Oceanic Defense: July 2010

7.29.2010

Marine Phytoplankton Declining: What this means for you

ScienceDaily — A new article published in the 29 July issue of the journal Nature reveals for the first time that microscopic marine algae known as "phytoplankton" have been declining globally over the 20th century. Phytoplankton forms the basis of the marine food chain and sustains diverse assemblages of species ranging from tiny zooplankton to large marine mammals, seabirds, and fish. Says lead author Daniel Boyce, "Phytoplankton is the fuel on which marine ecosystems run. A decline of phytoplankton affects everything up the food chain, including humans."

Using an unprecedented collection of historical and recent oceanographic data, a team from Canada's Dalhousie University documented phytoplankton declines of about 1% of the global average per year. This trend is particularly well documented in the Northern Hemisphere and after 1950, and would translate into a decline of approximately 40% since 1950. The scientists found that long-term phytoplankton declines were negatively correlated with rising sea surface temperatures and changing oceanographic conditions.

The goal of the three-year analysis was to resolve one of the most pressing issues in oceanography, namely to answer the seemingly simple question of whether the ocean is becoming more (or less) „green' with algae. Previous analyses had been limited to more recent satellite data (consistently available since 1997) and have yielded variable results. To extend the record into the past, the authors analysed a unique compilation of historical measurements of ocean transparency going back to the very beginning of quantitative oceanography in the late 1800s, and combined these with additional samples of phytoplankton pigment (chlorophyll) from ocean-going research vessels. The end result was a database of just under half a million observations which enabled the scientists to estimate phytoplankton trends over the entire globe going back to the year 1899.

The scientists report that most phytoplankton declines occurred in polar and tropical regions and in the open oceans where most phytoplankton production occurs. Rising sea surface temperatures were negatively correlated with phytoplankton growth over most of the globe, especially close to the equator. Phytoplankton need both sunlight and nutrients to grow; warm oceans are strongly stratified, which limits the amount of nutrients that are delivered from deeper waters to the surface ocean. Rising temperatures may contribute to making the tropical oceans even more stratified, leading to increasing nutrient limitation and phytoplankton declines. The scientists also found that large-scale climate fluctuations, such as the El-Niño Southern Oscillation (ENSO), affect phytoplankton on a year-to-year basis, by changing short-term oceanographic conditions.

The findings contribute to a growing body of scientific evidence indicating that global warming is altering the fundamentals of marine ecosystems. Says co-author Marlon Lewis, "Climate-driven phytoplankton declines are another important dimension of global change in the oceans, which are already stressed by the effects of fishing and pollution. Better observational tools and scientific understanding are needed to enable accurate forecasts of the future health of the ocean." Explains co-author Boris Worm, "Phytoplankton are a critical part of our planetary life support system. They produce half of the oxygen we breathe, draw down surface CO2, and ultimately support all of our fisheries. An ocean with less phytoplankton will function differently, and this has to be accounted for in our management efforts."

Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100728131705.htm

About Oceanic Defense
We are an international non-profit organization with members in over 60 countries, spanning 6 continents with 1 mission; healthy aquatic ecosystems free from human abuse and neglect. Oceanic Defense teaches people to protect our oceans by acting responsibly as consumers and by making smart decisions in our daily lives. Whether we are buying groceries, commuting to work, planning a vacation or advocating within our own communities; each action we take or decision we make either helps or hurts our oceans. We empower people to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem and work together to protect our blue planet.

Join us on Facebook:www.facebook.com/OceanicDefense
Visit our official website:www.oceanicdefense.org
Follow us on Twitter:www.twitter.com/OceanicDefense

7.21.2010

For Oysters, a ‘Remedy’ Turned Catastrophe

In late April, just days into what has turned out to be the largest oil spill in American history, Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, with the support of local parish officials, ordered the opening of giant valves on the Mississippi River, releasing torrents of freshwater that they hoped would push oil back out to sea.

Now, reports indicate that the freshwater diversions have had a catastrophic impact on southeastern Louisiana’s oyster beds that is far in excess of the damage done by oil from the spill.

The Associated Press broke the story of the oyster deaths last week, and local news outlets along the coast are following it as well. On Tuesday, The Wall Street Journal chimed in with its own in-depth report.

Oysters require saltwater to live, and massive infusions of freshwater can quickly kill them. Once dead, the beds can take two to five years to become commercially viable again.

Now, some oyster fishermen along the coast are reporting mortality rates as high as 80 percent along thousands of acres of oyster beds. In Barataria Bay, one of Louisiana’s most productive oyster fisheries, some beds are 60 percent dead, largely because of the freshwater influx, The Wall Street Journal quoted Louisiana’s top state oyster biologist as saying.

Many oyster beds in gulf waters have been shut down as a precaution because oil contamination was considered likely, but widespread die-offs caused by the oil have not yet been found.

Heavy damage to the oyster beds from the freshwater diversions could prove embarrassing to the Jindal administration, which already finds itself under scrutiny for its ambitious plans to build massive sand and rock structures along the coast to block the oil. Both the sand and rock barriers drew criticism from scientists and federal officials that they would have negative environmental consequences that outweighed their potential benefit in stemming the flow of oil.

Such criticisms deep-sixed a plan by the governor to build rock dikes across tidal inlets leading into Barataria Bay, but did not stand in the way of the construction of massive sand barriers, a project which is still under way in the gulf.

The Jindal administration may already be preparing to deflect criticism over the oyster deaths.

