The atmosphere that existed on Earth some 2.7 billion years ago
can be understood a little better by examining the fossil record
created when raindrops fell into volcanic ash so very long ago.
A South African meerkat sits on a
volcanic rock where raindrops left an impression 2.7 billion years
ago.
Photo courtesy of Wlady Altermann, University of
Pretoria
Using impressions left by falling raindrops, University of
Washington researchers have deduced that the atmospheric pressure
back then was not so different from today but that greenhouse gases
were probably causing the Earth to heat up considerably.
It was a time in the Earth’s geologic history when plants and
animals did not yet exist but microbes were common.
The findings, published yesterday in
“Nature,” provides new information in the search for life on
other planets.
I was awakened early this morning by the sound of gusty winds
blowing millions of raindrops against the side of my house. As I
lay in the dark, for once I was not thinking about how much I yearn
for spring weather to replace our ongoing gloom. Instead, I was
thinking about how the rains have endured, realizing that it was
raining on Earth long before the most primitive plants and animals
could benefit from the falling water.
Our mystery of the ancient raindrops begins with a long-held
understanding that during those early days on Earth, the sun was
burning about 30 percent dimmer than today, according to
information provided by Vince Stricherz of the UW’s
Office of News and Information. Other things being equal, the
Earth would have been encrusted in ice. But geologic evidence shows
that rivers were flowing across the surface.
The unusual death of L-112, a young female orca apparently
killed by “blunt force trauma,” continues to fuel discussions about
what may have killed her and what should be done about it.
Kenneth Hess, a Navy public affairs officer,
posted a comment today on the recent blog entry
“Balcomb wants to know if young orca was bombed.” In his
comment, Hess repeats that the Navy did not conduct any training
with sonar, bombs or explosives in the days preceding L-112’s
death. He called it “irresponsible and inaccurate” to blame the
Navy for “blowing up” the whale.
Another new development today is an e-mail I received from Lt.
Diane Larose of the Canadian Navy, responding to my inquiry about
any explosive devices used in the days before L-112 was found dead
on Feb. 11.
Read the e-mail (PDF 16 kb) I received:
“On February 6, 2012 HMCS Ottawa was operating in the Straits of
Juan de Fuca, specifically in Constance Bank, conducting Work Ups
Training including a period of sonar use and two small under water
charges as part of an anti-submarine warfare exercise. These small
charges were used to get the ships’ company to react to a potential
threat or damage to meet the necessary training requirement.”
In talking to experts involved in the investigation, it seems
unlikely that L-112 could have been injured or killed in the Strait
of Juan de Fuca and then wash up dead on Long Beach five days
later. So the mystery continues.
In
tomorrow’s Kitsap Sun, I’m reporting that environmental groups
on both sides of the Canadian border are calling on their
respective navies to disclose all the specific activities during
the 10 days leading up to the discovery of L-112’s carcass at Long
Beach on Feb. 11. The groups also are calling for a complete
cessation of sonar use for training and testing in the Salish
Sea.
Check out three letters submitted to the navies involved,
including one from U.S. and Canadian scientists: (more…)
Ken Balcomb, the dean of killer whale research in the Northwest,
has looked at the evidence and believes he knows what killed L-112,
a 3-year-old female orca found along the Washington Coast in
February.
L-112 in happier times. The
3-year-old orca died in February, and her death is the subject of
an intense investigation.
Photo by Jeanne Hyde, Whale of a Porpoise (Click on image to see Jeanne's tribute
page)
When I asked Ken to explain, he provided a lot more detail and
informed me that he was calling for a law-enforcement investigation
into the whale’s death by the National Marine Fisheries Service.
Why he is seeking more than a biological analysis of the death will
become clear in a moment.
What Ken is suggesting is that L-112 was killed by a bomb,
possibly dropped from an aircraft during a training event in the
Navy’s Northwest Training Range off the West Coast. His evidence is
circumstantial, but he wants some answers.
What we know for sure is that this young female orca washed up
dead at Long Beach on Feb. 11 in relatively fresh condition,
allowing a complete necropsy, including CT scans of the head and
dissections of the internal organs and head.
Joe Gaydos, a veterinarian with The SeaDoc Society who
participated in the necropsy, said the whale showed signs of “blunt
force trauma” with injury to the right and left sides of the head
and right side of the body. Blunt force trauma might be what a
human would experience if dropped from a helicopter onto soft
ground, he explained. (more…)
The Japanese whaling fleet killed 266 Antarctic minke whales
this year, compared to a government quota of 850, plus one fin
whale, compared to a quota of 50, according to Michihiko Kano,
Japan’s minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries.
