Following up on my recent post about whalers being early and unintentional environmentalists, here's some interesting news coming out of the University of Maine. A study conducted by researchers from the university, in addition to the University of British Columbia and the Gulf of Maine Research Institute, outlines the enormous carbon sequestering ability of whales and other large marine species; an ability that puts these animals on a par with other carbon storing organisms like peat bogs, grasslands and trees.
As an example, a blue whale can store up to 9 tons of carbon, surpassed only by large trees. But since the populations of blue whales have been reduced by as much as 99 percent, the planet has lost a vital source of carbon sequestration. Andrew Pershing, one of the Maine research scientists, describe the loss of potential carbon storage due to a century of whaling as the equivalent of burning more than 70 million acres of temperate forest or 28,000 SUVs driving for 100 years.
Many scientists have proposed "iron fertilization" as a method for sequestering carbon in the oceans. This process bonds iron particles with carbon and then, as the iron sinks into deep ocean depths, it takes along with it an amount of carbon. Pershing, whose research was supported by NASA and the National Science Foundation, sees whale conservation as equally if not more effective.
Pershing noted,“The big surprise was in our calculations comparing carbon exported by sinking whale carcasses to the carbon exported by iron fertilization. If we had all the whales we used to have, they would remove the same amount of carbon in a year as 200 of the most efficient iron fertilization events. What that tells me is that we can get significant carbon savings by conserving resources in the ocean, protecting whales, larger fish and sharks.”
Additionally, The larger whale and marine species prove to be more efficient at carbon storage than smaller species. While all animals absorb some measure of carbon (we're carbon lifeforms, remember?), the larger animals require less food (which equates to carbon) per unit of weight. The same amount of food can support more whale tonnage than, say, compared to penguins.
As the University of Maine reported in a recent press release, according to Pershing, “In many ways bigger is better.”Any whale could have told us that.
Over the past few years, scientists and government agencies have reported changes in the Arctic sea ice. Monitoring its annual undulations, they have seen marked reductions in the thickness and overall extant of the floating ice pack. But to determine whether this is a minor fluctuation or an actual alarming trend, a baseline is needed - one that extends farther beyond the time frame that researchers have worked within.
For that data, scientists have turned to what some ocean conservationists would consider an unlikely source: whalers.
Specifically, whalers of the late 1800's, when the industry was in full swing and whaling vessels were plying the Arctic seas in search of whales to meet the Industrial Revolution's demand for whale oil. By charting the range and condition of Arctic sea ice for the purpose of determining safe routes for their ships, whalers unintentionally became early environmentalists, providing detailed reports that scientists can use today to help establish that needed baseline for assessing long-term trends and conditions. Talk about unlikely bedfellows.
Douglas Mair, environmental expert from Scotland's Aberdeen University, is preparing to deliver a series of talks at the university on the whalers' contribution to Arctic climate science. As reported in Scotland's The Press and Journal, he said, “They [whalers] recorded a lot of their observations about sea ice, or frozen oceans, in the Arctic. They were simply trying to find a safe way through the ice. There was nothing scientific about it. But their notes show us how the Arctic waters have changed over the decades. There has been a dramatic decline in sea ice."
Another rather unlikely source for past Arctic ice data also comes from Russian studies done in the 60's involving suitable locations for hydrogen bomb tests. Again, ironic that out of the era of "mutually assured destruction" we find something that provides evidence for environmentalists to show the importance of climate change and why we must address it as the world-changing event that it is.
From one mutually assured destruction scenario to another. We seemed to have steered away from one; now let's chart a new course away from the other.
NOAA, the U.S. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, took a slightly unusual step by declaring the eastern North Pacific's basking shark a "species of concern." While it sounds a bit like a suspect in an unsolved homicide, what the designation actually does is recognize that the basking sharks that migrate along the coast from Canada to the central coast of California are not recovering in numbers as expected since the taking of basking sharks commercially was curtailed in the 1970s.
Basking sharks, which are listed as endangered on the IUCN Red List but not yet eligible for protection under the U.S.'s Endangered Species Act, are typically cold water, plankton-feeders and quite spectacular to see. Reaching lengths of up to 40 feet, they cruise near the surface with their cavernous mouth agape, filtering plankton and other small organisms. They pose no threat to humans but the reverse is certainly not the case.
