Sharks, Rays & Whales: end of the week wrap-up

Here's a collage of several conservation items of interest to close the week:

Chinese Celebrity Promotes Shark Conservation. . . in China
Basketball sports celebrity Yao Ming, ranked as China's most successful celebrity six years running, has been actively promoting shark conservation for several years, often in conjunction with WildAid. Not only is it important to have someone who is Chinese to make the case for sharks and the elimination of shark finning, but it is also strategically critical to bring the issue to where the market for shark products is the greatest. To that end, a new television commercial featuring Yao will air on China central television, the country's main government-run broadcast outlet, in addition to having the commercial play on screens in government buildings.

According to WildAid president Steve Trent, many Chinese are not aware that shark fins (for shark fin soup) are obtained from sharks! And what can be a very effective tool in making the issue personal to the Chinese people is the unfortunate levels of mercury found in shark products. According to Trent, a 2007-2008 WildAid study indicated that a quarter of shark fin samples sold at Hong Kong markets were unfit for human consumption.

Read article in Mother Nature Network.

Panama Bans Fishing of Rays
Cousins to the sharks are the many varieties of rays in the oceans - from small round sting rays up to the manta ray which can reach 20 feet from fin tip to fin tip. This past week, the Panama government instituted a ban on all the fishing and commercialization of rays within its territorial waters. According to WildAid, "the Authority on Aquatic Resources of Panama (ARAP) informed that "the fishing, capture, transport, transfer, possession and commercialisation of rays [is now] totally prohibited" throughout the national territory."

This is a remarkable move on the part of a government because it was in response to an increasing level of catch but the decision was made without scientific evidence that the rays were at risk of being endangered or facing extinction within Panama waters. Unfortunately, decisions of this sort are typically made when a species is at grave risk; but here Panama has taken a preventative step and chosen to follow the Code of Conduct for Responsible Fishing of the United Nations Fishing and Agriculture Organization (FAO). With the ban in place, scientific studies will now be initiated to determine current populations and what, if any, sustainable levels of fishing can be managed successfully.

Read WildAid news item.

Beached Sperm Whales Died of Ingested Plastic
Scientists have now determined that seven sperm whales that beached themselves last week on the shores of Foggia, Italy, had died due to the ingestion of plastic. The whales, ranging in length from 30 to 45 feet, died within a few days of coming ashore. The results of necropsies showed the whales stomachs contained a variety of plastic, which gets caught up in the digestive tract and causes blockages or can cause the tract to twist or strangle itself. In addition, the stomachs also contained other indigestible items like rope, tin cans, and other containers.

Sperm whales are toothed whales and eat a variety of fish but are particularly fond of squid. "They must have mistaken the objects for squid, one of their favorite foods," said Giuseppe Nascetti, who teaches marine ecology at Tuscia University.

Read UPI.com news item.

Ocean Poison: chemical pollution from the Great Pacific Garbage Patch

Many of you have probably heard of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, an area in the mid-Pacific where the clockwise circulation of currents slowly works discarded plastics into a central area (about twice the size of Texas!). You may have visualized it as a floating garbage dump of plastic bags and discarded water bottles that we could, in some herculean effort, scoop all up.

Unfortunately, it's not that simple.

While there certainly are large pieces of plastic that make their way into the Garbage Patch - drawn in by the North Pacific Gyre (the famed "doldrums") and this material can pose a threat to ocean mammals and other animals like sea turtles that will sometimes mistake it for food, what constitutes a large portion of the garbage patch is "microplastic." These are minute pieces of plastic, the end result of being battered and ground by the action of the sea. It makes for a polluted soup that is ingested by a wide range of sea creatures, often unintentionally.

From seabirds all the way to larval fish, microplastic enters the marine food chain and as it does, it releases a variety of polluting chemicals as part of the process of breaking down - this breakdown we have come to call "biodegradable" but plastic doesn't really ever disappear; it simply continues to separate into smaller and smaller components, releasing chemicals into the water and into the tissues of many ocean species, many of which end up on our dinner table.

And this environmental threat is not being confined or contained within the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. After all, the plastic that is there did not just drop out of the sky. It came from the coastlines and spent weeks, months, and maybe even years, floating about, slowly disintegrating and discharging pollutants throughout the ocean, on its way to the ultimate plastic graveyard.

What to do? Well, the obvious answer would be to use less plastic and to dispose of plastic in a manner that keeps it out of the ocean. Both are challenging because the ubiquitous material has become a mainstay of our lives for the past century. And our sewage/trash transport infrastructure is still predominantly designed around the idea that the ocean is our convenient dumping ground. But, we must do what we can to minimize our "polyethylene footprint." (Are you bringing your own cloth bags to the supermarket or at least asking for paper bags over plastic? That's a start.)

Scientists are looking into methods of treating plastic, breaking it down into its base components and producing hydrocarbons - an alternative fuel source. But, currently, it requires more energy than the process produces - much like the problems with the production of ethanol, and the logistics of turning this technology towards such vast areas as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch and others worldwide is truly enormous.

To get a handle on the scope of this problem, read An Ocean of Plastic by Kitt Doucette in the latest print issue (No. 1090) of Rolling Stone (yes, Rolling Stone). I could cite several studies and technical papers, but this article puts the issue into language that everyone can understand. Right now, it's not a pretty picture and we can only hope that our actions to curtail discarded plastic combined with a future breakthrough in technology can stem the tide.

