climate change Archives - One Fish Foundation

Hurricane Ida wreaks havoc on Louisiana’s seafood industry

September 8, 2021October 20, 2021
by Colles Stowell

Share it!

This time, the levees around New Orleans held. The reduced flooding in the city after Hurricane Ida helped minimize the catastrophic loss of life following Hurricane Katrina 16 years ago.

But some levees in southern parishes didn’t fair as well. And Ida’s widespread devastation fueled by sustained 150 mph winds will have long-term consequences for Louisiana’s seafood industry.

I spoke with Lance Nacio, owner of Anna Marie Seafood in Montegut, La. on Monday to get a sense of what folks down there are dealing with. Here is a quick snapshot of our conversation:

He and his family are fine, living on his two fishing boats and in his house. The house, the boats and the processing facilities all weathered the storm pretty well, though there are some things to fix.
His boats are trapped in the canal across the street from his house until Sept. 29, which is the estimated time when power should be restored to allow the drawbridges to raise and let the boats motor to the Gulf of Mexico and begin fishing.
More than 60% of the structures in Terrebonne Parish (the 2,000-square mile parish south and west of New Orleans where Lance and many other fishermen live) are uninhabitable, according to authorities.
Lance predicts that many residents will not return in what may be a more expansive exodus than after Katrina.
This exodus will not only include fishermen, but also those who run critical infrastructure operations like docks, ice houses, boat maintenance operations, processing facilities, etc.
He will be working with Chef Dana Honn of Carmo to provide meals for first responders and line crews from across the country.

In essence, the industry in the state that provides the highest volume of domestically harvested wild shrimp and crab is in trouble. The entire regional seafood supply chain from boat to plate will likely be a shell (take or leave the pun) of itself in just a few months, sending shock waves across the country and around the world. As Dana said, “The fish will be out there. But with no infrastructure in place, who’s going to come back?” Louisiana Congressman Garrett Graves has formally called on the US Department of Commerce to declare a Fisheries Disaster Determination for the region to unlock funds to counteract the pending economic damage.

Worse still is the likelihood that further climate change will spin off more intense hurricanes like Ida and Katrina more frequently, leaving the Gulf Coast more vulnerable to long-term ecosystem damage.

This summer alone has seen several catastrophic events highlighting how climate change can have severe impacts on food systems:

the sweltering heat weave that smothered the Pacific Northwest for several days, literally cooking some oysters in their shells;
the anemic wild Pacific salmon runs in the Yukon territories, forcing remote Indigenous communities to scramble for winter food stores;
the devastating fires across California and other western states that have devoured millions of acres of old growth forest (very important to watersheds) and farmland.

Want to get involved? Here are a few ways to do so with a focus on Hurricane Ida’s aftermath:

Several people and organizations are raising funds for relief efforts, including providing food, shelter, medical services and supplies, debris removal, and repairs. Here are a couple of resources:
- Chef Dana is raising money to support Lance’s efforts to help his community and feed first responders and line workers.
  - Venmo: @Lance-Nacio
  - PalPal: orders@annamarieshrimp.com
  - Zelle: Lance Nacio
- Coastal Communities Consulting, Inc. is a nonprofit organization supporting coastal businesses and fishermen in La. It is doing good work to provide info on everything from prescriptions to food and water as well as coordinating donations.
- Gulf South Rapid Response Community Controlled Fund provides disaster relief directly to frontline communities in the Gulf South impacted by climate disasters. Local leaders have committed to a transparent and accountable process for the money – which will allow communities to practice self-governance and self-determination.
The Gulf Coast Center for Law and Policy is hosting a national press conference Thursday Sept. 9 from 10:30 am – 11:30 am CDT to address Ida’s impact on the Gulf Coast region and the nation. Here’s a link to more information.
Learn more about the Sustaining America’s Fisheries for the Future Act, which is a congressional bill that mandates accounting for climate change when setting fisheries policy in the U.S. This bill officially calls for the re-authorization of the Magnuson-Stevens Act, the primary fisheries management policy for the U.S. If you agree with its direction, contact your Congressional representatives and tell them to support it.
Learn more about the Keep America’s Waterfronts Working Act, a congressional bill that aims to preserve working waterfronts, like the ones in jeopardy in southern Louisiana following Hurricane Ida. Again, if you like what you see, contact your Congressional representatives.

The last thing we can all do is spread the word. The more folks know what’s going on and what’s at stake, the more the broader community can get involved and help chart the industry’s future.

We’ll post more updates in this blog and via our Facebook page.

Top photo: NOAA satellite image of Hurricane Ida’s destruction in Terrebonne Parish.

All Blog Posts

Attack of the Tiny Green Crabs

June 26, 2018October 20, 2021
by Colles Stowell

Share it!

I geeked out at the Green Crab Summit in Portland earlier this month. Which is kind of ironic given that I double majored in English and French in college. I’ve always had a fascination with life in the oceans … just not enough to want to embrace organic chemistry in college or graduate work.

I parlayed my majors into a writing career that often drew on investigation to dig deeper into newspaper and magazine stories. The European Green Crab story is compelling. It’s also emblematic of humankind’s ability to alter natural balances with long-term negative consequences.

We’re working to nail down the timing of European Green Crabs here in the states. These soft shells were a delicacy at Enoteca Athena in Brunswick, Me. Photo: Marissa McMahan.

Abundant in Spain, France, Italy and other European countries, the green crab is not the frighteningly destructive, ecosystem-tipping species that it is here in North America. Many predators there like fish, crabs and birds help keep green crab populations in check. And Italian fish harvesters and chefs have figured out how to create a market for soft-shell Mediterranean green crabs (a slightly different species than the crabs we have here), as well as a top-dollar market for green crab as bait.

That’s not the case on this side of the Atlantic. The crabs were first officially documented between New Jersey and Cape Cod in 1817 after presumably hitchhiking aboard trans-Atlantic ships in the ballast. Their spread up the coast was steady and relatively uninhibited. To be sure, some were gobbled up by native species here such as striped bass, tautog, lobster, blue claw crabs and other species. But they weren’t and aren’t the regular diet for native species here as in Europe, and therefore they continue to spread.

Different story for other invasives, though. We’re now finding that the newly invasive Asian Shore Crab (first noted in 1988) seems to be displacing and possibly preying upon green crabs, dropping their populations significantly along rocky intertidal zones in Southern New England and heading northward as the water warms. However, we’re kind of swapping out one pest for another.

Christopher Baillie of the Marine Science Center at Northeastern University said Asian Shore Crabs are “generalist eaters” that may have an appetite for many native species such as lobsters, Jonah crabs and molluscs. While there are some Asian Shore Crabs already in Maine, he said they may be up here in bigger numbers in the near future. That’s not good considering they’re rampant in southern New England, where they’ve changed ecosystem balance by dominating once diverse habitats, with densities of up to 200 crabs per square meter.

