#most garbage patch plastic is fishing gear)

[rotationalsymmetry]

Tumblr pet peeve 27: the people who apparently spend so little time in reality that they think the main appeal of fake leather is that it's vegan and not that real leather is fucking expensive. Seriously when's the last time you bought something made out of real leather? That shit costs so much money.

[acti-veg]

I think it's very strange how vegans get blamed for using plastic, when most of the plastic in the ocean is apparently from fishing industries, which vegans don't participate in.

Do you think it's because people just don't know? Or am I misunderstanding that statistic? It's been kind of hard to figure out what's actually true and what isn't, since a lot of environmental news often prioritizes quick, snappy headlines simplified so the average person can read it.

But even still, I don't see how people can say "going vegan won't fix anything" but also think that buying leather instead of pleather would fix things when that's objectively a much smaller change to make.

That isn’t quite true, about 70%-80% of plastic in our oceans is from land-based sources that is transported from land to the sea via rivers or coastlines. The other 20% to 30% comes from marine sources such as fishing nets, lines, ropes, and abandoned vessels. You may be thinking of the great pacific garbage patch, which is made up of about 75% abandoned fishing gear.

If the concern is about ocean health though (which they pretend it is), there are few industries doing more harm to our waterways and our oceans than animal agriculture. From plastic waste and run-off to animal waste and toxic effluent from leather tanning, supporting that while calling out vegans for the plastic clothes that we (and everyone else) wear because they're cheap, is pretty blatant hypocricy.

This is just the currently in vogue tu quoque fallacy, it's been soy, quinoa, agave, now pleather, it'll be something else in a couple of years. It gets debunked enough times so that nobody can realistically argue it anymore, then it goes away for it a bit, then it comes back in some other form. It's just endless finger pointing as a way to avoid having to look inwards at their own decisions and how they could be reducing harm in their own lives.

[doinsomethingdaily]

I feel like many people care about this but there is a lot of mis-information or one sided- information going around.

(Sources; I study environmental sciences. I have followed an course on marine litter and am currently doing my end research paper on microplastic pollution in surface water. I have used some papers for this, if you want them I can put them in the comments I think)

What I really want to put out there is that the problem is divers and that personal action and industry reform both are needed.

1. Plastic pollution is obviously a large problem. Think of the Atlantic garbage patch. But also in our own environment. More recently microplastics have been of growing concern. (there is even nanoplastics, but I am not going there)

2. When talking about plastic pollution there are many terms that are used to indicate different things.

- plastic pollution: all plastics currently in the environment that do not belong there

- marine plastic: plastic in seas and oceans

- microplastics: often classified as plastic particles under 5 mm, they are found in water, air, earth, Antarctic ice, human food and our bodies

- primary microplastics: plastic particles that enter the environment as particles under 5mm

- secondary microplastics: particles that come from larger plastics that are degraded.

With this wide variety of plastics to talk about sometimes the waters get muddies. I hear a lot of 'x is the main source of microplastics'. The simple truth is: we do not know what the main source is of most of these. But we do know what the biggest contributers are.

Plastic pollution: mostly land based sources of single use plastics. Recycling is still almost never viable or implemented. Research indicates that up to 80% of produced plastics each year ends up in the environment. That seems like a lot. ( This number probably counts landfills, which are also in the environment. stuf that goes to landfill does not magically disappear. )

Marine plastic: most marine plastic seems also to be from landbased sources. However, most of the plastic sinks. Yet, The great Pacific garbage patch is made up of almost 50% fishing gear (appearantly more buoyant?) Both of these are major problems.

Microplastics:

Primary: these come from tires, paint, washing clothes, cosmetics and other personal care products, but also the production pallets that are used to make bigger plastic products are a major source.

Secondary; these come from all the bigger plastic pollution (so land based litter for example) braking down in the environment. Currently the majority of marine microplastics seem to be secondary.

3. It is hard to measure the precise main source or sources of plastics because it is hard to monitor them. They move through the environment. The total amount of plastic amount to tons. Some sink to the sea bottoms or are currently somewhere in the atmosphere. Monitoring protocols for microplastics are still being established. So there is no absolute answer about most things right now.

4. What do we know: obviously humans are the source of plastics. Plastic need hundreds of years to break down. Most current research seems to indicate that microplastics will have negative health effects. You probably have plastic close to you right now.

Yes, we need to reform the industry large scale. Plastics should be used for the things where they are invaluable such as for medical applications and such. But we need to cut back on other uses of plastics. And we need good recycling. This one is going to be harder because of the many kinds of plastics and the limits on how many times it can be reused.

However, as an individual, you can help. I am certainly not saying everyone needs to go "zero waste." But even if you are switching out little things, you do have an impact. Further more, reducing plastics and microplastics might be healthier for you.

[newsource21]

What’s Really in the Patch?

Microplastics make up 94 percent of an estimated 1.8 trillion pieces of plastic in the patch. But that only amounts to eight percent of the total tonnage. As it turns out, of the 79,000 metric tons of plastic in the patch, most of it is abandoned fishing gear—not plastic bottles or packaging drawing headlines today. The writing on a third of the objects was Japanese and another third was Chinese. The country of production was readable on 41 objects, showing they were manufactured in 12 different nations Much of the world’s marine debris is believed to lie in the coastal regions, not in the middle of oceans.

[afeelgoodblog]

Best News of Last Week

Edition #013 - Hope you had a great weekend. Let's read some positive news

1. A half-mile installation just took 20,000 pounds of plastic out of the Pacific — proof that ocean garbage can be cleaned

The Ocean Cleanup, a nonprofit organization, aims to rid the world's oceans of plastic. It recently debuted a device it said collected 20,000 pounds from the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.

Once it's brought to shore, the plastic gets recycled. For now, the Ocean Cleanup is using the plastic to make $200 pairs of sunglasses, funneling the proceeds back into the cleanup efforts. Eventually, the organization hopes to partner with consumer brands to make more recycled products.”

2. Pandemic lockdowns improved air quality in 84% of countries worldwide, report finds“

Coronavirus lockdowns led to air quality improvements in most countries, but the level of pollutants will likely rise as governments lift restrictions and economies swing back into gear, according to a new report.

IQAir's 2020 World Air Quality Report said human-related emissions from industry and transport fell during lockdowns, and 65% of global cities analyzed experienced better air quality in 2020 compared to 2019. Some 84% of nations polled reported air quality improvements overall.”

3. France to ban plastic packaging for most fruit and vegetables from January 2022

“France will ban plastic packaging for nearly all fruit and vegetables from January 2022 in a bid to reduce plastic waste, the environment ministry said on Monday.”