Ocean Trash & Climate Change: California takes some small steps in research and adaptation

A couple of interesting items coming out of my home state of California:

You may have heard of the Great Pacific Ocean Garbage Patch, this floating mat of various plastic and trash items that has accumulated due to a convergence of several ocean currents. The "patch" is no small area, estimated to be almost twice the size of the state of Texas and posing an obvious health hazard to sea animals, like sea birds (who mistakenly feed on the debris), or land animals (as fragments of the patch float ashore).

Researchers and students from the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego, CA are planning a 20-day expedition to better map out this growing reminder of our non-biodegradable product dependence. They will investigate to determine it's size, depth, and make-up. And they will examine its contents in detail to determine whether it is harboring additional pollutants or any invasive species.

What's to be done about the garbage patch in the future remains unclear. Formed by oceanic forces out of our control and residing in open international waters, addressing its removal has been an international and diplomatic challenge. Certainly we know what to do to not add anymore waste to it, but how do we deal with the current situation? Hopefully, an international solution will be reached but it will require considerable technological and logistical resources.

California has often taken stronger environmental positions than those emanating from the federal government, but that is because California lawmakers recognize that the state, both, has a lot to lose if nothing substantial is done, and that the state has been a major contributor over the years to environmental problems ranging from CO2 emissions to overfishing.

In Yosemite National Park, research has been taking place to compare the growth of large-diameter trees. Comparing records dating back to the early 30's, it has been determined that there has been a marked reduction in the density of these trees by as much as 24%.

"Climate change is a likely contributor to these events and should be taken into consideration," said Jan van Wagtendonk, a U.S. Geological Survey scientist. "Warmer conditions increase the length of the summer dry season and decrease the snowpack that provides much of the water for the growing season. A longer summer dry season can also reduce tree growth and vigor, and can reduce trees' ability to resist insects and pathogens."

In addition to the reduced growth, the current condition of the trees exposes them to greater wildfire danger, as there has been a marked shift in some areas from ponderosa pines, a more fire-retardant species, to less fire-retardant white fir and incense cedar.

While California attempts to push some of the boundaries of environmental policy, it apparently recognizes the bureaucratic logjam that impedes new direction in national and international energy and environmental strategies. The California Natural Resource Agency has issued a preliminary report for public review on the subject of climate adaptation - a strategy wherein it is recognized that there will be inevitable climate-related changes and proposes changes in policies and regulations to deal with them. This means preparing for the worst: heat-waves, rising sea levels, flooding, wildlife die-offs, and more.

It is somewhat reassuring to know that a government agency truly recognizes the implications of climate change. But it is unfortunate that this realization comes at a time when, apparently, prevention is not an option regarding some of its impact. This is not to say that we should throw up our hands in defeat. On the contrary, it is reason for us to double our efforts so as to minimize these effects and perhaps even reverse them in the future.

Ocean Contaminants, Pollution & Trash: the water's murky but the issue is clear

I was reviewing the latest Marine Science Review from Seaweb on Contaminants and Pollution #318. It listed over 20 articles covering research studies on the impact of pollutants on marine ecosystems. From everything including pharmaceuticals to pesticides to manufacturing process ingredients, a chemical witches' brew is able to find its way into the seas through direct discharge into waterways, seepage through soil and groundwater, and from the sky.

The impact is felt worldwide, from deformed sturgeon in China due to triphenyltin, an agricultural fungicide; to contaminants found in seagull eggs as far north as Alaska; to the effect of pharmaceuticals and other pollutants on parasites and other single-celled organisms that form the foundation of a marine ecosystem.

Laying blame or divining efficient solutions is not so easy. Though banned for many years, there are still significant traces of the pesticide DDT being found in the egg shells of Arctic seabirds. There is plenty of research going on that is producing alarming, definitive data. The question is: What is being done to stop it?

In San Francisco, California, one positive move has occurred: under a settlement with the Center for Biological Diversity, last week the Environmental Protection Agency proposed to formally size up the harmful effects of 74 poisonous pesticides on nearly a dozen imperiled species in the San Francisco Bay Area. The settlement concludes a 2007 Center suit over the EPA's violation of the Endangered Species Act in registering the pesticides and allowing their use without considering the detrimental effects they may have on federally protected species -- decidedly not pests. The settlement could be a habitat-saving grace for 11 Bay Area animals, from the delta smelt to the San Joaquin kit fox. And until EPA's analysis of the pesticides' effects is completed, the agency promised, it will restrict the use of all 74 pesticides in and abutting endangered species habitat.

"The toxic stew of pesticides in the Bay-Delta has played a major role in the collapse of native fish populations, and pesticides are a leading cause of the loss of native amphibians," said Center Conservation Advocate Jeff Miller. "This agreement is a positive step for protection of some of the Bay Area's most endangered wildlife from pesticides."

Also, check out this very thorough report from the United Nations Environmental Programme, Marine Litter: A Global Challenge. Not only does it provide a detailed examination of marine litter in all of the major oceans, from plastic to, well, you name it, but it also provides strategies and solutions for each region. It's a great reference tool, not just a quick skim read. Check it out; it's a free PDF download.