The following study contrasts the fortunes of Chinstrap and Gentoo Penguins see http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/01/150120121304.htm Original study: MJ Polito, WZ Trivelpiece, WP Patterson, NJ Karnovsky, CS Reiss, SD Emslie. Contrasting specialist and generalist patterns facilitate foraging niche partitioning in sympatric populations of Pygoscelis penguins. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 2015; 519: 221 DOI: 10.3354/meps11095
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
G’day Martin You note that humanity’s carbon emissions are “a mere 3-4% of the annual total”. Actually, in terms of the global carbon budget, that’s a significant impact. Consider the following analogy. You have a fixed income of $1000 per week, and fixed expenses of $1000 per week. What happens to your savings if you start smoking tobacco at the rate of $40 per week? Laurie. On 26 Jan 2015, at 7:15 pm, M.J.Wigginton < m.j.wigginton@btinternet.com> wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
On the subject of climate: ever since I’ve been living in the rural area (nearly two years) I’ve taken notice of monthly temperatures – on Weatherzone they are given as an average monthly minimum and average maximum. The latter is consistently about a degree above the long term average (although this month looks like being the exception). However, the average minimum is also lower thus dragging down the overall average. Denise Denise Lawungkurr Goodfellow PO Box 71 Darwin River, NT, Australia 0841 PhD candidate, Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW. Founding Member: Ecotourism Australia Founding Member: Australian Federation of Graduate Women Northern Territory 043 8650 835 On 26 Jan 2015, at 9:25 pm, Chris Charles < licole@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
I also meant to comment on the flatline comment. Temperatures flatlined only if you look at them on an annual basis, which no sensible scientist would do. When looked at in the usual five or ten year scales, the continued increase is quite evident. It is no different from taking an extraordinarily hot day in spring and saying that weather flatlined through summer. Sent from my iPad
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
I also meant to comment on the flatline comment. Temperatures flatlined only if you look at them on an annual basis, which no sensible scientist would do. When looked at in the usual five or ten year scales, the continued increase is quite evident. It is no different from taking an extraordinarily hot day in spring and saying that weather flatlined through summer. Sent from my iPad
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
Great news Martin, but shouldn’t someone tell the glaciers & ice caps? Chris Charles http://www.licole.com.au Sent from my iPhone
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
If this is being ignored by most media, it is because it is more junk science perpetrated by totally unqualified hucksters. Neither Homewood nor Watt have any scientific or academic credentials, and their unsupported harangues have been repeatedly shown to be untrue. One can be a meteorologist without even a college degree, which seems to be the case for Watt. Eric Jeffrey Falls Church USA Sent from my iPhone
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
Of course, neither ‘believers’ nor sceptics have ever denied that climate change is happening; that part of the debate is only about the rate of change, and the degree to which man’s carbon dioxide emissions (a mere 3-4% of the annual total) have and are affecting it – or even if man’s contribution is affecting it significantly at all. The predominant drum-beat message that man’s carbon dioxide emissions are causing temperatures to rise at an alarming rate (global temperatures have been flat-lining for the last 18 years, but that’s merely ‘a pause’ according to the alarmists) are not supported by recent research. The true picture seems to be that temperatures have shown a steady but very slow rise since the end of the last Ice Age, though with short periods of more rapid rises and falls, and there is no cause for alarm. Coincidentally, in the Telegraph this week Booker has an article on the scandalous manipulation of surface temperatures that has been going on for decades, a subject carefully ignored by most of the mass media. For those inclined, the piece is here – http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/11367272/Climategate-the-sequel-How-we-are-STILL-being-tricked-with-flawed-data-on-global-warming.html Martin —–Original Message—– Sent: Sunday, January 25, 2015 8:47 PM Cc: Birding Aus eaters Believers in what? Looks like “60 minutes” is now the authority for peer reviewed “Climate Change” science. Laurie Knight wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
