Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Swarm of Giant Jellyfish Capsize 10-Ton Trawler

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the we're-gonna-need-a-bigger-boat dept.

Earth 227

Hugh Pickens writes "The Telegraph reports that the Japanese trawler Diasan Shinsho-maru has capsized off the coast of China, as its three-man crew dragged their net through a swarm of giant jellyfish (which can grow up to six feet in diameter and travel in packs) and tried to haul up a net that was too heavy. The crew was thrown into the sea when the vessel capsized, but the three men were rescued by another trawler. Relatively little is known about Nomura's jellyfish, such as why some years see thousands of the creatures floating across the Sea of Japan on the Tsushima Current, but last year there were virtually no sightings. In 2007, there were 15,500 reports of damage to fishing equipment caused by the creatures. Experts believe that one contributing factor to the jellyfish becoming more frequent visitors to Japanese waters may be a decline in the number of predators, which include sea turtles and certain species of fish. 'Jellies have likely swum and swarmed in our seas for over 600 million years,' says scientist Monty Graham of the Dauphin Island Sea Lab in Alabama. 'When conditions are right, jelly swarms can form quickly. They appear to do this for sexual reproduction.'"

cancel ×

227 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

I don't mean to Troll (4, Insightful)

Nerdfest (867930) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022456)

But didn't human error capsize this ship?

Re:I don't mean to Troll (5, Funny)

2.7182 (819680) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022530)

No. Let's be clear about this. These jellyfish has bred near a nuclear reactor, and in addition to being intelligent, are quite evil. They did it. And they did it on purpose.

Re:I don't mean to Troll (5, Funny)

mctk (840035) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022894)

Mod parent trawl.

Re:I don't mean to Troll (4, Funny)

jdfox (74524) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023820)

Re:I don't mean to Troll (Score: 15,500, Bait)

There coming for .....YOU (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023518)

and oddly i just watched that early next generation episode where the giant space jellyfish blasted the bandi on deneb

now there here wonder if the govt has one against its will at gitmo

Re:I don't mean to Troll (1)

HexOxide (1375611) | more than 4 years ago | (#30024050)

Wouldn't placing a nuclear reactor in such a place that jellyfish may breed next to it and mutate count as human error?

Re:I don't mean to Troll (2, Insightful)

OzPeter (195038) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022584)

But didn't human error capsize this ship?

Another fine first post wasted by common sense and intelligence.

Re:I don't mean to Troll (1)

MiniMike (234881) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022842)

Just be glad it wasn't some doofus welcoming new jellyfish overlords...

Oh drats...

Re:I don't mean to Troll (3, Funny)

Stupid McStupidson (1660141) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023484)

I'm a jellyfish overlord, you insensitive clod!

Re:I don't mean to Troll (1)

MiniMike (234881) | more than 4 years ago | (#30024142)

Then someone will be welcoming you shortly. Just keep hanging on to that net...

Re:I don't mean to Troll (4, Insightful)

chriss (26574) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023002)

In 2007, there were 15,500 reports of damage to fishing equipment caused by the creatures.

In other news: Last year several thousands of SUVs were damaged by children who, for some reasons, were not constrained by their parents to stay inside all the time and instead failed to stay at the proper speed to move smoothly with the traffic. Due to the excellent structural protection from the SUVs their drivers did not suffer major physical injuries.

Re:I don't mean to Troll (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023270)

In 2007, there were 15,500 reports of damage to fishing equipment caused by the creatures.

In other news: Last year several thousands of SUVs were damaged by children who, for some reasons, were not constrained by their parents to stay inside all the time and instead failed to stay at the proper speed to move smoothly with the traffic. Due to the excellent structural protection from the SUVs their drivers did not suffer major physical injuries.

It's not nearly as bad as you make it out to be. If you get the really big tires the little brats never even mess up the paint. Oh sure, sometimes a bicycle will damage a tire sidewall, but that's what roadside assistance if for, right?

Human Error (1)

handy_vandal (606174) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023122)

But didn't human error capsize this ship?

Seems likely.

The article at Telegraph states: "The trawler, the Diasan Shinsho-maru, capsized off Chiba`as its three-man crew was trying to haul in a net containing dozens of huge Nomura's jellyfish."

