Orca attack

[TSailors]

Btw, why don't they put some tracking devices on these Orcas and provide a web service to show their location on themap, so the navigators can avoid those areas?

 

[chrishscorp]

Btw, why don't they put some tracking devices on these Orcas and provide a web service to show their location on themap, so the navigators can avoid those areas?

This has been repeatedly suggested, but we are cap doffing plebs please remember your place.

 

[capnsensible]

 

[GHA]

Btw, why don't they put some tracking devices on these Orcas and provide a web service to show their location on themap, so the navigators can avoid those areas?

That's more of a scientific question which won't get answered on a forum of predominately unsubstantiated opinions.

Similar has been done with resident populations, even with a camera. > Tracking Orcas with Tech: ‘The Images Took Our Breath Away’ | The Tyee

But the pods practicing rudder nibbling are transient, apparently genetically separate for 750,000 years , they don't interbreed or socialize together.

So shooting from the hip completely (that's how we roll on here ?) -

• Who are "They" that must do something?
• Who pays for it? Spain & Portugal are skint. One never to happen option would be tax every sailing boat heading south to pay for all the research. Cruising boats add next to nothing to local coffers compared to a Ryanair flight.
• Is it even realistically/financially feasible to get to the animals to shoot?

No idea.

Another study > https://www.researchgate.net/profil...-Sea-Antarctica.pdf?origin=publication_detail

Our operations were based out of McMurdo Station, onRoss Island, in the southern Ross Sea, Antarctica (Fig.1a)from 14 January to 2 February 2006. We located killerwhales by Xying in a helicopter along the icebreaker chan-nel and leads opened by the icebreaker. When a group waslocated, we traveled approximately 3–5 km ahead in theirdirection of travel, landed the helicopter where the lead orchannel narrowed, or near an area of open water in thechannel, and waited for the whales to swim past us (Fig.2).The satellite transmitters were surface-mounted withsub-dermal attachments (Andrews et al. 2005) and werebased on the SPOT5 location-only Argos transmitter (Wild-life Computers, Redmond, WA). The transmitter electron-ics were cast in epoxy (Scotchcast 5, 3 M, Austin, TX) inthree diVerent designs that we refer to based upon theirshape and whether they were attached with one or twodarts: (1) single-dart (tag dimensions: 4.8 cm£4.8 cm by1.5 cm tall, 48 g); (2) low proWle double-dart (9.0 cm£3.2 cm by 1.5 cm tall, 56 g); (3) compact double-dart(6.0 cm£3.5 cm by 2.5 cm tall, 41 g; Fig.3). All transmit-ters had an 18.0-cm antenna mounted on the side oppositefrom the attachment darts. The stainless steel barbed dartswere designed to penetrate up to 6.5 cm into the dorsal Wntissue (Fig.3).The single-dart and compact double-dart transmitterswere remotely attached to the dorsal Wn using an adjustablepressure, modiWed air-gun (Model JP.SP-25, Dan-Inject,Børkop, Denmark). The low proWle double-dart transmitterwas delivered with a crossbow equipped with a 68.0 kg(150 lb) draw limb, with a 25.4 cm (10 in.) power stroke.The tag antenna was inserted into a hollow aluminum shaftor crossbow bolt. On contact with the dorsal Wn, the bolt orshaft fell away and was retrieved by a tether line, leavingthe transmitter attached to the dorsal Wn. All transmitterswere remotely attached by standing on the ice edge andlaunching the tag as a whale swam by within 1–5 m(Fig.2).To conserve power, tag transmissions were limited by asubmersion sensor to times when the whales were at thesurface, but no more frequently than once per 30 s. Thetransmitters were also limited to only 200 transmissions perday and only during 00:00 hour–10:00 hours GMT. Trans-missions were scheduled to occur daily during January andFebruary, every Wfth day in March, April, and May, andevery tenth day thereafter. With this duty-cycle the batteriesshould have provided enough power for 7–12 months oftransmissions.

