August 9, 2012
This Year Could Be the Last for Underwater Habitats
By Katherine Moreno
A trend emerged in the 1960s spawning the construction of over forty sea floor laboratories, or “habitats,” in the U.S. and other countries around the world (Walsh 48). The laboratories, maintaining the same pressure inside as the sea outside, provided a means for marine biologists to conduct lengthy underwater research without having to go through the time-consuming process of decompressing every time they leave the water (Bell). Today, the Aquarius 2000 (called Aquarius prior to 1997) is the only operational sea floor laboratory in the world (Walsh 48).
Constructed in the 1980s and funded by the National Oceanic and Atmosphere Administration (NOAA), the Aquarius was originally supposed to be located at the USC Catalina Marine Science Center (CMSC) on Catalina Island. It was planned that the lab would be placed next to the island’s giant kelp forest (Walsh 49). However, USC’s marine science program changed direction, and the NOAA decided to move the underwater lab to the U.S. Virgin Islands (Walsh 49). Following 1989’s Hurricane Hugo, the Aquarius was repaired and then moved to its final home in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, adjacent to the Conch Reef, where it has been used for a variety of purposes, from coral reef research to astronaut training (Allen).
Underwater research laboratories are particularly useful when located near sea-floor features that make good sites for studies that occur over long periods of time and are not disrupted by the comings and goings of researchers, such as the Catalina Island kelp forest and the Conch Reef coral reef. However, the high cost of underwater habitats relative to the cost of conventional methods of working from a research vessel and using SCUBA gear, combined with the fact that sea floor laboratories are fixed in location and limit research opportunities to a specific site, has led to the decline of such facilities (Walsh 49). Even the future of the Aquarius 2000 is now in jeopardy—the Obama administration recently eliminated funding for the facility, which will force it to shut down if its staff is unable to find another way to fund the laboratory’s three million dollar annual budget (Allen).
Marine researchers are currently fighting to prove that the Aquarius 2000 is worth saving. Tom Potts, director of the facility, says divers at the lab get about “ten times the productivity over diving from the surface” (Allen). Sylvia Earle, former chief scientist for the NOAA, says underwater laboratories offer “the gift of time;” researchers get a different perspective when they can observe a fish for hours and hours without having to leave the water (Allen). Mark Patterson, a professor at the College of William and Mary, says the lab allows scientists “to conduct measurements and experiments using delicate instruments, something not possible on a two-hour dive” (Allen).
The loss of the last underwater research habitat would deprive marine researchers of the only existing facility that allows them to conduct long-term underwater studies. Hopefully the Aquarius 2000 will get the funding it needs and we will avoid losing such a unique and valuable resource.
Sources Cited:
Allen, Greg. “With Funding Gone, Last Undersea Lab Could Surface.” NPR, 17 July 2012. Web. 7 Aug. 2012.
Bell, Peter M. “Underwater lab.” Eos Trans. AGU 64.36 (1983): 537. Web. 7 Aug. 2012
Walsh, Don. “Several firsts and a final farewell.” Sea Power (1998): 41-49. ProQuest. PDF file.
About the author: Katherine Moreno is a senior working toward a bachelor’s degree in environmental studies at USC Dana and David Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences.
Happy Fish, Happy People: Keeping Marine Ecosystems Healthy Comes Full Circle
By Richelle Tanner
As I’ve lived my whole life on the coast, seeing marine life a stone’s throw away from the shore is no surprise to me, in fact, I’ve come to expect it. The plethora of wildlife that I take for granted would not be there if not for the various environmental regulations imposed by authorities such as (on the federal level) the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Coastal Zone Management Act, the National Marine Sanctuaries Act, the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act, and the National Park Service Organic Act, among many others. Over-fishing and water pollution are major contributors to the decline of marine biodiversity; one way these effects can be stifled is with the installation of a Marine Protected Area (MPA).
