![fish_stories[1]](https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/fish_stories1.jpg?quality=83)
From the department of wasted grant money and YALE SCHOOL OF FORESTRY & ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES, comes this models gone wild fish story moment, bold mine:
Global warming will drive vast, unpredictable shift in natural wealth
Examination of shifting fish stocks illustrates potential net loss in global wealth
On its surface, these biophysical movements will shift resources from communities and nations closer to the equator into places closer to the poles. In many cases this would seem to exacerbate inequalities between richer and poorer communities.
But writing in the journal Nature Climate Change, the researchers suggest that the impacts on net global wealth may not be that straightforward. In fact, they make the case that changes are more likely than not to produce an overall net loss in global wealth.
The reason, says lead author Eli Fenichel, is the inevitable and unpredictable price impacts in places where the quantities of fish stocks increase depending on the quality of its resource management, existing institutions, and fishing regulations.
“People are mostly focused on the physical reallocation of these assets, but I don’t think we’ve really started thinking enough about how climate change can reallocate wealth and influence the prices of those assets,” said Fenichel, an assistant professor at the Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies. “We think these price impacts can be really, really important.”
“We don’t know how this will unfold, but we do know there will be price effects. It’s just Economics 101 — prices reflect quantity and scarcity and natural capital is hard for people to move,” he said. “It’s as inevitable as the movement of these fish species.”
These impacts on the value of natural capital highlight the need for coherent climate policies that integrate biophysical and social measurements, the authors say.
The study was conducted by researchers at Yale, Rutgers, Princeton, and Arizona State universities.
The paper illustrates how the inclusive wealth framework advocated by UNEP and the World Bank makes it possible to measure the shift in the amounts and distribution of wealth as a consequence of climate change, when coupled with approaches to value natural capital developed by Fenichel and others. As an example, the researchers used fish migration data collected by Malin Pinsky, an assistant professor at Rutgers and co-author of the study.
“We tend to think of climate change as just a problem of physics and biology,” Pinsky said. “But people react to climate change as well, and at the moment we don’t have a good understanding for the impacts of human behavior on natural resources affected by climate change.”
To illustrate their case, the authors model potential outcomes in two fictitious fishing communities (Northport and Southport) in the face of climate-driven shifts in fish populations. Southport’s fish stocks decline as the climate changes while Northport’s stock increases; it’s a scenario that reflects changes anticipated in areas such as the mid-Atlantic and the waters off New England in the eastern U.S.
According to their analysis, if fish quantities increase in a northern community, for instance, it will likely cause a devaluation of that resource locally, particularly if that community isn’t equipped to manage the resource efficiently. “If the northern community isn’t a particularly good steward or manager, they’re going to place a low value on that windfall they just inherited,” Fenichel said. “So the aggregate could go down.”
“To be clear, the ‘gainers’ here are clearly better off,” he said. “They’re just not more better off than the losers are worse off. The losers are losing much more than the gainers are gaining. And when that happens, it’s not an efficient reallocation of wealth.”
The analysis suggests that policy discussions around climate change should address how the physical changes will affect wealth reallocation, rather than allowing nature to redistribute this wealth in an unpredictable, “willy-nilly” manner.
“It also points to a greater need for the physical sciences and social sciences to be done in a coordinated fashion,” Fenichel said. “As much as scientists are doing lots of wonderful multidisciplinary research, I don’t know that we’re necessarily collecting the kinds of data, in a coordinated fashion, that will inform the emerging metrics of sustainability.”
###
The project is one of several being conducted as part of a $1.4 million grant from the National Science Foundation.
Wow, look at the conclusions:
“To be clear, the ‘gainers’ here are clearly better off,” he said. “They’re just not more better off than the losers are worse off. The losers are losing much more than the gainers are gaining. And when that happens, it’s not an efficient reallocation of wealth.”
Such stellar leaps of science acumen the world has never seen; fictitious fishing communities with more fish are “clearly better off”. Gosh. Thank goodness we have Yale around to tell us this sort of thing.
