From seaflower22 at gmail.com Wed Feb 1 03:55:34 2006 From: seaflower22 at gmail.com (Melanie Gomes) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 08:55:34 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Western Australia reference? Message-ID: <8793949b0602010055h2fcd9499h@mail.gmail.com> Dear All, Hope you are all having a good start to 2006! I was wondering if anyone could possibly help me to find a recent reference on the marine flora and fauna of Western Australia (I think this book was advertised on this list but can't seem to find the details). This was not the title although the book included, inverts and fish and was a general guide, a very good and recent one which I wrote down on an important piece of paper which I then lost! Any specially recommended guides on this part of the world would be appreciated as I'm going out there in March for a season to dive with the whale sharks and would also appreciate any recent refs on the sharks themselves for that matter. Thank you very much for your help, much appreciated. Best wishes Melanie Melanie Gomes B.Sc. M.Sc. From rousseau_herve at yahoo.fr Wed Feb 1 08:00:33 2006 From: rousseau_herve at yahoo.fr (=?iso-8859-1?q?herv=FFffffe9=20Rousseau?=) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:00:33 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] marine farm for sustainable development of aquariologytrade Message-ID: <20060201130033.85607.qmail@web25511.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hello, Frenchies answer to frenchies... If you need information in french about this topic, you can visit http://www.recifs.org which contain a lot of information about reef aquarium, aquarium trade, and sustainable development. You can focus on Vincent Chalias articles on aquarium trade, fishery and MAC (Marine Aquarium Council) activities. See you Herv? -----Message d'origine----- De : coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] De la part de yoann aumond Envoy? : mardi 31 janvier 2006 16:30 ? : coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Objet : [Coral-List] marine farm for sustainable development of aquariologytrade Hello, I'm a young french man with a degree in Marine Biology. I would like to investigate my self for the management of animal trade, and especially fish, for aquariology trade. This buisness make endangered the coral reef ecosystem physically and biologicaly due to the destructive practise (cyanure and explosive methods) which threaten the enormous diversity (important and essential for all the reasons you know). This practise occurs mainly in the south asia coral reef ecosystem which is the hot spoy for biodiversity. So I need more field information and a maximum of contact from people who are involved in this fight (scientist, association, local initiatives, possible grants....). I'm thinking about a project of a marine farm in the field, sustainable, which give a work to all the actual fisherman, give a high quality to the fish in the aim to reduce their mortality and the volume of export... I have a lot of good idea but I need support and help from people which know well this problem, from field, and are involved in and trust in the possibility to change the way of working (and of course the way of thinking). Thank you for you help and informations. Yoann AUMOND, "a motivated and hard worker dreamer" P.S.: sorry for my english, but I'm french... _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list ___________________________________________________________________________ Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international. T?l?chargez sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com From Chris.Ryan at irc-australia.com Wed Feb 1 18:25:27 2006 From: Chris.Ryan at irc-australia.com (Chris Ryan) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 07:25:27 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: Western Australia reference? Message-ID: <69D776850E99934E9FE517A99D52F2640111DBA6@ircs0001.intrisk.com> Hi Melanie This may be the reference you're after. Wells, FE, Walker, DI & Jones, DS (2003) The marine flora and fauna of Dampier, Western Australia: Proceedings of the twelfth International Marine Biological Workshop; held in Dampier from 24 Jul to 11 Aug 2000 [2 volumes Western Australian Museum, Perth, WA Cheers Chris Ryan Principal Consultant - Coastal and Marine Biology IRC Environment 26 Colin Street West Perth WA 6005 Tel: +61-8-9481-0100 Fax: +61-8-9481-0111 chris.ryan at irc-australia.com http://www.irc-australia.com Innovate | Resolve | Commit From reef at bellsouth.net Wed Feb 1 14:15:10 2006 From: reef at bellsouth.net (Vicky Ten Broeck) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:15:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] for coral list Message-ID: <20060201191512.HCBZ1691.ibm56aec.bellsouth.net@fiji> I am looking to go over to Madagascar this summer before graduate school to do coral reef research with a UK based non-profit and I was wondering if anyone knew of any agencies that might help fund the $5000 trip (6 weeks of diving research to help them establish a marine sanctuary). Thanks in advance! Vicky Ten Broeck Reef Relief Intern and Educational Assistant PO Box 430, Key West, FL 33040 (305) 294-3100 From treesandseas at yahoo.com Thu Feb 2 02:34:33 2006 From: treesandseas at yahoo.com (Trees Seas) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 23:34:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera Message-ID: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hello I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with an underwater housing) that takes good underwater pictures in natural light. I generally work in the 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so I usually use natural light to save on power. In my experience not all cameras that take good pictures above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind having to do a little color correction afterwards but I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater photos canNOT be color corrected. Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot Michelle Reyes __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From reefball at reefball.com Thu Feb 2 09:35:34 2006 From: reefball at reefball.com (Todd Barber) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 09:35:34 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <018c01c62805$ed9acad0$6501a8c0@LaFalda> Hi Trees, The Reef Ball Foundation's Coral Team has had very good results using the Cannon Powershot 400 series. The have an inexpensive housing that is rated to 100 feet. The trick to taking pictures in natural light is to set the white balance just before taking pictures and change it whenever you change depths. This can be done with the Cannon....whatever camera you get make SURE you can set the white balance with the controls available on the housing...many camera housings cannot control this feature on many cameras. The only disadvantage is the Cannon housing is plastic....so you have to be a bit careful with it heat wise. Also, if you are taking allot of pictures (more than 50 or so) in a short period of time, the lens tends to fog (common in most battery operated cameras) but using a little bit of mask defog on the underwater housing lens will usually stop this problem. Happy shooting. "take only pictures and leave only footprints," Todd Barber Chairman Reef Ball Foundation, Inc. 3305 Edwards Court Greenville, NC 27858 reefball at reefball.com http://www.artificialreefs.org http://www.reefball.org http://www.reefball.com Direct: 252-353-9094 mobile: 941-720-7549 Fax 425-963-4119 Personal Space: http://www.myspace/reefball Group Space http://groups.myspace.com/reefballfoundation Skype & MSN For Voice or Video Conferences: Available upon request Atlanta/Athens Office 890 Hill Street Athens, GA 30606 USA 770-752-0202 (Our headquarters...not where I work see above) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Trees Seas" To: Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 2:34 AM Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera > Hello > > I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with > an underwater housing) that takes good underwater > pictures in natural light. I generally work in the > 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so > I usually use natural light to save on power. In my > experience not all cameras that take good pictures > above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind > having to do a little color correction afterwards but > I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater > photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel > resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show > corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any > recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks a lot > Michelle Reyes > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From TDWYATT at aol.com Thu Feb 2 11:28:14 2006 From: TDWYATT at aol.com (TDWYATT at aol.com) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 11:28:14 EST Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera Message-ID: <59.36a3ea91.31138d1e@aol.com> In a message dated 2/2/2006 6:45:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, treesandseas at yahoo.com writes: Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Nikon D70, Prolly the D50 as well. HTH, Tom Wyatt _tdwyatt at aol.com_ (mailto:tdwyatt at aol.com) From Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov Thu Feb 2 16:24:30 2006 From: Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:24:30 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: 2nd Call - Requesting Data on 2005 Caribbean Bleaching In-Reply-To: <43DAA0C6.8030600@noaa.gov> References: <43DAA0C6.8030600@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <7A2DDF74-0D42-4AC6-895D-5BA448045803@noaa.gov> As an update on this request that we sent out last week, I want to emphasize that we also need reports from those areas that did not bleach. We need to get information from reefs that fell outside the thermal stress zone, or where stress was less severe to really anchor the bottom end of the response of corals to thermal stress. If we only have positive bleaching reports, we can't nail down the threshold below which we did not see bleaching. Thanks, Mark On Jan 27, 2006, at 5:37 PM, Jessica A. Morgan wrote: > TO: Bleaching Observation Contributors > FROM: Jessica Morgan and Mark Eakin, NOAA Coral Reef Watch > > Second call: Deadline for data submission to be included in our > publication is Friday, February 3. Please contact me if you will > have any problems meeting this deadline. > > --------------------------- > > As you know, bleaching reports from contributors have been coming > in from much of the Caribbean and western North Atlantic. The US > Coral Reef Task Force (USCRTF) Bleaching Committee has held > conference calls to bring together and solicit input from NOAA and > DOI personnel, as well as other federal agencies, NGO partners, and > local Caribbean scientists and managers. The outcomes of the > initial meetings include the development of a 3-phase response > approach (including an initial response, near-term reporting and > assessment, and long-term monitoring) and identification of key > partners, resources, and issues. > > A part of the first phase is to identify and assess bleaching > severity throughout the region. I am collating these reports with > the plan to produce a multi-author, quick paper to Science or > Nature that documents the event. From there, I am sure that more > publications will follow. Everyone who provides data that are used > in the analysis of the event will be included as an author on the > resulting paper(s). Our intent is to provide the broad, Caribbean- > wide analysis, comparing the thermal stress recorded from > satellites with local observations of bleaching and temperatures. > That publication will only include summaries of the information > that you submit. We hope that all of our collaborators will > produce more detailed national or local analyses to further > document the event. At this point we have almost 1000 observations > contributed by 70 individuals in 18 jurisdictions. > > To collect the details needed for the first analysis and to > establish a baseline for follow-up work, a spreadsheet > questionnaire (?CRW Carib Bleach Report Form?) has been developed > for bleaching reports. We would like to invite all ReefBase > contributors who have made bleaching observations for the Caribbean > in 2005 to expand upon the original ReefBase information by > submitting a more quantitative report via the attached > questionnaire (an Excel file) to coralreefwatch at noaa.gov. Please > note that we are only seeking quantitative reports for this analysis. > > The blank questionnaire form, along with information from the US > Coral Reef Task Force, NOAA meetings held to date, and more, are > available for download at the website http:// > coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/caribbean2005. > > Thanks to all of you for your help, > Jessica > -- > Jessica A. Morgan > Operations Manager, NOAA Coral Reef Watch > SSMC1, E/RA 31, Rm. 5309, Silver Spring, MD 20910 > Phone: (301) 713-2857 x129 Fax: (301) 713-3136 > Email: Jessica.Morgan at noaa.gov Web: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ C. Mark Eakin, Ph.D. Coordinator, NOAA Coral Reef Watch National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Satellite Applications and Research Satellite Oceanography & Climate Division e-mail: mark.eakin at noaa.gov url: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov E/RA31, SSMC1, Room 5308 1335 East West Hwy Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226 301-713-2857 x109 Fax: 301-713-3136 From matz at whitney.ufl.edu Thu Feb 2 07:59:29 2006 From: matz at whitney.ufl.edu (Mikhail Matz) Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 07:59:29 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: coral facility @ austin, TX Message-ID: <43E20231.8010207@whitney.ufl.edu> Hello listers, I want to thank everybody for an extremely enthusiastic and helpful response concrrning the design of new coral facility. I've been given a lot of advice and put in contact with the most experienced people in the trade. Now I can really see it all happening! cheers Misha -- -------------------- Mikhail V Matz, Ph.D Research Assistant Professor Whitney Laboratory for Marine Bioscience University of Florida 9505 Ocean Shore Blvd St Augustine, FL 32080, USA phone 904 461 4025 fax 904 461 4008 matz at whitney.ufl.edu www.whitney.ufl.edu/research_programs/matz.htm From ashadevos at gmail.com Thu Feb 2 22:56:58 2006 From: ashadevos at gmail.com (Asha de Vos) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 09:56:58 +0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Coolpix and Strobes Message-ID: <90f39b5f0602021956r514b0e19q@mail.gmail.com> Hi I've recently started using a Nikon Coolpix 5600 with underwater housing to take photos while diving. However, the flash is not very strong and therefore photographs (other than macros - which come out beautifully) are not very clear. Does anyone use this (or a similar model) of camera and if yes, can anyone recommend a compatible strobe that I could purchase? Thanks. Asha. From dhopley at austarnet.com.au Sun Feb 5 18:37:37 2006 From: dhopley at austarnet.com.au (David Hopley) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 09:37:37 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Palau photographs Message-ID: Dear All, A quick thanks to all of you who provided me with photographs of the Palau Rock Islands, or referred me to sources. I've tried to respond to everybody and am sending this out just in case I missed anyone. David Dr. David Hopley Coastal and Marine Consultant 3 Wingadee Court ANNANDALE QLD 4814 AUSTRALIA PHONE: +61 7 4725 2856 dhopley at austarnet.com.au From Georgios at icm.csic.es Fri Feb 3 16:58:25 2006 From: Georgios at icm.csic.es (Georgios Tsounis) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 22:58:25 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: underwater camera In-Reply-To: <20060202170041.80E481795F@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> References: <20060202170041.80E481795F@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: Hi Michelle, back in 2001 when 7 Megapixels were still expensive, we used a small sony digital compact with great success for a population structure study. The only drawback of the compacts compared to a digital SLR was the extreme shutterlag (annoying and at times stressful, but still tolerable with coral work). I would rather recomend something like a Nikon Coolpix 5000, if 5MP are enough, as our colleagues have had good experience with this one. If you need a certain range from wideangle to macro, then the compact cameras offer more flexibility than an SLR with a macro lens, and are much cheaper to house. The macro ability was quite astonishing to me, but it is important to check it out before purchase. I am pretty sure the coolpix range of nikons allow whitebalance settings. However, I suspect whitebalance has limits when used at 20m (did not ry this though). In our experience flash use under water was problematic with compacts. I usually switched off the build in flash, or blocked it by hand. Instead we used a divers light on a strobe arm to illuminate the corals and provide a focussing light to the autofocus. It worked fine, but required sufficient battery capacity. With some underwaterhousings (such as Sealux), you can connect an external flash. Amphibious flashes by Nikon are compatible with the Nikon digitals. However, you can only use the flash in manual mode, unless you use a pro SLR. For our work I really think 5Megapixels are sufficient. I found this website helpful in this regard: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm There is a wealth of information on the net about compatibility of cameras, housings and strobes. You can always ask questions about digital underwater photography on the forum mantained by: www.wetpixel.com. I think there was a good article on white balance by Alexander Mustard stored in the archives. You can see how we used the digicams in our work by downloading the results of our survey (3.6 mb document): http://elib.suub.uni-bremen.de/publications/dissertations/E- Diss1246_TsounisG.pdf Cheers, Georgios Dr. Georgios Tsounis Institut de Ci?ncies del Mar, CMIMA (CSIC) Passeig Mar?tim de la Barceloneta, 37-49 08003 Barcelona, Spain Phone: 34 93 230 96 07 Fax: 34 93 230 95 55 E-mail: georgios at icm.csic.es http://www.icm.csic.es Message: 4 Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 23:34:33 -0800 (PST) From: Trees Seas Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: <20060202073433.87687.qmail at web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Hello I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with an underwater housing) that takes good underwater pictures in natural light. I generally work in the 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so I usually use natural light to save on power. In my experience not all cameras that take good pictures above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind having to do a little color correction afterwards but I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater photos canNOT be color corrected. Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot Michelle Reyes _____________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 2 ***************************************** From thierry_work at usgs.gov Sun Feb 5 14:49:47 2006 From: thierry_work at usgs.gov (Thierry Work) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 09:49:47 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] mucus in the ectodermal epithelium of corals In-Reply-To: <003f01c624b5$d6dfa7a0$e3904084@es.huji.ac.il> Message-ID: Dear Yael: yes, mucocytes definitely are present in calicoblastic epithelium (at least in Porite compressa and lobata) as visualized on electron microscopy. I have, however, yet to see micro-organisms associated with this layer. Thierry M. Work Wildlife Disease Specialist USGS-National Wildlife Health Center Honolulu Field Station PO Box 50167 Honolulu, HI 96850 Tel: 808 792-9520 Fax: 808 792-9596 Cel: 808 554-6490 Web: www.nwhc.usgs.gov/hfs/Homepage.htm Check out the following references on microscopic morphology of corals. These may help: Goldberg W, Makemson J, Colley S (1984) Entoclada endozoica sp. nov., a pathogenic chlorophyte: structure, life history, physiology, and effect on its coral host. Biological Bulletin 166:368-383 Goldberg W, Taylor G (1989) Cellular structure and ultrastructure of the black coral Antipathes aperta: 2. the gastrodermis and its collar cells. Journal of Morphology 202:255-269 Goldberg WM, Taylor G (1989) Cellular structure and ultrastructure of the black coral Antipathes aperta: 1. Organization of the tentacular epidermis and nervous system. Journal of Morphology 202:239-253 Goldberg WM (2001) Acid polysaccharides in the skeletal matrix and calicoblastic epithelium of the stony coral Mycetophyllia reesi. Tissue & Cell 33:376-387 Goldberg WM (2001) Desmocytes in the calicoblastic epithelium of the stony coral Mycetophyllia reesi and their attachment to the skeleton. Tissue & Cell 33:388-394 Goldberg W (2002) Gastrodermal structure and feeding response in the scleractinian Mycetophyllia reesi, a coral with novel digestive filaments. Tissue & Cell 34:246-261 Goldberg WM (2002) Feeding behavior, epidermal structure and mucus cytochemistry of the scleractinian Mycetophyllia reesi, a coral without tentacles. Tissue & Cell 34:232-245 Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates Volume 2 Placozoa, Porifera, Cnidaria & Ctenophora by FW Harrison (Editor) Wiley Press. -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Yael Ben-Haim Rozenblat Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 11:25 PM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] mucus in the ectodermal epithelium of corals Hi all coral listrers, Does anyone knows if there is mucus secretion (or something similar to mucus) from the ectodermal epithelium layer of corals? (meaning the calicoblastic ectodermis, close to the skeleton), and/ or any microorganisms associated with this microlayer of the corals? Are there any publications or work done about this? I appreciate any advice and help , and thank you in advance, Yael Yael Ben-Haim , Pn.D The Institute of Earth Sciences The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Givat Ram Campus, Israel Office: (+972) 2 6586194 _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From keulen at murdoch.edu.au Fri Feb 3 01:08:30 2006 From: keulen at murdoch.edu.au (Mike van Keulen) Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:08:30 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera In-Reply-To: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20060203135409.0238a638@www.mail.murdoch.edu.au> Hi Michelle, I've been using Olympus cameras for some time and found they're excellent for underwater use. Most models have reasonably priced dedicated housings and third party strobes are available for them too. The ones I've used are the C-5060 (5 megapixel) and the C-8080 (8 megapixel) - I think these models have been superseded, but I would guess there would be a suitable replacement. Both the models I use have an excellent super-macro allowing you to get to within 2 cm of the subject. Colour reproduction is excellent. Cheers, Mike At 15:34 2/02/2006, Trees Seas wrote: >Hello > >I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with >an underwater housing) that takes good underwater >pictures in natural light. I generally work in the >5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so >I usually use natural light to save on power. In my >experience not all cameras that take good pictures >above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind >having to do a little color correction afterwards but >I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater >photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel >resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show >corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any >recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks a lot >Michelle Reyes > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Dr Mike van Keulen Lecturer in Plant Sciences and Marine Biology Research Director - Coral Bay Research Station Murdoch University, WA 6150, Australia List-owner: Seagrass_Forum, Mangrove Ph: +61 8 93602369 E-mail: keulen at murdoch.edu.au Fax: +61 8 93606303 URL: http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~keulen/ From jware at erols.com Fri Feb 3 09:34:36 2006 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 09:34:36 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43E369FC.4090403@erols.com> Michelle, I would guess that you are going to get dozens of replies and end up just as confused as before. First question back to you is: How much money do you have? Next would be: Why natural light? (and let me tell you why later). As you have noted, the thing that limits the number of UW pictures you can take in one dive is usually power. So having come to that conclusion let me point out that: 1- The primary camera battery drain is the LCD (or whatever) display. Therefore, if your need is to take 100+ pictures per dive or per excursion (e.g., on a small boat and can't change batteries) go with an SLR (single lens reflex) and set the camera so that it only displays on the LCD for a few seconds after the picture is taken (to assure that you have actually got a decent picture. Using my Nikon D70, I have taken hundreds and hundreds of pictures over the course of a week on a single battery charge. 2- The strobe. I know you wanted to use natural light, but that doesn't always work depending upon depth and the screwing around underwater with white balance. If you use a strobe that holds 8 AAs (e.g. Sea&Sea YS90) and use NiMH batteries rated at 2000+ Ma, you should get at least 200 full strobe flashes. Since you won't need full strobe for most pictures, the actual number will be much greater. My only experience is with the Nikon D70 in a Sea&Sea housing. However, I have friends who use a EOS rebel in a Ikelite housing with the new digital TTL in the housing. I seem to recall that Yossi Loya was not too happy with his at first, I don't know about now. Nikon makes 2 very good, and reasonably priced, digital cameras, the D50 and the D70. About the only difference from a practical viewpoint is the storage media. I prefer the D70 because the compact flash storage is sturdy. Only 6 MegPix but that is plenty because of what appears to be superior interpolation scheme. Also, Nikon has a zoom lens, often part of the purchase package, 28 to 80. This gives reasonable wide angle and still allows sufficient close ups. However, you must make sure that the housing will allow adjusting the zoom as Nikon has a couple of different but very similar lenses, one that doesn't quite fit. But now the price. The camera is not too bad, its the housings that kill you. I suspect that, as with most research, money is limiting. The set ups I have been describing will probably cost about US3000 for everything, maybe even a little more. Having said that, my long experience in UW photography is that, whenever I have tried to go cheap I eventually end up so dissatisfied that I end up buying twice. John Trees Seas wrote: >Hello > >I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with >an underwater housing) that takes good underwater >pictures in natural light. I generally work in the >5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so >I usually use natural light to save on power. In my >experience not all cameras that take good pictures >above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind >having to do a little color correction afterwards but >I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater >photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel >resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show >corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any >recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks a lot >Michelle Reyes > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886, USA * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * http://www.seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * Treasurer and Member of the Council: * * International Society for Reef Studies * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Untainted by Technology \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************* From John.Rollino at earthtech.com Fri Feb 3 07:40:19 2006 From: John.Rollino at earthtech.com (Rollino, John) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 04:40:19 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Species List - CARICOMP Algae Classification Message-ID: <0FE7A03100C5D949A074D0A58DBCCEEA032D1ABE@usnycmail01.et.rootad.com> Hello All: Can someone direct me to a list that identifies which algal species are classified by CARICOMP as the following: * Turf Algae * Fleshy Algae * Calcareous Algae * Encrusting Calcareous Algae Thank you, John This e-mail is intended to be delivered only to the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and proprietary. If this information is received by anyone other than the named addressee(s), the recipient(s) should immediately notify the sender by e-mail and promptly delete the transmitted material from your computer and server. In no event shall this material be read, used, stored, or retained by anyone other than the named addressee(s) without the express written consent of the sender or the named addressee(s). From nithyrna at yahoo.co.in Sun Feb 5 11:47:21 2006 From: nithyrna at yahoo.co.in (nithy anand) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 16:47:21 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] query to coral microbiologist & biotechnologists Message-ID: <20060205164721.48797.qmail@web8314.mail.in.yahoo.com> Dear Listers, Is anyone working with Vibrioids and Pseudomonads associated with corals? I want to know the predominant species and total count associated with them. Somebody please help on these aspects. cheers, Nithy P.Nithyanand Research Scholar C/O Dr. S. Karutha Pandian Department of Biotechnology Alagappa University Karaikudi - 630 003 TamilNadu INDIA H/P: 9443743580 --------------------------------- Jiyo cricket on Yahoo! India cricket From shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au Sun Feb 5 19:22:57 2006 From: shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au (Shelley Anthony) Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 10:22:57 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] 2006/2007 Research Internships available at ReefHQ Aquarium, Townsville, Australia Message-ID: <43E696E1.7080308@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear Colleagues, I would very much appreciate it if you could forward this internship offer to appropriate students and staff, and/or post it on your university job notice board. We are also still seeking qualified applicants for a position to start in September 2006. Regards, Shelley / /As part of its education and outreach role, Reef HQ is offering four curatorial internship positions to suitable applicants for 2007. Each internship position involves one specialist research and development project, that will be the core duty of the candidate. However, interns will also assist with extensive water quality analyses, routine diving and field trips, construction and maintenance of aquarium systems, and other duties related to animal care. This program is designed for university-level or recently graduated individuals intending to undertake a technical or professional career in marine science, aquaculture or a closely related discipline. Please refer to the following link for further information: "http://www.reefhq.com.au/involved/intern/curatorial.html"./ /// -- Shelley L. Anthony, M.Sc. Acting Biologist - Coral Reef Ecosystems ReefHQ Aquarium/The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2-68 Flinders St. PO Box 1379 Townsville QLD 4810 AUSTRALIA Ph: (07)4750-0876 Fax: (07)4772-5281 email: shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au PhD Student ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies School of Marine Biology & Aquaculture James Cook University Townsville QLD 4811 AUSTRALIA shelley.anthony at jcu.edu.au ============================================================================== If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ============================================================================== From claudio.richter at zmt-bremen.de Mon Feb 6 11:31:09 2006 From: claudio.richter at zmt-bremen.de (Claudio Richter) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 17:31:09 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Meeting Announcement: ISRS European Coral Reef Conference 2006 in Bremen Message-ID: 1st Circular 6th European Coral Reef Conference 2006 European Meeting of the International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) 19 - 22 September, 2006, Bremen, Germany Welcome to Bremen! The 6th European Coral Reef Conference 2006 in Bremen is expected to bring together leading coral reef scientists and students to present and discuss state-of-the-art scientific results, education and outreach. It covers all aspects of research, use and management of reefs with a focus on European and European partner contributions from tropical shallow waters to high-latitude deep continental shelves. Date: September 19-22, 2006 Venue: University of Bremen & Center for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT), Bremen, Germany Organisation: Center for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT) Deadline for submission of Abstracts: 15 May, 2006 Deadline for Early Registration: 15 May, 2006 Programme Schedule A regional focus will be on the Indian Ocean and adjacent seas, taking into account the wealth of studies conducted in response to the 1998 bleaching event and the 2004 earthquake and tsunami. As another scientific highlight we expect first results from the IODP Tahiti reef drilling programme. There are many more interesting sessions, and abstracts on all aspects of basic and applied research are welcome! Please submit your abstract by 15 May, 2006! For details, please visit the conference webpage at isrs2006.zmt.uni-bremen.de On behalf of ZMT, the ISRS President and Council, we hope to see you in Bremen! Dr. Claudio Richter Zentrum f?r Marine Tropen?kologie Center for Tropical Marine Ecology Fahrenheitstr. 6 D-28359 Bremen Germany T. +49-421-2380025 F. +49-421-2380030 From michelc at squ.edu.om Mon Feb 6 23:29:13 2006 From: michelc at squ.edu.om (Michel Claereboudt) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 08:29:13 +0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Software to analyse coral video transects Message-ID: <30052D55-B224-46FE-B2AC-E6D2AD95E070@squ.edu.om> I have been off the list for a while. Apparently, a subscriber was interested in a software to analyse (sample I suppose) video transects of coral communities. I have written (still under development, but usable at this stage) such software. If anyone is interested I can email a copy. It works on both PCs and Mac and requires the presence of Quicktime. All formats that quicktime understands can be used as video source files. Dr. Michel Claereboudt Sultan Qaboos University College Agr. and Mar. Sciences Dpt. Marine Sci. and Fisheries Box 34, al-khod 123 Sultanate of Oman Tel: (968) 244 15 249 Fax; (968) 244 13 418 email: michelc at squ.edu.om From eweil at caribe.net Tue Feb 7 08:11:32 2006 From: eweil at caribe.net (EWeil) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 09:11:32 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Information on white plague outbreaks in the Caribbean Message-ID: <0b1ec65a6a674213a4b12aaaa117d18e.eweil@caribe.net> Dear listers, I am interested in observations and/or reports on outbreaks of white plague (or any other coral reef disease) during or after the mass bleaching event of last year in the Caribbean. I know there was an outbreak in St. John reported by Jeff Miller and we put something out from Puerto Rico where we observed and quantified WP outbreaks in several reefs that started around mid-late November. The outbreak was also more intensive in offshore, deep reefs (>15 m) with better water quality compared to inshore and/or shallower reef areas (???). If you have observed any outbreaks, could you please contact me and include the following information: 1- Disease 2- Date outbreak started (approximation will be ok) 3- Locality - reef (if possible GPS coordinates) and approximate depth interval. 4- Any assessment of intensity (proportion of colonies affected) and extension (area - reefs - etc) 5- Current status (still going or it arrested) 6- Any other information/observations you deem relevant Thank you all for your cooperation!! EW Dr. Ernesto Weil Department of Marine Sciences University of Puerto Rico PO BOX 3208 Lajas PR 00667 Pho: (787) 899-2048 x. 241 Fax: (787) 899-5500 - 2630 From david at trilliumfilms.net Tue Feb 7 20:47:58 2006 From: david at trilliumfilms.net (David McGuire) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 17:47:58 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] coral bleaching and selecting marine protected areas Message-ID: Hello, I am new to the list. I am working on a coral reef conservation documentary and would like to do some fact checking. Much of the underwater imagery is shot in atolls in the north and south pacific. We are supporting the NWHI MPA in the film as one solution to protect reef habitat. However, it is difficult to protect against global sea water temperature rises and large scale bleaching events. Would it be accurate to say that the NWHI are well situated geographically in the Pacific gyre to minimize the coral reefs exposure to sea water increase and subsequent bleaching events in comparison to other island groups or reef systems? The Hawaiian Islands experienced cool water temperatures in 1998 and experienced little bleaching effects. It is a bit of a leap perhaps but makes for a good generalized statement of support. Thanks for your advice David McGuire Trillium Films Sausalito CA From G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au Wed Feb 8 01:08:50 2006 From: G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au (Gillian Goby) Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 16:08:50 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] GBRMPA Current Conditions Report (3) Message-ID: <43E98AF2.5040404@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear All, *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the third Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 6 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, the threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region is currently rated as moderate. Sea temperatures in the southern GBR have remained significantly warmer than average (+ 0.5 - 2.5 degrees C) since December 2005 (ReefTemp), and are now exceeding the long-term summer maxima by up to 2 degrees C (NOAA HotSpot map). In contrast, recent heavy cloud cover and rain over northern parts of the GBR has kept temperatures close to average conditions for this region (Reef Futures). Central GBR waters have shown a warming tendency in recent weeks, with sea surface temperatures currently exceeding the January long-term average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C (ReefTemp). Consistent with these temperature patterns, reports of severe coral bleaching have now been confirmed for some reefs in the southern region, with minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer, and with the bleaching risk period far from over we are heavily relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ From jware at erols.com Tue Feb 7 11:01:37 2006 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:01:37 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43E369FC.4090403@erols.com> Message-ID: <43E8C461.4090609@erols.com> Not to belabor this UW camera thing, but I have been corrected: the Sea&Sea YS-90 uses 4 AAs, it is the YS120 that uses 8 AAs and, therefore, carries twice the milliamp*hours for the same type of batteries. John -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886, USA * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * http://www.seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * Treasurer and Member of the Council: * * International Society for Reef Studies * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Untainted by Technology \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************* From Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov Tue Feb 7 11:28:00 2006 From: Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:28:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Update: Bleaching Potential around Melanesia and Australia Message-ID: Melanesia: Bleaching Warning in Fiji-Beqa Warming in Melanesia continues. DHWs now exceed 8 in some areas to the east of Papua New Guinea and around the Solomon Islands. The region of heat stress may be contracting slightly around the Solomon Islands, but warming is now evident to the south of Samoa, American Samoa, and Fiji. A bleaching warning has now been issued for Fiji-Beqa. Australia: Heat Stress is Subsiding on GBR Fortunately, the center of anomalously warm ocean temperatures has moved farther south along the eastern Australian coast. The region of warming evidenced by HotSpot values over 1 degree C is now largely south and east of the Gold Coast, so the immediate threat to the GBR has ended. However, early warming such as this has frequently preceded bleaching stress late in the austral summer. The warming in the Timor Sea has also abated. According to our past data, some bleaching is likely at DHW values of 4 or above and large-scale bleaching and some mortality is likely above 8. We encourage researchers in these regions to watch out for signs of bleaching. Current HotSpot and Degree Heating Week charts can be found at: http://coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/index.html Improved time series graphics for index sites can be found at http:// coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/current/sstdhwsba_series_24reefs.html You can sign up for automated bleaching alerts at http:// coralreefwatch-satops.noaa.gov/SBA.html Please continue reporting bleaching events (or non-events) at http:// www.reefbase.org/input/bleachingreport/index.asp Regards, Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ C. Mark Eakin, Ph.D. Coordinator, NOAA Coral Reef Watch National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Satellite Applications and Research Satellite Oceanography & Climate Division e-mail: mark.eakin at noaa.gov url: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov E/RA31, SSMC1, Room 5308 1335 East West Hwy Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226 301-713-2857 x109 Fax: 301-713-3136 From sdalton at nmsc.edu.au Tue Feb 7 18:58:53 2006 From: sdalton at nmsc.edu.au (Steve Dalton) Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 10:58:53 +1100 Subject: [Coral-List] Management of disease outbreaks Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20060208105247.02428320@mail> Firstly I would like to thank everyone for their replies to my email regarding software to analyse video transects, the response was great, and certainly shows the benefits of this list. I was wondering if anyone has done any studies involving diseased corals where the active margin has been completely removed from the infected colonies and monitored the colony for reinfection? Has anyone had any success in stopping progressive disease/syndrome by removing the margin? Any comments would be welcome Regards Steven Dalton PhD student University of New England NMSC Postgraduate Representative National Marine Science Centre Bay Drive, Charlesworth Bay (PO Box J321) Coffs Harbour, NSW Australia 2450 Ph: 6648 3928 Mob: 0432 946 782 sdalton at nmsc.edu.au From thomas_houze at hotmail.com Wed Feb 8 05:47:11 2006 From: thomas_houze at hotmail.com (Thomas Houze) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 11:47:11 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: Request for Coral manuscript Message-ID: Dear coral biologist, Recently I had the good fortune to see that the first batch of EST for the corals Acropora palmata and Montastraea faveolata are available for download from the NCBI. I was wondering if someone could please send me a copy of the manuscript as an attachment. I am particularly interested in what life-phase the samples used to create the ESTs where in that where used in the study. Thomas Houze, Ph.D. Bioinformatics G?teborg University Dept. of Cell and Molecular Biology Lundberg Laboratory Medicinaregatan 9C 405 30 G?teborg Sweden From ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com Wed Feb 8 12:02:46 2006 From: ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com (Eric Coral Inquiry) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 01:02:46 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Information/Literature on Mineral Accretion Technology (Biorock) Message-ID: <6400622e0602080902w3dd3f2caq3178e612c947a853@mail.gmail.com> Dear Listers, I am planning to carry out research on how MAT, Mineral Accretion Technology (Biorock) affect the growth rate of different coral species in my area. I would like to find out if there is anyone who has any helpful information, or literature references related to MAT, Biorock that can help me. Also, I like to find out if anyone currently doing any research on Biorock and I would like to get in touch with you. At the same time, would also appreciate your help on any existing literature regarding the species of coral found in Sabah (North Borneo) waters. 1) Info/literature on Biorock (I have already been to the Biorock website http://www.globalcoral.org/ , www.*biorock*.net/, www.*wolf**hilbertz*.com/) 2) Like to geet in touch with you if you are doing anything on Biorock 3) Coral Species found in Sabah (North Borneo) waters. Really appreciate your help on the above-mentioned matter. Eric YSY "Marine Biologist in the making" Kota Kinabalu Sabah Malaysia. You can also reach me at: ericevany at gmail.com erjonah at hotmail.com From mjnewman at ucsd.edu Wed Feb 8 12:10:53 2006 From: mjnewman at ucsd.edu (Marah Newman) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:10:53 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons Message-ID: <3F2A27B5-FC18-44CA-8EFB-55300C6CF781@ucsd.edu> Hi All, I have several bleached coral skeletons and I need to calculate skeleton density. I have looked at several papers that detail methods for calculating density via buoyant weights, but I believe this is to get measurements of live corals. Since I have the coral skeleton only, is there any reason why I cannot simple use the basic water displacement method (aka Archimedes)? I know there is some concern regarding trapped air, but if I soak the corals overnight first in DI water, will this take care of it? Any comments as to why this will NOT work, would be great. Thanks. Marah Newman From cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw Thu Feb 9 07:18:39 2006 From: cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw (Chaolun Allen Chen) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 20:18:39 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] coconut crabs and horseshoe crabs conservation genetics Message-ID: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> Dear All, We are developing the conservation project targeted on two large arthropods, coconut crab (Birgus latro) and horseshoe crab ( Tachypleus tridentatus ) in the Indo-West-Pacific region. Our team includes two groups, one is developing aquaculture technique to propagate of these two species. So far we have quite successful results. The other group is developing microsatellite markers for conservation genetics of these two species. For this part of project, we are seeking for the help to collect a small portion of crab's appendage for genetic study throughout the region. For those who can kindly provide us samples, host our field collection, or just want to know the propagation technique of these two crabs, please feel free to contact me. Thank you in advance for your help. Allen Chen, PhD Associate Research Fellow Evolutionary Ecology and Genetics of Coral Reef Laboratory Research Centre for Biodiversity, Academia Sinica, Taiwan E-mail: cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw From csaenger at MIT.EDU Thu Feb 9 11:08:55 2006 From: csaenger at MIT.EDU (Casey Saenger) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 11:08:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Instrumental Salinity/Temperature in Bahamas In-Reply-To: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> References: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> Message-ID: <3762cdc14b847029eaef3aa95240017f@mit.edu> Dear All, Does someone know when noaa's CREWS monitoring of temperature and salinity began in the Bahamas? Thanks, Casey Saenger > Woods Hole Oceanographic Inst. M.S. #23, Clark 117 Woods Hole, MA 02543 508-289-3418 csaenger at mit.edu From szmanta at uncw.edu Thu Feb 9 12:20:07 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 12:20:07 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] New articles on e-journal "Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy" Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A6763A1@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Greetins All: The conservation oriented, free e-journal "Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy" has new publications that can be access through the URL below http://ejournal.nbii.org/progress/index.html ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From Eileen.Alicea at noaa.gov Thu Feb 9 13:04:32 2006 From: Eileen.Alicea at noaa.gov (Eileen Alicea) Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 13:04:32 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Searching for Carib fish out-of-water photos Message-ID: <43EB8430.4010503@noaa.gov> Hello Coral listers, I'm working with the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources on the development of a Spanish (regulated) fish guide for their enforcement officers. We are collecting excellent resolution photos of fish out of the water because they are more realistic for the rangers to learn from and use when inspecting fishers' catches. We have many so far but I'm still searching for the following. We have already searched the DNER files, Fishbase.org and Google images and I'm in the process of reaching the photographers. If you can facilitate these named below, please write to me directly. It will greatly serve the coral reef and fisheries conservation goals of Puerto Rico. 1) Scomberomorus regalis- Cero; Sierra 2) Istiophorus platypterus or albicans; Sailfish - Pez vela. 3) Tetrapturus pfluegeri; Longbill spearfish; aguja picuda. 4) Epinephelus guttatus- Red Hind- Mero Cabrilla 5) Epinephelus striatus- Nassau Grouper; Mero Cherna Thank you, Eileen Alicea NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program From dbucher at scu.edu.au Thu Feb 9 18:40:49 2006 From: dbucher at scu.edu.au (dbucher) Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:40:49 +1100 Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons Message-ID: Hi Marah, Try the following reference for a discussion of Archimedian methods for determining density of bleached coral skeletons. The important distinction is whether you want bulk density/porosity or the specific gravity of the mineral matrix (microdensity). We recommended the use of acetone to penetrate the small pore spaces as the surface tension in water is too great to remove all gas bubbles. We accelerated the process by using a vacuum pump and a bell-jar to lower the pressure. Without the vacuum pump overnight soaking was not long enough - you need several days at least for porous skeletons. The acetone- saturated skeleton was then soaked in several changes of water. Acetone has the added advantage of dissolving residual organic matter (waxes, oils etc) left behind by the bleaching process. Buoyant weigh the saturated skeleton, dry it, coat it with a thin layer of parafin wax and buoyant weigh it again - if you accurately measure the specific density of the water in the weighing apparatus you can calculate the coral's total enclosed volume (matrix plus pore spaces), its dry weight and the volume of the matrix alone. It's not the most exciting thing you will ever do, but it worked for us. Bucher, D., Harriott, V. and Roberts, L. 1998 Skeletal bulk density, micro-density and porosity of acroporid corals. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 228(1)117-135. It's not the most exciting thing you will ever do, but it worked for us. See my small contribution to the next reference for an application of this method. K. Koop, D. Booth, A. Broadbent, J. Brodie, D. Bucher, D. Capone, J. Coll, W. Dennison, M. Erdmann, P. Harrison, O. Hoegh-Guldberg, P. Hutchings, G.B. Jones, A.W.D. Larkum, J. O'Neil, A. Steven, E. Tentori, S. Ward, J. Williamson, D. Yellowlees 2001 ENCORE: The effect of nutrient enrichment on coral reefs: Synthesis of results and conclusions. Marine Pollution Bulletin 42(2):91-120. Cheers, Danny Dr Daniel Bucher Lecturer, Marine Biology and Fisheries School Director of Postgraduate Studies and Research School of Environmental Science and Management Southern Cross University PO Box 157 Lismore, NSW 2480 Australia Ph: 02 6620 3665 Fax: 02 6621 2669 Mobile: 0414 864085 >Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:10:53 -0500 >From: Marah Newman >Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons >To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >Hi All, > >I have several bleached coral skeletons and I need to calculate >skeleton density. I have looked at several papers that detail...snip From sajhowe at yahoo.com Sat Feb 11 19:52:32 2006 From: sajhowe at yahoo.com (Steffan Howe) Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:52:32 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] Eritrean coral reef surveys Message-ID: <20060212005232.60854.qmail@web34707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear coral-listers I am interested in obtaining as much information as possible about coral reef surveys (biodiversity or monitoring etc.) or habitat maps (e.g. showing coral reef locations) from the Eritrean Red Sea for Eritrea?s Coastal, Marine and Island Biodiversity Conservation Project (UNDP/GEF). The Project has already conducted some of its own surveys, but if anyone out there as has any more information it would be greatly appreciated. Regards Steffan Howe --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos ? NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo. From thedivinebovine at gmail.com Sun Feb 12 21:20:32 2006 From: thedivinebovine at gmail.com (wai leong) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Whether Alizarin S dye affects coral recruits Message-ID: Dear coral-listers, I'm investigating the effects of depth on coral growth and survivorship for my final year undergraduate research project in the National University of Singapore. I will be setting out tiles on the reef slope for a 3-4 months before shifting them up to the reef crest and leaving them out for another 3-4 months before taking them out to measure any differences in size and survivorship. As part of this study, I'd have to be able to differentiate the recruits that settled prior to shifting from the ones that settle post-shifting. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I should tag the recruits, apart from trying to find them individually under a microscope before shifting and marking them by hand? I was thinking of marking them with Alizarin S, but am not sure about any effects this might have on the recruits. I should be able to use a low concentration since I'm only trying to faintly dye the existing polyps to be able to tell them apart from the ones that recruit later on. Would appreciate any advice or suggestions anyone might have about this. Thank you! Sincerely, Leong Wai leongwai at nus.edu.sg From will_m_holden at hotmail.com Sat Feb 11 14:57:53 2006 From: will_m_holden at hotmail.com (Will Holden) Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 19:57:53 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] the next step Message-ID: Hi, my name is william holden and i have recently graduated from Newcastle University with a 2:1 degree in Marine biology. I am based in the Uk and am currently looking for work. Whilst this email is an attempt to get advice fon the best way of going about finding work, i do not want people to read this and simply think i am trying to sell myself to the highest bidder (if there happen to be any) I am hoping to get a job either working in a recognised aquarium in the Uk or at a dive centre as it is scuba diving that i am interested in and wish to pursue. This email is merely to ask for advice and any advice given would be gratefully received. Many thanks Will Holden _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN Search Toolbar now includes Desktop search! http://toolbar.msn.co.uk/ From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Mon Feb 13 18:24:00 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:24:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] New Coral-List Posting Policy Message-ID: <1214c8122b5a.122b5a1214c8@noaa.gov> Greetings! I'm afraid the amount of incoming spam to coral-list has become way too burdensome for the coral-list administrators. From now on, all messages from non-members will be automatically discarded, instead of being queued for review. For those of you who like to read from one email address yet post from another, you can add both addresses to coral-list, but enable/disable the other (see http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list, bottom of page, to subscribe/unsubscribe and choose other delivery options). I realize some folks are not subscribers to coral-list and like to occasionally post job or meeting announcements, and when that happens we have sometimes approved those messages. If your colleagues fall into that category, let me know and I'll add them to a special "free pass" sort of category so that those messages can be placed in the queue for consideration. You might also want to review how your address appears to coral-list. For instance, your address may be listed as, say, john.smith at university.edu but when you post, it comes across as john.smith at mach1.university.edu, which might be rejected by the software. Again, check your settings at http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list. If you have any problems with posting a message, please let us know. Thank you for your support and patience. Cheers, Louis Florit Mike Jankulak Jim Hendee From personal at hellenfaus.com Tue Feb 14 07:11:06 2006 From: personal at hellenfaus.com (Hellen Faus ) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 13:11:06 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Presentation In-Reply-To: <20060213170042.BD7031795C@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> Hi all! I'm new at the list and at coral world research itself. I'm a Veterinarian but not working in clinics but in travel and dive issues. I've just discovered the amazing world of corals and want to bet for it and its knowledge and conservation here in Spain, where I live, and over the world. My idea is, with time and a lot of learning, becoming part of any project (new or existent) that involves he sea health... Actually I'm collaboration in the translation into spanish of a web page dedicated to coral and plan to do a educative programme with time. At the end of the year I'll join a 9 months study of coral in the Australian and Indonesian seas, on board of Heraclitus, and meanwhile I want to learn and do as much as I can in this field... Just this presentation to tell you I'm learning a lot here, and would love to participate and have all the ideas you may give to me. Anything you consider to tell me, websites to look to, people to met, places to go, things to read, actions to do, ideas to carry on... do it!! Any help I could offer, any question or information you want to ask me -not about corals as you are the experts ;-) - feel free!! Thanks a lot to all, and remember, here I am! Hellen Faus, DVM Spain. hellen at viajarsolo.com +34 658 421 629 -----Mensaje original----- De: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] En nombre de coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Enviado el: lunes, 13 de febrero de 2006 18:01 Para: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Asunto: Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 10 Send Coral-List mailing list submissions to coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov You can reach the person managing the list at coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Coral-List digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Eritrean coral reef surveys (Steffan Howe) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:52:32 +0000 (GMT) From: Steffan Howe Subject: [Coral-List] Eritrean coral reef surveys To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: <20060212005232.60854.qmail at web34707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Dear coral-listers I am interested in obtaining as much information as possible about coral reef surveys (biodiversity or monitoring etc.) or habitat maps (e.g. showing coral reef locations) from the Eritrean Red Sea for Eritreas Coastal, Marine and Island Biodiversity Conservation Project (UNDP/GEF). The Project has already conducted some of its own surveys, but if anyone out there as has any more information it would be greatly appreciated. Regards Steffan Howe --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos  NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo.From thedivinebovine at gmail.com Sun Feb 12 21:20:41 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Delivered-To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Received: by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (Postfix, from userid 504) id EF7B417952; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.domain.tld (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0152717950 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.194]) by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36EF9177C7 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 16so873573nzp for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:33 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=EYFv37Az2pz4SnGOY6LRlxh7kV2NoEMZshiR354Tdgta8+juuYrulgfSukykT2q1wwUFgZD6wg p/Ndvt7nKVgjenuoAAMvBg4aqCrUDNNVMjSGN0K31Ap0HdrFoz9If16fPuhslODtFDt0SNTkz1A6 aLQTCwSjlObxtUJggo6XY= Received: by 10.36.88.13 with SMTP id l13mr2188985nzb; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.36.36.6 with HTTP; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800 From: wai leong To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov MIME-Version: 1.0 /usr/bin/arc: /usr/bin/arc X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on coral.aoml.noaa.gov X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=HTML_00_10,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_BY_IP autolearn=no version=3.0.4 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 07:57:08 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.2 Subject: [Coral-List] Whether Alizarin S dye affects coral recruits X-BeenThere: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: NOAA's Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP) listserver for coral reef information and news List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Dear coral-listers, I'm investigating the effects of depth on coral growth and survivorship for my final year undergraduate research project in the National University of Singapore. I will be setting out tiles on the reef slope for a 3-4 months before shifting them up to the reef crest and leaving them out for another 3-4 months before taking them out to measure any differences in size and survivorship. As part of this study, I'd have to be able to differentiate the recruits that settled prior to shifting from the ones that settle post-shifting. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I should tag the recruits, apart from trying to find them individually under a microscope before shifting and marking them by hand? I was thinking of marking them with Alizarin S, but am not sure about any effects this might have on the recruits. I should be able to use a low concentration since I'm only trying to faintly dye the existing polyps to b= e able to tell them apart from the ones that recruit later on. Would appreciate any advice or suggestions anyone might have about this. Thank you! Sincerely, Leong Wai leongwai at nus.edu.sg ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 10 ****************************************** From manfrino at reefresearch.org Tue Feb 14 11:54:07 2006 From: manfrino at reefresearch.org (manfrino at reefresearch.org) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 09:54:07 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Little Cayman Research Centre opens for Visiting Researchers this spring... Message-ID: <20060214095407.cc3c2c4bf8d3647e4241dc6e34e2d1c6.eb2d37bf1a.wbe@email.email.secureserver.net> The Little Cayman Research Centre opens for visiting researchers this spring. The Central Caribbean Marine Institute is proud to announce that Caribbean's newest field station, the Little Cayman Research Centre (LCRC) fringed by the world-renowned coral reefs of Bloody Bay Marine Park, is open to researchers. The Centre opened to students late last summer. Shallow lagoon, wall, and deep ocean (several thousand meters) habitats are all within swimming distance of the LCRC field station. The coral reefs of Little Cayman are among the best in the Caribbean for research due to the fact that they are isolated from continental and anthropogenic influences and water quality is excellent. In addition to diverse oceanographic settings over relatively short distances, Little Cayman has a well-established marine park system and one of the last spawning aggregations of the Nassau grouper. For more information on the research centre, please visit [1]www.reefresearch.org or contact me or our [2]manager at reefresearch.org to book a project (group or class). Thanks, Carrie Manfrino Central Caribbean Marine Institute [3]www.reefresearch.org Dr. Carrie Manfrino, President P.O. Box 1461 Princeton, NJ 08540 Ph:(609) 933-4559 Caribbean Headquarters Little Cayman Research Centre North Coast Road P.O. Box 37 Little Cayman, Cayman Islands (345) 926-2789 References 1. http://www.reefresearch.org/ 2. mailto:manager at reefresearch.org 3. http://www.reefresearch.org/ From pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr Tue Feb 14 18:14:32 2006 From: pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr (sandrine job) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:14:32 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] Killing Acanthaster planci In-Reply-To: <43E98AF2.5040404@gbrmpa.gov.au> Message-ID: <20060214231432.46799.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Dear Coral List, Firstly I would like to thank all the person who answered my questions about the Culcita pleague I observed on one of my restoration site in New Caledonia. I will keep you inform on the progress on this phenomenon during the course of the monitoring. So far, from the latest observations I have made on site, their number seems to stabilise and only very few coarls were attacked lately. It thus seems to confirm that they were attracted by stressed corals just after their transplantation and now that transplants are adapting to their new environmeent (and repair their lost tissue), the mortality is lower... These trends need to be confirmed. Once again thank you coral list members and if you hear anything about Culcita let me know. Secondly I had a question about what is the best way to kill COTs? Is it appropriate to kill them under the water by smashing them? or should we remove them from the water?and what about pricking them to catch them? Is it true that they will release eggs and worsten their invasion?? Cheers, Sandrine JOB Gillian Goby a ?crit : Dear All, *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the third Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 6 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, the threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region is currently rated as moderate. Sea temperatures in the southern GBR have remained significantly warmer than average (+ 0.5 - 2.5 degrees C) since December 2005 (ReefTemp), and are now exceeding the long-term summer maxima by up to 2 degrees C (NOAA HotSpot map). In contrast, recent heavy cloud cover and rain over northern parts of the GBR has kept temperatures close to average conditions for this region (Reef Futures). Central GBR waters have shown a warming tendency in recent weeks, with sea surface temperatures currently exceeding the January long-term average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C (ReefTemp). Consistent with these temperature patterns, reports of severe coral bleaching have now been confirmed for some reefs in the southern region, with minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer, and with the bleaching risk period far from over we are heavily relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.T?l?chargez la version beta. From burdickdr at hotmail.com Wed Feb 15 07:03:06 2006 From: burdickdr at hotmail.com (David burdick) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 07:03:06 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? Message-ID: Greetings coral-listers, I am interested in obtaining coral recruit/juvenile coral data for the Bahamas from 2002-2004 but I haven't had any luck finding anything in the literature - any suggestions? I performed a small-scale study looking at the effects of macroalgal reduction and Diadema antillarum addition on a set of small patch reefs off the SW coast of Eleuthera and wish to compare the results of my juvenile coral surveys to that of other researchers in the area. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! David R. Burdick NOAA Pacific Islands Assistant Guam Guam Coastal Management Program Phone: 671.472.4201 From ccook at HBOI.edu Wed Feb 15 10:14:11 2006 From: ccook at HBOI.edu (Clay Cook) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:14:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Professorship in Marine Biology Message-ID: <2309E53F80BD7841A64800D44F69F71B270239@sailfish.hboi.edu> Dear Coral-listers, Note the following position that is currently available at Florida Atlantic University, as part of the joint FAU-Harbor Branch Oceanographic partnership. Inquiries should be sent to Dr. Rod Murphey, (rmurph16 at fau.edu),Chairman, Department of Biological Sciences. Please pass this on to interested parties. Thanks and cheers, Clay Clayton B. Cook, Ph. D. Senior Scientist Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution Ft. Pierce, FL 34946 USA Ph. 772-465-2400 x 301 Mobile 772-579-0599 Fax 772-468-0757 McGinty Endowed Chair in Marine Biology The Department of Biological Sciences at Florida Atlantic University (FAU) invites nominations and applications for the John Thomas Ladue McGinty Eminent Scholar chair position in Marine Biology. Candidates should be internationally recognized as distinguished leaders in their specific field of marine biology and currently have a well-established research program. We seek an individual deeply committed to both research and teaching, particularly at the graduate level, in order to enhance a new Ph.D. program in Integrative Biology. Special consideration will be given to candidates whose research takes full advantage of FAU's geographic proximity to the marine and estuarine environments of Florida and the tropical Atlantic-Caribbean region. Applicants from a diversity of subdisciplines will be considered including, but not limited to ecology, physiology, molecular biology and organismal biology. The McGinty Eminent Scholar will conduct a program of research that facilitates collaborations with departmental faculty and strengthens current collaborations with Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution (HBOI) and other marine institutes in the region. Biology faculty are actively involved in marine biological research at both the Boca Raton (www.science.fau.edu/biology) and HBOI campuses (www.hboi.edu). The Eminent Scholar will be active on both campuses having primary research space in the new 40,000 sq. ft. FAU-HBOI facility. He/she will be expected to guide the recruitment of several new junior faculty positions aimed at enhancing the Marine Biology initiative at FAU. The endowed chair position will be filled at the full professor level with a joint appointment at the Senior Scientist level at HBOI. Review of applications will start March 1, 2006 and continue until the position is filled. Further information regarding the position can be obtained from Dr. Rod Murphey (rmurph16 at fau.edu),Chairman, Department of Biological Sciences. Applications and nominations should include curriculum vitae, five representative publications, a short description of research and teaching interests, and names and contact information of three referees. Submit applications electronically to Mrs. Lynn Sargent (lsargent at fau.edu) McGinty Eminent Scholar Search Committee, Department of Biological Sciences, Florida Atlantic University, 777 Glades Rd., Boca Raton, FL 33431. FAU is an Equal Opportunity/Equal Access Institution. From reefball at reefball.com Wed Feb 15 10:30:52 2006 From: reefball at reefball.com (Todd Barber) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:30:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? References: Message-ID: <00fa01c63244$f657c530$6501a8c0@LaFalda> Hi David, You might check with the Island School on Eleuthera. The kids there did a Reef Ball project and various classes did various monitoring projects on them. I'm not sure you could give much power to any data collected since I doubt they had adequate controls or even consistent data collection methods but there might be something there for at least sounding board. Thanks, Todd Barber Chairman Reef Ball Foundation, Inc. 3305 Edwards Court Greenville, NC 27858 reefball at reefball.com http://www.artificialreefs.org http://www.reefball.org http://www.reefball.com Direct: 252-353-9094 mobile: 941-720-7549 Fax 425-963-4119 Personal Space: http://www.myspace/reefball Group Space http://groups.myspace.com/reefballfoundation Skype & MSN For Voice or Video Conferences: Available upon request Atlanta/Athens Office 890 Hill Street Athens, GA 30606 USA 770-752-0202 (Our headquarters...not where I work see above) ----- Original Message ----- From: "David burdick" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 7:03 AM Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? > > Greetings coral-listers, > > I am interested in obtaining coral recruit/juvenile coral data for the > Bahamas from 2002-2004 but I haven't had any luck finding anything in > the literature - any suggestions? I performed a small-scale study > looking at the effects of macroalgal reduction and Diadema antillarum > addition on a set of small patch reefs off the SW coast of Eleuthera > and wish to compare the results of my juvenile coral surveys to that > of other researchers in the area. Any help would be greatly > appreciated. > > Thanks! > > David R. Burdick > > NOAA Pacific Islands Assistant Guam > > Guam Coastal Management Program > > Phone: 671.472.4201 > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From F.Webster at murdoch.edu.au Wed Feb 15 20:43:11 2006 From: F.Webster at murdoch.edu.au (Fiona Webster) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:43:11 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Postings please Message-ID: Hi I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after references and/or unpublished data. Thank you Fiona Webster Phd student Marine Ecology School Biological Sciences Department of Science and Engineering Murdoch University From deevon at bellsouth.net Thu Feb 16 09:56:52 2006 From: deevon at bellsouth.net (DeeVon Quirolo) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:56:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20060216094920.026ff5c0@bellsouth.net> Dr. Brian Lapointe of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution and Dr. Peter Bell of University of Queensland/Australia both arrived at the same thresholds from different perspectives, but they are: 1 mg/L dissolved inorganic nitrogen, .01 mg/L soluble reactive phosphorus. You can contact either Lapointe or Bell for further info. These thresholds are far lower than any current water quality regulations. Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Reef Relief www.reefrelief.org At 08:43 PM 2/15/2006, Fiona Webster wrote: >content-class: urn:content-classes:message >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="utf-8" > >Hi >I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in >Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down >effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral >health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal >growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar >level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient >enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and >phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after >references and/or unpublished data. >Thank you > > >Fiona Webster > >Phd student > >Marine Ecology > >School Biological Sciences > >Department of Science and Engineering > >Murdoch University > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From dustanp at cofc.edu Thu Feb 16 10:39:04 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:39:04 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> References: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> Message-ID: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil From info at reefguardian.org Thu Feb 16 09:34:44 2006 From: info at reefguardian.org (ReefDispatch) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:34:44 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Will Development Smother Guana Cay Reef? Message-ID: <43F48D84.78CE@reefguardian.org> ****************************** * February 16, 2006 * * R E E F D I S P A T C H * * __________________________ * * Will Unwise Development * * Smother Guana Cay Reef? * * * * -- sign on via -- * *http://www.reefguardian.org * ****************************** A Periodic Inside Look at a Coral Reef Issue from Alexander Stone, ReefGuardian International Director ____________________________________________________ Dear Friend of Coral Reefs, The coral reefs off tiny seven-mile Great Guana Cay in the northern Bahamas is under threat by an irresponsible mega-development.? Scientists around the world -- including top coral reef ecologists, and coral pathologists -- agree that the Discovery Land Company's plans to build a golf course, 500 residential units and a 180-slip marina will kill the coral reef in a matter of a few years. You could help prevent this by speaking up for this coral reef through the Featured Petition at ReefGuardian's just-updated website at http://www.reefguardian.org. Coral reefs are in serious decline around the world, and especially in the Caribbean.? But the reef at Great Guana Cay is among the few remaining healthy reefs in the entire Caribbean.? This reef, which is only 45 feet away from the beach of the proposed development, contains an incredible diversity of reef fishes, sharks, and brilliant corals. But that will all become an algae-ridden dead zone in just a few years if the Discovery Land development proceeds as planned. That's why I urge you to get involved through the Speak Up section at http://www.reefguardian.org. The native inhabitants of Guana Cay have formed an environmental organization to fight this development. But they need all the help they can get. Normally, such small islands never have an international voice.? Help prove that even little islands can have a strong voice in defense of their coral reefs. Go to our newly-updated website at http://www.reefguardian.org to learn how. Thanks so much for caring! Alexander Stone Director ReefGuardian International *************************** http://www.reefguardian.org *************************** From rvw at fit.edu Thu Feb 16 09:36:11 2006 From: rvw at fit.edu (Robert van Woesik) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:36:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Funding opportunity: Six ISRS/TOC fellowships for 2006 Message-ID: <000001c63306$55445600$6c4876a3@CORAL> Dear coral-list, The International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) are very pleased to announce that in 2006 we will be supporting up to six Ph.D. students in the general area of coral reef ecosystem research. Each award will be up to US$15,000. Submission DEADLINE - 31 March 2006 The following text is available in pdf format at http://www.fit.edu/isrs/ Fellowship announcement for coral reef studies Six ISRS/TOC fellowships (2006): International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) graduate fellowship for coral reef research DEADLINE - 31 March 2006 - for funds up to US$15,000 per award are available to support up to six Ph.D. students in the general area of coral reef ecosystem research. 1) Background and Fellowship Goals "Considerable thicknesses of rock have certainly been formed within the present geological era by the growth of coral and the accumulation of its detritus; and, secondly, that the increase of individual corals and of reefs, both out wards or horizontally and upwards or vertically, under the peculiar conditions favourable to such increase, is not slow, when referred either to the standard of the average oscillations of level in the earth's crust, or to the more precise but less important one of a cycle of years" (page 79, Darwin, 1842 The Structure & Distribution of Coral Reefs). Indeed, Darwin would be surprised just how 'peculiar' those conditions are on contemporary coral reefs. In 2006 unfavorable conditions are ubiquitous on reefs globally. Scientists and reef managers are increasingly working together to develop sound management strategies that are based on rigorous science. Scientific questions are being addressed on reef disturbances and reef resilience, climate change and adaptation, reef connectivity, and effective management practices, to name a few. Many coral reefs are in poor condition, yet we know very little about the very threats that are undermining the integrity of coral reefs. What processes and mechanisms are causing differential mortality and how are some species still able to survive and indeed be successful in times of stress. Studies are needed that will combine management with process level information. Research supported by the ISRS/TOC Fellowship should increase our understanding of processes on coral reefs that are relevant to management at local, regional, or global scales. 2) Conditions Within the proposal, and as a condition of each ISRS/TOC Fellowship, recipients will be required to articulate how they will report back to the ISRS/TOC on their research progress, outline their findings, acknowledge the support, and publicize the outcomes. 3) Who can apply? The Fellowship is available to students worldwide, who are already admitted to a graduate program at an accredited university. The intent of the fellowship is to help Ph.D. students develop skills and to address problems related to relevant applications of coral reef ecosystem research and management. The Fellowship can be used to support salary, travel, fieldwork, and laboratory analyses. The student can work entirely at the host institution, or can split time between developed and developing country institutions. 4) Application materials A four page proposal as a pdf document, using 12-point font or larger, double spaced, in English, is required from prospective fellowship candidates: proposals that do not meet these criteria may be returned. The proposal should include the following sections: a. Overview: The overview starts with the Proposal Title, Author Name, Author's Address, Major Professor Name, Major Professor's Address (if different than the Author's), and total amount in the budget request. The overview should place the proposed research in context. We are looking for a clearly stated rationale, research objectives and a clear question that is driving the research within the context of the literature. b. Methods: The methods section includes hypotheses, methods, and experimental design - including details on field or laboratory techniques and how data will be analyzed. c. Relevance & implications of research: This section will outline expected outcomes, how the work is relevant to host country management and science issues and the implications of the research within a broader context. This section also includes evidence of host country coordination (e.g., identification of individuals or programs that will benefit from your results); The following three sections are required but do not count against the four page limit: d. Detailed Budget: The budget must not exceed $15,000. Evidence of cost sharing is desirable for the application. Cost sharing might include, for example, additional funding, accommodation, the loan of equipment, or access to analytical facilities. e. Literature Cited: Use a bibliographic format that includes full titles in the citations. f. Applicant CV: 2 pages maximum. g. Letter of support: The student's major professor must submit a support letter for the project based on their knowledge of the project, and familiarity with the student's background and abilities. If work will be conducted at another university, a support letter is required from the sponsoring Professor. 5) Submitting your application All application materials must be submitted electronically as follows: a) All materials must be sent to Dr. Robert van Woesik at: rvw at fit.edu b) The completed proposal (items 4a-f above) must be combined into a single document and sent as an attachment in pdf format. Please enter the subject line of your message as your last name followed by "ISRS/TOC Proposal" (e.g., "VAN WOESIK_ISRS/TOC Proposal") c) The letter of support (item 4g above) must come directly from the major professor as an e-mail attachment (pdf format). Please enter the subject line of the message as the last name of the applicant followed by "ISRS/TOC Support" (e.g., "VAN WOESIK_ISRS/TOC Support"). Applications will be considered complete only after the support letter has arrived. You should ensure that your sponsors are aware of the deadline, and can get their letters submitted in a timely manner. Only completed electronic applications will be reviewed, and this will be accomplished by an ISRS panel. 6) Evaluation Criteria include: a) scientific merit, b) feasibility, c) support letter from major professor, d) host country coordination, e) relevancy to the Fellowship guidelines, f) reporting strategy (on research progress and findings, see conditions in 2, above). 7) Administration of the Fellowship The International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) support the Fellowship through professional and administrative contributions. ISRS/TOC is committed to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination. The mission of the ISRS is to promote for the benefit of the public, the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge and understanding concerning coral reefs, both living and fossil. The TOC is committed to protecting ocean environments and conserving the global abundance and diversity of marine life. Through science-based advocacy, research, and public education, TOC promotes informed citizen participation to reverse the degradation of our oceans. Dr. Robert van Woesik Professor Department of Biological Sciences Florida Institute of Technology 150 West University Boulevard Melbourne Florida 32901-6988 USA Email: rvw at fit.edu http://www.fit.edu/~rvw/ Phone 321 674 7475 From chwkins at yahoo.com Thu Feb 16 11:17:01 2006 From: chwkins at yahoo.com (Christopher Hawkins) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 08:17:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060216161702.33190.qmail@web32802.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Phil- A good question. I know that TNC folks, as part of the Florida Reef Resiliency Program (which has state, Sanctuary, NOAA and university partners), is working on this as we speak. I am fairly sure they haven't inked anything concrete yet, though. Best, Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Hawkins at forwild.umass.edu Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil --------------------------------- What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos From pkramer at tnc.org Thu Feb 16 15:18:04 2006 From: pkramer at tnc.org (Phillip Kramer) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:18:04 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Phil- As Chris mentioned, The Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) has been working on this question for the past year. Finding few agreed upon quantitative metrics for assessing resilience on Florida reefs in the literature has led us to approaching it from a number of different angles- expert input, review and analysis of existing monitoring data, statistically based broad-scale surveys to quantify response to disturbance (in this case bleaching) across all sub-regions and reef zones that have been identified within the Florida reef tract, and finer scale investigations tracking coral survivorship along selected gradients. Below is a summary from a pilot expert based (delphic) exercise we did last year to tap into local knowledge. Not surprisingly, we found quite a bit of disparity between what experts thought were "resilient" often based on background/expertise/age of the person. From this excersise, we have a GIS database and can provide maps which identify over 43 "resilient" reefs as identified by experts along with the reasons these reefs were identified. This might be a useful starting point for where to start looking at some standard metrics. Steven Miller's group also has a very rich baseline dataset collected over a number of years for a much broader set of functional and structural indicators that may also help inform this question. If anyone is interested in the expert maps or an overview of the FRRP program just let me know. We can also share results of the first broad scale bleaching surveys carried out last summer. Regards, Phil Philip Kramer, Ph. D. Director, Caribbean Marine Program The Nature Consevancy 55 N. Johnson Road Sugarloaf Key, FL 33042 305-745-8402 ext. 103 Summary of South Florida Reef Expert Meetings on Reslience One of the initial goals of the Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) is to locate and map coral reefs within the region that exhibit characteristics of resilience. To arrive at this goal, several activities have been implemented by The Nature Conservancy during spring 2005. Along with conducting an analysis of existing coral reef monitoring data, anecdotal information has been collected from local reef experts to help identify where potentially resilient reefs are located. A diverse array of individuals with considerable first hand knowledge of the coral reef resources within the region were identified and subsequently interviewed for this effort. Three tropical sea life collectors, 2 fishers, 6 federal employees (NOAA and USGS), 1 state employee, 5 individuals affiliated with universities, 7 members of local non-governmental organizations, and 1 dive industry representative were involved with this process. These 25 individuals provided a wealth of information from a wide geographic range and from varying perspectives. Interviews with individuals or small groups were conducted over a 4 week period; from April 1 through Aril 26, 2005. During each interview, a similar range of questions were asked to ensure compatibility of responses. Reef experts were first given a brief description about the FRRP goals and overview of a number of activities currently underway. Each person was first asked to comment on the spatial framework which identifies unique reef ?strata? that occur within different subregions and cross shelf zones of the Florida reef tract. This spatial framework will function to identify distinct reef biotopes within the region and guide the a regional stratiofied sampling design to assess response to disturbances such as coral bleaching. Interviewed participants provided useful information on ways to improve the framework and/or confirm it?s accuracy from their point of view. Experts were asked if they know of existing data sets that may be useful for the further improvement of the spatial framework as well. In order to assess the geographic areas each individual is most familiar with, the zones and sub-regions within the spatial framework were used as a reference. Following these discussions, using nautical charts, benthic habitat maps, and other spatial datasets, reef experts were asked to identify reef or hardbottom areas they believe have maintained its functional integrity over the past years to decades given the various disturbances which have influenced south Florida. They were also asked if they know of ?special or unique areas? that may act as refuges (e.g., do not bleach when other areas do or have functional or structural characteristics indicative of resilience such areas with particularly high coral cover or large living coral heads, etc..). Interviewees identified a wide range of potentially resilient areas- from specific parts of individual reefs to entire habitats or zones. The information gathered from these interviews on potentially resilient reef areas was tabulated and then digitized in GIS. Along with these questions, we asked the experts to comment on why they belief these areas are showing signs of ?resilience? (factors of resilience). Finally, we asked each expert to describe what attributes of a reef is most valuable to them. Table 1: List of interviewed reef experts Reef Expert Organization/Occupation Geographic Area of Expertise Don de Maria Fisher Lower Keys Billy Causey Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Region wide Ken Nedimyer Tropical sea life collector Upper and Lower Keys Lad Atkins Reef Environmental Education Foundation Keys wide and SE coast Harold Hudson Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Keys wide Forest Young Dynasty Marine Rebecca Shoal to Middle Keys Bob Ginsburg University of Miami, RSMAS Region wide Margaret Miller NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami Dana Williams NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami Rodrigo Garza University of Miami, RSMAS Tortugas and Miami Michelle PaddockUniversity of Miami, RSMAS Upper Keys through Miami Bill Parks Tropical sea life collector Palm Beach County Gene Shinn US Geological Survey Region wide Bob Halley US Geological Survey Region wide Walt Jaap Florida Wildlife Research Institute Region wide Pam Muller University of South Florida Region wide Dr. Ray McAllister Prof. Emeritus, Florida Atlantic University SE Coast Stephen Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Timothy Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Debrorah Devers Vone Research (501c3) Broward County David Zinni Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Randy Brooks Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Jeff Torode Greater Ft. Lauderdale Diving Association Broward County Peter Cone Lobster diver Key West Erich Bartels Mote Marine Laboratory Region wide -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Christopher Hawkins Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 11:17 AM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Cc: Dave Loomis Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Phil- A good question. I know that TNC folks, as part of the Florida Reef Resiliency Program (which has state, Sanctuary, NOAA and university partners), is working on this as we speak. I am fairly sure they haven't inked anything concrete yet, though. Best, Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Hawkins at forwild.umass.edu Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil --------------------------------- What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From reef at bellsouth.net Thu Feb 16 16:47:14 2006 From: reef at bellsouth.net (reef at bellsouth.net) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:47:14 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] (no subject) Message-ID: <20060216214714.DCBQ1775.ibm67aec.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> RE: healthy coral in the Florida Keys I would suggest Western Samboos off of Key West. There is a lot of healthy elkhorn (alittle storm damage from Wilma though). Parts of it is from the coral nursery project that had great results (done by Reef Relief). The Dry Tortugas park is a great resource as well. Hope this helps! Vicky Ten Broeck From julian at twolittlefishies.com Thu Feb 16 18:17:33 2006 From: julian at twolittlefishies.com (Julian Sprung) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 18:17:33 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs Message-ID: <60146F1515751D4AA4CB4D3EC514F9E311AA1C@SERVER.tlf.local> It may be news to some members of the list to know that aquarists growing corals in reef aquariums come to essentially the same recommended background level for phosphorus, about 0.015 mg/L being a threshold that seems to be important in managing the proliferation of algae in reef aquariums. Some other observations about it - 1. corals will grow at substantially higher phosphorus concentrations in aquariums, especially when grazers are present to control algae. 2. Some corals will stop growing or bleach and die when the phosphate level is maintained not very much below the abovementioned threshold! This is a point of great interest as aquarists balance food inputs and phosphate export. Apparently corals can acclimate to lower levels as long as the transition is not too fast. Acclimation to "higher" concentrations, but still close to the abovementioned threshold, does not kill corals, but may cause SPS corals to become less colorful. It should also be noted that the observations may have some relation to the loss of corals to bleaching events in the most nutrient poor waters in the natural environment. There was already a long thread on this list about inorganic nitrogen in aquarium culture of corals, but suffice it to say that corals in aquariums grow well with background levels much higher than proposed for their natural environment. They also grow well at nitrogen poor conditions, but may bleach if the levels become too low in an aquarium, especially when food inputs are scarce. Maintaining low levels help promote bright color in (Indo-Pacific) SPS corals, as the "background" zoox brown color is reduced and other pigments become more obvious. When discussing nutrients I like to make an analogy that I think is appropriate-- I compare nutrients to light availability. If you think about sunlight on the reef, it comes in 2 distinct forms: background sky light and light from the sun itself. Nutrients as a background level (the abovementioned thresholds) could be thought of as analogous to sky light- all around and just right for normal growth. There are other sources of nutrients that are like the point source of light from the sun-- more intense and focused. Fish living (and eliminating waste) among coral branches would be an example of a nutrient supply that far exceeds the "background." These point sources (light or nutrients) seem to enhance growth. The analogy works but does not correspond with respect to water movement effects on nutrient availability. Julian > ---------- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of DeeVon Quirolo > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 9:56 AM > To: Fiona Webster; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov; coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs > > Dr. Brian Lapointe of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution and Dr. > Peter Bell of University of Queensland/Australia both arrived at the > same thresholds from different perspectives, but they are: 1 mg/L > dissolved inorganic nitrogen, .01 mg/L soluble reactive > phosphorus. You can contact either Lapointe or Bell for further > info. These thresholds are far lower than any current water quality > regulations. > > Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Reef Relief www.reefrelief.org > > > > At 08:43 PM 2/15/2006, Fiona Webster wrote: > >content-class: urn:content-classes:message > >Content-Type: text/plain; > > charset="utf-8" > > > >Hi > >I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in > >Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down > >effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral > >health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal > >growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar > >level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient > > >enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and > >phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after > >references and/or unpublished data. > >Thank you > > > > > >Fiona Webster > > > >Phd student > > > >Marine Ecology > > > >School Biological Sciences > > > >Department of Science and Engineering > > > >Murdoch University > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Coral-List mailing list > >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From colocha30 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 16 18:52:05 2006 From: colocha30 at yahoo.com (carolina castro) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 17:52:05 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Looking for PDF articles Message-ID: <20060216235205.65991.qmail@web34712.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear All, I am looking for some articles that I couldn?t be able to download. I would really appreciate if somebody could attach them on PDF format for me. Thank you. Brander, et.al., 1971. Comparison of species diversity and ecology of reef-living invertebrates on Aldabra Atoll and at Watamu, Kenya. Symp. Zool. Soc. London, 28: 397-431. J.B. Lewis and P.V.R. Snelgrove, 1989. Response of a coral-associated crustacean community to eutrophication. Marine Biology, 101(2): 249-257. J.B. Lewis and P.V.R. Snelgrove, 1990. Corallum morphology and composition of crustacean cryptofauna of the hermatypic coral Madrasis mirabilis. Marine Biology, 106(2): 267-272. Carolina Castro S. Biologa Marina UJTL Bogota, Colombia __________________________________________________ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ?gratis! Reg?strate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/ From gregorh at reefcheck.org Thu Feb 16 19:42:31 2006 From: gregorh at reefcheck.org (Gregor Hodgson) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:42:31 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <003301c6335b$0d0a57e0$0600a8c0@toshibauser> Hi Phil, I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and only one species of human. Regards, Greg -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From j.oliver at cgiar.org Fri Feb 17 03:31:44 2006 From: j.oliver at cgiar.org (Oliver, Jamie (WorldFish)) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 16:31:44 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef Scientist Position at the WorldFish Center - Penang Message-ID: Dear Colleagues The WorldFish Center has an exciting new position opening for a Coral Reef Scientist at the WorldFish Center. This is a normal staff position with a 3 year renewable contract. The Scientist would lead a new GEF-funded project examining lessons learned and best practices in coral reef management, and would also be expected to develop and lead other coral reef projects relevant to the mission of the Center. The position would contribute to, and assist in the strategic planning and oversight of ReefBase, the Center's global information system on coral reefs. This position will be one of several new positions currently being filled at the Center in the field of Natural Resources management, and offers the opportunity to join a dynamic new multi-disciplinary team seeking to make a significant impact on poverty and food security in developing countries. (see "jobs" on our website www.worldfishcenter.org ). Please pass this message on to any potential candidates or interested parties. Best regards Jamie Oliver Research Scientist - Coral Reefs Description: The WorldFish Center , located on the island of Penang , Malaysia , is a world-class scientific research organization. Our mission is to reduce poverty and hunger by improving fisheries and aquaculture. We have offices in nine countries and engaged in collaborative research with our partners in more than 50 countries. The Center is a nonprofit organization and a member of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). A unique opportunity has arisen for a gifted individual to contribute to the mission of the Center and make a personal impact on the lives of millions of less fortunate people in developing countries around the world. We seek a highly competent and motivated individual to fill the following position within the Natural Resources Management Discipline: Responsibilities: Provide scientific leadership and vision in the development of new research and knowledge management opportunities relating to coral reefs and associated ecosystems. Design, develop and submit project proposals relevant to the management and sustainable use of coral reefs in developing countries. Develop collaborative arrangements with advanced scientific institutions and national research systems to increase the outputs for agreed research projects Prepare proposals to development agencies for funding of new priority projects and the continuation of existing long-term projects Publish results of research in peer-reviewed scientific journals, and disseminate in web pages, newsletters and other popular media Prepare scientific reports for donors and WorldFish management Represent the Center at relevant high level scientific fora Supervise and mentor relevant staff Contribute to strategic science discussions and the development of science directions within the NRM Discipline and relevant regional strategies and global initiatives. Requirements: Phd in Ecology, tropical fisheries, or related discipline and 3 year's research experience related to coral reefs or tropical coastal systems. Demonstrated research innovation, publications in internationally reefed journals and the application of research to management issues Experience in assembling, organizing and analyzing large volumes of information from a variety of sources and disciplines and synthesizing these into clear themes and identifying emergent issues and ideas. Strong quantitative skill in statistical and spatial analysis, and relevant computer programs Excellent program management skills, including planning organization, and budgeting. Ability to manage several projects simultaneously. Experience in multi-disciplinary and multi-organization and multi-country projects. Ability to work effectively in diverse cultural contexts English proficiency and excellent project management skills The WorldFish Center offers a competitive remuneration package, a non-discriminatory policy and provides an innovative work environment. Interested applicants are invited to submit a comprehensive curriculum vitae that includes names and contacts (telephone, fax, and e-mail address) of three (3) professional referees who are familiar with the candidate's qualifications and work experience, via e-mail to worldfish-hr at cgiar.org, no later than 15 March 2006. Only short-listed candidates will be notified. ============================================ Jamie Oliver Director, Science Coordination The WorldFish Center PO Box 500, GPO, 10670 Penang Malaysia Street address: Jalan Batu Maung, 11960 Bayan Lepas, Penang, Malaysia Ph: 60 4 620 2209 Fax: 60 4 626 5690 email: J.Oliver at cgiar.org ========================================== From laura.jeffrey at imperial.ac.uk Fri Feb 17 04:26:23 2006 From: laura.jeffrey at imperial.ac.uk (Jeffrey, Laura) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 09:26:23 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] MSc Thesis Ideas Imperial Message-ID: <37629CD96DEBCF42B807EAD22EA7EF78C84EC5@icex3.ic.ac.uk> Dear All, I am a postgrad presently reading for an MSc in Environmental Technology at Imperial College, London. In April we are due to start our dissertations and my hope that I would be able to investigate coral reefs and their current level or protection through policy/initiatives and such like. I hold a 1+3 studentship so the hope is that this project will be the stepping-stone to a PhD in the same field. I have attached below my current thoughts and ideas regarding this subject. However, I am well aware that I am limited in knowledge on this subject and would therefore appreciate any suggestions that come my way. I was advised by a colleague that the coral list was the best way to go with regards finding the right experts to talk to; useful contacts; projects that are currently underway so that maybe I could join one; advising a specific region to focus on; further suggestions re the direction of my ideas so that they mat form a project and such like. Any help on this matter would be much appreciated! Yours Sincerely, Laura Jeffrey Project Ideas: Environmental Law/Policy and Biodiversity/Conservation: Coral Reef Project Ideas Coral Reefs are not only extremely aesthetically pleasing, but they support an extraordinary amount of biodiversity and have enormous economic value. However, at present coral reefs are at serious risk of decline considering the current trends in climate change (threats posed by global warming), coastal development, pressure from over-fishing, fishing practices such as cyanide poisoning and explosives and tourism, along with other environmental stressors. According to The Nature Conservancy, if the destruction increases at the current rate, 70% of the world's coral reefs will have disappeared within 50 years. Such a loss would have dramatic impacts on marine biodiversity, fisheries, shore protection, tourism and would be an economic disaster for those people living in the tropics. Dissertation: Initially set out to see whether or not the world's coral reefs are being sufficiently protected by reviewing (investigation into?) the current level of protection, including MPAs, any policy instruments, environmental agreements already in place to encourage protection, or lack thereof. Given the depth and breath of the subject matter, the study would invariably have to be selective....zone in on specific area/case study PhD: Is there a role for environmental law (policy/treaties) to tackle the environmental degradation of coral reefs? Assess the viability of transposing legal remedies to environmental protection of this endangered area with a view that the author would hopefully provide recommendations/possible options at the end! Included in thesis/PhD? * The best methods of protection are those that are specific to the problem, therefore explore the role of how science can inform policy here (make policy makers aware/political science of MPAs). * (From Dr Polunin, Newcastle, "and nearly all the science is derived from reef habitats that don't apply at al to continental shelf waters" ??? Significant? * What determines the most viable strategy? * What would influence uptake? * How would this be implemented and enforced? Specific criteria for successful implementation. * Interaction between different sectors, national, provincial, and local community level? I am aware that America is very forward thinking in this field and has initiatives in place. Maybe this would be an appropriate case study? Again, any help much appreciated!! From esther.peters at verizon.net Fri Feb 17 11:40:25 2006 From: esther.peters at verizon.net (Esther Peters) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:40:25 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? References: <003301c6335b$0d0a57e0$0600a8c0@toshibauser> Message-ID: <43F5FC79.7090506@verizon.net> Gregor and Phil make good points. As part of an exercise to look at reef classification for the purpose of developing coral reef biocriteria, I examined the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program data from the Keys collected in 1996, looking at coral cover, species dominance, and richness, and applying the "coral morphological triangles" (conservation class) concept of Edinger and Risk (2000). A preliminary comparison with the results obtained from the 2004 CREMP dataset revealed that just in those few years there were significant structural and functional changes at some offshore shallow reef sites. And of course, based on long-time Keys' residents and reef scientists, we know of even more changes over the past 25 years. The Nature Conservancy's diverse approach is also important to help us understand reef dynamics in the Keys and the influences of natural and anthropogenic disturbances. I'm not sure that anyone has figured out the "standard, or baseline reef." My first look at this issue indicates that even in the Keys there are several biotopes and more investigations are needed as to which one(s) should serve as "reference condition" for each class. Esther Peters Gregor Hodgson wrote: > Hi Phil, > > I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a > "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? > > Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be > a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It > is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs > given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, > sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing > conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging > will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. > > Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and > only one species of human. > > Regards, > Greg > > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? > > > Dear Listers, > With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency > underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as > measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or > Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". > Thanks, > Phil > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From esther.peters at verizon.net Fri Feb 17 11:56:47 2006 From: esther.peters at verizon.net (Esther Peters) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:56:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] 2006 Advanced Courses in Tropical Marine Sciences in the Florida Keys Message-ID: <43F6004F.1080103@verizon.net> The following opportunities for advanced studies on coral reefs will be offered at Mote Marine Laboratory's Tropical Research Laboratory in the Florida Keys this summer. Please use these links to learn more about each session and obtain application materials: Coral Tissue Slide Reading Workshop (July 25-28) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/slide_workshop.phtml Diseases of Corals and Other Reef Organisms (July 29-August 6) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/disease_workshop.phtml Secondary Succession on Damaged Coral Reefs Workshop (August 7-10) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/succession_workshop.phtml From l.bunce at conservation.org Fri Feb 17 12:14:52 2006 From: l.bunce at conservation.org (Leah Bunce) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 12:14:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] MPA Social Scientist position Message-ID: <64207F75AB45B54296B2E2DAA4DA9D8B08707302@ci-mail1.ci.conservation.org> Dear Coral Colleagues, I would greatly appreciate it if you would forward the announcement below to social scientists who might be interested or who know those who might. This is a unique opportunity to direct a large social science research initiative to further management effectiveness of marine protected areas worldwide. The position involves working with CI here in DC and closely with CI and partners in-country. For more info about the program, see . Thank you! Leah ______________ Leah Bunce, PhD Senior Director Marine Management Area Science Program Center for Applied Biodiversity Science Conservation International 1919 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 (202) 912-1238 l.bunce at conservation.org Position: Research Scientist - MPA Social Scientist Program: Center for Applied Biodiversity Sciences, Conservation International Location: Washington, DC The social scientist will be responsible for overseeing Conservation International's Marine Management Area Science Program social science research activities. This is a unique opportunity for someone with strong academic credentials and overseas conservation experience to gain experience managing a large program of applied marine research across many sites. Program research is focused around critical marine management area research needs related to management effectiveness, connectivity, resiliency, valuation, economic development and enforcement. Required: A solid understanding of the marine protected area social science field. Preferred: Four years of experience conducting applied social science research and translating the results into conservation action. Experience in tropical nations, preferably in one of the 4 priority sites (Brazil, Belize, Panama & Ecuador and Fiji). Project management experience, including planning, working with a range of colleagues, and budgeting. Experience conducting social science to benefit marine conservation and establishing a process to ensure the results are used by decision-makers. Flexibility and the ability to coordinate science activities outside the person's immediate area of expertise. Master's degree required, Ph.D. preferred. To apply: Application deadline - March 1, 2006 From hyamano at nies.go.jp Mon Feb 20 00:10:03 2006 From: hyamano at nies.go.jp (hyamano at nies.go.jp) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 14:10:03 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Dear colleagues, Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th ICRS, Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD-ROMs will be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send it to all the participants. For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the print. If the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop printing the Proceedings. More news will be sent as soon as I hear. Best wishes, Hiroya Yamano Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html From eborneman at uh.edu Mon Feb 20 10:00:11 2006 From: eborneman at uh.edu (Eric Borneman) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:00:11 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS In-Reply-To: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> References: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Message-ID: <09599ED7-B06F-4340-9BBE-76B3B0CA8921@uh.edu> Hello Hiroya: Thank you for the update on the Proceedings and I am greatly looking forward to seeing them and appreciate the work that has certainly been required to produce them. I am curious, though, about the printing. If the CD-ROM is already formatted, as it should be given the nature of the formatting required for submitted material, then any of thousands of print-on- demand printers should be able to produce bound volumes by a print-on- demand cost that can be from 1 to many thousands of copies. For example, one print-on-demand company found with a quick google search will print hardback copies (6x9) with full color covers, dust jackets, up to 500 pages and provide 10 free copies of the book for US $1000 and this includes free CD e-books and 30% royalties for each copy sold if they are the distributor and 50% of CD-ROM sales. I consider this to be quite expensive. I think others on this list I know who have written full color books over 500 pages would agree that we would not be writing (or selling) much if printing costs and selling prices were this high. While I don't have the details of the manuscript, the minimum order and costs seem very out of line with what I know about book publishing (which isn't much), having written two books. I think the cost of book series, such as Corals of the World, which are similarly large, colorful (which previous Proceedings have never been) and well made indicates what is possible. The costs of scientific publication have always been a mystery to me, to say the least, and in terms of most journals, an outrageous racket. If, however, there are very few orders for text-based copies I can see that the cost would be high, but I see no reason for it to be impossible for even one copy to be produced given the nature of POD technology today. I hope others on the list who have published books could comment further. Best, Eric Borneman Dept. of Biology and Biochemistry University of Houston Science and Research Bldg. II 4800 Calhoun Houston, TX 77204 On Feb 19, 2006, at 11:10 PM, hyamano at nies.go.jp wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th > ICRS, > Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. > > We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD- > ROMs will > be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send > it to > all the participants. > > For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. > However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the > print. If > the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop > printing the Proceedings. > > More news will be sent as soon as I hear. > > Best wishes, > > Hiroya Yamano > Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS > Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings > > ---- > Hiroya Yamano > UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement > BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia > Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 > Also at NIES > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From sjameson at coralseas.com Mon Feb 20 04:06:15 2006 From: sjameson at coralseas.com (Dr. Stephen Jameson) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:06:15 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Message-ID: Dear Phil, Thanks for the Coral-List note regarding: >> Dear Listers, >> With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency >> underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as >> measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or >> Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Per: Jameson SC, Erdmann MV, Karr JR, Potts KW (2001) Charting a course toward diagnostic monitoring: A continuing review of coral reef attributes and a research strategy for creating coral reef indexes of biotic integrity. Bull Mar Sci 69(2):701-744 "In multimetric biological assessment, reference condition equates with biological integrity. Biological integrity is defined as the condition at sites able to support and maintain a balanced, integrated, and adaptive biological system having the full range of elements and processes expected for that biogeographical region and type of environment (coral reef zone) (Jameson et al. 2001, Table 1, page 702). Biological integrity is the product of ecological and evolutionary processes at a site with MINIMAL human influence (determined by best available information)." As you well know, there is no reef in the Florida Keys with minimal human influence. For a recent summary of this situation see: Jameson SC, Tupper MH, Ridley JM (2002) The three screen doors: can marine ?protected? areas be effective? Marine Pollution Bulletin 44(11):1177-1183. So how could you approach this problem? Your question is assuming just using a "single" reference site to create a reference condition. (Note of caution: I would recommend using more than one reference site to create a reference condition for a specific biogeographic region. Also, reference conditions based on reference sites may incorporate considerable variability because of scale and in some biogeographic regions this variability may be unsatisfactory.) However, you can create reference conditions using a combination of the following types of data (Jameson et al. 2001, page 705). Each approach has its strength and weaknesses. Historical Paleoecological Experimental Laboratory Quantitative Models Best Professional Judgment References Sites But, before this question can be answered a few more questions need to be addressed. 1. What metrics and related organisms are you using in your monitoring and assessment program? Are you just looking at corals or are you developing a more complex invertebrate, algae and/or fish index of biotic integrity with a mix of species? For example, if you were using forams you might have good paleo data to create your reference condition with. If you are using corals, there might be good historical data or you might be able to use agent based models (like John McManus is developing) and run them backwards to get a historical perspective. Best professional judgment will also be a valuable resource for all metrics. Your sampling protocol is critical, it needs to be consistent and this will control what organisms are available for analysis - and determine what reference conditions are needed. If you can't create a defendable reference condition then your chosen metric is of little use. 2. What coral reef zone are you targeting (Esther's point). Different types of organisms will be found in different zones, so you want to be comparing apples to apples and not confounding (mixing) data. This will also influence what reference conditions you need to develop. 3. How far back in history do you want to go with your reference condition - pre-Columbus, start of the industrial revolution, pre-Miami development? Bottom line: just using a single Florida Keys reference site selected in 2006 will not produce a satisfactory reference condition in the Florida Keys situation no matter what metric/s you are using - which I know you realize. I am putting the final touches on the following paper that outlines these concepts in more detail. Jameson SC, Karr JR, Potts KW (in ms) Coral reef biological response signatures: a new approach to coral reef monitoring and assessment with early warning, diagnostic, and status & trend capabilities. Coral Reefs Also see, when it comes out: Jameson SC (in press) Summary of Mini-Symposium 4-2, Diagnostic Monitoring and Assessment of Coral Reefs: Studies from Around the World. Proc 10th Intl Coral Reef Symposium, Okinawa, Japan I hope this brief summary helps. All papers referenced can be downloaded at . If I can be of further service please give me a call. PS. Caution should be used with respect to using "resilient reefs" for reference sites as the fact that they are categorized as "resilient" suggests that they have been subjected to stressors and are not located in minimally impaired environments. We are looking for those reefs that have not bleached - which as Greg points out - will be harder and harder to find, thus reinforcing the need to use the other approaches for creating reference conditions. Best regards, Dr. Stephen C. Jameson, President Coral Seas Inc. - Integrated Coastal Zone Management 4254 Hungry Run Road, The Plains, VA 20198-1715 USA Office: 703-754-8690, Fax: 703-754-9139 Email: sjameson at coralseas.com Web Site: http://www.coralseas.com and Research Collaborator Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History Washington, DC 20560 ******************* > Gregor and Phil make good points. As part of an exercise to look at > reef classification for the purpose of developing coral reef > biocriteria, I examined the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program > data from the Keys collected in 1996, looking at coral cover, species > dominance, and richness, and applying the "coral morphological > triangles" (conservation class) concept of Edinger and Risk (2000). A > preliminary comparison with the results obtained from the 2004 CREMP > dataset revealed that just in those few years there were significant > structural and functional changes at some offshore shallow reef sites. > And of course, based on long-time Keys' residents and reef > scientists, we know of even more changes over the past 25 years. The > Nature Conservancy's diverse approach is also important to help us > understand reef dynamics in the Keys and the influences of natural and > anthropogenic disturbances. I'm not sure that anyone has figured out > the "standard, or baseline reef." My first look at this issue indicates > that even in the Keys there are several biotopes and more investigations > are needed as to which one(s) should serve as "reference condition" for > each class. > > Esther Peters > > > Hi Phil- As Chris mentioned, The Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) has > been working on this question for the past year. Finding few agreed upon > quantitative metrics for assessing resilience on Florida reefs in the > literature has led us to approaching it from a number of different angles- > expert input, review and analysis of existing monitoring data, statistically > based broad-scale surveys to quantify response to disturbance (in this case > bleaching) across all sub-regions and reef zones that have been identified > within the Florida reef tract, and finer scale investigations tracking coral > survivorship along selected gradients. > > Below is a summary from a pilot expert based (delphic) exercise we did last > year to tap into local knowledge. Not surprisingly, we found quite a bit of > disparity between what experts thought were "resilient" often based on > background/expertise/age of the person. From this excersise, we have a GIS > database and can provide maps which identify over 43 "resilient" reefs as > identified by experts along with the reasons these reefs were identified. > This might be a useful starting point for where to start looking at some > standard metrics. Steven Miller's group also has a very rich baseline > dataset collected over a number of years for a much broader set of > functional and structural indicators that may also help inform this > question. > > If anyone is interested in the expert maps or an overview of the FRRP > program just let me know. We can also share results of the first broad > scale bleaching surveys carried out last summer. > > Regards, > Phil > > Philip Kramer, Ph. D. > Director, Caribbean Marine Program > The Nature Consevancy > 55 N. Johnson Road > Sugarloaf Key, FL 33042 > 305-745-8402 ext. 103 > > Summary of South Florida Reef Expert Meetings on Reslience > > One of the initial goals of the Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) is to > locate and map coral reefs within the region that exhibit characteristics of > resilience. To arrive at this goal, several activities have been > implemented by The Nature Conservancy during spring 2005. Along with > conducting an analysis of existing coral reef monitoring data, anecdotal > information has been collected from local reef experts to help identify > where potentially resilient reefs are located. A diverse array of > individuals with considerable first hand knowledge of the coral reef > resources within the region were identified and subsequently interviewed for > this effort. Three tropical sea life collectors, 2 fishers, 6 federal > employees (NOAA and USGS), 1 state employee, 5 individuals affiliated with > universities, 7 members of local non-governmental organizations, and 1 dive > industry representative were involved with this process. These 25 > individuals provided a wealth of information from a wide geographic range > and from varying perspectives. > > Interviews with individuals or small groups were conducted over a 4 week > period; from April 1 through Aril 26, 2005. During each interview, a > similar range of questions were asked to ensure compatibility of responses. > Reef experts were first given a brief description about the FRRP goals and > overview of a number of activities currently underway. Each person was > first asked to comment on the spatial framework which identifies unique reef > ?strata? that occur within different subregions and cross shelf zones of the > Florida reef tract. This spatial framework will function to identify > distinct reef biotopes within the region and guide the a regional > stratiofied sampling design to assess response to disturbances such as coral > bleaching. Interviewed participants provided useful information on ways to > improve the framework and/or confirm it?s accuracy from their point of view. > Experts were asked if they know of existing data sets that may be useful for > the further improvement of the spatial framework as well. In order to > assess the geographic areas each individual is most familiar with, the zones > and sub-regions within the spatial framework were used as a reference. > Following these discussions, using nautical charts, benthic habitat maps, > and other spatial datasets, reef experts were asked to identify reef or > hardbottom areas they believe have maintained its functional integrity over > the past years to decades given the various disturbances which have > influenced south Florida. They were also asked if they know of ?special or > unique areas? that may act as refuges (e.g., do not bleach when other areas > do or have functional or structural characteristics indicative of resilience > such areas with particularly high coral cover or large living coral heads, > etc..). Interviewees identified a wide range of potentially resilient > areas- from specific parts of individual reefs to entire habitats or zones. > The information gathered from these interviews on potentially resilient reef > areas was tabulated and then digitized in GIS. Along with these questions, > we asked the experts to comment on why they belief these areas are showing > signs of ?resilience? (factors of resilience). Finally, we asked each > expert to describe what attributes of a reef is most valuable to them. > > Table 1: List of interviewed reef experts > > Reef Expert Organization/Occupation Geographic Area of Expertise > Don de Maria Fisher Lower Keys > Billy Causey Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Region wide > Ken Nedimyer Tropical sea life collector Upper and Lower Keys > Lad Atkins Reef Environmental Education Foundation Keys wide and SE coast > Harold Hudson Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Keys wide > Forest Young Dynasty Marine Rebecca Shoal to Middle Keys > Bob Ginsburg University of Miami, RSMAS Region wide > Margaret Miller NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami > Dana Williams NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami > Rodrigo Garza University of Miami, RSMAS Tortugas and Miami > Michelle PaddockUniversity of Miami, RSMAS Upper Keys through Miami > Bill Parks Tropical sea life collector Palm Beach County > Gene Shinn US Geological Survey Region wide > Bob Halley US Geological Survey Region wide > Walt Jaap Florida Wildlife Research Institute Region wide > Pam Muller University of South Florida Region wide > Dr. Ray McAllister Prof. Emeritus, Florida Atlantic University SE Coast > Stephen Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Timothy Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Debrorah Devers Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > David Zinni Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Randy Brooks Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Jeff Torode Greater Ft. Lauderdale Diving Association Broward County > Peter Cone Lobster diver Key West > Erich Bartels Mote Marine Laboratory Region wide > Gregor Hodgson wrote: > >> Hi Phil, >> >> I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a >> "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? >> >> Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be >> a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It >> is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs >> given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, >> sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing >> conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging >> will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. >> >> Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and >> only one species of human. >> >> Regards, >> Greg >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan >> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM >> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? >> >> >> Dear Listers, >> With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency >> underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as >> measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or >> Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From simmi_nuern at yahoo.com Mon Feb 20 09:32:24 2006 From: simmi_nuern at yahoo.com (Simone Nuernberger) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 06:32:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Coralliophila In-Reply-To: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Message-ID: <20060220143224.12107.qmail@web60313.mail.yahoo.com> Hi everyone, Can anyone please tell me (as detailed as possible) how the gastropod Coralliophila sp. affects hard corals and how this predation can be visually identified? Do signs of Coralliophila differ with the presence of algae in coral tissue? How can these predation scars be distinguished from coral diseases? One more question: Has anyone encountered a syndrome showing as ?green spots? ? small necrotic patches of light green coloration on the coral surface? Our studies were based in Indonesia and we mostly found these impairments on massive colonies of Porites spp. I appreciate your help! Cheers, Simone *************************************************************************** Simone N?rnberger (M.Sc.) simone_nuernberger at web.de Institute of Biology (Biological Oceanography) University of Southern Denmark DK-5230 Odense M --------------------------------- Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses! From habakuk at nova.edu Mon Feb 20 21:31:43 2006 From: habakuk at nova.edu (Lindsey Klink) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 21:31:43 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Mooring Buoy Questionnaire Message-ID: <20060220213143.2hlykz9pcks048k8@mail.acast.nova.edu> Mooring Buoy Questionnaire I am a Research Assistant with the National Coral Reef Institute (NCRI). I am currently conducting a mooring buoy use and effectiveness study. As part of this study I am compiling detailed information about mooring buoy programs around the world. To collect this information I have created a web-based questionnaire to be filled out by individuals associated with mooring buoy programs. To read more about this effort and to take part in the study, please visit: www.nova.edu/ncri/mooringbuoy.html Thank you very much for your time and any information about mooring buoy programs that you are able to provide! Lindsey H. Klink Research Assistant National Coral Reef Institute Nova Southeastern Univ. Oceanographic Center 8000 N. Ocean Dr. Dania Beach, FL 33004 USA habakuk at nova.edu From dustanp at cofc.edu Tue Feb 21 09:32:11 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Message-ID: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And probably haven't been for a long time. My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses that are far greater, supports this form of denial. Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even be up to R4 if conservation is successful. Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) From ctwiliams at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 11:59:39 2006 From: ctwiliams at yahoo.com (Tom Williams) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 08:59:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060221165939.90967.qmail@web50408.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Agreed - what is left after 50-100years of farm runoff, fertilizer, golf courses, bottle/dynamite blasting, etc. would be a better question - at this stage, every coral should be precious and protected, but they are in the wrong places.... Recent discussions regarding Arabian/Persian Gulf and Red Sea, and East Malaysia, Philippines, and Majuro/Marshalls can be added to the Keys. Costs $50 to reclaim and can sell for $500...OK But some for Dubai Claim that programs are underway to mitigate and compensate after the fact and since fish like the reclamation it is improved. Dr. Tom Williams The original is too long --- Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots > of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are > none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > My point is that before we talk about resilience, > maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of > their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost > over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the > 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing > vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been > talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in > full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to > minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be > worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully > engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, > or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, > some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or > boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no > point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are > the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting > (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. From szmanta at uncw.edu Tue Feb 21 12:35:10 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:35:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] FW: Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813A2D@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Dear Dr. Yamano: I am concerned about the proposed high cost of hard copies of the proceedings. Since I came to UNCW, I have helped our library acquire all of the series of proceedings (most we obtained for free from the various institutions that had published them) so that our students could use these valuable tomes to learn from and plan research. But my institution, as I am sure is true for so many others, does not have enough funds to pay for all the journals and books we need, and such a high cost could mean that they would decide not to buy this proceedings set. I suggest an alternative: The cost of the CD set is reasonable I hope. If the 10thICRS committee would permit non-for-profit academic institutions to make their own hard copies from the CDs, then each institution could find a less expensive way to make a permanent copy for their collections. It should certainly cost less that a few hundred dollars to print out a full copy (and there would be no shipping of heavy books across the seas!). It may not be as nice as a professionally printed copy but it will do the job. At least my university library would not do this unless there was an explicit permission to make such a copy so as not to violate copyright laws. Unless you can find a less expensive printer, I suggest you consider this option. It would be a shame if after all that work on your part, the Proceedings didn't find homes in our libraries. Sincerely, Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of hyamano at nies.go.jp Sent: Mon 2/20/2006 12:10 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Cc: paal.buhl.mortensen at imr.no; i04t0021 at k.hosei.ac.jp; purkis at nova.edu; c.roelfsema at uq.edu.au; rwaller at whoi.edu; p.kench at auckland.ac.nz; jan.helge.fossaa at imr.no; jgoodman at uprm.edu; Qamar.Schuyler at crm.gov.mp; yamano at noumea.ird.nc; andrefou at noumea.ird.nc Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Dear colleagues, Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th ICRS, Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD-ROMs will be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send it to all the participants. For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the print. If the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop printing the Proceedings. More news will be sent as soon as I hear. Best wishes, Hiroya Yamano Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From riskmj at univmail.cis.mcmaster.ca Tue Feb 21 12:45:43 2006 From: riskmj at univmail.cis.mcmaster.ca (Michael Risk) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:45:43 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: Hi Phil. Thanks you for crystallising the discussion, and articulating some of my own concerns. One of the many problems is: "All politics is local." (Tip O'Neil, American politician) It is always easier to blame the external. One of my students was in the back of a hall in the Keys 2-3 years ago during one of those public meetings, and heard a senior Florida reef manager say the decline in the reefs was caused by "All those Canadians driving down here every winter in their SUV's, making Carbon Dioxide." (True quote-no one has to MAKE UP things reef managers say.) Now, it may well be that no one should drive SUV's, but it cannot be said enough times: bleaching has had NOTHING TO DO with the decline of Florida's reefs. Everyone reading this list should repeat after me-and Phil-NOTHING TO DO. And now we see that the new kid on the block, FRRP, will focus only on bleaching. Something is badly wrong. We don't need more science-the science has spoken eloquently. In...2000? (help me, Walt, Phil-when was it?) I was a member of a NOAA panel that evaluated all the reef monitoring programs in the Florida Keys. (Why was there more than one, you may ask? In fact, there were about six.) Our conclusion was that monitoring had done its job. (Monitoring can NEVER identify causes, although a good monitoring program can allow selection of hypotheses.) In this case, the monitoring programs, especially the FMRI program, had successfully documented the regional mass extinction under way in the Keys. And that was the panel's carefully-chosen phrase: "regional mass extinction." We recommended consolidation of the monitoring programs, and an immediate increase in funding designed to rank the various land-based threats, in order that action could be taken. We also recommended an outreach program. That may be the key to the Keys. Every citizen of Florida should be told that: 1. there is big trouble in the Keys, and that 2. the causes are all local. The managers will be reluctant to be too assertive-after all, they have Big Sugar and Big God-knows-what watching them. The impetus has to be bottom-up. To coin a phrase. And we reef scientists have to learn that we score our own points at the expense of the ecosystem. Mike On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but > no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach > a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty > fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about > studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right > in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this > years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the > built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in > continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of > a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the > losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps > there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many > people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not > simply > sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s > > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of > having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats > their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and > denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > > than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or > slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the > R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might > even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor > is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > > -- > Phillip Dustan Ph.D. > Department of Biology > College of Charleston > Charleston SC 29424 > (843) 953-8086 voice > (843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From chwkins at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 13:15:18 2006 From: chwkins at yahoo.com (Christopher Hawkins) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:15:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060221181518.99270.qmail@web32813.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Phil and everyone: Your shot across the bow is welcome by some of us who realize that the biology only holds so much promise for a solution, and that there are a suite of things that need to be employed in tandem with the biophysical sciences to address these issues. I am not sure where I stand about remnancy vs. resiliency. It has a bit of a chicken and the egg connotation to it. Are some reefs remnant because they are resilient? Are they now resilient because they are remnant, for whatever reason? It is a tough one to wrap your head around... I'd like to comment, though, on one part of your posting, and that is the notion that promoting competition among dive shops with a "R" scale. I would think that identifying a reef as an R3 would prompt management to look more towards limiting activities at that site, rather than a "rush to destroy it" approach. At first glance, I might suggest that such a scale would be useful, though. However, it is critical not just to understand the reef condition, but also the users of that reef(s). Specialization theory (a human dimensions tool) offers a framework to do this. With specialization, we know that there are is a continuum of users from low to highly specialized (e.g. PADI Open Water Divers to Nitrox Divers), and that highly specialized users are the ones most likey to obey regulations and support management actions (Ditton, Loomis, Choi, 1992; Salz and Loomis, 2005, Salz, Loomis and Finn, 2001; Bryan, 1977/2000). Directing those users with to an R3, R4, or R5 reef would be then become a management alternative. In addition, management alternatives such as placing only a few mooring bouys at the highest "R" sites, would seem like a good strategy. Of course, all of this depends on identifiying resilient or remnant reefs and then scaling them, which seems to be what is causing some problems. And on understanding the nature of the area's user groups, which is never done very methodically. I have just identified one potential way to like resiliency to a conservation mechanism. I believe there are others, but we need to know all of the tools available. Thanks. Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Marine and Coastal Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And probably haven't been for a long time. My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses that are far greater, supports this form of denial. Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply sewage But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, Carysfort R1, etc Maybe this might help create public awareness and political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even be up to R4 if conservation is successful. Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. From ricksanders at comcast.net Tue Feb 21 13:34:49 2006 From: ricksanders at comcast.net (Rick Sanders) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:34:49 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas References: <6.0.1.1.2.20060118164353.02559c00@mail.waquarium.org> <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CAE9A@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <004b01c63715$7fa4b760$650da8c0@manta> Dear Listers, I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find an image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been unable to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish brown color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each other in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped into more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm in width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if to crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what I am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a copy or link. Thanks very much in advance, Best regards, Rick Rick Sanders Deep Blue Solutions Media, PA 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net From kruer at 3rivers.net Tue Feb 21 15:27:21 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:27:21 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <43FB77A9.7050007@3rivers.net> Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil Dustan. But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true change in direction. There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the amazingly productive Keys (and no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, and no it should never be held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with problems much broader than simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying that the problem with seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important figure easily dispenses with all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and filling, thousands upon thousands of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc etc., See how easy it is. And it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself during some of the countless consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I refused to play along with the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys all would be OK. What a joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo is going to change much is wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions to upgrade the Key West plant to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything measurable? And we were promised that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds good but can't happen on a scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of the Keys as I began to see myself as a part of the problem. The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the Keys ecosystem and manage human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too much attention is focused on a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that most else would be protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's limited funds on a new facility in Key West is going to change much? Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as stand alone systems and the problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands continue to be lost and degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are trying legally to protect the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving activity (and associated impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the state and the state points to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have taken place but it's not working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - but it's obviously not enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live bottom and predictably now hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of miles of slow-degrading poly line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to replace them every year just to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by the tens of thousands daily, fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot long cruise ships plow up the bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone effectively turns a blind eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. Shallow water marine habitats throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are subjected to the disturbing and destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster boats of all types. People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is failing. The rate of loss and anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that is what matters. Large vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's great. But new leadership is needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? Catering to virtually every user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in ecosystem protection or even maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef management in the Keys as a success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New leadership is needed and that leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and address all issues throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And they need to be loudly supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has the most knowledge about what has been lost and is being lost. Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and other lists will lead to something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and misdirected effort. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply > sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > From szmanta at uncw.edu Tue Feb 21 17:33:52 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 17:33:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813BB7@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Hello Mike, Phil and Curtis: The problem with attributing all of the loss of coral in the Florida Keys to local human impacts, as you three have done in your comments, is that the same pattern of loss of live coral is being observed in remote places of the Bahamas and other small Caribbean islands with small or no human populations, no sewage to speak of and no cruise ships. To ignore the dramatic effect coral bleaching and subsequent disease outbreaks, on top of overfishing, have had on Keys and northern Caribbean corals since the mid-1990s and especially since the severe 1997-1998 back-to-back bleaching events, is not helpful to conservation or management efforts. Bleaching has reached reefs that are distant from direct human impact as well as the Keys, with similar effects on both. Overfishing is far more pervasive than water quality degradation because boats go everywhere to extract the last lobster and grouper. The healthiest Caribbean reefs, if one judges that based on live coral cover, that I have seen in a long while are those in the lower Caribbean where they have, for hydrographic and climatic reasons, not been as impacted by either bleaching or major storms: Reefs on the S side of Curacao and Bonaire still have more coral now than what I remember for places like PR and the USVI back in the 1960s and 1970s. And they have high coral cover within 1 km of where the cruise ships docks and next to the outflow from the desalination plant. And they have very high rates of coral recruitment and no algae even on boulders with no Diadema, and few fishes. Go figure! There are many reefs on the GBR with water quality conditions far worse than in the Florida Keys (in terms of turbidity, nutrient levels and such variables) with much higher coral cover and diversity. Ken Anthony is even showing corals on these turbid reefs feed on the detritus and have higher growth rates than corals on more offshore reefs. Florida reefs have a disadvantage of being at the northern limits of the climatic window for coral well being in the Atlantic province, with way too many severe winter and summer storms. These geographic limitations have existed for thousands of years and have limited coral reef growth over Holocene time frames. When I first visited Nassau reefs in 1971 and the Florida reefs during the 1977 symposium, when my frame of reference was Puerto Rican reefs, my opinion of Florida/Bahamas reefs was that they were puny and depauperate. Now they are even more depauperate. That is no excuse to abuse them, but to ignore the climatic factor is not helpful towards restoring or protecting them (if that is possible). Multiple factors are at work, and a single quick fix will not do the trick. Over-simplification and trying to crucify a single factor will not help society deal with these complex issues. Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Curtis Kruer Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 3:27 PM To: Phil Dustan Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil Dustan. But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true change in direction. There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the amazingly productive Keys (and no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, and no it should never be held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with problems much broader than simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying that the problem with seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important figure easily dispenses with all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and filling, thousands upon thousands of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc etc., See how easy it is. And it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself during some of the countless consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I refused to play along with the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys all would be OK. What a joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo is going to change much is wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions to upgrade the Key West plant to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything measurable? And we were promised that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds good but can't happen on a scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of the Keys as I began to see myself as a part of the problem. The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the Keys ecosystem and manage human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too much attention is focused on a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that most else would be protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's limited funds on a new facility in Key West is going to change much? Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as stand alone systems and the problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands continue to be lost and degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are trying legally to protect the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving activity (and associated impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the state and the state points to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have taken place but it's not working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - but it's obviously not enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live bottom and predictably now hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of miles of slow-degrading poly line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to replace them every year just to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by the tens of thousands daily, fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot long cruise ships plow up the bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone effectively turns a blind eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. Shallow water marine habitats throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are subjected to the disturbing and destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster boats of all types. People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is failing. The rate of loss and anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that is what matters. Large vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's great. But new leadership is needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? Catering to virtually every user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in ecosystem protection or even maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef management in the Keys as a success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New leadership is needed and that leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and address all issues throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And they need to be loudly supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has the most knowledge about what has been lost and is being lost. Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and other lists will lead to something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and misdirected effort. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I'd like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it's patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there's a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we've know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply > sewage......But still we look for bright spots. I think it's because it's > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It's been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > than resiliency, I'd favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc... Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it's a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From knudby at gmail.com Tue Feb 21 16:48:14 2006 From: knudby at gmail.com (Anders Knudby) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:48:14 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] instrument to measure water depths Message-ID: <551b8dba0602211348y1e58fb60y20da80776e676217@mail.gmail.com> Hi coral listers, I am looking for an instrument that I can use to measure consecutive substrate depths on a reef. Ideally something that I can place on or just above the substrate, press a button to take a measurement (for direct display or preferably download later), and then move on to the next point of measurement and press the button again. Quick and simple. I have found a couple of instruments (pressure transducers) that almost fit that specification, but not quite, and I would like to hear if anybody out there have already found exactly what I am looking for. If so please let me know. (sorry to post a monitoring-related question in the middle of the more important remnancy discussion, seems out of place, but I'm trying to do my PhD..... thus perhaps scoring my own points at the expense of the ecosystem) Best regards, Anders Knudby -- Anders Knudby PhD Candidate Department of Geography University of Waterloo, Canada phone: +1 519 888 4567 x7575 e-mail: knudby at gmail.com From pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr Tue Feb 21 18:52:43 2006 From: pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr (sandrine job) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:52:43 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] Coral farming In-Reply-To: <09599ED7-B06F-4340-9BBE-76B3B0CA8921@uh.edu> Message-ID: <20060221235243.68069.qmail@web25108.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Dear all, I am seeking for any information related to coral farms, especially farms made in situ. The best would be to send me email adresses or web sites of Coral Farms. Thanks to you all, Cheers, Sandrine JOB Eric Borneman a ?crit : Hello Hiroya: Thank you for the update on the Proceedings and I am greatly looking forward to seeing them and appreciate the work that has certainly been required to produce them. I am curious, though, about the printing. If the CD-ROM is already formatted, as it should be given the nature of the formatting required for submitted material, then any of thousands of print-on- demand printers should be able to produce bound volumes by a print-on- demand cost that can be from 1 to many thousands of copies. For example, one print-on-demand company found with a quick google search will print hardback copies (6x9) with full color covers, dust jackets, up to 500 pages and provide 10 free copies of the book for US $1000 and this includes free CD e-books and 30% royalties for each copy sold if they are the distributor and 50% of CD-ROM sales. I consider this to be quite expensive. I think others on this list I know who have written full color books over 500 pages would agree that we would not be writing (or selling) much if printing costs and selling prices were this high. While I don't have the details of the manuscript, the minimum order and costs seem very out of line with what I know about book publishing (which isn't much), having written two books. I think the cost of book series, such as Corals of the World, which are similarly large, colorful (which previous Proceedings have never been) and well made indicates what is possible. The costs of scientific publication have always been a mystery to me, to say the least, and in terms of most journals, an outrageous racket. If, however, there are very few orders for text-based copies I can see that the cost would be high, but I see no reason for it to be impossible for even one copy to be produced given the nature of POD technology today. I hope others on the list who have published books could comment further. Best, Eric Borneman Dept. of Biology and Biochemistry University of Houston Science and Research Bldg. II 4800 Calhoun Houston, TX 77204 On Feb 19, 2006, at 11:10 PM, hyamano at nies.go.jp wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th > ICRS, > Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. > > We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD- > ROMs will > be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send > it to > all the participants. > > For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. > However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the > print. If > the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop > printing the Proceedings. > > More news will be sent as soon as I hear. > > Best wishes, > > Hiroya Yamano > Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS > Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings > > ---- > Hiroya Yamano > UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement > BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia > Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 > Also at NIES > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.T?l?chargez la version beta. From hyamano at nies.go.jp Tue Feb 21 19:23:08 2006 From: hyamano at nies.go.jp (hyamano at nies.go.jp) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:23:08 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <20060222002306689.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Dear coral-listers, Thank you very much for sending comments, especially on the hard copies of the 10ICRS Proceedings. I forwarded the messages to the 10ICRS program committee and asked reconsideration. We will decide the contact information for the purchase and also the price of the CDs for non- participants, in addition to the price of the hard copies. I appreciate to have received some orders of the hard copies, but please do not send more orders to me before the next news. We should be very pleased if you could let us have some more time for the details. I will let you know the news as soon as I hear. Again, thank you very much for your cooperation and patience. Best wishes, Hiroya ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html ---- From cat64fish at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 20:49:22 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:49:22 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB77A9.7050007@3rivers.net> Message-ID: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi everyone, Certainly an interesting discussion on the fate of the Florida reefs. Not being from the US, and never having had the opportunity to visit the Florida Keys, I am unable to fully appreciate the extent fo the damage that has been done to that rich ecosystem. Mike, as usual, you have cut through the bs and succinctly stated the problem in the Florida Keys. I suspect similar situations occur wolrdwide, where reef systems are in decline (for example, I've heard from fishermen how their reefs have been destroyed by blast fishing caused by fishermen from the "other" island). While sitting on the fence, and agreeing that there needs to be more science directed at the reef ecosystem, the impacts would seem to far, far outweigh the need for more exacting science. Conservation, and perhaps even the more exacting word, preservation, is needed, if reefs are to survive the human onslaught. Someone mentioned (I am not sure of it is on this list or somewhere else) that it was a good ting that there are many coral species and only one human. Be that as it may, that one species has the capacity to totally destroy the diversity that exists today. Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place. MPAs managed in isolation, was something else that was brought up in this discussion. While it is undeniable (at least to me) that MPAs do help in the conservation of coral reefs and other marine ecosystems, the term MPA itself is an "isolationist" word, as it implies some sought of boundary. "Enlightened management plans" that look at the totality of the marine system, that will conserve and sustain our marine resources, understanding that it is inter-connected and intricately linked system, are what is needed. I suspect that part of the reason that scientists treat reef systems in isolation is that if they did not, then there would be no "scientific" papers (as we know them) in existence. The momentum of publishing, or doing publishable research, is probably what is limiting the science from expanding beyond its narrow confines. Reef managers on the other hand, must not only be biologists, but people managers, ecosystem managers, fund managers, and sometimes, visionaries, all rolled into one. Good luck finding such people in great enough quantity to "manage" even the existing MPAs. To round up, I agree with Mike that "people power" may be the way to go to get the necessary protection for our marine resources. "People cannot love, what they do not know", or so I've been told. While I cannot "love" the Florida Keys, I do love the coral reefs in my own backyard, and sometimes the wrangling that goes on between scientists, conservationists and politicians, while the reefs are slowly but surely being degraded, is more than I can bear. Holding out for coral reefs the world over Jeff --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. From Craig.Bonn at noaa.gov Wed Feb 22 09:44:49 2006 From: Craig.Bonn at noaa.gov (Craig S Bonn) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:44:49 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43FC78E1.10008@noaa.gov> Hi listers, I recently accepted a position with the Dry Tortugas NP where I will be coordinating a monitoring program within a new 47 square mile research natural area recently established within park boundaries where all consumptive practices will be prohibited. Diving and snorkeling will still be allowed and a system of mooring buoys has been established for boaters to tie up to within the RNA. I have worked in the Tortugas for the past six years and have witnessed myself the degradation that is occurring there-- some of the reefs are almost completely dead and covered in algae while others (Sherwood Forest in the northern portion of the TER) while healthier in terms of percent cover are also exhibiting signs of degradation and that it may simply be not how but when these reefs will suffer to the point of no return. I also know that there are so many variables involved in what is happening to our reefs on a global scale that the task at hand almost seems impossible especially when you listen to the doom sayers who state that the worlds reefs will be gone in a matter of years if nothing is done to correct the mistakes we have all made with regards to stewardship of our planet. If we take a look at the variables involved: water quality, over fishing, vessel groundings, seagrass dieoffs, urchin dieoffs, bleaching, coral disease, the possibility that our planet and our oceans are warming with subsequent melting of our polar regions and of course one of the biggest problems in my opinion is complete lack of concern by many. Lets admit it, some people simply dont care and I think this has a lot to do with the state our world is in now, cultural, religious, and political differences also play a role here but Im not going to get into that. Anyway, Im looking forward to the challenges that this new position will present to me and my colleagues and I guess what Im asking for is some advice. I am very concerned as many of you are as well and I would like to part of a new approach to management issues of not only the coral reefs of the world but our entire world. I believe that education an outreach could play an important role and will be one of my priorities along with others. Any advice would certainly be appreciated, perhaps efforts focused on small areas can have a spillover effect in terms of getting the public really involved, but I think its going to have to be a worldwide involvement if we really want to improve things. But its only a start, we have to finish, and send the right messages to generations of scientists coming behind us to better improve things so that they, and we, can perhaps begin to see positive changes taking place for the planet we all call home. thanks Craig Michael Risk wrote: >Hi Phil. > >Thanks you for crystallising the discussion, and articulating some of >my own concerns. One of the many problems is: > >"All politics is local." (Tip O'Neil, American politician) > >It is always easier to blame the external. One of my students was in >the back of a hall in the Keys 2-3 years ago during one of those public >meetings, and heard a senior Florida reef manager say the decline in >the reefs was caused by "All those Canadians driving down here every >winter in their SUV's, making Carbon Dioxide." (True quote-no one has >to MAKE UP things reef managers say.) > > >Now, it may well be that no one should drive SUV's, but it cannot be >said enough times: bleaching has had NOTHING TO DO with the decline of >Florida's reefs. Everyone reading this list should repeat after me-and >Phil-NOTHING TO DO. > >And now we see that the new kid on the block, FRRP, will focus only on >bleaching. Something is badly wrong. We don't need more science-the >science has spoken eloquently. > >In...2000? (help me, Walt, Phil-when was it?) I was a member of a NOAA >panel that evaluated all the reef monitoring programs in the Florida >Keys. (Why was there more than one, you may ask? In fact, there were >about six.) > >Our conclusion was that monitoring had done its job. (Monitoring can >NEVER identify causes, although a good monitoring program can allow >selection of hypotheses.) In this case, the monitoring programs, >especially the FMRI program, had successfully documented the regional >mass extinction under way in the Keys. And that was the panel's >carefully-chosen phrase: "regional mass extinction." > >We recommended consolidation of the monitoring programs, and an >immediate increase in funding designed to rank the various land-based >threats, in order that action could be taken. We also recommended an >outreach program. > >That may be the key to the Keys. Every citizen of Florida should be >told that: >1. there is big trouble in the Keys, and that >2. the causes are all local. > >The managers will be reluctant to be too assertive-after all, they have >Big Sugar and Big God-knows-what watching them. The impetus has to be >bottom-up. To coin a phrase. > >And we reef scientists have to learn that we score our own points at >the expense of the ecosystem. > >Mike > >On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 > Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Coral List, >> I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about >> >>healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but >>no >>one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And >>probably haven't been for a long time. >> >> My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach >>a >>true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my >>calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their >>living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The >>Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty >>fast >>too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about >>studies, >>monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right >>in >>front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, >> >>even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to >>protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this >>years >>ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or >>look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to >>think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the >>built >>it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in >>continuing >>to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of >>a >>far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the >>losses >>that are far greater, supports this form of denial. >> >> Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long >>time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps >>there >>are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many >>people >>fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage >>system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not >>simply >>sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s >> >>more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is >>hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, >>sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of >>having >>a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? >> >> It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats >>their >>young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and >>denial. >> The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather >> >>than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) >>that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or >>slower >>in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the >>R >>scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, >>Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and >>political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between >> >>dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 >> >>when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might >>even >>be up to R4 if conservation is successful. >> Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline >> >>downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we >>need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor >>is >>wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. >> Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just >>imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From kruer at 3rivers.net Wed Feb 22 12:27:54 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 10:27:54 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813BB7@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <43FC9F1A.5020204@3rivers.net> Dr. Szmant, Thanks for the note. You are a reef researcher and you love to research and explore reefs around the world and you agree that Florida's reefs are under multiple stresses, including due to their geographic location. I too began exploring Keys reefs in the 1970s and have witnessed the dramatic changes there. My approach is simply that management should start by dealing with the stresses that can realistically be managed (routine, easily identified, cumulative, physical impacts in particular and habitat degradation in general) and quit using issues like climate change as an excuse to do virtually nothing on a local level. It's getting old. To me that would be like us agreeing that due to its importance we should all start working towards stopping the melting of the Greenland ice sheets, and ignore local problems that unequivocally are trashing coastal resources on a daily basis. And don't forget that in the 1980s and 1990s the mantra from many outspoken reef types was that wastewater and other nutrients were killing Keys reefs. I participated in a couple of recent exchanges wherein a federal manager suggested that researchers were not provididng needed information for reef management (and more research was needed), while at the same time a researcher was stating that managers were not using data made available by researchers - and that direction needed to be given for what information was needed. Both argued that more research and information is needed for proper reef management and this is what I reject - the excuses for not curtailing destructive human practices that are obviously and directly degrading reef ecosystem resources. And I believe that the notion that we can completely decipher to the nth degree (or ever really know) what is going on with reefs (and many other natural systems) is a loser from the get-go, and very self-serving. I don't ignore climate change as you suggest (and I doubt that others do) but recognize and embrace the notion that it's here to stay and nothing that you or I can do individually will change that - but you and others prominent in the scientific and management community can individually make changes and help force changes that will help protect and conserve reef resources. If you truly want to help coral reef ecosystems argue for improved funding for broader and more effective management based on what we do know and less funding for research to try to learn (forever) what we don't know. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Szmant, Alina wrote: > Hello Mike, Phil and Curtis: > > The problem with attributing all of the loss of coral in the Florida > Keys to local human impacts, as you three have done in your comments, is > that the same pattern of loss of live coral is being observed in remote > places of the Bahamas and other small Caribbean islands with small or no > human populations, no sewage to speak of and no cruise ships. To ignore > the dramatic effect coral bleaching and subsequent disease outbreaks, on > top of overfishing, have had on Keys and northern Caribbean corals since > the mid-1990s and especially since the severe 1997-1998 back-to-back > bleaching events, is not helpful to conservation or management efforts. > Bleaching has reached reefs that are distant from direct human impact as > well as the Keys, with similar effects on both. Overfishing is far more > pervasive than water quality degradation because boats go everywhere to > extract the last lobster and grouper. The healthiest Caribbean reefs, if > one judges that based on live coral cover, that I have seen in a long > while are those in the lower Caribbean where they have, for hydrographic > and climatic reasons, not been as impacted by either bleaching or major > storms: Reefs on the S side of Curacao and Bonaire still have more > coral now than what I remember for places like PR and the USVI back in > the 1960s and 1970s. And they have high coral cover within 1 km of > where the cruise ships docks and next to the outflow from the > desalination plant. And they have very high rates of coral recruitment > and no algae even on boulders with no Diadema, and few fishes. Go > figure! > > There are many reefs on the GBR with water quality conditions far worse > than in the Florida Keys (in terms of turbidity, nutrient levels and > such variables) with much higher coral cover and diversity. Ken Anthony > is even showing corals on these turbid reefs feed on the detritus and > have higher growth rates than corals on more offshore reefs. Florida > reefs have a disadvantage of being at the northern limits of the > climatic window for coral well being in the Atlantic province, with way > too many severe winter and summer storms. These geographic limitations > have existed for thousands of years and have limited coral reef growth > over Holocene time frames. When I first visited Nassau reefs in 1971 > and the Florida reefs during the 1977 symposium, when my frame of > reference was Puerto Rican reefs, my opinion of Florida/Bahamas reefs > was that they were puny and depauperate. Now they are even more > depauperate. That is no excuse to abuse them, but to ignore the > climatic factor is not helpful towards restoring or protecting them (if > that is possible). Multiple factors are at work, and a single quick fix > will not do the trick. Over-simplification and trying to crucify a > single factor will not help society deal with these complex issues. > > Alina Szmant > > ******************************************************************* > Dr. Alina M. Szmant > Coral Reef Research Group > UNCW-Center for Marine Science > 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln > Wilmington NC 28409 > Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 > Cell: (910)200-3913 > email: szmanta at uncw.edu > Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta > ****************************************************************** > > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Curtis > Kruer > Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 3:27 PM > To: Phil Dustan > Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency > > Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil > Dustan. > But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true > change in direction. > > There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the > amazingly productive Keys (and > no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, > and no it should never be > held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). > > And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with > problems much broader than > simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying > that the problem with > seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important > figure easily dispenses with > all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and > filling, thousands upon thousands > of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc > etc., See how easy it is. And > it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself > during some of the countless > consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I > refused to play along with > the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys > all would be OK. What a > joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo > is going to change much is > wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions > to upgrade the Key West plant > to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything > measurable? And we were promised > that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds > good but can't happen on a > scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of > the Keys as I began to see > myself as a part of the problem. > > The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the > Keys ecosystem and manage > human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too > much attention is focused on > a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that > most else would be > protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's > limited funds on a new > facility in Key West is going to change much? > > Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as > stand alone systems and the > problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands > continue to be lost and > degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are > trying legally to protect > the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving > activity (and associated > impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the > state and the state points > to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have > taken place but it's not > working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - > but it's obviously not > enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live > bottom and predictably now > hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of > miles of slow-degrading poly > line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to > replace them every year just > to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by > the tens of thousands daily, > fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot > long cruise ships plow up the > bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone > effectively turns a blind > eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. > Shallow water marine habitats > throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are > subjected to the disturbing and > destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster > boats of all types. > > People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is > failing. The rate of loss and > anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that > is what matters. Large > vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's > great. But new leadership is > needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? > Catering to virtually every > user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in > ecosystem protection or even > maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef > management in the Keys as a > success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New > leadership is needed and that > leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and > address all issues > throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And > they need to be loudly > supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has > the most knowledge about what > has been lost and is being lost. > > Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and > other lists will lead to > something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and > misdirected effort. > > Thanks. > > Curtis Kruer > > > > > Phil Dustan wrote: > >>Dear Coral List, >> I'd like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion > > about > >>healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > > >>one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And >>probably haven't been for a long time. >> >> My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can > > reach a > >>true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my >>calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their >>living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The >>Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > > >>too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about > > studies, > >>monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right > > in > >>front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, >>even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to >>protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > > >>ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it's patchy, or not here, or >>look over there, there's a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to >>think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > > >>it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in > > continuing > >>to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > > >>far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the > > losses > >>that are far greater, supports this form of denial. >> >> Well, the water is too polluted and we've know this for a very > > long > >>time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > > >>are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many > > people > >>fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage >>system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not > > simply > >>sewage......But still we look for bright spots. I think it's because > > it's > >>more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is >>hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, >>sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of > > having > >>a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? >> >> It's been said by many that the coral reef science community > > eats their > >>young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and > > denial. > >> The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather >>than resiliency, I'd favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) >>that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or > > slower > >>in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the > > R > >>scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, >>Carysfort R1, etc... Maybe this might help create public awareness and > > >>political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between >>dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 >>when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > > >>be up to R4 if conservation is successful. >> Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the > > baseline > >>downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it's a problem that we >>need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor > > is > >>wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. >> Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > > >>imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? >> Phil >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From albert at ecology.su.se Wed Feb 22 09:46:53 2006 From: albert at ecology.su.se (Albert Norstrom) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:46:53 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Thanks Phil for starting what must be the most interesting discourse held on these boards in a long time. Some extremely thought-provoking comments all around. Yes, the Keys do seem to have it real bad, but this isn't a problem isolated to the Caribbean. I've conducted field trips in the Phillippines and Zanzibar during the past years and we are witnessing moderate-to-severe degradation in those regions too. The general feeling diving on reefs off the North coast of the Philippines is that of entering a ghost town. Fish abundnace is frighteningly low (you'd be lucky to see a parrotfish above 35cm after a week of diving), and community changes are rapidly manifesting themselves (we have observed some sites where soft corals are taking over completely following the bleaching event of '98). The causes behind this seem to be a confounding mixture of synergistic factors, just as in the Caribbean. As Alina points out, local factors alone (such as a decline water quality due to human terrestrial activities) cannot be ascertained to be the single driving forces behind the changes. As such, what speaks for a sudden improvement in reef conditon if we manage to address that single point - when the problems of climate change and lack of grazers (due to a brutal historical overfishing and disease) loom overhead? I found Jeffrey Lowes comment "Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place." interesting. How about I play devils advocate with you all for awhile. A few months ago, a very interesting point of discourse popped up during an internal discussion group at the department. The notion that ecosystems are intrinsically unpredictable and characterized by alternative system regimes is gaining more and more weight in the coral ecology community. It is thus interesting that we as a group (and society as a whole) are continually so ill-prepared for when such shifts occur. For 20 or so odd years the Caribbean has been dominated by macroalgae regime that seems pretty resilient itself (probably due a strengthening of certain internal feedback loops in that system over the years). I'm curious to know if any serious attempt has been made to investigate what goods and services are available from these new regimes (e.g. what kinds of fish can be harvested), and if fishing communities have adapted in any way, and if so are they succesful, to these new conditions? For sure, I'm an advocate for proactive measures to foster resilience of coral ecosystems. (Already an array of tools have been suggested, MPA's being the most popular at the moment, but in order to succeed with this I think we have to witness a more fundamental change in our economic and social structures. How on earth will MPA's solve anything if market economy dictates that its economically viable to continue overfishing an already ecologically depleted fish stock in the regions outside these sanctuaries? Forgive the side-note, back to being devils advocate again.) But it seems equally important to create institutional frameworks that can foster adaptivity in social systems. The new macroalgal regimes could be the norm for the Caribbean for the next unforeseeable future, much as (from my own personal observations, and research) other regimes are becoming more common in other biogeographic regions. Is it "fatalistic" to start looking around us and maybe accept that coral ecosystems are dynamic and alternative regimes are not something aberrant, but a phenomenon we could (or should) get accustomed to as conditions change. Maybe the pressing question is, not if we can restore reefs to some abstract baseline level, but can we predict these new regimes (I think never completely, seeing the complex nature of ecosystsm) and can we adapt to them? /Cheers Albert Norstr?m PhD Student Dept. Systems Ecology Natural Resource Management Group Stockholm University SE-106 91 Stockholm Sweden Tel: +46 (0)8 16 44 84 Email: albert at ecology.su.se Fax: +46 (0)8 15 84 17 Personal page: http://www.ecology.su.se/staff/personal.asp?id=119 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffrey Low" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 2:49 AM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency > Hi everyone, > > Certainly an interesting discussion on the fate of the Florida reefs. Not being from the US, and never having had the opportunity to visit the Florida Keys, I am unable to fully appreciate the extent fo the damage that has been done to that rich ecosystem. > > Mike, as usual, you have cut through the bs and succinctly stated the problem in the Florida Keys. I suspect similar situations occur wolrdwide, where reef systems are in decline (for example, I've heard from fishermen how their reefs have been destroyed by blast fishing caused by fishermen from the "other" island). > > While sitting on the fence, and agreeing that there needs to be more science directed at the reef ecosystem, the impacts would seem to far, far outweigh the need for more exacting science. Conservation, and perhaps even the more exacting word, preservation, is needed, if reefs are to survive the human onslaught. > > Someone mentioned (I am not sure of it is on this list or somewhere else) that it was a good ting that there are many coral species and only one human. Be that as it may, that one species has the capacity to totally destroy the diversity that exists today. > > Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place. > > MPAs managed in isolation, was something else that was brought up in this discussion. While it is undeniable (at least to me) that MPAs do help in the conservation of coral reefs and other marine ecosystems, the term MPA itself is an "isolationist" word, as it implies some sought of boundary. "Enlightened management plans" that look at the totality of the marine system, that will conserve and sustain our marine resources, understanding that it is inter-connected and intricately linked system, are what is needed. > > I suspect that part of the reason that scientists treat reef systems in isolation is that if they did not, then there would be no "scientific" papers (as we know them) in existence. The momentum of publishing, or doing publishable research, is probably what is limiting the science from expanding beyond its narrow confines. Reef managers on the other hand, must not only be biologists, but people managers, ecosystem managers, fund managers, and sometimes, visionaries, all rolled into one. Good luck finding such people in great enough quantity to "manage" even the existing MPAs. > > To round up, I agree with Mike that "people power" may be the way to go to get the necessary protection for our marine resources. "People cannot love, what they do not know", or so I've been told. While I cannot "love" the Florida Keys, I do love the coral reefs in my own backyard, and sometimes the wrangling that goes on between scientists, conservationists and politicians, while the reefs are slowly but surely being degraded, is more than I can bear. > > Holding out for coral reefs the world over > > Jeff > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From smiller at gate.net Wed Feb 22 11:15:20 2006 From: smiller at gate.net (Steven Miller) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:15:20 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef condition discussion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43FC8E18.1090108@gate.net> All politics is local? Tell that to Acropora and other coral species (and Diadema too) after Caribbean-wide waves of disease and bleaching helped push the system in Florida, already at the northern limit geographically of coral distribution in this part of the world, to - or over - the edge. Alina's response hit all the high points about why it's necessary to consider complexity (ecologically and I would add politically). Much of this was previously addressed in a series of letters published in Science Magazine (Science 17 June 2005 308) including a summary of work already accomplished or underway related to management of water quality in the Keys. To try and advance this discussion (without writing anything lengthy) rather than dwell too much on the negative, I think it's important to ask, "Is there any good news on the coral reef front?" Well, mostly not. BUT, we know we can do better with MPAs to help manage resource use (fishing, boating, diving) and to - at the very least - watch (research) what happens to fish and benthic communities when no-take protection is enforced. I like the idea that a 75 pound grouper is more valuable as a tourist attraction than on dinner plates, but some might argue that point. And many don't know this, but there remain spectacular places in the Keys with high cover and corals in relatively good condition, just not offshore where so much was previously considered in "good" condition because large stands of Acropora persisted in the days before bleaching and disease. Where are these sites? They are found near s;yc0bhokr npobno rouubs and xoyub=- hpbsl ngpui. Sorry, that was too easy, but the sites are real. Also, we know that Acropora is a fast-growing species and that under the right set of circumstances we could see massive proliferation over relatively short time scales, maybe even sufficient to match sea level rise that will result from global warming. Of course, coastal areas will also flood and that will degrade water quality, which might prevent more immediate coral growth - there's that complexity thing again. So what's my take home message? The sky might be falling - remember the chicken little thread so many years ago? You can duck and cover or you can do what you can to try and make things better. Personally, I think we are in trouble because environment (and not just coral reefs, but also our air and water and if some have their way endangered species too) is not a political issue these days. How does it get political? Environmentalism needs to become a social movement the way it was in the 1960s and 1970s. That will only happen when a thousand grassroots efforts at the local level merge and become something bigger. In that regard, I agree that all politics is local. Best regards. Steven Miller, Ph.D. Research Professor UNC Wilmington And a possibly relevant plug... see the trailer for a new movie about the Evolution and Intelligent Design Circus at www.flockofdodos.com, a feature documentary written and directed by former marine biologist Dr. Randy Olson (and exec produced by me). The movie is ultimately about communication of science in today's media landscape. Coral reef scientists have much to learn about communicating for the benefit of coral reefs and not personal agendas or career advancement (my personal and I'm sure provocative opinion, and not directed to the current thread). From delbeek at waquarium.org Wed Feb 22 20:27:56 2006 From: delbeek at waquarium.org (Charles Delbeek) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:27:56 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> References: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20060222152219.02a7f8d0@mail.waquarium.org> >It is very interesting to follow this discussion and draw parallels >with closed system reef aquariums. The problems of algal overgrowth, >nutrient load, temperature, water motion, nutrient uptake, >ultraviolet intensity, coral bleaching, coral tissue loss are ALL >encountered in closed systems. Though we do not have all the answers >we do know enough to control some of these factors and what effects >changing such factors can have on our miniature "ecosystems". I >strongly believe that some of the answers to problems facing wild >reefs can be mirrored in closed reef systems, and perhaps can yield >some answers as well. The rapid advancements in coral husbandry >opens up tremendous opportunities for coral researchers to >manipulate systems within a controlled setting. Aloha! J. Charles Delbeek M.Sc. Aquarium Biologist III Waikiki Aquarium, University of Hawaii 2777 Kalakaua Ave. Honolulu, HI, USA 96815 www.waquarium.org 808-923-9741 ext. 0 VOICE 808-923-1771 FAX From cat64fish at yahoo.com Wed Feb 22 21:25:26 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 10:25:26 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Message-ID: <20060223022526.80199.qmail@web35310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi Albert and others .... Does that phrase "... let me play devil's advocate ..." mean that I am the angel? ... :P Anyway, frivolity aside, you raise a very pertinent point, that coral ecosystems are dynamic, and that different "regimes" can arise, oftentimes from similar starting points. I am sure someone can list a series of papers and research showing this to be the case. However, what is the acceptable change that we (at this point in time) are willing to accept? I find myself asking, more and more, not questions that are quantifiable, like "What percent of coral cover is on the reef?" Or "How many species are there?" but "Can I accept seeing the change of *my* coral reefs from the reefal system to [an algal dominanted one] / [rubble reef] / [artificial reef]?". Monitoring seems to be something that almost *everyone* does. I do it ... and I've been doing for almost 20 years now (*geez*). But where has that gotten me ... or rather the reefs? I know it is in decline ... *everyone* who has worked in the field for any length of time knows this. Do we need to conduct another study to confirm the results of a study that has confirmed the decline of the reefs, which was conducted to confirm the results of a previous study? Even though the formation of coral reef system (or any other ecosystem, for that matter) may be inherently unpredictable - I don't think the question is whether we can predict what it will change into, but can we live with it changing, in the first place? Knowing that it was through our inaction that the changes occurred? Adaptation would be an inevitable result of change (or else you would die out), so I don't think it is a major part of the equation. On the "local" vs. "global" issue, I will sit on the fence on this one - I see the merits of both "camps". My feeling is that what occurs locally, will affect things globally. Take carbon emissions, for example. If, and this is a BIG IF, everyone were to convert to less carbon emitting vehicles, would [human-input to the magnitude of] global warming be reduced? If the answer is yes (to me it is a "yes"), then what needs to be in place before this conversion can come about? The changes would be in three main areas: - Political : "Local" politicians must push for the necessary legislative changes to limit the carbon emissions in all aspects of industry, and to enfrce them - Infrastructure : "Local" businesses must be ready to support technology that emits less carbon - Lifestyle changes need to be made : The most "local" aspect of all ... the people must embrace low / no carbon emiision technology (that might mean giving up that 10-litre, SUV-built-like-a-tank-off-roader-that-I-drive-in-the-city car) There would be global issues, of course .... even with carbon reducing industries, the shear magnitude of the human population would probably over whelm the ecosystems. The "global" issue, to my mind, isn't the fact that warming is occurring, but what the world (as in its people) are going to do about it. Cheers, Jeff --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. From martin_moe at yahoo.com Wed Feb 22 23:52:45 2006 From: martin_moe at yahoo.com (Martin Moe) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 20:52:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20060222152219.02a7f8d0@mail.waquarium.org> Message-ID: <20060223045245.67761.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com> Hi all, I?m always hesitant to comment in these threads since I?m not a ?real? coral reef scientist, but Steven Miller?s comment ?You can duck and cover or you can do what you can to try and make things better.? stimulated me to weigh in on this. There are efforts now underway to try to make things better on Florida?s coral reefs, but has been exceedingly difficult to get support for these efforts. As Steven said, the factors negatively affecting the coral reefs of Florida, Bahamas and the Caribbean are many and complex, but there are things that can be done to improve specific reef areas and perhaps even reef ecosystems. Site restoration of reef areas impacted by boat groundings and protection of the reefs through good management (MPA establishment) and water quality improvement are very important and essential to the future of the reefs, but even more important is to achieve ecological restoration. This may be an impossible task but we won?t know that if we don?t try. We can?t restore the reefs to the conditions that were present 100 or even 50 years ago but I am of the opinion that it is possible to achieve some level of ecological restoration if we make a serious effort to do so. I attended a talk that Alina Szmant gave in 1999 on her coral reef research and she greatly impressed me with the take home message of her talk that the decline of the reefs was caused more by the loss of biodiversity than anthropogenic nutrients. That made a lot of sense to me, and subsequent research indicates that she is correct. The loss of the Diadema sea urchins in 1983-4, the keystone herbivores of the Western Atlantic coral reefs, shifted the ecology of the reefs from coral dominance to macro algae dominance, a well accepted premise by most coral reef scientists. In addition, on Florida reefs, the almost total loss of populations of adult spiny lobster removed an important predator of coralivorus snails and other small predators that feed on living coral tissue and create opportunities for introduction of coral disease. If we were really serious about coral reef restoration, we would eliminate lobster fishing, recreational and commercial, on all offshore reefs past a certain distance from shore, perhaps 3 miles, and most important, really get serious about researching the possibility of restoration of pre plague population levels of Diadema on the reefs. These are not impossible tasks, but they do require concerted effort and scientific collaboration. And the lobster issue is also fraught with political mine fields. But these are real possibilities for ecological improvement of our coral reefs and to not explore them fully is grossly irresponsible. Ken Nedimyer and I did a experimental re establishment of Diadema on two small patch reefs in the Upper Keys in 2001 supported by the Florida Keys Marine Sanctuary (http://www.fknms.nos.noaa.gov/research_monitoring/report/diadema/diadema/.html) and this study well illustrated the positive effect a marginal population of Diadema can have on a Florida reef in the short space of one year. We are now working with the Mote Marine Laboratory to expand this work. There has also been work by The Nature Conversancy in the Keys on similar projects and there have been other studies as well. So research on ecological restoration has begun and hopefully will produce an effective reef restoration program while there is still reef left to restore. Martin A. Moe, Jr. Adjunct Scientist, Mote Marine Laboratory> > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From simmi_nuern at yahoo.com Thu Feb 23 04:10:55 2006 From: simmi_nuern at yahoo.com (Simone Nuernberger) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 01:10:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Coralliophila - Thank you Message-ID: <20060223091055.63682.qmail@web60313.mail.yahoo.com> Hello again, I just wanted to thank all the people who took the time to reply. Your emails were extremely helpful! Thank you very much! Best regards, Simone *************************************************************************** Simone N?rnberger (M.Sc.) simone_nuernberger at web.de Institute of Biology (Biological Oceanography) University of Southern Denmark DK-5230 Odense M --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. From andy_wb at email.com Thu Feb 23 04:25:39 2006 From: andy_wb at email.com (Andy Woods-Ballard) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:25:39 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Instrument to measure water depths. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060223092544.AF9DE1795C@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hi Anders Working in Mexico with Global Vision International, we used a handheld depth sounder, Plastimo Echotest II. I believe this has a range of about 80m. But more importantly for you, I think it is submersible and water proof to depths of 50m. It will not however store data and might need to be used with a slate for recording. Check out the product to be sure, but I hope this helps. Andy Woods-Ballard From ckappel at stanford.edu Thu Feb 23 12:49:05 2006 From: ckappel at stanford.edu (Carrie Vanessa Kappel) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:49:05 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas Message-ID: <1140716945.43fdf59126a88@webmail.stanford.edu> Hi Rick, >From your description, it sounds like what you were seeing was likely Microdictyon marinum, which has been observed to have strong summertime blooms on reefs in The Bahamas. We also saw high densities of Microdictyon during our surveys on North Andros in July 2002 and San Salvador in July 2003. It's not clear why this seaweed has increased so dramatically on Bahamian reefs in recent years, but I'd guess it's due to an interaction between nutrient runoff and grazing. Brian Lapointe and coauthors suggested that Microdictyon marinum might benefit from submarine groundwater discharge, whereby nutrients (in this case dissolved inorganic nitrogen) from land are transported to reefs offshore via groundwater fluxes through porous limestone (Lapointe et al. 2004. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. 298:275-301). The Littler and Littler Caribbean Reef Plants book has a nice picture of this species and others with which it might be confused. Cheers, Carrie Carrie Kappel Postdoctoral Fellow National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis University of California Santa Barbara 735 State Street, Suite 300 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 kappel at nceas.ucsb.edu 805.966.1677 w 805.892.2510 f 831.869.1503 m Permanent email address Carrie.Kappel at alumni.brown.edu ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:34:49 -0500 From: "Rick Sanders" Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas To: Message-ID: <004b01c63715$7fa4b760$650da8c0 at manta> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Dear Listers, I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find an image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been unable to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish brown color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each other in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped into more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm in width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if to crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what I am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a copy or link. Thanks very much in advance, Best regards, Rick Rick Sanders Deep Blue Solutions Media, PA 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net ------------------------- From Bprecht at pbsj.com Thu Feb 23 14:14:47 2006 From: Bprecht at pbsj.com (Precht, Bill) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:14:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef condition discussion Message-ID: <8511092CB6C11C4BB2632F61A82C620C03FD68B2@MIAMBX.pbsj.com> Dear Coral-List: I have read with great interest the recent thread on Florida's reef woes. In Steven Miller's recent message, he reminds us of the "reefs at risk" thread that discussed the very same issues on the Coral-List during June and July of 1998. It was in-part, as an outcome of that discussion that Steven and I decided to write a book chapter on this very subject entitled: Precht, W.F. and Miller, S.L.(in press) Ecological shifts along the Florida reef tract: the past as a key to the future: in Aronson, R.B. (ed) Geological Approaches to Coral Reef Ecology. Springer Verlag, NY If anyone is interested in a pre-print of this chapter please send me an email and I'll send it along. Cheers, Bill Precht Senior Scientist PBS&J - Division of Ecological Sciences Miami, FL From abaker at rsmas.miami.edu Thu Feb 23 14:26:34 2006 From: abaker at rsmas.miami.edu (Andrew Baker) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:26:34 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Laboratory Technician Position in Coral Molecular Ecology In-Reply-To: <10313196.1129601388953.JavaMail.SYSTEM@us-webcti01> Message-ID: <00e601c638af$0e8bc0f0$3d6fab81@DellD600> Funding is available for a Laboratory Technician in coral molecular ecology at the Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science (RSMAS) at the University of Miami, Florida, USA (www.rsmas.miami.edu ). The successful candidate will assume primary responsibility for the management and day-to-day operations of a molecular laboratory specializing in the ecology and systematics of corals and their symbiotic dinoflagellates ("zooxanthellae"), but will also be involved in physiological experimental work at the University's Experimental Hatchery facility, and coral reef fieldwork in Florida and elsewhere. Specific duties include extracting, purifying, archiving and analyzing DNA from coral samples, ordering and management of scientific supplies and reagents, managing undergraduate volunteers and interns, and working with the principal investigator, postdoctoral associate and graduate students on collaborative research projects. Ongoing research, funded principally by the US National Science Foundation, the Pew Institute for Ocean Science, and the Wildlife Conservation Society, uses both field survey and experimental approaches to study the responses of reef corals to climate change. The position is funded for three years, subject to satisfactory performance. The successful candidate will also be encouraged to pursue independent research and publication in related fields of interest. Candidates should have a Master's degree in molecular systematics, molecular ecology and/or population genetics, but candidates with Bachelor's degrees and an equivalent level of molecular experience will also be considered. Ideal candidates should be SCUBA-certified and be able to pass a physical examination to obtain scientific diver certification with the American Academy of Underwater Sciences (AAUS). Experience manipulating computer models of climate change (e.g., Hadley dataset) and/or maintaining outdoor aquarium systems is desirable, but not required. Position includes benefits and a retirement package. Please submit a current CV, names and contact information of three references, and a cover letter indicating research interests and experience electronically as a single .pdf file to Andrew Baker at abaker at rsmas.miami.edu. Applications are being accepted immediately. The position will remain open until filled. The University of Miami is an EEO/AA Employer. Please post this advertisement as appropriate. ___________________ Andrew C. Baker, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Division of Marine Biology and Fisheries Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science University of Miami 4600 Rickenbacker Cswy. Miami, FL 33149, USA Voice: +1 (305) 421-4642 Fax: +1 (305) 421-4600 From milviapin at yahoo.com Thu Feb 23 18:37:21 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:37:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Microdyction Message-ID: <20060223233721.57467.qmail@web50313.mail.yahoo.com> Dear listers, Large abundance of this algae were found in Namu atoll, Marshall islands, in November 2004. Lagoon and ocean sides were covered by the alga. No nutrients inputs are known in this slighlty populated atoll (300 people). Other outgrowth of this alga ave been noticed in different atolls although not to this extent. Thank you silvia Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. From ctwiliams at yahoo.com Fri Feb 24 00:43:55 2006 From: ctwiliams at yahoo.com (Tom Williams) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 21:43:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Microdyction In-Reply-To: <20060223233721.57467.qmail@web50313.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060224054355.9921.qmail@web50412.mail.yahoo.com> I worked in Majuro on ADB job for water supply/wastewater. Please provide more details. Simply put - where do they get the nitrate for the algal growth. 300 people = say =>75kg of nitrate + plus agriculture = NHNO People on septic tanks?? or seawater flushing?? Green grass lawns anywhere?? ?Any previous military operations on island?? Follow the nitrate. --- Silvia Pinca wrote: > Dear listers, > Large abundance of this algae were found in Namu > atoll, Marshall islands, in November 2004. Lagoon > and ocean sides were covered by the alga. No > nutrients inputs are known in this slighlty > populated atoll (300 people). Other outgrowth of > this alga ave been noticed in different atolls > although not to this extent. > Thank you > silvia > > > Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. > NRAS - Marshall Islands > Nature Resources Assessment Surveys > Research and Education for Conservation > spinca at nras-conservation.org > www.nras-conservation.org > > > --------------------------------- > Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get > pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Fri Feb 24 09:37:55 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:37:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] resiliency vs. "remnancy" vs. sustainability Message-ID: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> It would seem most people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what they used to be. The word resiliency is another word for resilient, which means an ability to quickly (usually) recover from a bad or unnatural condition--in the present case, we might assume from a previously pristine (i.e., uncorrupted by civilization) condition. I wonder if there are any such reefs left. I'm not so sure the word is being used correctly in our fellowship (more below). Although "remnancy" is not a real word, one would infer that our colleague Phil's intended usage would be as a means to describe the degree or condition of the reef after it has been adversely affected by civilization (more colloquially: trashed); that is, how it can be described as a remnant of its former "self" (biome?). I'm not so sure describing how much a reef has been adversely affected from its former condition is useful, though, since (as was pointed out) in many cases the reef in question may never have been adequately described (have any?), especially since they're always changing (evolving) anyway, thus few cases in which to measure past against current condition (I guess that's what started the whole discussion). But don't get me wrong: we should understand what is adversely affecting the reefs so we can stop or ameliorate the condition. I'm just not so sure "remnancy" has much practical application for science, although for political purposes it is probably perfectly practical. Instead, since we want to keep coral reefs in existence, and we want to provide them with the proper environment and support their vitality, where we can, perhaps a better word for purposes of marshaling our efforts is sustainability (I know I'm not the first to suggest this). Shouldn't we sustain the reefs until we remedy what ails them? (Now there's a concept: clean up the environment!) We can't really do anything to promote resiliency (how do you measure such an ecologically difficult concept?), although a conducive environment might be sustained or managed (i.e., "cleaned up") to allow full (how to measure?) resiliency. Is it possible to describe how all the members of the coral ecosystem interact to contribute to an integral resiliency? This is extremely difficult stuff, yet I would agree the goal is laudable and should be pursued. Okay, I know, the word sustain might imply leaving everything as it is, rather than making things better, but I'm just not comfortable with the word resiliency or "remnancy." Just my two cents... Cheers, Jim From deevon at bellsouth.net Fri Feb 24 10:10:09 2006 From: deevon at bellsouth.net (DeeVon Quirolo) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 10:10:09 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] resiliency vs. "remnancy" vs. sustainability In-Reply-To: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> References: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20060224100227.026dd6d8@bellsouth.net> Ok ok, I'll add my two cents. At this time for coral reefs, I think that what we need are efforts to RESTORE coral reefs, including immediate efforts to reduce heavy physical impacts and habitat destruction, as well as improve water quality from local and regional pollution sources and reduce global warming (although we may have already crossed the critical threshold there). We already know that corals need clear clean nutrient free waters to thrive and that they do not do well when battered by various user groups and of course natural events such as storms. I think the reef resiliency approach is flawed because it proposes to study healthy reefs, and looks the other way while those corals that need our help most are ignored. Applying what we know already to these reefs on the part of current managers would do wonders. There you have it. Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Executive Director, Reef Relief At 09:37 AM 2/24/2006, Jim Hendee wrote: >It would seem most people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what >they used to be. > >The word resiliency is another word for resilient, which means an >ability to quickly (usually) recover from a bad or unnatural >condition--in the present case, we might assume from a previously >pristine (i.e., uncorrupted by civilization) condition. I wonder if >there are any such reefs left. I'm not so sure the word is being used >correctly in our fellowship (more below). > >Although "remnancy" is not a real word, one would infer that our >colleague Phil's intended usage would be as a means to describe the >degree or condition of the reef after it has been adversely affected by >civilization (more colloquially: trashed); that is, how it can be >described as a remnant of its former "self" (biome?). I'm not so sure >describing how much a reef has been adversely affected from its former >condition is useful, though, since (as was pointed out) in many cases >the reef in question may never have been adequately described (have >any?), especially since they're always changing (evolving) anyway, thus >few cases in which to measure past against current condition (I guess >that's what started the whole discussion). But don't get me wrong: we >should understand what is adversely affecting the reefs so we can stop >or ameliorate the condition. I'm just not so sure "remnancy" has much >practical application for science, although for political purposes it is >probably perfectly practical. > >Instead, since we want to keep coral reefs in existence, and we want to >provide them with the proper environment and support their vitality, >where we can, perhaps a better word for purposes of marshaling our >efforts is sustainability (I know I'm not the first to suggest this). >Shouldn't we sustain the reefs until we remedy what ails them? (Now >there's a concept: clean up the environment!) We can't really do >anything to promote resiliency (how do you measure such an ecologically >difficult concept?), although a conducive environment might be sustained >or managed (i.e., "cleaned up") to allow full (how to measure?) >resiliency. Is it possible to describe how all the members of the >coral ecosystem interact to contribute to an integral resiliency? This >is extremely difficult stuff, yet I would agree the goal is laudable and >should be pursued. > >Okay, I know, the word sustain might imply leaving everything as it is, >rather than making things better, but I'm just not comfortable with the >word resiliency or "remnancy." > >Just my two cents... > > Cheers, > Jim > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From dustanp at cofc.edu Fri Feb 24 12:23:45 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 12:23:45 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Message-ID: <43FF4121.6040400@cofc.edu> Dear Colleagues, Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote and less remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own history and ecology. Let?s face it: The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human reproductive success. Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the radar screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities (along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying and we have got to do more. As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we are going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect?.. And the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost every reef on the planet. This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal agency, is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think can be done right now as well as over the long term? Thanks, Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Fri Feb 24 15:58:39 2006 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Gene Shinn) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Not what they used to be Message-ID: >>I have to agree with Jim Hendee when he wrote, "It would seem most >>people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what they used to >>be." As a geologist I can honestly agree that Holocene reefs are >>not what they "used to be" during the Pleistocene, and they were >>not what they "used to be" earlier during the Pliocene, and they >>certainly were not what "they used to be" during the Lower >>Cretaceous, (and there were hardly any during the Upper Cretaceous) >>and then there are the well known Permian reefs which were not what >>they "used to be" during the Cambrian. >>Yes, nothing is what "it used to be." May be we just need to take a >>longer view of things. Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida Marine Science Center (room 204) 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu Fri Feb 24 14:42:13 2006 From: rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu (Richard Grigg) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:42:13 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <43FF4121.6040400@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let?s face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 03:45:17 2006 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E. Strong) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 03:45:17 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <4400191D.6040105@noaa.gov> Hi Phil, Even Plenary talk at Ocean Sciences here in Hawaii this week...George Philander...claims the evidence is not that clear... Cheers, Al Richard Grigg wrote: >Phil, > > Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > > Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Colleagues, >> Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >>thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >>years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >>continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >>thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. >> We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote >>and less >>remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >>different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >>nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >>diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >>Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >>cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >>signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >>blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >>history and ecology. >> >>Let?s face it: >> The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >>varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >>ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >>record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >>in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >>have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >>outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >>its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >>seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >>in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >>spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >>Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >>reproductive success. >> >> Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the >>radar >>screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >>of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >>opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >>(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >>health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >>reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >>earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >>and we have got to do more. >> >> As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >>resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >>scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >>everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >>resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >>ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >>with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >>ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. >> >> As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we >>are >>going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >>list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >>should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >>scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >>could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >>example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >>of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >>health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >>concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >>resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >>simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >>lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >>still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >>exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >>sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect?.. And >>the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >>had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >>every reef on the planet. >> >> This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal >>agency, >>is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >>reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >>process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >>in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >>on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >>forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >>of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >>can be done right now as well as over the long term? >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 04:14:00 2006 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E. Strong) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 04:14:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] "Caribbean" Bleaching Verification needed - Moderate to Light to No Message-ID: <44001FD8.1030507@noaa.gov> Information sought: Over the next month Coral Reef Watch is hoping to finalize feedback from the field for the 2005 Caribbean bleaching event for issuing a report. At present this appears to be the most well documented bleaching event ever conducted....for all of you who have provided information to date: THANK YOU! Nevertheless we are still missing those "negative" reports that are needed to fill out the other end of the bleaching spectrum in areas where minimal bleaching was observed. From our HotSpot DHWs we expect those regions might include (but not necessarily limited to): ...Bermuda ...Bonaire...Curacao...Aruba and possibly ...Belize. Can any of you provide verification to Coral Reef Watch over the next few weeks for these more fortunate areas?? Please send your info to: Mark Eakin and/or Jessica Morgan. Thanks, Al Strong Coral Reef Watch From mtupper at picrc.org Sat Feb 25 02:00:14 2006 From: mtupper at picrc.org (Mark Tupper) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 16:00:14 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <000e01c639d9$23c94fc0$63c8c814@TUPPER> Rick Grigg wrote: "Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations." Isn't that just a matter of semantics? There are many dead or dying reefs in the Pacific, the Indian Ocean and Caribbean, and probably everwhere that coral reefs are found. So one could say, as Phil Dustan did, that "coral reefs are dying all over the world". However, since there are also healthy reefs in all of these places, someone who's agenda did not include coral reef conservation could just as easily say "coral reefs are healthy all over the world." I have heard exactly that claim from several politicians and agency spokespeople in the last few years. Rick is right, though, in that sweeping generalizations are not helpful to management of coral reefs (or any other resource). If one "side" makes sweeping generalizations to support their view, it becomes easier for others to support an opposing viewpoint with their own generalizations. I think that it's important to be as specific and factual as possible when emphasizing the need for coral reef conservation. It's much harder to argue against specifics than generalities. Having said that, I liked Phil's idea about finding a set of action items we could use to move forward now. Cheers, Mark Dr. Mark H Tupper, Senior Scientist Palau International Coral Reef Center PO Box 7086, Koror, Palau 96940 tel (680) 488-6950; fax (680) 488-6951 and Adjunct Research Associate University of Guam Marine Laboratory UOG Station, Mangilao, Guam 96923, USA tel (671) 735-2375; fax (671) 734-6767 From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 07:16:55 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 07:16:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Message-ID: <14f78414cb3b.14cb3b14f784@noaa.gov> Hiya, Phil, Concerning your quote: "Lots of us have struggled with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind." I think this is a more tractable approach when you consider finite financial resources and manhours (peoplehours?) to throw at the problem. What I'm getting at is that defining an organism or ecosystem in terms of the "normal" environment (i.e., that which promotes optimal vitality) may be an easier way to present the problem to the public. For instance, look at the Goreau and Hayes (1994) concept and Al Strong's presentation and further elucidation of the concept to the public on how HotSpots (unseasonably high sea temperatures) coincide with bleaching events: it's an easier way for the public to understand large-scale environmental stress and the result, rather than trying to explain all the actual physiology behind the phenomenon, which is still not totally understood. I believe Basset Maguire had in mind a "niche response structure" idea years ago which described organisms as a response to their environment, and if I remember correctly, he tried to quantify that for selected species. Maybe the same approach is valid for coral ecosystems. That may be easier than trying to define "ecosystem vitality" in terms of each organism's "health," a difficult concept to quantify. Defining "ecosystem health" would seem to be fraught with unending debate on what constitutes each contributing organism's normal (uncompromised?) lifecycle. (Again, I'm not saying we shouldn't try to undertake such research, and unending debate is what all science needs and likes--I'm mainly trying to get at a way to awaken the public and policy makers.) Anyway, I would like to hear of the approaches you mention, and I would vote that defining the recent historical and current physical environment for each major coral reef area as one of the 8-10 action items you mention. This should be a fundamental part of any "ecosystem vitality index," at least in my mind. This would also give us a platform from which to say, "This is how it was when corals were doing well, and this is how it is now, and corals are not doing well," without having to explain the physiology of why this is so. This would also give us a solid comparison basis for understanding why one reef ecosystem in the Pacific is doing swimmingly (so to speak), and another is not. I think the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force and the Interntational Coral Reef Initiative and NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation Program and other groups have already listed this as a goal, but I think it's an important one for your list. In fact, if you cross-compare a lot of the conservation groups' action items, I think you could probably come up with 8-10 items in a prioritized list most would agree upon. In other words, a lot of people are already working on these problems, and it is extremely difficult to make decisions on what activities to fund, but I think what you are also saying is we need to shake the tree a little harder. I have no suggestion on how to do that! [Mea culpa: We at NOAA/AOML are already compiling physical environmental data and establishing environmental indices, so this whole rap of course appears self-serving and provincially contrived. Hey, it's all I know, and at least I'm being honest about it!] Okay, that makes 4 cents from me... :) Cheers, Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil Dustan Date: Friday, February 24, 2006 12:23 pm Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 > Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most > interesting > thread. It also reminds me...[etc.] From cat64fish at yahoo.com Sat Feb 25 08:52:17 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:52:17 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <4400191D.6040105@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <20060225135217.56489.qmail@web35313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> It boggles the mind (ok, just mine) that some one at a PLENARY talk could say something like this. To say that there is evidence of reefs that have been impacted, and reefs that have not, I can understand ... but the "evidence is not clear"? .... *shakes head in disbelief and disgust* Jeff "Alan E. Strong" wrote: Hi Phil, Even Plenary talk at Ocean Sciences here in Hawaii this week...George Philander...claims the evidence is not that clear... Cheers, Al Richard Grigg wrote: >Phil, > > Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > > Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Colleagues, >> Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >>thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >>years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >>continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >>thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. >> We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote >>and less >>remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >>different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >>nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >>diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >>Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >>cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >>signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >>blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >>history and ecology. >> >>Let?s face it: >> The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >>varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >>ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >>record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >>in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >>have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >>outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >>its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >>seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >>in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >>spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >>Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >>reproductive success. >> >> Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the >>radar >>screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >>of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >>opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >>(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >>health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >>reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >>earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >>and we have got to do more. >> >> As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >>resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >>scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >>everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >>resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >>ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >>with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >>ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. >> >> As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we >>are >>going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >>list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >>should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >>scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >>could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >>example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >>of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >>health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >>concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >>resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >>simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >>lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >>still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >>exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >>sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >>the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >>had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >>every reef on the planet. >> >> This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal >>agency, >>is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >>reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >>process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >>in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >>on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >>forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >>of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >>can be done right now as well as over the long term? >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 1GB free storage! From lesk at bu.edu Sat Feb 25 11:03:06 2006 From: lesk at bu.edu (lesk at bu.edu) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:03:06 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060225110306.0iwtfp3s0kcg84sw@www.bu.edu> Dear Colleagues, It is extremely important that we converge on a common and consistant view on coral reef health that we can convey to the lay public. We must also speak precisely when referring to any particular symptom of coral reef health on a global scale. I challenge anybody to produce data demonstrating that the tropical west Atlantic coral reefs have improved in condition or remained at level condition, by any measure you wish, over the past 25 years. That does not mean that the changes are irreversible or unprecedented in deep time, Gene. It only means that it is a sad thing for us and for our childern that this is happening at this particular time, for we now cause this decline knowingly and deliberately, recovery will likely be a very lengthy process, and we are seem to be doing our best to inhibit even that. The long view will always be there to make us feel better in some existential sense, but it is no balm to those of us who wish to enjoy and benefit from coral reefs during our lives and the lives of our children and grandchildren. Indo-Pacific coral reefs exhibit a vigorous ability to bounce back from denudation or phase shift, so long as there is a stable physical substratum on which they can rebuild (dynamite rubble piles are not very good for this). However, the proportion of reef surface that is in a disturbed, regenerating state at any given time, and more importantly, the size-frequency distribution of these disturbances, looks very odd and very different than when I was a graduate student. Are we using the right data to characterize and track these changes, Rick? Because the Pacific is still more robust than the Atlantic, there is much of concern that we can choose to overlook if that is our bias. We'd better be careful not to be too easily reassured by the positive signs that coral reefs in the Pacific could hold their own, given the chance...because they by and large are not being given the chance. The pace and extent of bleaching alone is awesome. Who is coming forward to call this a non-event, or our response to it exagerated and misplaced? Who is saying that overfishing is something that will have no effect on reefs worth worrying about, and that we can ignore it? Who is saying that the industrialization of reef destruction is not a real thing worth keeping in check? Who is saying with confidence that the earth is not getting warmer, that bleaching is not more frequent and severe, or that corals will definitely adapt to these changes and that the world shall remain much as wonderful as it has always been for us, no matter what we do? So what gentle hand is it, exactly that Gene and Rick wish to lay upon the scene? Les Kaufman From szmanta at uncw.edu Sat Feb 25 08:50:30 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 08:50:30 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 3 References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From anderson at africaonline.co.tz Sat Feb 25 12:38:51 2006 From: anderson at africaonline.co.tz (Jim Anderson) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 20:38:51 +0300 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence - Effect of Bombing References: Message-ID: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> Dear Listers, Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is sibylle at chumbeisland.com] Jim Anderson, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. From manfrino at reefresearch.org Sat Feb 25 12:55:45 2006 From: manfrino at reefresearch.org (Carrie Manfrino) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:55:45 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Summer Coral Reef Internship and Conservation Programs at the Little Cayman Research Centre Message-ID: <014101c63a34$b5315f60$2f01a8c0@CPQ10443900021> Summer Coral Reef Research Internship -a four-week program through Rutgers University Study Abroad at the Little Cayman Research Centre >From July 15 - August 10 2006, the Central Caribbean Marine Institute (CCMI) offers a four-week voluntary research internship program through Rutgers University's Institute of Marine & Coastal Sciences. This program is an opportunity for graduate students and conservation professionals (a few advanced undergraduates may be accepted) to gain advanced underwater research experience. The goals of the program are to train participants in coral ecology protocols and to provide scientifically usable data to assist CCMI in its ecosystem monitoring and coral disease research initiatives. For more information, go to www.reefresearch.org and click on educational and field programs where students will find full details on program cost, credits, registration process, and activities. An Introduction to Tropical Marine Conservation & Field Research Methodologies - a one-week Tropical Marine Conservation course at the Little Cayman Research Centre >From June 23-30 2006, the Central Caribbean Marine Institute offers a one week course at the Little Cayman Research Centre designed to introduce undergraduates to the biology and ecology of tropical marine habitats and to the basics of field research. Students will come away with a strong understanding of the conservation challenge associated with protecting rapidly declining coral reef systems and be prepared to take more advanced research courses or internships. For more information on this course offered through Kean University's Travelearn program, go to www.reefresearch.org and click on educational and field programs where students will find full details on program cost, credits, registration process, and activities. Central Caribbean Marine Institute www.reefresearch.org Dr. Carrie Manfrino, President P.O. Box 1461 Princeton, NJ 08540 Ph:(609) 933-4559 Caribbean Headquarters Little Cayman Research Centre North Coast Road P.O. Box 37 Little Cayman, Cayman Islands (345) 926-2789 From kruer at 3rivers.net Sat Feb 25 14:22:48 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:22:48 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence References: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> Message-ID: <4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net> Folks, In just a few days we've gone from a discussion of reef problems and degradation in the Florida Keys, and how best to approach them after all these years, to a global (and even geologic time, which I too find foolish) focus promoted by US scientists. And the more global the view, the more complicated and diverse the opinions about what is going on and what should be done (if anything) become. And I suspect that those who still question worldwide reef problems are limiting their view to the role of climate change. So what a great irony today to read Anderson's concern of dynamite fishing increasing on reefs in Tanzania. While US NOAA scientists continually move the target and encourage us to think big. Keys problems don't rise to the level of dynamite fishing but the end result may be the same. My suggestions are simply to do what we can locally in places like the Florida Keys to deal with obvious problems, not mysteries - but we're not even close to doing what is possible to protect and conserve the place. In light of the fact that the budget of NOAA's Habitat Conservation Division and other programs have been cut nationally that will only be more difficult in the future. Time to come home. Curtis Kruer ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim Anderson wrote: > Dear Listers, > > Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from > episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet > bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any > prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars > that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? > > The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the > fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast > becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are > pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district > governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those > who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that > network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is > sibylle at chumbeisland.com] > > Jim Anderson, > Dar es Salaam, > Tanzania. > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From phoetjes at cura.net Sat Feb 25 20:45:29 2006 From: phoetjes at cura.net (Paul Hoetjes) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence In-Reply-To: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> 4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net References: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> 4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net Message-ID: <44010839.4050303@cura.net> This has been a most stirring discussion, and I believe very much to the point of what those of us who are extremely worried about the future of coral reefs as we know them, are trying to do. As Les said we really need a common and consistent viewpoint, and that will need to focus down on particulars and concrete activities, and not stay afloat on the 'big' picture, whether it be global or geological. Though thank you Alina for putting things so eloquently depressing. Local people are experiencing this unprecedented (Gene: in the sense that we humans have never experienced it before, AND we are actually causing it) disaster that is befalling our reefs. Whether it be in Florida, or Tanzania, or down here in Curacao in the Southern Caribbean, those of us old enough to know the reefs at the time when reef science really started coming into its own in the sixties, we experienced their demise (not decline, let's face it the reefs of the sixties are dead, what we still have are pale ghosts of them) in disaster after disaster. First it was spearfishing with world championship tournaments moving from place to place in the sixties and early seventies, when everyone was spearfishing and within ten years every big fish was gone anywhere that was accessible to divers. Then (in the Caribbean) the Diadema die-off, completely changing the reef as we knew it, and followed by an insidious wasting away of shallow water reefs (and I mean shallow, 1-4 ft deep, yes there was actual reef at those shallow depths in those days in the Caribbean!). Then the white-band disease neatly removed miles and miles of Acropora cervicornis forests. Then in the nineties bleaching and yellow-blotch disease started in on our remaining reef infrastructure. What was left standing was now called 'coral reef', and it was still magnificent, and although we did start to worry by then, nobody really believed that the dire predictions of the ISRS meeting in the early nineties that we would lose 20-40 % of our (still remaining) reefs within a generation, would come true. But, we had white plague and more bleaching and increasing numbers of hurricanes wreaking havoc on the weakened reef structure, and 15 years later we have a prediction that in twenty years we will loose 40 % of what is left if we don't do something. What we should say is that in another 20 years we may have 10 % of our reefs left! Sorry for this somewhat lengthy introduction, but we cannot keep on pretending everything is hunky dory, and oh, since we don't have any reefs left that are a shadow of what they once were, let's call some of the hardiest weed patches that are so adapted to inhospitable circumstance that most of the changes going on elsewhere left them mostly untouched, let's call those 'resilient' reefs, and focus all our meager resources on protecting those. Oh, oh, and guess what, since nothing seems to have been able to kill these little hardy patches, protecting them is a good bet since we're likely to be succesful even if we can't stop all the causes that are killing all the other reefs. I feel that this focusing on 'resilient' reefs is confusing the issues. It's a giving up on trying to stop the causes of reef death. We can be happy that there are still some areas that look remotely like a reef used to, but we can't lower our standards and forget about what a reef once was. We need to keep fighting to protect all our coasts with an eye to reef preservation, not just those pieces of coast with 'resilient' reefs and elsewhere giving a free reign to developers and erosion and overfishing and irresponsible boating and pollution and septic tanks. Those need to be controlled effectively, everywhere, leaving only a few 'resilient' areas where people can still behave unsustainably. That is what resilience should mean, places that you can't destroy because they've already been completely trashed (and we have plenty of those). If we can achieve only that much, restrict people's activities directly affecting reefs to recreational reserves where they can't do much damage, then we can maybe start worrying about really combating global warming instead of just talking about it. As it stands, all our reefs will have been killed long before global warming will really get it's licks in. So, speaking from an area where reefs are still in somewhat better shape than elsewhere in the region, in summary: There are no reefs left in anything approaching untouched condition. Diseases, and (because of?) overfishing, insiduous pollution and siltation, not just bleaching, have taken care of most of the original reefs. Focusing protection on those reefs that apparently had least need of protection over the past 40 years (resilient reefs) is a cop out. We need to protect all reefs (or what can still with leniency be called reefs). We need to protect them from such 'easy' (well, at least clear cut) things to control as human destructiveness and gregariousness. PS, I'm writing this from a non-airconditioned house in the tropics, I drive a fuel efficient small car, so I do my bit against global warming (though I do have a computer and a television and leave more lights on than strictly necessary, sorry). Cheers, Paul Hoetjes Dept. of Environment Netherlands Antilles Curtis Kruer wrote: >Folks, > >In just a few days we've gone from a discussion of reef problems and degradation in the Florida >Keys, and how best to approach them after all these years, to a global (and even geologic time, >which I too find foolish) focus promoted by US scientists. And the more global the view, the more >complicated and diverse the opinions about what is going on and what should be done (if anything) >become. > >And I suspect that those who still question worldwide reef problems are limiting their view to the >role of climate change. So what a great irony today to read Anderson's concern of dynamite fishing >increasing on reefs in Tanzania. While US NOAA scientists continually move the target and encourage >us to think big. Keys problems don't rise to the level of dynamite fishing but the end result may be >the same. My suggestions are simply to do what we can locally in places like the Florida Keys to >deal with obvious problems, not mysteries - but we're not even close to doing what is possible to >protect and conserve the place. In light of the fact that the budget of NOAA's Habitat Conservation >Division and other programs have been cut nationally that will only be more difficult in the future. > Time to come home. > >Curtis Kruer > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > >Jim Anderson wrote: > > >>Dear Listers, >> >>Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from >>episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet >>bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any >>prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars >>that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? >> >>The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the >>fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast >>becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are >>pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district >>governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those >>who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that >>network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is >>sibylle at chumbeisland.com] >> >>Jim Anderson, >>Dar es Salaam, >>Tanzania. >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> -- Paul C. Hoetjes Senior Policy Advisor Department of Environment & Nature (MINA) Ministry of Public Health & Social Development (VSO) Schouwburgweg 26 (APNA building) Cura?ao Netherlands Antilles tel. +(599-9)466-9307; fax: +(599-9)461-0254 e-mail: paul at mina.vomil.an =========================================== -- http://mina.vomil.an -- =========================================== This message has been scanned for Spam and Virus by CuraNet. From jhocevar at dialb.greenpeace.org Sat Feb 25 22:31:44 2006 From: jhocevar at dialb.greenpeace.org (John Hocevar) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:31:44 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] consensus statement References: Message-ID: <277f01c63a85$3ddc58b0$fc02a8c0@Bolivar> Greetings, I'm enjoying this discussion. While it is admittedly frustrating to see some of the conversation focusing on semantics rather than the seriousness of the threats to coral reefs, it would appear that most, if not all, would agree that there is an observable trend of reef decline, and that anthropogenic impacts are among the primary causes. Global Warming and its more direct and potentially devastating cousin Acidification would present enormous challenges for conservationists even if these burdens were being placed on the shoulders of pristine reefs. Of course, that is hardly the case, as erosion, high nutrient run-off, and toxic pollution have already taken a toll. Fishing has done a job on reefs as well, whether by removing algal grazers or even by dynamiting or poisoning. There is no doubt need for exploration of the degree to which the above statement is true in different regions, and the degree to which the above factors are responsible for past declines or future threats. For the most part, though, it seems that this has been sufficiently well established. Is the general public aware of this situation? Are policy makers placing solutions high enough on their agendas? Clearly not. I strongly support Phil Dustan's proposal for production of a consensus statement (in this case, probably a sign-on statement) of actions that can be taken to conserve coral reefs. My hope is that this community will not shy away from addressing the need to reduce consumption of fossil fuels, unsustainable fishing practices, or coastal development. Human behaviors are contributing to reef decline, so policies must be created to guide changes in those behaviors. If those who best understand the problems are unwilling to propose these changes, there is little hope that this decline can be slowed, much less halted or turned around. As someone who decided to leave academia for conservation advocacy, I can offer to help bring together environmental organizations to broadcast your concerns and recommendations to a wider audience. A coalition of a broad spectrum of organizations representing millions of people working to communicate a solution-oriented scientific consensus on the coral reef crisis would be a strong force for reef conservation. (This would not occur in a vacuum; any successful collaboration of this kind would utilize existing networks and build on past statements.) John Hocevar Oceans Specialist Greenpeace USA Office: 512 454-6140 Cel: 512 577-3868 From estherborell at yahoo.co.uk Sun Feb 26 02:13:43 2006 From: estherborell at yahoo.co.uk (Esther Borell) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 07:13:43 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? In-Reply-To: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <20060226071343.24908.qmail@web86912.