The Slashdot submitter states: "... three-man crew dragged their net through a swarm of giant jellyfish ... and tried to haul up a net that was too heavy."

There's some difference between "haul in" and "haul up", but in both cases the ship's crew is hauling. Sounds to me like the crew capsized their boat by hauling too hard.

Re:Human Error (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023308)

There's some difference between "haul in" and "haul up",

Not really. The net was being hauled UP out of the water and IN to the boat.

but in both cases the ship's crew is hauling. Sounds to me like the crew capsized their boat by hauling too hard.

Despite not being a nautical person, I'm sure ships & fishing gear have rated maximum weights. And once the center of mass tilts beyond a certain point, the boat will flip.

Haul Up, Haul In (1)

handy_vandal (606174) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023750)

The net was being hauled UP out of the water and IN to the boat.

Not necessarily. If the net is any distance from the ship, hauling in means hauling the net through the water. Only when the net is adjacent to the boat (beneath the business end of the boom arm, I suppose) is it hauled into the boat. Hauling up out of the water is the dangerous part, I assume that's when the ship capsized. But the ship could conceivably have capsized while hauling the net through the water, given enough jellyfish mass and enough pull from the ship's winch (not likely, but the syntactic ambiguity bugs me to I have to explore the problem).

As you say, rated maximum weights, center of mass tilt, boat flip. The crew should know such things and acted accordingly.

Re:I don't mean to Troll (0, Redundant)

flyneye (84093) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023160)

It definitely was, but I'm sure they weren't " trolling" for jellyfish. (BA BOOM CHANG)

          NEXT!

 

History shows again and again... (1)

denzacar (181829) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023574)

With a purposeful grimace and a terrible sound
He pulls the spitting high tension wires down

Helpless people on a subway train
Scream bug-eyed as he looks in on them

He picks up a bus and he throws it back down
As he wades through the buildings toward the center of town

Oh no, they say hes got to go
Go go Godzilla, yeah
Oh no, there goes Tokyo
Go go Godzilla, yeah

Rinji news o moshiagemasu!
Rinji news o moshiagemasu!
Godzilla ga ginza hoomen e mukatte imasu!
Daishkyu hinan shite kudasai!
Daishkyu hinan shite kudasai!

Oh no, they say hes got to go
Go go Godzilla, yeah
Oh no, there goes Tokyo
Go go Godzilla, yeah

History shows again and again
How nature points up the folly of men
Godzilla!

Re:I don't mean to Troll (4, Funny)

spongman (182339) | more than 4 years ago | (#30024016)

in other news visitors from the middle east were tragically killed when the twin towers of the world trade center blocked the path of the jet they were traveling on. the pentagon building and a field in Pennsylvania were responsible for similar incidents.

But... (1)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022464)

Do the jellyfish also serve as flotation devices?

I don't think we're ready for this jelly (5, Interesting)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022474)

The worst part of this "invasion" is that the species isn't really tasty at all. Not to mention that every part of this particular jellyfish contains toxins. Every touching the top of the jellyfish will result in temporary numbness.

If they are proliferating because of a lack of predators, we should probably go ahead and kill as many of these as we can to maintain a good ecosystem balance.

Re:I don't think we're ready for this jelly (1)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022496)

Wouldn't the proliferation at least help the predator population? At least they're less likely to go hungry.

Except for the other predator using the nets. (1)

Marrow (195242) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022542)

If its a predator fish, we probably think its tasty or at least good
enough for pet food.

Re:I don't think we're ready for this jelly (4, Insightful)

squidfood (149212) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023458)

Wouldn't the proliferation at least help the predator population? At least they're less likely to go hungry.

Being able to eat jellyfish profitably (they are not very nutritious) is an adaptation a relatively small number of predators (in particular turtles, a very limited number of mostly non-commercial fish) enjoy; those predators are mainly limited by other factors (like habitat damage on beaches) - hunger isn't a main issue for them right now.

That's the thing about jellies; they're really the end of the food chain (despite being low down) so if they bloom, there's not much predator control to bring then in check.

