https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/02/river-thames-home-to-138-baby-seals-latest-count-finds?CMP=soc_567&fbclid=IwAR36vKOuhol8XXK6g96wybf_YqFEPofzNDTjJ-h4vDY9flmMUZ1j8n0ItQo

River Thames home to 138 seal pups, finds annual count

English river’s ecosystem is thriving, 62 years after being declared biologically dead

It has been a highway, a sewer and was declared biologically dead in the 1950s but the River Thames is now a nursery for 138 baby seals, according to the first comprehensive count of pups.

Scientists from ZSL analysed photographs taken from a specially-chartered light aircraft to identify and count harbour seal pups, which rest on sandbanks and creeks around the Thames estuary, downstream from London, during the summer, shortly after they are born.

“We were thrilled to count 138 pups born in a single season,” said conservation biologist Thea Cox. “The seals would not be able to pup here at all without a reliable food source, so this demonstrates that the Thames ecosystem is thriving and shows just how far we have come since the river was declared biologically dead in the 1950s.”

The Thames is home to both grey seals and harbour seals, although only the latter breed there. The seals can feed on more than 120 species of fish in the river, including two species of shark, short-snouted seahorses and the European eel, which is critically endangered. Marine mammals spotted in the Thames include porpoises, dolphins and “Benny” the beluga whale.

—-

So that’s nice

dv said:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/02/river-thames-home-to-138-baby-seals-latest-count-finds?CMP=soc_567&fbclid=IwAR36vKOuhol8XXK6g96wybf_YqFEPofzNDTjJ-h4vDY9flmMUZ1j8n0ItQo

River Thames home to 138 seal pups, finds annual count

English river’s ecosystem is thriving, 62 years after being declared biologically dead

It has been a highway, a sewer and was declared biologically dead in the 1950s but the River Thames is now a nursery for 138 baby seals, according to the first comprehensive count of pups.

Scientists from ZSL analysed photographs taken from a specially-chartered light aircraft to identify and count harbour seal pups, which rest on sandbanks and creeks around the Thames estuary, downstream from London, during the summer, shortly after they are born.

“We were thrilled to count 138 pups born in a single season,” said conservation biologist Thea Cox. “The seals would not be able to pup here at all without a reliable food source, so this demonstrates that the Thames ecosystem is thriving and shows just how far we have come since the river was declared biologically dead in the 1950s.”

The Thames is home to both grey seals and harbour seals, although only the latter breed there. The seals can feed on more than 120 species of fish in the river, including two species of shark, short-snouted seahorses and the European eel, which is critically endangered. Marine mammals spotted in the Thames include porpoises, dolphins and “Benny” the beluga whale.

—-

So that’s nice

It is nice. And 62 years from dead (more than just dead) but actively poisoned and polluted to sustaining a top predator eco system, that’s even more interesting.

almost enough seal pups to have a club.

party_pants said:

almost enough seal pups to have a club.

dude

party_pants said:

almost enough seal pups to have a club.

Don’t tell the Canadians.

When politicians talk about cutting environmental red-tape, they are talking about undoing the regulations that lead to recoveries like this.

dv said:

party_pants said:

almost enough seal pups to have a club.

dude

A seal-watching club.

Excellent.

dv said:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/02/river-thames-home-to-138-baby-seals-latest-count-finds?CMP=soc_567&fbclid=IwAR36vKOuhol8XXK6g96wybf_YqFEPofzNDTjJ-h4vDY9flmMUZ1j8n0ItQo

River Thames home to 138 seal pups, finds annual count

English river’s ecosystem is thriving, 62 years after being declared biologically dead

It has been a highway, a sewer and was declared biologically dead in the 1950s but the River Thames is now a nursery for 138 baby seals, according to the first comprehensive count of pups.

Scientists from ZSL analysed photographs taken from a specially-chartered light aircraft to identify and count harbour seal pups, which rest on sandbanks and creeks around the Thames estuary, downstream from London, during the summer, shortly after they are born.

