Science

EAST BAY — Chris Deacutis, chief scientist for the Narragansett Bay Estuary Program (NBEP) at the URI Bay Campus, has been working on the issue of excess nutrients (nitrogen) and the low oxygen issue in the upper half of Narragansett Bay for over 10 years.

Today things are better, but Bay advocates are still combating nutrients in the Bay that create algae blooms (which actually create oxygen). But as algae decays it uses oxygen and reduces the oxygen level in the water, often times well below the levels that fish need. This low oxygen level has occurred in Greenwich Bay in the summer as well as in other parts of the Bay.

With a prevailing southwest summer wind in Narragansett Bay, Greenwich Bay (particularly East Greenwich Cove), does not get flushed and low oxygen levels are more prominent there, according to the NBEP, which measures oxygen levels in the Bay. “The famous menhaden fish kill of August 2003 was clearly caused by a sever hypoxia (actually anoxic — no oxygen) events that centered on western Greenwich Bay,” said Dr. Deacutis.

The NBEP eliminated the East Passage, the Mt. Hope Bay and the lower Bay from measurement because oxygen levels in these areas are good. The channel in the east passage acts as a conduit for flushing and mixing. Oxygen levels in deep water off Warwick Neck mix well too, due to the water passing from the east to the west passage and back. Water at Quonset Point and south have good oxygen levels as well.

According to the NBEP blog, “Marine animals breathe oxygen, too, and when oxygen levels drop below 3mg/L there is not enough oxygen to go around. Creatures that live on the bottom of the bay such as oysters, littlenecks and marine worms are at a greater risk during hypoxic events because they cannot move to a different area. Schooling fish such as menhaden are also affected by hypoxia because they are often chased into coves by predators such as striped bass and the school will use up the oxygen faster than it can be produced by photosynthesis or mixed into the water at the surface from the air.”

 

Read the complete story from The East Bay RI

 

 

 

 

July 18, 2011 (CNN) — Massive global greenhouse gas pollution is changing the chemistry of the world's oceans so much that scientists now predict it could severely damage shellfish populations and the nations that depend on the harvests if significant action isn't taken.

A new study from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution in Massachusetts shows that ocean acidification is becoming a very serious problem. The study was published in July online in the journal Fish and Fisheries.

"What the study found was that in the next 10 to 50 years many countries are going to see impacts, particularly countries that are heavily reliant on clams and oysters and mussels, and will not be able to adapt by shifting to other foods or aquaculture methods," said Jackie Savitz, senior scientist and chief strategist for the international ocean conservation and advocacy organization Oceana.

 

Read the complete story from CNN

Off the coast of San Juan Island, greenlings doze on ledges 400 feet down. Sculpins snuggle into reefs scattered with scallops. Crabs camouflaged with feathery hydroids creep past crimson sea cucumbers.

It's a world invisible to us, at depths divers seldom venture. But a series of expeditions mounted this summer by the environmental group Oceana is bringing some of these scenes into focus for what may be the first time.

"No one has ever seen what the sea floor looks like in some of these areas," said project leader Geoff Shester. Working on the cheap, the team outfitted small ROVs (remotely-operated vehicles) with the type of video cameras skiers strap to their helmets. Operators guided the craft with joysticks and oohed and aahed as images flashed across their shipboard monitors.

Read the complete story from The Seattle Times.

 

 

 

 

Writing in Quadrant magazine, the Australian journal of ideas, literature, poetry and historical and political debate,  Dr.Walter Starck observes that before "the ascendancy of environmentalism, the scientific ideal was an objective, evidence-based, value-neutral search for truth. Basic research, aimed only at better understanding the world in which we live, was pursued with considerable success. Over recent decades, however, basic research in natural history has been largely supplanted by studies predicated on environmental concerns. As a consequence, acquisition of new understanding of the nature and functioning of the natural world has declined. In addition, much of the research into purported environmental problems suffers from bias and distortion arising from adherence to faith-based notions of environmental correctness."  Dr. Starck holds a  PhD in marine science from the Institute of Marine Science at the University of Miami. He was a pioneer in the study of coral reef biology and the development of undersea technology.

