Thanksgiving 2012: taking the glass beyond half full

In the U.S. we are preparing to celebrate Thanksgiving this Thursday.  It commemorates a moment when early Pilgrim settlers chose to give thanks for what they had at that moment, even when they knew they still were facing formidable obstacles.  That is the power of optimism coupled with a strong sense of reality.  The glass is half-full but we won't stop until it's over the rim.

Conservation and environmental issues have taken a pretty good beating over the past few years.  Since the two depend so heavily on "the kindness of strangers" (as Blanche DuBois once said) or on a benevolent or generous government, funding and government allocations have diminished as nation after nation endures a prolonged depressed economic situation.

And that can lead to the biggest threat of all: apathy.  The oceans face many perils, the consequences of which may be many years away but, to gain the upper hand, they need to be dealt with sooner rather than later.  Climate change, acidification, overfishing, pollution - they all loom large but they become even more threatening if government officials, policy makers and the everyday individual choose to take their eye off the ball.  Distraction leads to disinterest which leads to apathy.  Only a crisis can snap us out of it but by then it may be too late.

So that is the biggest challenge we face in filling that glass to the rim.  But with that said, we still have a tremendous amount to be thankful for.  We continue to achieve significant victories that speak to our optimistic side and fuel our desire to achieve more.  Whether it be the growth of substantial marine protected areas, more and stronger legislation regarding shark conservation, forward strides in seafood sustainability through better managed ocean harvesting, or technological innovations in alternative energy - each step is bringing us just that much closer to the kind of stewardship of the planet that will help sustain it . . . and us.

Search through the blogosphere, through social media, or simply type in "ocean conservation victories" in Google.  The list is long, it is encouraging, and it reaffirms that what we have done, what we are doing, and what we hope to accomplish is feasible, reasonable, and righteous.

Give thanks today and always.  

ICCAT 2012: gains and losses with no help from Canada

ICCAT, the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna, recently convened in Morocco for its annual evaluation of catch limits.  This is a group that for many years seemed to be turning a deaf ear to the calls of conservationists and even its own scientific advisers as to the diminishing bluefin tuna population (read prior posts here & here).  Year after year, catch limits were set way above any recommended number that could potentially provide sustainability.

This year, the ICCAT awoke slightly from its deep, dark slumber and established catch levels that were in line with limits prescribed by marine scientists: maintaining the current level of 13,500 tons annually, along with an improved management and control process.

It still leaves the Atlantic bluefin tuna on a razor's edge with extinction a distinct possibility.  A complete moratorium would be the most sensible environmental solution but the economic influence of the tuna fishing industry makes that a slim possibility - although it could occur if continued observation and management shows that tuna stocks are not improving.

That was the wake up call this time around: that after 30 years of setting catch levels that were considered sufficient, the ICCAT realized that was just not the case.  Now the big concern is whether this new effort will be sufficient to give the bluefin tuna a fighting chance.

The ICCAT also establishes quotas for its member nations with regard to sharks.  This year there was a proposal from the EU to limit catches of shortfin mako and a complete ban on the porbeagle shark.  The poor porbeagle.  This is a shark that has truly been hammered by the shark fishing industry.  Authorities do not question the fact that the population of porbeagle sharks has declined by 90% since the 1960s.  Where once there were ten, there is now only one - and it only took five decades to do it.

Unfortunately, the EU's proposals were tabled due to some political maneuvering by a few dissenting members.  To accommodate some of the dissenters, like Canada, there were rumored discussions about allowing Canada an exemption.  With that, other dissenting members demanded equal treatment which was sufficient to knock the wind out of the sails of the entire proposed platform.

Often when we think of the overfishing of tuna or sharks, many turn to Asian markets as the primary villains.  While it may be true that that is where most of the demand is coming from, we must also consider the nations that support that demand.  At the ICCAT meeting this year, Canada turned out to be a disappointing supporter; one of the pushers supplying the junkie's habit.

The Canadian contingent had actually requested an increase to 2,000 tons in the bluefin tuna catch limit, but they were soundly defeated by the majority.  However, they doubled their efforts when it came to resisting the shark limits, even though the Canadian government is considering listing the porbeagle shark as an endangered species under its Species at Risk Act.