“We were thrilled to count 138 pups born in a single season,” said conservation biologist Thea Cox. “The seals would not be able to pup here at all without a reliable food source, so this demonstrates that the Thames ecosystem is thriving and shows just how far we have come since the river was declared biologically dead in the 1950s.”

The Thames is home to both grey seals and harbour seals, although only the latter breed there. The seals can feed on more than 120 species of fish in the river, including two species of shark, short-snouted seahorses and the European eel, which is critically endangered. Marine mammals spotted in the Thames include porpoises, dolphins and “Benny” the beluga whale.

—-

So that’s nice

Reckon they will they evolve a bit more with arms and legs ?

party_pants said:

almost enough seal pups to have a club.

Some of them do get clubbed to death.

Too many drugs in the water I think.

Tau.Neutrino said:

party_pants said:

almost enough seal pups to have a club.

Some of them do get clubbed to death.

Too many drugs in the water I think.

> the European eel, which is critically endangered
Don’t tell the Greens. They’ll want to kill the seals to save the eel.

Tau.Neutrino said:

dv said:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/02/river-thames-home-to-138-baby-seals-latest-count-finds?CMP=soc_567&fbclid=IwAR36vKOuhol8XXK6g96wybf_YqFEPofzNDTjJ-h4vDY9flmMUZ1j8n0ItQo

River Thames home to 138 seal pups, finds annual count

English river’s ecosystem is thriving, 62 years after being declared biologically dead

It has been a highway, a sewer and was declared biologically dead in the 1950s but the River Thames is now a nursery for 138 baby seals, according to the first comprehensive count of pups.

Scientists from ZSL analysed photographs taken from a specially-chartered light aircraft to identify and count harbour seal pups, which rest on sandbanks and creeks around the Thames estuary, downstream from London, during the summer, shortly after they are born.

“We were thrilled to count 138 pups born in a single season,” said conservation biologist Thea Cox. “The seals would not be able to pup here at all without a reliable food source, so this demonstrates that the Thames ecosystem is thriving and shows just how far we have come since the river was declared biologically dead in the 1950s.”

The Thames is home to both grey seals and harbour seals, although only the latter breed there. The seals can feed on more than 120 species of fish in the river, including two species of shark, short-snouted seahorses and the European eel, which is critically endangered. Marine mammals spotted in the Thames include porpoises, dolphins and “Benny” the beluga whale.

—-

So that’s nice

Reckon they will they evolve a bit more with arms and legs ?

I guess if living things wriggle from side to side to move around then developing arms and legs seems obvious in the future and yet some living things don’t like snakes, worms etc.

Tamb said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

party_pants said:

almost enough seal pups to have a club.

Some of them do get clubbed to death.

Too many drugs in the water I think.

> the European eel, which is critically endangered
Don’t tell the Greens. They’ll want to kill the seals to save the eel.

Unlikely. Greens have a good understanding of ecology.

dv said:

Tamb said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Some of them do get clubbed to death.

Too many drugs in the water I think.

> the European eel, which is critically endangered
Don’t tell the Greens. They’ll want to kill the seals to save the eel.

Unlikely. Greens have a good understanding of ecology.

But no understanding of practicality.

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

dv said:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/02/river-thames-home-to-138-baby-seals-latest-count-finds?CMP=soc_567&fbclid=IwAR36vKOuhol8XXK6g96wybf_YqFEPofzNDTjJ-h4vDY9flmMUZ1j8n0ItQo

River Thames home to 138 seal pups, finds annual count

English river’s ecosystem is thriving, 62 years after being declared biologically dead

It has been a highway, a sewer and was declared biologically dead in the 1950s but the River Thames is now a nursery for 138 baby seals, according to the first comprehensive count of pups.

Scientists from ZSL analysed photographs taken from a specially-chartered light aircraft to identify and count harbour seal pups, which rest on sandbanks and creeks around the Thames estuary, downstream from London, during the summer, shortly after they are born.

