Thriving Oceans

As the fisheries war continues to rage amongst conservationists, commercial entities, and international politics, it is always good news when a species in peril gets what perhaps can be called a break. Just a few months back the IUCN reported, “The global conservation status of 64 species of open ocean (pelagic) sharks and rays reveals that 32 percent are threatened with extinction, primarily due to overfishing.”

And can we honestly be surprised at the findings when we have all seen the photos displaying mounds of confiscated shark fins not unlike the old west pictures showcasing a day’s work hunting bison?  But, it is not only pelagic species that are feeling the pressure of overfishing as the small coastal blacknose shark is on an unsustainable road towards collapse.

A recreationally and commercially harvested fish, the blacknose shark was hauled from the ocean at a rate of over 27,000 individuals (62 metric tons without head, guts, fins) per year from 1999-2005.  Because they bear few young and were unable to cope with previous fishing pressures, NOAA is proposing a change in the status quo of lumping blacknose sharks in with other coastal shark quotas and effectively reducing their loss by 78%.  Thus, blacknose sharks would be separated from the general coastal shark quota, and under the proposal the annual quota would fall to 6,065 individuals or 14.9 metric tons.  Additionally, the shark would only be available for landing by commercial fishermen with directed permits.

“To help rebuild the blacknose population, NOAA’s Fisheries Service is also proposing to prohibit the landing of all Atlantic sharks with gillnet gear—the primary way blacknose sharks are caught—from South Carolina south, including the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea.”

“Because they are frequently caught with other small coastal sharks, there is also a proposed annual quota for the non-blacknose small coastal sharks, including finetooth, Atlantic sharpnose, and bonnethead sharks.  The proposed quota would be significantly reduced from the current 454 metric tons dressed weight quota to 56.9 metric tons dressed weight. The proposed quotas for blacknose and the non-blacknose small coastal sharks represent an overall 76 percent reduction in landings by weight of small coastal sharks.”  (NOAA, July 24, 2009)

Last Saturday my wife and I made the 2 hour journey to the Monterey Bay Aquarium, which marks our first visit in about 4 years.  As with each and every time before, I left wondering why it took me so long to get back, and most importantly how can I swing a personal 28 foot tall kelp forest aquarium…OK I admit I’m a fish lover.  But the show was not only within the confines of the plexiglass walls as the wildlife visible from the outside amphitheatre at the Great Tide Pool was amazing.

In the distance wrapped in kelp were approximately 9 sea otters. Kayaks would approach (all at a distance to prevent disturbance) and then wander away after a few minutes of enjoying the view.  Throw in a couple harbor seals, cormorants, murres, and sea lions and the bay becomes a picturesque wildlife refuge. 

Interestingly enough though, on June 30th the U.S. Geological Survey reported a 3.8% drop in sea otter numbers during the 2009 census.  A decrease of 106 individuals may not seem like a terribly large decline overall, but it keeps them below the criteria needed to remove them from the Endangered Species Act (the 3-year running averages would have to exceed 3,090 for 3 continuous years), it represents a population growth plateau for the last three years, and according to Dr. Tim Tinker of the USGS,

“This year’s census results demonstrate that sea otters continue to experience levels of mortality sufficient to limit their recovery. This highlights the need for continued efforts to understand and mitigate threats to sea otters and other species in the nearshore ecosystem.”

A more in depth examination into the cause of the declining sea otter population trend was sought out by the San Francisco Chronicle.  In a July 1st article, it was reported that deceased otters have been testing positive for bacteria, viruses, and parasites often associated with sewage, urban, and farm runoff.  Thus, are we witnessing the first signs of a pollution problem along the California coast?

And what about overfishing?  Well an inadequate amount of available favored invertebrates may be limiting nutritional intake, resulting in otters that are more susceptible to diseases and preventing the population from reaching a healthy status.

Although there are currently more questions than answers, it would not be surprising to find that the southern sea otter of California is being hindered by a combination of multiple factors.

**USGS: To reduce the influence of anomalously high or low counts during any particular year, three-year running averages of the survey results are also used to assess whether the population is growing or declining. Factors that can influence the count include viewing conditions, abundance and species composition of surface canopy kelp, observer experience, and distribution and movements of the animals.

