1
00:00:05,170 --> 00:00:07,680
GoToMeeting Auto Voice >> This conference
will now be recorded.

2
00:00:07,680 --> 00:00:11,970
Heather Tabisola >> Yes, Nick, we can see
your screen.

3
00:00:11,970 --> 00:00:13,550
Everything looks good.

4
00:00:13,550 --> 00:00:16,180
Nick Bond >> Ok.

5
00:00:16,180 --> 00:00:21,250
And just kinda starting off, you know, there's
a whole trick for speakers to relax, in terms

6
00:00:21,250 --> 00:00:25,730
of imagining their audience is just in their
underwear.

7
00:00:25,730 --> 00:00:30,320
And so, I'd like to turn the tables today
and just encourage you to imagine that I am

8
00:00:30,320 --> 00:00:32,750
giving this talk in my underwear.

9
00:00:32,750 --> 00:00:41,200
Ok, to start off here, I've dug up an old
slide from a Far Side cartoon about, you know,

10
00:00:41,200 --> 00:00:47,390
the committee to decide whether spawning should
be taught in school.

11
00:00:47,390 --> 00:00:52,089
It turns out, maybe the cod in the Gulf of
Alaska should've taken that to heart, because

12
00:00:52,089 --> 00:00:53,960
they're in pretty bad shape.

13
00:00:53,960 --> 00:00:58,120
And, in fact, that fishery was virtually closed.

14
00:00:58,120 --> 00:01:04,140
It was a small fishery, opened up just for
local fishers.

15
00:01:04,140 --> 00:01:10,799
But this kind of, this event has kinda motivated
this, this study that I'm going to briefly

16
00:01:10,799 --> 00:01:14,090
review here today.

17
00:01:14,090 --> 00:01:22,969
As part of that, this brief review, I'm going
to touch on a little bit about what has happened

18
00:01:22,969 --> 00:01:28,130
recently, in terms of the warm temperatures
in the Gulf of Alaska, versus, you know, the

19
00:01:28,130 --> 00:01:31,880
"Blob" of 2014, 2015 into 2016.

20
00:01:31,880 --> 00:01:40,390
A little bit on the biological responses,
maybe, probably focused more on the mechanisms

21
00:01:40,390 --> 00:01:46,659
in just a little, a couple of recent tidbits
about predicting these kinds of events.

22
00:01:46,659 --> 00:01:52,560
I'd like to recognize the contributions by
Phyllis Stabeno and on the physics part and

23
00:01:52,560 --> 00:01:56,270
especially for some of the stuff I'm going
to be showing here.

24
00:01:56,270 --> 00:02:02,770
Right away, Dave Kimmel and Alison Deary's,
some of their results.

25
00:02:02,770 --> 00:02:07,499
Dave has presented some of this at a previous
EcoFOCI seminar.

26
00:02:07,499 --> 00:02:11,690
But, I'm going to present it again.

27
00:02:11,690 --> 00:02:16,170
So, first of all.

28
00:02:16,170 --> 00:02:25,420
I'm not sure if the little GotoMeeting control
panel is covering this part of the screen.

29
00:02:25,420 --> 00:02:28,220
But anyway, I'll give it a go.

30
00:02:28,220 --> 00:02:36,110
Just taking a look at a series of maps for
the progression of the sea surface temperature

31
00:02:36,110 --> 00:02:44,730
anomalies during the big event, The "Blob"
of 2014 into 2016, versus the more recent

32
00:02:44,730 --> 00:02:45,730
one.

33
00:02:45,730 --> 00:02:51,650
You can see by kind of the middle, late summer
of 2019,

34
00:02:51,650 --> 00:02:59,500
from a sea surface temperature anomaly perspective,
is every bit as warm as it was in late in

35
00:02:59,500 --> 00:03:00,980
the summer of 2014.

36
00:03:00,980 --> 00:03:06,470
They did get started at different times of
year.

37
00:03:06,470 --> 00:03:14,439
The original "Blob" really revved up in the
winter of 2013, 2014, while the more recent

38
00:03:14,439 --> 00:03:21,530
one for most of its geographic extent was
more, really developed in the summer of 2019.

39
00:03:21,530 --> 00:03:27,970
So, we kind of expect that those events are
gonna, you know, have different kinds of structures

40
00:03:27,970 --> 00:03:30,800
and so forth.

41
00:03:30,800 --> 00:03:33,849
And more about that in a few minutes.

42
00:03:33,849 --> 00:03:42,000
So, the stuff I'm going to be presenting today,
just again, I cannibalized some slides that

43
00:03:42,000 --> 00:03:50,299
Dave Kimmel put together mostly from the Larval
Groundfish Assessments that have been done

44
00:03:50,299 --> 00:03:52,410
over the years.

45
00:03:52,410 --> 00:03:59,390
I'm going to be doing a lot about looking
at the ocean temperatures, and in particular

46
00:03:59,390 --> 00:04:01,769
sub-surface temperatures.

47
00:04:01,769 --> 00:04:11,550
And there, go down to the third point, mostly
relying on ocean re-analysis type data.

48
00:04:11,550 --> 00:04:18,930
And particularly, that from the NOAA GODAS
product.

49
00:04:18,930 --> 00:04:25,130
I have done some comparisons with the more
direct measurements from the Argo Profiling

50
00:04:25,130 --> 00:04:27,940
Network.

51
00:04:27,940 --> 00:04:32,780
And then at the very end, I'm gonna be talking
about some predictions.

52
00:04:32,780 --> 00:04:36,890
So, here we go.

53
00:04:36,890 --> 00:04:43,440
So first of all, again, you know, what was
happening out there...

54
00:04:43,440 --> 00:04:51,110
There's some direct measurements at depth
not really deep, but certainly below the surface,

55
00:04:51,110 --> 00:04:54,510
50 to 100 meters, showing the temperatures.