In its article, the Wall Street Journal quotes an unnamed spokesman with the state’s coastal protection authority saying that “rain and the natural flow of the river” were also factors in the decrease in salinity. Attributing specific numbers of oyster deaths to the freshwater diversions would be “difficult,” the spokesman said.

Yet oyster fisheries in nearby Mississippi appear to have been unscathed. “We are finding no major mortalities,” an official with the Mississippi Department of Marine Resources recently told the AP.

In statements to the AP and the Journal, Garrett Graves, chairman of Louisiana’s Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority, and a lead official in the state’s oil spill response, indicated that BP would be held responsible for the damage to the oyster beds caused by the freshwater releases.

Source: New York Times

Antidepressants Make Shrimps See the Light

ScienceDaily — Rising levels of antidepressants in coastal waters could change sea-life behaviour and potentially damage the food-chain, according to a new study.

Research into the behaviour of shrimps exposed to the antidepressant fluoxetine, showed that their behaviour is dramatically affected. The shrimps are five times more likely to swim toward the light instead of away from it -- making them more likely to be eaten by fish or birds, which could have devastating effects on the shrimp population.

"Crustaceans are crucial to the food chain and if shrimps' natural behaviour is being changed because of antidepressant levels in the sea this could seriously upset the natural balance of the ecosystem," said Dr Alex Ford from the University of Portsmouth's Institute of Marine Sciences.

"Much of what humans consume you can detect in the water in some concentration. We're a nation of coffee drinkers and there is a huge amount of caffeine found in waste water, for example. It's no surprise that what we get from the pharmacy will also be contaminating the country's waterways."

The research is published in the journal Aquatic Toxicology. The study found that the shrimps' behaviour changes when they are exposed to the same levels of fluoxetine found in the waste water that flows to rivers and estuaries as a result of the drugs humans excrete in sewage.

Dr Ford's research was motivated by a species of parasite which can alter the behaviour of aquatic creatures through changing serotonin levels within the brains of the organisms. Serotonin is a neuro-hormone found in many animals, including humans, known to control types of behaviour, such as modulating mood and decreasing anxiety.

Drugs to combat depression in humans are often designed to target levels of serotonin which led to the question of whether they could also alter the behaviour of marine organisms.

Dr Ford said: "Effluent is concentrated in river estuaries and coastal areas, which is where shrimps and other marine life live -- this means that the shrimps are taking on the excreted drugs of whole towns."

Prescriptions for antidepressants have risen rapidly in recent years, according to the Office for National Statistics. In 2002, there were 26.3 million antidepressant prescriptions handed out by doctors in England and Wales -- yet the environmental effect of pharmaceuticals in sewage has been largely unexplored.

Dr Ford is hoping to carry out future research on a number of other prescribed drugs on the market known to affect serotonin.

Head of the School of Biological Sciences, Professor Matt Guille, said: "Dr Ford has conducted some beautifully simple research, which potentially shows huge ecological consequences. I hope it will lead the way for further study of prescribed drugs and other substances impacting on the country's marine-life."

Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100706204430.htm

7.19.2010

Florida Keys' Coral Reefs Set for 'Broadcast Spawning'

KEY WEST, Florida -- Sparked by the August and September full moons, a rare and wondrous underwater exchange of reproductive cells heralds the continued survival of coral reefs and creates a fascinating experience for divers.

According to researchers, corals use multiple reproductive strategies. Nearly all large reef-building species release millions of gametes once a year in synchronized mass spawnings. This spectacular white excretion enables the immobile animals to send their eggs and sperm into the water in massive quantities.

When egg and sperm unite, the resulting larval-stage "planula" swims to the surface to drift in the current and grow. After some time — two days to two months — the planula settles to the bottom where it grows into a polyp. The polyp grows into a coral head by asexual budding that creates new polyps.

This annual "broadcast spawning" is believed to maximize the chances of fertilization, yet overwhelm predators with more food than they can consume. The exact cues triggering the fragile phenomenon remain unclear but are believed to be linked to water temperatures and tidal and 24-hour light cycles. Scientific observations also indicate a strong connection between the coral spawn and seasonal lunar cycles.

In August 2009, the first cultured corals — cultivated to help rebuild the reef — were discovered spawning after only two years, the first time it had been observed in the wild. That followed transplant efforts off Key Largo and the Upper Keys spearheaded by Ken Nedimyer, a coral restoration expert and president of the Coral Restoration Foundation.

"The goal is to get them to reproduce successfully so the corals that have spawned here can settle 10 miles or 50 miles from here," Nedimyer said. "What we're trying to do is put the girls and the boys back together in the same room so that they'll make babies."

Though the polyp release cannot be guaranteed to happen on the exact date, this year full moons fall on Tuesday, Aug. 24, and Thursday, Sept. 23. Divers can check with local dive operators about participating in coral spawning night dives scheduled around those dates.

In addition to coral reproduction, coral restoration is an attraction for people who love the reef. Amoray Dive Resort is offering a combination of coral transplanting seminars, restoration dives and (potential) coral spawn night dives Aug. 11-13 as well as Aug. 26 through Sept. 2, when world-famous underwater naturalists Ned and Anna DeLoach are to host their third annual sea critter seminars. For more information, visit www.amoray.com.

Source: http://www.underwatertimes.com/news.php?article_id=27583961041

7.15.2010

Gulf Oil Spill Stopped? Testing Continues

NEW ORLEANS - A tightly fitted cap was successfully keeping oil from gushing into the Gulf of Mexico for the first time in three months, BP said Thursday. The victory -- long awaited by weary residents along the coast -- is the most significant milestone yet in BP's effort to control one of the worst environmental disasters in U.S. history.

