Jump to content

1,300-Year-Old Technology In Comox harbour


Recommended Posts

Just ask the local folks. Western archaeologists are notorious for this sort of behaviour. Do a lot of digging for pot shards and make guesses but forget the original inhabitants of the area have relatives still in the area.

"One K’ómoks elder gave Greene a clue: her grandmother said the stakes were weirs that helped catch salmon, and each family was responsible for specific weirs."

My wife did a story about Covid and traveling up the BC coast by boat and how the local First Nations communities were isolating. Some of the elders she spoke to had grandparents who told stories them about the small pox epidemics they experienced as little kids. 1862 was the epidemic.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Around here, fish traps were banned more than a century ago because they worked too well.  They caught every damned fish in the river, leaving none to spawn or to travel to fisheries farther up stream.  Might be a different result in the open ocean.  Dunno.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

We use this exact type of arrangement on the Chesapeake now.  We call them pound nets. 

They catch too many,  too much by-catch and they're a navigational hazard as they're unlit. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Ajax said:

We use this exact type of arrangement on the Chesapeake now.  We call them pound nets. 

They catch too many,  too much by-catch and they're a navigational hazard as they're unlit. 

I'm perfectly happy that the pound net near West River #2 is no longer there.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Ajax said:

We use this exact type of arrangement on the Chesapeake now.  We call them pound nets. 

They catch too many,  too much by-catch and they're a navigational hazard as they're unlit. 

When I tell people around here that we've already passed Peak Fish, they tend to not believe me. Sometimes, admittedly rarely, they actually look up figures and become alarmed.

A person who is worried about the environment may or may not know the facts, but person who is not worried is definitely ignorant.

FB- Doug

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Steam Flyer said:

When I tell people around here that we've already passed Peak Fish, they tend to not believe me. Sometimes, admittedly rarely, they actually look up figures and become alarmed.

A person who is worried about the environment may or may not know the facts, but person who is not worried is definitely ignorant.

FB- Doug

The commercial, and nearly biological, extinction of the Atlantic cod is a case study in the anthropocene. The human trope "There are always more fish in the sea" has been falsified by human ingenuity in removing all cod from the sea. Nothing left but hagfish.

It's not the first time a single species has categorically altered the biological course of this planet, nor will it be the last. But we won't be here to witness the next go-round.

One scrap of good news: most true fish (as opposed to marine mammals or shellfish) have r-strategies with very high fecundity. If you establish closely-policed nursery grounds, or just stop kicking the shit out of a fish species for a decade or so, it will recover to pre-exploitation numbers quite rapidly. On two assumptions: 1) another species has not seized its niche (see: hagfish); and 2) the environment can support their return in numbers (see: coral bleaching).

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Ajax said:

We use this exact type of arrangement on the Chesapeake now.  We call them pound nets. 

They catch too many,  too much by-catch and they're a navigational hazard as they're unlit. 

Two new ones just went up near me. The birds love them, every piling had a bird on it. As far as lighting goes, the watermen seem to "acquire" road construction blinkers and put them on the traps. YMMV on how bright they are or even if the batteries are still good at all :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Diarmuid said:

The commercial, and nearly biological, extinction of the Atlantic cod is a case study in the anthropocene. The human trope "There are always more fish in the sea" has been falsified by human ingenuity in removing all cod from the sea. Nothing left but hagfish.

It's not the first time a single species has categorically altered the biological course of this planet, nor will it be the last. But we won't be here to witness the next go-round.

One scrap of good news: most true fish (as opposed to marine mammals or shellfish) have r-strategies with very high fecundity. If you establish closely-policed nursery grounds, or just stop kicking the shit out of a fish species for a decade or so, it will recover to pre-exploitation numbers quite rapidly. On two assumptions: 1) another species has not seized its niche (see: hagfish); and 2) the environment can support their return in numbers (see: coral bleaching).

 

The NC fisheries people are pretty good, and take a pretty serious cut at the science. The commercial fishermen have a few grudges, but for the most part they listen.

