rss_fish

Archive for the ‘Wildlife’ Category

Full of Life Those Anchialine Ponds

Posted by Scott A. On June - 1 - 2010

redshrimpEver heard of an Anchialine (‘near the sea’) Pond ? Well neither had I until I stumbled upon a series of these pools adorning the coast of the Big Island of Hawaii.  While following the convex nature of the coastline from Waiulua Bay to Anaehoomalu Bay, my eyes managed to wander from the crashing waves just in time to catch a placard telling passersby to refrain from disturbing sensitive habitat.  Of course I was curious and so I left the coral beach, stepped onto the tree-shaded dirt path and peered across lava beds that were cupping crystal clear waters.  But that is an understatement as far as  a description goes because the waters bristled with life, colorful algae coated the water covered rocks and birds waded in the waters and disappeared behind once molten rock.

I was really anxious to get a closer look and for a split second even contemplated a quick inspection, but that sign flickered in my head and I knew I had to keep a responsible distance; practice what I preach whether I liked it or not.  But it did not take long to discern a path made for human travelers had been installed and provided ample space for observation.  This was virgin territory, for me anyways, and I quickly managed to forget all the signs that indicated people had come and gone before…my expedition was underway.   I traversed the well groomed path and wondered whether they were fresh or salt or brackish water ponds.  I had hypotheses for each scenario, which was extended to include a reason for the presence of an incredible amount of small fish schooling in the variety of pools ranging from the scientific units of very small to quite large.  But I began to realize their salty nature after spotting the presence of a small surgeonfish swimming amongst the other gilled residents.  Besides fish, the ponds are home for algae, plants, shrimp, snails, insects and provide foraging sites for birds.

Alas, a sign describing yet another Hawaiian treasure identified the name of my latest discovery.  And before I provide additional verbiage and photos, I should mention that I was brought back to reality as the path ultimately ended amongst the streets of civilization. An adventure none the less.

“Anchialine ponds are one of Hawaii’s most threatened ecosystems. There are about 700 known anchialine ponds in Hawai’i. Most Hawaiian anchialine ponds are in the youngest lava areas of the Big Island of Hawai’i and Maui. They exist in inland lava depressions near the shore and contain brackish (a mixture of freshwater and saltwater) water. Freshwater is fed to the ponds from ground water that moves down slope and from rainwater. Ocean water seeps into the ponds through underground crevices in the surrounding lava rock.”  University of Hawaii at Hilo

According to the signs on site, “Tiny red shrimp, collectively called ‘Opae’ula, are one of the unique features of these anchialine pools and are found only in Hawaii.  The shrimp are omnivorous and can live for long periods of time underground in the interstitial groundwater without appearing in the pools.  The shrimp have been found in wells located a mile inland.  The smaller and more numerous shrimp (Halocaridina rubra) is preyed upon by a larger red shrimp (Matabetaeus lohena).”

anchialine-1_swartis

anchialine-2_swartis

anchialine-3_swartis

anchialine-4_swartis

Humpback whale tailIt’s probably not much of a limb to go out on, but I’m pretty sure there is a clear majority and mandate by Americans to halt whaling, let alone lend official support and endorse such actions by other nations.  And I think I may enter the frigid waters and tackle our own policies regarding indigenous harvesting in another setting.  For now, I like to imagine that the approval rating for whaling is somewhere in the single digit range, but after reality sets in I doubt we have yet to reach the incredible homogeneity that the populace of Australia has been demonstrating.  As reported by Time, ” A national poll conducted in January [2010], 94% of Australians said they were against whaling.”

As for the U.S., the numbers I have on hand are two decades old, but it does speak to our disdain for a practice that seems only fitting for 160 year old novels and blurry monochromatic photos adorning museum walls. The poll found that 83 percent of American voters oppose killing whales, 61% “strongly” oppose whaling, 82 percent want government officials to speak out publicly against commercial whaling, and 55% believe the U.S. government should impose limited trade sanctions banning the import of seafood products from countries that continue whaling (Schoen & Berland Associates 1999).

Now that a new proposal to lift the ban on commercial whaling is making headlines, I am wondering if the voices of the American people are simply being ignored…again.  And I think there really might be a disconnect between governments, the International Whaling Commission, and the people when it comes to this particular issue.  WHALES ARE NOT ANIMALS.  And I think most of us inherently understand this ideology and have a connection to cetaceans that far surpasses something that can simply be chalked up to the love for a high profile, charismatic species.

So for those wondering what whales are if not simply animals, the answer is a BEING.  We are human beings and they are whale beings; it’s an existential connection based on mutual respect, based on intelligence, and based on the fact that we see us in them.  Yet it is so much more than mere anthropomorphism as I/we embrace them as colleagues in life.  Thus, many of us perceive whaling as an antiquated notion, whether or not done under the guise of scientific permits.

