ANCHORAGE, Alaska, Dec. 24, 2007
Walrus Latest To Be Threatened By Warming
Sea Ice Melting Leaving Many Stranded On Land, Causing Stampedes, Woes For Other Species
-
Photo provided by Pacific Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography shows female walrus, after stampede on Cape Vankarem, Russia in March, 2007. (AP)
-
Interactive Global Warming The greenhouse effect, a look at the Kyoto Protocol and a history of the Earth's climate.
The experts - who study the effects of global warming on walrus, polar bears and ice seals, while lobbying to protect the animals by restricting hunting, ship traffic and offshore petroleum activity - say there is little more they can do if the animals' basic habitat, sea ice, continues to vanish.
"Ultimately it's beyond my scope," said Joel Garlich-Miller, a walrus expert for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in Anchorage. "I can't make ice cubes out there."
Garlich-Miller said 3,000 to 4,000 mostly young walrus died this year in stampedes on land on the Russian side of the Chukchi Sea, the body of water touching Alaska and Russia just north of the Bering Strait. Instead of spending the summer spread over sea ice, thousands of walruses were stranded on land in unprecedented numbers for up to three months.
Anatoly Kochnev, who conducts walrus research for Russia's Pacific Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography, said the loss of 3,000-4,000 animals this year from mostly one demographic could be disastrous.
If current ice trends continue, and walrus have to stay on coastlines every summer, they may put too much pressure on nearby foraging areas instead of feeding in the rich waters offshore, U.S. Geological Survey biologist Tony Fischbach said.
Experts on summer sea ice say it is not likely to suddenly reappear. Arctic sea ice this summer plummeted to its lowest levels since satellite measurements began in 1979, according to the National Snow and Ice Data Center at the University of Colorado.
"Certainly we look like we're on a death spiral right now," said Mark Serreze, senior research scientist. "Losing that summer sea ice over by 2030, within some of our lifetimes, is a reasonable expectation."
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will decide within weeks whether to list polar bears as "threatened" under the federal Endangered Species Act because of the loss of sea ice from global warming. Polar bears hunt and breed on sea ice and are poor candidates for survival if they are based on land, where grizzly bears dominate.
Polar bears' primary prey are ringed seals, the only seals that thrive under sea ice. They dig breathing holes with their thick claws and create lairs on top of the ice where they birth their young.
With warming, those lairs collapse earlier in springtime, leaving hairless pups susceptible to freezing, foxes, other polar bears and even ravens and gulls.
And then there is the Pacific walrus, which face at least three problems: Their ocean habitat may be changing, they may be forced to shore for long periods, and their weakest members are in danger when crowded on land.
Walruses dive to the ocean bottom to eat clams, snails, crabs, shrimps and worms. Research suggests that diminished sea ice and warmer water may decrease plankton, which are food for creatures on the bottom.
Unlike seals, walruses cannot swim indefinitely. Females and their young traditionally use ice as a diving platform, riding it north like a moving sidewalk over offshore foraging areas, first in the northern Bering Sea, then into the Chukchi Sea.
If animals are on shore for three months every summer, they cannot reach offshore foraging areas. Chad Jay, chief walrus researcher for the USGS, said there are concerns about how much energy walruses will expend swimming to foraging areas.
An adult walrus can eat 200 pounds of clams in a day. If the walrus population stays within 30 miles of shore in summers, they could overharvest the available clams and other food.
"I suspect they won't do very well as totally shore-based animals," said Vera Alexander, one of three members of the U.S. Marine Mammal Commission.
© MMVII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The secrets of tennis legend 
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 13
- next
See all 252 CommentsYeah, this is funny and sad at the same time. I am in my 40''s, doubt this will affect my life much either way. But I worry for my children and grandchildren.
Seems like we could at least unite around the goal of green energy, which solves many problems at once. Guys like CO2Max unfortunately distract from that goal, by in essence saying "take your time, no problem here."
Hehehe. Have you read the story "Survey of published physicists shows no support for theory of gravity, danger of falling concrete overstated." They looked at (surveyed) abstracts of every physics paper and if they didn''t mention gravity or concrete falling, counted them as a "published physicist" who did not support the theory of gravity. Okay that did not happen, but the deniers of climate change did do the same thing.