Any links to online scientific discussions about the rudder nibblers would be very interesting, social media is just unsubstantiated emotional reactions. Personally very interested in damaging Orca's hearing with very loud underwater noise and an animal near by, the use sound for most things so damage that & the animal is in trouble.
3,6 billion years of evolution & there's plenty rich westerners just want them dead cos it interferes with their playtime. So short sighted. Homo Sapiens are immensely more aggressive & destructive, I wouldn't want a rudder nibbled but also want no part in causing any more damage to the ocean's apex predictor. We've already diminished about 3/4 of Atlantic Tuna, would rather not makes things worse for such majestic creatures. When they're gone they're gone.

 

[doug748]

Btw, why don't they put some tracking devices on these Orcas and provide a web service to show their location on themap, so the navigators can avoid those areas?

It's been mentioned. I can't see it, they can swim up to 30kts and are said to roam 60 miles per day. If they are coming your way does not seem much you could do (legally that is -)

 

[Kelpie]

That's more of a scientific question which won't get answered on a forum of predominately unsubstantiated opinions.

Similar has been done with resident populations, even with a camera. > Tracking Orcas with Tech: ‘The Images Took Our Breath Away’ | The Tyee

But the pods practicing rudder nibbling are transient, apparently genetically separate for 750,000 years , they don't interbreed or socialize together.

So shooting from the hip completely (that's how we roll on here ?) -

• Who are "They" that must do something?
• Who pays for it? Spain & Portugal are skint. One never to happen option would be tax every sailing boat heading south to pay for all the research. Cruising boats add next to nothing to local coffers compared to a Ryanair flight.
• Is it even realistically/financially feasible to get to the animals to shoot?

No idea.

Another study > https://www.researchgate.net/profil...-Sea-Antarctica.pdf?origin=publication_detail



Any links to online scientific discussions about the rudder nibblers would be very interesting, social media is just unsubstantiated emotional reactions. Personally very interested in damaging Orca's hearing with very loud underwater noise and an animal near by, the use sound for most things so damage that & the animal is in trouble.
3,6 billion years of evolution & there's plenty rich westerners just want them dead cos it interferes with their playtime. So short sighted. Homo Sapiens are immensely more aggressive & destructive, I wouldn't want a rudder nibbled but also want no part in causing any more damage to the ocean's apex predictor. We've already diminished about 3/4 of Atlantic Tuna, would rather not makes things worse for such majestic creatures. When they're gone they're gone.

Thanks for the info about tracking devices. It does seem possible.

A question- can we detect Orcas in the way that we find bats, by listening for their echolocation signals?

An idea- for those who say it would be too hard to find the orcas, or to chase them at 30kt... it seems that if you just bobbed around in one of the hot spots for a few days you'd be bound to 'encounter' them. And from videos I've seen they would spend a fair bit of time at the surface right beside the boat, where they could (relatively) easily be tagged.

I wonder what the ideal boat would be. Maybe something with a transom hung rudder, so that you could carry several spares and easily fit them as needed...

 

[GHA]

An idea- for those who say it would be too hard to find the orcas, or to chase them at 30kt... it seems that if you just bobbed around in one of the hot spots for a few days you'd be bound to 'encounter' them.

Sounds easy from a non academic point of view knowing nothing of the practicalities (me ?). Scientists thrive & are addicted to data, guessing anyone involved in research would love to get any data possible & know so much more than a bunch of yachties about the roadblocks on the way. If it was easy they would have done it already.
But who will pay for a team/vessels to do that? And pay for the technology & find the animals again to fit another every 6 months? Cruising sailors add next to nothing to local coffers compared to a ryanair flight.
It's a very black & white perfect world inside the heads of the multitude of social media posts, & tricky to find and details of what the various researchers are up to (no to mention their budget ?)

 

[capnsensible]

Thanks for the info about tracking devices. It does seem possible.

A question- can we detect Orcas in the way that we find bats, by listening for their echolocation signals?