Re:I don't think we're ready for this jelly (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30022628)

This is a big todo about nothing. Though jellyfish are a problem in and around Japan, it's not a problem in the seas of China because of the Chinese needle fish. It is confused for a snake (the Chinese needle snake) but is actually an eel. The easiest thing to do is to introduce the needle fish to the waters around Japan.

Re:I don't think we're ready for this jelly (5, Funny)

PitaBred (632671) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022882)

But then where will we get eel-eating gorillas? I mean, snake-eating ones are a doddle, but eel-eating ones? Plus, do the eel-eating gorillas die over the winter?

Don't kill predators (3, Insightful)

mangu (126918) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022656)

If they are proliferating because of a lack of predators, we should probably go ahead and kill as many of these as we can to maintain a good ecosystem balance.

Wrong, we should stop killing predators. The seas have been overfished for too long, equilibrium is broken on so many levels that only true regulation and control of fishing will get any results.

After all, fishing is *so* primitive. Civilized people *grow* their food, hunter/gatherer economics are for barbarians.

Re:Don't kill predators (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023014)

hunter/gatherer economics are for barbarians.

which some of us still are, so shut up before I club your head with my stick

Re:Don't kill predators (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023280)

CLUB HIM! CLUB HIM! The barbie-que is already fired up. You club him, I'll clean him!! He'll look good beside the eels, the shark steaks, and the dog steaks! I hear geek tastes like pork! Oh, I'm so excited, CLUB HIM!

Re:Don't kill predators (1)

PsychoSlashDot (207849) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023762)

CLUB HIM! CLUB HIM! The barbie-que is already fired up.

There's a queue for Barbie now and everyone in it is fired up? Pictures, please.

Re:Don't kill predators (1)

Kneo24 (688412) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023168)

Some people speculate, and I agree with this based on subjective experience, that farmed fish doesn't taste as good as fresh fish. You can grow all the fish you want. Sure, it tastes okay, but I prefer fresh. There's something about fresh fish that makes for a better meal in whatever you tend to use it in. It's considerably more noticeable in Sushi.

Re:Don't kill predators (1, Troll)

FlyingBishop (1293238) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023328)

You don't need to eat animals. And it's very easy to select plants for flavor on a farm (we've had millennia of selective breeding to get it right.)

Re:Don't kill predators (3, Insightful)

Firkragg14 (992271) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023348)

If they didnt want to be eaten then why would they taste so good. Answer me that.

Re:Don't kill predators (1)

rcolbert (1631881) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023580)

I'm a charter member of PETA (People Eating Tasty Animals), and have to express my outrage at this insensitive comment. I am a devout 50% vegetarian. Please support my online initiative to have bacon reclassified as a vegetable by the FDA at www.baconmakeseverythingbetter.org.

Re:Don't kill predators (1)

Kral_Blbec (1201285) | more than 4 years ago | (#30024048)

I tried to visit your site, but was very disappointed to see it time out. It must have been slashdotted already. Do you happen to have a mirror?

Re:Don't kill predators (5, Interesting)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023356)

It's the feed. Ever eaten rabbit? A wild rabbit has a taste that is very distinctive. Farm raised rabbit has a rather soapy taste, so I won't eat it. The only difference is, wild rabbit eat what wild rabbits are SUPPOSED to eat - green vegetation. Farm raised rabbits eat prepared feed, which includes anti-biotics, possibly hormonal growth accelerators like they use for cattle - whatever the eggheads believe will grow the most meat for the least money. Farm fisheries are the same. It's near impossible to duplicate their natural diet, and if you could duplicate it, they would be far more expensive than wild fish.

Diet has everything to do with the flavor of the meat.

Re:Don't kill predators (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023538)

I wonder if that means humans taste like crap.

Re:Don't kill predators (1)

228e2 (934443) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023690)

Hmm . . . what a modest proposal J Smith!

Re:Don't kill predators (2, Interesting)

A Boy and His Blob (772370) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023846)

So I wonder... would a farm rabbit raised on feed taste better if its diet were changed to something more natural say... a month or so... before it was killed? Or is this something that happens over the entire course of its life?

