Why don't we just get the same three scientists that say greenhouse gases aren't changing the climate to say that they don't hurt crabs, either?

Problem solved.

Fish on...

Todd

You gotta be chitin me!

As the PH levels slowly rise there is a good chance that through the process of evolution the crab will slowly evolve along with the PH change.

A good chance, huh?

Jesus.

Don't think that is the reason for no crab in MA 13.......

Ocean acidification has scary potential, but experiments like this one don't scare me too much. I'm willing to bet human infants born into what these scientists would forecast our world to look like in 84 years, given no time to adapt, would also survive at lower rates.

Considering the harvest rate in today's crab fisheries, if you tell me crab productivity will be "less" in 84 years, I'll take that as great news. If we keep going the way we're going, there won't be much left in the ocean by 2100, period.

I complain a lot that mankind suffers from a tragic lack of foresight. In this particular case (as with salmon), I think we could stand to focus more on the state of the species TODAY. The status quo in our marine fisheries is a far greater, much more immediate threat to our iconic marine species, and it's something we actually CAN control in the near term.

Jerry, this is about PH and inorganic chemsitry which is before the cellular biological realm. This means no adaptations will solve this issue. It will hinder or hault the efficiency of development of small crab because it is more difficult to develop shell in an acidic environment. Life forms can not adapt in ways that break physical and chemical laws.

I spoke to the three scientists, and Rich G.

The crabs will be fine...it's you 'Merica haters that are going extinct.

Fish on...

Todd

Thanks for the explanation Jason. As for the brainiac 3 musketeers, GFY.

Don't worry. I'll bet you'll always be able to catch crabs in Aberdeen.

The Jurassic period had 5x the CO2 of today....

...and look at where that got them!

How many dinosaurs you see running around today?



As for the crab non-issue? We will harvest them to extinction LONG before their human-altered environment kills them off! Just saying. It's what we do to fisheries and it's how we manage them. Fish them to near extinction *then* figure out how to manage the resource.

Seems to be pretty good working model.

One of my bosses (and one of the very best-he got me into and (probably out of) a lot of stuff) said that most salmon biologists are simply managing the rate of extinction.

Te discussion earlier on how the "recovery" of Green, Puyallup, and Nisqually Chinook shows the truth of this..

That's quite an idiot contest Jerry and RvW have going on here.

No clear leader as of yet.

The ocean acidity thing and its detrimental effects on shell formation is VERY real.

Same thing is happening to juvenile oysters.

It's also affecting the ability to lay down new coral reefs.

Good news is that worldwide, populations begin to decline later this century so carbon emissions may go down. Now, the bigger issue is that population declines, historically speaking, have never been a good thing with regard to human flourishing but maybe it'll be good for sea life.

Yes, if we are thinking of a last supper scenario it is more likely that we will be on the crabs menu rather than the other way around.

Are you suggesting I am winning the (seasonal) battles yet losing the war?

I wasn't trying to be insulting. I am sorry if it came off that way.

You disagree with my statement or just being your usual ankle biting bitch?

Another Times Article

The question is not if crabs can evolve for ultra hostile environments. They can - see Vent / Hoff / Yeti Crabs. The question is if they can do it fast enough and why should they have to? An example in some random evolution hope: within the past 70 years, small Anole lizards in the South East US are developing longer legs to deal with introduced Fire Ants. Nature can and will find a way to survive, but it probably shouldn't have to and definitely not within our human time table. We'll probably all be eating Soylent Green by 2100. Or dead. I'll be long gone, but your great grand children should love their future good times!

“It’s not unreasonable to assume, for example, that they might move, that some form of rapid evolution will occur, that they may become somewhat more robust,” said Andre Punt, a University of Washington professor

Good read here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chitin

I will say I spoke too soon. I thought marine Arthropoda had exoskeletons made of calcite but it is chitin. Calcite leads to limestone which is very sensative to PH. Chitin apparently is different and is much more complex so perhaps there is room for adaptations there.

What WDFW needs are more wool stocking hat wearing biologists.

Such a clown show.

How about they get someone in there that can strike deals with other groups and get things done?

Shut up, stupid, before you take the lead.

I don't trust liberal college professors

What? Dan is not a Geoduck fan, lol.

Something in the system certainly is effecting the clams and oysters in the South Sound. The kelp forest at the lower end of Squaxin Island is a remnant of it's former self as well.

Ocean acidification is a problem that impacts all fisheries. Northwest marine waters are particularly vulnerable because they are more acidic than many areas because of ocean currents. Squid and pteropods are two groups that will likely suffer. Both are important food sources for salmon and steelhead. For those with some time and interest the link below is a paper that explores the effects of OA on fisheries in the Northeast Pacific.

OA in the Northeast Pacific

Sweet baby jesus! Check out the brains on Hank.

My reply to RvW "might" have been a tinsy bit sarcastic......but thanks for letting everyone else know why there are no Velociraptors running around eating people on the Skok these days.

Actually, one could only wish for such a thing........