56
00:04:54,510 --> 00:05:03,000
In the years to 2013 through 2019, the little
postage stamp maps to the right.

57
00:05:03,000 --> 00:05:06,380
The redder colors show warmer temperatures.

58
00:05:06,380 --> 00:05:13,980
And you can see that 2019, along with 2015,
were quite warm years.

59
00:05:13,980 --> 00:05:20,970
2013 was on the cool side, 2017 was kinda
more in, in the middle.

60
00:05:20,970 --> 00:05:25,360
Along with those warm temperatures in...

61
00:05:25,360 --> 00:05:31,920
[Child's voice] What kind of ice...over the
wall?

62
00:05:31,920 --> 00:05:32,500
Nick Bond >> Say, again?

63
00:05:33,500 --> 00:05:35,600
Sorry?

64
00:05:37,690 --> 00:05:44,620
[Child's voice, indistinct]
Nick Bond >> Oh.

65
00:05:44,620 --> 00:05:47,090
I'm sorry, I didn't get that question.

66
00:05:47,090 --> 00:05:49,860
Heather Tabisola >> Everyone should be muted
now, Nick.

67
00:05:49,860 --> 00:05:50,860
Sorry.

68
00:05:50,860 --> 00:05:51,940
Nick Bond >> Oh, OK.

69
00:05:51,940 --> 00:05:52,940
Sorry.

70
00:05:52,940 --> 00:05:53,940
[Laughs]
Yeah.

71
00:05:53,940 --> 00:05:54,940
Feel free to interrupt.

72
00:05:54,940 --> 00:05:58,500
You know, we're all, you know, getting through
this.

73
00:05:58,500 --> 00:05:59,500
All right.

74
00:05:59,500 --> 00:06:06,190
So, in terms of what was out there, you know,
from a biological point of view, these three

75
00:06:06,190 --> 00:06:12,530
plots show time series generally every two
years of spring zooplankton numbers.

76
00:06:12,530 --> 00:06:18,920
And in the upper left, small copepods.

77
00:06:18,920 --> 00:06:20,830
Lower left, large copepods.

78
00:06:20,830 --> 00:06:24,350
Lower right, euphausiids
in the spring.

79
00:06:24,350 --> 00:06:33,580
And can see that, especially for the large
copepods and euphausiids, especially that

80
00:06:33,580 --> 00:06:41,700
the numbers during the warm years of 2015
and 2019 were very much reduced in the spring.

81
00:06:41,700 --> 00:06:46,550
I don't have a plot, but my understanding
is there were some recovery in the summer.

82
00:06:46,550 --> 00:06:57,890
But, anyway, going into the the warm season
it certainly, um, um, wasn't good for those

83
00:06:57,890 --> 00:07:04,960
higher predators that are looking for large
copepods and euphausiids as prey.

84
00:07:04,960 --> 00:07:14,820
In terms of what the larval assessments were
finding in terms of ground fish, larvae, that

85
00:07:14,820 --> 00:07:27,130
is, the maps on the left show for walleye
pollock in 5, uh, 4 different years: 2013, 2015,

86
00:07:27,130 --> 00:07:32,500
2017, and 2019 what the distributions of the
catches were.

87
00:07:32,500 --> 00:07:40,150
The red dots showing where there were no larvae
of walleye pollock, in this case, in that

88
00:07:40,150 --> 00:07:47,720
particular tow, and small blue circles were
just relatively limited numbers.

89
00:07:47,720 --> 00:07:56,310
The time series at the right show kind of
overall abundances.

90
00:07:56,310 --> 00:08:06,270
And with the Pacific Cod being the, in the
left column, the middle one, showing both

91
00:08:06,270 --> 00:08:10,140
2015 and 2019, very low numbers.

92
00:08:10,140 --> 00:08:16,160
And in 2017, some recovery, but certainly
nothing like it was in the 1990s and most

93
00:08:16,160 --> 00:08:19,000
of the 2000s.

94
00:08:19,000 --> 00:08:26,980
And so, this is why there was so much concern,
and what I think, it makes it interesting

95
00:08:26,980 --> 00:08:30,900
to look about how we got warm there.

96
00:08:30,900 --> 00:08:38,439
Before I really get started there, I would
like to point out some work that was carried

97
00:08:38,439 --> 00:08:43,269
out by the FOCI group a few years ago.

98
00:08:43,269 --> 00:08:53,449
And here, to me to emphasize that, groundfish
don't, aren't necessarily near the surface.

99
00:08:53,449 --> 00:08:58,020
You know, given their name, maybe that's not
a huge surprise.

100
00:08:58,020 --> 00:09:06,029
The larval fish tend to be higher up in the
water column, but the larger fish down lower.

101
00:09:06,029 --> 00:09:14,889
And it is, um, this plot is kind of confusing,
but what it shows is, how those fish in the

102
00:09:14,889 --> 00:09:23,520
past, and this is, in particular, Pacific
Cod, respond to temperatures in their environment.

103
00:09:23,520 --> 00:09:30,860
And especially the bigger fish, which are
indicated by the larger dots in this plot,

104
00:09:30,860 --> 00:09:36,220
tend to, when it's warm, they tend to move
lower into the water column.

105
00:09:36,220 --> 00:09:39,300
And when it's cooler up into the water column.

106
00:09:39,300 --> 00:09:47,370
And that so, when you separate, you know,
kind of the cold periods with the blue dots

107
00:09:47,370 --> 00:09:53,190
the, kinda more neutral temperatures, the
black dots, and the warm periods, the red

108
00:09:53,190 --> 00:09:58,399
dots, you can see that there's definitely
some vertical migration that was directly

109
00:09:58,399 --> 00:10:03,170
observed with the trawl surveys there.

110
00:10:03,170 --> 00:10:09,820
And so that, the fish care what's happening
in their environment below the surface.