Now that we have established a background, it’s time to circle back to the proposal to end a ban on whaling.  In March 2010, the International Whaling Commission (IWC) produced a draft proposal to address:

…the problems within the Convention; conservation and sustainability; healthy whale populations; exploitation and protection; whaling under special permit (‘scientific whaling’); small type coastal whaling; benefits for developing countries; monitoring and accountability; sanctuaries; the commercial whaling moratorium; an interim period; governance mechanisms of the IWC; animal welfare; aboriginal subsistence whaling; international trade; reservations and objections; whale watching; bycatch and human impacts; small cetaceans; an acceptable “Package”.

whaling-iwcAddressing problems is always a good thing, right?  Well, after waving away the smoke we find that the proposal not only recommends whaling for members of the IWC who are currently killing whales to legally do so for the next 10 years, but that the Obama Administration is backing the plan (Which by the way was announced in a press release on Earth Day 2010).  Additionally, the key is an “acceptable package,” which can be argued as strictly no whaling,  and is currently tied to the fact “that whaling catch limits are largely still to be determined.”  It is because of this ambiguity in the draft proposal that the International Fund for the Welfare of Animals (IFAW) is looking for support and involvement. 

“The plan can mean not only reversing the current ban on whale hunting by Norway, Iceland, and Japan for the next ten years, but will allow whaling in the internationally recognized whale sanctuary around Antarctica.” IFAW 2010

 Thus, I caught up with Chris Cutter, IFAW spokesperson, to find out a little bit more about this developing situation as they fight to protect a species in which we have so much in common.

Thriving Oceans:  What is your main concern with the new proposal and the backing by the current Administration?

Chris Cutter: Our main issue is that the administration is saying definitively that this deal would save X numbers of whales. The issue is that the current proposal has “draft” numbers in it.

 You could take the administration at face value and say the “intention” is to reduce the numbers of whales killed, but it’s inaccurate to say that the proposal would save X amount of whales without any hard figures to back that up.

Thriving Oceans:  Are we potentially jumping the gun by criticizing a draft proposal?

Chris Cutter:You could flip that around and say it’s inaccurate for IFAW and other NGOs to criticize the plan for the same reasons. Without any numbers it is impossible to assess. Suffice it to say, given the history of the negotiations to date, the structure of the proposal itself, and the fact that all of the conservation benefits are based on dubious science, we’re skeptical.

 Thriving Oceans:  So we’re potentially hearing some environmental pandering as the Administration is claiming whales are going to be saved?

Chris Cutter:  The problem is that there will be hard numbers in the proposal when it is voted on next month. Until those numbers are written in ink, not pencil, no one should be talking about future numbers of whales killed or saved.

It is up to us to lead the effort in protecting these animals.

To learn about how you can get involved, please visit IFAW on Facebook or visit www.IFAW.org.

Amazing Cephalopods

Posted by Scott A. On May - 27 - 2010

Octopus on Hawaiian Reef – Wordless Wednesday

Posted by Scott A. On May - 19 - 2010

Bycatch Claims Sea Turtles By the Millions

Posted by Scott A. On May - 18 - 2010

This post was chosen as an Editor's Selection for ResearchBlogging.org
It’s an article packed full of potential contention as it speaks to a variety of issues involving fisheries management.  So thank God we are dealing with a charismatic marine species or we just may be contemplating their extinction.  But then again, perhaps we are doing just that since all 7 species of marine turtles are listed under the Endangered Species Act.  So what does that mean when millions of sea  turtles are caught as bycatch in just 18 years?  I think it means the status quo is definitely due for an overhaul to say the least.

Leatherback Turtle caught on longlineBycatch.  It’s a word that sounds rather innocuous as it rolls off the tongue, but clearly does not do justice to the staggering amount of life that is instantly converted to simple biological waste.  It’s a problem that amounts to tonnes, in the neighborhood of several million per year.  And again I say thank God because the widely popular sea turtle may be able to help shine the light on an ever growing problem responsible for population declines in multiple species.  Well, at least I hope so.

In Global Patterns of Marine Turtle Bycatch, gillnets, longlines, and trawl fisheries are providing us with a perspective that we would probably rather ignore.  Unfortunately the out of sight out of mind attitude is not helping the sea turtle situation and it reminds me of an old mantra I used, “The catch of the day may cost more than you think.”  In this scenario, that cost is…

The total reported global marine turtle bycatch (1990-2008) was ∼85,000 turtles, but due to the small percentage of fishing effort observed and reported (typically <1% of total fleets), and to a global lack of bycatch information from small-scale fisheries, this likely underestimates the true total by at least two orders of magnitude.

turtle-bycatchAnd after looking at the data I am left wondering how many sea turtles are actually killed or die as a result of wounds incurred by coming into contact with gillnets, longlines and trawls.  I can imagine it is only palatable when wearing a pair of rose colored glasses.  But as far as the research goes, there was insufficient data to incorporate mortality rates.

