Melting Starfish and Odd Orca Behavior in Pacific Ocean

It would appear as though they were prepared for this event long before its fruition:

Before leaving office, Bush approved new Protective Action Guides (PAGs) for radiation releases

Carreau
An estimated 300 tonnes of contaminated water is spilling daily into the ocean from Fukushima.

While this is bad, that's only 1 olympic sized swimming pool per week (actually, a little less). In a body of water as large as the Pacific Ocean it's a very small amount.

PhageAssuming you are right that it radiation sickness, what do you think can be done about it?

If it actually is due to Fukushima (which it's not), there's nothing that can be done.

HeyAHuman
It would appear as though they were prepared for this event long before its fruition:

Before leaving office, Bush approved new Protective Action Guides (PAGs) for radiation releases

Absolutely guaranteed! Upon doing some further research after this occurred, I discovered a thick trail of sequenced events that unquestionably pointed to a very coordinated plan of attack not to mention the endless number of inconsistencies related to every single aspect of this in its entirety.

I noticed that the information consistently changed and some kept being pulled, facts kept being altered and the blanket world blackout just spread quietly as though nothing ever happened.

They can make all problems simply just go away including prominent scientists. They can fabricate data, alter perception and sway an entire population. They can do anything in their playground and so they do but just for a time.

Let's try that again. 'Melting' Sea Stars - not nuclear disaster related.

Different Ocean, same phenomenon.

When University of Rhode Island graduate student Caitlin DelSesto collected starfish in Narragansett Bay for an undergraduate research project in 2011, she was surprised to watch as the animals appeared to melt and die in her tank within a week. After bringing it to the attention of URI Professor Marta Gomez-Chiarri, she learned it was among the first observations of a new disease that is now affecting starfish – also called sea stars – from New Jersey to Maine.

“There was a big increase in sea star numbers about three or four years ago,” said Gomez-Chiarri, “and often when you have a population explosion of any species you end up with a disease outbreak. When there’s not enough food for them all it causes stress, and the density of animals leads to increased disease transmission.

www.uri.edu...

Same Ocean, different time.

Sea star wasting disease is a general description of a set of symptoms that are found in sea stars. Typically, lesions appear in the ectoderm followed by decay of tissue surrounding the lesions, which leads to eventual fragmentation of the body and death. A deflated appearance can precede other morphological signs of the disease. All of these symptoms are also associated with ordinary attributes of unhealthy stars and can arise when an individual is stranded too high in the intertidal zone (for example) and simply desiccates. “True” wasting disease will be present in individuals that are found in suitable habitat, often in the midst of other individuals that might also be affected. The progression of wasting disease can be rapid, leading to death within a few days, and its effects can be devastating on seastar populations.

The ultimate cause is not clear although such events are often associated with warmer than typical water temperatures as was the case for the major die off in southern California in 1983-1984 and again (on a lesser scale) in 1997-98. Following the 1983-1984 event, the ochre star, Pisaster ochraceus, was virtually absent along southern California shorelines for years.

www.eeb.ucsc.edu...

Starfish population explosion. Note the date.

While theories abound about why starfish populations appear to be spiking, scientists acknowledge it is largely a mystery. Radical population shifts occur naturally in scores of species, from lynx to lobster. Yet researchers are only now unraveling the complex relationships and influences that govern their cycles of abundance.

It's not clear how widespread the invasion is because so few scientists study starfish. News of the population uptick is coming via reports from divers, fishermen, and spring beachgoers. State divers in Buzzards Bay were startled two weeks ago to find vast carpets of starfish - each creature 4 to 5 inches across - stretching 100 yards along the sea floor. Some fishermen in Narragansett Bay are hauling up an increasing number of starfish. Workers dredging contaminated shellfish in upper Mount Hope Bay between Rhode Island and Massachusetts also are seeing more. And last week at Scusset, overjoyed children armed with nets and buckets scooped up dozens of smaller starfish to show parents and take home as mementos.

"It's really cyclical," said Terry O'Neil, a Massachusetts marine fisheries biologist who came across a giant pack of starfish on top of bay scallop beds in Buzzards Bay two weeks ago. "I've never seen so many starfish there before," he said, "but I have seen it in Cape Cod Bay - and the next year they are gone."

boston.com

reply to post by Egyptia


Exactly

ketsuko
Here's the thing - what this article is describing is highly localized. The starfish aren't going to be exposed to stuff from all over the sea unless it's all over the place. Ergo, the starfish would be melting all over and not just in that one little area because if the radiation was what was doing it, then the radiation would have to be all over doing it to starfish all over and not just the ones in that little area.

Orcas, believe it or not, are also fairly local. They stay in one place and develop highly individualized strategies/cultures and even whistle/click languages that are passed down through the generations to teach the young how to survive specifically in that area. There are even some major "linguistic" differences between coastal whale pods in that area and those that live further out to sea. They hunt differently, eat different things, etc. That's how localized killer whales can be.