111
00:10:09,820 --> 00:10:12,360
All right.

112
00:10:12,360 --> 00:10:23,930
So, it was, um, again, the idea is just how
warm was it there at depth, and how did it

113
00:10:23,930 --> 00:10:26,060
get that way.

114
00:10:26,060 --> 00:10:34,160
And what I'm showing here are three plots
showing, I picked the layer from 100 to 250

115
00:10:34,160 --> 00:10:41,980
meters below the surface, that's kinda arbitrary,
as one to mostly focus on.

116
00:10:41,980 --> 00:10:49,740
And what I'm showing is for the year ending
last summer, what the temperature distribution

117
00:10:49,740 --> 00:10:55,330
was at for that layer across the Gulf of Alaska.

118
00:10:55,330 --> 00:11:01,379
The GODAS and Hadley maps show two different
ocean re-analyses that it's easy to get their

119
00:11:01,379 --> 00:11:03,569
data in near real-time.

120
00:11:03,569 --> 00:11:13,400
And the bottom map shows from the gridded
product from the Argo project directly measured

121
00:11:13,400 --> 00:11:14,459
temperatures.

122
00:11:14,459 --> 00:11:21,819
The one of the problems with the Argo dataset
is it's mostly a blue water sort of product.

123
00:11:21,819 --> 00:11:28,139
So it can't really get close enough to places
like Kodiak Island, where we really care about,

124
00:11:28,139 --> 00:11:33,629
you know, what the conditions are like, and
that's where the cod are hanging out.

125
00:11:33,629 --> 00:11:42,519
And so have done some comparisons between
Argo and these ocean re-analyses, and they're

126
00:11:42,519 --> 00:11:44,829
mostly favorable comparisons.

127
00:11:44,829 --> 00:11:54,180
But again, relying again on the ocean re-analyses
because they are, giving us the data where

128
00:11:54,180 --> 00:11:56,009
we need it.

129
00:11:56,009 --> 00:12:02,269
And here, one of the other things that we
have been doing is comparing the analyses

130
00:12:02,269 --> 00:12:04,430
to one another.

131
00:12:04,430 --> 00:12:13,790
And this is actually just a climatology, the
mean September temperatures, and these comparisons

132
00:12:13,790 --> 00:12:23,970
I have found to be heartening, in that they
seem to be kind of all on the same page with,

133
00:12:23,970 --> 00:12:27,920
admittedly, some differences between them.

134
00:12:27,920 --> 00:12:33,740
Different products have different resolutions,
maybe have a little bit more mesoscale variability

135
00:12:33,740 --> 00:12:37,819
than other ones
But they are, for the most part, telling the

136
00:12:37,819 --> 00:12:39,939
same story.

137
00:12:39,939 --> 00:12:53,579
Ok, so, it was warm, really warm, in 2019,
in this, in the place, it's of special interest

138
00:12:53,579 --> 00:12:58,350
here, but sometimes called the central Gulf
of Alaska, sometimes west central Gulf of

139
00:12:58,350 --> 00:12:59,370
Alaska.

140
00:12:59,370 --> 00:13:02,980
This is just southeast of Kodiak Island.

141
00:13:02,980 --> 00:13:10,940
Basically, along the shelf break there, extending
a little bit into deeper water, the time series

142
00:13:10,940 --> 00:13:20,120
in red on the upper left, shows just the temperatures
there from the GODAS product back to 1980

143
00:13:20,120 --> 00:13:22,670
through September 2019.

144
00:13:22,670 --> 00:13:28,579
And what I think is really interesting, and
of course, is that the 2019 at these depths

145
00:13:28,579 --> 00:13:39,249
was actually considerably warmer than 2015
into 2016, and that there's this kind of slow

146
00:13:39,249 --> 00:13:42,860
oscillation in temperatures in that region.

147
00:13:42,860 --> 00:13:50,670
It was also quite warm there in around 2000
and a kind of a spiky warmer temperatures

148
00:13:50,670 --> 00:13:54,889
in the early 1980s, again according to GODAS.

149
00:13:54,889 --> 00:14:02,559
And that time series at depth doesn't much
resemble the PDO that is off, that's shown

150
00:14:02,559 --> 00:14:10,069
in the lower right, that's often used to characterize
the North Pacific Ocean conditions.

151
00:14:10,069 --> 00:14:15,990
And so if you want to know what's going on
at depth, you'd be well-advised to be careful

152
00:14:15,990 --> 00:14:21,329
about using some of these favorite indices
we have for characterizing the state of that

153
00:14:21,329 --> 00:14:24,699
system.

154
00:14:24,699 --> 00:14:30,879
Just to kind of reinforce that point here,
I'm just plotting depth profiles again from

155
00:14:30,879 --> 00:14:34,949
that box of interest southeast of Kodiak Island.

156
00:14:34,949 --> 00:14:38,820
There's 2015 in black, 2019 in red.

157
00:14:38,820 --> 00:14:45,750
And you can see, you know, it was maybe a
little warmer at near the surface in 2015

158
00:14:45,750 --> 00:14:52,829
overall, but it was considerably warmer at
depth in 2019.

159
00:14:52,829 --> 00:15:02,009
The idea that it was warmer, it actually shouldn't
come as too great a surprise.

160
00:15:02,009 --> 00:15:10,880
We know as kind of a hangover from the "Blob"
of 2014, 2016, that a lot of that warm water

161
00:15:10,880 --> 00:15:18,129
that developed in the northeast Pacific eventually,
some of that heat worked down into the, well,

162
00:15:18,129 --> 00:15:22,490
100 to 300 meter layer.

163
00:15:22,490 --> 00:15:28,139
This is, these just show some plots excerpted
from this, this monthly ocean briefing that

164
00:15:28,139 --> 00:15:29,970
NOAA CPC holds.

