Seaweb.org recently released some interesting ocean conservation news - a bit of a mixed bag really.
The U.S. has been making some marked improvement in regulating the level of bycatch by commercial fishing operations. Bycatch is a critical issue in ocean conservation as it represents millions of tons of wasted sealife, from the loss of marine mammals, sharks, and turtles in longline nets to the "scorched earth" effect exhibited in shrimp harvesting techniques. Through the application of four different regulatory laws or agencies (the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and the Endangered Species Act), the level of bycatch is being federally monitored and managed through the use of government observers.
One major issue though is the problem of having four different pieces of regulatory legislation, each with its own focus or emphasis on a particular situation or species. Involving this many cooks makes it difficult to get a more unifying and holistic approach to the entire issue. A recent report issued by Duke University's Marine Laboratory cited an approach by NOAA to establish a single set of regulations in 2006 for the Mid-Atlantic gillnet fisheries that proved to be a promising model and suggests that a review of existing regulations to develop a more cohesive strategy should be undertaken.
I had the opportunity to fly over the Northwest Passage in 2007 and see for myself the shrinking summer sea ice that had reached its lowest level in recorded history that year. As one could expect, there was a lot of alarming news coverage predicting an ice-free Northwest Passage within a few decades. Many computer models predicted the Arctic would lose its summer sea ice by 2080. But according to research by UCLA's Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences Department, many of those models relied on ice data that reflected a gradual decline, but did not include the data from recent ice levels.
With the growing awareness of the feedback effect of melting ice (exposing more heat-absorbing ocean to sunlight, thereby accelerating the melting process), the department's revised computer models move the clock forward by almost 20 years wherein we will be faced with an Arctic region devoid of most, if not all of its, summer sea ice - a monumental ringing of the alarm bell that global warming is now upon us. Methylmercury - that dangerous party favor that lies within much of the seafood we consume - must share its host fish with the more beneficial omega-3 fatty acids. Can a risk/benefit analysisdetermine which seafood would be more or less safe depending on species and frequency of consumption? This was the question that was studied recently and reported in Environmental Health Perspectives. The results of the study were not definitive but suggested that such a matrix could be developed. The report noted that farmed salmon, herring, and trout had a significant higher benefit vs. risk based on levels of methylmercury and omega-3 fatty acids. The opposite was true for swordfish and shark. Flounder and canned light tuna had a small benefit, while canned white tuna and halibut had a small risk.
While the elimination of allmethylmercury should be our ongoing focus, such a risk/benefit analysis matrix would be helpful in dealing with current seafood stocks, since methylymercury is retained in the tissues and would be present in many species for some time in the future.
The latest report from the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP) confirms what other scientific agencies have been saying, that the Arctic ice is melting at a rate faster than previously thought. Previous scientific models are not keeping up with the rapid changes taking place due to the feedback effect (when warmer temperatures melt ice that exposes dark water which absorbs sunlight and therefore warms the water even more), complicated by the influx of warmer water currents as climate change begins to impact the temperature/current relationships in the oceans.
I had the opportunity to see and film firsthand the 2007 summer sea ice that had reached its lowest level that year in recorded history. It was impressive to see until you realized that the ice floes and floating shards were supposed to be one solid sheet of impenetrable ice. The following year, even with a cooler spring, produced the second lowest level.
The AMAP report, Update on Selected Climate Issues of Concern, noted the need for improved models (a subject I mentioned in an earlier posting) to determine the long-term impact of negative and potential positive effects. As an example, will the newly exposed seas increase plankton growth which can absorb more carbon (a positive) be offset by the loss of marine life, including plankton, due to the influx of more fresh water from melting ice (a negative) or vice-versa?
One thing is certain: whether you watch the summer ice in the Northwest Passage or the reduction of ice in Greenland, climate change is a real growing threat and must be addressed. Nature won't wait while the decision-makers muddle it over.
I had the pleasure and thrill of traveling above the Arctic Circle to the area known as the Northwest Passage. Working for the research organization InMER, I was tasked with documenting evidence of climate change through interviews with Inuit indian tribal elders and government officials, in addition to capturing images of the flora and fauna.
Flying from one location to another, we came across a vast field of sea ice - the very stuff that provides a floating base for animals like polar bears, penguins, and even seals. My first impression was that the ice was solid and impenetrable. But soon I could see that it was like a vast expanse of shattered glass.
At that very same moment, we learned that the summer ice levels had reached their lowest in recorded history. This made for a very sobering moment. Here I was, looking down on clear cut evidence of climate change, on a landscape as fragile as any you could imagine. With the loss of more and more sea ice, the opening of the Northwest Passage to commercial shipping traffic becomes an increasing reality. That spells serious environmental concerns for the region, not to mention what it says about the worldwide impact of climate change.
