plankton vanishing

[Onokai]

Interesting article

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...NG8SDMMR01.DTL

Mark

[TundraIII]

****SOYLENT GREEN****.......doesnt seem so ridiculous and far fetched anymore!

[saman]

Peterson said the water temperature off Oregon in late June is normally 10 degrees Celsius (about 50 Fahrenheit), "and this year it's 16 degrees (about 61 F).

Do you suppose all of us laying in bed at night and dreaming of catching tuna is actually having some osmosis affect on the ocean temperatures being abnormally warm?

In any case this ain't good.

[Sensei-san]

Mark, Earlier in the year I speculated about the vanishing salmon on a Salty Dog thread. It looks like my speculation has some scientific merit. If you have followed the sst charts this year, the seas off the PNW have been abnormally warm. I am hoping that the salmon are trapped in the Gulf of Alaska and have not perished due to the lack of upwelling near the coast.

The comment about the layer of warm water being deeper than normal concerns me the most. If this is true than the marine ecosystem could be seriously disrupted. Sure albacore could thrive for a short period but they too need the krill and small bait fish. Most of the time when albacore cough up their prey, it is krill and sauries. The smallest bait around. Couple this report with the discovery of krill eating parasites, it could spell disaster for fisheries up and down the coast.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...illkiller.html

[SeaSparrow]

The comment about the layer of warm water being deeper than normal concerns me the most.

You are right to be concerned. Even if the north winds resume as they hopefully will, it will take an enormous amount of wind energy to drive this deep warm water offshore. This could severely disrupt upwelling this summer and majorly impact fisheries in the future.

[Salty Walty]

It is not a pretty picture but there is an upside to it also. There has been an unusually high incidence of pup mortality in the seals and sealions and low nesting #s and brood success in seabirds. The lack of food has hit them also. The benefit may not be seen for a few years but with a lower # of predators it will mean that when the fish do start to rebound those that prey on them will be fewer also.

[WildHawg]

VERY scary indeed. I find it interesting how we TUNA! fishers laud the warm water nearshore.
Lord, I pray for upwelling, and TUNA! 25 miles+ offshore

[wak'm&stak'm]

I have been watching this unfold this year also. The resident whales aren't out front like usual.
As you can see there is definantly a Northwester today....I can't wait to see what is next.

[Deepslayer]

Sounds like it's going to affect a generation of bottom fish too. :whazzup:

[skein]

I have to wonder if we're not dealing with a natural cycle here. If the last time this happened was in '83, i.e. roughly 20 years ago, would there be a similar occurance in the early 60's? Do we have data that go back that far?

On another note, or the same note but with a different accent, wasn't there a similar situation in Britain last year; a natural upwelling of cold water that didn't happen? I remember they were predicting dire consequences if it didn't show. I wonder if the predictions came true, and if they have data that might show a correlation between their lack of upwelling and ours.

Skein

[Flush Release]

Natural cycle. Last one was in the early 80's.

http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tao/elnino/1997.html

[CATCH AND EAT]

I have to wonder if we're not dealing with a natural cycle here. If the last time this happened was in '83, i.e. roughly 20 years ago, would there be a similar occurance in the early 60's? Do we have data that go back that far?

Jim thank you for your level headed responce here. You to Flush Release. As most all of us are armchair biologist here maybe, just maybe this is indeed a cyclical event. Has happened many times before and can be trace back to events in the 1800's and testimony from tribes that had tough winters do to a shortage of salmon.

That said, it has been a weird year of weather so far.

[jigmaster]

In 1983 there was a huge El Nino in San Diego...Yellowfin Tuna, Dorado, giant squid, etc. 7 miles offshore around kelp paddies... 75 degree water...Maybe this bodes well for inshore Albacore..

[Bill Monroe]

In 1983 there was a huge El Nino in San Diego...Yellowfin Tuna, Dorado, giant squid, etc. 7 miles offshore around kelp paddies... 75 degree water...Maybe this bodes well for inshore Albacore..