Tough little buggers

Green crabs are tough, voracious, fertile and very hardy. They can live for days out of water. One crab can eat up to 40 mussels a day and lay 165,000 eggs a year. They are adapting to winter, which seems to be changing their spawning habits. They decimate vital eel grass beds while rooting out mussels, oysters and soft shell clams.

It’s the soft shell clams that have suffered the most at the claws of the green crabs. Casco Bay has witnessed a 70% drop in soft shell clam populations in the past decade. Maine’s landings have dropped from 8 million pounds in the 1970s to 1.5 million in 2016. Recent studies suggest that without significant steps to protect larval clams, 99% of the settling clams (the larval and growing stage molluscs) will fall to predation, and much of that comes from green crabs. Milky ribbon worms have also become a big problem.

The news was even bleak on the West Bath School Channel 28 News, as students showcased what they’ve learned about green crabs…that they’re devastating to soft shell clams.

Adaptation will be central to protecting the soft shell clam industry and co-existing with green crabs, according to several researchers at the summit. As Sara Randall of the Downeast Institute put it, “We have to think of green crabs as a permanent part of our ecosystem. We need to be active, not passive.” Sara was part of a team of researchers that sifted through more than 34 tons of mud in a four-year study to determine what’s happening with soft shell clams and devise strategies such as protecting larval clams in screened boxes in tidal flats that would keep out green crabs.

However, as with everything concerning green crabs, it’s not that easy. Brian Beal has been studying green crabs and their impact on intertidal ecosystems for more than 30 years. A professor at the University of Maine at Machias, Brian has been outspoken about adapting to the new reality of green crabs and their impacts. “Population control is unlikely and impractical. They can’t be fished out,” he said, explaining that we’re talking about billions of organisms based on several trapping studies throughout the Gulf of Maine.

Commercial fisherman Jamie Bassett showing West Bath School students how to extract crab roe.

Green crab bisque, anyone?

One of the common discussion threads was finding ways to make humans the alpha green crab predator. How can we create culinary markets to make green crabs an attractive seafood choice? Again, it’s not so simple. First, their size means there’s little meat yield. And they’re built like tanks, so there’s a bunch of effort to get a small portion of meat.

Second, we Americans have a track record of following habit and price when making seafood decisions. This explains in part why 90% of the seafood we eat is imported. It’s cheaper and hews to menu selection we are most familiar with. Shrimp, salmon, tuna, etc. Collectively, we aren’t adventurous, and so, since we haven’t been eating green crabs for centuries, as they have in Italy (again the slightly different Mediterranean green crab), creating the marketing campaign to get us to start eating vast quantities of green crabs is a hard sell.

Chef Ali Waks-Adams laid down some green crab rangoon.

I know several chefs in coastal Maine and New Hampshire who are ready and willing to give it a go. Soft shell, stock, mixed in to other dishes. For example, at the event, Chef Ali Waks-Adams (executive chef at the Brunswick Inn) prepared delicious green crab Rangoon using mince (crabs that have been finely ground up, shell and all into a flavorful paste). She also demonstrated how to fry up the small crabs in a batter and eat them like popcorn. Chef Matt Louis (executive chef/owner of Moxy and The Franklin in Portsmouth, NH) created an inventive green crab pozoles dish and a delicately flavored green crab arancini. All of the food we sampled showed the tasty possibilities.

Chef Matt Louis using green crab for a pozoles, a traditional Mexican stew with hominy.

We still have a bit of research to do to nail down the soft shell season for green crabs. That’s because we don’t have the centuries of research the Italians do, and because the green crabs here seem to be adapting to the warming waters of the Gulf of Maine, which seems to be changing when they molt, or shed their old shells. Also, it’s easier to identify pre-molt Mediterranean green crabs than the species in the U.S.

Adapt or get run over

But even if we do create a viable market, we aren’t likely to make a huge dent in the green crab population. “The variability in density and mean size [of the crabs] will make it difficult to create a dependable fishery,” said Beal.

He also dropped another theory that raised several eyebrows. Clams aren’t just worried about the typically sized 3-inch or bigger crabs, but the 3 millimeter crabs feasting on clams that are half a millimeter in width. And it’s going to be damn hard to do much about those little s—s.

Beal agreed with others that adaption will be key, and we’re going to have to make some dramatic changes to the soft shell clam industry if we want to protect it. Some of his suggestions included increasing the amount of clam farming that now occurs, changing the size limit on clams to allow for the prime breeders to reproduce, and closing certain areas along the coast from May to July to allow for more productive spawning.

Some of the green crab brain trust discussing policy and other issues and how we need to continue to research and collaborate to better adapt to the new reality of Carcinus maenus.

We heard about one success in green crab mitigation in Canada from Gabrielle Beaulieu of Kejimkuik National Park Seaside Parks in Nova Scotia. She explained how a team of staff and citizen scientists harvested more than 2 million green crabs over a 10-year period. Following the intensive trapping and removal of the crabs, researchers noticed significant gains in eel grass recovery (in areas that crabs had mowed down) and soft shell clam populations.

Green crabs pose a significant threat to several commercially vital species in the Gulf of Maine. I agree with Brian Beale that putting a bounty on green crabs alone isn’t going to make a huge dent. However, I agree with others at the conference that we’re going to have to adapt, and implement a multi-pronged approach to mitigate the challenges. We’ll need to have some widespread harvest/green-crab-as-food markets opened up, along with raising public awareness both about the ecological threat and the culinary benefits of green crabs. We’re also going to have to take some significant steps as Brian mentioned to safeguard species like soft shell clams.

And yes, we need to devote more time, effort and financial resources to figuring out how to address this problem, and the looming time bomb of the Asian Shore Crabs. Knowledge is power … In this case, the power to adapt, rather than be overrun.

All Blog Posts

Students Teaching Students

May 24, 2018October 20, 2021
by Colles Stowell

Share it!

Last week, One Fish Foundation visited Portland High School for the third year in a row to discuss seafood sustainability with seniors taking a Marine Sciences course. Intern Jennifer Halstead, a senior at the University of New Hampshire, adeptly presented a clear, concise and digestible explanation of ocean acidification and how it is affecting cornerstone Gulf of Maine species like lobster and mussels. In this guest blog, Jennifer discusses the importance of taking advantage of opportunities to speak to students and community members about ocean acidification, other challenges our oceans face with climate change, and why we all need to be involved.

By Jennifer Halstead

Speaking to a crowd of people, no matter the size or demographic, can be at once daunting and rewarding, especially for a college student. Truly. It’s empowering to have people listen to your words. It’s uplifting to have them ask questions and even challenge your ideas.