A prime example of a successful MPA is on Catalina Island, CA around the USC Wrigley Institute For Environmental Studies. In my short time here, the quantity and diversity of marine life that I’ve seen while snorkeling is unparalleled — where else can one stumble upon 30+ enormous bat rays and leopard sharks practically on top of each other on the sandy bottom just off the shore? For anyone witnessing this firsthand, it can be hard to fathom that the effectiveness of MPAs is being questioned within the scientific community. Granted, the impact on intertidal zones rather than areas beyond the littoral zone garners more concern, however, it is applicable to all MPAs’ regions. An exemplary concern is the act of illegally harvesting prohibited species in easily accessible zones. This undermines the intentions of the MPAs, as the restrictions on harvesting species and disturbing marine species and habitats are in place to protect healthy biodiversity from human influences. To read more about the value of MPAs, click here.
In a MPA, certain restrictions for pollution, interaction, and harvesting are imposed in order to preserve the natural marine habitat. For example, around Catalina Island, boats are not allowed to drop anchor, the harvest of shellfish is prohibited, and only certain coastal pelagic species are available for harvest, among countless other regulations regarding pollution. In addition, there are regulations on land uses, as certain practices in maintaining soil health can impact nearby marine ecosystems. Nitrogen fixation and denitrification are issues normally associated with soil and agriculture, however, runoff from excessive fertilization can offset the natural balance in an ecosystem (in this case, a marine ecosystem). This can indirectly lead to nutrient pollution and/or dead zones, which marine ecosystems are protected against when they become MPAs. Also in the case of the Wrigley Institute on Catalina, certain herbicides cannot be used on invasive species such as fennel, since the runoff would eventually make its way to the MPA and contaminate it. This type of marine conservation is one of the more effective methods, as it is preventative rather than restorative (after the damage has been done). For example, it is infinitely better for an oil spill to be prevented than even the best, least intrusive clean-up of an oil spill. Similarly, it is easier to protect biodiversity and pristine habitats than to try to recreate them after allowing ecosystem decay due to anthropogenic influences.
As with any ecosystem, humans are as much a part of it as any other organisms. Not only can we negatively influence it with pollution and overuse, or positively influence it (or at least protect it from our own harmful ways) with protection laws, but the ecosystem can affect us accordingly with its overall health. Climate change is inevitably a factor in the health of an ecosystem, and its impact on MPAs is a factor in their effectiveness. Climate change is both influenced by humans and can influence human activities; it exemplifies the “full circle” relationship that we have with our surrounding ecosystems. In establishing more MPAs and similar programs, humans will benefit because healthy ecosystems are more efficient and preserve more natural biodiversity, slowing the growing effects of anthropogenic influences on the world, one reserve at a time. Although the trade-off for a clean, healthy MPA involves relinquishing economic benefits and coastal transportation conveniences, it is worth it. With a growing population and increasing anthropogenic influences on the environment in our future, MPAs are an essential part of preserving biodiversity and healthy marine ecosystems for years to come.
http://www.mpa.gov/resources/faqs/
http://www.springerlink.com.libproxy.usc.edu/content/017187002nt71191/fulltext.html
http://www.sciencedirect.com.libproxy.usc.edu/science/article/pii/S0964569110000037
About the author: Richelle Tanner is a sophomore in the USC Dornsife College and the USC Thornton School of Music pursuing a double degree in Environmental Studies, B.S., and Jazz Studies, B.M.. She intends to pursue graduate studies in Marine Science and originally is from Seattle, WA.
Santa Catalina: the Bison’s Makeshift Home
By: Lauren Stoneburner
Santa Catalina Island—a coastal Mediterranean island off the coast of California—is the least likely place to find America’s quintessential prairie animal, the American Bison (Bison bison). However, the filming of a Western movie in 1924 summoned these beasts from the grasslands of central North America to this isolated island, which they have come to call “home.”