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hi Alina and all others, I think your letter has not only contextualized our ?reef problems? but also hit a nerve. Its time to change our dogma. Its time to strip down the fancy costume of sustainability. I sometimes even wonder whether this word was invented to keep social economists in business. I don?t want to see them unemployed, the contrary, but I believe that sustainability, as a concept needs to be reinvented. The red queen is running faster than ever, unable to not only maintain her position, but even starting to fall behind. I am currently based in southeast Sulawesi, alleged centre of coral reef biodiversity but I am placing a safe bet that 70% of reefs here in the Spermonde archipel are very ill, losing their diversity, maybe not like rainforests in %s, not yet but it?s probably only a matter of time ? on an ecological, not geological time scale. Diving reminds me of walking along the Via Appia in Rome, looking at the remains of the past, providing faint evidence of how ?it?used be. Many of the reefs here look like rubble deserts. To see fish one has to pay extra entrance fee. I have counted 7 bombs on a one and a half our dive the other day. Reefs here don?t seem to suffer from bleaching (ironically I am researching just that) but from structural devastation (bombing), insane overfishing and severe eutrophication. Most corals of the inner and middle shelf within this archipelago are heavily infested by all sorts of borers. Its like cancer. Seemingly healthy and flourishing to the outside, but then unable to withstand January and February storms, which have eroded large patches of reefs and signs of algal succession are already on the way. The only way to sustain would be to stop ANY reef and coastal related activities until further notice. But this of course is just na?ve wishful thinking. The present resilience vs remnance discussion has been largely gravitated around the Keys and I noticed that most if not all participants were ?1st world scientists?. I am sitting in the middle of the 3rd world biodiversity hot spot wondering where our ?hotspot affilated collegues? are. I am guessing, that many are oblivious to this discussion due to the lack of adequate internet access, which at least here in Indonesia is still a novelty, slow and expensive. But they need to be integrated ? asap. Reef decline here is more than the problem of policy implementation, local politics and steak holder conflicts. It?s the consequence on the tail of a much bigger issue, an issue of local culture and education. We, the 1st world scientists live in a world of health insurances, unemployment insurances and mortgages. Hooray to those that can afford to recycle their rubbish. It?s a luxury. In Germany every household has more rubbish bins than fingers on one hand. Here in Indonesia we have none. Rubbish is dumped into the ocean, onto the reefs or disposed of ?thermally? (I know ...weve been there - still are?). My point is, we are living in a world that has conditioned us to think ahead, trying to not only predict but also prepare for future, featuring perspectives extending beyond that of individuality - a concept as such alien to indonesien society. Family rules. Thinking future is much more confined to the individual and future predictions seldom appear to penetrate any further then to the F1 generation. Producing offsprings to secure the future. Offsprings are the real existing currency.And can we blame them? I cant. The 62 yr old woman in the states really didn?t need the 12th child. That?s pure stupidity. She probably didn?t even need 3, but I am hitting thin ice here. Women on the archipel islands however do need children (but not 12). Most people on the islands don?t qualify for mortgages and likes, most don?t even qualify for simple bank accounts. They borrow money from affluent parties, thereby entering into a livelong dependence, becoming an accessory to the complex network of the local illegal fishing industry, paying off their debts by carrying out the task at hand, namely bombing. Many of them risking their lives in doing so, many being driven into invalidity of some sort. What we need, is educational sustainability. Education that lasts. Education that indoctrinates and is assimilated and passed on to F2, F3 .Fn. Academically and practically its time for consilience, in the sense it was formulated by O. Wilson. We need a unification of knowledge in order to act. Disciplines need to be pulled together. Reef conservation here in spermonde is a first order task for anthropologists, sociologists, and socioeconomists, then for marinebiologists and in the last instance for politicians, but creating a circular network of exchange. Maybe its time that universities teach marine anthropology. But yes, its easy to stay in our studies busying us with intellectual chit chat contemplating fancy ?nce words ..creating awareness amongst those that are aware anyway. I am just wearing the shoes of the devils advocate, and am certainly not throwing the first stone. After all I am researching bleaching in corals that do not bleach and my bahasa Indonesia is as fragile as the reefs. So whats the new dogma? What do do? And who is doing it? Learning the language, going into teaching after finishing the PhD? Become a marineanthropologist? Maybe I should give up my oil leaking motorbike and do what with it?...dump it the ocean? trying to keep up optimism esther . "Szmant, Alina" wrote: Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now --------------------------------- From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sun Feb 26 08:58:31 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 08:58:31 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Message-ID: <4401B407.2000407@noaa.gov> Hey, folks, I'm certainly not going to be one who runs around waving the flag of *sustainability*. My main point was that these words means different things to different people, most likely because they aren't being used correctly. Like, let's look at the definition of the word *sustain*, then look at how it is currently being used: sus?tain 1. To keep in existence; maintain. 2. To supply with necessities or nourishment; provide for. Don't we want to do this for coral reefs? Of course we do. But now that I've thrown the word out there (after admittedly not ever really using it much--certainly not in fora like these), I'm starting to notice it more. Like, I now see a Request For Proposals that mentions sustainable development. What the heck is that supposed to mean? It means, essentially, let's develop some enterprise(s) near the coast or coral reef area that can support economies, yet not compromise the environment. I think that's what it means. The concept of how you can support an economy near a reef area, yet not compromise it (the reef area, that is), is what should separate the good proposals and actions from the bad. This approach says "let's find a way for people to live [*develop*] near ecosystems without messing them up [too much]." Those who are against sustainable development would prefer to either not develop near these areas, or keep people out of the area, which is a great idea if it is a realistic approach, but how do you push back the tide of people? So, to me "sustainable development" seems to be an oxymoron and a phrase meant to countenance or disguise coastal development. I'll bet a real estate developer came up with that phrase. So, what I said was we should sustain the reefs, not (necessarily) permit sustainable development. I personally don't see how you can sustain a clean environment and also permit people to crawl (swim) all over it. I guess I'm saying our goal should be to sustain the reefs that are in good condition, but what I admittedly didn't address was how to fix the compromised reefs. You have to accept what Alina says, that we're in a big mess and we have to work with what we have, but to do that we all have to do our part and we need strong leadership. Our leaders listen (theoretically) to lots of voices and also to big money. Now, addressing the charge that we first-world (and NOAA) coral scientists have no clue as to what's going on in the rest of the world, I would have to agree that THIS scientist is clueless about a lot of international coral problems, at least from a first-person account. I have never seen bombs on the ocean floor, and have never had my ear drums blown out from blast-fishing. HOWEVER, I have been part of proposal review processes before and I can tell you that a large number of very savvy coral scientists (NOAA, academic and NGO) and policy makers put large numbers of well-meaning hours into trying to determine where best to fund coral conservation efforts (but the process is not perfect). It's a very difficult decision process, and the final decision makers ultimately have no other agenda except to conserve coral reefs. If the squeaky wheel gets the grease (see also last sentence of previous paragraph), then we have to agree on what needs to squeak the loudest, or at least prioritize the squeaks. Which is what Phil was saying with his plea to come up with 8 - 10 action items. Later... From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sun Feb 26 09:10:34 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 09:10:34 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] disclaimer Message-ID: <4401B6DA.3060400@noaa.gov> Whoops, I should have put this at the bottom of my last couple of messages, because it's true: "The contents of this message are mine personally and do not necessarily reflect any position of the Government or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration." From cnidaria at earthlink.net Sun Feb 26 12:34:28 2006 From: cnidaria at earthlink.net (James M Cervino) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 12:34:28 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Resilience? After Heat Stroke? Message-ID: Dear Coral Reef Scientists, Alina's post states the truth as it address our cultural behavior in the USA and how this may be having a negative impact on the reefs throughout the world. We all agree that thermal stress is the number one cause of coral mortality coupled with localized deforestation and anthropogenic nutrient enrichment. However, it was not long ago that there were people out there (marine scientists) that refused to admit that global warming induced thermal heat shock is the number one threat reefs are facing today. Reef Resilience! Are we fooling ourselves? With the growing population and the types of vehicles we use to transport our kiddies to soccer practice we will continue to produce more heat trapping gasses into the atmosphere that are directly correlated with higher sea surface temperatures. This will have a serious effect on tropical corals that are sensitive and already threatened. The major reef builders of the Pacific are not resilient, and will not be resistant to thermal stress and coral disease. We can say good-by to the diversity of corals I am looking at in Jen Veron's book that is sitting in front of me on my desk, especially if we all are not vocal about the Energy Policy produced by the Whitehouse this year. Were there any atmospheric and marine scientists acting as advisors quoted in this Energy Policy brief? We as marine scientists should be outraged as we all know now that reefs will not be resilient to the changing oceanographic conditions in the next decade. So the question is, how will we address this as marine scientists? Create more MPAs? I don't care how many MPAs we create throughout the world, if we are not going to get serious about global warming and anthropogenic nutrient enrichment we are wasting time. Will MPAs protect corals from heat stroke or nutrient enrichment? Are corals protected from global warming and nutrient pollution and is this addressed in MPAs ? Below are some vital statistics regarding how the USA is addressing global warming induced climate change: In 2004, China consumed 6.5 million barrels of oil per day. The United States consumed 20.4 million barrels, and demand is rising as a result of economic growth and American cars. It has been estimated that the bulk of the imports are going directly to SUVs. SUVs made up 5% of the American arsenal of cars in 1990; currently they make up 54%. U.S. oil imports are at the highest ever, 55%. Department of Energy projections show imports rising to 70 percent by 2025. Interpreting this to a global scale the United States transportation sector produces about 8% of world global warming pollution and accounts for 18 percent of an increasingly tight world oil market each year according to the Energy Foundation and the Association for Peak Oil&Gas (http://www.peakoil.net/). If American cars averaged 40 miles per gallon, we would soon reduce consumption by 2 million to 3 million barrels of oil a day. That could translate into a sustained price drop of more than $20 a barrel. And getting cars to be that efficient is easy. This was not addressed in the recent energy bill recently passed by Congress. Global oil use = 31.5 billion barrels per year One barrel oil = 42 U.S. gallons One cubic foot = 7.48 U.S. gallons One cubic mile = 147.2 billion cubic feet Country Barrels of oil per person annually United States 25 Japan 14.0 Spain 13.8 Mexico 6.0 Brazil 3.5 China 1.5 India 0.8 Source: Goldman Sachs, Energy Weekly, August 11, 1999 Consumption (Millions of barrels per day): Source DOE ------------------------------------------------------------------------ United States: 19.993 Japan: 5.423 China: 4.854 Germany: 2.814 Russia: 2.531 South Korea: 2.126 Brazil: 2.123 Canada: 2.048 France: 2.040 India: 2.011 Mexico: 1.932 Italy: 1.881 United Kingdom: 1.699 Spain: 1.465 SaudiArabia: 1.415 Iran: 1.109 Indonesia: 1.063 Netherlands: .881 Australia: .879 Taiwan: .846 -- ************************************************** Dr. James M. Cervino, MS, Ph.D. Marine Biologist Department of Biological & Health Sciences Pace University New York NYC Phone: (917) 620-5287 Web site: http://www.globalcoral.org *************************************************** From reginal at hawaii.edu Sun Feb 26 16:56:04 2006 From: reginal at hawaii.edu (Regina) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:56:04 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? Message-ID: <67fdad82756000d396460a6add72f34e@hawaii.edu> Esther and all, As a marine anthropologist, I read your post with great interest and had to resist the temptation to shout out loud "here here!!" lest my office mates think me a bit mad. There are actually a few universities teaching marine anthropology and I agree that the inclusion of a marine anthropologist in interdisciplinary marine science projects is vital. As Chuck Birkeland, one of my favorite professors often says, one cannot manage the marine environment, one has to manage the people using it. Aloha, Regina Regina Woodrom Luna Maritime and Fisheries Anthropologist PhD Candidate, Ecological Anthropology Program (Marine) University of Hawaii Manoa Lecturer: Biology of Marine Reptiles, Human Adaptation to the Sea, Anthropology of Tourism, American Cultures Biological Assistant: Oahu Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvaging Group ReginaL at hawaii.edu >From: Esther Borell >To: "Szmant, Alina" >CC: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? >Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 07:13:43 +0000 (GMT) > > >Hi Alina and all others, > I think your letter has not only contextualized our ?reef problems? but also hit a nerve. > Its time to change our dogma. Its time to strip down the fancy costume of sustainability. I sometimes even wonder whether this word was invented to keep social economists in business. I don?t want to see them unemployed, the contrary, but I believe that sustainability, as a concept needs to be reinvented. > The red queen is running faster than ever, unable to not only maintain her position, but even starting to fall behind. > I am currently based in southeast Sulawesi, alleged centre of coral reef biodiversity but I am placing a safe bet that 70% of reefs here in the Spermonde archipel are very ill, losing their diversity, maybe not like rainforests in %s, not yet but it?s probably only a matter of time ? on an ecological, not geological time scale. Diving reminds me of walking along the Via Appia in Rome, looking at the remains of the past, providing faint evidence of how ?it?used be. > Many of the reefs here look like rubble deserts. To see fish one has to pay extra entrance fee. I have counted 7 bombs on a one and a half our dive the other day. > Reefs here don?t seem to suffer from bleaching (ironically I am researching just that) but from structural devastation (bombing), insane overfishing and severe eutrophication. Most corals of the inner and middle shelf within this archipelago are heavily infested by all sorts of borers. Its like cancer. Seemingly healthy and flourishing to the outside, but then unable to withstand January and February storms, which have eroded large patches of reefs and signs of algal succession are already on the way. > > The only way to sustain would be to stop ANY reef and coastal related activities until further notice. But this of course is just na?ve wishful thinking. > > The present resilience vs remnance discussion has been largely gravitated around the Keys and I noticed that most if not all participants were ?1st world scientists?. I am sitting in the middle of the 3rd world biodiversity hot spot wondering where our ?hotspot affilated collegues? are. I am guessing, that many are oblivious to this discussion due to the lack of adequate internet access, which at least here in Indonesia is still a novelty, slow and expensive. But they need to be integrated ? asap. Reef decline here is more than the problem of policy implementation, local politics and steak holder conflicts. It?s the consequence on the tail of a much bigger issue, an issue of local culture and education. > We, the 1st world scientists live in a world of health insurances, unemployment insurances and mortgages. Hooray to those that can afford to recycle their rubbish. It?s a luxury. In Germany every household has more rubbish bins than fingers on one hand. Here in Indonesia we have none. Rubbish is dumped into the ocean, onto the reefs or disposed of ?thermally? (I know ...weve been there - still are?). > My point is, we are living in a world that has conditioned us to think ahead, trying to not only predict but also prepare for future, featuring perspectives extending beyond that of individuality - a concept as such alien to indonesien society. Family rules. Thinking future is much more confined to the individual and future predictions seldom appear to penetrate any further then to the F1 generation. Producing offsprings to secure the future. Offsprings are the real existing currency.And can we blame them? I cant. The 62 yr old woman in the states really didn?t need the 12th child. That?s pure stupidity. She probably didn?t even need 3, but I am hitting thin ice here. Women on the archipel islands however do need children (but not 12). > Most people on the islands don?t qualify for mortgages and likes, most don?t even qualify for simple bank accounts. They borrow money from affluent parties, thereby entering into a livelong dependence, becoming an accessory to the complex network of the local illegal fishing industry, paying off their debts by carrying out the task at hand, namely bombing. Many of them risking their lives in doing so, many being driven into invalidity of some sort. > > What we need, is educational sustainability. Education that lasts. Education that indoctrinates and is assimilated and passed on to F2, F3 ?.Fn. > Academically and practically its time for consilience, in the sense it was formulated by O. Wilson. We need a unification of knowledge in order to act. Disciplines need to be pulled together. Reef conservation here in spermonde is a first order task for anthropologists, sociologists, and socioeconomists, then for marinebiologists and in the last instance for politicians, but creating a circular network of exchange. > Maybe its time that universities teach marine anthropology. But yes, its easy to stay in our studies busying us with intellectual chit chat contemplating fancy ?nce words?..creating awareness amongst those that are aware anyway. > > I am just wearing the shoes of the devils advocate, and am certainly not throwing the first stone. After all I am researching bleaching in corals that do not bleach and my bahasa Indonesia is as fragile as the reefs. So whats the new dogma? What do do? And who is doing it? > Learning the language, going into teaching after finishing the PhD? Become a marineanthropologist? Maybe I should give up my oil leaking motorbike ?and do what with it?...dump it the ocean? > > trying to keep up optimism > > esther > > > > . > > > > >"Szmant, Alina" wrote: > Hi Phil & others: > >I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created > through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not > taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? > >You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I > have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? > >China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. > >For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. > >So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. > >Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. > >So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. > >So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. > >In a pessimistic mood this morn', > >Alina Szmant > > >******************************************************************* >Dr. Alina M. Szmant >Coral Reef Research Group >UNCW-Center for Marine Science >5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln >Wilmington NC 28409 >Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 >Cell: (910)200-3913 >email: szmanta at uncw.edu >Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta >****************************************************************** > >________________________________ > >From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg >Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM >To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 > > > >Phil, > >Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > >Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > >Dear Colleagues, > > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting > >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few > >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to > >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our > >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > > and less > >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by > >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from > >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of > >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the > >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral > >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show > >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to > >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own > >history and ecology. > > > >Let's face it: > > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, > >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is > >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological > >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal > >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't > >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's > >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take > >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the > >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all > >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread > >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. > >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human > >reproductive success. > > > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > > radar > >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation > >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my > >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities > >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the > >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs > >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this > >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying > >and we have got to do more. > > > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think > >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We > >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the > >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of > >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of > >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled > >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and > >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > > are > >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral > >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, > >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own > >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and > >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For > >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes > >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, > >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations > >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a > >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is > >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the > >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and > >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the > >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is > >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And > >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we > >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost > >every reef on the planet. > > > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > > agency, > >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for > >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a > >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded > >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus > >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would > >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study > >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think > >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > > Thanks, > > Phil > > > >-- > >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. > >Department of Biology > >College of Charleston > >Charleston SC 29424 > >(843) 953-8086 voice > >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Coral-List mailing list > >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > >--------------------------------- > Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now >--------------------------------- > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From lesk at bu.edu Sun Feb 26 11:08:47 2006 From: lesk at bu.edu (lesk at bu.edu) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:08:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Faith in local efforts; ferocity in facing the world In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060226110847.e61yypg760ww0w8w@www.bu.edu> Phil Dustan asked what we can do. Perhaps a start is to share what we are doing now, and help each other forge our puzzle pieces into a whole. This sometimes works better than launching a new big empty vessel with a fancy name and fundraising needs in hopes of picking up paying passengers along the way. Here is the piece I am on now. A small idea emerged from a workshop several years ago in Los Cabos. Conservation International organized a party called "Defying Ocean's End". No, I did not make up that name, though margaritas inspired an indecent salute to go along with it. DOE is a business plan to save the sea, vetted by folks from Goldman Sachs Inc. to make sure the scientists, environmentalists and stakeholders present were able to add up the numbers properly. A news piece on DOE is at http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/ 2003/06/0603_030603_oceanboundaries.html and the resulting Island Press book is at: http://www.islandpress.org/books/detail.html/SKU/1-55963-753-6 At DOE, Jeremy Jackson and I co-chaired a very lively working group focussed on science to "restore and maintain marine ecosystem function." In order to restore a marine ecosystem, we reasoned that we should first restore faith in a coastal community that they can steward their local marine environment despite the sky falling all about them. The small idea is this: resistance is not futile. This is a tough nut because people are hearing that no matter what they do to control fishing pressure and overdevelopment in their own front yards, the First World is going to get them- cook them, innundate them, poison them, and overpower them economically, to the strains of a siren call irresistable to their greedy and their young. The key would be for a local community to do their level best to manage their doings in their own bit of sea in an enduring and rewarding fashion (the "S" word). If it works even a little, empowerment can hopefully do the rest. After DOE, I teamed up with CI to work on this problem. We were fortunate to get start-up funding from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation for a project called the Marine Management Area Science program (MMAS). We have four years to get going. Dr. Leah Bunce is the Project Director. I am the PI. Roger McManus is supervising staffer. Sylvia Earle is spokesperson/Godess. CI staff and partners are the implementing folks. For anybody who is interested, as materials become available they are posted to a general access web site. The quickest route to a fact sheet and workplan for the project is to put "CI MMAS" into Google and take the top hits. The project is evolving faster than the web portal and we do need some privacy and distance to get something done. However, link-ups, partnerships, criticisms are welcome. At its core MMAS is a natural and social science research project. Because it is a research project, parts of it that are new will appear in peer-reviewed papers first, and then be applied and publicized. These parts mostly have to do with the invention of new diagnostics to help sort out the effects of local management efforts, from changes (good or bad) in marine and social systems due to other causes. But much of what you will see in MMAS sounds like what others are doing, because all are part of the same global context. Let us call it: Alina's Lament. It is essential that these more general objectives be achieved collaboratively with other projects being carried out in the same geographical areas, in a united front. The egofriction static charge of NGO's and Kurtz-like characters- scientists and saviors, parachute-diplomats and prodigal sons alike- must be smoothed or we will be each others' failures. We are all human and we all set up fiefdoms and power structures as automatically as dogs piss to mark their having passed. Once everybody has pissed we can get down to work, and the mix will smell at least as good, or as bad, as the mark of any one. The Scientific Advisory Committee for MMAS has helped to guide us into a focus for the project in four primary geographical areas, and two for work to ramp up later on. These areas are: Greater Caribbean- primary focus on Belize and MBRS region Brazil- Abrolhos Shelf Tropical Eastern Pacific- Coiba, Cocos, Malpelo, Galapagos Fiji Archipelago The two areas for later on are Raja Ampat (eastern Indonesia) and the western Indian Ocean someplace. In each place we are fitting our little piece (MMA science) into the context of existing, locally initiated partnerships and projects. We also have some small, thematic research projects that are not geographically tied down to these spots except that the products will then be applied in each of them. Those are our beans. We have decided to work small. Together, the sites constitute a global observatory for the efficacy of MMA effects under varied biological and social conditions, strewn across E-W and N-S biodiversity gradients. Okay, that was my sharing time. Now it is all of your turns. Perhaps we can look at different parts of the world of tropical nearshore marine conservation organizationally, the way that ReefBase has helped us to do biologically. Find the pressure points. Hone the messages and the campaigns. Move from one immediate objective to the next. Shout into the media's ear instead of the other way. Remember, this isn't to say that the global UN diplomacy march on Washington thing isn't important, too. All of us have folks in our organizations who, bless their hearts, are doing just that. It just isn't what I am doing right now. Sounds kind of like baloney but maybe what we do can be better than what it sounds like. Now, that would be really novel. Les From JKoven at aol.com Sun Feb 26 18:05:29 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:05:29 EST Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Message-ID: Yes, Jim, "sustainable" and "development" ARE? oxymorons.? It all depends on what level of income/development the community stakeholders need to produce from their reefs, absent other income sources.? Their choices are often limited - they can bring in tourists/divers or over-fish, even though that diminishes or damages the resources.? Reefs provided sustenance for entire island communities for millenia - they can't now sustain other urban communities with growing populations.? The needs of these stakeholders has changed over the past 50 years - they want to send their children to schools off-island, they want the same techological "improvements" in their lives that those in the urban areas have and to catch up with the 21st century world.? Both climate change and over-fishing have? affected many Pacific reefs that have not been subjected to gross land-based pollution.? Nothing the stakeholders of small islands can do will change the global climate picture and fishing is part of their culture.? The search is on for other ways to sustain the way of life they wish to have, without further destroying fisheries and thus reefs. It's interesting that outrigger canoes once sped villagers to other islands.? Then came the diesel powered boats - slower and costly, although one was less dependant upon weather and perhaps drier upon arrival.? Now faster fiberglass boats are the thing.....they travel as swiftly as an outrigger in a decent wind, but leave one beholden to the fuel companies.? Progress?? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From JKoven at aol.com Sun Feb 26 18:04:05 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:04:05 EST Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence - Effect of Bombing Message-ID: <290.64bb747.31338de5@aol.com> Has anyone studied the reefs in Guam since WWII? Of course....but the diversity was vastly reduced. Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu Sun Feb 26 18:16:56 2006 From: rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu (Richard Grigg) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 13:16:56 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today In-Reply-To: <20060225110306.0iwtfp3s0kcg84sw@www.bu.edu> References: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20060226131545.01ca73d8@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Les, My real opinion and view of the world is much the same as Alina Szmant's. Overpopulation is the problem. The Club of Rome estimated that the carrying capacity of planet earth is about 3 billion people. We are double that now and there is no going back, at least not without a catastrophic event. The 1000's of reefs that are still healthy in the Pacific are in places underpopulated or even uninhabited. I visited about 25 such places several years ago in the Tuamotu Archipelago. Unfortunately, they too will probably be discovered. After that, if humankind does not face the human population issue head on, I don't think we can prevent these reefs from the same fate as those Phil Dustan was talking about. There is time, but not the political will on a global scale. But rather than dooming and glooming all the reefs in the world (dead or not), I think the number one action item should be containing the human population bomb. Not overgeneralizing about the reefs but facing the real issue....us. Rick Grigg At 11:03 AM 2/25/2006 -0500, lesk at bu.edu wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > >It is extremely important that we converge on a common and consistant >view on coral reef health that we can convey to the lay public. We >must also speak precisely when referring to any particular symptom of >coral reef health on a global scale. > >I challenge anybody to produce data demonstrating that the tropical >west Atlantic coral reefs have improved in condition or remained at >level condition, by any measure you wish, over the past 25 years. That >does not mean that the changes are irreversible or unprecedented in >deep time, Gene. It only means that it is a sad thing for us and for >our childern that this is happening at this particular time, for we now >cause this decline knowingly and deliberately, recovery will likely be >a very lengthy process, and we are seem to be doing our best to inhibit >even that. The long view will always be there to make us feel better >in some existential sense, but it is no balm to those of us who wish to >enjoy and benefit from coral reefs during our lives and the lives of >our children and grandchildren. > >Indo-Pacific coral reefs exhibit a vigorous ability to bounce back from >denudation or phase shift, so long as there is a stable physical >substratum on which they can rebuild (dynamite rubble piles are not >very good for this). However, the proportion of reef surface that is >in a disturbed, regenerating state at any given time, and more >importantly, the size-frequency distribution of these disturbances, >looks very odd and very different than when I was a graduate student. >Are we using the right data to characterize and track these changes, >Rick? Because the Pacific is still more robust than the Atlantic, >there is much of concern that we can choose to overlook if that is our >bias. We'd better be careful not to be too easily reassured by the >positive signs that coral reefs in the Pacific could hold their own, >given the chance...because they by and large are not being given the >chance. > >The pace and extent of bleaching alone is awesome. Who is coming >forward to call this a non-event, or our response to it exagerated and >misplaced? Who is saying that overfishing is something that will have >no effect on reefs worth worrying about, and that we can ignore it? >Who is saying that the industrialization of reef destruction is not a >real thing worth keeping in check? Who is saying with confidence that >the earth is not getting warmer, that bleaching is not more frequent >and severe, or that corals will definitely adapt to these changes and >that the world shall remain much as wonderful as it has always been for >us, no matter what we do? > >So what gentle hand is it, exactly that Gene and Rick wish to lay upon >the scene? > >Les Kaufman > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From milviapin at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 18:41:09 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 15:41:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <20060226234109.88917.qmail@web50303.mail.yahoo.com> dear listers, I agree with Rick, there are reefs that are considered pristine in RMI for example. No diseases, no bleaching, no eutrophication, no overfishing or destructive fishing nor boat damage threaten some of the reefs in remote areas . At many locations, we can still witness this ecosystem as clean, productive, diverse as some can only imagine it "should have been" earlier. No take areas or sanctuaries are indeed to be made the rule, and governments and managers in remote island countries hear this message, although thay often have to apply it not as a recovery or restoration process but as a conservation of extant natural health. This decision is often more difficult than similar action needed when the damage is instead evident and advanced. Also, I do not think people in the Pacific islands nor in South East Asia can agree we (they) can live "without reefs". It is not just a question of loosing biodiversity or beauty! Millions of people still REALLY depend on these ecosystems for their food AND income! Thank you Silvia Richard Grigg wrote: Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let?s face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze. From milviapin at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 19:07:07 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 16:07:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 3 In-Reply-To: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <20060227000708.48318.qmail@web50311.mail.yahoo.com> Alina, I think you had a very important message for all of us. "For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! " If we are not ready to relinquish some of our personal comfort(s), we cannot expect politicians to make things better for all of us and we should stop blaiming international politics for the damage caused to the global environment. I believe protecting reefs, or the environment, or the forests is less an issue of political decision and more of behaviour. Everybody's. Each one can make a little change in each one's life. All together we are definetely more powerful than a few "decision makers". cheers silvia "Szmant, Alina" wrote: Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. From szmanta at uncw.edu Sun Feb 26 20:09:28 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 20:09:28 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline References: <46F56ACD52BC5F4F911EF9C4264FB46404AD29DE@UNCWMAILVS1.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB028@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> For those of you loooking for how some scientists are trying to desseminate the word.... ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From: Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST) To: Subject: University of Texas Ocean Research Webcast Dear Science Enthusiast, University of Texas at Austin Webcast Entitled "Brave New Ocean." A webcast presentation given by Professor Jeremy Jackson, William E. and Mary B. Ritter Professor and Director of the Geosciences Research Division at Scripps Institution of Oceanography will be March 3, 2006 at 7pm. Dr. Jeremy Jackson is one of the most prominent marine ecologists in the world and he has a message to get out about the world's oceans - it documents declines in coral reefs, decreasing numbers of large marine fish, and losses of coastal and marine ecosystems. More than just an academic researcher, Dr. Jackson has actively searched for innovative ways to reach the public, applying his skills as a communicator with his scientific knowledge to inspire action. Dr. Jackson desires to reach a broader audience and affect change into the future with tomorrow's generation on this topic of interest. View a FREE web broadcast of the lecture live Friday, March 3, 2006 at 7 pm CST. During the live webcast, you can submit questions to Dr. Jackson and he will answer as many as he can for the live and webcast audiences. If possible, can you distribute or post a link to this webcast on your website, newsletter, or listserv as well as pass this notice on to any colleagues of yours that may be interested. The link to our Lecture Series website, where the details of the lecture and the webcast can be found, is: http://www.esi.utexas.edu/outreach/ols/lectures/Jackson/ Please let me know if you will consider posting this information. Thanks for your time, Brian Zavala Environmental Science Institute The University of Texas at Austin brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu 512.471.5847 ------ End of Forwarded Message From mtupper at picrc.org Sun Feb 26 21:11:37 2006 From: mtupper at picrc.org (Mark Tupper) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 11:11:37 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] vehicle emissions, lifestyle changes and global warming References: <20060223022526.80199.qmail@web35310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <009901c63b43$26543be0$63c8c814@TUPPER> Hi listers, I think James, Jeff and Alina are right on the money when they talk about vehicle emissions and today's "bigger is better" SUV mindset. I doubt that the public has any realization of the degree to which vehicle emissions contribute to greenhouse gases. A quote from the California Cars Initiative: "In California, transportation accounts for over 40% of greenhouse gas emissions. Nationally the number is around 33%. Globally it's 20% and rising fast, especially as car-starved China, India and Russia add to their fleets." So, if we can agree that global warming and climate change are adversely affecting coral reefs, then vehicle emissions are one of the major culprits. But have governments or the auto industry made any attempt to educate the public on this issue? If so, I must have missed it... This is one of the most challenging problems our environment faces, given the long history of our deep-rooted "car culture" lifestyle in North America. It's amazing to me that with sky-high gas prices unlikely to change while there is continuing war in the Middle East, people still want to buy the biggest, most expensive SUV they can. For example, in the last decade, Hummer went from a cottage industry aimed at producing exclusive (and enormous) vehicles for celebrities, to a major automaker producing over 100,000 SUVs per year. And as Jeff said, how many of those are ever taken off-road? And while DaimlerChrysler has been touting their advances in PHEV technology (plug-in hybrid electric vehicles that can get 100+ mpg), they were busy reviving the 425 horsepower Hemi engine and stuffing it into 4-door family sedans, and then developing a 500 horsepower V-10 for their SUVs and pickup trucks. Do soccer moms really need to go 0-60 in under 5 seconds and cruise the highway at over 170 mph, which just 10 years ago could only be done with a $200,000 exotic sports car? No. It would be illegal anyway. Has DaimlerChrysler sold any mass-produced PHEVs yet? No. Why not? Because hybrids are for nerdy enviro-geeks like us. Nobody else would pay the premium price charged for them when they could get a "real" car for less. In North America's car culture, big and powerful is sexy; small and efficient is lame. Sorry if this post seems too much about vehicles and not enough about coral reefs, but I'm trying to address one of the root causes of coral reef decline. We might say that greenhouse gases and resulting thermal stress are a root cause of decline but they aren't the ultimate cause. They are a symptom generated by human activities - a symptom that happens to trigger its own set of secondary symptoms, including coral bleaching and disease. In addressing the ultimate cause, the question is, how do we change the mindset of an entire nation from one of spending all their disposable income on unnecessary luxuries to one of moderation and conservation? Cheers, Mark Dr. Mark H Tupper, Senior Scientist Palau International Coral Reef Center PO Box 7086, Koror, Palau 96940 tel (680) 488-6950; fax (680) 488-6951 and Adjunct Research Associate University of Guam Marine Laboratory UOG Station, Mangilao, Guam 96923, USA tel (671) 735-2375; fax (671) 734-6767 From A.J.G.Williams at newcastle.ac.uk Mon Feb 27 14:30:15 2006 From: A.J.G.Williams at newcastle.ac.uk (Andrew Williams) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 19:30:15 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Resilience, Remnancy, Sustainability - Semantics? References: <46F56ACD52BC5F4F911EF9C4264FB46404AD29DE@UNCWMAILVS1.dcs.uncw.edu> <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB028@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <0BE60E6F26C4034388842EA9FA0DC94525281B@quarrel.campus.ncl.ac.uk> Dear All, I started out reading this topic with interest, but it is now becoming irritation, because it seems to be a great deal of definitions, discussions of semantics and ego flattering statements. Do I intend to be insulting? No, I attempt to point out that if this discussion is affecting me in this way (an alleged scientist), imagine what it does for members of the public... Now watch me reel off a massive list of definitions! *laughs* Global warming - fossil fuels are the key issue, yet they are owned by massive MNCs whose sole interest is capital generation. The technology to replace these energy sources already exists, is owned by MNCs and DODs around the world, either hidden from public use for protectionism of markets or national security (i.e. protectionism of national markets!). The USA is 'run' by an oil baron, a man who was re-elected by over 50% (ish) of the nation (well those who voted). What is the solution when the public are disinterested in (global) politics, and the politicians are interested in re-election and capital accumulation? Education is fundamentally important to changing public, and thus political, agendas, yet who controls school curricula? What happens when the media has become mankind's source of (dis)information? What happens when scientists cannot even decide within themselves the 'correct' course of action? I'll tell you what I believe happens, things get worse, further ingrained, more polarised and more self-centred. There are two real problems in this world, apathy and greed. If these two variables can be addressed, mankind has a chance at not destroying itself and the planet in the process. I've seen/heard various people say things like, "thanks for that depressing outlook" to which my response is, do we live on the same planet? I would dearly love to be optimistic about global affairs, but I think it's deluded. I don't believe in the Hollywood happy ending, in fact if I did, I wouldn't be studying natural resource management. I will happily admit that there are success stories about the place and I will come to that point 'shortly'. We are creeping in the right direction, but we could be walking, if not running (hand in hand into the sunset...sorry!). We all talk about globalisation, yet where are the international laws, where is the international institution that represents mankind's interest and not national interests? None of us alone is going to change global problems, it is going to take a concerted global effort, it is not going to be easy, it is going to require considerable pain in the process, because current consumption of global resources are not sustainable (yup sorry, there's that buzz word again). There are no 'silver bullets', if we haven't learned that yet... Admittedly, all this globalisation 'stuff' is in it's infancy, it is barely crawling, but someone (plural) MUST teach it how to walk and it cannot be driven solely by the free market ideology. 'Over' population - Carrying capacities do not take into account advances in technology, so improvements in agricultural practices increases production (agreed, simply pouring chemicals into the ground is not sustainable, but there are alternatives). There's plenty of food being produced today, it's not a production issue it's a distribution issue. I only have to wander around shops like 'Pound Land' to realise there are massive amounts of resources being poured into utterly useless products, yet people still buy them. My computers enable me to communicate globally, increase my productivity, my lights enable me to work in the dark, but, for example, these ridiculous plastic (oil derivative) desk ornaments - where's the utility in that? Don't even get me started on SUVs! To say China has the right idea about birth control, is rather simplistic, just look at how many female babies are abandoned or aborted, I feel that women being marched en-mass into sterilisation programs (India) against their will is totally indefensible. Human rights on one hand, control systems on the other - where is the middle ground? I personally would like to see a licensing system, whereby people have to prove they are capable of being good parents and are economically able to raise their kids - but of course that only works in developed nations, I could not possibly argue for that to be applied in developing nations. I'm sure that would cause a massive outcry, it being a fundamental human right to have children, but this example of the women having her 12th baby - what about the rights of people who don't want to live in an overcrowded world? Since when do the rights of the individual outweigh the rights of the many (sorry, rather star trek I know!)? We are boxing ourselves into a corner with all this political correctness. Timescales - someone mentioned that on a long enough time line, reefs will be gone. Well in several billion years the sun will expand to the point Earth will be uninhabitable - does this mean we should all just give up and damn the world to extinction early? I absolutely take the point that ecosystems are processes, (perhaps they should be renamed as ecoprocesses and not systems (I am so joking!)) and that on a long enough time line everything will change, but these changes are for the most part geologically slow - slow enough for evolution to keep pace. Mankind's affects on the planet are accelerating beyond the pace of evolution, plus I would prefer to live in a world where the atmosphere is breathable, the water drinkable, the soils cultivable... Spatial scales - I vaguely remember mentioning I would come to a point and this is it - start small, lead by example and the people will follow! We can't take on global issues, the institutions and laws simply are not there yet, it's currently far too voluntary and un-enforceable. Apart from anything else, ecosystems are site specific - there are reefs on the east coast of Australia that are growing in highly turbid conditions, whereas in other places, turbidity is fatal. I don't think it is possible to come up with a 10 point plan to global success, because by doing so you are going to have to cut down a 1000 points to 10, what if the 990 disregarded points aggregate to greater importance than the 10 you chose? Global affairs are for the politicians, scientists should be there in an advisory capacity but when I say scientists I mean all of them, not just e.g. Marine Biologists - see my next point. Integration - So, one school of thought cries out for public awareness and consumer driven market forces, one cries out for more stringent laws and regulations, another for strict conservationism, another for... where is the integration, where's the facilitator, the chair person co-ordinating all these schools? If you are going to try and solve issues, then you must consider (in alphabetical order) economics, environment, politics and social anthropology - not on a sectoral basis but as an integrated whole. You cannot just form MPAs where ever biodiversity is greatest, because you will more than likely marginalise the people living off that resource. Making the poor poorer just causes further environmental degradation as they are forced to exploit any (free/common) natural resource they can. If you exclude people from the picture, you have an issue of non-compliance and thus a cost in enforcement. I entered into my first degree of the opinion that the environment should be protected no matter the human cost, I have since completely amended that outlook since it's myopic at best and downright inhumane at worst. Participation - To overcome issues of non-compliance, marginalisation and often to increase knowledge of local systems, people must be allowed to participate at ALL levels of project and policy formulation/implementation - that does not mean consultation, that means active participation. Process - Sustainable Development (sorry but I don't see it as an oxymoron - I do see it's false implementation as oxy-moronic) is a process, not a system, thus projects and policies should be re-evaluated as often as humanly possible, because making changes causes changes. Good governance - We are only just starting to see models of good governance, not top-down, not bottom-up, but multi-tier (local, regional, national, international) well organised/managed, with an ability to pass information/resources up and down the system with speed and efficiency. Good governance starts with individuals and ends with international agreements, with every single organisation/institution in-between. It needs to be based on equity, equality and shared interest, not ego, power and greed. Now that's a serious challenge because a majority of the current systems of governance are corrupt and unwieldy, favouring the rich and powerful, self-protecting and exacerbating poverty. Developed nations cannot dictate how developing nations can and cannot develop when, as someone has already pointed out, a large proportion of greenhouse gases derive from our activities. Good governance must be about setting a good example, not just enforcing it. I think I am probably boring everyone by now, but I have one more thing to say. All of the above I have been taught, ok some of it I consciously/sub-consciously knew already, but there are more people behind me, coming up through the 'new' schools of thought. One day, these people will be the top scientists of the day, the politicians, the decision makers - when that day comes, I think (hope) we will see some real changes being made. I can only hope that some of the above will help people break free of the chains of sectoralism and start seeing things from a holistic perspective, you cannot save reefs by simply speaking about how they are dying at n.nnn% a year. Of all the traits of human nature, survival is one of the greatest, otherwise we'd already be gone. The glass can be half empty and/or half full, it all depends on how you view it, but why does no one ever consider topping it back up to brim? Stop observing, start doing! A passionate Msc Student From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Mon Feb 27 10:32:07 2006 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Gene Shinn) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 10:32:07 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Intellectual chit chat Message-ID: The letter by Esther Borell is a most thoughtful, sobering and revealing one and should serve as a lesson to all of us "first world scientists" with our "intellectual chit chat." We should all applaud Ester for "trying to keep up optimism." Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida Marine Science Center (room 204) 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From martin_moe at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 22:55:02 2006 From: martin_moe at yahoo.com (Martin Moe) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 19:55:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence Message-ID: <20060227035502.81516.qmail@web60014.mail.yahoo.com> Hi All, Hoo Boy! The world is a scary place these days. Alina is right, James is right, Curtis is right, Steven is right, everyone commenting is right to a greater or lesser degree. I wonder if Malthus was right .. While acknowledging the global problems, the reefs of the Florida Keys, and to a lesser extent, the Bahamas and the Caribbean, are what concern me most personally. It pains me to see huge coral heads slowly dying, the tissue receding and the exposed coral rock thick with algae and sediment, to see acres of coral rock rubble composed of easily identifiable pieces of the remains of huge elkhorn coral skeletons, and patch reefs covered by extensive growths of Sargassum and Dictyota algae. I know what the reefs were like only a few decades ago and the loss is staggering. The TDC knows this also or at least it seems like they should. (This is the Tourist Development Council for Monroe County, the Florida Keys) Their latest brochure http://www.fla-keys.com/diving/ has fantastically beautiful pictures of the coral reefs of yesteryear, some from the Bahamas but most from the Keys reefs of the 60s and 70s available for download on the diving page. Diving tourists are lured to the Keys by these spectacular photos but the reality they find is quite different. There are no vast growths of huge elkhorn coral colonies, and few great healthy heads of brain and star coral, a sort of governmental ?Bait and Switch? advertising. So what can we do? Of course there is no simple answer. All reefs, Pacific or Atlantic, are separate ecosystems connected closely or distantly, and each reef area has its own web of life and its own constellation of problems and solutions. Some problems are global and some are local, the only way to proceed is as the bumper sticker says, ?Think globally, act locally?. Grand analysis of global and regional social, industrial, population and pollution problems are critical and essential and must be pursued and solutions sought on a national governmental scale, but we also have to take care of the trees as well as worry about the forest. As many contributors to this thread have stated, we have to focus on local conditions and find ways to improve specific reef areas, and what we learn and achieve on a ?micro? level will pave the way for ?macro? efforts. (Or we can say, ?Nothing can be done, the world is going to collapse.? And move to the mountains and seek self sustainability with a cache of weapons and foodstuffs. Hmmm The Rockys or the Appalachians?) To do nothing is not an option, I repeat, not an option. We have monitored and measured and we know the problems. We don?t know all the causes and we don?t know the future of the global problems but we have to work with what we have. We talk of resiliency, remmancy, and sustainability and look for coral genotypes with the capability to survive despite adverse conditions, and this is good, but a coral reef is much, much more than just coral. It is a web of life that interacts with itself and feeds upon itself and grows according to the balance of its life forms. A reef in all its complexity cannot be resilient and withstand adversity if the ecology that drove its evolution is impaired. And the reefs of Florida, the Bahamas and the Caribbean are greatly impaired by the almost total loss of the herbivores that maintained the balance between the slow growing, reef forming stony corals and the rapid growing, energy producing macro algae. Without herbivores, establishment of functional reef resiliency is the ?impossible dream?. Without herbivores, planting seedling coral colonies on the reefs has little chance to succeed. Without herbivores, coral larvae have no place to settle. The extent and depth of other problems that plague our reefs cannot be accurately determined until the herbivores return. The first consideration in ecological reef restoration in this region should be how to return herbivores (think Diadema) to the reefs. And like all great journeys, we have to start with small steps, but we must start. Actually the work of Szmant, Miller, Capo, Nedimyer, me, and the Nature Conservency, FKNMS, and Mote Marine Laboratory is a start. I hope we never abandon this effort because it just seems like an impossible task. Martin Moe From eweil at caribe.net Mon Feb 27 02:45:23 2006 From: eweil at caribe.net (EWeil) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 03:45:23 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] "resilience".... Message-ID: Dear coral listers, I agree that the source of all environmental problems affecting terrestrial and marine systems have a common denominator, human population growth, as Alina so eloquently put it. It is also clear to me that lack of education, and wrong government decisions significantly compounds the problem. If this list can somehow help to actively educate people about the benefits of having fewer children and not driving an 8-cylinder, 340 HP truck to get the kids to the soccer game, it would be wonderful. However, after dealing with politicians in Latin America, watching todays religious moderate and extreme fanatism, the Bush administration at work and the selfishness of most people, I remain highly eskeptical and pesimistic about the future of coral reefs and most other ecosystems as well. Saludos! Dr. Ernesto Weil Department of Marine Sciences University of Puerto Rico PO BOX 3208 Lajas PR 00667 Pho: (787) 899-2048 x. 241 Fax: (787) 899-5500 - 2630 From ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com Mon Feb 27 12:05:27 2006 From: ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com (Eric Coral Inquiry) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:05:27 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Corals Gonad Development Message-ID: <6400622e0602270905k186c1de2la565ddd1c991c9ab@mail.gmail.com> Dear listers, Expertise help needed in the area of corals gonad development. Welcome any information, literatures, resources and recommendation of presons who have done work in this area. I am interested to look at the gonad development of corals under artificial reed structures and compare that to nature colony but unfortunately I do not have a clue where, how to start and the place where I come from is lacking in expertise in such area. Is there anyone who has done histological examation on corals gonad development? Do keep in touch. Billion Thanks. Eric YSY "Marine Biologist in the Making" Kota Kinabalu. P.S: This is my mailing address : Eric Yu S Y NO:93, JALAN KIJANG, LUYANG PHASE 3, 88300 KOTA KINABALU SABAH MALAYSIA TEL:+6088213276 From clarionreef at aol.com Mon Feb 27 17:24:59 2006 From: clarionreef at aol.com (clarionreef at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 17:24:59 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8C80A03C77FEB1B-AD4-1654@FWM-M02.sysops.aol.com> People, I relize that many folks in the scientific community and academia often refer to the Marine Aquarium Council [ MAC ] as some kind of intelligent response to ensuring "sustainability" in the growing trade in reef tropical fishes and organisms. Having followed them for years since their inception, I can assure you that they are adrift and without results, achievement or leadership to go with all the public relations that have fooled so many. They have endeavored to "train" collectors to fish sustainably and disdain cyanide and yet have pretty much driven collectors back to cyanide with their ill-advised, culturally insensitive, top-down approach. Faced with a mass exodus from their well financed "cause", they re-certified marinelife dealers with out cause and without clean fish supply. The lack of fish supply to go with all the trouble and expense to become certified had left many dealers with a desire to end the game and not re-certify this year. The non interest in re-certifying as the years deadline approached left MAC in a panic at the pending loss of all their members on a single date. So, in an effort to prevent the exodus from MAC and a collapse of the small level of industry support that existed anyway...they just automatically re-certified for free all those who were certified before. Have a look and see the admission of chronic failure to provide substance to go with the wordplay in 7 year old drama...in quotes from memos to the dealers who carry cyanide fish for lack of any certified, netcaught fishes. On paragraph two regard the following ; "This was based on an assumption that there would be a steadily increasing supply of MAC certified organisms from the early days of certification. Unfortunately this supply has not materialised and this has left MAC certified exporters, importers and retailers without access to a meaningful supply of MAC certified organisms on a regular basis." And then everyones certification status was automatically extended til 2008! And so on it goes, fooling people who hope and want a cleaner industry ...cashing in on it without reforming it. Sincerely, Steve Robinson commercial collector & past president AMDA American Marinelife Deales Assoc PS. 5 years and 5 million dollars of Packard, McArthur and US AID money etc. ... and no fish supply? As I said long ago..."That dog don't hunt".. -----Original Message----- From: JKoven at aol.com To: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:05:29 EST Subject: Re: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Yes, Jim, "sustainable" and "development" ARE oxymorons. It all depends on what level of income/development the community stakeholders need to produce from their reefs, absent other income sources. Their choices are often limited - they can bring in tourists/divers or over-fish, even though that diminishes or damages the resources. Reefs provided sustenance for entire island communities for millenia - they can't now sustain other urban communities with growing populations. The needs of these stakeholders has changed over the past 50 years - they want to send their children to schools off-island, they want the same techological "improvements" in their lives that those in the urban areas have and to catch up with the 21st century world. Both climate change and over-fishing have affected many Pacific reefs that have not been subjected to gross land-based pollution. Nothing the stakeholders of small islands can do will change the global climate picture and fishing is part of their culture. The search is on for other ways to sustain the way of life they wish to have, without further destroying fisheries and thus reefs. It's interesting that outrigger canoes once sped villagers to other islands. Then came the diesel powered boats - slower and costly, although one was less dependant upon weather and perhaps drier upon arrival. Now faster fiberglass boats are the thing.....they travel as swiftly as an outrigger in a decent wind, but leave one beholden to the fuel companies. Progress? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From JKoven at aol.com Mon Feb 27 17:49:43 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 17:49:43 EST Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today Message-ID: <67.55e12d55.3134dc07@aol.com> The people who live in these underpopulated areas are still trying to earn a living...often by fishing their own reefs and selling to those who have depleted their own fisheries and willing to pay the price. Yes, over-population is at the base of many world problems but it is a sticky issue, at once cultural, ethnic and religious.? Not exactly one to be solved by reef scientists.? Perhaps women's education in general and in reproductive rights are the answers?? Women want better lives for their children, after they've been fed, saved from curable infectious diseases, and educated....and who is to determine what that better life is?? Is it what they perceive as the lives that other children in the world have, including yours?? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From jandl at rivnet.net Mon Feb 27 19:15:17 2006 From: jandl at rivnet.net (Judith Lang/Lynton Land) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 19:15:17 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] How to inspire responsible actions? Message-ID: Dear listers, I seems we are painfully aware of problems, from overpopulation to all manner of over-indulgence. But how to inspire responsible actions on our part and others? Absent easily available remedies, inspirational messages/reminders/ exhortations, however persuasive, are unlikely to have much effect. Jamaican members of the list can correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been thinking we could borrow some strategies from its early family- planning campaign. After initial successes targeting women with the simple but powerful theme, "Plan Your Family; Better Your Life," plus birth control pills that would either have been free or very cheap, it was realized that, to be truly successful, men also had to be included in the decision-making process. I remember a creative campaign of newspaper advertisements suggesting the more nuanced idea that "of course" dads want their children to have a chance to grow up and achieve some measure of respectable employment and social status (e.g., bank teller, carpenter), paired with condom advertisements on billboards that featured an enormous and very sexy looking, black panther. Surely we could come up with some attention-grabbing, genuine solutions to offer the world? Judy From G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au Tue Feb 28 00:38:07 2006 From: G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au (Gillian Goby) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 15:38:07 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] GBRMPA Current Conditions Report (4) Message-ID: <4403E1BF.8040308@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear Coral- Listers, apologies for cross-postings. Please find below the latest Current Conditions report for bleaching on the GBR. *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the Fourth Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 23 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current weather conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, *the* *threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region continues to be rated as moderate*. Severe coral bleaching has been confirmed for several reefs in the southern region during recent GBRMPA surveys. In addition, BleachWatch participants have recorded minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR and more recently the northern GBR. Temperature patterns are consistent with these reports. Although sea temperatures in the southern GBR have slightly decreased, they continue to exceed the February average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C and long-term summer maxima by 0.5 degrees C respectively. Central GBR waters have remained warm in recent weeks, and sea surface temperatures are still currently exceeding the February long-term average by 0.5 to 1.5 degrees C. Temperatures in northern parts of the GBR have increased and are elevated 0.5 to 2.0 degrees C above the February long-term average. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer we are still relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ From solutions at cozm.co.uk Tue Feb 28 03:25:57 2006 From: solutions at cozm.co.uk (Duncan MacRae) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 08:25:57 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Conservation work in Nusa Lembongan and Nusa Penida, near Bali - Indonesia Message-ID: <001801c63c40$99a579d0$4fd7fea9@Sarah> Dear all, Does anyone know of any marine conservation work carried out around the Nusa Lembongan/Penida Island group near Bali, Indonesia? Regards, Duncan R. MacRae Director Coastal Zone Management (UK) Integrated Conservation Solutions Blythe Cottage, 22 Rosemundy, St Agnes, Cornwall. UK ++(0) 1872 552 219 ++(0) 7958 230 076 e-mail: solutions at cozm.co.uk web: www.cozm.co.uk This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version From nhg3 at hw.ac.uk Tue Feb 28 12:54:47 2006 From: nhg3 at hw.ac.uk (Galvis, Nohora H) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 17:54:47 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline Message-ID: <2DEC240A2A06F04BB9D3BBF02DE198BD4D3382@ex5.mail.win.hw.ac.uk> I have followed with a lot of interest the discussions of the last days, confirming how passionate scientists have become nowadays when talking about the evidence of the coral reefs decline. This is a Social Psychological trend of applied science: Scientists engage with the study of environmental problems and feel an urgent need to contribute identifying solutions as a matter of ethical responsibility. This new perspective makes acceptable and even desirable for scientists to express emotions of frustration for being eyewitnesses of decline in the past decades and now by changing their priorities, attitudes and behaviours towards environmental management to get involved trying to communicate a pertinent message to decision makers, decision takers and the general public to allow them to be part of the solutions. Thanks to Dr. Alina Szmant for the webpage information about the web cast presentation of Dr. Jeremy Jackson. Nohora Galvis (Mental Models to improve coral reef management) ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Szmant, Alina Sent: Mon 27/2/06 1:09 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline For those of you loooking for how some scientists are trying to desseminate the word.... ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From: Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST) To: Subject: University of Texas Ocean Research Webcast Dear Science Enthusiast, University of Texas at Austin Webcast Entitled "Brave New Ocean." A webcast presentation given by Professor Jeremy Jackson, William E. and Mary B. Ritter Professor and Director of the Geosciences Research Division at Scripps Institution of Oceanography will be March 3, 2006 at 7pm. Dr. Jeremy Jackson is one of the most prominent marine ecologists in the world and he has a message to get out about the world's oceans - it documents declines in coral reefs, decreasing numbers of large marine fish, and losses of coastal and marine ecosystems. More than just an academic researcher, Dr. Jackson has actively searched for innovative ways to reach the public, applying his skills as a communicator with his scientific knowledge to inspire action. Dr. Jackson desires to reach a broader audience and affect change into the future with tomorrow's generation on this topic of interest. View a FREE web broadcast of the lecture live Friday, March 3, 2006 at 7 pm CST. During the live webcast, you can submit questions to Dr. Jackson and he will answer as many as he can for the live and webcast audiences. If possible, can you distribute or post a link to this webcast on your website, newsletter, or listserv as well as pass this notice on to any colleagues of yours that may be interested. The link to our Lecture Series website, where the details of the lecture and the webcast can be found, is: http://www.esi.utexas.edu/outreach/ols/lectures/Jackson/ Please let me know if you will consider posting this information. Thanks for your time, Brian Zavala Environmental Science Institute The University of Texas at Austin brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu 512.471.5847 ------ End of Forwarded Message _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From treesandseas at yahoo.com Tue Feb 28 22:51:15 2006 From: treesandseas at yahoo.com (Trees Seas) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 19:51:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060301035115.72877.qmail@web32709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Many thanks to everyone who responded to my query about a good underwater camera. The advice was greatly appreciated! Michelle Reyes __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From ricksanders at comcast.net Tue Feb 28 00:44:10 2006 From: ricksanders at comcast.net (Rick Sanders) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 00:44:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen onreefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas References: Message-ID: <007201c63c29$ffade530$650da8c0@manta> Raphael, That photo looks like it? I have gotten so many responses and I haven't had a chance to write back to thank any of you for sending your information on the macro algae. The photo you sent looks like a good example of the what I saw on the reefs in Cat Island. Quite a few other also suggested it was Microdictyon. Who is doing work on this algae and its impacts in the Bahamas? It seems strange that this algae is popping up in such remote locations...it has been suggested that currents may be carrying nutrients into these areas from other locations where the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients are greater. What is the impact that Microdictyon is having on these reefs? It seems to be overgrowing many healthy corals. It was also mentioned in other responses that I have gotten that this algae is seasonal. Does this mean that it's impact is only temporary and the impacted corals have a chance to recover from the infestation? Thanks again for the great photo and information, Rick Rick Sanders President Deep Blue Solutions 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "Raphael Williams" To: Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 4:13 PM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen onreefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas > Hi Rick this is probably a species of Microdictyon, I've attached a photo > from Sweetings Key, Bahamas. We found it there very common. I usually > use > the Littler's book "Caribbean Reef Plants" to id the common algae, it is a > very useful guide, written by Diane Littler and Mark Littler, 2000, > published by OffShore Graphics Inc. I hope this helps. Cheers,Raphael > > Raphael Ritson-Williams > Laboratory Technician Marine Chemical Ecology > Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce > 701 Seaway Dr, Fort Pierce, Fl, 34949 > (772) 465-6630 x146 > williams at sms.si.edu > >>>> "Rick Sanders" 02/21 1:34 PM >>> > Dear Listers, > > I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find > an > image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I > dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been > unable > to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. > > Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish > brown > color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each > other > in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped > into > more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm > in > width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if > to > crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing > many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. > > I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs > there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the > first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what > I > am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a > copy or link. > > Thanks very much in advance, > > Best regards, > > Rick > > > Rick Sanders > Deep Blue Solutions > Media, PA > 610-892-5272 > ricksanders at comcast.net > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From seaflower22 at gmail.com Wed Feb 1 03:55:34 2006 From: seaflower22 at gmail.com (Melanie Gomes) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 08:55:34 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Western Australia reference? Message-ID: <8793949b0602010055h2fcd9499h@mail.gmail.com> Dear All, Hope you are all having a good start to 2006! I was wondering if anyone could possibly help me to find a recent reference on the marine flora and fauna of Western Australia (I think this book was advertised on this list but can't seem to find the details). This was not the title although the book included, inverts and fish and was a general guide, a very good and recent one which I wrote down on an important piece of paper which I then lost! Any specially recommended guides on this part of the world would be appreciated as I'm going out there in March for a season to dive with the whale sharks and would also appreciate any recent refs on the sharks themselves for that matter. Thank you very much for your help, much appreciated. Best wishes Melanie Melanie Gomes B.Sc. M.Sc. From rousseau_herve at yahoo.fr Wed Feb 1 08:00:33 2006 From: rousseau_herve at yahoo.fr (=?iso-8859-1?q?herv=FFffffe9=20Rousseau?=) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:00:33 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] marine farm for sustainable development of aquariologytrade Message-ID: <20060201130033.85607.qmail@web25511.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hello, Frenchies answer to frenchies... If you need information in french about this topic, you can visit http://www.recifs.org which contain a lot of information about reef aquarium, aquarium trade, and sustainable development. You can focus on Vincent Chalias articles on aquarium trade, fishery and MAC (Marine Aquarium Council) activities. See you Herv? -----Message d'origine----- De : coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] De la part de yoann aumond Envoy? : mardi 31 janvier 2006 16:30 ? : coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Objet : [Coral-List] marine farm for sustainable development of aquariologytrade Hello, I'm a young french man with a degree in Marine Biology. I would like to investigate my self for the management of animal trade, and especially fish, for aquariology trade. This buisness make endangered the coral reef ecosystem physically and biologicaly due to the destructive practise (cyanure and explosive methods) which threaten the enormous diversity (important and essential for all the reasons you know). This practise occurs mainly in the south asia coral reef ecosystem which is the hot spoy for biodiversity. So I need more field information and a maximum of contact from people who are involved in this fight (scientist, association, local initiatives, possible grants....). I'm thinking about a project of a marine farm in the field, sustainable, which give a work to all the actual fisherman, give a high quality to the fish in the aim to reduce their mortality and the volume of export... I have a lot of good idea but I need support and help from people which know well this problem, from field, and are involved in and trust in the possibility to change the way of working (and of course the way of thinking). Thank you for you help and informations. Yoann AUMOND, "a motivated and hard worker dreamer" P.S.: sorry for my english, but I'm french... _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list ___________________________________________________________________________ Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international. T?l?chargez sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com From Chris.Ryan at irc-australia.com Wed Feb 1 18:25:27 2006 From: Chris.Ryan at irc-australia.com (Chris Ryan) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 07:25:27 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: Western Australia reference? Message-ID: <69D776850E99934E9FE517A99D52F2640111DBA6@ircs0001.intrisk.com> Hi Melanie This may be the reference you're after. Wells, FE, Walker, DI & Jones, DS (2003) The marine flora and fauna of Dampier, Western Australia: Proceedings of the twelfth International Marine Biological Workshop; held in Dampier from 24 Jul to 11 Aug 2000 [2 volumes Western Australian Museum, Perth, WA Cheers Chris Ryan Principal Consultant - Coastal and Marine Biology IRC Environment 26 Colin Street West Perth WA 6005 Tel: +61-8-9481-0100 Fax: +61-8-9481-0111 chris.ryan at irc-australia.com http://www.irc-australia.com Innovate | Resolve | Commit From reef at bellsouth.net Wed Feb 1 14:15:10 2006 From: reef at bellsouth.net (Vicky Ten Broeck) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:15:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] for coral list Message-ID: <20060201191512.HCBZ1691.ibm56aec.bellsouth.net@fiji> I am looking to go over to Madagascar this summer before graduate school to do coral reef research with a UK based non-profit and I was wondering if anyone knew of any agencies that might help fund the $5000 trip (6 weeks of diving research to help them establish a marine sanctuary). Thanks in advance! Vicky Ten Broeck Reef Relief Intern and Educational Assistant PO Box 430, Key West, FL 33040 (305) 294-3100 From treesandseas at yahoo.com Thu Feb 2 02:34:33 2006 From: treesandseas at yahoo.com (Trees Seas) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 23:34:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera Message-ID: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hello I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with an underwater housing) that takes good underwater pictures in natural light. I generally work in the 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so I usually use natural light to save on power. In my experience not all cameras that take good pictures above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind having to do a little color correction afterwards but I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater photos canNOT be color corrected. Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot Michelle Reyes __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From reefball at reefball.com Thu Feb 2 09:35:34 2006 From: reefball at reefball.com (Todd Barber) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 09:35:34 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <018c01c62805$ed9acad0$6501a8c0@LaFalda> Hi Trees, The Reef Ball Foundation's Coral Team has had very good results using the Cannon Powershot 400 series. The have an inexpensive housing that is rated to 100 feet. The trick to taking pictures in natural light is to set the white balance just before taking pictures and change it whenever you change depths. This can be done with the Cannon....whatever camera you get make SURE you can set the white balance with the controls available on the housing...many camera housings cannot control this feature on many cameras. The only disadvantage is the Cannon housing is plastic....so you have to be a bit careful with it heat wise. Also, if you are taking allot of pictures (more than 50 or so) in a short period of time, the lens tends to fog (common in most battery operated cameras) but using a little bit of mask defog on the underwater housing lens will usually stop this problem. Happy shooting. "take only pictures and leave only footprints," Todd Barber Chairman Reef Ball Foundation, Inc. 3305 Edwards Court Greenville, NC 27858 reefball at reefball.com http://www.artificialreefs.org http://www.reefball.org http://www.reefball.com Direct: 252-353-9094 mobile: 941-720-7549 Fax 425-963-4119 Personal Space: http://www.myspace/reefball Group Space http://groups.myspace.com/reefballfoundation Skype & MSN For Voice or Video Conferences: Available upon request Atlanta/Athens Office 890 Hill Street Athens, GA 30606 USA 770-752-0202 (Our headquarters...not where I work see above) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Trees Seas" To: Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 2:34 AM Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera > Hello > > I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with > an underwater housing) that takes good underwater > pictures in natural light. I generally work in the > 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so > I usually use natural light to save on power. In my > experience not all cameras that take good pictures > above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind > having to do a little color correction afterwards but > I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater > photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel > resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show > corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any > recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks a lot > Michelle Reyes > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From TDWYATT at aol.com Thu Feb 2 11:28:14 2006 From: TDWYATT at aol.com (TDWYATT at aol.com) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 11:28:14 EST Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera Message-ID: <59.36a3ea91.31138d1e@aol.com> In a message dated 2/2/2006 6:45:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, treesandseas at yahoo.com writes: Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Nikon D70, Prolly the D50 as well. HTH, Tom Wyatt _tdwyatt at aol.com_ (mailto:tdwyatt at aol.com) From Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov Thu Feb 2 16:24:30 2006 From: Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:24:30 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: 2nd Call - Requesting Data on 2005 Caribbean Bleaching In-Reply-To: <43DAA0C6.8030600@noaa.gov> References: <43DAA0C6.8030600@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <7A2DDF74-0D42-4AC6-895D-5BA448045803@noaa.gov> As an update on this request that we sent out last week, I want to emphasize that we also need reports from those areas that did not bleach. We need to get information from reefs that fell outside the thermal stress zone, or where stress was less severe to really anchor the bottom end of the response of corals to thermal stress. If we only have positive bleaching reports, we can't nail down the threshold below which we did not see bleaching. Thanks, Mark On Jan 27, 2006, at 5:37 PM, Jessica A. Morgan wrote: > TO: Bleaching Observation Contributors > FROM: Jessica Morgan and Mark Eakin, NOAA Coral Reef Watch > > Second call: Deadline for data submission to be included in our > publication is Friday, February 3. Please contact me if you will > have any problems meeting this deadline. > > --------------------------- > > As you know, bleaching reports from contributors have been coming > in from much of the Caribbean and western North Atlantic. The US > Coral Reef Task Force (USCRTF) Bleaching Committee has held > conference calls to bring together and solicit input from NOAA and > DOI personnel, as well as other federal agencies, NGO partners, and > local Caribbean scientists and managers. The outcomes of the > initial meetings include the development of a 3-phase response > approach (including an initial response, near-term reporting and > assessment, and long-term monitoring) and identification of key > partners, resources, and issues. > > A part of the first phase is to identify and assess bleaching > severity throughout the region. I am collating these reports with > the plan to produce a multi-author, quick paper to Science or > Nature that documents the event. From there, I am sure that more > publications will follow. Everyone who provides data that are used > in the analysis of the event will be included as an author on the > resulting paper(s). Our intent is to provide the broad, Caribbean- > wide analysis, comparing the thermal stress recorded from > satellites with local observations of bleaching and temperatures. > That publication will only include summaries of the information > that you submit. We hope that all of our collaborators will > produce more detailed national or local analyses to further > document the event. At this point we have almost 1000 observations > contributed by 70 individuals in 18 jurisdictions. > > To collect the details needed for the first analysis and to > establish a baseline for follow-up work, a spreadsheet > questionnaire (?CRW Carib Bleach Report Form?) has been developed > for bleaching reports. We would like to invite all ReefBase > contributors who have made bleaching observations for the Caribbean > in 2005 to expand upon the original ReefBase information by > submitting a more quantitative report via the attached > questionnaire (an Excel file) to coralreefwatch at noaa.gov. Please > note that we are only seeking quantitative reports for this analysis. > > The blank questionnaire form, along with information from the US > Coral Reef Task Force, NOAA meetings held to date, and more, are > available for download at the website http:// > coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/caribbean2005. > > Thanks to all of you for your help, > Jessica > -- > Jessica A. Morgan > Operations Manager, NOAA Coral Reef Watch > SSMC1, E/RA 31, Rm. 5309, Silver Spring, MD 20910 > Phone: (301) 713-2857 x129 Fax: (301) 713-3136 > Email: Jessica.Morgan at noaa.gov Web: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ C. Mark Eakin, Ph.D. Coordinator, NOAA Coral Reef Watch National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Satellite Applications and Research Satellite Oceanography & Climate Division e-mail: mark.eakin at noaa.gov url: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov E/RA31, SSMC1, Room 5308 1335 East West Hwy Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226 301-713-2857 x109 Fax: 301-713-3136 From matz at whitney.ufl.edu Thu Feb 2 07:59:29 2006 From: matz at whitney.ufl.edu (Mikhail Matz) Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 07:59:29 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: coral facility @ austin, TX Message-ID: <43E20231.8010207@whitney.ufl.edu> Hello listers, I want to thank everybody for an extremely enthusiastic and helpful response concrrning the design of new coral facility. I've been given a lot of advice and put in contact with the most experienced people in the trade. Now I can really see it all happening! cheers Misha -- -------------------- Mikhail V Matz, Ph.D Research Assistant Professor Whitney Laboratory for Marine Bioscience University of Florida 9505 Ocean Shore Blvd St Augustine, FL 32080, USA phone 904 461 4025 fax 904 461 4008 matz at whitney.ufl.edu www.whitney.ufl.edu/research_programs/matz.htm From ashadevos at gmail.com Thu Feb 2 22:56:58 2006 From: ashadevos at gmail.com (Asha de Vos) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 09:56:58 +0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Coolpix and Strobes Message-ID: <90f39b5f0602021956r514b0e19q@mail.gmail.com> Hi I've recently started using a Nikon Coolpix 5600 with underwater housing to take photos while diving. However, the flash is not very strong and therefore photographs (other than macros - which come out beautifully) are not very clear. Does anyone use this (or a similar model) of camera and if yes, can anyone recommend a compatible strobe that I could purchase? Thanks. Asha. From dhopley at austarnet.com.au Sun Feb 5 18:37:37 2006 From: dhopley at austarnet.com.au (David Hopley) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 09:37:37 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Palau photographs Message-ID: Dear All, A quick thanks to all of you who provided me with photographs of the Palau Rock Islands, or referred me to sources. I've tried to respond to everybody and am sending this out just in case I missed anyone. David Dr. David Hopley Coastal and Marine Consultant 3 Wingadee Court ANNANDALE QLD 4814 AUSTRALIA PHONE: +61 7 4725 2856 dhopley at austarnet.com.au From Georgios at icm.csic.es Fri Feb 3 16:58:25 2006 From: Georgios at icm.csic.es (Georgios Tsounis) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 22:58:25 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: underwater camera In-Reply-To: <20060202170041.80E481795F@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> References: <20060202170041.80E481795F@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: Hi Michelle, back in 2001 when 7 Megapixels were still expensive, we used a small sony digital compact with great success for a population structure study. The only drawback of the compacts compared to a digital SLR was the extreme shutterlag (annoying and at times stressful, but still tolerable with coral work). I would rather recomend something like a Nikon Coolpix 5000, if 5MP are enough, as our colleagues have had good experience with this one. If you need a certain range from wideangle to macro, then the compact cameras offer more flexibility than an SLR with a macro lens, and are much cheaper to house. The macro ability was quite astonishing to me, but it is important to check it out before purchase. I am pretty sure the coolpix range of nikons allow whitebalance settings. However, I suspect whitebalance has limits when used at 20m (did not ry this though). In our experience flash use under water was problematic with compacts. I usually switched off the build in flash, or blocked it by hand. Instead we used a divers light on a strobe arm to illuminate the corals and provide a focussing light to the autofocus. It worked fine, but required sufficient battery capacity. With some underwaterhousings (such as Sealux), you can connect an external flash. Amphibious flashes by Nikon are compatible with the Nikon digitals. However, you can only use the flash in manual mode, unless you use a pro SLR. For our work I really think 5Megapixels are sufficient. I found this website helpful in this regard: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm There is a wealth of information on the net about compatibility of cameras, housings and strobes. You can always ask questions about digital underwater photography on the forum mantained by: www.wetpixel.com. I think there was a good article on white balance by Alexander Mustard stored in the archives. You can see how we used the digicams in our work by downloading the results of our survey (3.6 mb document): http://elib.suub.uni-bremen.de/publications/dissertations/E- Diss1246_TsounisG.pdf Cheers, Georgios Dr. Georgios Tsounis Institut de Ci?ncies del Mar, CMIMA (CSIC) Passeig Mar?tim de la Barceloneta, 37-49 08003 Barcelona, Spain Phone: 34 93 230 96 07 Fax: 34 93 230 95 55 E-mail: georgios at icm.csic.es http://www.icm.csic.es Message: 4 Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 23:34:33 -0800 (PST) From: Trees Seas Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: <20060202073433.87687.qmail at web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Hello I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with an underwater housing) that takes good underwater pictures in natural light. I generally work in the 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so I usually use natural light to save on power. In my experience not all cameras that take good pictures above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind having to do a little color correction afterwards but I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater photos canNOT be color corrected. Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot Michelle Reyes _____________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 2 ***************************************** From thierry_work at usgs.gov Sun Feb 5 14:49:47 2006 From: thierry_work at usgs.gov (Thierry Work) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 09:49:47 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] mucus in the ectodermal epithelium of corals In-Reply-To: <003f01c624b5$d6dfa7a0$e3904084@es.huji.ac.il> Message-ID: Dear Yael: yes, mucocytes definitely are present in calicoblastic epithelium (at least in Porite compressa and lobata) as visualized on electron microscopy. I have, however, yet to see micro-organisms associated with this layer. Thierry M. Work Wildlife Disease Specialist USGS-National Wildlife Health Center Honolulu Field Station PO Box 50167 Honolulu, HI 96850 Tel: 808 792-9520 Fax: 808 792-9596 Cel: 808 554-6490 Web: www.nwhc.usgs.gov/hfs/Homepage.htm Check out the following references on microscopic morphology of corals. These may help: Goldberg W, Makemson J, Colley S (1984) Entoclada endozoica sp. nov., a pathogenic chlorophyte: structure, life history, physiology, and effect on its coral host. Biological Bulletin 166:368-383 Goldberg W, Taylor G (1989) Cellular structure and ultrastructure of the black coral Antipathes aperta: 2. the gastrodermis and its collar cells. Journal of Morphology 202:255-269 Goldberg WM, Taylor G (1989) Cellular structure and ultrastructure of the black coral Antipathes aperta: 1. Organization of the tentacular epidermis and nervous system. Journal of Morphology 202:239-253 Goldberg WM (2001) Acid polysaccharides in the skeletal matrix and calicoblastic epithelium of the stony coral Mycetophyllia reesi. Tissue & Cell 33:376-387 Goldberg WM (2001) Desmocytes in the calicoblastic epithelium of the stony coral Mycetophyllia reesi and their attachment to the skeleton. Tissue & Cell 33:388-394 Goldberg W (2002) Gastrodermal structure and feeding response in the scleractinian Mycetophyllia reesi, a coral with novel digestive filaments. Tissue & Cell 34:246-261 Goldberg WM (2002) Feeding behavior, epidermal structure and mucus cytochemistry of the scleractinian Mycetophyllia reesi, a coral without tentacles. Tissue & Cell 34:232-245 Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates Volume 2 Placozoa, Porifera, Cnidaria & Ctenophora by FW Harrison (Editor) Wiley Press. -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Yael Ben-Haim Rozenblat Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 11:25 PM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] mucus in the ectodermal epithelium of corals Hi all coral listrers, Does anyone knows if there is mucus secretion (or something similar to mucus) from the ectodermal epithelium layer of corals? (meaning the calicoblastic ectodermis, close to the skeleton), and/ or any microorganisms associated with this microlayer of the corals? Are there any publications or work done about this? I appreciate any advice and help , and thank you in advance, Yael Yael Ben-Haim , Pn.D The Institute of Earth Sciences The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Givat Ram Campus, Israel Office: (+972) 2 6586194 _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From keulen at murdoch.edu.au Fri Feb 3 01:08:30 2006 From: keulen at murdoch.edu.au (Mike van Keulen) Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:08:30 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera In-Reply-To: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20060203135409.0238a638@www.mail.murdoch.edu.au> Hi Michelle, I've been using Olympus cameras for some time and found they're excellent for underwater use. Most models have reasonably priced dedicated housings and third party strobes are available for them too. The ones I've used are the C-5060 (5 megapixel) and the C-8080 (8 megapixel) - I think these models have been superseded, but I would guess there would be a suitable replacement. Both the models I use have an excellent super-macro allowing you to get to within 2 cm of the subject. Colour reproduction is excellent. Cheers, Mike At 15:34 2/02/2006, Trees Seas wrote: >Hello > >I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with >an underwater housing) that takes good underwater >pictures in natural light. I generally work in the >5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so >I usually use natural light to save on power. In my >experience not all cameras that take good pictures >above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind >having to do a little color correction afterwards but >I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater >photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel >resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show >corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any >recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks a lot >Michelle Reyes > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Dr Mike van Keulen Lecturer in Plant Sciences and Marine Biology Research Director - Coral Bay Research Station Murdoch University, WA 6150, Australia List-owner: Seagrass_Forum, Mangrove Ph: +61 8 93602369 E-mail: keulen at murdoch.edu.au Fax: +61 8 93606303 URL: http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~keulen/ From jware at erols.com Fri Feb 3 09:34:36 2006 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 09:34:36 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43E369FC.4090403@erols.com> Michelle, I would guess that you are going to get dozens of replies and end up just as confused as before. First question back to you is: How much money do you have? Next would be: Why natural light? (and let me tell you why later). As you have noted, the thing that limits the number of UW pictures you can take in one dive is usually power. So having come to that conclusion let me point out that: 1- The primary camera battery drain is the LCD (or whatever) display. Therefore, if your need is to take 100+ pictures per dive or per excursion (e.g., on a small boat and can't change batteries) go with an SLR (single lens reflex) and set the camera so that it only displays on the LCD for a few seconds after the picture is taken (to assure that you have actually got a decent picture. Using my Nikon D70, I have taken hundreds and hundreds of pictures over the course of a week on a single battery charge. 2- The strobe. I know you wanted to use natural light, but that doesn't always work depending upon depth and the screwing around underwater with white balance. If you use a strobe that holds 8 AAs (e.g. Sea&Sea YS90) and use NiMH batteries rated at 2000+ Ma, you should get at least 200 full strobe flashes. Since you won't need full strobe for most pictures, the actual number will be much greater. My only experience is with the Nikon D70 in a Sea&Sea housing. However, I have friends who use a EOS rebel in a Ikelite housing with the new digital TTL in the housing. I seem to recall that Yossi Loya was not too happy with his at first, I don't know about now. Nikon makes 2 very good, and reasonably priced, digital cameras, the D50 and the D70. About the only difference from a practical viewpoint is the storage media. I prefer the D70 because the compact flash storage is sturdy. Only 6 MegPix but that is plenty because of what appears to be superior interpolation scheme. Also, Nikon has a zoom lens, often part of the purchase package, 28 to 80. This gives reasonable wide angle and still allows sufficient close ups. However, you must make sure that the housing will allow adjusting the zoom as Nikon has a couple of different but very similar lenses, one that doesn't quite fit. But now the price. The camera is not too bad, its the housings that kill you. I suspect that, as with most research, money is limiting. The set ups I have been describing will probably cost about US3000 for everything, maybe even a little more. Having said that, my long experience in UW photography is that, whenever I have tried to go cheap I eventually end up so dissatisfied that I end up buying twice. John Trees Seas wrote: >Hello > >I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with >an underwater housing) that takes good underwater >pictures in natural light. I generally work in the >5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so >I usually use natural light to save on power. In my >experience not all cameras that take good pictures >above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind >having to do a little color correction afterwards but >I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater >photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel >resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show >corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any >recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks a lot >Michelle Reyes > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886, USA * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * http://www.seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * Treasurer and Member of the Council: * * International Society for Reef Studies * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Untainted by Technology \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************* From John.Rollino at earthtech.com Fri Feb 3 07:40:19 2006 From: John.Rollino at earthtech.com (Rollino, John) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 04:40:19 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Species List - CARICOMP Algae Classification Message-ID: <0FE7A03100C5D949A074D0A58DBCCEEA032D1ABE@usnycmail01.et.rootad.com> Hello All: Can someone direct me to a list that identifies which algal species are classified by CARICOMP as the following: * Turf Algae * Fleshy Algae * Calcareous Algae * Encrusting Calcareous Algae Thank you, John This e-mail is intended to be delivered only to the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and proprietary. If this information is received by anyone other than the named addressee(s), the recipient(s) should immediately notify the sender by e-mail and promptly delete the transmitted material from your computer and server. In no event shall this material be read, used, stored, or retained by anyone other than the named addressee(s) without the express written consent of the sender or the named addressee(s). From nithyrna at yahoo.co.in Sun Feb 5 11:47:21 2006 From: nithyrna at yahoo.co.in (nithy anand) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 16:47:21 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] query to coral microbiologist & biotechnologists Message-ID: <20060205164721.48797.qmail@web8314.mail.in.yahoo.com> Dear Listers, Is anyone working with Vibrioids and Pseudomonads associated with corals? I want to know the predominant species and total count associated with them. Somebody please help on these aspects. cheers, Nithy P.Nithyanand Research Scholar C/O Dr. S. Karutha Pandian Department of Biotechnology Alagappa University Karaikudi - 630 003 TamilNadu INDIA H/P: 9443743580 --------------------------------- Jiyo cricket on Yahoo! India cricket From shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au Sun Feb 5 19:22:57 2006 From: shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au (Shelley Anthony) Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 10:22:57 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] 2006/2007 Research Internships available at ReefHQ Aquarium, Townsville, Australia Message-ID: <43E696E1.7080308@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear Colleagues, I would very much appreciate it if you could forward this internship offer to appropriate students and staff, and/or post it on your university job notice board. We are also still seeking qualified applicants for a position to start in September 2006. Regards, Shelley / /As part of its education and outreach role, Reef HQ is offering four curatorial internship positions to suitable applicants for 2007. Each internship position involves one specialist research and development project, that will be the core duty of the candidate. However, interns will also assist with extensive water quality analyses, routine diving and field trips, construction and maintenance of aquarium systems, and other duties related to animal care. This program is designed for university-level or recently graduated individuals intending to undertake a technical or professional career in marine science, aquaculture or a closely related discipline. Please refer to the following link for further information: "http://www.reefhq.com.au/involved/intern/curatorial.html"./ /// -- Shelley L. Anthony, M.Sc. Acting Biologist - Coral Reef Ecosystems ReefHQ Aquarium/The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2-68 Flinders St. PO Box 1379 Townsville QLD 4810 AUSTRALIA Ph: (07)4750-0876 Fax: (07)4772-5281 email: shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au PhD Student ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies School of Marine Biology & Aquaculture James Cook University Townsville QLD 4811 AUSTRALIA shelley.anthony at jcu.edu.au ============================================================================== If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ============================================================================== From claudio.richter at zmt-bremen.de Mon Feb 6 11:31:09 2006 From: claudio.richter at zmt-bremen.de (Claudio Richter) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 17:31:09 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Meeting Announcement: ISRS European Coral Reef Conference 2006 in Bremen Message-ID: 1st Circular 6th European Coral Reef Conference 2006 European Meeting of the International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) 19 - 22 September, 2006, Bremen, Germany Welcome to Bremen! The 6th European Coral Reef Conference 2006 in Bremen is expected to bring together leading coral reef scientists and students to present and discuss state-of-the-art scientific results, education and outreach. It covers all aspects of research, use and management of reefs with a focus on European and European partner contributions from tropical shallow waters to high-latitude deep continental shelves. Date: September 19-22, 2006 Venue: University of Bremen & Center for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT), Bremen, Germany Organisation: Center for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT) Deadline for submission of Abstracts: 15 May, 2006 Deadline for Early Registration: 15 May, 2006 Programme Schedule A regional focus will be on the Indian Ocean and adjacent seas, taking into account the wealth of studies conducted in response to the 1998 bleaching event and the 2004 earthquake and tsunami. As another scientific highlight we expect first results from the IODP Tahiti reef drilling programme. There are many more interesting sessions, and abstracts on all aspects of basic and applied research are welcome! Please submit your abstract by 15 May, 2006! For details, please visit the conference webpage at isrs2006.zmt.uni-bremen.de On behalf of ZMT, the ISRS President and Council, we hope to see you in Bremen! Dr. Claudio Richter Zentrum f?r Marine Tropen?kologie Center for Tropical Marine Ecology Fahrenheitstr. 6 D-28359 Bremen Germany T. +49-421-2380025 F. +49-421-2380030 From michelc at squ.edu.om Mon Feb 6 23:29:13 2006 From: michelc at squ.edu.om (Michel Claereboudt) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 08:29:13 +0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Software to analyse coral video transects Message-ID: <30052D55-B224-46FE-B2AC-E6D2AD95E070@squ.edu.om> I have been off the list for a while. Apparently, a subscriber was interested in a software to analyse (sample I suppose) video transects of coral communities. I have written (still under development, but usable at this stage) such software. If anyone is interested I can email a copy. It works on both PCs and Mac and requires the presence of Quicktime. All formats that quicktime understands can be used as video source files. Dr. Michel Claereboudt Sultan Qaboos University College Agr. and Mar. Sciences Dpt. Marine Sci. and Fisheries Box 34, al-khod 123 Sultanate of Oman Tel: (968) 244 15 249 Fax; (968) 244 13 418 email: michelc at squ.edu.om From eweil at caribe.net Tue Feb 7 08:11:32 2006 From: eweil at caribe.net (EWeil) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 09:11:32 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Information on white plague outbreaks in the Caribbean Message-ID: <0b1ec65a6a674213a4b12aaaa117d18e.eweil@caribe.net> Dear listers, I am interested in observations and/or reports on outbreaks of white plague (or any other coral reef disease) during or after the mass bleaching event of last year in the Caribbean. I know there was an outbreak in St. John reported by Jeff Miller and we put something out from Puerto Rico where we observed and quantified WP outbreaks in several reefs that started around mid-late November. The outbreak was also more intensive in offshore, deep reefs (>15 m) with better water quality compared to inshore and/or shallower reef areas (???). If you have observed any outbreaks, could you please contact me and include the following information: 1- Disease 2- Date outbreak started (approximation will be ok) 3- Locality - reef (if possible GPS coordinates) and approximate depth interval. 4- Any assessment of intensity (proportion of colonies affected) and extension (area - reefs - etc) 5- Current status (still going or it arrested) 6- Any other information/observations you deem relevant Thank you all for your cooperation!! EW Dr. Ernesto Weil Department of Marine Sciences University of Puerto Rico PO BOX 3208 Lajas PR 00667 Pho: (787) 899-2048 x. 241 Fax: (787) 899-5500 - 2630 From david at trilliumfilms.net Tue Feb 7 20:47:58 2006 From: david at trilliumfilms.net (David McGuire) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 17:47:58 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] coral bleaching and selecting marine protected areas Message-ID: Hello, I am new to the list. I am working on a coral reef conservation documentary and would like to do some fact checking. Much of the underwater imagery is shot in atolls in the north and south pacific. We are supporting the NWHI MPA in the film as one solution to protect reef habitat. However, it is difficult to protect against global sea water temperature rises and large scale bleaching events. Would it be accurate to say that the NWHI are well situated geographically in the Pacific gyre to minimize the coral reefs exposure to sea water increase and subsequent bleaching events in comparison to other island groups or reef systems? The Hawaiian Islands experienced cool water temperatures in 1998 and experienced little bleaching effects. It is a bit of a leap perhaps but makes for a good generalized statement of support. Thanks for your advice David McGuire Trillium Films Sausalito CA From G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au Wed Feb 8 01:08:50 2006 From: G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au (Gillian Goby) Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 16:08:50 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] GBRMPA Current Conditions Report (3) Message-ID: <43E98AF2.5040404@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear All, *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the third Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 6 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, the threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region is currently rated as moderate. Sea temperatures in the southern GBR have remained significantly warmer than average (+ 0.5 - 2.5 degrees C) since December 2005 (ReefTemp), and are now exceeding the long-term summer maxima by up to 2 degrees C (NOAA HotSpot map). In contrast, recent heavy cloud cover and rain over northern parts of the GBR has kept temperatures close to average conditions for this region (Reef Futures). Central GBR waters have shown a warming tendency in recent weeks, with sea surface temperatures currently exceeding the January long-term average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C (ReefTemp). Consistent with these temperature patterns, reports of severe coral bleaching have now been confirmed for some reefs in the southern region, with minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer, and with the bleaching risk period far from over we are heavily relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ From jware at erols.com Tue Feb 7 11:01:37 2006 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:01:37 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43E369FC.4090403@erols.com> Message-ID: <43E8C461.4090609@erols.com> Not to belabor this UW camera thing, but I have been corrected: the Sea&Sea YS-90 uses 4 AAs, it is the YS120 that uses 8 AAs and, therefore, carries twice the milliamp*hours for the same type of batteries. John -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886, USA * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * http://www.seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * Treasurer and Member of the Council: * * International Society for Reef Studies * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Untainted by Technology \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************* From Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov Tue Feb 7 11:28:00 2006 From: Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:28:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Update: Bleaching Potential around Melanesia and Australia Message-ID: Melanesia: Bleaching Warning in Fiji-Beqa Warming in Melanesia continues. DHWs now exceed 8 in some areas to the east of Papua New Guinea and around the Solomon Islands. The region of heat stress may be contracting slightly around the Solomon Islands, but warming is now evident to the south of Samoa, American Samoa, and Fiji. A bleaching warning has now been issued for Fiji-Beqa. Australia: Heat Stress is Subsiding on GBR Fortunately, the center of anomalously warm ocean temperatures has moved farther south along the eastern Australian coast. The region of warming evidenced by HotSpot values over 1 degree C is now largely south and east of the Gold Coast, so the immediate threat to the GBR has ended. However, early warming such as this has frequently preceded bleaching stress late in the austral summer. The warming in the Timor Sea has also abated. According to our past data, some bleaching is likely at DHW values of 4 or above and large-scale bleaching and some mortality is likely above 8. We encourage researchers in these regions to watch out for signs of bleaching. Current HotSpot and Degree Heating Week charts can be found at: http://coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/index.html Improved time series graphics for index sites can be found at http:// coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/current/sstdhwsba_series_24reefs.html You can sign up for automated bleaching alerts at http:// coralreefwatch-satops.noaa.gov/SBA.html Please continue reporting bleaching events (or non-events) at http:// www.reefbase.org/input/bleachingreport/index.asp Regards, Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ C. Mark Eakin, Ph.D. Coordinator, NOAA Coral Reef Watch National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Satellite Applications and Research Satellite Oceanography & Climate Division e-mail: mark.eakin at noaa.gov url: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov E/RA31, SSMC1, Room 5308 1335 East West Hwy Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226 301-713-2857 x109 Fax: 301-713-3136 From sdalton at nmsc.edu.au Tue Feb 7 18:58:53 2006 From: sdalton at nmsc.edu.au (Steve Dalton) Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 10:58:53 +1100 Subject: [Coral-List] Management of disease outbreaks Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20060208105247.02428320@mail> Firstly I would like to thank everyone for their replies to my email regarding software to analyse video transects, the response was great, and certainly shows the benefits of this list. I was wondering if anyone has done any studies involving diseased corals where the active margin has been completely removed from the infected colonies and monitored the colony for reinfection? Has anyone had any success in stopping progressive disease/syndrome by removing the margin? Any comments would be welcome Regards Steven Dalton PhD student University of New England NMSC Postgraduate Representative National Marine Science Centre Bay Drive, Charlesworth Bay (PO Box J321) Coffs Harbour, NSW Australia 2450 Ph: 6648 3928 Mob: 0432 946 782 sdalton at nmsc.edu.au From thomas_houze at hotmail.com Wed Feb 8 05:47:11 2006 From: thomas_houze at hotmail.com (Thomas Houze) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 11:47:11 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: Request for Coral manuscript Message-ID: Dear coral biologist, Recently I had the good fortune to see that the first batch of EST for the corals Acropora palmata and Montastraea faveolata are available for download from the NCBI. I was wondering if someone could please send me a copy of the manuscript as an attachment. I am particularly interested in what life-phase the samples used to create the ESTs where in that where used in the study. Thomas Houze, Ph.D. Bioinformatics G?teborg University Dept. of Cell and Molecular Biology Lundberg Laboratory Medicinaregatan 9C 405 30 G?teborg Sweden From ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com Wed Feb 8 12:02:46 2006 From: ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com (Eric Coral Inquiry) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 01:02:46 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Information/Literature on Mineral Accretion Technology (Biorock) Message-ID: <6400622e0602080902w3dd3f2caq3178e612c947a853@mail.gmail.com> Dear Listers, I am planning to carry out research on how MAT, Mineral Accretion Technology (Biorock) affect the growth rate of different coral species in my area. I would like to find out if there is anyone who has any helpful information, or literature references related to MAT, Biorock that can help me. Also, I like to find out if anyone currently doing any research on Biorock and I would like to get in touch with you. At the same time, would also appreciate your help on any existing literature regarding the species of coral found in Sabah (North Borneo) waters. 1) Info/literature on Biorock (I have already been to the Biorock website http://www.globalcoral.org/ , www.*biorock*.net/, www.*wolf**hilbertz*.com/) 2) Like to geet in touch with you if you are doing anything on Biorock 3) Coral Species found in Sabah (North Borneo) waters. Really appreciate your help on the above-mentioned matter. Eric YSY "Marine Biologist in the making" Kota Kinabalu Sabah Malaysia. You can also reach me at: ericevany at gmail.com erjonah at hotmail.com From mjnewman at ucsd.edu Wed Feb 8 12:10:53 2006 From: mjnewman at ucsd.edu (Marah Newman) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:10:53 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons Message-ID: <3F2A27B5-FC18-44CA-8EFB-55300C6CF781@ucsd.edu> Hi All, I have several bleached coral skeletons and I need to calculate skeleton density. I have looked at several papers that detail methods for calculating density via buoyant weights, but I believe this is to get measurements of live corals. Since I have the coral skeleton only, is there any reason why I cannot simple use the basic water displacement method (aka Archimedes)? I know there is some concern regarding trapped air, but if I soak the corals overnight first in DI water, will this take care of it? Any comments as to why this will NOT work, would be great. Thanks. Marah Newman From cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw Thu Feb 9 07:18:39 2006 From: cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw (Chaolun Allen Chen) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 20:18:39 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] coconut crabs and horseshoe crabs conservation genetics Message-ID: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> Dear All, We are developing the conservation project targeted on two large arthropods, coconut crab (Birgus latro) and horseshoe crab ( Tachypleus tridentatus ) in the Indo-West-Pacific region. Our team includes two groups, one is developing aquaculture technique to propagate of these two species. So far we have quite successful results. The other group is developing microsatellite markers for conservation genetics of these two species. For this part of project, we are seeking for the help to collect a small portion of crab's appendage for genetic study throughout the region. For those who can kindly provide us samples, host our field collection, or just want to know the propagation technique of these two crabs, please feel free to contact me. Thank you in advance for your help. Allen Chen, PhD Associate Research Fellow Evolutionary Ecology and Genetics of Coral Reef Laboratory Research Centre for Biodiversity, Academia Sinica, Taiwan E-mail: cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw From csaenger at MIT.EDU Thu Feb 9 11:08:55 2006 From: csaenger at MIT.EDU (Casey Saenger) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 11:08:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Instrumental Salinity/Temperature in Bahamas In-Reply-To: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> References: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> Message-ID: <3762cdc14b847029eaef3aa95240017f@mit.edu> Dear All, Does someone know when noaa's CREWS monitoring of temperature and salinity began in the Bahamas? Thanks, Casey Saenger > Woods Hole Oceanographic Inst. M.S. #23, Clark 117 Woods Hole, MA 02543 508-289-3418 csaenger at mit.edu From szmanta at uncw.edu Thu Feb 9 12:20:07 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 12:20:07 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] New articles on e-journal "Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy" Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A6763A1@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Greetins All: The conservation oriented, free e-journal "Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy" has new publications that can be access through the URL below http://ejournal.nbii.org/progress/index.html ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From Eileen.Alicea at noaa.gov Thu Feb 9 13:04:32 2006 From: Eileen.Alicea at noaa.gov (Eileen Alicea) Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 13:04:32 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Searching for Carib fish out-of-water photos Message-ID: <43EB8430.4010503@noaa.gov> Hello Coral listers, I'm working with the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources on the development of a Spanish (regulated) fish guide for their enforcement officers. We are collecting excellent resolution photos of fish out of the water because they are more realistic for the rangers to learn from and use when inspecting fishers' catches. We have many so far but I'm still searching for the following. We have already searched the DNER files, Fishbase.org and Google images and I'm in the process of reaching the photographers. If you can facilitate these named below, please write to me directly. It will greatly serve the coral reef and fisheries conservation goals of Puerto Rico. 1) Scomberomorus regalis- Cero; Sierra 2) Istiophorus platypterus or albicans; Sailfish - Pez vela. 3) Tetrapturus pfluegeri; Longbill spearfish; aguja picuda. 4) Epinephelus guttatus- Red Hind- Mero Cabrilla 5) Epinephelus striatus- Nassau Grouper; Mero Cherna Thank you, Eileen Alicea NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program From dbucher at scu.edu.au Thu Feb 9 18:40:49 2006 From: dbucher at scu.edu.au (dbucher) Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:40:49 +1100 Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons Message-ID: Hi Marah, Try the following reference for a discussion of Archimedian methods for determining density of bleached coral skeletons. The important distinction is whether you want bulk density/porosity or the specific gravity of the mineral matrix (microdensity). We recommended the use of acetone to penetrate the small pore spaces as the surface tension in water is too great to remove all gas bubbles. We accelerated the process by using a vacuum pump and a bell-jar to lower the pressure. Without the vacuum pump overnight soaking was not long enough - you need several days at least for porous skeletons. The acetone- saturated skeleton was then soaked in several changes of water. Acetone has the added advantage of dissolving residual organic matter (waxes, oils etc) left behind by the bleaching process. Buoyant weigh the saturated skeleton, dry it, coat it with a thin layer of parafin wax and buoyant weigh it again - if you accurately measure the specific density of the water in the weighing apparatus you can calculate the coral's total enclosed volume (matrix plus pore spaces), its dry weight and the volume of the matrix alone. It's not the most exciting thing you will ever do, but it worked for us. Bucher, D., Harriott, V. and Roberts, L. 1998 Skeletal bulk density, micro-density and porosity of acroporid corals. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 228(1)117-135. It's not the most exciting thing you will ever do, but it worked for us. See my small contribution to the next reference for an application of this method. K. Koop, D. Booth, A. Broadbent, J. Brodie, D. Bucher, D. Capone, J. Coll, W. Dennison, M. Erdmann, P. Harrison, O. Hoegh-Guldberg, P. Hutchings, G.B. Jones, A.W.D. Larkum, J. O'Neil, A. Steven, E. Tentori, S. Ward, J. Williamson, D. Yellowlees 2001 ENCORE: The effect of nutrient enrichment on coral reefs: Synthesis of results and conclusions. Marine Pollution Bulletin 42(2):91-120. Cheers, Danny Dr Daniel Bucher Lecturer, Marine Biology and Fisheries School Director of Postgraduate Studies and Research School of Environmental Science and Management Southern Cross University PO Box 157 Lismore, NSW 2480 Australia Ph: 02 6620 3665 Fax: 02 6621 2669 Mobile: 0414 864085 >Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:10:53 -0500 >From: Marah Newman >Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons >To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >Hi All, > >I have several bleached coral skeletons and I need to calculate >skeleton density. I have looked at several papers that detail...snip From sajhowe at yahoo.com Sat Feb 11 19:52:32 2006 From: sajhowe at yahoo.com (Steffan Howe) Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:52:32 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] Eritrean coral reef surveys Message-ID: <20060212005232.60854.qmail@web34707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear coral-listers I am interested in obtaining as much information as possible about coral reef surveys (biodiversity or monitoring etc.) or habitat maps (e.g. showing coral reef locations) from the Eritrean Red Sea for Eritrea?s Coastal, Marine and Island Biodiversity Conservation Project (UNDP/GEF). The Project has already conducted some of its own surveys, but if anyone out there as has any more information it would be greatly appreciated. Regards Steffan Howe --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos ? NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo. From thedivinebovine at gmail.com Sun Feb 12 21:20:32 2006 From: thedivinebovine at gmail.com (wai leong) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Whether Alizarin S dye affects coral recruits Message-ID: Dear coral-listers, I'm investigating the effects of depth on coral growth and survivorship for my final year undergraduate research project in the National University of Singapore. I will be setting out tiles on the reef slope for a 3-4 months before shifting them up to the reef crest and leaving them out for another 3-4 months before taking them out to measure any differences in size and survivorship. As part of this study, I'd have to be able to differentiate the recruits that settled prior to shifting from the ones that settle post-shifting. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I should tag the recruits, apart from trying to find them individually under a microscope before shifting and marking them by hand? I was thinking of marking them with Alizarin S, but am not sure about any effects this might have on the recruits. I should be able to use a low concentration since I'm only trying to faintly dye the existing polyps to be able to tell them apart from the ones that recruit later on. Would appreciate any advice or suggestions anyone might have about this. Thank you! Sincerely, Leong Wai leongwai at nus.edu.sg From will_m_holden at hotmail.com Sat Feb 11 14:57:53 2006 From: will_m_holden at hotmail.com (Will Holden) Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 19:57:53 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] the next step Message-ID: Hi, my name is william holden and i have recently graduated from Newcastle University with a 2:1 degree in Marine biology. I am based in the Uk and am currently looking for work. Whilst this email is an attempt to get advice fon the best way of going about finding work, i do not want people to read this and simply think i am trying to sell myself to the highest bidder (if there happen to be any) I am hoping to get a job either working in a recognised aquarium in the Uk or at a dive centre as it is scuba diving that i am interested in and wish to pursue. This email is merely to ask for advice and any advice given would be gratefully received. Many thanks Will Holden _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN Search Toolbar now includes Desktop search! http://toolbar.msn.co.uk/ From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Mon Feb 13 18:24:00 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:24:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] New Coral-List Posting Policy Message-ID: <1214c8122b5a.122b5a1214c8@noaa.gov> Greetings! I'm afraid the amount of incoming spam to coral-list has become way too burdensome for the coral-list administrators. From now on, all messages from non-members will be automatically discarded, instead of being queued for review. For those of you who like to read from one email address yet post from another, you can add both addresses to coral-list, but enable/disable the other (see http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list, bottom of page, to subscribe/unsubscribe and choose other delivery options). I realize some folks are not subscribers to coral-list and like to occasionally post job or meeting announcements, and when that happens we have sometimes approved those messages. If your colleagues fall into that category, let me know and I'll add them to a special "free pass" sort of category so that those messages can be placed in the queue for consideration. You might also want to review how your address appears to coral-list. For instance, your address may be listed as, say, john.smith at university.edu but when you post, it comes across as john.smith at mach1.university.edu, which might be rejected by the software. Again, check your settings at http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list. If you have any problems with posting a message, please let us know. Thank you for your support and patience. Cheers, Louis Florit Mike Jankulak Jim Hendee From personal at hellenfaus.com Tue Feb 14 07:11:06 2006 From: personal at hellenfaus.com (Hellen Faus ) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 13:11:06 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Presentation In-Reply-To: <20060213170042.BD7031795C@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> Hi all! I'm new at the list and at coral world research itself. I'm a Veterinarian but not working in clinics but in travel and dive issues. I've just discovered the amazing world of corals and want to bet for it and its knowledge and conservation here in Spain, where I live, and over the world. My idea is, with time and a lot of learning, becoming part of any project (new or existent) that involves he sea health... Actually I'm collaboration in the translation into spanish of a web page dedicated to coral and plan to do a educative programme with time. At the end of the year I'll join a 9 months study of coral in the Australian and Indonesian seas, on board of Heraclitus, and meanwhile I want to learn and do as much as I can in this field... Just this presentation to tell you I'm learning a lot here, and would love to participate and have all the ideas you may give to me. Anything you consider to tell me, websites to look to, people to met, places to go, things to read, actions to do, ideas to carry on... do it!! Any help I could offer, any question or information you want to ask me -not about corals as you are the experts ;-) - feel free!! Thanks a lot to all, and remember, here I am! Hellen Faus, DVM Spain. hellen at viajarsolo.com +34 658 421 629 -----Mensaje original----- De: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] En nombre de coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Enviado el: lunes, 13 de febrero de 2006 18:01 Para: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Asunto: Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 10 Send Coral-List mailing list submissions to coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov You can reach the person managing the list at coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Coral-List digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Eritrean coral reef surveys (Steffan Howe) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:52:32 +0000 (GMT) From: Steffan Howe Subject: [Coral-List] Eritrean coral reef surveys To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: <20060212005232.60854.qmail at web34707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Dear coral-listers I am interested in obtaining as much information as possible about coral reef surveys (biodiversity or monitoring etc.) or habitat maps (e.g. showing coral reef locations) from the Eritrean Red Sea for Eritreas Coastal, Marine and Island Biodiversity Conservation Project (UNDP/GEF). The Project has already conducted some of its own surveys, but if anyone out there as has any more information it would be greatly appreciated. Regards Steffan Howe --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos  NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo.From thedivinebovine at gmail.com Sun Feb 12 21:20:41 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Delivered-To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Received: by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (Postfix, from userid 504) id EF7B417952; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.domain.tld (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0152717950 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.194]) by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36EF9177C7 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 16so873573nzp for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:33 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=EYFv37Az2pz4SnGOY6LRlxh7kV2NoEMZshiR354Tdgta8+juuYrulgfSukykT2q1wwUFgZD6wg p/Ndvt7nKVgjenuoAAMvBg4aqCrUDNNVMjSGN0K31Ap0HdrFoz9If16fPuhslODtFDt0SNTkz1A6 aLQTCwSjlObxtUJggo6XY= Received: by 10.36.88.13 with SMTP id l13mr2188985nzb; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.36.36.6 with HTTP; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800 From: wai leong To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov MIME-Version: 1.0 /usr/bin/arc: /usr/bin/arc X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on coral.aoml.noaa.gov X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=HTML_00_10,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_BY_IP autolearn=no version=3.0.4 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 07:57:08 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.2 Subject: [Coral-List] Whether Alizarin S dye affects coral recruits X-BeenThere: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: NOAA's Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP) listserver for coral reef information and news List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Dear coral-listers, I'm investigating the effects of depth on coral growth and survivorship for my final year undergraduate research project in the National University of Singapore. I will be setting out tiles on the reef slope for a 3-4 months before shifting them up to the reef crest and leaving them out for another 3-4 months before taking them out to measure any differences in size and survivorship. As part of this study, I'd have to be able to differentiate the recruits that settled prior to shifting from the ones that settle post-shifting. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I should tag the recruits, apart from trying to find them individually under a microscope before shifting and marking them by hand? I was thinking of marking them with Alizarin S, but am not sure about any effects this might have on the recruits. I should be able to use a low concentration since I'm only trying to faintly dye the existing polyps to b= e able to tell them apart from the ones that recruit later on. Would appreciate any advice or suggestions anyone might have about this. Thank you! Sincerely, Leong Wai leongwai at nus.edu.sg ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 10 ****************************************** From manfrino at reefresearch.org Tue Feb 14 11:54:07 2006 From: manfrino at reefresearch.org (manfrino at reefresearch.org) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 09:54:07 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Little Cayman Research Centre opens for Visiting Researchers this spring... Message-ID: <20060214095407.cc3c2c4bf8d3647e4241dc6e34e2d1c6.eb2d37bf1a.wbe@email.email.secureserver.net> The Little Cayman Research Centre opens for visiting researchers this spring. The Central Caribbean Marine Institute is proud to announce that Caribbean's newest field station, the Little Cayman Research Centre (LCRC) fringed by the world-renowned coral reefs of Bloody Bay Marine Park, is open to researchers. The Centre opened to students late last summer. Shallow lagoon, wall, and deep ocean (several thousand meters) habitats are all within swimming distance of the LCRC field station. The coral reefs of Little Cayman are among the best in the Caribbean for research due to the fact that they are isolated from continental and anthropogenic influences and water quality is excellent. In addition to diverse oceanographic settings over relatively short distances, Little Cayman has a well-established marine park system and one of the last spawning aggregations of the Nassau grouper. For more information on the research centre, please visit [1]www.reefresearch.org or contact me or our [2]manager at reefresearch.org to book a project (group or class). Thanks, Carrie Manfrino Central Caribbean Marine Institute [3]www.reefresearch.org Dr. Carrie Manfrino, President P.O. Box 1461 Princeton, NJ 08540 Ph:(609) 933-4559 Caribbean Headquarters Little Cayman Research Centre North Coast Road P.O. Box 37 Little Cayman, Cayman Islands (345) 926-2789 References 1. http://www.reefresearch.org/ 2. mailto:manager at reefresearch.org 3. http://www.reefresearch.org/ From pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr Tue Feb 14 18:14:32 2006 From: pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr (sandrine job) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:14:32 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] Killing Acanthaster planci In-Reply-To: <43E98AF2.5040404@gbrmpa.gov.au> Message-ID: <20060214231432.46799.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Dear Coral List, Firstly I would like to thank all the person who answered my questions about the Culcita pleague I observed on one of my restoration site in New Caledonia. I will keep you inform on the progress on this phenomenon during the course of the monitoring. So far, from the latest observations I have made on site, their number seems to stabilise and only very few coarls were attacked lately. It thus seems to confirm that they were attracted by stressed corals just after their transplantation and now that transplants are adapting to their new environmeent (and repair their lost tissue), the mortality is lower... These trends need to be confirmed. Once again thank you coral list members and if you hear anything about Culcita let me know. Secondly I had a question about what is the best way to kill COTs? Is it appropriate to kill them under the water by smashing them? or should we remove them from the water?and what about pricking them to catch them? Is it true that they will release eggs and worsten their invasion?? Cheers, Sandrine JOB Gillian Goby a ?crit : Dear All, *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the third Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 6 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, the threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region is currently rated as moderate. Sea temperatures in the southern GBR have remained significantly warmer than average (+ 0.5 - 2.5 degrees C) since December 2005 (ReefTemp), and are now exceeding the long-term summer maxima by up to 2 degrees C (NOAA HotSpot map). In contrast, recent heavy cloud cover and rain over northern parts of the GBR has kept temperatures close to average conditions for this region (Reef Futures). Central GBR waters have shown a warming tendency in recent weeks, with sea surface temperatures currently exceeding the January long-term average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C (ReefTemp). Consistent with these temperature patterns, reports of severe coral bleaching have now been confirmed for some reefs in the southern region, with minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer, and with the bleaching risk period far from over we are heavily relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.T?l?chargez la version beta. From burdickdr at hotmail.com Wed Feb 15 07:03:06 2006 From: burdickdr at hotmail.com (David burdick) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 07:03:06 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? Message-ID: Greetings coral-listers, I am interested in obtaining coral recruit/juvenile coral data for the Bahamas from 2002-2004 but I haven't had any luck finding anything in the literature - any suggestions? I performed a small-scale study looking at the effects of macroalgal reduction and Diadema antillarum addition on a set of small patch reefs off the SW coast of Eleuthera and wish to compare the results of my juvenile coral surveys to that of other researchers in the area. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! David R. Burdick NOAA Pacific Islands Assistant Guam Guam Coastal Management Program Phone: 671.472.4201 From ccook at HBOI.edu Wed Feb 15 10:14:11 2006 From: ccook at HBOI.edu (Clay Cook) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:14:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Professorship in Marine Biology Message-ID: <2309E53F80BD7841A64800D44F69F71B270239@sailfish.hboi.edu> Dear Coral-listers, Note the following position that is currently available at Florida Atlantic University, as part of the joint FAU-Harbor Branch Oceanographic partnership. Inquiries should be sent to Dr. Rod Murphey, (rmurph16 at fau.edu),Chairman, Department of Biological Sciences. Please pass this on to interested parties. Thanks and cheers, Clay Clayton B. Cook, Ph. D. Senior Scientist Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution Ft. Pierce, FL 34946 USA Ph. 772-465-2400 x 301 Mobile 772-579-0599 Fax 772-468-0757 McGinty Endowed Chair in Marine Biology The Department of Biological Sciences at Florida Atlantic University (FAU) invites nominations and applications for the John Thomas Ladue McGinty Eminent Scholar chair position in Marine Biology. Candidates should be internationally recognized as distinguished leaders in their specific field of marine biology and currently have a well-established research program. We seek an individual deeply committed to both research and teaching, particularly at the graduate level, in order to enhance a new Ph.D. program in Integrative Biology. Special consideration will be given to candidates whose research takes full advantage of FAU's geographic proximity to the marine and estuarine environments of Florida and the tropical Atlantic-Caribbean region. Applicants from a diversity of subdisciplines will be considered including, but not limited to ecology, physiology, molecular biology and organismal biology. The McGinty Eminent Scholar will conduct a program of research that facilitates collaborations with departmental faculty and strengthens current collaborations with Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution (HBOI) and other marine institutes in the region. Biology faculty are actively involved in marine biological research at both the Boca Raton (www.science.fau.edu/biology) and HBOI campuses (www.hboi.edu). The Eminent Scholar will be active on both campuses having primary research space in the new 40,000 sq. ft. FAU-HBOI facility. He/she will be expected to guide the recruitment of several new junior faculty positions aimed at enhancing the Marine Biology initiative at FAU. The endowed chair position will be filled at the full professor level with a joint appointment at the Senior Scientist level at HBOI. Review of applications will start March 1, 2006 and continue until the position is filled. Further information regarding the position can be obtained from Dr. Rod Murphey (rmurph16 at fau.edu),Chairman, Department of Biological Sciences. Applications and nominations should include curriculum vitae, five representative publications, a short description of research and teaching interests, and names and contact information of three referees. Submit applications electronically to Mrs. Lynn Sargent (lsargent at fau.edu) McGinty Eminent Scholar Search Committee, Department of Biological Sciences, Florida Atlantic University, 777 Glades Rd., Boca Raton, FL 33431. FAU is an Equal Opportunity/Equal Access Institution. From reefball at reefball.com Wed Feb 15 10:30:52 2006 From: reefball at reefball.com (Todd Barber) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:30:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? References: Message-ID: <00fa01c63244$f657c530$6501a8c0@LaFalda> Hi David, You might check with the Island School on Eleuthera. The kids there did a Reef Ball project and various classes did various monitoring projects on them. I'm not sure you could give much power to any data collected since I doubt they had adequate controls or even consistent data collection methods but there might be something there for at least sounding board. Thanks, Todd Barber Chairman Reef Ball Foundation, Inc. 3305 Edwards Court Greenville, NC 27858 reefball at reefball.com http://www.artificialreefs.org http://www.reefball.org http://www.reefball.com Direct: 252-353-9094 mobile: 941-720-7549 Fax 425-963-4119 Personal Space: http://www.myspace/reefball Group Space http://groups.myspace.com/reefballfoundation Skype & MSN For Voice or Video Conferences: Available upon request Atlanta/Athens Office 890 Hill Street Athens, GA 30606 USA 770-752-0202 (Our headquarters...not where I work see above) ----- Original Message ----- From: "David burdick" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 7:03 AM Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? > > Greetings coral-listers, > > I am interested in obtaining coral recruit/juvenile coral data for the > Bahamas from 2002-2004 but I haven't had any luck finding anything in > the literature - any suggestions? I performed a small-scale study > looking at the effects of macroalgal reduction and Diadema antillarum > addition on a set of small patch reefs off the SW coast of Eleuthera > and wish to compare the results of my juvenile coral surveys to that > of other researchers in the area. Any help would be greatly > appreciated. > > Thanks! > > David R. Burdick > > NOAA Pacific Islands Assistant Guam > > Guam Coastal Management Program > > Phone: 671.472.4201 > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From F.Webster at murdoch.edu.au Wed Feb 15 20:43:11 2006 From: F.Webster at murdoch.edu.au (Fiona Webster) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:43:11 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Postings please Message-ID: Hi I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after references and/or unpublished data. Thank you Fiona Webster Phd student Marine Ecology School Biological Sciences Department of Science and Engineering Murdoch University From deevon at bellsouth.net Thu Feb 16 09:56:52 2006 From: deevon at bellsouth.net (DeeVon Quirolo) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:56:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20060216094920.026ff5c0@bellsouth.net> Dr. Brian Lapointe of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution and Dr. Peter Bell of University of Queensland/Australia both arrived at the same thresholds from different perspectives, but they are: 1 mg/L dissolved inorganic nitrogen, .01 mg/L soluble reactive phosphorus. You can contact either Lapointe or Bell for further info. These thresholds are far lower than any current water quality regulations. Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Reef Relief www.reefrelief.org At 08:43 PM 2/15/2006, Fiona Webster wrote: >content-class: urn:content-classes:message >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="utf-8" > >Hi >I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in >Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down >effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral >health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal >growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar >level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient >enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and >phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after >references and/or unpublished data. >Thank you > > >Fiona Webster > >Phd student > >Marine Ecology > >School Biological Sciences > >Department of Science and Engineering > >Murdoch University > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From dustanp at cofc.edu Thu Feb 16 10:39:04 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:39:04 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> References: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> Message-ID: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil From info at reefguardian.org Thu Feb 16 09:34:44 2006 From: info at reefguardian.org (ReefDispatch) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:34:44 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Will Development Smother Guana Cay Reef? Message-ID: <43F48D84.78CE@reefguardian.org> ****************************** * February 16, 2006 * * R E E F D I S P A T C H * * __________________________ * * Will Unwise Development * * Smother Guana Cay Reef? * * * * -- sign on via -- * *http://www.reefguardian.org * ****************************** A Periodic Inside Look at a Coral Reef Issue from Alexander Stone, ReefGuardian International Director ____________________________________________________ Dear Friend of Coral Reefs, The coral reefs off tiny seven-mile Great Guana Cay in the northern Bahamas is under threat by an irresponsible mega-development.? Scientists around the world -- including top coral reef ecologists, and coral pathologists -- agree that the Discovery Land Company's plans to build a golf course, 500 residential units and a 180-slip marina will kill the coral reef in a matter of a few years. You could help prevent this by speaking up for this coral reef through the Featured Petition at ReefGuardian's just-updated website at http://www.reefguardian.org. Coral reefs are in serious decline around the world, and especially in the Caribbean.? But the reef at Great Guana Cay is among the few remaining healthy reefs in the entire Caribbean.? This reef, which is only 45 feet away from the beach of the proposed development, contains an incredible diversity of reef fishes, sharks, and brilliant corals. But that will all become an algae-ridden dead zone in just a few years if the Discovery Land development proceeds as planned. That's why I urge you to get involved through the Speak Up section at http://www.reefguardian.org. The native inhabitants of Guana Cay have formed an environmental organization to fight this development. But they need all the help they can get. Normally, such small islands never have an international voice.? Help prove that even little islands can have a strong voice in defense of their coral reefs. Go to our newly-updated website at http://www.reefguardian.org to learn how. Thanks so much for caring! Alexander Stone Director ReefGuardian International *************************** http://www.reefguardian.org *************************** From rvw at fit.edu Thu Feb 16 09:36:11 2006 From: rvw at fit.edu (Robert van Woesik) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:36:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Funding opportunity: Six ISRS/TOC fellowships for 2006 Message-ID: <000001c63306$55445600$6c4876a3@CORAL> Dear coral-list, The International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) are very pleased to announce that in 2006 we will be supporting up to six Ph.D. students in the general area of coral reef ecosystem research. Each award will be up to US$15,000. Submission DEADLINE - 31 March 2006 The following text is available in pdf format at http://www.fit.edu/isrs/ Fellowship announcement for coral reef studies Six ISRS/TOC fellowships (2006): International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) graduate fellowship for coral reef research DEADLINE - 31 March 2006 - for funds up to US$15,000 per award are available to support up to six Ph.D. students in the general area of coral reef ecosystem research. 1) Background and Fellowship Goals "Considerable thicknesses of rock have certainly been formed within the present geological era by the growth of coral and the accumulation of its detritus; and, secondly, that the increase of individual corals and of reefs, both out wards or horizontally and upwards or vertically, under the peculiar conditions favourable to such increase, is not slow, when referred either to the standard of the average oscillations of level in the earth's crust, or to the more precise but less important one of a cycle of years" (page 79, Darwin, 1842 The Structure & Distribution of Coral Reefs). Indeed, Darwin would be surprised just how 'peculiar' those conditions are on contemporary coral reefs. In 2006 unfavorable conditions are ubiquitous on reefs globally. Scientists and reef managers are increasingly working together to develop sound management strategies that are based on rigorous science. Scientific questions are being addressed on reef disturbances and reef resilience, climate change and adaptation, reef connectivity, and effective management practices, to name a few. Many coral reefs are in poor condition, yet we know very little about the very threats that are undermining the integrity of coral reefs. What processes and mechanisms are causing differential mortality and how are some species still able to survive and indeed be successful in times of stress. Studies are needed that will combine management with process level information. Research supported by the ISRS/TOC Fellowship should increase our understanding of processes on coral reefs that are relevant to management at local, regional, or global scales. 2) Conditions Within the proposal, and as a condition of each ISRS/TOC Fellowship, recipients will be required to articulate how they will report back to the ISRS/TOC on their research progress, outline their findings, acknowledge the support, and publicize the outcomes. 3) Who can apply? The Fellowship is available to students worldwide, who are already admitted to a graduate program at an accredited university. The intent of the fellowship is to help Ph.D. students develop skills and to address problems related to relevant applications of coral reef ecosystem research and management. The Fellowship can be used to support salary, travel, fieldwork, and laboratory analyses. The student can work entirely at the host institution, or can split time between developed and developing country institutions. 4) Application materials A four page proposal as a pdf document, using 12-point font or larger, double spaced, in English, is required from prospective fellowship candidates: proposals that do not meet these criteria may be returned. The proposal should include the following sections: a. Overview: The overview starts with the Proposal Title, Author Name, Author's Address, Major Professor Name, Major Professor's Address (if different than the Author's), and total amount in the budget request. The overview should place the proposed research in context. We are looking for a clearly stated rationale, research objectives and a clear question that is driving the research within the context of the literature. b. Methods: The methods section includes hypotheses, methods, and experimental design - including details on field or laboratory techniques and how data will be analyzed. c. Relevance & implications of research: This section will outline expected outcomes, how the work is relevant to host country management and science issues and the implications of the research within a broader context. This section also includes evidence of host country coordination (e.g., identification of individuals or programs that will benefit from your results); The following three sections are required but do not count against the four page limit: d. Detailed Budget: The budget must not exceed $15,000. Evidence of cost sharing is desirable for the application. Cost sharing might include, for example, additional funding, accommodation, the loan of equipment, or access to analytical facilities. e. Literature Cited: Use a bibliographic format that includes full titles in the citations. f. Applicant CV: 2 pages maximum. g. Letter of support: The student's major professor must submit a support letter for the project based on their knowledge of the project, and familiarity with the student's background and abilities. If work will be conducted at another university, a support letter is required from the sponsoring Professor. 5) Submitting your application All application materials must be submitted electronically as follows: a) All materials must be sent to Dr. Robert van Woesik at: rvw at fit.edu b) The completed proposal (items 4a-f above) must be combined into a single document and sent as an attachment in pdf format. Please enter the subject line of your message as your last name followed by "ISRS/TOC Proposal" (e.g., "VAN WOESIK_ISRS/TOC Proposal") c) The letter of support (item 4g above) must come directly from the major professor as an e-mail attachment (pdf format). Please enter the subject line of the message as the last name of the applicant followed by "ISRS/TOC Support" (e.g., "VAN WOESIK_ISRS/TOC Support"). Applications will be considered complete only after the support letter has arrived. You should ensure that your sponsors are aware of the deadline, and can get their letters submitted in a timely manner. Only completed electronic applications will be reviewed, and this will be accomplished by an ISRS panel. 6) Evaluation Criteria include: a) scientific merit, b) feasibility, c) support letter from major professor, d) host country coordination, e) relevancy to the Fellowship guidelines, f) reporting strategy (on research progress and findings, see conditions in 2, above). 7) Administration of the Fellowship The International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) support the Fellowship through professional and administrative contributions. ISRS/TOC is committed to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination. The mission of the ISRS is to promote for the benefit of the public, the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge and understanding concerning coral reefs, both living and fossil. The TOC is committed to protecting ocean environments and conserving the global abundance and diversity of marine life. Through science-based advocacy, research, and public education, TOC promotes informed citizen participation to reverse the degradation of our oceans. Dr. Robert van Woesik Professor Department of Biological Sciences Florida Institute of Technology 150 West University Boulevard Melbourne Florida 32901-6988 USA Email: rvw at fit.edu http://www.fit.edu/~rvw/ Phone 321 674 7475 From chwkins at yahoo.com Thu Feb 16 11:17:01 2006 From: chwkins at yahoo.com (Christopher Hawkins) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 08:17:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060216161702.33190.qmail@web32802.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Phil- A good question. I know that TNC folks, as part of the Florida Reef Resiliency Program (which has state, Sanctuary, NOAA and university partners), is working on this as we speak. I am fairly sure they haven't inked anything concrete yet, though. Best, Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Hawkins at forwild.umass.edu Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil --------------------------------- What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos From pkramer at tnc.org Thu Feb 16 15:18:04 2006 From: pkramer at tnc.org (Phillip Kramer) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:18:04 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Phil- As Chris mentioned, The Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) has been working on this question for the past year. Finding few agreed upon quantitative metrics for assessing resilience on Florida reefs in the literature has led us to approaching it from a number of different angles- expert input, review and analysis of existing monitoring data, statistically based broad-scale surveys to quantify response to disturbance (in this case bleaching) across all sub-regions and reef zones that have been identified within the Florida reef tract, and finer scale investigations tracking coral survivorship along selected gradients. Below is a summary from a pilot expert based (delphic) exercise we did last year to tap into local knowledge. Not surprisingly, we found quite a bit of disparity between what experts thought were "resilient" often based on background/expertise/age of the person. From this excersise, we have a GIS database and can provide maps which identify over 43 "resilient" reefs as identified by experts along with the reasons these reefs were identified. This might be a useful starting point for where to start looking at some standard metrics. Steven Miller's group also has a very rich baseline dataset collected over a number of years for a much broader set of functional and structural indicators that may also help inform this question. If anyone is interested in the expert maps or an overview of the FRRP program just let me know. We can also share results of the first broad scale bleaching surveys carried out last summer. Regards, Phil Philip Kramer, Ph. D. Director, Caribbean Marine Program The Nature Consevancy 55 N. Johnson Road Sugarloaf Key, FL 33042 305-745-8402 ext. 103 Summary of South Florida Reef Expert Meetings on Reslience One of the initial goals of the Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) is to locate and map coral reefs within the region that exhibit characteristics of resilience. To arrive at this goal, several activities have been implemented by The Nature Conservancy during spring 2005. Along with conducting an analysis of existing coral reef monitoring data, anecdotal information has been collected from local reef experts to help identify where potentially resilient reefs are located. A diverse array of individuals with considerable first hand knowledge of the coral reef resources within the region were identified and subsequently interviewed for this effort. Three tropical sea life collectors, 2 fishers, 6 federal employees (NOAA and USGS), 1 state employee, 5 individuals affiliated with universities, 7 members of local non-governmental organizations, and 1 dive industry representative were involved with this process. These 25 individuals provided a wealth of information from a wide geographic range and from varying perspectives. Interviews with individuals or small groups were conducted over a 4 week period; from April 1 through Aril 26, 2005. During each interview, a similar range of questions were asked to ensure compatibility of responses. Reef experts were first given a brief description about the FRRP goals and overview of a number of activities currently underway. Each person was first asked to comment on the spatial framework which identifies unique reef ?strata? that occur within different subregions and cross shelf zones of the Florida reef tract. This spatial framework will function to identify distinct reef biotopes within the region and guide the a regional stratiofied sampling design to assess response to disturbances such as coral bleaching. Interviewed participants provided useful information on ways to improve the framework and/or confirm it?s accuracy from their point of view. Experts were asked if they know of existing data sets that may be useful for the further improvement of the spatial framework as well. In order to assess the geographic areas each individual is most familiar with, the zones and sub-regions within the spatial framework were used as a reference. Following these discussions, using nautical charts, benthic habitat maps, and other spatial datasets, reef experts were asked to identify reef or hardbottom areas they believe have maintained its functional integrity over the past years to decades given the various disturbances which have influenced south Florida. They were also asked if they know of ?special or unique areas? that may act as refuges (e.g., do not bleach when other areas do or have functional or structural characteristics indicative of resilience such areas with particularly high coral cover or large living coral heads, etc..). Interviewees identified a wide range of potentially resilient areas- from specific parts of individual reefs to entire habitats or zones. The information gathered from these interviews on potentially resilient reef areas was tabulated and then digitized in GIS. Along with these questions, we asked the experts to comment on why they belief these areas are showing signs of ?resilience? (factors of resilience). Finally, we asked each expert to describe what attributes of a reef is most valuable to them. Table 1: List of interviewed reef experts Reef Expert Organization/Occupation Geographic Area of Expertise Don de Maria Fisher Lower Keys Billy Causey Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Region wide Ken Nedimyer Tropical sea life collector Upper and Lower Keys Lad Atkins Reef Environmental Education Foundation Keys wide and SE coast Harold Hudson Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Keys wide Forest Young Dynasty Marine Rebecca Shoal to Middle Keys Bob Ginsburg University of Miami, RSMAS Region wide Margaret Miller NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami Dana Williams NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami Rodrigo Garza University of Miami, RSMAS Tortugas and Miami Michelle PaddockUniversity of Miami, RSMAS Upper Keys through Miami Bill Parks Tropical sea life collector Palm Beach County Gene Shinn US Geological Survey Region wide Bob Halley US Geological Survey Region wide Walt Jaap Florida Wildlife Research Institute Region wide Pam Muller University of South Florida Region wide Dr. Ray McAllister Prof. Emeritus, Florida Atlantic University SE Coast Stephen Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Timothy Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Debrorah Devers Vone Research (501c3) Broward County David Zinni Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Randy Brooks Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Jeff Torode Greater Ft. Lauderdale Diving Association Broward County Peter Cone Lobster diver Key West Erich Bartels Mote Marine Laboratory Region wide -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Christopher Hawkins Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 11:17 AM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Cc: Dave Loomis Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Phil- A good question. I know that TNC folks, as part of the Florida Reef Resiliency Program (which has state, Sanctuary, NOAA and university partners), is working on this as we speak. I am fairly sure they haven't inked anything concrete yet, though. Best, Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Hawkins at forwild.umass.edu Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil --------------------------------- What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From reef at bellsouth.net Thu Feb 16 16:47:14 2006 From: reef at bellsouth.net (reef at bellsouth.net) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:47:14 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] (no subject) Message-ID: <20060216214714.DCBQ1775.ibm67aec.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> RE: healthy coral in the Florida Keys I would suggest Western Samboos off of Key West. There is a lot of healthy elkhorn (alittle storm damage from Wilma though). Parts of it is from the coral nursery project that had great results (done by Reef Relief). The Dry Tortugas park is a great resource as well. Hope this helps! Vicky Ten Broeck From julian at twolittlefishies.com Thu Feb 16 18:17:33 2006 From: julian at twolittlefishies.com (Julian Sprung) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 18:17:33 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs Message-ID: <60146F1515751D4AA4CB4D3EC514F9E311AA1C@SERVER.tlf.local> It may be news to some members of the list to know that aquarists growing corals in reef aquariums come to essentially the same recommended background level for phosphorus, about 0.015 mg/L being a threshold that seems to be important in managing the proliferation of algae in reef aquariums. Some other observations about it - 1. corals will grow at substantially higher phosphorus concentrations in aquariums, especially when grazers are present to control algae. 2. Some corals will stop growing or bleach and die when the phosphate level is maintained not very much below the abovementioned threshold! This is a point of great interest as aquarists balance food inputs and phosphate export. Apparently corals can acclimate to lower levels as long as the transition is not too fast. Acclimation to "higher" concentrations, but still close to the abovementioned threshold, does not kill corals, but may cause SPS corals to become less colorful. It should also be noted that the observations may have some relation to the loss of corals to bleaching events in the most nutrient poor waters in the natural environment. There was already a long thread on this list about inorganic nitrogen in aquarium culture of corals, but suffice it to say that corals in aquariums grow well with background levels much higher than proposed for their natural environment. They also grow well at nitrogen poor conditions, but may bleach if the levels become too low in an aquarium, especially when food inputs are scarce. Maintaining low levels help promote bright color in (Indo-Pacific) SPS corals, as the "background" zoox brown color is reduced and other pigments become more obvious. When discussing nutrients I like to make an analogy that I think is appropriate-- I compare nutrients to light availability. If you think about sunlight on the reef, it comes in 2 distinct forms: background sky light and light from the sun itself. Nutrients as a background level (the abovementioned thresholds) could be thought of as analogous to sky light- all around and just right for normal growth. There are other sources of nutrients that are like the point source of light from the sun-- more intense and focused. Fish living (and eliminating waste) among coral branches would be an example of a nutrient supply that far exceeds the "background." These point sources (light or nutrients) seem to enhance growth. The analogy works but does not correspond with respect to water movement effects on nutrient availability. Julian > ---------- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of DeeVon Quirolo > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 9:56 AM > To: Fiona Webster; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov; coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs > > Dr. Brian Lapointe of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution and Dr. > Peter Bell of University of Queensland/Australia both arrived at the > same thresholds from different perspectives, but they are: 1 mg/L > dissolved inorganic nitrogen, .01 mg/L soluble reactive > phosphorus. You can contact either Lapointe or Bell for further > info. These thresholds are far lower than any current water quality > regulations. > > Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Reef Relief www.reefrelief.org > > > > At 08:43 PM 2/15/2006, Fiona Webster wrote: > >content-class: urn:content-classes:message > >Content-Type: text/plain; > > charset="utf-8" > > > >Hi > >I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in > >Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down > >effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral > >health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal > >growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar > >level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient > > >enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and > >phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after > >references and/or unpublished data. > >Thank you > > > > > >Fiona Webster > > > >Phd student > > > >Marine Ecology > > > >School Biological Sciences > > > >Department of Science and Engineering > > > >Murdoch University > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Coral-List mailing list > >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From colocha30 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 16 18:52:05 2006 From: colocha30 at yahoo.com (carolina castro) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 17:52:05 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Looking for PDF articles Message-ID: <20060216235205.65991.qmail@web34712.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear All, I am looking for some articles that I couldn?t be able to download. I would really appreciate if somebody could attach them on PDF format for me. Thank you. Brander, et.al., 1971. Comparison of species diversity and ecology of reef-living invertebrates on Aldabra Atoll and at Watamu, Kenya. Symp. Zool. Soc. London, 28: 397-431. J.B. Lewis and P.V.R. Snelgrove, 1989. Response of a coral-associated crustacean community to eutrophication. Marine Biology, 101(2): 249-257. J.B. Lewis and P.V.R. Snelgrove, 1990. Corallum morphology and composition of crustacean cryptofauna of the hermatypic coral Madrasis mirabilis. Marine Biology, 106(2): 267-272. Carolina Castro S. Biologa Marina UJTL Bogota, Colombia __________________________________________________ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ?gratis! Reg?strate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/ From gregorh at reefcheck.org Thu Feb 16 19:42:31 2006 From: gregorh at reefcheck.org (Gregor Hodgson) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:42:31 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <003301c6335b$0d0a57e0$0600a8c0@toshibauser> Hi Phil, I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and only one species of human. Regards, Greg -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From j.oliver at cgiar.org Fri Feb 17 03:31:44 2006 From: j.oliver at cgiar.org (Oliver, Jamie (WorldFish)) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 16:31:44 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef Scientist Position at the WorldFish Center - Penang Message-ID: Dear Colleagues The WorldFish Center has an exciting new position opening for a Coral Reef Scientist at the WorldFish Center. This is a normal staff position with a 3 year renewable contract. The Scientist would lead a new GEF-funded project examining lessons learned and best practices in coral reef management, and would also be expected to develop and lead other coral reef projects relevant to the mission of the Center. The position would contribute to, and assist in the strategic planning and oversight of ReefBase, the Center's global information system on coral reefs. This position will be one of several new positions currently being filled at the Center in the field of Natural Resources management, and offers the opportunity to join a dynamic new multi-disciplinary team seeking to make a significant impact on poverty and food security in developing countries. (see "jobs" on our website www.worldfishcenter.org ). Please pass this message on to any potential candidates or interested parties. Best regards Jamie Oliver Research Scientist - Coral Reefs Description: The WorldFish Center , located on the island of Penang , Malaysia , is a world-class scientific research organization. Our mission is to reduce poverty and hunger by improving fisheries and aquaculture. We have offices in nine countries and engaged in collaborative research with our partners in more than 50 countries. The Center is a nonprofit organization and a member of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). A unique opportunity has arisen for a gifted individual to contribute to the mission of the Center and make a personal impact on the lives of millions of less fortunate people in developing countries around the world. We seek a highly competent and motivated individual to fill the following position within the Natural Resources Management Discipline: Responsibilities: Provide scientific leadership and vision in the development of new research and knowledge management opportunities relating to coral reefs and associated ecosystems. Design, develop and submit project proposals relevant to the management and sustainable use of coral reefs in developing countries. Develop collaborative arrangements with advanced scientific institutions and national research systems to increase the outputs for agreed research projects Prepare proposals to development agencies for funding of new priority projects and the continuation of existing long-term projects Publish results of research in peer-reviewed scientific journals, and disseminate in web pages, newsletters and other popular media Prepare scientific reports for donors and WorldFish management Represent the Center at relevant high level scientific fora Supervise and mentor relevant staff Contribute to strategic science discussions and the development of science directions within the NRM Discipline and relevant regional strategies and global initiatives. Requirements: Phd in Ecology, tropical fisheries, or related discipline and 3 year's research experience related to coral reefs or tropical coastal systems. Demonstrated research innovation, publications in internationally reefed journals and the application of research to management issues Experience in assembling, organizing and analyzing large volumes of information from a variety of sources and disciplines and synthesizing these into clear themes and identifying emergent issues and ideas. Strong quantitative skill in statistical and spatial analysis, and relevant computer programs Excellent program management skills, including planning organization, and budgeting. Ability to manage several projects simultaneously. Experience in multi-disciplinary and multi-organization and multi-country projects. Ability to work effectively in diverse cultural contexts English proficiency and excellent project management skills The WorldFish Center offers a competitive remuneration package, a non-discriminatory policy and provides an innovative work environment. Interested applicants are invited to submit a comprehensive curriculum vitae that includes names and contacts (telephone, fax, and e-mail address) of three (3) professional referees who are familiar with the candidate's qualifications and work experience, via e-mail to worldfish-hr at cgiar.org, no later than 15 March 2006. Only short-listed candidates will be notified. ============================================ Jamie Oliver Director, Science Coordination The WorldFish Center PO Box 500, GPO, 10670 Penang Malaysia Street address: Jalan Batu Maung, 11960 Bayan Lepas, Penang, Malaysia Ph: 60 4 620 2209 Fax: 60 4 626 5690 email: J.Oliver at cgiar.org ========================================== From laura.jeffrey at imperial.ac.uk Fri Feb 17 04:26:23 2006 From: laura.jeffrey at imperial.ac.uk (Jeffrey, Laura) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 09:26:23 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] MSc Thesis Ideas Imperial Message-ID: <37629CD96DEBCF42B807EAD22EA7EF78C84EC5@icex3.ic.ac.uk> Dear All, I am a postgrad presently reading for an MSc in Environmental Technology at Imperial College, London. In April we are due to start our dissertations and my hope that I would be able to investigate coral reefs and their current level or protection through policy/initiatives and such like. I hold a 1+3 studentship so the hope is that this project will be the stepping-stone to a PhD in the same field. I have attached below my current thoughts and ideas regarding this subject. However, I am well aware that I am limited in knowledge on this subject and would therefore appreciate any suggestions that come my way. I was advised by a colleague that the coral list was the best way to go with regards finding the right experts to talk to; useful contacts; projects that are currently underway so that maybe I could join one; advising a specific region to focus on; further suggestions re the direction of my ideas so that they mat form a project and such like. Any help on this matter would be much appreciated! Yours Sincerely, Laura Jeffrey Project Ideas: Environmental Law/Policy and Biodiversity/Conservation: Coral Reef Project Ideas Coral Reefs are not only extremely aesthetically pleasing, but they support an extraordinary amount of biodiversity and have enormous economic value. However, at present coral reefs are at serious risk of decline considering the current trends in climate change (threats posed by global warming), coastal development, pressure from over-fishing, fishing practices such as cyanide poisoning and explosives and tourism, along with other environmental stressors. According to The Nature Conservancy, if the destruction increases at the current rate, 70% of the world's coral reefs will have disappeared within 50 years. Such a loss would have dramatic impacts on marine biodiversity, fisheries, shore protection, tourism and would be an economic disaster for those people living in the tropics. Dissertation: Initially set out to see whether or not the world's coral reefs are being sufficiently protected by reviewing (investigation into?) the current level of protection, including MPAs, any policy instruments, environmental agreements already in place to encourage protection, or lack thereof. Given the depth and breath of the subject matter, the study would invariably have to be selective....zone in on specific area/case study PhD: Is there a role for environmental law (policy/treaties) to tackle the environmental degradation of coral reefs? Assess the viability of transposing legal remedies to environmental protection of this endangered area with a view that the author would hopefully provide recommendations/possible options at the end! Included in thesis/PhD? * The best methods of protection are those that are specific to the problem, therefore explore the role of how science can inform policy here (make policy makers aware/political science of MPAs). * (From Dr Polunin, Newcastle, "and nearly all the science is derived from reef habitats that don't apply at al to continental shelf waters" ??? Significant? * What determines the most viable strategy? * What would influence uptake? * How would this be implemented and enforced? Specific criteria for successful implementation. * Interaction between different sectors, national, provincial, and local community level? I am aware that America is very forward thinking in this field and has initiatives in place. Maybe this would be an appropriate case study? Again, any help much appreciated!! From esther.peters at verizon.net Fri Feb 17 11:40:25 2006 From: esther.peters at verizon.net (Esther Peters) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:40:25 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? References: <003301c6335b$0d0a57e0$0600a8c0@toshibauser> Message-ID: <43F5FC79.7090506@verizon.net> Gregor and Phil make good points. As part of an exercise to look at reef classification for the purpose of developing coral reef biocriteria, I examined the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program data from the Keys collected in 1996, looking at coral cover, species dominance, and richness, and applying the "coral morphological triangles" (conservation class) concept of Edinger and Risk (2000). A preliminary comparison with the results obtained from the 2004 CREMP dataset revealed that just in those few years there were significant structural and functional changes at some offshore shallow reef sites. And of course, based on long-time Keys' residents and reef scientists, we know of even more changes over the past 25 years. The Nature Conservancy's diverse approach is also important to help us understand reef dynamics in the Keys and the influences of natural and anthropogenic disturbances. I'm not sure that anyone has figured out the "standard, or baseline reef." My first look at this issue indicates that even in the Keys there are several biotopes and more investigations are needed as to which one(s) should serve as "reference condition" for each class. Esther Peters Gregor Hodgson wrote: > Hi Phil, > > I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a > "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? > > Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be > a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It > is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs > given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, > sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing > conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging > will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. > > Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and > only one species of human. > > Regards, > Greg > > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? > > > Dear Listers, > With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency > underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as > measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or > Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". > Thanks, > Phil > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From esther.peters at verizon.net Fri Feb 17 11:56:47 2006 From: esther.peters at verizon.net (Esther Peters) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:56:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] 2006 Advanced Courses in Tropical Marine Sciences in the Florida Keys Message-ID: <43F6004F.1080103@verizon.net> The following opportunities for advanced studies on coral reefs will be offered at Mote Marine Laboratory's Tropical Research Laboratory in the Florida Keys this summer. Please use these links to learn more about each session and obtain application materials: Coral Tissue Slide Reading Workshop (July 25-28) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/slide_workshop.phtml Diseases of Corals and Other Reef Organisms (July 29-August 6) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/disease_workshop.phtml Secondary Succession on Damaged Coral Reefs Workshop (August 7-10) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/succession_workshop.phtml From l.bunce at conservation.org Fri Feb 17 12:14:52 2006 From: l.bunce at conservation.org (Leah Bunce) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 12:14:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] MPA Social Scientist position Message-ID: <64207F75AB45B54296B2E2DAA4DA9D8B08707302@ci-mail1.ci.conservation.org> Dear Coral Colleagues, I would greatly appreciate it if you would forward the announcement below to social scientists who might be interested or who know those who might. This is a unique opportunity to direct a large social science research initiative to further management effectiveness of marine protected areas worldwide. The position involves working with CI here in DC and closely with CI and partners in-country. For more info about the program, see . Thank you! Leah ______________ Leah Bunce, PhD Senior Director Marine Management Area Science Program Center for Applied Biodiversity Science Conservation International 1919 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 (202) 912-1238 l.bunce at conservation.org Position: Research Scientist - MPA Social Scientist Program: Center for Applied Biodiversity Sciences, Conservation International Location: Washington, DC The social scientist will be responsible for overseeing Conservation International's Marine Management Area Science Program social science research activities. This is a unique opportunity for someone with strong academic credentials and overseas conservation experience to gain experience managing a large program of applied marine research across many sites. Program research is focused around critical marine management area research needs related to management effectiveness, connectivity, resiliency, valuation, economic development and enforcement. Required: A solid understanding of the marine protected area social science field. Preferred: Four years of experience conducting applied social science research and translating the results into conservation action. Experience in tropical nations, preferably in one of the 4 priority sites (Brazil, Belize, Panama & Ecuador and Fiji). Project management experience, including planning, working with a range of colleagues, and budgeting. Experience conducting social science to benefit marine conservation and establishing a process to ensure the results are used by decision-makers. Flexibility and the ability to coordinate science activities outside the person's immediate area of expertise. Master's degree required, Ph.D. preferred. To apply: Application deadline - March 1, 2006 From hyamano at nies.go.jp Mon Feb 20 00:10:03 2006 From: hyamano at nies.go.jp (hyamano at nies.go.jp) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 14:10:03 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Dear colleagues, Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th ICRS, Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD-ROMs will be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send it to all the participants. For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the print. If the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop printing the Proceedings. More news will be sent as soon as I hear. Best wishes, Hiroya Yamano Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html From eborneman at uh.edu Mon Feb 20 10:00:11 2006 From: eborneman at uh.edu (Eric Borneman) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:00:11 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS In-Reply-To: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> References: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Message-ID: <09599ED7-B06F-4340-9BBE-76B3B0CA8921@uh.edu> Hello Hiroya: Thank you for the update on the Proceedings and I am greatly looking forward to seeing them and appreciate the work that has certainly been required to produce them. I am curious, though, about the printing. If the CD-ROM is already formatted, as it should be given the nature of the formatting required for submitted material, then any of thousands of print-on- demand printers should be able to produce bound volumes by a print-on- demand cost that can be from 1 to many thousands of copies. For example, one print-on-demand company found with a quick google search will print hardback copies (6x9) with full color covers, dust jackets, up to 500 pages and provide 10 free copies of the book for US $1000 and this includes free CD e-books and 30% royalties for each copy sold if they are the distributor and 50% of CD-ROM sales. I consider this to be quite expensive. I think others on this list I know who have written full color books over 500 pages would agree that we would not be writing (or selling) much if printing costs and selling prices were this high. While I don't have the details of the manuscript, the minimum order and costs seem very out of line with what I know about book publishing (which isn't much), having written two books. I think the cost of book series, such as Corals of the World, which are similarly large, colorful (which previous Proceedings have never been) and well made indicates what is possible. The costs of scientific publication have always been a mystery to me, to say the least, and in terms of most journals, an outrageous racket. If, however, there are very few orders for text-based copies I can see that the cost would be high, but I see no reason for it to be impossible for even one copy to be produced given the nature of POD technology today. I hope others on the list who have published books could comment further. Best, Eric Borneman Dept. of Biology and Biochemistry University of Houston Science and Research Bldg. II 4800 Calhoun Houston, TX 77204 On Feb 19, 2006, at 11:10 PM, hyamano at nies.go.jp wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th > ICRS, > Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. > > We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD- > ROMs will > be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send > it to > all the participants. > > For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. > However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the > print. If > the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop > printing the Proceedings. > > More news will be sent as soon as I hear. > > Best wishes, > > Hiroya Yamano > Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS > Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings > > ---- > Hiroya Yamano > UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement > BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia > Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 > Also at NIES > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From sjameson at coralseas.com Mon Feb 20 04:06:15 2006 From: sjameson at coralseas.com (Dr. Stephen Jameson) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:06:15 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Message-ID: Dear Phil, Thanks for the Coral-List note regarding: >> Dear Listers, >> With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency >> underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as >> measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or >> Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Per: Jameson SC, Erdmann MV, Karr JR, Potts KW (2001) Charting a course toward diagnostic monitoring: A continuing review of coral reef attributes and a research strategy for creating coral reef indexes of biotic integrity. Bull Mar Sci 69(2):701-744 "In multimetric biological assessment, reference condition equates with biological integrity. Biological integrity is defined as the condition at sites able to support and maintain a balanced, integrated, and adaptive biological system having the full range of elements and processes expected for that biogeographical region and type of environment (coral reef zone) (Jameson et al. 2001, Table 1, page 702). Biological integrity is the product of ecological and evolutionary processes at a site with MINIMAL human influence (determined by best available information)." As you well know, there is no reef in the Florida Keys with minimal human influence. For a recent summary of this situation see: Jameson SC, Tupper MH, Ridley JM (2002) The three screen doors: can marine ?protected? areas be effective? Marine Pollution Bulletin 44(11):1177-1183. So how could you approach this problem? Your question is assuming just using a "single" reference site to create a reference condition. (Note of caution: I would recommend using more than one reference site to create a reference condition for a specific biogeographic region. Also, reference conditions based on reference sites may incorporate considerable variability because of scale and in some biogeographic regions this variability may be unsatisfactory.) However, you can create reference conditions using a combination of the following types of data (Jameson et al. 2001, page 705). Each approach has its strength and weaknesses. Historical Paleoecological Experimental Laboratory Quantitative Models Best Professional Judgment References Sites But, before this question can be answered a few more questions need to be addressed. 1. What metrics and related organisms are you using in your monitoring and assessment program? Are you just looking at corals or are you developing a more complex invertebrate, algae and/or fish index of biotic integrity with a mix of species? For example, if you were using forams you might have good paleo data to create your reference condition with. If you are using corals, there might be good historical data or you might be able to use agent based models (like John McManus is developing) and run them backwards to get a historical perspective. Best professional judgment will also be a valuable resource for all metrics. Your sampling protocol is critical, it needs to be consistent and this will control what organisms are available for analysis - and determine what reference conditions are needed. If you can't create a defendable reference condition then your chosen metric is of little use. 2. What coral reef zone are you targeting (Esther's point). Different types of organisms will be found in different zones, so you want to be comparing apples to apples and not confounding (mixing) data. This will also influence what reference conditions you need to develop. 3. How far back in history do you want to go with your reference condition - pre-Columbus, start of the industrial revolution, pre-Miami development? Bottom line: just using a single Florida Keys reference site selected in 2006 will not produce a satisfactory reference condition in the Florida Keys situation no matter what metric/s you are using - which I know you realize. I am putting the final touches on the following paper that outlines these concepts in more detail. Jameson SC, Karr JR, Potts KW (in ms) Coral reef biological response signatures: a new approach to coral reef monitoring and assessment with early warning, diagnostic, and status & trend capabilities. Coral Reefs Also see, when it comes out: Jameson SC (in press) Summary of Mini-Symposium 4-2, Diagnostic Monitoring and Assessment of Coral Reefs: Studies from Around the World. Proc 10th Intl Coral Reef Symposium, Okinawa, Japan I hope this brief summary helps. All papers referenced can be downloaded at . If I can be of further service please give me a call. PS. Caution should be used with respect to using "resilient reefs" for reference sites as the fact that they are categorized as "resilient" suggests that they have been subjected to stressors and are not located in minimally impaired environments. We are looking for those reefs that have not bleached - which as Greg points out - will be harder and harder to find, thus reinforcing the need to use the other approaches for creating reference conditions. Best regards, Dr. Stephen C. Jameson, President Coral Seas Inc. - Integrated Coastal Zone Management 4254 Hungry Run Road, The Plains, VA 20198-1715 USA Office: 703-754-8690, Fax: 703-754-9139 Email: sjameson at coralseas.com Web Site: http://www.coralseas.com and Research Collaborator Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History Washington, DC 20560 ******************* > Gregor and Phil make good points. As part of an exercise to look at > reef classification for the purpose of developing coral reef > biocriteria, I examined the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program > data from the Keys collected in 1996, looking at coral cover, species > dominance, and richness, and applying the "coral morphological > triangles" (conservation class) concept of Edinger and Risk (2000). A > preliminary comparison with the results obtained from the 2004 CREMP > dataset revealed that just in those few years there were significant > structural and functional changes at some offshore shallow reef sites. > And of course, based on long-time Keys' residents and reef > scientists, we know of even more changes over the past 25 years. The > Nature Conservancy's diverse approach is also important to help us > understand reef dynamics in the Keys and the influences of natural and > anthropogenic disturbances. I'm not sure that anyone has figured out > the "standard, or baseline reef." My first look at this issue indicates > that even in the Keys there are several biotopes and more investigations > are needed as to which one(s) should serve as "reference condition" for > each class. > > Esther Peters > > > Hi Phil- As Chris mentioned, The Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) has > been working on this question for the past year. Finding few agreed upon > quantitative metrics for assessing resilience on Florida reefs in the > literature has led us to approaching it from a number of different angles- > expert input, review and analysis of existing monitoring data, statistically > based broad-scale surveys to quantify response to disturbance (in this case > bleaching) across all sub-regions and reef zones that have been identified > within the Florida reef tract, and finer scale investigations tracking coral > survivorship along selected gradients. > > Below is a summary from a pilot expert based (delphic) exercise we did last > year to tap into local knowledge. Not surprisingly, we found quite a bit of > disparity between what experts thought were "resilient" often based on > background/expertise/age of the person. From this excersise, we have a GIS > database and can provide maps which identify over 43 "resilient" reefs as > identified by experts along with the reasons these reefs were identified. > This might be a useful starting point for where to start looking at some > standard metrics. Steven Miller's group also has a very rich baseline > dataset collected over a number of years for a much broader set of > functional and structural indicators that may also help inform this > question. > > If anyone is interested in the expert maps or an overview of the FRRP > program just let me know. We can also share results of the first broad > scale bleaching surveys carried out last summer. > > Regards, > Phil > > Philip Kramer, Ph. D. > Director, Caribbean Marine Program > The Nature Consevancy > 55 N. Johnson Road > Sugarloaf Key, FL 33042 > 305-745-8402 ext. 103 > > Summary of South Florida Reef Expert Meetings on Reslience > > One of the initial goals of the Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) is to > locate and map coral reefs within the region that exhibit characteristics of > resilience. To arrive at this goal, several activities have been > implemented by The Nature Conservancy during spring 2005. Along with > conducting an analysis of existing coral reef monitoring data, anecdotal > information has been collected from local reef experts to help identify > where potentially resilient reefs are located. A diverse array of > individuals with considerable first hand knowledge of the coral reef > resources within the region were identified and subsequently interviewed for > this effort. Three tropical sea life collectors, 2 fishers, 6 federal > employees (NOAA and USGS), 1 state employee, 5 individuals affiliated with > universities, 7 members of local non-governmental organizations, and 1 dive > industry representative were involved with this process. These 25 > individuals provided a wealth of information from a wide geographic range > and from varying perspectives. > > Interviews with individuals or small groups were conducted over a 4 week > period; from April 1 through Aril 26, 2005. During each interview, a > similar range of questions were asked to ensure compatibility of responses. > Reef experts were first given a brief description about the FRRP goals and > overview of a number of activities currently underway. Each person was > first asked to comment on the spatial framework which identifies unique reef > ?strata? that occur within different subregions and cross shelf zones of the > Florida reef tract. This spatial framework will function to identify > distinct reef biotopes within the region and guide the a regional > stratiofied sampling design to assess response to disturbances such as coral > bleaching. Interviewed participants provided useful information on ways to > improve the framework and/or confirm it?s accuracy from their point of view. > Experts were asked if they know of existing data sets that may be useful for > the further improvement of the spatial framework as well. In order to > assess the geographic areas each individual is most familiar with, the zones > and sub-regions within the spatial framework were used as a reference. > Following these discussions, using nautical charts, benthic habitat maps, > and other spatial datasets, reef experts were asked to identify reef or > hardbottom areas they believe have maintained its functional integrity over > the past years to decades given the various disturbances which have > influenced south Florida. They were also asked if they know of ?special or > unique areas? that may act as refuges (e.g., do not bleach when other areas > do or have functional or structural characteristics indicative of resilience > such areas with particularly high coral cover or large living coral heads, > etc..). Interviewees identified a wide range of potentially resilient > areas- from specific parts of individual reefs to entire habitats or zones. > The information gathered from these interviews on potentially resilient reef > areas was tabulated and then digitized in GIS. Along with these questions, > we asked the experts to comment on why they belief these areas are showing > signs of ?resilience? (factors of resilience). Finally, we asked each > expert to describe what attributes of a reef is most valuable to them. > > Table 1: List of interviewed reef experts > > Reef Expert Organization/Occupation Geographic Area of Expertise > Don de Maria Fisher Lower Keys > Billy Causey Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Region wide > Ken Nedimyer Tropical sea life collector Upper and Lower Keys > Lad Atkins Reef Environmental Education Foundation Keys wide and SE coast > Harold Hudson Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Keys wide > Forest Young Dynasty Marine Rebecca Shoal to Middle Keys > Bob Ginsburg University of Miami, RSMAS Region wide > Margaret Miller NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami > Dana Williams NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami > Rodrigo Garza University of Miami, RSMAS Tortugas and Miami > Michelle PaddockUniversity of Miami, RSMAS Upper Keys through Miami > Bill Parks Tropical sea life collector Palm Beach County > Gene Shinn US Geological Survey Region wide > Bob Halley US Geological Survey Region wide > Walt Jaap Florida Wildlife Research Institute Region wide > Pam Muller University of South Florida Region wide > Dr. Ray McAllister Prof. Emeritus, Florida Atlantic University SE Coast > Stephen Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Timothy Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Debrorah Devers Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > David Zinni Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Randy Brooks Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Jeff Torode Greater Ft. Lauderdale Diving Association Broward County > Peter Cone Lobster diver Key West > Erich Bartels Mote Marine Laboratory Region wide > Gregor Hodgson wrote: > >> Hi Phil, >> >> I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a >> "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? >> >> Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be >> a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It >> is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs >> given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, >> sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing >> conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging >> will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. >> >> Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and >> only one species of human. >> >> Regards, >> Greg >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan >> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM >> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? >> >> >> Dear Listers, >> With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency >> underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as >> measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or >> Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From simmi_nuern at yahoo.com Mon Feb 20 09:32:24 2006 From: simmi_nuern at yahoo.com (Simone Nuernberger) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 06:32:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Coralliophila In-Reply-To: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Message-ID: <20060220143224.12107.qmail@web60313.mail.yahoo.com> Hi everyone, Can anyone please tell me (as detailed as possible) how the gastropod Coralliophila sp. affects hard corals and how this predation can be visually identified? Do signs of Coralliophila differ with the presence of algae in coral tissue? How can these predation scars be distinguished from coral diseases? One more question: Has anyone encountered a syndrome showing as ?green spots? ? small necrotic patches of light green coloration on the coral surface? Our studies were based in Indonesia and we mostly found these impairments on massive colonies of Porites spp. I appreciate your help! Cheers, Simone *************************************************************************** Simone N?rnberger (M.Sc.) simone_nuernberger at web.de Institute of Biology (Biological Oceanography) University of Southern Denmark DK-5230 Odense M --------------------------------- Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses! From habakuk at nova.edu Mon Feb 20 21:31:43 2006 From: habakuk at nova.edu (Lindsey Klink) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 21:31:43 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Mooring Buoy Questionnaire Message-ID: <20060220213143.2hlykz9pcks048k8@mail.acast.nova.edu> Mooring Buoy Questionnaire I am a Research Assistant with the National Coral Reef Institute (NCRI). I am currently conducting a mooring buoy use and effectiveness study. As part of this study I am compiling detailed information about mooring buoy programs around the world. To collect this information I have created a web-based questionnaire to be filled out by individuals associated with mooring buoy programs. To read more about this effort and to take part in the study, please visit: www.nova.edu/ncri/mooringbuoy.html Thank you very much for your time and any information about mooring buoy programs that you are able to provide! Lindsey H. Klink Research Assistant National Coral Reef Institute Nova Southeastern Univ. Oceanographic Center 8000 N. Ocean Dr. Dania Beach, FL 33004 USA habakuk at nova.edu From dustanp at cofc.edu Tue Feb 21 09:32:11 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Message-ID: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And probably haven't been for a long time. My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses that are far greater, supports this form of denial. Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even be up to R4 if conservation is successful. Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) From ctwiliams at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 11:59:39 2006 From: ctwiliams at yahoo.com (Tom Williams) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 08:59:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060221165939.90967.qmail@web50408.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Agreed - what is left after 50-100years of farm runoff, fertilizer, golf courses, bottle/dynamite blasting, etc. would be a better question - at this stage, every coral should be precious and protected, but they are in the wrong places.... Recent discussions regarding Arabian/Persian Gulf and Red Sea, and East Malaysia, Philippines, and Majuro/Marshalls can be added to the Keys. Costs $50 to reclaim and can sell for $500...OK But some for Dubai Claim that programs are underway to mitigate and compensate after the fact and since fish like the reclamation it is improved. Dr. Tom Williams The original is too long --- Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots > of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are > none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > My point is that before we talk about resilience, > maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of > their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost > over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the > 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing > vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been > talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in > full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to > minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be > worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully > engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, > or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, > some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or > boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no > point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are > the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting > (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. From szmanta at uncw.edu Tue Feb 21 12:35:10 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:35:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] FW: Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813A2D@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Dear Dr. Yamano: I am concerned about the proposed high cost of hard copies of the proceedings. Since I came to UNCW, I have helped our library acquire all of the series of proceedings (most we obtained for free from the various institutions that had published them) so that our students could use these valuable tomes to learn from and plan research. But my institution, as I am sure is true for so many others, does not have enough funds to pay for all the journals and books we need, and such a high cost could mean that they would decide not to buy this proceedings set. I suggest an alternative: The cost of the CD set is reasonable I hope. If the 10thICRS committee would permit non-for-profit academic institutions to make their own hard copies from the CDs, then each institution could find a less expensive way to make a permanent copy for their collections. It should certainly cost less that a few hundred dollars to print out a full copy (and there would be no shipping of heavy books across the seas!). It may not be as nice as a professionally printed copy but it will do the job. At least my university library would not do this unless there was an explicit permission to make such a copy so as not to violate copyright laws. Unless you can find a less expensive printer, I suggest you consider this option. It would be a shame if after all that work on your part, the Proceedings didn't find homes in our libraries. Sincerely, Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of hyamano at nies.go.jp Sent: Mon 2/20/2006 12:10 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Cc: paal.buhl.mortensen at imr.no; i04t0021 at k.hosei.ac.jp; purkis at nova.edu; c.roelfsema at uq.edu.au; rwaller at whoi.edu; p.kench at auckland.ac.nz; jan.helge.fossaa at imr.no; jgoodman at uprm.edu; Qamar.Schuyler at crm.gov.mp; yamano at noumea.ird.nc; andrefou at noumea.ird.nc Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Dear colleagues, Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th ICRS, Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD-ROMs will be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send it to all the participants. For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the print. If the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop printing the Proceedings. More news will be sent as soon as I hear. Best wishes, Hiroya Yamano Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From riskmj at univmail.cis.mcmaster.ca Tue Feb 21 12:45:43 2006 From: riskmj at univmail.cis.mcmaster.ca (Michael Risk) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:45:43 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: Hi Phil. Thanks you for crystallising the discussion, and articulating some of my own concerns. One of the many problems is: "All politics is local." (Tip O'Neil, American politician) It is always easier to blame the external. One of my students was in the back of a hall in the Keys 2-3 years ago during one of those public meetings, and heard a senior Florida reef manager say the decline in the reefs was caused by "All those Canadians driving down here every winter in their SUV's, making Carbon Dioxide." (True quote-no one has to MAKE UP things reef managers say.) Now, it may well be that no one should drive SUV's, but it cannot be said enough times: bleaching has had NOTHING TO DO with the decline of Florida's reefs. Everyone reading this list should repeat after me-and Phil-NOTHING TO DO. And now we see that the new kid on the block, FRRP, will focus only on bleaching. Something is badly wrong. We don't need more science-the science has spoken eloquently. In...2000? (help me, Walt, Phil-when was it?) I was a member of a NOAA panel that evaluated all the reef monitoring programs in the Florida Keys. (Why was there more than one, you may ask? In fact, there were about six.) Our conclusion was that monitoring had done its job. (Monitoring can NEVER identify causes, although a good monitoring program can allow selection of hypotheses.) In this case, the monitoring programs, especially the FMRI program, had successfully documented the regional mass extinction under way in the Keys. And that was the panel's carefully-chosen phrase: "regional mass extinction." We recommended consolidation of the monitoring programs, and an immediate increase in funding designed to rank the various land-based threats, in order that action could be taken. We also recommended an outreach program. That may be the key to the Keys. Every citizen of Florida should be told that: 1. there is big trouble in the Keys, and that 2. the causes are all local. The managers will be reluctant to be too assertive-after all, they have Big Sugar and Big God-knows-what watching them. The impetus has to be bottom-up. To coin a phrase. And we reef scientists have to learn that we score our own points at the expense of the ecosystem. Mike On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but > no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach > a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty > fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about > studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right > in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this > years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the > built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in > continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of > a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the > losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps > there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many > people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not > simply > sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s > > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of > having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats > their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and > denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > > than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or > slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the > R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might > even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor > is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > > -- > Phillip Dustan Ph.D. > Department of Biology > College of Charleston > Charleston SC 29424 > (843) 953-8086 voice > (843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From chwkins at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 13:15:18 2006 From: chwkins at yahoo.com (Christopher Hawkins) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:15:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060221181518.99270.qmail@web32813.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Phil and everyone: Your shot across the bow is welcome by some of us who realize that the biology only holds so much promise for a solution, and that there are a suite of things that need to be employed in tandem with the biophysical sciences to address these issues. I am not sure where I stand about remnancy vs. resiliency. It has a bit of a chicken and the egg connotation to it. Are some reefs remnant because they are resilient? Are they now resilient because they are remnant, for whatever reason? It is a tough one to wrap your head around... I'd like to comment, though, on one part of your posting, and that is the notion that promoting competition among dive shops with a "R" scale. I would think that identifying a reef as an R3 would prompt management to look more towards limiting activities at that site, rather than a "rush to destroy it" approach. At first glance, I might suggest that such a scale would be useful, though. However, it is critical not just to understand the reef condition, but also the users of that reef(s). Specialization theory (a human dimensions tool) offers a framework to do this. With specialization, we know that there are is a continuum of users from low to highly specialized (e.g. PADI Open Water Divers to Nitrox Divers), and that highly specialized users are the ones most likey to obey regulations and support management actions (Ditton, Loomis, Choi, 1992; Salz and Loomis, 2005, Salz, Loomis and Finn, 2001; Bryan, 1977/2000). Directing those users with to an R3, R4, or R5 reef would be then become a management alternative. In addition, management alternatives such as placing only a few mooring bouys at the highest "R" sites, would seem like a good strategy. Of course, all of this depends on identifiying resilient or remnant reefs and then scaling them, which seems to be what is causing some problems. And on understanding the nature of the area's user groups, which is never done very methodically. I have just identified one potential way to like resiliency to a conservation mechanism. I believe there are others, but we need to know all of the tools available. Thanks. Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Marine and Coastal Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And probably haven't been for a long time. My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses that are far greater, supports this form of denial. Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply sewage But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, Carysfort R1, etc Maybe this might help create public awareness and political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even be up to R4 if conservation is successful. Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. From ricksanders at comcast.net Tue Feb 21 13:34:49 2006 From: ricksanders at comcast.net (Rick Sanders) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:34:49 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas References: <6.0.1.1.2.20060118164353.02559c00@mail.waquarium.org> <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CAE9A@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <004b01c63715$7fa4b760$650da8c0@manta> Dear Listers, I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find an image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been unable to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish brown color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each other in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped into more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm in width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if to crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what I am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a copy or link. Thanks very much in advance, Best regards, Rick Rick Sanders Deep Blue Solutions Media, PA 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net From kruer at 3rivers.net Tue Feb 21 15:27:21 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:27:21 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <43FB77A9.7050007@3rivers.net> Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil Dustan. But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true change in direction. There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the amazingly productive Keys (and no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, and no it should never be held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with problems much broader than simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying that the problem with seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important figure easily dispenses with all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and filling, thousands upon thousands of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc etc., See how easy it is. And it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself during some of the countless consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I refused to play along with the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys all would be OK. What a joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo is going to change much is wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions to upgrade the Key West plant to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything measurable? And we were promised that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds good but can't happen on a scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of the Keys as I began to see myself as a part of the problem. The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the Keys ecosystem and manage human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too much attention is focused on a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that most else would be protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's limited funds on a new facility in Key West is going to change much? Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as stand alone systems and the problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands continue to be lost and degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are trying legally to protect the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving activity (and associated impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the state and the state points to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have taken place but it's not working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - but it's obviously not enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live bottom and predictably now hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of miles of slow-degrading poly line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to replace them every year just to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by the tens of thousands daily, fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot long cruise ships plow up the bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone effectively turns a blind eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. Shallow water marine habitats throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are subjected to the disturbing and destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster boats of all types. People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is failing. The rate of loss and anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that is what matters. Large vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's great. But new leadership is needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? Catering to virtually every user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in ecosystem protection or even maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef management in the Keys as a success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New leadership is needed and that leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and address all issues throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And they need to be loudly supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has the most knowledge about what has been lost and is being lost. Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and other lists will lead to something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and misdirected effort. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply > sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > From szmanta at uncw.edu Tue Feb 21 17:33:52 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 17:33:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813BB7@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Hello Mike, Phil and Curtis: The problem with attributing all of the loss of coral in the Florida Keys to local human impacts, as you three have done in your comments, is that the same pattern of loss of live coral is being observed in remote places of the Bahamas and other small Caribbean islands with small or no human populations, no sewage to speak of and no cruise ships. To ignore the dramatic effect coral bleaching and subsequent disease outbreaks, on top of overfishing, have had on Keys and northern Caribbean corals since the mid-1990s and especially since the severe 1997-1998 back-to-back bleaching events, is not helpful to conservation or management efforts. Bleaching has reached reefs that are distant from direct human impact as well as the Keys, with similar effects on both. Overfishing is far more pervasive than water quality degradation because boats go everywhere to extract the last lobster and grouper. The healthiest Caribbean reefs, if one judges that based on live coral cover, that I have seen in a long while are those in the lower Caribbean where they have, for hydrographic and climatic reasons, not been as impacted by either bleaching or major storms: Reefs on the S side of Curacao and Bonaire still have more coral now than what I remember for places like PR and the USVI back in the 1960s and 1970s. And they have high coral cover within 1 km of where the cruise ships docks and next to the outflow from the desalination plant. And they have very high rates of coral recruitment and no algae even on boulders with no Diadema, and few fishes. Go figure! There are many reefs on the GBR with water quality conditions far worse than in the Florida Keys (in terms of turbidity, nutrient levels and such variables) with much higher coral cover and diversity. Ken Anthony is even showing corals on these turbid reefs feed on the detritus and have higher growth rates than corals on more offshore reefs. Florida reefs have a disadvantage of being at the northern limits of the climatic window for coral well being in the Atlantic province, with way too many severe winter and summer storms. These geographic limitations have existed for thousands of years and have limited coral reef growth over Holocene time frames. When I first visited Nassau reefs in 1971 and the Florida reefs during the 1977 symposium, when my frame of reference was Puerto Rican reefs, my opinion of Florida/Bahamas reefs was that they were puny and depauperate. Now they are even more depauperate. That is no excuse to abuse them, but to ignore the climatic factor is not helpful towards restoring or protecting them (if that is possible). Multiple factors are at work, and a single quick fix will not do the trick. Over-simplification and trying to crucify a single factor will not help society deal with these complex issues. Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Curtis Kruer Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 3:27 PM To: Phil Dustan Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil Dustan. But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true change in direction. There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the amazingly productive Keys (and no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, and no it should never be held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with problems much broader than simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying that the problem with seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important figure easily dispenses with all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and filling, thousands upon thousands of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc etc., See how easy it is. And it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself during some of the countless consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I refused to play along with the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys all would be OK. What a joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo is going to change much is wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions to upgrade the Key West plant to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything measurable? And we were promised that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds good but can't happen on a scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of the Keys as I began to see myself as a part of the problem. The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the Keys ecosystem and manage human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too much attention is focused on a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that most else would be protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's limited funds on a new facility in Key West is going to change much? Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as stand alone systems and the problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands continue to be lost and degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are trying legally to protect the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving activity (and associated impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the state and the state points to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have taken place but it's not working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - but it's obviously not enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live bottom and predictably now hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of miles of slow-degrading poly line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to replace them every year just to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by the tens of thousands daily, fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot long cruise ships plow up the bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone effectively turns a blind eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. Shallow water marine habitats throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are subjected to the disturbing and destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster boats of all types. People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is failing. The rate of loss and anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that is what matters. Large vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's great. But new leadership is needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? Catering to virtually every user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in ecosystem protection or even maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef management in the Keys as a success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New leadership is needed and that leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and address all issues throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And they need to be loudly supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has the most knowledge about what has been lost and is being lost. Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and other lists will lead to something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and misdirected effort. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I'd like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it's patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there's a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we've know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply > sewage......But still we look for bright spots. I think it's because it's > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It's been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > than resiliency, I'd favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc... Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it's a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From knudby at gmail.com Tue Feb 21 16:48:14 2006 From: knudby at gmail.com (Anders Knudby) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:48:14 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] instrument to measure water depths Message-ID: <551b8dba0602211348y1e58fb60y20da80776e676217@mail.gmail.com> Hi coral listers, I am looking for an instrument that I can use to measure consecutive substrate depths on a reef. Ideally something that I can place on or just above the substrate, press a button to take a measurement (for direct display or preferably download later), and then move on to the next point of measurement and press the button again. Quick and simple. I have found a couple of instruments (pressure transducers) that almost fit that specification, but not quite, and I would like to hear if anybody out there have already found exactly what I am looking for. If so please let me know. (sorry to post a monitoring-related question in the middle of the more important remnancy discussion, seems out of place, but I'm trying to do my PhD..... thus perhaps scoring my own points at the expense of the ecosystem) Best regards, Anders Knudby -- Anders Knudby PhD Candidate Department of Geography University of Waterloo, Canada phone: +1 519 888 4567 x7575 e-mail: knudby at gmail.com From pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr Tue Feb 21 18:52:43 2006 From: pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr (sandrine job) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:52:43 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] Coral farming In-Reply-To: <09599ED7-B06F-4340-9BBE-76B3B0CA8921@uh.edu> Message-ID: <20060221235243.68069.qmail@web25108.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Dear all, I am seeking for any information related to coral farms, especially farms made in situ. The best would be to send me email adresses or web sites of Coral Farms. Thanks to you all, Cheers, Sandrine JOB Eric Borneman a ?crit : Hello Hiroya: Thank you for the update on the Proceedings and I am greatly looking forward to seeing them and appreciate the work that has certainly been required to produce them. I am curious, though, about the printing. If the CD-ROM is already formatted, as it should be given the nature of the formatting required for submitted material, then any of thousands of print-on- demand printers should be able to produce bound volumes by a print-on- demand cost that can be from 1 to many thousands of copies. For example, one print-on-demand company found with a quick google search will print hardback copies (6x9) with full color covers, dust jackets, up to 500 pages and provide 10 free copies of the book for US $1000 and this includes free CD e-books and 30% royalties for each copy sold if they are the distributor and 50% of CD-ROM sales. I consider this to be quite expensive. I think others on this list I know who have written full color books over 500 pages would agree that we would not be writing (or selling) much if printing costs and selling prices were this high. While I don't have the details of the manuscript, the minimum order and costs seem very out of line with what I know about book publishing (which isn't much), having written two books. I think the cost of book series, such as Corals of the World, which are similarly large, colorful (which previous Proceedings have never been) and well made indicates what is possible. The costs of scientific publication have always been a mystery to me, to say the least, and in terms of most journals, an outrageous racket. If, however, there are very few orders for text-based copies I can see that the cost would be high, but I see no reason for it to be impossible for even one copy to be produced given the nature of POD technology today. I hope others on the list who have published books could comment further. Best, Eric Borneman Dept. of Biology and Biochemistry University of Houston Science and Research Bldg. II 4800 Calhoun Houston, TX 77204 On Feb 19, 2006, at 11:10 PM, hyamano at nies.go.jp wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th > ICRS, > Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. > > We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD- > ROMs will > be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send > it to > all the participants. > > For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. > However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the > print. If > the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop > printing the Proceedings. > > More news will be sent as soon as I hear. > > Best wishes, > > Hiroya Yamano > Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS > Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings > > ---- > Hiroya Yamano > UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement > BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia > Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 > Also at NIES > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.T?l?chargez la version beta. From hyamano at nies.go.jp Tue Feb 21 19:23:08 2006 From: hyamano at nies.go.jp (hyamano at nies.go.jp) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:23:08 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <20060222002306689.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Dear coral-listers, Thank you very much for sending comments, especially on the hard copies of the 10ICRS Proceedings. I forwarded the messages to the 10ICRS program committee and asked reconsideration. We will decide the contact information for the purchase and also the price of the CDs for non- participants, in addition to the price of the hard copies. I appreciate to have received some orders of the hard copies, but please do not send more orders to me before the next news. We should be very pleased if you could let us have some more time for the details. I will let you know the news as soon as I hear. Again, thank you very much for your cooperation and patience. Best wishes, Hiroya ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html ---- From cat64fish at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 20:49:22 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:49:22 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB77A9.7050007@3rivers.net> Message-ID: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi everyone, Certainly an interesting discussion on the fate of the Florida reefs. Not being from the US, and never having had the opportunity to visit the Florida Keys, I am unable to fully appreciate the extent fo the damage that has been done to that rich ecosystem. Mike, as usual, you have cut through the bs and succinctly stated the problem in the Florida Keys. I suspect similar situations occur wolrdwide, where reef systems are in decline (for example, I've heard from fishermen how their reefs have been destroyed by blast fishing caused by fishermen from the "other" island). While sitting on the fence, and agreeing that there needs to be more science directed at the reef ecosystem, the impacts would seem to far, far outweigh the need for more exacting science. Conservation, and perhaps even the more exacting word, preservation, is needed, if reefs are to survive the human onslaught. Someone mentioned (I am not sure of it is on this list or somewhere else) that it was a good ting that there are many coral species and only one human. Be that as it may, that one species has the capacity to totally destroy the diversity that exists today. Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place. MPAs managed in isolation, was something else that was brought up in this discussion. While it is undeniable (at least to me) that MPAs do help in the conservation of coral reefs and other marine ecosystems, the term MPA itself is an "isolationist" word, as it implies some sought of boundary. "Enlightened management plans" that look at the totality of the marine system, that will conserve and sustain our marine resources, understanding that it is inter-connected and intricately linked system, are what is needed. I suspect that part of the reason that scientists treat reef systems in isolation is that if they did not, then there would be no "scientific" papers (as we know them) in existence. The momentum of publishing, or doing publishable research, is probably what is limiting the science from expanding beyond its narrow confines. Reef managers on the other hand, must not only be biologists, but people managers, ecosystem managers, fund managers, and sometimes, visionaries, all rolled into one. Good luck finding such people in great enough quantity to "manage" even the existing MPAs. To round up, I agree with Mike that "people power" may be the way to go to get the necessary protection for our marine resources. "People cannot love, what they do not know", or so I've been told. While I cannot "love" the Florida Keys, I do love the coral reefs in my own backyard, and sometimes the wrangling that goes on between scientists, conservationists and politicians, while the reefs are slowly but surely being degraded, is more than I can bear. Holding out for coral reefs the world over Jeff --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. From Craig.Bonn at noaa.gov Wed Feb 22 09:44:49 2006 From: Craig.Bonn at noaa.gov (Craig S Bonn) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:44:49 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43FC78E1.10008@noaa.gov> Hi listers, I recently accepted a position with the Dry Tortugas NP where I will be coordinating a monitoring program within a new 47 square mile research natural area recently established within park boundaries where all consumptive practices will be prohibited. Diving and snorkeling will still be allowed and a system of mooring buoys has been established for boaters to tie up to within the RNA. I have worked in the Tortugas for the past six years and have witnessed myself the degradation that is occurring there-- some of the reefs are almost completely dead and covered in algae while others (Sherwood Forest in the northern portion of the TER) while healthier in terms of percent cover are also exhibiting signs of degradation and that it may simply be not how but when these reefs will suffer to the point of no return. I also know that there are so many variables involved in what is happening to our reefs on a global scale that the task at hand almost seems impossible especially when you listen to the doom sayers who state that the worlds reefs will be gone in a matter of years if nothing is done to correct the mistakes we have all made with regards to stewardship of our planet. If we take a look at the variables involved: water quality, over fishing, vessel groundings, seagrass dieoffs, urchin dieoffs, bleaching, coral disease, the possibility that our planet and our oceans are warming with subsequent melting of our polar regions and of course one of the biggest problems in my opinion is complete lack of concern by many. Lets admit it, some people simply dont care and I think this has a lot to do with the state our world is in now, cultural, religious, and political differences also play a role here but Im not going to get into that. Anyway, Im looking forward to the challenges that this new position will present to me and my colleagues and I guess what Im asking for is some advice. I am very concerned as many of you are as well and I would like to part of a new approach to management issues of not only the coral reefs of the world but our entire world. I believe that education an outreach could play an important role and will be one of my priorities along with others. Any advice would certainly be appreciated, perhaps efforts focused on small areas can have a spillover effect in terms of getting the public really involved, but I think its going to have to be a worldwide involvement if we really want to improve things. But its only a start, we have to finish, and send the right messages to generations of scientists coming behind us to better improve things so that they, and we, can perhaps begin to see positive changes taking place for the planet we all call home. thanks Craig Michael Risk wrote: >Hi Phil. > >Thanks you for crystallising the discussion, and articulating some of >my own concerns. One of the many problems is: > >"All politics is local." (Tip O'Neil, American politician) > >It is always easier to blame the external. One of my students was in >the back of a hall in the Keys 2-3 years ago during one of those public >meetings, and heard a senior Florida reef manager say the decline in >the reefs was caused by "All those Canadians driving down here every >winter in their SUV's, making Carbon Dioxide." (True quote-no one has >to MAKE UP things reef managers say.) > > >Now, it may well be that no one should drive SUV's, but it cannot be >said enough times: bleaching has had NOTHING TO DO with the decline of >Florida's reefs. Everyone reading this list should repeat after me-and >Phil-NOTHING TO DO. > >And now we see that the new kid on the block, FRRP, will focus only on >bleaching. Something is badly wrong. We don't need more science-the >science has spoken eloquently. > >In...2000? (help me, Walt, Phil-when was it?) I was a member of a NOAA >panel that evaluated all the reef monitoring programs in the Florida >Keys. (Why was there more than one, you may ask? In fact, there were >about six.) > >Our conclusion was that monitoring had done its job. (Monitoring can >NEVER identify causes, although a good monitoring program can allow >selection of hypotheses.) In this case, the monitoring programs, >especially the FMRI program, had successfully documented the regional >mass extinction under way in the Keys. And that was the panel's >carefully-chosen phrase: "regional mass extinction." > >We recommended consolidation of the monitoring programs, and an >immediate increase in funding designed to rank the various land-based >threats, in order that action could be taken. We also recommended an >outreach program. > >That may be the key to the Keys. Every citizen of Florida should be >told that: >1. there is big trouble in the Keys, and that >2. the causes are all local. > >The managers will be reluctant to be too assertive-after all, they have >Big Sugar and Big God-knows-what watching them. The impetus has to be >bottom-up. To coin a phrase. > >And we reef scientists have to learn that we score our own points at >the expense of the ecosystem. > >Mike > >On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 > Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Coral List, >> I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about >> >>healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but >>no >>one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And >>probably haven't been for a long time. >> >> My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach >>a >>true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my >>calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their >>living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The >>Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty >>fast >>too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about >>studies, >>monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right >>in >>front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, >> >>even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to >>protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this >>years >>ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or >>look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to >>think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the >>built >>it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in >>continuing >>to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of >>a >>far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the >>losses >>that are far greater, supports this form of denial. >> >> Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long >>time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps >>there >>are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many >>people >>fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage >>system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not >>simply >>sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s >> >>more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is >>hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, >>sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of >>having >>a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? >> >> It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats >>their >>young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and >>denial. >> The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather >> >>than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) >>that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or >>slower >>in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the >>R >>scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, >>Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and >>political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between >> >>dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 >> >>when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might >>even >>be up to R4 if conservation is successful. >> Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline >> >>downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we >>need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor >>is >>wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. >> Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just >>imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From kruer at 3rivers.net Wed Feb 22 12:27:54 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 10:27:54 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813BB7@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <43FC9F1A.5020204@3rivers.net> Dr. Szmant, Thanks for the note. You are a reef researcher and you love to research and explore reefs around the world and you agree that Florida's reefs are under multiple stresses, including due to their geographic location. I too began exploring Keys reefs in the 1970s and have witnessed the dramatic changes there. My approach is simply that management should start by dealing with the stresses that can realistically be managed (routine, easily identified, cumulative, physical impacts in particular and habitat degradation in general) and quit using issues like climate change as an excuse to do virtually nothing on a local level. It's getting old. To me that would be like us agreeing that due to its importance we should all start working towards stopping the melting of the Greenland ice sheets, and ignore local problems that unequivocally are trashing coastal resources on a daily basis. And don't forget that in the 1980s and 1990s the mantra from many outspoken reef types was that wastewater and other nutrients were killing Keys reefs. I participated in a couple of recent exchanges wherein a federal manager suggested that researchers were not provididng needed information for reef management (and more research was needed), while at the same time a researcher was stating that managers were not using data made available by researchers - and that direction needed to be given for what information was needed. Both argued that more research and information is needed for proper reef management and this is what I reject - the excuses for not curtailing destructive human practices that are obviously and directly degrading reef ecosystem resources. And I believe that the notion that we can completely decipher to the nth degree (or ever really know) what is going on with reefs (and many other natural systems) is a loser from the get-go, and very self-serving. I don't ignore climate change as you suggest (and I doubt that others do) but recognize and embrace the notion that it's here to stay and nothing that you or I can do individually will change that - but you and others prominent in the scientific and management community can individually make changes and help force changes that will help protect and conserve reef resources. If you truly want to help coral reef ecosystems argue for improved funding for broader and more effective management based on what we do know and less funding for research to try to learn (forever) what we don't know. