By Lynda V. Mapes
SEATTLE TIMES

SEATTLE -- It looked big. It looked bad. But the marine heat wave that threatened much of the West Coast in the fall of 2019 has mostly dissipated, at least at the surface.

The Northeast Pacific Marine Heatwave of 2019, or NEP19, lasted 225 days and at its peak covered about 3.2 million square miles. It was the second longest-lasting and second-largest such event recorded in the northern Pacific Ocean over the past 39 years, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

The disturbance decreased below the agency's classification threshold for a heat wave as of Jan. 5, said Chris Harvey, a fisheries biologist at the agency's Northwest Fisheries Science Center, on Tuesday.

But while NEP19 is mostly gone, it's not forgotten: Scientists caution that it is not clear the heat wave is entirely dissipated, or that it will not return. The deep ocean is still retaining significant amounts of heat. Monitoring of sea surface temperature readings from multiple platforms, including satellites, ships and buoys will continue.

The biggest marine-warming event ever was the original 2014-16 “Blob,” which resulted in unprecedented harmful algal blooms, invasive species, shifts in migratory ranges for animals, including humpback and gray whales, and changes in the marine food web that, among other things, depressed salmon returns for years.

Seabirds and marine mammals starved to death as a result of The Blob, as their marine food supplies collapsed and the heat wave barreled all the way to the shore, leaving them with nowhere to go. Warming water also stoked disease in starfish, wiping out sunflower stars, once a common species.

Salmon and steelhead runs crashed in part because of ocean conditions, hitting lows not seen since the 1990s. Many runs have yet to rebound. That in turn compounded the troubles of endangered southern resident orcas. Lack of regularly available, quality salmon is one of the factors driving them to extinction.

In both marine heat waves, the main driver was the atmosphere, said Andy Leising, research oceanographer with NOAA's Southwest Fisheries Science Center in San Diego. In the case of The Blob, an unusually large and persistent high pressure system stoked warm weather and killed winds that normally would have stirred up cooler water from below. The system stalled and reinforced itself, baking heat into the deeper ocean.

"The atmosphere failed to have its normal pattern of strong winds and storms that would come through and mix that warm water, Leising said. "What happened this winter was it kicked in late, but we got the change in wind and atmosphere patterns and storms that were able to mix the warm water in."

But scientists remain wary. The last event came and went, and came back again, partly because of heat still stored at depth.

"We are going to keep our eyes very peeled on this," Harvey said. "The Blob had a heartbeat to it, there were times when it was very strong and times when it backed off, then it resurged. ... We need to keep our guard up."

The ocean is still on the warm side and the climate models used for forecasting are unanimous in predicting warmer than normal water near the coast, said Nicholas Bond, the state climatologist and senior research scientist with the Joint Institute for the Study of Atmosphere and Ocean at the University of Washington.

The ocean has a memory. With so much lingering heat in the deep ocean, effects from the first Blob are still being seen and it doesn't take much to pile on new impacts.

The Pacific cod fishery in the Gulf of Alaska has collapsed as cod have fled north because heat is still stored in the deep ocean in the gulf, where the adult cod usually thrive. "Right now in that 100-to-200-meter layer, it is warmer than it was during the original Blob," Bond said.

Closer to home, the location of tuna that sport fishers delighted in catching close to shore in Oregon last year was a clue that the ocean was disrupted by the 2019 heat wave, said Nate Mantua, research scientist at NOAA's SW Fisheries Science Center.

Albacore typically are found in warmer water, but last year, Oregon anglers were nailing them right off the beach. Salmon catches, meanwhile, in the same area were dismal.

A bright spot looking ahead is the storms that broke up the 2019 heat wave also dumped enough snow in the mountains in Washington that the freshwater migration conditions for salmon -- at least where there isn't flooding -- should be favorable this year, Bond said.
​
“Our snow pack right now is right around normal, we are still in good shape.”

SOURCE: https://www.adn.com/nation-world/2020/02/19/feared-return-of-the-blob-fizzles-at-least-for-now-as-storms-churn-and-chill-the-north-pacific/

By Adam Vaughan
NEW SCIENTIST

The reappearance of a vast ‘blob’ of abnormally warm water in the Pacific, around seven times the size of Alaska, has raised the prospect of serious impacts on marine ecosystems and the weather.