Believers in what? Looks like “60 minutes” is now the authority for peer reviewed “Climate Change” science. Laurie Knight wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
It is pretty much the same story for all the glaciers along the Andes. Western South America is heading for a water supply catastrophe very quickly. Carl Clifford
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
Unfortunately evolution progresses at a slower rate than appears to be the impacts of climate change. I just happened to watch 60 minutes section on Patagonia and the retreat of the glaciers there is nothing short of horrifying. David Bishop
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
Every “step up” in the evolution of Hominids appears to have been associated with a major climatic change. Perhaps the present climatic event may result in the demise of Homo sapiens sapiens and the emergence of a more intelligent ssp of Homo. I hope so, because the current version is not working very well. Carl Clifford
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
I was in the US in 2009, lecturing among other things, on conservation. Many at those lectures (e.g. at various universities and Sierra and Audubon chapters) told me that they lived a “green” lifestyle. On visiting or staying in US homes I learned what they meant. These houses were largely energy-efficient, but they were huge. As for solar panels – they were rare. I covered thirteen states, mostly by air, and only saw a handful. Coming from Darwin where most homes have solar panels, I found this mind-boggling! Many in the US believe that climate change is occurring whether it’s anthropogenic or not. The science that emerged in the public arena after Sandy and the polar conditions and drought that have engulfed numerous states in recent years, have changed a lot of minds. Despite a recalcitrant Congress change is happening, driven by the lower echelons of government, for example the mayors of towns and cities. No, it’s not happening fast enough, but it is happening. Denise On 25 Jan 2015, at 8:10 am, Laurie Knight < l.knight@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
Unfortunately Janine there are still those who deny it is happening. And there are some who reluctantly agree it might be happening but could not possibly be the fault of humans. On 25 January 2015 at 09:36, Janine Duffy < janine@echidnawalkabout.com.au> wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
As Cicero would say, “Cui bono?” When it benefits them and the people who donate to them, they will. There are trillions of dollars tied up with carbon-based fuels. They will support measures that don’t threaten those profits or negatively impinge on the things they hold dear. For example, they will support measures to protect threatened coastal infrastructure (worth billions of dollars). The interests of birds, or other living things and systems are not an issue for them. Regards, Laurie. On 25 Jan 2015, at 7:48 am, Dave Torr < davidtorr@gmail.com> wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
Yes Laurie, I thought the same thing. There is no need to discuss belief in climate change. Its not a religion. Its science. Let’s get on with fighting it. Janine Sent from my Motorola RAZR™ M on the Telstra Next G™ Network Laurie Knight < l.knight@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
Amazing Laurie. But do they accept that we ought to try and do something about it?
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
Yes Ian, believers in what? Even the United States Republican Party accepts that climate change is happening. Last week the US Senate voted 98-1 that “It is the sense of the Senate that climate change is real and not a hoax.” http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-senate-climate-hoax-20150121-story.html Regards, Laurie. On 23 Jan 2015, at 10:59 am, Carl Clifford < carlsclifford@gmail.com> wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
G’day Ian, Laurie & other readers Another check on this would be to see what has happened to Antarctic Petrel numbers in NZ waters. In the 12 years that I worked in NZ and was involved in the collection and assessment of dead sea-birds we found a marked increase in this species, and it was commonly believed that this was because their competitors – the krill eating whales had been dealt a population blow. Cheers Mike =================== Michael Tarburton tarburton.m@optusnet.com.au =================== On 23/01/2015, at 9:10 AM, Ian May wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
