IT'S ABOUT REPORTS FROM PEOPLE WHO ARE SEEING THIS HAPPEN, INCLUDING INDIGENOUS TRIBES WHO HAVE BEEN TRYING TO GET SOMEONE TO LISTEN TO THEM FOR DECADES NOW.
SO TRY, JUST TRY, PLEASE, TO READ AND WONDER WITH ME WHAT'S REALLY HAPPENING "OUT THERE" THAT IS FORCING SPECIES TO MOVE THEIR HABITAT, CHANGE THEIR MIGRATORY HABITS, ETC, WHEN IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A 1 DEGREE CHANGE IN WATER TEMPERATURE SHOULD CAUSE SO MANY TO BE ON THE MOVE.
"Both land and sea creatures are moving closer to the north and south poles and to cooler altitudes at rates faster than first predicted.
Professor Camille Parmesan from Plymouth University in the UK said around the world animals and plants were moving towards the Earth’s poles, and it is happening faster than scientists had originally predicted.
“For the species that we have really good data on, where they’ve lived historically over the past 100 years, we’re seeing about half of those have actually moved where they live, which is an astonishing number given we’ve only had one degree centigrade warming,” she said.
The East Australian Current has moved 350 kilometres further south in the past 60 years.
Tasmania’s east coast is a global hotspot for marine species that are moving south.
One of them is the long-spined sea urchin. Associate Professor Gretta Pecl from the University of Tasmania’s Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies said the species was becoming a pest.
Professor Parmesan said the conference was not just about plants and animals having to move, humans also needed to adapt to climate change. “A lot of people want to know why should they care about a butterfly moving from the US to Canada, and my point is that these are indicator species,” she said.
“What we’re seeing is that 1 degree centigrade warming is having a massive effect on wild plants and animals."
WHILE MANY WANT TO BLAME THIS ON THE WORN-OUT THEORY THAT HUMANS ARE TOTALLY RESPONSIBLE, OTHERS REJECT THAT IDEA.
WHY HAVE OCEAN CURRENTS MOVED TOWARD THE POLES?
HOW CAN HUMANS AFFECT THAT?
BUT, LET'S EXPLORE 'POSSIBILITIES'...LOOK AT THINGS THAT CAN BE PROVEN, DEMONSTRATED AS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW.
AUSTRALIANS ARE SEEING THE MOVEMENT WITH THEIR OWN EYES.
[Marine life] is on the move towards the poles at a rate of about seven kilometres a year.
Fish and other marine creatures are seeking cooler habitat much faster than terrestrial life, according to an international study published in the journal Nature Climate Change.
In Australia, this re-shaping of the marine ecosystem will have significant repercussions for people such as fishers, according to CSIRO marine ecologist and study leader Elvira Poloczanska.
[THE INDIGENOUS TRIBES IN THE ARCTIC CIRCLE HAVE BEEN SAYING THIS FOR A LONG TIME! SOME JUST CAN'T SUSTAIN THEIR LIVELIHOOD ANY LONGER BECAUSE THEIR TRADITIONAL DIET, THE MARINE ANIMALS THAT PROVIDE THAT, ARE DISAPPEARING.]
Dr Poloczanska, of the University of Queensland, and 18 international colleagues found no doubt about who was responsible for the greenhouse gas-related warming of the ocean's upper layers. "Global responses of marine species revealed here demonstrate a strong fingerprint of this anthropogenic [caused by humans] climate change on marine life," the paper said.
Dr Poloczanska said in Australia's south-east, tropical and subtropical species of fish, molluscs and plankton were shifting much further south through the Tasman Sea.
"The leading edge or 'front line' of a marine species distribution is moving towards the poles at the average rate of 72 kilometres per decade," Dr Poloczanska said.
"This is considerably faster than terrestrial species moving poleward at an average of six kilometres per decade . . . despite sea-surface temperatures warming three times slower than land temperatures."
THERE IS A 'PEER-REVIEWED' STUDY ON THIS FOR ANYONE INTERESTED:
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate2769.html
BUT WHY IS THIS HAPPENING WORLDWIDE?
WHY ARE MARINE ANIMALS MOVING AWAY FASTER THAN LAND ANIMALS?
IF THE OCEANS ARE WARMING SO LITTLE, WHAT ELSE CAN BE DRIVING THE MARINE CREATURES' MOVEMENT?
THE NORTH ATLANTIC OSCILLATION HAS ALSO CHANGED.