“I think it is fair to say that there was a general feeling across the meeting that [Canada’s tuna proposal] was out of step, that there was very clear scientific advice that said maintain the quotas,” said Amanda Nickson, director of the U.S.-based Pew Environmental Group’s global tuna conservation program.

Basic supply and demand principles work fine for manufactured or grown products.  It can be a seesaw of price vs. demand and demand vs. production, but it works most of the time.  Where it does not work is when you have a finite resource like tuna or sharks.  Demanding consumers and the producers that blindly support that demand with product, both are responsible parties to what could be the collapse of an industry and, sadly, the extinction of important ocean species.  Scientists and conservationists must be relentless in their efforts to halt overfishing of the bluefin tuna, shortfin makos, porbeagle sharks, and many others.

Source: GozoNews.com
Source: The Globe and Mail                       

Sharks, the Beauty of the Ocean Predator: March lecture/exhibition event in Long Beach, CA

In early March, the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach, CA will host a lecture/exhibition, Sharks: the Beauty of the Ocean Predator featuring yours truly and sculptor Victor Douieb. 

The event is being described as "Art and science come together like never before to heighten awareness for ocean conservation.  Sculptor Victor Douieb and filmmaker Richard Theiss present an exhibition and lecture series combining stunning and impressive bronze pieces of marine animals with insightful and thought-provoking commentary on marine research and the changing landscape of ocean conservation.  Douieb's work has been on display nationwide in major galleries and museums and his magnificent shark sculptures are popular favorites.  As a filmmaker, Theiss has worked closely with marine scientists and spent many years filming the iconic great white shark.  His work has been seen on major networks like Discovery and National Geographic.  Many of Douieb's most popular sculptures will be on display and there will be a series of lectures where people can learn more about these two dedicated conservationists, the challenging issues facing many ocean species like sharks, and what we can do to shape the future of the oceans." 

The origin of this event came about when I first met Victor at the Santa Monica Pier Aquarium.  I had been contemplating a new lecture series, a kind of update from my presentation at the time and Victor was looking for more avenues to present his work.  It occurred to me that by combining forces we could offer something special that aquariums and other ocean education institutions might be interested in having.  I approached my friend, Dr, Jerry Schubel, CEO of the Aquarium of the Pacific, and he was quite enthusiastic with the concept.  And so, the Aquarium will host the inaugural event, putting Victor's work on display for several months and the lectures will take place in early March.

Victor has sculpted some amazing works in bronze and stainless steel of sharks and other sea creatures (his recent work of a lionfish is a favorite of mine).  His work is striking in its artistic beauty while also being anatomically accurate, and that allows people to view and appreciate sharks from an entirely different perspective.  His website lists sculptures currently available and at the event he will be presenting a new sculpture of one of the Aquarium's sand tiger sharks which Victor studied firsthand in the Aquarium's Shark Lagoon exhibit.

For my part, I will be sharing some of my personal experiences with sharks - in particular the great white shark, given that it's a California audience.  Also, I will be touching on what science has found that makes these predators so unique and critically important.  Then we will turn to the important issue of shark conservation and how it has evolved from a grass roots movement to a struggle on the battleground of international politics.  And finally, despite the progress that has been made to date, we'll look at why and how people still need to be concerned and involved.  Victor will also be on hand to discuss his journey as a committed conservationist.

The Aquarium of the Pacific will be posting details soon for Sharks: the Beauty of the Ocean Predator on their website.  Lectures are tentatively scheduled for the evenings of March 5th (opening night), 7th and 13th.  The sculptures will be on display for several months.  If you're in the neighborhood, hope to you see there.  It will be an opportunity for Southern Californians to see some awesome sealife sculptures and learn about the amazing sharks of California and what is in store for their future.

Source: Aquarium of the Pacific

Shark Net: Dr. Barbara Block/TOPP release great app to track California's white sharks

I have been fortunate to meet and speak with many accomplished marine scientists and researchers.  One who is definitely on my Top 10 list is Dr. Barbara Block.  Based at Stanford University, California, she oversees TOPP (Tagging of Pacific Predators), a program started in 2000 that tracks pelagic animals from tuna to swordfish to turtles to great white sharks, and more. (Couple of previous posts on the subject here & here.)

