From MacRitchie Nature Trail: Bringing in the Animal Perspective (Part 1)

"The good man is the friend of all living things"

Mahatma Gandhi

On what was a breezy and warm Sunday morning, I had the opportunity to go on a nature walk along MacRitchie's Prunus-Petai Trail with BES's very own Drongos, a guiding interest group featuring awesome BES seniors! (find out more about what they do here!!!).

A breezy Sunday - taken just before the start of the walk

A relaxing walk of ~2.5hrs, the focus of this series of walks is to educate others on the biodiversity present in Singapore's nature reserve, and the impending threats they face should the development of the Cross-Island Line proceed. (to learn more about the saga, follow the Love MacRitchie movement here)

What got me thinking was when my guide, Judy, started to talk about how the fruits and flowers of plants along the boardwalk were food sources for wildlife residing in the area. Hearing her prompted me to think about my entry for this blog.  

BES Drongos after their guiding session!
(Source: Jacqueline Chua (14 September 2014))

My blog content has presently been focused on the challenges of fulfilling human needs. But food isn't a need exclusive to humans. Aren't animals (and by extension of that idea biodiversity) part of this bigger picture? Don't they need food too and just where do they get their source of food from in Singapore? Do animals and other forms of biodiversity in Singapore have sufficient food sources to feed on?

Reports and studies indicate that Singapore is a sanctuary for many species of wildlife. Our tropical climate and multiple habitats (ranging from coastal mangroves to inland forests) lead to more forms of biodiversity in comparison to temperate and arid environments (Laurance et al., 2012). So what would these species do to procure food then? Obviously they don't visit the supermarket or the food court like we do (just imagine the social trauma people would experience should a monkey order a bowl of noodles; that'll make us all go bananas!), rather they source their food from where they live, climbing trees, entering water bodies, even foraging through the soil for smaller animals, plants and nuts to feed on.

Let me share some pictures of plants I have taken today, which are actually food sources for animals residing in the Prunus-Petai Trail of MacRitchie:

The first picture is of a Fishtail Palm (Caryota mitis). This palm's fruit is one of the foods for the common palm civet (Paradoxurus hermaphroditus)

The next one features the Common Marang (Macaranga bancana). The plant produces food for the ants, in the form of "Beccarian bodies", which are rich in lipids. In return, the ants protect the plant from prospective herbivores that might try to feed on it. 

The 3rd picture shows the Mousedeer plant (Anisophyllea disticha). Found in lowland secondary forests across the region, the fleshy red drupes produced by the plant are known to be eaten by birds, as well as the lesser mousedeer.

This last picture is the Tampinis tree (Streblus elongatus). Having a neighbourhood (Tampines) named after it, birds and squirrels are known to go after the sweet tasting fruit, whereas Long-tailed Macaques feed on their leaves as well.

Not featured (due to a lack of pictures) but also known to bear fruit are the Nibong palm, a palm with prickly needles on its stem to deter climbers (Oncosperma tigillarium) as well as the Golden Hairy Figs (Ficus aurata), a longan-like fruit in terms of its shape.

As a whole, while humans have historically been caught in strife and wars, animals seem to live their lives in peace in comparison, sure a few get eaten by others and by humans, but that's part of natural selection in action. Humans have also lived off these forests and this is continued by many ethnic tribes all around the world, such as the Batwa (which was mentioned briefly during my ENV1101 lecture). In fact, National Geographic published an article last month discussing about the interconnectedness behind human health and environmental health from assessment studies done in Madagascar. 

However, human needs seemed to have changed and drastically increased with the advancement of technology and society as a whole over these past 50-60 years. Termed the 'Great Acceleration' by some in the scientific community, we observe a sharp increase in development and urbanization across the world (Steffen et al., 2011). This is also rather evident in Singapore, where we have progressed tremendously from Third World to First, but also transformed from forest to urban jungle, losing much of our original forest cover. With our increased demand for natural resources on a global level, the availability of these resources will deplete in the future, and could be an indication of the environment reaching its carrying capacity, which is suggested in a Malthusian model for population-resource relationships. 

