4 ms·

We don't know what the cause is. From the article: Scientists are now scrambling to figure out what is killing these 40-foot-long marine mammals. The “what” is

We don't know what the cause is. From the article: Scientists are now scrambling to figure out what is killing these 40-foot-long marine mammals. The “what” is anything but obvious. Some scientists believe there may be too many whales for the population to sustain itself. Others say this explanation of “overcapacity” and “natural causes” overlooks the gantlet of hazards that grays now face — including ecosystem alteration, ship strikes, entanglement in fishing gear, plastics pollution, disease, ocean acidification and loss of kelp forests.

anyfoo 5y ago
> We don't know what the cause is. I'm always wondering what cause someone who replies with this is trying to advance. You are probably correct, we don't know what the cause is for this specific problem. We do know that we cause massive, let's say, "alterations" to the oceans by acidification and plastic pollution alone, and there is very strong indication that the effects of those alterations are not positive. So the worst case when addressing those issues is that we have solved or at the very least ameliorated acidification and plastic pollution, only to find out that gray whales dying specifically was not covered by those causes. Yes, finding out the actual cause is important (there may be other issues we are not yet aware of), but prioritizing the recovery of the ocean in general is not exactly a waste of effort in the meantime. As an analogy, if a bathroom smells like excrement, fixing the toilets known to overflow is a suitable activity. If it still smells like excrement after, or if you discover a different cause while the toilets are being fixed, you're still glad you fixed those toilets.
- yarky 5y ago
  I agree, the "we don't know that the cause is" type of answer makes me think of those doctors saying back in the days that we didn't know whether smoking cigarettes caused health issues. There's something called common sense and it's whatever contradicts common sense that deserves a clear explanation/evidence. It's quite obvious that whales shouldn't expect much from the way we treat our oceans.
- betwixthewires 5y ago
  Cause? Saying "it is very possible, even likely, that human activity caused this, but as of right now we just don't know, so let's not jump to conclusions and do the science first" requires some shady motive now. Refusal to blame yourself with literally 0 evidence is itself evidence that someone is an oil company shill or something.
  - themaninthedark 5y ago
    Troubleshooting is very much like science. If you are trying to fix the problem, finding the cause is very important. By just doing something, or worst many somethings, you may make the problem worse and still have no clue of how to fix it. Now something like this is a little harder because it is not just trying to fix a problem, it is trying to fix a problem with a time limit. Similar to emergency medicine. But harder because the patient is one who's anatomy and physiology you are not familiar with. And they might have reactions to the medicine you are giving them. The article keeps hinting at lack of food, malnourished, feeding in unusual places. Then goes on to say the last mass die off occurred during colder than usual weather as opposed the recent hotter then usual. It sounds like more data would be very helpful. Also >Refusal to blame yourself with literally 0 evidence is itself evidence that someone is an oil company shill or something. Is very hostile and breaks the guideline: >Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
    - techbio 5y ago
      I don't know that questioning this idiom breaks the guidelines. If not a shill it sounds like an ask for more resources, to save the gray whales or study the oceans, or something. Either way, "a precise cause has yet to be determined" seems to be playing a little too close to the vest, and can be true without being especially meaningful. "Bad ocean management" turns out to be more of a triage problem and less blue-sky research for the sake of knowledge.
    - betwixthewires 5y ago
      The insinuation that there's a motive to say "we don't quite know what it is yet", in the comment I was responding to, is all I addressed. That assumes bad faith, all I'm doing is pointing out how ridiculous such an assumption is.
- kortilla 5y ago
  > I'm always wondering what cause someone who replies with this is trying to advance. Rational thought? The search for truth? The moment we are happy with “humans lol” as an answer to everything, we’ve given up on science and solutions. In this scenario, finding the actual cause could actually lead to a specific solution (e.g. banning a particular type of sonar).
musha68k 5y ago
Ship strikes have been increasing over the years now as our ever-growing global economy depends on maritime transport. The scientists are working on good solutions but it might be too late, too many ships travel too fast these days[0]. They also mention this in the article: In a study published this year, a research team found that a variety of whales face risk of ship strikes. That was illustrated in May, when two fin whales came to port in San Diego, plastered to the hull of an Australian warship. But of all whales in the Pacific, grays are the most likely to be struck by ships, the study concluded. “Risk appeared greatest during south- and northbound migration when much of the gray whale population is moving through waters near shore” — places with “high vessel densities,” the study found. According to a NOAA database, 205 gray whales were killed by vessels between January 2016 and December 2020 in the eastern Pacific. [0] https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5zaW1wbGVjYXN0LmNvbS9xdFVjWnZzWA/episode/ODA4YmExMGUtYjU3MC00N2NlLTkwOTktMDcyNWMxNGRkYzUz?sa=X&ved=0CAUQkfYCahcKEwjQptjlh7fyAhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQAg&hl=en-CA https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5zaW1wbGV...
Igelau 5y ago
> Some scientists believe there may be too many whales for the population to sustain itself. That's the one no one wants to hear. Commercial whaling is practically extinct. Sustainable hunting (like Norway and the Minke) might actually be the solution.
- fractallyte 5y ago
  If the oceans can't sustain such a small population of whales, then the ocean ecology is itself a problem. Bear in mind that before voracious industrial-scale harvesting, oceans were teeming with life. This book says it all: https://www.jbmackinnon.com/the-once-and-future-world https://www.jbmackinnon.com/the-once-and-future-world
- pvaldes 5y ago
  > too many whales The more people will overfish, the more gray whales we should have around. And this whales can migrate.