We have fabulous shrimp here. The fisheries studies indicate that they have a very high reproduction rate, so high that as long as their spawning grounds remain, there is no practical upper limit on the catch. Crabs are a different story, the crabs are also marvelous but they are in steep decline and the state is having both a crackdown on unlicensed traps and clean-up of old orphaned traps (where the buoy has been cut). There are two crabbers here who had their boats confiscated after they lost their licenses because they had out about 3X as many traps as they had licensed.

- DSK

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Crabs suffer from a lot more than crabbers. Specifically, all the housing development along shorelines introduces turbidity, pet feces/nutrients, lawn fertilizer/nutrients, herbicides, pesticides, you get the idea. The Chesapeake has been fighting this battle for a long time, but is hampered by the conflicting jurisdictions.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, mookiesurfs said:

Crabs suffer from a lot more than crabbers. Specifically, all the housing development along shorelines introduces turbidity, pet feces/nutrients, lawn fertilizer/nutrients, herbicides, pesticides, you get the idea. The Chesapeake has been fighting this battle for a long time, but is hampered by the conflicting jurisdictions.

The battle is hampered by wealthy, connected developers constantly weaseling around existing storm water runoff regulations and other environmental protection laws. Maryland actually has laws in place that would help but developers are rarely held to them. There's always a variance or an exception.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Diarmuid said:

The commercial, and nearly biological, extinction of the Atlantic cod is a case study in the anthropocene. The human trope "There are always more fish in the sea" has been falsified by human ingenuity in removing all cod from the sea. Nothing left but hagfish.

It's not the first time a single species has categorically altered the biological course of this planet, nor will it be the last. But we won't be here to witness the next go-round.

One scrap of good news: most true fish (as opposed to marine mammals or shellfish) have r-strategies with very high fecundity. If you establish closely-policed nursery grounds, or just stop kicking the shit out of a fish species for a decade or so, it will recover to pre-exploitation numbers quite rapidly. On two assumptions: 1) another species has not seized its niche (see: hagfish); and 2) the environment can support their return in numbers (see: coral bleaching).

 

The answer to all of this of course is fewer people on the planet. That's a conversation that we were having in the 1960s and 70s that we have now gotten too "religious" to have anymore.  People hate to think of themselves as common animals. But we are. And we have over-populated.

If we burn out as a species, I have no doubt that the Earth will be healthily repopulated with wild terrestrial and ocean animals once again. One fun fact that most people don't get is that were we to substitute wild land animals for our farmed food animals, humans would consume every last wild land animal within a matter of months. 

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Israel Hands said:

The answer to all of this of course is fewer people on the planet. That's a conversation that we were having in the 1960s and 70s that we have now gotten too "religious" to have anymore.  People hate to think of themselves as common animals. But we are. And we have over-populated.

If we burn out as a species, I have no doubt that the Earth will be healthily repopulated with wild terrestrial and ocean animals once again. One fun fact that most people don't get is that were we to substitute wild land animals for our farmed food animals, humans would consume every last wild land animal within a matter of months. 

We are infinitesimal specks living on an equally infinitesimal speck in an infinite void. More of us or fewer of us doesn’t have any cosmic implications, so I vote for fewer. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Israel Hands said:

The answer to all of this of course is fewer people on the planet. That's a conversation that we were having in the 1960s and 70s that we have now gotten too "religious" to have anymore.  People hate to think of themselves as common animals. But we are. And we have over-populated.

If we burn out as a species, I have no doubt that the Earth will be healthily repopulated with wild terrestrial and ocean animals once again. One fun fact that most people don't get is that were we to substitute wild land animals for our farmed food animals, humans would consume every last wild land animal within a matter of months. 

My undergrad was in geophysics. One of the lasting lessons I learned was really how little humans matter on a geological calendar...it is true that we are now leaving enough record to get to name our own era- anthropocene era -...

But we will still probably end up just a smudge line in a sedimentary formation.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bull City said:

An interesting perspective.

Actually it is very liberating that on a geological perspective we have to the earth about 1/4 the life span that ants have to us.

A realization of ones immateriality takes a weight off your shoulders

10 Interesting Facts About the Geological Time Scale

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Diarmuid said:

The commercial, and nearly biological, extinction of the Atlantic cod is a case study in the anthropocene. The human trope "There are always more fish in the sea" has been falsified by human ingenuity in removing all cod from the sea. Nothing left but hagfish.