The study found the bycatch per unit effort (BPUE) varied greatly depending upon the region and fishing method employed.  In fact , it identified certain hotspots that are a cause for concern and highlight the need for fisheries management intervention.

Based on reported sea turtle bycatch, the maximum BPUEs found for each fishing method are as follows:

  • 2.2 turtles per set for gillnets in the Mediterranean Sea
  • 19.3 turtles per 1,000 hooks for longlines in the eastern Pacific Ocean
  • 7.2 turtles per haul for trawls in the southwest Atlantic Ocean

Loggerhead Bycatch“Targeted action to reduce turtle-gear interactions is essential for population persistence, and is already underway for some fleets…our study revealed that reports of longline bycatch are two-fold more common than reports of bycatch in either trawls or gillnets.”

Having the data means we have no more excuses for not developing, continuing to develop and implementing a conservation plan that is both regional and fishing gear specific.  The plan must be more than focusing on turtle excluder devices, but must include other innovative management techniques on the lines of time-area closures, etc.  And since time is of the essence and marine turtle populations are at risk, immediate action is required.

ResearchBlogging.org
Wallace, B., Lewison, R., McDonald, S., McDonald, R., Kot, C., Kelez, S., Bjorkland, R., Finkbeiner, E., Helmbrecht, S., & Crowder, L. (2010). Global patterns of marine turtle bycatch Conservation Letters DOI: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00105.x

nwhi-sharkI’ll be perfectly honest…I’ve been sitting on this essay from Conservation Biology for the last week or so as I mulled over my approach on breaching this topic.  At one point I envisioned the title as Torn Between Ocean Science and Ocean Conservation; clearly a manifestation of the dilemma with which I was trying to come to terms.  The direction we go just seems so obvious, right?  Well I guess that depends on which side of the fence you fall on as the authors, Heupel and Simpendorfer,  do a fairly good job at covering all aspects of the issue, from allowing scientific collection of only healthy species to limited collections of endangered species to the use of non-lethal methods to use of collections only in an attempt to perfect non-lethal sampling methods.  So what SHOULD we choose? 

Whether good or bad scientifically speaking, the fact is that continued media coverage of declining shark populations and our fisheries in general is sparking a change in the attitudes of our future scientists as conservationist ideals seep into the public.

“One noticeable result of the increase in concern about sharks is that more students enquiring about graduate school who are interested in working on sharks are indicating they are not willing to participate in projects that may harm sharks. This occurs before they know which species are involved, the status of that species, or what benefits could be gained from lethal sampling. This suggests their perspective is not rooted in science, but is ethical, political, or emotive.”

dusky_shark

So are ethics, politics, and emotions incompatible with science?  Perhaps.  But before any skewering takes place let me qualify that remark.  Science strives or should strive to remain unbiased  in its approach to answering questions or interpreting results.  Science should not let politics drive a conclusion, science should not let profits mask facts, science should be done responsibly, and science should not be performed when devoid of morality.  And if this is the case, then I think it is obvious why we find ourselves with up and coming scientists displaying perspectives rooted in wildlife and ocean preservation.  Our ethics and emotions are driving those interested in marine conservation to take the lead for the protection of ecosystems as next generation scientists.  And when we combine this with garbage filled oceans, oil spills and pollution, and overfishing ,for instance, it should not be surprising that those tired of ocean degradation are interested in making a positive difference.   

sharkessay-quoteAnd let’s not forget that we apply such a social standard when it comes to research on whales.  Non-lethal sampling is a worthy endeavor and out of scientific necessity ingenuity will drive new and innovative data gathering methods.

This definitely goes beyond sharks and speaks to greater societal attitudes. There’s a problem and our oceans need fixing.  And I am hoping that this change in attitude is not limited to those aspiring to be ichthyologists and marine biologists, but highlights growing awareness amongst consumers.  Getting back to the issue on the table, sharks are declining worldwide because of finning, commercial and recreational overharvesting , and loss of functional habitat to name a few.  But what does this all mean for science?  Well the authors ask the following questions:

“Should research sampling be slowed, stopped, or questioned because of their status?”

“Is the preservationist’s point of view misguided because information on depleted species is being applied to all shark populations?”

“Thus, if shark species are not assessed accurately and scientifically and suffer from biases, how can effective management and conservation be applied?”

I think one thing that is clear is that the answers or reasons will be just as varied as the life amongst a coral reef. But in regards to Heupel and Simpendorfer, the answer is rather middle of the road in that they believe we should not forego compiling data nor completely condemn killing sharks in the name of responsible science.  Additionally, they recommend always taking appropriate precautions to use nonlethal approaches whenever possible. However, this is just conjecture as I guess the actual solution will be determined in the near future by those now entering the scientific field.

ResearchBlogging.org
HEUPEL, M., & SIMPFENDORFER, C. (2010). Science or Slaughter: Need for Lethal Sampling of Sharks Conservation Biology DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01491.x



    • Visit Thriving Oceans