4. Ozone layer on route to be completely healed by 2050

This is an example of what can be achieved if all the nations come together to fight environmental issues like these. If only all nations could come together to fight off climate change…

5. 4000 year old knife found under Canadian Parliament to be returned to Algonquin nations in historic move

“This stone knife, shown in this handout image, dating from 2,500 - 4,000 years ago, is thought to have been used by the Algonquin people. It was discovered by archaeologists on Parliament hill during the renovation of the Parliament buildings in Ottawa. It is to be returned to the stewardship of local First Nations, and put on show when Parliament reopens. “

6. Biologists Rescue Unborn Baby Sharks at Fish Markets.

“Scientists are collecting egg cases from recently caught pregnant sharks, raising the babies and releasing them into the wild”

7. After several attempts, wildlife officers remove tire that was around an elk's neck for over two years

Or, alternative headline “Bull elk incredibly pissed off wildlife officers stole his bling because it really attracted the fine cows” :D

___

That's it for this week. Until next week,

You can follow me on twitter . Also, I have a newsletter :)

Subscribe here to receive a collection of wholesome news every week in your inbox :D

[thehungryplaice]

Go Back To The 80s With The Hungry Plaice....

https://www.the-hungryplaice.uk/go-back-to-the-80s-at-your-event

The 80s....What a Decade! I don't mind admitting we are big 80s lovers at The Hungry Plaice, it was the decade of our childhood filled with cheese and the start of the video game revolution and if we could go back in time that's where you would find us, I would love to go back to experience the feelings of being back there but with alot more appreciation for what we had as we didn't have a clue back then how fab that time was. There are loads of 80s revivals around, 80s pop stars relaunching their careers and touring again and TV shows picking up on the 80s themes. We love our 80s vans so much that we currently have two these are our Vintage Fish and Chip Vans Betty and Beryl, we try not to look around and see if there are any more for sale as we would be quite happy to fill up our driveway with more of these beauties!

The 80s was filled with fun, fun and loads more fun from the Neon leggings we all wore to the Arcades full of cool games that we used to play, things back then just seemed so much easier and we were still in the days when it was safe for us kids to be playing out all day without our parents knowing where we were rather than being stuck in your bedroom glued to a game, we enjoyed fresh air and freedom and as long as we were back for tea our parents didn't worry about us. We didn't have rules like we do nowadays, Health and Safety was in it's infancy and as kids we could do pretty much what we wanted, we had metal bars we would swing on in the playground at school with huge concrete stepping stones you'd jump across, I got a scar from banging my nose on one of those in my Primary School and I still think it was character building. At home we had a metal framed bunk bed I'm sure was from MFI, there was a metal netted bottom that the mattress sat on top of, I always used to get my hair tangled up in that and I'm sure I've probably got bald patches from where I had to be cut out to be freed. We had a pampas greenish coloured bathroom set in my childhood home which would be considered Vintage today and lots of brown 80s things around the house like pull down coiled lights in the ceilings. My parents were delighted when they had the chance to put an eye level oven in the kitchen and ditch the freestanding gas oven where you had the grill at the top and try to burn your hands when you were cooking your fish fingers, we did have a microwave at some point and that lead to a rebellion on proper cooking! I remember using libraries alot when I was younger, it was a treat going and picking out books you could take away home, there was a limit to the number that you could have and you had to be careful not to get a fine for taking it back late. Information had to be researched and you couldn't do that from the comfort of home, for school I had to go there to find books on certain subjects and I remember being fascinated when having to use those terminals to look at old newspapers. The music was so much better back then, there was a happiness to songs that just made you want to dance not full of rude words and sexual references like today, we had an array of one hit wonders and big massive stars like Madonna and Kylie, Duran Duran and Wham! The songs still get played today but they sound more superior as we no longer listen to them on cassette tapes.

Cassette Tapes.....they were the days, I forgot how you had to rewind them to the beginning to get to the start and you could use a pencil if the tape pulled out and how there are pauses between songs and of course whilst you can try to to rewind and forward wind you'll never find the start of a song, we are spoilt now that we can do that just by pressing a button. The most embarrassing bit was when I asked my husband if something was wrong with the tape as the pause was going on just a bit too long....he gently reminded me that it was the end of the tape and it needed to be turned over haha!! Of course we all had those high tech Pre MP3/IPod/CD Players to play our music with a set of headphones with the fuzzy ears, my brother had one of the early Sony Walkmans and never let me even see it, I bet that's worth something these days I bought a cheap one off Ebay recently I couldn't help myself! Toys were actual toys there were a few electronic ones around such as Speak & Spell or a talking doll where you had a pull a bit of string and it only said about three words, we really actually played with physical things I had Sindy and some Barbie Dolls in fact I had so much of it I'd carry it all in one of those old large blue plastic shopping bags funny there were sold by Tesco to put into your trolley when they introduced self scanning it seems the technology died a death all those years ago but it now all the range. My brothers had Action Men and loads of model cars, we had a huge floor mat that had map on it with roads and a town that you would drive your model cars around all day on. There were Garbage Pail Kids, Care Bears, Rubix Cubes Train Sets and Scaletrix and as we were a bit more money savvy in those days you'd only get something for your birthday and Christmas not just because your parents wanted you to be quiet!

TV Back in the 80s

When we wanted to watch something on TV we only had a few channels I remember the time before Channel 5 and we had one huge Brown TV in the Lounge where you had to press the buttons on the front to change the channel, I reckon you would have needed a forklift to move the damn thing it was so huge and took up half the room. Days were filled with whatever my parents wanted to watch, there was Rainbow and Playschool when I was little, I remember watching the very first episode of Eastenders (a bad TV habit I dropped a few years ago), programmes were quite limited back then but it wasn't a huge deal because we entertained ourselves as kids, sometimes watching a Film would be a big treat and made special times like Christmas were more exciting sitting down together as a family and watching a film just released on TV that we had never seen before. We didn't mind adverts if we were watching ITV or Channel4 they didn't drag on like you get these days.

I don't remember exactly when Video Recorders came on the market but I know there were Betamax and VHS, we had VHS machine, you could record programmes off the TV and playback at your leisure and you always knew someone who was copying VHS to VHS that would sell you some films. I still used VHS tapes when my daughter was little so they were around all the time I was growing up. Buying a VHS tape was a real treat, you might have been lucky enough to have seen a film in the cinema but there was always a really big delay until they were released on Video or so it seemed. Of course for a really special treat you would go Blockbusters to rent a video but they were quite strict if you forgot your video card I guess computer systems weren't able to let you confirm any of your account details you had!

80s Fashion

Then there was the fashion in the 80s.....wow it was great and brilliant all neon neon neon and bright colours, I had one of those multi coloured white and purple shellsuits and Hi-Tec Trainers. There were punk hairstyles and coloured dyed hair and clothes that didn't match, famous stars created looks from throwing clothes together like Madonna and Boy George. Colours like pink, yellow and blue where everywhere, we had shoulder pads and polka dots, tracksuits and fitness gear, an explosion of trainers and dungarees. There are brands that have come back into fashion nowadays like Kappa and Champion, I wish to god I had kept them all to have them now! We would shop in the local high street and independent fashion shops, I lived in London and would go markets at the weekend, Wembley market was a huge favourite. We had BHS and C&A and a shop called Madhouse in the High Street at the top of the road, I don't really remember when the supermarkets starting selling clothes and the rise of the bigger fashion names back then we were quite limited to only a few shops. I have to mention Woolworths of course, we had one in our high street and I would enjoy just walking around looking at the everything they had including the glorious pick and mix!