The Japanese whale hunters claim that with the decline in the large balleen whales due to hunting the smaller Minke Whales numbers have exploded. They call them the ‘cockroaches of the sea’ and claim that their hunting is only controlling a species whose numbers are out of control. Therefore if they are correct then the excess plankton would be already consumed. The situation is obviously very complex and I don’t think we should be making too many presumptions without good scientific evidence. Is there evidence for overall seabird population increases? I thought most were declining or at least stable. There is solid scientific evidence for climate change and although not all of the earth’s problems are caused by it to ignore the evidence is very risky for the future of humans and biodiversity in general. Regards Greg Dr Greg. P. Clancy Ecologist and Birding-wildlife Guide | PO Box 63 Coutts Crossing NSW 2460 | 02 6649 315302 6649 3153 | 0429 601 9600429 601 960 http://www.gregclancyecologistguide.com http://gregswildliferamblings.blogspot.com.au/ —–Original Message—– Sent: Friday, January 23, 2015 11:10 AM Cc: birding-aus ; David Bishop eaters Yes, there is little doubt that the commercial Krill harvest would contribute to a decline in the pelagic food source however if you look at the numbers, it is most likely if the Cetacean competition for the same food source is as great as I think it could be, it will be uneconomic to harvest Krill soon, if not now. ———————————————————————— Dave Torr wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
The believers? What? The Monkees fan club? Carl Clifford
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
Yes, there is little doubt that the commercial Krill harvest would contribute to a decline in the pelagic food source however if you look at the numbers, it is most likely if the Cetacean competition for the same food source is as great as I think it could be, it will be uneconomic to harvest Krill soon, if not now. ———————————————————————— Dave Torr wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
I think increasing krill harvesting by humans will also play a role Ian! On 23 January 2015 at 10:28, Ian May < birding@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
The situation with wolves and their prey base on Isle Royal comes to mind. David
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
Thanks for your reply David. Yes I think “prior to ma’s assault on whales and other cetaceans” the available food balance was probably of little concern regarding population survival, but the problem as I see it, is that now is a time when overall seabird numbers are artificially increased due to the absence of significant feeding competition from Cetaceans, and because of this, the entire seabird population is now at much greater risk of a crash from starvation if impacts on the same available food source are suddenly increased, as must be the case now, not from Climate Change, but from Cetacean feeding competition. Most people with an agricultural background will be aware of what happens to animals, both wildlife and domestic when severe drought descends on the country. If my memory of J curve is correct, when a population exceeds the carrying capacity of its food source, there “will be” a significant population crash. After this occurs, for species that have evolved to adapt to a boom bust cycle, most of these populations will recover, but as you would be aware, boom bust ecology is not how it is with seabirds and a major crash may well go beyond the tipping point for many of them. regards Ian May PO Box 110 St Helens, TAS 7216 ———————————————————————— David Bishop wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
Dear Ian, This sort of connectivity fascinates me. I cannot help but ponder your question as it makes one wonder, if you are correct, what were penguin numbers like prior to ma’s assault on whales and other cetaceans? Perhaps the krill population was commensurately larger in those far off times? David Bishop P. O. Box 1234, Armidale, NSW 2350, Australia M +61 412 737 297 Office +61 2 6771 5580
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org
H Hello Laurie Not wanting to upset “the believers”, I cannot help but wonder if these researchers ever considered that a decline of Antarctic Krill could be caused by the exponential increase of Cetaceans that has occurred over the past two decades. Is it true that a current population estimate of just one species, the humpback whale has now reached 80,000 individuals? About five years ago, the population estimate at that time had increased to 35,000 animals? See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cetaceans#Global_Population_Estimates or http://whaleone.com.au/whale-facts/ As a part time researcher from a time nearing the end of the commercial whaling era when it was rare to sight a large whale in Australian waters, I occasionally pondered the effects on the pelagic world from competition on the basic marine food source impacted by the presence or absence of Cetaceans. My conclusion was that you cannot have your krill and eat it too. regards Ian May PO Box 110 St Helens, 7216 ———————————————————————— Laurie Knight wrote:
Birding-Aus mailing list
Birding-Aus@birding-aus.org
To change settings or unsubscribe visit:
http://birding-aus.org/mailman/listinfo/birding-aus_birding-aus.org