It's not the first time a single species has categorically altered the biological course of this planet

Worth picking it up.  He has another one on salt.

download (1).jpeg

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KC375 said:

Actually it is very liberating that on a geological perspective we have to the earth about 1/4 the life span that ants have to us.

A realization of ones immateriality takes a weight off your shoulders

Well... for another perspective, we've burned through about 80% of the habitability life span of the earth, and in all that time produced ONE species capable of leaving the planet and (potentially) preserving any of the biosphere beyond that.  There's only about another billion years left before the expanding sun cooks off Earth's atmosphere.   Who else is gonna save the bacon?  Dolphins are too lazy and have no thumbs.  Actually it's only 999,999,975 years, now.  I know because an astrophysicist told me that 25 years ago!  Tick tock. Tick Tock.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KC375 said:

A realization of ones immateriality takes a weight off your shoulders

Great illustration and concept. I'll bear my immateriality in mind the next time I step on the scale.

Life is so uncertain!

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, toddster said:

Well... for another perspective, we've burned through about 80% of the habitability life span of the earth, and in all that time produced ONE species capable of leaving the planet and (potentially) preserving any of the biosphere beyond that.

That one species capable of leaving the planet is so damn destructive that it's the one species which should never be allowed to leave its home planet.  That much destructiveness should be contained.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, toddster said:

Well... for another perspective, we've burned through about 80% of the habitability life span of the earth, and in all that time produced ONE species capable of leaving the planet and (potentially) preserving any of the biosphere beyond that.  There's only about another billion years left before the expanding sun cooks off Earth's atmosphere.   Who else is gonna save the bacon?  Dolphins are too lazy and have no thumbs.  Actually it's only 999,999,975 years, now.  I know because an astrophysicist told me that 25 years ago!  Tick tock. Tick Tock.  

It's important for a project plan to have a clear timeline

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Leeroy Jenkins said:

Worth picking it up.  He has another one on salt.

download (1).jpeg

I read "Salt" a couple of months ago

It was well written, he likes to belabor his points and also go into recipes; but I enjoyed it. A good bit of history I did not know, and from a different angle also.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, toddster said:

Well... for another perspective, we've burned through about 80% of the habitability life span of the earth, and in all that time produced ONE species capable of leaving the planet and (potentially) preserving any of the biosphere beyond that.  There's only about another billion years left before the expanding sun cooks off Earth's atmosphere.   Who else is gonna save the bacon?  Dolphins are too lazy and have no thumbs.  Actually it's only 999,999,975 years, now.  I know because an astrophysicist told me that 25 years ago!  Tick tock. Tick Tock.  

When I was studying geophysics I occasionally hung out with some folks studying astrophysics.

After exhausting important topics like was Elvis actually important to the development of popular music and why did the jocks always get the best dates, the conversation would get to the big bang and would the expansion eventually stop and reverse leading to the big crunch...and would the big crunch lead to a rebound, another big bang starting a universe again....how many times had the universe been born or reborn...around that point the munchies would kick in big time

newtons-cradle-halloween.gif

 

IMG_1529.jpg

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, TwoLegged said:

That one species capable of leaving the planet is so damn destructive that it's the one species which should never be allowed to leave its home planet.  That much destructiveness should be contained.

But we promise we'll do better next time

- DSK

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, KC375 said:

Actually it is very liberating that on a geological perspective we have to the earth about 1/4 the life span that ants have to us.

A realization of ones immateriality takes a weight off your shoulders

 

10 Interesting Facts About the Geological Time Scale

Dragonflies evolved 300 MILLION years ago. They have seen the dinosaurs come and go.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, mookiesurfs said:

Dragonflies evolved 300 MILLION years ago. They have seen the dinosaurs come and go.

A bit like millennials.  they had a big dinosaur phase as pre-teens, before they matured ;) into TikToking

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Leeroy Jenkins said:

Worth picking it up.  He has another one on salt.

download (1).jpeg

I've often wondered if Mr. Kurlansky might be our own Mark K?

I read The Big Oyster, it's amazing how that guy can make any topic, no matter how mundane, seem positively engrossing!