Re:Don't kill predators (4, Insightful)

value_added (719364) | more than 4 years ago | (#30024190)

So I wonder... would a farm rabbit raised on feed taste better if its diet were changed to something more natural say... a month or so... before it was killed?

Sure, but I don't know about a month.

Don't enjoy rabbit, so I'll pass on commenting. Chicken, on the other hand, if you feed one a steady diet of corn, you get golden-coloured and really tasty meat. Cows that are fed grass (as opposed to grain), give milk that tastes far better than what you'll find in the American supermarket aisles. The cheese made from that milk doubly so. The meat obviously is better too and priced accordingly.

It's a simple concept, really. Garbage in, garbage out.

Re:Don't kill predators (3, Insightful)

spitzak (4019) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023366)

Um, "fresh" for fish means "not-frozen", and has nothing to do with whether it is farmed or not. I think the term you are looking for is "wild" or perhaps "not-farmed".

Re:Don't kill predators (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023562)

> Civilized people *grow* their food, hunter/gatherer economics are for barbarians.

That's what _you_ think.

Civilized ones over here know e.g. that grown salmon has more pollutants than natural fished.

Also, this idea of growing is a lot more complex than it seems... some primitive folks have rituals to seed new "harvests" (which they won't tend, but will use), to help predators and natural defenders (like insects).

Seems the civilized ones cannot learn how to behave inside their society _and_ outside, too.

FWIW, I believe there will come a day -- too far in the future from now -- when we will relearn how to profit from Nature being gatherers again.

Re:Don't kill predators (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023596)

Bingo. There's actually plenty of active research on what happens to habitats that lose their predators. It of course varies dramatically between habitats, but there's good evidence that humans actually can not (or will not) replicate the effects of these predators in a habitat.

I saw a talk recently by this guy (Bill Ripple) discussing research results that will be coming out fairly soon. Basically, they examined a couple of habitats and found that habitats with predators (wolves and cougars, in the places they did their studies checked) were -dramatically- more healthy than those without.

This seems obvious, but the slides he had were eye-opening, for me. I recommend reading more, though the main research isn't published yet. There is still plenty of good stuff here:
http://www.forestry.oregonstate.edu/wolves/ [oregonstate.edu]

Soylent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023600)

After all, fishing is *so* primitive. Civilized people *grow* their food, hunter/gatherer economics are for barbarians.

I for one welcome our new Soylent Green overloards.

Re:Don't kill predators (1)

T Murphy (1054674) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023862)

He's talking short-term, you are talking long-term. Both solutions should be pursued on an appropriate time-scale.

Re:Don't kill predators (1)

drsquare (530038) | more than 4 years ago | (#30024170)

After all, fishing is *so* primitive. Civilized people *grow* their food, hunter/gatherer economics are for barbarians.

Farmed fish are inferior to wild fish, and need to be fed from wild fish anyway. Civilised people eat whatever's nicest and most convenient.

Re:I don't think we're ready for this jelly (1, Troll)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022768)

What could possibly eat these things ? THEY are the apex predator.

Re:I don't think we're ready for this jelly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023178)

TFA mentions "sea turtles and certain species of fish". Oh is reading TFA cheating? Carry on then.

Re:I don't think we're ready for this jelly (1)

XDirtypunkX (1290358) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022792)

Not just ecosystem balance, those things creep me the fuck out.

Re:I don't think we're ready for this jelly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023126)

Wake me up when they can crawl 500 miles inland. Until they do, I guess I'm safe from jelly-related demise.

Re:I don't think we're ready for this jelly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30022922)

I bet there's some group of Chinese that will market eating this jellyfish as curing $DISEASE or improving $HEALTH. Then in a few years, this predator like the shark/whale will end up on the endangered species list.

I recall a while back that the Swiss were angry at the Chinese for eating Switzerland's national animal (the St. Bernard); people were joking that the Swiss should start eating Panda.

Re:I don't think we're ready for this jelly (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022930)

More activity to hunt this things probably will also hurt even more their predators or whatever contributed to regulate their numbers. The best way to get to balance is to try to repair what we did to unbalance things, like stop/minimize hunting sea turtles or that species of fishes that controlled their numbers.