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Szmant, Alina wrote: > Hello Mike, Phil and Curtis: > > The problem with attributing all of the loss of coral in the Florida > Keys to local human impacts, as you three have done in your comments, is > that the same pattern of loss of live coral is being observed in remote > places of the Bahamas and other small Caribbean islands with small or no > human populations, no sewage to speak of and no cruise ships. To ignore > the dramatic effect coral bleaching and subsequent disease outbreaks, on > top of overfishing, have had on Keys and northern Caribbean corals since > the mid-1990s and especially since the severe 1997-1998 back-to-back > bleaching events, is not helpful to conservation or management efforts. > Bleaching has reached reefs that are distant from direct human impact as > well as the Keys, with similar effects on both. Overfishing is far more > pervasive than water quality degradation because boats go everywhere to > extract the last lobster and grouper. The healthiest Caribbean reefs, if > one judges that based on live coral cover, that I have seen in a long > while are those in the lower Caribbean where they have, for hydrographic > and climatic reasons, not been as impacted by either bleaching or major > storms: Reefs on the S side of Curacao and Bonaire still have more > coral now than what I remember for places like PR and the USVI back in > the 1960s and 1970s. And they have high coral cover within 1 km of > where the cruise ships docks and next to the outflow from the > desalination plant. And they have very high rates of coral recruitment > and no algae even on boulders with no Diadema, and few fishes. Go > figure! > > There are many reefs on the GBR with water quality conditions far worse > than in the Florida Keys (in terms of turbidity, nutrient levels and > such variables) with much higher coral cover and diversity. Ken Anthony > is even showing corals on these turbid reefs feed on the detritus and > have higher growth rates than corals on more offshore reefs. Florida > reefs have a disadvantage of being at the northern limits of the > climatic window for coral well being in the Atlantic province, with way > too many severe winter and summer storms. These geographic limitations > have existed for thousands of years and have limited coral reef growth > over Holocene time frames. When I first visited Nassau reefs in 1971 > and the Florida reefs during the 1977 symposium, when my frame of > reference was Puerto Rican reefs, my opinion of Florida/Bahamas reefs > was that they were puny and depauperate. Now they are even more > depauperate. That is no excuse to abuse them, but to ignore the > climatic factor is not helpful towards restoring or protecting them (if > that is possible). Multiple factors are at work, and a single quick fix > will not do the trick. Over-simplification and trying to crucify a > single factor will not help society deal with these complex issues. > > Alina Szmant > > ******************************************************************* > Dr. Alina M. Szmant > Coral Reef Research Group > UNCW-Center for Marine Science > 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln > Wilmington NC 28409 > Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 > Cell: (910)200-3913 > email: szmanta at uncw.edu > Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta > ****************************************************************** > > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Curtis > Kruer > Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 3:27 PM > To: Phil Dustan > Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency > > Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil > Dustan. > But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true > change in direction. > > There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the > amazingly productive Keys (and > no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, > and no it should never be > held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). > > And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with > problems much broader than > simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying > that the problem with > seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important > figure easily dispenses with > all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and > filling, thousands upon thousands > of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc > etc., See how easy it is. And > it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself > during some of the countless > consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I > refused to play along with > the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys > all would be OK. What a > joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo > is going to change much is > wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions > to upgrade the Key West plant > to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything > measurable? And we were promised > that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds > good but can't happen on a > scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of > the Keys as I began to see > myself as a part of the problem. > > The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the > Keys ecosystem and manage > human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too > much attention is focused on > a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that > most else would be > protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's > limited funds on a new > facility in Key West is going to change much? > > Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as > stand alone systems and the > problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands > continue to be lost and > degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are > trying legally to protect > the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving > activity (and associated > impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the > state and the state points > to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have > taken place but it's not > working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - > but it's obviously not > enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live > bottom and predictably now > hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of > miles of slow-degrading poly > line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to > replace them every year just > to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by > the tens of thousands daily, > fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot > long cruise ships plow up the > bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone > effectively turns a blind > eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. > Shallow water marine habitats > throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are > subjected to the disturbing and > destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster > boats of all types. > > People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is > failing. The rate of loss and > anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that > is what matters. Large > vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's > great. But new leadership is > needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? > Catering to virtually every > user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in > ecosystem protection or even > maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef > management in the Keys as a > success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New > leadership is needed and that > leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and > address all issues > throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And > they need to be loudly > supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has > the most knowledge about what > has been lost and is being lost. > > Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and > other lists will lead to > something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and > misdirected effort. > > Thanks. > > Curtis Kruer > > > > > Phil Dustan wrote: > >>Dear Coral List, >> I'd like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion > > about > >>healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > > >>one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And >>probably haven't been for a long time. >> >> My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can > > reach a > >>true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my >>calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their >>living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The >>Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > > >>too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about > > studies, > >>monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right > > in > >>front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, >>even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to >>protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > > >>ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it's patchy, or not here, or >>look over there, there's a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to >>think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > > >>it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in > > continuing > >>to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > > >>far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the > > losses > >>that are far greater, supports this form of denial. >> >> Well, the water is too polluted and we've know this for a very > > long > >>time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > > >>are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many > > people > >>fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage >>system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not > > simply > >>sewage......But still we look for bright spots. I think it's because > > it's > >>more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is >>hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, >>sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of > > having > >>a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? >> >> It's been said by many that the coral reef science community > > eats their > >>young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and > > denial. > >> The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather >>than resiliency, I'd favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) >>that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or > > slower > >>in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the > > R > >>scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, >>Carysfort R1, etc... Maybe this might help create public awareness and > > >>political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between >>dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 >>when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > > >>be up to R4 if conservation is successful. >> Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the > > baseline > >>downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it's a problem that we >>need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor > > is > >>wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. >> Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > > >>imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? >> Phil >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From albert at ecology.su.se Wed Feb 22 09:46:53 2006 From: albert at ecology.su.se (Albert Norstrom) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:46:53 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Thanks Phil for starting what must be the most interesting discourse held on these boards in a long time. Some extremely thought-provoking comments all around. Yes, the Keys do seem to have it real bad, but this isn't a problem isolated to the Caribbean. I've conducted field trips in the Phillippines and Zanzibar during the past years and we are witnessing moderate-to-severe degradation in those regions too. The general feeling diving on reefs off the North coast of the Philippines is that of entering a ghost town. Fish abundnace is frighteningly low (you'd be lucky to see a parrotfish above 35cm after a week of diving), and community changes are rapidly manifesting themselves (we have observed some sites where soft corals are taking over completely following the bleaching event of '98). The causes behind this seem to be a confounding mixture of synergistic factors, just as in the Caribbean. As Alina points out, local factors alone (such as a decline water quality due to human terrestrial activities) cannot be ascertained to be the single driving forces behind the changes. As such, what speaks for a sudden improvement in reef conditon if we manage to address that single point - when the problems of climate change and lack of grazers (due to a brutal historical overfishing and disease) loom overhead? I found Jeffrey Lowes comment "Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place." interesting. How about I play devils advocate with you all for awhile. A few months ago, a very interesting point of discourse popped up during an internal discussion group at the department. The notion that ecosystems are intrinsically unpredictable and characterized by alternative system regimes is gaining more and more weight in the coral ecology community. It is thus interesting that we as a group (and society as a whole) are continually so ill-prepared for when such shifts occur. For 20 or so odd years the Caribbean has been dominated by macroalgae regime that seems pretty resilient itself (probably due a strengthening of certain internal feedback loops in that system over the years). I'm curious to know if any serious attempt has been made to investigate what goods and services are available from these new regimes (e.g. what kinds of fish can be harvested), and if fishing communities have adapted in any way, and if so are they succesful, to these new conditions? For sure, I'm an advocate for proactive measures to foster resilience of coral ecosystems. (Already an array of tools have been suggested, MPA's being the most popular at the moment, but in order to succeed with this I think we have to witness a more fundamental change in our economic and social structures. How on earth will MPA's solve anything if market economy dictates that its economically viable to continue overfishing an already ecologically depleted fish stock in the regions outside these sanctuaries? Forgive the side-note, back to being devils advocate again.) But it seems equally important to create institutional frameworks that can foster adaptivity in social systems. The new macroalgal regimes could be the norm for the Caribbean for the next unforeseeable future, much as (from my own personal observations, and research) other regimes are becoming more common in other biogeographic regions. Is it "fatalistic" to start looking around us and maybe accept that coral ecosystems are dynamic and alternative regimes are not something aberrant, but a phenomenon we could (or should) get accustomed to as conditions change. Maybe the pressing question is, not if we can restore reefs to some abstract baseline level, but can we predict these new regimes (I think never completely, seeing the complex nature of ecosystsm) and can we adapt to them? /Cheers Albert Norstr?m PhD Student Dept. Systems Ecology Natural Resource Management Group Stockholm University SE-106 91 Stockholm Sweden Tel: +46 (0)8 16 44 84 Email: albert at ecology.su.se Fax: +46 (0)8 15 84 17 Personal page: http://www.ecology.su.se/staff/personal.asp?id=119 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffrey Low" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 2:49 AM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency > Hi everyone, > > Certainly an interesting discussion on the fate of the Florida reefs. Not being from the US, and never having had the opportunity to visit the Florida Keys, I am unable to fully appreciate the extent fo the damage that has been done to that rich ecosystem. > > Mike, as usual, you have cut through the bs and succinctly stated the problem in the Florida Keys. I suspect similar situations occur wolrdwide, where reef systems are in decline (for example, I've heard from fishermen how their reefs have been destroyed by blast fishing caused by fishermen from the "other" island). > > While sitting on the fence, and agreeing that there needs to be more science directed at the reef ecosystem, the impacts would seem to far, far outweigh the need for more exacting science. Conservation, and perhaps even the more exacting word, preservation, is needed, if reefs are to survive the human onslaught. > > Someone mentioned (I am not sure of it is on this list or somewhere else) that it was a good ting that there are many coral species and only one human. Be that as it may, that one species has the capacity to totally destroy the diversity that exists today. > > Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place. > > MPAs managed in isolation, was something else that was brought up in this discussion. While it is undeniable (at least to me) that MPAs do help in the conservation of coral reefs and other marine ecosystems, the term MPA itself is an "isolationist" word, as it implies some sought of boundary. "Enlightened management plans" that look at the totality of the marine system, that will conserve and sustain our marine resources, understanding that it is inter-connected and intricately linked system, are what is needed. > > I suspect that part of the reason that scientists treat reef systems in isolation is that if they did not, then there would be no "scientific" papers (as we know them) in existence. The momentum of publishing, or doing publishable research, is probably what is limiting the science from expanding beyond its narrow confines. Reef managers on the other hand, must not only be biologists, but people managers, ecosystem managers, fund managers, and sometimes, visionaries, all rolled into one. Good luck finding such people in great enough quantity to "manage" even the existing MPAs. > > To round up, I agree with Mike that "people power" may be the way to go to get the necessary protection for our marine resources. "People cannot love, what they do not know", or so I've been told. While I cannot "love" the Florida Keys, I do love the coral reefs in my own backyard, and sometimes the wrangling that goes on between scientists, conservationists and politicians, while the reefs are slowly but surely being degraded, is more than I can bear. > > Holding out for coral reefs the world over > > Jeff > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From smiller at gate.net Wed Feb 22 11:15:20 2006 From: smiller at gate.net (Steven Miller) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:15:20 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef condition discussion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43FC8E18.1090108@gate.net> All politics is local? Tell that to Acropora and other coral species (and Diadema too) after Caribbean-wide waves of disease and bleaching helped push the system in Florida, already at the northern limit geographically of coral distribution in this part of the world, to - or over - the edge. Alina's response hit all the high points about why it's necessary to consider complexity (ecologically and I would add politically). Much of this was previously addressed in a series of letters published in Science Magazine (Science 17 June 2005 308) including a summary of work already accomplished or underway related to management of water quality in the Keys. To try and advance this discussion (without writing anything lengthy) rather than dwell too much on the negative, I think it's important to ask, "Is there any good news on the coral reef front?" Well, mostly not. BUT, we know we can do better with MPAs to help manage resource use (fishing, boating, diving) and to - at the very least - watch (research) what happens to fish and benthic communities when no-take protection is enforced. I like the idea that a 75 pound grouper is more valuable as a tourist attraction than on dinner plates, but some might argue that point. And many don't know this, but there remain spectacular places in the Keys with high cover and corals in relatively good condition, just not offshore where so much was previously considered in "good" condition because large stands of Acropora persisted in the days before bleaching and disease. Where are these sites? They are found near s;yc0bhokr npobno rouubs and xoyub=- hpbsl ngpui. Sorry, that was too easy, but the sites are real. Also, we know that Acropora is a fast-growing species and that under the right set of circumstances we could see massive proliferation over relatively short time scales, maybe even sufficient to match sea level rise that will result from global warming. Of course, coastal areas will also flood and that will degrade water quality, which might prevent more immediate coral growth - there's that complexity thing again. So what's my take home message? The sky might be falling - remember the chicken little thread so many years ago? You can duck and cover or you can do what you can to try and make things better. Personally, I think we are in trouble because environment (and not just coral reefs, but also our air and water and if some have their way endangered species too) is not a political issue these days. How does it get political? Environmentalism needs to become a social movement the way it was in the 1960s and 1970s. That will only happen when a thousand grassroots efforts at the local level merge and become something bigger. In that regard, I agree that all politics is local. Best regards. Steven Miller, Ph.D. Research Professor UNC Wilmington And a possibly relevant plug... see the trailer for a new movie about the Evolution and Intelligent Design Circus at www.flockofdodos.com, a feature documentary written and directed by former marine biologist Dr. Randy Olson (and exec produced by me). The movie is ultimately about communication of science in today's media landscape. Coral reef scientists have much to learn about communicating for the benefit of coral reefs and not personal agendas or career advancement (my personal and I'm sure provocative opinion, and not directed to the current thread). From delbeek at waquarium.org Wed Feb 22 20:27:56 2006 From: delbeek at waquarium.org (Charles Delbeek) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:27:56 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> References: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20060222152219.02a7f8d0@mail.waquarium.org> >It is very interesting to follow this discussion and draw parallels >with closed system reef aquariums. The problems of algal overgrowth, >nutrient load, temperature, water motion, nutrient uptake, >ultraviolet intensity, coral bleaching, coral tissue loss are ALL >encountered in closed systems. Though we do not have all the answers >we do know enough to control some of these factors and what effects >changing such factors can have on our miniature "ecosystems". I >strongly believe that some of the answers to problems facing wild >reefs can be mirrored in closed reef systems, and perhaps can yield >some answers as well. The rapid advancements in coral husbandry >opens up tremendous opportunities for coral researchers to >manipulate systems within a controlled setting. Aloha! J. Charles Delbeek M.Sc. Aquarium Biologist III Waikiki Aquarium, University of Hawaii 2777 Kalakaua Ave. Honolulu, HI, USA 96815 www.waquarium.org 808-923-9741 ext. 0 VOICE 808-923-1771 FAX From cat64fish at yahoo.com Wed Feb 22 21:25:26 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 10:25:26 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Message-ID: <20060223022526.80199.qmail@web35310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi Albert and others .... Does that phrase "... let me play devil's advocate ..." mean that I am the angel? ... :P Anyway, frivolity aside, you raise a very pertinent point, that coral ecosystems are dynamic, and that different "regimes" can arise, oftentimes from similar starting points. I am sure someone can list a series of papers and research showing this to be the case. However, what is the acceptable change that we (at this point in time) are willing to accept? I find myself asking, more and more, not questions that are quantifiable, like "What percent of coral cover is on the reef?" Or "How many species are there?" but "Can I accept seeing the change of *my* coral reefs from the reefal system to [an algal dominanted one] / [rubble reef] / [artificial reef]?". Monitoring seems to be something that almost *everyone* does. I do it ... and I've been doing for almost 20 years now (*geez*). But where has that gotten me ... or rather the reefs? I know it is in decline ... *everyone* who has worked in the field for any length of time knows this. Do we need to conduct another study to confirm the results of a study that has confirmed the decline of the reefs, which was conducted to confirm the results of a previous study? Even though the formation of coral reef system (or any other ecosystem, for that matter) may be inherently unpredictable - I don't think the question is whether we can predict what it will change into, but can we live with it changing, in the first place? Knowing that it was through our inaction that the changes occurred? Adaptation would be an inevitable result of change (or else you would die out), so I don't think it is a major part of the equation. On the "local" vs. "global" issue, I will sit on the fence on this one - I see the merits of both "camps". My feeling is that what occurs locally, will affect things globally. Take carbon emissions, for example. If, and this is a BIG IF, everyone were to convert to less carbon emitting vehicles, would [human-input to the magnitude of] global warming be reduced? If the answer is yes (to me it is a "yes"), then what needs to be in place before this conversion can come about? The changes would be in three main areas: - Political : "Local" politicians must push for the necessary legislative changes to limit the carbon emissions in all aspects of industry, and to enfrce them - Infrastructure : "Local" businesses must be ready to support technology that emits less carbon - Lifestyle changes need to be made : The most "local" aspect of all ... the people must embrace low / no carbon emiision technology (that might mean giving up that 10-litre, SUV-built-like-a-tank-off-roader-that-I-drive-in-the-city car) There would be global issues, of course .... even with carbon reducing industries, the shear magnitude of the human population would probably over whelm the ecosystems. The "global" issue, to my mind, isn't the fact that warming is occurring, but what the world (as in its people) are going to do about it. Cheers, Jeff --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. From martin_moe at yahoo.com Wed Feb 22 23:52:45 2006 From: martin_moe at yahoo.com (Martin Moe) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 20:52:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20060222152219.02a7f8d0@mail.waquarium.org> Message-ID: <20060223045245.67761.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com> Hi all, I?m always hesitant to comment in these threads since I?m not a ?real? coral reef scientist, but Steven Miller?s comment ?You can duck and cover or you can do what you can to try and make things better.? stimulated me to weigh in on this. There are efforts now underway to try to make things better on Florida?s coral reefs, but has been exceedingly difficult to get support for these efforts. As Steven said, the factors negatively affecting the coral reefs of Florida, Bahamas and the Caribbean are many and complex, but there are things that can be done to improve specific reef areas and perhaps even reef ecosystems. Site restoration of reef areas impacted by boat groundings and protection of the reefs through good management (MPA establishment) and water quality improvement are very important and essential to the future of the reefs, but even more important is to achieve ecological restoration. This may be an impossible task but we won?t know that if we don?t try. We can?t restore the reefs to the conditions that were present 100 or even 50 years ago but I am of the opinion that it is possible to achieve some level of ecological restoration if we make a serious effort to do so. I attended a talk that Alina Szmant gave in 1999 on her coral reef research and she greatly impressed me with the take home message of her talk that the decline of the reefs was caused more by the loss of biodiversity than anthropogenic nutrients. That made a lot of sense to me, and subsequent research indicates that she is correct. The loss of the Diadema sea urchins in 1983-4, the keystone herbivores of the Western Atlantic coral reefs, shifted the ecology of the reefs from coral dominance to macro algae dominance, a well accepted premise by most coral reef scientists. In addition, on Florida reefs, the almost total loss of populations of adult spiny lobster removed an important predator of coralivorus snails and other small predators that feed on living coral tissue and create opportunities for introduction of coral disease. If we were really serious about coral reef restoration, we would eliminate lobster fishing, recreational and commercial, on all offshore reefs past a certain distance from shore, perhaps 3 miles, and most important, really get serious about researching the possibility of restoration of pre plague population levels of Diadema on the reefs. These are not impossible tasks, but they do require concerted effort and scientific collaboration. And the lobster issue is also fraught with political mine fields. But these are real possibilities for ecological improvement of our coral reefs and to not explore them fully is grossly irresponsible. Ken Nedimyer and I did a experimental re establishment of Diadema on two small patch reefs in the Upper Keys in 2001 supported by the Florida Keys Marine Sanctuary (http://www.fknms.nos.noaa.gov/research_monitoring/report/diadema/diadema/.html) and this study well illustrated the positive effect a marginal population of Diadema can have on a Florida reef in the short space of one year. We are now working with the Mote Marine Laboratory to expand this work. There has also been work by The Nature Conversancy in the Keys on similar projects and there have been other studies as well. So research on ecological restoration has begun and hopefully will produce an effective reef restoration program while there is still reef left to restore. Martin A. Moe, Jr. Adjunct Scientist, Mote Marine Laboratory> > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From simmi_nuern at yahoo.com Thu Feb 23 04:10:55 2006 From: simmi_nuern at yahoo.com (Simone Nuernberger) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 01:10:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Coralliophila - Thank you Message-ID: <20060223091055.63682.qmail@web60313.mail.yahoo.com> Hello again, I just wanted to thank all the people who took the time to reply. Your emails were extremely helpful! Thank you very much! Best regards, Simone *************************************************************************** Simone N?rnberger (M.Sc.) simone_nuernberger at web.de Institute of Biology (Biological Oceanography) University of Southern Denmark DK-5230 Odense M --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. From andy_wb at email.com Thu Feb 23 04:25:39 2006 From: andy_wb at email.com (Andy Woods-Ballard) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:25:39 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Instrument to measure water depths. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060223092544.AF9DE1795C@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hi Anders Working in Mexico with Global Vision International, we used a handheld depth sounder, Plastimo Echotest II. I believe this has a range of about 80m. But more importantly for you, I think it is submersible and water proof to depths of 50m. It will not however store data and might need to be used with a slate for recording. Check out the product to be sure, but I hope this helps. Andy Woods-Ballard From ckappel at stanford.edu Thu Feb 23 12:49:05 2006 From: ckappel at stanford.edu (Carrie Vanessa Kappel) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:49:05 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas Message-ID: <1140716945.43fdf59126a88@webmail.stanford.edu> Hi Rick, >From your description, it sounds like what you were seeing was likely Microdictyon marinum, which has been observed to have strong summertime blooms on reefs in The Bahamas. We also saw high densities of Microdictyon during our surveys on North Andros in July 2002 and San Salvador in July 2003. It's not clear why this seaweed has increased so dramatically on Bahamian reefs in recent years, but I'd guess it's due to an interaction between nutrient runoff and grazing. Brian Lapointe and coauthors suggested that Microdictyon marinum might benefit from submarine groundwater discharge, whereby nutrients (in this case dissolved inorganic nitrogen) from land are transported to reefs offshore via groundwater fluxes through porous limestone (Lapointe et al. 2004. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. 298:275-301). The Littler and Littler Caribbean Reef Plants book has a nice picture of this species and others with which it might be confused. Cheers, Carrie Carrie Kappel Postdoctoral Fellow National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis University of California Santa Barbara 735 State Street, Suite 300 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 kappel at nceas.ucsb.edu 805.966.1677 w 805.892.2510 f 831.869.1503 m Permanent email address Carrie.Kappel at alumni.brown.edu ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:34:49 -0500 From: "Rick Sanders" Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas To: Message-ID: <004b01c63715$7fa4b760$650da8c0 at manta> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Dear Listers, I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find an image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been unable to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish brown color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each other in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped into more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm in width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if to crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what I am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a copy or link. Thanks very much in advance, Best regards, Rick Rick Sanders Deep Blue Solutions Media, PA 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net ------------------------- From Bprecht at pbsj.com Thu Feb 23 14:14:47 2006 From: Bprecht at pbsj.com (Precht, Bill) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:14:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef condition discussion Message-ID: <8511092CB6C11C4BB2632F61A82C620C03FD68B2@MIAMBX.pbsj.com> Dear Coral-List: I have read with great interest the recent thread on Florida's reef woes. In Steven Miller's recent message, he reminds us of the "reefs at risk" thread that discussed the very same issues on the Coral-List during June and July of 1998. It was in-part, as an outcome of that discussion that Steven and I decided to write a book chapter on this very subject entitled: Precht, W.F. and Miller, S.L.(in press) Ecological shifts along the Florida reef tract: the past as a key to the future: in Aronson, R.B. (ed) Geological Approaches to Coral Reef Ecology. Springer Verlag, NY If anyone is interested in a pre-print of this chapter please send me an email and I'll send it along. Cheers, Bill Precht Senior Scientist PBS&J - Division of Ecological Sciences Miami, FL From abaker at rsmas.miami.edu Thu Feb 23 14:26:34 2006 From: abaker at rsmas.miami.edu (Andrew Baker) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:26:34 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Laboratory Technician Position in Coral Molecular Ecology In-Reply-To: <10313196.1129601388953.JavaMail.SYSTEM@us-webcti01> Message-ID: <00e601c638af$0e8bc0f0$3d6fab81@DellD600> Funding is available for a Laboratory Technician in coral molecular ecology at the Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science (RSMAS) at the University of Miami, Florida, USA (www.rsmas.miami.edu ). The successful candidate will assume primary responsibility for the management and day-to-day operations of a molecular laboratory specializing in the ecology and systematics of corals and their symbiotic dinoflagellates ("zooxanthellae"), but will also be involved in physiological experimental work at the University's Experimental Hatchery facility, and coral reef fieldwork in Florida and elsewhere. Specific duties include extracting, purifying, archiving and analyzing DNA from coral samples, ordering and management of scientific supplies and reagents, managing undergraduate volunteers and interns, and working with the principal investigator, postdoctoral associate and graduate students on collaborative research projects. Ongoing research, funded principally by the US National Science Foundation, the Pew Institute for Ocean Science, and the Wildlife Conservation Society, uses both field survey and experimental approaches to study the responses of reef corals to climate change. The position is funded for three years, subject to satisfactory performance. The successful candidate will also be encouraged to pursue independent research and publication in related fields of interest. Candidates should have a Master's degree in molecular systematics, molecular ecology and/or population genetics, but candidates with Bachelor's degrees and an equivalent level of molecular experience will also be considered. Ideal candidates should be SCUBA-certified and be able to pass a physical examination to obtain scientific diver certification with the American Academy of Underwater Sciences (AAUS). Experience manipulating computer models of climate change (e.g., Hadley dataset) and/or maintaining outdoor aquarium systems is desirable, but not required. Position includes benefits and a retirement package. Please submit a current CV, names and contact information of three references, and a cover letter indicating research interests and experience electronically as a single .pdf file to Andrew Baker at abaker at rsmas.miami.edu. Applications are being accepted immediately. The position will remain open until filled. The University of Miami is an EEO/AA Employer. Please post this advertisement as appropriate. ___________________ Andrew C. Baker, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Division of Marine Biology and Fisheries Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science University of Miami 4600 Rickenbacker Cswy. Miami, FL 33149, USA Voice: +1 (305) 421-4642 Fax: +1 (305) 421-4600 From milviapin at yahoo.com Thu Feb 23 18:37:21 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:37:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Microdyction Message-ID: <20060223233721.57467.qmail@web50313.mail.yahoo.com> Dear listers, Large abundance of this algae were found in Namu atoll, Marshall islands, in November 2004. Lagoon and ocean sides were covered by the alga. No nutrients inputs are known in this slighlty populated atoll (300 people). Other outgrowth of this alga ave been noticed in different atolls although not to this extent. Thank you silvia Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. From ctwiliams at yahoo.com Fri Feb 24 00:43:55 2006 From: ctwiliams at yahoo.com (Tom Williams) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 21:43:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Microdyction In-Reply-To: <20060223233721.57467.qmail@web50313.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060224054355.9921.qmail@web50412.mail.yahoo.com> I worked in Majuro on ADB job for water supply/wastewater. Please provide more details. Simply put - where do they get the nitrate for the algal growth. 300 people = say =>75kg of nitrate + plus agriculture = NHNO People on septic tanks?? or seawater flushing?? Green grass lawns anywhere?? ?Any previous military operations on island?? Follow the nitrate. --- Silvia Pinca wrote: > Dear listers, > Large abundance of this algae were found in Namu > atoll, Marshall islands, in November 2004. Lagoon > and ocean sides were covered by the alga. No > nutrients inputs are known in this slighlty > populated atoll (300 people). Other outgrowth of > this alga ave been noticed in different atolls > although not to this extent. > Thank you > silvia > > > Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. > NRAS - Marshall Islands > Nature Resources Assessment Surveys > Research and Education for Conservation > spinca at nras-conservation.org > www.nras-conservation.org > > > --------------------------------- > Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get > pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Fri Feb 24 09:37:55 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:37:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] resiliency vs. "remnancy" vs. sustainability Message-ID: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> It would seem most people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what they used to be. The word resiliency is another word for resilient, which means an ability to quickly (usually) recover from a bad or unnatural condition--in the present case, we might assume from a previously pristine (i.e., uncorrupted by civilization) condition. I wonder if there are any such reefs left. I'm not so sure the word is being used correctly in our fellowship (more below). Although "remnancy" is not a real word, one would infer that our colleague Phil's intended usage would be as a means to describe the degree or condition of the reef after it has been adversely affected by civilization (more colloquially: trashed); that is, how it can be described as a remnant of its former "self" (biome?). I'm not so sure describing how much a reef has been adversely affected from its former condition is useful, though, since (as was pointed out) in many cases the reef in question may never have been adequately described (have any?), especially since they're always changing (evolving) anyway, thus few cases in which to measure past against current condition (I guess that's what started the whole discussion). But don't get me wrong: we should understand what is adversely affecting the reefs so we can stop or ameliorate the condition. I'm just not so sure "remnancy" has much practical application for science, although for political purposes it is probably perfectly practical. Instead, since we want to keep coral reefs in existence, and we want to provide them with the proper environment and support their vitality, where we can, perhaps a better word for purposes of marshaling our efforts is sustainability (I know I'm not the first to suggest this). Shouldn't we sustain the reefs until we remedy what ails them? (Now there's a concept: clean up the environment!) We can't really do anything to promote resiliency (how do you measure such an ecologically difficult concept?), although a conducive environment might be sustained or managed (i.e., "cleaned up") to allow full (how to measure?) resiliency. Is it possible to describe how all the members of the coral ecosystem interact to contribute to an integral resiliency? This is extremely difficult stuff, yet I would agree the goal is laudable and should be pursued. Okay, I know, the word sustain might imply leaving everything as it is, rather than making things better, but I'm just not comfortable with the word resiliency or "remnancy." Just my two cents... Cheers, Jim From deevon at bellsouth.net Fri Feb 24 10:10:09 2006 From: deevon at bellsouth.net (DeeVon Quirolo) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 10:10:09 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] resiliency vs. "remnancy" vs. sustainability In-Reply-To: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> References: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20060224100227.026dd6d8@bellsouth.net> Ok ok, I'll add my two cents. At this time for coral reefs, I think that what we need are efforts to RESTORE coral reefs, including immediate efforts to reduce heavy physical impacts and habitat destruction, as well as improve water quality from local and regional pollution sources and reduce global warming (although we may have already crossed the critical threshold there). We already know that corals need clear clean nutrient free waters to thrive and that they do not do well when battered by various user groups and of course natural events such as storms. I think the reef resiliency approach is flawed because it proposes to study healthy reefs, and looks the other way while those corals that need our help most are ignored. Applying what we know already to these reefs on the part of current managers would do wonders. There you have it. Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Executive Director, Reef Relief At 09:37 AM 2/24/2006, Jim Hendee wrote: >It would seem most people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what >they used to be. > >The word resiliency is another word for resilient, which means an >ability to quickly (usually) recover from a bad or unnatural >condition--in the present case, we might assume from a previously >pristine (i.e., uncorrupted by civilization) condition. I wonder if >there are any such reefs left. I'm not so sure the word is being used >correctly in our fellowship (more below). > >Although "remnancy" is not a real word, one would infer that our >colleague Phil's intended usage would be as a means to describe the >degree or condition of the reef after it has been adversely affected by >civilization (more colloquially: trashed); that is, how it can be >described as a remnant of its former "self" (biome?). I'm not so sure >describing how much a reef has been adversely affected from its former >condition is useful, though, since (as was pointed out) in many cases >the reef in question may never have been adequately described (have >any?), especially since they're always changing (evolving) anyway, thus >few cases in which to measure past against current condition (I guess >that's what started the whole discussion). But don't get me wrong: we >should understand what is adversely affecting the reefs so we can stop >or ameliorate the condition. I'm just not so sure "remnancy" has much >practical application for science, although for political purposes it is >probably perfectly practical. > >Instead, since we want to keep coral reefs in existence, and we want to >provide them with the proper environment and support their vitality, >where we can, perhaps a better word for purposes of marshaling our >efforts is sustainability (I know I'm not the first to suggest this). >Shouldn't we sustain the reefs until we remedy what ails them? (Now >there's a concept: clean up the environment!) We can't really do >anything to promote resiliency (how do you measure such an ecologically >difficult concept?), although a conducive environment might be sustained >or managed (i.e., "cleaned up") to allow full (how to measure?) >resiliency. Is it possible to describe how all the members of the >coral ecosystem interact to contribute to an integral resiliency? This >is extremely difficult stuff, yet I would agree the goal is laudable and >should be pursued. > >Okay, I know, the word sustain might imply leaving everything as it is, >rather than making things better, but I'm just not comfortable with the >word resiliency or "remnancy." > >Just my two cents... > > Cheers, > Jim > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From dustanp at cofc.edu Fri Feb 24 12:23:45 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 12:23:45 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Message-ID: <43FF4121.6040400@cofc.edu> Dear Colleagues, Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote and less remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own history and ecology. Let?s face it: The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human reproductive success. Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the radar screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities (along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying and we have got to do more. As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we are going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect?.. And the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost every reef on the planet. This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal agency, is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think can be done right now as well as over the long term? Thanks, Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Fri Feb 24 15:58:39 2006 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Gene Shinn) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Not what they used to be Message-ID: >>I have to agree with Jim Hendee when he wrote, "It would seem most >>people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what they used to >>be." As a geologist I can honestly agree that Holocene reefs are >>not what they "used to be" during the Pleistocene, and they were >>not what they "used to be" earlier during the Pliocene, and they >>certainly were not what "they used to be" during the Lower >>Cretaceous, (and there were hardly any during the Upper Cretaceous) >>and then there are the well known Permian reefs which were not what >>they "used to be" during the Cambrian. >>Yes, nothing is what "it used to be." May be we just need to take a >>longer view of things. Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida Marine Science Center (room 204) 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu Fri Feb 24 14:42:13 2006 From: rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu (Richard Grigg) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:42:13 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <43FF4121.6040400@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let?s face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 03:45:17 2006 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E. Strong) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 03:45:17 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <4400191D.6040105@noaa.gov> Hi Phil, Even Plenary talk at Ocean Sciences here in Hawaii this week...George Philander...claims the evidence is not that clear... Cheers, Al Richard Grigg wrote: >Phil, > > Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > > Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Colleagues, >> Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >>thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >>years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >>continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >>thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. >> We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote >>and less >>remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >>different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >>nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >>diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >>Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >>cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >>signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >>blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >>history and ecology. >> >>Let?s face it: >> The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >>varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >>ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >>record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >>in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >>have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >>outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >>its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >>seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >>in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >>spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >>Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >>reproductive success. >> >> Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the >>radar >>screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >>of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >>opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >>(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >>health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >>reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >>earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >>and we have got to do more. >> >> As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >>resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >>scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >>everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >>resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >>ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >>with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >>ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. >> >> As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we >>are >>going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >>list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >>should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >>scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >>could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >>example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >>of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >>health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >>concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >>resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >>simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >>lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >>still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >>exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >>sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect?.. And >>the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >>had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >>every reef on the planet. >> >> This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal >>agency, >>is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >>reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >>process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >>in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >>on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >>forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >>of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >>can be done right now as well as over the long term? >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 04:14:00 2006 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E. Strong) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 04:14:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] "Caribbean" Bleaching Verification needed - Moderate to Light to No Message-ID: <44001FD8.1030507@noaa.gov> Information sought: Over the next month Coral Reef Watch is hoping to finalize feedback from the field for the 2005 Caribbean bleaching event for issuing a report. At present this appears to be the most well documented bleaching event ever conducted....for all of you who have provided information to date: THANK YOU! Nevertheless we are still missing those "negative" reports that are needed to fill out the other end of the bleaching spectrum in areas where minimal bleaching was observed. From our HotSpot DHWs we expect those regions might include (but not necessarily limited to): ...Bermuda ...Bonaire...Curacao...Aruba and possibly ...Belize. Can any of you provide verification to Coral Reef Watch over the next few weeks for these more fortunate areas?? Please send your info to: Mark Eakin and/or Jessica Morgan. Thanks, Al Strong Coral Reef Watch From mtupper at picrc.org Sat Feb 25 02:00:14 2006 From: mtupper at picrc.org (Mark Tupper) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 16:00:14 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <000e01c639d9$23c94fc0$63c8c814@TUPPER> Rick Grigg wrote: "Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations." Isn't that just a matter of semantics? There are many dead or dying reefs in the Pacific, the Indian Ocean and Caribbean, and probably everwhere that coral reefs are found. So one could say, as Phil Dustan did, that "coral reefs are dying all over the world". However, since there are also healthy reefs in all of these places, someone who's agenda did not include coral reef conservation could just as easily say "coral reefs are healthy all over the world." I have heard exactly that claim from several politicians and agency spokespeople in the last few years. Rick is right, though, in that sweeping generalizations are not helpful to management of coral reefs (or any other resource). If one "side" makes sweeping generalizations to support their view, it becomes easier for others to support an opposing viewpoint with their own generalizations. I think that it's important to be as specific and factual as possible when emphasizing the need for coral reef conservation. It's much harder to argue against specifics than generalities. Having said that, I liked Phil's idea about finding a set of action items we could use to move forward now. Cheers, Mark Dr. Mark H Tupper, Senior Scientist Palau International Coral Reef Center PO Box 7086, Koror, Palau 96940 tel (680) 488-6950; fax (680) 488-6951 and Adjunct Research Associate University of Guam Marine Laboratory UOG Station, Mangilao, Guam 96923, USA tel (671) 735-2375; fax (671) 734-6767 From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 07:16:55 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 07:16:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Message-ID: <14f78414cb3b.14cb3b14f784@noaa.gov> Hiya, Phil, Concerning your quote: "Lots of us have struggled with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind." I think this is a more tractable approach when you consider finite financial resources and manhours (peoplehours?) to throw at the problem. What I'm getting at is that defining an organism or ecosystem in terms of the "normal" environment (i.e., that which promotes optimal vitality) may be an easier way to present the problem to the public. For instance, look at the Goreau and Hayes (1994) concept and Al Strong's presentation and further elucidation of the concept to the public on how HotSpots (unseasonably high sea temperatures) coincide with bleaching events: it's an easier way for the public to understand large-scale environmental stress and the result, rather than trying to explain all the actual physiology behind the phenomenon, which is still not totally understood. I believe Basset Maguire had in mind a "niche response structure" idea years ago which described organisms as a response to their environment, and if I remember correctly, he tried to quantify that for selected species. Maybe the same approach is valid for coral ecosystems. That may be easier than trying to define "ecosystem vitality" in terms of each organism's "health," a difficult concept to quantify. Defining "ecosystem health" would seem to be fraught with unending debate on what constitutes each contributing organism's normal (uncompromised?) lifecycle. (Again, I'm not saying we shouldn't try to undertake such research, and unending debate is what all science needs and likes--I'm mainly trying to get at a way to awaken the public and policy makers.) Anyway, I would like to hear of the approaches you mention, and I would vote that defining the recent historical and current physical environment for each major coral reef area as one of the 8-10 action items you mention. This should be a fundamental part of any "ecosystem vitality index," at least in my mind. This would also give us a platform from which to say, "This is how it was when corals were doing well, and this is how it is now, and corals are not doing well," without having to explain the physiology of why this is so. This would also give us a solid comparison basis for understanding why one reef ecosystem in the Pacific is doing swimmingly (so to speak), and another is not. I think the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force and the Interntational Coral Reef Initiative and NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation Program and other groups have already listed this as a goal, but I think it's an important one for your list. In fact, if you cross-compare a lot of the conservation groups' action items, I think you could probably come up with 8-10 items in a prioritized list most would agree upon. In other words, a lot of people are already working on these problems, and it is extremely difficult to make decisions on what activities to fund, but I think what you are also saying is we need to shake the tree a little harder. I have no suggestion on how to do that! [Mea culpa: We at NOAA/AOML are already compiling physical environmental data and establishing environmental indices, so this whole rap of course appears self-serving and provincially contrived. Hey, it's all I know, and at least I'm being honest about it!] Okay, that makes 4 cents from me... :) Cheers, Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil Dustan Date: Friday, February 24, 2006 12:23 pm Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 > Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most > interesting > thread. It also reminds me...[etc.] From cat64fish at yahoo.com Sat Feb 25 08:52:17 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:52:17 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <4400191D.6040105@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <20060225135217.56489.qmail@web35313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> It boggles the mind (ok, just mine) that some one at a PLENARY talk could say something like this. To say that there is evidence of reefs that have been impacted, and reefs that have not, I can understand ... but the "evidence is not clear"? .... *shakes head in disbelief and disgust* Jeff "Alan E. Strong" wrote: Hi Phil, Even Plenary talk at Ocean Sciences here in Hawaii this week...George Philander...claims the evidence is not that clear... Cheers, Al Richard Grigg wrote: >Phil, > > Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > > Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Colleagues, >> Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >>thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >>years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >>continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >>thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. >> We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote >>and less >>remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >>different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >>nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >>diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >>Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >>cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >>signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >>blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >>history and ecology. >> >>Let?s face it: >> The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >>varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >>ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >>record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >>in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >>have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >>outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >>its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >>seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >>in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >>spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >>Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >>reproductive success. >> >> Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the >>radar >>screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >>of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >>opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >>(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >>health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >>reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >>earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >>and we have got to do more. >> >> As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >>resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >>scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >>everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >>resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >>ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >>with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >>ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. >> >> As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we >>are >>going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >>list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >>should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >>scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >>could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >>example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >>of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >>health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >>concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >>resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >>simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >>lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >>still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >>exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >>sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >>the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >>had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >>every reef on the planet. >> >> This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal >>agency, >>is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >>reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >>process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >>in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >>on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >>forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >>of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >>can be done right now as well as over the long term? >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 1GB free storage! From lesk at bu.edu Sat Feb 25 11:03:06 2006 From: lesk at bu.edu (lesk at bu.edu) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:03:06 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060225110306.0iwtfp3s0kcg84sw@www.bu.edu> Dear Colleagues, It is extremely important that we converge on a common and consistant view on coral reef health that we can convey to the lay public. We must also speak precisely when referring to any particular symptom of coral reef health on a global scale. I challenge anybody to produce data demonstrating that the tropical west Atlantic coral reefs have improved in condition or remained at level condition, by any measure you wish, over the past 25 years. That does not mean that the changes are irreversible or unprecedented in deep time, Gene. It only means that it is a sad thing for us and for our childern that this is happening at this particular time, for we now cause this decline knowingly and deliberately, recovery will likely be a very lengthy process, and we are seem to be doing our best to inhibit even that. The long view will always be there to make us feel better in some existential sense, but it is no balm to those of us who wish to enjoy and benefit from coral reefs during our lives and the lives of our children and grandchildren. Indo-Pacific coral reefs exhibit a vigorous ability to bounce back from denudation or phase shift, so long as there is a stable physical substratum on which they can rebuild (dynamite rubble piles are not very good for this). However, the proportion of reef surface that is in a disturbed, regenerating state at any given time, and more importantly, the size-frequency distribution of these disturbances, looks very odd and very different than when I was a graduate student. Are we using the right data to characterize and track these changes, Rick? Because the Pacific is still more robust than the Atlantic, there is much of concern that we can choose to overlook if that is our bias. We'd better be careful not to be too easily reassured by the positive signs that coral reefs in the Pacific could hold their own, given the chance...because they by and large are not being given the chance. The pace and extent of bleaching alone is awesome. Who is coming forward to call this a non-event, or our response to it exagerated and misplaced? Who is saying that overfishing is something that will have no effect on reefs worth worrying about, and that we can ignore it? Who is saying that the industrialization of reef destruction is not a real thing worth keeping in check? Who is saying with confidence that the earth is not getting warmer, that bleaching is not more frequent and severe, or that corals will definitely adapt to these changes and that the world shall remain much as wonderful as it has always been for us, no matter what we do? So what gentle hand is it, exactly that Gene and Rick wish to lay upon the scene? Les Kaufman From szmanta at uncw.edu Sat Feb 25 08:50:30 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 08:50:30 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 3 References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From anderson at africaonline.co.tz Sat Feb 25 12:38:51 2006 From: anderson at africaonline.co.tz (Jim Anderson) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 20:38:51 +0300 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence - Effect of Bombing References: Message-ID: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> Dear Listers, Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is sibylle at chumbeisland.com] Jim Anderson, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. From manfrino at reefresearch.org Sat Feb 25 12:55:45 2006 From: manfrino at reefresearch.org (Carrie Manfrino) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:55:45 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Summer Coral Reef Internship and Conservation Programs at the Little Cayman Research Centre Message-ID: <014101c63a34$b5315f60$2f01a8c0@CPQ10443900021> Summer Coral Reef Research Internship -a four-week program through Rutgers University Study Abroad at the Little Cayman Research Centre >From July 15 - August 10 2006, the Central Caribbean Marine Institute (CCMI) offers a four-week voluntary research internship program through Rutgers University's Institute of Marine & Coastal Sciences. This program is an opportunity for graduate students and conservation professionals (a few advanced undergraduates may be accepted) to gain advanced underwater research experience. The goals of the program are to train participants in coral ecology protocols and to provide scientifically usable data to assist CCMI in its ecosystem monitoring and coral disease research initiatives. For more information, go to www.reefresearch.org and click on educational and field programs where students will find full details on program cost, credits, registration process, and activities. An Introduction to Tropical Marine Conservation & Field Research Methodologies - a one-week Tropical Marine Conservation course at the Little Cayman Research Centre >From June 23-30 2006, the Central Caribbean Marine Institute offers a one week course at the Little Cayman Research Centre designed to introduce undergraduates to the biology and ecology of tropical marine habitats and to the basics of field research. Students will come away with a strong understanding of the conservation challenge associated with protecting rapidly declining coral reef systems and be prepared to take more advanced research courses or internships. For more information on this course offered through Kean University's Travelearn program, go to www.reefresearch.org and click on educational and field programs where students will find full details on program cost, credits, registration process, and activities. Central Caribbean Marine Institute www.reefresearch.org Dr. Carrie Manfrino, President P.O. Box 1461 Princeton, NJ 08540 Ph:(609) 933-4559 Caribbean Headquarters Little Cayman Research Centre North Coast Road P.O. Box 37 Little Cayman, Cayman Islands (345) 926-2789 From kruer at 3rivers.net Sat Feb 25 14:22:48 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:22:48 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence References: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> Message-ID: <4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net> Folks, In just a few days we've gone from a discussion of reef problems and degradation in the Florida Keys, and how best to approach them after all these years, to a global (and even geologic time, which I too find foolish) focus promoted by US scientists. And the more global the view, the more complicated and diverse the opinions about what is going on and what should be done (if anything) become. And I suspect that those who still question worldwide reef problems are limiting their view to the role of climate change. So what a great irony today to read Anderson's concern of dynamite fishing increasing on reefs in Tanzania. While US NOAA scientists continually move the target and encourage us to think big. Keys problems don't rise to the level of dynamite fishing but the end result may be the same. My suggestions are simply to do what we can locally in places like the Florida Keys to deal with obvious problems, not mysteries - but we're not even close to doing what is possible to protect and conserve the place. In light of the fact that the budget of NOAA's Habitat Conservation Division and other programs have been cut nationally that will only be more difficult in the future. Time to come home. Curtis Kruer ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim Anderson wrote: > Dear Listers, > > Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from > episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet > bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any > prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars > that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? > > The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the > fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast > becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are > pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district > governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those > who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that > network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is > sibylle at chumbeisland.com] > > Jim Anderson, > Dar es Salaam, > Tanzania. > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From phoetjes at cura.net Sat Feb 25 20:45:29 2006 From: phoetjes at cura.net (Paul Hoetjes) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence In-Reply-To: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> 4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net References: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> 4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net Message-ID: <44010839.4050303@cura.net> This has been a most stirring discussion, and I believe very much to the point of what those of us who are extremely worried about the future of coral reefs as we know them, are trying to do. As Les said we really need a common and consistent viewpoint, and that will need to focus down on particulars and concrete activities, and not stay afloat on the 'big' picture, whether it be global or geological. Though thank you Alina for putting things so eloquently depressing. Local people are experiencing this unprecedented (Gene: in the sense that we humans have never experienced it before, AND we are actually causing it) disaster that is befalling our reefs. Whether it be in Florida, or Tanzania, or down here in Curacao in the Southern Caribbean, those of us old enough to know the reefs at the time when reef science really started coming into its own in the sixties, we experienced their demise (not decline, let's face it the reefs of the sixties are dead, what we still have are pale ghosts of them) in disaster after disaster. First it was spearfishing with world championship tournaments moving from place to place in the sixties and early seventies, when everyone was spearfishing and within ten years every big fish was gone anywhere that was accessible to divers. Then (in the Caribbean) the Diadema die-off, completely changing the reef as we knew it, and followed by an insidious wasting away of shallow water reefs (and I mean shallow, 1-4 ft deep, yes there was actual reef at those shallow depths in those days in the Caribbean!). Then the white-band disease neatly removed miles and miles of Acropora cervicornis forests. Then in the nineties bleaching and yellow-blotch disease started in on our remaining reef infrastructure. What was left standing was now called 'coral reef', and it was still magnificent, and although we did start to worry by then, nobody really believed that the dire predictions of the ISRS meeting in the early nineties that we would lose 20-40 % of our (still remaining) reefs within a generation, would come true. But, we had white plague and more bleaching and increasing numbers of hurricanes wreaking havoc on the weakened reef structure, and 15 years later we have a prediction that in twenty years we will loose 40 % of what is left if we don't do something. What we should say is that in another 20 years we may have 10 % of our reefs left! Sorry for this somewhat lengthy introduction, but we cannot keep on pretending everything is hunky dory, and oh, since we don't have any reefs left that are a shadow of what they once were, let's call some of the hardiest weed patches that are so adapted to inhospitable circumstance that most of the changes going on elsewhere left them mostly untouched, let's call those 'resilient' reefs, and focus all our meager resources on protecting those. Oh, oh, and guess what, since nothing seems to have been able to kill these little hardy patches, protecting them is a good bet since we're likely to be succesful even if we can't stop all the causes that are killing all the other reefs. I feel that this focusing on 'resilient' reefs is confusing the issues. It's a giving up on trying to stop the causes of reef death. We can be happy that there are still some areas that look remotely like a reef used to, but we can't lower our standards and forget about what a reef once was. We need to keep fighting to protect all our coasts with an eye to reef preservation, not just those pieces of coast with 'resilient' reefs and elsewhere giving a free reign to developers and erosion and overfishing and irresponsible boating and pollution and septic tanks. Those need to be controlled effectively, everywhere, leaving only a few 'resilient' areas where people can still behave unsustainably. That is what resilience should mean, places that you can't destroy because they've already been completely trashed (and we have plenty of those). If we can achieve only that much, restrict people's activities directly affecting reefs to recreational reserves where they can't do much damage, then we can maybe start worrying about really combating global warming instead of just talking about it. As it stands, all our reefs will have been killed long before global warming will really get it's licks in. So, speaking from an area where reefs are still in somewhat better shape than elsewhere in the region, in summary: There are no reefs left in anything approaching untouched condition. Diseases, and (because of?) overfishing, insiduous pollution and siltation, not just bleaching, have taken care of most of the original reefs. Focusing protection on those reefs that apparently had least need of protection over the past 40 years (resilient reefs) is a cop out. We need to protect all reefs (or what can still with leniency be called reefs). We need to protect them from such 'easy' (well, at least clear cut) things to control as human destructiveness and gregariousness. PS, I'm writing this from a non-airconditioned house in the tropics, I drive a fuel efficient small car, so I do my bit against global warming (though I do have a computer and a television and leave more lights on than strictly necessary, sorry). Cheers, Paul Hoetjes Dept. of Environment Netherlands Antilles Curtis Kruer wrote: >Folks, > >In just a few days we've gone from a discussion of reef problems and degradation in the Florida >Keys, and how best to approach them after all these years, to a global (and even geologic time, >which I too find foolish) focus promoted by US scientists. And the more global the view, the more >complicated and diverse the opinions about what is going on and what should be done (if anything) >become. > >And I suspect that those who still question worldwide reef problems are limiting their view to the >role of climate change. So what a great irony today to read Anderson's concern of dynamite fishing >increasing on reefs in Tanzania. While US NOAA scientists continually move the target and encourage >us to think big. Keys problems don't rise to the level of dynamite fishing but the end result may be >the same. My suggestions are simply to do what we can locally in places like the Florida Keys to >deal with obvious problems, not mysteries - but we're not even close to doing what is possible to >protect and conserve the place. In light of the fact that the budget of NOAA's Habitat Conservation >Division and other programs have been cut nationally that will only be more difficult in the future. > Time to come home. > >Curtis Kruer > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > >Jim Anderson wrote: > > >>Dear Listers, >> >>Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from >>episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet >>bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any >>prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars >>that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? >> >>The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the >>fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast >>becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are >>pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district >>governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those >>who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that >>network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is >>sibylle at chumbeisland.com] >> >>Jim Anderson, >>Dar es Salaam, >>Tanzania. >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> -- Paul C. Hoetjes Senior Policy Advisor Department of Environment & Nature (MINA) Ministry of Public Health & Social Development (VSO) Schouwburgweg 26 (APNA building) Cura?ao Netherlands Antilles tel. +(599-9)466-9307; fax: +(599-9)461-0254 e-mail: paul at mina.vomil.an =========================================== -- http://mina.vomil.an -- =========================================== This message has been scanned for Spam and Virus by CuraNet. From jhocevar at dialb.greenpeace.org Sat Feb 25 22:31:44 2006 From: jhocevar at dialb.greenpeace.org (John Hocevar) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:31:44 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] consensus statement References: Message-ID: <277f01c63a85$3ddc58b0$fc02a8c0@Bolivar> Greetings, I'm enjoying this discussion. While it is admittedly frustrating to see some of the conversation focusing on semantics rather than the seriousness of the threats to coral reefs, it would appear that most, if not all, would agree that there is an observable trend of reef decline, and that anthropogenic impacts are among the primary causes. Global Warming and its more direct and potentially devastating cousin Acidification would present enormous challenges for conservationists even if these burdens were being placed on the shoulders of pristine reefs. Of course, that is hardly the case, as erosion, high nutrient run-off, and toxic pollution have already taken a toll. Fishing has done a job on reefs as well, whether by removing algal grazers or even by dynamiting or poisoning. There is no doubt need for exploration of the degree to which the above statement is true in different regions, and the degree to which the above factors are responsible for past declines or future threats. For the most part, though, it seems that this has been sufficiently well established. Is the general public aware of this situation? Are policy makers placing solutions high enough on their agendas? Clearly not. I strongly support Phil Dustan's proposal for production of a consensus statement (in this case, probably a sign-on statement) of actions that can be taken to conserve coral reefs. My hope is that this community will not shy away from addressing the need to reduce consumption of fossil fuels, unsustainable fishing practices, or coastal development. Human behaviors are contributing to reef decline, so policies must be created to guide changes in those behaviors. If those who best understand the problems are unwilling to propose these changes, there is little hope that this decline can be slowed, much less halted or turned around. As someone who decided to leave academia for conservation advocacy, I can offer to help bring together environmental organizations to broadcast your concerns and recommendations to a wider audience. A coalition of a broad spectrum of organizations representing millions of people working to communicate a solution-oriented scientific consensus on the coral reef crisis would be a strong force for reef conservation. (This would not occur in a vacuum; any successful collaboration of this kind would utilize existing networks and build on past statements.) John Hocevar Oceans Specialist Greenpeace USA Office: 512 454-6140 Cel: 512 577-3868 From estherborell at yahoo.co.uk Sun Feb 26 02:13:43 2006 From: estherborell at yahoo.co.uk (Esther Borell) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 07:13:43 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? In-Reply-To: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <20060226071343.24908.qmail@web86912.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hi Alina and all others, I think your letter has not only contextualized our ?reef problems? but also hit a nerve. Its time to change our dogma. Its time to strip down the fancy costume of sustainability. I sometimes even wonder whether this word was invented to keep social economists in business. I don?t want to see them unemployed, the contrary, but I believe that sustainability, as a concept needs to be reinvented. The red queen is running faster than ever, unable to not only maintain her position, but even starting to fall behind. I am currently based in southeast Sulawesi, alleged centre of coral reef biodiversity but I am placing a safe bet that 70% of reefs here in the Spermonde archipel are very ill, losing their diversity, maybe not like rainforests in %s, not yet but it?s probably only a matter of time ? on an ecological, not geological time scale. Diving reminds me of walking along the Via Appia in Rome, looking at the remains of the past, providing faint evidence of how ?it?used be. Many of the reefs here look like rubble deserts. To see fish one has to pay extra entrance fee. I have counted 7 bombs on a one and a half our dive the other day. Reefs here don?t seem to suffer from bleaching (ironically I am researching just that) but from structural devastation (bombing), insane overfishing and severe eutrophication. Most corals of the inner and middle shelf within this archipelago are heavily infested by all sorts of borers. Its like cancer. Seemingly healthy and flourishing to the outside, but then unable to withstand January and February storms, which have eroded large patches of reefs and signs of algal succession are already on the way. The only way to sustain would be to stop ANY reef and coastal related activities until further notice. But this of course is just na?ve wishful thinking. The present resilience vs remnance discussion has been largely gravitated around the Keys and I noticed that most if not all participants were ?1st world scientists?. I am sitting in the middle of the 3rd world biodiversity hot spot wondering where our ?hotspot affilated collegues? are. I am guessing, that many are oblivious to this discussion due to the lack of adequate internet access, which at least here in Indonesia is still a novelty, slow and expensive. But they need to be integrated ? asap. Reef decline here is more than the problem of policy implementation, local politics and steak holder conflicts. It?s the consequence on the tail of a much bigger issue, an issue of local culture and education. We, the 1st world scientists live in a world of health insurances, unemployment insurances and mortgages. Hooray to those that can afford to recycle their rubbish. It?s a luxury. In Germany every household has more rubbish bins than fingers on one hand. Here in Indonesia we have none. Rubbish is dumped into the ocean, onto the reefs or disposed of ?thermally? (I know ...weve been there - still are?). My point is, we are living in a world that has conditioned us to think ahead, trying to not only predict but also prepare for future, featuring perspectives extending beyond that of individuality - a concept as such alien to indonesien society. Family rules. Thinking future is much more confined to the individual and future predictions seldom appear to penetrate any further then to the F1 generation. Producing offsprings to secure the future. Offsprings are the real existing currency.And can we blame them? I cant. The 62 yr old woman in the states really didn?t need the 12th child. That?s pure stupidity. She probably didn?t even need 3, but I am hitting thin ice here. Women on the archipel islands however do need children (but not 12). Most people on the islands don?t qualify for mortgages and likes, most don?t even qualify for simple bank accounts. They borrow money from affluent parties, thereby entering into a livelong dependence, becoming an accessory to the complex network of the local illegal fishing industry, paying off their debts by carrying out the task at hand, namely bombing. Many of them risking their lives in doing so, many being driven into invalidity of some sort. What we need, is educational sustainability. Education that lasts. Education that indoctrinates and is assimilated and passed on to F2, F3 .Fn. Academically and practically its time for consilience, in the sense it was formulated by O. Wilson. We need a unification of knowledge in order to act. Disciplines need to be pulled together. Reef conservation here in spermonde is a first order task for anthropologists, sociologists, and socioeconomists, then for marinebiologists and in the last instance for politicians, but creating a circular network of exchange. Maybe its time that universities teach marine anthropology. But yes, its easy to stay in our studies busying us with intellectual chit chat contemplating fancy ?nce words ..creating awareness amongst those that are aware anyway. I am just wearing the shoes of the devils advocate, and am certainly not throwing the first stone. After all I am researching bleaching in corals that do not bleach and my bahasa Indonesia is as fragile as the reefs. So whats the new dogma? What do do? And who is doing it? Learning the language, going into teaching after finishing the PhD? Become a marineanthropologist? Maybe I should give up my oil leaking motorbike and do what with it?...dump it the ocean? trying to keep up optimism esther . "Szmant, Alina" wrote: Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now --------------------------------- From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sun Feb 26 08:58:31 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 08:58:31 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Message-ID: <4401B407.2000407@noaa.gov> Hey, folks, I'm certainly not going to be one who runs around waving the flag of *sustainability*. My main point was that these words means different things to different people, most likely because they aren't being used correctly. Like, let's look at the definition of the word *sustain*, then look at how it is currently being used: sus?tain 1. To keep in existence; maintain. 2. To supply with necessities or nourishment; provide for. Don't we want to do this for coral reefs? Of course we do. But now that I've thrown the word out there (after admittedly not ever really using it much--certainly not in fora like these), I'm starting to notice it more. Like, I now see a Request For Proposals that mentions sustainable development. What the heck is that supposed to mean? It means, essentially, let's develop some enterprise(s) near the coast or coral reef area that can support economies, yet not compromise the environment. I think that's what it means. The concept of how you can support an economy near a reef area, yet not compromise it (the reef area, that is), is what should separate the good proposals and actions from the bad. This approach says "let's find a way for people to live [*develop*] near ecosystems without messing them up [too much]." Those who are against sustainable development would prefer to either not develop near these areas, or keep people out of the area, which is a great idea if it is a realistic approach, but how do you push back the tide of people? So, to me "sustainable development" seems to be an oxymoron and a phrase meant to countenance or disguise coastal development. I'll bet a real estate developer came up with that phrase. So, what I said was we should sustain the reefs, not (necessarily) permit sustainable development. I personally don't see how you can sustain a clean environment and also permit people to crawl (swim) all over it. I guess I'm saying our goal should be to sustain the reefs that are in good condition, but what I admittedly didn't address was how to fix the compromised reefs. You have to accept what Alina says, that we're in a big mess and we have to work with what we have, but to do that we all have to do our part and we need strong leadership. Our leaders listen (theoretically) to lots of voices and also to big money. Now, addressing the charge that we first-world (and NOAA) coral scientists have no clue as to what's going on in the rest of the world, I would have to agree that THIS scientist is clueless about a lot of international coral problems, at least from a first-person account. I have never seen bombs on the ocean floor, and have never had my ear drums blown out from blast-fishing. HOWEVER, I have been part of proposal review processes before and I can tell you that a large number of very savvy coral scientists (NOAA, academic and NGO) and policy makers put large numbers of well-meaning hours into trying to determine where best to fund coral conservation efforts (but the process is not perfect). It's a very difficult decision process, and the final decision makers ultimately have no other agenda except to conserve coral reefs. If the squeaky wheel gets the grease (see also last sentence of previous paragraph), then we have to agree on what needs to squeak the loudest, or at least prioritize the squeaks. Which is what Phil was saying with his plea to come up with 8 - 10 action items. Later... From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sun Feb 26 09:10:34 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 09:10:34 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] disclaimer Message-ID: <4401B6DA.3060400@noaa.gov> Whoops, I should have put this at the bottom of my last couple of messages, because it's true: "The contents of this message are mine personally and do not necessarily reflect any position of the Government or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration." From cnidaria at earthlink.net Sun Feb 26 12:34:28 2006 From: cnidaria at earthlink.net (James M Cervino) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 12:34:28 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Resilience? After Heat Stroke? Message-ID: Dear Coral Reef Scientists, Alina's post states the truth as it address our cultural behavior in the USA and how this may be having a negative impact on the reefs throughout the world. We all agree that thermal stress is the number one cause of coral mortality coupled with localized deforestation and anthropogenic nutrient enrichment. However, it was not long ago that there were people out there (marine scientists) that refused to admit that global warming induced thermal heat shock is the number one threat reefs are facing today. Reef Resilience! Are we fooling ourselves? With the growing population and the types of vehicles we use to transport our kiddies to soccer practice we will continue to produce more heat trapping gasses into the atmosphere that are directly correlated with higher sea surface temperatures. This will have a serious effect on tropical corals that are sensitive and already threatened. The major reef builders of the Pacific are not resilient, and will not be resistant to thermal stress and coral disease. We can say good-by to the diversity of corals I am looking at in Jen Veron's book that is sitting in front of me on my desk, especially if we all are not vocal about the Energy Policy produced by the Whitehouse this year. Were there any atmospheric and marine scientists acting as advisors quoted in this Energy Policy brief? We as marine scientists should be outraged as we all know now that reefs will not be resilient to the changing oceanographic conditions in the next decade. So the question is, how will we address this as marine scientists? Create more MPAs? I don't care how many MPAs we create throughout the world, if we are not going to get serious about global warming and anthropogenic nutrient enrichment we are wasting time. Will MPAs protect corals from heat stroke or nutrient enrichment? Are corals protected from global warming and nutrient pollution and is this addressed in MPAs ? Below are some vital statistics regarding how the USA is addressing global warming induced climate change: In 2004, China consumed 6.5 million barrels of oil per day. The United States consumed 20.4 million barrels, and demand is rising as a result of economic growth and American cars. It has been estimated that the bulk of the imports are going directly to SUVs. SUVs made up 5% of the American arsenal of cars in 1990; currently they make up 54%. U.S. oil imports are at the highest ever, 55%. Department of Energy projections show imports rising to 70 percent by 2025. Interpreting this to a global scale the United States transportation sector produces about 8% of world global warming pollution and accounts for 18 percent of an increasingly tight world oil market each year according to the Energy Foundation and the Association for Peak Oil&Gas (http://www.peakoil.net/). If American cars averaged 40 miles per gallon, we would soon reduce consumption by 2 million to 3 million barrels of oil a day. That could translate into a sustained price drop of more than $20 a barrel. And getting cars to be that efficient is easy. This was not addressed in the recent energy bill recently passed by Congress. Global oil use = 31.5 billion barrels per year One barrel oil = 42 U.S. gallons One cubic foot = 7.48 U.S. gallons One cubic mile = 147.2 billion cubic feet Country Barrels of oil per person annually United States 25 Japan 14.0 Spain 13.8 Mexico 6.0 Brazil 3.5 China 1.5 India 0.8 Source: Goldman Sachs, Energy Weekly, August 11, 1999 Consumption (Millions of barrels per day): Source DOE ------------------------------------------------------------------------ United States: 19.993 Japan: 5.423 China: 4.854 Germany: 2.814 Russia: 2.531 South Korea: 2.126 Brazil: 2.123 Canada: 2.048 France: 2.040 India: 2.011 Mexico: 1.932 Italy: 1.881 United Kingdom: 1.699 Spain: 1.465 SaudiArabia: 1.415 Iran: 1.109 Indonesia: 1.063 Netherlands: .881 Australia: .879 Taiwan: .846 -- ************************************************** Dr. James M. Cervino, MS, Ph.D. Marine Biologist Department of Biological & Health Sciences Pace University New York NYC Phone: (917) 620-5287 Web site: http://www.globalcoral.org *************************************************** From reginal at hawaii.edu Sun Feb 26 16:56:04 2006 From: reginal at hawaii.edu (Regina) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:56:04 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? Message-ID: <67fdad82756000d396460a6add72f34e@hawaii.edu> Esther and all, As a marine anthropologist, I read your post with great interest and had to resist the temptation to shout out loud "here here!!" lest my office mates think me a bit mad. There are actually a few universities teaching marine anthropology and I agree that the inclusion of a marine anthropologist in interdisciplinary marine science projects is vital. As Chuck Birkeland, one of my favorite professors often says, one cannot manage the marine environment, one has to manage the people using it. Aloha, Regina Regina Woodrom Luna Maritime and Fisheries Anthropologist PhD Candidate, Ecological Anthropology Program (Marine) University of Hawaii Manoa Lecturer: Biology of Marine Reptiles, Human Adaptation to the Sea, Anthropology of Tourism, American Cultures Biological Assistant: Oahu Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvaging Group ReginaL at hawaii.edu >From: Esther Borell >To: "Szmant, Alina" >CC: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? >Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 07:13:43 +0000 (GMT) > > >Hi Alina and all others, > I think your letter has not only contextualized our ?reef problems? but also hit a nerve. > Its time to change our dogma. Its time to strip down the fancy costume of sustainability. I sometimes even wonder whether this word was invented to keep social economists in business. I don?t want to see them unemployed, the contrary, but I believe that sustainability, as a concept needs to be reinvented. > The red queen is running faster than ever, unable to not only maintain her position, but even starting to fall behind. > I am currently based in southeast Sulawesi, alleged centre of coral reef biodiversity but I am placing a safe bet that 70% of reefs here in the Spermonde archipel are very ill, losing their diversity, maybe not like rainforests in %s, not yet but it?s probably only a matter of time ? on an ecological, not geological time scale. Diving reminds me of walking along the Via Appia in Rome, looking at the remains of the past, providing faint evidence of how ?it?used be. > Many of the reefs here look like rubble deserts. To see fish one has to pay extra entrance fee. I have counted 7 bombs on a one and a half our dive the other day. > Reefs here don?t seem to suffer from bleaching (ironically I am researching just that) but from structural devastation (bombing), insane overfishing and severe eutrophication. Most corals of the inner and middle shelf within this archipelago are heavily infested by all sorts of borers. Its like cancer. Seemingly healthy and flourishing to the outside, but then unable to withstand January and February storms, which have eroded large patches of reefs and signs of algal succession are already on the way. > > The only way to sustain would be to stop ANY reef and coastal related activities until further notice. But this of course is just na?ve wishful thinking. > > The present resilience vs remnance discussion has been largely gravitated around the Keys and I noticed that most if not all participants were ?1st world scientists?. I am sitting in the middle of the 3rd world biodiversity hot spot wondering where our ?hotspot affilated collegues? are. I am guessing, that many are oblivious to this discussion due to the lack of adequate internet access, which at least here in Indonesia is still a novelty, slow and expensive. But they need to be integrated ? asap. Reef decline here is more than the problem of policy implementation, local politics and steak holder conflicts. It?s the consequence on the tail of a much bigger issue, an issue of local culture and education. > We, the 1st world scientists live in a world of health insurances, unemployment insurances and mortgages. Hooray to those that can afford to recycle their rubbish. It?s a luxury. In Germany every household has more rubbish bins than fingers on one hand. Here in Indonesia we have none. Rubbish is dumped into the ocean, onto the reefs or disposed of ?thermally? (I know ...weve been there - still are?). > My point is, we are living in a world that has conditioned us to think ahead, trying to not only predict but also prepare for future, featuring perspectives extending beyond that of individuality - a concept as such alien to indonesien society. Family rules. Thinking future is much more confined to the individual and future predictions seldom appear to penetrate any further then to the F1 generation. Producing offsprings to secure the future. Offsprings are the real existing currency.And can we blame them? I cant. The 62 yr old woman in the states really didn?t need the 12th child. That?s pure stupidity. She probably didn?t even need 3, but I am hitting thin ice here. Women on the archipel islands however do need children (but not 12). > Most people on the islands don?t qualify for mortgages and likes, most don?t even qualify for simple bank accounts. They borrow money from affluent parties, thereby entering into a livelong dependence, becoming an accessory to the complex network of the local illegal fishing industry, paying off their debts by carrying out the task at hand, namely bombing. Many of them risking their lives in doing so, many being driven into invalidity of some sort. > > What we need, is educational sustainability. Education that lasts. Education that indoctrinates and is assimilated and passed on to F2, F3 ?.Fn. > Academically and practically its time for consilience, in the sense it was formulated by O. Wilson. We need a unification of knowledge in order to act. Disciplines need to be pulled together. Reef conservation here in spermonde is a first order task for anthropologists, sociologists, and socioeconomists, then for marinebiologists and in the last instance for politicians, but creating a circular network of exchange. > Maybe its time that universities teach marine anthropology. But yes, its easy to stay in our studies busying us with intellectual chit chat contemplating fancy ?nce words?..creating awareness amongst those that are aware anyway. > > I am just wearing the shoes of the devils advocate, and am certainly not throwing the first stone. After all I am researching bleaching in corals that do not bleach and my bahasa Indonesia is as fragile as the reefs. So whats the new dogma? What do do? And who is doing it? > Learning the language, going into teaching after finishing the PhD? Become a marineanthropologist? Maybe I should give up my oil leaking motorbike ?and do what with it?...dump it the ocean? > > trying to keep up optimism > > esther > > > > . > > > > >"Szmant, Alina" wrote: > Hi Phil & others: > >I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created > through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not > taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? > >You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I > have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? > >China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. > >For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. > >So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. > >Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. > >So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. > >So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. > >In a pessimistic mood this morn', > >Alina Szmant > > >******************************************************************* >Dr. Alina M. Szmant >Coral Reef Research Group >UNCW-Center for Marine Science >5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln >Wilmington NC 28409 >Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 >Cell: (910)200-3913 >email: szmanta at uncw.edu >Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta >****************************************************************** > >________________________________ > >From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg >Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM >To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 > > > >Phil, > >Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > >Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > >Dear Colleagues, > > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting > >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few > >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to > >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our > >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > > and less > >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by > >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from > >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of > >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the > >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral > >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show > >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to > >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own > >history and ecology. > > > >Let's face it: > > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, > >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is > >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological > >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal > >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't > >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's > >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take > >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the > >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all > >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread > >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. > >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human > >reproductive success. > > > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > > radar > >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation > >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my > >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities > >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the > >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs > >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this > >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying > >and we have got to do more. > > > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think > >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We > >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the > >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of > >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of > >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled > >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and > >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > > are > >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral > >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, > >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own > >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and > >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For > >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes > >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, > >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations > >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a > >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is > >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the > >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and > >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the > >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is > >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And > >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we > >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost > >every reef on the planet. > > > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > > agency, > >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for > >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a > >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded > >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus > >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would > >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study > >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think > >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > > Thanks, > > Phil > > > >-- > >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. > >Department of Biology > >College of Charleston > >Charleston SC 29424 > >(843) 953-8086 voice > >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Coral-List mailing list > >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > >--------------------------------- > Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now >--------------------------------- > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From lesk at bu.edu Sun Feb 26 11:08:47 2006 From: lesk at bu.edu (lesk at bu.edu) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:08:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Faith in local efforts; ferocity in facing the world In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060226110847.e61yypg760ww0w8w@www.bu.edu> Phil Dustan asked what we can do. Perhaps a start is to share what we are doing now, and help each other forge our puzzle pieces into a whole. This sometimes works better than launching a new big empty vessel with a fancy name and fundraising needs in hopes of picking up paying passengers along the way. Here is the piece I am on now. A small idea emerged from a workshop several years ago in Los Cabos. Conservation International organized a party called "Defying Ocean's End". No, I did not make up that name, though margaritas inspired an indecent salute to go along with it. DOE is a business plan to save the sea, vetted by folks from Goldman Sachs Inc. to make sure the scientists, environmentalists and stakeholders present were able to add up the numbers properly. A news piece on DOE is at http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/ 2003/06/0603_030603_oceanboundaries.html and the resulting Island Press book is at: http://www.islandpress.org/books/detail.html/SKU/1-55963-753-6 At DOE, Jeremy Jackson and I co-chaired a very lively working group focussed on science to "restore and maintain marine ecosystem function." In order to restore a marine ecosystem, we reasoned that we should first restore faith in a coastal community that they can steward their local marine environment despite the sky falling all about them. The small idea is this: resistance is not futile. This is a tough nut because people are hearing that no matter what they do to control fishing pressure and overdevelopment in their own front yards, the First World is going to get them- cook them, innundate them, poison them, and overpower them economically, to the strains of a siren call irresistable to their greedy and their young. The key would be for a local community to do their level best to manage their doings in their own bit of sea in an enduring and rewarding fashion (the "S" word). If it works even a little, empowerment can hopefully do the rest. After DOE, I teamed up with CI to work on this problem. We were fortunate to get start-up funding from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation for a project called the Marine Management Area Science program (MMAS). We have four years to get going. Dr. Leah Bunce is the Project Director. I am the PI. Roger McManus is supervising staffer. Sylvia Earle is spokesperson/Godess. CI staff and partners are the implementing folks. For anybody who is interested, as materials become available they are posted to a general access web site. The quickest route to a fact sheet and workplan for the project is to put "CI MMAS" into Google and take the top hits. The project is evolving faster than the web portal and we do need some privacy and distance to get something done. However, link-ups, partnerships, criticisms are welcome. At its core MMAS is a natural and social science research project. Because it is a research project, parts of it that are new will appear in peer-reviewed papers first, and then be applied and publicized. These parts mostly have to do with the invention of new diagnostics to help sort out the effects of local management efforts, from changes (good or bad) in marine and social systems due to other causes. But much of what you will see in MMAS sounds like what others are doing, because all are part of the same global context. Let us call it: Alina's Lament. It is essential that these more general objectives be achieved collaboratively with other projects being carried out in the same geographical areas, in a united front. The egofriction static charge of NGO's and Kurtz-like characters- scientists and saviors, parachute-diplomats and prodigal sons alike- must be smoothed or we will be each others' failures. We are all human and we all set up fiefdoms and power structures as automatically as dogs piss to mark their having passed. Once everybody has pissed we can get down to work, and the mix will smell at least as good, or as bad, as the mark of any one. The Scientific Advisory Committee for MMAS has helped to guide us into a focus for the project in four primary geographical areas, and two for work to ramp up later on. These areas are: Greater Caribbean- primary focus on Belize and MBRS region Brazil- Abrolhos Shelf Tropical Eastern Pacific- Coiba, Cocos, Malpelo, Galapagos Fiji Archipelago The two areas for later on are Raja Ampat (eastern Indonesia) and the western Indian Ocean someplace. In each place we are fitting our little piece (MMA science) into the context of existing, locally initiated partnerships and projects. We also have some small, thematic research projects that are not geographically tied down to these spots except that the products will then be applied in each of them. Those are our beans. We have decided to work small. Together, the sites constitute a global observatory for the efficacy of MMA effects under varied biological and social conditions, strewn across E-W and N-S biodiversity gradients. Okay, that was my sharing time. Now it is all of your turns. Perhaps we can look at different parts of the world of tropical nearshore marine conservation organizationally, the way that ReefBase has helped us to do biologically. Find the pressure points. Hone the messages and the campaigns. Move from one immediate objective to the next. Shout into the media's ear instead of the other way. Remember, this isn't to say that the global UN diplomacy march on Washington thing isn't important, too. All of us have folks in our organizations who, bless their hearts, are doing just that. It just isn't what I am doing right now. Sounds kind of like baloney but maybe what we do can be better than what it sounds like. Now, that would be really novel. Les From JKoven at aol.com Sun Feb 26 18:05:29 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:05:29 EST Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Message-ID: Yes, Jim, "sustainable" and "development" ARE? oxymorons.? It all depends on what level of income/development the community stakeholders need to produce from their reefs, absent other income sources.? Their choices are often limited - they can bring in tourists/divers or over-fish, even though that diminishes or damages the resources.? Reefs provided sustenance for entire island communities for millenia - they can't now sustain other urban communities with growing populations.? The needs of these stakeholders has changed over the past 50 years - they want to send their children to schools off-island, they want the same techological "improvements" in their lives that those in the urban areas have and to catch up with the 21st century world.? Both climate change and over-fishing have? affected many Pacific reefs that have not been subjected to gross land-based pollution.? Nothing the stakeholders of small islands can do will change the global climate picture and fishing is part of their culture.? The search is on for other ways to sustain the way of life they wish to have, without further destroying fisheries and thus reefs. It's interesting that outrigger canoes once sped villagers to other islands.? Then came the diesel powered boats - slower and costly, although one was less dependant upon weather and perhaps drier upon arrival.? Now faster fiberglass boats are the thing.....they travel as swiftly as an outrigger in a decent wind, but leave one beholden to the fuel companies.? Progress?? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From JKoven at aol.com Sun Feb 26 18:04:05 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:04:05 EST Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence - Effect of Bombing Message-ID: <290.64bb747.31338de5@aol.com> Has anyone studied the reefs in Guam since WWII? Of course....but the diversity was vastly reduced. Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu Sun Feb 26 18:16:56 2006 From: rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu (Richard Grigg) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 13:16:56 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today In-Reply-To: <20060225110306.0iwtfp3s0kcg84sw@www.bu.edu> References: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20060226131545.01ca73d8@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Les, My real opinion and view of the world is much the same as Alina Szmant's. Overpopulation is the problem. The Club of Rome estimated that the carrying capacity of planet earth is about 3 billion people. We are double that now and there is no going back, at least not without a catastrophic event. The 1000's of reefs that are still healthy in the Pacific are in places underpopulated or even uninhabited. I visited about 25 such places several years ago in the Tuamotu Archipelago. Unfortunately, they too will probably be discovered. After that, if humankind does not face the human population issue head on, I don't think we can prevent these reefs from the same fate as those Phil Dustan was talking about. There is time, but not the political will on a global scale. But rather than dooming and glooming all the reefs in the world (dead or not), I think the number one action item should be containing the human population bomb. Not overgeneralizing about the reefs but facing the real issue....us. Rick Grigg At 11:03 AM 2/25/2006 -0500, lesk at bu.edu wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > >It is extremely important that we converge on a common and consistant >view on coral reef health that we can convey to the lay public. We >must also speak precisely when referring to any particular symptom of >coral reef health on a global scale. > >I challenge anybody to produce data demonstrating that the tropical >west Atlantic coral reefs have improved in condition or remained at >level condition, by any measure you wish, over the past 25 years. That >does not mean that the changes are irreversible or unprecedented in >deep time, Gene. It only means that it is a sad thing for us and for >our childern that this is happening at this particular time, for we now >cause this decline knowingly and deliberately, recovery will likely be >a very lengthy process, and we are seem to be doing our best to inhibit >even that. The long view will always be there to make us feel better >in some existential sense, but it is no balm to those of us who wish to >enjoy and benefit from coral reefs during our lives and the lives of >our children and grandchildren. > >Indo-Pacific coral reefs exhibit a vigorous ability to bounce back from >denudation or phase shift, so long as there is a stable physical >substratum on which they can rebuild (dynamite rubble piles are not >very good for this). However, the proportion of reef surface that is >in a disturbed, regenerating state at any given time, and more >importantly, the size-frequency distribution of these disturbances, >looks very odd and very different than when I was a graduate student. >Are we using the right data to characterize and track these changes, >Rick? Because the Pacific is still more robust than the Atlantic, >there is much of concern that we can choose to overlook if that is our >bias. We'd better be careful not to be too easily reassured by the >positive signs that coral reefs in the Pacific could hold their own, >given the chance...because they by and large are not being given the >chance. > >The pace and extent of bleaching alone is awesome. Who is coming >forward to call this a non-event, or our response to it exagerated and >misplaced? Who is saying that overfishing is something that will have >no effect on reefs worth worrying about, and that we can ignore it? >Who is saying that the industrialization of reef destruction is not a >real thing worth keeping in check? Who is saying with confidence that >the earth is not getting warmer, that bleaching is not more frequent >and severe, or that corals will definitely adapt to these changes and >that the world shall remain much as wonderful as it has always been for >us, no matter what we do? > >So what gentle hand is it, exactly that Gene and Rick wish to lay upon >the scene? > >Les Kaufman > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From milviapin at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 18:41:09 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 15:41:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <20060226234109.88917.qmail@web50303.mail.yahoo.com> dear listers, I agree with Rick, there are reefs that are considered pristine in RMI for example. No diseases, no bleaching, no eutrophication, no overfishing or destructive fishing nor boat damage threaten some of the reefs in remote areas . At many locations, we can still witness this ecosystem as clean, productive, diverse as some can only imagine it "should have been" earlier. No take areas or sanctuaries are indeed to be made the rule, and governments and managers in remote island countries hear this message, although thay often have to apply it not as a recovery or restoration process but as a conservation of extant natural health. This decision is often more difficult than similar action needed when the damage is instead evident and advanced. Also, I do not think people in the Pacific islands nor in South East Asia can agree we (they) can live "without reefs". It is not just a question of loosing biodiversity or beauty! Millions of people still REALLY depend on these ecosystems for their food AND income! Thank you Silvia Richard Grigg wrote: Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let?s face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze. From milviapin at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 19:07:07 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 16:07:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 3 In-Reply-To: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <20060227000708.48318.qmail@web50311.mail.yahoo.com> Alina, I think you had a very important message for all of us. "For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! " If we are not ready to relinquish some of our personal comfort(s), we cannot expect politicians to make things better for all of us and we should stop blaiming international politics for the damage caused to the global environment. I believe protecting reefs, or the environment, or the forests is less an issue of political decision and more of behaviour. Everybody's. Each one can make a little change in each one's life. All together we are definetely more powerful than a few "decision makers". cheers silvia "Szmant, Alina" wrote: Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. From szmanta at uncw.edu Sun Feb 26 20:09:28 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 20:09:28 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline References: <46F56ACD52BC5F4F911EF9C4264FB46404AD29DE@UNCWMAILVS1.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB028@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> For those of you loooking for how some scientists are trying to desseminate the word.... ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From: Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST) To: Subject: University of Texas Ocean Research Webcast Dear Science Enthusiast, University of Texas at Austin Webcast Entitled "Brave New Ocean." A webcast presentation given by Professor Jeremy Jackson, William E. and Mary B. Ritter Professor and Director of the Geosciences Research Division at Scripps Institution of Oceanography will be March 3, 2006 at 7pm. Dr. Jeremy Jackson is one of the most prominent marine ecologists in the world and he has a message to get out about the world's oceans - it documents declines in coral reefs, decreasing numbers of large marine fish, and losses of coastal and marine ecosystems. More than just an academic researcher, Dr. Jackson has actively searched for innovative ways to reach the public, applying his skills as a communicator with his scientific knowledge to inspire action. Dr. Jackson desires to reach a broader audience and affect change into the future with tomorrow's generation on this topic of interest. View a FREE web broadcast of the lecture live Friday, March 3, 2006 at 7 pm CST. During the live webcast, you can submit questions to Dr. Jackson and he will answer as many as he can for the live and webcast audiences. If possible, can you distribute or post a link to this webcast on your website, newsletter, or listserv as well as pass this notice on to any colleagues of yours that may be interested. The link to our Lecture Series website, where the details of the lecture and the webcast can be found, is: http://www.esi.utexas.edu/outreach/ols/lectures/Jackson/ Please let me know if you will consider posting this information. Thanks for your time, Brian Zavala Environmental Science Institute The University of Texas at Austin brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu 512.471.5847 ------ End of Forwarded Message From mtupper at picrc.org Sun Feb 26 21:11:37 2006 From: mtupper at picrc.org (Mark Tupper) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 11:11:37 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] vehicle emissions, lifestyle changes and global warming References: <20060223022526.80199.qmail@web35310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <009901c63b43$26543be0$63c8c814@TUPPER> Hi listers, I think James, Jeff and Alina are right on the money when they talk about vehicle emissions and today's "bigger is better" SUV mindset. I doubt that the public has any realization of the degree to which vehicle emissions contribute to greenhouse gases. A quote from the California Cars Initiative: "In California, transportation accounts for over 40% of greenhouse gas emissions. Nationally the number is around 33%. Globally it's 20% and rising fast, especially as car-starved China, India and Russia add to their fleets." So, if we can agree that global warming and climate change are adversely affecting coral reefs, then vehicle emissions are one of the major culprits. But have governments or the auto industry made any attempt to educate the public on this issue? If so, I must have missed it... This is one of the most challenging problems our environment faces, given the long history of our deep-rooted "car culture" lifestyle in North America. It's amazing to me that with sky-high gas prices unlikely to change while there is continuing war in the Middle East, people still want to buy the biggest, most expensive SUV they can. For example, in the last decade, Hummer went from a cottage industry aimed at producing exclusive (and enormous) vehicles for celebrities, to a major automaker producing over 100,000 SUVs per year. And as Jeff said, how many of those are ever taken off-road? And while DaimlerChrysler has been touting their advances in PHEV technology (plug-in hybrid electric vehicles that can get 100+ mpg), they were busy reviving the 425 horsepower Hemi engine and stuffing it into 4-door family sedans, and then developing a 500 horsepower V-10 for their SUVs and pickup trucks. Do soccer moms really need to go 0-60 in under 5 seconds and cruise the highway at over 170 mph, which just 10 years ago could only be done with a $200,000 exotic sports car? No. It would be illegal anyway. Has DaimlerChrysler sold any mass-produced PHEVs yet? No. Why not? Because hybrids are for nerdy enviro-geeks like us. Nobody else would pay the premium price charged for them when they could get a "real" car for less. In North America's car culture, big and powerful is sexy; small and efficient is lame. Sorry if this post seems too much about vehicles and not enough about coral reefs, but I'm trying to address one of the root causes of coral reef decline. We might say that greenhouse gases and resulting thermal stress are a root cause of decline but they aren't the ultimate cause. They are a symptom generated by human activities - a symptom that happens to trigger its own set of secondary symptoms, including coral bleaching and disease. In addressing the ultimate cause, the question is, how do we change the mindset of an entire nation from one of spending all their disposable income on unnecessary luxuries to one of moderation and conservation? Cheers, Mark Dr. Mark H Tupper, Senior Scientist Palau International Coral Reef Center PO Box 7086, Koror, Palau 96940 tel (680) 488-6950; fax (680) 488-6951 and Adjunct Research Associate University of Guam Marine Laboratory UOG Station, Mangilao, Guam 96923, USA tel (671) 735-2375; fax (671) 734-6767 From A.J.G.Williams at newcastle.ac.uk Mon Feb 27 14:30:15 2006 From: A.J.G.Williams at newcastle.ac.uk (Andrew Williams) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 19:30:15 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Resilience, Remnancy, Sustainability - Semantics? References: <46F56ACD52BC5F4F911EF9C4264FB46404AD29DE@UNCWMAILVS1.dcs.uncw.edu> <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB028@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <0BE60E6F26C4034388842EA9FA0DC94525281B@quarrel.campus.ncl.ac.uk> Dear All, I started out reading this topic with interest, but it is now becoming irritation, because it seems to be a great deal of definitions, discussions of semantics and ego flattering statements. Do I intend to be insulting? No, I attempt to point out that if this discussion is affecting me in this way (an alleged scientist), imagine what it does for members of the public... Now watch me reel off a massive list of definitions! *laughs* Global warming - fossil fuels are the key issue, yet they are owned by massive MNCs whose sole interest is capital generation. The technology to replace these energy sources already exists, is owned by MNCs and DODs around the world, either hidden from public use for protectionism of markets or national security (i.e. protectionism of national markets!). The USA is 'run' by an oil baron, a man who was re-elected by over 50% (ish) of the nation (well those who voted). What is the solution when the public are disinterested in (global) politics, and the politicians are interested in re-election and capital accumulation? Education is fundamentally important to changing public, and thus political, agendas, yet who controls school curricula? What happens when the media has become mankind's source of (dis)information? What happens when scientists cannot even decide within themselves the 'correct' course of action? I'll tell you what I believe happens, things get worse, further ingrained, more polarised and more self-centred. There are two real problems in this world, apathy and greed. If these two variables can be addressed, mankind has a chance at not destroying itself and the planet in the process. I've seen/heard various people say things like, "thanks for that depressing outlook" to which my response is, do we live on the same planet? I would dearly love to be optimistic about global affairs, but I think it's deluded. I don't believe in the Hollywood happy ending, in fact if I did, I wouldn't be studying natural resource management. I will happily admit that there are success stories about the place and I will come to that point 'shortly'. We are creeping in the right direction, but we could be walking, if not running (hand in hand into the sunset...sorry!). We all talk about globalisation, yet where are the international laws, where is the international institution that represents mankind's interest and not national interests? None of us alone is going to change global problems, it is going to take a concerted global effort, it is not going to be easy, it is going to require considerable pain in the process, because current consumption of global resources are not sustainable (yup sorry, there's that buzz word again). There are no 'silver bullets', if we haven't learned that yet... Admittedly, all this globalisation 'stuff' is in it's infancy, it is barely crawling, but someone (plural) MUST teach it how to walk and it cannot be driven solely by the free market ideology. 