Barbara is a spunky taskmaster but, working with her staff, it is that very drive that has enabled TOPP to discover many of the secrets involving the migration patterns of these large and critically important animals.  It was TOPP that coined the phrase "White Shark Cafe" to describe where great white sharks from California and Mexico migrate to in the Pacific Ocean. 

One particularly important finding regarding these migration patterns was the possible explanation for the seasonal nature of the sharks' sojourns: Mid-Pacific upwellings which bring nutrients that feed the food chain and ultimately replenish the larger fish that the sharks feed on.  Cyclical weather and ocean movement patterns produce these upwellings - and as climate change continues to present itself, there is always the possibility of shifts in the upwelling cycle that could have unknown consequences for these animals.

Whenever I am called upon to speak about sharks, these fascinating migration patterns are always a topic I include as I am guaranteed they will mesmerize my audience.  So, thank you, Dr. Block!

While Internet users can monitor the ongoing activities of TOPP through its website, it's now possible to carry it with you on your iPhone or iPad.  Shark Net - Predators of the Blue Serengeti is available from iTunes at no charge (as in free!) and provides a range of features on the cataloging and whereabouts of those most iconic of California ocean predators, the great white shark.

Users can get updates on the latest monitoring of sharks, pinpoint the location of the tracking buoys that gather the data, and get biographies, photos, and videos about many of the sharks that frequent California's waters.  There are other apps available that provide white shark tracking info but this is the definitive app for monitoring the white sharks that ply the waters off California's coast  - and beyond, thanks to those incredible migration patterns.

In a recent interview for U.K.'s The Guardian, Dr. Block explained her use of the term "Blue Serengeti" to describe California's coastal waters and the large migration patterns that occur within it.

"White sharks and tuna travel for thousands of miles before returning to the same hot spot just as salmon do when they return to the same stream. These journeys are the marine equivalent of wildebeest migrations that take place on the Serengeti plain in Africa. That is why I call this part of the Californian coast the Blue Serengeti."

"Everyone knows about watering holes on the Serengeti even though most of us have never been there. We can just close our eyes and see the zebras, the elephants and the hyenas. We want to do the same for the migration hot spots we have found off the coast of California."

Dr. Block and TOPP are setting new standards for ocean animal tracking, expanding on the various GPS and satellite tracking methods (which can sometimes provide data intermittently) to include cutting-edge, round-the-clock monitoring technology using monitoring networks or even self-contained, solar-powered tracking stations like Wave Glider that travels the currents along the California coast. 

Through the efforts of TOPP and consumer apps like Shark Net, Dr. Block hopes to bring the hidden complexity of our ocean planet to a wider audience.  Humankind's curiosity makes it look outward, and that has lead us into the stars.  But there is a whole world to be discovered starting right at the shoreline.

"Human technology has made it to Mars. We are transmitting gorgeous pictures from it. Yet we have not explored our own planet. Two-thirds of it is covered with oceans that are still mysterious places. We are trying to hook people up to what is going on out there now and get them to realize that it could all be lost if we did not do something to protect it. Ultimately, I want to create a world heritage site here. Wiring up the oceans, as we are doing, is our way to get people to understand the importance of these places."

Shark Net app available on iTunes for iPad and iPhone
Source: The Guardian   

Handling Invasive Species: studies look at treatment and commercial enterprise

Invasive species continue to pose problems around the world - from relocated fish and land animals to plants to even infectious diseases.  In the oceans, invasive species can prove to be both disruptive to the marine environment and a potential hazard to humans as well.

Two recent scientific studies, one in Emerging Infectious Diseases and the other in Marine Pollution Bulletin, looked at the issue of ballast water that is taken in and released by tankers and freighters in ports all over the globe.  This exchange of water to maintain a safe balance to the ship as it loads or unloads its cargo has introduced a variety of unwelcome guests including mussels, seaweeds and algae, and even cholera.

