Posted by michellefrey on 08/27/2008 4:01 pm

The North Atlantic right whale is very rare—there are only about 300 in existence today. Recent news that these magnificent whales may finally get a helping hand highlights the sad, sad state of the right whales. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) officials released a final analysis to slow down ship speeds and use shipping routes that avoid whale grounds along the U.S. east coast where the whales live.

But, what does this “final analysis” really do for the whales? Well, nothing right now.  In my mind it is like being engaged. There is the “promise” to get married, but also the possibility for the couple to go their separate ways. And, just how long will the engagement last? NOAA has promised to save the right whales, but how long will their “engagement” last? Will they elope and have the regulations enacted tomorrow, or will it drag on and on for months or years?

Did I mention that there were only 300 right whales left on the planet? Right whales have been fighting for increased protections for years and years. I remember going to a public testimony, probably about two or three years ago on this very same issue. NOAA had an open comment period and I was on hand to present thousands of public petitions in support of saving the right whales. But, sadly, there haven’t been any increased protections—just the promise that some day there might be. Is this good enough?

A 44-foot right whale washed up on a beach in Massachusetts on March 11th of this year. A ship strike is the probable cause of death.

Oh, and if these regulations do get implemented the U.S. government made some exemptions. The U.S. Navy is exempt from these rules about slowing down. And, the regulations will only be in place for five years—that is unless another round of “red tape” and bureaucratic analysis takes place.

While the government continues to use every stall tactic in the book, right whales continue to swim in harms way. Ship strikes are the largest known cause of death for the endangered North Atlantic right whale, particularly baby calves.

I have been lucky to see two right whales in my lifetime. One was during a whale watching adventure in New England (where I got insanely sunburned) and the other is a “squishy” toy that a colleague got for me. I hope my children will be able to see real right whales and not just the toy sitting up on my desk.

--Michelle

Posted by pribilof on 08/26/2008 10:06 am

Greenpeace applauds the decision by the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (NPFMC) to limit bottom trawl fisheries in the northern Bering Sea. Any cutback on this destructive fishery practice is welcome news. However, in this case, it’s misleading.

Industrial fishing, with the exception of the use of bottom trawlers, will continue in these areas. And provisions included in the decision raise alarm bells that plans may be in the making to eventually re-open the area to bottom trawlers to do their damage.

Bottom trawl lobbyists are pressuring the NPFMC to open more of this “northern boundary” because, as they themselves have testified before the Council, the fish are moving north due to climate change, and their boats have to travel further north to find fish. The other reason, one which they are not talking about, is that heavy fishing pressure in the southern Bering Sea has dramatically reduced populations of many groundfish stocks.

The size of the closure area is also misleading. As with the Aleutian Island bottom trawl closure adopted previously, a large percentage of this area of no trawl fishing is in an area where no fishing has taken place due to its depth and distance from on shore processors. No one fished there anyway. So while this is a forward-looking and precautionary step, action is urgently needed to address damage from bottom trawling that is occurring now in known coral and sponge habitats.  

Incorporating Greenpeace research, NOAA has identified several deep sea coral areas that currently lack protection. Last year, Greenpeace used submarines and a Remote Operated Vehicle (ROV) to survey seafloor habitats in two underwater canyons along the highly productive Bering Sea shelf break. Zhemchug Canyon, the world’s largest, had never been explored.  We found at least 14 species of coral, and more than 20 species of sponge – including one that was previously unknown to science. Alarmingly, we also saw documented considerable evidence of fishing impacts – trenches dug through the seafloor, and broken and overturned corals.

Virtually none of the Bering Sea or Gulf of Alaska is protected from all fishing, despite the growing body of evidence of the value of marine reserves in fisheries management.  Fully protected marine reserves can help speed the recovery of fish stocks and degraded habitats, and have proven to increase yields in surrounding areas due to a spillover effect. By serving as experimental controls, marine reserves can also help us understand the impacts of climate change on our oceans and fisheries.

It’s time for the NPFMC to take a more ecosystem-based approach, and to protect the habitats that sustain Alaska’s fisheries. So far, most of what we’ve seen has looked good on paper but has had little impact on the status quo. And in the meantime, fish stocks continue to dwindle, critical habitat continues to be destroyed, and fishing communities continue to await relief.