Here is a video that I put together for InMER that has been included in the new ocean layer of Google Earth (courtesy of InMER.org). Check it out and check out the new Google Earth!
Some of the footage I shot for InMER was also used in a segment of National Geographic Wild Chronicles series on PBS. The more that people learn about what is happening to our climate, hopefully the more we can do to improve the situation.
This past Monday in San Francisco, I had the honor and pleasure to attend the unveiling of the newest version of Google Earth - which now incorporates the oceans as well. I was invited to represent the marine education and research organization InMER as a contributing partner to Google Earth. RTSea had provided video and photographic services during InMER's 2007 expedition to the Northwest Passage, above the Arctic Circle, and the resulting footage and images have been incorporated into the new Google Earth. (Previous postings on InMER and the Arctic: click here, here, and here.)
The unveiling took place at San Francisco's California Academy of Sciences with an A-list of dignitaries on hand including former Vice President Al Gore, Google CEO Eric Schmidt, and world-renowned oceanographer Dr. Sylvia Earle. Dr. Earle was the prominent champion and driving source of inspiration for this new version, having once teasingly described the original Google Earth to its creators as "Google Dirt, because you left out over 70% of the planet."
With the new version of Google Earth, users are able to zoom in on the Earth's seas and literally dip below the surface to see an incredible perspective of our water planet. Numerous icons appear that provide text, videos, images, and links to additional information. If you ever found yourself wandering the land and zooming in on details with the old Google Earth, this new version will really have you hooked. But it's more than just a gimmick. This new version represents a serious academic and research tool for both schools and scientists alike, with a variety of visual perspectives of the oceans and a tremendous amount of data that will continue to grow over time as new information is added.
I feel very fortunate to have some of my work available on such a broad worldwide information platform. I thank InMER's CEO and founder, Ed Cassano, and Google for the opportunity and I hope to be able to participate in future contributions to help advance the world's knowledge and appreciation of our oceans.
We need to understand and protect the planet's oceans. None of us would be here without them.
Last summer I had the opportunity to travel with InMER on its Summer Reconnaissance Expedition to the Northwest Passage, documenting the effects of climate change. There was a wide range of filming to do, from important interviews with Inuit tribal elders to government officials, capturing the stark but majestic arctic tundra - and then there's the "fun stuff" like stalking a herd of muskox.
Looking like prehistoric buffalo, the muskox is actually more closely related to goats. With a heavy coat of fur and a pair of curved horns, they are an odd sight - looking like something from one of those 1950's caveman movies where they throw a worn rug over an elephant and call it a mammoth!
Telling the expedition leader, Ed Cassano, CEO of InMER, that I needed close-up footage of a herd of muskox (well, "need" is a bit strong; more like "wanted" to be honest), we set out to scan the horizon from atop Mt. Pelly, a low, local mountain near Cambridge Bay, Nanuvut, in search of muskox. It didn't take long for us to spot a small herd moving across the tundra below. With that we traveled back down the mountain and tried to position ourselves out of sight and scent of our quarry.
Ever tried to sneak up on a 600+ pound muskox on the open tundra? Let me tell you, it's not easy. Tundra is made up of spongy mosses and lichens and stubby grasses, with the occasional basketball-size boulder. I felt like an ol' Saturday morning cartoon character as I slowly zigzagged from a rock to an indentation in the ground (making like a pancake!) to another rock, and so on - hoping all the while that I was moving unseen.
Well, not likely, oh great hunter with a camera. While the rest of the expedition team was safely over the next ridge, I initially found myself upwind of these hairy beasts. They knew I was there and would occasionally take off in a brief stampede. My team mates would hear this and imagine me being trampled like a rag doll. So for several hours I crawled on my belly as the herd would move about until I finally found myself down wind. Now I could close in, I thought.
As I slowly approached, some of the herd paid no attention and grazed peacefully or sat down on the tundra to rest. But others would sense something from time to time and slowly form a group with their rear ends together, forming the horned spokes of a wheel - a very common defensive action against wolves and bears.
So there I was, within 50 to 75 yards, filming these amazing animals found only well above the Arctic Circle. But before I became too full of myself, I spied a lone male standing on a nearby ridge. This was the herd's "alpha male" or dominant bull and from his perch he knew exactly what was going on. "You think I don't see you, you little pipsqueak?" he was probably thinking.
He simply watched, probably confident that if he felt the herd was truly threatened by my presence, he could stomp my sorry little rear end into the ground. So, when he would finally get bored with me, he would nonchalantly saunter over the back side of the ridge and wait for the eventual result. "Ohmygosh, Harriet! Bruno's gone! Come along everyone, chop chop! The boss is on the move!" And the subsequent stampede would follow until they were in eyesight of their fearless leader.