Sometimes the ballast exchange takes place in deep enough water so that its contents are sufficiently dissipated.  But in shallower water, pathogens as a product of urbanization and sewage can either come aboard or be expelled and soon brought into shore via swells and currents.

One solution is to treat the ballast water on board the vessel.  However, ports and cities are then dependent on the ships having the proper equipment and using the methods effectively to do the job.   The other possible approach is to develop an onshore treatment process wherein the ballast water is pumped ashore for treatment and then pumped back to the ship as needed, rather than having the entire ballast exchange take place in open water.  A better idea perhaps on paper, but it requires  considerable investment in equipment and the design of each port must be carefully studied to determine if and where the systems can be installed.

However, compared to the financial losses incurred by invasive species from disrupted commercial fisheries to clogged water inlet/outlet pipes to disease outbreaks, the costs of advanced onshore treatment systems could prove to be a bargain.

Another study, written up in Conservation Letters, examined the issue of whether consuming an invasive species as a possible food source could prove to be an effective means of populations.  Why beat it, just eat it.

This has been the approach taken in areas where the Humboldt squid has moved in, shifting the fishermens catch from local commercial fish stocks to all squid.  And in the Caribbean and the eastern Florida coast, where the lionfish population has exploded recently from its accidental introduction several years ago, attempts are being made to develop a taste for the South Pacific reef fish's meat among local sharks and even with the human population (a bit tricky to prepare but, I have been told, quite tasty).

The study, however, notes the dilemma that this approach can cause through the production then of a viable market.  An invasive species could turn out to be a commercial success and where there is commercial success there can be the desire to maintain or even expand it.  Suddenly, the invasive species becomes a profitable friend to man - at the expense of the marine environment it is affecting.  The ultimate insult would be that an effort could be made to protect the species for the sake of its commercial value - a complete reversal of the original concept of reducing or eliminating the population through harvesting.

The introduction of commercial enterprise and consumption in the control of any invasive species must be undertaken with a clear understanding by government and regulatory agencies as to the underlying purpose of taking such a step.  Either supported by scientific research or even just the common sense that every invasive species is a Pandora's box of unknown consequences, decisions must be thoughtful and well-informed.

Source: Emerging Infectious Diseases 18(10)
Source: Marine Pollution Bulletin 64(11)
Source: Conservation Letters 5(5)
          

Conservation Victories: government steps up to help whales, sharks, and birds

Well, how about some good news for a change?  Conservation and protection of species and the environment got a bit of a boost from the machinations of government today in several areas.  Some of these advances are moving through cyberspace as I write this, while others are more quiet victories.

No Sonic Tests Off California for Utility

The California Coastal Commission today unanimously agreed to deny a permit to Pacific Gas & Electric, who had requested to begin a series of seismic tests using sonic air cannons to determine fault lines in and around the seafloor near the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant.

Now checking for faults that could potentially threaten a nuclear power plant isn't a bad idea (nuclear power plants themselves are another controversial subject for another day) and PG&E officials claimed that the multiple sonic blasts would be ramped up in intensity to warm or scare off any marine mammals that could be at risk.

However, those same officials also stated that the tests would induce short-term disruption.  And given the number of beachings and deaths that have been documented regarding whales, porpoises, and dolphins, long-term effects can not be definitively ruled out.

According to the Associated Press, the coastal commission's staff recommended to the coastal regulators to reject the utilityy company's plan. "In a report this month, the staff said sonic blasts would cause 'significant and unavoidable impacts to marine resources.' More than 7,000 sea mammals would be disturbed by the ear-piercing noise, including fin whales, blue whales, humpback whales, and harbor porpoises."

PG&E has not yet said what it plans to do next, but should they appeal, they will find stiff resistance from many of the regulators.

Win one for the cetaceans!

American Samoa Bans Shark Fishing

In the South Pacific, the United States' unincorporated territory of American Samoa has initiated a ban on all shark fishing that will go into effect this week.  The ban will extend three miles from the shoreline and also include three reef fish species.

What is most encouraging with this news is that it was not an island nation like Palau or Kiribati that has imposed these restrictions; it was the U.S. government.  The Department of Marine & Wildlife Resources is the agency that has imposed the ban, recognizing the decline of shark populations throughout the Pacific Ocean.

