Thriving Oceans

It’s unfortunate that administrations and politics have such heavy and far reaching hands when it comes to directing government departments (Does that make any sense?) as I would like to believe in a eco-utopian setting by which they always acted in the best interest of the nation’s natural resources.

Now since we clearly know this is not the case, it is still unfathomable that at the end of an 8 year reign the outgoing Administration is diligently working to slash fisheries protections. In a move that is clearly no treat (blatant Halloween pun intended), a National Marine Fisheries Service rule is undergoing final review that would eliminate the current SOP involving environmental impact statements for certain commercial fisheries operations. In fact, according to the Washington Post, the rule would “give review authority to regional councils dominated by commercial and recreational fishing interests.”

Has not history taught us leaving management of our fisheries to commercial organizations a dire move? Plus, it was only 4 years ago, mind you the midpoint in the term of same Administration, that The U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy warned of the deleterious state of our fisheries.

Experts estimate that 25 to 30 percent of the world’s major fish stocks are overexploited, and a recent report indicates that U.S. fisheries are experiencing similar difficulties. Of our nation’s 259 major fish stocks—representing 99 percent of total commercial landings—roughly 25 percent are either already overfished or experiencing overfishing (Ocean Commission, 2004).

Well here’s my spin on the formulaic fair and balanced, point counterpoint, cheers and jeers, and so on in regards to some recent happenings at the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). Since listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 2006, there has been another positive move in the protection of Elkhorn and Staghorn corals. These corals once dominated reef building in the Caribbean, but over the years have succumbed to the negative implications of encroaching human activities. NOAA estimates a population loss of 90%, while other organizations like the Center for Biological Diversity reports a 97% decline since the 1970s.

However, these two coral species can count their blessings just in time for Thanksgiving as the new rule on Nov. 21 will…

Prohibit the import, export, take, and all commercial activities involving elkhorn and staghorn corals, including:

• collection or any activities that result in the corals’ mortality or injury;
• anchoring, grounding a vessel, or dragging any other gear on the species;
• damaging the species’ habitat;
• discharging any pollutant or contaminant that harms the species.

Just to throw in some information I keep in my back pocket and regurgitate every now and then is that The U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy’s Preliminary Draft Report in 2004 advised as much as 60% of the coral reefs may be gone by 2035.

As a perfectly ironic segue to my next thoughts (Take a little…),  let’s keep protections moving in the right direction.

Apparently levying six and seven figure fines is an oily drop in the bucket to commercial shippers as yet another company has been caught illegally dumping their waste. It seems Casilda Shipping Ltd. got off easy with a $750K fine for violating international law by forging their “oil record book” and discharging waste oil at sea prior to coming to port in Oakland. By easy, I mean that this was a mere sub-million dollar fine imposed for polluting our oceans with untreated waste oil over a period from July 2007 to May 2008. They should consider themselves quite lucky that their ecological indifference and criminal activities did not result in fines topping $7 million, as was the case with an Egyptian shipping company earlier this year.

Since commercial shipping companies continue to bypass their anti-pollution systems, discharge waste, and risk fines, we need to ask ourselves if these fines are at all adequate. Obviously guilty operating companies are performing a classic cost-benefit analysis and realizing that it is cheaper to incur periodic punitive assessments than disposing of the sludge properly, which can be quite expensive and time consuming.

The Journal of the U.S. EPA Oil Program (2003)

• A National Academy of Sciences (NAS) study estimated last year that ships worldwide generate 500 million gallons of this sludge.
• NAS estimates that roughly 5 percent of waste from the largest tankers was discharged illegally and that 15 percent generated by smaller ships was discharged illegally.
• The study concluded that 65 million gallons is dumped annually.

Well who knew that the first thoughts I’d transcribe under Thriving Oceans would be so politically charged. I guess it is perfect timing considering the upcoming elections as anti-this and pro-that rallies drift from state to state solely for the opportunity to discharge their nematocysts and hook passersby with talking points.

Additionally, environmentalists, conservationists, legislators, representatives, and citizens continue to spar over the safety and expansion of nuclear power plants. Even a few years back, Patrick Moore, co-founder of Greenpeace, declared in The Washington Post, “Nuclear energy is the only large-scale, cost-effective energy source that can reduce these emissions while continuing to satisfy a growing demand for power. And these days it can do so safely.” Such comments exploded like Chernobyl, setting off a chain of events that resulted simultaneously in condemnation and praise.

While our society still continues to swim amongst the fall out, a bloom of jellyfish managed to exercise their innate marine right to congregate and protest yesterday. The target of these activist cnidarians was the Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant in California. Although they did not manage to shut down the plant completely, they were effective enough to force a reduction in operating power.

Now that we know the stance of jellyfish on nuclear power, it will be interesting to see how this floating “block” influences our future alternative energy decisions.