The Mainichi Daily News, based in Japan, reports that the low
numbers were attributed to bad weather but noted that Sea Shepherd
obstructed the whaling operations 11 times during the season.
—–
Sea Shepherd Conservation Society has completed another year of
battling Japanese whaling ships in the Antarctic, and again this
year a camera crew was on board its ships to film a new season of
“Whale Wars.” The new season of the TV show will begin in June.
The Japanese whaling vessel Yushin
Maru 2 shoots its water cannons at a Sea Shepherd inflatable, which
had approached it.
Photo by Billy Danger, Sea Shepherd
The Japanese government reportedly provided $30 million from its
tsunami and earthquake relief fund to continue the whaling, which
the government allows as “scientific research.” The ban on whaling
includes an exemption for research, but the International Whaling
Commission has failed to preclude the commercial sale of meat from
“research” animals. The result has been an ongoing dispute about
whether commercial whaling should be considered research.
Needless to say, Sea Shepherd does not consider it research. For
the past eight years, the whale-advocacy group has followed the
whaling fleet and disrupted the hunt whenever possible.
For much of the recent whaling season, which began in December,
Sea Shepherd was able to divert the attention of two harpoon ships
and a security vessel. Sea Shepherd’s leader, Paul Watson, said the
whalers ignored their own protocols this year by going to the same
area as last year:
“This illustrates that they really have no scientific agenda at
all since their so-called survey requires them to ‘sample’ whales
from the two different areas alternatively each year. This is not
about science and it never has been. It’s not even about profit
anymore because we have negated their profits. It’s simply about
pride. Whaling in the Southern Ocean has become a heavily
subsidized welfare project for an archaic industry that has no
place in the twenty-first century.”
The following chronology was compiled from reports issued by Sea
Shepherd and by the Japanese Institute for Cetacean Research: (more…)
A dozen environmental groups say they will boycott the nine
“scoping meetings” the Navy is holding to kick off a new round of
studies regarding testing and training activities in the
Northwest.
In a letter dated March 13 (PDF 16 kb), the groups said the
format of the meetings is not designed to encourage public
discussion or even allow public comment. In addition, the Navy and
the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have ignored
ongoing calls for the Navy to better protect marine wildlife and
the environment along the Washington Coast and other biologically
important areas, they say.
Navy's Northwest testing and
training ranges. Click to enlarge.
Map by U.S. Navy
The Navy will seek a new permit from NOAA for the incidental
harassment of marine mammals during testing and training
activities. Most of the activities are identical to what is taking
place now, but some new activities are added — including the
testing of sonar from ships docked at piers.
Between now and 2015, Navy officials will describe and study the
effects of various activities on marine life and update existing
mitigation with new research findings. See my initial story in the
Kitsap Sun, Feb. 27, and a related post in
Water Ways, March 6. Also, you may review the official
notice in the Federal Register.
Back to the letter, which states in part:
“As you know, the scoping process is the best time to identify
issues and provide recommendations to agencies on what should be
analyzed in the EIS. However, a process developed for activities
with controversial impacts, like those at issue here, that does not
provide opportunity for the public to testify or speak to a broader
audience, or to hear answers to questions raised by others, and
that fails to engage major population centers is not designed to
help citizens and organizations effectively participate in
agencies’ environmental reviews.”
While the scientific and policy debate rages on about methods of
extracting natural gas from underground shale deposits, I’ve
experienced a few amusing moments regarding this topic of hydraulic
fracturing — “fracking.”
Comedian Stephen Colbert is a huge supporter of fracking, as you
can see in the video at right.
“My only worry,” he says, “is that we will become too dependent
on ourselves and end up invading Pennsylvania. That place is a
quagmire full of religious extremists (photo of two Amish men) and
fanatics (photo of Philadelphia Phillies mascot Phillie
Phanatic).
Comedian Jon Stewart conducts a semi-serious conversation about
natural gas development with T. Boone Pickens, the business
financier who is heavily invested in natural gas resources. Stewart
never seems to get around to asking about industry changes the past
few years or about the potential environmental consequences of
fracking.
A more balanced examination of the issue was written by Steven
Mufson of The Washington Post, carried a couple days ago on the
Seattle Times website. I’m offering that link for information,
not amusement.