The marine heatwave stretches up the US and Canadian west coast, covering a similar extent to a mass of warm water in the region between 2014 and 2016, dubbed ‘the blob’. The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which reported the new patch this week, notes the last blob caused toxic algal blooms and massive die-offs of marine life.

“There’s definitely already been impacts and there’s likely to be further,” says Andrew Leising at NOAA. Algal blooms have already been seen off Washington state.

Simon Boxall at the University of Southampton, UK, says: “We do sometimes see anomalous warm or cold blobs in our oceans so shouldn’t necessarily assume the end of the world is coming. However, the fact it’s becoming more frequent will have an impact on ecosystems.”

Watched carefullyHe adds: “In the long term, if this is happening regularly, it could be we are seeing a difference because of climate change. It is something that needs to be watched carefully. It will bring changes to the area both in terms of ecology and weather.”

Scientists have different definitions of marine heatwaves, says David Ferreira at the University of Reading, UK. But typically, rises of 2-4°C over a region for a prolonged time would be considered a marine heatwave, he says.

While such blobs can’t be attributed to climate change, warmer average global temperatures create the conditions for them to appear, says Ferreira. “In the context of global warming, the warmer the background temperature the higher the probability you might get a blob.”

The climate phenomenon El Nino may also play a role in the formation of blobs, Leising adds.

Shallow blobOne of the key differences between this blob and the last one is the heat only goes down a fraction of the depth of the last event. The depth is a measure of how much heat is being stored, and gives a sense of how long the blob might persist, says Ferreira.

It is unclear clear how long this blob will last. The weather will be key and there are already some signs in the latest data – which comes via satellites and ocean buoys – that some cooling may have occurred in September, according to Leising. “But the jury is still out on whether it will dissipate,” he concludes.

If the blob lasts into next year, it is likely to have significant impacts on ecosystems and weather. “What’s happening in the Pacific is clearly very worrying,” says Jason Hall-Spencer of Plymouth University, UK. “The warming of the sea creates severe destruction to the marine ecology but also to our weather.”
​
Hall-Spencer is in Japan this week to undertake marine research but expects his equipment to be destroyed by super typhoon Hagibis, one of the most powerful in decades, which is expected to hit Japan by the weekend
​
Read more: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2219501-return-of-warm-water-blob-in-the-pacific-threatens-marine-life/#ixzz6MjSVRYWt

By Amanda Jackson
CNN

With hibernation fast approaching, a grizzly bear family is spotted searching for fish near the shores of Canada's Knight Inlet. They're emaciated.

The heartbreaking images, captured by a Canadian photographer, have sparked concern from wildlife observers. They worry whether the bear and two cubs will even make it through hibernation.

It also shines light on another victim of the climate crisis and the depletion of wild salmon population.

Knight Inlet is a prime tourist spot in British Columbia, Canada for grizzly bear viewing. Visitors from all over the world come to take in the wilderness and admire the wildlife.
​
The Mamalilikulla First Nation has been monitoring the bears, specifically those in Hoeya Sound and Lull Bay, for several years.

"They have drastically changed within a couple months," Jake Smith, guardian watchman manager for the Mamalilikulla First Nation, told CNN. "The bears are in trouble."

Smith said when he saw the images on Friday, he knew he had to try to help. The bears' main food source, salmon, is at an all time low in the area. Commercial fishermen in British Columbia are calling this the worst salmon season in nearly 50 years.

In August, a report released by the Fisheries and Oceans Canada noted that Canada's climate is warming twice as fast as the global average, drastically impacting the salmon's ecosystems. The report also cited marine heatwaves, increased floods and droughts as causing greater stress on the fish.

Smith arranged for 500 salmon, donated by A-Tlegay Fisheries Society on Vancouver Island, to be distributed along the shorelines that the grizzlies frequent. Volunteers on Sunday piled the fish in ice chests and delivered them by boat to the area. Smith said bears were present and started eating the fish right away.

"We were about 30 feet away from them," Smith said. "A little grizzly looked up at us and the mother bear came out to get the fish."
​
While this is only a small step to help the bears, the First Nation will now continue to monitor the bears for any updates.