Rumbelows.... I remember when you wanted something electrical you could shop at Currys and Comet and even Rumbelows, you always had to go out to buy something and bigger electrical items were never in stock and always had to be ordered and delivered weeks later, we really don't know how lucky we are to have the internet and the ability to order online it saves so much time and give us the freedom of choice to buy from so many different places. Of course the reason we couldn't buy online was because we didn't have the internet in our homes, no mobile phones, I got my first when I was 18 and had to ask permission to call anyone from the house phone, if you wanted to meet your friends you had to arrange it all before you went out and you couldn't check if they were on their way to see you unless you have 10p and phone box nearby. You were lucky if you had a Games Console let alone a Computer....

Gaming in the 80s, well what can I say it put gaming on the map and if it wasn't for those early days I doubt the gaming industry would be what it is today. We had a Spectrum Sinclair 48k first, I'm not even sure what a 48k would be today in terms of processing or storage even a single Word document can be bigger than that. It was bought as a shared present in the family one Christmas and I rarely got to play on it. All I remember is that we had a small black and white TV that we would connect to the computer and you'd have a cassette player connected to, for the Sinclair 128k we had later on I know there was a cassette player connected to the right hand side of the keyboard. Anyway you'd press play and then hear this whizzing buzzing noise whilst the game was loading and the TV would go all fuzzy, sometimes it would take ages and if you had a copy your mate recorded it might not load properly, talk about building your anticipation and then letting you down! The games we had included Daley Thompson, Hungry Horace and Jet Set Willy, I've seen the Spectrum emulator and its a great reminder of the games we had in the days gone by, they now download in seconds....just think what we could have done with all that time we sat staring at a screeching cassette tape player waiting for games to load. We would use the keyboard to play or a joystick if that sort of thing was sold with the Computer you had and your parents could afford one, it was quite easy....left, right, up, down and fire. Us kids would normally have one type of computer, ours was the Spectrum and I know someone on our road had the Commodore and I think there was a Binatone in someone's house, you were royalty if you were lucky enough to have more than one Computer. Handhelds were around then like the Game and Watch ones I don't remember all the different ones they made there were so many sold, we had an early Donkey Kong split screen it was orange on the casing of course I hardly got to play that either, the newer generation of Gaming Consoles like the Sega Megadrive was a big surprise to us kids that you could just put your game in and not long after be playing your game how did that happen! We also had the launch of the Nintendo Gameboy at the end of the decade which changed our gaming lives forever! Another side of gaming that you don't really see today was the Arcades, they were places you hung out with your mates for hours and hours playing Street Fighter and Pac Man, we had a shop on the high street which only had one or two I think it might have been a cafe, when you scored a high score you'd put your three initials in, arcades are mostly for the seaside holidays today full of the boring 2p push machines and fruities, as we know the game industry moved from those high street arcades to bedrooms.... So next time you complain about having to wait whilst you're downloading that highly sophisticated game with the controller I would need a degree to understand how to use think about us kids and our gaming....!

The 80s....wow what a decade

what a time, full of colour, lights and fun, I do wish I could get in a time machine and go back there and have some fun but I know we will never go back to those easy days we will keep moving forwards so instead I'll enjoy our road trips in the vans with the crackling radios....

https://www.the-hungryplaice.uk/go-back-to-the-80s-at-your-event

[and-then-there-were-n0ne]

The livestock sector is one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global. 

When assessing animal agriculture’s overall contribution to greenhouse gas emissions, estimates range dramatically depending on what is included in the calculation. The 2006 report Livestock’s Long Shadow from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) claimed that animal agriculture caused 18 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions. [x]

The livestock sector is a major player, responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions measured in CO2 equivalent. This is a higher share than transport. […] Livestock are responsible for much larger shares of some gases with far higher potential to warm the atmosphere. The sector emits 37 percent of anthropogenic methane (with 23 times the global warming potential (GWP) of CO2) most of that from enteric fermentation by ruminants. It emits 65 percent of anthropogenic nitrous oxide (with 296 times the GWP of CO2), the great majority from manure. Livestock are also responsible for almost two-thirds (64 percent) of anthropogenic ammonia emissions, which contribute significantly to acid rain and acidification of ecosystems.

The FAO calculation includes the CO2 emitted when forests are cleared for animal feed crops and pastures, but it does not take into account the CO2 that those forests can no longer absorb. (Imagine a life insurance policy that covered the cost of the funeral but not future lost wages.) When researchers at the Worldwatch Institute accounted for emissions that the FAO overlooked, they estimated that livestock are responsible for 32,564 million tons of CO2 emissions per year, or 51 percent of annual global emissions.

Between 2010 and 2050, rising demand for animal products means emissions will continue to rise. Even with best efforts to reduce the footprint of livestock production, the sector will consume a growing share of the remaining carbon budget. [x] 

To avoid dangerous climate change, global yearly emissions must fall rapidly from today’s levels of 49 GtCO2 e to around 23 GtCO2 e by 2050. If meat and dairy consumption continues to rise at current rates, the agricultural sector alone will soak up 20 of the 23 gtco2 e yearly limit in 2050, leaving just 3 gtco2 e for the rest of the global economy. Even under the most ambitious of decarbonization scenarios, it will be near impossible for emissions from other sectors to drop to such levels by the middle of the century. [x]

The environmental impacts of the food system will exceed the planetary boundaries for food-related GHG emissions by 110%, for cropland use by 70%, for bluewater use by 50%, for nitrogen application by 125%, and for phosphorus application by 75%. This means that, by 2050, the livestock sector alone may either occupy the majority of, or significantly overshoot, recently published estimates of humanity’s “safe operating space” in each of these domains. [x]

Barring unforseen technological breakthroughs, worldwide animal product consumption at current North American per capita rates is incompatible with a 1.5°C warming target.

In addition to its effects on greenhouse gases, animal agriculture affects the environment by the conversion of natural ecosystems to agriculture since growing the crops used for feeding animals, such as soy and maize, eats up land. 26 percent of the earth’s terrestrial surface is used for livestock grazing. 40 percent of our cereal production is not destined for human consumption, but for animal feed. So is 80% of Amazon soy. [x] [x] [x]

Land use and habitat conversion are, in essence, a zero-sum game: land converted to agriculture to meet growing food demand comes from forests, grasslands, and other natural habitats. Consequently, cattle ranching is the largest driver of deforestation, accounting for 80% of current deforestation rates in South America. Seventy percent of Brazil’s deforested land is now used as pasture, with feed crop cultivation occupying much of the remainder. [x]

These numbers are the result of today’s meat consumption levels: If developing countries were to eat as much meat as developed countries per capita, the amount of agricultural land required worldwide would be about two thirds larger than today. [x]

This is concerning, especially in light of the new UN report warning that “We have 12 years to limit climate change catastrophe”: the IPCC maps out four pathways to achieve 1.5C, with different combinations of land use and technological change. Reforestation is essential to all of them as are shifts to electric transport systems and greater adoption of carbon capture technology.

