day," denoting days when the mercury hits 35 degrees Celsius or above, for the sixth straight day on July 26. A high-pressure system covered a wide area of the Japanese archipelago July 26, leading to a nationwide rise in temperatures. According to the Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA), as of 2 p.m., 217 out of 914 observation points across the country had recorded temperatures of 35 C or higher. It was the sixth consecutive day for over 200 locations to experience extreme heat. As of 2:40 p.m., the daily high recorded across the country was 39.9 C in Date, Fukushima Prefecture. Both the city of Fukushima and the Gunma Prefecture city of Kiryu saw temperatures rise to 39.2 C, with Fukushima experiencing its highest temperature on record. The town of Hatoyama, Saitama Prefecture, recorded 38.9 C, followed by the city of Miyazu, Kyoto Prefecture, at 38.7 C. The Ministry of the Environment and the JMA issued heatstroke alerts for 20 out of Japan's 47 prefectures, urging the public to use air conditioning appropriately and to stay hydrated. (Japanese original by Maki Kihara, Tokyo City News Department)
21-07-2025
- Business
She's fought for clean water for years and fears proposed Ontario permit changes will hurt First Nations
Makasa Looking Horse Henry remembers the moment she learned some people in her community had never tasted clean tap water. A lot of people have to rely on buying water, not having any hooked-up water, piped-in water and running water in their households, she said. This is a huge stressor on Indigenous women's mental health and Indigenous families' mental health. For the past eight years, Henry has fought for water sovereignty in a place that's been her home her entire life, Six Nations of the Grand River, which is near Brantford and is home to people from all six Haudenosaunee nations. Now, Henry says, a proposed regulation from the Ontario government could roll back years of advocacy and sideline voices of Indigenous communities like hers. It's honestly really, really disappointing and disheartening, she said. It feels as if the proposal is designed to keep Indigenous Peoples out of the decision-making from water extraction, and governing our own waters and governing our own lands, Henry added. Enlarge image (new window) Henry, of Six Nations near Brantford, Ont., has been advocating for Indigenous water rights for the past eight years. Photo: Submitted The proposed regulation Under the province's current regulations, companies that want to extract groundwater must apply for a permit to take water, triggering environmental assessments, public consultation, a review of the purpose for taking water and a duty to consult Indigenous communities. Businesses that might want to take groundwater include agriculture, gravel mining and water-bottling plants. The proposed regulation would allow those permits to be transferred from one company to another without reapplying, so long as the intended use for the water and amount taken stays the same or declines. That means a business could be sold to a new owner who could inherit the water rights with minimal additional review. In an emailed statement from a Ministry of the Environment spokesperson, the province said this streamlines the permit approval process, potentially cutting months off the current approval wait time. The ministry said it would also continue to review all applicants in the streamlined process to ensure requirements are met. But according to critics, such changes to the process would bypass meaningful environmental checks. What's at stake Arlene Slocombe, executive director of Wellington Water Watchers, shares Henry's concerns. The [Premier Doug] Ford government wants to make water-taking permits transferrable, meaning no input, no consent and no accountability if corporate ownership changes hands, she said in a phone interview with CBC News. Enlarge image (new window) Arlene Slocombe of Wellington Water Watchers says the proposed regulation to make water-taking permits transferrable would bypass key environmental assessments. Photo: Submitted This move to change the water-taking permit process is essentially a water-grabbing tactic that would make water-taking permits functionally and potentially eternal once approved. Slocombe warns the regulation could lead to unchecked withdrawals from groundwater systems with unknown limits. It's essentially like writing checks on a bank account that you don't know the balance of, and at some point, you run out, she said. Nobody's really tallying exactly when that 'zero' mark happens. Slocombe said while most municipal wells supplying houses and businesses eventually return water to the watershed, facilities like bottling plants could permanently remove it by shipping it beyond the local ecosystem. Another major concern is the removal of the 30-day public comment period that currently accompanies water-taking applications. Slocombe said that when BlueTriton applied for its permit to run its Aberfoyle water-bottling operation, more than 32,000 people submitted feedback. Under the new rules, a permit transfer would not require any public input. Nor would it require consultation with Indigenous groups. Again, something else that they're trying to push and take our voices out of the entire conversation, said Henry. We're not going anywhere and they need to respect us as sovereign nations. The economics of water-taking Roy Brouwer, executive director of the University of Waterloo's Water Institute and an economics professor, said the province is undervaluing the true cost of its water. Enlarge image (new window) Roy Brouwer, an economics professor at the University of Waterloo and executive director of the university's Water Institute, says the province is undervaluing the true cost of its water. Photo: Submitted He said that when he moved to Waterloo region a decade or so ago, the cost was under $5 for 1,000 cubic metres of water (one million litres). Since then, the cost has increased, but not in a way that reflects limited supply or environmental impact. They just added $500 like a round number, $500 on the