This shift in emphasis from basic research to environmentalism began innocuously in the 1960s and 1970s when an expanding scientific community began to outgrow its funding, and competition for research grants became stronger. At the same time, government was also coming to realise that scientific research was a black hole that could devour any amount of funding and always be hungry for more. Moreover, much of the research appeared to be highly esoteric with little prospect of ever yielding anything of practical or even intellectual value. Governments started to demand a greater consideration of utility.

For those schooled in the ideal of basic research, finding practical relevance was not always easy. Coincidentally, environmental concerns were on the rise in public awareness and were gaining political traction. Grant-seekers found that with a little imagination some environmental aspect could be suggested to attend to the basic research one actually wanted to pursue. Initially this worked to advantage; but competition soon demanded something stronger. Grant applications began to shift their focus to environmental concerns themselves with basic research receiving diminishing attention.

An environmental problem suitable for grant-seeking is not as easy to find as it might seem. It needs to be one that has credibility as a problem or, better still, public perception as being one. It also needs to be one that is not already over-subscribed by competing researchers. It further needs to appear both solvable and important enough to warrant considerable expense to do so. Preferably it should be something that involves a human cause, as this not only makes it amenable to correction but provides a dimension of moral rectitude as well. The moral aspect always goes down well politically and makes any criticism look shabby.

Just any old problem won’t do. Most are too hard, too unimportant or too uncertain to attract significant research funding. This limitation was met by manufacturing new ones. An early and highly successful effort in eco-threat manufacture here in Australia was the great crown-of-thorns starfish plague.

Population explosions of the coral-eating crown-of-thorns starfish on the Great Barrier Reef first came to scientific and public attention in the late 1960s. The starfish threat was soon deemed by academic “experts” to be unprecedented, even though earlier scientific research and underwater exploration on the reef which might have found any earlier outbreaks were almost non-existent. Once a few such outbreaks had been found, the “problem” was deemed to be on a scale which threatened the entire reef. It was even predicted that unless something was done (that is, generous funding for research) the reef would be killed and then wash away, causing massive coastal erosion as well.

When it was discovered that the triton’s trumpet shell was a natural predator of the crown-of-thorns starfish, it was immediately concluded that shell collectors were to blame for the starfish outbreaks. That trumpet shells are never abundant enough anywhere to control an outbreak of starfish and most of the reefs involved had never been subjected to shell collecting was ignored.

Although a geologist found good evidence for ongoing earlier crown-of-thorns outbreaks in the form of varying amounts of their distinctive skeletal elements at different levels in the reef sediments, this too was simply ignored. As far as the crown-of-thorns bandwagon was concerned, the science was quickly settled: the starfish plague had to be unprecedented and somehow caused by humans. All that was needed to solve the problem was more funding for research.

The Great Barrier Reef is a national icon and the success of the starfish threat in releasing government purse strings founded a substantial new industry for the region. “Saving” the reef from various purported threats has continued for almost half a century. This has entailed a total expenditure in the hundreds of millions of dollars with no real threat ever being confirmed and, of course, no solution ever being found. As old threats lose credibility and public concern fades, new ones always seem to be found.

Following the starfish plague, overfishing became a major concern. This generated more millions in research and culminated in the creation of a vast complicated array of green zones comprising about a third of the entire region where the already highly restricted fishing activity is prohibited entirely. While there is voluminous evidence to refute the existence of a threat from overfishing, just one fact alone demonstrates the utter absurdity of this claim.

Read the complete story from Quadrant Online.

 

 

 

 

 

 

By Steven Salzberg – July 4, 2011 – What happened to genetically modified salmon? A few months back I was looking forward to my first taste of the new AquaBounty salmon, which grows to maturity twice as fast as wild salmon. Will it taste just as good? Better? I thought I’d know soon. But then politics intervened.

It’s almost always bad when politicians meddle in science. Usually they do so because they just don’t like what they’re hearing, as they have done time after time with global warming. Now it’s genetically modified salmon. What happened? The FDA was ready to approve the new salmon until two weeks ago, when Congressman Don Young from Alaska, under heavy lobbying pressure from the Alaskan fisheries industry, simply stepped in to block it. The FDA had already found that the fish was safe to eat, but hadn’t yet issued final approval. So Congressman Young and his pals decided to pass legislation to halt the process.