The only itty bitty wrinkle here (I think...I'm still making some calls) is that this isn't a substantial El Nino year and 1983 was...this discussion is on that Web site:

"However, the overall pattern of tropical convection was near average. During June there was very little week-to-week variation in circulation features, as the MJO became inactive.
A majority of the statistical and coupled model forecasts (Fig. 3) indicate that SST anomalies will likely remain positive during the next 3-6 months, but still within the ENSO-neutral range."

[Sensei-san]

Bill,

I would get down to the Hatfield Science Center and ask the people there about their opinions for an article.

Personally I feel that everyone is dancing around the maypole and not addressing the real culprit.

GLOBAL WARMING

The nonexistent word in the Bush lexicon. There are only two heatsinks for all the energy that is being pumped into the environment. The atmosphere and the oceans. The atmosphere has absorbed as much as it can and now the seas are starting to warm dramatically. Coupled with that will be massive changes in the ocean current dynamics. I think that this years abnormal warm ocean winter SST's off the PNW is just the beginning of the changes.

As for comparisions with the 1983 event. As you pointed out the 1983 event was a strong el Nino event. This year was not. This could be a scary situation. If the ocean currents are changing to allow the Humboldt or Davidson Current to always run north as a warm current even in the winter, Pacific salmon may be doomed. This years lack of a return on the Columbia and Rogue of the spring run maybe an indicator that this is already occuring.

I disagree with trying to pass this off as a "normal" cycle. Couple this with the killer krill parasite, I feel that the ocean is warming and not to our ultimate benefit as a people who have a diverse fishery as a tradition.

[SeaSparrow]

Bill- You are right that '83 was an El Nino year. The difference now is that there is no associated El Nino happening. The last 2 years had weaker than normal upwelling with this year being the most significant. Could this be linked to the record warm year in Alaska and the Arctic (where ice is melting faster now than at any recorded time in the past)? Global warming is happening whether we want to deny it or not. Whether it is due to natural variations or due in part to man's activities does not matter, it is a real phenomenon. Even the present administration last week admitted for the first time that warming is occurring. Do we standby passively and watch and deny it is happening or do we take a proactive stand and take steps to address the issue and the possiblity that our activities could be contributing?

[Bill Monroe]

If you've been reading, I'm far from complacent about global warming...I quite agree. This doesn't seem to be a normal cycle at all and the questions are being asked at every turn. I'll raise them in Sunday's column (again).

But, too, in the back of my mind is a small museum in Ft. St. James, B.C., where a crash of the Fraser River sockeye run was recorded in the late 1700s, causing widespread starvation among the soldiers and community...

These things have happened in the past.

Question, though, isn't whether this cycle is man caused. it is..Question is how long it will last and what else will it do...We've managed to ignore science until it can no longer ignore us.

[Miss B Haven]

We've managed to ignore science until it can no longer ignore us.

It's not the first time Bill and unfortunately it won't be the last. Sometimes it's not even science that's ignored, just plain old common sense. :depressed:

[BUGLEMAN]

Global warming? My first instinct is to say come on guys. What would you be saying if it was a colder than average year? The ice age is returning again? This is a normal ocean cycle. Our fish runs have adapted to these normal cycles. That is one reason why a brood year doesn't all come back in one year.

I have seen data though that the arctic is warming considerably because small changes in atmouspheric temperatures decreases pack ice recruitment on a larger scale. Anecdotally, I heard an escamo say that where there was 12' of pack ice 25 years ago, there is now 2-3'. Sea water reflects less energy than pack ice so, the ocean warms up. I believe it is on the order of 6 degrees F. average.

[wak'm&stak'm]

I believe Global warming is 99% bull$$.

Whoever pays the Grant...gets the results that benifit their purpose....be it the industrial group, or enirvomentalist.
The more they doom and gloom / fear they reap on the uniformed public, the greater the donations.

100 years ago third world countries had very poor data gathering. The USA lead the way in accurate data tables.
Which in no way explains why the average temp in the USA has actual decreased for 30 years starting in the 70s.