“We were thrilled to count 138 pups born in a single season,” said conservation biologist Thea Cox. “The seals would not be able to pup here at all without a reliable food source, so this demonstrates that the Thames ecosystem is thriving and shows just how far we have come since the river was declared biologically dead in the 1950s.”

The Thames is home to both grey seals and harbour seals, although only the latter breed there. The seals can feed on more than 120 species of fish in the river, including two species of shark, short-snouted seahorses and the European eel, which is critically endangered. Marine mammals spotted in the Thames include porpoises, dolphins and “Benny” the beluga whale.

—-

So that’s nice

Reckon they will they evolve a bit more with arms and legs ?

I guess if living things wriggle from side to side to move around then developing arms and legs seems obvious in the future and yet some living things don’t like snakes, worms etc.

I mean y’all know that seals evolved from creatures with legs. Only 20 million years or so ago.

dv said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

Reckon they will they evolve a bit more with arms and legs ?

I guess if living things wriggle from side to side to move around then developing arms and legs seems obvious in the future and yet some living things don’t like snakes, worms etc.

I mean y’all know that seals evolved from creatures with legs. Only 20 million years or so ago.

For a swimming creature flippers/fins is a way better method of propulsion.

Tamb said:

dv said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

I guess if living things wriggle from side to side to move around then developing arms and legs seems obvious in the future and yet some living things don’t like snakes, worms etc.

I mean y’all know that seals evolved from creatures with legs. Only 20 million years or so ago.

For a swimming creature flippers/fins is a way better method of propulsion.

Right, But they weren’t swimming creatures til, in evolutionary terms, quite recently. I don’t see that there is likely to be any evolutionary drive for them to develop arms and legs.

dv said:

Tamb said:

dv said:

I mean y’all know that seals evolved from creatures with legs. Only 20 million years or so ago.

For a swimming creature flippers/fins is a way better method of propulsion.

Right, But they weren’t swimming creatures til, in evolutionary terms, quite recently. I don’t see that there is likely to be any evolutionary drive for them to develop arms and legs.

I agree.
Look how clumsy tree kangaroos are. Evolved to hop then went back into the trees.

Tamb said:

dv said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

I guess if living things wriggle from side to side to move around then developing arms and legs seems obvious in the future and yet some living things don’t like snakes, worms etc.

I mean y’all know that seals evolved from creatures with legs. Only 20 million years or so ago.

For a swimming creature flippers/fins is a way better method of propulsion.

yes for creatures in water

but for creatures that live near shore lines and one beach that wriggle around between tides and stuff over millions of years they need to find different methods of propulsion

Tau.Neutrino said:

Tamb said:

dv said:

I mean y’all know that seals evolved from creatures with legs. Only 20 million years or so ago.

For a swimming creature flippers/fins is a way better method of propulsion.

yes for creatures in water

but for creatures that live near shore lines and one beach that wriggle around between tides and stuff over millions of years they need to find different methods of propulsion

They hunt in the water so that’s where they need the best system.

I would have thought that creatures that wriggle around over millions of years would go on to develop arms and legs.

Ok, not all of them, snakes and worms are different to turtles and seals.

I would expect seals to develop arms and legs eventually, not tomorrow, but eventually.

dv said:

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/02/river-thames-home-to-138-baby-seals-latest-count-finds?CMP=soc_567&fbclid=IwAR36vKOuhol8XXK6g96wybf_YqFEPofzNDTjJ-h4vDY9flmMUZ1j8n0ItQo

River Thames home to 138 seal pups, finds annual count

English river’s ecosystem is thriving, 62 years after being declared biologically dead

It has been a highway, a sewer and was declared biologically dead in the 1950s but the River Thames is now a nursery for 138 baby seals, according to the first comprehensive count of pups.

Scientists from ZSL analysed photographs taken from a specially-chartered light aircraft to identify and count harbour seal pups, which rest on sandbanks and creeks around the Thames estuary, downstream from London, during the summer, shortly after they are born.

“We were thrilled to count 138 pups born in a single season,” said conservation biologist Thea Cox. “The seals would not be able to pup here at all without a reliable food source, so this demonstrates that the Thames ecosystem is thriving and shows just how far we have come since the river was declared biologically dead in the 1950s.”

