After 90% of California’s Kelp Forests Were Destroyed, SeaTrees Is Restoring Them - The Inertia

[@reasings]

this warmed my heart and made my day!! i want to come help!!

[@Theinertia]

Check out SeaTrees! They'd gladly welcome a helping hand!

[@johnbehneman1546]

Thank you so much

[@aazhie]

Sea Otters are the scourge of urchins and can eat so many in a single day that bringing them back to areas will make the divers have to work only short term. The issue is, otters need kelp forests to hide in from their own predators! So it's important for us to help the kelp forests get big before we reintroduce otters to an area

[@JS-zq1gp]

Sea coasts all around USA as well and many other countries are suffering. Can Biorock scaffolds can help creat coral reefs which in turn attracts sealife, bivalves and sea plants with sea grass Biorock will release a dissolved CO2 but if Kelp or other sea grasses are growing on it they will talk advantage of the CO2. the net reduction of C02 in the ocean water is a positive but this is a case where kelp in conjunction with BioRock coral scaffolds sum is better than the parts.

[@paulkociara5992]

Chemicals introduced via treated sewer water are what's killing the kelp forests.

[@johnbehneman1546]

California Restoration 2024

[@colourrider533]

I do not understand why the urchins have to go, do they disturb the kelp?

[@bennettbugbee6293]

Urchins consume kelp

[@Stuff-yp1ty]

The kelp is being eaten by an extreme overpopulation of urchins.

[@colourrider533]

@@Stuff-yp1ty ​@UCfuF-Dd98R6ILnevsYnLwAA Ah thanks!

[@seraseely6570]

Those Urchins are from a species of Sea Urchins not native to the seas off the California coast, and without natural predators to keep their populations in check, the local ecosystem can't handle them.

[@leowall8799]

@@seraseely6570 As well as their natural predators are dying from an unexpected disease seen to be caused by climate change and warming oceans.

[@loveofsea1]

Why doesn't anyone ever mention what actually happened to the historical kelp forests throughout California? So far not one 'concerned' entity has figured it out, I find that omission to be stunning! While every kelp concern in the state was looking into their own concerns, in the last 3 years one of the 8 Channel Islands has been denuded of all kelp canopy! And the good kelp folks did exactly what to stop it? Keep doing what you are doing, but realize none of you are focusing on the real problem..

[@russfrancis4220]

I don't believe that 90% of the kelp was lost. That is almost ALL of it.🤔🤔🤔 Possible you R exaggerating. A few divers smashing urchins with a hammer is like one lick on a tootsie roll tootsie pop. Donate....🤣🤣🤣

[@etemytradel4509]

California should fix theys own problems before them tells everyone else how to act.

[@ciello___8307]

kelp forest decline is a worldwide problem.

[@shouheiakagi2583]

Kelp Forest is on a decline worldwide. Not only that, a Viral infection that is affecting all Sea Stars, are affecting Sea Stars in the Pacific. These Sea stars that are along the coast of California are a natural predator of the Sea Urchins that destroy the Kelp Forest Ecosystem. Part of the reason why these Sea Star are dying might be due to climate change itself, which isn't a California only issue. And as a result, California has to find a way to help the Sea Stars survive the virus, and bring back the natural habitat of the Kelp Forests.

[@PeterDjordjevich]

Algae likes to eat fertilizer, aka nitrates/phosphates aka shit, maybe the kelp is declining because we are dumping less sewage into the water. It would be interesting to see how much kelp was around before the 1900s. Everything they are doing in the video is counter to nature balancing itself. Every aquarium hobby'ist knows this. Fighting algae blooms is the eternal struggle. Our ocean policies over the recent years is helping clean the ocean, and the urchins are doing their part by cleaning excess algae. Global warming would actually help increase algae growth if that was the problem. These people are inventing a problem that does not exist and are going around killing urchins who are just doing their job and asking for your money to help them do nothing but pay for their vacation diving around the coast. Here is a very basic tutorial on how to keep a clean ocean kzbin.info/www/bejne/lXecqISHgaZ1j9E

[@joaquimbarbosa896]

If you think 90% of kelp forests desapearing in only 10 years because of an invasive species that has no predator in that area therefor destroying the equilibrium in the ecossystem is natural you either don't know what you're talking about or you're just dumb

[@PeterDjordjevich]

@@joaquimbarbosa896 Urchins are not invasive, they have been there long before any of us. Removing them could cause unintentional consequences. We should focus on keeping the waters clean, and not over fish the areas.

[@joaquimbarbosa896]

@@PeterDjordjevich Did you even read? I never said urchins are invasive. O said this SPECIFIC species of urchins are invasive. And execuse me, a species growing more than a 1000% in 10 years and other desappeaeing in the same small ammount of time shows that there is no equilibrou in the efossystem. Wich by itself is proof that what is happening I unnatural Also, can you be more specific in "Keeping oceans clean?"

[@PeterDjordjevich]

@@joaquimbarbosa896 I mean 10 years ago those reefs were 10x more polluted, so the kelp was growing more since there were more nitrates feeding them. Now it's less polluted, so the kelp might be backong off. The urchins will eat any algea, maybe the crab population is down since they eat urchins. Sending drivers down to scrape them off is pointless.

[@joaquimbarbosa896]

@@PeterDjordjevich You continue to insist in this bullshit First, are you telling me ocean polution decreased 10 times in 10 years all over California's coast? Second, if algae have more food, even tho they have more urchins going after them, the fact that the kelp can grow faster should mean It's number should imcrease, not decrease. That makes no sense Third, if this was about natural equilibrium, than the urchin population would have reduce a LONG time ago. Why? Because there is almost no kelp left, but the urchins are still growing This also makes no sense for other reasons, like. 10 years ago there were allways the same ammount of fertelizers? Kelp forestd have been reducing in quantity for a LONG time. And in 10 years that decrease became absurd. But before those 10 years let's say the 90's), the ammount of fertelizers etc was vastlt smaller than now, specially in countries like the US Fifth, how is a natural ecossystem that should existe here (Kelp forests) desappeaeing in 10 years a natural thing. You assumed the kelp needs our fertelizers to grow, wich is stupid. How did they grow before we dumoed fertelizers into the o cenas than? Because that was when their number were bigger. 6th The ammount of fertelizers that end up in the ocean is much smaller than you think. Or better saying, it is Big, but compare to the giantness of the ocean it's incredibly small 7th, those fertelizers are toxic to basicly all species, including photossynthetic one like kelp. Than how does it help kelp growing? Remeber that from the momment they are used until reaching the ocean it takes a lot of time, and their molecules enter in reaction with others quite frequently.