Comparing forest cover from 1819 to the 1990s, it is suggested that Singapore has lost close to 90% of its original forest from rapid development (Source: http://mangrove.nus.edu.sg/guidebooks/text/1004.htm) 

In this light, I would talk more about (in my subsequent post) what happens when human needs and the needs of animals residing in our natural environments clash? What happens if animals are no longer able to get their food, and what conflicts arise in satisfying human needs.

Stay tuned for the next post! And here are two more pictures of what you might be able to find during the trail, do visit Prunus-Petai Trail if you can!

Jelutong tree or the Chewing Gum tree - the tallest tree in MacRitchie reservoir park

A Riang Riang tree situated near the reservoir water

References:

Laurance, W., Useche, D., Rendeiro, J., Kalka, M., Bradshaw, C., Sloan, S., Laurance, S., Campbell, M., Abernethy, K., Alvarez, P. and others, (2012). Averting biodiversity collapse in tropical forest protected areas. Nature, 489(7415), pp.290--294.

Steffen, W., Persson., Deutsch, L., Zalasiewicz, J., Williams, M., Richardson, K., Crumley, C., Crutzen, P., Folke, C., Gordon, L. and others, (2011). The Anthropocene: From global change to planetary stewardship. Ambio, 40(7), pp.739--761.

----------------------------------

All Scientific Names for species in this post were obtained from:
The DNA of Singapore, (2014). Information Search. [online] Available at: http://137.132.71.21/dna/search/information/20/1/U2ltcG9oIEFpcg [Accessed 14 Sep. 2014].

Greening Singapore, why not Feeding Singapore too? - Food Gardens

“If you have a garden and a library, you have everything you need"

Cicero

Let me begin today’s post by sharing you this video:

Given this blog title is ‘From the Field…’, it feels strange to me on how little of the agricultural sector (i.e. the field) we see in Singapore, strategically placed away from the residential and CBD areas. Listening to Ron Finley’s inspiring story of creating a food garden movement in his city, I felt compelled into writing my views on the potential of food gardens within our neighborhoods, whether it is possible to begin with and the challenges we might face.

Singapore has a rather friendly environment to grow food and spices, given our agricultural history. Think about Orchard Road, Singapore’s shopping street, but named for previously housing plantations for nutmeg, pepper and other spices. We are in a geographical favorable location for biodiversity. While we lack seasons, our tropical climate and lack of environmental hazards such as floods and drought (Rosenzwelg and Parry, 1994), allow for a multitude of vegetables and fruits to grow, such as kang kong and tomatoes.

 Orchard Road - from agricultural hub to shopping promenade
(Source: Singapore Philatelic Museum)

What about the costs of planting your own fruits / vegetables then? Beyond the investment of time (weeks, sometimes months) required to tend the plant(s), gardening can be a rather cost-efficient activity too. A gardening shop in Singapore would sell seeds at $5 for a pack of 50 seeds and gardening tools can be purchased at a hardware store such as Home DIY. There is also a need to consider for compost and fertilizer, but you can always DIY that with your food scraps (if you cook). Just go to YouTube or Google to search for countless of methods. Here’s one which utilizes egg shells which I found fascinating!

You don’t necessarily have to have to own a plot of land to begin growing your own food either. There are many groups around Singapore that have a keen eye for gardening, and this is further supported by the National Parks’ Board ‘Community in Bloom’ initiative, which allows Singaporeans to contribute to the green ambiance in Singapore’s neighbourhoods (NParks, 2013). Below are some resources to learn more about gardening in general and food garden projects currently existing in Singapore.

“Edible 'Garden City' Project” -
One of the most prominent groups championing the 'Grow Your Own Food' movement in Singapore. They conduct consultations for F&B outlets and homes, as well as workshops on how to grow your own vegetables

“Green Culture SG” -
A forum to for local gardeners to share their knowledge and discuss about gardening. (link goes to the sub-forum on Edible Plants)

“NParks Gardening Resource Websites” -

NParks' very own resource list comprising of videos, websites and tips on Gardening

The hard truth is that we will not be able to get everything out of these gardens, and the role of markets will remain central in the lives of Singaporeans as a way to get a bulk of their cooking ingredients. Nonetheless, food gardens can have multiple purposes as well, becoming a new recreational space for communities, and more importantly provide an opportunity to bring the public closer than ever to appreciate food coming straight from the field, rather than off the shelf.