Causes of decline in wild salmon population

The wild salmon population has been steadily declining in the British Columbia area over the past few years. Just last month, advocates for commercial fishing asked the government for disaster relief to help the industry.

"The impacts of this climate change disaster has been coast wide," said Joy Thorkelson, president of the United Fishermen and Allied Workers' Union, at a press conference in September.

The warmer weather has impacted the temperature of the water and drastically impacted the salmon run this year, according to CNN news partner CTV.

Another factor for the wild salmon population loss is the open-net fish farming that critics say are spreading disease and pollution in the water.

"Everywhere in the world where there is salmon farming you have a decline in the wild salmon population," said biologist Alexandra Morton, who has been researching the effects of farming for the past 30 years. This type of farming allows for waste to be added back into the water and exposes the wild salmon population to viruses, according to Morton.

In December, the British Columbia government along with First Nations created a plan to transition out of open-net farming by 2023 so that the wild salmon population can recover. The Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance has defended open-net farming as environmentally sustainable, calling plans to phase out open-net farming "a reckless policy, not grounded in science."

Bears forced to travel far for food

​Rolf Hicker, a wildlife photographer, took the images of the thin bears while giving a boat tour. He posted them on Facebook on September 23.

"We saw this sow with her two little ones a couple of weeks ago and then we saw her again only a few days ago," he posted. "I have no idea how she would make it through the winter without salmon."

More than half of Canada's grizzly population lives in British Columbia, and their average weight is 220 to 880 pounds, according to the Nature Conservancy of Canada. They forage for berries and plants, but salmon is their main food source.

Hicker told CNN that not all of the bears that he's seen are this thin, but the majority are not healthy.

Smith and Hicker said the grizzlies are starting to relocate and island hop to other areas, including Vancouver Island, looking for food.

"Provincial biologists cannot confirm why the bears appear to be in poor shape," said a statement from the province's Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development.

"If salmon runs in the area are lower than expected, this will have an added effect and bears may have to travel further to find food."

Grizzly bears hibernate for five to seven months each year and live off the fat built up during the summer and fall months, according to the National Park Service. If female bears go into hibernation leaner than normal, this might impact how many cubs she has, according to Parks Canada.

"Grizzlies are not native to Vancouver Island," said Hicker. " They are spending all their energy swimming to go to another location. They are being forced to do that for food."

Swanson Island, about an hour boat ride from Knight Inlet, is another location where grizzlies are showing up, Smith said.

"They were approaching our camps, and we are seeing them in areas we rarely ever see bears," Rick Snowdon, owner of Spirit of The West, told CNN. He takes tourists to Swanson Island for camping trips and kayaking.

Snowdon said while they haven't had a negative interaction with the bears, they have had to emphasize to guests to use caution.

"I've seen several grizzles with cubs," he said. "They definitely looked lightweight."
​
The natural resources ministry told CNN they will be meeting with First Nations on Thursday to discuss the situation.

Canada isn't the only area facing issues with wild salmon populations. This summer, the heat wave in Alaska resulted in scientist finding hundreds of dead salmon due to heat stress. The water temperatures broke records as it rose to 81 degrees in July in Cook Inlet.

SOURCE: https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/03/americas/emaciated-grizzly-bears-knights-inlet-canada-trnd-scn/index.html

By KASHMIRA GANDER 
NEWSWEEK

Levels of methane—the second biggest contributor to climate change after carbon dioxide—have spiked in the atmosphere in the past decade. And a study says fracking in North America could be partly to blame.

The gas is linked to climate change, as well as ground-level ozone levels that can harm agriculture. It can also trigger a range of health problems, including chest pains, as well as reducing lung function and worsening conditions such as bronchitis, emphysema and asthma.

In the last half of the 20th, century levels of methane in the atmosphere rose. They then plateaued, and spiking in 2008. Robert W. Howarth of Cornell University, who published a study in the journal Biogeosciences, investigated fracking as a potential culprit.

Hydraulic fracturing, known as fracking, is the process of extracting gas and oil from shale sedimentary rock using pressurized liquid. The method is controversial and has been linked to contaminated drinking water in the U.S, methane gas escaping from wells into the atmosphere and earthquakes.