permit, he said. It has all the appearances of an administrative fee. And it doesn't necessarily reflect the scarcity costs of the resource now and into the future, benefiting multiple users, said Brouwer. He believes the transfer system, as proposed, ignores the fact that water is limited. Brouwer said he's also concerned about the environmental impact. Over time … what you initially identified as a maybe limited or moderate ecological risk is perhaps a bigger risk because you actually do the pumping and you can actually observe what is happening to the natural environment. The fight in Aberfoyle Henry was a vocal critic of the former Nestlé bottling plant in Aberfoyle, later sold to BlueTriton and now owned by Ice River Springs. Despite it being part of the application process, indigenous consultation was minimal. Nobody knew in my community that water extraction … was happening. And with the lack of consultation, not even the governments knew that that was happening either, she said. Our people had no idea. Over the years, she's held groundwater awareness rallies — sometimes by herself — and delivered cease-and-desist letters on behalf of her band council. She said she secured those by going to meetings at our long house and letting our clan mothers, faith keepers and chiefs know what was happening. And so they said deliver the cease-and-desist to them. And so that's what I did. Ice River Springs, an Ontario-based bottling company and the newest owner of the Aberfoyle water-bottling facility, has yet to apply for its water-taking permit. In an emailed statement to CBC News, executive vice-president and co-owner Sandy Gott said the company supports initiatives that maintain environmental protection and it would do its work with respect for the communities in which [they] operate. Concerns about being cut out The public comment period for Ontario's proposed water permit regulation runs until Aug. 1. After that, it moves to a review and decision stage. There is no fixed timeline for when a final decision will be made. Henry said she's concerned about being cut out of the process entirely. Right now, they're trying to take every single thing that they can and they're trying to take more water, she said. And so we're just trying to fight with everything we have to protect our waters and our lands. They go hand in hand.
Yahoo
21-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
She's fought for clean water for years and fears proposed Ontario permit changes will hurt First Nations
Makasa Looking Horse Henry remembers the moment she learned some people in her community had never tasted clean tap water. "A lot of people have to rely on buying water, not having any hooked-up water, piped-in water and running water in their households," she said. "This is a huge stressor on Indigenous women's mental health and Indigenous families' mental health." For the past eight years, Henry has fought for water sovereignty in a place that's been her home her entire life, Six Nations of the Grand River, which is near Brantford and is home to people from all six Haudenosaunee nations. Now, Henry says, a proposed regulation from the Ontario government could roll back years of advocacy and sideline voices of Indigenous communities like hers. "It's honestly really, really disappointing and disheartening," she said. It feels as if the proposal is designed to "keep Indigenous Peoples out of the decision-making from water extraction, and governing our own waters and governing our own lands," Henry added. The proposed regulation Under the province's current regulations, companies that want to extract groundwater must apply for a permit to take water, triggering environmental assessments, public consultation, a review of the purpose for taking water and a duty to consult Indigenous communities. Businesses that might want to take groundwater include agriculture, gravel mining and water-bottling plants. The proposed regulation would allow those permits to be transferred from one company to another without reapplying, so long as the intended use for the water and amount taken stays the same or declines. That means a business could be sold to a new owner who could inherit the water rights with minimal additional review. In an emailed statement from a Ministry of the Environment spokesperson, the province said this streamlines the permit approval process, potentially cutting months off the current approval wait time. The ministry said it would also continue to review all applicants in the streamlined process to ensure requirements are met. But according to critics, such changes to the process would bypass meaningful environmental checks. What's at stake Arlene Slocombe, executive director of Wellington Water Watchers, shares Henry's concerns. "The [Premier Doug] Ford government wants to make water-taking permits transferrable, meaning no input, no consent and no accountability if corporate ownership changes hands," she said in a phone interview with CBC News. "This move to change the water-taking permit process is essentially a water-grabbing tactic that would make water-taking permits functionally and potentially eternal once approved." Slocombe warns the regulation could lead to unchecked withdrawals from groundwater systems with unknown limits. "It's essentially like writing checks on a bank account that you don't know the balance of, and at some point, you run out," she said. "Nobody's really tallying exactly when that 'zero' mark happens." Slocombe said while most municipal wells supplying houses and businesses eventually return water to the watershed, facilities like bottling plants could permanently remove it by shipping it beyond the local ecosystem. Another major concern is the removal of the 30-day public comment period that currently accompanies water-taking applications. Slocombe said that when BlueTriton applied for its permit to run its Aberfoyle water-bottling operation, more than 32,000 people submitted feedback. Under the new rules, a permit transfer would not require any public input. Nor would it require consultation with Indigenous groups. "Again, something