 

Just last month, over 350 community-run gardens under the Community in Bloom Programme were awarded prizes during the Singapore Garden Festival. Featured above is from Woodlands Zone 2 RC, a Platinum and Diamond award winner. Their food garden grows plants such as pandan and chilli which are condiments in cooking
(Source: Zachariah, 2014)

Gardens can be beautiful. Why not eat off them every now and then too?

References

NParks, 2013. Community in Bloom. [Online] 

Available at: http://www.nparks.gov.sg/cms/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=32&Itemid=145
[Accessed 7 September 2014].

Rosenzweig, C and Perry, M. (1994). Potential impact of climate change on world food supply. Nature, 367(6459), pp.133—138

Zachariah, N. (2014). Green plots for young and old among Community In Bloom award winners. The Straits Times. [Online] Available at: http://www.straitstimes.com/lifestyle/home-garden/story/green-plots-young-and-old-among-community-bloom-award-winners-20140705#5 [Accessed 7 September 2014].

To Meat or Not to Meat, that is the question

"Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things."

Genesis 9:3, The Bible

Earlier in May this year, Ms Grace Fu, 2^nd Minister for the Environment and Water Resources, spoke with participants at the National Climate Change Youth Conference, and while many were able to forsake their electronic devices and take public transport, far fewer were able to commit to going meat-less to reduce the amount of carbon emissions in our atmosphere. (James, 2014)

Could meat be the new must-have product amongst our youth? Having been recognised as a key source of protein and integrated seamlessly into our diet, it is also important to note that the production of meat in itself has been criticised to be intensive in water and land resources, as well as a significant contributor of greenhouse gases (roughly 18% according to the FAO).

Livestock production accounts for roughly 18% of all carbon emissions, the 2^nd highest behind energy production
(Source: http://www.scientificamerican.com/slideshow/the-greenhouse-hamburger/#3)

In today’s post, I will be focusing on a journal article, entitled The Price of Protein, which I encountered while researching about sustainable consumption. In essence, the article compares the amount of land use utilized and carbon emissions emitted between production methods for protein providing products, comprising of conventional animal meats (red meats, poultry, seafood) along with vegetarian alternatives, such as pulses (dried legume seeds).

Using carbon emissions and land use as indicators for environmental impacts, the report asserts that the production of red meats released the most amount of carbon emissions (up to 150kg CO2 per kg of meat), followed by the production of other animal meats, and finally vegetarian alternatives (Nijdam, Rood and Westhoek, 2012). However, the differences in environmental impacts between red meat production and other animal meat production was suggested to be far larger than the difference between animal meat production and vegetarian alternative production,

My biggest takeaway reading the report was how much potential the agricultural sector has to make its processes less carbon intensive and more sustainable. One particular example to highlight would be on the comparison of cattle farming methods, whereby carbon emissions for methods to produce beef from mixed calves or culled dairy cows in the Netherlands can be up to 5 times less than the conventional extensive ranching methods (Nijdam, Rood and Westhoek, 2012) (for more info click here) But, while traditional animal husbandry can be revamped, it is also important that on the consumer end we curb our demand for meat, to reduce our ecological footprint and push for a sustainable earth.

Dutch farming methods showing emission outputs that are 20% of traditional methods, and generating close to the same level of emissions as other forms of livestock
(Source: Nijdam, Rood and Westhoek, 2012)

What does all this have to do with us then? Singapore might not produce majority of our own meats, yet as a small island state, we stand to lose a lot from rising sea levels as a result of global warming. Our country also shows much potential in cutting down our meat consumption levels, consuming 87kg / capita (AVA, 2014), almost twice the amount of animal food products as compared to the global average of 42kg / capita (FAO, 2012).