How this stinker ever got funded, much less published is a sad commentary on NSF and science.
JFHC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
..Why a university degree has no value anymore…
http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/4772030845001/brown-university-students-too-busy-with-social-activism-to-do-homework/?intcmp=obnetwork#sp=show-clips
Hey man, you triggered me without an appropriate warning!
That comment was made in my safe zone, and now I am inconsolably offended.
And why are they singling out brown university students anyway?
Racists!
/sarc off
LOL
Global warming must be the cause of why my cats are peeing in the pantry. Can I get a grant?
You are seeing the Cat Conspiracy To Pee. Be grateful it isn’t on your bed, too.
Was Yogi Berra one of the authors?
“It’s as inevitable as the movement of these fish species.”
You can’t make this sort of nonsense up!
“Our hypothesis, that commercially viable fish species will migrate somewhat north and south when ocean waters warm (as they do in El Nino years) from off the coasts of poor Latin American and African countries to the North American, European and Australian coasts is easily modeled, and can therefore be used as another area where UN, WMF and other blood bank elitests of the NWO can prove the need for International intervention to transfer more wealth from Canada,Australia, the US and the EEC to emerging markets. And we get paid to do this! Wheee!”
the real question here is not whether this assessment is accurate
but whether it can be related to fossil fuel emissions.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2725743
““They’re just not more better off than the losers are worse off. ”
That there is some mighty find use of them there language words. I wonder if there was a more better way to say it.
..Nah, it was betterest theys culd due !
This is the English Language crisis, now.
So the Bering Sea and Nova Scotia will remain great places for fishing fleets?
Reblogged this on Norah4you's Weblog and commented:
Somewhere over the rainbow I do hope that the religious CO2-believers understand that reality beats fiction,
and while it’s allowed for any human to be stupid,
it’s never good to prove it him-/herself…
Where have all the money gone collected by true CO2-threat believers? Has anyone seen an estimated total cost for the believers’ so called experts “studie”
and
above all have anyone of the belivers understood that this winter the Antarctic is even worse than when the belivers ship had to be resqued from the frozen ice of Antarctic?
Guess at least some of you are aware of a potential true scientists been frozen in with an ice-breaking ship travelling to a true (hopefully) scientstation i Antarctic with supplies and exchanging scholars…..
Norah,
I’ve been on the ‘Aurora Australis’ – about twenty years ago, now.
One or two design problems, but, overall, a sturdy ship, with good Masters [I met both] Officers and crew.
The reported weather – ‘sustained 80 knot winds’ I saw in one report – may be a bit of a problem in a blizzard, especially to a rather bluff, high-sided vessel.
Think also car carriers and container ships.
I expect all on board will be OK – I certainly hope so.
Auto
Good to hear you are all well. I only wish I had been 26 instead of 66. At least I would have loved to see the sea from Australia to Antarctica. I am one of the few who love high sea. Been out in 40 sek/m so not the highest waves but still I loved it. The sea never is the same from one moment to the next and that’s the best there is looking out over water and no land
Does it really differ much from earnestly debating how many angels can dance on the point of a needle??
Even an idiot can see straight through this one , I should know because I am one .
Fish are fine with temperature change of a small degree as long as the temperature changes slow enough for their metabolism to cope with.
For example 1″ size fish species can tolerate 4 or 5 degrees change in a day, as long as their metabolism can adjust quicker than the temperature changes. Fish have a range they can tolerate and a time within that change can happen that is OK. 2 degrees change in 2 minutes is obviously bad.
A fish would not notice 0.01c let alone migrate because of that change. Even for small 1″ fish, they can tolerate almost 1 degree change per hour for many species.
When I say degree I mean c not f
==============================================================================
“Many studies have shown that critical natural resources, including fish stocks, are moving poleward as the planet warms.”
===============================================================================
Really, and the list of those papers? If they exist, I will bet dollars to donuts they do not say that, but instead say many IPC models say this will happen in the future.
I should have read all the comments, as my concerns were accurate. Thanks to Scotts William Benet’s comment above I see they have redefined the meaning of the word “observation”
===========================================================================
“What is an observation?