First performed in 1949, the fracking industry has boomed in the past decade or so. Between 2005 and 2015, global rates of fracking went from producing 31 billion cubic meters per year to 435 billion, according to Howarth. Of this, 89 percent occurred in the U.S., and 10 percent in Canada. The U.S Department of Energy forecasts production will spike to 1500 billion cubic meters per year by 2040.

For the new study, Howarth looked at existing research on the levels of certain carbon isotopes of atmospheric methane to find a potential source, and created an equation to investigate the link.

Methane is a compound made up of carbon and hydrogen. While methane released in the late 20th century was enriched with the carbon isotope 13C, Howarth highlights methane released in recent years features lower levels. That's because the methane in shale gas has depleted levels of the isotope when compared with conventional natural gas or fossil fuels such as coal, he explained.

This leads Howarth to conclude: "The commercialization of shale gas and oil in the 21st century has dramatically increased global methane emissions."

If trends of releasing methane continue, he said, this will "significantly increase global warming and undercut efforts" to meet the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to keep post-industrial revolution global temperatures below 2 C.

Howarth urged those involved in the energy industries to "move as quickly as possible away from natural gas, reducing both carbon dioxide and methane emissions."

The good news, argued Howarth, is that climate reacts quicker to methane than carbon dioxide, meaning cutting emissions of the gas emissions "could provide an opportunity to immediately slow the rate of global warming."

This could help the commitment of the Paris Agreement be met.

Howarth said in a statement: "This recent increase in methane is massive. It's globally significant. It's contributed to some of the increase in global warming we've seen and shale gas is a major player."

"If we can stop pouring methane into the atmosphere, it will dissipate. It goes away pretty quickly, compared to carbon dioxide. It's the low-hanging fruit to slow global warming."

Researchers not involved in the study welcomed Howarth's efforts, but pointed out some limitations. 

Grant Allen, professor of atmospheric physics at the U.K.'s University of Manchester, commented: "A wide range of different methane fluxes from different source types (e.g. fossil fuels, agriculture, wildfires and wetlands) can all simultaneously explain the observed trend in methane (and carbon isotopes of methane) within the limits of uncertainty in our knowledge of their carbon-isotopic fingerprints and estimates of total methane emitted from each source type.

"Other work has also proposed a role for changing chemical sinks of methane in the atmosphere. The jury is still out on the relative importance of all of these sources in explaining methane's rise."

Allen continued: "However, this paper makes a very important point—some sources of methane are within our gift to control, other (natural sources) are not as easily targeted. Controlling emissions from fracking, and fossil fuels in general, represents a potential policy quick fix to stemming the rise of methane still further."

Quentin Fisher, professor of petroleum geoengineering at the U.K.'s University of Leeds, said he was "deeply skeptical" about the study.

"The results are extremely sensitive to highly questionable assumptions regarding the isotopic composition of methane found in shale. The arguments made by previous studies that increase in methane in the atmosphere is from biogenic sources, such as release from wetlands and agriculture or burning of biomass, seem far more convincing."

"It's also the case that the study itself admits that even if the increased methane concentrations were from shale that they are not a direct result of the hydraulic fracturing process," he argued.
​
"For example, the USA has an aging gas transportation network, which results in significant methane leakages."

NEW YORK TIMES
By Kendra Pierre-Louis

Fish populations are declining as oceans warm, putting a key source of food and income at risk for millions of people around the world, according to new research published Thursday.

The study found that the amount of seafood that humans could sustainably harvest from a wide range of species shrank by 4.1 percent from 1930 to 2010, a casualty of human-caused climate change.

“That 4 percent decline sounds small, but it’s 1.4 million metric tons of fish from 1930 to 2010,” said Chris Free, the lead author of the study, which appears in the journal Science.

Scientists have warned that global warming will put pressure on the world’s food supplies in coming decades. But the new findings — which separate the effects of warming waters from other factors, like overfishing — suggest that climate change is already having a serious impact on seafood.

Fish make up 17 percent of the global population’s intake of protein, and as much as 70 percent for people living in some coastal and island countries, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

“Fish provide a vital source of protein for over half of the global population, and some 56 million people worldwide are supported in some way by marine fisheries,” Dr. Free said.