Basking sharks have been hunted in the past - sometimes for meat, sometimes because they disrupt the salmon fisheries. Though now protected from deliberately being taken, they can still get caught in fishing nets or struck by vessels as they cruise the surface.
The importance of a government scientific agency taking a step like this is that it essentially greases the wheels for marine scientists to consider the basking shark as a study subject. With NOAA's acknowledged concern, the designation can assist scientists in seeking funding for research projects.
"But why should we fund your study of this shark? It's not exactly endangered is it?" "No, not yet. But NOAA feels sufficiently concerned enough to give it this designation as a warning that steps need to be taken to avoid endangering the animal further. And to know just what those steps should be, we need research. Funded research."
The basking shark - a shark that once schooled by the hundreds in decades past, now only seen a few at a time. If at all. NOAA is taking the commendable step of raising a flag. And they plan to do more. A website will be launched in December for scientists and the public alike to report sightings. In the meantime, you can report sightings by calling 858-334-2884 or send an email to Heidi.Dewar@noaa.gov.
Read more about NOAA's announcement in ScienceNews. Read more about basking sharks at NOAA'swebsite.
Sewage treatment seems like a practical and logical step from an environmental perspective. Much better to treat raw sewage than to flush it right out to sea. But in taking that step decades ago, there was a learning curve involved, and part of that curve was the realization of the impact that nitrates, produced by the treatment process, would have on fresh water and ocean environments.
Organic nitrogen (nitrates) has been shown to cause a marked increase in plankton and several forms of algae which reduce both sunlight and oxygen levels - thereby choking off aquatic plantlife and from there a cascading effect ripples through the aquatic ecosystem, eliminating fish, shellfish, and just about everything else within the ecosystem. Rivers, estuaries, and shallow bays have been hard hit by many years of treated sewage, but there are distinct signs that conditions can be improved - if not reversed all together.
A study monitoring the effects of reducing nitrates in the Potomac River, in the eastern United States, has verified a noticeable improvement in aquatic vegetation. With a return of this basic ecological building block, so returns the animal life. And the vegetation acts as a filtering agent and buffer against floating particles, thereby improving overall water quality.
According to NatureNews, a reduction of two-thirds in the discharge of nitrates (from 20 tons per day in 1990 to 6 tons in 2007) through improved technology is primarily responsible for the improvement. "'It [the vegetation]is the base of the food chain,' says [participating scientist Nancy]Rybicki. 'The number of fish, particularly young fish, and the number of invertebrates increase dramatically within the plant beds.'" Not only does this improvement in the Potomac mean good news for adjacent waterways like the Chesapeake Bay, which has seen a disastrous decline in its crab and oyster populations over the years, but it gives hope for many bodies of water and shallow tidelands worldwide. With past attempts to improve conditions in the Chesapeake Bay having been largely unsuccessful, in 2009 President Obama mandated a change by executive order, recognizing the bay as a national treasure and calling on the federal government to renew efforts to restore it. Through improved sewage treatment technology and careful monitoring of conditions, improvements can be realized.
William Ball, environmental engineer at John Hopkins University was quoted as saying, "Because much of the nitrogen decrease in the Potomac has been due to advanced wastewater treatment, this study is a strong validation of the utility and importance of applying this technology worldwide."
Margaret Palmer of Maryland's Biological Laboratory in Solomons added, "If we can clean things up in the bay, it offers great hope for other ecosystems, such as the Black Sea, the Baltic and many others."
Imagine slipping into the cool, late summer waters of Monterey Bay in central California, expecting to settle to the bottom and film kelp beds and the sealife associated with this unique marine ecosystem. As you descend into the Bay's emerald green water laden with nutrients, you find yourself surrounded, engulfed by sea jellies reaching two feet in length. An invasion of sea jellies is in full assault in Monterey Bay.
But it's not as hostile as it seems. Aggregations of sea jellies have occurred around the world, to the extant that scientists were able to see cyclical patterns. But now they are beginning to scratch their heads as more and more population outbreaks of various species are happening worldwide. The potential for a sea jelly to become an invasive species is always there, possibly transported in the bilges of international freighters as has been the case for some species of algae and seaweed. And their increased presence can destabilize local fish populations as fish seek locations free of the sea jellies' stinging tentacles.