So, this could be a very local problem. Do you have any evidence to suggest that these problems are extended to starfish and killer whales beyond this one area? Are there problems in the Arctic, around the southern coast of Alaska? If my understanding of the ocean flow is correct, we would have seen the contaminated water there first since it looks like the surface flow is north out of Japan and then along the coast and north across to Alaska and down south along the West.

So, are there any reports of strange happenings with the sea life in any of those areas? Because if this were due to radioactive water, I would think the sea life there would be showing some strange behavior.

Also radiation hits the very young and developing hardest, not the oldest, most established organisms in the population.

Interesting claims and if you could, a link to the above information would be appreciated by all ,
Regards, Iwinder

collietta
reply to post by Carreau

 

Considering this is only happening around Elliott Bay and off the coast of Canada, I do not think it's related to Fukishima. If it is radiation sickness, wouldn't the sea stars be melting in other Puget Sound waters? Especially near Olympia or Tacoma, where the water tends to stagnate due to geography and pollution.

I'm thinking it's a pollutant being dumped in the water.

Edit: I also want to add, after watching the King 5 video twice, that the woman handling the bag of melting stars in the lab said that they went from a healthy population to a sick population in under a week. This tells me that something new has been added into those waters.

I'm just not sure what it could be.

edit on 27-10-2013 by collietta because: (no reason given)

perhaps massive amounts of iodide is being dumped to counter the radiation?

okay... I know, retarded.... lol

reply to post by Phage

The fish caught were migratory, they had spent time in the waters of Japan. They did not acquire the cesium in California waters.

This is the problem, almost all fish are migratory and move from place to place.
With that pattern they take all pollutants with them where ever they go.

en.wikipedia.org...
ladywildlife.com...

What fish you eat in California, there is a good chance that fish has crossed the Pacific 10 times in its lifetime.

Regards, Iwinder

reply to post by Iwinder


Culture of Northwestern Pacific Orcas

This just sort of scratches the surface. Most of what I pick up on animals is gleaned from years of nature docs, Nat Geo Mags and the like. Animals are a hobby of mine.

As to the starfish ... well, how is an animal like that going to crawl across the Pacific? Even if it's long-lived enough to make it across the entire Pacific floor, there simply hasn't been enough time for a creature that slow to have migrated here from Japan. Therefore, the starfish, themselves, must be local, so if they're suffering from radiation, it would be showing up elsewhere in other starfish. In other words, the radiation had to come to the starfish and not the other way around.

reply to post by ketsuko


The one link you provided is much appreciated and I read it front to back.

Try this link
topinfopost.com...

www.huffingtonpost.com...

news.msn.com...

www.vicnews.com...

This is not only about star fish, this is about migratory fish that we eat.

The big word is "Migratory".......They do not craw around on the sea bed, they actually do better time than an ocean going freighter crossing the Pacific.

Regards, Iwinder

MadMax9

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What do you suggest! Seriously !!!!!, think about it!
Nothing is begin done about it because nothing CAN be done about it.

Honestly, is the IQ level in this site dropping?

To EVERY POSTER LIKE THIS,

Yeah, maybe we don't know what to do about it... but the START is TALKING ABOUT IT!!!
Bring it to everyone's attention so that smarter minds can get together and solve this problem.
How can you solve a problem when you're not addressing the problem??
Talk about low IQs and just plain ignorance... yeesh, you guys are killing me...

reply to post by Drunkenparrot


Extra radiation is never good for you. There are peer reviews on this too. So saying a bit extra is ok (won't kill you) is different than saying it is ideal. It's also always about us. What about life in the sea - they don't fly, get X-rays (normally), or have constant exposure like land dwellers. They will respond to it differently.

It is good to see this star fish thing may be due to disease rather than Fukushima. I have little doubt they will see casualties from that plant though. There are others in earthquake areas by the sea (Moss Landing in Monterey Ca comes to mind). They simply don't know yet - run off from a nuclear plant directly into the ocean has not happened on this level. Maybe this is just enough to tip the scales out of the environments favor (added to the pollution already present).

Phage
reply to post by Carreau

 

Through all those articles I linked, not one is even mentioning Fukushima.

Maybe that's because the symptoms don't resemble radiation poisoning.
Maybe that's because high levels of radioactive material have not been found.

edit on 10/27/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Assumptions are the mother of all f*** ups

Maybe we still don't know, and thinking that maybe nothing is happening and then not trying to do something about it because "maybe" there's nothing unnatural going on, can result in very bad things.

Just like your doctor just doesn't simply say, hey "maybe its not cancer!", and before you think of replying with something like "a doctor knows the symptoms", well they didn't know before they found them out, did they? so if we really follow a scientific method we must not assume that "maybe" is a valid response for anything other than a possible lead that may allow to discover the root cause of the problem, and not a way to deny or refute something because we still don't have enough information.

reply to post by Metaphysique

where are all the deformed babies and cancer/leukemia patients, like the ones in iraq caused by DU ?