We defined an observation as one where a biological response was, at a minimum, discussed in relation to EXPECTED impacts of climate change.”
============================================================================
So, with Popper rolling in his grave, an “OBSERVATION” is now a discussion of an “EXPECTED” future event.
Scott goes on to quote the study further…
============================================================================
“We selected all studies that focused on climate change regardless of whether the primary climate variable was temperature, sea ice, pH or “climate oscillation” such as the North Atlantic Oscillation index or Pacific Decadal Oscillation.”
============================================================================
So major natural drivers of ocean currents and sea ice flux, and natural affects they may have on species movements are now blamed on your SUV. If you are not sufficiently alarmed by this, preliminary indications from their next study indicates that last June they observed humpback whales migrating thousands of miles North due to CAGW. And for those that criticized our definition of an observation, this was not a computer model, we actually saw this!
If this hypothesis is true can someone explain why cod stocks in the North Sea which have completely recovered in the last 20 years are not migrating northwards to polar regions?
Recovered somewhat not completely, and the North Sea cod stocks are shifting North.
“The past three decades have also seen an apparent shift in the mean distribution of cod within the North Sea, to more northerly and on average deeper waters; this has been reported by studies based on fisheries-independent International Bottom Trawl Surveys (IBTS; see Hedger et al., 2004; Perry et al., 2005; Rindorf & Lewy, 2006; Dulvy et al., 2008). As this shift coincided with the decline in stock size, it is important to understand its possible causes, not only because of predicted links between distribution and abundance (Blanchard et al., 2005) but also because changes in fish distributions may have knock-on effects upon fisheries (Cheung et al., 2013).”
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gcb.12513/full
As this shift coincided with the decline in stock size
=================
or it simply be that fishing is heaviest in the shallower southern waters, and there is no shift in fish. the shift is in population due to uneven fishing.
Most of the fishermen I know and have fished with go where the fish are. The shift in population is due to both warming and fishing pressure, the analysis shows that the move to the north and deeper water is temperature related and the shift towards the east is related to fishing pressure. Try reading the paper.
Perhaps if one tracks the market price of cod there may be a clue.
As a yale is an imaginary creature, perhaps Yale university can be considered an imaginary university that does imaginary studies about imaginary catastrophes?
Well, I imagine so, Richard of NZ.
We suspect that they exist, so therefore we now have observations of them.
Yale U. was named after Elihu Yale, a real person.
According to Wiki:
The subsequent decline in fish stocks and fishing fleets was blamed on the EU, a convenient scapegoat which got UK politicians and fishermen out of a hole.
Well the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) which your quote refers to was an EU program.
Yes, we do need to measure the social and psychological impact the alarmists have on the general public. Reminds me of Michael Crichton’s lecture on State of Fear where he began developing the book, but wanted to first go with a big disaster befalls humanity. His example was Chernobyl and apparently only 50 people died from the initial explosion. But the projections of disaster broadcast by the various media caused more psychological damage than the actual disaster. This is what Climate Change will do in our modern day.
“…it’s not an efficient reallocation of wealth.”
They would know. If there’s anything watermelons are experts on, it’s the redistribution of wealth.
Southport’s fish stocks decline as the climate changes while Northport’s stock increases
==============
nonsense. nature abhors a vacuum. if fish migrate northward new species will expand in the south to take their place. the limiting factor isn’t temperature, it is feed, which is limited by micro nutrients in the ocean. phosphorus for example, which is scarce in the upper ocean.
