Keep in mind that many countries use the ocean as there sewer system and garbage dump. As for sharks they are declining rapidly due to shark finning, this includes the Great White which has a slow reproductive rate. Big corporations will dump their toxic waste into the ocean because it is hard to regulate and far more cost effective than dumping in a proper facility.

– Tue Jun 21, 5:50 am ET
OSLO (Reuters) – Life in the oceans is at imminent risk of the worst spate of extinctions in millions of years due to threats such as climate change and over-fishing, a study showed on Tuesday.
Time was running short to counter hazards such as a collapse of coral reefs or a spread of low-oxygen "dead zones," according to the study led by the International Programme on the State of the Ocean (IPSO).
"We now face losing marine species and entire marine ecosystems, such as coral reefs, within a single generation," according to the study by 27 experts to be presented to the United Nations.
"Unless action is taken now, the consequences of our activities are at a high risk of causing, through the combined effects of climate change, over-exploitation, pollution and habitat loss, the next globally significant extinction event in the ocean," it said.
Scientists list five mass extinctions over 600 million years -- most recently when the dinosaurs vanished 65 million years ago, apparently after an asteroid struck. Among others, the Permian period abruptly ended 250 million years ago.
"The findings are shocking," Alex Rogers, scientific director of IPSO, wrote of the conclusions from a 2011 workshop of ocean experts staged by IPSO and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) at Oxford University.
Fish are the main source of protein for a fifth of the world's population and the seas cycle oxygen and help absorb carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas from human activities.
OXYGEN
Jelle Bijma, of the Alfred Wegener Institute, said the seas faced a "deadly trio" of threats of higher temperatures, acidification and lack of oxygen, known as anoxia, that had featured in several past mass extinctions.
A build-up of carbon dioxide, blamed by the U.N. panel of climate scientists on human use of fossil fuels, is heating the planet. Absorbed into the oceans, it causes acidification, while run-off of fertilizers and pollution stokes anoxia.
"From a geological point of view, mass extinctions happen overnight, but on human timescales we may not realize that we are in the middle of such an event," Bijma wrote.
The study said that over-fishing is the easiest for governments to reverse -- countering global warming means a shift from fossil fuels, for instance, toward cleaner energies such as wind and solar power.
"Unlike climate change, it can be directly, immediately and effectively tackled by policy change," said William Cheung of the University of East Anglia.
"Over-fishing is now estimated to account for over 60 percent of the known local and global extinction of marine fishes," he wrote.
Among examples of over-fishing are the Chinese bahaba that can grow 2 meters long. Prices per kilo (2.2 lbs) for its swim bladder -- meant to have medicinal properties -- have risen from a few dollars in the 1930s to $20,000-$70,000.

Nice post.

It is amazing how few are aware of the problem, and how many deny it once they are make aware. The really scary part is the magnitude of the problem and the consequences which will result.

NOAA recently reported that tuna should not be placed on an endangered species list as fishing rules should take care of the problem. Meanwhile, the world's fishing fleets are struggling to catch the last ones left.

I was watching a new show called "whale wars" We need more of these brave souls to disrupt greedy fishing fleets around the world. Enough is enough!


Japan, I'm calling you out as eco-terrorists!

Those guys have balls allright! The fake "scientific" whaling of the Japanese is insane. They kill close to a thousand whales a year for food and claim it is for science? What a joke!

Here is some poop on the guys who have done the most to stop recent whaling.

Exclusive Sea Shepherd: how we sank the Japanese whaling fleet

Deborah Bassett

21st April, 2011
In an exclusive interview, founder of Sea Shepherd, Captain Paul Watson, talks to Deborah Bassett about the end of Japanese whaling, seal hunting, the politics of extinction, and the 11th hour crisis facing the world's oceans

Deborah Bassett: You and your crew recently returned from your 7th anti-whaling campaign to the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary - Operation No Compromise. This year you successfully drove the Japanese whaling fleet to abandon their hunting season over a month early and over 800 whales short of their annual quota. Does this defeat represent the end of Japanese whaling in he Southern Ocean?