anyfoo 5y ago

> We don't know what the cause is. I'm always wondering what cause someone who replies with this is trying to advance. You are probably correct, we don't know what the cause is for this specific problem. We do know that we cause massive, let's say, "alterations" to the oceans by acidification and plastic pollution alone, and there is very strong indication that the effects of those alterations are not positive. So the worst case when addressing those issues is that we have solved or at the very least ameliorated acidification and plastic pollution, only to find out that gray whales dying specifically was not covered by those causes. Yes, finding out the actual cause is important (there may be other issues we are not yet aware of), but prioritizing the recovery of the ocean in general is not exactly a waste of effort in the meantime. As an analogy, if a bathroom smells like excrement, fixing the toilets known to overflow is a suitable activity. If it still smells like excrement after, or if you discover a different cause while the toilets are being fixed, you're still glad you fixed those toilets.

yarky 5y ago
I agree, the "we don't know that the cause is" type of answer makes me think of those doctors saying back in the days that we didn't know whether smoking cigarettes caused health issues. There's something called common sense and it's whatever contradicts common sense that deserves a clear explanation/evidence. It's quite obvious that whales shouldn't expect much from the way we treat our oceans.
betwixthewires 5y ago
Cause? Saying "it is very possible, even likely, that human activity caused this, but as of right now we just don't know, so let's not jump to conclusions and do the science first" requires some shady motive now. Refusal to blame yourself with literally 0 evidence is itself evidence that someone is an oil company shill or something.
- themaninthedark 5y ago
  Troubleshooting is very much like science. If you are trying to fix the problem, finding the cause is very important. By just doing something, or worst many somethings, you may make the problem worse and still have no clue of how to fix it. Now something like this is a little harder because it is not just trying to fix a problem, it is trying to fix a problem with a time limit. Similar to emergency medicine. But harder because the patient is one who's anatomy and physiology you are not familiar with. And they might have reactions to the medicine you are giving them. The article keeps hinting at lack of food, malnourished, feeding in unusual places. Then goes on to say the last mass die off occurred during colder than usual weather as opposed the recent hotter then usual. It sounds like more data would be very helpful. Also >Refusal to blame yourself with literally 0 evidence is itself evidence that someone is an oil company shill or something. Is very hostile and breaks the guideline: >Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
  - techbio 5y ago
    I don't know that questioning this idiom breaks the guidelines. If not a shill it sounds like an ask for more resources, to save the gray whales or study the oceans, or something. Either way, "a precise cause has yet to be determined" seems to be playing a little too close to the vest, and can be true without being especially meaningful. "Bad ocean management" turns out to be more of a triage problem and less blue-sky research for the sake of knowledge.
  - betwixthewires 5y ago
    The insinuation that there's a motive to say "we don't quite know what it is yet", in the comment I was responding to, is all I addressed. That assumes bad faith, all I'm doing is pointing out how ridiculous such an assumption is.
kortilla 5y ago
> I'm always wondering what cause someone who replies with this is trying to advance. Rational thought? The search for truth? The moment we are happy with “humans lol” as an answer to everything, we’ve given up on science and solutions. In this scenario, finding the actual cause could actually lead to a specific solution (e.g. banning a particular type of sonar).

musha68k 5y ago

Ship strikes have been increasing over the years now as our ever-growing global economy depends on maritime transport. The scientists are working on good solutions but it might be too late, too many ships travel too fast these days[0]. They also mention this in the article: In a study published this year, a research team found that a variety of whales face risk of ship strikes. That was illustrated in May, when two fin whales came to port in San Diego, plastered to the hull of an Australian warship. But of all whales in the Pacific, grays are the most likely to be struck by ships, the study concluded. “Risk appeared greatest during south- and northbound migration when much of the gray whale population is moving through waters near shore” — places with “high vessel densities,” the study found. According to a NOAA database, 205 gray whales were killed by vessels between January 2016 and December 2020 in the eastern Pacific. [0] https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5zaW1wbGVjYXN0LmNvbS9xdFVjWnZzWA/episode/ODA4YmExMGUtYjU3MC00N2NlLTkwOTktMDcyNWMxNGRkYzUz?sa=X&ved=0CAUQkfYCahcKEwjQptjlh7fyAhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQAg&hl=en-CA https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9mZWVkcy5zaW1wbGV...

Igelau 5y ago

> Some scientists believe there may be too many whales for the population to sustain itself. That's the one no one wants to hear. Commercial whaling is practically extinct. Sustainable hunting (like Norway and the Minke) might actually be the solution.

fractallyte 5y ago
If the oceans can't sustain such a small population of whales, then the ocean ecology is itself a problem. Bear in mind that before voracious industrial-scale harvesting, oceans were teeming with life. This book says it all: https://www.jbmackinnon.com/the-once-and-future-world https://www.jbmackinnon.com/the-once-and-future-world
pvaldes 5y ago
> too many whales The more people will overfish, the more gray whales we should have around. And this whales can migrate.