Talking to a small class of students at Portland High School last week was no different. Ocean acidification (OA) is something that’s not easy to wrap your head around, but these students understood the urgency related to the issue. If at least one of them continues to ask questions and be curious, I feel as though I did my job.

Sadly, we don’t know how acidification is going to impact lobsters, one of the most important economic industries in Maine (the entire industry, including the supply chain is valued at over $1 billion). [Lobster harvests already face threats from the rapidly warming Gulf of Maine. A recent study suggests the lobster harvest could decline by as much as 62% by 2050 if the Gulf of Maine keeps warming at its current pace].

As concerned citizens and scientists, we need to start asking more questions and demanding more answers. And that is how we create change. The power is in your hands – our hands – to save oceans and our beloved lobster rolls.

I’ve spent a good portion of my college career learning about OA. Unfortunately, while our understanding of the impacts of OA is growing, OA is occurring more rapidly than we can keep up with in some places, including the Gulf of Maine. The West Coast has dealt with OA fallout, such as steep declines in oyster hatchery production in 2005, which threatened economics and 130 years of oyster hatchery history. In the Gulf of Maine, we haven’t seen complete devastation yet, but top scientists fear that it’s coming, and so do I.

Part of Jennifer’s research on OA: a type of sea snail on the left, and blue mussel on the right. Both the sea snail and the half mussel shell you can almost see through (on the right) were exposed to acidic water. Increased acidity in the ocean weakens many shellfish’s capabilities to calcify their shells and protect themselves from disease. Credit: Jennifer Halstead.

We understand climate change impacts like OA, temperature, salinity, and currents, but not the details of how they interact and impact different species. We don’t understand the entire system. We only understand the pieces. Imagine trying to put a puzzle together with no idea what the end result is supposed to look like. That’s the immense challenge of trying to understand climate change impacts here in the Gulf of Maine and elsewhere; things are happening now that we won’t fully realize for several months, or even years.

To move forward and get research to catch up with the changes in the Gulf of Maine, we need the public’s interest and support. We need people to ask questions and demand answers. Spreading the word about these issues through presentations and hands-on demonstrations is a key piece to garnering support for these causes. Every time I stand in front of a group of people and talk to them about acidification, I can see us moving forward. Future generations are interested in problems, but even more interested in pushing for solutions.

As a college student, I often get asked where I see myself in 5 years, or what I want to do after I graduate. My broad answer is that I hope to be doing something to change the world for the better. To do that, I’ll keep standing in front of crowds of people, telling them about problems our oceans face, and asking for their help in saving them.

All Blog Posts

Opening Eyes and Providing Hope

March 23, 2018October 20, 2021
by Colles Stowell

Share it!

Every class I speak to has a different dynamic. Aside from age and geography, there are other variables such as social fabric/personalities, ranges of interest in marine sciences, topics already covered in their curricula. These variables can sometimes determine how fast I make connections and get students engaged in the conversation.

This is why I work with teachers in advance to get a sense of the class dynamic and ensure I weave my message into content the students can relate to, either because they have already covered some of the material, or are about to do so.

Such was the case this week when Jennifer Halstead, One Fish Foundation’s intern, and I visited Thornton Academy in Saco, Maine. We had the pleasure of speaking to two groups of seniors. One was a group of AP Environmental Science students already conversant in eutrophication, ocean acidification and thermohaline circulation.

That background knowledge allowed us to dive deeper into issues around environmental impact of industrial aquaculture such as algal blooms (see Chile in 2016), net pen escapes (see Cooke Aquaculture last August) and feed (see West Coast of Africa…ongoing).

The key to successfully engaging students in the discussion about seafood sourcing and personal choices is connecting them emotionally to the narrative. When students care, they join the conversation and carry the salient points with them going forward…hopefully.

As Jennifer walked the environmental science students through how ocean acidification can impact shellfish ability to calcify protective shells, they immediately connected with the images of larval sea snails and blue mussels, both clearly compromised by more acidic waters.

Students in the senior marine science class engaged in the discussion about why European green crabs are capable of significantly shifting ecosystem balance. Naturalized “residents” in North America since the early 1800s, green crabs are everywhere. You can scarcely turn over a rock without finding at least one along New England coasts.

They are fertile (students were surprised to hear that one female can lay up to 190,000 eggs in its lifetime), hardy (they seem to be adapting to winter and changing their spawning habits) and very destructive. They are also voracious eaters. While handling some live crabs, students learned that one crab can eat up to 40 mussels in a day. To get to larval mussels, clams and oysters, green crabs tear up vital eel grass beds, which are precious nursery habitat for a host of species such as hermit crabs, sea snails, other shellfish and even smaller bait fish.

Can you eat this thing? Well, yes, but not easily.

Students asked good questions about what we are doing to try to become the predator that keeps green crabs in check. They learned some chefs make seafood stock with the crabs, while others are working with researchers from the Island Institute, New Hampshire Sea Grant and the Massachusetts Department of Marine Fisheries to determine when the crabs molt. Doing so would help them harvest crabs to cook up as tasty soft shell crabs, just as you’d find in the south.

In both classes, we discussed some of the challenges fishermen, scientists and policy makers must address in ensuring different seafood stock health in the face of issues like climate change, bycatch, industrial scale fishing and aquaculture and environmental impact.

And as we discussed how the fast changing Gulf of Maine affects local species and introduces new invasive species, we also discussed ways the industry is adapting to these changes. Rather than rob students of hope, we talked about our need and ability to adapt to, not solve, climate change and its impact on seafood in the Gulf of Maine.

All photos credit: Jennifer Halstead

All Blog Posts

A College Student Walks into a Webinar…

November 23, 2017October 20, 2021
by Colles Stowell

Share it!

One Fish Foundation Intern Jennifer Halstead is a senior at the University of New Hampshire. She has been instrumental with several One Fish projects, including the coordination of the recent Webinar co-hosted by One Fish Foundation and Local Catch, Fisheries Management: Best Available Science May Not Be Good Enough. Below is her take on the Webinar from the perspective of a college student, and why we should include college students in these discussions more frequently. And she’s right. Why wouldn’t we want to empower future leading researchers, fishermen and policy makers with a broader perspective and a voice?

By Jennifer Halstead

I had to drive to a neighboring town to run some errands immediately following the webinar, and I had a million thoughts swimming around in my head. So, I did what any millennial would do, and I used my smart phone to take notes for me, setting it to record as I drove.

Listening to the recording later, I realized some critical points. First, I was extremely fired up and passionate about the issues, and even a little angry about some of them. Second, I recognized through this webinar that the scientists, fishermen, and others taking part in the conversation represented a broad range of backgrounds and viewpoints, but were united on one theme: that the current fisheries management model doesn’t work for this extremely dynamic, and rapidly changing ecosystem.