Re:I don't think we're ready for this jelly (2, Interesting)

squidfood (149212) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023492)

...stop/minimize hunting sea turtles or that species of fishes that controlled their numbers.

Not everything is subject to predator control. Jellies may be more limited (historically) by competition for food with small fishes. It's possible a combination of changing climate conditions favoring jellies over small fishes, and removal of competitors for zooplankton leads to these events rather than removing predators.

It's not that (1)

Das Auge (597142) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022948)

It's not a lack of predators. The problem with this particular jellyfish stems from increased global temperature and pollution from China (near Hong Kong).

Thinking about it, the Chinese and Japanese will eat rhino penis because they think it's an aphrodisiac. Someone should tell them that eating giant jellyfish will give them a bigger penis.

Problem solved.

Re:It's not that (1)

orlanz (882574) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023392)

A better solution is to dope these things into male/female enhancement drugs and market it to the US. That way, the Chinese and Japanese economies will double their export revenues, completely recover, the world economy will go back to the way things were, someone will actually make profit, net spam traffic will triple, and we will continue to have the biggest compensating for something or other ....

Re:I don't think we're ready for this jelly (2, Funny)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023688)

Well duh. Fish Jelly is the worst idea since slug paste.

Re:I don't think we're ready for this jelly (1)

grumling (94709) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023790)

Sounds like it could be the next big recreational drug.

One man's toxin is another man's lost weekend.

jelly fhish (1)

alxkit (941262) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022522)

it looks like a job for SpongeBob and friends...

Woho! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30022564)

It's peanut butter jelly... fish?

Mystery solved (3, Funny)

Oyjord (810904) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022632)

"Relatively little is known about Nomura's jellyfish, such as why some years see thousands of the creatures floating across the Sea of Japan on the Tsushima Current, but last year there were virtually no sightings."

Godzilla had the munchies?

Soon: (5, Funny)

DemonBeaver (1485573) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022640)

Capsizing Jellyfish: The Hentai

Re:Soon: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023382)

Time to learn to eat some jellyfish, then. The Jellyfish Lickers, that's a reasonable name for a band or a movie of sorts.

Obligatory simpons reference (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30022738)

I for one, welcome our new trawler capzising jellyfish overlords!

We must take action immediately! (2, Funny)

mister_playboy (1474163) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023082)

I move to petition Congress to recommission the USS Iowa and deploy it to the Sea of Japan.

Jellyfish born near China and hanging out near Japan will not be open to English-language negotiations, so we must instead negotiate with 16 inch guns. They will surely give in to a show of force... everyone knows jellyfish are spineless!

Re:Obligatory simpons reference (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023288)

Deeply sorry, but somebody had to say it:

In Soviet Russia, jellyfish capsize YOU !

In Korea, capsizing jellyfish are for old people.

Chiba != China (5, Informative)

gzipped_tar (1151931) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022746)

The boat turned turtle off the coast of Chiba, which is a Japanese port, rather than the coast of China. TFA did mention that the jellyfish's breeding location is off the Chinese coast though.

Mod Parent Up (Informative) (1)

theTerribleRobbo (661592) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022822)

(Please.)

So, that's why it sank so easily... (4, Funny)

karlandtanya (601084) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023456)

I thought it sounded kinda small for a commercial vessel.

It was a Chibi-trawler.

Hey there! FlashMob4Jellyfish is using Twitter (5, Funny)

jms (11418) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022802)

"Relatively little is known about Nomura's jellyfish, such as why some years see thousands of the creatures floating across the Sea of Japan on the Tsushima Current, but last year there were virtually no sightings."

Hey there! FlashMob4Jellyfish is using Twitter

WhN? 2day. Where? Sea of Japan. What? Jam as many of us into
a fishing net and capsize the boat.
4:48 PM Oct 9th from ocean

Re:Hey there! FlashMob4Jellyfish is using Twitter (1)

FlyingBishop (1293238) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023490)

Twitter? That sounds like 4Chan to me.

A much bigger problem (4, Insightful)

Das Auge (597142) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022892)

I saw a Nation Geographic (I think) special on this.

