Global Warming and Increased Shipping Threaten Arctic Wildlife
The Arctic Council has recently reported that global warming is causing more shipping to travel through the Arctic region, resulting in actual and potential harm to marine wildlife. As is already well known, marine based birds and seal pups are highly sensitive to oil and frequently die of hypothermia if oil pollution damages their feathers or fur. As more shipping—ranging from container vessels to oil tankers to cruise ships—is using Arctic waters, the risk of major oil spillages increases but the actual incidence of minor spills resulting from trimming vessels or flushing tanks is growing and remains largely unreported by shipping lines.
Mammalian communication suffers when ships pass in the night
However, this isn’t the only risk that is likely to damage the fragile Arctic ecosystem. Research has shown that whales and walruses can have difficulty finding prey and communicating with each other if local waters become noisy through increased marine traffic using sonar. And there are increased risks of introducing invasive and predatory species through the emptying of ballast in the form of water or cargo, or simply through transportation on the hulls of ships. Rodents arriving on islands where seabirds ground nest can be devastating. On the Aleutian Islands, rats have caused an uninhabited island to be renamed Rat Island since a Japanese shipwreck in 1780 led to the devastation of the breeding ground of millions of seabirds which had no defence against such predators.
Sea ice retreat causes increased shipping
The reduction in sea ice as a result of climate change means that several Straits are becoming much more widely used than previously, particularly the Bering Strait between Alaska and Russia. In addition, the popularity of adventure and expedition cruising means that major cruise lines are increasingly viewing the Arctic as a potential source of income, which is not always unpopular, as tourist income can make a big difference to the economic situation of native communities.
The report makes several recommendations such as Arctic nations passing laws to limit the emissions of greenhouse gases and other air pollutants from ships, to lower the risk of oil spills, and to create reserves in areas of the Arctic Ocean to ensure environmental protection for more threatened species.
Aleutians courtesy of Seabarimum at Flickr under a creative commons licence
http://en.msa.gov.cn/msa/features/root/02/1243216484886/1242798322 Dear Sirs, The reason we can not get our Federal government to act on ballast dumping is because of the economic domination that trade has over human health. Although the environmental aspect is a disaster we need to address the human health problem as the above web address shows others are doing. I hope the US will use its sovereign right to protect its citizens from H1N1 the same as China appears to have. Maybe they seem to understand the cost savings of preventive action on health care. Interesting how ocean currents out beyond even the two hundred mile limit could carry disease, toxins, nuclear waste water etc.to islands, and areas of ocean development (mining) and exploration. What temperature activated virus, or other pathogens may be released as the ancient ice melts around the shared area of the poles? The day of designer algae is already here and with new pathogens being released from the ancient fresh water ice melting they could act as a host or their may be existing marine life that will work. The idea that the IMO can do more than promote clean ballast water technology is a throw back to a time when smaller maritime nations could dominate the military power of the sea. Yes we need technology on an international basis, but since 911 we can not afford the risk of our safety, health, and environment, being in only the hands of an international organization of foreign sea captains and state laws. H1N1 is one pathogen we were lucky with, what will happen when one like bird flue mutates from bird excrement in water near ships taking on ballast water, will our country be able to afford to use our military to protect us, under our version, of the law of the sea? All governments need to be involved in inspection, technology, and surveillance.
Sincerely
Don Mitchel
Don – the concept of temperature sensitive virae or pathogens is very far off government agendas, I fear, and yet the risk of mutating bacteria is surely greater than that of our planet being hit by a meteorite, which does feature in future scenario planning. It’s quite frightening to think how short-sighted we are about the risks inherent in a global shipping system.
[...] Marine dumping is the most likely cause of such wide-spread cancer developments. Many sea lions that have cancer are found to have high levels of DDT in their blubber, and this possibly results from DDT dumping on a number of offshore islands, including the UK Channel Islands, in the 1970s, when DDT was outlawed. [...]