else that they're trying to push and take our voices out of the entire conversation," said Henry. "We're not going anywhere and they need to respect us as sovereign nations." The economics of water-taking Roy Brouwer, executive director of the University of Waterloo's Water Institute and an economics professor, said the province is undervaluing the true cost of its water. He said that when he moved to Waterloo region a decade or so ago, the cost was under $5 for 1,000 cubic metres of water (one million litres). Since then, the cost has increased, but not in a way that reflects limited supply or environmental impact. "They just added $500 like a round number, $500 on the permit," he said. "It has all the appearances of an administrative fee. And it doesn't necessarily reflect the scarcity costs of the resource now and into the future, benefiting multiple users," said Brouwer. He believes the transfer system, as proposed, ignores the fact that water is limited. Brouwer said he's also concerned about the environmental impact. "Over time … what you initially identified as a maybe limited or moderate ecological risk is perhaps a bigger risk because you actually do the pumping and you can actually observe what is happening to the natural environment." The fight in Aberfoyle Henry was a vocal critic of the former Nestlé bottling plant in Aberfoyle, later sold to BlueTriton and now owned by Ice River Springs. Despite it being part of the application process, indigenous consultation was minimal. "Nobody knew in my community that water extraction … was happening. And with the lack of consultation, not even the governments knew that that was happening either," she said. "Our people had no idea." Over the years, she's held groundwater awareness rallies — sometimes by herself — and delivered cease-and-desist letters on behalf of her band council. She said she secured those by "going to meetings at our long house and letting our clan mothers, faith keepers and chiefs know what was happening. And so they said deliver the cease-and-desist to them. And so that's what I did." Ice River Springs, an Ontario-based bottling company and the newest owner of the Aberfoyle water-bottling facility, has yet to apply for its water-taking permit. In an emailed statement to CBC News, executive vice-president and co-owner Sandy Gott said the company "supports initiatives that maintain environmental protection" and it would do its work "with respect for the communities in which [they] operate." Concerns about being cut out The public comment period for Ontario's proposed water permit regulation runs until Aug. 1. After that, it moves to a review and decision stage. There is no fixed timeline for when a final decision will be made. Henry said she's concerned about being cut out of the process entirely. "Right now, they're trying to take every single thing that they can and they're trying to take more water," she said. "And so we're just trying to fight with everything we have to protect our waters and our lands. They go hand in hand."
The Mainichi
20-07-2025
- Business
- The Mainichi
Japan firm offers bear hunting insurance to local gov'ts as law broadens rifle use
TOKYO -- As bear-related injuries rise in Japan, an insurance company is offering to cover local governments for damages related to wildlife control once legal revisions allow for expanded urban use of hunting rifles under certain conditions from September. Tokio Marine & Nichido Fire Insurance Co. has developed a new insurance policy for municipalities to cover damage to buildings or vehicles caused by stray bullets during the culling of dangerous wild animals such as bears in urban areas and elsewhere, responding to revisions in the Wildlife Protection, Control, and Hunting Management Act. The policy aims to reduce liabilities and burdens among those involved in animal control. Until now, hunting rifles could only be used against bears appearing in urban areas in limited cases, such as when hunters were authorized by police officers under the Police Execution of Duties Act. Due to a surge in bear attacks, however, the revised law will from September allow municipal employees and hunters to use them under the authority of local governments if certain conditions are met, such as when there is a risk of harm to humans. The Ministry of the Environment has newly designated bears and wild boars as "dangerous wild animals" under the legal change. With the expected increase in urban rifle use, the risk of damage to nearby buildings and property is also expected to rise. The act stipulates that municipalities must compensate for damage to buildings, vehicles or personal property from rifle fire in urban settings. The new insurance policy will cover such losses up to 30 million yen (around $202,000). The insurance covers not only repair costs, but business losses, such as lost rental income if rental properties are damaged. Personal injury however, remains outside its scope, as compensation for such cases are handled under the State Redress Act. Annual premiums will start at about 100,000 yen (some $675), but will vary per municipality depending on the number of bear sightings in the previous fiscal year. The policy will be available starting in September, and the company plans to promote it to local governments nationwide. Between April and June, 37 people have suffered bear-related injuries across Japan, keeping pace with 39 recorded during the same period in fiscal 2023, when the country saw the highest number of victims at 219 people since records began being kept in fiscal 2006. On July 4, an 81-year-old woman was found dead in her home in the city of Kitakami, Iwate Prefecture, with multiple claw marks on her entire body including her head. The prefectural police are investigating the incident as a suspected bear attack. On July 12, a 52-year-old newsstand employee was fatally attacked by a brown bear in the town of Fukushima, Hokkaido. The Hokkaido Prefectural Government has responded with enhanced protective measures, including a "brown bear alert" calling for heightened vigilance across that entire town.