These jellyfish spawn off the cost of China, near Hong Kong. The increasing water temperature (since the end of the last ice age) coupled with the pollution that China dumps into the sea, has caused an explosion of the aforementioned animals. The jellyfish then float eastward, right into the Japanese fishing waters.

The Japanese have no real solution to this problem. Thy only thing they can do it try to kill as many jellyfish as they can (using bladed or hooked poles).

Here's when I venture into probably troll country: I'm okay with the affect the jellyfish are having. The way that the Japanese over-fish the oceans (not to mention killing whales), I'm okay with anything that slows them down. Now only if something could slow down the over-fishing done by the rest of the world. This includes the US, of which I'm a citizen.

I'm not a Green Peace lovin' (I hate 'em), tree hugging, nut job; but we really need to have some sort of international regulation (with punishments in the form of sanctions) on the fishing and care of the oceans. From over-fishing to habitat destruction (often a side affect of fishing) to pollution, we're well on our way to killing the oceans as we know them. Which will lead to the killing of our civilization as we know it. Not the end of it, mind you. Just the end of it as we know it.

Re:A much bigger problem (3, Insightful)

maxume (22995) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023086)

The best thing about good fisheries management is the increased harvests...

Re:A much bigger problem (4, Interesting)

Das Auge (597142) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023268)

There's no need for fisheries. It's been shown that simply cordoning off sections of the ocean where no one is allowed to fish at all, causes an explosion of sea life in the surrounding areas.

Well...okay, I take back part of what I said. We do need fisheries for shell fish. It's fishing for shell fish (especially shrimp) that causes so much of the habitat destruction. The trawlers rake scoops across the ocean beds to catch shrimp. Which annihilate the corral reefs.

Re:A much bigger problem (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023430)

'fishery' simply describes an area where fish might be.

Re:A much bigger problem (1)

FrankDerKte (1472221) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023276)

Yes, we have to solve the tragedy of the commons.

Re:A much bigger problem (1)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023362)

Capitalism to the rescue, baby.

All we need is for our chemistry wizards to come up with a recipe to turn the suckas into McNuggets (or equivalents), and those buggas will turn into an endangered species by the following Thursday.

Re:A much bigger problem (1)

Firkragg14 (992271) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023384)

(southpark reference) We could just tell the Japanese that Jellyfish were responsible for hiroshima and let them sort it out.

Re:A much bigger problem (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023628)

FOOKYU JELLYFISH!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAH!

                             

Re:A much bigger problem (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023856)

Thy only thing they can do it try to kill as many jellyfish as they can (using bladed or hooked poles).

^jellyfish^Chinese

Capsizing in a swarm of jellyfish (2, Interesting)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022940)

That's got to be one of a mariner's worst nightmares...

Hard to top that... capsizing amidst a swarm of hungry sharks, maybe.

Winch error (0)

SetupWeasel (54062) | more than 4 years ago | (#30022958)

Perhaps they should make winches that aren't strong enough to capsize a boat. Just a thought.

THANK GOD FOR CAPTAIN SLASHDOT! (5, Insightful)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023148)

Perhaps they should make winches that aren't strong enough to capsize a boat. Just a thought.

WOW, I'm sure decades of fishermen haven't considered that. Thank god we have Slashdot.

"What capsizes a boat" is probably very complicated- how loaded is it with fish? How high are the seas? How much water and fuel does it have on board? How much angular momentum does the boat have? How much water resistance does the hull give?

It's probably possible or even normal to haul up a load that, if you kept it hanging out on the crane, would slowly cause the ship to heel over too far, but if brought aboard relatively quickly, wouldn't...

Re:THANK GOD FOR CAPTAIN SLASHDOT! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30024182)

That's... not that complicated.

In fact each of those qualities is quantifiable, as well as pretty much everything else you'd need to do the calculations.

Apparently there's just no phrase for "set your drag" in Japanese.

Re:Winch error (1)

PIBM (588930) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023190)

Well, the problem probably resulted from a much higher drag on a single side of the trawler. They usually work in groups, (at least, the small ones), and if most of the jellyfish are on a specific side, the drag can getting close to an horizontal pull, easily capsizing the boat.