However, persuading others to do so on numbers alone is not going to move people by much. Numerical data to fill any knowledge gap about the environmental costs must also be combined with values-based persuasion to appeal better to audiences. (Bubela and Nisbet, 2009). In addition, advocating for a less meat diet solely for environmental benefits isn’t enough to convince Singaporeans, majority of whom are comfortable with consuming meat, rather it has be branded with other social, ethical and economic benefits as well.

Combining hard-to-read data (left) and simple messaging strategies (right) to getting a message across will be the next challenge of less-meat advocates 
(Source: Nidjam, Rood and Westhoek, 2012; http://globalvoicesonline.org/2014/04/04/singapore-poster-campaign-wants-public-to-feel-guilty-about-meat-consumption/)

However, change may just be coming, all around the world, bottom-up initiatives are leading the charge for a less-meat diet, proposing meatless days to spread the message. In Singapore, an emerging veggiethursday.sg is a variant of the international movement, and might just be the start of something big here.

-----------------------------------------------------

P.S.
If you are interested in learning more about the challenges of reducing meat consumption, feel free to visit http://blog.nus.edu.sg/xiran/2014/08/18/meat-consumption-and-climate-change/, posted by my friend and fellow BES student, Xiran, who is also blogging about food as well and the environmental issues pertaining to it.

References

Agri-Food and Vetirinary Authority of Singapore , 2014. Statistics - Per capita consumption. [Online] Available at: http://www.ava.gov.sg/Publications/Statistics/#capita[Accessed 30 August 2014].

Bubela, T. & Nisbet, M., 2009. Science communication reconsidered. Nature Biotechnology, 27(6), pp. 514-518.

Food and Agriculture Organisation, United Nations, 2012. By the numbers: GHG emissions by livestock. [Online] Available at: http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/197623/icode/[Accessed 30 August 2014].

James, H., 2014. Education, Collaboration and Technology of equal importance - CleanEnviro Summit 2014 Solutions No. 3, Singapore: Novus.

Nijdam, D., Rood, T. and Westhoek, H. (2012). The price of protein: Review of land use and carbon footprints from life cycle assessments of animal food products and their substitutes. Food Policy, 37(6), pp760--770

Picking your foods right – Thoughts on what makes food safe

“Tell me what you eat, and I will tell you who you are."

Jean-Anthelme Brillat Saverin

Just a few days back, Channel NewsAsia reported that Singapore has began to lift bans for food grown in Fukushima, some 3 and a half years after the Fukushima nuclear crisis (see article here). While AVA will continue to conduct radiation checks, Singapore is making a bold move in re-introducing potentially radioactive foods into the market, considering that even within Japan, people are turning their backs on Fukushima produce (see article here). Regionally, contaminated foods also threaten the image of fast food in China, where the meat supplier for McDonalds’ has been accused of providing expired meats (see article here).

In light of all these food scares, it has made me question what I have been eating off the shelf all this time, and whether it has been safe for me or the environment. For that matter, what really makes food safe anyway, when what happens to your body in the short term (i.e. food poisoning) and the long term (i.e. cancer), can be very different? 

naturallysaavy.com, an organic living blog, highlights what they think are the 7 most dangerous ingredients in foods today

While technological innovation(s) like preservatives and GM foods have greatly improved our food supply, many have been a topic of environmental controversy as well. In particular, the heavy use of pesticides in agriculture to kill pests has been linked to poisoning our water supply (via leaching into groundwater), and causing pesticide-resistant ‘superweeds’ to emerge (Sattler and Kächele, 2007). In Canada today, environmentalists continue to be engaged in banning the use of neonicotinoids as a pesticide, for it has causing the death of nearby pollinating bee populations, and potentially causing neurodegenerative disorders amongst humans whom consume these foods sprayed. (see article here)

On the bright side, many Singaporeans have begun to support organic food instead, citing health and environmental reasons (Weber Shandwick, 2014), and suppliers are responding to this demand. The next challenge lies in making organic food an economically viable option in a nation of growing income inequality. During my groceries shopping for the week, I took a peek at the supermarket's organic corner and found the price differences between organic foods and non-organic ones to be staggering .

