Nearly 50% Decline in Marine life since 1970

Marine Life Devastating Hit

I would say this is due to man's activities. Still, corporate lobbyists fight to dump crap in the water and have less 'restrictions on pollution' because it would cost them so much. This could lead to a dead ocean.

I have a hard time trusting propaganda Pieces.

seems like one anyway.

I just don't know what to believe on this topic, the health of our oceans.

a reply to: reldra

It's depressing to see marine life disappearing. It seems like a trajectory we have to follow through with despite knowing where it will take us. Obviously, there are lots of factors at play and it won't entirely be the fault of humanity-at-large; it's still clear that we are more responsible for the declines than, say, diseases or invasive new species.

It's that human factor that 'people gotta eat.' Fishermen, trawlers etc rely on fish stocks for a living and will carry on fishing. Plastics are part of industry and jobs and will continue to pollute various eco-systems. We'll leave the brunt of the problems to be 'solved' by the following generations and they'll be able to look back and blame us for the world we leave them.

Well obviously this was going to be the end result of us polluting the oceans and waterways. Oil spills and trash being poured into the ocean will cause this. I'm not surprised one bit. For the most part we're not a very compassionate species, as long as we get ours we don't care.

a reply to: reldra

If this continues then one day Karma will bomb humanity back to stone age in order to stop humanity from inflicting further damage on the ecosystems.

without life in the Oceans then we will become extinct.......... bit like the demise of bees in regards to pollination etc....we will become extinct...

It's fast becoming a matter of time IMHO as we put more and more pressure on to the earths dwindelling capacity to sustain us....

Regards

PDUK

a reply to: reldra

As much as i realize there is a huge pollution problem and i have little doubt our industry is poisoning the planet....the wwf in my opinion is not the greatest source of info i would go as far as to say quite bias....

It may have started out with good intentions but when it sided with the enemy for funding i am not sure they stayed on the right path.......

Illusion of Aid

But can the WWF truly protect nature against human beings? Or do the organization's attractive posters merely offer the illusion of help? Fifty years after the organization was founded, there are growing doubts as to the independence of the WWF and its business model, which involves partnering with industry to protect nature.

The WWF, whose international headquarters are located in Gland, Switzerland, is seen as the world's most powerful conservation organization. It is active in more than 100 countries, where it enjoys close connections to the rich and the powerful. Its trademark panda emblem appears on Danone yoghurt cups and the clothing of jetsetters like Princess Charlene of Monaco. Companies pay seven-figure fees for the privilege of using the logo.

www.spiegel.de...

a reply to: PurpleDog UK

bit like the demise of bees in regards to pollination

I think i remember reading somewhere that the last land animal will be dead about 4 years after the last bees dies . We must look after our little bee friends as we should also look after our oceans Thing is how do we look after the bees .

a reply to: reldra

I read about this the other day as well as the story and photo of this Polar bear which was photographed in the Arctic which was sickening to see as it was pretty skinny, the story went on to say that because the ice is melting, the bears are finding it harder and harder to catch fish and I was pretty saddened to read that news.

I think our pollutions of the sea's is causing mass die off... I just hope its not too late but 50% since 1970 (If correct) is a huge amount in that time.

We haven't seen nothing yet.

Wait until they start full travel through the Arctic oceans, oh yeah also the offshore drilling.

They don't have equipment invented yet that can handle a oil spill under / around ice flows.

It really is a shame too, specially since there are humans on this planet who care about the earth and the nature on it, enough to do what is needed to preserve them. The only issue is these people either don't have the money or the authority to really impact laws.

It seems that man's destiny is to be the destroyer of worlds.

How much can be attributed purely to population increase? Also remember the fishing quotas don't work, extra fish caught are thrown back dead. So that's one policy that doesn't help at all.

a reply to: reldra

Of course whatever reduction there has been would be due to human activity, 50% of what though? They have not discovered 100% of the marine life yet, so how would they know?

Only 10% of the world's water has been explored.

Also, which is it global warming, coming ice age, magnetic pole shift, anyone of these could be contributing factors. right?

Me and a classmate wrote a report about the state of the worlds oceans and their ecology last year. Definitely the most interesting school project I've ever had the privilage of working on.

Recent estimates predict that commercial fisheries could be emptied by 2050. This is not only a problem for millions of people all around the world, since fish is a primary resource of protein for many, but it's also a major problem for marine ecosystems with unpredictable consequenses.

Because of destructive fishing methods, bottom trawling being one of (if not) the most devastating, several dolpin species, 7 of the 13 whale species, 1/3 of all shark species, sea lions, some seal species, the majority of all turtle species and a high amount of fish species are classified as either vulnerable, endanger or threatened.

Since 1988, the global catch of wild commercial fisheries has been declining. Global fisheries only produce half of the catch that they did 10-15 years ago.

A study made by Britas Eriksson at Groningen University in the Netherlands showed that overfishing also effects algae concentrations. Because commercial fishing influences relations between predator and prey fish by exclusively targeting the big species, many of which are predators, the number of smaller prey fish increases. Why is this a problem? The smaller prey fish eat molluscs and crustaceans, which in turn regulate algae concentrations. Less molluscs and crustaceans lead to larger algal blooms, which in their turn causes marine "dead zones". Google this if you want to know more, but trust me, they're bad. Very bad.

Overfishing truly is a major concern and an acute one at that. I recommend watching "The End of the Line" and/or "Mission Blue" if you are interested and can handle getting really depressed.

Cheers.