There's not much chance that if we'd lock down the bottom of the net in something underneath the boat, that 1 the net would be strong enough so that infinite strenght winch would bring the boat underneath the water rather than break the net, and 2, a real winch would not be strong enough to bring the boat underwater for an infinite strenght net :)

So, it's either a human error, or the jellyfish decided that swimming in a direction perpendicular to the boat would be the best thing they could do :)

Re:Winch error (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023368)

Maybe they should keep closer to shore with such a small boat. With a 10 m^3 displacement, the boat could be less than 10meters long.

Re:Winch error (1)

autophile (640621) | more than 4 years ago | (#30024022)

Perhaps they should make winches that aren't strong enough to capsize a boat. Just a thought.

Captain Watson, is that you?

Oh no... there goes Tokyo... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023020)

Is there any doubt that these giant, radioactive jellyfish are headed for Japan? Fortunately, they probably can't move very well on land. so Tokyo Tower is safe.

Is this a remake? (2, Funny)

magusxxx (751600) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023090)

Great...can't wait for the Syfy movie. *rolling eyes*

Obligitory Jokes (5, Funny)

flyneye (84093) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023094)

'When conditions are right, jelly swarms can form quickly. They appear to do this for sexual reproduction.'"

            Perhaps genetic experimentation to produce K.Y. Jellyfish would aid this.

About time (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023106)

Good to see that the seas are fighting back at our rape of the oceans.
I, for one, welcome our Nemopilema overlord swarms reclaiming their underworld domain.
Why is trawling still legal? Are we only going to stop when there are no fish or reefs left?
Why are we still eating Tuna? [bbc.co.uk]
ICCAT [iccat.int]

polka face? (0, Flamebait)

kribby (964773) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023138)

Another thing for Japanese to hate....including dolphins, whales, and the Enola Gay

I for one welcome... (0)

smitty777 (1612557) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023300)

...our Cnidarian Overlords

Life Imitates Art... (0)

OmniGeek (72743) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023444)

In this case, a German eco-thriller by Frank Schätzing entitled "Der Schwarm" (The Swarm), which features just such an attack, orchestrated by an intelligent marine species, (named the Yrr 'cause that randomly-typed letter sequence worked as well as any) that has decided to get rid of those messy, polluting land-dwellers, AKA us.

Next up: Swarms of highly-toxic white crabs invade the beaches of the US East Coast, while Canadian Orcas start dining on whale-watchers.

'Sexual' reproduction? (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023618)

When conditions are right, jelly swarms can form quickly. They appear to do this for sexual reproduction.

As opposed to what? Cloning?

Re:'Sexual' reproduction? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023758)

Anemones can reproduce through cloning.

Re:'Sexual' reproduction? (5, Informative)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023812)

> As opposed to what? Cloning?

Well, yes, actually. Jellyfish reproduce both sexually and asexually.

Re:'Sexual' reproduction? (1)

Yvan256 (722131) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023998)

They can do both? Does one has any advantage over the other? (aside from not having to deal with "not tonight I have a headache")

Re:'Sexual' reproduction? (3, Informative)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#30023848)

As opposed to what? Cloning?

Actually, yes. Jellyfish normally asexually reproduce; essentially cloning. They can also sexually reproduce.

Re:'Sexual' reproduction? (4, Funny)

tomhath (637240) | more than 4 years ago | (#30024110)

As opposed to what? Cloning?

No, as opposed to swarming for some other reason such as protection from predators, attacking Japanese fishermen, or as part of their agile software development process.

Oblig. South Park reference (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30023800)

Japanese fishers running into problems, again?

"Fuck you, jellyfish!" [youtube.com]

Its a potent of future diaster (2, Funny)

physburn (1095481) | more than 4 years ago | (#30024272)

Japanese nuclear radiation has stirred up Godzilla into an attack on one of the Cephalopod kings of the Major Arcana. The world is doomed. The only question is how we will die. Screaming Mad from Cthulhu, or Alien inversion from Waking Kraken.

---

Cryptozoology [feeddistiller.com] Feed @ Feed Distiller [feeddistiller.com]

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>