I wrote about AquaBounty’s salmon last year, when the FDA was holding hearings to approve it for human consumption. Ironically, the FDA doesn’t get to approve genetically modified crops, and our food supply is filled with GM corn, soy, and other plants. But thanks to the vagaries of U.S. law, the FDA gets to weigh in on salmon.

Read the complete story from Forbes.

 

 

 

 

 

The Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS) conducted two sea scallop dredge surveys in the access area of Closed Area I (CAI) and the Hudson Canyon Closed Area (HCCA) during July of 2010. The area surveyed in CAI encompassed the proposed expansion of the access area specified in Amendment 15. These surveys were funded by the Sea Scallop Research Set-Aside Program (RSA). Results from the survey in CAI indicated that exploitable scallop biomass at the time of the survey was 12,160 metric tons or 26.8 million pounds of meats with an average meat count of 10.8 MPP. Results from the survey in HCCA indicated that exploitable scallop biomass at the time of the survey was 14,460 metric tons or 31.8 million pounds of meats with an average meat count of 17.9 MPP. This is more than sufficient for an opening for both areas in 2011 and Framework 22 specifies that for the 2011 fishing year, 1.5 and 1.0 trips are allocated to the CAI and HCCA, respectively.

The survey of CAI was conducted aboard the F/V Celtic towing a NMFS 8 foot survey dredge along with a 15 foot Coonamessett Farm Turtle Dredge (CFTD) equipped with a 10 inch diamond mesh twine top with a 1.76 hanging ratio (60 meshes, 34 rings) and 8.5 meshes on the side. The survey of HCCA was conducted aboard the F/V Pursuit towing the same NMFS 8 foot survey dredge in conjunction with a 14 ft. CFTD. While the comparison of catches between the two dredges is informative on a relative basis, for the purposes of this report, we present only the catch data from the CFTD during a 15 minute survey tow at 3.8 kts. with a 3:1 scope. This information is more applicable to what the industry will encounter during the openings.

Catch data in tabular form is shown in Tables 1 and 2. The spatial distribution of scallop catch and observed meat count at each tow is shown in Figures 1-4. In Figure 3, the shell height frequency distribution from the catches by the CFTD is shown for the two areas. The scallops in CAI are clearly dominated by large numbers of older animals (120-140 mm). This is especially true in the southern portion of the area, proposed to be opened by Amendment #15. The scallop population in HCCA is dominated by animals from one year class with a peak around 110 mm. This size generally corresponds to a 10-20 count, however it is important to note that for both areas the opening will occur roughly one year since the data was taken. Scallop size and abundance in both areas has been affected by some levels of growth and mortality since July 2010.

In addition to scallop information we routinely collect data relating to finfish bycatch. During the CAI cruise, we encountered a limited number of yellowtail flounder, Limanda ferrunginea. Yellowtail flounder bycatch has the potential to shorten the opening, in the event that the yellowtail TAC is reached before all allocated scallop trips are completed. The spatial distribution of yellowtail bycatch is not shown here, as there were a total of 10 animals caught over the course of the entire survey. We urge industry to participate and monitor the yellowtail situation as it develops, via the yellowtail bycatch avoidance program administered by The School for Marine Science and Technology (SMAST).

A word about twine top configuration VIMS conducted several research trips aboard the F/V Celtic within the boundaries of the Georges Bank Access Areas during 2006 and 2007 to test the effects of altering the twine top ratio on finfish bycatch. Results indicated that there was a significant reduction in yellowtail bycatch and no loss of scallops when a twine top hanging ratio of 1.76 (60 meshes, 34 rings) was used compared to a 2.64 hanging ratio (90 meshes, 34 rings) During the experiment, both dredges had twine tops with 8.5 meshes on the side and 7 rings to the clubstick. An additional experiment was conducted using a short twine top (5.5 meshes on the side) with an apron of 13 rings compared with a standard twine top with 8.5 meshes on the side and a 7 ring apron. The results showed that the short twine top configuration caught more yellowtail flounder than the standard configuration. Dredges rigged with short twine tops and high hanging ratios are not useful for the reduction of yellowtail flounder bycatch. In addition to the spatial strategy for avoiding yellowtail bycatch, gear modifications with respect to twine top configuration can also have a positive impact during the opening of GBCAI and GBCAII in 2011.