Kent Wells, a BP PLC vice president, said at a news briefing that oil stopped flowing into the water at 2:25 p.m. CDT after engineers gradually dialed down the amount of crude escaping through the last of three valves in the 75-ton cap.

"I am very pleased that there's no oil going into the Gulf of Mexico. In fact, I'm really excited there's no oil going into the Gulf of Mexico," Wells said.

The stoppage came 85 days, 16 hours and 25 minutes after the first report April 20 of an explosion on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig that killed 11 workers and triggered the spill.

Now begins a waiting period to see if the cap can hold the oil without blowing a new leak in the well. Engineers will monitor pressure readings incrementally for up to 48 hours before reopening the cap while they decide what to do.

Though not a permanent fix, the solution has been the only one that has worked to stem the flow of oil since April. BP is drilling two relief wells so it can pump mud and cement into the leaking well in hopes of plugging it for good by mid-August.

BP has struggled to contain the spill and had so far been successful only in reducing the flow, not stopping it. The company removed an old, leaky cap and installed the new one Monday.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/15/gulf-oil-spill-stopped-bp_n_647988.html

7.14.2010

Keeping An Ear On Gulf Oil Spill

UC San Diego researchers are using underwater acoustic equipment to listen in to the sounds of whales and other endangered marine life in the Gulf of Mexico. The goal is to study the oil spill's effects on the animals.

UC San Diego has already sent one research vessel to study the effects of the Gulf oil spill on marine mammals. Another boat left last week and another trip is planned at the end of July.

Along with tagging mammals and taking tissue samples, UCSD researchers also plan to use underwater listening devices.

Scripps Institution of Oceanography Professor John Hildebrand specializes in monitoring marine mammals using acoustic recorders that are made in his UCSD lab.

"It allows us to get the echo location clicks of dolphins and the recorders go all the way down to frequencies that are lower than hearing, infrasonic, and this allows us to get the moans and songs of Baleen whales," said Hildebrand.

Hildebrand is using the recording devices to help monitor the condition of marine mammals during and after the oil spill.

"We're looking for trends as the spill goes on and as more time passes," said Hildebrand. "Are the animals leaving the area, do we see or hear less presence of the animals."

The listening devices don't provide real time information.

But Hildebrand said the devices will be removed in late August or early September when he expects to hear sounds of sperm whales. He said the Gulf of Mexico is a foraging ground for the sperm whales because of deepwater squid.

"So what we hope to do is look at the data and assess are there consistent numbers of sperm whales or are there declining numbers of sperm whales?" said Hildebrand. "And then try to relate that to the presence of the oil."

Hildebrand said the sperm whales use a specific "click" when foraging. He said the sound speeds up when they find squid.

Hildebrand said if the click rate does not increase, it could be an indication of the oil spill's wider effects on the marine ecosystem.

Source: http://www.kpbs.org/news/2010/jul/06/ucsd-scientists-keeping-ear-gulf-oil-spill/

7.12.2010

U.S. issues new offshore oil drilling ban

(Reuters) - The Obama administration issued a new moratorium on deepwater oil drilling on Monday, a move the industry said was unnecessary and would place tens of thousands of jobs at risk.

Shares in BP Plc shares surged and sources said the British energy giant is in talks with U.S. energy company Apache Corp and others to sell assets worth up to $10 billion.

Meanwhile, BP was in the process of installing a new cap on its ruptured deep-sea well to try to capture almost all the oil that was spewing into the Gulf of Mexico for the 84th day.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar unveiled the new six-month moratorium, worded differently from an earlier drilling ban after a U.S. appeals court struck down the original moratorium last week.

"I am basing my decision on evidence that grows every day of the industry's inability in the deepwater to contain a catastrophic blowout, respond to an oil spill and to operate safely," Salazar said.

The new ban will extend until November 30 and affects the same drill rigs as before, although it is based on types of drilling technologies rather than on water depths as the old one was.

President Barack Obama is under pressure to make offshore drilling safer and hold BP accountable as the spill hurts multibillion dollar tourism and fishing industries across all five states along the Gulf of Mexico.

The oil industry reacted to the new drilling ban by saying it would make matters worse.

"It is unnecessary and shortsighted to shut down a major part of the nation's energy lifeline while working to enhance offshore safety," said American Petroleum Institute CEO Jack Gerard. "It places the jobs of tens of thousands of workers in serious and immediate jeopardy and promises a substantial reduction in domestic energy production."

Analysts said the oil industry was likely to contest the new ban in court, but drilling was unlikely to resume any time soon given the prospect of lengthy legal battles.

The White House was confident the new moratorium would stand up in court, spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

Fear of new rules and regulations has already led many drillers to slow their exploration in the Gulf of Mexico, and some energy analysts have said the hesitation could last longer than six months.

In New Orleans, Obama's independent oil spill commission held its first hearings on the impacts of the spill and of the drilling ban.

Michael Hecht, of the development agency Greater New Orleans Inc, told the hearing a drilling freeze threatened 24,000 jobs in Louisiana alone.

The panel of seven engineers, environmentalists and former politicians is investigating decisions by oil companies and government regulators that may have led to the disaster. Its findings will be crucial to any new regulations put in place and an eventual relaxation of the drilling ban.

BP SHARES LEAP ON ASSET TALKS

BP shares surged more than 9 percent in London and nearly 8 percent in New York on Monday, driven by the potential asset sales and hopes for a new system to capture almost all of the spewing oil.