-- George

Posted by michellefrey on 08/19/2008 4:33 pm

In certain regions of the Gulf of Mexico, there is not enough oxygen in the water to support marine life. Fish either suffocate or relocate to other areas. And, it’s not a tiny little area—it’s a big area we’re talking about. It is around 8,000 square miles, that’s about the size of New Jersey. But, what happened to the oxygen? Where’d it all go? Scientists point north, hundreds of miles up the Mississippi River to corn country.

Up in corn country, farmers use a boatload of chemicals to make their cornfields more productive. Two chemicals that are of particular concern are nitrogen and phosphorous. They are used in many fertilizers. But, when the rain shows up to nourish these crops, the water causes the fertilizers to runoff the farmland and into the mighty Mississippi River.

And, with this summer’s historic flooding in the Midwest, even more runoff from farms has been going into the mighty Mississippi. And, all of this creates a mighty mess once it gets to the Gulf of Mexico.

Just imagine how much fertilizer makes its way to the Gulf of Mexico? The Mississippi River collects all these chemicals throughout its entire length and all of it ends up in one place—the Gulf of Mexico.

Like I mentioned above, the fertilizers are used to help crops grow—well, the same is true for making algae grow in the Gulf of Mexico. These fertilizers land in the Gulf and the algae just love it. They go crazy for it and there are algae blooms and the algae grows like wild!

When all the algae die and fall to the bottom of the seafloor, this is where the story takes a turn for the worst. The algae dies and decomposes—but, since decomposition requires oxygen to make it “work” these huge masses of dying algae consume oxygen, and lots of it.

So much oxygen is taken from the sea that sealife suffocates and dies. The poor slow-moving creatures like clams, small crabs and snails have little chance to escape the oxygen-depleted waters.

Fishermen and environmentalists are actually on the same page and working together to fight this problem. Fishermen see their livelihood vanishing just like the fish in the Gulf and environmentalists want to restore the balance of the sea.

And, the Gulf of Mexico isn’t the only place where dead zones are occurring—these dead zones are scattered all across the globe.

--Michelle

 

 

Posted by michellefrey on 08/15/2008 12:14 pm

When I hear a piece of news, I usually take it with a grain of salt. So, earlier in the week when I read an article about humpback whale populations making an incredible recovery, let’s just say I was very skeptical. The reason I was skeptical, is because time and time again we hear that animals are taken off the endangered species list—only to help developers build in a certain area or air quality standards get relaxed, not because of “so-called” improved air, but because industry wants to loosen emission regulations.

Recently, the IUCN (World Conservation Union) reported that humpback whales have downgraded from Vulnerable to Least Concern, meaning it is at low risk of extinction.

I am really happy that humpback whales are doing much better! And, the credit goes to conservation efforts and the fact that humpbacks have been protected from commercial hunting.

But, my worry is now that the humpback whale has been “down-graded” some of their protections will be lifted. They will receive less habitat protection and many will feel that they are now in the running for commercial hunting once again. Why waste all the good work protecting them, just to go back in and decimate their populations again?

It’s also interesting to note that while some species have started to recover, no whale population has reached the level it had before industrial whaling began. Whales species are either recovering very slowly, or not recovering at all. Clearly, commercial whaling is neither sustainable nor necessary in the 21st century.

I hope the news of the humpback recovery is just the beginning! If resources continue to be put towards recover efforts and commercial whalers can keep their “hands-off”—then, it truly will be a good day for the humpbacks.

--Michelle

Posted by pribilof on 08/10/2008 11:49 am

One of the most used comments bantered in the halls of the hotels where the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (NPFMC) holds their meetings where many of the decisions are already decided with the big, wild, commercial fishing industry with the public is “best available science.” The NPFMC usually holds their meetings at the Hilton hotel in Anchorage four times a year. And, although no one says it, the process is a “good ol boys” conference. My brother is fond of telling me; the industry writes the regulations. But, even though the cards are stacked up against me and others who have concerns and try to offer alternatives toward habitat protections, I attend. Its part of my responsibility. I often feel like my attendance is futile and a waste of time. Anyway, “best available science.”

The use of that term as an acceptable tool to manage our fisheries seems to me is like saying: “best available truth.” Remember the most famous question ever asked in all of humanity? “What is truth?” And so I wonder, what is “best available science. What does that mean and how does that help our people in the villages?”