To raise livestock also takes water: nearly one-third of the total water footprint of agriculture in the world is related to the production of animal products. The water footprint of a live animal consists of different components: the indirect water footprint of the feed and the direct water footprint related to the drinking water and service water consumed (service water refers to the water used to clean the farmyard, wash the animal and carry out other services necessary to maintain the environment). For example, 89% of italians’ water footprint relates to consumption of agricultural products and 7% to industrial products. Nearly, half of the water footprint of Italian consumption is related to the consumption of animal products. [x] [x]

An important distinction must be made here between water “use” and “consumption”. Hydroelectric power is one of the largest “users” of water in the USA, but actually consumes very little water. The water is used to power turbines or for cooling and is almost always returned to the source immediately. Agriculture is the largest “consumer” of water because it pulls water from the source and locks it up in products, not returning it to the source immediately, if ever.

Fishing also affects ecological processes at very large scale. The overall impact on aquatic systems has been described as comparable to that of agriculture on land. In fact, with the rise of commercial fishing methods marine animal populations are no longer able to replenish themselves fast enough. Between the 1950’s to 2011 worldwide catches increased 5 fold while the amount of fish in the sea was reduced by half. Some scientists predict that we will see fishless oceans by 2048.

The most obvious reason for the reduction of marine life is overfishing. 90-100 million tonnes of fish are pulled from our oceans each year, with some sources even estimating 150 million tonnes. ¾ of the world’s fisheries are exploited or depleted. But it’s not just the amount of fish being taken from the ocean for food that is the issue. there is also the method of species targeting. Humans tend to go after the biggest fish first until they are no longer available, then they move on down the chain: over the last 50 years, the abundance of large predator fish, such as cod, swordfish and tuna, has dropped 90 percent. Fishing vessels now increasingly pursue the smaller forage fish, such as herrings, sardines, menhaden and anchovies, that are lower on the food chain. The removal of apex predators leads to what’s called “trophic downgrading” where the loss of predators allows other species to grow unimpeded, upsetting the entire ecosystem. One study suggests that the removal of sharks may contribute to climate change by leaving the unchecked numbers of species to feast on the ocean’s vegetation, releasing the ancient carbon found there in massive quantities. Dr. Peter Macreadie, one of the study’s authors, cautioned that “If we just lost 1 percent of the oceans’ blue carbon ecosystems, it would be equivalent to releasing 460 million tonnes of carbon annually, which is about the equivalent of about 97 million cars. It’s about equivalent to Australia’s annual greenhouse gas emissions.” With 73 million sharks killed every year for the shark fin industry and 40-50 million sharks dying every year as bycatch*, this is more than mere speculation.

*bycatch is a fish or other marine species that is caught unintentionally while catching certain target species and target sizes of fish, crabs etc. According to the FAO, for every 1 pound of fish caught, up to 5 pounds of unintended marine species are caught and discarded as bycatch.  

Even marine plastic is in large part a fishing issue. It turns out that 46 percent of the Great Pacific garbage patch is composed of discarded nets, and much of the rest consists of other kinds of fishing gear. To put this in perspective, things like plastic straws - which everyone seems so eager to eliminate - make up 0.03% of all marine plastic. [x]

All these sources of global change will rival and significantly interact with climatic change in environmental and societal impacts.

For more information: [x]

[teenyfish]

Marine Biology Story of the Day #8

Before I start in on this one I would just like to say how all of your reblogs and likes totally make my day—thanks so much for the support!  I put a lot of effort into these so they read well! 

Okay, so as promised, this is part 2 of what it’s like to live on a working tallship.  You can check out part 1 and other information about this voyage here: post 7 and post 1  .  Today we are going to talk about what it’s like to do science on a sailing vessel. Our baby was the Robert C. Seamans, a 134 ft brigantine.

We were limited to what we could research-wise do since a sailing vessel does not have the same power as a modern vessel with an engine.  We were mainly researching plastic concentration (from trash and garbage that gets released into the ocean) in the north pacific subtropical gyre.  A gyre is basically a big ocean current, and they tend to concentrate plastic and garbage into central regions (shown below) we were studying the garbage patch off the California coast.

We did see a lot of large plastic, mostly in the form of in-tact plastic containers, buoys, or derelict fishing gear (known as ghost fishing, because this gear continues to catch and kill fish even though no one is benefiting from it).  

But, in actuality, most of the plastic found in these patches is nano or micro, basically little pieces that have broken off of larger pieces and get worn down by the wind and the waves. This also includes little pieces of fishing line (monofilament).  These pieces are often more dangerous because very small organisms (including plankton!) can swallow them, and the plastic can rip up their insides and release harmful chemicals.  

How did we sample for this micro plastic?  The same way we did plankton!  We used a net with very very fine mesh called a neuston net, which we towed along side the ship, and then we filtered the water into increasingly smaller sizes of mesh. After that, used a microscope to sort and count plastic, and to identify species within the plankton community.

We caught a lot of interesting organisms and species in these tows, including these types of zooplankton below:

Top row: Copepods and amphipods, which sort of form the bottom of the food chain out in the open ocean, Bottom left: pteropod, or a swimming snail, these guys have modified their “feet” to form wings that the flap to get around in the open ocean, Bottom right: velella velella, or by-the-wind sailors, are siphonophores (similar to jellyfish) that use their big sail to push them around the surface of the ocean.

We also caught a variety of larger organisms, including flying fish (which are a real treat to see IRL, they really do glide for hundreds of feet) and various species of squid.

We also collected water samples.  Water temperature, salinity, and dissolved oxygen are all important parameters that help us understand why certain species live where, and how climate change could impact these species habitats and ranges.  We used a hydrocast (shown below) to do this:

A hydrocast has multiple canisters that are all opened before the hydrocast is lowered down, and each cannister is programmed to snap shut at a different depth.  This way we could collect water samples at a variety of different depths, all the way down to the sea floor.  

We also sampled at night to collect deep sea plankton and fishes as they migrated up to the surface to feed (called diel vertical migration).  During the nighttime, there are less predators, so it’s more beneficial for them to come up to the surface and access the nutrients and phytoplankton on the surface.  If you want to check out some of these deep sea critters, check out my previous post! In the meantime though, to pass time, we would sometimes fish for squid. This involved shining a light down in the water to attract the squid, and then throw baited handlines down in the water—we were not often successful.

We were more successful at fishing for tuna and mahi mahi however, during the daytime. We would throw a baited line off the back of the ship while the ship was running at full sail. These fish would get fin clips for genetic studies, and would also get turned into some pretty boss cerviche, poke, and fish tacos (our stewards, or boat chefs, were AMAZING).  Don’t worry, we didn’t catch too many of these guys, but they were still pretty cool to see up close and in person.

Left, A mahi mahi, (or dolphinfish or dorodo, depending on where you come from) slowly loosing color; these fish die pretty quickly out of water, and they quickly become grey, loosing their bright blue and yellow coloration.  Right, a skipjack tuna; these are one of the smallest tuna species and are usually considered trash fish—the endangered bluefin and yellowfin tuna are like, bigger than a person.  It will blow your mind.