THAT STUDY CAN BE HAD IN PDF FORM, COMPLETE WITH MAPS, AT:
http://imedea.uib-csic.es/master/cambioglobal/Modulo_III_cod101608/tema%204-temperatura/arti%CC%81culos%20tema%204/Burrows%20et%20al%202011%28Science-2011-%29.pdf
NASA PLAYED A BIG PART IN THAT MAPPING, BTW.
IT'S HARD TO ARGUE WITH THEIR SATELLITE DATA.
WE CAN SEE THAT THE ACTUAL TEMPERATURE CHANGE HAS BEEN VERY SMALL.
STILL, WHY?
IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
WE'VE SEEN GREATER TEMPERATURE CHANGES IN THE PAST.
WHILE PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESENTED SOME CAPTIVATING RESULTS FROM THEIR RATHER EXTENSIVE STUDY, ONE IS STILL LEFT WONDERING WHY...
Scientists expect climate change and warmer oceans to push the fish that people rely on for food and income into new territory.
Predictions of where and when species will relocate, however, are based on broad expectations about how animals will move and have often not played out in nature.
New research based at Princeton University shows that the trick to more precise forecasts is to follow local temperature changes.
The researchers report in the journal Science the first evidence that sea creatures consistently keep pace with "climate velocity," or the speed and direction in which changes such as ocean temperature move.
They compiled 43 years of data related to the movement of 128 million animals from 360 species living around North America, including commercial staples such as lobster, shrimp and cod. They found that 70 percent of shifts in animals' depth and 74 percent of changes in latitude correlated with regional-scale fluctuations in ocean temperature.
On average, changes in temperature moved north at 4.5 miles per decade and species shifted an average of 5 miles north per decade.
But species-specific movements varied greatly.
For example, lobster in the northeastern United States (above) moved north at a pace of 43 miles per decade. Nearly half of all species studied moved south. (Video by Leah Lewis and D. Richardson, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration)
The researchers compiled survey data collected from 1968 to 2011 by American and Canadian fishery-research centers and government panels.
The surveys recorded surface and bottom temperatures, as well as the complete mass of animals in nine areas central to North American fisheries: the Aleutian Islands; the eastern Bering Sea; the Gulf of Alaska; the West Coast from Washington to California; the Gulf Coast from Louisiana to Mexico; the Northeast coast from North Carolina to Maine; the coast of Nova Scotia; the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence; and the Atlantic Ocean east of Newfoundland.
Details of the surveys revealed that sea creatures adhere to a "complex mosaic of local climate velocities," the researchers reported.
On average, changes in temperature for North America moved north a mere 4.5 miles per decade, but in parts of Newfoundland that pace was a speedier 38 miles north per decade. In areas off the U.S. West Coast, temperatures shifted south at 30 miles per decade, while in the Gulf of Mexico velocities varied from 19 miles south to 11 miles north per decade.
Animal movements were just as motley.
As a whole, species shifted an average of 5 miles north per decade, but 45 percent of animal specific populations swam south.
Cod off Newfoundland moved 37 miles north per decade, while lobster in the northeastern United States went the same direction at 43 miles per decade.
On the other hand, pink shrimp, a staple of Gulf Coast fisheries, migrated south 41 miles per decade, the researchers found.
WHAT FOLLOWS REALLY FLIES IN THE FACE OF WHAT SOME "EXPERTS" HAVE BEEN TELLING US ABOUT OUR AMERICAN WEST COAST...THE "WARM WATER IS KILLING SEA LIFE" GETS BLOWN TO BITS BY THIS:
Regional factors such as wind can actually counteract warmer water and result in cooler seas, as is the case off the coasts of California and Peru, Pauly said.
In addition, fish are extremely sensitive to even slight temperature changes and will quickly seek ideal locales, which can appear like erratic shifts in distribution.
Large-scale models based on global averages don't reflect these nuances.
Yet, Pauly said, the researchers also validate larger models by showing that their inconsistencies are due to small-scale variations, and not to a problem with the models as a whole.
Writ large, marine species will seek cooler water and in many cases gradually move away from their traditional territory.
"It validates the whole concept of linking the physiology of fish with water temperature and its patterns," Pauly said. "At the end of the day, the overall temperature of the ocean changes. You can have local temperature resistance against the overall pattern, but not for long and not everywhere."
The researchers found that 74 percent of the animals studied changed latitude (A and B) and 70 percent moved to new depths (C and D) in accordance with changes in bottom and surface temperature.