"It's probably worth more than what it's trading for right now if they can ever get this well capped and get the cleanup effort really going," said Ted Parrish, a co-portfolio manager at Henssler Equity Fund in Georgia.

The asset sale talks are at an exploratory stage and it was uncertain whether any plans would be advanced enough to be disclosed before BP announces second-quarter earnings this month.

BP owns a 26 percent stake in Alaska's Prudhoe Bay, the largest oilfield in North America and one of the 20 largest ever discovered.

BP and Apache declined to comment on reports of the talks.

BP is to install a new cap on the gushing well later on Monday that it said could capture virtually all of the leaking oil for the first time.

"It's very close," said Doug Suttles, BP's chief operating officer of exploration and production. "We're going through the final checks."

BP, which said the cost of the spill was now about $3.5 billion, expects its first relief well to reach the blown-out well late this month, a first step in finally plugging the gusher by the first half of August as planned.

As several previous attempts to contain the oil have failed, BP is preparing a backup if the relief wells do not succeed. BP said it could install a new permanent oil-capture system by late August or early September.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65O5TA20100712

7.07.2010

Citizen Water Sample Results: Beyond Toxic According to Lab Tests

BP's Big Print Ad Buys: At least $5.6 Million

Anybody who's bought a national newspaper in the past two months has probably seen BP's full-page spreads pledging, "We will get it done. We will make this right." The ads have been prominently displayed in the New York Times, Washington Post, and USA Today, among other outlets. Given the ad rates at these papers, it's clear that BP has been forking over plenty of money for the campaign.

Just how much? Greenpeace kept track of BP's ads throughout June and came up with a rundown of how much they likely cost. The company ran 12 ads in the Times, 15 in the Washington Post, and 11 in USA Today. Based on the ad rates for each paper, which vary by color, day of the week, and size (for example, according to their rate card, a full-page color at the Times on a weekday costs $230,266, while a black and white ad costs $194,166), Greenpeace calculated that BP spent at least $5.6 million on ads in these three papers alone in the month of June—no small chunk of change considering how bad the adversting market is for print media these days.

BP has bought enough ads at the Post, for example, to qualify for a bulk rate. It's not a special discount, Marc Rosenberg, senior advertising manager at the paper, explained to me last month. "Anybody who is buying 10 full pages of ads would get the discount," he said. Rosenberg also said that BP can state a preference on where an ad goes in the paper—meaning the company could request that its ads not be positioned immediately across from photos of oil-soaked birds, for example. "Any advertiser has the right to request preferences for placement," he said.

And BP of course has the right to shell out as much money as it wants on the ads—and, knowing full well the state of the print media, I wouldn't begrudge any paper for taking as much BP ad money as they can get their hands on. But how much control BP might have over where the ads are placed and whether the company gets discounts is an interesting subject. After all, these papers have done amazing and abundant work on the Gulf disaster, so it must raise at least a few questions about how to best deal with these giant ads about a controversial subject that is currently all over the news.

"That has obviously been a challenge at times," Rosenberg acknowledged. "There are days that there isn't much in the paper besides oil spill."

USA Today vice president of advertising Bruce Dewar said that it's standard industry practice to work with advertisers on placement, though he said that, to his knowledge, BP has not made any specific requests to avoid placing its ads near spill coverage. "We will work with an advertiser if there is going to be a clear direct conflict that is going to be embarrassing to both of us," said Dewar. He also said the BP is getting a bulk rate on ads there too. "BP is spending at a level that is definitely earning them some discount," he said. The Times didn't return requests for information about their policies.

Greenpeace's Kert Davies argues that perhaps BP shouldn't get a say when it comes to placement given the current situation, or in the very least should be forced to pay full-price. "This is part of a very clear national image washing campaign. It's damage control," he says. "They're clearly broadcasting to an audience of decision makers, thought leaders, and the public through these print outlets." But at the same time, he said, "It's good if this ad revenue supports ongoing, good reporting that the Times and Post are doing."

There's also another important question about just how much these ads are actually helping BP. Congressmen have lambasted the "make this right" line repeatedly, noting that it can never really be "right," given the scale of the disaster. And I've talked to more than one person who felt the ads were more off-putting than anything else. As Gavan Fitzsimons, a professor of marketing and psychology at Duke University's Fuqua School of Business, explained, "A lot of folks see those ads and think, give me a break. It's too little too late." The ads, he said, "really strike the wrong cord with a lot of folks."

It's also worth noting that the $5.6 million on print ads in major papers alone is probably only a tiny fraction of what the company has bought so far. They've also run ads in local Gulf papers, on television, and all over the internet, which isn't included in that figure.

Source: http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2010/07/bps-big-ad-buys

China launches armada to head off algae plume

High sea temperatures and nitrogen runoff from agriculture blamed for 400 sq km of enteromorpha heading for coast

Chinese authorities have dispatched a flotilla of more than 60 ships to head off a massive tide of algae that is approaching the coast of Qingdao.

The outbreak is thought to be caused by high ocean temperatures and excess nitrogen runoff from agriculture and fish farms.

Scientists involved in the operation say the seaweed known as enteromorpha needs to be cleaned up before it decomposes on beaches and releases noxious gases.

According to the domestic media, the green tide covers an area of 400 sq km. Newspapers ran pictures of coastguard officials raking up the gunk as soon as it reached the shore.

As well as the 66 vessels sent to intercept the approaching algae, a net has been stretched offshore as an extra defence. Ten forklift trucks, seven lorries and 168 people were clearing up the many tonnes of seaweed that still got through.