Captain Paul Watson: When the Japanese fleet ended their operation a month and a half early this year I felt that there was a 75 per cent chance they would not be returning. They know we can find them and they know that once we find them we can shut down their operations. They quit the field because they could not kill any whales and they could not shake us off their tail. Now in light of the Earthquake I am 99 per cent certain they will not return. Japan has other problems to deal with an subsidising an unpopular industry that annually incurs a large debt is certainly no longer a priority. However if they do return we will be ready to intercept them once again. Our commitment is to a whaling free Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.

DB: Has there been one primary strategy that you have implemented over the past seven years?

CPW: Our strategy from the beginning was to sink the Japanese whaling fleet economically, to bankrupt them. I think we have accomplished that.

DB: You were the youngest founding member of Greenpeace and have persevered in the direct action environmental movement for well over four decades. Is there one campaign or success story of which you are most proud?

CPW: There have been so many campaigns, so many voyages that I have lost count. And so many that were successful. I would have to say however that the hunting down and destruction of the pirate whaler Sierra in 1979 was my proudest moment. It was my first major confrontation that resulted in a total victory and I learned the experience of seeing a strategy fully implemented and carried out successfully.

DB: Some of your critics say that you are too radical and many have even use the word 'eco-terrorist'. Japan even had you placed on the Interpol Blue List in 2010. What is your response to these types of accusations?

CPW: They can either arrest me or shut the hell up. This charge of 'eco-terrorist' is nothing more than public relations rhetoric. I have never injured a single person nor have I ever been convicted of a felony nor have we ever been sued in civil court. Why? Because we target poachers. We intervene against criminal operations and we do so in accordance with the principles established by the United Nations World Charter for Nature.

DB: That being said, you have taken on some of the world's strongest navies, braved some of the most treacherous oceans and weather conditions in the world, your vessels have been fired upon in international waters and you have put yourself directly in harms way to protect and defend marine life. Are there any personal philosophies or strategies that have helped you to remain so seemingly cool, calm and collected throughout it all?

...

DB: Last summer you tackled the Bluefin Tuna crisis during your Mediterranean campaign, Operation Blue Rage. Can you please explain your theory on the 'politics of extinction' in relation to this particular issue?

CPW: The only responsible fishing is conducted by traditional artisanal fishermen. Corporations on average simply look on it as short term investment for short term gain. Mitsubishi for example is stockpiling flash frozen tuna in huge refrigerated warehouses. They are building up supplies. If they can get a ten to fifteen year supply of Bluefin into their warehouse they will have an investment. The more Bluefin they can catch the more they will diminish the populations and diminishment translates into higher prices for the frozen commodity in the warehouses. If driven to extinction the stockpile becomes hugely valuable. This is already a $75,000 fish. It could become a million dollar fish once they are extinct and the only source will be the frozen carcasses in the warehouses. This is the best example of what I call the politics of extinction.

DB: Studies show that over 90 per cent of sharks have already been removed from the world's oceans, primarily for shark fin soup. How important is the role of the shark in the overall health of the marine eco-system? Does Sea Shepherd have any campaigns in place to tackle this particular issue?

CPW: The shark is the apex predator in the sea. Sharks have molded evolution for 450 million years. All fish species that are prey to the sharks have had their behavior, their speed, their camouflage, their defense mechanisms molded by the shark. The shark is an essential predator in marine eco-systems. If removed the eco-systems will be greatly diminished.

Poor whales.

http://www.theglobaleducationproject.org/earth/food-from-the-oceans.php

$.02

Nice website but the data is nine years old. Conditions are much worse now.