Posted by andor3
Yes yes, of course concrete is heavy and could smash you when it falls. But really, some additional research is needed. Let us not be alarmist, after all the scientist have been wrong before. Why, back in the 70''s they actually said that concrete was light! Yes, and that it would fall up not down! What, me worry?
Right! Now he''s getting it! The climate is a highly complex system. Add over 100ppm of CO2 to an already warming system and you risk throwing it into high gear. We are accelerating a natural occurrence and maybe even ramping up the intensity. This acceleration is causing things to move faster than ever before. Species that might have been able to adapt through natural selection to the naturally warming climate will instead possibly go extinct because there will not be enough time to make those adaptations. That''s the point.
It doesn''t matter that Vikings could once grow corn in Greenland. We all know that the climate changes. Nobody has said otherwise. It''s the speed with which it is changing that is worrisome. The balance has been upset. Maybe it''s not too late to minimize the impact. Personally, I''d rather reduce the carbon output and see what happens (with the side-effect of not having to pay a Muslim for the ability to drive my car) than keep up the same levels of emissions and hope nothing changes.
wow that shows how mistaken I was in saying that you just include random facts that do not support your point.
I believe that concrete in the atmosphere over your head is both unstable and dangerous. But then gravity is just a theory by a few scientists.
Yeah, now I am going to flinch every time I see a dark green Rav4.
I declare victory.
Posted by CO2Max
Funny. That reminds me of Pres Bush and his famous "Mission Accomplished" banner....
hey there is another of those sentences that claim to make a point but are completely inaccurate.
"...hunt down and kill everybody in the country who owns or drives a dark green RAV4"
why? this thread if nothing else is entertaining: watching a guy with not even a passing acquaintance with science or scientific principles try to make scientific arguments. It is a little like when Homer Simpson tried to build that BBQ.
Posted by CO2Max
Um, dude. I am really embarrassed for you. Got to the USGS website and take a look at their extensive research into climate change.
http://geochange.er.usgs.gov/
I declare victory.
Global Warming?
--Naturally!
(The Flying Spaghetti Monster would agree.)
jimfinster -- Dude, I have made no concession here. If the rational future is the one you envision, I ain''t goin'' there.
Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas in the same way that concrete is a hard substance, almost rock-like. But you don''t see geologists studying concrete and its dynamics and the concentration on manmade carbon dioxide as a driver of climate is equally as nutty.
Posted by CO2Max
Hallelujah! Baby steps on your way to a rational future!
That is hysterical! You got the color of his SUV!!!
Yep! And if hunt down and kill everybody in the country who owns or drives a dark green RAV4, you might manage to shut me up. So far your nonsense hasn''t been very effective at doing that. Science prevails!
How much tons of CO2 would be produced by 7 million metric tons of carbon?
Something on the order of 20 million tons of carbon dioxide. Big number . . . small overall proportion.
Next!
That is hysterical! You got the color of his SUV!!!
Why should I bother to answer you any more since you seem intent either to miss the point of my response or play word games with me. But duty compells me...
Carbon dioxide is indeed one of the greenhouse gases. It is not new in the atmosphere and it has been present in hugely bigger concentrations in the past (without excessive corresponding heating). As such, CO2 is a relatively weak greenhouse gas, occurring today in relatively weak increased concentration.
When you consider the effects of a world that was already warming over thousands over years BEFORE the industrial revolution and that shrinking ice caps are part of the positive feedback loop that started just as humans were learning to farm, the increased carbon dioxide component of the situation just is not significant.
Unless you proposing that 100ppm of carbon dioxide is the straw that breaks the camels back of global climate, I state firmly that carbon dioxide increases, as we presently see them account for a small increase of global warmth, but it is not the major factor.
How much tons of CO2 would be produced by 7 million metric tons of carbon?
Actually, my SUV is dark green and it is a RAV4--gets up to 28mpg . . . and doesn''t need one of the costly and damaging battery replacements every 100k miles.
You are dancing like crazy, but back to the basic question.
You agreed with every point, and the logical conclusion is that the resultant CO2 would increase temperature. Yes or no? If no, why not?
And I rely strictly upon science. I have no interest whatsoever in advancing any kind of public policy initiative, except to prevent a needless sacrifice of what we have for the sake of a social agenda that is not going to help us or make a difference.
Global Warming?
--Naturally!
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
... - 13
- next
See all 252 Comments