Being a college student in marine sciences is exhilarating and intimidating. We’re presented with myriad challenges and questions, and rarely presented with solutions. We’re kind of left in limbo: We have a strong knowledge base, but a wide-open area to apply it, and we’re walking into a field of open-ended questions that have been asked for decades.

The curriculum of marine sciences now has a large portion of time allocated to climate change-related topics and challenges. As students, we’re presented with climate related disasters in all our classes. Not only is this depressing, but the lack of tangible solutions can take away our hope for our future in minutes. Being able to be part of an active discussion about how to change that as part of this Webinar put the last four years of me hearing about these unsolvable problems into a different perspective. I know we need change, because that’s what I’ve paid tuition to learn. An entirely different story starts when I hear other people talking about change, however. Suddenly, there’s a light ahead, collaboration forms, and solutions start to appear to all of those previously unsolvable problems.

Determining lobster sex aboard the F/V Vivian Mae this summer.

I was emboldened by hearing fishermen and scientists talk about how different, fast-changing dynamics throughout the Gulf of Maine necessitate a different data approach: one that is more localized. Hearing them talk about a solution motivated me to keep moving forward and not feel as overwhelmed by the issues. We as college students will listen and take heart when authoritative voices such as fishermen, council members and scientists uniformly agree on the need for change and discuss possible solutions. Hopefully, these credible voices will resonate with the larger community.

To move forward, we need to analyze the current model and determine what the problems are that are highest in priority to address. In addition to this, we need to keep the conversation going, and keep working toward common goals.

The current data collection model is a One-Size-Fits-All model, but the consensus of the discussion was that one size does not fit all. Therefore, the current model is not doing its job and needs to change. The Gulf of Maine is an extremely dynamic region, with highly productive areas, multiple spawning areas and freshwater inputs. Unfortunately, it is feeling climate change impacts at an alarming rate. In a system with this many moving parts, we should not be employing a model that is rigid. Instead of adjusting this model, however, it may be easier to start with new ideas. Relying on data from random trawl surveys that occurred three years ago is not a solid foundation to build a management plan on.

So, let’s change the way we collect data. Fishermen are out on the water every day in different areas, looking for different target species and making different observations. Why not make their observations available for scientists to use, creating an up-to-date, usable set of data? Up-to-date data means that the moving and fluctuating parts of the system can be more accurately accounted for, and we can develop more accurate and successful management plans more quickly. Collaboration between fishermen and scientists when it comes to collection of data and observations is important. It helps refine the current model and bring the sides together while doing it.

A large part of creating change and addressing these problems exists in the need to have active discussions. Everyone sitting at the table, simply discussing the challenges, could lead to change. Different perspectives bring different ideas, and then solutions can start to form. College students taking part in such discussions and offering their perspectives could be integral to the formation of such solutions. That involvement would also likely encourage them (as it has with me) to dive deeper into the issues and help find solutions, rather than be overwhelmed with fear and gloom.

Along with this, it is imperative that all stakeholders be involved in these discussions. If we want to use data that fishermen collect, for example, we need to make sure they’re on board with the idea, and we need to see how much they’re willing to do to create a better system. If too much is put on the fishermen’s plates, or on the plates of any other group for that matter, the new method will work as effectively as the current one. It won’t.

Jennifer Halstead is a senior at University of New Hampshire studying marine biology, and intern for One Fish Foundation.

Top Photo: Jennifer extracts the otoliths (ear bones) of a bluefin tuna to determine its age.

All Blog Posts

A scientist, a fisherman and a healthcare rep enter…

November 14, 2017November 15, 2017
by Colles Stowell

Share it!

Back in January as everyone was adjusting to a new political landscape, I was on a call with Brett Tolley of the Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance and Bob Steneck, Professor of Oceanography, Marine Biology and Marine Policy at University of Maine. We were talking about a recent report on climate change impacts in the Gulf of Maine, and what fisheries policy may look like in the context of climate impact and the shifting political landscape.

Needless to say there were many unanswered questions. At the time, the administration threatened to cut crucial funding for Sea Grant, climate science and even some fisheries management programs. Our discussion centered on how to adapt more nimbly to climate change impacts on fisheries, and how to make fisheries management more efficient and effective. We also wondered how significantly US fisheries management could shift in a year or two.

That conversation was the seed for last Friday’s (Nov. 3) Webinar: Fisheries Management: Best Available Science May Not Be Good Enough. The discussion was a frank look at the issues with current fisheries policy based on specific examples and some speculation on what management would look like if it were more localized and relied on a different data modeling system.

Joining me on the call were David Goethel, commercial fishermen from Hampton, NH and former three-term member of the New England Fisheries Management Council; John Stoddard, New England Regional Coordinator for Health Care Without Harm’s Healthy Food in Health Care program; and Steneck.

This was a diverse panel with deep knowledge from broad perspectives. Steneck has been at the forefront of research on coral, lobsters, urchins, kelp, forage fish and species interrelationships in coastal ecosystems. Goethel has the unique experience of a commercial fishermen who has had to shift his harvest target and method because of changes in the Gulf of Maine, and who has spent several years either as an advisor to the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Council or NEFMC. John Stoddard brought an institutional buyer’s perspective to the panel. He knows what healthcare representatives want from the seafood they serve their patients. They do have some concerns about sustainability, and when policy creates market forces that may limit access to locally harvested seafood, they may want to know what can be done to change the dynamic.

How’d we get here?

Steneck methodically walked us through some of the core issues with the current management system. Chief among those is the fact the Gulf of Maine, as well as other US coastal ecosystems, are changing faster than we can manage them. We have been a couple of steps behind climate change because our current data assessment system takes several years between collection and analysis and policy action. In essence, by the time policy has been set, the seascape has changed because of rising temperatures, current shifts, increased ocean acidification, etc. All of these changes have forced commercially valuable species to shift their patterns and adapt.

Overfishing of cod resulted in a sea urchin boom in the Gulf of Maine that collapsed in a decade. Interspecies relationships are critical to understanding dynamically changing ecosystems, and are often overlooked with current data management tools.

He pointed to the cod collapse in particular as a bellwether for how we missed the warning signs because of static data analysis, and how that type of “miss” happens frequently due to the data-intensive approach to stock assessment. He showed a brief video featuring a Canadian fisherman who said he had the trip reports to show cod stocks persistently dropping in key areas … data the government ignored because of its current management system.

Genetically distinct cod inhabit different ocean ecosystems and should be managed accordingly, not as one, all-inclusive species.

Steneck concluded that we need to “reinvent fisheries management to include multiple, independent indicators”, rather than drill down into details of one species without taking into account other critical factors such as complex interspecies relationships. Taking into account the dynamic changes within spatially appropriate areas of observation will give a more accurate view of fisheries and how quickly they change. Equally importantly, he stressed the need to expand collaboration with fishermen, mining their knowledge base to enhance data collection and analysis.