The glaciers in Greenland are actually growing and not deceasing.

The Antartic contains 90% of the earths ice. Sure it calves off, just as it has for thousands of years. Yet the total mass is the same.

Urban warming....( due to road replacing cool trees and roof tops replacing cool swamps) is expected to have an adverse effect as great or greater than the depleteing ozone.. Funny you don't hear those enviromental fruitcakes in the cities critizing thier own heat geneating nieghborhoods, and malls. Grrrrr......
Yet.....a 0.4 - 0.8 c increase in the last 150 years has generated havic and income to special groups.

They can not even agree if Global warming..means more or less clouds....increased water evaperation vs..warmer air holding more vapor.

Depending on where you live....IF, there was global warming...the increased growing season in northern areas is a good thing.

....Gee ...don't even get me started on those Red fish lovers....and their lack of data, and their more resent rants on the destruction off the ocean floor.

Sure you have some truly sincere individuals....who mean well...... but the bottom line is dollars in the earth loving CEO bank accounts. I will have to find that story again....but it was unbelievable the resource and funding they generate.
The poor little hippy chaining himself to the trees.....is the news they want you to see and read about.

I better shut up and get off my soap box. My point is global warming is not a fact as many believe. Ice core samples over 5000 years actually show warmer trends come and go than we have today.

[SeaSparrow]

Ice core samples over 5000 years actually show warmer trends come and go than we have today.

I know it is fruitless to debate with people who have their minds made up whether it be politics, religion or science and global warming. Science, however can measure variables and use knowledge based on fact to gather inferences.
Fact#1: CO2 is a greenhouse gas.
Fact#2: CO2 levels are higher now than at any time in the past 400,000 years (based on ice cores).
Inference: It would be surprising if the rising CO2 levels DIDN'T affect our climate.
Fact#3: Our present administration just last week said that it appears that our climate is warming.
Fact#4: the Arctic has lost more ice in the last 15 years than in the last 200.
Fact#5: The Antarctic ice shelf similarly continues to diminish.
Fact#6: This is all just food for thought and not meant in any way to inflame or incite ill will!

[seacurr]

Well put Wak. It is very difficult to form an acurate opinion on this huge issue, and an OPINION is exactly what it is no matter where you stand. There is so-called factual information to back up no matter what stance any group takes it seems as long as there is funding. I heard a statistic not long ago that a volcanic occurence the size of the Mt.St.Helens belch we recently experienced puts out more CO2(green house gas) than all of the idustrial plants in the country over a five year period. I can't vouch for the accuracy of this, but somebody said it or somebody published it so it must be true right? I don't fault the left wing enviro-***** for having a cause and doing what they think is right, in fact I respect it at some level. It just always seems it's some new knee jerk reaction based on some natural phenomenum that nobody can explain with the end result being more regulation on the things I love to do. Just my .02

[Bill Monroe]

Bury your heads in the sand all you want and debate whether GW is real. Meanwhile, your butts are getting sunburned.

All this is happening sans (that means WITHOUT) a major El Nino like 1983. And the hurricane pattern has never done this (well, recorded anyway). Even back then, as poor as the spring chinook runs got, they were relatively predictable.
Something is happening that is not natural.
And it's starting to look as if it's coming PDQ. :whazzup:

[Miss B Haven]

Guys- Look at it this way...if the ice caps melt I can park Miss B in my pond which will then be salt water. I won't even have to pay for a slip AND....I'll have beach front property! :grin:

[wak'm&stak'm]

I am actually open minded, and I totally agree on knowledge based fact.

Interesting....I said said 5000 years...not 400,000. but good point...what I see from the graft is not answers but more questions.
1.I wonder why the 3 spikes a hundred thousand years apart. What do they believe caused they????
2.Was CO2 was the cause for rising temps or result of rising temps... ?
3.What in nature causes co2 levels to increase..prior to modern man?
4. Was plant life stimulated by the co2? Such as algea growth in the oceans...which produce more Oxygen then the rain forests.?