Li Delin, the engineer in charge of the beach clearance, estimated that his team had collected about 3,900 tonnes as of today. The seaweed has been taken away to be processed, possibly for use as natural fertiliser or animal feed.

And more is on the way. Northern China has been experiencing the hottest week of the year – in some areas, such as Beijing, temperatures have reached highs not seen in decades – which was accelerating the growth of the algae.

Green and red tides have become increasingly common across the world since the 1970s. Usually they occur in coastal water near densely populated areas or where there is large-scale runoff of agricultural chemicals from farmland.

China has been particularly affected in recent years. An even bigger outbreak off Qingdao, estimated at 170,000 tonnes, in 2008 threatened to ruin the sailing events for the Olympics, prompting the authorities to call on hundreds of local fishermen to help them in the cleanup operation.

The green tide is a sign of eutrophication, a build up of algae caused by excess levels of nitrogen in the water. At low levels this simply means a green slime on the water's surface, such as that often seen on polluted lakes.

In its worst form, the algae can be toxic or so dense that it chokes the life below it, creating underwater "dead zones".

The green tide approaching Qingdao is harmless in its current form and, if quickly dealt with, could even help to clean up the coastal waters.

Li said that given the size of the algae plume, it would be unwise to let it decompose naturally. "If the enteromorpha on the beach can't be cleared on time, it will rot and affect the ecosystem in the bay area. Also the smell will be really bad," he said.

Preventing future algae outbreaks is a challenge. Scientists have advised the government to discourage overuse of fertiliser and to build more water treatment plants. But many experts believe the cause is deeper.

"At a fundamental level, the way to deal with this should be to combat climate change and control pollution," said Mao Yunxiang, a professor at the College of Marine Life, Ocean University of China, who is a consultant on the operation.

"We should also consider the possibility that the green tide are inevitable so we should make use of them. The algae can clean water, and be harvested for animal feed and biofertiliser."

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/07/china-algae

Lone Whales Shout to Overcome Noise

ScienceDaily — Just like people in a bar or other noisy location, North American right whales increase the volume of their calls as environmental noise increases; and just like humans, at a certain point, it may become too costly to continue to shout, according to marine and acoustic scientists.

"The impacts of increases in ocean noise from human activities are a concern for the conservation of marine animals like right whales," said Susan Parks, assistant professor of acoustics and research associate, Applied Research Laboratory, Penn State. "The ability to change vocalizations to compensate for environmental noise is critical for successful communication in an increasingly noisy ocean."

Right whales are large baleen whales that often approach close to shore. They may have been given the name because they were the right whales to hunt as they are rich in blubber, slow swimming and remain afloat after death. Consequently, whalers nearly hunted these whales to extinction. Currently right whales are monitored to determine the health and size of the population. The northern and southern right whales are on the endangered species list.

"Right whale upcalls are used extensively for passive acoustic monitoring in conservation efforts to protect this endangered species," said Parks.

Whales produce upcalls, sometimes called contact calls, when they are alone or in the process of joining with other whales. An upcall begins low and rises in pitch. It is the most frequent call produced by right whales.

Parks and her colleagues, Mark Johnson and Peter L. Tyack, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution and Douglas Nowacek, Duke University, looked at short-term modifications of calling behavior of individual North Atlantic right whales in varying environmental noise situations. They report their results in Biology Letters.

The researchers' data came from right whales tagged with acoustic suction cup tags. They listened to tag recordings from seven male and seven female whales totaling 107 calls. The tags recorded from 2 to 18 calls each. The team looked at received level, duration and fundamental frequency of the calls, and they compared background noise levels with the call-received levels of the individual calls. Noise below 400 Hertz dominated the recorded background noise. These frequencies overlap with the frequencies of right whale upcalls. Much of the increase in background ocean noise in right whale habitat is believed to be due to commercial shipping.

It appears that right whales increase the amplitude, or the energy in their calls, directly as background noise levels increase without changing the frequency. This suggests that right whales can maintain the signal to noise ratio of their calls in moderate levels of ocean noise.

"To our knowledge, this is the first evidence for noise-dependent amplitude modification of calls produced by a baleen whale," said Parks.

Changing calling patterns can, however, incur costs including increased energy expenditure, alteration of the signal and the information it contains, and increased predatory risks. With increased noise the effective communication range for feeding or mating will shrink and stress levels on individual animals may rise.

"Whether they can maintain their communication range in noisier environments still needs to be tested," said Parks. "Ocean sound levels will probably continue to increase due to human activities and there is a physical limit to the maximum source level that an animal can produce."

Another implication for potential changes in whale calls is that upcalls are the whale calls that conservationists use to monitor right whale populations. They do this using automated acoustic sensors that are looking for specific parameters to tease out the whale calls from other noises.

The research team cautions that "Variability of call parameters also can reduce the effectiveness of detection algorithms and should be taken into account when calculating the probability of detection in different habitats."

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Office of Naval Research supported this work.

Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100706204713.htm

7.06.2010

Oil Spill Website To Be Controlled By U.S., Not BP

HOUSTON — The US government is expected to take over control of the central information website on the Gulf oil spill response that has been run jointly by various agencies and BP for the 2 1/2 months since the rig explosion.

The Department of Homeland Security wants a one-stop shop for information that is completely overseen by the government as it settles into the long-haul of dealing with the response to the disaster. The U.S. Coast Guard falls under Homeland Security's authority.

BP and the federal government are part of a unified command that is working together to try to contain the oil gusher, but the government has been directing BP at every turn.

A DHS spokesman told The Associated Press on Sunday that the joint relationship won't change when the website is given a dot-gov address instead of a dot-com address.