An idea- for those who say it would be too hard to find the orcas, or to chase them at 30kt... it seems that if you just bobbed around in one of the hot spots for a few days you'd be bound to 'encounter' them. And from videos I've seen they would spend a fair bit of time at the surface right beside the boat, where they could (relatively) easily be tagged.

I wonder what the ideal boat would be. Maybe something with a transom hung rudder, so that you could carry several spares and easily fit them as needed...

 

[Kelpie]

Sounds easy from a non academic point of view knowing nothing of the practicalities (me ?). Scientists thrive & are addicted to data, guessing anyone involved in research would love to get any data possible & know so much more than a bunch of yachties about the roadblocks on the way. If it was easy they would have done it already.
But who will pay for a team/vessels to do that? And pay for the technology & find the animals again to fit another every 6 months? Cruising sailors add next to nothing to local coffers compared to a ryanair flight.
It's a very black & white perfect world inside the heads of the multitude of social media posts, & tricky to find and details of what the various researchers are up to (no to mention their budget ?)

This won't happen, but ideally it could be done quite cheaply. Buy a few old sailing boats, get some underpaid biology graduates, entice them with the promise of sun, sea, sailing, and shooting things at big sea animals.

Maybe somebody could ask Matt Rutherford to do it as a citizen science project.

I expect the real stumbling blocks would be getting the various permissions needed, not the difficulty of the actual task.

 

[GHA]

I expect the real stumbling blocks would be getting the various permissions needed, not the difficulty of the actual task.

I expect if it was so easy it would have been done a *long* time ago...
But neither of us know. ?

 

[Daydream believer]

When they're gone they're gone.

What would be the effect on other species if some Orcas were lost? ie losing a few pods . I understood that they feed off the young of other whales- Not good. Off Tuna- not helpful in the grand scheme of things. Off dolphins & seals- well there are certainly too many seals. Off Walrusses- Do not know about those.

But the point is , that losing a section of a top of the line predator, thus giving a chance to life below that line a chance, cannot be so bad. The Orca numbers might still rise again, in the future, due to availability of increased food. More so, if the world would get its act together & clean up the oceans, rather than feed the conglomerates by building electric cars or whatever, for financial gain. Perhaps, Orcas would then have less desire to feed off a yachts fin.
Watching films of how they separate a mother whale from the pup, then attack the pup makes one wonder if it there is not a connection.
I appreciate that toying with the balance of nature can be dangerous. As demonstrated by the loss of the wolves in yellowstone Park (I think that was the nature reserve) That led to all sorts of problems. Even the damage to trees & water flow of rivers etc.
But whilst everyone is getting tearful over the Orca they are a problem that might lead to loss of life. If it does then there is a clash of human & Orca that has to be solved. A bit drastic But!!!

 

[GHA]

What would be the effect on other species if some Orcas were lost? ie losing a few pods . I understood that they feed off the young of other whales- Not good. Off Tuna- not helpful in the grand scheme of things. Off dolphins & seals- well there are certainly too many seals. Off Walrusses- Do not know about those.

But the point is , that losing a section of a top of the line predator, thus giving a chance to life below that line a chance, cannot be so bad. The Orca numbers might still rise again, in the future, due to availability of increased food. More so, if the world would get its act together & clean up the oceans, rather than feed the conglomerates by building electric cars or whatever, for financial gain. Perhaps, Orcas would then have less desire to feed off a yachts fin.
Watching films of how they separate a mother whale from the pup, then attack the pup makes one wonder if it there is not a connection.
I appreciate that toying with the balance of nature can be dangerous. As demonstrated by the loss of the wolves in yellowstone Park (I think that was the nature reserve) That led to all sorts of problems. Even the damage to trees & water flow of rivers etc.
But whilst everyone is getting tearful over the Orca they are a problem that might lead to loss of life. If it does then there is a clash of human & Orca that has to be solved. A bit drastic But!!!

WooHoo - someone who knows even less than me ?????