One last thing before we go—by the end of the trip they started letting us, the students become the chief scientist during our watches, which was an amazing learning experience, and we were bestowed the magical tutu of chief scientist-dom (made out of a torn neuston net).  

This picture of me was taken in the science lab when we officially hit 1000 nautical miles into our journey—at 3 am in the morning.  Yes, being a scientist was a 24 hour job on this trip, if you couldn’t tell from my dark circles. 

Alright, well that’s about all I have for today.  Next week I’ll reveal to you all what I do as a marine biologist currently, and while I’m no longer sailing on the pacific, I’m still doing big studies---and this time, they are all  

And as always, PLEASE don’t hesitate to ask about this research or anything else on this trip!

[nezumiko]

Concerning your comment on the straw post ("Straws help many disabled people drink. Including me."): I just wanted to let you know that there are re-usable plastic straws (which are better for the environment of course) and even metal straws you can use many many times. So it shouldn't be a big issue :) Have a nice day x

I’m just gonna collect several Anons in one place here:

Anon #2: Please don’t take this ask the wrong way. This is in regards to the plastic straw ban, have you tried reusable straws? or paper straws? There’s a bunch of different types and biodegradable paper & plastics out there! I just wanted to see why plastic straws were so specifically important, and why reusable straws, or biodegradable straws, aren’t coming to the table. Don’t mean to be rude or anything, i’m genuinely interested. i’ve seen this discourse more than once and was just wondering.

Anon #3: u know as a disabled person u can use reusable straws, right? it's still something

Hey, Anons, you are right, there are reusable straws. In fact I have silicone straws I use at home. 

What I don’t have is an ability to summon a reusable straw to wherever I happen to be when I need one. And more to the point, neither does anyone else, presuming none of us have been to Hogwarts and learned Accio. 

In an ideal world, I’d have reusable straws in my back pocket at all times. And restaurants would supply reusable straws or biodegradable straws. And that would be great. But we live in a world where neither of those things are happening, and where the needs of the disabled are routinely not considered. Restaurants may happily join the straw ban in the name of environmentalism and good publicity, and never once consider that there are some people who actually need straws.

The straw ban advocates taking away something easily and freely available that helps disabled people, without offering anything easily and freely available to replace it. Reusable straws are costly, so takeout restaurants simply won’t supply them. 

As far as the reusable straws themselves: 

Metal straws conduct heat and cold too well and can make drinking uncomfortable, and for people with muscle spasticity, cause chipped teeth or soft-palate injuries. 

Metal and silicone straws are challenging to clean without a special brush designed for the purpose, and prone to harboring mold and bacteria. A big problem for the immunocompromised, which many disabled people are.

Most reusable straws are not flexible. Silicone straws can flex, but they kink when they do. Metal straws do not flex. A flexible straw is important when you are drinking in anything other than an upright position. Some reusable straws have a pre-formed bend, but that just means you can only use it at that one other specific angle. Imagine trying to drink from a glass while reclined or in bed. A straw with adjustable flexibility is essential.

But also. You are going after the wrong target. There is a lot of plastic in the ocean, but it’s not straws: it’s fishing nets. 

“Microplastics make up 94 percent of an estimated 1.8 trillion pieces of plastic in the [Pacific garbage] patch. But that only amounts to eight percent of the total tonnage. As it turns out, of the 79,000 metric tons of plastic in the patch, most of it is abandoned fishing gear—not plastic bottles or packaging drawing headlines today.” 

Banning straws looks nice from a PR perspective — its easy for corporations to do, it’s symbolic, it’s visible — but it does very little to address the real problem of plastics pollution. The straw ban is based on a child’s survey of three straw manufacturers estimates, and compared to other, more scientific surveys, it wildly overestimates the number of straws in use. Banning straws isn’t going to save the oceans, not by a long shot.

So yes. I can use a reusable straw. If I have one. If I can afford to buy them (not everyone has a spare $10-$15). If I can get one that will work at the angle I need it to. If I remember to bring it with me wherever I go. If I have the energy and the facilities to clean it after each use. What happens when I’m out at a restaurant or the movies or somewhere I can’t easily clean it? Do I just shove the dirty straw back in my pocket or bag after I use it? If I drop it on the floor and can’t clean it right away, then how do I drink? Should I be carrying several spare straws at all times, just in case?

I can use a reusable straw. And you, if you are able bodied, can chose to forego a straw altogether. But you’re missing the point when you tell me, a person with a disability who already struggles enough with an inaccessible world, that it’s my responsibility to accommodate your desire to look like a good environmentalist.

[amandabe11man]

to whom it may concern

i’ve seen a lot of people on tumblr devolve in their views on pollution and shit, despite tumblr’s alleged wokeness. i’ve seen them deflect blame from us civilians and putting it all on big corporations instead. i’ve seen people making fun of the plastic straw ban. i’ve seen people losing their shit over the donations to fixing up notre dame instead of giving their money to save the ocean because money can just magically make shit go away, in their minds. 

yes, it’s true that corporations like coca cola etc are responsible for the MAJOR pollution, extinction and deforestation and other bad shit that’s making it worse for our planet. however, we, as HUMANS, even if we have nothing to do with big corporations, all have played our part in letting it get this far.  because why do you think big corporations keep doing the shit they do? because it’s profitable for them; because WE, THE CONSUMERS, KEEP CONSUMING THEIR PRODUCTS EVERY DAY. we as a society have fucking allowed them to dictate the way we live, ie. having cars, buying gasoline, etc. i’m sorry but yes, us consumers DO have a part in this shit.

yes, plastic straws are only a small part, seemingly insignificant, to the polluted and full-of-garbage ocean problem. yes, abandoned fishing gear is was hurts the animals, most of the time. however, do you really honestly think that all of our societies are gonna magically agree on banning fishing right away? do you think we’ll all just go hand in hand and help cleaning up everything we leave in the ocean? if you think that, you are looking at humanity through rose-tinted glasses, friend. we’re selfish, we want easy lives, and though we may think something is a good idea, we would rather want others to fix it, when push comes to shove. my point being, when it comes to humans, sometimes it’s a good thing to start out with changing the small stuff; get them used to making the positive change and THEN move onto the bigger stuff, like that garbage patch etc.

as soon as a european country cares about a HUGELY significant part of their culture (because how very DARE they??), tumblr mocks them for it and gets outraged at all the other things they could do with the notre dame-donations. bitch, i’d like to see YOU do your part then and go clean up your local beach! THEN, i might believe you actually care for the environment rather than just seeking conflict in whatever you see. there’s such a black and white view of things on here now; it’s either one thing or the other, because you can’t care about notre dame AND cleaning up the oceans at the same time or anything, can you? fuck sake.

so basically, it doesn’t matter if only the big bad corporations change, because lots of people will still have the mindset they’ve always had: live their life as comfortable as possible because they don’t have time to care about how they’re affecting the world around them. but here’s the deal; WE ALL NEED TO CHANGE. we ALL need to do our part in making the planet a better place again! to think it’s all just gonna solve itself as soon as we somehow stop the big bad corporations is just naive. to deflect blame from the regular person is an escape-tactic and it’s not helping anyone.