But marine biologists are also considering man-made factors like climate change and ocean pollution. Increasing water temperatures due to climate change can stimulate sea jelly growth. And sea jellies also thrive in areas of low oxygen as a result of pollutants.
Additionally, you have the impact of overfishing on some of the sea jellies' natural predators, whether they are a commercially sought species or not. The loss of tuna and sea turtles, among others, removes an important control mechanism to sea jelly populations. And in turn, swarms of sea jellies can envenom and spoil entire commercial catches.
Sea jelly invasions. It's a topic that raises more questions than there are definitive answers at this time. Some scientists are hesitant to correlate human actions with sea jelly populations, while others pose the possibility that sea jellies could become the dominant species in the ocean. And in several Asian countries, sea jellies are already on the menu; an indication that their increasing numbers could prove a viable food source (I'll pass, if you don't mind.)
One thing is for sure; to be in the midst of thousands of these fascinating invertebrates, slowly weaving along with the currents, is an awesome sight. That is until you feel the burning, itching sensation around your unprotected face and you give leeway to these gelatinous invaders.
A brief news item caught my attention as it serves as a follow up to my recent post about the assessment of shark conservation at the recent BLUE Ocean Film Festival and Ocean Summit.
Hong Kong's Ocean Park - an aquatic amusement park similar to the Sea World parks in the U.S. - is initiating preliminary research on the viability of acquiring beluga whales from Russian waters, specifically the Okhotsk Sea.
According to Hong Kong's The Standard, the research could take anywhere from 5 to 10 years, but some conservationists are concerned that the research will be fast tracked to just a few years and that whales could be captured without fully knowing the impact on beluga whale populations in the area.
Naomi Rose, senior scientist with The Humane Society International, was quoted as saying, "'My guess is [Ocean Park officials] are going to acquire them from Russia, and if they sponsor this research ... it would take five years minimum, more like 10, before they would have sufficient information to determine any kind of safe removal level,' she said. 'They are not going to wait five to 10 years. They are going to do a couple of years of research and say: `Oh, we know now' and this is how many that would be safe.'" Ocean Park is a very successful attraction in China. It includes a marine mammal park, major aquarium, and a variety of amusement park rides. In attendance, it ranks in the top 20 worldwide (15th in 2008), exceeding Hong Kong's Disneyland. It is also a member of the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA), which requires members to seek animals from other institutions and acquiring wild animals only as a last resort.
Now, as I have previously said in this blog, I am not an advocate of marine mammals like whales and dolphins in captivity, particularly as these animals are pelagic. There just isn't an exhibit large enough to provide a healthy environment. But what I found interesting with the article and after reviewing the Ocean Park website is the growing schizophrenic position that Asian cultures are beginning to find themselves in. They can view sea creatures with awe and enthusiasm at Ocean Park - just like Western cultures - and then finish the day with a bowl of shark fin soup or whale meat. But this paradox can lead to an opportunity.
As Peter Knights of WildAid commented during the recent shark conservation panel I moderated for the BLUE Ocean Film Festival, many of the Chinese people, and other Asian countries, are not fully aware of the practices of shark finning, or dolphin/whale hunting. At the moment, they have their feet in two worlds - a cultural heritage that looks at many sea creatures as merely food items to be taken as needed and by any means possible, and a more contemporary approach where a greater appreciation for the animals and the ecological implications exists. It's a paradox that provides a fracture for conservationists to utilize if done rationally and carefully.
However, it is very easy for outside groups to alienate themselves and lose the opportunity to sway Asian public opinion in favor of protection and conservation if the approach is perceived more as condemnation and ridicule rather than a rational and tempered argument. Everyone responds to enlightenment and illumination when it is not at the expense of humiliation. That is the tightrope that shark and marine mammal conservationists must walk to effectively reach the Asian populace.
Read article in The Standard. View Ocean Park's website.
The complexity of global warming and its effects are highlighted in journal articles cited by SeaWeb in its latest Marine Science Review (issue #359). The challenge to scientists in determining the long-term effects is how best to correlate a myriad of artificially introduced components that can either increase or even decrease atmospheric and ocean temperatures.