– Sat Jun 11, 2:34 am ET
TOKYO (AFP) – Japan sent a whaling fleet to the northwest Pacific for what it called a research hunt, four months after cutting short a similar mission in the Antarctic due to obstruction by activists.
The three-vessel fleet, led by the Nisshin Maru, plans to catch 260 whales including 100 minkes until late August to study their stomach contents, DNA and other information, according to the Institute of Cetacean Research.
The government-affiliated institute has organised such operations since 1987, citing a loophole in a 1986 international moratorium on commercial whaling which allows hunts for scientific research.
Anti-whaling nations and environmentalist groups condemn the activity as a cover for commercial whaling but Japan said it is necessary to substantiate its claim that there is a robust whale population in the world.
The institute said the mission would be its 18th scientific expedition to the northwest Pacific.
On February 18, Japan halted a research hunt in the Antarctic Ocean for the 2010-2011 season, which had been due to run from December until March, because of obstruction by militant environmentalist group Sea Shepherd.
The US-based Sea Shepherd, which says its tactics are non-violent but aggressive, hurled paint and stink bombs at whaling ships, snared their propellers with rope, and moved its own boats between the harpoon ships and their prey.
The four-ship fleet killed 172 whales in that season, only about a fifth of its target, the fisheries agency said at that time.
Australia -- which last year launched legal action against Japan's whaling programme at the International Court of Justice -- and New Zealand said they hoped Japan had given up whaling for good.
The institute told Japanese media that there has been no instance of obstructive activities in the northwest Pacific so far but that "we cannot automatically consider the area safe."

This is a short fun video about what happens to the last can of tuna.


The sad fact is that it may come way sooner than we think.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwFiudX4q2s

June 23, 2011 9:43 AM | Comments0Recommend0
By Quirks

By Bob McDonald, Quirks & Quarks

An international report released this week, called State of the Ocean, suggests time is running out on the colourful coral reefs and pristine waters pictured in holiday travel brochures.

According to the multidisciplinary team of scientists, marine species are being lost at a rate rivaling that of the extinction 65 million years ago that killed off the dinosaurs. Except this time, we are the dinosaurs at the top of the food chain with the most to lose.

While the report did not really tell us anything we haven't heard before - collapsing cod stocks on the East Coast and salmon stocks on the West Coast, toxic algae blooms, melting ice caps, etc. - it did say that the oceans are changing faster than anyone imagined. It's a rather scary scenario, as our demands on the ocean for food continue to grow.

So can we turn it around?

In fact, a model for effective global change already exists: the Clean Air Act. Like the oceans today, the air was used for decades as a dumping ground for our waste. There was no regard for whatever came out of smokestacks or exhaust pipes, because the air would always just blow it away. Out of sight and out of mind. But in the 1970s, the pollution came back to us in the form of brown smog hanging over cities. You could see it, taste it and feel the pain in your lungs.

Clearly, something had to be done.

While scientists waved red flags about the effects of air pollution on human health, politicians responded with legislation demanding a wide variety of changes, including catalytic converters on automotive exhaust systems, scrubbers in industrial smoke stacks, as well as a host of serious fines for polluting the air. And while there is still a long way to go, the air over North American and European cities today is vastly more breathable than it was decades ago - thanks to effective political action.

Now the scientists are raising a red flag about the health of the oceans, so it's time for the political process to respond again with effective legislation.

The problem, however, is far more complicated this time because it's not simply a matter of stopping our pollution of the oceans, as we did with the air. There's the complex matter of the fish.

With so many countries around the world depending on the ocean for their food, it will be tricky enforcing fishing quotas, especially in areas where the population is growing and agricultural land is being taken over by city sprawl.

The United Nations agreement on the Law of the Sea states that outside of offshore boundaries, no one owns the ocean. That leaves it wide open to abuse, with no ability to enforce penalties. The ocean is simply too large to patrol effectively.

But fish know no boundaries.

Losing the vitality of the oceans means more than facing a shortage of food for the future. There is only one interconnected ocean on planet Earth and it affects everything above and around it. The oceans are the lungs of the planet. Most of the oxygen we breathe comes from phytoplankton, microscopic plants floating in seawater. There's more phytoplankton than there are trees.

Tropical storms and hurricanes are fuelled by warm seawater. The warmer it gets, the more violent the storms become. El Nino and La Nina ocean currents affect the climate of continents, while the entire ocean moderates the climate of the planet as a whole.

And then there is the fact that all life came from the sea, so we owe our very existence to it.

If human activity does cause an extinction event in the oceans on the scale of the dinosaur demise, which these scientists say is very likely, the oceans will not actually die. Mass extinctions have happened many times in the past and, each time, new forms of life replace those that were lost. So, instead of finding colourful fish, stingrays and sea turtles, snorkelers in the future might be swimming through a murky green ooze, covering what was once a vital sea floor.