How would you like to pay close to 7 times more for 5 oranges?

Contamination of food however, will remain something people will never take lightly. With respect to the lifting of bans for Fukushima produce, I still feel Singaporeans will likely still avoid them, and look towards substitutes imported from other areas, even if they come at a higher price. Somehow Singaporeans, for all our bargain-hunting, will never compromise on personal health, and that’s a good thing. Hopefully for that we make smarter, environmentally-friendly food choices as well. 

References

Channel NewsAsia, 2014. Fukushima food imports ban lifted, but AVA still conducting checks. [Online]
Available at: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/fukushima-food-imports/1323994.html
[Accessed 27 August 2014].

Sattlera, C., Kächele, H. & Verch, G., 2007. Assessing the intensity of pesticide use in agriculture. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment, 119(3-4), pp. 299-304.

Weber Shandwick, 2014. Food Forward Trends Report 2014 , Singapore: s.n.

Filling the Plate - A look at Food Insecurity

“Hunger knows no friend but its feeder”

Aristophanes

Satisfying hunger, even in times of old, has always been one of homo sapiens’ fundamental needs. As so aptly coined by Snickers:

(Source: http://alittlesomethingabout.com/2012/07/25/hungry/)

Imagine the last time you went un-fed for an extended duration. Did it prompt you to become lethargic and lifeless, or enter a sour mood? Yet, while we merely become physically and emotionally deprived until the next available meal, the sad reality is people worldwide continue to face this problem day in, day out.

All 842 million-odd of them.

(Soucre: The State of Food Insecurity in the World - Executive Summary 2013)

Granted, majority of the world’s hungry originate from developing regions in Africa and the Asia-Pacific, but a recent article from National Geographic entitled 'The New Face of Hunger' explored the evolving face of hunger and food insecurity in the United States, and it has shown that food insecurity is no longer a prevalent issue from developing nations alone, but can be experienced worldwide (National Geographic, 2014). Known to be one of the largest corn producers in the world, it is surprising and worrying that one of the world’s superpowers has become filled with citizens whom, despite owning a car and house, lack the financial ability to satisfy their personal food needs.

Such has left me to ponder on Singapore’s own ability to fulfil our food needs. With the wide availability of food kiosks, hawker centres and supermarkets islandwide, it is virtually impossible to identify food deserts like National Geographic highlighted for the US. Yet, our weakest link could lie in our high reliance on imports for food (roughly 90%). What happens should our supply chains be cut off? Do we have a Plan B or will our island-state go 6 million hungry?

Unlike our independence in 1965, Singapore’s food independence looks much harder to achieve. In our largely urbanized city, arable land use has fallen below 1%, as traced by World Bank (2013), with the remaining of our forested areas kept for military training or as natural sites for biodiversity. Geographical conditions such as extended periods of rain and our consistently one-dimensional climate puts us at a comparative disadvantage in crop growth in comparison to our regional neighbours.

That isn’t to say Singapore is helpless to its limitations. Technological innovations, such as vertical farming to grow vegetables, is picking up in Singapore, but it may be decades before Singapore can confidently say that we are able to feed our own people.

                                     

References

Krishnamurthy, R. (2014). Vertical Farming: Singapore’s Solution to Feed the Local Urban Population. [online] PermacultureNews.org. Available at: http://permaculturenews.org/2014/07/25/vertical-farming-singapores-solution-feed-local-urban-population/ [Accessed 17 Aug. 2014].

National Geographic, (2014). The New Face of Hunger. [online] Available at: http://www.nationalgeographic.com/foodfeatures/hunger/ [Accessed 17 Aug. 2014].

The State of Food Insecurity in the World – Executive Summary 2013. (2013). 1^st ed. [ebook] Available at: http://www.fao.org/docrep/018/i3458e/i3458e.pdf [Accessed 17 Aug. 2014]

World Bank, (2013). Arable land (% of land area) | Data | Table. [online] Available at: http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/AG.LND.ARBL.ZS [Accessed 17 Aug. 2014].