Well, NPFMC, Mr. Secretary Carlos M. Gutierrez of the U.S. Department of Commerce, we have a problem. What does your “best available science” or “best available truth” tell you about our out of control salmon by catch problems in Western Alaska? The problem is this. Really huge, large, big industrialized fishing machines, called boats, use huge, large, big nets and go out into the waters of southern Bering Sea, just north of the Alaska Peninsula to fish for 3.2 billion pounds of pollock, the total allowable catch from both the Gulf of Alaska and the Bering Sea. And as they vacuum up these fish, a very important food source of the foods we depend upon for our survival, they “accidentally catch”  hundreds of thousands, and millions of salmon during the past 30 years, in their pursuit of happiness. This is by catch. In 2004, they caught, as far as we know, 63,000 king salmon. In 2005, 75,000 kings. Chum salmon took a huge hit. In 2004, 447,000 chums, and in 2005, 700,000 chums. That’s according to their best available truth. If I remember correctly, in 2007, they said they caught 117,000 king salmon while in pursuit of happiness, their happiness. Never mind our people’s food security in our villages that depend on these fish for survival. The song and dance is getting old. Outside multinational fishing companies, meeting with the federal government in a hotel somewhere destroying our home. Destroying our dreams. Destroying our children. And saying, well, sorry. It’s legal. It may be, but it is immoral.

A really good friend of mine once told me: “our commercial fishing season for king salmon on the Kuskokwim River lasted for 60 minutes, all year!” And he has a family, Children. And he cannot do anything, anything about it, because like you and me, he is poor. He cannot afford to attend one of them meetings in a hotel somewhere to testify for three minutes about his concerns, nor, like you and me, he cannot afford a lawyer or a lobbyist. And so, he hears “best available science” spoken from reputable scientists and NPFMC members. And to further add salt to the wound, the Council will say, we are only an advisory council. Mr. Gutierrez makes the final decision. Know what? Uncle Ted in his wisdom thru the Magnuson Stevens Act set it up like this.

Well, the NPFMC says they have a solution to deal with this salmon by catch, stolen fish problem. Here it is, in brief. Lets not force our good buddies who go out to the Bering Sea to fish for a share of the 3.2 billion pounds of pollock they catch every year to suffer to much. After all, they are our buds. Lets let them continue stealing food from the people on the Kuskokwim River, but, really, not too much. Lets put a cap on how much they can take out of the mouths of our children. Now, really. And further, lets let one of the biggest fishing companies who participate in this immoral practice, Trident Seafoods, give that fish to Bean’s Café to feed the hungry. Peter stealing from Paul to feed people? And now, others are caught up in their circle of destruction, being used to make themselves feel better about what they are doing and getting a huge tax write off to boot. See how this “best available science” and “best available truth” works? And so the question: “what is truth?”

The only real solution to this problem is stop it. Stop the insane practice of by catch. Stop raiding our people’s food. Stop. And use your “best available science” to figure out how not to do it any more. After all, you use that statement to justify what you do. And, in many cases, you give the scientists who use that statement, grants to provide research to justify that behavior. We the people in Western Alaska have had enough of supporting your pursuit of happiness. We need to pursue ours and that of our children. Please, level the playing field. Your quarterbacks are just too “best available.” You can afford it. We cannot even afford to feed our children.


George Pletnikoff is Unangan from the Pribilof Islands. He now works for Greenpeace as the Alaska Oceans Campaigner in Anchorage. He can be reached at george.pletnikoff@greenpeace.org

Posted by michellefrey on 08/01/2008 2:52 pm

Growing up, I always loved listening to Bryan Adams. I think I may have even had a couple posters of him hanging up on my bedroom walls. So, when I found a YouTube video of him being interviewed by the BBC and wearing a Release Junichi and Toru t-shirt I just had to share it with everyone.

Junichi and Toru are Greenpeace anti-whaling activists who were being held for 23 days without charge for uncovering a whale meat smuggling scandal in Japan. Currently, the activsts are out on bail and awaiting trial. You can read more about their story on the Greenpeace website.

I'll post the video up here, but after watching the video for 8 minutes, the talk show hosts don't even ask him about the t-shirt. How upsetting. But, hopefully people will want to learn more and will be able to google it and find the Greenpeace information.