As residents and tourists grew accustomed to their presence, they became an iconic feature on the islands. More than one million tourists visit Catalina Island every year, and many of those tourists come specifically to see the bison (Trivedi). The bison has not only brought revenue to Catalina’s economy, but residents have adopted a sense of pride over these animals, contributing to the island’s culture (Sweitzer). The economic and cultural value that these beloved animals provide has protected the species from being completely eradicated. However, their numbers must be limited, for their impact on the native island ecosystem is undeniable.
Because of its long-term isolation, Santa Catalina has developed an intricate ecosystem, composed of specialized species that play very specific roles within the ecosystem. Prior to the bison’s arrival, Santa Catalina had never before hosted large, grazing ungulates (Sweitzer), so their presence has greatly disturbed the dynamics of this fragile ecosystem. The bison’s primary impacts stem from their grazing, trampling, and wallowing behavior.
Catalina’s bison currently graze on a variety of native and non-native vegetation. Though they primarily eat grasses and forbs, they have added to their diets cactus and some woody schrubs, including the endemic coastal scrub oak (Sweitzer). Thus, bison do control the exotic species populations through grazing, but they directly limit the success of native plants as well. In total, the pressure that bison have put on native plants is far greater than the benefit of their controlling invasive competitors (Sweitzer).
Additionally, bison wallowing has also promoted the spread of invasive plants. As bison wallow, they embed plant seeds into their fur and later release the seeds into the environment as they wallow elsewhere. This behavior directly spreads non-native seeds across the island, allowing the plants to establish populations in new regions and further outcompete native species (Sweitzer). These impacts can be reduced by limiting the bison population size, for fewer bison directly lessens non-native plant dispersal (Sweitzer).
Trampling, along with grazing and wallowing, causes the worst damage—soil degradation. These behaviors kill the vegetation, which hold the soil in place. As a result, the soil becomes loose and exposed, leaving it vulnerable to erosion (Trivedi). Erosion washes away fertile soil, transporting critical nutrients, such as nitrogen and phosphorus needed for plant growth, and microorganisms living in the soil that perform ecosystem functions, such as nitrification, decomposition of dead organics, and recycling of other nutrients. Thus, the impact that bison have on soil quality is catastrophic, for the soil ecosystem is lost and no longer provides nutrients that native plants need to support the rest of the ecosystem. This provides further opportunities for invasive plant species with less specified soil requirements.
The Catalina Island Conservancy manages the bison herd size, keeping the population between 150 and 200 individuals (“History”). This status quo compromises the environmental integrity of the island and the cultural and economic pressures. Considering how strongly attached the residents and tourists are to the American bison, it is not currently feasible that the bison will be entirely eradicated. However, the current status quo still sacrifices more environmental integrity than should be allowed.
Catalina Island holds an especially unique and fragile ecosystem that is currently threatened by the proliferation of invasive species. As bison continue to persist in high numbers, restoration attempts will be undone. Soil quality will continue to decline, and invasive species will further dominate native landscapes. Many decades or centuries from now, the bison may become naturalized, becoming integrated into the island’s intricate ecosystem. However, if Catalina’s native ecosystem continues to deteriorate by the bison’s doing, residents may have to accept that this island is not a permanent home, but a makeshift residence that is breaking down, long expired, and in need of significant repair.
About the author: Lauren Stoneburner is a sophomore undergraduate majoring in Environmental Studies and Biological Anthropology at the USC Dana and David Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences.
Works Cited:
“History.” Catalina Island Conservancy. Catalina Island Conservancy, 2009. Web. 09 Aug. 2012. http://www.catalinaconservancy.org/index.php?s=wildlife .
Sweitzer, Rick; Van Vuren, Dirk. “Bison Study Executive Summary.” Santa Catalina Island Conservancy. Catalina Island Conservancy, 2009. Web. 07 Aug. 2012. http://www.catalinaconservancy.org/userfiles/files/Bison%2520Study%2520Executive%2520Summary.pdf .