A unique point of view

David Goethel echoed those concerns. From both perspectives as fisherman and NEFMC member, he saw how current modeling methods’ stagnation meant policy did not match actual stock health and ability to withstand fishing pressure. He pointed to the impact the recent collapse of capelin in Newfoundland had on cod, seals and northern shrimp. Like Steneck, he called for managing fisheries based on the correct spatial scale and with a better understanding of changing predator-prey relationships.

Getting his point across at a management council meeting.

He also urged continued public/fishermen input at council meetings. The system breaks down when fishermen who feel disenfranchised by restrictive policies don’t participate in the process. He decried a lack of transparency in the policy process that frustrates fishermen to the point where many don’t believe it’s worth their time to speak out.

Goethel agreed with Steneck that data poor methods based on local, spatially appropriate areas of survey would provide the local detail current “big solution” modeling misses. He also agreed that involving more fishermen in the process would play a significant role in collecting more accurate data in a timely fashion, and restoring more fishermen’s faith in the process.

A healthcare approach

Stoddard emphasized Health Care Without Harm’s mission to provide locally sourced, sustainable seafood, with a goal toward supporting community based fishermen. This is a critical issue healthcare industry staff are finding with many patients, especially in coastal New England. Some of these patients have had family or friends who fished commercially, so the some of these issues matter to them.

An example of a successful program providing locally harvested seafood to patients.

He said Health Care Without Harm has steadily moved away from big ecolabels such as MSC to support more locally focused programs. Stoddard highlighted a successful program by which Massachusetts Eye and Ear Infirmary sources locally harvested seafood from Gloucester via the Gloucester Fishermen’s Wives Association. Such programs address patient demand for locally sourced seafood while strengthening healthcare institutions’ support of surrounding communities … and specifically fishermen.

Continuing the dialogue

It was a good discussion, with some engaged back and forth on next steps. For example, one of the parting questions focused on what a successful, cooperative data-poor, localized management program might look like. Steneck suggested a demonstration project within an already existing sample area (under the current management system), using a data poor assessment approach. Goethel suggested using echo system modeling that incorporates multiple species relationships, that he believes would yield a more realistic view of stock health.

The next step in the community discussion about these issues is to begin planning the next conversation. At the outset, I said we weren’t going to solve all of the issues we discussed in one conversation. But the goal is to follow up the conversation with another Webinar that explores a bit deeper what a demonstration project might look like, the type of data to study, and the hoped-for outcomes.

We will aim to set up another Webinar in the first quarter of 2018 tapping the collective knowledge of a well-informed panel, willing to explore the possibilities and elevate the discussion. Ultimately, we hope to build a foundation of knowledge that may lead to a roadmap for change.

Stay tuned.

If you’d like to view the Webinar, click on this link and then the tab that says Watch Now: Fisheries Management: Best Available Science May Not Be Good Enough.

All Blog Posts

“We’ll Always Have Paris”… or not

June 10, 2017October 20, 2021
by Colles Stowell

Share it!

Some interesting questions on climate change arise as I’m preparing a discussion on seafood sustainability with college students next week. The administration’s withdrawal from the landmark Paris climate accord have brought these questions to the fore, even if the underlying causes have been brewing for some time.

What message are we sending high school and college students if we as a country (the largest historical contributor to climate change) step away from a global agreement on the issue?
How do we convince students who may be on the fence about pursuing marine or climate science careers that we need more research, funding and more young brilliant minds to help us try to keep up with climate change if our government shows little willingness to believe in the need for, much less fund further research?

Throwing down a challenge

This spring I developed new high school lesson plans for seniors that focused on climate change impacts on seafood in the Gulf of Maine. The narrative begins with a broad view of the domestic and global seafood dynamic, and then focuses on why consumers should care, highlighting everything from bycatch to environmental impact and social ramifications.

Then we discuss the rapid temperature increase in the Gulf of Maine (faster than 99% of the Earth’s oceans), recent research on changes to global ocean currents and salinity and increasing ocean acidification due to higher absorption of man-made CO2. We talk about how fishermen are on the front lines of recognizing climate change impacts, and how they are struggling to interpret what the long-term ramifications are on their livelihoods. We discuss how researchers continue to improve our visibility into near- and long-term impacts of warming water, OA, and current and salinity changes.

We also discuss how despite these advances, we’re still often two steps behind climate change because we have much more research to do to figure out how myriad factors work in concert to change marine ecosystems where fish and shellfish try to thrive. A lot of the complex geophysical interactions demand more research so that we can have a more precise view of how we must adapt to, not fix, climate change impacts.

Then I challenge them to help find a solution. I urge any of them remotely interested in marine or climate sciences to commit to help us better understand these issues. Doing so would not just help from an environmental perspective, but an economic and social one as well. If our oceans rise by nearly seven feet by the end of the century (as some scientists now predict), water temperatures increase by several degrees and the ocean’s acidity increases just a little bit, seafood markets could suffer tremendously.

Mixed messages

So when the 2^nd largest polluter in the world (China is tops by far, but the US has generated more over time) pulls out of the most significant global agreement on climate change – one that it helped coordinate – what does that say to these students? At a time when we should be doing everything to encourage young people to pursue these careers, our administration is caving to an industry that is literally fueling the problem.

The irony is staggering.

I will continue proselytizing. This is not the time to let political isolationism derail global momentum toward some semblance of unified action on climate change. Stepping away now simply cedes the leadership role to other countries that may have more to gain.

Reneging on the deal may also create another hurdle to convincing students we need their help. Why would they want to spend the time and energy diving into the issues if there isn’t going to be any money to support their efforts?

Rallying cry

Conversely, the administration’s move may have some consequences advisers may not have fully predicted ahead of time. Climate change has again become a major topic of conversation here. Individual cities and states are talking about signing on independently. Perhaps the withdrawal will, like other recent administration edicts, become a galvanizing point.

I hope so. That would make these discussions more relevant, and perhaps, more effective. I’ll have a better perspective next week after I speak with the students participating in the Sustainable Marine Fisheries Course at the Shoals Marine Laboratory hosted by N.H. Sea Grant.

Additional reading:

Vox overview of the Paris Accord and climate change.

The Economist view of the impact of the US withdrawal.

New York Times analysis with compelling graphics on the implications of the withdrawal.

National Review blog showing conservative support for the administration’s decision.

Climate Nexus analysis disputing conservative claims in the president’s speech on the withdrawal.

Top photo credit: (NASA/NOAA/GSFC/Suomi NPP/VIIRS/Norman Kuring)

All Blog Posts

Challenging Next-Gen Scientists

March 21, 2017October 20, 2021
by Colles Stowell

Share it!

Call it irony.

Last week I was putting the finishing touches on a presentation about climate change impacts on seafood for two classes when I saw a news brief about how ocean acidification is spreading quickly in the western Arctic Ocean.