But who can post information to the site would change. Details are still being worked out.

The spokesman, Sean Smith, said the government wants to be as transparent as possible and increase Americans' access to information.

BP is helping pay for the current website. The government could still bill BP when it takes over the site.

The deepwaterhorizonresponse.com site may still be maintained during the changeover, but ultimately it will be taken down altogether when the government moves the response information to its own website.

A BP spokesman did not immediately respond to several requests for comment on the move, which could occur within days.

A frequent critic of the administration's response to the oil spill, Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., was skeptical the change would amount to much.

"Given that the government taking over the cleanup hasn't exactly fixed things, it's hard to imagine the government taking over a website making things much better either," Issa, a member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said in a statement e-mailed to the AP.

"In recent weeks, we've heard directly from local officials pleading for less bureaucracy, more resources and expressing an overall frustration with this administration's apparent pre-occupation with the public relations surrounding this catastrophe," he said.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/04/oil-spill-website-to-be-c_n_635251.html

Scientists Predict 'Larger Than Average' Gulf Dead Zone

ScienceDaily — The northern Gulf of Mexico hypoxic zone, an underwater area with little or no oxygen known commonly as the "dead zone," could be larger than the recent average, according to a forecast by a team of NOAA-supported scientists from the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium, Louisiana State University, and the University of Michigan.

Scientists are predicting the area could measure between 6,500 and 7,800 square miles, or an area roughly the size of the state of New Jersey. The average of the past five years is approximately 6,000 square miles. It is the goal of a federal state task force to reduce it to 1,900 square miles. The largest dead zone on record, 8,484 square miles, occurred in 2002.

This forecast is based on Mississippi River nutrient flows compiled annually by the U.S. Geological Survey. Dead zones off the coast of Louisiana and Texas are caused by nutrient runoff, principally from agricultural activity, which stimulates an overgrowth of algae that sinks, decomposes, and consumes most of the life-giving oxygen supply in the water. It is unclear what impact, if any, the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill will have on the size of the dead zone.

"The oil spill could enhance the size of the hypoxic zone through the microbial breakdown of oil, which consumes oxygen, but the oil could also limit the growth of the hypoxia-fueling algae," said R. Eugene Turner, Ph.D., professor of oceanography at Louisiana State University. "It is clear, however, that the combination of the hypoxic zone and the oil spill is not good for local fisheries."

Hypoxia is of particular concern because it threatens valuable commercial and recreational Gulf fisheries. In 2008, the dockside value of commercial fisheries was $659 million. The 24 million fishing trips taken in 2008 by more than three million recreational fishers further contributed well over a billion dollars to the Gulf economy.

"As with weather forecasts, this prediction uses multiple models to predict the range of the expected size of the dead zone," said Robert Magnien, Ph.D., director of NOAA's Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research. "The strong track record of these models reinforces our confidence in the link between excess nutrients from the Mississippi River and the dead zone."

"The 2010 spring nutrient load transported to the northern Gulf of Mexico is about 11 percent less than the average over the last 30 years," said Matthew Larsen, Ph.D., USGS associate director for water. "An estimated 118,000 metric tons of nitrogen in the form of nitrate were transported in May 2010 to the northern Gulf."

The collaboration among NOAA, USGS, and University scientists facilitates understanding of the linkages between activities in the Mississippi River watershed and the downstream effects on the northern Gulf of Mexico. Long-term data sets on nutrient loads and the extent of the hypoxic zone have improved forecast models used by management agencies to understand the nutrient reductions required to reduce the size of the hypoxic zone to the established goal. This year's forecast is an example of NOAA's growing ecological forecasting capabilities that allow for the protection of valuable resources using scientific, ecosystem-based approaches.

An announcement of the size of the 2010 hypoxic zone, which is an annual requirement of the Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Task Force Action Plan, will follow a NOAA-supported monitoring survey led by the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium between July 24 and August 2. Information on the extent of hypoxia will also be available on the NOAA's Gulf of Mexico Hypoxia Watch Web page, which displays near real-time results of the NOAA Fisheries Service summer fish survey in the northern Gulf of Mexico currently underway and scheduled to be completed by July 18.

Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100629122948.htm

7.05.2010

Agency Agreed Wildlife Risk From Oil Was ‘Low’

The federal agency charged with protecting endangered species like the brown pelican and the Kemp’s ridley sea turtle signed off on the Minerals Management Service’s conclusion that deepwater drilling for oil in the Gulf of Mexico posed no significant risk to wildlife, despite evidence that a spill of even moderate size could be disastrous, according to federal documents.

By law, the minerals service, before selling oil leases in the gulf, must submit an evaluation of the potential biological impact on threatened species to the Fish and Wildlife Service, whose responsibilities include protecting endangered species on land. Although the wildlife agency cannot block lease sales, it can ask for changes in the assessment if it believes it is inadequate, or it can insist on conducting its own survey of potential threats, something the agency has frequently done in the past.

But in a letter dated Sept. 14, 2007, and obtained by The New York Times, the wildlife agency agreed with the minerals service’s characterization that the chances that deepwater drilling would result in a spill that would pollute critical habitat was “low.”

The agency signed off on the minerals service’s biological evaluation, even though that assessment considered only the risks to wildlife based on spills of 1,000 to 15,000 barrels — a minuscule amount compared with the hundreds of thousands of barrels now spewing into the gulf. The assessment also noted that even such modest spills carried up to a 27 percent risk of oil reaching the critical habitat for some endangered species.