Are the oceans dying?
A new report warns that many types of fish and whales could be wiped out if we don't do something — fast
posted on June 22, 2011, at 2:35 PM
A healthy reef system in the Indian Ocean: Record-high temperatures and acidification threaten the world's tropical coral reefs, which are crucial to sea life.

Environmentalists have long been worried about the health of Earth's oceans, but a jarring new report from the International Programme on the State of the Ocean says things are worse than most scientists feared. In fact, the authors warn we're "at high risk of entering a phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history." Here, a brief guide to the seas' decline:

Why do scientists think the oceans are in such trouble?
In recent years, some fish populations have declined by as much as 90 percent. In 1998 alone, record-high temperatures wiped out about 16 percent of the world's tropical coral reefs, which are crucial incubators of all kinds of sea life. Massive, low-oxygen "dead zones" are appearing where fish and other marine life can't survive. If the oceans continue on this path, the report says, mass extinctions — of fish, whales, and other marine species — are "inevitable."

What exactly is killing marine creatures?
The oceans are under siege by a "deadly trio" of threats — rising water temperature, acidification, and lack of oxygen — that played a role in similar mass extinctions 55 million years ago, says Jelle Bijma of the Alfred Wegener Institute. This time, humans are largely to blame, according to the report. Overfishing alone has pushed many species to the brink of extinction. Pollution and run-off of fertilizers from farms have choked out life in vast areas. And the oceans absorb most of the carbon dioxide we pump into the atmosphere, changing pH levels and adding stress on all kinds of marine creatures.

Can anything be done to reverse the decline?
One obvious fix, according to the IPSO, is a greater effort to prevent over-fishing, which "is now estimated to account for over 60 percent of the known local and global extinction of marine fishes," says William Cheung of the University of East Anglia, as quoted by Reuters. And, "unlike climate change, it can be directly, immediately and effectively tackled by policy change." Reducing pollution, including plastics, agricultural fertilizers and human waste, would help, too. Ultimately, though, the authors say we must eliminate carbon dioxide emissions. "If we don't do that," says Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, as quoted by BBC News, "we're going to see steady acidification of the seas, heat events that are wiping out things like kelp forests and coral reefs, and we'll see a very different ocean."

Sources: BBC News, Guardian, TIME, Reuters

NEW ORLEANS – Scientists predict this year's "dead zone" of low-oxygen water in the northern Gulf of Mexico will be the largest in history -- about the size of Lake Erie -- because of more runoff from the flooded Mississippi River valley.

Each year when the nutrient-rich freshwater from the Mississippi and Atchafalaya rivers pours into the Gulf, it spawns massive algae blooms. In turn, the algae consume the oxygen in the Gulf, creating the low oxygen conditions. Fish, shrimp and many other species must escape the dead zone or face dying.

Federal and university scientists predict this year's zone will be between 8,500 square miles (22,015 sq. kilometers) and about 9,400 square miles (24,346 sq. kilometers). The actual size of the dead zone will be measured over the summer.

The largest recorded dead zone was found in 2002 when 8,400 square miles (21,756 sq. kilometers) of the Gulf was found to lacking sufficient oxygen for most marine life.

The forecasts on the size of the hypoxic zone are usually close to the mark, although hurricanes have chopped them up in the past.

Eugene Turner, an oceanographer at Louisiana State University, said the dead zone has continued to get larger since it was first noticed and measured in the 1970s. He said the dead zone is getting worse with time.

The biggest contributor is the amount of fertilizer -- and the nitrates and phosphates in them -- that wind up in the Mississippi River each spring and get flushed out to the Gulf.

"The nitrogen is fertilizing the waters offshore," Turner said. He said little progress has been made in recent years to reduce the nutrient load into the Gulf.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/06/15/forecast-predicts-biggest-gulf-dead-zone-ever/#ixzz1RKgs9eDN

True,very true.along with fossil fuel,the world is running out of everything! http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/

I saw a sad story on TV last night. A fisheries scientist from Louisiana was studying the brackish marshes where so many shrimp and fish breed.He said global warming is already causing the oceans to rise but it only takes a small amount of rise to increase the salt content in the marshes and estuaries to the point where fish can't breed there anymore.

