Tag Archives: Cape Cod

MARINE MAMMALS: Right whale shuts down Cape Cod Canal

Posted on by
Reply

right-whale-sightingsnorth-atlantic-right-whaleIMAGE: The above image illustrates the Cape Cod Canal right whale sighting marked as 1.  The image at left shows a right whale with calf. Image by NOAA.

Earlier this week, the Cape Cod Canal was closed for several hours to allow a North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis) safe passage through the canal. The North Atlantic right whale is a critically endangered species, and it is threatened by ship strikes. NOAA finally promulgated regulations to mitigate deadly interactions with cargo ships after some substantial foot dragging by the Bush Administration. Apparently, Vice President Dick Cheney’s office was instrumental in delaying the process. However, Senator John Kerry introduced legislation earlier this year (The Ship Strike Reduction Act of 2008), which required the “Bush Administration to finalize a rule establishing speed limits for specified vessels in migratory paths of North Atlantic right whales.” The North Atlantic right whale is so critically endangered that its population cannot sustain any loss of individuals, especially breeding females. From the Boston Globe:

It is relatively rare for a right whale to find its way into the canal. It only happens about once or twice a year, said Scott Landry, director of whale rescues at the Provincetown Center for Coastal Studies.

“It just happens by chance. Most whale species tend to wander quite a bit,” said Landry. “Just because it was by the canal we don’t think there was something wrong. Wandering is a natural part of the whale.”

The 35-foot whale entered on the Cape Cod Bay side and it was escorted by a US Army Corps of Engineers boat through to the Buzzards Bay side of the canal.

The whale appeared unharmed, said Dave Carriuolo, a marine traffic controller with the Corps at the canal, and there were no significant delays in commercial traffic.

The whale was initially spotted around 9:30 this morning. The canal was closed at 1 p.m. and reopened at 3 p.m. said Carriuolo.

Ships must begin to slow down for North Atlantic right whales. From NOAA:

Ships in southeastern Atlantic and mid-Atlantic U.S. waters must slow down to protect endangered right whales starting this week.

A landmark regulation going into effect on Dec. 9 will require ships 65 feet or longer to travel at 10 knots or less in certain areas where right whales gather. These new speed restrictions will take effect in waters off New England beginning in January 2009 when whales begin gathering in this area as part of their annual migration. The goal is to reduce the chances ships will collide with whales, injuring or killing them.

With only 300 to 400 in existence, North Atlantic right whales are among the most endangered whales in the world. Their slow movements and time spent at the surface and near the coast make right whales highly vulnerable to being struck by ships, especially since shipping lanes into East Coast ports cut across their migration routes.

The 10-knot speed restriction will extend out to 20 nautical miles around major mid-Atlantic ports. According to NOAA researchers, about 83 percent of right whale sightings in the mid-Atlantic region occur within 20 nautical miles of shore. The speed restriction also applies in waters off New England and the southeastern U.S., where whales gather seasonally.

The speed restrictions apply in the following approximate locations at the following times; they are based on times whales are known to be in these areas:

Southeastern U.S. from St. Augustine, Fla. to Brunswick, Ga. from Nov. 15 to April 15
Mid-Atlantic U.S. areas from Rhode Island to Georgia from Nov. 1 to April 30
Cape Cod Bay from Jan. 1 to May 15
Off Race Point at northern end of Cape Cod from March 1 to April 30
Great South Channel of New England from April 1 to July 31

NOAA also will call for temporary voluntary speed limits in other areas or times when a group of three or more right whales is confirmed. Scientists will assess whether the speed restrictions are effective before the rule expires in 2013.

On the Net:

  1. Latest Right Whale Sightings
  2. Chairman Waxman Releases Internal Administration Documents, Calls for Right Whale Protections
  3. NOAA Files Final Environmental Impact Statement on Ship Strike Reduction Measures

add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: Digg it :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: add to simpy :: seed the vine :: :: :: TailRank :: post to facebook

SHARK WEEK: Oak Bluffs Monster Shark Tournament: Sport or slaughter?

