Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
June's Record Ocean Warmth Worries Fishermen, Environmentalists
WASHINGTON - Ocean surface temperatures around the world were the warmest on record for the month of June, according to federal scientists, though they caution that one month doesn't necessarily imply global warming.
Two men in suits hold pictures of dinosaurs during a protest on climate change in central Sydney August 13, 2009. Australia's parliament rejected on Thursday a government plan for the world's most ambitions emissions trade regime, bringing the nation closer to a snap election.
REUTERS/Daniel Munoz The warmer temperatures do confirm that an ocean phenomenon known as El Nino is building in the Pacific Ocean.
Some scientists think that the rising temperatures hint at broader changes, perhaps resulting from global climate change. Environmentalists and fishermen are wary of what it may mean.
"It's really kind of disturbing," said Zeke Grader, the executive director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, based in San Francisco. "What we've seen right offshore here is a real variation in temperature. But we don't know what to expect in the future."
So far, the year has been among the warmest on record for ocean temperatures, ranking sixth based on January through June. The June temperature averaged 62.56 degrees Fahrenheit; the 20th-century average was 61.5 degrees. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has been keeping the records since 1880.
"The high ocean temperatures can threaten coral reefs, provide more energy to hurricanes, cause thermal expansion, which would raise sea level and inundate coasts, force the relocation of some aquatic species and thus impact fisheries," said Ahira Sanchez-Lugo, a NOAA climate scientist.
The hottest spots were the north Pacific south of Alaska, along the U.S. West Coast and the Atlantic Ocean off New England. Overall, the Pacific was the warmest. The measurements were taken for every 5 degrees of latitude, however, and an overall temperature for each ocean wasn't calculated, said Deke Arndt, a climate scientist with NOAA in Ashville, N.C.
"Individually, no single month can be attributed to long-term global warming," Arndt said, though he added that this June marked the 33rd consecutive June with a temperature above the 20th-century average, which may provide an indication of global warming.
In addition to having the warmest waters, this June saw the second warmest combined ocean and land temperature on record, 61.02 degrees, which was more than a degree above the 20th-century average of 59.9.
Though some climatologists dismiss the June heat as an anomaly, others say it's part of a traditional El Nino pattern. Occurring roughly every three to eight years, El Nino is a warming of water in the eastern Pacific Ocean, which can disrupt usual weather patterns. During an El Nino year, the Southwest United States tends to be wetter, the Northwest drier and there's an increased chance of severe weather, such as hurricanes, in the Southern United States.
"Current conditions and trends, as well as the majority of dynamic climate models, are suggesting that (El Nino) will indeed occur," said Karsten Shein, another climate scientist with NOAA.
Grader said fishermen were worried about their catches, and he, for one, thinks that it isn't just El Nino that's causing the higher ocean temperatures.
"Colder water fish will go north," he said. "It'll affect phytoplankton and krill production. You'll see salmon getting smaller."
Other fishermen aren't as concerned.
"We've fished El Ninos before," said Larry Collins, 52, a commercial fisherman based at Fishermen's Wharf in San Francisco. "There's good and bad things about El Ninos for the California coast. Nature will throw you a curveball."

19 Comments so far
Show AllProbably too much to ask for a newspaper article, but this report needs to provide more context to the observation that ocean temperatures are at their highest for the month of June. What is the overall pattern over the last thirty years? How big a jump is the increase--is it just "noise" or is it something a couple of standard deviations away from the mean?
If the observation cannot be associated with global warming, then why bring it up at all? It's enough to talk about local impacts on weather over the next six months as well as impacts on coral reefs and fishing. Forget climate change. And I say this as someone who is convinced that human interventions have caused a change in world climate.
Too bad the previous administration reduced NOAA funding. Possibly it was intentional to prevent us from knowing exactly what is happening.
it is entirely possible that el nino is caused by undersea volcanic activity.
Except that submarine vulcanism is concentrated at the mid-ocean ridges, not the "eastern Pacific".
And the heat from undersea volcanoes is many orders of magnitude too small.
And El Nino is well-explained by persistent pressure differences (between Tahiti and Darwin).
Other than those glaring unlikelihoods, "entirely possible".
Possible, but I've never seen that mentioned in the literature discussing el nino as even a conjecture.
Volcanic activity has no significant effect on sea temperatures. The heat output of a volcano is minuscule compared to the volume of water in the ocean.
Conceivable, but location's improbable, & leaves relatively cyclic return unexplained.