He said we have actually known this for years since the areas hit by ocean surge during a hurricane die, but since it was always an isolated area, on average it didn't affect the overall fish population much. That is all changing as all the world's estuaries will be affected at once and there is no way for new ones to develop in time.

He didn't give exact times or the amount of rise required for devastation but said the rise required was small and the time was very soon.

Proof the Oceans are evolving and not dying

http://news.yahoo.com/world-first-hybrid-shark-found-off-australia-070347608.html

Evolving and dying are two different problems. Your article is proof that the specific shark species are evolving but the article states that the reason for it could be the same reasons that the oceans are dying.

About 1/3 of global coral reefs are already dead the the changes in temperature and chemistry that are killing them are increasing, not decreasing. Overfishing has removed over 90% of predator fish from the oceans and is working hard against the last 10% now.

There is now a growing acidity problem that could make all other ocean problems pale in comparison by disruption of the food chain.

What is currently happening in the oceans.

... The vast majority of oceanic climate research in recent years has focused on the potential impacts of increasing temperatures on ocean ecosystems as a consequence of rising levels of anthropogenically-generated carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, including methane, nitrous oxide, and chloroflourocarbons. However, there is growing evidence that the gravest peril for ocean species may be posed by what Victoria Fabry of the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory has termed “the other CO2 problem”—acidification of the world’s oceans as a consequence of the influx of carbon dioxide generated by human activities...

read more at http://www.terrain.org/articles/21/burns.htm

Coral bleaching.... I have seen this with my own eyes!


http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/geekquinox/world-coral-reefs-die-without-drastic-action-limit-174623228.html


Most of the world's coral reefs are in dire risk of dying unless climate change is drastically reduced, a new study has shown.
The study, conducted by researchers from Germany, Australia and the University of British Columbia, is the first to express the results of a survey of coral bleaching around the world in terms of temperature rises linnked to climate change.
"Our findings show that under current assumptions regarding thermal sensitivity, coral reefs might no longer be prominent coastal ecosystems if global mean temperatures actually exceed two degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial level," says Dr. Katja Frieler, lead author of the study.
Coral reefs are extremely sensitive to temperature changes. Corals are marine animals, however, they get most of their energy and nutrients from photosynthetic algae — called zooxanthellae — that live inside them. If the temperature rises too high, the symbiotic relationship between the coral and the algae breaks down, and the algae leave, causing the coral to 'bleach'. Without its primary source of food, the coral quickly dies, which upsets the entire marine ecosystem built up around the coral reef.
[ More Geekquinox: 'Blueberries' may be evidence of life on Mars ]
According to Dr. Stuart Sandin of the University of California San Diego's Scripps Institution of Oceanography, the entire coral reef ecosystem provides benefits to us: "They provide food for a lot of people, they provide shoreline protection, they provide species that are providing us with new drugs," he said in an interview with Huffington Post.
"Every year a new species are found that provide new drugs for people. They provide income for communities that have dive tourism nearby. There are a lot of people that get a lot of benefits out of them."
Back in 1992, countries around the world made an international treaty, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). They agreed that emissions of greenhouse gases must be significantly reduced and that any further rise in global temperatures should be kept to below two degrees C over pre-industrial levels — the same limit that Dr. Frieler stated would be necessary to prevent the collapse of coral ecosystems. However, a 2011 report suggested that efforts over the past decade may have been insufficient to meet the UNFCCC's goal.
"The window of opportunity to preserve the majority of coral reefs, part of the world's natural heritage, is small," says co-author of the study Malte Meinshausen, who is a senior researcher at the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research and an Honorary Senior Research Fellow at the University of Melbourne.
"We close this window if we follow another decade of ballooning global greenhouse-gas emissions."

This breaks my heart.

This probably has nothing to do with this, but I just feel like if we could all adopt a simpler lifestyle it would help. I like conveniences as much as the next person, but some of the modern conveniences we use so regularly now may not be worth the damage to us and to our planet in the long run. I don't know. I know very little about environmental science, but that's what makes sense to me.