Rapid increase in thyroid cancer in Fukushima kids – cover-up of causes

Fukushima Disaster: Infant Girls at 70% Increased Risk of Thyroid Cancer

Thyroid cancer increase in Fukushima, vitiligo starts appearing in Japan.

Study: 28% Increase In Thyroid Problems In Babies Born After Fukushima in Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon and Washington

humpback whales usually number in the hundreds around the west coast of Vancouver Island.
They were hardly seen this year.

violet
humpback whales usually number in the hundreds around the west coast of Vancouver Island.
They were hardly seen this year.

www.huffingtonpost.ca...

“There’s more and more every year, but this year’s been phenomenal,” said Ocean Ecoventure‘s Simon Pidcock. “We’ve definitely noticed an increase in sheer numbers as well as activity.”

A veteran tour operator, Pidcock says the humpbacks are also expanding their territory and increasing the length of their stay.

metronews.ca...

With due deference to your past contributions and the respect you have earned ...

Phage
The ocean is not irradiated. The water is not radioactive.

Our world is radioactive and has been since it was created. Over 60 radionuclides (radioactive elements) can be found in nature, and they can be placed in three general categories:

Primordial - from before the creation of the Earth
Cosmogenic - formed as a result of cosmic ray interactions
Human produced - enhanced or formed due to human actions (minor amounts compared to natural)

Radionuclides are found naturally in air, water and soil. They are even found in us, being that we are products of our environment. Every day, we ingest and inhale radionuclides in our air and food and the water. Natural radioactivity is common in the rocks and soil that makes up our planet, in water and oceans, and in our building materials and homes. There is nowhere on Earth that you can not find Natural Radioactivity.

Source
Considering the variety of species today, and scientific evidence defining near total collapse of life on five distinct occasions

would you not admit the possibility of disastrous consequences where Fuku is concerned?

Phage
Radioactive materials (like cesium) were (and are being) released in to the ocean. These materials do not evaporate.

The scientific method is a slow, tedious, methodical process which has a tendency to break down into conjecture and consensus over long periods. The full-impact of 2d and 3d order effects from Fuku's contamination will not be known (possibly) for decades. By that time conjecture and consensus will be the remaining order of the day. Intelligent and influential people, such as yourself, might not listen to a hand-wringer like me. I hope I've played my role well and won't simply be dismissed by my bit-part in the big play that is life.

Radiation's greatest impact is on the small. Who is looking at the no-see-ums in our ocean's environment? How complete can their studies be? Consider the frightening effects of mutations in the things we ARE aware of (i.e. H1 strands) think DNA, is there no cause for any alarm?

Why, pray tell, are we defining the Fuku discharge in becquerels? Is it not to confuse and shut down thought processes concerning potential consequences? But hey, let's not be concerned. This stuff is just blowing around in the wind or being diluted into the vast-vast oceans.

Common folks are overwhelmed by large numbers (and lengthy replies on ATS). If they understood every becquerel is a potentially lethal mutation ... If they knew there were more viruses present in the ocean than there are stars in the universe ... If they realized that being killed by direct exposure is less likely to happen than by being struck by lightening exactly 10 seconds from now ... then ... we'd be free to address 2d and 3d order effects which are the things nightmares are made of.

The bottom line on Fuku: It's not gonna stop.
The question is: How long can the environment stand the strain until an unstoppable bug mutates into the equation?

reply to post by Snarl

With due deference to your past contributions and the respect you have earned ...

No deference required but my statement was in regard to a question about "irradiated" water evaporating. The water (H2O) is not radioactive. The water (H2O) is what evaporates.

would you not admit the possibility of disastrous consequences where Fuku is concerned?

There have indeed been disastrous consequences. The region is irreparably damaged.

The question is: How long can the environment stand the strain until an unstoppable bug mutates into the equation?

I'm not sure what you mean? Giant ants? Contrary to the monster movies of the 1950s, that isn't how it works.

Carreau
reply to post by Phage

 

Tepco is still continuing to release contaminated water back into the ocean. Maybe they should stop making an already bad situation worse. Through all those articles I linked, not one is even mentioning Fukushima.

No reports of active studies being done, no current reports on any major news source. Out of sight out of mind.

edit on 27-10-2013 by Carreau because: (no reason given)

I'm curious as to what this map is supposed to be showing. The measurements are apparently something in cm, so clearly not radiation. The map does appear to hold Japan as the focal point - I'm assuming the measurements must be change in ocean level (measurements from the tsunami?) Anyhow, it would certainly mean more if we knew what it was.

reply to post by dogstar23

I'm curious as to what this map is supposed to be showing.

It's showing the height of the tsunami. No relation to radioactive materials.

nctr.pmel.noaa.gov...