A study in Nature Geoscience examines the complexities behind the El Nino-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) which begins in the tropical Pacific but whose effects extend worldwide. Predicting the frequency and extant of this oscillation has been a challenge even in the best (aka "alnaturale") of circumstances. By interjecting man-made factors, the predictability becomes even more difficult. But it is clear that a strong ENSO raises temperatures along the equator, changing wind patterns that impact temperature gradients between surface and deep water layers both at the equator and beyond.
Another study in Nature Geoscience examined issues related to atmospheric aerosols - particles and gases in the atmosphere that have the ability to actually lower temperatures (an extreme example of this would be the extended "winter" that doomed the dinosaurs brought on by ejecta from a meteorite impact). With man-made pollutants, like smog, sometimes both effects - heating and cooling - are at work due to the nature of what is being thrown into the air. This can make it challenging for scientists to determine the end net result and for those who have proposed the use of man-made atmospheric aerosols to moderate temperature, called radiation management, the results are questionable. One fact is known: atmospheric aerosols ultimately weaken the ozone layer, as we had over the Arctic, which increases temperatures.
There were two studies in Toxicon that examined the increase of Ciguatera, a fish poisoning that occurs with the ingestion of algal toxins. As it works its way up the food chain, the effect accumulates and becomes magnified. Human consumption of infected fish can produce some nasty gastrointestinal and even neurological effects. One study, focused on the Caribbean, and showed that the incidence of ciguatera was highest where high and relatively consistent sea surface temperatures (SST) occurred. In contrast, another study in the South Pacific showed that there is a temperature threshold over which ciguatera prevalence is dampened, but determining where and when this dampening effect occurs is challenging due to the oscillation of ocean currents in the area.
And lastly, a study in Climate Policy reminded us all of where the impacts of climate change will fall on human populations. Equatorial, developing countries - in Africa, the Indian subcontinent, Latin America, and small island states - will feel the greatest effects, affecting subsistence-level economies. And this will have to be taken into consideration when establishing international policies. The industrial world, existing in colder latitudes, has produced over 66% of the global greenhouse gases, but its equatorial neighbors will experience over 75% of the effects within this century.
Climate ecology, like many of the natural forces from evolution to the birth of the universe, is an incredibly complex system unto itself. This makes the study and outcomes of man-made intrusions a very difficult one to forecast. But there is no doubt that mankind is having an impact. I receive 20 to 30 summaries on climate change studies each month from SeaWeb - the data is there, the research is ongoing, and the reality of climate change should be a worldwide concern.
With the recent Gulf Oil Spill disaster, the subject of mangroves has become a hot topic. We have all seen the images of oil lapping at the roots of mangroves in Louisiana and Florida, choking the life that not only is growing from the silty bottom on up, but which also surrounds the mangroves in the form of shrimp, sea larvae, and newly hatched fish seeking protection.
Now, a new study published in Global Ecology and Biogeography warns that the world's entire acreage of mangroves has been overestimated, that there is less than originally thought and that we are losing these critically important aquatic forests at an alarming rate.
Scientists from the United States, Australia, and Kenya poured over the most recent satellite data taken by the U.S. Geological Survey for its Global Land Survey, along with other archive images, that utilize remarkable high resolution Landsat satellite photographs. By comparing them to previous estimates by the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), it was found that overall, mangrove forests are 12.9% less than previously thought. And since 1980, 20% to 30% has been lost globally, with mangrove forests disappearing at an average rate of 1% per year.
As reported by BBC Earth News, Dr. Chandra Giri, one of the scientists involved in the study, warned, "13% is significant, especially as it is disappearing faster than inland tropical forests. We need to preserve the remaining mangrove forests with urgency otherwise they might disappear."
What makes mangroves so important? First, they serve as a protective nursery for a variety of sea life. Their root structures and the action of the roots on the fine ocean sediment make for ideal habitat conditions for oysters, sponges, algae, shrimp, lobsters and other small crustaceans - not to mention offering a safe haven for a variety of larval and juvenile fish. The loss of mangroves as nurseries can have a profound impact on adult populations further out at sea.