Dog Fenner, who monitors sharks for the department, claims that these new regulations are the strongest ever imposed by the U.S.  About bloody time.

Win one for the sharks!

Animal Lead Poisoning Amendments

Getting a little less attention are two amendments to S.B. 3525, known as the "Sportsman's Act."  Filed by California's Senator Barbara Boxer, the amendments would 1.) eliminate an NRA-supported provision in the Sportsman's Act that banned the Environmental Protection Agency from doing anything regarding lead poisoning from lead ammunition and fishing tackle (originally supported by, and 2.) require the EPA to conduct a potential threat study of human health, wildlife, and the environment regarding lead ammunition and tackle.

According to the Conservation for Biological Diversity, which has been prodding the EPA regarding this issue for years, "Lead poisons and kills millions of eagles, loons, endangered California condors and other birds and wildlife each year." 

Win one (hopefully) for a lead-free wilderness!

The common thread in all of these encouraging developments is that it represents government, in one form or another, getting of its butt and doing something about the environment.  One can only hope that as the U.S. economy improves, attention will once again be turned toward solving long-term environmental issues with decisive action in the here-and-now. 

Source: Associated Press (Cetacea)
Source: Washington Post (Sharks)
Source: Center for Biological Diversity (Lead)

Children & Nature: Australian writer captures what conservation needs from our youth

Occasionally I will come across an article that needs no journalistic rephrasing, no "spin" or retelling.  It is succinct and delivers a message that must be presented undilluted.

Such is the case with an article I came across in the Opinion section of ABC News (Australia).  Written by educator and naturalist Warren McClaren, it addresss the impact on our children when there is a disconnect between ourselves and nature.

Growing up as I did in suburban Southern California, I can look back on my experiences with nature in a very positive way and I can see the roots of my current passion for preservation and conservation of our natural resources stemming from those early moments.  I was not someone who lived 24/7 in the outdoors, but I came in contact with enough to leave a lasting impact.  And, sadly, that is much more than what many children are experiencing today.

Children are hearing about threats and negative impacts on nature and they are voicing their concern.  And that is good.  But if those feelings exist in a bubble, devoid of the first hand knowledge, can we expect their concerns to carry them into adulthood? 

 Without nature, the little children suffer
Warren McLaren ABC Environment 12 Nov 2012

Most adults climbed trees and played outdoors when they were children. But today's young people don't play outdoors like their parents. It's an omission with grave implications.

We come alive for what we hold near and dear. It's hard to be impassioned for a cause which feels remote.

Charities know this. It's why they bring impoverished third world villagers, or cancer suffers, into our lounge room, via the telly: if they can make us connect with the issue, we are more inclined to support it.

Environmental activists are emboldened to speak up because they perceive they are about to lose something. Something they truly, deeply connect with.

"In wildness is the preservation of the world." With these few words, American philosopher, Henry David Thoreau, succinctly captured humanity's fate. Nature is unruly, untamed. But it is also our future.

Yet we so often talk of 'The Environment' as if it exists elsewhere else, a distant entity that humankind is not connected to. A naughty, wild child, whom we might put in a room and close the door on, for a bit of 'time out'.

We may have disconnected from nature, but we are delusional if we think we can live without it. Ignoring the value and contribution of nature to our well being is, quite literally, life threatening. 

But ignoring is exactly what we're doing. In his seminal 2005 book, Last Child in the Woods, author Richard Louv, gave this ignorance a term: Nature Deficit Disorder. While not a medically recognised condition, there is an ever expanding body of work which supports Louv's central theme: that deprivation of a relationship with nature is fraught with multiple health and welfare issues. For people. And planet. 

There's head-shaking anecdotal evidence of our disconnect with nature, such as the story I was told of kids too scared to play in their own backyard, because they'd heard that insects wee and poo out there.

Scientific corroboration is also abundant. The Children and Nature Network has a collection of research papers, published between 2009 and 2011, which explored benefits to kids from contact with the outdoors. The list of abstracts alone runs to 68 pages.