Trivedi, Bijal P. “”Tourist” Bison Devastate California Island.” National Geographic. National Geographic Society, 17 Dec. 2001. Web. 07 Aug. 2012. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2001/12/1217_TVbison.html .
Trailblazers: Rudimentary Soil Survey of the Deer Valley Trail
By Will Getz
The Deer Valley trail, recently completed by USC ENST faculty and students[i] provides great insight into the Mediterranean climate and chaparral biome that characterizes southern California. Dry and warm with low precipitation, this climate still supports a variety of grasses, plants and tree species.[ii] Located a few hundred meters from the Wrigley Center, Deer Valley serves as part of the greater watershed that terminates into the Marine Protected Area (MPA) of Fisherman’s Cove. This course’s weekly fieldwork has been dedicated to analyzing soils along the Deer Valley trail and their possible role in the larger watershed dynamic as well as the other environmental issues associated with them.
The surface soil quality along the trail seems fairly uniform up the valley supporting large populations of the native Coastal Sage, Coastal Prickly Pear Cactus, and Toyon bush, and other scrub. However, the climate has brought on the prolific invasive Mediterranean Fennel, which has outcompeted native scrub. Fennel removal is one of the new projects of the Wrigley Center, and this class has aided in that effort. The prolific and virulent Fennel are persistent and can survive in a wide variety of soils and variable climate conditions. Controlling the already prevalent Fennel is a challenging task, and is the subject of future work by the ENST program. About a half kilometer into the trail there is a section of soil, which has undergone great degradation where the organic layer and topsoil were removed for road development and subsequently eroded via water and wind. This area is a site of restoration, with the goal to regenerate the top layers of soil and seed native scrub. Preventing large-scale loss of soil quantity and quality such as occurred in is important to maintain health of the watershed.
In our elementary survey of the surface layer soils on the trail (most likely the O and A Horizons), we sampled ten different sites and took one sample at the beachfront adjacent to Fisherman’s cove to analyze particle size and soil porosity as well as pH. Due to material and time constraints, we were only able to analyze six of the samples collected. Presently, the soil texture analyses have not yielded any conclusive results. However, from the raw pH data collected, one interesting trend that emerged was an increasing basicity of soils moving down the watershed from the top of the trail towards the trail entrance at Little Fisherman’s Cove road. The pH of the soil at the top of the trail is 6.0. This value gradually increased moving up the trail to the trail entrance where the pH value is 7.0-7.5. The pH of the soil at the beachfront was measured to be 6.5. In viewing a soil survey of Catalina conducted by the US Department of Agriculture, most soils at comparable altitudes with similar vegetation had pH within the neutral pH range observed 6.0-7.0.[iii] According to the survey, most surface soils on Catalina are slightly acidic, with some being more acidic such as Dewpoint having a pH of 5.5 and Luff a pH of 5.3 at the time of the survey in 2008.
It is premature to make any conclusions from this rough survey of the soils. We certainly did not perform a comprehensive survey of the trail given a number of details: The sample size was not large enough and we did not collect enough replicates of soil samples to reanalyze in order to remove probability that observed results were due to error or random chance. We also only analyzed soils that were in relative proximity to the trail, and not those of a significant distance from the trail path. However, these interesting preliminary results are motivation for extensive future study. The variation of pH we observed was not drastic, moving from slightly acidic to slightly alkaline down the trail. If this trend is accurate, it may reveal that soils near the bottom of the trail have a better buffering capacity or have greater interaction with basic minerals, which can affect what flora are capable of growing which can change watershed dynamic. These initial tests hold great promise for future soil surveys of the Deer Valley trail looking into how the soils might play a role in the watershed function and proliferation of invasive species.
About the Author: Will Getz is a junior working toward dual degrees, a BS in Chemistry, and a BA in East Asian Languages in Cultures with a minor in Environmental Studies in the USC Dana and David Dornsife School of Letters, Arts, and Sciences.