165
00:15:29,970 --> 00:15:38,050
And so you can see that really warm temperatures
there 2015 into 2016.

166
00:15:38,050 --> 00:15:43,809
But when the surface recovered, there was
still this warm water, kinda at depth.

167
00:15:43,809 --> 00:15:55,290
And in terms of kind of figuring out what's
happening at Kodiak Island, it's worth considering

168
00:15:55,290 --> 00:15:59,360
the main circulation here in the area of interest.

169
00:15:59,360 --> 00:16:06,230
Now, I know most of you are probably familiar
with the main currents, but, you know, people

170
00:16:06,230 --> 00:16:08,910
are born every day that don't know about this.

171
00:16:08,910 --> 00:16:16,430
And so just to review, there's a counterclockwise
circulation around the Gulf of Alaska.

172
00:16:16,430 --> 00:16:25,519
In the middle of the Gulf, kind of very slow
poleward flow to the water, a more concentrated

173
00:16:25,519 --> 00:16:33,509
currents, kind of off the shelf break Alaska
current and especially picks up in the Alaskan

174
00:16:33,509 --> 00:16:37,899
stream in the western part of the basin.

175
00:16:37,899 --> 00:16:45,639
And here, just to give away a punchline, essentially,
kinda conditions that are in the eastern part

176
00:16:45,639 --> 00:16:53,559
of the basin will be kinda transported into
the region off at Kodiak Island there without

177
00:16:53,559 --> 00:16:58,790
much delay because of this circulation.

178
00:16:58,790 --> 00:17:06,650
As part of that circulation, another thing
to keep in mind is that the flow isn't exactly

179
00:17:06,650 --> 00:17:09,310
horizontal.

180
00:17:09,310 --> 00:17:16,040
It turns out, in that, not strictly, but,
for the most part, the flow follows along

181
00:17:16,040 --> 00:17:23,870
density surfaces, isopycnals, and here, for
the Gulf of Alaska, those isopycnals, are

182
00:17:23,870 --> 00:17:31,630
more depressed in the east, off BC in southeast
Alaska.

183
00:17:31,630 --> 00:17:38,870
And they're higher, yeah, in the water column,
in the west, off the Kodiak Island

184
00:17:38,870 --> 00:17:42,150
That tilt is mostly due to the temperature.

185
00:17:42,150 --> 00:17:52,190
So it's especially warm in the east and cooler
in the west and so saltier in and fresher

186
00:17:52,190 --> 00:17:53,540
in the west.

187
00:17:53,540 --> 00:17:59,470
And so this is, you know, the kind of overall
oceanography.

188
00:17:59,470 --> 00:18:06,720
Another way to look at that and this is just
from Argo, direct data.

189
00:18:06,720 --> 00:18:12,870
If you look at the depth of this constant
density surface that the flow mostly goes

190
00:18:12,870 --> 00:18:15,030
along, it is much deeper.

191
00:18:15,030 --> 00:18:22,940
The kinda yellow-red colors there in the eastern
part of the basin and it shoals as the water

192
00:18:22,940 --> 00:18:28,630
moves counterclockwise around towards Kodiak
Island.

193
00:18:28,630 --> 00:18:30,920
So that's the depth on that isopycnal.

194
00:18:30,920 --> 00:18:39,820
Another way to look at that is just what for
a particular depth, in this case, 250 meters,

195
00:18:39,820 --> 00:18:48,200
what the density is with the kinda redder
colors actually showing higher density.

196
00:18:48,200 --> 00:18:53,930
And so it's kind of lower density water in
the east and higher density water in the west.

197
00:18:53,930 --> 00:19:01,300
And so that water, as it ship lakes around,
cools off and freshens as it goes.

198
00:19:01,300 --> 00:19:02,300
Ah.

199
00:19:02,300 --> 00:19:05,480
Oh, I wanna go back here.

200
00:19:05,480 --> 00:19:08,420
So I gave away something there.

201
00:19:08,420 --> 00:19:15,420
You know, so the idea that, oh, with warmer
water in the dast, perhaps, one way you could

202
00:19:15,420 --> 00:19:22,550
get it warmer in the west is just have a stronger
gyre circulation there.

203
00:19:22,550 --> 00:19:31,210
You know, I have faster transport of water
into that region off at Kodiak Island.

204
00:19:31,210 --> 00:19:37,270
If you actually look again, from the GODAS
re-analysis about what the flow was like in

205
00:19:37,270 --> 00:19:42,420
the year or so leading up to this, there was
really warm conditions.

206
00:19:42,420 --> 00:19:49,610
It's just the opposite signal that the flow
anomalies here is what's plotted.

207
00:19:49,610 --> 00:19:59,170
It was actually a reduced cyclonic or clockwise
circulation around the Gulf of Alaska.

208
00:19:59,170 --> 00:20:04,610
It was still going in the same sense, but
it was just slower than usual.

209
00:20:04,610 --> 00:20:09,400
And so it wasn't that the currents were stronger.

210
00:20:09,400 --> 00:20:10,960
They were weaker.

211
00:20:10,960 --> 00:20:20,420
But what instead, if you concentrate on that
rectangle, that I plot there in the right,

212
00:20:20,420 --> 00:20:30,510
was what conditions were like there the thermodynamic
properties of the water in that, in that region

213
00:20:30,510 --> 00:20:35,240
that eventually did get over to Kodiak Island.

214
00:20:35,240 --> 00:20:43,790
And there, this might be kind of confusing,
but I put it in kind of sort of maybe a weird

215
00:20:43,790 --> 00:20:51,210
sort of clock form, in terms of the progression
of what, what the temperatures were like in

216
00:20:51,210 --> 00:20:52,360
the northeast Pacific.