Research such as Planet Ark's recent examinations (pdf) of Australian childhood interaction with nature today, relative to a generation ago. One of the findings being that, "64 per cent of respondents reported climbing trees when they were children as compared to less than 20 per cent of their children." (pdf) 

The Danish Society for Nature Conservation observed very similar findings in their survey of 2,000 Danes:"59 per cent of grandparents reported visiting a natural setting every day during the summer when they were children, as compared to... just 26 per cent of children today." (pdf) 

Four hundred German and Lithuanian high school students participated in research that found "children's emotional affinity towards nature was a significant predictor of children's willingness for pro-environmental commitment."

A related study in the USA set out to "understand what leads children to continue participating in natural history-oriented professions/education/hobbies as a young adult." The research concluded that a such vocational choice results from "early childhood and is driven by direct, informal and unstructured experiences with nature (from wildlands to vacant lots)."

For many Aussies their introduction to camping and outside adventures began with involvement in Scouts and Guides. Five years ago the international Scout movement celebrated 100 years of life in the great outdoors. But it was a bittersweet centenary. In 2001, Australia had 2,126 Scout Groups, yet by 2011 this had shrunk to just 1,524. A noteworthy decline, coming on the back of a significant modernisation drive within Scouting.

Where did all those budding young Baden Powells go? Inside.

For 98 per cent of Australian children, "watching TV or videos out of school hours remains the most common recreational activity of children aged 5 to 14 years." So revealed the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) in the 2003 study, Children's Participation in Cultural and Leisure Activities.

A follow up report in 2006 noted that "[N]ot only was the participation rate highest for 'watching television, videos or DVDs', on average, children involved spent more time on this activity than on any of the other selected activities." In a study published last year, the ABS reported that whereas a tad over half of all children were playing games online in 2006, by 2009 and this had increased to just shy of 70 per cent. The ABS also noted that 17 per cent of kids 8 to 14 had a computer in their bedroom.

Researchers at the University of Sydney discovered that "Children who spend more time in outdoor sport activities and less time watching TV have better retinal microvascular structure." Retinal blood vessels have been linked to cardiovascular disease risk factors and blood pressure.

A couple of years ago the Australian national depression initiative, Beyond Blue, engaged Associate Professor Mardie Townsend of Deakin University's Faculty of Health, Medicine, Nursing and Behavioural Sciences to investigate any health benefits from including the outdoors in our lives. She observed, "Experiencing nature in an outdoor setting can help tackle not only physical health problems such as obesity and coronary heart disease, but also mental health problems - and there is plenty of evidence to support the claim." Laying out that evidence in her 160-page report.

Drawing on the work of Kurt Hahn, pioneer of experiential learning and the guy behind Outward Bound and the Duke of Edinburgh Award scheme, Expeditionary Learning schools cite as one of their core principles, "direct respectful relationship with the natural world refreshes the human spirit and teaches the important ideas of recurring cycles and cause and effect. Students learn to become stewards of the earth and of future generations."

Developing this early connection with nature is not just some bucolic vision of the 'nuts and berries' crowd. It also has a deep and profound influence on children's intellectual health as well. Richard Louv's book is packed with examples, including the school who educated their kids out amongst local rivers, mountains and forests, "96 per cent of [their] students meet or exceed state standards for math problem-solving—compared to only 65 per cent of eighth graders at comparable middle schools."

I'm not suggesting that everyone need spend 738 days hugging a tree like Julia Hill or Miranda Gibson. There are a host of mainstream opportunities for our children to learn about, and from, the outdoors. There's school endorsed outdoor education experiences, or Stephanie Alexander's Kitchen Garden programs as currently embraced by 267 Australian primary schools. From horticultural therapy to care farming. Or Scouts and Guides. And let's not forget family weekends camping in the bush; or simply get down and dirty, rolling in the grass and watching bees in the backyard or nearby park, with Mum and Dad.

For as William Shakespeare penned, "One touch of nature makes the whole world kin."

Source: ABC News
         

GotMercury.org Gets Cooperation From Supermarket: testing seafood in two month pilot program

 It has been some time since I mentioned the GotMercury organization.  But that is not to say that they have not been busy.  This is an organization dedicated to making people aware of the unhealthy levels of mercury in our seafood - levels that can, in some cases, reach in excess of 4 times the weekly safe levels recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from just one serving of certain fish.

