BLACKFISH SOUND, QUEEN CHARLOTTE STRAIT, B.C. Bigger and bigger, with a puff and a blow, the orca surfaces, supreme in his kingdom of green.
Northern resident orcas like this one live primarily in the cleaner, quieter waters of northern Vancouver Island and Southeast Alaska, where there also are more fish to eat. They are the same animal as the southern residents that frequent Puget Sound, eating the same diet, and even sharing some of the same waters. They have similar family bonds and culture.
The difference between them is us.
The southern residents are struggling to survive amid waters influenced by more than 6 million people, between Vancouver and Seattle, with pollution, habitat degradation and fishery declines. The plight of the southern residents has become grimly familiar as they slide toward extinction, with three more deaths just last summer. Telling was the sad journey of J35, or Tahlequah, traveling more than 1,000 miles for at least 17 days, clinging to her dead calf, which lived only one half-hour.
Yet just to the north, the orca population has more than doubled to 309 whales since scientists started counting them in 1974, and has been growing ever since, at 2.2 percent per year on average.
For scientists seeking to better understand the southern residents’ troubles, the northern residents are like a control group, said Sheila Thornton, chief killer-whale biologist for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada.
“Their environment has changed so quickly, over just two generations,” Thornton said of the southern residents. “To keep up with these changes is almost an impossible task. How do they survive in the environment we have created for them?”
The decline of the whales, a symbol of the Northwest, is also a warning, as climate change and development remake our region.
The northern residents live in not just a different place, but another world.
more at Source: Orcas thrive in a land to the north. Why are Puget Sound’s dying? – Chicago Tribune
Confessions of a Greenpeace Dropout – video with comments
Dr. Moore makes a great case for the truth and I don’t suspect he is bought off by the traditional energy sector (much), considering his legitimate ecology and ‘social engineering’ background as a former executive of Greenpeace. The Michael Crichton quote about “being certain there is too much certainty in the world” just nails the whole issue. I also liked his reference to Gaia: that we are all part of her household and maybe Gaia intends for us to pump out as much carbon as possible to sustain her. Great notion and his nuts and bolts facts were a pleasure to behold! Finally some simple language. Great short talk. He’s obviously carried these ideas around with him for a long time and is able to articulate them very convincingly.
That being said, and I realize it was only a 20 minute talk, he did gloss over many issues regarding our treatment of the planet, its people and the flora and fauna that fill up the spaces around us. ie: how to mitigate forced migration of populations; how to protect wildlife migratory routes; and protecting workers from dangerous working environments. Traditional tech like coal, hydro and wood fibre production all have huge knock on effects that are well documented and papered over very easily amidst the absurdity of the time scale we are talking about which he uses adroitly to his advantage. IMO he does this in an effort to be that guy with the correct answer to the big questions. With his background he probably has more than one chip on his shoulder. He does not seem to have considered that when we insert these meat suit issues, as above, into the calculus of planetary survival, we introduce variables that can quickly spin projects like mining for coal, developing huge hydro projects and artificially trying to manage carbon redistribution, out of our control. (see forest fires, tailing ponds, war). But rest assured the poor, sick and vulnerable will get the short end of the stick for the sake of shareholder value and the bragging rights for the winning idea.
Certainty is a powerful tool in the hands of the uncertain. On the other hand someone has to throw ideas at the wall to see what sticks and a certain amount of bravado goes a long way to increasing chances of a hit. So, it’s a fine balance between certainty vs overreach and uncertainty vs no reach at all. Look at the banks. They are certain I am a credit risk as I can’t show a steady income as a freelance professional. I’m a musician, a builder, a writer, a software developer, a legal advocate and I like to work with plants. But I still don’t fit any cell in their spreadsheet (think Caribou on a pipeline route) so they are certain I must be culled from the herd: no car loan for me. No car, no work. No work, who knows. Major uncertainty for sure. But I’m not a Caribou. Thanks mom and dad. But maybe Gaia wants me to keep reminding their lackies that there are individuals out here that do work hard, that do contribute to the community and that will defend their right not to be an virtually indentured servant just to put food on the table. Maybe Gaia wants me to confirm my certainty, to them, that there is more than one way to live a life, more than one way to solve a problem, more than one way to corner a market. Maybe my job is to keep them guessing, be a ghost in their machine. Cause there’s just too much certainty in the world. They want to call me sub-prime because of my life choices. And they are certain that is where I belong. Then Greenpeace is sub-prime too and so are Dr. Moore’s conclusions. If the banks, governments and corporations can’t fit you into their box, considering themselves to be judge and jury, you are de facto sub-prime until you prove yourself otherwise, ie: bend to their will and to their definition of what is prime, otherwise you’re a pariah. I didn’t give them that power over me and I don’t accept their assessment. Likewise Dr. Moore doesn’t accept Al Gore. But who’s the pariah? Not certain.
We need to continue to fight the tide of of bad energy production and distribution whether it is ethereal energy or energy that comes out of a hose or in the form of cash from a bank. Positive flow only. We can’t continue to talk and live in a world of abstractions. It’s obviously not working for us. Dr. Moore, like the banks and the oil companies, is more concerned with his own right-itude than with the messy details inherent in making a safe, happy world for all. The difference is, I believe, that Dr. Moore’s ideas are based on facts (with some omissions), whereas the banks, gov’s and corp’s ‘s ideas are based on greed and attaining more power and capital. I’m not writing him off. But on the face of it, the hypocrisy is a bit much.
-dg