Finally, Ann McElhinney, an Irish filmmaker, believes that
fracking is an important element in this nation’s effort to develop
new energy supplies. (Check out this YouTube video.)
She argues that the environmental risks have been greatly overblown
and is planning to make a film about the issue. It will be called
“FrackNation,”
a counterpoint to Josh Fox’s “Gasland.” I think you’ll
find her talk amusing, though it may stir up some other emotions as
well.
After years of hearing bits and pieces about an Army Corps of
Engineers investigation of the Skokomish River ecosystem, it seems
that things are now moving toward work on a variety of projects.
Many are of the type and scale that one would associate with the
corps.
The public will get its first glance at 40 or so potential
projects during an open house and slide show next Thursday
beginning at 5 p.m. at the Mason County Public Works Building, 100
West Public Works Drive in Shelton. Review the news
release (PDF 44 kb) on the event.
The Skokomish Watershed Action Team
(SWAT) surveys an area where the Skokomish River has wiped out all
vegetation and left a massive gravel bar.
Photo by Steve Zugschwerdt
The 40 or so projects to be presented at next week’s meeting are
only at a conceptual stage. They must undergo further feasibility
studies and cost analyses. A draft feasibility report and
environmental impact statement are scheduled for release in August
2013.
As I mentioned in January, the corps is no longer focused on
controlling flooding in the Skokomish Valley. Still, much of the
ecosystem-restoration work could provide some flood relief. See
Kitsap Sun, Jan. 22, and
Water Ways, Jan. 25.
Jessie Winkler, project manager for the Army Corps of Engineers,
told me in January:
“Clearly, flooding is a problem in the basin. But because of
limited residential and commercial activity, it would be very
difficult to justify a flood-control project. In order to be
justified as a federal project, the economic benefits must be
greater than the cost.”
Here are some of the preliminary projects to be described at
next week’s meeting:
Install aeration or oxygenation system in Annas Bay to reduce
the dissolved oxygen problem
Add a cool water diversion to Annas Bay to improve water
quality
Restore eelgrass beds in Hood Canal west of the river’s
delta
Restore oyster beds in Hood Canal within the delta area
Remove additional roads and levies in the lower flood plain and
delta
Relocate West Valley Road
Widen Highway 101 bridge
Widen Highway 106 bridge
Reconnect wetland at River Road
Modify Agency Road to improve flow conditions
Rehabilitate channel for Skabob Creek
Address levee and side channels on Hunter and Bourgault
farms
Address car body levee and improve channel for lower Weaver
Creek
Reconnect Weaver Creek side channel
Setback the Grange dike
Remove Hunter Creek blockage
Install a sediment trap after dredging the main channel
downstream of Vance Creek
Reconfigure main channel upstream of Vance Creek
Reconnect Sunnyside channel
Remove or setback levees upstream and downstream of Vance
Creek
Projects may include adding salmon-spawning habitat and/or large
woody debris, removing invasive plants, planting native vegetation,
improving fish passage, removing gravel on gravel bars and
spot-dredging.
Last Monday, Feb. 27, the Navy announced that it was beginning
an environmental review that will lead up to a new federal permit
involving Navy testing and training efforts in the Northwest,
including the use of sonar at pierside in Puget Sound. See
Kitsap Sun, Feb. 27.
Two days later, workers and passengers on the Clinton-Mukilteo
ferry heard sonar pings apparently vibrating through the hull loud
enough to be heard above the water. Scott Veirs was the first to
report this issue in his blog
Orcasphere that same day.
Jason Wood, a bioacoustician and research associate at The Whale
Museum in Friday Harbor, made some phone calls and issued this
report:
“The crew in the engine room, the captain, and passengers could
hear the sonar, at times so loudly that the ferry agent on land
could hear the sonar coming up through the ferry while it was at
the dock…. The operations center called the Everett Naval base, but
got no answers. They also called the Coast Guard. No (Navy) or
Coast Guard vessels were reported seen during the sonar incident,
other than a naval vessel at the dock in the Everett Navy
yard.”
I phoned Sheila Murray, spokeswoman for Navy Region Northwest,
who confirmed that the sonar was coming from the USS Shoup, docked
at Naval Station Everett. She issued this statement:
“In response to your query, the Navy was conducting pierside
testing of mid-frequency active sonar at Naval Station Everett
yesterday. This is routine testing that is a longstanding and
ongoing requirement, and is an essential process in preparing a
Navy ship to get underway.
“Pierside testing is not continuous, but consists of very brief
transmissions of acoustic energy interspersed with longer silent
periods.”