Read the complete study.

 

 

 

 

 

The Virginia Institute of Marine Science (VIMS), College of William and Mary conducted a scallop resource survey in the access area of Georges Bank Closed Area II (GBCAII) during May of 2011. The survey was funded by the Sea Scallop Research Set-Aside Program.

The survey was conducted aboard the F/V Celtic based out of New Bedford, MA. The vessel towed a National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) 8 foot survey dredge with 2 inch rings, a three inch mesh twine-top and a 0.25 inch mesh liner along with a 15 foot Coonamessett Farm Turtle Deflector Dredge (CFTDD) with a 10 inch mesh twine top with a 1.76 hanging ratio (60 meshes, 34 rings) and 8.5 meshes on the side. The dredges were towed at 3.8 kts with a scope of 3:1 for 15 minutes. While the comparison of the catches is informative for management purposes, for this report we are presenting the catch composition for only the CFTDD modification of the standard commercial New Bedford style dredge.

The catch data is presented in tabular form (Table 1). This table shows the tow location, scallop catch in baskets, number of scallops and meat count. For this report, we also show the bycatch of yellowtail flounder both in numbers and pounds. The catch data is also displayed in a spatial format (Figures 1- 4) showing the distribution of scallop catch (baskets, scallop meat count) and yellowtail flounder bycatch in terms of both numbers and weight caught.

The scallops in GBCAII are dominated by large scallops in the 130-140 mm size range (5.25-5.5 inches) with a significant number of scallops larger than 5.5 inches. We also observed a sizable number of scallops in the 100-120 mm size range (4-5 inches) which are probably from the 2006 year class that was first detected in the 2008 surveys (Figure 5). Data from the NMFS survey dredge indicated some scallops around 90 mm (3.25-4.0 inches) which were not retained by the commercial dredge in significant numbers. Importantly, we did not observe the presence of scallop seed in the 40-60 mm (around 2 inches) size range which would be an indication of future recruitment of scallops in GBCAII.

Also of importance is the data for yellowtail flounder bycatch. The tows with the largest amount of yellowtail flounder also had very low catches of scallops (tows 90, 91, 5, 23, 26, 28). The spatial data presented in the figures clearly indicate that significant scallop catches can be obtained in areas with the lowest yellowtail flounder bycatch. We recognize that this data is for the period from May 7-14, 2011 and the GBCAII opening will be in mid to late July 2011. This baseline information should be helpful in diverting fishing effort from areas of high yellowtail bycatch. We urge industry to participate in the yellowtail bycatch avoidance program conducted by SMAST and to practice smart fishing techniques so that the yellowtail bycatch TAC is not reached. The access area trip you save may be your own.

A word about twine top configuration VIMS conducted several research trips aboard the F/V Celtic within the boundaries of the Georges Bank Access Areas during 2006 and 2007 to test the effects of altering the twine top ratio on finfish bycatch. Results indicated that there was a significant reduction in yellowtail bycatch and no loss of scallops when a twine top hanging ratio of 1.76 (60 meshes, 34 rings) was used compared to a 2.64 hanging ratio (90 meshes, 34 rings) During the experiment, both dredges had twine tops with 8.5 meshes on the side and 7 rings to the clubstick. An additional experiment was conducted using a short twine top (5.5 meshes on the side) with an apron of 13 rings compared with a standard twine top with 8.5 meshes on the side and a 7 ring apron. The results showed that the short twine top configuration caught more yellowtail flounder than the standard configuration. Dredges rigged with short twine tops and high hanging ratios are not useful for the reduction of yellowtail flounder bycatch. In addition to the spatial strategy for avoiding yellowtail bycatch, gear modifications with respect to twine top configuration can also have a positive impact during the opening of GBCAII in 2011.

Read the complete study.

 

 

 

 

 

Jud Crawford is a science and policy manager for the Pew Environment Group. 

Recent reports by Preston Pate and by Michael Sissenwine and Brian Rothschild have expressed other views on NOAA science in the northeast.