217
00:20:52,360 --> 00:20:59,040
So, it starts off the clock, starts off in
the upper right, and goes to lower right,

218
00:20:59,040 --> 00:21:02,620
and then, lower left, and then, upper left.

219
00:21:02,620 --> 00:21:11,940
And, so, starting in the winter of 2017, 2018,
it was and this is all for the 100 to 250

220
00:21:11,940 --> 00:21:17,730
meter layer, it was somewhat warmer than,
quite a bit warmer than normal, in the eastern

221
00:21:17,730 --> 00:21:26,020
Gulf of Alaska just near Haida Gwaii, the
Alexander Archipelago, there you know, off

222
00:21:26,020 --> 00:21:27,830
Sitka and so forth.

223
00:21:27,830 --> 00:21:34,770
It actually was a little bit lesser there
through the summer of 2018.

224
00:21:34,770 --> 00:21:46,610
But then in the winter of 2018, 2019, it really
warmed up in that, in that region there, again,

225
00:21:46,610 --> 00:21:49,700
near that box that I've highlighted.

226
00:21:49,700 --> 00:21:57,400
And then, over the course of 2019, from GODAS,
at least, there's the indication that warm

227
00:21:57,400 --> 00:22:04,650
water was, much of it, was advected with the
main circulation around to the Kodiak Island.

228
00:22:04,650 --> 00:22:13,540
So now, I'm going to go back here and note
in that rectangle there, off of, in the eastern

229
00:22:13,540 --> 00:22:19,900
Gulf of Alaska, the anomalous flow was directed
offshore.

230
00:22:19,900 --> 00:22:25,720
And it was also, in that region, again, from
GODAS.

231
00:22:25,720 --> 00:22:32,240
And this part of the ocean re analysis I don't
fully trust, but it indicates that there was

232
00:22:32,240 --> 00:22:36,920
also a anomalous downward motion in that region.

233
00:22:36,920 --> 00:22:43,460
And so, the circulation, the dynamics, for
whatever reason, were causing, at least in

234
00:22:43,460 --> 00:22:51,240
this, according to this ocean re-analysis,
an offshore directed and downward flow relative

235
00:22:51,240 --> 00:23:00,000
to normal of water that is generally warm
near the coasts and shallower, depths.

236
00:23:00,000 --> 00:23:05,410
And so that's kinda illustrated with this
diagram, this vertical cross-section in the

237
00:23:05,410 --> 00:23:11,920
same place that relative to normal, there
was kind of a transport of this warmer water

238
00:23:11,920 --> 00:23:25,630
from near the coast, and shallower depths
into the region of the kinda near the, well,

239
00:23:25,630 --> 00:23:30,120
the starting point of the Alaska current.

240
00:23:30,120 --> 00:23:32,070
All right.

241
00:23:32,070 --> 00:23:34,540
So what could have caused that?

242
00:23:34,540 --> 00:23:42,600
Well, there was during the winter of 2018,
2019 there was a very strong ridge of anomalous

243
00:23:42,600 --> 00:23:45,400
high pressure in that region.

244
00:23:45,400 --> 00:23:52,340
And that would tend to just from an Ekman
pumping point of view and just would tend

245
00:23:52,340 --> 00:24:04,360
to promote downward motion in the ocean, and
conceivably also, considering the kinda anti-clockwise

246
00:24:04,360 --> 00:24:11,050
circulation around these anomalies, transport
of water is offshore.

247
00:24:11,050 --> 00:24:18,530
Ok, so just to get back, I want to go back
to this plot here.

248
00:24:18,530 --> 00:24:25,010
There is pretty strong evidence that, at least
the precursor conditions for the warming in

249
00:24:25,010 --> 00:24:36,240
the central Western Gulf of Alaska were preceded,
something like nine months or so, 6 to 9 months

250
00:24:36,240 --> 00:24:41,030
hit by warm waters in the eastern Gulf of
Alaska.

251
00:24:41,030 --> 00:24:45,340
And so the idea is, can we predict this sort
of thing?

252
00:24:45,340 --> 00:24:55,320
And so what I've just done in the last few
days actually is gone in and looked at the

253
00:24:55,320 --> 00:25:01,090
sub-surface temperature predictions from the
model that's used by NOAA, for seasonal weather

254
00:25:01,090 --> 00:25:02,090
prediction.

255
00:25:02,090 --> 00:25:15,660
And what it was showing the real-time version
of that, of what the temperatures were the

256
00:25:15,660 --> 00:25:22,720
forecasts made in, on March one, for September
temperatures, from that, that product, for

257
00:25:22,720 --> 00:25:25,910
my box off the Kodiak Island.

258
00:25:25,910 --> 00:25:28,990
And that's the orange trace there.

259
00:25:28,990 --> 00:25:37,200
The actual temperatures, again, if we trust
the GODAS product to say what they are, is

260
00:25:37,200 --> 00:25:43,880
our them, it's the blue trace with the big
blue squares.

261
00:25:43,880 --> 00:25:52,290
And, you know, the correspondance there between
the actual temperatures, and the forecast

262
00:25:52,290 --> 00:25:56,280
temperatures is OK.

263
00:25:56,280 --> 00:26:00,960
The linear correlation coefficient between
the two is .6, or something like that.

264
00:26:00,960 --> 00:26:04,680
It's not very many points to make a correlation
about.

265
00:26:04,680 --> 00:26:12,430
If you just take what the temperatures are
in the eastern part of the Gulf and shift

266
00:26:12,430 --> 00:26:19,490
them accounting for the cooling that always
goes on as the water moves from the eastern

267
00:26:19,490 --> 00:26:20,850
Gulf to the western Gulf.

268
00:26:20,850 --> 00:26:27,450
Then you get, maybe even stronger correspondence
with what the actual observed temperatures

269
00:26:27,450 --> 00:26:29,080
were.