The Shoup gained a notorious reputation among some killer whale
researchers in 2003, when the intense sound of sonar pings was
reported to have caused J pod to flee in a confused pattern. See
Water Ways, Feb. 11, for links to videos of that incident.
Sheila also confirmed that this is the kind of “pierside
testing” contemplated for the new permit being sought from the
National Marine Fisheries Service, a permit that will allow
incidental harassment of marine mammals under the Marine Mammal
Protection Act. Such activities will be analyzed in an upcoming
environmental impact statement, as I described last week. (more…)
As you probably know if you follow this blog, a team of
researchers attached a satellite tag to one of the Southern
Resident killer whales a few days ago
(Water Ways, Feb. 22). But the transmission stopped sometime
after Thursday morning, following three days of transmissions used
to track J pod in the Strait of Juan de Fuca and Pacific Ocean.
Bell M. Shimada, the research ship
now in search of killer whales. / NOAA
photo.
The researchers, led by Brad Hanson of the Northwest Fisheries
Science Center, are now trying to locate J pod during the day to
determine whether the tag fell off or simply stopped
transmitting.
I received this e-mail from Brad yesterday:
“We have been unable to locate them during daylight hours the
last two days. We detected the whales on our towed array on
Thursday evening after sunset near the west end of the Strait of
Juan de Fuca but we were not able to stay with them until daybreak
because they stopped vocalizing and echolocating about 0130 on
Friday.
“We spent most of Friday searching the central Strait of Juan de
Fuca before heading to Port Angeles late in the evening to avoid an
approaching storm. J pod calls were detected off San Juan Island
late Friday evening. We are waiting for winds to subside and will
resume our search as soon as possible.”
A decision about whether to attach a transmitter to another orca
in J pod will wait until the researchers get a look at J-26 to see
what may have happened to the transmission. No more than two tags
per year may used to track any one pod. Specific whales were
selected for tags, generally avoiding females that could contribute
to the population.
The ability to track the whales by satellite makes the research
work easier, but it does not change the priorities. Figuring out
where the Southern Residents travel in winter remains a primary
goal of the ongoing research. Two years ago, the crew went to sea
looking for the whales without the option of tagging, using the
same acoustic equipment being used now to find them.
The cruise also is collecting data on birds, zooplankton and
oceanographic conditions, as with the cruise in 2009, Brad told me.
The ability to use the satellite data to track the whales allows
researchers to collect information along the track where the whales
had been.
Without information about the location of the whales, the
researchers tend to follow systematic track lines with their
research vessel. When the whales are picked up on the acoustic
array, the effort to locate the animals takes precedence over data
collection. At night, changes in ship speed and heading limits the
type and quality of data that can be collected.
The risks of tagging can be debated, and I’ve tried to share the
concerns. Still, it is easy to see why researchers wish to have
this tool available to them as they try to figure out where the
whales go in winter.
A humpback whale, first seen in Hood
Canal three weeks ago, was spotted again today.
Photo by Connie Gallant, Greenfleet Monitoring
Expeditions
History repeated itself today on Dabob Bay, where Connie and JD
Gallant were conducting research when a humpback whale surfaced
nearby — just as events unfolded three weeks ago when the couple
first reported the animal. See
Water Ways, Jan. 31, for the initial report and some background
on humpbacks.
Connie called me early this afternoon from her boat on Hood
Canal’s Dabob Bay, then she sent a photo and e-mail with this
description:
“We spotted it close to 12:20 p.m., and it put on a nice little
show for about 10 minutes, then disappeared — same pattern as on
1/27. It was playing in same area, between Taylor Shellfish Labs
and Broadspit.
“I was again on the computer inputting data as we headed north
on Dabob Bay when JD yelled the same, ‘Whale off the port bow!’
This time, I did not hesitate flying out of the cockpit, grabbing
camera on the way.”
Connie has a hunch that the whale likes her boat, the Sea
Turtle:
“If you take a peek at the contour of the bottom of the Sea
Turtle (see Greenfleet website), you
will see that it has 2 keels and a skag on the stern. We think that
this shape must be of interest to the whale, and it is saying
‘hello’ to the Turtle!
“And, just as the last time, it was totally awesome to watch it
frolic. I absolutely cannot believe our fortune.”
"In the end, we will conserve only what we love, we will love only what we understand, and we will understand only what we are taught."
— Baba Dioum, Senegalese conservationist
Scripps Interactive Newspapers Group
Recent Comments