Specifically, a report from NOAA cited a new study showing how high acidity waters have spread more than 300 nautical miles almost to the North Pole and have increased in depth from 325 feet to 800 feet in the past 20 years. This rate of expansion is more than twice the global average, and it could harm mussel, clam and sea snail (food for salmon) populations.

So I had some fresh, relevant news to discuss with these students.

The classes were part of a statewide symposium bringing high school students interested in marine sciences to Salem State University. I was one of a dozen or so teachers speaking with students that day. I focused on four significant but interrelated climate factors that affect seafood webs in and around the Gulf of Maine: temperature increase, changes in current and salinity, and ocean acidification.

2016 was the warmest year on record. NOAA graphic

First, I briefly discussed seafood as an economic resource, and why we should care about where, when, how and by whom it was harvested. Next we talked about 2016 being the fifth year in a row for setting global land and ocean temperature records, and that the first 16 years of the 21^st century are among the 17 warmest on record (138 years). We talked about how the Gulf of Maine is warming four times faster than 99% of the oceans on the planet.

Influential currents

Students asked questions about new research showing that some key currents in the Atlantic Ocean may be slowing down because of warming waters in the Arctic. The Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation or AMOC, (known as the ocean conveyor belt), drives global ocean currents and climates.

Scientists think that if warming continues, the collision of warm and cold water in the Arctic that drives the global currents could slow or even stall, eventually putting Europe in a deep freeze and baking the southern hemisphere. This could significantly change the number and intensity of Atlantic hurricanes and Pacific Monsoons.

It could also have major impacts on a wide swath of seafood in the Gulf of Maine. These types of temperature and current fluctuations dramatically affect salinity and ocean acidification. All of these changes can alter ecosystems, including spawning areas and timing, migration, plankton production (which is the base layer of the ecosystem) and predator-prey relationships.

To drive the point home, I brought out some live green crabs. The students were all about hearing how the green crab can wipe out entire mini-ecosystems of eel grass as they root out mussels and clams to devour. They also learned about increasing efforts to determine how to best control green crab populations as they’ve become omnipresent in the Gulf of Maine as temperatures increase. Though they’ve been around since the early 1800s, they’ve become much more populous here because they have adapted to the seasonal temperature changes and they are prolific.

Throwing down a challenge

I ended the class with a challenge. I described discussions I’ve had with scientists on the forefront of the research on climate impacts on seafood … all leading to the same conclusion. We currently know a fair amount about the impacts of temperature, current, salinity and OA on different ecosystems. But we don’t have a real good, long-term, predictive view of how these (and other) factors work in concert to affect ecosystems and even specific species.

We need the next generation of scientists to help us find these answers. As Marcus Carson, lead scientist on the in-depth Arctic Resilience Report on climate change said, “It’s frustrating always being two or three steps behind climate change.”

We need bright minds to dive into the advanced geophysical, meteorological, metabolic and organic shifts climate change will impose on our marine ecosystems to help us better understand how to adapt to these changes. It’s unlikely we’ll fully stop climate change. But perhaps if we begin collectively cutting carbon emissions and planning ahead, we can slow it down enough for future scientists to help us better anticipate, rather than react to these changes. That’s how we take care of seafood as a resource.

So yes, the NOAA acidification report was timely, if a bit ironic … another unfortunate red flag that should serve as a call to arms.

Top image credit: NASA spectroradiometer view of thermal variations in the Northwest Atlantic ocean. The warm Gulf Stream is the orange streak along the Eastern seaboard.

All Blog Posts

Arctic Climate Change Could Have Irreversible Global Impact

December 21, 2016October 20, 2021
by Colles Stowell

Share it!

Every time I read a story with dire predictions about climate change impacts I imagine a gong the size of a barn door sending a warning echo off the mountains in the distance.

A team of scientists recently released a report stating that changes in the Arctic climate, everything from melting polar ice caps to warming waters and changing ocean salinity is happening faster than previously predicted. Currently, the atmospheric temperatures there are about 20 degrees Celsius warmer than normal and water temperatures are 4 degrees warmer than normal. The likelihood of no summer sea ice forming this century is very high.

Arctic tipping points

The Arctic Resilience Report states that all of this could push conditions in the Arctic toward 19 regime shifts or tipping points – climate situations that if reached, may prove to be irreversible. For example, the Greenland ice sheet is widely considered the Northern Hemisphere’s air conditioner. It is massive, nearly 1.1 million square miles, and it serves a critical role in keeping temperatures above the equator from getting too hot. This massive sheet of ice acts like a mirror, reflecting the sun’s powerful rays back into space and minimizing solar radiation warming.

The melting Greenland ice sheet. Photo by Marcus Carson

But as global temperatures have risen, the ice sheet has become thinner and smaller, and as waters around the sheet have become warmer, they have accelerated melting. This creates a cycle in which the sheet’s shrinking could accelerate localized climate change, which could further accelerate the ice sheet’s shrinking. If the ice sheet disappears (which could take centuries), scientists predict it could cause global sea levels to rise by more than 20 feet.

This is just one of the 19 tipping points. Others include: Arctic sea ice loss, which would have some of the same effects as the melting of the Greenland ice sheet; changes in ocean salinity and current, which could spread warmer water faster than normal, with global implications; changes in land-based ecosystems that could release more greenhouse gases and reduce ice/snow reflectivity; and changes in Arctic snow patterns, which could also increase global ocean temperatures that effect climate patterns such as the monsoon season in Asia.

Fisheries impact

And then there is the impact on fisheries. The report cites manmade climate change (greenhouse gases, warming oceans, pollution, etc.) as well as other external factors like fishing pressure, as drivers for what could result in fisheries collapses in the Arctic. This could play out in a couple of different ways. First, a combination of warming water, shifting current, salinity and acidification could alter the vital nutrient upwellings that produce the plankton forage fish feed on. If the forage fish don’t thrive, neither do commercially important species like salmon, cod, pollock and shrimp. Couple that with continued fishing pressure, and you’ve got a recipe for collapse.

Climate change could cause fisheries collapse in the Arctic and elsewhere. Photo by Marcus Carson

The question is, how could fisheries collapse in the Arctic affect fisheries elsewhere?

This is no small question.

Complex challenges

So I asked Marcus Carson, one of the lead authors of the 218-page report. He talked about what we know and don’t know about how rapidly things are changing. “Often, when we see these things, it’s really hard to set in motion the processes we need to take them back,” he said from his home in Sweden.

“The challenge is the relational understanding. We understand the silos [warming oceans, ice melt, carbon storage in peat bogs, etc.] pretty well. What we’re lacking is how these connections in these really complex systems really work.”