This went on for several hours: stalk, shoot, stalk, shoot. And there's only one word that can describe the experience - it was fun! This is one of the joys of nature filming: depending on patience, stealth, and luck - lots of luck.
The attached video is just a little collage of footage taken from that day. I wonder what Bruno thought of me in the end? Probably, "Geez, what a tourist!"
After having had the opportunity to travel through a portion of the Northwest Passage, above the Arctic Circle, documenting evidence of climate change for the marine research organization InMER, I became more interested in what is happening to this region and the implications. There are some serious issues beyond what is most often portrayed in the news: the threatened polar bear.
In the recent issue of SeaWeb's Marine Science Review #290: Climate and Climate Change, several articles and abstracts outline studies made regarding the effects of rising temperatures on the permafrost that forms the primary ground cover in the region. Permafrost is, in essence, a frozen soil layer. The upper or active portion of the layer supports flora with shallow root structures - different types of moss and lichen abound and bushes or trees do not grow there.
But also trapped in that frozen layer is a considerable amount of organic carbon and methane and as the temperature increases, those potential greenhouse gases can be released. In terms of greenhouse gas emissions, it makes the permafrost a ticking time bomb.
The SeaWeb review sited two articles: "Vulnerability of permafrost carbon to climate change: Implications for the global carbon cycle" (BioScience 58[8], 2008) and "Soil microbial respiration in arctic soil does not acclimate to temperature" (Ecology Letters 11[10], 2008). Really exciting, attention-grabbing titles, I know, and they're very heavy on the academic/scientific gobbledygook but what it boils down to is that with even a slight increase in temperature, the permafrost experiences an increase in soil decomposition that releases the trapped organic carbon and methane. And there is a considerable amount held in that frozen soil.
It's another example of the "cascade effect" where one change - an increase in temperature - causes a myriad of other changes, with some of these changes feeding back into the original issue and exacerbating the problem.
The polar bear can generate well-deserved public sympathy and hopefully provide impetus to address the problem of climate change. But it's a multi-faceted problem with potential land mines right under our feet.
On 08/29/07,RTSeawrote: I just returned last week from a film assignment in the Northwest Passage, above the Arctic Circle, documenting the effects of climate change on the environment and Inuit culture there. The organization sponsoring the expedition was InMER (Integrated Marine Education and Research), a non-profit group dedicated to public awareness of key environmental issues. They have an ambitious project through 2010 to research and document climate change in this vital region and communicate their findings to both decision-makers and the general public through an arsenal of communication channels and formats. You can learn more at www.inmer.org.
The Arctic is an incredible ecological system. My first impression was one of a stark, bleak environment, seemingly impenetrable and impervious. But as I complied more and more images - from muskox to tundra moss to summer sea ice, from interviews with Inuit elders to government officials - I began to realize how fragile this ecosystem is in reality. And, like its southern cousin, the Antarctic, it serves as a barometer for worldwide change and a tripwire to warn us as to our future if we do not take steps to reverse the man-made effects on our climate. The earth's poles are trying to speak to us . . . and we must listen.
Addendum: The National Snow and Ice Data Center has reported that the 2007 summer ice field has been the smallest on record and many scientific agencies are saying that the arctic ice is melting in excess of predicted models. The impact on the Northwest Passage - it's people, wildlife, and ecosystem may arrive sooner than expected. See pictures and video of this year's summer ice by going to the Media Library and typing in "Northwest" or "ice".
millions of tons of wasted sealife, from the loss of marine mammals, sharks, and turtles in longline nets to the "scorched earth" effect exhibited in shrimp harvesting techniques. Through the application of four different regulatory laws or agencies (the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, and the Endangered Species Act), the level of bycatch is being federally monitored and managed through the use of government observers.
With the growing awareness of the feedback effect of melting ice (exposing more heat-absorbing ocean to sunlight, thereby accelerating the melting process), the department's revised computer models move the clock forward by almost 20 years wherein we will be faced with an Arctic region devoid of most, if not all of its, summer sea ice - a monumental ringing of the alarm bell that global warming is now upon us.
determine which seafood would be more or less safe depending on species and frequency of consumption? This was the question that was studied recently and reported in Environmental Health Perspectives. The results of the study were not definitive but suggested that such a matrix could be developed. The report noted that farmed salmon, herring, and trout had a significant higher benefit vs. risk based on levels of methylmercury and omega-3 fatty acids. The opposite was true for swordfish and shark. Flounder and canned light tuna had a small benefit, while canned white tuna and halibut had a small risk.