5. Are there ice sample from the northern hemsphere theat refect the same trends>?

I am not wanting to argue, I am just 100% curious. I find this subject mind boggling.

I once read that termites accually outweigh the human population some 2 to 1. They produce like 10 times the methane. If we take this study to heart.....termites are the problem for this dangerous gas.. My point is for every study , there is another with opposing data. I just don't think people should cry wolf just yet.

What I personally find interesting is the lush vegitation under artic ice, and the mamoths froze with veggies in their mouth. I understand that a huge amount of water became present and the temp. dropped. But there must have been one hell of a greenhouse effect at one time.

I bet the tuna were HUGE back them....

Good one Mel....You will have beach front property and I will be underwater. I think I will go build a reef in the front yard, I will share the coordinates later.

[Bill Monroe]

Quite true that the Arctic was once neo-tropical...still, even if that's what's occurring instead/because of CO2 emissions, the end result is the same...and, in this case, almost unbelievable accelerated. We're in for some major social changes...

[ron m]

We may very well be in for some major changes, social and otherwise, plus there may well be changes that are so far unforeseen. We may chose to believe or not believe global warming is happening, but most of the scientific community thinks (based on the data) it is happening, including the ones that don't get their funding from environmental groups.
ron m aka Ron Mason

[SeaSparrow]

...most of the scientific community thinks (based on the data) GW is happening, including the ones that don't get their funding from environmental groups.
ron m aka Ron Mason

Guess what, those of us who work diligently in scientific endeavors for the majority of our lives know that the "rich CEOs" and other "special interests" that pay our salaries are actually you and me the taxpayers. Most all the funding we "objective" researchers receive comes from the National Science Foundation funded by us taxpayers. Sometimes the data we scientists measure conflicts with the favored views of the current administration. But data is data nevertheless and is published in peer reviewed journals under rigorous standards. That's when the "fun" begins over interpretation of the data... :lurk:

[PGJPJ]

OK, so not all science is bought by America LLC. But there are some well-publicized research studies that may very well have been bought. The one that comes to mind is "The Greening of Planet Earth." A study that proved how CO2 emissions were accelerating the growth of plant life on Earth... Made me want to go out and buy 2 SUVs.

OSU Library

There are defiantly a number of unanswered questions regarding global warming, and if such a thing exists. And whom are we going to trust to give us answers? Not our sold out government! Not the sold out scientists! Not the uneducated media.

And if global warming is a man made phenomena, what exactly can be done to stop it. Do you really think China or India gives a crap about our views on the environment? Or the near future of some island countries? Nope!

On a lighter note, have a great weekend!

[wak'm&stak'm]

Well said PGJPJ....

I do not believe one minute that ALL studies recieve the same press time. You can not say that certain scientific studies are not slanted, as they search to prove their own agendas and theories. I am sure there are plenty of reseach foundations that tweek data to recieve further grants.

I do not believe we the public are being difficult or negitive. I think our attitudes are a result of years of inaccurate or opposing studies.
What is accepted as fact today, will be found incorrect tomorrow.

There has been a lot of faith lost in the science communittee as a whole. I wish it were different....but they have brought it upon themselves.

The yelloweye study is a fine example. The fire was started because of the lack of large mature fish in the trawl nets. They even siad..." this COULD BE the result of habitat, or behavior of the species".
I know for a 100% fact that the study is inaccurate. I have set down with many commercial fisherman and had them show me where they fished. They ALL point out areas of large concentration of redfish, but they can not drop their gear there without loosing it.
If I had 8 million dollars to hire a research team to count fish in these areas......we would have a whole different arguement today. But that is not going to happen is it.
Instead lets just the control the crap out of the 20% of the ocean floor that is fishable, and not count the fish in the other 80%.
The general assumption is a lack of fish, the data put to the press will support their claims, inaccurate or not.
I don't blame them really, why publish or fund research that will make your agency look like a real dumb a$$.

Now! lets discuss colestral studies, reforestration studies, genetic engineering, artifical sweetner studies, or the breeding habits of dust mites.