Much has been written about whale, dolphin, and tuna meat and the high levels of pollutants, like mercury, that can be found in these fish.  Served to children or pregnant women, as is done in many Asian countries, is a risky business indeed.  However, these fish are not the only ones with unsafe levels of mercury in their tissues.

GotMercury.org provides a handy online calculator with which you can use to determine the approximate levels of mercury in various seafood.  There is also a cell phone version of the calculator which I keep with me to educate my friends when we are in a restaurant and they are considering the seafood on the menu.  You enter your weight, select the fish you are considering, and then choose a size portion in ounces.  The calculator then gives you the percentage of your EPA/FDA limit of mercury you will be consuming.  Most people are shocked by the results.

GotMercury has also been hard at work exposing tainted seafood at the seafood counter of your local supermarket.  In years past, they were the renegades, buying seafood like any other customer, then testing it and announcing their findings - which were usually disturbing and much to the chagrin of the supermarket.

However, times are changing.  GotMercury is collaborating with Safe Harbor Foods to do testing of seafood sold through the Safeway supermarket chain - with Safeway's cooperation.  Any tainted seafood that is found will be pulled and not sold.  This is a pilot program that will take place over the next two months in 47 Safeway stores in Oregon and Washington.  From there, it will potentially go nationwide throughout the entire Safeway chain.  You can follow the results of this testing process online either through GotMercury's Facebook or Causes pages.

Congratulations to GotMercury.org, Safe Harbor Foods, and to the Safeway supermarket chain for taking the responsible step in participating even at the risk of losing money should any of their seafood be found to be high in mercury.

And if you don't already have the GotMercury calculator either loaded on your cell phone or bookmarked in your browser, I would highly recommend that you do so.  To do otherwise is a risk not worth taking.

Source: GotMercury.org               

Environmental Leadership: some, but not enough, are looking to the future

On the eve of the U.S. presidential election, I thought I would share a little observation I heard that reinforced my feelings regarding politics and the environment.  I was watching a political talk show the other day and on the discussion panel a conservative and a liberal were going at it regarding climate change.  The conservative, a former congressman, was questioning the validity of the science that supports climate change and the liberal was taking the standard position that the science is overwhelming - the usual standoff, positions and arguments that many of us have heard before.

The conservative than said something very revealing.  He acknowledged that temperatures in the oceans and atmosphere have changed but said, as a sort of counter-argument, that scientists have claimed that if we stopped producing CO2 today, it would take a hundred years for temperatures to cool down by a few degrees.  To which the liberal replied, "And so that is why you suggest that we don't need to do anything?  That it will take a hundred years to see any results?  That's why we should have been doing something decades ago, but we didn't know any better.  But today, we do."

One of the biggest challenges facing the environmental movement is that so much of what needs to be accomplished is long-term in nature.  Sometimes very, very long term.  The benefits of reducing overfishing, of restricting CO2 emissions and cutting back on ocean acidification - these may not be apparent in the short term.  We may not see it within a politician's term in office, we may not see it in our lifetime, or even in our children's lifetime.  Nature has an amazing ability to heal itself when given a chance, when not pushed to the point of no return.  But it can be a slow healing process and we have become a very impatient people.

Mankind seems to be a species that thrives on crisis.  We don't like it, yet time and time again we push ourselves to the edge before we act.  We've done it with our economies, we've done it with political conflict and wars, but we can't do it with the environment.  As Dr. Greg Stone of Conservation International is fond of saying (I heard him re-tell this again at a recent reception saluting the Phoenix Islands Protected Area), earth is a spaceship hurtling through the cosmos at thousands of miles per hour.  It is a spaceship that comes with a life support system that cannot be replenished or resupplied.  What we have is all that we have.

However, while current politicians cajole us with a chicken-in-every-pot promises and ignore the hard issues that won't garner them immediately positive poll numbers, there are some organizations, even government institutions, that are looking at long-term problems like climate change, considering the myriad of implications which lie ahead and taking steps to address them.