Because of the mangroves' massive root networks, they also serve to protect fragile coastlines from erosion. The impact of daily tidal ebb and flow - and even the extreme action of storm surge or tsunami movements - are moderated by this botanical line of defense. And the mangroves can assist in filtering and maintaining water and air quality by sequestering CO2 and helping the sediments to retain gases and heavy metals.
While the Gulf of Mexico's mangroves have received a lot of publicity of late, 40% of the world's mangroves are located in Asia (compared to North and Central America's 15%). Often based at the mouths of large delta river areas, the shrinking mangrove forests pose a major risk to local communities both from heightened exposure to the elements and from the negative impact on seafood that is a means of economic or nutritional survival.
Read an abstract of the research study. Read more about the study in Earth News.
Working towards a sea change. That is the tag line for a charming new book titled Sea Voices that compiles interviews with a a wide range of people involved in ocean conservation. From scientists and policy makers to filmmakers, celebrities, and musicians - whoever has a dedication to the protection of our aquatic resources, many of them appear in this coffee table-sized volume with personable interviews that explain their interests and what they are doing on behalf of the oceans.
Making that human connection is the foundation behind Sea Voices. As the authors note, "The purpose of this book is to unite people all around the world for one common cause, the health of our Global Ocean, a responsibility that we all share." I had the opportunity to meet and spend some time talking about the oceans with authors Duffy and Elizabeth Healey. Their enthusiasm and dedication to this approach, to bring the issues of ocean conservation to a general audience through the many names and faces who are championing the cause, was obvious the moment I met them.
From scientists and explorers like Dr. Bob Ballard and Lt. Don Walsh, to actors and celebrities like Ted Danson and Kate Walsh, to musicians like Jack Johnson and Jason Mraz - over 130 in all appear in Sea Voices because all have a stake in the game just like the rest of us.
Sea Voices. This is a delightful, informative, and fun read - a great way to get someone energized and involved but who is reticent about detailed, arcane tomes on dire conservation issues. The book just came out and will be available in bookstores soon or you can order online at the book's website.
The BLUE Ocean Film Festival & Conservation Summit came to a close this past Sunday, leaving behind a terrific week of conversation seminars, ocean films, and meetings with some of the ocean's leading defenders in the film, scientific, and political arenas. The film festival's big prize winner was Bag It, by Reel Thing, a personal journey of one man to learn and unravel the issues surrounding the use and impact of plastics on the environment.
On Saturday, I moderated a discussion panel, New Strategies in Shark Conservation, at the Monterey Conference Center's Steinbeck Forum. I was honored to have four panelists who have been deeply involved in shark conservation, and their particular perspectives were very insightful as to what the future holds for shark conservation.
Shark Conservation Panelists Peter Knights, executive director of WildAid: Peter's work with WildAid has been focused on the illegal trade in endangered species and he typically directs his battles toward the international frontlines. In particular, he sees great potential in bringing the issue directly to the people of China. This is a nation that not only has a sizable population - one that he says is not fully aware of the implications of the commercial shark market - but is also a nation that can have influence on many other Asian nations. WildAid continues with its campaign of public awareness to Asian-speaking populations with the wide use of Asian celebrity endorsements.
Stefanie Brendl, involved in Hawaii's recent shark fin prohibition legislation: Stefanie, as owner of Hawaii Shark Encounters, has jumped feet-first into the legislative arena, seeing what can be realistically accomplished through the halls of regional, state, and national politics. She is currently working with WildAid, which is based in San Francisco, to determine ways in which possible legislation can be initiated in California. The Hawaiian anti-fin bill can be an inspiration but, for California and anywhere else, a new political initiative means a minefield of new players, political influences, and constituencies. One of Stefanie's observations was that many of the emotional issues that fuel the shark conservation movement on a personal level have no resonance in the world of politics - it's a matter of economics and political logic supported by hard, undeniable data.
Laleh Mohajerani, director of Iemanya Oceanica: Mexico brings together many components involved in the shark conservation issue - governmental regulations and the viability of enforcement based on available resources; public awareness to a population whose focus can be on more fundamental needs of food and survival; and a local fishing population that has not fully been afforded economic alternatives to the overfishing of valuable marine resources. Laleh's organization is directing campaigns to bring not only more awareness to the Mexican public in general but to also show local fishing communities ways to support themselves without decimating the populations of sharks, turtles, and many other ocean species. These types of directives can be applied to other second and third world nations.