An idea first proposed in 2009, climate velocity explains why as many as 60 percent of land and sea species have deviated from the expectation that rising global temperatures would drive animals toward cooler high latitudes and elevations, or deeper waters, the researchers report.
Instead, animals follow local temperatures, which over the next few decades may warm or cool even as global temperatures overall are rising, Pinsky said.
In the case of ocean temperatures, the march of balmy tides depends on currents, changes in the atmosphere, and geological features on the shore and in the ocean.
The temperatures that species prefer tend to move toward the poles, but not as a single wave. In some cases, local changes in water temperature move away from the poles, or to deep water.
As a result, the researchers found that 73 percent of animals that moved south and 75 percent that relocated to shallower waters were following temperature changes.
The paper, "Marine Taxa Track Local Climate Velocities," was published Sept. 13, 2013 by Science.
In the Marine Environment
ON TO THE ARCTIC ANIMALS AND THE INDIGENOUS TRIBES' DILEMMA.
Many arctic communities depend on hunting polar bear, walrus, seals, whales, seabirds, and other marine animals.
[FEW AMERICANS UNDERSTAND A TRIBE'S CONNECTION TO THE LAND.
IT'S AS THOUGH THE TWO ARE ONE. THESE ARE HUMAN BEINGS WHOSE LIVES ABSOLUTELY DEPEND ON LOCAL WILDLIFE FOR FOOD.
WHEN THAT IS DISRUPTED, AN ENTIRE CULTURE, AN ANCIENT WAY OF LIFE IS ENDANGERED, AS MUCH SO AS ARE THE SPECIES THEY NEED TO LIVE.]
Changes in the species' ranges and availability, and the decreased ability to travel safely in changing and unpredictable ice conditions are making people feel like strangers in their own land.
Some societal changes have increased vulnerability to climate-induced changes.
For example, over recent decades, many Inuit hunters have switched from dog sleds to snowmobiles, and while dogs could sense dangerous ice conditions, snowmobiles cannot.
(On the other hand, snowmobiles allow people to hunt over larger areas and to transport bigger loads.)
In addition, people are no longer nomadic, following animals' seasonal movements. Because people now live in permanent settlements, their ability to adapt to changing climatic conditions and/or animal availability by moving has been greatly reduced.
More than half of the Arctic region is comprised of ocean.
Many arctic life forms rely on productivity from the sea, which is highly climate-dependent. Climate variations have profound influences on marine animals.
For example, the climate-related collapse of capelin in the Barents Sea in 1987 had a devastating effect on seabirds that breed in the area.
And years with little or no ice in the Gulf of St. Lawrence in Canada (1967, 1981, 2000, 2001, 2002) resulted in years with virtually no surviving seal pups, when in other years, these numbered in the hundreds of thousands.
POLAR BEARS
Polar bears are unlikely to survive as a species if there is an almost complete loss of summer sea-ice cover, which is projected to occur before the end of this century by some climate models.
The only foreseeable option that polar bears would have is to adapt to a land-based summer lifestyle, but competition, risk of hybridization with brown and grizzly bears, and increased human interactions would then present additional threats to their survival as a species. The loss of polar bears is likely to have significant and rapid consequences for the ecosystems that they currently occupy.
[Source & ©: ACIA Impacts of a Warming Arctic: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (2004), Key Finding #4, Polar Bears, p.58]
The increase in environmental stress on polar bears caused by climate change interacts with the stresses caused by chemical contaminants. Polar bears, at the top of the marine food chain, accumulate contaminants in their fat by eating ringed seals and other marine mammals who have absorbed the chemicals by eating contaminated species lower on the food chain.
High levels of chlorinated compounds and heavy metals have been found in polar bears.
In some cases, contaminants may be stored in fat, keeping the chemicals from affecting the bears' health when fat reserves are high.
But during a poor feeding season, when the fat reserves must be used, the chemicals are released into the body.
Polar bears in some areas of the Arctic have been observed to have less fat reserves in recent decades as sea ice breakup occurs progressively earlier, forcing them ashore where they are required to fast for increasingly longer periods.
ARCTIC SEALS
Ice-dependent seals, including the ringed seal, ribbon seal, and bearded seal, are particularly vulnerable to the observed and projected reductions in arctic sea ice because they give birth to and nurse their pups on the ice and use it as a resting platform. They also forage near the ice edge and under the ice. Ringed seals are likely to be the most highly affected species of seal because all aspects of their lives are tied to sea ice. They require sufficient snow cover to construct lairs and the sea ice must be stable enough in the spring to successfully rear young.