270
00:26:29,080 --> 00:26:35,120
And so, again, from both these kinds of things,
and, it's, and give some strong evidence that

271
00:26:35,120 --> 00:26:40,170
would say that we can forecast what's happening
in the western Gulf, with at least, you know,

272
00:26:40,170 --> 00:26:43,770
maybe 6 to 9 months lead time.

273
00:26:43,770 --> 00:26:52,590
I've done the same sort of thing and used
the whole GODAS temperature record.

274
00:26:52,590 --> 00:26:59,670
Um, and going back to 1980 to do the same
sort of thing here, I've, for what it's worth,

275
00:26:59,670 --> 00:27:05,200
I've used three months running means, and
kind of taking into account the choline, the

276
00:27:05,200 --> 00:27:09,350
isopycnal in that circulation.

277
00:27:09,350 --> 00:27:19,650
And, so, here, just, in the, um, what we're
trying to predict is that blue trace there,

278
00:27:19,650 --> 00:27:28,730
with the blue squares what the temperatures
are like in the west central Gulf of Alaska.

279
00:27:28,730 --> 00:27:38,560
And here, just looking at the mean temperatures
in eastern Gulf preceeding that you can judge

280
00:27:38,560 --> 00:27:41,710
for yourself how good a correspondence this
is.

281
00:27:41,710 --> 00:27:47,460
Clearly on longer timescales you're going
to attract one another, and that should be

282
00:27:47,460 --> 00:27:48,460
the case.

283
00:27:48,460 --> 00:27:55,750
In terms of the kind of inter-annual variations,
not bad, you know, it's not a perfect forecast.

284
00:27:55,750 --> 00:27:58,150
You know, there's other things that are going
on.

285
00:27:58,150 --> 00:28:06,350
But I think, again, it gives some kind of
support to the idea of forecasting for our

286
00:28:06,350 --> 00:28:09,750
cod stocks, perhaps.

287
00:28:09,750 --> 00:28:12,340
One last thing, and I just did this, this
morning.

288
00:28:12,340 --> 00:28:14,390
You can see it's kind of such an ugly plot.

289
00:28:14,390 --> 00:28:18,180
This is kinda for Steve Barbeaux's benefit,
I don't know if he's on.

290
00:28:18,180 --> 00:28:22,200
If not, may God have mercy on his soul or
whatever.

291
00:28:22,200 --> 00:28:29,750
But here, he has talked about how the cod
in the Gulf of Alaska had some really big

292
00:28:29,750 --> 00:28:34,270
swings in their abundance over a long timescales.

293
00:28:34,270 --> 00:28:41,690
And if I remember correctly, around 1940,
there were some real low population estimates.

294
00:28:41,690 --> 00:28:47,350
And for what it's worth, here from a different
ocean re-analysis product that actually goes

295
00:28:47,350 --> 00:28:56,340
back a long way, so you can see, that, that
1940 was a period off of Kodiak Island, which

296
00:28:56,340 --> 00:28:58,890
was very warm.

297
00:28:58,890 --> 00:29:03,640
And whether this is a coincidence or not who
can say.

298
00:29:03,640 --> 00:29:05,840
All right.

299
00:29:05,840 --> 00:29:08,820
So just last remarks.

300
00:29:08,820 --> 00:29:15,130
We had a marine heat wave again in 2019 in
the Gulf of Alaska.

301
00:29:15,130 --> 00:29:19,830
I think of it was especially noteworthy because
of what was happening below the surface.

302
00:29:19,830 --> 00:29:26,800
And that it was actually quite a bit warmer
in this 100 to 250 meter layer in 2019 than

303
00:29:26,800 --> 00:29:30,730
it was during the "Blob" that got so much
attention.

304
00:29:30,730 --> 00:29:39,550
And I would say, there's pretty strong evidence
that, in general, warm water in that region

305
00:29:39,550 --> 00:29:46,210
is preceded by warm water in the eastern Gulf
of Alaska which just makes sense given the

306
00:29:46,210 --> 00:29:48,710
main circulation.

307
00:29:48,710 --> 00:29:53,930
And that last point there, that perhaps we
actually have some predictability in these

308
00:29:53,930 --> 00:29:55,970
kinds of events.

309
00:29:55,970 --> 00:29:59,440
And so with that, I'll close, and let's see.

310
00:29:59,440 --> 00:30:09,920
I see some things coming up in the chat box,
and I'll let Heather run the show.

311
00:30:09,920 --> 00:30:10,920
Thank you.

312
00:30:10,920 --> 00:30:12,100
Heather Tabisola >> Thank you so much, Nick.

313
00:30:12,100 --> 00:30:16,830
I'm going to just clap from my laptop for
you for everybody here.

314
00:30:16,830 --> 00:30:23,560
Ok, if you have questions, please type them
in the chat box.

315
00:30:23,560 --> 00:30:25,300
There are 110 of you online.

316
00:30:25,300 --> 00:30:29,460
Nick Bond >> Oh my!
Heather Tabisola >> [Laughs] I know!

317
00:30:29,460 --> 00:30:31,060
So...

318
00:30:31,060 --> 00:30:36,010
And it's so good to see some of you from our
lab tuning in as well, and all of you who

319
00:30:36,010 --> 00:30:39,790
are not from the lab.

320
00:30:39,790 --> 00:30:44,820
While I wait for some questions to be typed
in, if you also just want to ask yourself,

321
00:30:44,820 --> 00:30:46,490
I will do my best to unmute you.

322
00:30:46,490 --> 00:30:49,520
So if you just sort of like, raise your hand
in some way and just let me know that you

323
00:30:49,520 --> 00:30:55,230
have a question in the chat, then I will try
to navigate that just because I know it might

324
00:30:55,230 --> 00:30:58,980
be nice to hear some voices.

325
00:30:58,980 --> 00:31:03,180
Thank you all, again for joining us for our
remote seminar.