Dr. Greg Stone, senior scientist of the oceans, Conservation International: Greg brings a wealth of both scientific and international diplomacy experience and much of what Conservation International has been involved in has included scientific research that provides the hard, indisputable data for the policy and decision makers. The organization also works by bringing together the interests of multiple nations to form large-scale policy and regulatory agreements, such as the Phoenix Islands marine reserve and the Pacific Oceanscape - examples of large geographic zones where marine resources are protected, monitored, and enforced. Greg emphasized the importance of having the accurate facts and data to define the important role that sharks play in maintaining a healthy marine environment and that the larger organizations, - like Conservation International, WildAid, and the Humane Society - are perhaps best equipped to accomplish these critical, large-scale international goals that can produce quantifiable results.
Shark Conservation Maturing The shark conservation movement is at a critical stage of maturation. It has been fueled by emotional hot buttons like the cruel hunting methods of shark finning and the seeming waste of a luxury item like shark fin soup or shark cartilage. But there was much agreement within the panel that, as important as these components are to the debate, to see quantifiable change in policy we must deal with the harsh realities of politics and economics. There are fundamental cultural differences between peoples that may never be resolved regarding attitudes towards sharks or seafood in general. And to challenge or resolve those cultural roadblocks may take too long or be too divisive. Instead, developing fact-based platforms that speak to the specific needs of nations will more and more become the model for future progress.
So where does this leave us as individual advocates and supporters? The panel still felt there was a strong need for the individual efforts, the grass-root movements. Concern was raised though that with so many "save the shark" groups today, each fighting for a measure of recognition and funding, the movement can become dissipated. Peter Knights noted that the individual choices we make regarding sharks and seafood in restaurants and supermarkets, what we tell our friends and acquaintances about the shark problem (calmly and matter-of-factly), all still can have a tremendous impact. Greg Stone commented that we all need to make careful, informed decisions about what organizations we support financially, learning what groups can show real and tangible accomplishments.
Stefanie Brendl noted that, while many shark supporters are inundated with one petition after another from a variety of groups and causes and may question whether so many of these are nothing more than feel-good exercises to rally the troops, the concept of the petition (or personal email, hand-written letter, or phone call) can be effective if properly directed to the right policy or decision-maker. And that is something that can often be best accomplished by yourself rather than relying on another group to be your water boy.
And, as a filmmaker, I reiterated my position that sharks need to be represented accurately and without over-sensationalism or, as sometimes happens with ardent shark supporters, misrepresentations of sharks as cuddly pets. Shark conservation is a tough enough proposition for many in the general public (or in the halls of congress) to appreciate; no need to come across as shark-hugging lunatics to those we are trying to persuade.
The Future In the future, we may see a combining of efforts that will bring many shark advocate organizations to align themselves with larger organizations to consolidate power. This will be an important step in securing sensible political and economic measures on both a national and international level. And all of us will need to take greater personal responsibility for our involvement - mindful of the impact of rational and reasoned arguments in a complicated multi-cultural world, and cautious as to who we support and why.
The RTSea Blog was started in 2008 and now includes over 950 entries available for media or academic background research use, including observations on a wide range of topical issues and events involving the oceans, sharks, and nature in general. After a brief break in 2012-13, there will now be more posts forthcoming.
Use keywords in the Search tool below or at the bottom of this web page to locate articles of interest.
Cinematographer/media consultant & producerRichard TheissandRTSea Mediaadministers this blog with the intent that information will be disseminated across the Internet and, in so doing, will illuminate others as to the serious challenges that lay before us in preserving and protecting our natural resources.
Search This Archive
Richard Theiss - DP/Media Consultant & Producer
Available for HD video assignments, media consulting, and speaking engagements. For contact information, click on the image above.
Following up on my recent post about whalers being early and unintentional environmentalists, here's some interesting news coming out of the University of Maine. A study conducted by researchers from the university, in addition to the University of British Columbia and the Gulf of Maine Research Institute, outlines the enormous carbon sequestering ability of whales and other large marine species; an ability that puts these animals on a par with other carbon storing organisms like peat bogs, grasslands and trees.