Earlier ice break-up could result in premature separation of mothers and pups, leading to higher death rates among newborns.
Adapting to life on land in the absence of summer sea ice seems highly unlikely for the ringed seal as they rarely, if ever, come onto land. Hauling themselves out on land to rest would be a dramatic change to the species' behavior. Giving birth to their pups on land would expose newborns to a much higher risk of being killed by predators. Other ice-dependent seals that are likely to suffer as sea ice declines include the spotted seal, which breeds exclusively at the ice edge in the Bering Sea in spring, and the harp seal, which lives associated with sea ice all year.
Unlike these ice-associated seal species, harbour seals and grey seals are more temperate species with sufficiently broad niches that they are likely to expand their ranges in an Arctic that has less ice coverage.
SEABIRDS
Some seabirds such as ivory gulls and little auks are very likely to be negatively impacted by the decline of sea ice and subsequent changes to the communities in which they live. The ivory gull is intimately associated with sea ice for most of its life, nesting and breeding on rocky cliffs that offer protection from predators, and flying to the nearby sea ice to fish through cracks in the ice and scavenge on top of the ice.
As the sea ice edge retreats further and further from suitable coastal nesting sites, serious consequences are very likely to result.
Major declines have already been observed in ivory gull populations, including an estimated 90% reduction in Canada over the past 20 years.
WALRUSES
The ice edge is an extremely productive area and is very sensitive to climate change. The most productive areas are nearest the coasts, over the continental shelves. As sea ice retreats farther from the shorelines, the marine system will lose some of its most productive areas. For walrus in many areas, the ice edge provides the ideal location for resting and feeding because walrus are bottom feeders that eat clams and other shellfish on the continental shelves. As the ice edge retreats away from the shelves to deeper areas, there will be no clams nearby. Walrus also normally travel long distances on floating ice, allowing them to feed over a wide area
ICE ALGAE AND THE ARCTIC FOOD WEB
The vast reduction in multiyear ice in the Arctic Ocean is likely to be immensely disruptive to microscopic life forms associated with the ice, as they will lack a permanent habitat.
Research in the Beaufort Sea suggests that ice algae at the base of the marine food web may have already been profoundly affected by warming over the last few decades.
Results indicate that most of the larger marine algae under the ice at this site died out between the 1970s and the late 1990s, and were replaced by less-productive species of algae usually associated with freshwater.
Researchers say that this is likely to be related to the fact that melting has formed a 30-meter thick layer of relatively fresh water below the remaining ice, one third deeper than it was 20 years before.
Among the areas likely to be most severely affected by such changes will be the Bering Sea and Hudson Bay, in the lower Arctic, where sea ice is already disappearing earlier in spring and forming later in the autumn. As the Arctic continues to warm, sea ice will melt rapidly in the spring over continental shelf areas and withdraw toward the deep ocean of the central Arctic.
ARCTIC FISHERIES
Arctic marine fisheries provide an important food source globally, and a vital part of the economy of the region.
Because they are largely controlled by factors such as local weather conditions, ecosystem dynamics, and management decisions, projecting the impacts of climate change on marine fish stocks is problematic.
There is some chance that climate change will induce major ecosystem shifts in some areas that would result in radical changes in species composition with unknown consequences.
Barring such shifts, moderate warming is likely to improve conditions for some important fish stocks such as cod and herring, as higher temperatures and reduced ice cover could possibly increase productivity of their prey and provide more extensive habitat.
LAND ANIMALS IN THE ARCTIC
Arctic animals on land include small plant-eaters like ground squirrels, hares, lemmings, and voles; large plant-eaters like moose, caribou/reindeer, and musk ox; and meat-eaters like weasels, wolverine, wolf, fox, bear, and birds of prey.
Climate-related changes are likely to cause cascading impacts involving many species of plants and animals. Compared to ecosystems in warmer regions, arctic systems generally have fewer species filling similar roles.
Thus when arctic species are displaced, there can be important implications for species that depend upon them.
For example, mosses and lichens are particularly vulnerable to warming. Because these plants form the base of important food chains, providing primary winter food sources for reindeer/caribou and other species, their decline will have far-reaching impacts throughout the ecosystem.
A decline in reindeer and caribou populations will affect species that hunt them (including wolves, wolverines, and people) as well as species that scavenge on them (such as arctic foxes and various birds). Because some local communities are particularly dependent on reindeer/caribou, their well-being will also be affected.
