"Green" Krill Oil?

I came across a very interesting press release claiming that a certain company has developed environmentally friendly krill harvesting methods. Often, I'm happy to hear about developments that help obviate the reasons for eating a healthy diet of whole, natural foods. Why waste time purchasing and cooking real food when you could just swallow an overpriced capsule along with your takeout*? Especially now that it's environmentally sound? The ridiculousness of nutritionism aside, the idea that it's only the harvesting methods that make krill oil un-green is completely false. It's very nice that this company's methods reduce bycatch of other marine species. The bycatch problem plagues the entire fishing industry and constitutes a serious threat to many marine species. Their other methods also are probably better for the environment than those previously used. Yet no amount of green harvesting techniques can erase the fact that increased krill harvesting is likely to have serious consequences for the Antarctic food chain. If you really want "green" Omega-3s, read this book and research local, sustainable sources of the foods recommended therein. Guranteed to taste better than krill!

Stay Away from Migaloo!

The Australian government is warning whale watchers and others to give a wide berth to a rare albino humpback whale named Migaloo. Or face fines of over $13,000 U.S. dollars. Apparently, Migaloo has picked up quite a following since he was first discovered in 1991, which likely prompted the warnings from the government. His fans, meanwhile, remain concerned that the Japanese will kill him during their annual hunt in the Southern Ocean, where Migaloo and other humpbacks will go to feed during the summer. It's unclear whether Japan actually would kill Migaloo. Probably depends on how much they want to infuriate Australia. Or, given the unprofitability of whaling, it depends on whether they think the market might be better for a rare animal's meat. At the end of the day, Migaloo's really no different from any other humpback. But his situation puts me in mind of the fact that all over the world, endangered and animals fetch high prices because there are people who think it is exciting to consume the flesh of a rare species. My instinctive reaction to this attitude is that it is sickeningly immature and shortsighted. Yet it also makes the world a more boring place. On a basic level, albino whales, sea turtles, and megamouth sharks showcase the crazier side of nature. Without considering any of the sophisticated arguments in favor of maintaing high biodiversity, if we don't have it, what are we left with? The craze over Migaloo demonstrates yet again that unusual animals capture people's imaginations in a powerful way. The success of the Planet Earth documentary series was no fluke.

So the next time you hear complaints about the extraordinary lengths recommended to save some relatively unknown species, remember that without that species, we're just heading further down the road to dullness, also known as loss of biodiversity. Squirrels and crows are amusing to a point, but I personally am glad there are bowerbirds and white whales out there as well.

The IWC's (Not So) Surprising Result

The IWC finished up a day early this week, and as you can probably guess, it wasn't because the delegates all got along so well that they quickly agreed upon plans to resolve all of their disagreements. Instead, they agreed to more discussion on the issue of reforming the IWC. The news this week was not entirely negative, however. Norway announced that its whalers would stop whaling, apparently because the market for whale meat was poor. Yet the optimistic assessment of a Greenpeace Norway campaigner that the industry was dying and would soon be finished may be overstating the situation. The evidence compiled by WWF that government money keeps the Norwegian and Japanese whaling industries economically viable indicates that the profit motive is probably not the primary driver of whaling nations.

But William Hogarth's assertion that resuming limited commercial whaling would satisfy the whalers is equally ridiculous. Hogarth, who retires as IWC chair this year, prefaced his remarks by saying, "I'll probably get in trouble for making this statement..." Like most statements that being by suggesting that the speaker is about to lay upon us some brave bold truth that less intrepid thinkers can't handle, Hogarth went on to make a ridiculous claim: that allowing regulated commercial whaling would reduce the number of whales killed. Because Japan's use of the scientific whaling exemption means that they just have to take a lot of whales, to get a statistically valid sample size! They'd prefer to just take a few, despite the millions they've spent trying to create a bigger national market for whale meat, of course.

Hogarth's new commercial whaling vision includes lots of restrictions to ensure that only enough whales for "local consumption" would be taken. That argument might seem less ridiculous if subsistence whalers in Greenland didn't consistently agitate for larger and larger IWC quotas, only to have whale meat end up being sold in stores (which should not happen if only going for local, indigenous use). My point is that it seems clear that most of the groups wishing to hunt whales seem to be motivated by more than mere survival. Whales should not have to die so that people can fulfill their arcane notions of national pride. It's time that the IWC stopped pretending that pro-whaling nations are trying to protect anything but their own egos.

The Costs of Whaling

Iceland's delegate to the IWC meeting has a great sense of humor. According to a BBC article, the delegate asserted that whaling and whale watching were industries that could enjoy simultaneous growth. The comment came in response to an International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) report that was released this week. The report stated that the whale watching industry generates over $2 billion in revenue every year (read report). Contrast that to last week's WWF report on the millions in subsidies Japan and Norway give money-losing whaling industries just to keep them afloat, and it's difficult to understand the intransigence of whaling nations.