Perfect example of evolution coming up with an aggressive and very destructive animal.

 

[Fr J Hackett]

WooHoo - someone who knows even less than me ?????

Perfect example of evolution coming up with an aggressive and very destructive animal.

Ah you mean an Orca.

 

[Kelpie]

What would be the effect on other species if some Orcas were lost?

...

I appreciate that toying with the balance of nature can be dangerous.

As humans have leaned more about the natural world, the recurring theme has been that it is always much more complex than we thought. Layers upon layers of interactions and processes which work at timescales which we do not always fully comprehend. So trying to predict the effect of the removal of a species is not straightforward.

You cite the wolves in Yellowstone. Good example. People sometimes suggest that the role of apex predators can be replicated by a few shooting parties. But that assumes that all you have to do is occasionally bring the numbers down. In reality this is far too simplistic. A constant predator presence will encourage grazing animals to seek cover, and allow trees to grow in open ground. This completely changes the landscape, but you have to understand animal behaviours, not just numbers.

We simply do not understand enough about ecosystems to try to deliberately change them.

 

[GHA]

You cite the wolves in Yellowstone. Good example.

Great example of how complex & interconnected life on our lonely little planet is. Possibly the only place life exists ever anywhere, and one particular animal is eradicating many of the rest.

Just a blip on normal time scales for the planet but does seem very short sighted to not at least try to be a bit less destructive & selfish.
"Lets kill them cos I want to go and play on my plastic toy. " 3.8 billion years of evolution, seems a bit of a waste in some ways... ?

 

[newtothis]

It's been mentioned. I can't see it, they can swim up to 30kts and are said to roam 60 miles per day. If they are coming your way does not seem much you could do (legally that is -)

I'm surprised its so little. 60 miles in a 24-hour period is just 2.5kts. Even allowing for a few hours kip, at 6kts they could get that done by supper time, and they seem to be able to keep up with yachts doing around 6kts with no problems.

 

[newtothis]

Great example of how complex & interconnected life on our lonely little planet is. Possibly the only place life exists ever anywhere, and one particular animal is eradicating many of the rest.

Just a blip on normal time scales for the planet but does seem very short sighted to not at least try to be a bit less destructive & selfish.
"Lets kill them cos I want to go and play on my plastic toy. " 3.8 billion years of evolution, seems a bit of a waste in some ways... ?

Damn orcas had the same opportunity to evolve as we did. I don't see why we should have to pay for their feckless swimming about all day when it was our species that had the nouse to go out an invent plastic boats.
They may be an apex predator, but we are the apex di apex. And evolved into harpoon users.

 

[GHA]

Damn orcas had the same opportunity to evolve as we did. I don't see why we should have to pay for their feckless swimming about all day when it was our species that had the nouse to go out an invent plastic boats.
They may be an apex predator, but we are the apex di apex. And evolved into harpoon users.

?
3.8 billion years of evolution to get a bunch of carbon and other atoms to think like that, really wasn't worth it, was it. ??
Might as well start again. ??

(which will happen, we will be extinct just like all the others)

Least Orcas have had a good few millions years at it, humans the new boy upstarts trashing the place.

Wonder if compressed air would annoy them?
Still not found anything much about how easily their hearing could be damaged.

 

[billskip]

Still not found anything much about how easily their hearing could be damaged.

Well they seemed to survive the ww2 depth charges ..

 

[GHA]

Well they seemed to survive the ww2 depth charges ..

Any more details? How far away were the animals from the explosions? How can anyone know their hearing wasn't damaged?

Edit. Your statement sounds bit dodgy..... >
Navy training, testing may kill whales, dolphins
"U.S. Navy training and testing could inadvertently kill hundreds of whales and dolphins and injure thousands over the next five years, mostly as a result of detonating explosives underwater, according to two environmental impact statements released by the military Friday."
"Off the East Coast, there could be 11,267 serious injuries and 1.89 million minor injuries like temporary hearing loss. "