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, TwoLegged said:

That one species capable of leaving the planet is so damn destructive that it's the one species which should never be allowed to leave its home planet.  That much destructiveness should be contained.

One species evolved on Earth and developed new skills that made it more successful than other life forms.  Unfortunately, the waste-products of this species were toxic to all other life forms and killed off all other species or forced them to retreat into isolated niches, or to actually evolve ways to live on the waste products of that one species.  Eventually, it dominated the entire planet and radically changed the composition of the atmosphere.  The most destructive thing that has ever happened to the biosphere.  Of course, I mean the first cyanobacterium.  

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, toddster said:

One species evolved on Earth and developed new skills that made it more successful than other life forms.  Unfortunately, the waste-products of this species were toxic to all other life forms and killed off all other species or forced them to retreat into isolated niches, or to actually evolve ways to live on the waste products of that one species.  Eventually, it dominated the entire planet and radically changed the composition of the atmosphere.  The most destructive thing that has ever happened to the biosphere.  Of course, I mean the first cyanobacterium.  

 

Interesting BBC article The animals changed by proximity to humans

From this

red-junglefowl-3c4a50fe47f54dfbb0ef9e109

To this in a decade

3844.jpg?width=620&quality=85&auto=forma

Interesting note, mice get smarter living near humans....

But fruit flies get dumber

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, KC375 said:

Actually it is very liberating that on a geological perspective we have to the earth about 1/4 the life span that ants have to us.

A realization of ones immateriality takes a weight off your shoulders

 

10 Interesting Facts About the Geological Time Scale

If those layers were to scale you wouldn't even be able to see the Holocene.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, B.J. Porter said:

If those layers were to scale you wouldn't even be able to see the Holocene.

Hell, until recently, I wasn't even sure that I believed in the Holocene.  But we seem to be nailing it down now...

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, toddster said:

Hell, until recently, I wasn't even sure that I believed in the Holocene.  But we seem to be nailing it down now...

It's starting to roll up in the corners. Needs more glue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, TwoLegged said:

Nah, it just needs a heat gun.  And that is in hand

No glue or heat gun needed, future eras will weight down our fleeting geological event line the sediment layer

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/10/2021 at 10:45 AM, Ajax said:

The battle is hampered by wealthy, connected developers constantly weaseling around existing storm water runoff regulations and other environmental protection laws. Maryland actually has laws in place that would help but developers are rarely held to them. There's always a variance or an exception.

Oh you bad bad developer. You totally broke the rules and made a million dollars. Send your $437.54 fine in or face another strongly worded letter :rolleyes:

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/9/2021 at 2:07 PM, TwoLegged said:

When I read the headline, I assumed that someone was throwing well-justified snark at Brent Swain's dilapidated hulks.

But sadly, it's something much less fun.  Fascinating, but not fun

https://comoxvalley.news/amazing-1300-year-old-technology-found-hidden-in-comox-harbour/ 

Here’s a pic I took on Mitlenatch Island last week (no, that’s not a German name; its indigenous), the “Galapagos” of Georgia Strait. http://www.mitlenatch.ca/mitlenatch-island/

The lady in the pic is a volunteer park guide (people volunteer for one-week stints all summer; no one else lives on the island) explaining the hard-to-see, roughly v-shaped arrangements of rocks in the low-tide/dried out bay in the pic - ancient fish weirs.  I’d never noticed them before she pointed them out!  So very cool to somehow “connect” with traces of people from many thousands of years ago, long before Donald Trump.  (That said, the very noisy profusion of literally nonstop all-night-long crying and mewling seabird ashore, and grunting and growling sea lion populations in the sea connect you with something even more primeval and ancient!!)

B253D2C6-7709-4DF9-926C-13055B730FA6.png

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2021 at 11:28 AM, KC375 said:

No glue or heat gun needed, future eras will weight down our fleeting geological event line the sediment layer

https://geologywriter.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Screen-shot-2014-09-15-at-7.18.26-AM.png

Future (probably alien) geologists: "Here you can see clearly defined the H/X (holocene/xerisphere) boundary layer, made up mostly of medium hydrocarbons, plastic Walmart bags, and compacted Amazon shipping boxes."

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...