But back to Iceland. The idea that there are ways to exploit natural resources without depleting them utterly is a good one. Sustainable use of resources usually enhances, not hampers, economic growth (see the recent stories about how clearcutting in the Brazilian rainforest makes people poorer in the long run). However, sustainable use is not applicable in all situations. Whales would likely begin avoiding vessels of all kinds if hunting increased. Studies also show that whale watchers are strongly anti-whaling, and are not as likely to visit countries with growing whaling industries. So countries pursuing a growth in both industries will perhaps find that even as they must subsidize whaling, tourism revenues are declining. Everyone loses!

Furthermore, despite the endless parade of stories about overfishing, the world is still struggling to enact meaningful laws and regulations that will stop serious population declines. One of the reasons for this is that the needs of industry often seem to come before the recommendations of scientists. Another is that people seem determined not to acknowledge that wild fish (and whales) cannot be treated like underwater livestock. Their populations aren't privately held, they aren't corralled and bred, and they are hard to count accurately - hence the global decline. Demand for bison meat has helped increase the population of American buffalo, but I cannot think of a single instance in which popularity has done the same for a marine species. Usually the populations just crash. Combine this dismal history with the aforementioned refusal to accept scientific data, and an increase in catches spells doom for any marine species. So the idea that the fin whale, whose population has yet to recover from commercial whaling (ended in 1965) is ready for more slaughter is ludicrous. Fin whales reproduce every 3-4 years, meaning that even small catches could further slow their full recovery.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the BBC story is the role reversal. Environmental advocates often receive criticism for their supposedly idealistic devotion to conservation at the expense of practical economic considerations. Yet here IFAW stands on the side of the practical, promoting the moneymaking, increasingly popular whale watching industry while the governments of whaling nations insist on expanding their hunts even though they are unprofitable and unpopular. Even if you have no particular love for whales, you can't deny that making $2 billion dollars sounds a lot better than losing millions.

Guest Post at the Reef Tank

The Reef Tank has once again graciously hosted a guest post from me. Check it out - it's all about the Ross Sea and a symposium held on it at the International Marine Conservation Congress!

Australia and New Zealand Launch Challenge to Scientific Whaling

Australia and New Zealand announced today that they will be launching a joint whale research program in 2010. The announcement came with explicit statements from the Australian government that the non-lethal research was intended to demonstrate that Japan's lethal scientific whaling was completely unnecessary for cetacean research. Even more encouraging, the results are going to be used to help develop whale management plans, something our organization has been urging the International Whaling Commission (IWC) to put in place for a while now.

It's hard to imagine that the Japanese will welcome this news. Pro-whaling nations often seem very sensitive to perceived slights from anti-whaling nations, and this is an overt challenge to Japan's "scientific" whaling program. Whether you actually believe that Japan is being sincere when it calls its program scientific or not, the Australia/New Zealand program is clearly out to discredit their methods. It'll be interesting to see how Japan and its allies at the IWC respond. It's never dull at the IWC.

Emperor Penguins are AWESOME.

I clearly do not monitor ASOC's Flickr account closely enough, or I would have noticed that several of our emperor penguin pictures are being used in an AwesomeOff. Or should that be AWESOMEOFF? Anyway, should you decide to check out this contest, I think you will agree that male emperor penguins are way more awesome than the Notorious B.I.G. doll, or the Peekaru, which is a garment that allows your parasitic twin to finally get some air.

Male emperor penguins are of course famous for their dedicated egg tending. The female penguin lays the egg, and then, exhausted from that process, treks back out to the ocean to feed. The male, meanwhile, remains several miles inland (no predators there), incubating the egg, which sits on top of his feet under his warm overhanging belly blubber. He slowly burns off his fat stores whilst keeping this egg warm and away from the ice, in the middle of some very unpleasant weather. He even feeds the chick with some stored-up food when it hatches, despite being pretty close to starvation himself. Only when his mate returns to take over caring for the chick will he be able to return to the ocean and get a decent meal. It gets so cold that the male penguins huddle together to form a giant rotating mass so as to share the burden of being fully exposed to the wind (penguins move in and out of the warm center). They somehow manage coordinate this without letting the eggs roll off their feet. It's no fun, even if the result is an adorable fluffy penguin chick.

Having defeated three opponents in this month's AwesomeOff, male emperor penguins are waiting for a new contest. When they get one, make sure to vote for them. I don't even care who their opponent is - of the slate of June combatants, I count exactly zero others who can survive in the Antarctic without protective gear or food, balance an egg on their feet for weeks at a time, and look good doing it.