The Thames is home to both grey seals and harbour seals, although only the latter breed there. The seals can feed on more than 120 species of fish in the river, including two species of shark, short-snouted seahorses and the European eel, which is critically endangered. Marine mammals spotted in the Thames include porpoises, dolphins and “Benny” the beluga whale.

—-

So that’s nice

> River Thames home to 138 seal pups, finds annual count.
> English river’s ecosystem is thriving, 62 years after being declared biologically dead.

Nice recovery. It was pretty damn dead when I was there, in the late 1980s.

Both Sydney Harbour and Lake Illawarra were in a pretty bad way at that time, too. Hosting very little apart from masses of jellyfish.

Tau.Neutrino said:

I would have thought that creatures that wriggle around over millions of years would go on to develop arms and legs.

Ok, not all of them, snakes and worms are different to turtles and seals.

I would expect seals to develop arms and legs eventually, not tomorrow, but eventually.

Their main food is fish, eels or squid. They need to have a body shape adapted to catching their food.

I mean I don’t want to dismiss your idea, obviously it is possible, who knows what the future holds etc…

But they just got their flippers. They just got into the water. All of the mammal traffic has been one way, from the land to the sea, in the last 60 million years. Cetaceans (whales, dolphins, porpoises), pinnipeds (seals, walruses) and sirenians (dugongs) all went from land to water in that time and there has been zero traffic in the other direction. They have not redeveloped complex limbs, they have become more adapted to the eater.

Kutchicetus was a somewhat seal- or otter- like early whale that was adapted for both sea and shore dwelling, 48 million years ago. Its descendants did not become more dextrous: they became completely aquatic, developing full flippers with no external toes, and even fins.

Animals like seals and whales are usually described as “highly evolved”, i.e., now equipped with specialised adaptations in contrast with their more generalised ancestors.

Once such specialisation occurs, it’s unlikely that they’d be able to evolve back into a more generalised form.

dv said:

When politicians talk about cutting environmental red-tape, they are talking about undoing the regulations that lead to recoveries like this.

No they’re not. They’re talking about allowing backburning and other good land management strategies.

mollwollfumble said:

dv said:

When politicians talk about cutting environmental red-tape, they are talking about undoing the regulations that lead to recoveries like this.

No they’re not. They’re talking about allowing backburning and other good land management strategies.

I think you mean fuel or hazard reduction burning Moll.

Tamb said:

mollwollfumble said:

dv said:

When politicians talk about cutting environmental red-tape, they are talking about undoing the regulations that lead to recoveries like this.

No they’re not. They’re talking about allowing backburning and other good land management strategies.

I think you mean fuel or hazard reduction burning Moll.

Well you’re both wrong. They specifically mean reduce water and air quality controls.

dv said:

Tamb said:

mollwollfumble said:

No they’re not. They’re talking about allowing backburning and other good land management strategies.

I think you mean fuel or hazard reduction burning Moll.

Well you’re both wrong. They specifically mean reduce water and air quality controls.

I was only questioning the use of the term backburning.

mollwollfumble said:

dv said:

When politicians talk about cutting environmental red-tape, they are talking about undoing the regulations that lead to recoveries like this.

No they’re not. They’re talking about allowing backburning and other good land management strategies.

No they’re not.

I have no idea whether backburning (as practiced now) is a good land management strategy or not, but I’m bloody sure that’s not what politicians have in mind when they talk about cutting red tape.

The Rev Dodgson said:

mollwollfumble said:

dv said:

When politicians talk about cutting environmental red-tape, they are talking about undoing the regulations that lead to recoveries like this.

No they’re not. They’re talking about allowing backburning and other good land management strategies.

No they’re not.

I have no idea whether backburning (as practiced now) is a good land management strategy or not, but I’m bloody sure that’s not what politicians have in mind when they talk about cutting red tape.

Cutting the requirement of diligent flora and fauna surveys, etc.