Scientist Look far to the North to Explain Young Whale in San Francisco Bay

Recently, there has been a sighting of two grey whales swimming near Alcatraz and Sausalito in San Francisco Bay.

Scientist say that this is unnormal around this time of the year. Gray whales normally mate tropical lagoons of Baja California around winter, then migrate towards the north to chilly polar waters to feed on shrimp-like prey that come to the surface of the water during the spring and summer time. After, they return to Mexico the following winter to give birth in the lagoons in order to keep them safe from sharks and orcas.

But the small calf that is with its mother in the Bay Area, is a new born. The new born is about 15 feet, meaning that she recently just had birth on her way towards Mexico. "We're seeing more and more calves born before they get all the way down to Mexico," said Wayne Perryman, leader of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

Researchers have been looking into the changes in the feeding and migration patterns. Some of these changes are due to climate change, while in other cases its linked to the recovery of the species from overhunting.

Mr. Perryman said that grey whales are leaving polar waters later compared to when they left back 15 to 20 years ago. As ice sheets move more northward, it might take longer for the whales to reach their food before they turn south again. Or, its because they are not able to find enough food in time to keep the traditional schedule. He also talks about how the primary feeding grounds have shifted.

Some grey whales have been eating off the northern coast of California, meaning that they are eating different kinds of prey then they would in polar waters. However, the population has been relearning direct migration routes that were being forgotten when manny of the animals were killed by whalers.

The whales have learned to go towards the west, around the Channel Islands off of Southern California. But according to Mr. Harvey, the wayward mother in the bay was hugging the coast because she wanted to protect her baby from the predators when she accidentally followed the shoreline into San Francisco Bay.

“If you’re a female with a calf,” Mr. Harvey said, “the best thing to do is swim really close to the coastline.”

Stopping climate change might be cheaper than we think

A recent climate model, created by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, predicts that "the median forecast is for a climb of 9 degrees Fahrenheit by century’s end, in the absence of effective countermeasures." That is just the median. The model also predicts that there is a 10% chance the temperature will rise by more than 12.4 degrees by 2010. This information should have us quaking in fear. An increase of only a couple degrees would have deadly effects on our planet's wildlife.

Considering the consequences, we should have a greater fear of inaction than the potential costs of actually curbing global warming. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has estimated that by simply putting a tax of about $80 on each metric ton of carbon dioxide, we could completely halt global warming by mid-century. More recent reports suggest that $80 might be a little low; a sum of about $300 would be more appropriate. This tax would make it such that prices would rise in accordance to a good's carbon footprint.

While this might mean pricier gas, and heaven forbid, ditching the car to take public transportation on occasion, the benefits far outweigh the costs. While it might seem "inconvenient," I would much rather have to pay $10 more for gas than live on a planet that is 10 degrees hotter than it should be. Passing legislation to allow this kind of tax would be next to impossible of course, especially considering certain conservative members of congress who still deny that humans are actually the cause of global warming. But, wouldn't it be nice if we actually took a proactive step to stop global warming? There isn't going to be an easy, cost free solution. And honestly, we are running out of time.