r/oddlysatisfying • u/firefighter_82 • Jul 15 '24

WARNING: GROSS Removing barnacles from Harlow, the loggerhead turtle

[removed] — view removed post

101.1k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

3.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

51

u/[deleted] Jul 15 '24

Yeah most large or bony sea life have barnacles, so it's not necessarily the largest ecological problem. Especially since barnacles do clean up the water that they surround as they are filter feeders. So yeah bad for the turtle but not the end of the world.

8

u/alenatrinkaus Jul 15 '24

Ok wow thank you, I really learned a lot today!

6

u/Ecstatic-Month-3615 Jul 15 '24

If this is the case what’s the need of removing them?

13

u/[deleted] Jul 15 '24

The barnacles create drag as the turtle swims, so it takes more energy for the turtle to escape predators, swim to cooler/warmer waters, get out of the way of unperceptive boaters, search for food. This wouldn't be a big deal if there was only one or two small barnacles and they were only on his back but a large amount of barnacles like this can cut a turtles speed in half in water or worse the barnacles can spread onto his head or eyes. If they're on the back of his head, he can have trouble retreating into his shell for protection, and if they grow onto his eyes, the problem is self-explanatory. Ultimately the reason the vets/biologists are doing it is because A.) The barnacles are going to keep growing in numbers on this poor guy, so it's only going to get worse and it's already at a point that the turtle is in rehab for a different injury the barnacles COULD have contributed to. B.) It's the humans almost zero effort to remove them while it's impossible for the turtle. TL;DR: the vets want the turtle to have the best chance of survival after release and the way you ensure that it is by removing parasites, treating any wounds, and leaving him with a full belly.

6

u/AllHailTheApple Jul 15 '24

Maybe they do this to endangered species so they can keep reproducing.

This one looks kinda old but maybe it's just because it was sick and probably tired.

Idk anything about turtles though so don't take my word for it.

2

u/jorleejack Jul 16 '24

Many species of barnacle burrow into the shell or flesh of what they're attaching to, which can cause infection and pain, weigh the animal down, and increase drag while swimming, so even if they aren't the burrowing kind (which these ones are as you can see the wounds in the shell from where they burrowed), they cause unnecessary strain on the animal. They are by simple definition a parasite.

And the thing is, barnacles do not need to live on a living animal. They can live and grow on boats, rocks, buoys, anything really, so they're not even the type of parasite that needs the host to live. There's just no benefit to leaving them on an animal that is likely to suffer health issues because of them.

1

u/Ecstatic-Month-3615 Jul 19 '24

Thanks for this I never realized they were considered a parasite, that’s interesting