Posted on by
19

A video posted by The Humane Society of the United States on the Oak Bluffs Monster Shark Tournament of Martha’s Vineyard shows two very different world views colliding.

CAPE WIND: Support for Cape Wind is increasing amongst residents with support in the majority

Posted on by
Reply

From “3 in 5 on Cape Cod & Islands now approve wind farm” of Cape Cod Today:

Speaking on a media conference call Thursday, Opinion Research Corporation senior researcher Graham Hueber said “we tested six arguments used by Cape Wind opponents and none of them persuaded half or more of Cape and islands residents to join their ranks.

In some cases,” Hueber said, “including concerns about the potential impact on tourism and the regional economy, the opponents’ arguments actually boomerang against them and end up making most people more likely to support Cape Wind. This would appear to explain why only slightly over a third of Cape and island residents oppose Cape Wind today.”

WIND POWER: Cape Wind is needed

Posted on by
1

We will continue to save nonrenewable energy sources as we depend more on renewable energy.

The “rush” to build wind farms is often compared to the past rush to build dams. However, I believe comparing the environmental impacts of wind power to dams is like comparing apples to oranges.

Furthermore, it is necessary to consider the time and place where winds farms have been constructed in the past, since previous decisions have not been wise. However, today we have environmental assessments (EAs) and watchdog organizations that place a higher level of scrutiny on construction projects than was available in the past.

A lot of dam construction occurred before the environmental movement, before the existence of EAs, and watchdog groups. No doubt, both dams and wind turbines have the potential to kill animals that encounter them. For example, a big concern with dams, are their impacts on fish such as salmon and American eels, but with wind farms it is birds and bats.

However, the grave and significant impact on bird populations from the spinning of wind turbines seems to be myth. Denmark is using “thermal animal detection systems” to monitor offshore wind farms for sea bird collisions. Results show seabirds avoid the turbines. Furthermore, other anthropogenic activities cause much greater bird mortalities than wind turbines. Nonetheless, the precautionary approach should be taken in areas where endangered or critically endangered bird populations occur, since any interaction with wind turbines—no matter how infrequent—may pose a significant risk for the survival of a population.  A population can be so endangered that any taking of an individual would be too detrimental to the population as a whole.

I believe the pros and cons of any project should be compared and weighed objectively. I believe the benefits from wind power far outweigh the negatives, since many governments and organizations are using successful mitigatory and monitoring programs. Furthermore, given the level of attention and scrutiny, Cape Wind will not be haphazardly randomly placed junk in the ocean. Just like you and me, Cape Wind wants to make a profit and watchdog organizations want the turbines placed appropriately, so certainly a lot of attention has already been given to the placement and quality of these turbines.

Furthermore, Cape Wind represents technology that provides benefit away from the detriment of dirty energy sources. Coal factories translate to excess carbon dioxide in the atmosphere and mercury in the landscape and aquatic environments, and coal-powered plants are the largest producer of mercury. In addition, it is possible to rely on wind power to provide electricity for a large number of homes, and Denmark has plans to have 50% of their power come from wind. Ultimately and for many reasons, wind turbines are much more benign than coal power plants. True, the metal to construct the turbines will have to be constructed from the mechanization process, but this will be negated by the longevity of the project in addition to the benefits of clean power. Furthermore, we must use our oil supplies wisely to build the renewable infrastructure and allow for the continuation of a stable society that further produces new and improved technologies.

NIMBYism and the perceived impacts on marine life (and lack of hard evidence) are not significant enough when comparing how dirty power sources currently impact our backyards and marine organisms. It is scary to think  about a world that has starved itself of energy with no way of producing more energy and new technologies. Ultimately, the backlash will be against nature before destroying ourselves. The world should be viewed as an island where resources are limited, so we must take the steps through negotiation to figure out the best solutions. Otherwise, we could be another Easter Island, just on a much larger scale.

On the Net: Wind Power and Birds Consultants: Curry & Kerlinger, LLC

—
Photo source for attribution. The author or licensor of this image does not endorse me or my work and their image is protected under an attribution license.