'Over' population - Carrying capacities do not take into account advances in technology, so improvements in agricultural practices increases production (agreed, simply pouring chemicals into the ground is not sustainable, but there are alternatives). There's plenty of food being produced today, it's not a production issue it's a distribution issue. I only have to wander around shops like 'Pound Land' to realise there are massive amounts of resources being poured into utterly useless products, yet people still buy them. My computers enable me to communicate globally, increase my productivity, my lights enable me to work in the dark, but, for example, these ridiculous plastic (oil derivative) desk ornaments - where's the utility in that? Don't even get me started on SUVs! To say China has the right idea about birth control, is rather simplistic, just look at how many female babies are abandoned or aborted, I feel that women being marched en-mass into sterilisation programs (India) against their will is totally indefensible. Human rights on one hand, control systems on the other - where is the middle ground? I personally would like to see a licensing system, whereby people have to prove they are capable of being good parents and are economically able to raise their kids - but of course that only works in developed nations, I could not possibly argue for that to be applied in developing nations. I'm sure that would cause a massive outcry, it being a fundamental human right to have children, but this example of the women having her 12th baby - what about the rights of people who don't want to live in an overcrowded world? Since when do the rights of the individual outweigh the rights of the many (sorry, rather star trek I know!)? We are boxing ourselves into a corner with all this political correctness. Timescales - someone mentioned that on a long enough time line, reefs will be gone. Well in several billion years the sun will expand to the point Earth will be uninhabitable - does this mean we should all just give up and damn the world to extinction early? I absolutely take the point that ecosystems are processes, (perhaps they should be renamed as ecoprocesses and not systems (I am so joking!)) and that on a long enough time line everything will change, but these changes are for the most part geologically slow - slow enough for evolution to keep pace. Mankind's affects on the planet are accelerating beyond the pace of evolution, plus I would prefer to live in a world where the atmosphere is breathable, the water drinkable, the soils cultivable... Spatial scales - I vaguely remember mentioning I would come to a point and this is it - start small, lead by example and the people will follow! We can't take on global issues, the institutions and laws simply are not there yet, it's currently far too voluntary and un-enforceable. Apart from anything else, ecosystems are site specific - there are reefs on the east coast of Australia that are growing in highly turbid conditions, whereas in other places, turbidity is fatal. I don't think it is possible to come up with a 10 point plan to global success, because by doing so you are going to have to cut down a 1000 points to 10, what if the 990 disregarded points aggregate to greater importance than the 10 you chose? Global affairs are for the politicians, scientists should be there in an advisory capacity but when I say scientists I mean all of them, not just e.g. Marine Biologists - see my next point. Integration - So, one school of thought cries out for public awareness and consumer driven market forces, one cries out for more stringent laws and regulations, another for strict conservationism, another for... where is the integration, where's the facilitator, the chair person co-ordinating all these schools? If you are going to try and solve issues, then you must consider (in alphabetical order) economics, environment, politics and social anthropology - not on a sectoral basis but as an integrated whole. You cannot just form MPAs where ever biodiversity is greatest, because you will more than likely marginalise the people living off that resource. Making the poor poorer just causes further environmental degradation as they are forced to exploit any (free/common) natural resource they can. If you exclude people from the picture, you have an issue of non-compliance and thus a cost in enforcement. I entered into my first degree of the opinion that the environment should be protected no matter the human cost, I have since completely amended that outlook since it's myopic at best and downright inhumane at worst. Participation - To overcome issues of non-compliance, marginalisation and often to increase knowledge of local systems, people must be allowed to participate at ALL levels of project and policy formulation/implementation - that does not mean consultation, that means active participation. Process - Sustainable Development (sorry but I don't see it as an oxymoron - I do see it's false implementation as oxy-moronic) is a process, not a system, thus projects and policies should be re-evaluated as often as humanly possible, because making changes causes changes. Good governance - We are only just starting to see models of good governance, not top-down, not bottom-up, but multi-tier (local, regional, national, international) well organised/managed, with an ability to pass information/resources up and down the system with speed and efficiency. Good governance starts with individuals and ends with international agreements, with every single organisation/institution in-between. It needs to be based on equity, equality and shared interest, not ego, power and greed. Now that's a serious challenge because a majority of the current systems of governance are corrupt and unwieldy, favouring the rich and powerful, self-protecting and exacerbating poverty. Developed nations cannot dictate how developing nations can and cannot develop when, as someone has already pointed out, a large proportion of greenhouse gases derive from our activities. Good governance must be about setting a good example, not just enforcing it. I think I am probably boring everyone by now, but I have one more thing to say. All of the above I have been taught, ok some of it I consciously/sub-consciously knew already, but there are more people behind me, coming up through the 'new' schools of thought. One day, these people will be the top scientists of the day, the politicians, the decision makers - when that day comes, I think (hope) we will see some real changes being made. I can only hope that some of the above will help people break free of the chains of sectoralism and start seeing things from a holistic perspective, you cannot save reefs by simply speaking about how they are dying at n.nnn% a year. Of all the traits of human nature, survival is one of the greatest, otherwise we'd already be gone. The glass can be half empty and/or half full, it all depends on how you view it, but why does no one ever consider topping it back up to brim? Stop observing, start doing! A passionate Msc Student From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Mon Feb 27 10:32:07 2006 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Gene Shinn) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 10:32:07 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Intellectual chit chat Message-ID: The letter by Esther Borell is a most thoughtful, sobering and revealing one and should serve as a lesson to all of us "first world scientists" with our "intellectual chit chat." We should all applaud Ester for "trying to keep up optimism." Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida Marine Science Center (room 204) 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From martin_moe at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 22:55:02 2006 From: martin_moe at yahoo.com (Martin Moe) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 19:55:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence Message-ID: <20060227035502.81516.qmail@web60014.mail.yahoo.com> Hi All, Hoo Boy! The world is a scary place these days. Alina is right, James is right, Curtis is right, Steven is right, everyone commenting is right to a greater or lesser degree. I wonder if Malthus was right .. While acknowledging the global problems, the reefs of the Florida Keys, and to a lesser extent, the Bahamas and the Caribbean, are what concern me most personally. It pains me to see huge coral heads slowly dying, the tissue receding and the exposed coral rock thick with algae and sediment, to see acres of coral rock rubble composed of easily identifiable pieces of the remains of huge elkhorn coral skeletons, and patch reefs covered by extensive growths of Sargassum and Dictyota algae. I know what the reefs were like only a few decades ago and the loss is staggering. The TDC knows this also or at least it seems like they should. (This is the Tourist Development Council for Monroe County, the Florida Keys) Their latest brochure http://www.fla-keys.com/diving/ has fantastically beautiful pictures of the coral reefs of yesteryear, some from the Bahamas but most from the Keys reefs of the 60s and 70s available for download on the diving page. Diving tourists are lured to the Keys by these spectacular photos but the reality they find is quite different. There are no vast growths of huge elkhorn coral colonies, and few great healthy heads of brain and star coral, a sort of governmental ?Bait and Switch? advertising. So what can we do? Of course there is no simple answer. All reefs, Pacific or Atlantic, are separate ecosystems connected closely or distantly, and each reef area has its own web of life and its own constellation of problems and solutions. Some problems are global and some are local, the only way to proceed is as the bumper sticker says, ?Think globally, act locally?. Grand analysis of global and regional social, industrial, population and pollution problems are critical and essential and must be pursued and solutions sought on a national governmental scale, but we also have to take care of the trees as well as worry about the forest. As many contributors to this thread have stated, we have to focus on local conditions and find ways to improve specific reef areas, and what we learn and achieve on a ?micro? level will pave the way for ?macro? efforts. (Or we can say, ?Nothing can be done, the world is going to collapse.? And move to the mountains and seek self sustainability with a cache of weapons and foodstuffs. Hmmm The Rockys or the Appalachians?) To do nothing is not an option, I repeat, not an option. We have monitored and measured and we know the problems. We don?t know all the causes and we don?t know the future of the global problems but we have to work with what we have. We talk of resiliency, remmancy, and sustainability and look for coral genotypes with the capability to survive despite adverse conditions, and this is good, but a coral reef is much, much more than just coral. It is a web of life that interacts with itself and feeds upon itself and grows according to the balance of its life forms. A reef in all its complexity cannot be resilient and withstand adversity if the ecology that drove its evolution is impaired. And the reefs of Florida, the Bahamas and the Caribbean are greatly impaired by the almost total loss of the herbivores that maintained the balance between the slow growing, reef forming stony corals and the rapid growing, energy producing macro algae. Without herbivores, establishment of functional reef resiliency is the ?impossible dream?. Without herbivores, planting seedling coral colonies on the reefs has little chance to succeed. Without herbivores, coral larvae have no place to settle. The extent and depth of other problems that plague our reefs cannot be accurately determined until the herbivores return. The first consideration in ecological reef restoration in this region should be how to return herbivores (think Diadema) to the reefs. And like all great journeys, we have to start with small steps, but we must start. Actually the work of Szmant, Miller, Capo, Nedimyer, me, and the Nature Conservency, FKNMS, and Mote Marine Laboratory is a start. I hope we never abandon this effort because it just seems like an impossible task. Martin Moe From eweil at caribe.net Mon Feb 27 02:45:23 2006 From: eweil at caribe.net (EWeil) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 03:45:23 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] "resilience".... Message-ID: Dear coral listers, I agree that the source of all environmental problems affecting terrestrial and marine systems have a common denominator, human population growth, as Alina so eloquently put it. It is also clear to me that lack of education, and wrong government decisions significantly compounds the problem. If this list can somehow help to actively educate people about the benefits of having fewer children and not driving an 8-cylinder, 340 HP truck to get the kids to the soccer game, it would be wonderful. However, after dealing with politicians in Latin America, watching todays religious moderate and extreme fanatism, the Bush administration at work and the selfishness of most people, I remain highly eskeptical and pesimistic about the future of coral reefs and most other ecosystems as well. Saludos! Dr. Ernesto Weil Department of Marine Sciences University of Puerto Rico PO BOX 3208 Lajas PR 00667 Pho: (787) 899-2048 x. 241 Fax: (787) 899-5500 - 2630 From ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com Mon Feb 27 12:05:27 2006 From: ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com (Eric Coral Inquiry) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:05:27 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Corals Gonad Development Message-ID: <6400622e0602270905k186c1de2la565ddd1c991c9ab@mail.gmail.com> Dear listers, Expertise help needed in the area of corals gonad development. Welcome any information, literatures, resources and recommendation of presons who have done work in this area. I am interested to look at the gonad development of corals under artificial reed structures and compare that to nature colony but unfortunately I do not have a clue where, how to start and the place where I come from is lacking in expertise in such area. Is there anyone who has done histological examation on corals gonad development? Do keep in touch. Billion Thanks. Eric YSY "Marine Biologist in the Making" Kota Kinabalu. P.S: This is my mailing address : Eric Yu S Y NO:93, JALAN KIJANG, LUYANG PHASE 3, 88300 KOTA KINABALU SABAH MALAYSIA TEL:+6088213276 From clarionreef at aol.com Mon Feb 27 17:24:59 2006 From: clarionreef at aol.com (clarionreef at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 17:24:59 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8C80A03C77FEB1B-AD4-1654@FWM-M02.sysops.aol.com> People, I relize that many folks in the scientific community and academia often refer to the Marine Aquarium Council [ MAC ] as some kind of intelligent response to ensuring "sustainability" in the growing trade in reef tropical fishes and organisms. Having followed them for years since their inception, I can assure you that they are adrift and without results, achievement or leadership to go with all the public relations that have fooled so many. They have endeavored to "train" collectors to fish sustainably and disdain cyanide and yet have pretty much driven collectors back to cyanide with their ill-advised, culturally insensitive, top-down approach. Faced with a mass exodus from their well financed "cause", they re-certified marinelife dealers with out cause and without clean fish supply. The lack of fish supply to go with all the trouble and expense to become certified had left many dealers with a desire to end the game and not re-certify this year. The non interest in re-certifying as the years deadline approached left MAC in a panic at the pending loss of all their members on a single date. So, in an effort to prevent the exodus from MAC and a collapse of the small level of industry support that existed anyway...they just automatically re-certified for free all those who were certified before. Have a look and see the admission of chronic failure to provide substance to go with the wordplay in 7 year old drama...in quotes from memos to the dealers who carry cyanide fish for lack of any certified, netcaught fishes. On paragraph two regard the following ; "This was based on an assumption that there would be a steadily increasing supply of MAC certified organisms from the early days of certification. Unfortunately this supply has not materialised and this has left MAC certified exporters, importers and retailers without access to a meaningful supply of MAC certified organisms on a regular basis." And then everyones certification status was automatically extended til 2008! And so on it goes, fooling people who hope and want a cleaner industry ...cashing in on it without reforming it. Sincerely, Steve Robinson commercial collector & past president AMDA American Marinelife Deales Assoc PS. 5 years and 5 million dollars of Packard, McArthur and US AID money etc. ... and no fish supply? As I said long ago..."That dog don't hunt".. -----Original Message----- From: JKoven at aol.com To: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:05:29 EST Subject: Re: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Yes, Jim, "sustainable" and "development" ARE oxymorons. It all depends on what level of income/development the community stakeholders need to produce from their reefs, absent other income sources. Their choices are often limited - they can bring in tourists/divers or over-fish, even though that diminishes or damages the resources. Reefs provided sustenance for entire island communities for millenia - they can't now sustain other urban communities with growing populations. The needs of these stakeholders has changed over the past 50 years - they want to send their children to schools off-island, they want the same techological "improvements" in their lives that those in the urban areas have and to catch up with the 21st century world. Both climate change and over-fishing have affected many Pacific reefs that have not been subjected to gross land-based pollution. Nothing the stakeholders of small islands can do will change the global climate picture and fishing is part of their culture. The search is on for other ways to sustain the way of life they wish to have, without further destroying fisheries and thus reefs. It's interesting that outrigger canoes once sped villagers to other islands. Then came the diesel powered boats - slower and costly, although one was less dependant upon weather and perhaps drier upon arrival. Now faster fiberglass boats are the thing.....they travel as swiftly as an outrigger in a decent wind, but leave one beholden to the fuel companies. Progress? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From JKoven at aol.com Mon Feb 27 17:49:43 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 17:49:43 EST Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today Message-ID: <67.55e12d55.3134dc07@aol.com> The people who live in these underpopulated areas are still trying to earn a living...often by fishing their own reefs and selling to those who have depleted their own fisheries and willing to pay the price. Yes, over-population is at the base of many world problems but it is a sticky issue, at once cultural, ethnic and religious.? Not exactly one to be solved by reef scientists.? Perhaps women's education in general and in reproductive rights are the answers?? Women want better lives for their children, after they've been fed, saved from curable infectious diseases, and educated....and who is to determine what that better life is?? Is it what they perceive as the lives that other children in the world have, including yours?? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From jandl at rivnet.net Mon Feb 27 19:15:17 2006 From: jandl at rivnet.net (Judith Lang/Lynton Land) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 19:15:17 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] How to inspire responsible actions? Message-ID: Dear listers, I seems we are painfully aware of problems, from overpopulation to all manner of over-indulgence. But how to inspire responsible actions on our part and others? Absent easily available remedies, inspirational messages/reminders/ exhortations, however persuasive, are unlikely to have much effect. Jamaican members of the list can correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been thinking we could borrow some strategies from its early family- planning campaign. After initial successes targeting women with the simple but powerful theme, "Plan Your Family; Better Your Life," plus birth control pills that would either have been free or very cheap, it was realized that, to be truly successful, men also had to be included in the decision-making process. I remember a creative campaign of newspaper advertisements suggesting the more nuanced idea that "of course" dads want their children to have a chance to grow up and achieve some measure of respectable employment and social status (e.g., bank teller, carpenter), paired with condom advertisements on billboards that featured an enormous and very sexy looking, black panther. Surely we could come up with some attention-grabbing, genuine solutions to offer the world? Judy From G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au Tue Feb 28 00:38:07 2006 From: G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au (Gillian Goby) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 15:38:07 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] GBRMPA Current Conditions Report (4) Message-ID: <4403E1BF.8040308@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear Coral- Listers, apologies for cross-postings. Please find below the latest Current Conditions report for bleaching on the GBR. *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the Fourth Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 23 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current weather conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, *the* *threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region continues to be rated as moderate*. Severe coral bleaching has been confirmed for several reefs in the southern region during recent GBRMPA surveys. In addition, BleachWatch participants have recorded minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR and more recently the northern GBR. Temperature patterns are consistent with these reports. Although sea temperatures in the southern GBR have slightly decreased, they continue to exceed the February average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C and long-term summer maxima by 0.5 degrees C respectively. Central GBR waters have remained warm in recent weeks, and sea surface temperatures are still currently exceeding the February long-term average by 0.5 to 1.5 degrees C. Temperatures in northern parts of the GBR have increased and are elevated 0.5 to 2.0 degrees C above the February long-term average. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer we are still relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ From solutions at cozm.co.uk Tue Feb 28 03:25:57 2006 From: solutions at cozm.co.uk (Duncan MacRae) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 08:25:57 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Conservation work in Nusa Lembongan and Nusa Penida, near Bali - Indonesia Message-ID: <001801c63c40$99a579d0$4fd7fea9@Sarah> Dear all, Does anyone know of any marine conservation work carried out around the Nusa Lembongan/Penida Island group near Bali, Indonesia? Regards, Duncan R. MacRae Director Coastal Zone Management (UK) Integrated Conservation Solutions Blythe Cottage, 22 Rosemundy, St Agnes, Cornwall. UK ++(0) 1872 552 219 ++(0) 7958 230 076 e-mail: solutions at cozm.co.uk web: www.cozm.co.uk This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version From nhg3 at hw.ac.uk Tue Feb 28 12:54:47 2006 From: nhg3 at hw.ac.uk (Galvis, Nohora H) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 17:54:47 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline Message-ID: <2DEC240A2A06F04BB9D3BBF02DE198BD4D3382@ex5.mail.win.hw.ac.uk> I have followed with a lot of interest the discussions of the last days, confirming how passionate scientists have become nowadays when talking about the evidence of the coral reefs decline. This is a Social Psychological trend of applied science: Scientists engage with the study of environmental problems and feel an urgent need to contribute identifying solutions as a matter of ethical responsibility. This new perspective makes acceptable and even desirable for scientists to express emotions of frustration for being eyewitnesses of decline in the past decades and now by changing their priorities, attitudes and behaviours towards environmental management to get involved trying to communicate a pertinent message to decision makers, decision takers and the general public to allow them to be part of the solutions. Thanks to Dr. Alina Szmant for the webpage information about the web cast presentation of Dr. Jeremy Jackson. Nohora Galvis (Mental Models to improve coral reef management) ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Szmant, Alina Sent: Mon 27/2/06 1:09 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline For those of you loooking for how some scientists are trying to desseminate the word.... ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From: Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST) To: Subject: University of Texas Ocean Research Webcast Dear Science Enthusiast, University of Texas at Austin Webcast Entitled "Brave New Ocean." A webcast presentation given by Professor Jeremy Jackson, William E. and Mary B. Ritter Professor and Director of the Geosciences Research Division at Scripps Institution of Oceanography will be March 3, 2006 at 7pm. Dr. Jeremy Jackson is one of the most prominent marine ecologists in the world and he has a message to get out about the world's oceans - it documents declines in coral reefs, decreasing numbers of large marine fish, and losses of coastal and marine ecosystems. More than just an academic researcher, Dr. Jackson has actively searched for innovative ways to reach the public, applying his skills as a communicator with his scientific knowledge to inspire action. Dr. Jackson desires to reach a broader audience and affect change into the future with tomorrow's generation on this topic of interest. View a FREE web broadcast of the lecture live Friday, March 3, 2006 at 7 pm CST. During the live webcast, you can submit questions to Dr. Jackson and he will answer as many as he can for the live and webcast audiences. If possible, can you distribute or post a link to this webcast on your website, newsletter, or listserv as well as pass this notice on to any colleagues of yours that may be interested. The link to our Lecture Series website, where the details of the lecture and the webcast can be found, is: http://www.esi.utexas.edu/outreach/ols/lectures/Jackson/ Please let me know if you will consider posting this information. Thanks for your time, Brian Zavala Environmental Science Institute The University of Texas at Austin brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu 512.471.5847 ------ End of Forwarded Message _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From treesandseas at yahoo.com Tue Feb 28 22:51:15 2006 From: treesandseas at yahoo.com (Trees Seas) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 19:51:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060301035115.72877.qmail@web32709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Many thanks to everyone who responded to my query about a good underwater camera. The advice was greatly appreciated! Michelle Reyes __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From ricksanders at comcast.net Tue Feb 28 00:44:10 2006 From: ricksanders at comcast.net (Rick Sanders) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 00:44:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen onreefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas References: Message-ID: <007201c63c29$ffade530$650da8c0@manta> Raphael, That photo looks like it? I have gotten so many responses and I haven't had a chance to write back to thank any of you for sending your information on the macro algae. The photo you sent looks like a good example of the what I saw on the reefs in Cat Island. Quite a few other also suggested it was Microdictyon. Who is doing work on this algae and its impacts in the Bahamas? It seems strange that this algae is popping up in such remote locations...it has been suggested that currents may be carrying nutrients into these areas from other locations where the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients are greater. What is the impact that Microdictyon is having on these reefs? It seems to be overgrowing many healthy corals. It was also mentioned in other responses that I have gotten that this algae is seasonal. Does this mean that it's impact is only temporary and the impacted corals have a chance to recover from the infestation? Thanks again for the great photo and information, Rick Rick Sanders President Deep Blue Solutions 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "Raphael Williams" To: Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 4:13 PM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen onreefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas > Hi Rick this is probably a species of Microdictyon, I've attached a photo > from Sweetings Key, Bahamas. We found it there very common. I usually > use > the Littler's book "Caribbean Reef Plants" to id the common algae, it is a > very useful guide, written by Diane Littler and Mark Littler, 2000, > published by OffShore Graphics Inc. I hope this helps. Cheers,Raphael > > Raphael Ritson-Williams > Laboratory Technician Marine Chemical Ecology > Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce > 701 Seaway Dr, Fort Pierce, Fl, 34949 > (772) 465-6630 x146 > williams at sms.si.edu > >>>> "Rick Sanders" 02/21 1:34 PM >>> > Dear Listers, > > I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find > an > image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I > dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been > unable > to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. > > Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish > brown > color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each > other > in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped > into > more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm > in > width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if > to > crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing > many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. > > I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs > there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the > first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what > I > am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a > copy or link. > > Thanks very much in advance, > > Best regards, > > Rick > > > Rick Sanders > Deep Blue Solutions > Media, PA > 610-892-5272 > ricksanders at comcast.net > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From seaflower22 at gmail.com Wed Feb 1 03:55:34 2006 From: seaflower22 at gmail.com (Melanie Gomes) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 08:55:34 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Western Australia reference? Message-ID: <8793949b0602010055h2fcd9499h@mail.gmail.com> Dear All, Hope you are all having a good start to 2006! I was wondering if anyone could possibly help me to find a recent reference on the marine flora and fauna of Western Australia (I think this book was advertised on this list but can't seem to find the details). This was not the title although the book included, inverts and fish and was a general guide, a very good and recent one which I wrote down on an important piece of paper which I then lost! Any specially recommended guides on this part of the world would be appreciated as I'm going out there in March for a season to dive with the whale sharks and would also appreciate any recent refs on the sharks themselves for that matter. Thank you very much for your help, much appreciated. Best wishes Melanie Melanie Gomes B.Sc. M.Sc. From rousseau_herve at yahoo.fr Wed Feb 1 08:00:33 2006 From: rousseau_herve at yahoo.fr (=?iso-8859-1?q?herv=FFffffe9=20Rousseau?=) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:00:33 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] marine farm for sustainable development of aquariologytrade Message-ID: <20060201130033.85607.qmail@web25511.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hello, Frenchies answer to frenchies... If you need information in french about this topic, you can visit http://www.recifs.org which contain a lot of information about reef aquarium, aquarium trade, and sustainable development. You can focus on Vincent Chalias articles on aquarium trade, fishery and MAC (Marine Aquarium Council) activities. See you Herv? -----Message d'origine----- De : coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] De la part de yoann aumond Envoy? : mardi 31 janvier 2006 16:30 ? : coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Objet : [Coral-List] marine farm for sustainable development of aquariologytrade Hello, I'm a young french man with a degree in Marine Biology. I would like to investigate my self for the management of animal trade, and especially fish, for aquariology trade. This buisness make endangered the coral reef ecosystem physically and biologicaly due to the destructive practise (cyanure and explosive methods) which threaten the enormous diversity (important and essential for all the reasons you know). This practise occurs mainly in the south asia coral reef ecosystem which is the hot spoy for biodiversity. So I need more field information and a maximum of contact from people who are involved in this fight (scientist, association, local initiatives, possible grants....). I'm thinking about a project of a marine farm in the field, sustainable, which give a work to all the actual fisherman, give a high quality to the fish in the aim to reduce their mortality and the volume of export... I have a lot of good idea but I need support and help from people which know well this problem, from field, and are involved in and trust in the possibility to change the way of working (and of course the way of thinking). Thank you for you help and informations. Yoann AUMOND, "a motivated and hard worker dreamer" P.S.: sorry for my english, but I'm french... _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list ___________________________________________________________________________ Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international. T?l?chargez sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com From Chris.Ryan at irc-australia.com Wed Feb 1 18:25:27 2006 From: Chris.Ryan at irc-australia.com (Chris Ryan) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 07:25:27 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: Western Australia reference? Message-ID: <69D776850E99934E9FE517A99D52F2640111DBA6@ircs0001.intrisk.com> Hi Melanie This may be the reference you're after. Wells, FE, Walker, DI & Jones, DS (2003) The marine flora and fauna of Dampier, Western Australia: Proceedings of the twelfth International Marine Biological Workshop; held in Dampier from 24 Jul to 11 Aug 2000 [2 volumes Western Australian Museum, Perth, WA Cheers Chris Ryan Principal Consultant - Coastal and Marine Biology IRC Environment 26 Colin Street West Perth WA 6005 Tel: +61-8-9481-0100 Fax: +61-8-9481-0111 chris.ryan at irc-australia.com http://www.irc-australia.com Innovate | Resolve | Commit From reef at bellsouth.net Wed Feb 1 14:15:10 2006 From: reef at bellsouth.net (Vicky Ten Broeck) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:15:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] for coral list Message-ID: <20060201191512.HCBZ1691.ibm56aec.bellsouth.net@fiji> I am looking to go over to Madagascar this summer before graduate school to do coral reef research with a UK based non-profit and I was wondering if anyone knew of any agencies that might help fund the $5000 trip (6 weeks of diving research to help them establish a marine sanctuary). Thanks in advance! Vicky Ten Broeck Reef Relief Intern and Educational Assistant PO Box 430, Key West, FL 33040 (305) 294-3100 From treesandseas at yahoo.com Thu Feb 2 02:34:33 2006 From: treesandseas at yahoo.com (Trees Seas) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 23:34:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera Message-ID: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hello I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with an underwater housing) that takes good underwater pictures in natural light. I generally work in the 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so I usually use natural light to save on power. In my experience not all cameras that take good pictures above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind having to do a little color correction afterwards but I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater photos canNOT be color corrected. Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot Michelle Reyes __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From reefball at reefball.com Thu Feb 2 09:35:34 2006 From: reefball at reefball.com (Todd Barber) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 09:35:34 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <018c01c62805$ed9acad0$6501a8c0@LaFalda> Hi Trees, The Reef Ball Foundation's Coral Team has had very good results using the Cannon Powershot 400 series. The have an inexpensive housing that is rated to 100 feet. The trick to taking pictures in natural light is to set the white balance just before taking pictures and change it whenever you change depths. This can be done with the Cannon....whatever camera you get make SURE you can set the white balance with the controls available on the housing...many camera housings cannot control this feature on many cameras. The only disadvantage is the Cannon housing is plastic....so you have to be a bit careful with it heat wise. Also, if you are taking allot of pictures (more than 50 or so) in a short period of time, the lens tends to fog (common in most battery operated cameras) but using a little bit of mask defog on the underwater housing lens will usually stop this problem. Happy shooting. "take only pictures and leave only footprints," Todd Barber Chairman Reef Ball Foundation, Inc. 3305 Edwards Court Greenville, NC 27858 reefball at reefball.com http://www.artificialreefs.org http://www.reefball.org http://www.reefball.com Direct: 252-353-9094 mobile: 941-720-7549 Fax 425-963-4119 Personal Space: http://www.myspace/reefball Group Space http://groups.myspace.com/reefballfoundation Skype & MSN For Voice or Video Conferences: Available upon request Atlanta/Athens Office 890 Hill Street Athens, GA 30606 USA 770-752-0202 (Our headquarters...not where I work see above) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Trees Seas" To: Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 2:34 AM Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera > Hello > > I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with > an underwater housing) that takes good underwater > pictures in natural light. I generally work in the > 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so > I usually use natural light to save on power. In my > experience not all cameras that take good pictures > above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind > having to do a little color correction afterwards but > I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater > photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel > resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show > corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any > recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks a lot > Michelle Reyes > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From TDWYATT at aol.com Thu Feb 2 11:28:14 2006 From: TDWYATT at aol.com (TDWYATT at aol.com) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 11:28:14 EST Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera Message-ID: <59.36a3ea91.31138d1e@aol.com> In a message dated 2/2/2006 6:45:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, treesandseas at yahoo.com writes: Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Nikon D70, Prolly the D50 as well. HTH, Tom Wyatt _tdwyatt at aol.com_ (mailto:tdwyatt at aol.com) From Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov Thu Feb 2 16:24:30 2006 From: Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:24:30 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: 2nd Call - Requesting Data on 2005 Caribbean Bleaching In-Reply-To: <43DAA0C6.8030600@noaa.gov> References: <43DAA0C6.8030600@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <7A2DDF74-0D42-4AC6-895D-5BA448045803@noaa.gov> As an update on this request that we sent out last week, I want to emphasize that we also need reports from those areas that did not bleach. We need to get information from reefs that fell outside the thermal stress zone, or where stress was less severe to really anchor the bottom end of the response of corals to thermal stress. If we only have positive bleaching reports, we can't nail down the threshold below which we did not see bleaching. Thanks, Mark On Jan 27, 2006, at 5:37 PM, Jessica A. Morgan wrote: > TO: Bleaching Observation Contributors > FROM: Jessica Morgan and Mark Eakin, NOAA Coral Reef Watch > > Second call: Deadline for data submission to be included in our > publication is Friday, February 3. Please contact me if you will > have any problems meeting this deadline. > > --------------------------- > > As you know, bleaching reports from contributors have been coming > in from much of the Caribbean and western North Atlantic. The US > Coral Reef Task Force (USCRTF) Bleaching Committee has held > conference calls to bring together and solicit input from NOAA and > DOI personnel, as well as other federal agencies, NGO partners, and > local Caribbean scientists and managers. The outcomes of the > initial meetings include the development of a 3-phase response > approach (including an initial response, near-term reporting and > assessment, and long-term monitoring) and identification of key > partners, resources, and issues. > > A part of the first phase is to identify and assess bleaching > severity throughout the region. I am collating these reports with > the plan to produce a multi-author, quick paper to Science or > Nature that documents the event. From there, I am sure that more > publications will follow. Everyone who provides data that are used > in the analysis of the event will be included as an author on the > resulting paper(s). Our intent is to provide the broad, Caribbean- > wide analysis, comparing the thermal stress recorded from > satellites with local observations of bleaching and temperatures. > That publication will only include summaries of the information > that you submit. We hope that all of our collaborators will > produce more detailed national or local analyses to further > document the event. At this point we have almost 1000 observations > contributed by 70 individuals in 18 jurisdictions. > > To collect the details needed for the first analysis and to > establish a baseline for follow-up work, a spreadsheet > questionnaire (?CRW Carib Bleach Report Form?) has been developed > for bleaching reports. We would like to invite all ReefBase > contributors who have made bleaching observations for the Caribbean > in 2005 to expand upon the original ReefBase information by > submitting a more quantitative report via the attached > questionnaire (an Excel file) to coralreefwatch at noaa.gov. Please > note that we are only seeking quantitative reports for this analysis. > > The blank questionnaire form, along with information from the US > Coral Reef Task Force, NOAA meetings held to date, and more, are > available for download at the website http:// > coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/caribbean2005. > > Thanks to all of you for your help, > Jessica > -- > Jessica A. Morgan > Operations Manager, NOAA Coral Reef Watch > SSMC1, E/RA 31, Rm. 5309, Silver Spring, MD 20910 > Phone: (301) 713-2857 x129 Fax: (301) 713-3136 > Email: Jessica.Morgan at noaa.gov Web: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ C. Mark Eakin, Ph.D. Coordinator, NOAA Coral Reef Watch National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Satellite Applications and Research Satellite Oceanography & Climate Division e-mail: mark.eakin at noaa.gov url: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov E/RA31, SSMC1, Room 5308 1335 East West Hwy Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226 301-713-2857 x109 Fax: 301-713-3136 From matz at whitney.ufl.edu Thu Feb 2 07:59:29 2006 From: matz at whitney.ufl.edu (Mikhail Matz) Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 07:59:29 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: coral facility @ austin, TX Message-ID: <43E20231.8010207@whitney.ufl.edu> Hello listers, I want to thank everybody for an extremely enthusiastic and helpful response concrrning the design of new coral facility. I've been given a lot of advice and put in contact with the most experienced people in the trade. Now I can really see it all happening! cheers Misha -- -------------------- Mikhail V Matz, Ph.D Research Assistant Professor Whitney Laboratory for Marine Bioscience University of Florida 9505 Ocean Shore Blvd St Augustine, FL 32080, USA phone 904 461 4025 fax 904 461 4008 matz at whitney.ufl.edu www.whitney.ufl.edu/research_programs/matz.htm From ashadevos at gmail.com Thu Feb 2 22:56:58 2006 From: ashadevos at gmail.com (Asha de Vos) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 09:56:58 +0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Coolpix and Strobes Message-ID: <90f39b5f0602021956r514b0e19q@mail.gmail.com> Hi I've recently started using a Nikon Coolpix 5600 with underwater housing to take photos while diving. However, the flash is not very strong and therefore photographs (other than macros - which come out beautifully) are not very clear. Does anyone use this (or a similar model) of camera and if yes, can anyone recommend a compatible strobe that I could purchase? Thanks. Asha. From dhopley at austarnet.com.au Sun Feb 5 18:37:37 2006 From: dhopley at austarnet.com.au (David Hopley) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 09:37:37 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Palau photographs Message-ID: Dear All, A quick thanks to all of you who provided me with photographs of the Palau Rock Islands, or referred me to sources. I've tried to respond to everybody and am sending this out just in case I missed anyone. David Dr. David Hopley Coastal and Marine Consultant 3 Wingadee Court ANNANDALE QLD 4814 AUSTRALIA PHONE: +61 7 4725 2856 dhopley at austarnet.com.au From Georgios at icm.csic.es Fri Feb 3 16:58:25 2006 From: Georgios at icm.csic.es (Georgios Tsounis) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 22:58:25 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: underwater camera In-Reply-To: <20060202170041.80E481795F@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> References: <20060202170041.80E481795F@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: Hi Michelle, back in 2001 when 7 Megapixels were still expensive, we used a small sony digital compact with great success for a population structure study. The only drawback of the compacts compared to a digital SLR was the extreme shutterlag (annoying and at times stressful, but still tolerable with coral work). I would rather recomend something like a Nikon Coolpix 5000, if 5MP are enough, as our colleagues have had good experience with this one. If you need a certain range from wideangle to macro, then the compact cameras offer more flexibility than an SLR with a macro lens, and are much cheaper to house. The macro ability was quite astonishing to me, but it is important to check it out before purchase. I am pretty sure the coolpix range of nikons allow whitebalance settings. However, I suspect whitebalance has limits when used at 20m (did not ry this though). In our experience flash use under water was problematic with compacts. I usually switched off the build in flash, or blocked it by hand. Instead we used a divers light on a strobe arm to illuminate the corals and provide a focussing light to the autofocus. It worked fine, but required sufficient battery capacity. With some underwaterhousings (such as Sealux), you can connect an external flash. Amphibious flashes by Nikon are compatible with the Nikon digitals. However, you can only use the flash in manual mode, unless you use a pro SLR. For our work I really think 5Megapixels are sufficient. I found this website helpful in this regard: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm There is a wealth of information on the net about compatibility of cameras, housings and strobes. You can always ask questions about digital underwater photography on the forum mantained by: www.wetpixel.com. I think there was a good article on white balance by Alexander Mustard stored in the archives. You can see how we used the digicams in our work by downloading the results of our survey (3.6 mb document): http://elib.suub.uni-bremen.de/publications/dissertations/E- Diss1246_TsounisG.pdf Cheers, Georgios Dr. Georgios Tsounis Institut de Ci?ncies del Mar, CMIMA (CSIC) Passeig Mar?tim de la Barceloneta, 37-49 08003 Barcelona, Spain Phone: 34 93 230 96 07 Fax: 34 93 230 95 55 E-mail: georgios at icm.csic.es http://www.icm.csic.es Message: 4 Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 23:34:33 -0800 (PST) From: Trees Seas Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: <20060202073433.87687.qmail at web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Hello I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with an underwater housing) that takes good underwater pictures in natural light. I generally work in the 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so I usually use natural light to save on power. In my experience not all cameras that take good pictures above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind having to do a little color correction afterwards but I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater photos canNOT be color corrected. Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot Michelle Reyes _____________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 2 ***************************************** From thierry_work at usgs.gov Sun Feb 5 14:49:47 2006 From: thierry_work at usgs.gov (Thierry Work) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 09:49:47 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] mucus in the ectodermal epithelium of corals In-Reply-To: <003f01c624b5$d6dfa7a0$e3904084@es.huji.ac.il> Message-ID: Dear Yael: yes, mucocytes definitely are present in calicoblastic epithelium (at least in Porite compressa and lobata) as visualized on electron microscopy. I have, however, yet to see micro-organisms associated with this layer. Thierry M. Work Wildlife Disease Specialist USGS-National Wildlife Health Center Honolulu Field Station PO Box 50167 Honolulu, HI 96850 Tel: 808 792-9520 Fax: 808 792-9596 Cel: 808 554-6490 Web: www.nwhc.usgs.gov/hfs/Homepage.htm Check out the following references on microscopic morphology of corals. These may help: Goldberg W, Makemson J, Colley S (1984) Entoclada endozoica sp. nov., a pathogenic chlorophyte: structure, life history, physiology, and effect on its coral host. Biological Bulletin 166:368-383 Goldberg W, Taylor G (1989) Cellular structure and ultrastructure of the black coral Antipathes aperta: 2. the gastrodermis and its collar cells. Journal of Morphology 202:255-269 Goldberg WM, Taylor G (1989) Cellular structure and ultrastructure of the black coral Antipathes aperta: 1. Organization of the tentacular epidermis and nervous system. Journal of Morphology 202:239-253 Goldberg WM (2001) Acid polysaccharides in the skeletal matrix and calicoblastic epithelium of the stony coral Mycetophyllia reesi. Tissue & Cell 33:376-387 Goldberg WM (2001) Desmocytes in the calicoblastic epithelium of the stony coral Mycetophyllia reesi and their attachment to the skeleton. Tissue & Cell 33:388-394 Goldberg W (2002) Gastrodermal structure and feeding response in the scleractinian Mycetophyllia reesi, a coral with novel digestive filaments. Tissue & Cell 34:246-261 Goldberg WM (2002) Feeding behavior, epidermal structure and mucus cytochemistry of the scleractinian Mycetophyllia reesi, a coral without tentacles. Tissue & Cell 34:232-245 Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates Volume 2 Placozoa, Porifera, Cnidaria & Ctenophora by FW Harrison (Editor) Wiley Press. -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Yael Ben-Haim Rozenblat Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 11:25 PM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] mucus in the ectodermal epithelium of corals Hi all coral listrers, Does anyone knows if there is mucus secretion (or something similar to mucus) from the ectodermal epithelium layer of corals? (meaning the calicoblastic ectodermis, close to the skeleton), and/ or any microorganisms associated with this microlayer of the corals? Are there any publications or work done about this? I appreciate any advice and help , and thank you in advance, Yael Yael Ben-Haim , Pn.D The Institute of Earth Sciences The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Givat Ram Campus, Israel Office: (+972) 2 6586194 _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From keulen at murdoch.edu.au Fri Feb 3 01:08:30 2006 From: keulen at murdoch.edu.au (Mike van Keulen) Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:08:30 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera In-Reply-To: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20060203135409.0238a638@www.mail.murdoch.edu.au> Hi Michelle, I've been using Olympus cameras for some time and found they're excellent for underwater use. Most models have reasonably priced dedicated housings and third party strobes are available for them too. The ones I've used are the C-5060 (5 megapixel) and the C-8080 (8 megapixel) - I think these models have been superseded, but I would guess there would be a suitable replacement. Both the models I use have an excellent super-macro allowing you to get to within 2 cm of the subject. Colour reproduction is excellent. Cheers, Mike At 15:34 2/02/2006, Trees Seas wrote: >Hello > >I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with >an underwater housing) that takes good underwater >pictures in natural light. I generally work in the >5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so >I usually use natural light to save on power. In my >experience not all cameras that take good pictures >above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind >having to do a little color correction afterwards but >I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater >photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel >resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show >corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any >recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks a lot >Michelle Reyes > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Dr Mike van Keulen Lecturer in Plant Sciences and Marine Biology Research Director - Coral Bay Research Station Murdoch University, WA 6150, Australia List-owner: Seagrass_Forum, Mangrove Ph: +61 8 93602369 E-mail: keulen at murdoch.edu.au Fax: +61 8 93606303 URL: http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~keulen/ From jware at erols.com Fri Feb 3 09:34:36 2006 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 09:34:36 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43E369FC.4090403@erols.com> Michelle, I would guess that you are going to get dozens of replies and end up just as confused as before. First question back to you is: How much money do you have? Next would be: Why natural light? (and let me tell you why later). As you have noted, the thing that limits the number of UW pictures you can take in one dive is usually power. So having come to that conclusion let me point out that: 1- The primary camera battery drain is the LCD (or whatever) display. Therefore, if your need is to take 100+ pictures per dive or per excursion (e.g., on a small boat and can't change batteries) go with an SLR (single lens reflex) and set the camera so that it only displays on the LCD for a few seconds after the picture is taken (to assure that you have actually got a decent picture. Using my Nikon D70, I have taken hundreds and hundreds of pictures over the course of a week on a single battery charge. 2- The strobe. I know you wanted to use natural light, but that doesn't always work depending upon depth and the screwing around underwater with white balance. If you use a strobe that holds 8 AAs (e.g. Sea&Sea YS90) and use NiMH batteries rated at 2000+ Ma, you should get at least 200 full strobe flashes. Since you won't need full strobe for most pictures, the actual number will be much greater. My only experience is with the Nikon D70 in a Sea&Sea housing. However, I have friends who use a EOS rebel in a Ikelite housing with the new digital TTL in the housing. I seem to recall that Yossi Loya was not too happy with his at first, I don't know about now. Nikon makes 2 very good, and reasonably priced, digital cameras, the D50 and the D70. About the only difference from a practical viewpoint is the storage media. I prefer the D70 because the compact flash storage is sturdy. Only 6 MegPix but that is plenty because of what appears to be superior interpolation scheme. Also, Nikon has a zoom lens, often part of the purchase package, 28 to 80. This gives reasonable wide angle and still allows sufficient close ups. However, you must make sure that the housing will allow adjusting the zoom as Nikon has a couple of different but very similar lenses, one that doesn't quite fit. But now the price. The camera is not too bad, its the housings that kill you. I suspect that, as with most research, money is limiting. The set ups I have been describing will probably cost about US3000 for everything, maybe even a little more. Having said that, my long experience in UW photography is that, whenever I have tried to go cheap I eventually end up so dissatisfied that I end up buying twice. John Trees Seas wrote: >Hello > >I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with >an underwater housing) that takes good underwater >pictures in natural light. I generally work in the >5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so >I usually use natural light to save on power. In my >experience not all cameras that take good pictures >above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind >having to do a little color correction afterwards but >I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater >photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel >resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show >corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any >recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks a lot >Michelle Reyes > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886, USA * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * http://www.seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * Treasurer and Member of the Council: * * International Society for Reef Studies * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Untainted by Technology \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************* From John.Rollino at earthtech.com Fri Feb 3 07:40:19 2006 From: John.Rollino at earthtech.com (Rollino, John) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 04:40:19 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Species List - CARICOMP Algae Classification Message-ID: <0FE7A03100C5D949A074D0A58DBCCEEA032D1ABE@usnycmail01.et.rootad.com> Hello All: Can someone direct me to a list that identifies which algal species are classified by CARICOMP as the following: * Turf Algae * Fleshy Algae * Calcareous Algae * Encrusting Calcareous Algae Thank you, John This e-mail is intended to be delivered only to the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and proprietary. If this information is received by anyone other than the named addressee(s), the recipient(s) should immediately notify the sender by e-mail and promptly delete the transmitted material from your computer and server. In no event shall this material be read, used, stored, or retained by anyone other than the named addressee(s) without the express written consent of the sender or the named addressee(s). From nithyrna at yahoo.co.in Sun Feb 5 11:47:21 2006 From: nithyrna at yahoo.co.in (nithy anand) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 16:47:21 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] query to coral microbiologist & biotechnologists Message-ID: <20060205164721.48797.qmail@web8314.mail.in.yahoo.com> Dear Listers, Is anyone working with Vibrioids and Pseudomonads associated with corals? I want to know the predominant species and total count associated with them. Somebody please help on these aspects. cheers, Nithy P.Nithyanand Research Scholar C/O Dr. S. Karutha Pandian Department of Biotechnology Alagappa University Karaikudi - 630 003 TamilNadu INDIA H/P: 9443743580 --------------------------------- Jiyo cricket on Yahoo! India cricket From shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au Sun Feb 5 19:22:57 2006 From: shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au (Shelley Anthony) Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 10:22:57 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] 2006/2007 Research Internships available at ReefHQ Aquarium, Townsville, Australia Message-ID: <43E696E1.7080308@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear Colleagues, I would very much appreciate it if you could forward this internship offer to appropriate students and staff, and/or post it on your university job notice board. We are also still seeking qualified applicants for a position to start in September 2006. Regards, Shelley / /As part of its education and outreach role, Reef HQ is offering four curatorial internship positions to suitable applicants for 2007. Each internship position involves one specialist research and development project, that will be the core duty of the candidate. However, interns will also assist with extensive water quality analyses, routine diving and field trips, construction and maintenance of aquarium systems, and other duties related to animal care. This program is designed for university-level or recently graduated individuals intending to undertake a technical or professional career in marine science, aquaculture or a closely related discipline. Please refer to the following link for further information: "http://www.reefhq.com.au/involved/intern/curatorial.html"./ /// -- Shelley L. Anthony, M.Sc. Acting Biologist - Coral Reef Ecosystems ReefHQ Aquarium/The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2-68 Flinders St. PO Box 1379 Townsville QLD 4810 AUSTRALIA Ph: (07)4750-0876 Fax: (07)4772-5281 email: shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au PhD Student ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies School of Marine Biology & Aquaculture James Cook University Townsville QLD 4811 AUSTRALIA shelley.anthony at jcu.edu.au ============================================================================== If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ============================================================================== From claudio.richter at zmt-bremen.de Mon Feb 6 11:31:09 2006 From: claudio.richter at zmt-bremen.de (Claudio Richter) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 17:31:09 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Meeting Announcement: ISRS European Coral Reef Conference 2006 in Bremen Message-ID: 1st Circular 6th European Coral Reef Conference 2006 European Meeting of the International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) 19 - 22 September, 2006, Bremen, Germany Welcome to Bremen! The 6th European Coral Reef Conference 2006 in Bremen is expected to bring together leading coral reef scientists and students to present and discuss state-of-the-art scientific results, education and outreach. It covers all aspects of research, use and management of reefs with a focus on European and European partner contributions from tropical shallow waters to high-latitude deep continental shelves. Date: September 19-22, 2006 Venue: University of Bremen & Center for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT), Bremen, Germany Organisation: Center for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT) Deadline for submission of Abstracts: 15 May, 2006 Deadline for Early Registration: 15 May, 2006 Programme Schedule A regional focus will be on the Indian Ocean and adjacent seas, taking into account the wealth of studies conducted in response to the 1998 bleaching event and the 2004 earthquake and tsunami. As another scientific highlight we expect first results from the IODP Tahiti reef drilling programme. There are many more interesting sessions, and abstracts on all aspects of basic and applied research are welcome! Please submit your abstract by 15 May, 2006! For details, please visit the conference webpage at isrs2006.zmt.uni-bremen.de On behalf of ZMT, the ISRS President and Council, we hope to see you in Bremen! Dr. Claudio Richter Zentrum f?r Marine Tropen?kologie Center for Tropical Marine Ecology Fahrenheitstr. 6 D-28359 Bremen Germany T. +49-421-2380025 F. +49-421-2380030 From michelc at squ.edu.om Mon Feb 6 23:29:13 2006 From: michelc at squ.edu.om (Michel Claereboudt) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 08:29:13 +0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Software to analyse coral video transects Message-ID: <30052D55-B224-46FE-B2AC-E6D2AD95E070@squ.edu.om> I have been off the list for a while. Apparently, a subscriber was interested in a software to analyse (sample I suppose) video transects of coral communities. I have written (still under development, but usable at this stage) such software. If anyone is interested I can email a copy. It works on both PCs and Mac and requires the presence of Quicktime. All formats that quicktime understands can be used as video source files. Dr. Michel Claereboudt Sultan Qaboos University College Agr. and Mar. Sciences Dpt. Marine Sci. and Fisheries Box 34, al-khod 123 Sultanate of Oman Tel: (968) 244 15 249 Fax; (968) 244 13 418 email: michelc at squ.edu.om From eweil at caribe.net Tue Feb 7 08:11:32 2006 From: eweil at caribe.net (EWeil) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 09:11:32 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Information on white plague outbreaks in the Caribbean Message-ID: <0b1ec65a6a674213a4b12aaaa117d18e.eweil@caribe.net> Dear listers, I am interested in observations and/or reports on outbreaks of white plague (or any other coral reef disease) during or after the mass bleaching event of last year in the Caribbean. I know there was an outbreak in St. John reported by Jeff Miller and we put something out from Puerto Rico where we observed and quantified WP outbreaks in several reefs that started around mid-late November. The outbreak was also more intensive in offshore, deep reefs (>15 m) with better water quality compared to inshore and/or shallower reef areas (???). If you have observed any outbreaks, could you please contact me and include the following information: 1- Disease 2- Date outbreak started (approximation will be ok) 3- Locality - reef (if possible GPS coordinates) and approximate depth interval. 4- Any assessment of intensity (proportion of colonies affected) and extension (area - reefs - etc) 5- Current status (still going or it arrested) 6- Any other information/observations you deem relevant Thank you all for your cooperation!! EW Dr. Ernesto Weil Department of Marine Sciences University of Puerto Rico PO BOX 3208 Lajas PR 00667 Pho: (787) 899-2048 x. 241 Fax: (787) 899-5500 - 2630 From david at trilliumfilms.net Tue Feb 7 20:47:58 2006 From: david at trilliumfilms.net (David McGuire) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 17:47:58 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] coral bleaching and selecting marine protected areas Message-ID: Hello, I am new to the list. I am working on a coral reef conservation documentary and would like to do some fact checking. Much of the underwater imagery is shot in atolls in the north and south pacific. We are supporting the NWHI MPA in the film as one solution to protect reef habitat. However, it is difficult to protect against global sea water temperature rises and large scale bleaching events. Would it be accurate to say that the NWHI are well situated geographically in the Pacific gyre to minimize the coral reefs exposure to sea water increase and subsequent bleaching events in comparison to other island groups or reef systems? The Hawaiian Islands experienced cool water temperatures in 1998 and experienced little bleaching effects. It is a bit of a leap perhaps but makes for a good generalized statement of support. Thanks for your advice David McGuire Trillium Films Sausalito CA From G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au Wed Feb 8 01:08:50 2006 From: G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au (Gillian Goby) Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 16:08:50 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] GBRMPA Current Conditions Report (3) Message-ID: <43E98AF2.5040404@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear All, *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the third Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 6 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, the threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region is currently rated as moderate. Sea temperatures in the southern GBR have remained significantly warmer than average (+ 0.5 - 2.5 degrees C) since December 2005 (ReefTemp), and are now exceeding the long-term summer maxima by up to 2 degrees C (NOAA HotSpot map). In contrast, recent heavy cloud cover and rain over northern parts of the GBR has kept temperatures close to average conditions for this region (Reef Futures). Central GBR waters have shown a warming tendency in recent weeks, with sea surface temperatures currently exceeding the January long-term average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C (ReefTemp). Consistent with these temperature patterns, reports of severe coral bleaching have now been confirmed for some reefs in the southern region, with minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer, and with the bleaching risk period far from over we are heavily relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ From jware at erols.com Tue Feb 7 11:01:37 2006 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:01:37 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43E369FC.4090403@erols.com> Message-ID: <43E8C461.4090609@erols.com> Not to belabor this UW camera thing, but I have been corrected: the Sea&Sea YS-90 uses 4 AAs, it is the YS120 that uses 8 AAs and, therefore, carries twice the milliamp*hours for the same type of batteries. John -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886, USA * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * http://www.seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * Treasurer and Member of the Council: * * International Society for Reef Studies * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Untainted by Technology \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************* From Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov Tue Feb 7 11:28:00 2006 From: Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:28:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Update: Bleaching Potential around Melanesia and Australia Message-ID: Melanesia: Bleaching Warning in Fiji-Beqa Warming in Melanesia continues. DHWs now exceed 8 in some areas to the east of Papua New Guinea and around the Solomon Islands. The region of heat stress may be contracting slightly around the Solomon Islands, but warming is now evident to the south of Samoa, American Samoa, and Fiji. A bleaching warning has now been issued for Fiji-Beqa. Australia: Heat Stress is Subsiding on GBR Fortunately, the center of anomalously warm ocean temperatures has moved farther south along the eastern Australian coast. The region of warming evidenced by HotSpot values over 1 degree C is now largely south and east of the Gold Coast, so the immediate threat to the GBR has ended. However, early warming such as this has frequently preceded bleaching stress late in the austral summer. The warming in the Timor Sea has also abated. According to our past data, some bleaching is likely at DHW values of 4 or above and large-scale bleaching and some mortality is likely above 8. We encourage researchers in these regions to watch out for signs of bleaching. Current HotSpot and Degree Heating Week charts can be found at: http://coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/index.html Improved time series graphics for index sites can be found at http:// coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/current/sstdhwsba_series_24reefs.html You can sign up for automated bleaching alerts at http:// coralreefwatch-satops.noaa.gov/SBA.html Please continue reporting bleaching events (or non-events) at http:// www.reefbase.org/input/bleachingreport/index.asp Regards, Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ C. Mark Eakin, Ph.D. Coordinator, NOAA Coral Reef Watch National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Satellite Applications and Research Satellite Oceanography & Climate Division e-mail: mark.eakin at noaa.gov url: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov E/RA31, SSMC1, Room 5308 1335 East West Hwy Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226 301-713-2857 x109 Fax: 301-713-3136 From sdalton at nmsc.edu.au Tue Feb 7 18:58:53 2006 From: sdalton at nmsc.edu.au (Steve Dalton) Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 10:58:53 +1100 Subject: [Coral-List] Management of disease outbreaks Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20060208105247.02428320@mail> Firstly I would like to thank everyone for their replies to my email regarding software to analyse video transects, the response was great, and certainly shows the benefits of this list. I was wondering if anyone has done any studies involving diseased corals where the active margin has been completely removed from the infected colonies and monitored the colony for reinfection? Has anyone had any success in stopping progressive disease/syndrome by removing the margin? Any comments would be welcome Regards Steven Dalton PhD student University of New England NMSC Postgraduate Representative National Marine Science Centre Bay Drive, Charlesworth Bay (PO Box J321) Coffs Harbour, NSW Australia 2450 Ph: 6648 3928 Mob: 0432 946 782 sdalton at nmsc.edu.au From thomas_houze at hotmail.com Wed Feb 8 05:47:11 2006 From: thomas_houze at hotmail.com (Thomas Houze) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 11:47:11 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: Request for Coral manuscript Message-ID: Dear coral biologist, Recently I had the good fortune to see that the first batch of EST for the corals Acropora palmata and Montastraea faveolata are available for download from the NCBI. I was wondering if someone could please send me a copy of the manuscript as an attachment. I am particularly interested in what life-phase the samples used to create the ESTs where in that where used in the study. Thomas Houze, Ph.D. Bioinformatics G?teborg University Dept. of Cell and Molecular Biology Lundberg Laboratory Medicinaregatan 9C 405 30 G?teborg Sweden From ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com Wed Feb 8 12:02:46 2006 From: ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com (Eric Coral Inquiry) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 01:02:46 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Information/Literature on Mineral Accretion Technology (Biorock) Message-ID: <6400622e0602080902w3dd3f2caq3178e612c947a853@mail.gmail.com> Dear Listers, I am planning to carry out research on how MAT, Mineral Accretion Technology (Biorock) affect the growth rate of different coral species in my area. I would like to find out if there is anyone who has any helpful information, or literature references related to MAT, Biorock that can help me. Also, I like to find out if anyone currently doing any research on Biorock and I would like to get in touch with you. At the same time, would also appreciate your help on any existing literature regarding the species of coral found in Sabah (North Borneo) waters. 1) Info/literature on Biorock (I have already been to the Biorock website http://www.globalcoral.org/ , www.*biorock*.net/, www.*wolf**hilbertz*.com/) 2) Like to geet in touch with you if you are doing anything on Biorock 3) Coral Species found in Sabah (North Borneo) waters. Really appreciate your help on the above-mentioned matter. Eric YSY "Marine Biologist in the making" Kota Kinabalu Sabah Malaysia. You can also reach me at: ericevany at gmail.com erjonah at hotmail.com From mjnewman at ucsd.edu Wed Feb 8 12:10:53 2006 From: mjnewman at ucsd.edu (Marah Newman) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:10:53 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons Message-ID: <3F2A27B5-FC18-44CA-8EFB-55300C6CF781@ucsd.edu> Hi All, I have several bleached coral skeletons and I need to calculate skeleton density. I have looked at several papers that detail methods for calculating density via buoyant weights, but I believe this is to get measurements of live corals. Since I have the coral skeleton only, is there any reason why I cannot simple use the basic water displacement method (aka Archimedes)? I know there is some concern regarding trapped air, but if I soak the corals overnight first in DI water, will this take care of it? Any comments as to why this will NOT work, would be great. Thanks. Marah Newman From cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw Thu Feb 9 07:18:39 2006 From: cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw (Chaolun Allen Chen) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 20:18:39 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] coconut crabs and horseshoe crabs conservation genetics Message-ID: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> Dear All, We are developing the conservation project targeted on two large arthropods, coconut crab (Birgus latro) and horseshoe crab ( Tachypleus tridentatus ) in the Indo-West-Pacific region. Our team includes two groups, one is developing aquaculture technique to propagate of these two species. So far we have quite successful results. The other group is developing microsatellite markers for conservation genetics of these two species. For this part of project, we are seeking for the help to collect a small portion of crab's appendage for genetic study throughout the region. For those who can kindly provide us samples, host our field collection, or just want to know the propagation technique of these two crabs, please feel free to contact me. Thank you in advance for your help. Allen Chen, PhD Associate Research Fellow Evolutionary Ecology and Genetics of Coral Reef Laboratory Research Centre for Biodiversity, Academia Sinica, Taiwan E-mail: cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw From csaenger at MIT.EDU Thu Feb 9 11:08:55 2006 From: csaenger at MIT.EDU (Casey Saenger) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 11:08:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Instrumental Salinity/Temperature in Bahamas In-Reply-To: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> References: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> Message-ID: <3762cdc14b847029eaef3aa95240017f@mit.edu> Dear All, Does someone know when noaa's CREWS monitoring of temperature and salinity began in the Bahamas? Thanks, Casey Saenger > Woods Hole Oceanographic Inst. M.S. #23, Clark 117 Woods Hole, MA 02543 508-289-3418 csaenger at mit.edu From szmanta at uncw.edu Thu Feb 9 12:20:07 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 12:20:07 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] New articles on e-journal "Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy" Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A6763A1@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Greetins All: The conservation oriented, free e-journal "Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy" has new publications that can be access through the URL below http://ejournal.nbii.org/progress/index.html ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From Eileen.Alicea at noaa.gov Thu Feb 9 13:04:32 2006 From: Eileen.Alicea at noaa.gov (Eileen Alicea) Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 13:04:32 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Searching for Carib fish out-of-water photos Message-ID: <43EB8430.4010503@noaa.gov> Hello Coral listers, I'm working with the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources on the development of a Spanish (regulated) fish guide for their enforcement officers. We are collecting excellent resolution photos of fish out of the water because they are more realistic for the rangers to learn from and use when inspecting fishers' catches. We have many so far but I'm still searching for the following. We have already searched the DNER files, Fishbase.org and Google images and I'm in the process of reaching the photographers. If you can facilitate these named below, please write to me directly. It will greatly serve the coral reef and fisheries conservation goals of Puerto Rico. 1) Scomberomorus regalis- Cero; Sierra 2) Istiophorus platypterus or albicans; Sailfish - Pez vela. 3) Tetrapturus pfluegeri; Longbill spearfish; aguja picuda. 4) Epinephelus guttatus- Red Hind- Mero Cabrilla 5) Epinephelus striatus- Nassau Grouper; Mero Cherna Thank you, Eileen Alicea NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program From dbucher at scu.edu.au Thu Feb 9 18:40:49 2006 From: dbucher at scu.edu.au (dbucher) Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:40:49 +1100 Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons Message-ID: Hi Marah, Try the following reference for a discussion of Archimedian methods for determining density of bleached coral skeletons. The important distinction is whether you want bulk density/porosity or the specific gravity of the mineral matrix (microdensity). We recommended the use of acetone to penetrate the small pore spaces as the surface tension in water is too great to remove all gas bubbles. We accelerated the process by using a vacuum pump and a bell-jar to lower the pressure. Without the vacuum pump overnight soaking was not long enough - you need several days at least for porous skeletons. The acetone- saturated skeleton was then soaked in several changes of water. Acetone has the added advantage of dissolving residual organic matter (waxes, oils etc) left behind by the bleaching process. Buoyant weigh the saturated skeleton, dry it, coat it with a thin layer of parafin wax and buoyant weigh it again - if you accurately measure the specific density of the water in the weighing apparatus you can calculate the coral's total enclosed volume (matrix plus pore spaces), its dry weight and the volume of the matrix alone. It's not the most exciting thing you will ever do, but it worked for us. Bucher, D., Harriott, V. and Roberts, L. 1998 Skeletal bulk density, micro-density and porosity of acroporid corals. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 228(1)117-135. It's not the most exciting thing you will ever do, but it worked for us. See my small contribution to the next reference for an application of this method. K. Koop, D. Booth, A. Broadbent, J. Brodie, D. Bucher, D. Capone, J. Coll, W. Dennison, M. Erdmann, P. Harrison, O. Hoegh-Guldberg, P. Hutchings, G.B. Jones, A.W.D. Larkum, J. O'Neil, A. Steven, E. Tentori, S. Ward, J. Williamson, D. Yellowlees 2001 ENCORE: The effect of nutrient enrichment on coral reefs: Synthesis of results and conclusions. Marine Pollution Bulletin 42(2):91-120. Cheers, Danny Dr Daniel Bucher Lecturer, Marine Biology and Fisheries School Director of Postgraduate Studies and Research School of Environmental Science and Management Southern Cross University PO Box 157 Lismore, NSW 2480 Australia Ph: 02 6620 3665 Fax: 02 6621 2669 Mobile: 0414 864085 >Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:10:53 -0500 >From: Marah Newman >Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons >To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >Hi All, > >I have several bleached coral skeletons and I need to calculate >skeleton density. I have looked at several papers that detail...snip From sajhowe at yahoo.com Sat Feb 11 19:52:32 2006 From: sajhowe at yahoo.com (Steffan Howe) Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:52:32 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] Eritrean coral reef surveys Message-ID: <20060212005232.60854.qmail@web34707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear coral-listers I am interested in obtaining as much information as possible about coral reef surveys (biodiversity or monitoring etc.) or habitat maps (e.g. showing coral reef locations) from the Eritrean Red Sea for Eritrea?s Coastal, Marine and Island Biodiversity Conservation Project (UNDP/GEF). The Project has already conducted some of its own surveys, but if anyone out there as has any more information it would be greatly appreciated. Regards Steffan Howe --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos ? NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo. From thedivinebovine at gmail.com Sun Feb 12 21:20:32 2006 From: thedivinebovine at gmail.com (wai leong) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Whether Alizarin S dye affects coral recruits Message-ID: Dear coral-listers, I'm investigating the effects of depth on coral growth and survivorship for my final year undergraduate research project in the National University of Singapore. I will be setting out tiles on the reef slope for a 3-4 months before shifting them up to the reef crest and leaving them out for another 3-4 months before taking them out to measure any differences in size and survivorship. As part of this study, I'd have to be able to differentiate the recruits that settled prior to shifting from the ones that settle post-shifting. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I should tag the recruits, apart from trying to find them individually under a microscope before shifting and marking them by hand? I was thinking of marking them with Alizarin S, but am not sure about any effects this might have on the recruits. I should be able to use a low concentration since I'm only trying to faintly dye the existing polyps to be able to tell them apart from the ones that recruit later on. Would appreciate any advice or suggestions anyone might have about this. Thank you! Sincerely, Leong Wai leongwai at nus.edu.sg From will_m_holden at hotmail.com Sat Feb 11 14:57:53 2006 From: will_m_holden at hotmail.com (Will Holden) Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 19:57:53 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] the next step Message-ID: Hi, my name is william holden and i have recently graduated from Newcastle University with a 2:1 degree in Marine biology. I am based in the Uk and am currently looking for work. Whilst this email is an attempt to get advice fon the best way of going about finding work, i do not want people to read this and simply think i am trying to sell myself to the highest bidder (if there happen to be any) I am hoping to get a job either working in a recognised aquarium in the Uk or at a dive centre as it is scuba diving that i am interested in and wish to pursue. This email is merely to ask for advice and any advice given would be gratefully received. Many thanks Will Holden _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN Search Toolbar now includes Desktop search! http://toolbar.msn.co.uk/ From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Mon Feb 13 18:24:00 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:24:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] New Coral-List Posting Policy Message-ID: <1214c8122b5a.122b5a1214c8@noaa.gov> Greetings! I'm afraid the amount of incoming spam to coral-list has become way too burdensome for the coral-list administrators. From now on, all messages from non-members will be automatically discarded, instead of being queued for review. For those of you who like to read from one email address yet post from another, you can add both addresses to coral-list, but enable/disable the other (see http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list, bottom of page, to subscribe/unsubscribe and choose other delivery options). I realize some folks are not subscribers to coral-list and like to occasionally post job or meeting announcements, and when that happens we have sometimes approved those messages. If your colleagues fall into that category, let me know and I'll add them to a special "free pass" sort of category so that those messages can be placed in the queue for consideration. You might also want to review how your address appears to coral-list. For instance, your address may be listed as, say, john.smith at university.edu but when you post, it comes across as john.smith at mach1.university.edu, which might be rejected by the software. Again, check your settings at http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list. If you have any problems with posting a message, please let us know. Thank you for your support and patience. Cheers, Louis Florit Mike Jankulak Jim Hendee From personal at hellenfaus.com Tue Feb 14 07:11:06 2006 From: personal at hellenfaus.com (Hellen Faus ) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 13:11:06 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Presentation In-Reply-To: <20060213170042.BD7031795C@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> Hi all! I'm new at the list and at coral world research itself. I'm a Veterinarian but not working in clinics but in travel and dive issues. I've just discovered the amazing world of corals and want to bet for it and its knowledge and conservation here in Spain, where I live, and over the world. My idea is, with time and a lot of learning, becoming part of any project (new or existent) that involves he sea health... Actually I'm collaboration in the translation into spanish of a web page dedicated to coral and plan to do a educative programme with time. At the end of the year I'll join a 9 months study of coral in the Australian and Indonesian seas, on board of Heraclitus, and meanwhile I want to learn and do as much as I can in this field... Just this presentation to tell you I'm learning a lot here, and would love to participate and have all the ideas you may give to me. Anything you consider to tell me, websites to look to, people to met, places to go, things to read, actions to do, ideas to carry on... do it!! Any help I could offer, any question or information you want to ask me -not about corals as you are the experts ;-) - feel free!! Thanks a lot to all, and remember, here I am! Hellen Faus, DVM Spain. hellen at viajarsolo.com +34 658 421 629 -----Mensaje original----- De: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] En nombre de coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Enviado el: lunes, 13 de febrero de 2006 18:01 Para: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Asunto: Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 10 Send Coral-List mailing list submissions to coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov You can reach the person managing the list at coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Coral-List digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Eritrean coral reef surveys (Steffan Howe) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:52:32 +0000 (GMT) From: Steffan Howe Subject: [Coral-List] Eritrean coral reef surveys To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: <20060212005232.60854.qmail at web34707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Dear coral-listers I am interested in obtaining as much information as possible about coral reef surveys (biodiversity or monitoring etc.) or habitat maps (e.g. showing coral reef locations) from the Eritrean Red Sea for Eritreas Coastal, Marine and Island Biodiversity Conservation Project (UNDP/GEF). The Project has already conducted some of its own surveys, but if anyone out there as has any more information it would be greatly appreciated. Regards Steffan Howe --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos  NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo.From thedivinebovine at gmail.com Sun Feb 12 21:20:41 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Delivered-To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Received: by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (Postfix, from userid 504) id EF7B417952; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.domain.tld (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0152717950 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.194]) by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36EF9177C7 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 16so873573nzp for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:33 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=EYFv37Az2pz4SnGOY6LRlxh7kV2NoEMZshiR354Tdgta8+juuYrulgfSukykT2q1wwUFgZD6wg p/Ndvt7nKVgjenuoAAMvBg4aqCrUDNNVMjSGN0K31Ap0HdrFoz9If16fPuhslODtFDt0SNTkz1A6 aLQTCwSjlObxtUJggo6XY= Received: by 10.36.88.13 with SMTP id l13mr2188985nzb; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.36.36.6 with HTTP; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800 From: wai leong To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov MIME-Version: 1.0 /usr/bin/arc: /usr/bin/arc X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on coral.aoml.noaa.gov X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=HTML_00_10,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_BY_IP autolearn=no version=3.0.4 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 07:57:08 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.2 Subject: [Coral-List] Whether Alizarin S dye affects coral recruits X-BeenThere: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: NOAA's Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP) listserver for coral reef information and news List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Dear coral-listers, I'm investigating the effects of depth on coral growth and survivorship for my final year undergraduate research project in the National University of Singapore. I will be setting out tiles on the reef slope for a 3-4 months before shifting them up to the reef crest and leaving them out for another 3-4 months before taking them out to measure any differences in size and survivorship. As part of this study, I'd have to be able to differentiate the recruits that settled prior to shifting from the ones that settle post-shifting. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I should tag the recruits, apart from trying to find them individually under a microscope before shifting and marking them by hand? I was thinking of marking them with Alizarin S, but am not sure about any effects this might have on the recruits. I should be able to use a low concentration since I'm only trying to faintly dye the existing polyps to b= e able to tell them apart from the ones that recruit later on. Would appreciate any advice or suggestions anyone might have about this. Thank you! Sincerely, Leong Wai leongwai at nus.edu.sg ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 10 ****************************************** From manfrino at reefresearch.org Tue Feb 14 11:54:07 2006 From: manfrino at reefresearch.org (manfrino at reefresearch.org) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 09:54:07 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Little Cayman Research Centre opens for Visiting Researchers this spring... Message-ID: <20060214095407.cc3c2c4bf8d3647e4241dc6e34e2d1c6.eb2d37bf1a.wbe@email.email.secureserver.net> The Little Cayman Research Centre opens for visiting researchers this spring. The Central Caribbean Marine Institute is proud to announce that Caribbean's newest field station, the Little Cayman Research Centre (LCRC) fringed by the world-renowned coral reefs of Bloody Bay Marine Park, is open to researchers. The Centre opened to students late last summer. Shallow lagoon, wall, and deep ocean (several thousand meters) habitats are all within swimming distance of the LCRC field station. The coral reefs of Little Cayman are among the best in the Caribbean for research due to the fact that they are isolated from continental and anthropogenic influences and water quality is excellent. In addition to diverse oceanographic settings over relatively short distances, Little Cayman has a well-established marine park system and one of the last spawning aggregations of the Nassau grouper. For more information on the research centre, please visit [1]www.reefresearch.org or contact me or our [2]manager at reefresearch.org to book a project (group or class). Thanks, Carrie Manfrino Central Caribbean Marine Institute [3]www.reefresearch.org Dr. Carrie Manfrino, President P.O. Box 1461 Princeton, NJ 08540 Ph:(609) 933-4559 Caribbean Headquarters Little Cayman Research Centre North Coast Road P.O. Box 37 Little Cayman, Cayman Islands (345) 926-2789 References 1. http://www.reefresearch.org/ 2. mailto:manager at reefresearch.org 3. http://www.reefresearch.org/ From pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr Tue Feb 14 18:14:32 2006 From: pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr (sandrine job) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:14:32 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] Killing Acanthaster planci In-Reply-To: <43E98AF2.5040404@gbrmpa.gov.au> Message-ID: <20060214231432.46799.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Dear Coral List, Firstly I would like to thank all the person who answered my questions about the Culcita pleague I observed on one of my restoration site in New Caledonia. I will keep you inform on the progress on this phenomenon during the course of the monitoring. So far, from the latest observations I have made on site, their number seems to stabilise and only very few coarls were attacked lately. It thus seems to confirm that they were attracted by stressed corals just after their transplantation and now that transplants are adapting to their new environmeent (and repair their lost tissue), the mortality is lower... These trends need to be confirmed. Once again thank you coral list members and if you hear anything about Culcita let me know. Secondly I had a question about what is the best way to kill COTs? Is it appropriate to kill them under the water by smashing them? or should we remove them from the water?and what about pricking them to catch them? Is it true that they will release eggs and worsten their invasion?? Cheers, Sandrine JOB Gillian Goby a ?crit : Dear All, *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the third Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 6 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, the threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region is currently rated as moderate. Sea temperatures in the southern GBR have remained significantly warmer than average (+ 0.5 - 2.5 degrees C) since December 2005 (ReefTemp), and are now exceeding the long-term summer maxima by up to 2 degrees C (NOAA HotSpot map). In contrast, recent heavy cloud cover and rain over northern parts of the GBR has kept temperatures close to average conditions for this region (Reef Futures). Central GBR waters have shown a warming tendency in recent weeks, with sea surface temperatures currently exceeding the January long-term average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C (ReefTemp). Consistent with these temperature patterns, reports of severe coral bleaching have now been confirmed for some reefs in the southern region, with minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer, and with the bleaching risk period far from over we are heavily relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.T?l?chargez la version beta. From burdickdr at hotmail.com Wed Feb 15 07:03:06 2006 From: burdickdr at hotmail.com (David burdick) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 07:03:06 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? Message-ID: Greetings coral-listers, I am interested in obtaining coral recruit/juvenile coral data for the Bahamas from 2002-2004 but I haven't had any luck finding anything in the literature - any suggestions? I performed a small-scale study looking at the effects of macroalgal reduction and Diadema antillarum addition on a set of small patch reefs off the SW coast of Eleuthera and wish to compare the results of my juvenile coral surveys to that of other researchers in the area. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! David R. Burdick NOAA Pacific Islands Assistant Guam Guam Coastal Management Program Phone: 671.472.4201 From ccook at HBOI.edu Wed Feb 15 10:14:11 2006 From: ccook at HBOI.edu (Clay Cook) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:14:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Professorship in Marine Biology Message-ID: <2309E53F80BD7841A64800D44F69F71B270239@sailfish.hboi.edu> Dear Coral-listers, Note the following position that is currently available at Florida Atlantic University, as part of the joint FAU-Harbor Branch Oceanographic partnership. Inquiries should be sent to Dr. Rod Murphey, (rmurph16 at fau.edu),Chairman, Department of Biological Sciences. Please pass this on to interested parties. Thanks and cheers, Clay Clayton B. Cook, Ph. D. Senior Scientist Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution Ft. Pierce, FL 34946 USA Ph. 772-465-2400 x 301 Mobile 772-579-0599 Fax 772-468-0757 McGinty Endowed Chair in Marine Biology The Department of Biological Sciences at Florida Atlantic University (FAU) invites nominations and applications for the John Thomas Ladue McGinty Eminent Scholar chair position in Marine Biology. Candidates should be internationally recognized as distinguished leaders in their specific field of marine biology and currently have a well-established research program. We seek an individual deeply committed to both research and teaching, particularly at the graduate level, in order to enhance a new Ph.D. program in Integrative Biology. Special consideration will be given to candidates whose research takes full advantage of FAU's geographic proximity to the marine and estuarine environments of Florida and the tropical Atlantic-Caribbean region. Applicants from a diversity of subdisciplines will be considered including, but not limited to ecology, physiology, molecular biology and organismal biology. The McGinty Eminent Scholar will conduct a program of research that facilitates collaborations with departmental faculty and strengthens current collaborations with Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution (HBOI) and other marine institutes in the region. Biology faculty are actively involved in marine biological research at both the Boca Raton (www.science.fau.edu/biology) and HBOI campuses (www.hboi.edu). The Eminent Scholar will be active on both campuses having primary research space in the new 40,000 sq. ft. FAU-HBOI facility. He/she will be expected to guide the recruitment of several new junior faculty positions aimed at enhancing the Marine Biology initiative at FAU. The endowed chair position will be filled at the full professor level with a joint appointment at the Senior Scientist level at HBOI. Review of applications will start March 1, 2006 and continue until the position is filled. Further information regarding the position can be obtained from Dr. Rod Murphey (rmurph16 at fau.edu),Chairman, Department of Biological Sciences. Applications and nominations should include curriculum vitae, five representative publications, a short description of research and teaching interests, and names and contact information of three referees. Submit applications electronically to Mrs. Lynn Sargent (lsargent at fau.edu) McGinty Eminent Scholar Search Committee, Department of Biological Sciences, Florida Atlantic University, 777 Glades Rd., Boca Raton, FL 33431. FAU is an Equal Opportunity/Equal Access Institution. From reefball at reefball.com Wed Feb 15 10:30:52 2006 From: reefball at reefball.com (Todd Barber) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:30:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? References: Message-ID: <00fa01c63244$f657c530$6501a8c0@LaFalda> Hi David, You might check with the Island School on Eleuthera. The kids there did a Reef Ball project and various classes did various monitoring projects on them. I'm not sure you could give much power to any data collected since I doubt they had adequate controls or even consistent data collection methods but there might be something there for at least sounding board. Thanks, Todd Barber Chairman Reef Ball Foundation, Inc. 3305 Edwards Court Greenville, NC 27858 reefball at reefball.com http://www.artificialreefs.org http://www.reefball.org http://www.reefball.com Direct: 252-353-9094 mobile: 941-720-7549 Fax 425-963-4119 Personal Space: http://www.myspace/reefball Group Space http://groups.myspace.com/reefballfoundation Skype & MSN For Voice or Video Conferences: Available upon request Atlanta/Athens Office 890 Hill Street Athens, GA 30606 USA 770-752-0202 (Our headquarters...not where I work see above) ----- Original Message ----- From: "David burdick" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 7:03 AM Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? > > Greetings coral-listers, > > I am interested in obtaining coral recruit/juvenile coral data for the > Bahamas from 2002-2004 but I haven't had any luck finding anything in > the literature - any suggestions? I performed a small-scale study > looking at the effects of macroalgal reduction and Diadema antillarum > addition on a set of small patch reefs off the SW coast of Eleuthera > and wish to compare the results of my juvenile coral surveys to that > of other researchers in the area. Any help would be greatly > appreciated. > > Thanks! > > David R. Burdick > > NOAA Pacific Islands Assistant Guam > > Guam Coastal Management Program > > Phone: 671.472.4201 > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From F.Webster at murdoch.edu.au Wed Feb 15 20:43:11 2006 From: F.Webster at murdoch.edu.au (Fiona Webster) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:43:11 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Postings please Message-ID: Hi I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after references and/or unpublished data. Thank you Fiona Webster Phd student Marine Ecology School Biological Sciences Department of Science and Engineering Murdoch University From deevon at bellsouth.net Thu Feb 16 09:56:52 2006 From: deevon at bellsouth.net (DeeVon Quirolo) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:56:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20060216094920.026ff5c0@bellsouth.net> Dr. Brian Lapointe of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution and Dr. Peter Bell of University of Queensland/Australia both arrived at the same thresholds from different perspectives, but they are: 1 mg/L dissolved inorganic nitrogen, .01 mg/L soluble reactive phosphorus. You can contact either Lapointe or Bell for further info. These thresholds are far lower than any current water quality regulations. Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Reef Relief www.reefrelief.org At 08:43 PM 2/15/2006, Fiona Webster wrote: >content-class: urn:content-classes:message >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="utf-8" > >Hi >I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in >Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down >effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral >health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal >growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar >level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient >enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and >phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after >references and/or unpublished data. >Thank you > > >Fiona Webster > >Phd student > >Marine Ecology > >School Biological Sciences > >Department of Science and Engineering > >Murdoch University > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From dustanp at cofc.edu Thu Feb 16 10:39:04 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:39:04 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> References: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> Message-ID: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil From info at reefguardian.org Thu Feb 16 09:34:44 2006 From: info at reefguardian.org (ReefDispatch) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:34:44 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Will Development Smother Guana Cay Reef? Message-ID: <43F48D84.78CE@reefguardian.org> ****************************** * February 16, 2006 * * R E E F D I S P A T C H * * __________________________ * * Will Unwise Development * * Smother Guana Cay Reef? * * * * -- sign on via -- * *http://www.reefguardian.org * ****************************** A Periodic Inside Look at a Coral Reef Issue from Alexander Stone, ReefGuardian International Director ____________________________________________________ Dear Friend of Coral Reefs, The coral reefs off tiny seven-mile Great Guana Cay in the northern Bahamas is under threat by an irresponsible mega-development.? Scientists around the world -- including top coral reef ecologists, and coral pathologists -- agree that the Discovery Land Company's plans to build a golf course, 500 residential units and a 180-slip marina will kill the coral reef in a matter of a few years. You could help prevent this by speaking up for this coral reef through the Featured Petition at ReefGuardian's just-updated website at http://www.reefguardian.org. Coral reefs are in serious decline around the world, and especially in the Caribbean.? But the reef at Great Guana Cay is among the few remaining healthy reefs in the entire Caribbean.? This reef, which is only 45 feet away from the beach of the proposed development, contains an incredible diversity of reef fishes, sharks, and brilliant corals. But that will all become an algae-ridden dead zone in just a few years if the Discovery Land development proceeds as planned. That's why I urge you to get involved through the Speak Up section at http://www.reefguardian.org. The native inhabitants of Guana Cay have formed an environmental organization to fight this development. But they need all the help they can get. Normally, such small islands never have an international voice.? Help prove that even little islands can have a strong voice in defense of their coral reefs. Go to our newly-updated website at http://www.reefguardian.org to learn how. Thanks so much for caring! Alexander Stone Director ReefGuardian International *************************** http://www.reefguardian.org *************************** From rvw at fit.edu Thu Feb 16 09:36:11 2006 From: rvw at fit.edu (Robert van Woesik) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:36:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Funding opportunity: Six ISRS/TOC fellowships for 2006 Message-ID: <000001c63306$55445600$6c4876a3@CORAL> Dear coral-list, The International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) are very pleased to announce that in 2006 we will be supporting up to six Ph.D. students in the general area of coral reef ecosystem research. Each award will be up to US$15,000. Submission DEADLINE - 31 March 2006 The following text is available in pdf format at http://www.fit.edu/isrs/ Fellowship announcement for coral reef studies Six ISRS/TOC fellowships (2006): International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) graduate fellowship for coral reef research DEADLINE - 31 March 2006 - for funds up to US$15,000 per award are available to support up to six Ph.D. students in the general area of coral reef ecosystem research. 1) Background and Fellowship Goals "Considerable thicknesses of rock have certainly been formed within the present geological era by the growth of coral and the accumulation of its detritus; and, secondly, that the increase of individual corals and of reefs, both out wards or horizontally and upwards or vertically, under the peculiar conditions favourable to such increase, is not slow, when referred either to the standard of the average oscillations of level in the earth's crust, or to the more precise but less important one of a cycle of years" (page 79, Darwin, 1842 The Structure & Distribution of Coral Reefs). Indeed, Darwin would be surprised just how 'peculiar' those conditions are on contemporary coral reefs. In 2006 unfavorable conditions are ubiquitous on reefs globally. Scientists and reef managers are increasingly working together to develop sound management strategies that are based on rigorous science. Scientific questions are being addressed on reef disturbances and reef resilience, climate change and adaptation, reef connectivity, and effective management practices, to name a few. Many coral reefs are in poor condition, yet we know very little about the very threats that are undermining the integrity of coral reefs. What processes and mechanisms are causing differential mortality and how are some species still able to survive and indeed be successful in times of stress. Studies are needed that will combine management with process level information. Research supported by the ISRS/TOC Fellowship should increase our understanding of processes on coral reefs that are relevant to management at local, regional, or global scales. 2) Conditions Within the proposal, and as a condition of each ISRS/TOC Fellowship, recipients will be required to articulate how they will report back to the ISRS/TOC on their research progress, outline their findings, acknowledge the support, and publicize the outcomes. 3) Who can apply? The Fellowship is available to students worldwide, who are already admitted to a graduate program at an accredited university. The intent of the fellowship is to help Ph.D. students develop skills and to address problems related to relevant applications of coral reef ecosystem research and management. The Fellowship can be used to support salary, travel, fieldwork, and laboratory analyses. The student can work entirely at the host institution, or can split time between developed and developing country institutions. 4) Application materials A four page proposal as a pdf document, using 12-point font or larger, double spaced, in English, is required from prospective fellowship candidates: proposals that do not meet these criteria may be returned. The proposal should include the following sections: a. Overview: The overview starts with the Proposal Title, Author Name, Author's Address, Major Professor Name, Major Professor's Address (if different than the Author's), and total amount in the budget request. The overview should place the proposed research in context. We are looking for a clearly stated rationale, research objectives and a clear question that is driving the research within the context of the literature. b. Methods: The methods section includes hypotheses, methods, and experimental design - including details on field or laboratory techniques and how data will be analyzed. c. Relevance & implications of research: This section will outline expected outcomes, how the work is relevant to host country management and science issues and the implications of the research within a broader context. This section also includes evidence of host country coordination (e.g., identification of individuals or programs that will benefit from your results); The following three sections are required but do not count against the four page limit: d. Detailed Budget: The budget must not exceed $15,000. Evidence of cost sharing is desirable for the application. Cost sharing might include, for example, additional funding, accommodation, the loan of equipment, or access to analytical facilities. e. Literature Cited: Use a bibliographic format that includes full titles in the citations. f. Applicant CV: 2 pages maximum. g. Letter of support: The student's major professor must submit a support letter for the project based on their knowledge of the project, and familiarity with the student's background and abilities. If work will be conducted at another university, a support letter is required from the sponsoring Professor. 5) Submitting your application All application materials must be submitted electronically as follows: a) All materials must be sent to Dr. Robert van Woesik at: rvw at fit.edu b) The completed proposal (items 4a-f above) must be combined into a single document and sent as an attachment in pdf format. Please enter the subject line of your message as your last name followed by "ISRS/TOC Proposal" (e.g., "VAN WOESIK_ISRS/TOC Proposal") c) The letter of support (item 4g above) must come directly from the major professor as an e-mail attachment (pdf format). Please enter the subject line of the message as the last name of the applicant followed by "ISRS/TOC Support" (e.g., "VAN WOESIK_ISRS/TOC Support"). Applications will be considered complete only after the support letter has arrived. You should ensure that your sponsors are aware of the deadline, and can get their letters submitted in a timely manner. Only completed electronic applications will be reviewed, and this will be accomplished by an ISRS panel. 6) Evaluation Criteria include: a) scientific merit, b) feasibility, c) support letter from major professor, d) host country coordination, e) relevancy to the Fellowship guidelines, f) reporting strategy (on research progress and findings, see conditions in 2, above). 7) Administration of the Fellowship The International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) support the Fellowship through professional and administrative contributions. ISRS/TOC is committed to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination. The mission of the ISRS is to promote for the benefit of the public, the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge and understanding concerning coral reefs, both living and fossil. The TOC is committed to protecting ocean environments and conserving the global abundance and diversity of marine life. Through science-based advocacy, research, and public education, TOC promotes informed citizen participation to reverse the degradation of our oceans. Dr. Robert van Woesik Professor Department of Biological Sciences Florida Institute of Technology 150 West University Boulevard Melbourne Florida 32901-6988 USA Email: rvw at fit.edu http://www.fit.edu/~rvw/ Phone 321 674 7475 From chwkins at yahoo.com Thu Feb 16 11:17:01 2006 From: chwkins at yahoo.com (Christopher Hawkins) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 08:17:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060216161702.33190.qmail@web32802.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Phil- A good question. I know that TNC folks, as part of the Florida Reef Resiliency Program (which has state, Sanctuary, NOAA and university partners), is working on this as we speak. I am fairly sure they haven't inked anything concrete yet, though. Best, Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Hawkins at forwild.umass.edu Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil --------------------------------- What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos From pkramer at tnc.org Thu Feb 16 15:18:04 2006 From: pkramer at tnc.org (Phillip Kramer) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:18:04 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Phil- As Chris mentioned, The Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) has been working on this question for the past year. Finding few agreed upon quantitative metrics for assessing resilience on Florida reefs in the literature has led us to approaching it from a number of different angles- expert input, review and analysis of existing monitoring data, statistically based broad-scale surveys to quantify response to disturbance (in this case bleaching) across all sub-regions and reef zones that have been identified within the Florida reef tract, and finer scale investigations tracking coral survivorship along selected gradients. Below is a summary from a pilot expert based (delphic) exercise we did last year to tap into local knowledge. Not surprisingly, we found quite a bit of disparity between what experts thought were "resilient" often based on background/expertise/age of the person. From this excersise, we have a GIS database and can provide maps which identify over 43 "resilient" reefs as identified by experts along with the reasons these reefs were identified. This might be a useful starting point for where to start looking at some standard metrics. Steven Miller's group also has a very rich baseline dataset collected over a number of years for a much broader set of functional and structural indicators that may also help inform this question. If anyone is interested in the expert maps or an overview of the FRRP program just let me know. We can also share results of the first broad scale bleaching surveys carried out last summer. Regards, Phil Philip Kramer, Ph. D. Director, Caribbean Marine Program The Nature Consevancy 55 N. Johnson Road Sugarloaf Key, FL 33042 305-745-8402 ext. 103 Summary of South Florida Reef Expert Meetings on Reslience One of the initial goals of the Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) is to locate and map coral reefs within the region that exhibit characteristics of resilience. To arrive at this goal, several activities have been implemented by The Nature Conservancy during spring 2005. Along with conducting an analysis of existing coral reef monitoring data, anecdotal information has been collected from local reef experts to help identify where potentially resilient reefs are located. A diverse array of individuals with considerable first hand knowledge of the coral reef resources within the region were identified and subsequently interviewed for this effort. Three tropical sea life collectors, 2 fishers, 6 federal employees (NOAA and USGS), 1 state employee, 5 individuals affiliated with universities, 7 members of local non-governmental organizations, and 1 dive industry representative were involved with this process. These 25 individuals provided a wealth of information from a wide geographic range and from varying perspectives. Interviews with individuals or small groups were conducted over a 4 week period; from April 1 through Aril 26, 2005. During each interview, a similar range of questions were asked to ensure compatibility of responses. Reef experts were first given a brief description about the FRRP goals and overview of a number of activities currently underway. Each person was first asked to comment on the spatial framework which identifies unique reef ?strata? that occur within different subregions and cross shelf zones of the Florida reef tract. This spatial framework will function to identify distinct reef biotopes within the region and guide the a regional stratiofied sampling design to assess response to disturbances such as coral bleaching. Interviewed participants provided useful information on ways to improve the framework and/or confirm it?s accuracy from their point of view. Experts were asked if they know of existing data sets that may be useful for the further improvement of the spatial framework as well. In order to assess the geographic areas each individual is most familiar with, the zones and sub-regions within the spatial framework were used as a reference. Following these discussions, using nautical charts, benthic habitat maps, and other spatial datasets, reef experts were asked to identify reef or hardbottom areas they believe have maintained its functional integrity over the past years to decades given the various disturbances which have influenced south Florida. They were also asked if they know of ?special or unique areas? that may act as refuges (e.g., do not bleach when other areas do or have functional or structural characteristics indicative of resilience such areas with particularly high coral cover or large living coral heads, etc..). Interviewees identified a wide range of potentially resilient areas- from specific parts of individual reefs to entire habitats or zones. The information gathered from these interviews on potentially resilient reef areas was tabulated and then digitized in GIS. Along with these questions, we asked the experts to comment on why they belief these areas are showing signs of ?resilience? (factors of resilience). Finally, we asked each expert to describe what attributes of a reef is most valuable to them. Table 1: List of interviewed reef experts Reef Expert Organization/Occupation Geographic Area of Expertise Don de Maria Fisher Lower Keys Billy Causey Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Region wide Ken Nedimyer Tropical sea life collector Upper and Lower Keys Lad Atkins Reef Environmental Education Foundation Keys wide and SE coast Harold Hudson Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Keys wide Forest Young Dynasty Marine Rebecca Shoal to Middle Keys Bob Ginsburg University of Miami, RSMAS Region wide Margaret Miller NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami Dana Williams NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami Rodrigo Garza University of Miami, RSMAS Tortugas and Miami Michelle PaddockUniversity of Miami, RSMAS Upper Keys through Miami Bill Parks Tropical sea life collector Palm Beach County Gene Shinn US Geological Survey Region wide Bob Halley US Geological Survey Region wide Walt Jaap Florida Wildlife Research Institute Region wide Pam Muller University of South Florida Region wide Dr. Ray McAllister Prof. Emeritus, Florida Atlantic University SE Coast Stephen Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Timothy Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Debrorah Devers Vone Research (501c3) Broward County David Zinni Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Randy Brooks Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Jeff Torode Greater Ft. Lauderdale Diving Association Broward County Peter Cone Lobster diver Key West Erich Bartels Mote Marine Laboratory Region wide -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Christopher Hawkins Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 11:17 AM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Cc: Dave Loomis Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Phil- A good question. I know that TNC folks, as part of the Florida Reef Resiliency Program (which has state, Sanctuary, NOAA and university partners), is working on this as we speak. I am fairly sure they haven't inked anything concrete yet, though. Best, Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Hawkins at forwild.umass.edu Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil --------------------------------- What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From reef at bellsouth.net Thu Feb 16 16:47:14 2006 From: reef at bellsouth.net (reef at bellsouth.net) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:47:14 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] (no subject) Message-ID: <20060216214714.DCBQ1775.ibm67aec.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> RE: healthy coral in the Florida Keys I would suggest Western Samboos off of Key West. There is a lot of healthy elkhorn (alittle storm damage from Wilma though). Parts of it is from the coral nursery project that had great results (done by Reef Relief). The Dry Tortugas park is a great resource as well. Hope this helps! Vicky Ten Broeck From julian at twolittlefishies.com Thu Feb 16 18:17:33 2006 From: julian at twolittlefishies.com (Julian Sprung) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 18:17:33 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs Message-ID: <60146F1515751D4AA4CB4D3EC514F9E311AA1C@SERVER.tlf.local> It may be news to some members of the list to know that aquarists growing corals in reef aquariums come to essentially the same recommended background level for phosphorus, about 0.015 mg/L being a threshold that seems to be important in managing the proliferation of algae in reef aquariums. Some other observations about it - 1. corals will grow at substantially higher phosphorus concentrations in aquariums, especially when grazers are present to control algae. 2. Some corals will stop growing or bleach and die when the phosphate level is maintained not very much below the abovementioned threshold! This is a point of great interest as aquarists balance food inputs and phosphate export. Apparently corals can acclimate to lower levels as long as the transition is not too fast. Acclimation to "higher" concentrations, but still close to the abovementioned threshold, does not kill corals, but may cause SPS corals to become less colorful. It should also be noted that the observations may have some relation to the loss of corals to bleaching events in the most nutrient poor waters in the natural environment. There was already a long thread on this list about inorganic nitrogen in aquarium culture of corals, but suffice it to say that corals in aquariums grow well with background levels much higher than proposed for their natural environment. They also grow well at nitrogen poor conditions, but may bleach if the levels become too low in an aquarium, especially when food inputs are scarce. Maintaining low levels help promote bright color in (Indo-Pacific) SPS corals, as the "background" zoox brown color is reduced and other pigments become more obvious. When discussing nutrients I like to make an analogy that I think is appropriate-- I compare nutrients to light availability. If you think about sunlight on the reef, it comes in 2 distinct forms: background sky light and light from the sun itself. Nutrients as a background level (the abovementioned thresholds) could be thought of as analogous to sky light- all around and just right for normal growth. There are other sources of nutrients that are like the point source of light from the sun-- more intense and focused. Fish living (and eliminating waste) among coral branches would be an example of a nutrient supply that far exceeds the "background." These point sources (light or nutrients) seem to enhance growth. The analogy works but does not correspond with respect to water movement effects on nutrient availability. Julian > ---------- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of DeeVon Quirolo > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 9:56 AM > To: Fiona Webster; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov; coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs > > Dr. Brian Lapointe of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution and Dr. > Peter Bell of University of Queensland/Australia both arrived at the > same thresholds from different perspectives, but they are: 1 mg/L > dissolved inorganic nitrogen, .01 mg/L soluble reactive > phosphorus. You can contact either Lapointe or Bell for further > info. These thresholds are far lower than any current water quality > regulations. > > Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Reef Relief www.reefrelief.org > > > > At 08:43 PM 2/15/2006, Fiona Webster wrote: > >content-class: urn:content-classes:message > >Content-Type: text/plain; > > charset="utf-8" > > > >Hi > >I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in > >Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down > >effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral > >health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal > >growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar > >level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient > > >enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and > >phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after > >references and/or unpublished data. > >Thank you > > > > > >Fiona Webster > > > >Phd student > > > >Marine Ecology > > > >School Biological Sciences > > > >Department of Science and Engineering > > > >Murdoch University > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Coral-List mailing list > >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From colocha30 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 16 18:52:05 2006 From: colocha30 at yahoo.com (carolina castro) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 17:52:05 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Looking for PDF articles Message-ID: <20060216235205.65991.qmail@web34712.