[i] Hoops, R. (2011, July 15). A Trail-Blazing Summer Internship USC Dana and David Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences. Retrieved August 7, 2012, from http://dornsife.usc.edu/news/stories/980/a-trail-blazing-summer-internship/
[ii] Regional Climate Center. (2012, June 30). SANTA CATALINA WB AIRPO, CALIFORNIA – Climate Summary . Western Regional Climate Center. Retrieved August 9, 2012, from http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca7910
[iii] United States Department of Agriculture. (2008). Soil Survey of Santa Catalina Island, California (Part of the Soil Survey Area of the Channel Islands (CA688)) Washington, DC: Natural Resources Conservation Service. Retrieved August 7, 2012, from http://soils.usda.gov/survey/online_surveys/california/catalina/Catalina_CA.pdf
[i] Hoops, R. (2011, July 15). A Trail-Blazing Summer Internship USC Dana and David Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences. Retrieved August 7, 2012, from http://dornsife.usc.edu/news/stories/980/a-trail-blazing-summer-internship/
[ii] Regional Climate Center. (2012, June 30). SANTA CATALINA WB AIRPO, CALIFORNIA – Climate Summary . Western Regional Climate Center. Retrieved August 9, 2012, from http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca7910
[iii] United States Department of Agriculture. (2008). Soil Survey of Santa Catalina Island, California (Part of the Soil Survey Area of the Channel Islands (CA688)) Washington, DC: Natural Resources Conservation Service. Retrieved August 7, 2012, from http://soils.usda.gov/survey/online_surveys/california/catalina/Catalina_CA.pdf
Protect Our Oceans
By: Jordan Smith-Newman
In the many environmental studies courses I have been required to take as part of my major, I have learned the huge range of threats to which marine habitats are exposed. From unsustainable and destructive fishing to heavy-footed coral trampling, from runoff of land-based agriculture to the threats of global warming, ocean acidification, and bleaching, numerous factors are placing stress on our oceans.
These same oceans provide us with beauty and are home to thousands of flora and fauna species. They supply millions of people with their primary protein and absorb much of the problematic atmospheric carbon dioxide. Because these resources are so valuable international agencies have recently taken action to protect and preserve such striking ecosystems.
Despite its reputation for not having reached significant outcomes, the 2002 Earth Summit on Sustainable Development held in Johannesburg, South Africa has succeeded in calling for the establishment of marine protected areas. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) defines the general function of Marine Protected Areas as a place to help protect resources within the marine environment for the benefit of present and future generations.
One such Marine Protected Area is Big Fisherman’s Cove, right off of the USC Wrigley Institute for Environmental Studies on Catalina Island. The land was formally owned by the Wrigley family, the founders of the chewing gum company, with the ultimate goal of preservation. The kelp beds are some of the largest in the world, reason alone to protect the area. The kelp and cove also shelter the California garibaldi, leopard sharks, white sea bass and lobsters, to name a few fish species. Big Fisherman’s Cove falls into the 5% designated Marine Protected Areas of Southern California that are fully protected no-take areas. The commitment and relationship between the Wrigley family and USC has been crucial in keeping the cove pristine.
A similar marine protected area is Ngederrak Reef in the Republic of Palau. The vulnerability of the coral reef ecosystems has led to its recognition as a Special Management Area by the Koror State Government Department of Conservation and Law Enforcement. Unless conducting research with permission and a permit from the State, no one can enter the area because Ngederrak Reef goes beyond a no-take zone and is a no-entry zone. Continual surveying of the reef has been effective for the conservation and preservation of species biodiversity.
While protection of marine ecosystems is imperative, practical and effective means of enforcement have proven to be challenging. There must be continued and additional work by respective governments to further protect both official Marine Protected Areas as well as the general marine habitat.
About the author: Jordan forgot to submit her author bio….