326
00:31:03,180 --> 00:31:05,910
Thank you, Nick, for doing this today for
us.

327
00:31:05,910 --> 00:31:08,800
I know this is not the normal.

328
00:31:08,800 --> 00:31:15,800
Um, and also remember that we do, this is
the first of the next five weeks of seminars

329
00:31:15,800 --> 00:31:16,800
that we have.

330
00:31:16,800 --> 00:31:18,690
We do have one break week in-between.

331
00:31:18,690 --> 00:31:24,830
And then, if you guys do check out the One
Noaa Science Seminar listing, or also the

332
00:31:24,830 --> 00:31:29,880
NOAA PMEL website, for a list of the upcoming
seminars as well.

333
00:31:29,880 --> 00:31:31,780
Oh, yeah, I'm sorry.

334
00:31:31,780 --> 00:31:36,230
Yes, thank you for that reminder.

335
00:31:36,230 --> 00:31:43,400
Jens reminded me that Matt had a question
earlier on with one of your first slides.

336
00:31:43,400 --> 00:31:50,600
And it was that, were the error bars for variation
for 'within season' or 'among location'?

337
00:31:50,600 --> 00:31:53,160
And it was your...

338
00:31:53,160 --> 00:31:57,630
The next slide.

339
00:31:57,630 --> 00:32:02,750
Your arrow's on one slide, but the next slide,
Nick, is where he was asking that question.

340
00:32:02,750 --> 00:32:04,550
Nick Bond >> Ah, yes.

341
00:32:04,550 --> 00:32:07,710
Yeah, they're dah, dah, dah, dah, dah...

342
00:32:07,710 --> 00:32:10,910
I'm going to have to defer to Dave Kimmel.

343
00:32:10,910 --> 00:32:13,550
I'm not sure if he's on the phone.

344
00:32:13,550 --> 00:32:17,390
Um, but, uh...

345
00:32:17,390 --> 00:32:19,390
Heather Tabisola >> I don't see him listed.

346
00:32:19,390 --> 00:32:23,280
But, Dave, if you're just a caller without
a name, please go ahead and let me know if

347
00:32:23,280 --> 00:32:24,280
you're here.

348
00:32:24,280 --> 00:32:31,910
Nick Bond >> Yeah, no, I know that at least
the last year, 2019 estimates, are based on

349
00:32:31,910 --> 00:32:36,880
just some estimates made.

350
00:32:36,880 --> 00:32:40,560
Not complete counts necessarily.

351
00:32:40,560 --> 00:32:47,990
And then I think those abundances might...

352
00:32:47,990 --> 00:32:53,380
The error bars there may have to do something
with the, kind of just the way the sampling

353
00:32:53,380 --> 00:32:59,870
is done, that it's not quite the same plane
each year, and so there's some uncertainty.

354
00:32:59,870 --> 00:33:03,010
You don't, you're not covering each point.

355
00:33:03,010 --> 00:33:06,050
Jens Nielsen >> Nick?

356
00:33:06,050 --> 00:33:10,220
This is...I can't quite see the figure, I
think it's the larval data.

357
00:33:10,220 --> 00:33:11,570
Nick Bond >> Yeah.

358
00:33:11,570 --> 00:33:12,920
Jens Nielsen >> Yeah.

359
00:33:12,920 --> 00:33:17,620
So the question was about the error bars.

360
00:33:17,620 --> 00:33:23,470
And I think we sampled...Normally, it's spring
data sampled in sort of a pretty set window

361
00:33:23,470 --> 00:33:28,160
in April, May, and then it's a core area that's
sampled.

362
00:33:28,160 --> 00:33:35,500
So it's simply, I think, the variation is
sort of for these samples within each year,

363
00:33:35,500 --> 00:33:38,860
there's data samples across sort of a finite
space.

364
00:33:38,860 --> 00:33:45,180
So there are multiple vertical tows of fish,
or tows of fish larvae.

365
00:33:45,180 --> 00:33:50,730
And then the red dot in 2019 is from what
we call Rapid Assessments.

366
00:33:50,730 --> 00:33:53,230
So these are done on the boat.

367
00:33:53,230 --> 00:33:55,390
And then later, they will be verified.

368
00:33:55,390 --> 00:33:59,960
You know, as we go through the samples.

369
00:33:59,960 --> 00:34:01,980
I think that's how it is.

370
00:34:01,980 --> 00:34:03,990
Nick Bond >> Right.

371
00:34:03,990 --> 00:34:08,419
That's my understanding, too, and you stated
it more articulately.

372
00:34:08,419 --> 00:34:09,839
So thanks!

373
00:34:09,839 --> 00:34:13,669
Heather Tabisola >> Thanks, Jens, for that
as well.

374
00:34:13,669 --> 00:34:16,230
Ok, so Mike Alexander had a question.

375
00:34:16,230 --> 00:34:24,029
Can you see, month to month propagation of
the anomalies from the east to Kodiak Island?

376
00:34:24,029 --> 00:34:25,690
Perhaps along an isopycnal?

377
00:34:25,690 --> 00:34:33,559
Nick Bond >> I have to admit, I haven't really
checked that.

378
00:34:33,559 --> 00:34:37,210
And then, that would be a meaningful thing
to do.

379
00:34:37,210 --> 00:34:46,350
And, to the extent that, I don't want to get
into the weeds here, but these ocean re-analyses

380
00:34:46,350 --> 00:34:52,259
are, they aren't necessarily dynamically consistent
from month to month and then they get new

381
00:34:52,259 --> 00:34:55,700
data and then have to kind of adjust things
and so on.

382
00:34:55,700 --> 00:35:02,470
That's a good idea to, to do that sort of
thing to.