I’m sure Yale is pushing Wind in Maine (along with John Malone -Liberty Media and Plum Creek), being one of the larger land owners.
http://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/yale-bayroot-looking-back
Bayroot LLC became one of the largest private timberland owners in New England in December 2003 when it bought 129,000 acres in New Hampshire and more than 500,000 acres in Maine from paper company MeadWestvaco. But who is Bayroot?Bayroots incorporation papers in Delaware, as well as corporate filings in Maine and New Hampshire, all refer back to Wagner Forest Management Ltd. of Lyme, which runs forestry operations for Bayroot and half a dozen other limited liability companies.Wagner does not disclose the identity of its investors, who own 2.5 million acres of timberland in Vermont, Maine, New Hampshire, New York, West Virginia, Kentucky, Virginia and Canada.We never discuss our clients, says president and chief executive Tom Colgan.Jym St. Pierre, a Maine environmental activist, says the public has a right to know whos benefiting from tax dollars spent on conservation easements.Irrespective of what the law says and what they can get away with, theres enormous reason to be transparent and it creates terrible suspicion and distrust if you dont, says St. Pierre, of RESTORE: The North Woods.That was demonstrated several years ago when Maine was negotiating to pay millions of dollars to another Wagner-affiliated company, Yankee Forest LLC, for a conservation easement on 280,000 acres around the west branch of the Penobscot River. Using tax returns, two newspapers revealed that Yankee Forest was Yale Universitys endowment.That caused a controversy on campus, where critics said Yale wasnt living up to the standards it teaches at its respected forestry school.The conservation easement went through, but the land was promptly transferred to another owner.Many North Country residents want to know who Bayroots owners are and consider Yale the prime suspect.Yale did not return messages seeking comment. Its fiscal 2003 tax return, the latest available, does not cover the period when Bayroot was formed.Wagner Chairman Henry Snow, who also heads the New Hampshire chapter of the Nature Conservancy, says it is Wagner that should be and is accountable for its forestry practices. The company adheres to the industrys Sustainable Forestry Initiative and prides itself on working with government agencies and nonprofits to protect sensitive lands.The company also welcomes reporters on its land. On Bayroots land in Millsfield, the logging trails are 60 to 70 feet apart and cutting between them appears to be selective. Critical habitats for deer and pine marten are flagged so contractors wont cut there…
=========
This from 3 days ago…
Landowners, unorganized territory residents at odds over fast-track wind development
http://www.centralmaine.com/2016/02/22/landowners-unorganized-territory-residents-at-odds-over-fast-track-wind-development/
Forest products companies that own land in unorganized and deorganized parts of Maine are challenging petitions by residents of the communities who want to opt out of fast-track commercial wind development.
Since Jan.1 more than 20 communities have petitioned the state under a new law that allows residents of unorganized territories to ask for exemptions to the expedited wind permitting area created under Maine’s Wind Energy Act. Several of those petitions were filed Jan. 4, the first Monday after the law went into effect. Those challenging that first round of peititions had a midnight deadline Monday to file challenges.
Communities have until June 30 to submit petitions to the Maine Land Use Planning Commission asking for exemption from the expedited area, and opponents have 45 days following the submission of the petition to challenge it. If no requests are submitted for the review of a petition, it will be approved and the land in question will automatically become excluded from the expedited permitting area.
Those challenging petitions so far include Seattle-based Plum Creek, which owns 400,000 acres in the Moosehead Lake region; timber companies Frontier Forest LLC and Lakeville Shores Inc. and Milton Township private landowner Wayne S. Buck Sr.
Rep. Larry Dunphy, an unenrolled legislator from Embden, who sponsored the law allowing communities to opt out, said he expects a large number of the petitions to be challenged.
“The reason I think these large landowners are challenging this is it’s pretty lucrative for them to lease their land. A lot of these wind developments are on high ridges that probably don’t get harvested a lot anyway. They simply lease that land, they make a ton of money and retain the rights to the land,” Dunphy said. “It’s a pretty lucrative gig for a lot of these large landowners. I can understand from a business standpoint why they are challenging it.”
Still, he said the law is not about stopping wind development, but rather about allowing small communities to have a say in the permitting process.
By Monday afternoon the commission had received letters from three commercial landowners and a private individual challenging the requests of seven communities seeking to be excluded from the expedited wind permitting area, according to Samantha Horn-Olsen, planning manager for the commission.
Challenges require the state to thoroughly review the petitions and allow public comment, possibly through public hearings.