i seriously saw a post once where someone basically said that it doesn’t matter if we, as individuals, live “green”, because “the corporations have all the power anyway blah blah... the individual can’t make a difference uwu”. do you know how fucking DANGEROUS it is to say such a thing? plus, it’s plain fucking WRONG. get out of your comfortable victimhood and MAKE A DIFFERENCE. it doesn’t have to be big, but it will inspire others to make changes too. we HAVE to make sacrifices if we’re gonna make ANYTHING better  when it comes to environmental issues. don’t fucking spread misinformation like that, because that’s how people start neglecting a problem since “i’m just one person so obviously i can’t do anything so i’ll just sit here on my ass and look at my dumbass phone until i die”. @ whoever made that post: EVERY LITTLE BIT MATTERS, YOU FUCKING QUITTER

in conclusion: given this “i COULD do something but i won’t unless coca cola magically stops production first”-mentality, it’s no wonder humanity’s environmental progress is at a goddamn stall right now, damn

[slarsen20ahsgov-blog]

Media Assessment of Issue

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/25/596880500/the-great-pacific-garbage-patch-much-bigger-than-previously-thought - NPR objective source

Subject: The main point of this article is to convey the issue of plastics collecting in the ocean. It is a thorough examination of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.

Author: Christopher Joyce, a correspondent on the science desk of NPR. He is also an established author of The Stories Bones Tell and Earthly Goods: Medicine-Hunting in the Rainforest. He has a history and experience in reporting scientific news and evidence to the public. 

Context: This story was released on March 25th, 2018. It was first put on, All Things Considered, the National public radio program. 

Audience: This source is objective and does not hold a bias to either side. This is significant because it only reports the facts of the issue. It does not digress but only focuses on the Pacific Garbage Patch and the problems with plastic waste in the Ocean.

Perspective: The article is neutral and does not point fingers at a certain group. The article claims that the trash comes from both the fishing industries and plastics on land. According to the article, the solution to this problem is stopping the trash at river arteries and coastal environments before it disperses into the ocean. Because most people believe the trash pollution is a problem, it’s more about what they think the severity of the issue is. The article 

Significance: Because the purpose of the article is to draw more attention to the Garbage Patch, they don’t need to twist evidence. The author refers to the problem of fishing gear in the ocean. He talks about “ghost nets” that are lost by fishing boats and continue to trap and kill fish as they float in the ocean. 

https://www.motherjones.com/environment/2019/01/remember-that-20-million-ocean-cleanup-project-it-isnt-working/ mother jones (liberal source)

Subject: The main point of the article is to convey the failed efforts to clean the ocean, specifically the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. The central message is that it’s up to non-profit and non-governmental organizations to figure out a solution.

Author: The author of the article is Paola Rosa-Aquino. Not much information is given about her or her background. But she is a left-wing Latina Environmental Justice Fellow. She writes environmental articles for Mother Jones and Grist. Her articles are left-leaning and usually anti-Trump. 

Context: The article was released on January 1st, 2019 in the environmental section of the Mother Jones website. Although the main focus is on the Pacific Garbage Patch, Rosa-Aquino indirectly targets the current administration’s lack of urgency with the issue. Putting a subtle politically biased piece in the environmental section adds to the belief and doubt that our government cares for the issue of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.

Audience: The source is created to appeal to a liberal, most likely younger, audience. The author uses phrases like “yikes” and includes a YouTube link for a visual aid to further describe the ocean cleanup technology being used. Rosa-Aquino specifies that the Ocean Cleanup Project is a non-government organization.

Perspective: The article is subjective and holds a more liberal agenda. The article is stating information about the failed attempts to clean up plastic from the ocean. Rosa-Aquino reports on the facts of the issue but holds a slight bias. 

Significance: She interviews the founder of the Ocean Cleanup Project, Boyan Slat, and reports his opinion on the matter. She includes his statement that what their project is doing “has never been done before.” The evidence subtly points at the failures of the current administration and environmental policies or lack thereof. I agree more with this article because it delivers information on the organization attempting to clean the ocean. Although it holds a bias, it is slightly more objective and avoids pointing too many fingers. 

https://nypost.com/2019/01/04/mission-to-clean-up-ocean-pollution-put-on-hold-indefinitely/

Subject: The article is about the setbacks and failures of the Ocean Cleanup Project. The technology needs to be repaired after recent damages. The central message is that the project is not helping the oceans or reducing plastic in the Pacific Garbage Patch. According to the article: “One ocean expert called the breakdown predictable.” 

Author: The author is Natalie O’Neill, a young caucasian female residing in Oregon. She a freelance journalist for the New York Post and other conservative news outlets. Her affiliation to other conservative sources is important because it shows her own personal bias towards right-leaning reporting. 

Context: The article was released in the news column on the New York Post website on January 4th, 2019. This was three days after the previous article by Paola Rosa-Aquino was released.

Audience: The source was created for a conservative audience as it was released on the right-wing leaning source: The New York Post. The article contains many negative connotations about the Ocean Cleanup Project and its failure to help the issue. People reading it are lead to believe that the non-government organization is a complete failure and a waste of money. This affects the reliability of the source because the issue is obviously extremely important, but the article is only pointing out the project’s setbacks and unreliability. 

Perspective: The article is biased towards a conservative agenda. The author does not directly claim that the Ocean Cleanup Project is a waste of time and money but, O’Neill includes phrases and biased quotes and sources. She sites “one ocean expert” who called the breakdown “predictable.” I do not agree with the bias in this article because I believe she is minimizing the severity of the issue and discrediting the attempts of the Ocean Cleanup Project. 

Significance: The evidence she uses is somewhat unreliable. Like I mentioned, she is vague and sites “one ocean expert.” She also only includes evidence for the negative aspects of the organization’s plan. She portrays the “liberal” efforts as poorly thought out and executed: “‘I certainly hope they will be able to get it to work, but this is a very difficult environment where equipment breaks, which is why you normally do things closer to shore, where things are easier to repair,’ said Miriam Goldstein, director of ocean policy at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank.” 

SIMILARITIES OF ARTICLES:

the articles all describe the size and (to different degrees) the issue of the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. The subjective articles reported on the same event with differing perspectives. While both of them included the name of the organization and its goal to clean the ocean, the conservative outlet focused more on its failures and inability to operate. The liberal one did not include as much of that information in the article and centered on the goals and positive efforts. The objective article from NPR remains factual and does not actively disclose or put forth information that leans right or left. 

I identify more with the NPR article. I thought I would lean more towards the liberal source, but the article did not include as much information as it should have. The NPR article was not on the same topic of the Ocean Cleanup Project, but it still offered different indiviuduals solutions to the issue without bias. 