Well if you haven’t heard the news that a federal court has upheld protections for the threatened marbled murrelet…now you have.  But what I found most intriguing was the short AP piece released on July 8th that describes the breaking news for this old growth nesting seabird.  As I first read the article I took it simply as an announcement of the decision, especially since it contained no more than 123 words. However, it was the last sentence that spoke volumes  and initiated my ‘WHAT!’ response.

“Partin adds the council continues to believe that food shortages in the ocean are a bigger problem for the birds than limited nesting habitat.” (Associated Press)

Tom Partin of the American Forest Resource Council, was reported to have contributed the above response after learning that the court dismissed the timber industry’s lawsuit aimed at removing murrelet protections in the Pacific Northwest.

The ironic part of the council’s belief is in the term ‘bigger problem.’  So if I understand correctly the American Forest Resource Council does recognize that the felling of old growth trees upon which murrelets need for nesting is still a problem. And if it is indeed a problem in their view then I am left scratching my head as to why the lawsuit to remove the seabird’s protection was justified. Especially since we would not want to compound one problem (ocean food shortage) with another (limited nesting habitat). If this was valid logic I could have avoided a speeding ticket by telling the officer that I was not going as fast as the other cars in front of me.

Speaking about beliefs, I contend that we are witnessing a cold hard case of semantics in which pointing the finger at another industry/issue dismisses your contribution to the problem in an attempt to salvage profits.

*The American Forest Resource Council ‘s website includes a member list of 70 logging and timber product companies.

Data: The Center for Responsive Politics (July 9,2009)

Original AP Article: Court dismisses challenge to seabird protection

It definitely took longer than I expected to get back in the swing of a daily routine after a one week stay in Maui, followed up by a weeklong business excursion to San Diego (of which began 14 hours after returning home), and finally returning home to a rather unproductive work week that culminated with a celebration of independence.

So with that said, and my apologies to delayed email responses, I decided to start anew with some information that may or may not have already circled through the web.  Just as I left for the islands, The End of the Line officially premiered, bringing the plight of our fisheries to the big screens of the world.  And wouldn’t you know it, but I missed the local showings while I was traveling.  However, I like the message so I am looking for any feedback from those you have managed to catch a viewing.

Additionally, the film is more than a movie but a campaign of which is self-described:

The End of the Line is not against fishing. It is not against eating fish. But it is for a responsible attitude  towards the oceans. The film has three messages for consumers, citizens and companies:

Ask before you buy: only eat sustainable seafood.
Tell politicians: respect the science, cut the fishing fleet
Join the campaign for marine protected areas and responsible fishing

So check out the website to find a local screening, make sure you grab a safe seafood list, and ‘Sign Up and Claim Your Piece of Ocean’.

Here’s the trailer…

Are you a snorkeler or diver and live within the REEF’s project area?  Why not turn your hobby this summer into a reef survey by participating in The Great Annual Fish Count-

“The Great Annual Fish Count (GAFC) is an event coordinated by the Reef Environmental Education Foundation (REEF) that mobilizes and trains volunteer divers and snorkelers in established methodologies to identify and document fish diversity and population trends in marine ecosystems. This annual event takes place the month of July, and serves to introduce and inspire recreational divers and snorkelers to: participate in REEF’s year-round Volunteer Survey Project; raise awareness among both the diving community and public-at-large regarding marine habitats and trends in fish populations; and provide researchers, marine resource managers and policy makers with this useful information that would otherwise be unavailable.”

Map credit: Reef Environmental Education Foundation (REEF)

The California Department of Water Resources is experimenting with a new way to save salmon in the delta.  “Preliminary results show that an experimental, non-physical fish barrier is working to help keep young Chinook salmon and steelhead in a more direct path to the ocean and away from agricultural diversion and the state and federal pumping plants. The bubble curtain barrier project combines acoustics and a strobe-lit sheet of bubbles to create an underwater wall of light and sound at frequencies that repel juvenile Chinook salmon.”

Check out the video…