For example, he mentioned that ocean acidification, the process by which the overall acidity of the ocean increases due to increased environmental carbon release, was not included as one of the tipping points in the report because scientists couldn’t pinpoint how it will behave in concert with other factors like salinity, temperature, current, etc. What scientists do know is that the rate of acidification in the Arctic has increased twice as high as almost anywhere on earth, and that acidification is generally higher in colder water.

“What we don’t understand is the exact relation between climate change and ocean acidification where fisheries are involved,” he said. Many species follow temperature, which is the case with some species here in the Gulf of Maine. For example, as waters have warmed off Long Island Sound, lobsters have pushed north and east, and there is no sustainable lobster fishery there anymore.

We also know as we dump more carbon into the atmosphere and put more chemicals into our estuaries, the acidity goes up. But as Carson said, we don’t yet know how changes in acidification from these types of drivers will work in concert with temperature, salinity, current to affect marine food webs. Species that are more tolerant of some or all of these drivers will likely thrive more in a changing Arctic climate than others.

We need to better understand how all climate change factors could affect entire food webs. Photo by Mark Tozer

“There may be some biological variability that might get species competing with each other moving into the same space,” he said.

When it comes to impact on climate change in the Arctic affecting fisheries there and elsewhere, we still have to take a broad view. There will undoubtedly be an impact, especially when considering how currents will channel warmer, denser water globally.

A global climate

“There’s a saying around the working groups of the Arctic Council. ‘What happens in the Arctic doesn’t stay there.’ A lot of changes beyond seasonal fluctuations aren’t generated there. They start outside the Arctic, and get in there,” he said. And the changes in the Arctic may have global impacts.

“The implication with these 19 potential shifts … is that when these things start interacting with one another, the concern is that we could be setting forces in motion that are wildly out of our control,” he said.

The cycle continues. Melting ice sheet allows more solar rays to warm oceans and atmosphere, accelerating ice melt. Photo by Marcus Carson

Not surprisingly, almost every response option cited in the report for the 19 tipping points calls for some form of reducing global greenhouse gases and shifting toward renewable energy.

This is the same message a majority of scientists have been saying in ever growing numbers and volume. However, the incoming administration has virtually declared war on climate change science.

Asked about threats to defund NASA’s climate science regimen, Carson used the analogy of “tearing the instrument panel out of your plane while in flight. It’s like you want to poke our eyes out while we’re heading into these big changes.”

Indeed.

That gong is getting louder. Do you hear it?

All Blog Posts

Hearing Nature’s Lessons in the Classroom

November 22, 2016October 20, 2021
by Colles Stowell

Share it!

“Nature has it right. It’s set things up that work. When we interfere, we mess it up.”

We’ve seen a lot of words of wisdom from different mindfulness gurus and healing practitioners in the past couple of weeks. Sometimes they come from a place of unclouded truth, such as the perspective of a fifth grade student.

rye-elem-lobster-trap_ — Yes, lobsters can waltz in and out of these traps pretty much as they please.

The quote above stemmed from a conversation about genetically engineered salmon at Rye Elementary School yesterday. We were talking about finfish farming and some of the drawbacks of the fish pellets used as feed, including the demand on ecologically critical forage fish and the reduced nutritional value. We discussed how farmed salmon have been found to have lower beneficial Omega 3s because of their feed than the naturally high Omega 3s of wild salmon. We discussed the same issues with GE salmon, as well as the various unknown risks of engineering fish as food and it’s ecological impact.

So when the student spoke about interfering with Nature’s design, I smiled and asked him to repeat it so that everyone in the class of 20 or so could hear it. Several in the class nodded their agreement.

rye-elem-jigs — Discussing the low bycatch of jig fishing.

I’d made a connection.

Every dialogue with students, their parents, sustainable seafood dinner attendees, etc. is based on telling a story and making connections. A connection that will resonate. A connection that will knit together the information into one cohesive, compelling narrative. A connection that will inform decisions in the future.

When I’ve made a good connection, the effect is immediate and sometimes profound. It is especially rewarding when someone who is 11 years old comes up with such clarity. It is also enlightening. I often learn something about myself and the message I’m sending just by listening to students.

Turtle excluder device: always a crowd pleaser, and a good teaching tool.

The students at Rye Elementary asked thoughtful questions. They were truly engaged in the conversation. We poked at a lobster trap. We stretched out a turtle excluder device and talked about how it is an example of what we’re doing to reduce bycatch. We touched on how climate change is affecting the Gulf of Maine.

By the end of each of the three classes I visited, students seemed to take ownership of the fact that they do have a choice at restaurants or grocery stores and that their choice matters.

They left armed with questions to ask:

Where is it from? How was it caught? Was it farmed? Were there any hormones, antibiotics or pesticides used?

Perhaps they will spread the word … one connection at a time.

Photo credit: Denise Wheeler

All Blog Posts

Know Fish: A Dinner Series of Food, Fun and…

September 28, 2016October 20, 2021
by Colles Stowell

Share it!

For most people, seafood is simply a protein either on a menu, laid across some ice in a display case or pre-packaged in a box at a supermarket. There’s typically no story about where and how the fish was caught, much less by whom. Consumers have little or no idea of how far the fish has traveled, nor whether the fish and shellfish are abundant, stressed or fed antibiotics and hormones at an industrial aquaculture site.

One Fish Foundation arose from a wish to spread the word about our relationship to oceans and specifically to seafood. This means bringing the story behind the seafood we eat into classrooms. I’ll lug in a bunch of fishing gear to talk about different harvest methods and their impact on the resource and marine ecosystems. I’ll throw out eye-popping stats to illustrate how skewed our domestic seafood consumption picture is.

Spreading the word also means going into communities and having conversations with people who care about the environment and want to learn more about the food they eat. That’s what the Know Fish Dinner Series is about. For the past five months, I’ve worked with Seacoast chefs who are passionate about sourcing sustainably harvested seafood; activists who speak out on issues like fisheries management fairness and climate change; fishmongers selling locally abundant, underutilized species; and one fisherman who is bucking the trend toward consolidation, resource depletion and massive bycatch.

These dinners will be a fun, interactive dialogue about why we should be concerned that 90% of the seafood consumed in the U.S. is imported. We’ll eat deliciously prepared, sustainable groundfish caught on rod and reel by Capt. Tim Rider out of Eliot, Me. We’ll discuss why supporting local fishing communities is important and how our seafood choices make a difference: to the resource, the oceans and the fishermen who work them

We’ll have some fun with trivia that sheds light on the resource, the supply chain, marine ecosystems, aquaculture, invasive species, climate change impacts and more. We’ll discuss these topics, ask and answer questions, and bring more of the story to life.

This will be your chance to talk to Capt. Rider about why he spends 18 hours a day or more on the water, fishing with rod and reel in a fishery dominated by trawl nets.