[lindenfern]

Ghost net is one of the most abundant and dangerous sources of marine debris in our oceans. This lost or abandoned fishing gear makes up 46% of the mass in the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, where it entangles wildlife and disintegrates into micro-plastics, affecting every level of the food web and marine ecosystem. - Artist, Emily Miller, creates machine-stitched baskets from this fishing rope washed up on the coastlines of Oregon, Kauai, and Maine. The collection site of each rope tells its own unique story about the effects of coastal industry on local and global scales. - This exhibition has been a collaborative effort from the start: crab fishermen, Oregon state park rangers, @surfrider, and many friends + family have helped her gather the ghost net; builders, actors, and artists have all come together to create the show; and, everyone is welcome to come in to the gallery to make something with the rope - adding their own unique touch to the installation! - I had the chance to interact with the Ghost Net Landscape first hand and sit down with Emily to chat about her process with this unique fiber art experience. To find out more — about how she found the calling to not just create + add to the waste problem, but take what would be wasted and create stunning + useful works of art — check out my full article/interview over on the Modern Macramé Blog: https://modernmacrame.com/blogs/blog/ghost-net-landscape 🧜🏼‍♀️🧵🌊 (at Elisabeth Jones Art Center) https://www.instagram.com/p/ByvY6WFh4ok/?igshid=c67t326pwbjy

[radio-volta]

Okay im genuinely curious: what does eating fish have to do with plastic? Line i really dont know and im curious, no hate whatsoever

Thank you for asking, anon.

Plastic waste that gets into nature tends to end up in oceans, sometimes in bigger pieces, but often broken down into microplastics. A notable example, the so called Great Pacific Garbage Patch is an area full of floating plastic in the Pacific Ocean – 79,000 metric tons of it (that’s the combined weight of over 564 average-sized blue whales). And although 94% of the individual pieces in the Patch are microplastic, 46% of the weight is… fishing nets and other abandoned fishing gear. Even though 20% of that is estimated to have ended up in the ocean with the tsunami in 2011, it’s still a crazy amount of plastic just from fishing. [Source]

(Referring to the post this question is related to – yes, synthetic textiles are a big source of microplastics. One estimate I found says they might make up as much as 35% of the microplastic in the oceans. My personal beef with the post is how it blames vegans for something that basically everyone does – that is, using clothes made of synthetic textiles. There are many plastic-free alternatives, but all textiles have their downsides; ethical and ecological alternatives tend to be more expensive and therefore not available for everyone. Areas with more poverty also tend to have poorer wastewater treatment, which exacerbates the microplastic problem.)

So in conclusion, the fishing industry causes a shitload of pollution and eating fish is something most people can afford to stop doing (unless you live somewhere where it’s the main source of food and other alternatives aren’t viable).

[jemimacaleyfmpyear1]

As I’m looking at the destruction and violence towards wildlife due to man made items, I’m looking art statistics and real facts to raise awareness of the devastating truth. Today, I’m looking at sea life and how Marian animals such as turtles, sharks, dolphins, whales and birds are being killed or injured severely due to fishing nets.

On the WWF website link (which I’ve linked in my last post) there is a section which highlights what fish netting is doing to the Marian world and coral. On there website it explains how thousands and thousands of miles of nets are set in the worlds seas each day. Modern fishing gear are normally undetectable and are difficult to see on the ocean floor and also very strong, which means that is very difficult to get them back. A shocking amount of sea life is hauled up every day and even the ones that they don’t want die anyway before they are placed back into the ocean. Fishing industry leaders increasingly realise the need to reduce this phenomenon. Bycatch occurs because modern fishing gear is very efficient, often covers an extensive area, which means that all animals are caught in the netting not just fish. Poor fisheries further contributes to the ever growing problem. Fishing netting also goes deep on the ocean floor and when they string it back up it rips through the seabeds causing unreversable damage to the precious coral life. Most Fishing gear are also non selective which means that species that don’t mean to get will be caught too. Fishing netting tends to get trapped and stuck everywhere so it is generally left there for other animals to be caught and stuck for no reason.

It is estimated that over 300,000 small whales, dolphins, and porpoises die from entanglement in fishing nets each year, making this the single largest cause of mortality for small cetaceans. Species such as the Vaquita from the gulf of California and Maui’s dolphin from New Zealand face extinction if they threat of unselective fishing gear is not eliminated. Hundreds of thousands of endangered loggerhead turtles and critically endangered leatherback turtles drown annually on long lines set for tuna, swordfish and other fish.

What WWF is doing -

WWF are working to develop alternative fishing gear, and they are also raising awareness and using charity money to put towards helping marine animals to be safe.

Statistics and facts -

The lines of the nets are also dangerous- thin and sharp, they can catch animal bodies, causing infections, loss of body parts and very little movement. For animals that need oxygen to breathe like turtles and dolphins-becoming caught in these nets is a death sentence to drown. Each year, more then 100,000 marine mammals die when they ingest debris or become entangled in ropes, fishing line, fishing nets and other debris dumped into the ocean. As many as 2 million seabirds also die every year due to ingestion and entanglement. One of the biggest threats to sea turtles is being accidentally caught and killed in fishing nets. Trapped in a net, then turtles are dragged through the water with no access to the surface to breathe, causing them to then drown. Fishing nets make up 46 percent of the plastic in the great pacific garbage patch. According to the laws of California, casting nets are illegal to use for inland fishing but you can still use them to fish. Fishing gear, which has been abandoned and lost at sea, makes up most of the plastic pollution in some parts of the worlds oceans and seas, according to a report by environmental charity Greenpeace. After death due to getting stuck in the netting, their rotting carcasses draw in still more victims and the cycle goes on and on, basically forever. The plastics that make up most of the nets in the oceans today take around 600 years to break apart. There are many sea animals out there now that have netting across their bodies which are stuck on them so even though they haven’t been killed by the nets they are still being tortured everyday.

[newstfionline]

Plastic Bag Found at the Bottom of World’s Deepest Ocean Trench

By Sarah Gibbens, National Geographic, May 11, 2018

The Mariana Trench--the deepest point in the ocean--extends nearly 36,000 feet down in a remote part of the Pacific Ocean. But if you thought the trench could escape the global onslaught of plastics pollution, you would be wrong.

A recent study revealed that a plastic bag, like the kind given away at grocery stores, is now the deepest known piece of plastic trash, found at a depth of 36,000 feet inside the Mariana Trench. Scientists found it by looking through the Deep-Sea Debris Database, a collection of photos and videos taken from 5,010 dives over the past 30 years that was recently made public.

Of the classifiable debris logged in the database, plastic was the most prevalent, and plastic bags in particular made up the greatest source of plastic trash. Other debris came from material like rubber, metal, wood, and cloth, and some is yet to be classified.

Most of the plastic--a whopping 89 percent--was the type of plastic that is used once and then thrown away, like a plastic water bottle or disposable utensil.

While the Mariana Trench may seem like a dark, lifeless pit, it hosts more life than you might think. NOAA’s Okeanos Explorer vessel searched the region’s depths in 2016 and found diverse life-forms, including species like coral, jellyfish, and octopus. The recent study also found that 17 percent of the images of plastic logged in the database showed interactions of some kind with marine life, like animals becoming entangled in the debris.

The new study is just one among many showing just how prevalent plastic pollution has become worldwide. Single-use plastics are virtually everywhere, and they may take hundreds of years or more to break down once in the wild.