The El Nino/Southern Oscillation is a very well known and researched climate phenomenon and here are a few links to get you started:
http://www.elnino.noaa.gov/
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/precip/CWlink/MJO/enso.shtml
http://www.cdc.noaa.gov/enso/
Wonderful site NOAA is when in want of the actual current information on climate.
This is the first time I have ever seen anyone make the connection between phytoplankton and rising temperatures. What no one is saying is that the phytoplankton layer on the surface of the Southern Oceans [Pacific, Indian, Atlantic] produce over 40% of the world's oxygen. Those layers of plankton live in the top few meters of the ocean surface, and are salt water dependent. If the horror happens, and the ice glaciers start to melt on Antarctica, they will blanket the southern oceans with fresh water [which, of course, floats on salt water], killing the plankton, the basis of the oceanic food chain, and the source of much of our oxygen. One should be taking lots of yoga these days, so we will all be able to lean way over, stretch, and kiss our own asses goodbye.
BTW, rising ocean levels will also inundate the vast majority of our toxic waste dumps, rendering the oceanic food supply poisonous [more, even, than now].
For even more good news, do some research and think hard. Or, you could bury your head in the sand. While there still is any .....
MichaelC
Winds mix the upper layers of the oceans, especially the virtually continuous gale-force circumpolar vortex winds isolating Antarctica from the rest of the planet.
It will take thousands of years to melt the Antarctic ice sheets, time for winds to mix this freshwater into the larger ocean mass.
Runoff from melting Antarctic glaciers would certainly not "blanket the southern oceans with fresh water" as you claim (even the mighty Amazon freshwater plume dissipates within 500 miles of the River's outlet to the sea).
A large number of nuclear plants are on oceans and low-lying waterways as well.
Lets attribute all the changes we are seeing to El Nino and when it is over then we can forget about it because all will go back to normal,whatever that is,and we can go back to whatever lifestyle we had before.We will even have a northern passage to make shipping easier because of glacier and permafrost melt puting fresh water into the oceans causing a rise and permafrost melt throwing a toxic mix into the air killing trees that supply most of our oxygen and take most of the carbon dioxide that is breathed out by all living creatures plus changing the air mixture so that what benefits that we are supposed to get from the sun is changed also.Suppose it is true that thousand of years take place for glaciers to melt in Antarctica?Would that not cause an imballance to occur as glaciers melt up north,which they are all over.Russia,China,US,Canada,Europe,Arica.This is an enclosed system.Tony
Maybe this will reduce the (in)human population by a few billion. That should help a lot.
"Don't waste my time with this foolishness! Now, where is that fiddle?" - Nero, 64 AD
"You'll see salmon getting smaller."
Smaller, how about dead. Expected sockeye salmon returns on the Fraser this year were around 10 million but only just over 1 million have returned. This is so small that even aboriginal food fisheries that have first priority have been suspended.
Such concerns are valid, but equally troubling is ocean acidification, the effects of which are happening much faster than "predicted". We're talking about the basis of the ocean's food chain here. All phytoplankton, zooplankton, shellfish larvae, etc. dependent upon shell formation for survival, will find those shells either failing to form or dissolving entirely.
It's time for We the People to demand Waxman/Markey's climate change legislation(ACES Act), along with the corporatized environmental organizations cheerleading such half-measures to be thrown on the trash heap of very bad ideas.
Real climate change measures must be determined by scientists and not corporate lobbyists.
Please People, in what little remains of the planet's eleventh hour, we've got to demand these changes. Throw out the sold-out congressional representatives claiming to represent the people's best interests who fail to recognize the urgency of irreversible climate change.
In Vancouver Canada we were expecting ten million sockeye salmon to return to the mighty Fraser river to spawn this year. They never arrived. They dont know why. The commercial fishery was canceled for the third year in a row.
Everyone hopes the salmon will come back one day. Of course they thought the atlantic cod would make a come back after we stopped over fishing. They are still waiting.
Climate change, global warming will make fools of us all as several of the comments here atest to as fact but the closest to fact any will or can come is NOAA, Woods Hole Institute, and paleoclimitologist who all have the best grasp of what has happened in the climate change of ice ages to the present day el nino-southern oscilliation that controls much of the weather on this planet and what the future will bring.
And yes, in about 2000 years when the next ice sheets begin to accummolate, this obscene population of 6.8 billion people will be reduced to a point that a species of even humans might just learn live within its means instead of the corrupted crap the 'wired' jerks tend to think is life.
Trigger for cascading tipping points---?
Tectonic/seismic activity.
I hope I'm wrong...