Much of the first wave of criticism over the federal government’s part in the Deepwater Horizon disaster has focused on the dual role of the Minerals Management Service (renamed the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement last month), which was responsible for both promoting offshore drilling through the sale of leases and for policing it. But environmental groups were also critical of other federal agencies that have watchdog roles and could have exercised their authority to protect the species.

“The Endangered Species Act requires caution, but federal wildlife agencies allowed offshore oil drilling to play Russian roulette with endangered species in the gulf,” said Daniel J. Rohlf, the clinical director of the Pacific Environmental Advocacy Center at Lewis & Clark Law School.

“Would people get on a plane if they knew it had a one in four chance of a major mechanical problem?” Mr. Rohlf asked, adding, “Federal wildlife agencies made conscious choices — under the guise of science — to allow offshore oil drilling with an identical risk of serious harm to endangered species.”

Deborah Fuller, the endangered species program coordinator for the Fish and Wildlife Service’s office in Lafayette, La., led the team that reviewed the minerals service’s biological assessment. She said that her office recognized that a big spill would be disastrous to wildlife and that it made suggestions for increasing preparedness for the cleanup of a spill as part of an informal consultation on the biological review.

But she said her office did not challenge the minerals service’s assessment of the risk.

“We all know an oil spill is catastrophic, but what is the likelihood it will happen?” Ms. Fuller asked. She said her office had considered that any likelihood under 50 percent would not be enough to require the protections of her office.

“Obviously, we are going to relook at all these numbers for upcoming consultations,” she said.

In considering earlier plans by the minerals service to sell oil leases in the gulf, the Fish and Wildlife Service had decided to conduct its own biological assessment, using its own scientists. But in 2007, the Louisiana office chose to write only an informal letter of concurrence with the minerals service’s assessment, the agency’s lowest level of review. While the wildlife agency could not stop a lease sale, formally disagreeing with an assessment by the minerals service could deter buyers worried about possible litigation by environmental groups.

In its 71-page biological assessment, the Minerals Management Service concluded that the chances of oil from a spill larger than 1,000 barrels reaching critical habitat within 10 days could be more than 1 in 4 for the piping plover and the bald eagle, as high as 1 in 6 for the brown pelican and almost 1 in 10 for the Kemp’s ridley sea turtle. When the model was extended to 30 days, the assessment predicted even higher likelihoods of habitat pollution.

The report described in detail the severe consequences for a variety of species if they were to be affected by oil.

“Heavily oiled birds are likely to be killed,” the assessment said, adding that if the birds did not die, they might suffer from pneumonia or infection.

Stacy Small, a scientist with the Environmental Defense Fund, reviewed the biological assessment prepared by the minerals service and the letter in which the wildlife service concurred with the evaluation. “The wildlife risk models apparently weren’t based on large oil volumes and didn’t estimate risk for a worst case, or even really bad case, oil disaster scenario,” she said.

“If they had looked at a 30-day time span for oil reaching shore, the risk would probably have looked a lot higher and maybe triggered a more stringent review under the Endangered Species Act,” Dr. Small said. “Unfortunately, it doesn’t look like anyone at the agencies asked for that.”

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/06/us/06wildlife.html?_r=2

7.04.2010

Oil Spills Raise Arsenic Levels in the Ocean, Says New Research

ScienceDaily — Oil spills can increase levels of toxic arsenic in the ocean, creating an additional long-term threat to the marine ecosystem, according to research published July 2 in the journal Water Research.

Arsenic is a poisonous chemical element found in minerals and it is present in oil. High levels of arsenic in seawater can enable the toxin to enter the food chain. It can disrupt the photosynthesis process in marine plants and increase the chances of genetic alterations that can cause birth defects and behavioural changes in aquatic life. It can also kill animals such as birds that feed on sea creatures affected by arsenic.

In the study, a team from Imperial College London has discovered that oil spills can partially block the ocean's natural filtration system and prevent this from cleaning arsenic out of the seawater. The researchers say their study sheds light on a new toxic threat from the Gulf of Mexico oil leak.

Arsenic occurs naturally in the ocean, but sediments on the sea floor filter it out of seawater, which keeps the levels of naturally occurring arsenic low. However, arsenic is also flushed into the ocean in wastewater from oil rigs and from accidental oil spills and leakages from underground oil reservoirs.

In the study, the researchers discovered that oil spills and leakages clog up sediments on the ocean floor with oil, which prevents the sediments from bonding with arsenic and burying it safely underground with subsequent layers of sediment. The scientists say this shutdown of the natural filtration system causes arsenic levels in seawater to rise, which means that it can enter the marine ecosystem, where it becomes more concentrated and poisonous the further it moves up the food chain.

The scientists say their work demonstrates how the chemistry of sediments in the Gulf of Mexico may be affected by the current oil leak. Professor Mark Sephton, from the Department of Earth Science and Engineering at Imperial College London, says:

"We can't accurately measure how much arsenic is in the Gulf at the moment because the spill is ongoing. However, the real danger lies in arsenic's ability to accumulate, which means that each subsequent spill raises the levels of this pollutant in seawater. Our study is a timely reminder that oil spills could create a toxic ticking time bomb, which could threaten the fabric of the marine ecosystem in the future."

Wimolporn Wainipee, postgraduate and lead author of the study from the Department of Earth Science and Engineering at Imperial College London, adds:

"We carried out our study before the leak in the Gulf of Mexico occurred, but it gives us a big insight into a potential new environmental danger in the region. Thousands of gallons of oil are leaked into the world's oceans every year from big spills, offshore drilling and routine maintenance of rigs, which means many places may be at risk from rising arsenic levels, which could in the long run affect aquatic life, plants and the people who rely on the oceans for their livelihoods."