As the oceans have warmed, some regions have been particularly hard-hit. In the northeast Atlantic Ocean and the Sea of Japan, fish populations declined by as much as 35 percent over the period of the study.

“The ecosystems in East Asia have seen some of the largest decline in fisheries productivity,” Dr. Free said. “And that region is home to some of the largest growing human populations and populations that are highly dependent on seafood.”

Now a postdoctoral researcher at the University of California, Santa Barbara, Dr. Free began the research while a Ph.D. student at Rutgers University.

Marine life has been subjected to some of the most drastic effects of climate change. The oceans have absorbed 93 percent of the heat that is trapped by the greenhouse gases that humans pump into the atmosphere.

A study published in January, also in Science, found that ocean temperatures were increasing far faster than previous estimates.

Amid these changing conditions, fish are shifting where they live, in search of their preferred temperatures. High ocean temperatures can kill off both the fish themselves and the sources of food they depend on.

“Fish are like Goldilocks: They don’t like their water too hot or too cold,” said Malin L. Pinsky, an associate professor in the School of Environmental and Biological Sciences at Rutgers University and a co-author of the new study.

In about a quarter of the regions studied, fish had expanded their range. Off the Atlantic coast of the United States, sustainable catches of black sea bass increased by 6 percent over the study period.

Another quarter of the regions saw no significant changes in fish populations, like the northwest Atlantic Ocean, where Atlantic herring are abundant.

But half the regions did not fare as well. The northeast Atlantic Ocean — home to the Atlantic cod, the mainstay of fish and chips — saw a 34 percent decline in sustainable catches.

Over all, more populations of fish declined than increased over the eight decades in the study.

The researchers focused on sustainable catches, using a measure developed by the United Nations that quantifies the amount of food that can be repeatedly harvested from a base population of fish. “Fisheries are like a bank account, and we’re trying to live off the interest,” Dr. Pinsky said.

Several previous studies have predicted that climate change would lead to fewer ocean fish in the future, but the new research looked at historical data to determine that the declines had already begun.
​
“This is going to be one of those groundbreaking studies that gets cited over and over again,” said Trevor Branch, an associate professor at the University of Washington’s School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, who was not involved in the study. “Most of what I’ve seen before in terms of climate-change impacts have been speculative, in terms of, ‘We think this is what’s going to happen in the future.’ This one’s different.”

The researchers used a data set of 235 fish populations located in 38 ecological regions around the globe. The detailed data told them not only where the fish were but also how they reacted to environmental effects like changing water temperatures.

The team compared that data to records that showed how ocean temperatures had changed over time, broken down by the various regions. These regional analyses were important, because some parts of the ocean have warmed faster than others.

“We then connected those to which populations responded positively, negatively, and which didn’t respond at all,” Dr. Pinsky said.
​
The data revealed some other trends. Fish populations in the colder parts of their ranges tended to fare better than those located in warmer areas — for those fish, the extra heat was too much. This was especially troubling to the researchers, because the data they used was less detailed in the tropics. Fish losses in those regions may have been higher than in the regions the study focused on, Dr. Pinsky said.

Warm areas fared even worse when they were overfished. The researchers suggested that overfishing made fish even more vulnerable to temperature changes by hurting their ability to reproduce and damaging the ecosystem.

Guarding against overfishing and improving the overall management of fisheries can help, the researchers said. But ultimately, they said, the solution lies in slowing or halting climate change.
​
A separate study, published Wednesday in the journal Science Advances, found that limiting warming to 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, or 1.5 degrees Celsius, above preindustrial levels — a goal of the Paris climate agreement — could result in billions of dollars in extra revenue for fisheries globally. Much of that would be in the developing world, where many people rely on fish for protein.

“We hope that this highlights the importance of accounting for the fact that climate change is driving shifts in productivity,” Dr. Free said of his research. “Fishery managers need to come up with new innovative ways of accounting for those shifts. That includes reducing catch limits in warm negative years, but it can also include increasing catch limits in cooler positive years. Having regulations that are adaptive to climate change is going to be really important for maximizing food potential.”