You’ll have the opportunity to talk with chefs Evan Mallett of Black Trumpet, Rob Martin of When Pigs Fly and Brendan Vesey of Joinery Restaurant (Brendan will be cooking with Evan at the Black Trumpet event) about how they choose what seafood to put on the menu.

You’ll be able to ask fishmongers Spencer Montgomery of Dole and Bailey and Amanda Parks of New England Fishmongers about the products they market and handle, and some of the discussions they’ve had around underutilized species.

Got questions about why many small-scale fishermen are struggling? Follow up with one of the event collaborators, Brett Tolley, the community organizer and policy advocate for Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance. He’s been at the forefront of a campaign to revise current fisheries laws that are consolidating the fleet and squeezing out fishermen like Capt. Rider.

(And, I’ll be on hand to talk about sparking student interest in seafood sustainability, and the effectiveness of waving a dead fish at 6^th graders).

This is the team that has volunteered many hours to help organize these events. Everyone brings a great energy and passion to the dinners on Oct. 13 at When Pigs Fly and Oct. 27 at Black Trumpet.

So come out and eat some fabulous seafood, listen to some cool stories, test your seafood trivia, and most of all, get to know your fisherman, your fishmonger, your chefs, a couple of evangelists and your FISH.

Get tickets via the links below.

I hope to see you there!

Oct. 13: When Pigs Fly

Oct. 27: Black Trumpet

All Blog Posts

Climatologist Sees Climate Change as Innovation Opportunity

April 11, 2016October 20, 2021
by Colles Stowell

Share it!

Cameron Wake is used to being called “Dr. Doom.” He’s an ice core paleoclimatologist at the University of New Hampshire who’s been studying glaciers and their behavior for more than 30 years. He’s been on the forefront of some of the leading research into climate change, much of which now predicts more than six feet of sea level rise by 2100. That’s not fully accounting for the possible 20-25 additional feet of higher water if all of the earth’s glaciers melt.

So naturally, he does his best to be optimistic.

“Climate change is the innovation opportunity of the 21^st century,” he says, whether at a climate summit hosted by MIT Seagrant in 2014, or at an intimate gathering of 200 in Portsmouth, N.H. on March 28. Even though the range of possible sea level rise jumped 2.6 feet from 2014 to 2016, his insistence on the opportunity angle echoes some of the enthusiasm born of the global climate accord reached in Paris in December.

“Climate changes,” he said. “It always has and it always will. The biggest difference today is that there is an extensive and ever-growing body of scientific evidence that shows that humans are the main driver of that change.”

But, we have time to avoid some of the darkest “Dr. Doom” predictions … if we act now, and decisively, he said.

There is an interesting dialectic at play with climate change that can be a bit challenging to grasp. At the Maine Fisherman’s forum last month, NOAA’s John Hare made a striking comment: “Climate change has a long memory.” The next 25-50 years of climate change are already fixed based on what we’ve done up until now. However, the steps we take now to reduce greenhouse gases, widely accepted as the leading culprit causing global warming, will affect our climate after 50 years or so.

In Portsmouth, Wake described why studying the different strata of glaciers yields so much information about what the climate has done in the past. “Glaciers are great archives,” he said. “We can look at oxygen isotopes to see what has happened.” One fairly constant measure is that when CO2 levels are high, the temperatures are higher, when they are low, temperatures are low.

Wake put some of the need to act immediately and globally in context with some recent data:

Within the past 18,000 years, massive ice sheets that once covered North America and Northern Europe have melted;
To slow long-term climate change effects, we need to keep global CO2 at 400 parts per million. We are now on a path toward 1,000 parts per million;
Arctic sea ice is the air conditioner for the northern hemisphere, reflecting UV rays back into the atmosphere. If that ice melts, it will lead to warming of the atmosphere and the oceans, accelerating global warming;
We’ve seen a significant reduction in Arctic sea ice in the summer since 1975. Sea ice is likely going to disappear in the Arctic Ocean this summer;
The rate of the Greenland ice sheet moving toward the ocean where it melts has doubled in the past decade. One particular glacier, the size of Mount Washington in N.H., has doubled its rate toward the Atlantic;
We may not fully understand the physics of glacial movement and melting in light of global warming for another decade;
There will be no shortage of fresh water in New England. The number of rain events in Southern N.H. with more than four inches in 48 hours is projected to jump from four between 1980-2009 to nearly 12 between 2070 to 2099. This means we’ll have more water falling in fewer events, making coastal and flood plain areas more vulnerable;
“It’s a challenge to talk about future on climate because we don’t know what humans are going to do,” said Wake, explaining why climatologists now use two scenarios representing high and low carbon emissions. While there is little variability between the two scenarios until 2050 because the pattern is locked, potential temperature ranges for New Hampshire vary widely afterward. If we drastically cut greenhouse gases, the average number of summer days hotter than 90 degrees Fahrenheit would be 20-25. If we continue on our current path of greenhouse gas emissions, New Hampshire could experience 50-60 days above 90 degrees;

“We can’t wait until 2050 or 2080 to address this challenge,” he said. “We won’t have enough money in one year to adapt. We need to keep checking back in with the science. Where there is little tolerance for risk, communities should commit to 4 feet of sea level of rise, but be flexible to manage to 6.6 feet.”

Solutions

To begin with, we need to at least meet the emissions goals set at the Paris accord. It was a significant achievement to get nearly 200 nations to commit to do something to reduce carbon emissions, with a goal of limiting global temperature increase to 2 degrees Celsius (3.5 degrees Fahrenheit) by 2100. But even with those commitments, we’d only keep the global temperature rise to 3 degrees Celsius, many scientists say. We have to get the largest polluters, China, the U.S., India and other countries to cut more.

“We must decouple economic growth from greenhouse emissions,” said Wake. That means leaving a lot of fossil fuels in the ground. To prevent global temperature increases of more than 2 degrees Celsius, we must not burn 82% of the coal, 49% of the gas and 33% of the oil global reserves. We also need to increase annual global renewable energy investments to at least $1 trillion, he said. That kind of investment will likely yield innovations that make renewable energy more affordable and accessible on a global scale.

Most importantly, he said, we need to make personal commitments to reduce our carbon footprints. “I think every home should be its own powerhouse,” he said. Solar panels, efficient heating systems, better insulation, efficient windows, etc. are all some of the ways to reduce the carbon footprint of our homes.

“Think about what you can do. Your family. Your community.”

Resources

Cameron Wake’s slide presentation in Portsmouth

Chasing ice: Incredible video of largest ice calving event (Ilulissat Glacier, Greenland) ever captured on film.

New York Times article on new research showing how quickly the West Antarctic ice sheet could melt

photo: Thin sea ice and a few floating ice bergs near the Denmark Strait off of eastern Greenland. Credit: NASA/Jefferson Beck