For their research, the team analysed a mineral called goethite, one of the most abundant ocean sediments in the world, which is an iron bearing oxide.

The team carried out experiments in the laboratory that mimicked conditions in the ocean, to see how the goethite binds to arsenic under natural conditions. They discovered that seawater alters the chemistry of goethite, where low pH levels in the water create a positive change on the surface of goethite sediments, making them attractive to the negatively charged arsenic.

However, the scientists discovered that when they added oil, this created a physical barrier, covering the goethite sediments, which prevented the arsenic in the oil from binding to them. The team also found that the oil changed the chemistry of the sediments, which weakened the attraction between the goethite and arsenic.

In the future, the researchers plan to analyse other minerals such as clays and carbonates that are sediments on the ocean floor. Sediment content varies from ocean to ocean and the researchers will analyse how oil affects their ability to bind to arsenic after a spill.

Source: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/07/100702100144.htm

7.01.2010

Biologists: Killer whales 'neurotic' in captivity

(CNN) -- Killer whales can weigh up to 22,000 pounds, and may be as long as 32 feet, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. They often travel in groups of up to 50, being highly social.

Confining such an enormous animal in an aquarium tank leads the animal to display neurotic behavior, experts say.

"They get very stressed out," marine biologist Nancy Black of Monterey Bay Whale Watch said on CNN's "Larry King Live."

SeaWorld whale trainer Dawn Brancheau, 40, died Wednesday from "multiple traumatic injuries and drowning" after a whale called Tilikum grabbed her ponytail and pulled her underwater at Shamu Stadium, the Orange County Sheriff's office said Thursday.

An orca can travel easily 100 nautical miles every day, and to put them in a pool where they swim around in circles continually, and kept away from their families, "takes a toll on their brains," said Jim Borrowman, who has worked with whales for 30 years and runs Stubbs Island Whale Watching on Vancouver Island, British Columbia.

"'Neurotic' is the word that we've used, and I sense that that's probably what's happening," he said. "Perhaps that's what drives some of these issues."

Tilikum, weighing about 12,000 pounds, has been linked to two other deaths -- he and two other whales were involved in the drowning of a trainer at a Victoria, British Columbia, marine park in 1991. Authorities said in 1999 that a 27-year-old man was the apparent victim of Tilikum's "horseplay" at SeaWorld.

Whales are dangerous in captivity because of their tremendous size, experts said.

Annette Eckis Godsey, the victim of a 1972 incident, had to have 200 stitches from the waist down when a killer whale attacked her at the aquarium where she worked, she said on CNN's "Larry King Live." She said she didn't know why it happened, but "heard later that no one had ever ridden the whale without a wet suit, and no women had ever ridden the whale."

"Things that we've never heard or seen in the wild are happening in aquariums," Borrowman said.

"In the wild, killer whales have never been known to attack a human," said Kim Parsons, independent whale biologist from Seattle, Washington. "But they do play with, and/or kill, other species."

Trainers at SeaWorld are taught to reinforce the whales' good behavior with rewards and to not react at all to bad behavior, a technique developed by influential psychologist B.F. Skinner, said Dr. Jeffrey Ventre. Skinner's ideas fall under the psychological framework of operant conditioning.

"You don't defend yourself, in fact you're trained to do the exact opposite," said Ventre, who worked at SeaWorld for 8 years and had been a senior trainer there, on the same level as Brancheau.

Spectators who had attended the whale show before Brancheau was killed reported that the whales were not behaving -- "they weren't following instructions," Lori Miller, SeaWorld visitor, said.

This suggests that the whales had something going on socially among themselves, Ventre said.

"It's probably reasonable to suspect that something going on amongst the whales themselves may have triggered the frustration," he said. But, he added, it is "impossible to speculate what triggered the aggression."

Parsons added that perhaps the whales involved in harming humans were taking advantage of the opportunity to interact with novel stimuli in a habitat that is otherwise fairly mundane.

Although Tilikum is the largest of the whales in his group, he is also the most vulnerable to bullying from the others because there is less room for him to maneuver, Ventre said.

"The SeaWorld system is the best of all seaquaria in the world, but if I was an orca, that would be the last place I'd want to live," he said. "They are in what is essentially an acoustically dead cement pond, compared to the vibrancy of the ocean."

Animal rights groups such as People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, said killer whales should not be kept in aquariums to begin with.

"These are very dangerous animals, and being in captivity, they're ticking time bombs," said Debbie Leahy, director of PETA's Captive Animals and Entertainment Issues Department. "These animals become very depressed and neurotic in captivity, whereas in the wild they avoid human contact."

But Borrowman cautioned that it's hard to know what would happen if all aquarium whales were released into the ocean, especially those that were born in captivity. Tilikum, who was caught in Iceland in the 1980s, could potentially, for example, turn over a person in a kayak, Borrowman said. Ventre added that the captive whales may or may not survive if released.

There are already a lot of safety precautions in place, and only the most experienced trainers get to do the water work, Ventre said.

Ventre speculated that there may be more restrictions placed on who can work with the whale, but it's unclear whether much can be done -- someone still has to feed Tilikum 300 pounds of fish a day, administer medication and perform other daily tasks with the animal. Tilikum is also part of an artificial insemination program, which means someone has to roll him over and extract sperm from him.

"This is one of the inherent risks of working with animals like orcas or elephants, or walruses or even California sea lions," he said. "This kind of stuff happens."

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/02/25/whales.seaworld.death/index.html?hpt=T1