383
00:35:02,470 --> 00:35:11,650
What I have done in many cases is done some
kinda averaging over kind of larger areas

384
00:35:11,650 --> 00:35:20,380
in timescales of like three months or so to
try to minimize the impacts of any activity

385
00:35:20,380 --> 00:35:28,430
and how they're influencing, you know, conditions
as diagnosed because they could really be

386
00:35:28,430 --> 00:35:32,479
aliasing some of the results we're seeing.

387
00:35:32,479 --> 00:35:39,630
And in that, in other words, in some cases,
the an ocean re-analysis may be picking up

388
00:35:39,630 --> 00:35:44,349
the effects of any one month and not the next
month.

389
00:35:44,349 --> 00:35:52,410
And it could be kind of a kind of a mess,
but is it exactly right, is, as usual, that

390
00:35:52,410 --> 00:35:54,279
now would be a very good thing to do.

391
00:35:54,279 --> 00:35:59,259
Heather Tabisola >> Great, and we do have
another question from Chris Meinig.

392
00:35:59,259 --> 00:36:04,910
And Chris asks, What tools do the community
need to better monitor and predict marine

393
00:36:04,910 --> 00:36:06,170
heat waves?

394
00:36:06,170 --> 00:36:08,020
Have we identified gaps?

395
00:36:08,020 --> 00:36:16,579
Nick Bond >> Yeah, I would say that, because
a lot of the fish are on the shelf that we

396
00:36:16,579 --> 00:36:25,349
need in the North Pacific, we need more assets
whether it's gliders, or I'm not sure the

397
00:36:25,349 --> 00:36:28,779
best way to do this, but on the shelf.

398
00:36:28,779 --> 00:36:36,640
Argo is doing a great job at least on kind
of longer timescales of monitoring the blue

399
00:36:36,640 --> 00:36:37,730
ocean.

400
00:36:37,730 --> 00:36:48,930
And what we need is to, to be able to see,
is in fact, warming up along the shelf break

401
00:36:48,930 --> 00:36:55,400
there in the eastern Gulf of Alaska, because
if it is, we can be pretty sure that water

402
00:36:55,400 --> 00:37:00,310
is going to get to places where there are
important commercial fisheries.

403
00:37:00,310 --> 00:37:05,999
Heather Tabisola >> So, that's the last question
I have in the chat.

404
00:37:05,999 --> 00:37:10,390
Does anybody else have more questions for
Nick?

405
00:37:10,390 --> 00:37:14,130
Nick, anything else that you want to talk
about while you have people here?

406
00:37:14,130 --> 00:37:20,650
Nick Bond >> Well, I saw a comment from Ned
Cokelet, and I did kind of misspeak about

407
00:37:20,650 --> 00:37:26,559
just saying, you know, the nature of the bottom
trawls surveys, and essentially what, just

408
00:37:26,559 --> 00:37:36,960
to be, set the record straight, that study
they did, Yang et al., it would, the temperatures

409
00:37:36,960 --> 00:37:42,619
there were based on bottom trawl surveys,
and the fish didn't actually move up and down

410
00:37:42,619 --> 00:37:50,759
the water column, they moved to near the bottom
to shallower and deeper.

411
00:37:50,759 --> 00:38:01,339
And all along in this work, I've kinda tacitly
assumed that the places that I'm looking at

412
00:38:01,339 --> 00:38:06,410
that are kind of near the shelf break are
kind of reflecting some of the waters that

413
00:38:06,410 --> 00:38:10,590
are getting on to the outer shelf where some
of these fish hangout.

414
00:38:10,590 --> 00:38:20,249
But there's a little bit of an article of
faith there and so yeah, again, we have to

415
00:38:20,249 --> 00:38:29,730
be and keep reminding myself to be careful
there to in using some of these products that

416
00:38:29,730 --> 00:38:35,890
are out there because not strictly looking
at the same thing as what, where the fish

417
00:38:35,890 --> 00:38:37,970
really are.

418
00:38:37,970 --> 00:38:41,249
So, thanks for bringing that up.

419
00:38:41,249 --> 00:38:45,859
Heather Tabisola >> Any other questions from
folks online?

420
00:38:45,859 --> 00:38:50,599
I'll give you a minute to type them in.

421
00:38:50,599 --> 00:39:00,381
Nick Bond >> And now that we're finishing
up, I have a chance to actually put clothes

422
00:39:00,381 --> 00:39:03,529
on and get out of my, you know, not just be
in my underwear, right?

423
00:39:03,529 --> 00:39:06,539
Heather Tabisola >> Thanks for that image,
Nick, appreciate that.

424
00:39:06,539 --> 00:39:07,720
[Laughs]
All right.

425
00:39:07,720 --> 00:39:13,970
It doesn't seem like we have any more questions
online and folks are starting to sign off.

426
00:39:13,970 --> 00:39:17,200
So Nick, again, thank you so much for doing
this today.

427
00:39:17,200 --> 00:39:20,329
I'm sorry that it had to be virtual, but I
think it went pretty well.

428
00:39:20,329 --> 00:39:21,329
Nick Bond >> Yeah.

429
00:39:21,329 --> 00:39:24,390
Heather Tabisola >> And then hope we see all
of you next week.

430
00:39:24,390 --> 00:39:25,470
Nick Bond >> Yeah.

431
00:39:25,470 --> 00:39:27,970
And next time I get cookies, right?

432
00:39:27,970 --> 00:39:30,579
Heather Tabisola >> Ah, sure.

433
00:39:30,579 --> 00:39:31,579
Just for you.

434
00:39:31,579 --> 00:39:32,219
[Laughs]

435
00:39:32,579 --> 00:39:33,079
Nick Bond >> Yeah.

436
00:39:33,079 --> 00:39:33,579
There we go.

437
00:39:33,579 --> 00:39:34,579
All right, thanks to everybody!

438
00:39:34,579 --> 00:39:36,440
Heather Tabisola >> All right, thank you,
everybody!