The law that allows the unorganized territories to opt out of the expedited wind permitting area modifies the 2007 Wind Energy Act, which allowed organized municipalities to create ordinances regulating wind power projects, but did not give the same right to unorganized communities.
“So many people had been disenfranchised by (the Wind Energy Act),” Dunphy said. “They wanted their voices heard. That was my whole contention. The citizens wanted to be heard and wanted a right to a public hearing.”
The unorganized territory is that area of Maine that has no local incorporated municipal government, according to Maine Revenue Services. There are more than 400 townships and islands that fall in the unorganized territory and about 9,000 year-round residents.
Forest land owners are “exercising their right to request a complete and thorough review of how such a land use designation change would affect their property, its value and future potential uses,” said Patrick Strauch, executive director of the Maine Forest Products Council, in a written statement. The council represents many of the timber harvesting companies that own land in those parts of the state and has worked with some landowners on challenging the petitions.
Those pushing for their community to be left out of fast-track wind development have reasons ranging from their fears for the character of the area to the transparency of the process.
Amy Lane, co-owner of Gray Ghost Camps in Rockwood in Somerset County, has circulated 19 petitions in different unorganized communities around the Moosehead region…
…Among landowners challenging petitions, Plum Creek has asked that the state review petitions in Long Pond Township, Sapling Township and Taunton and Raynham Academy Grant Township. Wind developer SunEdison is currently testing wind conditions for a possible 26-turbine wind farm near Moosehead Lake on Plum Creek land, and both Sapling Township and Taunton and Raynham Academy Grant Township are on the shore of Moosehead Lake.
Anthony Chavez, public affairs manager for Plum Creek, did not respond to a request for comment Monday.
Lakeville Shores Inc., a forest products and real estate company, is asking for a review of petitions from Molunkus Township and Trescott Township. Ginger Maxwell, treasurer for Lakeville Shores, could not be reached for comment Monday.
Frontier Forest LLC is challenging a petition in Dennistown Township, and private landowner Buck is challenging a petition in Milton Township.
==========
Note: These folks could use use some help. Thank You.
Live webcam from Moosehead lake:
http://birches.com/webcam/index_big.htm
I stopped reading at the word Yale. It’s a foundered ship of fools.
Is it just me, or do environmentalists seem to think that herds (or schools in this case) have never moved before? It happens all the time. Fishing villages have always risen and fallen as the waters went from plentiful to destitute and then back again. Hunter-Gatherers are nomads because they have to follow the herds. Did they think that the world was in some kind of homeostasis before 80 years ago?
If I didn’t know better, I’d say they must be Young-Earth creationists, because they seem to be completely in denial about the very existence of evolution and adaptation.
The importance of the study has nothing to do with the study itself. The importance is in who is doing the study. We have now seen the next path of grant money. The Fish and Forest school wasn’t feeling the love of grant money so they put out a “study” that will guarantee them some future grant love, and that is the rest of the story. What is the next school of studies to try and belly up to the grant trough by putting out some watershed end of the world study thus proving their program needs a massive influx of grant money to avert the certain disaster shown in their paper. Or, come on grant money Prof needs a new pair of shoes.
Seems that the cities never invented trade, and never spoke to others.
Europe has no problems buying woodpellets from anywhere on the Earth, and all seems to benefit from that.
$1.4 million can buy 28000 tons of Ferrous Sulphate. 100 tons applied to a single NE Pacific eddy in 2012 produced the record breaking 272 million fish harvest of 2013 worth almost $700 million, a dollar return of over 100,000:1 vs the cost of the FeSO4. (The Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation spent several million on data collection, hundreds of times more than the cost of the iron itself.)
Of course that 28000 tons could not be usefully employed in a single year, but seeding 10 to 20 eddies near all the major fisheries of the world would have a stunning economic and ecological benefit- think of how well endangered whales, seals, and other sea life would thrive with abundant food.
http://juneauempire.com/outdoors/2014-01-17/2013-alaska-salmon-harvest-breaks-record-historic-number-pink-salmon