OTHER RISKS
Climate change poses risks to arctic marine mammals and some seabirds beyond the loss of habitat and forage bases.
These include increased risk of disease due to a warmer climate, increased pollution impacts as rising precipitation brings more atmospheric and river-borne pollution northward, increased competition as temperate species expand their ranges northward, and impacts due to increased human traffic and development in previously inaccessible, ice-covered areas.
WE MUST BE UNSATISFIED WITH ALL THESE STUDIES.
THEY JUST DON'T UNCOVER THE CAUSE, MERELY LEAVE UNANSWERED QUESTIONS.
THINGS ARE NOT AS THEY SHOULD BE, MANY SPECIES ARE BEHAVING ODDLY, WE SEE EXTREME SPECIES LOSS THAT IS NOT EXPLAINED BY DATA GATHERED SO FAR.
ONE THING THE TEA ROOM HAS TAKEN AWAY FROM LOOKING AT ALL THIS FOR A COUPLE DAYS NOW IS THAT RADIATION LEVELS CANNOT BE THE "END-ALL" CAUSAL FACTOR IN EITHER SPECIES DIE-OFFS OR SPECIES MIGRATION AND CHANGE OF HABITAT.
WHILE THERE IS, WITHOUT A DOUBT, A RISE IN RADIATION LEVELS IN THE TISSUES OF MANY MARINE SPECIES, THE PATTERN OF LOSS PRECEDES THE FUKUSHIMA EVENT.
THERE IS, THERE MUST BE, SOMETHING MORE, SOMETHING WE JUST HAVE NOT DISCOVERED YET.
WHETHER THAT COMES FROM THE DEEPEST RECESSES OF OUR OCEANS OR FROM ABOVE, WE SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW.
THAT THE SMALL RISE IN OCEAN TEMPERATURES CAN BE CANCELLED BY LOCAL WATER CURRENTS, LOCAL ANYTHING, NEGATES THAT THEORY OF "CLIMATE CHANGE", AT LEAST IN MY MIND, SINCE WE'VE SEEN MARINE LIFE ADJUST QUITE WELL TO RISE AND FALL IN TEMPS HISTORICALLY AND HAVE NOT SEEN THE MASS DIE-OFFS THAT WE'VE SEEN IN THE PAST 5 YEARS.
WE'LL JUST HAVE TO LOOK FURTHER UNTIL WE FIND THE REASON.
PERHAPS THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLE OF THE ARCTIC AND THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE SHOULD BE LISTENED TO MORE CLOSELY.
WE MIGHT LEARN MORE BY GOING STRAIGHT TO THOSE MOST AFFECTED BY ALL THIS "CHANGE".
THEIR SKY HAS CHANGED
Inuit knowledge and climate change was discussed by delegates at the recent global warming summit in Copenhagen and what the Eskimo elders are saying have NASA, scientists and experts alike worried....Global warming might not be the whole story!
It seems the Inuit elders are also witnessing strange and unfathomable weather up there in the North.
The elders talk about how their world has changed, how it was then and how it is now.
It is a worrying picture, a picture of melting glaciers and thinning or disappearing sea ice.
Seals with burns on their coats and covered with sores and a thinner hide, the Seal skin has deteriorated and while scientists maintain man made pollution is contributing to climate change the elders are convinced something much much bigger is going on!
Astonishingly what the elders are saying is global warming is not the whole story...
The elders maintain the Sun doesn't rise were it used too, they have longer day light to hunt and the Sun is higher than it used to be and warms up quicker than before.
The elders who were interviewed across the north all said the same thing, their sky has changed.
The stars the Sun and the Moon have all changed affecting the temperature, even affecting the way the wind blows, it is becoming increasingly hard to predict the weather, something that is a must on the Arctic.
The elders all agree, they believe the Earth has shifted, wobbled or tilted to the North.
Exploring centuries of Inuit knowledge, allowing the viewer to learn about climate change first-hand from Arctic residents themselves, the film portrays Inuit as experts regarding their land and wildlife and makes it clear that climate change is a human rights issue affecting this ingenious Indigenous culture. Hear stories about Arctic melting and how Inuit believe that human and animal intelligence are key to adaptability and survival in a warming world.
[THE DOCUMENTARY FILM ON THE INUIT CAN BE SEEN <HERE>.]
_______________________________
IMPACTS OF A WARMING ARCTIC...A NASA TAKE ON THE ISSUE
http://climate.nasa.gov/resources/education/pbs_modules/lesson2Explain/
No comments:
Post a Comment