Plastic has recently become a greater focus of the environmental movement, being featured prominently this past Earth Day, for example. While plastic can enter the ocean directly, such as trash blown from a beach or discarded from ships, a study published in 2017 found that most of it is flowing into the sea from 10 rivers that run through heavily populated regions.

Discarded fishing gear is also a major source of plastic pollution, and a study published last March found that the material comprised the bulk of the Texas-size Great Pacific Garbage Patch floating between Hawaii and California.

[blueimmersion-blog]

Trimix Diver Courses

Novice or intermediate scuba divers in Center America have discovered to scuba dive primarily in lakes and solely dream of scuba diving in an ocean. Belize, opposite to what one believes, affords loads of dive sights for the novice scuba diver from boat dives to shore entries.  Trimix Diver Courses

The Atolls Glovers has many dive websites for the novice and intermediate scuba divers starting from 5 ft to 130 ft depths. Lengthy Caye Lagoon is a pleasant place to have a soothing dive and simply to benefit from the serenity of the atolls system. To discover the inside partitions of the lagoon a ship is required however there may be a lot to see scuba diving from the shores too. Within the turtle grass and patch coral there are an abundance of smaller reef fish and there are additionally stingrays, eagle rays and way more together with sleeping nurse sharks at depths of not more than 30 ft. In and across the docks could not look that engaging however there may be loads of marine life to see by turning over coconut shells and no matter else you would possibly discover mendacity on the underside. Younger spiny lobsters and an occasional seahorse could be noticed together with filefish and snake eels.

There may be the Lengthy Caye Reduce which is an effective place for snorkelers and scuba divers alike. And remember in regards to the scuba dive digicam hanging out of your wrist because the abundance of marine life within the shallow depths could be so breath taking that you simply neglect to take an image. Within the coral heads you will note a big number of reef fish from youthful ones to extra mature fish. Watch rigorously as you may even see some massive morays and 4 eyed butterfly fish. Sometimes you'll be able to spot a brief nostril batfish to high off the underwater journey.

Read More

For the intermediate scuba divers there are a lot dive websites. Atolls Glovers for instance has the Center Caye Wall and has a number of the most lovely coral formations within the space. At depths of 35 ft to 125 ft there may be loads of marine life and at 50 ft is the highest of the wall with overhangs, cuts that makes for a pleasant place for resting nurse sharks and a wide range of different colleges of fish. On the high of the wall there's a mild present that pulls many species of underwater habitants corresponding to passing reef sharks, loggerhead turtles and an ever altering frontier. The visibility right here is spectacular making the passing by reef shark simple to see and to  so deliver a dive digicam with you.

It's not a dream for the novice or intermediate scuba divers: it may be a actuality. See your first shark or a loggerhead turtle and discover this extensive open frontier that is ready for the adventurer in you. In most of those dive websites it would be best to have  diving mild. Simply be sure your scuba gear is in nice working order and pack the dive digicam and go discover the underwater frontier.

The industrial divers work under floor of water, utilizing scuba gear to examine, restore, take away, or set up gear and buildings. They might use a wide range of energy and hand instruments, corresponding to drills, sledgehammers, torches, and welding gear. They might conduct checks or experiments, rig explosives, or  buildings or marine life.

The Industrial Divers should be capable of do the next job features:

The industrial divers job description entails checking and sustaining diving gear corresponding to helmets, masks, air tanks, harnesses and gauges. They examine and check docks, ships, bouyage programs, plant intakes and outflows, and underwater pipelines, cables, and sewers, utilizing closed circuit tv, nonetheless pictures, and testing gear. They receive details about diving duties and environmental situations. They function underwater video, sonar, recording, and associated gear to analyze underwater buildings or marine life. They carry out actions associated to underwater search and rescue, salvage, restoration, and cleanup operations. They carry out offshore oil and gasoline exploration and extraction duties corresponding to conducting underwater surveys and repairing and sustaining drilling rigs and platforms. They get well objects by inserting rigging round sunken objects, hooking rigging to crane traces, and working winches, derricks, or cranes to boost objects. They take away obstructions from strainers and marine railway or launching methods, utilizing pneumatic and energy hand instruments. They restore ships, bridge foundations, and different buildings under the water line, utilizing caulk, bolts, and hand instruments. They set or information placement of pilings and sandbags to offer assist for buildings corresponding to docks, bridges, cofferdams, and platforms. They take acceptable security precautions, corresponding to monitoring dive lengths and depths, and registering with authorities earlier than diving expeditions start. They take away garbage and air pollution from the ocean.

They will need to have information of machines and instruments, together with their designs, makes use of, restore, and upkeep. They need to be capable of coordinate the motion of your arms, legs, and torso collectively when the entire physique is in movement. They need to use palms and arms in dealing with, putting in, positioning, and transferring supplies, and manipulating issues.

A diving watch with automated options is a sort of watch that was designed for divers who want to dive to appreciable depths in a secure and managed manner. An ordinary dive watch has widespread options, together with water resistance to over 10ATM or successfully 100 meters in sea stage (330 toes). The very best quality watches are often designed for a lot deeper dives and may go all the way down to depths of over 200 meter or extra.

Utilizing modern-day know-how, an automated dive watch will offer you extra performance than has ever been potential utilizing the usual traditional diving applied sciences of the previous. A real look ahead to diving should immediately conform to the ISO 6425 worldwide customary that requires it to cross a sequence of rigorous checks so that or not it's deemed secure sufficient for critical diving missions. When diving watches gr passes the testing process, the producer is permitted to print the phrases "DIVER'S" on the again of the case to inform patrons that the timepiece has been topic to the ISO testing procedures and that it's secure and dependable in response to a minimal customary.

Related Topics:

http://blue-immersion.org/courses/tdi-courses/tdi-advanced-trimix-diver/ http://blue-immersion.org/courses/tdi-courses/tdi-trimix-diver/

A number of the different notable options of the ISO 6425 customary embrace a compulsory uni directional bezel that options at the least 5 minute elapsed minute markings in addition to a pre choose market that ensures  particular time marker can be utilized to assist use the conventional watch time as a measure of the full length of a dive. A divers watch should even be seen within the full absence of seen mild at a distance of 25cm. Each dive watch should by some means point out that the watch is working, even in pitch black situations, to attain this most divers watches for women and men function an illumination system, that means that you can see the motion of the watch in the dead of night.

Dive watches are additionally subjected to a level of shock resistance and resistance to magnetism. The check entails a stable, heavy plastic hammer on a pendulum. A blow to the facet of the face is given to check its potential to resist such a blow in an actual life state of affairs. A look ahead to diving can be examined for rust resistance and the strap examined for sturdiness. A diving watch also needs to show a battery life indicator and will clearly point out to the consumer when the battery is lifeless. Clearly some of these watches should cross a way more rigorous testing course of than could be stated for the usual mens sports activities watches. Whereas a divers timepiece tends to price extra money, they're much more durable and sturdy and in lots of circumstances will final you a life time.

Related Topics:

TDI Instructor Courses Tec Diver Instructor Internship