The World Ocean Observatory is an online information exchange that runs a series of weekly 5-minute podcasts.  I came across a recent podcast "Who's Thinking Ahead About Climate Change" that noted the efforts of two very different groups, the U.S. Navy and the International Federation of Red Cross/Red Crescent Societies, in acknowledging the current state of climate change and preparing for the consequences.  Accepting the scientific data, they recognize the implications and are preparing to deal with the environmental changes that lie ahead.  Here is the podcast:  Click here.

We demand leadership from our politicians and decision makers, but true leadership goes beyond promises of quick fixes back to the "good old days" of expensive homes, SUVs, and mindless consumption.  It requires decisions that move beyond immediate gratification and look to a future where succeeding generations of earth-bound astronauts will have a life support system that they can depend on.  It's paying it forward on the grandest of scale and the most noble endeavor mankind can undertake.

Source: World Ocean Observatory

Pacific Shark Populations In Decline: new study provides hard numbers on pelagic species

The results of a recent study published in Conservation Biology paints a disturbing picture of ongoing decline of sharks in the Pacific Ocean.  Now, to many who are familiar with the subject of shark finning and overfishing, this does not necessarily sound, unfortunately, like anything new - it is what many of us have been fighting about for some time.  However, it's an important report because it covers a wide period of time, has specific numbers, and notes that some areas in shark conservation that receive considerable public support may not be as effective as hoped.

The study by the Secretariat of the Pacific Community in New Caledonia, headed up by Dr. Shelley Clark, covers a fifteen-year period, examining catch records from several fisheries throughout the Pacific, and shows significant declines in the catch rates for blue, mako, oceanic whitetip sharks, along with declining average size in oceanic whitetip and silky sharks (following the same fate of tuna and billfish).  These are all, basically, pelagic or open water sharks that operate outside of most national ocean boundaries in international waters.

Oceanic whitetips were shown to be declining annually at a rate of 17%.  Based on just that number alone, that would mean that oceanic whitetips in Pacific waters have 5-6 years left.  Unfortunately, that could be accelerated because of how animal populations can reach a "tipping point" where their declining numbers can no longer be supported by any means of natural reproduction and the population suddenly collapses and they plummet to oblivion.

Blue sharks were also reported to be declining at a rate of 5% in the North Pacific.  Blue sharks are a bit more abundant and more productive, but they, along with the oceanic whitetip are highly sought after by commercial shark fishing operations.  Physically, these two species have particularly large pectoral fins so, quite literally, fishermen get more bang for the buck with a shark with large fins, in open international waters and, at least with the blue shark, are slightly more abundant.

The New Caledonia study goes on to report that, in international waters, shark fishing for fins or the entire carcass, has proved to be a difficult practice to regulate due to insufficient enforcement, complex laws regarding fin-to-carcass ratios (the result of compromises by international agencies to commercial interests), and no follow-through enforcement or prosecution at the domestic level.  And then there is the impact of illegal fishing or longline fishing where numbers of sharks are caught but were not necessarily targeted.  Time and time again, we find that laws or regulations that are in place mean nothing if there is insufficient enforcement and prosecution.  Pardon the pun, but too often the laws have no teeth.

As reported in a recent press release, Sonja Fordham, president of Shark Advocates International, had this to say about the report and the current state of regulations, "These findings underscore conservationists' messages that most finning bans are not properly enforced, and alone are not sufficient to reverse shark population declines.  Prohibitions on at-sea removal of shark fins not only bolster finning ban enforcement, but also facilitate collection of species-specific fisheries data that are key to refining population assessments and informing the establishment of urgently needed shark catch limits."

This is why it is critical for all shark conservationists to focus some of their interest, energy, and passion into prodding and supporting those organizations that work on behalf of sharks in the international arena.  It may seem a bit removed and you may feel a bit ineffectual compared to regional efforts like state or local shark finning or fishing bans, but, remember, most of the ocean is in international jurisdiction.  If we do not pressure these worldwide agencies to act responsibly, based on current scientific information, then we will find ourselves putting band aids on our local waters, while the open oceans are hemorrhaging badly.

Source: PRNewsire