Determining the past, present and future health of wild fish in the ocean is the complex task that scientists at New England’s Northeast Fisheries Science Center face every day. As numerous outside reviews have revealed, this group is top notch, bringing the best available scientists and methods to bear on this challenging problem and embracing a well-developed system for external peer review of their work.

Trends in birth, growth and death of fish, and other ecological factors, are used to make the best possible determination of how many are in the ocean and how many can be caught by fishermen without harming the population. The job is complicated because the required data are difficult to collect and because fish live in a system in which many different kinds of animals interact. For example, herring are consumed by many larger species in addition to being a target of a commercial fishery.

Despite the high quality of New England’s world-renowned marine science, bashing the science is almost as popular as complaining about the weather. The fact is, anticipating the behavior of complex systems, whether marine or meteorological, is highly evolved, but ultimately imprecise.

Read the complete story from Talking Fish.

 

 

 

 

 

A unique, 50-year dataset collected by researchers at the Virginia Institute of Marine Science shows that Chesapeake Bay oysters are developing resistance to the pair of diseases—MSX and Dermo—that have helped push populations of these iconic shellfish to one percent of historical levels.

This is despite the increasing prevalence in the Bay of the parasites that are responsible for the two diseases. MSX disease results from an infection by the single-celled protozoan Haplosporidium nelsoni. Dermo is caused by the parasite Perkinsus marinus.

Researchers in VIMS' Shellfish Pathology Laboratory began gathering the data in 1960 as part of their "Spring Imports" project. Each May, the researchers collect about 700 oysters from a disease-free area in the Bay. The current collection site is in the upper reaches of the Rappahannock River near Ross Rock, where low-salinity waters inhibit the parasites that cause MSX and Dermo disease.

The researchers then transport these disease-free oysters to the saltier waters of the York River near VIMS, where they are placed in cages and monitored each month through October for signs of disease.

Read the entire study from VIMS

 

 

 

 

 

 

WASHINGTON, DC – June 16, 2011 – NOAA’s draft scientific integrity policy is available for public review and comment until Aug. 15, 2011. The policy incorporates the principles of scientific integrity contained in guidance from the White House, and addresses how NOAA ensures quality science in its practices and policies and promotes a culture of transparency, integrity and ethical behavior.

“Scientific integrity is at the core of producing and using good science,” said Jane Lubchenco, Ph.D., undersecretary for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator. “By being open and honest about our science, we build understanding and trust. This policy reflects the commitment I made when I first came to NOAA to strengthen science, ensure it is not misused or undermined, and base decisions on good science. This scientific integrity policy is about fostering an environment where science is encouraged, nurtured, respected, rewarded and protected.”

At the beginning of Lubchenco’s tenure, NOAA embarked on a thoughtful and transparent effort to draft a policy to uphold the principles of scientific integrity. The policy contains the principles articulated in President Obama’s March 9, 2009, memorandum and further guidance provided in White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) Director John Holdren’s Dec. 17, 2010, memorandum on scientific integrity. The policy responds to Holdren’s directive to agencies to submit their draft policies to OSTP by early August.

NOAA’s draft policy:

    -Lays out formal guidance with a “Code of Conduct”
    -Creates the conditions for enabling first-rate science and guarding against attempts to undermine, discredit or change it
    -States the key role of science in informing policy
    -Encourages scientists to publish data and findings to advance science, their careers and NOAA’s reputation for reliable science
    -Encourages NOAA scientists to be leaders in the scientific community
    -Provides whistle-blower protection
    -Applies to all NOAA employees and provides applicable policies for contractors and grantees who conduct, supervise, assess and/or interpret scientific information for the use of NOAA, the Department of Commerce and the nation
    -Includes a training component.

In April, NOAA submitted a progress report to OSTP describing its progress on developing a scientific integrity policy and describing relevant policies currently in effect. In February 2011, an early draft scientific integrity policy was shared with all of the agency’s employees for their review and comment. The draft announced today takes those comments into consideration.

NOAA also seeks comments on the accompanying handbook that outlines procedures to respond to allegations of misconduct. Both draft documents can be found electronically at www.noaa.gov/scientificintegrity.

Those without computer access can call 301-734-1186 to request a copy of the draft policy and handbook and instructions for returning written comments via mail by Aug. 15.