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear All, I am looking for some articles that I couldn?t be able to download. I would really appreciate if somebody could attach them on PDF format for me. Thank you. Brander, et.al., 1971. Comparison of species diversity and ecology of reef-living invertebrates on Aldabra Atoll and at Watamu, Kenya. Symp. Zool. Soc. London, 28: 397-431. J.B. Lewis and P.V.R. Snelgrove, 1989. Response of a coral-associated crustacean community to eutrophication. Marine Biology, 101(2): 249-257. J.B. Lewis and P.V.R. Snelgrove, 1990. Corallum morphology and composition of crustacean cryptofauna of the hermatypic coral Madrasis mirabilis. Marine Biology, 106(2): 267-272. Carolina Castro S. Biologa Marina UJTL Bogota, Colombia __________________________________________________ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ?gratis! Reg?strate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/ From gregorh at reefcheck.org Thu Feb 16 19:42:31 2006 From: gregorh at reefcheck.org (Gregor Hodgson) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:42:31 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <003301c6335b$0d0a57e0$0600a8c0@toshibauser> Hi Phil, I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and only one species of human. Regards, Greg -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From j.oliver at cgiar.org Fri Feb 17 03:31:44 2006 From: j.oliver at cgiar.org (Oliver, Jamie (WorldFish)) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 16:31:44 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef Scientist Position at the WorldFish Center - Penang Message-ID: Dear Colleagues The WorldFish Center has an exciting new position opening for a Coral Reef Scientist at the WorldFish Center. This is a normal staff position with a 3 year renewable contract. The Scientist would lead a new GEF-funded project examining lessons learned and best practices in coral reef management, and would also be expected to develop and lead other coral reef projects relevant to the mission of the Center. The position would contribute to, and assist in the strategic planning and oversight of ReefBase, the Center's global information system on coral reefs. This position will be one of several new positions currently being filled at the Center in the field of Natural Resources management, and offers the opportunity to join a dynamic new multi-disciplinary team seeking to make a significant impact on poverty and food security in developing countries. (see "jobs" on our website www.worldfishcenter.org ). Please pass this message on to any potential candidates or interested parties. Best regards Jamie Oliver Research Scientist - Coral Reefs Description: The WorldFish Center , located on the island of Penang , Malaysia , is a world-class scientific research organization. Our mission is to reduce poverty and hunger by improving fisheries and aquaculture. We have offices in nine countries and engaged in collaborative research with our partners in more than 50 countries. The Center is a nonprofit organization and a member of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). A unique opportunity has arisen for a gifted individual to contribute to the mission of the Center and make a personal impact on the lives of millions of less fortunate people in developing countries around the world. We seek a highly competent and motivated individual to fill the following position within the Natural Resources Management Discipline: Responsibilities: Provide scientific leadership and vision in the development of new research and knowledge management opportunities relating to coral reefs and associated ecosystems. Design, develop and submit project proposals relevant to the management and sustainable use of coral reefs in developing countries. Develop collaborative arrangements with advanced scientific institutions and national research systems to increase the outputs for agreed research projects Prepare proposals to development agencies for funding of new priority projects and the continuation of existing long-term projects Publish results of research in peer-reviewed scientific journals, and disseminate in web pages, newsletters and other popular media Prepare scientific reports for donors and WorldFish management Represent the Center at relevant high level scientific fora Supervise and mentor relevant staff Contribute to strategic science discussions and the development of science directions within the NRM Discipline and relevant regional strategies and global initiatives. Requirements: Phd in Ecology, tropical fisheries, or related discipline and 3 year's research experience related to coral reefs or tropical coastal systems. Demonstrated research innovation, publications in internationally reefed journals and the application of research to management issues Experience in assembling, organizing and analyzing large volumes of information from a variety of sources and disciplines and synthesizing these into clear themes and identifying emergent issues and ideas. Strong quantitative skill in statistical and spatial analysis, and relevant computer programs Excellent program management skills, including planning organization, and budgeting. Ability to manage several projects simultaneously. Experience in multi-disciplinary and multi-organization and multi-country projects. Ability to work effectively in diverse cultural contexts English proficiency and excellent project management skills The WorldFish Center offers a competitive remuneration package, a non-discriminatory policy and provides an innovative work environment. Interested applicants are invited to submit a comprehensive curriculum vitae that includes names and contacts (telephone, fax, and e-mail address) of three (3) professional referees who are familiar with the candidate's qualifications and work experience, via e-mail to worldfish-hr at cgiar.org, no later than 15 March 2006. Only short-listed candidates will be notified. ============================================ Jamie Oliver Director, Science Coordination The WorldFish Center PO Box 500, GPO, 10670 Penang Malaysia Street address: Jalan Batu Maung, 11960 Bayan Lepas, Penang, Malaysia Ph: 60 4 620 2209 Fax: 60 4 626 5690 email: J.Oliver at cgiar.org ========================================== From laura.jeffrey at imperial.ac.uk Fri Feb 17 04:26:23 2006 From: laura.jeffrey at imperial.ac.uk (Jeffrey, Laura) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 09:26:23 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] MSc Thesis Ideas Imperial Message-ID: <37629CD96DEBCF42B807EAD22EA7EF78C84EC5@icex3.ic.ac.uk> Dear All, I am a postgrad presently reading for an MSc in Environmental Technology at Imperial College, London. In April we are due to start our dissertations and my hope that I would be able to investigate coral reefs and their current level or protection through policy/initiatives and such like. I hold a 1+3 studentship so the hope is that this project will be the stepping-stone to a PhD in the same field. I have attached below my current thoughts and ideas regarding this subject. However, I am well aware that I am limited in knowledge on this subject and would therefore appreciate any suggestions that come my way. I was advised by a colleague that the coral list was the best way to go with regards finding the right experts to talk to; useful contacts; projects that are currently underway so that maybe I could join one; advising a specific region to focus on; further suggestions re the direction of my ideas so that they mat form a project and such like. Any help on this matter would be much appreciated! Yours Sincerely, Laura Jeffrey Project Ideas: Environmental Law/Policy and Biodiversity/Conservation: Coral Reef Project Ideas Coral Reefs are not only extremely aesthetically pleasing, but they support an extraordinary amount of biodiversity and have enormous economic value. However, at present coral reefs are at serious risk of decline considering the current trends in climate change (threats posed by global warming), coastal development, pressure from over-fishing, fishing practices such as cyanide poisoning and explosives and tourism, along with other environmental stressors. According to The Nature Conservancy, if the destruction increases at the current rate, 70% of the world's coral reefs will have disappeared within 50 years. Such a loss would have dramatic impacts on marine biodiversity, fisheries, shore protection, tourism and would be an economic disaster for those people living in the tropics. Dissertation: Initially set out to see whether or not the world's coral reefs are being sufficiently protected by reviewing (investigation into?) the current level of protection, including MPAs, any policy instruments, environmental agreements already in place to encourage protection, or lack thereof. Given the depth and breath of the subject matter, the study would invariably have to be selective....zone in on specific area/case study PhD: Is there a role for environmental law (policy/treaties) to tackle the environmental degradation of coral reefs? Assess the viability of transposing legal remedies to environmental protection of this endangered area with a view that the author would hopefully provide recommendations/possible options at the end! Included in thesis/PhD? * The best methods of protection are those that are specific to the problem, therefore explore the role of how science can inform policy here (make policy makers aware/political science of MPAs). * (From Dr Polunin, Newcastle, "and nearly all the science is derived from reef habitats that don't apply at al to continental shelf waters" ??? Significant? * What determines the most viable strategy? * What would influence uptake? * How would this be implemented and enforced? Specific criteria for successful implementation. * Interaction between different sectors, national, provincial, and local community level? I am aware that America is very forward thinking in this field and has initiatives in place. Maybe this would be an appropriate case study? Again, any help much appreciated!! From esther.peters at verizon.net Fri Feb 17 11:40:25 2006 From: esther.peters at verizon.net (Esther Peters) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:40:25 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? References: <003301c6335b$0d0a57e0$0600a8c0@toshibauser> Message-ID: <43F5FC79.7090506@verizon.net> Gregor and Phil make good points. As part of an exercise to look at reef classification for the purpose of developing coral reef biocriteria, I examined the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program data from the Keys collected in 1996, looking at coral cover, species dominance, and richness, and applying the "coral morphological triangles" (conservation class) concept of Edinger and Risk (2000). A preliminary comparison with the results obtained from the 2004 CREMP dataset revealed that just in those few years there were significant structural and functional changes at some offshore shallow reef sites. And of course, based on long-time Keys' residents and reef scientists, we know of even more changes over the past 25 years. The Nature Conservancy's diverse approach is also important to help us understand reef dynamics in the Keys and the influences of natural and anthropogenic disturbances. I'm not sure that anyone has figured out the "standard, or baseline reef." My first look at this issue indicates that even in the Keys there are several biotopes and more investigations are needed as to which one(s) should serve as "reference condition" for each class. Esther Peters Gregor Hodgson wrote: > Hi Phil, > > I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a > "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? > > Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be > a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It > is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs > given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, > sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing > conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging > will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. > > Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and > only one species of human. > > Regards, > Greg > > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? > > > Dear Listers, > With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency > underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as > measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or > Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". > Thanks, > Phil > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From esther.peters at verizon.net Fri Feb 17 11:56:47 2006 From: esther.peters at verizon.net (Esther Peters) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:56:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] 2006 Advanced Courses in Tropical Marine Sciences in the Florida Keys Message-ID: <43F6004F.1080103@verizon.net> The following opportunities for advanced studies on coral reefs will be offered at Mote Marine Laboratory's Tropical Research Laboratory in the Florida Keys this summer. Please use these links to learn more about each session and obtain application materials: Coral Tissue Slide Reading Workshop (July 25-28) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/slide_workshop.phtml Diseases of Corals and Other Reef Organisms (July 29-August 6) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/disease_workshop.phtml Secondary Succession on Damaged Coral Reefs Workshop (August 7-10) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/succession_workshop.phtml From l.bunce at conservation.org Fri Feb 17 12:14:52 2006 From: l.bunce at conservation.org (Leah Bunce) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 12:14:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] MPA Social Scientist position Message-ID: <64207F75AB45B54296B2E2DAA4DA9D8B08707302@ci-mail1.ci.conservation.org> Dear Coral Colleagues, I would greatly appreciate it if you would forward the announcement below to social scientists who might be interested or who know those who might. This is a unique opportunity to direct a large social science research initiative to further management effectiveness of marine protected areas worldwide. The position involves working with CI here in DC and closely with CI and partners in-country. For more info about the program, see . Thank you! Leah ______________ Leah Bunce, PhD Senior Director Marine Management Area Science Program Center for Applied Biodiversity Science Conservation International 1919 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 (202) 912-1238 l.bunce at conservation.org Position: Research Scientist - MPA Social Scientist Program: Center for Applied Biodiversity Sciences, Conservation International Location: Washington, DC The social scientist will be responsible for overseeing Conservation International's Marine Management Area Science Program social science research activities. This is a unique opportunity for someone with strong academic credentials and overseas conservation experience to gain experience managing a large program of applied marine research across many sites. Program research is focused around critical marine management area research needs related to management effectiveness, connectivity, resiliency, valuation, economic development and enforcement. Required: A solid understanding of the marine protected area social science field. Preferred: Four years of experience conducting applied social science research and translating the results into conservation action. Experience in tropical nations, preferably in one of the 4 priority sites (Brazil, Belize, Panama & Ecuador and Fiji). Project management experience, including planning, working with a range of colleagues, and budgeting. Experience conducting social science to benefit marine conservation and establishing a process to ensure the results are used by decision-makers. Flexibility and the ability to coordinate science activities outside the person's immediate area of expertise. Master's degree required, Ph.D. preferred. To apply: Application deadline - March 1, 2006 From hyamano at nies.go.jp Mon Feb 20 00:10:03 2006 From: hyamano at nies.go.jp (hyamano at nies.go.jp) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 14:10:03 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Dear colleagues, Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th ICRS, Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD-ROMs will be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send it to all the participants. For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the print. If the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop printing the Proceedings. More news will be sent as soon as I hear. Best wishes, Hiroya Yamano Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html From eborneman at uh.edu Mon Feb 20 10:00:11 2006 From: eborneman at uh.edu (Eric Borneman) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:00:11 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS In-Reply-To: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> References: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Message-ID: <09599ED7-B06F-4340-9BBE-76B3B0CA8921@uh.edu> Hello Hiroya: Thank you for the update on the Proceedings and I am greatly looking forward to seeing them and appreciate the work that has certainly been required to produce them. I am curious, though, about the printing. If the CD-ROM is already formatted, as it should be given the nature of the formatting required for submitted material, then any of thousands of print-on- demand printers should be able to produce bound volumes by a print-on- demand cost that can be from 1 to many thousands of copies. For example, one print-on-demand company found with a quick google search will print hardback copies (6x9) with full color covers, dust jackets, up to 500 pages and provide 10 free copies of the book for US $1000 and this includes free CD e-books and 30% royalties for each copy sold if they are the distributor and 50% of CD-ROM sales. I consider this to be quite expensive. I think others on this list I know who have written full color books over 500 pages would agree that we would not be writing (or selling) much if printing costs and selling prices were this high. While I don't have the details of the manuscript, the minimum order and costs seem very out of line with what I know about book publishing (which isn't much), having written two books. I think the cost of book series, such as Corals of the World, which are similarly large, colorful (which previous Proceedings have never been) and well made indicates what is possible. The costs of scientific publication have always been a mystery to me, to say the least, and in terms of most journals, an outrageous racket. If, however, there are very few orders for text-based copies I can see that the cost would be high, but I see no reason for it to be impossible for even one copy to be produced given the nature of POD technology today. I hope others on the list who have published books could comment further. Best, Eric Borneman Dept. of Biology and Biochemistry University of Houston Science and Research Bldg. II 4800 Calhoun Houston, TX 77204 On Feb 19, 2006, at 11:10 PM, hyamano at nies.go.jp wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th > ICRS, > Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. > > We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD- > ROMs will > be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send > it to > all the participants. > > For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. > However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the > print. If > the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop > printing the Proceedings. > > More news will be sent as soon as I hear. > > Best wishes, > > Hiroya Yamano > Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS > Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings > > ---- > Hiroya Yamano > UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement > BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia > Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 > Also at NIES > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From sjameson at coralseas.com Mon Feb 20 04:06:15 2006 From: sjameson at coralseas.com (Dr. Stephen Jameson) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:06:15 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Message-ID: Dear Phil, Thanks for the Coral-List note regarding: >> Dear Listers, >> With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency >> underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as >> measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or >> Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Per: Jameson SC, Erdmann MV, Karr JR, Potts KW (2001) Charting a course toward diagnostic monitoring: A continuing review of coral reef attributes and a research strategy for creating coral reef indexes of biotic integrity. Bull Mar Sci 69(2):701-744 "In multimetric biological assessment, reference condition equates with biological integrity. Biological integrity is defined as the condition at sites able to support and maintain a balanced, integrated, and adaptive biological system having the full range of elements and processes expected for that biogeographical region and type of environment (coral reef zone) (Jameson et al. 2001, Table 1, page 702). Biological integrity is the product of ecological and evolutionary processes at a site with MINIMAL human influence (determined by best available information)." As you well know, there is no reef in the Florida Keys with minimal human influence. For a recent summary of this situation see: Jameson SC, Tupper MH, Ridley JM (2002) The three screen doors: can marine ?protected? areas be effective? Marine Pollution Bulletin 44(11):1177-1183. So how could you approach this problem? Your question is assuming just using a "single" reference site to create a reference condition. (Note of caution: I would recommend using more than one reference site to create a reference condition for a specific biogeographic region. Also, reference conditions based on reference sites may incorporate considerable variability because of scale and in some biogeographic regions this variability may be unsatisfactory.) However, you can create reference conditions using a combination of the following types of data (Jameson et al. 2001, page 705). Each approach has its strength and weaknesses. Historical Paleoecological Experimental Laboratory Quantitative Models Best Professional Judgment References Sites But, before this question can be answered a few more questions need to be addressed. 1. What metrics and related organisms are you using in your monitoring and assessment program? Are you just looking at corals or are you developing a more complex invertebrate, algae and/or fish index of biotic integrity with a mix of species? For example, if you were using forams you might have good paleo data to create your reference condition with. If you are using corals, there might be good historical data or you might be able to use agent based models (like John McManus is developing) and run them backwards to get a historical perspective. Best professional judgment will also be a valuable resource for all metrics. Your sampling protocol is critical, it needs to be consistent and this will control what organisms are available for analysis - and determine what reference conditions are needed. If you can't create a defendable reference condition then your chosen metric is of little use. 2. What coral reef zone are you targeting (Esther's point). Different types of organisms will be found in different zones, so you want to be comparing apples to apples and not confounding (mixing) data. This will also influence what reference conditions you need to develop. 3. How far back in history do you want to go with your reference condition - pre-Columbus, start of the industrial revolution, pre-Miami development? Bottom line: just using a single Florida Keys reference site selected in 2006 will not produce a satisfactory reference condition in the Florida Keys situation no matter what metric/s you are using - which I know you realize. I am putting the final touches on the following paper that outlines these concepts in more detail. Jameson SC, Karr JR, Potts KW (in ms) Coral reef biological response signatures: a new approach to coral reef monitoring and assessment with early warning, diagnostic, and status & trend capabilities. Coral Reefs Also see, when it comes out: Jameson SC (in press) Summary of Mini-Symposium 4-2, Diagnostic Monitoring and Assessment of Coral Reefs: Studies from Around the World. Proc 10th Intl Coral Reef Symposium, Okinawa, Japan I hope this brief summary helps. All papers referenced can be downloaded at . If I can be of further service please give me a call. PS. Caution should be used with respect to using "resilient reefs" for reference sites as the fact that they are categorized as "resilient" suggests that they have been subjected to stressors and are not located in minimally impaired environments. We are looking for those reefs that have not bleached - which as Greg points out - will be harder and harder to find, thus reinforcing the need to use the other approaches for creating reference conditions. Best regards, Dr. Stephen C. Jameson, President Coral Seas Inc. - Integrated Coastal Zone Management 4254 Hungry Run Road, The Plains, VA 20198-1715 USA Office: 703-754-8690, Fax: 703-754-9139 Email: sjameson at coralseas.com Web Site: http://www.coralseas.com and Research Collaborator Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History Washington, DC 20560 ******************* > Gregor and Phil make good points. As part of an exercise to look at > reef classification for the purpose of developing coral reef > biocriteria, I examined the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program > data from the Keys collected in 1996, looking at coral cover, species > dominance, and richness, and applying the "coral morphological > triangles" (conservation class) concept of Edinger and Risk (2000). A > preliminary comparison with the results obtained from the 2004 CREMP > dataset revealed that just in those few years there were significant > structural and functional changes at some offshore shallow reef sites. > And of course, based on long-time Keys' residents and reef > scientists, we know of even more changes over the past 25 years. The > Nature Conservancy's diverse approach is also important to help us > understand reef dynamics in the Keys and the influences of natural and > anthropogenic disturbances. I'm not sure that anyone has figured out > the "standard, or baseline reef." My first look at this issue indicates > that even in the Keys there are several biotopes and more investigations > are needed as to which one(s) should serve as "reference condition" for > each class. > > Esther Peters > > > Hi Phil- As Chris mentioned, The Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) has > been working on this question for the past year. Finding few agreed upon > quantitative metrics for assessing resilience on Florida reefs in the > literature has led us to approaching it from a number of different angles- > expert input, review and analysis of existing monitoring data, statistically > based broad-scale surveys to quantify response to disturbance (in this case > bleaching) across all sub-regions and reef zones that have been identified > within the Florida reef tract, and finer scale investigations tracking coral > survivorship along selected gradients. > > Below is a summary from a pilot expert based (delphic) exercise we did last > year to tap into local knowledge. Not surprisingly, we found quite a bit of > disparity between what experts thought were "resilient" often based on > background/expertise/age of the person. From this excersise, we have a GIS > database and can provide maps which identify over 43 "resilient" reefs as > identified by experts along with the reasons these reefs were identified. > This might be a useful starting point for where to start looking at some > standard metrics. Steven Miller's group also has a very rich baseline > dataset collected over a number of years for a much broader set of > functional and structural indicators that may also help inform this > question. > > If anyone is interested in the expert maps or an overview of the FRRP > program just let me know. We can also share results of the first broad > scale bleaching surveys carried out last summer. > > Regards, > Phil > > Philip Kramer, Ph. D. > Director, Caribbean Marine Program > The Nature Consevancy > 55 N. Johnson Road > Sugarloaf Key, FL 33042 > 305-745-8402 ext. 103 > > Summary of South Florida Reef Expert Meetings on Reslience > > One of the initial goals of the Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) is to > locate and map coral reefs within the region that exhibit characteristics of > resilience. To arrive at this goal, several activities have been > implemented by The Nature Conservancy during spring 2005. Along with > conducting an analysis of existing coral reef monitoring data, anecdotal > information has been collected from local reef experts to help identify > where potentially resilient reefs are located. A diverse array of > individuals with considerable first hand knowledge of the coral reef > resources within the region were identified and subsequently interviewed for > this effort. Three tropical sea life collectors, 2 fishers, 6 federal > employees (NOAA and USGS), 1 state employee, 5 individuals affiliated with > universities, 7 members of local non-governmental organizations, and 1 dive > industry representative were involved with this process. These 25 > individuals provided a wealth of information from a wide geographic range > and from varying perspectives. > > Interviews with individuals or small groups were conducted over a 4 week > period; from April 1 through Aril 26, 2005. During each interview, a > similar range of questions were asked to ensure compatibility of responses. > Reef experts were first given a brief description about the FRRP goals and > overview of a number of activities currently underway. Each person was > first asked to comment on the spatial framework which identifies unique reef > ?strata? that occur within different subregions and cross shelf zones of the > Florida reef tract. This spatial framework will function to identify > distinct reef biotopes within the region and guide the a regional > stratiofied sampling design to assess response to disturbances such as coral > bleaching. Interviewed participants provided useful information on ways to > improve the framework and/or confirm it?s accuracy from their point of view. > Experts were asked if they know of existing data sets that may be useful for > the further improvement of the spatial framework as well. In order to > assess the geographic areas each individual is most familiar with, the zones > and sub-regions within the spatial framework were used as a reference. > Following these discussions, using nautical charts, benthic habitat maps, > and other spatial datasets, reef experts were asked to identify reef or > hardbottom areas they believe have maintained its functional integrity over > the past years to decades given the various disturbances which have > influenced south Florida. They were also asked if they know of ?special or > unique areas? that may act as refuges (e.g., do not bleach when other areas > do or have functional or structural characteristics indicative of resilience > such areas with particularly high coral cover or large living coral heads, > etc..). Interviewees identified a wide range of potentially resilient > areas- from specific parts of individual reefs to entire habitats or zones. > The information gathered from these interviews on potentially resilient reef > areas was tabulated and then digitized in GIS. Along with these questions, > we asked the experts to comment on why they belief these areas are showing > signs of ?resilience? (factors of resilience). Finally, we asked each > expert to describe what attributes of a reef is most valuable to them. > > Table 1: List of interviewed reef experts > > Reef Expert Organization/Occupation Geographic Area of Expertise > Don de Maria Fisher Lower Keys > Billy Causey Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Region wide > Ken Nedimyer Tropical sea life collector Upper and Lower Keys > Lad Atkins Reef Environmental Education Foundation Keys wide and SE coast > Harold Hudson Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Keys wide > Forest Young Dynasty Marine Rebecca Shoal to Middle Keys > Bob Ginsburg University of Miami, RSMAS Region wide > Margaret Miller NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami > Dana Williams NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami > Rodrigo Garza University of Miami, RSMAS Tortugas and Miami > Michelle PaddockUniversity of Miami, RSMAS Upper Keys through Miami > Bill Parks Tropical sea life collector Palm Beach County > Gene Shinn US Geological Survey Region wide > Bob Halley US Geological Survey Region wide > Walt Jaap Florida Wildlife Research Institute Region wide > Pam Muller University of South Florida Region wide > Dr. Ray McAllister Prof. Emeritus, Florida Atlantic University SE Coast > Stephen Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Timothy Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Debrorah Devers Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > David Zinni Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Randy Brooks Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Jeff Torode Greater Ft. Lauderdale Diving Association Broward County > Peter Cone Lobster diver Key West > Erich Bartels Mote Marine Laboratory Region wide > Gregor Hodgson wrote: > >> Hi Phil, >> >> I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a >> "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? >> >> Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be >> a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It >> is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs >> given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, >> sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing >> conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging >> will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. >> >> Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and >> only one species of human. >> >> Regards, >> Greg >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan >> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM >> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? >> >> >> Dear Listers, >> With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency >> underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as >> measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or >> Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From simmi_nuern at yahoo.com Mon Feb 20 09:32:24 2006 From: simmi_nuern at yahoo.com (Simone Nuernberger) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 06:32:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Coralliophila In-Reply-To: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Message-ID: <20060220143224.12107.qmail@web60313.mail.yahoo.com> Hi everyone, Can anyone please tell me (as detailed as possible) how the gastropod Coralliophila sp. affects hard corals and how this predation can be visually identified? Do signs of Coralliophila differ with the presence of algae in coral tissue? How can these predation scars be distinguished from coral diseases? One more question: Has anyone encountered a syndrome showing as ?green spots? ? small necrotic patches of light green coloration on the coral surface? Our studies were based in Indonesia and we mostly found these impairments on massive colonies of Porites spp. I appreciate your help! Cheers, Simone *************************************************************************** Simone N?rnberger (M.Sc.) simone_nuernberger at web.de Institute of Biology (Biological Oceanography) University of Southern Denmark DK-5230 Odense M --------------------------------- Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses! From habakuk at nova.edu Mon Feb 20 21:31:43 2006 From: habakuk at nova.edu (Lindsey Klink) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 21:31:43 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Mooring Buoy Questionnaire Message-ID: <20060220213143.2hlykz9pcks048k8@mail.acast.nova.edu> Mooring Buoy Questionnaire I am a Research Assistant with the National Coral Reef Institute (NCRI). I am currently conducting a mooring buoy use and effectiveness study. As part of this study I am compiling detailed information about mooring buoy programs around the world. To collect this information I have created a web-based questionnaire to be filled out by individuals associated with mooring buoy programs. To read more about this effort and to take part in the study, please visit: www.nova.edu/ncri/mooringbuoy.html Thank you very much for your time and any information about mooring buoy programs that you are able to provide! Lindsey H. Klink Research Assistant National Coral Reef Institute Nova Southeastern Univ. Oceanographic Center 8000 N. Ocean Dr. Dania Beach, FL 33004 USA habakuk at nova.edu From dustanp at cofc.edu Tue Feb 21 09:32:11 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Message-ID: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And probably haven't been for a long time. My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses that are far greater, supports this form of denial. Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even be up to R4 if conservation is successful. Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) From ctwiliams at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 11:59:39 2006 From: ctwiliams at yahoo.com (Tom Williams) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 08:59:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060221165939.90967.qmail@web50408.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Agreed - what is left after 50-100years of farm runoff, fertilizer, golf courses, bottle/dynamite blasting, etc. would be a better question - at this stage, every coral should be precious and protected, but they are in the wrong places.... Recent discussions regarding Arabian/Persian Gulf and Red Sea, and East Malaysia, Philippines, and Majuro/Marshalls can be added to the Keys. Costs $50 to reclaim and can sell for $500...OK But some for Dubai Claim that programs are underway to mitigate and compensate after the fact and since fish like the reclamation it is improved. Dr. Tom Williams The original is too long --- Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots > of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are > none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > My point is that before we talk about resilience, > maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of > their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost > over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the > 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing > vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been > talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in > full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to > minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be > worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully > engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, > or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, > some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or > boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no > point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are > the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting > (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. From szmanta at uncw.edu Tue Feb 21 12:35:10 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:35:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] FW: Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813A2D@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Dear Dr. Yamano: I am concerned about the proposed high cost of hard copies of the proceedings. Since I came to UNCW, I have helped our library acquire all of the series of proceedings (most we obtained for free from the various institutions that had published them) so that our students could use these valuable tomes to learn from and plan research. But my institution, as I am sure is true for so many others, does not have enough funds to pay for all the journals and books we need, and such a high cost could mean that they would decide not to buy this proceedings set. I suggest an alternative: The cost of the CD set is reasonable I hope. If the 10thICRS committee would permit non-for-profit academic institutions to make their own hard copies from the CDs, then each institution could find a less expensive way to make a permanent copy for their collections. It should certainly cost less that a few hundred dollars to print out a full copy (and there would be no shipping of heavy books across the seas!). It may not be as nice as a professionally printed copy but it will do the job. At least my university library would not do this unless there was an explicit permission to make such a copy so as not to violate copyright laws. Unless you can find a less expensive printer, I suggest you consider this option. It would be a shame if after all that work on your part, the Proceedings didn't find homes in our libraries. Sincerely, Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of hyamano at nies.go.jp Sent: Mon 2/20/2006 12:10 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Cc: paal.buhl.mortensen at imr.no; i04t0021 at k.hosei.ac.jp; purkis at nova.edu; c.roelfsema at uq.edu.au; rwaller at whoi.edu; p.kench at auckland.ac.nz; jan.helge.fossaa at imr.no; jgoodman at uprm.edu; Qamar.Schuyler at crm.gov.mp; yamano at noumea.ird.nc; andrefou at noumea.ird.nc Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Dear colleagues, Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th ICRS, Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD-ROMs will be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send it to all the participants. For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the print. If the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop printing the Proceedings. More news will be sent as soon as I hear. Best wishes, Hiroya Yamano Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From riskmj at univmail.cis.mcmaster.ca Tue Feb 21 12:45:43 2006 From: riskmj at univmail.cis.mcmaster.ca (Michael Risk) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:45:43 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: Hi Phil. Thanks you for crystallising the discussion, and articulating some of my own concerns. One of the many problems is: "All politics is local." (Tip O'Neil, American politician) It is always easier to blame the external. One of my students was in the back of a hall in the Keys 2-3 years ago during one of those public meetings, and heard a senior Florida reef manager say the decline in the reefs was caused by "All those Canadians driving down here every winter in their SUV's, making Carbon Dioxide." (True quote-no one has to MAKE UP things reef managers say.) Now, it may well be that no one should drive SUV's, but it cannot be said enough times: bleaching has had NOTHING TO DO with the decline of Florida's reefs. Everyone reading this list should repeat after me-and Phil-NOTHING TO DO. And now we see that the new kid on the block, FRRP, will focus only on bleaching. Something is badly wrong. We don't need more science-the science has spoken eloquently. In...2000? (help me, Walt, Phil-when was it?) I was a member of a NOAA panel that evaluated all the reef monitoring programs in the Florida Keys. (Why was there more than one, you may ask? In fact, there were about six.) Our conclusion was that monitoring had done its job. (Monitoring can NEVER identify causes, although a good monitoring program can allow selection of hypotheses.) In this case, the monitoring programs, especially the FMRI program, had successfully documented the regional mass extinction under way in the Keys. And that was the panel's carefully-chosen phrase: "regional mass extinction." We recommended consolidation of the monitoring programs, and an immediate increase in funding designed to rank the various land-based threats, in order that action could be taken. We also recommended an outreach program. That may be the key to the Keys. Every citizen of Florida should be told that: 1. there is big trouble in the Keys, and that 2. the causes are all local. The managers will be reluctant to be too assertive-after all, they have Big Sugar and Big God-knows-what watching them. The impetus has to be bottom-up. To coin a phrase. And we reef scientists have to learn that we score our own points at the expense of the ecosystem. Mike On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but > no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach > a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty > fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about > studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right > in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this > years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the > built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in > continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of > a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the > losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps > there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many > people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not > simply > sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s > > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of > having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats > their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and > denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > > than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or > slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the > R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might > even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor > is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > > -- > Phillip Dustan Ph.D. > Department of Biology > College of Charleston > Charleston SC 29424 > (843) 953-8086 voice > (843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From chwkins at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 13:15:18 2006 From: chwkins at yahoo.com (Christopher Hawkins) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:15:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060221181518.99270.qmail@web32813.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Phil and everyone: Your shot across the bow is welcome by some of us who realize that the biology only holds so much promise for a solution, and that there are a suite of things that need to be employed in tandem with the biophysical sciences to address these issues. I am not sure where I stand about remnancy vs. resiliency. It has a bit of a chicken and the egg connotation to it. Are some reefs remnant because they are resilient? Are they now resilient because they are remnant, for whatever reason? It is a tough one to wrap your head around... I'd like to comment, though, on one part of your posting, and that is the notion that promoting competition among dive shops with a "R" scale. I would think that identifying a reef as an R3 would prompt management to look more towards limiting activities at that site, rather than a "rush to destroy it" approach. At first glance, I might suggest that such a scale would be useful, though. However, it is critical not just to understand the reef condition, but also the users of that reef(s). Specialization theory (a human dimensions tool) offers a framework to do this. With specialization, we know that there are is a continuum of users from low to highly specialized (e.g. PADI Open Water Divers to Nitrox Divers), and that highly specialized users are the ones most likey to obey regulations and support management actions (Ditton, Loomis, Choi, 1992; Salz and Loomis, 2005, Salz, Loomis and Finn, 2001; Bryan, 1977/2000). Directing those users with to an R3, R4, or R5 reef would be then become a management alternative. In addition, management alternatives such as placing only a few mooring bouys at the highest "R" sites, would seem like a good strategy. Of course, all of this depends on identifiying resilient or remnant reefs and then scaling them, which seems to be what is causing some problems. And on understanding the nature of the area's user groups, which is never done very methodically. I have just identified one potential way to like resiliency to a conservation mechanism. I believe there are others, but we need to know all of the tools available. Thanks. Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Marine and Coastal Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And probably haven't been for a long time. My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses that are far greater, supports this form of denial. Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply sewage But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, Carysfort R1, etc Maybe this might help create public awareness and political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even be up to R4 if conservation is successful. Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. From ricksanders at comcast.net Tue Feb 21 13:34:49 2006 From: ricksanders at comcast.net (Rick Sanders) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:34:49 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas References: <6.0.1.1.2.20060118164353.02559c00@mail.waquarium.org> <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CAE9A@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <004b01c63715$7fa4b760$650da8c0@manta> Dear Listers, I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find an image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been unable to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish brown color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each other in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped into more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm in width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if to crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what I am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a copy or link. Thanks very much in advance, Best regards, Rick Rick Sanders Deep Blue Solutions Media, PA 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net From kruer at 3rivers.net Tue Feb 21 15:27:21 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:27:21 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <43FB77A9.7050007@3rivers.net> Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil Dustan. But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true change in direction. There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the amazingly productive Keys (and no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, and no it should never be held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with problems much broader than simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying that the problem with seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important figure easily dispenses with all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and filling, thousands upon thousands of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc etc., See how easy it is. And it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself during some of the countless consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I refused to play along with the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys all would be OK. What a joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo is going to change much is wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions to upgrade the Key West plant to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything measurable? And we were promised that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds good but can't happen on a scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of the Keys as I began to see myself as a part of the problem. The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the Keys ecosystem and manage human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too much attention is focused on a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that most else would be protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's limited funds on a new facility in Key West is going to change much? Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as stand alone systems and the problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands continue to be lost and degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are trying legally to protect the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving activity (and associated impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the state and the state points to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have taken place but it's not working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - but it's obviously not enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live bottom and predictably now hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of miles of slow-degrading poly line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to replace them every year just to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by the tens of thousands daily, fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot long cruise ships plow up the bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone effectively turns a blind eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. Shallow water marine habitats throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are subjected to the disturbing and destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster boats of all types. People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is failing. The rate of loss and anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that is what matters. Large vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's great. But new leadership is needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? Catering to virtually every user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in ecosystem protection or even maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef management in the Keys as a success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New leadership is needed and that leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and address all issues throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And they need to be loudly supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has the most knowledge about what has been lost and is being lost. Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and other lists will lead to something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and misdirected effort. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply > sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > From szmanta at uncw.edu Tue Feb 21 17:33:52 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 17:33:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813BB7@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Hello Mike, Phil and Curtis: The problem with attributing all of the loss of coral in the Florida Keys to local human impacts, as you three have done in your comments, is that the same pattern of loss of live coral is being observed in remote places of the Bahamas and other small Caribbean islands with small or no human populations, no sewage to speak of and no cruise ships. To ignore the dramatic effect coral bleaching and subsequent disease outbreaks, on top of overfishing, have had on Keys and northern Caribbean corals since the mid-1990s and especially since the severe 1997-1998 back-to-back bleaching events, is not helpful to conservation or management efforts. Bleaching has reached reefs that are distant from direct human impact as well as the Keys, with similar effects on both. Overfishing is far more pervasive than water quality degradation because boats go everywhere to extract the last lobster and grouper. The healthiest Caribbean reefs, if one judges that based on live coral cover, that I have seen in a long while are those in the lower Caribbean where they have, for hydrographic and climatic reasons, not been as impacted by either bleaching or major storms: Reefs on the S side of Curacao and Bonaire still have more coral now than what I remember for places like PR and the USVI back in the 1960s and 1970s. And they have high coral cover within 1 km of where the cruise ships docks and next to the outflow from the desalination plant. And they have very high rates of coral recruitment and no algae even on boulders with no Diadema, and few fishes. Go figure! There are many reefs on the GBR with water quality conditions far worse than in the Florida Keys (in terms of turbidity, nutrient levels and such variables) with much higher coral cover and diversity. Ken Anthony is even showing corals on these turbid reefs feed on the detritus and have higher growth rates than corals on more offshore reefs. Florida reefs have a disadvantage of being at the northern limits of the climatic window for coral well being in the Atlantic province, with way too many severe winter and summer storms. These geographic limitations have existed for thousands of years and have limited coral reef growth over Holocene time frames. When I first visited Nassau reefs in 1971 and the Florida reefs during the 1977 symposium, when my frame of reference was Puerto Rican reefs, my opinion of Florida/Bahamas reefs was that they were puny and depauperate. Now they are even more depauperate. That is no excuse to abuse them, but to ignore the climatic factor is not helpful towards restoring or protecting them (if that is possible). Multiple factors are at work, and a single quick fix will not do the trick. Over-simplification and trying to crucify a single factor will not help society deal with these complex issues. Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Curtis Kruer Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 3:27 PM To: Phil Dustan Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil Dustan. But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true change in direction. There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the amazingly productive Keys (and no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, and no it should never be held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with problems much broader than simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying that the problem with seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important figure easily dispenses with all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and filling, thousands upon thousands of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc etc., See how easy it is. And it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself during some of the countless consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I refused to play along with the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys all would be OK. What a joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo is going to change much is wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions to upgrade the Key West plant to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything measurable? And we were promised that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds good but can't happen on a scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of the Keys as I began to see myself as a part of the problem. The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the Keys ecosystem and manage human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too much attention is focused on a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that most else would be protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's limited funds on a new facility in Key West is going to change much? Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as stand alone systems and the problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands continue to be lost and degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are trying legally to protect the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving activity (and associated impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the state and the state points to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have taken place but it's not working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - but it's obviously not enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live bottom and predictably now hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of miles of slow-degrading poly line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to replace them every year just to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by the tens of thousands daily, fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot long cruise ships plow up the bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone effectively turns a blind eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. Shallow water marine habitats throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are subjected to the disturbing and destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster boats of all types. People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is failing. The rate of loss and anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that is what matters. Large vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's great. But new leadership is needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? Catering to virtually every user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in ecosystem protection or even maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef management in the Keys as a success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New leadership is needed and that leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and address all issues throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And they need to be loudly supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has the most knowledge about what has been lost and is being lost. Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and other lists will lead to something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and misdirected effort. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I'd like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it's patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there's a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we've know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply > sewage......But still we look for bright spots. I think it's because it's > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It's been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > than resiliency, I'd favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc... Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it's a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From knudby at gmail.com Tue Feb 21 16:48:14 2006 From: knudby at gmail.com (Anders Knudby) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:48:14 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] instrument to measure water depths Message-ID: <551b8dba0602211348y1e58fb60y20da80776e676217@mail.gmail.com> Hi coral listers, I am looking for an instrument that I can use to measure consecutive substrate depths on a reef. Ideally something that I can place on or just above the substrate, press a button to take a measurement (for direct display or preferably download later), and then move on to the next point of measurement and press the button again. Quick and simple. I have found a couple of instruments (pressure transducers) that almost fit that specification, but not quite, and I would like to hear if anybody out there have already found exactly what I am looking for. If so please let me know. (sorry to post a monitoring-related question in the middle of the more important remnancy discussion, seems out of place, but I'm trying to do my PhD..... thus perhaps scoring my own points at the expense of the ecosystem) Best regards, Anders Knudby -- Anders Knudby PhD Candidate Department of Geography University of Waterloo, Canada phone: +1 519 888 4567 x7575 e-mail: knudby at gmail.com From pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr Tue Feb 21 18:52:43 2006 From: pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr (sandrine job) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:52:43 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] Coral farming In-Reply-To: <09599ED7-B06F-4340-9BBE-76B3B0CA8921@uh.edu> Message-ID: <20060221235243.68069.qmail@web25108.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Dear all, I am seeking for any information related to coral farms, especially farms made in situ. The best would be to send me email adresses or web sites of Coral Farms. Thanks to you all, Cheers, Sandrine JOB Eric Borneman a ?crit : Hello Hiroya: Thank you for the update on the Proceedings and I am greatly looking forward to seeing them and appreciate the work that has certainly been required to produce them. I am curious, though, about the printing. If the CD-ROM is already formatted, as it should be given the nature of the formatting required for submitted material, then any of thousands of print-on- demand printers should be able to produce bound volumes by a print-on- demand cost that can be from 1 to many thousands of copies. For example, one print-on-demand company found with a quick google search will print hardback copies (6x9) with full color covers, dust jackets, up to 500 pages and provide 10 free copies of the book for US $1000 and this includes free CD e-books and 30% royalties for each copy sold if they are the distributor and 50% of CD-ROM sales. I consider this to be quite expensive. I think others on this list I know who have written full color books over 500 pages would agree that we would not be writing (or selling) much if printing costs and selling prices were this high. While I don't have the details of the manuscript, the minimum order and costs seem very out of line with what I know about book publishing (which isn't much), having written two books. I think the cost of book series, such as Corals of the World, which are similarly large, colorful (which previous Proceedings have never been) and well made indicates what is possible. The costs of scientific publication have always been a mystery to me, to say the least, and in terms of most journals, an outrageous racket. If, however, there are very few orders for text-based copies I can see that the cost would be high, but I see no reason for it to be impossible for even one copy to be produced given the nature of POD technology today. I hope others on the list who have published books could comment further. Best, Eric Borneman Dept. of Biology and Biochemistry University of Houston Science and Research Bldg. II 4800 Calhoun Houston, TX 77204 On Feb 19, 2006, at 11:10 PM, hyamano at nies.go.jp wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th > ICRS, > Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. > > We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD- > ROMs will > be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send > it to > all the participants. > > For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. > However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the > print. If > the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop > printing the Proceedings. > > More news will be sent as soon as I hear. > > Best wishes, > > Hiroya Yamano > Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS > Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings > > ---- > Hiroya Yamano > UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement > BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia > Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 > Also at NIES > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.T?l?chargez la version beta. From hyamano at nies.go.jp Tue Feb 21 19:23:08 2006 From: hyamano at nies.go.jp (hyamano at nies.go.jp) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:23:08 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <20060222002306689.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Dear coral-listers, Thank you very much for sending comments, especially on the hard copies of the 10ICRS Proceedings. I forwarded the messages to the 10ICRS program committee and asked reconsideration. We will decide the contact information for the purchase and also the price of the CDs for non- participants, in addition to the price of the hard copies. I appreciate to have received some orders of the hard copies, but please do not send more orders to me before the next news. We should be very pleased if you could let us have some more time for the details. I will let you know the news as soon as I hear. Again, thank you very much for your cooperation and patience. Best wishes, Hiroya ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html ---- From cat64fish at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 20:49:22 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:49:22 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB77A9.7050007@3rivers.net> Message-ID: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi everyone, Certainly an interesting discussion on the fate of the Florida reefs. Not being from the US, and never having had the opportunity to visit the Florida Keys, I am unable to fully appreciate the extent fo the damage that has been done to that rich ecosystem. Mike, as usual, you have cut through the bs and succinctly stated the problem in the Florida Keys. I suspect similar situations occur wolrdwide, where reef systems are in decline (for example, I've heard from fishermen how their reefs have been destroyed by blast fishing caused by fishermen from the "other" island). While sitting on the fence, and agreeing that there needs to be more science directed at the reef ecosystem, the impacts would seem to far, far outweigh the need for more exacting science. Conservation, and perhaps even the more exacting word, preservation, is needed, if reefs are to survive the human onslaught. Someone mentioned (I am not sure of it is on this list or somewhere else) that it was a good ting that there are many coral species and only one human. Be that as it may, that one species has the capacity to totally destroy the diversity that exists today. Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place. MPAs managed in isolation, was something else that was brought up in this discussion. While it is undeniable (at least to me) that MPAs do help in the conservation of coral reefs and other marine ecosystems, the term MPA itself is an "isolationist" word, as it implies some sought of boundary. "Enlightened management plans" that look at the totality of the marine system, that will conserve and sustain our marine resources, understanding that it is inter-connected and intricately linked system, are what is needed. I suspect that part of the reason that scientists treat reef systems in isolation is that if they did not, then there would be no "scientific" papers (as we know them) in existence. The momentum of publishing, or doing publishable research, is probably what is limiting the science from expanding beyond its narrow confines. Reef managers on the other hand, must not only be biologists, but people managers, ecosystem managers, fund managers, and sometimes, visionaries, all rolled into one. Good luck finding such people in great enough quantity to "manage" even the existing MPAs. To round up, I agree with Mike that "people power" may be the way to go to get the necessary protection for our marine resources. "People cannot love, what they do not know", or so I've been told. While I cannot "love" the Florida Keys, I do love the coral reefs in my own backyard, and sometimes the wrangling that goes on between scientists, conservationists and politicians, while the reefs are slowly but surely being degraded, is more than I can bear. Holding out for coral reefs the world over Jeff --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. From Craig.Bonn at noaa.gov Wed Feb 22 09:44:49 2006 From: Craig.Bonn at noaa.gov (Craig S Bonn) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:44:49 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43FC78E1.10008@noaa.gov> Hi listers, I recently accepted a position with the Dry Tortugas NP where I will be coordinating a monitoring program within a new 47 square mile research natural area recently established within park boundaries where all consumptive practices will be prohibited. Diving and snorkeling will still be allowed and a system of mooring buoys has been established for boaters to tie up to within the RNA. I have worked in the Tortugas for the past six years and have witnessed myself the degradation that is occurring there-- some of the reefs are almost completely dead and covered in algae while others (Sherwood Forest in the northern portion of the TER) while healthier in terms of percent cover are also exhibiting signs of degradation and that it may simply be not how but when these reefs will suffer to the point of no return. I also know that there are so many variables involved in what is happening to our reefs on a global scale that the task at hand almost seems impossible especially when you listen to the doom sayers who state that the worlds reefs will be gone in a matter of years if nothing is done to correct the mistakes we have all made with regards to stewardship of our planet. If we take a look at the variables involved: water quality, over fishing, vessel groundings, seagrass dieoffs, urchin dieoffs, bleaching, coral disease, the possibility that our planet and our oceans are warming with subsequent melting of our polar regions and of course one of the biggest problems in my opinion is complete lack of concern by many. Lets admit it, some people simply dont care and I think this has a lot to do with the state our world is in now, cultural, religious, and political differences also play a role here but Im not going to get into that. Anyway, Im looking forward to the challenges that this new position will present to me and my colleagues and I guess what Im asking for is some advice. I am very concerned as many of you are as well and I would like to part of a new approach to management issues of not only the coral reefs of the world but our entire world. I believe that education an outreach could play an important role and will be one of my priorities along with others. Any advice would certainly be appreciated, perhaps efforts focused on small areas can have a spillover effect in terms of getting the public really involved, but I think its going to have to be a worldwide involvement if we really want to improve things. But its only a start, we have to finish, and send the right messages to generations of scientists coming behind us to better improve things so that they, and we, can perhaps begin to see positive changes taking place for the planet we all call home. thanks Craig Michael Risk wrote: >Hi Phil. > >Thanks you for crystallising the discussion, and articulating some of >my own concerns. One of the many problems is: > >"All politics is local." (Tip O'Neil, American politician) > >It is always easier to blame the external. One of my students was in >the back of a hall in the Keys 2-3 years ago during one of those public >meetings, and heard a senior Florida reef manager say the decline in >the reefs was caused by "All those Canadians driving down here every >winter in their SUV's, making Carbon Dioxide." (True quote-no one has >to MAKE UP things reef managers say.) > > >Now, it may well be that no one should drive SUV's, but it cannot be >said enough times: bleaching has had NOTHING TO DO with the decline of >Florida's reefs. Everyone reading this list should repeat after me-and >Phil-NOTHING TO DO. > >And now we see that the new kid on the block, FRRP, will focus only on >bleaching. Something is badly wrong. We don't need more science-the >science has spoken eloquently. > >In...2000? (help me, Walt, Phil-when was it?) I was a member of a NOAA >panel that evaluated all the reef monitoring programs in the Florida >Keys. (Why was there more than one, you may ask? In fact, there were >about six.) > >Our conclusion was that monitoring had done its job. (Monitoring can >NEVER identify causes, although a good monitoring program can allow >selection of hypotheses.) In this case, the monitoring programs, >especially the FMRI program, had successfully documented the regional >mass extinction under way in the Keys. And that was the panel's >carefully-chosen phrase: "regional mass extinction." > >We recommended consolidation of the monitoring programs, and an >immediate increase in funding designed to rank the various land-based >threats, in order that action could be taken. We also recommended an >outreach program. > >That may be the key to the Keys. Every citizen of Florida should be >told that: >1. there is big trouble in the Keys, and that >2. the causes are all local. > >The managers will be reluctant to be too assertive-after all, they have >Big Sugar and Big God-knows-what watching them. The impetus has to be >bottom-up. To coin a phrase. > >And we reef scientists have to learn that we score our own points at >the expense of the ecosystem. > >Mike > >On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 > Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Coral List, >> I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about >> >>healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but >>no >>one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And >>probably haven't been for a long time. >> >> My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach >>a >>true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my >>calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their >>living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The >>Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty >>fast >>too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about >>studies, >>monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right >>in >>front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, >> >>even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to >>protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this >>years >>ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or >>look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to >>think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the >>built >>it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in >>continuing >>to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of >>a >>far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the >>losses >>that are far greater, supports this form of denial. >> >> Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long >>time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps >>there >>are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many >>people >>fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage >>system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not >>simply >>sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s >> >>more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is >>hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, >>sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of >>having >>a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? >> >> It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats >>their >>young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and >>denial. >> The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather >> >>than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) >>that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or >>slower >>in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the >>R >>scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, >>Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and >>political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between >> >>dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 >> >>when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might >>even >>be up to R4 if conservation is successful. >> Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline >> >>downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we >>need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor >>is >>wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. >> Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just >>imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From kruer at 3rivers.net Wed Feb 22 12:27:54 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 10:27:54 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813BB7@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <43FC9F1A.5020204@3rivers.net> Dr. Szmant, Thanks for the note. You are a reef researcher and you love to research and explore reefs around the world and you agree that Florida's reefs are under multiple stresses, including due to their geographic location. I too began exploring Keys reefs in the 1970s and have witnessed the dramatic changes there. My approach is simply that management should start by dealing with the stresses that can realistically be managed (routine, easily identified, cumulative, physical impacts in particular and habitat degradation in general) and quit using issues like climate change as an excuse to do virtually nothing on a local level. It's getting old. To me that would be like us agreeing that due to its importance we should all start working towards stopping the melting of the Greenland ice sheets, and ignore local problems that unequivocally are trashing coastal resources on a daily basis. And don't forget that in the 1980s and 1990s the mantra from many outspoken reef types was that wastewater and other nutrients were killing Keys reefs. I participated in a couple of recent exchanges wherein a federal manager suggested that researchers were not provididng needed information for reef management (and more research was needed), while at the same time a researcher was stating that managers were not using data made available by researchers - and that direction needed to be given for what information was needed. Both argued that more research and information is needed for proper reef management and this is what I reject - the excuses for not curtailing destructive human practices that are obviously and directly degrading reef ecosystem resources. And I believe that the notion that we can completely decipher to the nth degree (or ever really know) what is going on with reefs (and many other natural systems) is a loser from the get-go, and very self-serving. I don't ignore climate change as you suggest (and I doubt that others do) but recognize and embrace the notion that it's here to stay and nothing that you or I can do individually will change that - but you and others prominent in the scientific and management community can individually make changes and help force changes that will help protect and conserve reef resources. If you truly want to help coral reef ecosystems argue for improved funding for broader and more effective management based on what we do know and less funding for research to try to learn (forever) what we don't know. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Szmant, Alina wrote: > Hello Mike, Phil and Curtis: > > The problem with attributing all of the loss of coral in the Florida > Keys to local human impacts, as you three have done in your comments, is > that the same pattern of loss of live coral is being observed in remote > places of the Bahamas and other small Caribbean islands with small or no > human populations, no sewage to speak of and no cruise ships. To ignore > the dramatic effect coral bleaching and subsequent disease outbreaks, on > top of overfishing, have had on Keys and northern Caribbean corals since > the mid-1990s and especially since the severe 1997-1998 back-to-back > bleaching events, is not helpful to conservation or management efforts. > Bleaching has reached reefs that are distant from direct human impact as > well as the Keys, with similar effects on both. Overfishing is far more > pervasive than water quality degradation because boats go everywhere to > extract the last lobster and grouper. The healthiest Caribbean reefs, if > one judges that based on live coral cover, that I have seen in a long > while are those in the lower Caribbean where they have, for hydrographic > and climatic reasons, not been as impacted by either bleaching or major > storms: Reefs on the S side of Curacao and Bonaire still have more > coral now than what I remember for places like PR and the USVI back in > the 1960s and 1970s. And they have high coral cover within 1 km of > where the cruise ships docks and next to the outflow from the > desalination plant. And they have very high rates of coral recruitment > and no algae even on boulders with no Diadema, and few fishes. Go > figure! > > There are many reefs on the GBR with water quality conditions far worse > than in the Florida Keys (in terms of turbidity, nutrient levels and > such variables) with much higher coral cover and diversity. Ken Anthony > is even showing corals on these turbid reefs feed on the detritus and > have higher growth rates than corals on more offshore reefs. Florida > reefs have a disadvantage of being at the northern limits of the > climatic window for coral well being in the Atlantic province, with way > too many severe winter and summer storms. These geographic limitations > have existed for thousands of years and have limited coral reef growth > over Holocene time frames. When I first visited Nassau reefs in 1971 > and the Florida reefs during the 1977 symposium, when my frame of > reference was Puerto Rican reefs, my opinion of Florida/Bahamas reefs > was that they were puny and depauperate. Now they are even more > depauperate. That is no excuse to abuse them, but to ignore the > climatic factor is not helpful towards restoring or protecting them (if > that is possible). Multiple factors are at work, and a single quick fix > will not do the trick. Over-simplification and trying to crucify a > single factor will not help society deal with these complex issues. > > Alina Szmant > > ******************************************************************* > Dr. Alina M. Szmant > Coral Reef Research Group > UNCW-Center for Marine Science > 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln > Wilmington NC 28409 > Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 > Cell: (910)200-3913 > email: szmanta at uncw.edu > Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta > ****************************************************************** > > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Curtis > Kruer > Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 3:27 PM > To: Phil Dustan > Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency > > Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil > Dustan. > But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true > change in direction. > > There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the > amazingly productive Keys (and > no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, > and no it should never be > held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). > > And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with > problems much broader than > simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying > that the problem with > seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important > figure easily dispenses with > all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and > filling, thousands upon thousands > of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc > etc., See how easy it is. And > it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself > during some of the countless > consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I > refused to play along with > the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys > all would be OK. What a > joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo > is going to change much is > wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions > to upgrade the Key West plant > to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything > measurable? And we were promised > that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds > good but can't happen on a > scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of > the Keys as I began to see > myself as a part of the problem. > > The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the > Keys ecosystem and manage > human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too > much attention is focused on > a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that > most else would be > protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's > limited funds on a new > facility in Key West is going to change much? > > Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as > stand alone systems and the > problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands > continue to be lost and > degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are > trying legally to protect > the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving > activity (and associated > impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the > state and the state points > to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have > taken place but it's not > working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - > but it's obviously not > enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live > bottom and predictably now > hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of > miles of slow-degrading poly > line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to > replace them every year just > to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by > the tens of thousands daily, > fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot > long cruise ships plow up the > bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone > effectively turns a blind > eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. > Shallow water marine habitats > throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are > subjected to the disturbing and > destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster > boats of all types. > > People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is > failing. The rate of loss and > anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that > is what matters. Large > vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's > great. But new leadership is > needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? > Catering to virtually every > user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in > ecosystem protection or even > maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef > management in the Keys as a > success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New > leadership is needed and that > leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and > address all issues > throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And > they need to be loudly > supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has > the most knowledge about what > has been lost and is being lost. > > Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and > other lists will lead to > something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and > misdirected effort. > > Thanks. > > Curtis Kruer > > > > > Phil Dustan wrote: > >>Dear Coral List, >> I'd like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion > > about > >>healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > > >>one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And >>probably haven't been for a long time. >> >> My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can > > reach a > >>true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my >>calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their >>living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The >>Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > > >>too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about > > studies, > >>monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right > > in > >>front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, >>even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to >>protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > > >>ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it's patchy, or not here, or >>look over there, there's a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to >>think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > > >>it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in > > continuing > >>to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > > >>far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the > > losses > >>that are far greater, supports this form of denial. >> >> Well, the water is too polluted and we've know this for a very > > long > >>time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > > >>are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many > > people > >>fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage >>system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not > > simply > >>sewage......But still we look for bright spots. I think it's because > > it's > >>more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is >>hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, >>sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of > > having > >>a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? >> >> It's been said by many that the coral reef science community > > eats their > >>young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and > > denial. > >> The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather >>than resiliency, I'd favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) >>that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or > > slower > >>in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the > > R > >>scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, >>Carysfort R1, etc... Maybe this might help create public awareness and > > >>political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between >>dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 >>when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > > >>be up to R4 if conservation is successful. >> Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the > > baseline > >>downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it's a problem that we >>need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor > > is > >>wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. >> Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > > >>imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? >> Phil >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From albert at ecology.su.se Wed Feb 22 09:46:53 2006 From: albert at ecology.su.se (Albert Norstrom) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:46:53 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Thanks Phil for starting what must be the most interesting discourse held on these boards in a long time. Some extremely thought-provoking comments all around. Yes, the Keys do seem to have it real bad, but this isn't a problem isolated to the Caribbean. I've conducted field trips in the Phillippines and Zanzibar during the past years and we are witnessing moderate-to-severe degradation in those regions too. The general feeling diving on reefs off the North coast of the Philippines is that of entering a ghost town. Fish abundnace is frighteningly low (you'd be lucky to see a parrotfish above 35cm after a week of diving), and community changes are rapidly manifesting themselves (we have observed some sites where soft corals are taking over completely following the bleaching event of '98). The causes behind this seem to be a confounding mixture of synergistic factors, just as in the Caribbean. As Alina points out, local factors alone (such as a decline water quality due to human terrestrial activities) cannot be ascertained to be the single driving forces behind the changes. As such, what speaks for a sudden improvement in reef conditon if we manage to address that single point - when the problems of climate change and lack of grazers (due to a brutal historical overfishing and disease) loom overhead? I found Jeffrey Lowes comment "Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place." interesting. How about I play devils advocate with you all for awhile. A few months ago, a very interesting point of discourse popped up during an internal discussion group at the department. The notion that ecosystems are intrinsically unpredictable and characterized by alternative system regimes is gaining more and more weight in the coral ecology community. It is thus interesting that we as a group (and society as a whole) are continually so ill-prepared for when such shifts occur. For 20 or so odd years the Caribbean has been dominated by macroalgae regime that seems pretty resilient itself (probably due a strengthening of certain internal feedback loops in that system over the years). I'm curious to know if any serious attempt has been made to investigate what goods and services are available from these new regimes (e.g. what kinds of fish can be harvested), and if fishing communities have adapted in any way, and if so are they succesful, to these new conditions? For sure, I'm an advocate for proactive measures to foster resilience of coral ecosystems. (Already an array of tools have been suggested, MPA's being the most popular at the moment, but in order to succeed with this I think we have to witness a more fundamental change in our economic and social structures. How on earth will MPA's solve anything if market economy dictates that its economically viable to continue overfishing an already ecologically depleted fish stock in the regions outside these sanctuaries? Forgive the side-note, back to being devils advocate again.) But it seems equally important to create institutional frameworks that can foster adaptivity in social systems. The new macroalgal regimes could be the norm for the Caribbean for the next unforeseeable future, much as (from my own personal observations, and research) other regimes are becoming more common in other biogeographic regions. Is it "fatalistic" to start looking around us and maybe accept that coral ecosystems are dynamic and alternative regimes are not something aberrant, but a phenomenon we could (or should) get accustomed to as conditions change. Maybe the pressing question is, not if we can restore reefs to some abstract baseline level, but can we predict these new regimes (I think never completely, seeing the complex nature of ecosystsm) and can we adapt to them? /Cheers Albert Norstr?m PhD Student Dept. Systems Ecology Natural Resource Management Group Stockholm University SE-106 91 Stockholm Sweden Tel: +46 (0)8 16 44 84 Email: albert at ecology.su.se Fax: +46 (0)8 15 84 17 Personal page: http://www.ecology.su.se/staff/personal.asp?id=119 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffrey Low" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 2:49 AM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency > Hi everyone, > > Certainly an interesting discussion on the fate of the Florida reefs. Not being from the US, and never having had the opportunity to visit the Florida Keys, I am unable to fully appreciate the extent fo the damage that has been done to that rich ecosystem. > > Mike, as usual, you have cut through the bs and succinctly stated the problem in the Florida Keys. I suspect similar situations occur wolrdwide, where reef systems are in decline (for example, I've heard from fishermen how their reefs have been destroyed by blast fishing caused by fishermen from the "other" island). > > While sitting on the fence, and agreeing that there needs to be more science directed at the reef ecosystem, the impacts would seem to far, far outweigh the need for more exacting science. Conservation, and perhaps even the more exacting word, preservation, is needed, if reefs are to survive the human onslaught. > > Someone mentioned (I am not sure of it is on this list or somewhere else) that it was a good ting that there are many coral species and only one human. Be that as it may, that one species has the capacity to totally destroy the diversity that exists today. > > Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place. > > MPAs managed in isolation, was something else that was brought up in this discussion. While it is undeniable (at least to me) that MPAs do help in the conservation of coral reefs and other marine ecosystems, the term MPA itself is an "isolationist" word, as it implies some sought of boundary. "Enlightened management plans" that look at the totality of the marine system, that will conserve and sustain our marine resources, understanding that it is inter-connected and intricately linked system, are what is needed. > > I suspect that part of the reason that scientists treat reef systems in isolation is that if they did not, then there would be no "scientific" papers (as we know them) in existence. The momentum of publishing, or doing publishable research, is probably what is limiting the science from expanding beyond its narrow confines. Reef managers on the other hand, must not only be biologists, but people managers, ecosystem managers, fund managers, and sometimes, visionaries, all rolled into one. Good luck finding such people in great enough quantity to "manage" even the existing MPAs. > > To round up, I agree with Mike that "people power" may be the way to go to get the necessary protection for our marine resources. "People cannot love, what they do not know", or so I've been told. While I cannot "love" the Florida Keys, I do love the coral reefs in my own backyard, and sometimes the wrangling that goes on between scientists, conservationists and politicians, while the reefs are slowly but surely being degraded, is more than I can bear. > > Holding out for coral reefs the world over > > Jeff > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From smiller at gate.net Wed Feb 22 11:15:20 2006 From: smiller at gate.net (Steven Miller) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:15:20 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef condition discussion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43FC8E18.1090108@gate.net> All politics is local? Tell that to Acropora and other coral species (and Diadema too) after Caribbean-wide waves of disease and bleaching helped push the system in Florida, already at the northern limit geographically of coral distribution in this part of the world, to - or over - the edge. Alina's response hit all the high points about why it's necessary to consider complexity (ecologically and I would add politically). Much of this was previously addressed in a series of letters published in Science Magazine (Science 17 June 2005 308) including a summary of work already accomplished or underway related to management of water quality in the Keys. To try and advance this discussion (without writing anything lengthy) rather than dwell too much on the negative, I think it's important to ask, "Is there any good news on the coral reef front?" Well, mostly not. BUT, we know we can do better with MPAs to help manage resource use (fishing, boating, diving) and to - at the very least - watch (research) what happens to fish and benthic communities when no-take protection is enforced. I like the idea that a 75 pound grouper is more valuable as a tourist attraction than on dinner plates, but some might argue that point. And many don't know this, but there remain spectacular places in the Keys with high cover and corals in relatively good condition, just not offshore where so much was previously considered in "good" condition because large stands of Acropora persisted in the days before bleaching and disease. Where are these sites? They are found near s;yc0bhokr npobno rouubs and xoyub=- hpbsl ngpui. Sorry, that was too easy, but the sites are real. Also, we know that Acropora is a fast-growing species and that under the right set of circumstances we could see massive proliferation over relatively short time scales, maybe even sufficient to match sea level rise that will result from global warming. Of course, coastal areas will also flood and that will degrade water quality, which might prevent more immediate coral growth - there's that complexity thing again. So what's my take home message? The sky might be falling - remember the chicken little thread so many years ago? You can duck and cover or you can do what you can to try and make things better. Personally, I think we are in trouble because environment (and not just coral reefs, but also our air and water and if some have their way endangered species too) is not a political issue these days. How does it get political? Environmentalism needs to become a social movement the way it was in the 1960s and 1970s. That will only happen when a thousand grassroots efforts at the local level merge and become something bigger. In that regard, I agree that all politics is local. Best regards. Steven Miller, Ph.D. Research Professor UNC Wilmington And a possibly relevant plug... see the trailer for a new movie about the Evolution and Intelligent Design Circus at www.flockofdodos.com, a feature documentary written and directed by former marine biologist Dr. Randy Olson (and exec produced by me). The movie is ultimately about communication of science in today's media landscape. Coral reef scientists have much to learn about communicating for the benefit of coral reefs and not personal agendas or career advancement (my personal and I'm sure provocative opinion, and not directed to the current thread). From delbeek at waquarium.org Wed Feb 22 20:27:56 2006 From: delbeek at waquarium.org (Charles Delbeek) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:27:56 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> References: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20060222152219.02a7f8d0@mail.waquarium.org> >It is very interesting to follow this discussion and draw parallels >with closed system reef aquariums. The problems of algal overgrowth, >nutrient load, temperature, water motion, nutrient uptake, >ultraviolet intensity, coral bleaching, coral tissue loss are ALL >encountered in closed systems. Though we do not have all the answers >we do know enough to control some of these factors and what effects >changing such factors can have on our miniature "ecosystems". I >strongly believe that some of the answers to problems facing wild >reefs can be mirrored in closed reef systems, and perhaps can yield >some answers as well. The rapid advancements in coral husbandry >opens up tremendous opportunities for coral researchers to >manipulate systems within a controlled setting. Aloha! J. Charles Delbeek M.Sc. Aquarium Biologist III Waikiki Aquarium, University of Hawaii 2777 Kalakaua Ave. Honolulu, HI, USA 96815 www.waquarium.org 808-923-9741 ext. 0 VOICE 808-923-1771 FAX From cat64fish at yahoo.com Wed Feb 22 21:25:26 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 10:25:26 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Message-ID: <20060223022526.80199.qmail@web35310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi Albert and others .... Does that phrase "... let me play devil's advocate ..." mean that I am the angel? ... :P Anyway, frivolity aside, you raise a very pertinent point, that coral ecosystems are dynamic, and that different "regimes" can arise, oftentimes from similar starting points. I am sure someone can list a series of papers and research showing this to be the case. However, what is the acceptable change that we (at this point in time) are willing to accept? I find myself asking, more and more, not questions that are quantifiable, like "What percent of coral cover is on the reef?" Or "How many species are there?" but "Can I accept seeing the change of *my* coral reefs from the reefal system to [an algal dominanted one] / [rubble reef] / [artificial reef]?". Monitoring seems to be something that almost *everyone* does. I do it ... and I've been doing for almost 20 years now (*geez*). But where has that gotten me ... or rather the reefs? I know it is in decline ... *everyone* who has worked in the field for any length of time knows this. Do we need to conduct another study to confirm the results of a study that has confirmed the decline of the reefs, which was conducted to confirm the results of a previous study? Even though the formation of coral reef system (or any other ecosystem, for that matter) may be inherently unpredictable - I don't think the question is whether we can predict what it will change into, but can we live with it changing, in the first place? Knowing that it was through our inaction that the changes occurred? Adaptation would be an inevitable result of change (or else you would die out), so I don't think it is a major part of the equation. On the "local" vs. "global" issue, I will sit on the fence on this one - I see the merits of both "camps". My feeling is that what occurs locally, will affect things globally. Take carbon emissions, for example. If, and this is a BIG IF, everyone were to convert to less carbon emitting vehicles, would [human-input to the magnitude of] global warming be reduced? If the answer is yes (to me it is a "yes"), then what needs to be in place before this conversion can come about? The changes would be in three main areas: - Political : "Local" politicians must push for the necessary legislative changes to limit the carbon emissions in all aspects of industry, and to enfrce them - Infrastructure : "Local" businesses must be ready to support technology that emits less carbon - Lifestyle changes need to be made : The most "local" aspect of all ... the people must embrace low / no carbon emiision technology (that might mean giving up that 10-litre, SUV-built-like-a-tank-off-roader-that-I-drive-in-the-city car) There would be global issues, of course .... even with carbon reducing industries, the shear magnitude of the human population would probably over whelm the ecosystems. The "global" issue, to my mind, isn't the fact that warming is occurring, but what the world (as in its people) are going to do about it. Cheers, Jeff --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. From martin_moe at yahoo.com Wed Feb 22 23:52:45 2006 From: martin_moe at yahoo.com (Martin Moe) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 20:52:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20060222152219.02a7f8d0@mail.waquarium.org> Message-ID: <20060223045245.67761.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com> Hi all, I?m always hesitant to comment in these threads since I?m not a ?real? coral reef scientist, but Steven Miller?s comment ?You can duck and cover or you can do what you can to try and make things better.? stimulated me to weigh in on this. There are efforts now underway to try to make things better on Florida?s coral reefs, but has been exceedingly difficult to get support for these efforts. As Steven said, the factors negatively affecting the coral reefs of Florida, Bahamas and the Caribbean are many and complex, but there are things that can be done to improve specific reef areas and perhaps even reef ecosystems. Site restoration of reef areas impacted by boat groundings and protection of the reefs through good management (MPA establishment) and water quality improvement are very important and essential to the future of the reefs, but even more important is to achieve ecological restoration. This may be an impossible task but we won?t know that if we don?t try. We can?t restore the reefs to the conditions that were present 100 or even 50 years ago but I am of the opinion that it is possible to achieve some level of ecological restoration if we make a serious effort to do so. I attended a talk that Alina Szmant gave in 1999 on her coral reef research and she greatly impressed me with the take home message of her talk that the decline of the reefs was caused more by the loss of biodiversity than anthropogenic nutrients. That made a lot of sense to me, and subsequent research indicates that she is correct. The loss of the Diadema sea urchins in 1983-4, the keystone herbivores of the Western Atlantic coral reefs, shifted the ecology of the reefs from coral dominance to macro algae dominance, a well accepted premise by most coral reef scientists. In addition, on Florida reefs, the almost total loss of populations of adult spiny lobster removed an important predator of coralivorus snails and other small predators that feed on living coral tissue and create opportunities for introduction of coral disease. If we were really serious about coral reef restoration, we would eliminate lobster fishing, recreational and commercial, on all offshore reefs past a certain distance from shore, perhaps 3 miles, and most important, really get serious about researching the possibility of restoration of pre plague population levels of Diadema on the reefs. These are not impossible tasks, but they do require concerted effort and scientific collaboration. And the lobster issue is also fraught with political mine fields. But these are real possibilities for ecological improvement of our coral reefs and to not explore them fully is grossly irresponsible. Ken Nedimyer and I did a experimental re establishment of Diadema on two small patch reefs in the Upper Keys in 2001 supported by the Florida Keys Marine Sanctuary (http://www.fknms.nos.noaa.gov/research_monitoring/report/diadema/diadema/.html) and this study well illustrated the positive effect a marginal population of Diadema can have on a Florida reef in the short space of one year. We are now working with the Mote Marine Laboratory to expand this work. There has also been work by The Nature Conversancy in the Keys on similar projects and there have been other studies as well. So research on ecological restoration has begun and hopefully will produce an effective reef restoration program while there is still reef left to restore. Martin A. Moe, Jr. Adjunct Scientist, Mote Marine Laboratory> > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From simmi_nuern at yahoo.com Thu Feb 23 04:10:55 2006 From: simmi_nuern at yahoo.com (Simone Nuernberger) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 01:10:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Coralliophila - Thank you Message-ID: <20060223091055.63682.qmail@web60313.mail.yahoo.com> Hello again, I just wanted to thank all the people who took the time to reply. Your emails were extremely helpful! Thank you very much! Best regards, Simone *************************************************************************** Simone N?rnberger (M.Sc.) simone_nuernberger at web.de Institute of Biology (Biological Oceanography) University of Southern Denmark DK-5230 Odense M --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. From andy_wb at email.com Thu Feb 23 04:25:39 2006 From: andy_wb at email.com (Andy Woods-Ballard) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:25:39 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Instrument to measure water depths. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060223092544.AF9DE1795C@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hi Anders Working in Mexico with Global Vision International, we used a handheld depth sounder, Plastimo Echotest II. I believe this has a range of about 80m. But more importantly for you, I think it is submersible and water proof to depths of 50m. It will not however store data and might need to be used with a slate for recording. Check out the product to be sure, but I hope this helps. Andy Woods-Ballard From ckappel at stanford.edu Thu Feb 23 12:49:05 2006 From: ckappel at stanford.edu (Carrie Vanessa Kappel) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:49:05 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas Message-ID: <1140716945.43fdf59126a88@webmail.stanford.edu> Hi Rick, >From your description, it sounds like what you were seeing was likely Microdictyon marinum, which has been observed to have strong summertime blooms on reefs in The Bahamas. We also saw high densities of Microdictyon during our surveys on North Andros in July 2002 and San Salvador in July 2003. It's not clear why this seaweed has increased so dramatically on Bahamian reefs in recent years, but I'd guess it's due to an interaction between nutrient runoff and grazing. Brian Lapointe and coauthors suggested that Microdictyon marinum might benefit from submarine groundwater discharge, whereby nutrients (in this case dissolved inorganic nitrogen) from land are transported to reefs offshore via groundwater fluxes through porous limestone (Lapointe et al. 2004. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. 298:275-301). The Littler and Littler Caribbean Reef Plants book has a nice picture of this species and others with which it might be confused. Cheers, Carrie Carrie Kappel Postdoctoral Fellow National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis University of California Santa Barbara 735 State Street, Suite 300 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 kappel at nceas.ucsb.edu 805.966.1677 w 805.892.2510 f 831.869.1503 m Permanent email address Carrie.Kappel at alumni.brown.edu ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:34:49 -0500 From: "Rick Sanders" Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas To: Message-ID: <004b01c63715$7fa4b760$650da8c0 at manta> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Dear Listers, I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find an image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been unable to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish brown color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each other in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped into more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm in width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if to crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what I am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a copy or link. Thanks very much in advance, Best regards, Rick Rick Sanders Deep Blue Solutions Media, PA 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net ------------------------- From Bprecht at pbsj.com Thu Feb 23 14:14:47 2006 From: Bprecht at pbsj.com (Precht, Bill) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:14:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef condition discussion Message-ID: <8511092CB6C11C4BB2632F61A82C620C03FD68B2@MIAMBX.pbsj.com> Dear Coral-List: I have read with great interest the recent thread on Florida's reef woes. In Steven Miller's recent message, he reminds us of the "reefs at risk" thread that discussed the very same issues on the Coral-List during June and July of 1998. It was in-part, as an outcome of that discussion that Steven and I decided to write a book chapter on this very subject entitled: Precht, W.F. and Miller, S.L.(in press) Ecological shifts along the Florida reef tract: the past as a key to the future: in Aronson, R.B. (ed) Geological Approaches to Coral Reef Ecology. Springer Verlag, NY If anyone is interested in a pre-print of this chapter please send me an email and I'll send it along. Cheers, Bill Precht Senior Scientist PBS&J - Division of Ecological Sciences Miami, FL From abaker at rsmas.miami.edu Thu Feb 23 14:26:34 2006 From: abaker at rsmas.miami.edu (Andrew Baker) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:26:34 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Laboratory Technician Position in Coral Molecular Ecology In-Reply-To: <10313196.1129601388953.JavaMail.SYSTEM@us-webcti01> Message-ID: <00e601c638af$0e8bc0f0$3d6fab81@DellD600> Funding is available for a Laboratory Technician in coral molecular ecology at the Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science (RSMAS) at the University of Miami, Florida, USA (www.rsmas.miami.edu ). The successful candidate will assume primary responsibility for the management and day-to-day operations of a molecular laboratory specializing in the ecology and systematics of corals and their symbiotic dinoflagellates ("zooxanthellae"), but will also be involved in physiological experimental work at the University's Experimental Hatchery facility, and coral reef fieldwork in Florida and elsewhere. Specific duties include extracting, purifying, archiving and analyzing DNA from coral samples, ordering and management of scientific supplies and reagents, managing undergraduate volunteers and interns, and working with the principal investigator, postdoctoral associate and graduate students on collaborative research projects. Ongoing research, funded principally by the US National Science Foundation, the Pew Institute for Ocean Science, and the Wildlife Conservation Society, uses both field survey and experimental approaches to study the responses of reef corals to climate change. The position is funded for three years, subject to satisfactory performance. The successful candidate will also be encouraged to pursue independent research and publication in related fields of interest. Candidates should have a Master's degree in molecular systematics, molecular ecology and/or population genetics, but candidates with Bachelor's degrees and an equivalent level of molecular experience will also be considered. Ideal candidates should be SCUBA-certified and be able to pass a physical examination to obtain scientific diver certification with the American Academy of Underwater Sciences (AAUS). Experience manipulating computer models of climate change (e.g., Hadley dataset) and/or maintaining outdoor aquarium systems is desirable, but not required. Position includes benefits and a retirement package. Please submit a current CV, names and contact information of three references, and a cover letter indicating research interests and experience electronically as a single .pdf file to Andrew Baker at abaker at rsmas.miami.edu. Applications are being accepted immediately. The position will remain open until filled. The University of Miami is an EEO/AA Employer. Please post this advertisement as appropriate. ___________________ Andrew C. Baker, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Division of Marine Biology and Fisheries Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science University of Miami 4600 Rickenbacker Cswy. Miami, FL 33149, USA Voice: +1 (305) 421-4642 Fax: +1 (305) 421-4600 From milviapin at yahoo.com Thu Feb 23 18:37:21 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:37:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Microdyction Message-ID: <20060223233721.57467.qmail@web50313.mail.yahoo.com> Dear listers, Large abundance of this algae were found in Namu atoll, Marshall islands, in November 2004. Lagoon and ocean sides were covered by the alga. No nutrients inputs are known in this slighlty populated atoll (300 people). Other outgrowth of this alga ave been noticed in different atolls although not to this extent. Thank you silvia Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. From ctwiliams at yahoo.com Fri Feb 24 00:43:55 2006 From: ctwiliams at yahoo.com (Tom Williams) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 21:43:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Microdyction In-Reply-To: <20060223233721.57467.qmail@web50313.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060224054355.9921.qmail@web50412.mail.yahoo.com> I worked in Majuro on ADB job for water supply/wastewater. Please provide more details. Simply put - where do they get the nitrate for the algal growth. 300 people = say =>75kg of nitrate + plus agriculture = NHNO People on septic tanks?? or seawater flushing?? Green grass lawns anywhere?? ?Any previous military operations on island?? Follow the nitrate. --- Silvia Pinca wrote: > Dear listers, > Large abundance of this algae were found in Namu > atoll, Marshall islands, in November 2004. Lagoon > and ocean sides were covered by the alga. No > nutrients inputs are known in this slighlty > populated atoll (300 people). Other outgrowth of > this alga ave been noticed in different atolls > although not to this extent. > Thank you > silvia > > > Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. > NRAS - Marshall Islands > Nature Resources Assessment Surveys > Research and Education for Conservation > spinca at nras-conservation.org > www.nras-conservation.org > > > --------------------------------- > Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get > pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Fri Feb 24 09:37:55 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:37:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] resiliency vs. "remnancy" vs. sustainability Message-ID: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> It would seem most people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what they used to be. The word resiliency is another word for resilient, which means an ability to quickly (usually) recover from a bad or unnatural condition--in the present case, we might assume from a previously pristine (i.e., uncorrupted by civilization) condition. I wonder if there are any such reefs left. I'm not so sure the word is being used correctly in our fellowship (more below). Although "remnancy" is not a real word, one would infer that our colleague Phil's intended usage would be as a means to describe the degree or condition of the reef after it has been adversely affected by civilization (more colloquially: trashed); that is, how it can be described as a remnant of its former "self" (biome?). I'm not so sure describing how much a reef has been adversely affected from its former condition is useful, though, since (as was pointed out) in many cases the reef in question may never have been adequately described (have any?), especially since they're always changing (evolving) anyway, thus few cases in which to measure past against current condition (I guess that's what started the whole discussion). But don't get me wrong: we should understand what is adversely affecting the reefs so we can stop or ameliorate the condition. I'm just not so sure "remnancy" has much practical application for science, although for political purposes it is probably perfectly practical. Instead, since we want to keep coral reefs in existence, and we want to provide them with the proper environment and support their vitality, where we can, perhaps a better word for purposes of marshaling our efforts is sustainability (I know I'm not the first to suggest this). Shouldn't we sustain the reefs until we remedy what ails them? (Now there's a concept: clean up the environment!) We can't really do anything to promote resiliency (how do you measure such an ecologically difficult concept?), although a conducive environment might be sustained or managed (i.e., "cleaned up") to allow full (how to measure?) resiliency. Is it possible to describe how all the members of the coral ecosystem interact to contribute to an integral resiliency? This is extremely difficult stuff, yet I would agree the goal is laudable and should be pursued. Okay, I know, the word sustain might imply leaving everything as it is, rather than making things better, but I'm just not comfortable with the word resiliency or "remnancy." Just my two cents... Cheers, Jim From deevon at bellsouth.net Fri Feb 24 10:10:09 2006 From: deevon at bellsouth.net (DeeVon Quirolo) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 10:10:09 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] resiliency vs. "remnancy" vs. sustainability In-Reply-To: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> References: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20060224100227.026dd6d8@bellsouth.net> Ok ok, I'll add my two cents. At this time for coral reefs, I think that what we need are efforts to RESTORE coral reefs, including immediate efforts to reduce heavy physical impacts and habitat destruction, as well as improve water quality from local and regional pollution sources and reduce global warming (although we may have already crossed the critical threshold there). We already know that corals need clear clean nutrient free waters to thrive and that they do not do well when battered by various user groups and of course natural events such as storms. I think the reef resiliency approach is flawed because it proposes to study healthy reefs, and looks the other way while those corals that need our help most are ignored. Applying what we know already to these reefs on the part of current managers would do wonders. There you have it. Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Executive Director, Reef Relief At 09:37 AM 2/24/2006, Jim Hendee wrote: >It would seem most people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what >they used to be. > >The word resiliency is another word for resilient, which means an >ability to quickly (usually) recover from a bad or unnatural >condition--in the present case, we might assume from a previously >pristine (i.e., uncorrupted by civilization) condition. I wonder if >there are any such reefs left. I'm not so sure the word is being used >correctly in our fellowship (more below). > >Although "remnancy" is not a real word, one would infer that our >colleague Phil's intended usage would be as a means to describe the >degree or condition of the reef after it has been adversely affected by >civilization (more colloquially: trashed); that is, how it can be >described as a remnant of its former "self" (biome?). I'm not so sure >describing how much a reef has been adversely affected from its former >condition is useful, though, since (as was pointed out) in many cases >the reef in question may never have been adequately described (have >any?), especially since they're always changing (evolving) anyway, thus >few cases in which to measure past against current condition (I guess >that's what started the whole discussion). But don't get me wrong: we >should understand what is adversely affecting the reefs so we can stop >or ameliorate the condition. I'm just not so sure "remnancy" has much >practical application for science, although for political purposes it is >probably perfectly practical. > >Instead, since we want to keep coral reefs in existence, and we want to >provide them with the proper environment and support their vitality, >where we can, perhaps a better word for purposes of marshaling our >efforts is sustainability (I know I'm not the first to suggest this). >Shouldn't we sustain the reefs until we remedy what ails them? (Now >there's a concept: clean up the environment!) We can't really do >anything to promote resiliency (how do you measure such an ecologically >difficult concept?), although a conducive environment might be sustained >or managed (i.e., "cleaned up") to allow full (how to measure?) >resiliency. Is it possible to describe how all the members of the >coral ecosystem interact to contribute to an integral resiliency? This >is extremely difficult stuff, yet I would agree the goal is laudable and >should be pursued. > >Okay, I know, the word sustain might imply leaving everything as it is, >rather than making things better, but I'm just not comfortable with the >word resiliency or "remnancy." > >Just my two cents... > > Cheers, > Jim > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From dustanp at cofc.edu Fri Feb 24 12:23:45 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 12:23:45 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Message-ID: <43FF4121.6040400@cofc.edu> Dear Colleagues, Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote and less remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own history and ecology. Let?s face it: The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human reproductive success. Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the radar screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities (along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying and we have got to do more. As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we are going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect?.. And the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost every reef on the planet. This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal agency, is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think can be done right now as well as over the long term? Thanks, Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Fri Feb 24 15:58:39 2006 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Gene Shinn) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Not what they used to be Message-ID: >>I have to agree with Jim Hendee when he wrote, "It would seem most >>people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what they used to >>be." As a geologist I can honestly agree that Holocene reefs are >>not what they "used to be" during the Pleistocene, and they were >>not what they "used to be" earlier during the Pliocene, and they >>certainly were not what "they used to be" during the Lower >>Cretaceous, (and there were hardly any during the Upper Cretaceous) >>and then there are the well known Permian reefs which were not what >>they "used to be" during the Cambrian. >>Yes, nothing is what "it used to be." May be we just need to take a >>longer view of things. Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida Marine Science Center (room 204) 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu Fri Feb 24 14:42:13 2006 From: rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu (Richard Grigg) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:42:13 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <43FF4121.6040400@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let?s face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 03:45:17 2006 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E. Strong) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 03:45:17 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <4400191D.6040105@noaa.gov> Hi Phil, Even Plenary talk at Ocean Sciences here in Hawaii this week...George Philander...claims the evidence is not that clear... Cheers, Al Richard Grigg wrote: >Phil, > > Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > > Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Colleagues, >> Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >>thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >>years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >>continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >>thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. >> We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote >>and less >>remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >>different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >>nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >>diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >>Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >>cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >>signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >>blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >>history and ecology. >> >>Let?s face it: >> The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >>varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >>ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >>record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >>in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >>have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >>outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >>its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >>seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >>in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >>spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >>Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >>reproductive success. >> >> Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the >>radar >>screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >>of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >>opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >>(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >>health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >>reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >>earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >>and we have got to do more. >> >> As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >>resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >>scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >>everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >>resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >>ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >>with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >>ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. >> >> As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we >>are >>going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >>list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >>should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >>scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >>could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >>example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >>of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >>health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >>concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >>resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >>simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >>lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >>still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >>exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >>sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect?.. And >>the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >>had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >>every reef on the planet. >> >> This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal >>agency, >>is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >>reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >>process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >>in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >>on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >>forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >>of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >>can be done right now as well as over the long term? >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 04:14:00 2006 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E. Strong) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 04:14:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] "Caribbean" Bleaching Verification needed - Moderate to Light to No Message-ID: <44001FD8.1030507@noaa.gov> Information sought: Over the next month Coral Reef Watch is hoping to finalize feedback from the field for the 2005 Caribbean bleaching event for issuing a report. At present this appears to be the most well documented bleaching event ever conducted....for all of you who have provided information to date: THANK YOU! Nevertheless we are still missing those "negative" reports that are needed to fill out the other end of the bleaching spectrum in areas where minimal bleaching was observed. From our HotSpot DHWs we expect those regions might include (but not necessarily limited to): ...Bermuda ...Bonaire...Curacao...Aruba and possibly ...Belize. Can any of you provide verification to Coral Reef Watch over the next few weeks for these more fortunate areas?? Please send your info to: Mark Eakin and/or Jessica Morgan. Thanks, Al Strong Coral Reef Watch From mtupper at picrc.org Sat Feb 25 02:00:14 2006 From: mtupper at picrc.org (Mark Tupper) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 16:00:14 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <000e01c639d9$23c94fc0$63c8c814@TUPPER> Rick Grigg wrote: "Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations." Isn't that just a matter of semantics? There are many dead or dying reefs in the Pacific, the Indian Ocean and Caribbean, and probably everwhere that coral reefs are found. So one could say, as Phil Dustan did, that "coral reefs are dying all over the world". However, since there are also healthy reefs in all of these places, someone who's agenda did not include coral reef conservation could just as easily say "coral reefs are healthy all over the world." I have heard exactly that claim from several politicians and agency spokespeople in the last few years. Rick is right, though, in that sweeping generalizations are not helpful to management of coral reefs (or any other resource). If one "side" makes sweeping generalizations to support their view, it becomes easier for others to support an opposing viewpoint with their own generalizations. I think that it's important to be as specific and factual as possible when emphasizing the need for coral reef conservation. It's much harder to argue against specifics than generalities. Having said that, I liked Phil's idea about finding a set of action items we could use to move forward now. Cheers, Mark Dr. Mark H Tupper, Senior Scientist Palau International Coral Reef Center PO Box 7086, Koror, Palau 96940 tel (680) 488-6950; fax (680) 488-6951 and Adjunct Research Associate University of Guam Marine Laboratory UOG Station, Mangilao, Guam 96923, USA tel (671) 735-2375; fax (671) 734-6767 From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 07:16:55 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 07:16:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Message-ID: <14f78414cb3b.14cb3b14f784@noaa.gov> Hiya, Phil, Concerning your quote: "Lots of us have struggled with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind." I think this is a more tractable approach when you consider finite financial resources and manhours (peoplehours?) to throw at the problem. What I'm getting at is that defining an organism or ecosystem in terms of the "normal" environment (i.e., that which promotes optimal vitality) may be an easier way to present the problem to the public. For instance, look at the Goreau and Hayes (1994) concept and Al Strong's presentation and further elucidation of the concept to the public on how HotSpots (unseasonably high sea temperatures) coincide with bleaching events: it's an easier way for the public to understand large-scale environmental stress and the result, rather than trying to explain all the actual physiology behind the phenomenon, which is still not totally understood. I believe Basset Maguire had in mind a "niche response structure" idea years ago which described organisms as a response to their environment, and if I remember correctly, he tried to quantify that for selected species. Maybe the same approach is valid for coral ecosystems. That may be easier than trying to define "ecosystem vitality" in terms of each organism's "health," a difficult concept to quantify. Defining "ecosystem health" would seem to be fraught with unending debate on what constitutes each contributing organism's normal (uncompromised?) lifecycle. (Again, I'm not saying we shouldn't try to undertake such research, and unending debate is what all science needs and likes--I'm mainly trying to get at a way to awaken the public and policy makers.) Anyway, I would like to hear of the approaches you mention, and I would vote that defining the recent historical and current physical environment for each major coral reef area as one of the 8-10 action items you mention. This should be a fundamental part of any "ecosystem vitality index," at least in my mind. This would also give us a platform from which to say, "This is how it was when corals were doing well, and this is how it is now, and corals are not doing well," without having to explain the physiology of why this is so. This would also give us a solid comparison basis for understanding why one reef ecosystem in the Pacific is doing swimmingly (so to speak), and another is not. I think the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force and the Interntational Coral Reef Initiative and NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation Program and other groups have already listed this as a goal, but I think it's an important one for your list. In fact, if you cross-compare a lot of the conservation groups' action items, I think you could probably come up with 8-10 items in a prioritized list most would agree upon. In other words, a lot of people are already working on these problems, and it is extremely difficult to make decisions on what activities to fund, but I think what you are also saying is we need to shake the tree a little harder. I have no suggestion on how to do that! [Mea culpa: We at NOAA/AOML are already compiling physical environmental data and establishing environmental indices, so this whole rap of course appears self-serving and provincially contrived. Hey, it's all I know, and at least I'm being honest about it!] Okay, that makes 4 cents from me... :) Cheers, Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil Dustan Date: Friday, February 24, 2006 12:23 pm Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 > Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most > interesting > thread. It also reminds me...[etc.] From cat64fish at yahoo.com Sat Feb 25 08:52:17 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:52:17 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <4400191D.6040105@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <20060225135217.56489.qmail@web35313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> It boggles the mind (ok, just mine) that some one at a PLENARY talk could say something like this. To say that there is evidence of reefs that have been impacted, and reefs that have not, I can understand ... but the "evidence is not clear"? .... *shakes head in disbelief and disgust* Jeff "Alan E. Strong" wrote: Hi Phil, Even Plenary talk at Ocean Sciences here in Hawaii this week...George Philander...claims the evidence is not that clear... Cheers, Al Richard Grigg wrote: >Phil, > > Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > > Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Colleagues, >> Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >>thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >>years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >>continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >>thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. >> We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote >>and less >>remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >>different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >>nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >>diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >>Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >>cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >>signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >>blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >>history and ecology. >> >>Let?s face it: >> The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >>varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >>ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >>record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >>in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >>have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >>outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >>its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >>seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >>in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >>spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >>Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >>reproductive success. >> >> Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the >>radar >>screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >>of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >>opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >>(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >>health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >>reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >>earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >>and we have got to do more. >> >> As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >>resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >>scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >>everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >>resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >>ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >>with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >>ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. >> >> As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we >>are >>going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >>list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >>should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >>scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >>could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >>example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >>of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >>health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >>concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >>resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >>simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >>lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >>still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >>exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >>sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >>the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >>had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >>every reef on the planet. >> >> This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal >>agency, >>is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >>reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >>process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >>in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >>on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >>forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >>of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >>can be done right now as well as over the long term? >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 1GB free storage! From lesk at bu.edu Sat Feb 25 11:03:06 2006 From: lesk at bu.edu (lesk at bu.edu) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:03:06 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060225110306.0iwtfp3s0kcg84sw@www.bu.edu> Dear Colleagues, It is extremely important that we converge on a common and consistant view on coral reef health that we can convey to the lay public. We must also speak precisely when referring to any particular symptom of coral reef health on a global scale. I challenge anybody to produce data demonstrating that the tropical west Atlantic coral reefs have improved in condition or remained at level condition, by any measure you wish, over the past 25 years. That does not mean that the changes are irreversible or unprecedented in deep time, Gene. It only means that it is a sad thing for us and for our childern that this is happening at this particular time, for we now cause this decline knowingly and deliberately, recovery will likely be a very lengthy process, and we are seem to be doing our best to inhibit even that. The long view will always be there to make us feel better in some existential sense, but it is no balm to those of us who wish to enjoy and benefit from coral reefs during our lives and the lives of our children and grandchildren. Indo-Pacific coral reefs exhibit a vigorous ability to bounce back from denudation or phase shift, so long as there is a stable physical substratum on which they can rebuild (dynamite rubble piles are not very good for this). However, the proportion of reef surface that is in a disturbed, regenerating state at any given time, and more importantly, the size-frequency distribution of these disturbances, looks very odd and very different than when I was a graduate student. Are we using the right data to characterize and track these changes, Rick? Because the Pacific is still more robust than the Atlantic, there is much of concern that we can choose to overlook if that is our bias. We'd better be careful not to be too easily reassured by the positive signs that coral reefs in the Pacific could hold their own, given the chance...because they by and large are not being given the chance. The pace and extent of bleaching alone is awesome. Who is coming forward to call this a non-event, or our response to it exagerated and misplaced? Who is saying that overfishing is something that will have no effect on reefs worth worrying about, and that we can ignore it? Who is saying that the industrialization of reef destruction is not a real thing worth keeping in check? Who is saying with confidence that the earth is not getting warmer, that bleaching is not more frequent and severe, or that corals will definitely adapt to these changes and that the world shall remain much as wonderful as it has always been for us, no matter what we do? So what gentle hand is it, exactly that Gene and Rick wish to lay upon the scene? Les Kaufman From szmanta at uncw.edu Sat Feb 25 08:50:30 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 08:50:30 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 3 References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From anderson at africaonline.co.tz Sat Feb 25 12:38:51 2006 From: anderson at africaonline.co.tz (Jim Anderson) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 20:38:51 +0300 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence - Effect of Bombing References: Message-ID: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> Dear Listers, Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is sibylle at chumbeisland.com] Jim Anderson, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. From manfrino at reefresearch.org Sat Feb 25 12:55:45 2006 From: manfrino at reefresearch.org (Carrie Manfrino) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:55:45 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Summer Coral Reef Internship and Conservation Programs at the Little Cayman Research Centre Message-ID: <014101c63a34$b5315f60$2f01a8c0@CPQ10443900021> Summer Coral Reef Research Internship -a four-week program through Rutgers University Study Abroad at the Little Cayman Research Centre >From July 15 - August 10 2006, the Central Caribbean Marine Institute (CCMI) offers a four-week voluntary research internship program through Rutgers University's Institute of Marine & Coastal Sciences. This program is an opportunity for graduate students and conservation professionals (a few advanced undergraduates may be accepted) to gain advanced underwater research experience. The goals of the program are to train participants in coral ecology protocols and to provide scientifically usable data to assist CCMI in its ecosystem monitoring and coral disease research initiatives. For more information, go to www.reefresearch.org and click on educational and field programs where students will find full details on program cost, credits, registration process, and activities. An Introduction to Tropical Marine Conservation & Field Research Methodologies - a one-week Tropical Marine Conservation course at the Little Cayman Research Centre >From June 23-30 2006, the Central Caribbean Marine Institute offers a one week course at the Little Cayman Research Centre designed to introduce undergraduates to the biology and ecology of tropical marine habitats and to the basics of field research. Students will come away with a strong understanding of the conservation challenge associated with protecting rapidly declining coral reef systems and be prepared to take more advanced research courses or internships. For more information on this course offered through Kean University's Travelearn program, go to www.reefresearch.org and click on educational and field programs where students will find full details on program cost, credits, registration process, and activities. Central Caribbean Marine Institute www.reefresearch.org Dr. Carrie Manfrino, President P.O. Box 1461 Princeton, NJ 08540 Ph:(609) 933-4559 Caribbean Headquarters Little Cayman Research Centre North Coast Road P.O. Box 37 Little Cayman, Cayman Islands (345) 926-2789 From kruer at 3rivers.net Sat Feb 25 14:22:48 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:22:48 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence References: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> Message-ID: <4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net> Folks, In just a few days we've gone from a discussion of reef problems and degradation in the Florida Keys, and how best to approach them after all these years, to a global (and even geologic time, which I too find foolish) focus promoted by US scientists. And the more global the view, the more complicated and diverse the opinions about what is going on and what should be done (if anything) become. And I suspect that those who still question worldwide reef problems are limiting their view to the role of climate change. So what a great irony today to read Anderson's concern of dynamite fishing increasing on reefs in Tanzania. While US NOAA scientists continually move the target and encourage us to think big. Keys problems don't rise to the level of dynamite fishing but the end result may be the same. My suggestions are simply to do what we can locally in places like the Florida Keys to deal with obvious problems, not mysteries - but we're not even close to doing what is possible to protect and conserve the place. In light of the fact that the budget of NOAA's Habitat Conservation Division and other programs have been cut nationally that will only be more difficult in the future. Time to come home. Curtis Kruer ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim Anderson wrote: > Dear Listers, > > Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from > episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet > bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any > prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars > that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? > > The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the > fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast > becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are > pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district > governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those > who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that > network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is > sibylle at chumbeisland.com] > > Jim Anderson, > Dar es Salaam, > Tanzania. > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From phoetjes at cura.net Sat Feb 25 20:45:29 2006 From: phoetjes at cura.net (Paul Hoetjes) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence In-Reply-To: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> 4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net References: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> 4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net Message-ID: <44010839.4050303@cura.net> This has been a most stirring discussion, and I believe very much to the point of what those of us who are extremely worried about the future of coral reefs as we know them, are trying to do. As Les said we really need a common and consistent viewpoint, and that will need to focus down on particulars and concrete activities, and not stay afloat on the 'big' picture, whether it be global or geological. Though thank you Alina for putting things so eloquently depressing. Local people are experiencing this unprecedented (Gene: in the sense that we humans have never experienced it before, AND we are actually causing it) disaster that is befalling our reefs. Whether it be in Florida, or Tanzania, or down here in Curacao in the Southern Caribbean, those of us old enough to know the reefs at the time when reef science really started coming into its own in the sixties, we experienced their demise (not decline, let's face it the reefs of the sixties are dead, what we still have are pale ghosts of them) in disaster after disaster. First it was spearfishing with world championship tournaments moving from place to place in the sixties and early seventies, when everyone was spearfishing and within ten years every big fish was gone anywhere that was accessible to divers. Then (in the Caribbean) the Diadema die-off, completely changing the reef as we knew it, and followed by an insidious wasting away of shallow water reefs (and I mean shallow, 1-4 ft deep, yes there was actual reef at those shallow depths in those days in the Caribbean!). Then the white-band disease neatly removed miles and miles of Acropora cervicornis forests. Then in the nineties bleaching and yellow-blotch disease started in on our remaining reef infrastructure. What was left standing was now called 'coral reef', and it was still magnificent, and although we did start to worry by then, nobody really believed that the dire predictions of the ISRS meeting in the early nineties that we would lose 20-40 % of our (still remaining) reefs within a generation, would come true. But, we had white plague and more bleaching and increasing numbers of hurricanes wreaking havoc on the weakened reef structure, and 15 years later we have a prediction that in twenty years we will loose 40 % of what is left if we don't do something. What we should say is that in another 20 years we may have 10 % of our reefs left! Sorry for this somewhat lengthy introduction, but we cannot keep on pretending everything is hunky dory, and oh, since we don't have any reefs left that are a shadow of what they once were, let's call some of the hardiest weed patches that are so adapted to inhospitable circumstance that most of the changes going on elsewhere left them mostly untouched, let's call those 'resilient' reefs, and focus all our meager resources on protecting those. Oh, oh, and guess what, since nothing seems to have been able to kill these little hardy patches, protecting them is a good bet since we're likely to be succesful even if we can't stop all the causes that are killing all the other reefs. I feel that this focusing on 'resilient' reefs is confusing the issues. It's a giving up on trying to stop the causes of reef death. We can be happy that there are still some areas that look remotely like a reef used to, but we can't lower our standards and forget about what a reef once was. We need to keep fighting to protect all our coasts with an eye to reef preservation, not just those pieces of coast with 'resilient' reefs and elsewhere giving a free reign to developers and erosion and overfishing and irresponsible boating and pollution and septic tanks. Those need to be controlled effectively, everywhere, leaving only a few 'resilient' areas where people can still behave unsustainably. That is what resilience should mean, places that you can't destroy because they've already been completely trashed (and we have plenty of those). If we can achieve only that much, restrict people's activities directly affecting reefs to recreational reserves where they can't do much damage, then we can maybe start worrying about really combating global warming instead of just talking about it. As it stands, all our reefs will have been killed long before global warming will really get it's licks in. So, speaking from an area where reefs are still in somewhat better shape than elsewhere in the region, in summary: There are no reefs left in anything approaching untouched condition. Diseases, and (because of?) overfishing, insiduous pollution and siltation, not just bleaching, have taken care of most of the original reefs. Focusing protection on those reefs that apparently had least need of protection over the past 40 years (resilient reefs) is a cop out. We need to protect all reefs (or what can still with leniency be called reefs). We need to protect them from such 'easy' (well, at least clear cut) things to control as human destructiveness and gregariousness. PS, I'm writing this from a non-airconditioned house in the tropics, I drive a fuel efficient small car, so I do my bit against global warming (though I do have a computer and a television and leave more lights on than strictly necessary, sorry). Cheers, Paul Hoetjes Dept. of Environment Netherlands Antilles Curtis Kruer wrote: >Folks, > >In just a few days we've gone from a discussion of reef problems and degradation in the Florida >Keys, and how best to approach them after all these years, to a global (and even geologic time, >which I too find foolish) focus promoted by US scientists. And the more global the view, the more >complicated and diverse the opinions about what is going on and what should be done (if anything) >become. > >And I suspect that those who still question worldwide reef problems are limiting their view to the >role of climate change. So what a great irony today to read Anderson's concern of dynamite fishing >increasing on reefs in Tanzania. While US NOAA scientists continually move the target and encourage >us to think big. Keys problems don't rise to the level of dynamite fishing but the end result may be >the same. My suggestions are simply to do what we can locally in places like the Florida Keys to >deal with obvious problems, not mysteries - but we're not even close to doing what is possible to >protect and conserve the place. In light of the fact that the budget of NOAA's Habitat Conservation >Division and other programs have been cut nationally that will only be more difficult in the future. > Time to come home. > >Curtis Kruer > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > >Jim Anderson wrote: > > >>Dear Listers, >> >>Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from >>episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet >>bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any >>prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars >>that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? >> >>The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the >>fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast >>becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are >>pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district >>governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those >>who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that >>network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is >>sibylle at chumbeisland.com] >> >>Jim Anderson, >>Dar es Salaam, >>Tanzania. >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> -- Paul C. Hoetjes Senior Policy Advisor Department of Environment & Nature (MINA) Ministry of Public Health & Social Development (VSO) Schouwburgweg 26 (APNA building) Cura?ao Netherlands Antilles tel. +(599-9)466-9307; fax: +(599-9)461-0254 e-mail: paul at mina.vomil.an =========================================== -- http://mina.vomil.an -- =========================================== This message has been scanned for Spam and Virus by CuraNet. From jhocevar at dialb.greenpeace.org Sat Feb 25 22:31:44 2006 From: jhocevar at dialb.greenpeace.org (John Hocevar) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:31:44 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] consensus statement References: Message-ID: <277f01c63a85$3ddc58b0$fc02a8c0@Bolivar> Greetings, I'm enjoying this discussion. While it is admittedly frustrating to see some of the conversation focusing on semantics rather than the seriousness of the threats to coral reefs, it would appear that most, if not all, would agree that there is an observable trend of reef decline, and that anthropogenic impacts are among the primary causes. Global Warming and its more direct and potentially devastating cousin Acidification would present enormous challenges for conservationists even if these burdens were being placed on the shoulders of pristine reefs. Of course, that is hardly the case, as erosion, high nutrient run-off, and toxic pollution have already taken a toll. Fishing has done a job on reefs as well, whether by removing algal grazers or even by dynamiting or poisoning. There is no doubt need for exploration of the degree to which the above statement is true in different regions, and the degree to which the above factors are responsible for past declines or future threats. For the most part, though, it seems that this has been sufficiently well established. Is the general public aware of this situation? Are policy makers placing solutions high enough on their agendas? Clearly not. I strongly support Phil Dustan's proposal for production of a consensus statement (in this case, probably a sign-on statement) of actions that can be taken to conserve coral reefs. My hope is that this community will not shy away from addressing the need to reduce consumption of fossil fuels, unsustainable fishing practices, or coastal development. Human behaviors are contributing to reef decline, so policies must be created to guide changes in those behaviors. If those who best understand the problems are unwilling to propose these changes, there is little hope that this decline can be slowed, much less halted or turned around. As someone who decided to leave academia for conservation advocacy, I can offer to help bring together environmental organizations to broadcast your concerns and recommendations to a wider audience. A coalition of a broad spectrum of organizations representing millions of people working to communicate a solution-oriented scientific consensus on the coral reef crisis would be a strong force for reef conservation. (This would not occur in a vacuum; any successful collaboration of this kind would utilize existing networks and build on past statements.) John Hocevar Oceans Specialist Greenpeace USA Office: 512 454-6140 Cel: 512 577-3868 From estherborell at yahoo.co.uk Sun Feb 26 02:13:43 2006 From: estherborell at yahoo.co.uk (Esther Borell) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 07:13:43 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? In-Reply-To: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <20060226071343.24908.qmail@web86912.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hi Alina and all others, I think your letter has not only contextualized our ?reef problems? but also hit a nerve. Its time to change our dogma. Its time to strip down the fancy costume of sustainability. I sometimes even wonder whether this word was invented to keep social economists in business. I don?t want to see them unemployed, the contrary, but I believe that sustainability, as a concept needs to be reinvented. The red queen is running faster than ever, unable to not only maintain her position, but even starting to fall behind. I am currently based in southeast Sulawesi, alleged centre of coral reef biodiversity but I am placing a safe bet that 70% of reefs here in the Spermonde archipel are very ill, losing their diversity, maybe not like rainforests in %s, not yet but it?s probably only a matter of time ? on an ecological, not geological time scale. Diving reminds me of walking along the Via Appia in Rome, looking at the remains of the past, providing faint evidence of how ?it?used be. Many of the reefs here look like rubble deserts. To see fish one has to pay extra entrance fee. I have counted 7 bombs on a one and a half our dive the other day. Reefs here don?t seem to suffer from bleaching (ironically I am researching just that) but from structural devastation (bombing), insane overfishing and severe eutrophication. Most corals of the inner and middle shelf within this archipelago are heavily infested by all sorts of borers. Its like cancer. Seemingly healthy and flourishing to the outside, but then unable to withstand January and February storms, which have eroded large patches of reefs and signs of algal succession are already on the way. The only way to sustain would be to stop ANY reef and coastal related activities until further notice. But this of course is just na?ve wishful thinking. The present resilience vs remnance discussion has been largely gravitated around the Keys and I noticed that most if not all participants were ?1st world scientists?. I am sitting in the middle of the 3rd world biodiversity hot spot wondering where our ?hotspot affilated collegues? are. I am guessing, that many are oblivious to this discussion due to the lack of adequate internet access, which at least here in Indonesia is still a novelty, slow and expensive. But they need to be integrated ? asap. Reef decline here is more than the problem of policy implementation, local politics and steak holder conflicts. It?s the consequence on the tail of a much bigger issue, an issue of local culture and education. We, the 1st world scientists live in a world of health insurances, unemployment insurances and mortgages. Hooray to those that can afford to recycle their rubbish. It?s a luxury. In Germany every household has more rubbish bins than fingers on one hand. Here in Indonesia we have none. Rubbish is dumped into the ocean, onto the reefs or disposed of ?thermally? (I know ...weve been there - still are?). My point is, we are living in a world that has conditioned us to think ahead, trying to not only predict but also prepare for future, featuring perspectives extending beyond that of individuality - a concept as such alien to indonesien society. Family rules. Thinking future is much more confined to the individual and future predictions seldom appear to penetrate any further then to the F1 generation. Producing offsprings to secure the future. Offsprings are the real existing currency.And can we blame them? I cant. The 62 yr old woman in the states really didn?t need the 12th child. That?s pure stupidity. She probably didn?t even need 3, but I am hitting thin ice here. Women on the archipel islands however do need children (but not 12). Most people on the islands don?t qualify for mortgages and likes, most don?t even qualify for simple bank accounts. They borrow money from affluent parties, thereby entering into a livelong dependence, becoming an accessory to the complex network of the local illegal fishing industry, paying off their debts by carrying out the task at hand, namely bombing. Many of them risking their lives in doing so, many being driven into invalidity of some sort. What we need, is educational sustainability. Education that lasts. Education that indoctrinates and is assimilated and passed on to F2, F3 .Fn. Academically and practically its time for consilience, in the sense it was formulated by O. Wilson. We need a unification of knowledge in order to act. Disciplines need to be pulled together. Reef conservation here in spermonde is a first order task for anthropologists, sociologists, and socioeconomists, then for marinebiologists and in the last instance for politicians, but creating a circular network of exchange. Maybe its time that universities teach marine anthropology. But yes, its easy to stay in our studies busying us with intellectual chit chat contemplating fancy ?nce words ..creating awareness amongst those that are aware anyway. I am just wearing the shoes of the devils advocate, and am certainly not throwing the first stone. After all I am researching bleaching in corals that do not bleach and my bahasa Indonesia is as fragile as the reefs. So whats the new dogma? What do do? And who is doing it? Learning the language, going into teaching after finishing the PhD? Become a marineanthropologist? Maybe I should give up my oil leaking motorbike and do what with it?...dump it the ocean? trying to keep up optimism esther . "Szmant, Alina" wrote: Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now --------------------------------- From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sun Feb 26 08:58:31 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 08:58:31 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Message-ID: <4401B407.2000407@noaa.gov> Hey, folks, I'm certainly not going to be one who runs around waving the flag of *sustainability*. My main point was that these words means different things to different people, most likely because they aren't being used correctly. Like, let's look at the definition of the word *sustain*, then look at how it is currently being used: sus?tain 1. To keep in existence; maintain. 2. To supply with necessities or nourishment; provide for. Don't we want to do this for coral reefs? Of course we do. But now that I've thrown the word out there (after admittedly not ever really using it much--certainly not in fora like these), I'm starting to notice it more. Like, I now see a Request For Proposals that mentions sustainable development. What the heck is that supposed to mean? It means, essentially, let's develop some enterprise(s) near the coast or coral reef area that can support economies, yet not compromise the environment. I think that's what it means. The concept of how you can support an economy near a reef area, yet not compromise it (the reef area, that is), is what should separate the good proposals and actions from the bad. This approach says "let's find a way for people to live [*develop*] near ecosystems without messing them up [too much]." Those who are against sustainable development would prefer to either not develop near these areas, or keep people out of the area, which is a great idea if it is a realistic approach, but how do you push back the tide of people? So, to me "sustainable development" seems to be an oxymoron and a phrase meant to countenance or disguise coastal development. I'll bet a real estate developer came up with that phrase. So, what I said was we should sustain the reefs, not (necessarily) permit sustainable development. I personally don't see how you can sustain a clean environment and also permit people to crawl (swim) all over it. I guess I'm saying our goal should be to sustain the reefs that are in good condition, but what I admittedly didn't address was how to fix the compromised reefs. You have to accept what Alina says, that we're in a big mess and we have to work with what we have, but to do that we all have to do our part and we need strong leadership. Our leaders listen (theoretically) to lots of voices and also to big money. Now, addressing the charge that we first-world (and NOAA) coral scientists have no clue as to what's going on in the rest of the world, I would have to agree that THIS scientist is clueless about a lot of international coral problems, at least from a first-person account. I have never seen bombs on the ocean floor, and have never had my ear drums blown out from blast-fishing. HOWEVER, I have been part of proposal review processes before and I can tell you that a large number of very savvy coral scientists (NOAA, academic and NGO) and policy makers put large numbers of well-meaning hours into trying to determine where best to fund coral conservation efforts (but the process is not perfect). It's a very difficult decision process, and the final decision makers ultimately have no other agenda except to conserve coral reefs. If the squeaky wheel gets the grease (see also last sentence of previous paragraph), then we have to agree on what needs to squeak the loudest, or at least prioritize the squeaks. Which is what Phil was saying with his plea to come up with 8 - 10 action items. Later... From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sun Feb 26 09:10:34 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 09:10:34 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] disclaimer Message-ID: <4401B6DA.3060400@noaa.gov> Whoops, I should have put this at the bottom of my last couple of messages, because it's true: "The contents of this message are mine personally and do not necessarily reflect any position of the Government or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration." From cnidaria at earthlink.net Sun Feb 26 12:34:28 2006 From: cnidaria at earthlink.net (James M Cervino) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 12:34:28 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Resilience? After Heat Stroke? Message-ID: Dear Coral Reef Scientists, Alina's post states the truth as it address our cultural behavior in the USA and how this may be having a negative impact on the reefs throughout the world. We all agree that thermal stress is the number one cause of coral mortality coupled with localized deforestation and anthropogenic nutrient enrichment. However, it was not long ago that there were people out there (marine scientists) that refused to admit that global warming induced thermal heat shock is the number one threat reefs are facing today. Reef Resilience! Are we fooling ourselves? With the growing population and the types of vehicles we use to transport our kiddies to soccer practice we will continue to produce more heat trapping gasses into the atmosphere that are directly correlated with higher sea surface temperatures. This will have a serious effect on tropical corals that are sensitive and already threatened. The major reef builders of the Pacific are not resilient, and will not be resistant to thermal stress and coral disease. We can say good-by to the diversity of corals I am looking at in Jen Veron's book that is sitting in front of me on my desk, especially if we all are not vocal about the Energy Policy produced by the Whitehouse this year. Were there any atmospheric and marine scientists acting as advisors quoted in this Energy Policy brief? We as marine scientists should be outraged as we all know now that reefs will not be resilient to the changing oceanographic conditions in the next decade. So the question is, how will we address this as marine scientists? Create more MPAs? I don't care how many MPAs we create throughout the world, if we are not going to get serious about global warming and anthropogenic nutrient enrichment we are wasting time. Will MPAs protect corals from heat stroke or nutrient enrichment? Are corals protected from global warming and nutrient pollution and is this addressed in MPAs ? Below are some vital statistics regarding how the USA is addressing global warming induced climate change: In 2004, China consumed 6.5 million barrels of oil per day. The United States consumed 20.4 million barrels, and demand is rising as a result of economic growth and American cars. It has been estimated that the bulk of the imports are going directly to SUVs. SUVs made up 5% of the American arsenal of cars in 1990; currently they make up 54%. U.S. oil imports are at the highest ever, 55%. Department of Energy projections show imports rising to 70 percent by 2025. Interpreting this to a global scale the United States transportation sector produces about 8% of world global warming pollution and accounts for 18 percent of an increasingly tight world oil market each year according to the Energy Foundation and the Association for Peak Oil&Gas (http://www.peakoil.net/). If American cars averaged 40 miles per gallon, we would soon reduce consumption by 2 million to 3 million barrels of oil a day. That could translate into a sustained price drop of more than $20 a barrel. And getting cars to be that efficient is easy. This was not addressed in the recent energy bill recently passed by Congress. Global oil use = 31.5 billion barrels per year One barrel oil = 42 U.S. gallons One cubic foot = 7.48 U.S. gallons One cubic mile = 147.2 billion cubic feet Country Barrels of oil per person annually United States 25 Japan 14.0 Spain 13.8 Mexico 6.0 Brazil 3.5 China 1.5 India 0.8 Source: Goldman Sachs, Energy Weekly, August 11, 1999 Consumption (Millions of barrels per day): Source DOE ------------------------------------------------------------------------ United States: 19.993 Japan: 5.423 China: 4.854 Germany: 2.814 Russia: 2.531 South Korea: 2.126 Brazil: 2.123 Canada: 2.048 France: 2.040 India: 2.011 Mexico: 1.932 Italy: 1.881 United Kingdom: 1.699 Spain: 1.465 SaudiArabia: 1.415 Iran: 1.109 Indonesia: 1.063 Netherlands: .881 Australia: .879 Taiwan: .846 -- ************************************************** Dr. James M. Cervino, MS, Ph.D. Marine Biologist Department of Biological & Health Sciences Pace University New York NYC Phone: (917) 620-5287 Web site: http://www.globalcoral.org *************************************************** From reginal at hawaii.edu Sun Feb 26 16:56:04 2006 From: reginal at hawaii.edu (Regina) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:56:04 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? Message-ID: <67fdad82756000d396460a6add72f34e@hawaii.edu> Esther and all, As a marine anthropologist, I read your post with great interest and had to resist the temptation to shout out loud "here here!!" lest my office mates think me a bit mad. There are actually a few universities teaching marine anthropology and I agree that the inclusion of a marine anthropologist in interdisciplinary marine science projects is vital. As Chuck Birkeland, one of my favorite professors often says, one cannot manage the marine environment, one has to manage the people using it. Aloha, Regina Regina Woodrom Luna Maritime and Fisheries Anthropologist PhD Candidate, Ecological Anthropology Program (Marine) University of Hawaii Manoa Lecturer: Biology of Marine Reptiles, Human Adaptation to the Sea, Anthropology of Tourism, American Cultures Biological Assistant: Oahu Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvaging Group ReginaL at hawaii.edu >From: Esther Borell >To: "Szmant, Alina" >CC: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? >Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 07:13:43 +0000 (GMT) > > >Hi Alina and all others, > I think your letter has not only contextualized our ?reef problems? but also hit a nerve. > Its time to change our dogma. Its time to strip down the fancy costume of sustainability. I sometimes even wonder whether this word was invented to keep social economists in business. I don?t want to see them unemployed, the contrary, but I believe that sustainability, as a concept needs to be reinvented. > The red queen is running faster than ever, unable to not only maintain her position, but even starting to fall behind. > I am currently based in southeast Sulawesi, alleged centre of coral reef biodiversity but I am placing a safe bet that 70% of reefs here in the Spermonde archipel are very ill, losing their diversity, maybe not like rainforests in %s, not yet but it?s probably only a matter of time ? on an ecological, not geological time scale. Diving reminds me of walking along the Via Appia in Rome, looking at the remains of the past, providing faint evidence of how ?it?used be. > Many of the reefs here look like rubble deserts. To see fish one has to pay extra entrance fee. I have counted 7 bombs on a one and a half our dive the other day. > Reefs here don?t seem to suffer from bleaching (ironically I am researching just that) but from structural devastation (bombing), insane overfishing and severe eutrophication. Most corals of the inner and middle shelf within this archipelago are heavily infested by all sorts of borers. Its like cancer. Seemingly healthy and flourishing to the outside, but then unable to withstand January and February storms, which have eroded large patches of reefs and signs of algal succession are already on the way. > > The only way to sustain would be to stop ANY reef and coastal related activities until further notice. But this of course is just na?ve wishful thinking. > > The present resilience vs remnance discussion has been largely gravitated around the Keys and I noticed that most if not all participants were ?1st world scientists?. I am sitting in the middle of the 3rd world biodiversity hot spot wondering where our ?hotspot affilated collegues? are. I am guessing, that many are oblivious to this discussion due to the lack of adequate internet access, which at least here in Indonesia is still a novelty, slow and expensive. But they need to be integrated ? asap. Reef decline here is more than the problem of policy implementation, local politics and steak holder conflicts. It?s the consequence on the tail of a much bigger issue, an issue of local culture and education. > We, the 1st world scientists live in a world of health insurances, unemployment insurances and mortgages. Hooray to those that can afford to recycle their rubbish. It?s a luxury. In Germany every household has more rubbish bins than fingers on one hand. Here in Indonesia we have none. Rubbish is dumped into the ocean, onto the reefs or disposed of ?thermally? (I know ...weve been there - still are?). > My point is, we are living in a world that has conditioned us to think ahead, trying to not only predict but also prepare for future, featuring perspectives extending beyond that of individuality - a concept as such alien to indonesien society. Family rules. Thinking future is much more confined to the individual and future predictions seldom appear to penetrate any further then to the F1 generation. Producing offsprings to secure the future. Offsprings are the real existing currency.And can we blame them? I cant. The 62 yr old woman in the states really didn?t need the 12th child. That?s pure stupidity. She probably didn?t even need 3, but I am hitting thin ice here. Women on the archipel islands however do need children (but not 12). > Most people on the islands don?t qualify for mortgages and likes, most don?t even qualify for simple bank accounts. They borrow money from affluent parties, thereby entering into a livelong dependence, becoming an accessory to the complex network of the local illegal fishing industry, paying off their debts by carrying out the task at hand, namely bombing. Many of them risking their lives in doing so, many being driven into invalidity of some sort. > > What we need, is educational sustainability. Education that lasts. Education that indoctrinates and is assimilated and passed on to F2, F3 ?.Fn. > Academically and practically its time for consilience, in the sense it was formulated by O. Wilson. We need a unification of knowledge in order to act. Disciplines need to be pulled together. Reef conservation here in spermonde is a first order task for anthropologists, sociologists, and socioeconomists, then for marinebiologists and in the last instance for politicians, but creating a circular network of exchange. > Maybe its time that universities teach marine anthropology. But yes, its easy to stay in our studies busying us with intellectual chit chat contemplating fancy ?nce words?..creating awareness amongst those that are aware anyway. > > I am just wearing the shoes of the devils advocate, and am certainly not throwing the first stone. After all I am researching bleaching in corals that do not bleach and my bahasa Indonesia is as fragile as the reefs. So whats the new dogma? What do do? And who is doing it? > Learning the language, going into teaching after finishing the PhD? Become a marineanthropologist? Maybe I should give up my oil leaking motorbike ?and do what with it?...dump it the ocean? > > trying to keep up optimism > > esther > > > > . > > > > >"Szmant, Alina" wrote: > Hi Phil & others: > >I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created > through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not > taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? > >You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I > have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? > >China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. > >For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. > >So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. > >Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. > >So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. > >So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. > >In a pessimistic mood this morn', > >Alina Szmant > > >******************************************************************* >Dr. Alina M. Szmant >Coral Reef Research Group >UNCW-Center for Marine Science >5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln >Wilmington NC 28409 >Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 >Cell: (910)200-3913 >email: szmanta at uncw.edu >Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta >****************************************************************** > >________________________________ > >From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg >Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM >To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 > > > >Phil, > >Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > >Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > >Dear Colleagues, > > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting > >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few > >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to > >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our > >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > > and less > >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by > >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from > >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of > >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the > >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral > >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show > >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to > >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own > >history and ecology. > > > >Let's face it: > > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, > >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is > >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological > >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal > >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't > >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's > >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take > >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the > >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all > >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread > >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. > >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human > >reproductive success. > > > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > > radar > >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation > >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my > >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities > >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the > >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs > >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this > >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying > >and we have got to do more. > > > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think > >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We > >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the > >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of > >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of > >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled > >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and > >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > > are > >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral > >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, > >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own > >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and > >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For > >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes > >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, > >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations > >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a > >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is > >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the > >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and > >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the > >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is > >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And > >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we > >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost > >every reef on the planet. > > > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > > agency, > >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for > >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a > >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded > >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus > >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would > >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study > >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think > >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > > Thanks, > > Phil > > > >-- > >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. > >Department of Biology > >College of Charleston > >Charleston SC 29424 > >(843) 953-8086 voice > >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Coral-List mailing list > >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > >--------------------------------- > Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now >--------------------------------- > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From lesk at bu.edu Sun Feb 26 11:08:47 2006 From: lesk at bu.edu (lesk at bu.edu) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:08:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Faith in local efforts; ferocity in facing the world In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060226110847.e61yypg760ww0w8w@www.bu.edu> Phil Dustan asked what we can do. Perhaps a start is to share what we are doing now, and help each other forge our puzzle pieces into a whole. This sometimes works better than launching a new big empty vessel with a fancy name and fundraising needs in hopes of picking up paying passengers along the way. Here is the piece I am on now. A small idea emerged from a workshop several years ago in Los Cabos. Conservation International organized a party called "Defying Ocean's End". No, I did not make up that name, though margaritas inspired an indecent salute to go along with it. DOE is a business plan to save the sea, vetted by folks from Goldman Sachs Inc. to make sure the scientists, environmentalists and stakeholders present were able to add up the numbers properly. A news piece on DOE is at http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/ 2003/06/0603_030603_oceanboundaries.html and the resulting Island Press book is at: http://www.islandpress.org/books/detail.html/SKU/1-55963-753-6 At DOE, Jeremy Jackson and I co-chaired a very lively working group focussed on science to "restore and maintain marine ecosystem function." In order to restore a marine ecosystem, we reasoned that we should first restore faith in a coastal community that they can steward their local marine environment despite the sky falling all about them. The small idea is this: resistance is not futile. This is a tough nut because people are hearing that no matter what they do to control fishing pressure and overdevelopment in their own front yards, the First World is going to get them- cook them, innundate them, poison them, and overpower them economically, to the strains of a siren call irresistable to their greedy and their young. The key would be for a local community to do their level best to manage their doings in their own bit of sea in an enduring and rewarding fashion (the "S" word). If it works even a little, empowerment can hopefully do the rest. After DOE, I teamed up with CI to work on this problem. We were fortunate to get start-up funding from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation for a project called the Marine Management Area Science program (MMAS). We have four years to get going. Dr. Leah Bunce is the Project Director. I am the PI. Roger McManus is supervising staffer. Sylvia Earle is spokesperson/Godess. CI staff and partners are the implementing folks. For anybody who is interested, as materials become available they are posted to a general access web site. The quickest route to a fact sheet and workplan for the project is to put "CI MMAS" into Google and take the top hits. The project is evolving faster than the web portal and we do need some privacy and distance to get something done. However, link-ups, partnerships, criticisms are welcome. At its core MMAS is a natural and social science research project. Because it is a research project, parts of it that are new will appear in peer-reviewed papers first, and then be applied and publicized. These parts mostly have to do with the invention of new diagnostics to help sort out the effects of local management efforts, from changes (good or bad) in marine and social systems due to other causes. But much of what you will see in MMAS sounds like what others are doing, because all are part of the same global context. Let us call it: Alina's Lament. It is essential that these more general objectives be achieved collaboratively with other projects being carried out in the same geographical areas, in a united front. The egofriction static charge of NGO's and Kurtz-like characters- scientists and saviors, parachute-diplomats and prodigal sons alike- must be smoothed or we will be each others' failures. We are all human and we all set up fiefdoms and power structures as automatically as dogs piss to mark their having passed. Once everybody has pissed we can get down to work, and the mix will smell at least as good, or as bad, as the mark of any one. The Scientific Advisory Committee for MMAS has helped to guide us into a focus for the project in four primary geographical areas, and two for work to ramp up later on. These areas are: Greater Caribbean- primary focus on Belize and MBRS region Brazil- Abrolhos Shelf Tropical Eastern Pacific- Coiba, Cocos, Malpelo, Galapagos Fiji Archipelago The two areas for later on are Raja Ampat (eastern Indonesia) and the western Indian Ocean someplace. In each place we are fitting our little piece (MMA science) into the context of existing, locally initiated partnerships and projects. We also have some small, thematic research projects that are not geographically tied down to these spots except that the products will then be applied in each of them. Those are our beans. We have decided to work small. Together, the sites constitute a global observatory for the efficacy of MMA effects under varied biological and social conditions, strewn across E-W and N-S biodiversity gradients. Okay, that was my sharing time. Now it is all of your turns. Perhaps we can look at different parts of the world of tropical nearshore marine conservation organizationally, the way that ReefBase has helped us to do biologically. Find the pressure points. Hone the messages and the campaigns. Move from one immediate objective to the next. Shout into the media's ear instead of the other way. Remember, this isn't to say that the global UN diplomacy march on Washington thing isn't important, too. All of us have folks in our organizations who, bless their hearts, are doing just that. It just isn't what I am doing right now. Sounds kind of like baloney but maybe what we do can be better than what it sounds like. Now, that would be really novel. Les From JKoven at aol.com Sun Feb 26 18:05:29 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:05:29 EST Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Message-ID: Yes, Jim, "sustainable" and "development" ARE? oxymorons.? It all depends on what level of income/development the community stakeholders need to produce from their reefs, absent other income sources.? Their choices are often limited - they can bring in tourists/divers or over-fish, even though that diminishes or damages the resources.? Reefs provided sustenance for entire island communities for millenia - they can't now sustain other urban communities with growing populations.? The needs of these stakeholders has changed over the past 50 years - they want to send their children to schools off-island, they want the same techological "improvements" in their lives that those in the urban areas have and to catch up with the 21st century world.? Both climate change and over-fishing have? affected many Pacific reefs that have not been subjected to gross land-based pollution.? Nothing the stakeholders of small islands can do will change the global climate picture and fishing is part of their culture.? The search is on for other ways to sustain the way of life they wish to have, without further destroying fisheries and thus reefs. It's interesting that outrigger canoes once sped villagers to other islands.? Then came the diesel powered boats - slower and costly, although one was less dependant upon weather and perhaps drier upon arrival.? Now faster fiberglass boats are the thing.....they travel as swiftly as an outrigger in a decent wind, but leave one beholden to the fuel companies.? Progress?? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From JKoven at aol.com Sun Feb 26 18:04:05 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:04:05 EST Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence - Effect of Bombing Message-ID: <290.64bb747.31338de5@aol.com> Has anyone studied the reefs in Guam since WWII? Of course....but the diversity was vastly reduced. Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu Sun Feb 26 18:16:56 2006 From: rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu (Richard Grigg) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 13:16:56 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today In-Reply-To: <20060225110306.0iwtfp3s0kcg84sw@www.bu.edu> References: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20060226131545.01ca73d8@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Les, My real opinion and view of the world is much the same as Alina Szmant's. Overpopulation is the problem. The Club of Rome estimated that the carrying capacity of planet earth is about 3 billion people. We are double that now and there is no going back, at least not without a catastrophic event. The 1000's of reefs that are still healthy in the Pacific are in places underpopulated or even uninhabited. I visited about 25 such places several years ago in the Tuamotu Archipelago. Unfortunately, they too will probably be discovered. After that, if humankind does not face the human population issue head on, I don't think we can prevent these reefs from the same fate as those Phil Dustan was talking about. There is time, but not the political will on a global scale. But rather than dooming and glooming all the reefs in the world (dead or not), I think the number one action item should be containing the human population bomb. Not overgeneralizing about the reefs but facing the real issue....us. Rick Grigg At 11:03 AM 2/25/2006 -0500, lesk at bu.edu wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > >It is extremely important that we converge on a common and consistant >view on coral reef health that we can convey to the lay public. We >must also speak precisely when referring to any particular symptom of >coral reef health on a global scale. > >I challenge anybody to produce data demonstrating that the tropical >west Atlantic coral reefs have improved in condition or remained at >level condition, by any measure you wish, over the past 25 years. That >does not mean that the changes are irreversible or unprecedented in >deep time, Gene. It only means that it is a sad thing for us and for >our childern that this is happening at this particular time, for we now >cause this decline knowingly and deliberately, recovery will likely be >a very lengthy process, and we are seem to be doing our best to inhibit >even that. The long view will always be there to make us feel better >in some existential sense, but it is no balm to those of us who wish to >enjoy and benefit from coral reefs during our lives and the lives of >our children and grandchildren. > >Indo-Pacific coral reefs exhibit a vigorous ability to bounce back from >denudation or phase shift, so long as there is a stable physical >substratum on which they can rebuild (dynamite rubble piles are not >very good for this). However, the proportion of reef surface that is >in a disturbed, regenerating state at any given time, and more >importantly, the size-frequency distribution of these disturbances, >looks very odd and very different than when I was a graduate student. >Are we using the right data to characterize and track these changes, >Rick? Because the Pacific is still more robust than the Atlantic, >there is much of concern that we can choose to overlook if that is our >bias. We'd better be careful not to be too easily reassured by the >positive signs that coral reefs in the Pacific could hold their own, >given the chance...because they by and large are not being given the >chance. > >The pace and extent of bleaching alone is awesome. Who is coming >forward to call this a non-event, or our response to it exagerated and >misplaced? Who is saying that overfishing is something that will have >no effect on reefs worth worrying about, and that we can ignore it? >Who is saying that the industrialization of reef destruction is not a >real thing worth keeping in check? Who is saying with confidence that >the earth is not getting warmer, that bleaching is not more frequent >and severe, or that corals will definitely adapt to these changes and >that the world shall remain much as wonderful as it has always been for >us, no matter what we do? > >So what gentle hand is it, exactly that Gene and Rick wish to lay upon >the scene? > >Les Kaufman > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From milviapin at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 18:41:09 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 15:41:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <20060226234109.88917.qmail@web50303.mail.yahoo.com> dear listers, I agree with Rick, there are reefs that are considered pristine in RMI for example. No diseases, no bleaching, no eutrophication, no overfishing or destructive fishing nor boat damage threaten some of the reefs in remote areas . At many locations, we can still witness this ecosystem as clean, productive, diverse as some can only imagine it "should have been" earlier. No take areas or sanctuaries are indeed to be made the rule, and governments and managers in remote island countries hear this message, although thay often have to apply it not as a recovery or restoration process but as a conservation of extant natural health. This decision is often more difficult than similar action needed when the damage is instead evident and advanced. Also, I do not think people in the Pacific islands nor in South East Asia can agree we (they) can live "without reefs". It is not just a question of loosing biodiversity or beauty! Millions of people still REALLY depend on these ecosystems for their food AND income! Thank you Silvia Richard Grigg wrote: Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let?s face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze. From milviapin at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 19:07:07 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 16:07:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 3 In-Reply-To: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <20060227000708.48318.qmail@web50311.mail.yahoo.com> Alina, I think you had a very important message for all of us. "For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! " If we are not ready to relinquish some of our personal comfort(s), we cannot expect politicians to make things better for all of us and we should stop blaiming international politics for the damage caused to the global environment. I believe protecting reefs, or the environment, or the forests is less an issue of political decision and more of behaviour. Everybody's. Each one can make a little change in each one's life. All together we are definetely more powerful than a few "decision makers". cheers silvia "Szmant, Alina" wrote: Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. From szmanta at uncw.edu Sun Feb 26 20:09:28 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 20:09:28 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline References: <46F56ACD52BC5F4F911EF9C4264FB46404AD29DE@UNCWMAILVS1.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB028@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> For those of you loooking for how some scientists are trying to desseminate the word.... ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From: Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST) To: Subject: University of Texas Ocean Research Webcast Dear Science Enthusiast, University of Texas at Austin Webcast Entitled "Brave New Ocean." A webcast presentation given by Professor Jeremy Jackson, William E. and Mary B. Ritter Professor and Director of the Geosciences Research Division at Scripps Institution of Oceanography will be March 3, 2006 at 7pm. Dr. Jeremy Jackson is one of the most prominent marine ecologists in the world and he has a message to get out about the world's oceans - it documents declines in coral reefs, decreasing numbers of large marine fish, and losses of coastal and marine ecosystems. More than just an academic researcher, Dr. Jackson has actively searched for innovative ways to reach the public, applying his skills as a communicator with his scientific knowledge to inspire action. Dr. Jackson desires to reach a broader audience and affect change into the future with tomorrow's generation on this topic of interest. View a FREE web broadcast of the lecture live Friday, March 3, 2006 at 7 pm CST. During the live webcast, you can submit questions to Dr. Jackson and he will answer as many as he can for the live and webcast audiences. If possible, can you distribute or post a link to this webcast on your website, newsletter, or listserv as well as pass this notice on to any colleagues of yours that may be interested. The link to our Lecture Series website, where the details of the lecture and the webcast can be found, is: http://www.esi.utexas.edu/outreach/ols/lectures/Jackson/ Please let me know if you will consider posting this information. Thanks for your time, Brian Zavala Environmental Science Institute The University of Texas at Austin brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu 512.471.5847 ------ End of Forwarded Message From mtupper at picrc.org Sun Feb 26 21:11:37 2006 From: mtupper at picrc.org (Mark Tupper) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 11:11:37 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] vehicle emissions, lifestyle changes and global warming References: <20060223022526.80199.qmail@web35310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <009901c63b43$26543be0$63c8c814@TUPPER> Hi listers, I think James, Jeff and Alina are right on the money when they talk about vehicle emissions and today's "bigger is better" SUV mindset. I doubt that the public has any realization of the degree to which vehicle emissions contribute to greenhouse gases. A quote from the California Cars Initiative: "In California, transportation accounts for over 40% of greenhouse gas emissions. Nationally the number is around 33%. Globally it's 20% and rising fast, especially as car-starved China, India and Russia add to their fleets." So, if we can agree that global warming and climate change are adversely affecting coral reefs, then vehicle emissions are one of the major culprits. But have governments or the auto industry made any attempt to educate the public on this issue? If so, I must have missed it... This is one of the most challenging problems our environment faces, given the long history of our deep-rooted "car culture" lifestyle in North America. It's amazing to me that with sky-high gas prices unlikely to change while there is continuing war in the Middle East, people still want to buy the biggest, most expensive SUV they can. For example, in the last decade, Hummer went from a cottage industry aimed at producing exclusive (and enormous) vehicles for celebrities, to a major automaker producing over 100,000 SUVs per year. And as Jeff said, how many of those are ever taken off-road? And while DaimlerChrysler has been touting their advances in PHEV technology (plug-in hybrid electric vehicles that can get 100+ mpg), they were busy reviving the 425 horsepower Hemi engine and stuffing it into 4-door family sedans, and then developing a 500 horsepower V-10 for their SUVs and pickup trucks. Do soccer moms really need to go 0-60 in under 5 seconds and cruise the highway at over 170 mph, which just 10 years ago could only be done with a $200,000 exotic sports car? No. It would be illegal anyway. Has DaimlerChrysler sold any mass-produced PHEVs yet? No. Why not? Because hybrids are for nerdy enviro-geeks like us. Nobody else would pay the premium price charged for them when they could get a "real" car for less. In North America's car culture, big and powerful is sexy; small and efficient is lame. Sorry if this post seems too much about vehicles and not enough about coral reefs, but I'm trying to address one of the root causes of coral reef decline. We might say that greenhouse gases and resulting thermal stress are a root cause of decline but they aren't the ultimate cause. They are a symptom generated by human activities - a symptom that happens to trigger its own set of secondary symptoms, including coral bleaching and disease. In addressing the ultimate cause, the question is, how do we change the mindset of an entire nation from one of spending all their disposable income on unnecessary luxuries to one of moderation and conservation? Cheers, Mark Dr. Mark H Tupper, Senior Scientist Palau International Coral Reef Center PO Box 7086, Koror, Palau 96940 tel (680) 488-6950; fax (680) 488-6951 and Adjunct Research Associate University of Guam Marine Laboratory UOG Station, Mangilao, Guam 96923, USA tel (671) 735-2375; fax (671) 734-6767 From A.J.G.Williams at newcastle.ac.uk Mon Feb 27 14:30:15 2006 From: A.J.G.Williams at newcastle.ac.uk (Andrew Williams) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 19:30:15 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Resilience, Remnancy, Sustainability - Semantics? References: <46F56ACD52BC5F4F911EF9C4264FB46404AD29DE@UNCWMAILVS1.dcs.uncw.edu> <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB028@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <0BE60E6F26C4034388842EA9FA0DC94525281B@quarrel.campus.ncl.ac.uk> Dear All, I started out reading this topic with interest, but it is now becoming irritation, because it seems to be a great deal of definitions, discussions of semantics and ego flattering statements. Do I intend to be insulting? No, I attempt to point out that if this discussion is affecting me in this way (an alleged scientist), imagine what it does for members of the public... Now watch me reel off a massive list of definitions! *laughs* Global warming - fossil fuels are the key issue, yet they are owned by massive MNCs whose sole interest is capital generation. The technology to replace these energy sources already exists, is owned by MNCs and DODs around the world, either hidden from public use for protectionism of markets or national security (i.e. protectionism of national markets!). The USA is 'run' by an oil baron, a man who was re-elected by over 50% (ish) of the nation (well those who voted). What is the solution when the public are disinterested in (global) politics, and the politicians are interested in re-election and capital accumulation? Education is fundamentally important to changing public, and thus political, agendas, yet who controls school curricula? What happens when the media has become mankind's source of (dis)information? What happens when scientists cannot even decide within themselves the 'correct' course of action? I'll tell you what I believe happens, things get worse, further ingrained, more polarised and more self-centred. There are two real problems in this world, apathy and greed. If these two variables can be addressed, mankind has a chance at not destroying itself and the planet in the process. I've seen/heard various people say things like, "thanks for that depressing outlook" to which my response is, do we live on the same planet? I would dearly love to be optimistic about global affairs, but I think it's deluded. I don't believe in the Hollywood happy ending, in fact if I did, I wouldn't be studying natural resource management. I will happily admit that there are success stories about the place and I will come to that point 'shortly'. We are creeping in the right direction, but we could be walking, if not running (hand in hand into the sunset...sorry!). We all talk about globalisation, yet where are the international laws, where is the international institution that represents mankind's interest and not national interests? None of us alone is going to change global problems, it is going to take a concerted global effort, it is not going to be easy, it is going to require considerable pain in the process, because current consumption of global resources are not sustainable (yup sorry, there's that buzz word again). There are no 'silver bullets', if we haven't learned that yet... Admittedly, all this globalisation 'stuff' is in it's infancy, it is barely crawling, but someone (plural) MUST teach it how to walk and it cannot be driven solely by the free market ideology. 'Over' population - Carrying capacities do not take into account advances in technology, so improvements in agricultural practices increases production (agreed, simply pouring chemicals into the ground is not sustainable, but there are alternatives). There's plenty of food being produced today, it's not a production issue it's a distribution issue. I only have to wander around shops like 'Pound Land' to realise there are massive amounts of resources being poured into utterly useless products, yet people still buy them. My computers enable me to communicate globally, increase my productivity, my lights enable me to work in the dark, but, for example, these ridiculous plastic (oil derivative) desk ornaments - where's the utility in that? Don't even get me started on SUVs! To say China has the right idea about birth control, is rather simplistic, just look at how many female babies are abandoned or aborted, I feel that women being marched en-mass into sterilisation programs (India) against their will is totally indefensible. Human rights on one hand, control systems on the other - where is the middle ground? I personally would like to see a licensing system, whereby people have to prove they are capable of being good parents and are economically able to raise their kids - but of course that only works in developed nations, I could not possibly argue for that to be applied in developing nations. I'm sure that would cause a massive outcry, it being a fundamental human right to have children, but this example of the women having her 12th baby - what about the rights of people who don't want to live in an overcrowded world? Since when do the rights of the individual outweigh the rights of the many (sorry, rather star trek I know!)? We are boxing ourselves into a corner with all this political correctness. Timescales - someone mentioned that on a long enough time line, reefs will be gone. Well in several billion years the sun will expand to the point Earth will be uninhabitable - does this mean we should all just give up and damn the world to extinction early? I absolutely take the point that ecosystems are processes, (perhaps they should be renamed as ecoprocesses and not systems (I am so joking!)) and that on a long enough time line everything will change, but these changes are for the most part geologically slow - slow enough for evolution to keep pace. Mankind's affects on the planet are accelerating beyond the pace of evolution, plus I would prefer to live in a world where the atmosphere is breathable, the water drinkable, the soils cultivable... Spatial scales - I vaguely remember mentioning I would come to a point and this is it - start small, lead by example and the people will follow! We can't take on global issues, the institutions and laws simply are not there yet, it's currently far too voluntary and un-enforceable. Apart from anything else, ecosystems are site specific - there are reefs on the east coast of Australia that are growing in highly turbid conditions, whereas in other places, turbidity is fatal. I don't think it is possible to come up with a 10 point plan to global success, because by doing so you are going to have to cut down a 1000 points to 10, what if the 990 disregarded points aggregate to greater importance than the 10 you chose? Global affairs are for the politicians, scientists should be there in an advisory capacity but when I say scientists I mean all of them, not just e.g. Marine Biologists - see my next point. Integration - So, one school of thought cries out for public awareness and consumer driven market forces, one cries out for more stringent laws and regulations, another for strict conservationism, another for... where is the integration, where's the facilitator, the chair person co-ordinating all these schools? If you are going to try and solve issues, then you must consider (in alphabetical order) economics, environment, politics and social anthropology - not on a sectoral basis but as an integrated whole. You cannot just form MPAs where ever biodiversity is greatest, because you will more than likely marginalise the people living off that resource. Making the poor poorer just causes further environmental degradation as they are forced to exploit any (free/common) natural resource they can. If you exclude people from the picture, you have an issue of non-compliance and thus a cost in enforcement. I entered into my first degree of the opinion that the environment should be protected no matter the human cost, I have since completely amended that outlook since it's myopic at best and downright inhumane at worst. Participation - To overcome issues of non-compliance, marginalisation and often to increase knowledge of local systems, people must be allowed to participate at ALL levels of project and policy formulation/implementation - that does not mean consultation, that means active participation. Process - Sustainable Development (sorry but I don't see it as an oxymoron - I do see it's false implementation as oxy-moronic) is a process, not a system, thus projects and policies should be re-evaluated as often as humanly possible, because making changes causes changes. Good governance - We are only just starting to see models of good governance, not top-down, not bottom-up, but multi-tier (local, regional, national, international) well organised/managed, with an ability to pass information/resources up and down the system with speed and efficiency. Good governance starts with individuals and ends with international agreements, with every single organisation/institution in-between. It needs to be based on equity, equality and shared interest, not ego, power and greed. Now that's a serious challenge because a majority of the current systems of governance are corrupt and unwieldy, favouring the rich and powerful, self-protecting and exacerbating poverty. Developed nations cannot dictate how developing nations can and cannot develop when, as someone has already pointed out, a large proportion of greenhouse gases derive from our activities. Good governance must be about setting a good example, not just enforcing it. I think I am probably boring everyone by now, but I have one more thing to say. All of the above I have been taught, ok some of it I consciously/sub-consciously knew already, but there are more people behind me, coming up through the 'new' schools of thought. One day, these people will be the top scientists of the day, the politicians, the decision makers - when that day comes, I think (hope) we will see some real changes being made. I can only hope that some of the above will help people break free of the chains of sectoralism and start seeing things from a holistic perspective, you cannot save reefs by simply speaking about how they are dying at n.nnn% a year. Of all the traits of human nature, survival is one of the greatest, otherwise we'd already be gone. The glass can be half empty and/or half full, it all depends on how you view it, but why does no one ever consider topping it back up to brim? Stop observing, start doing! A passionate Msc Student From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Mon Feb 27 10:32:07 2006 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Gene Shinn) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 10:32:07 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Intellectual chit chat Message-ID: The letter by Esther Borell is a most thoughtful, sobering and revealing one and should serve as a lesson to all of us "first world scientists" with our "intellectual chit chat." We should all applaud Ester for "trying to keep up optimism." Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida Marine Science Center (room 204) 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From martin_moe at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 22:55:02 2006 From: martin_moe at yahoo.com (Martin Moe) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 19:55:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence Message-ID: <20060227035502.81516.qmail@web60014.mail.yahoo.com> Hi All, Hoo Boy! The world is a scary place these days. Alina is right, James is right, Curtis is right, Steven is right, everyone commenting is right to a greater or lesser degree. I wonder if Malthus was right .. While acknowledging the global problems, the reefs of the Florida Keys, and to a lesser extent, the Bahamas and the Caribbean, are what concern me most personally. It pains me to see huge coral heads slowly dying, the tissue receding and the exposed coral rock thick with algae and sediment, to see acres of coral rock rubble composed of easily identifiable pieces of the remains of huge elkhorn coral skeletons, and patch reefs covered by extensive growths of Sargassum and Dictyota algae. I know what the reefs were like only a few decades ago and the loss is staggering. The TDC knows this also or at least it seems like they should. (This is the Tourist Development Council for Monroe County, the Florida Keys) Their latest brochure http://www.fla-keys.com/diving/ has fantastically beautiful pictures of the coral reefs of yesteryear, some from the Bahamas but most from the Keys reefs of the 60s and 70s available for download on the diving page. Diving tourists are lured to the Keys by these spectacular photos but the reality they find is quite different. There are no vast growths of huge elkhorn coral colonies, and few great healthy heads of brain and star coral, a sort of governmental ?Bait and Switch? advertising. So what can we do? Of course there is no simple answer. All reefs, Pacific or Atlantic, are separate ecosystems connected closely or distantly, and each reef area has its own web of life and its own constellation of problems and solutions. Some problems are global and some are local, the only way to proceed is as the bumper sticker says, ?Think globally, act locally?. Grand analysis of global and regional social, industrial, population and pollution problems are critical and essential and must be pursued and solutions sought on a national governmental scale, but we also have to take care of the trees as well as worry about the forest. As many contributors to this thread have stated, we have to focus on local conditions and find ways to improve specific reef areas, and what we learn and achieve on a ?micro? level will pave the way for ?macro? efforts. (Or we can say, ?Nothing can be done, the world is going to collapse.? And move to the mountains and seek self sustainability with a cache of weapons and foodstuffs. Hmmm The Rockys or the Appalachians?) To do nothing is not an option, I repeat, not an option. We have monitored and measured and we know the problems. We don?t know all the causes and we don?t know the future of the global problems but we have to work with what we have. We talk of resiliency, remmancy, and sustainability and look for coral genotypes with the capability to survive despite adverse conditions, and this is good, but a coral reef is much, much more than just coral. It is a web of life that interacts with itself and feeds upon itself and grows according to the balance of its life forms. A reef in all its complexity cannot be resilient and withstand adversity if the ecology that drove its evolution is impaired. And the reefs of Florida, the Bahamas and the Caribbean are greatly impaired by the almost total loss of the herbivores that maintained the balance between the slow growing, reef forming stony corals and the rapid growing, energy producing macro algae. Without herbivores, establishment of functional reef resiliency is the ?impossible dream?. Without herbivores, planting seedling coral colonies on the reefs has little chance to succeed. Without herbivores, coral larvae have no place to settle. The extent and depth of other problems that plague our reefs cannot be accurately determined until the herbivores return. The first consideration in ecological reef restoration in this region should be how to return herbivores (think Diadema) to the reefs. And like all great journeys, we have to start with small steps, but we must start. Actually the work of Szmant, Miller, Capo, Nedimyer, me, and the Nature Conservency, FKNMS, and Mote Marine Laboratory is a start. I hope we never abandon this effort because it just seems like an impossible task. Martin Moe From eweil at caribe.net Mon Feb 27 02:45:23 2006 From: eweil at caribe.net (EWeil) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 03:45:23 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] "resilience".... Message-ID: Dear coral listers, I agree that the source of all environmental problems affecting terrestrial and marine systems have a common denominator, human population growth, as Alina so eloquently put it. It is also clear to me that lack of education, and wrong government decisions significantly compounds the problem. If this list can somehow help to actively educate people about the benefits of having fewer children and not driving an 8-cylinder, 340 HP truck to get the kids to the soccer game, it would be wonderful. However, after dealing with politicians in Latin America, watching todays religious moderate and extreme fanatism, the Bush administration at work and the selfishness of most people, I remain highly eskeptical and pesimistic about the future of coral reefs and most other ecosystems as well. Saludos! Dr. Ernesto Weil Department of Marine Sciences University of Puerto Rico PO BOX 3208 Lajas PR 00667 Pho: (787) 899-2048 x. 241 Fax: (787) 899-5500 - 2630 From ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com Mon Feb 27 12:05:27 2006 From: ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com (Eric Coral Inquiry) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:05:27 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Corals Gonad Development Message-ID: <6400622e0602270905k186c1de2la565ddd1c991c9ab@mail.gmail.com> Dear listers, Expertise help needed in the area of corals gonad development. Welcome any information, literatures, resources and recommendation of presons who have done work in this area. I am interested to look at the gonad development of corals under artificial reed structures and compare that to nature colony but unfortunately I do not have a clue where, how to start and the place where I come from is lacking in expertise in such area. Is there anyone who has done histological examation on corals gonad development? Do keep in touch. Billion Thanks. Eric YSY "Marine Biologist in the Making" Kota Kinabalu. P.S: This is my mailing address : Eric Yu S Y NO:93, JALAN KIJANG, LUYANG PHASE 3, 88300 KOTA KINABALU SABAH MALAYSIA TEL:+6088213276 From clarionreef at aol.com Mon Feb 27 17:24:59 2006 From: clarionreef at aol.com (clarionreef at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 17:24:59 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8C80A03C77FEB1B-AD4-1654@FWM-M02.sysops.aol.com> People, I relize that many folks in the scientific community and academia often refer to the Marine Aquarium Council [ MAC ] as some kind of intelligent response to ensuring "sustainability" in the growing trade in reef tropical fishes and organisms. Having followed them for years since their inception, I can assure you that they are adrift and without results, achievement or leadership to go with all the public relations that have fooled so many. They have endeavored to "train" collectors to fish sustainably and disdain cyanide and yet have pretty much driven collectors back to cyanide with their ill-advised, culturally insensitive, top-down approach. Faced with a mass exodus from their well financed "cause", they re-certified marinelife dealers with out cause and without clean fish supply. The lack of fish supply to go with all the trouble and expense to become certified had left many dealers with a desire to end the game and not re-certify this year. The non interest in re-certifying as the years deadline approached left MAC in a panic at the pending loss of all their members on a single date. So, in an effort to prevent the exodus from MAC and a collapse of the small level of industry support that existed anyway...they just automatically re-certified for free all those who were certified before. Have a look and see the admission of chronic failure to provide substance to go with the wordplay in 7 year old drama...in quotes from memos to the dealers who carry cyanide fish for lack of any certified, netcaught fishes. On paragraph two regard the following ; "This was based on an assumption that there would be a steadily increasing supply of MAC certified organisms from the early days of certification. Unfortunately this supply has not materialised and this has left MAC certified exporters, importers and retailers without access to a meaningful supply of MAC certified organisms on a regular basis." And then everyones certification status was automatically extended til 2008! And so on it goes, fooling people who hope and want a cleaner industry ...cashing in on it without reforming it. Sincerely, Steve Robinson commercial collector & past president AMDA American Marinelife Deales Assoc PS. 5 years and 5 million dollars of Packard, McArthur and US AID money etc. ... and no fish supply? As I said long ago..."That dog don't hunt".. -----Original Message----- From: JKoven at aol.com To: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:05:29 EST Subject: Re: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Yes, Jim, "sustainable" and "development" ARE oxymorons. It all depends on what level of income/development the community stakeholders need to produce from their reefs, absent other income sources. Their choices are often limited - they can bring in tourists/divers or over-fish, even though that diminishes or damages the resources. Reefs provided sustenance for entire island communities for millenia - they can't now sustain other urban communities with growing populations. The needs of these stakeholders has changed over the past 50 years - they want to send their children to schools off-island, they want the same techological "improvements" in their lives that those in the urban areas have and to catch up with the 21st century world. Both climate change and over-fishing have affected many Pacific reefs that have not been subjected to gross land-based pollution. Nothing the stakeholders of small islands can do will change the global climate picture and fishing is part of their culture. The search is on for other ways to sustain the way of life they wish to have, without further destroying fisheries and thus reefs. It's interesting that outrigger canoes once sped villagers to other islands. Then came the diesel powered boats - slower and costly, although one was less dependant upon weather and perhaps drier upon arrival. Now faster fiberglass boats are the thing.....they travel as swiftly as an outrigger in a decent wind, but leave one beholden to the fuel companies. Progress? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From JKoven at aol.com Mon Feb 27 17:49:43 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 17:49:43 EST Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today Message-ID: <67.55e12d55.3134dc07@aol.com> The people who live in these underpopulated areas are still trying to earn a living...often by fishing their own reefs and selling to those who have depleted their own fisheries and willing to pay the price. Yes, over-population is at the base of many world problems but it is a sticky issue, at once cultural, ethnic and religious.? Not exactly one to be solved by reef scientists.? Perhaps women's education in general and in reproductive rights are the answers?? Women want better lives for their children, after they've been fed, saved from curable infectious diseases, and educated....and who is to determine what that better life is?? Is it what they perceive as the lives that other children in the world have, including yours?? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From jandl at rivnet.net Mon Feb 27 19:15:17 2006 From: jandl at rivnet.net (Judith Lang/Lynton Land) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 19:15:17 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] How to inspire responsible actions? Message-ID: Dear listers, I seems we are painfully aware of problems, from overpopulation to all manner of over-indulgence. But how to inspire responsible actions on our part and others? Absent easily available remedies, inspirational messages/reminders/ exhortations, however persuasive, are unlikely to have much effect. Jamaican members of the list can correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been thinking we could borrow some strategies from its early family- planning campaign. After initial successes targeting women with the simple but powerful theme, "Plan Your Family; Better Your Life," plus birth control pills that would either have been free or very cheap, it was realized that, to be truly successful, men also had to be included in the decision-making process. I remember a creative campaign of newspaper advertisements suggesting the more nuanced idea that "of course" dads want their children to have a chance to grow up and achieve some measure of respectable employment and social status (e.g., bank teller, carpenter), paired with condom advertisements on billboards that featured an enormous and very sexy looking, black panther. Surely we could come up with some attention-grabbing, genuine solutions to offer the world? Judy From G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au Tue Feb 28 00:38:07 2006 From: G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au (Gillian Goby) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 15:38:07 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] GBRMPA Current Conditions Report (4) Message-ID: <4403E1BF.8040308@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear Coral- Listers, apologies for cross-postings. Please find below the latest Current Conditions report for bleaching on the GBR. *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the Fourth Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 23 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current weather conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, *the* *threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region continues to be rated as moderate*. Severe coral bleaching has been confirmed for several reefs in the southern region during recent GBRMPA surveys. In addition, BleachWatch participants have recorded minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR and more recently the northern GBR. Temperature patterns are consistent with these reports. Although sea temperatures in the southern GBR have slightly decreased, they continue to exceed the February average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C and long-term summer maxima by 0.5 degrees C respectively. Central GBR waters have remained warm in recent weeks, and sea surface temperatures are still currently exceeding the February long-term average by 0.5 to 1.5 degrees C. Temperatures in northern parts of the GBR have increased and are elevated 0.5 to 2.0 degrees C above the February long-term average. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer we are still relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ From solutions at cozm.co.uk Tue Feb 28 03:25:57 2006 From: solutions at cozm.co.uk (Duncan MacRae) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 08:25:57 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Conservation work in Nusa Lembongan and Nusa Penida, near Bali - Indonesia Message-ID: <001801c63c40$99a579d0$4fd7fea9@Sarah> Dear all, Does anyone know of any marine conservation work carried out around the Nusa Lembongan/Penida Island group near Bali, Indonesia? Regards, Duncan R. MacRae Director Coastal Zone Management (UK) Integrated Conservation Solutions Blythe Cottage, 22 Rosemundy, St Agnes, Cornwall. UK ++(0) 1872 552 219 ++(0) 7958 230 076 e-mail: solutions at cozm.co.uk web: www.cozm.co.uk This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version From nhg3 at hw.ac.uk Tue Feb 28 12:54:47 2006 From: nhg3 at hw.ac.uk (Galvis, Nohora H) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 17:54:47 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline Message-ID: <2DEC240A2A06F04BB9D3BBF02DE198BD4D3382@ex5.mail.win.hw.ac.uk> I have followed with a lot of interest the discussions of the last days, confirming how passionate scientists have become nowadays when talking about the evidence of the coral reefs decline. This is a Social Psychological trend of applied science: Scientists engage with the study of environmental problems and feel an urgent need to contribute identifying solutions as a matter of ethical responsibility. This new perspective makes acceptable and even desirable for scientists to express emotions of frustration for being eyewitnesses of decline in the past decades and now by changing their priorities, attitudes and behaviours towards environmental management to get involved trying to communicate a pertinent message to decision makers, decision takers and the general public to allow them to be part of the solutions. Thanks to Dr. Alina Szmant for the webpage information about the web cast presentation of Dr. Jeremy Jackson. Nohora Galvis (Mental Models to improve coral reef management) ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Szmant, Alina Sent: Mon 27/2/06 1:09 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline For those of you loooking for how some scientists are trying to desseminate the word.... ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From: Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST) To: Subject: University of Texas Ocean Research Webcast Dear Science Enthusiast, University of Texas at Austin Webcast Entitled "Brave New Ocean." A webcast presentation given by Professor Jeremy Jackson, William E. and Mary B. Ritter Professor and Director of the Geosciences Research Division at Scripps Institution of Oceanography will be March 3, 2006 at 7pm. Dr. Jeremy Jackson is one of the most prominent marine ecologists in the world and he has a message to get out about the world's oceans - it documents declines in coral reefs, decreasing numbers of large marine fish, and losses of coastal and marine ecosystems. More than just an academic researcher, Dr. Jackson has actively searched for innovative ways to reach the public, applying his skills as a communicator with his scientific knowledge to inspire action. Dr. Jackson desires to reach a broader audience and affect change into the future with tomorrow's generation on this topic of interest. View a FREE web broadcast of the lecture live Friday, March 3, 2006 at 7 pm CST. During the live webcast, you can submit questions to Dr. Jackson and he will answer as many as he can for the live and webcast audiences. If possible, can you distribute or post a link to this webcast on your website, newsletter, or listserv as well as pass this notice on to any colleagues of yours that may be interested. The link to our Lecture Series website, where the details of the lecture and the webcast can be found, is: http://www.esi.utexas.edu/outreach/ols/lectures/Jackson/ Please let me know if you will consider posting this information. Thanks for your time, Brian Zavala Environmental Science Institute The University of Texas at Austin brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu 512.471.5847 ------ End of Forwarded Message _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From treesandseas at yahoo.com Tue Feb 28 22:51:15 2006 From: treesandseas at yahoo.com (Trees Seas) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 19:51:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060301035115.72877.qmail@web32709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Many thanks to everyone who responded to my query about a good underwater camera. The advice was greatly appreciated! Michelle Reyes __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From ricksanders at comcast.net Tue Feb 28 00:44:10 2006 From: ricksanders at comcast.net (Rick Sanders) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 00:44:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen onreefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas References: Message-ID: <007201c63c29$ffade530$650da8c0@manta> Raphael, That photo looks like it? I have gotten so many responses and I haven't had a chance to write back to thank any of you for sending your information on the macro algae. The photo you sent looks like a good example of the what I saw on the reefs in Cat Island. Quite a few other also suggested it was Microdictyon. Who is doing work on this algae and its impacts in the Bahamas? It seems strange that this algae is popping up in such remote locations...it has been suggested that currents may be carrying nutrients into these areas from other locations where the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients are greater. What is the impact that Microdictyon is having on these reefs? It seems to be overgrowing many healthy corals. It was also mentioned in other responses that I have gotten that this algae is seasonal. Does this mean that it's impact is only temporary and the impacted corals have a chance to recover from the infestation? Thanks again for the great photo and information, Rick Rick Sanders President Deep Blue Solutions 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "Raphael Williams" To: Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 4:13 PM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen onreefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas > Hi Rick this is probably a species of Microdictyon, I've attached a photo > from Sweetings Key, Bahamas. We found it there very common. I usually > use > the Littler's book "Caribbean Reef Plants" to id the common algae, it is a > very useful guide, written by Diane Littler and Mark Littler, 2000, > published by OffShore Graphics Inc. I hope this helps. Cheers,Raphael > > Raphael Ritson-Williams > Laboratory Technician Marine Chemical Ecology > Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce > 701 Seaway Dr, Fort Pierce, Fl, 34949 > (772) 465-6630 x146 > williams at sms.si.edu > >>>> "Rick Sanders" 02/21 1:34 PM >>> > Dear Listers, > > I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find > an > image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I > dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been > unable > to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. > > Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish > brown > color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each > other > in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped > into > more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm > in > width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if > to > crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing > many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. > > I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs > there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the > first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what > I > am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a > copy or link. > > Thanks very much in advance, > > Best regards, > > Rick > > > Rick Sanders > Deep Blue Solutions > Media, PA > 610-892-5272 > ricksanders at comcast.net > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From seaflower22 at gmail.com Wed Feb 1 03:55:34 2006 From: seaflower22 at gmail.com (Melanie Gomes) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 08:55:34 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Western Australia reference? Message-ID: <8793949b0602010055h2fcd9499h@mail.gmail.com> Dear All, Hope you are all having a good start to 2006! I was wondering if anyone could possibly help me to find a recent reference on the marine flora and fauna of Western Australia (I think this book was advertised on this list but can't seem to find the details). This was not the title although the book included, inverts and fish and was a general guide, a very good and recent one which I wrote down on an important piece of paper which I then lost! Any specially recommended guides on this part of the world would be appreciated as I'm going out there in March for a season to dive with the whale sharks and would also appreciate any recent refs on the sharks themselves for that matter. Thank you very much for your help, much appreciated. Best wishes Melanie Melanie Gomes B.Sc. M.Sc. From rousseau_herve at yahoo.fr Wed Feb 1 08:00:33 2006 From: rousseau_herve at yahoo.fr (=?iso-8859-1?q?herv=FFffffe9=20Rousseau?=) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:00:33 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] marine farm for sustainable development of aquariologytrade Message-ID: <20060201130033.85607.qmail@web25511.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hello, Frenchies answer to frenchies... If you need information in french about this topic, you can visit http://www.recifs.org which contain a lot of information about reef aquarium, aquarium trade, and sustainable development. You can focus on Vincent Chalias articles on aquarium trade, fishery and MAC (Marine Aquarium Council) activities. See you Herv? -----Message d'origine----- De : coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] De la part de yoann aumond Envoy? : mardi 31 janvier 2006 16:30 ? : coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Objet : [Coral-List] marine farm for sustainable development of aquariologytrade Hello, I'm a young french man with a degree in Marine Biology. I would like to investigate my self for the management of animal trade, and especially fish, for aquariology trade. This buisness make endangered the coral reef ecosystem physically and biologicaly due to the destructive practise (cyanure and explosive methods) which threaten the enormous diversity (important and essential for all the reasons you know). This practise occurs mainly in the south asia coral reef ecosystem which is the hot spoy for biodiversity. So I need more field information and a maximum of contact from people who are involved in this fight (scientist, association, local initiatives, possible grants....). I'm thinking about a project of a marine farm in the field, sustainable, which give a work to all the actual fisherman, give a high quality to the fish in the aim to reduce their mortality and the volume of export... I have a lot of good idea but I need support and help from people which know well this problem, from field, and are involved in and trust in the possibility to change the way of working (and of course the way of thinking). Thank you for you help and informations. Yoann AUMOND, "a motivated and hard worker dreamer" P.S.: sorry for my english, but I'm french... _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list ___________________________________________________________________________ Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international. T?l?chargez sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com From Chris.Ryan at irc-australia.com Wed Feb 1 18:25:27 2006 From: Chris.Ryan at irc-australia.com (Chris Ryan) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 07:25:27 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: Western Australia reference? Message-ID: <69D776850E99934E9FE517A99D52F2640111DBA6@ircs0001.intrisk.com> Hi Melanie This may be the reference you're after. Wells, FE, Walker, DI & Jones, DS (2003) The marine flora and fauna of Dampier, Western Australia: Proceedings of the twelfth International Marine Biological Workshop; held in Dampier from 24 Jul to 11 Aug 2000 [2 volumes Western Australian Museum, Perth, WA Cheers Chris Ryan Principal Consultant - Coastal and Marine Biology IRC Environment 26 Colin Street West Perth WA 6005 Tel: +61-8-9481-0100 Fax: +61-8-9481-0111 chris.ryan at irc-australia.com http://www.irc-australia.com Innovate | Resolve | Commit From reef at bellsouth.net Wed Feb 1 14:15:10 2006 From: reef at bellsouth.net (Vicky Ten Broeck) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:15:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] for coral list Message-ID: <20060201191512.HCBZ1691.ibm56aec.bellsouth.net@fiji> I am looking to go over to Madagascar this summer before graduate school to do coral reef research with a UK based non-profit and I was wondering if anyone knew of any agencies that might help fund the $5000 trip (6 weeks of diving research to help them establish a marine sanctuary). Thanks in advance! Vicky Ten Broeck Reef Relief Intern and Educational Assistant PO Box 430, Key West, FL 33040 (305) 294-3100 From treesandseas at yahoo.com Thu Feb 2 02:34:33 2006 From: treesandseas at yahoo.com (Trees Seas) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 23:34:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera Message-ID: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hello I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with an underwater housing) that takes good underwater pictures in natural light. I generally work in the 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so I usually use natural light to save on power. In my experience not all cameras that take good pictures above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind having to do a little color correction afterwards but I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater photos canNOT be color corrected. Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot Michelle Reyes __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From reefball at reefball.com Thu Feb 2 09:35:34 2006 From: reefball at reefball.com (Todd Barber) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 09:35:34 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <018c01c62805$ed9acad0$6501a8c0@LaFalda> Hi Trees, The Reef Ball Foundation's Coral Team has had very good results using the Cannon Powershot 400 series. The have an inexpensive housing that is rated to 100 feet. The trick to taking pictures in natural light is to set the white balance just before taking pictures and change it whenever you change depths. This can be done with the Cannon....whatever camera you get make SURE you can set the white balance with the controls available on the housing...many camera housings cannot control this feature on many cameras. The only disadvantage is the Cannon housing is plastic....so you have to be a bit careful with it heat wise. Also, if you are taking allot of pictures (more than 50 or so) in a short period of time, the lens tends to fog (common in most battery operated cameras) but using a little bit of mask defog on the underwater housing lens will usually stop this problem. Happy shooting. "take only pictures and leave only footprints," Todd Barber Chairman Reef Ball Foundation, Inc. 3305 Edwards Court Greenville, NC 27858 reefball at reefball.com http://www.artificialreefs.org http://www.reefball.org http://www.reefball.com Direct: 252-353-9094 mobile: 941-720-7549 Fax 425-963-4119 Personal Space: http://www.myspace/reefball Group Space http://groups.myspace.com/reefballfoundation Skype & MSN For Voice or Video Conferences: Available upon request Atlanta/Athens Office 890 Hill Street Athens, GA 30606 USA 770-752-0202 (Our headquarters...not where I work see above) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Trees Seas" To: Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 2:34 AM Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera > Hello > > I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with > an underwater housing) that takes good underwater > pictures in natural light. I generally work in the > 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so > I usually use natural light to save on power. In my > experience not all cameras that take good pictures > above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind > having to do a little color correction afterwards but > I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater > photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel > resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show > corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any > recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks a lot > Michelle Reyes > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From TDWYATT at aol.com Thu Feb 2 11:28:14 2006 From: TDWYATT at aol.com (TDWYATT at aol.com) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 11:28:14 EST Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera Message-ID: <59.36a3ea91.31138d1e@aol.com> In a message dated 2/2/2006 6:45:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, treesandseas at yahoo.com writes: Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Nikon D70, Prolly the D50 as well. HTH, Tom Wyatt _tdwyatt at aol.com_ (mailto:tdwyatt at aol.com) From Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov Thu Feb 2 16:24:30 2006 From: Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:24:30 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: 2nd Call - Requesting Data on 2005 Caribbean Bleaching In-Reply-To: <43DAA0C6.8030600@noaa.gov> References: <43DAA0C6.8030600@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <7A2DDF74-0D42-4AC6-895D-5BA448045803@noaa.gov> As an update on this request that we sent out last week, I want to emphasize that we also need reports from those areas that did not bleach. We need to get information from reefs that fell outside the thermal stress zone, or where stress was less severe to really anchor the bottom end of the response of corals to thermal stress. If we only have positive bleaching reports, we can't nail down the threshold below which we did not see bleaching. Thanks, Mark On Jan 27, 2006, at 5:37 PM, Jessica A. Morgan wrote: > TO: Bleaching Observation Contributors > FROM: Jessica Morgan and Mark Eakin, NOAA Coral Reef Watch > > Second call: Deadline for data submission to be included in our > publication is Friday, February 3. Please contact me if you will > have any problems meeting this deadline. > > --------------------------- > > As you know, bleaching reports from contributors have been coming > in from much of the Caribbean and western North Atlantic. The US > Coral Reef Task Force (USCRTF) Bleaching Committee has held > conference calls to bring together and solicit input from NOAA and > DOI personnel, as well as other federal agencies, NGO partners, and > local Caribbean scientists and managers. The outcomes of the > initial meetings include the development of a 3-phase response > approach (including an initial response, near-term reporting and > assessment, and long-term monitoring) and identification of key > partners, resources, and issues. > > A part of the first phase is to identify and assess bleaching > severity throughout the region. I am collating these reports with > the plan to produce a multi-author, quick paper to Science or > Nature that documents the event. From there, I am sure that more > publications will follow. Everyone who provides data that are used > in the analysis of the event will be included as an author on the > resulting paper(s). Our intent is to provide the broad, Caribbean- > wide analysis, comparing the thermal stress recorded from > satellites with local observations of bleaching and temperatures. > That publication will only include summaries of the information > that you submit. We hope that all of our collaborators will > produce more detailed national or local analyses to further > document the event. At this point we have almost 1000 observations > contributed by 70 individuals in 18 jurisdictions. > > To collect the details needed for the first analysis and to > establish a baseline for follow-up work, a spreadsheet > questionnaire (?CRW Carib Bleach Report Form?) has been developed > for bleaching reports. We would like to invite all ReefBase > contributors who have made bleaching observations for the Caribbean > in 2005 to expand upon the original ReefBase information by > submitting a more quantitative report via the attached > questionnaire (an Excel file) to coralreefwatch at noaa.gov. Please > note that we are only seeking quantitative reports for this analysis. > > The blank questionnaire form, along with information from the US > Coral Reef Task Force, NOAA meetings held to date, and more, are > available for download at the website http:// > coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/caribbean2005. > > Thanks to all of you for your help, > Jessica > -- > Jessica A. Morgan > Operations Manager, NOAA Coral Reef Watch > SSMC1, E/RA 31, Rm. 5309, Silver Spring, MD 20910 > Phone: (301) 713-2857 x129 Fax: (301) 713-3136 > Email: Jessica.Morgan at noaa.gov Web: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ C. Mark Eakin, Ph.D. Coordinator, NOAA Coral Reef Watch National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Satellite Applications and Research Satellite Oceanography & Climate Division e-mail: mark.eakin at noaa.gov url: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov E/RA31, SSMC1, Room 5308 1335 East West Hwy Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226 301-713-2857 x109 Fax: 301-713-3136 From matz at whitney.ufl.edu Thu Feb 2 07:59:29 2006 From: matz at whitney.ufl.edu (Mikhail Matz) Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 07:59:29 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: coral facility @ austin, TX Message-ID: <43E20231.8010207@whitney.ufl.edu> Hello listers, I want to thank everybody for an extremely enthusiastic and helpful response concrrning the design of new coral facility. I've been given a lot of advice and put in contact with the most experienced people in the trade. Now I can really see it all happening! cheers Misha -- -------------------- Mikhail V Matz, Ph.D Research Assistant Professor Whitney Laboratory for Marine Bioscience University of Florida 9505 Ocean Shore Blvd St Augustine, FL 32080, USA phone 904 461 4025 fax 904 461 4008 matz at whitney.ufl.edu www.whitney.ufl.edu/research_programs/matz.htm From ashadevos at gmail.com Thu Feb 2 22:56:58 2006 From: ashadevos at gmail.com (Asha de Vos) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 09:56:58 +0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Coolpix and Strobes Message-ID: <90f39b5f0602021956r514b0e19q@mail.gmail.com> Hi I've recently started using a Nikon Coolpix 5600 with underwater housing to take photos while diving. However, the flash is not very strong and therefore photographs (other than macros - which come out beautifully) are not very clear. Does anyone use this (or a similar model) of camera and if yes, can anyone recommend a compatible strobe that I could purchase? Thanks. Asha. From dhopley at austarnet.com.au Sun Feb 5 18:37:37 2006 From: dhopley at austarnet.com.au (David Hopley) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 09:37:37 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Palau photographs Message-ID: Dear All, A quick thanks to all of you who provided me with photographs of the Palau Rock Islands, or referred me to sources. I've tried to respond to everybody and am sending this out just in case I missed anyone. David Dr. David Hopley Coastal and Marine Consultant 3 Wingadee Court ANNANDALE QLD 4814 AUSTRALIA PHONE: +61 7 4725 2856 dhopley at austarnet.com.au From Georgios at icm.csic.es Fri Feb 3 16:58:25 2006 From: Georgios at icm.csic.es (Georgios Tsounis) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 22:58:25 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: underwater camera In-Reply-To: <20060202170041.80E481795F@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> References: <20060202170041.80E481795F@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: Hi Michelle, back in 2001 when 7 Megapixels were still expensive, we used a small sony digital compact with great success for a population structure study. The only drawback of the compacts compared to a digital SLR was the extreme shutterlag (annoying and at times stressful, but still tolerable with coral work). I would rather recomend something like a Nikon Coolpix 5000, if 5MP are enough, as our colleagues have had good experience with this one. If you need a certain range from wideangle to macro, then the compact cameras offer more flexibility than an SLR with a macro lens, and are much cheaper to house. The macro ability was quite astonishing to me, but it is important to check it out before purchase. I am pretty sure the coolpix range of nikons allow whitebalance settings. However, I suspect whitebalance has limits when used at 20m (did not ry this though). In our experience flash use under water was problematic with compacts. I usually switched off the build in flash, or blocked it by hand. Instead we used a divers light on a strobe arm to illuminate the corals and provide a focussing light to the autofocus. It worked fine, but required sufficient battery capacity. With some underwaterhousings (such as Sealux), you can connect an external flash. Amphibious flashes by Nikon are compatible with the Nikon digitals. However, you can only use the flash in manual mode, unless you use a pro SLR. For our work I really think 5Megapixels are sufficient. I found this website helpful in this regard: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm There is a wealth of information on the net about compatibility of cameras, housings and strobes. You can always ask questions about digital underwater photography on the forum mantained by: www.wetpixel.com. I think there was a good article on white balance by Alexander Mustard stored in the archives. You can see how we used the digicams in our work by downloading the results of our survey (3.6 mb document): http://elib.suub.uni-bremen.de/publications/dissertations/E- Diss1246_TsounisG.pdf Cheers, Georgios Dr. Georgios Tsounis Institut de Ci?ncies del Mar, CMIMA (CSIC) Passeig Mar?tim de la Barceloneta, 37-49 08003 Barcelona, Spain Phone: 34 93 230 96 07 Fax: 34 93 230 95 55 E-mail: georgios at icm.csic.es http://www.icm.csic.es Message: 4 Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 23:34:33 -0800 (PST) From: Trees Seas Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: <20060202073433.87687.qmail at web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Hello I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with an underwater housing) that takes good underwater pictures in natural light. I generally work in the 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so I usually use natural light to save on power. In my experience not all cameras that take good pictures above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind having to do a little color correction afterwards but I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater photos canNOT be color corrected. Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot Michelle Reyes _____________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 2 ***************************************** From thierry_work at usgs.gov Sun Feb 5 14:49:47 2006 From: thierry_work at usgs.gov (Thierry Work) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 09:49:47 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] mucus in the ectodermal epithelium of corals In-Reply-To: <003f01c624b5$d6dfa7a0$e3904084@es.huji.ac.il> Message-ID: Dear Yael: yes, mucocytes definitely are present in calicoblastic epithelium (at least in Porite compressa and lobata) as visualized on electron microscopy. I have, however, yet to see micro-organisms associated with this layer. Thierry M. Work Wildlife Disease Specialist USGS-National Wildlife Health Center Honolulu Field Station PO Box 50167 Honolulu, HI 96850 Tel: 808 792-9520 Fax: 808 792-9596 Cel: 808 554-6490 Web: www.nwhc.usgs.gov/hfs/Homepage.htm Check out the following references on microscopic morphology of corals. These may help: Goldberg W, Makemson J, Colley S (1984) Entoclada endozoica sp. nov., a pathogenic chlorophyte: structure, life history, physiology, and effect on its coral host. Biological Bulletin 166:368-383 Goldberg W, Taylor G (1989) Cellular structure and ultrastructure of the black coral Antipathes aperta: 2. the gastrodermis and its collar cells. Journal of Morphology 202:255-269 Goldberg WM, Taylor G (1989) Cellular structure and ultrastructure of the black coral Antipathes aperta: 1. Organization of the tentacular epidermis and nervous system. Journal of Morphology 202:239-253 Goldberg WM (2001) Acid polysaccharides in the skeletal matrix and calicoblastic epithelium of the stony coral Mycetophyllia reesi. Tissue & Cell 33:376-387 Goldberg WM (2001) Desmocytes in the calicoblastic epithelium of the stony coral Mycetophyllia reesi and their attachment to the skeleton. Tissue & Cell 33:388-394 Goldberg W (2002) Gastrodermal structure and feeding response in the scleractinian Mycetophyllia reesi, a coral with novel digestive filaments. Tissue & Cell 34:246-261 Goldberg WM (2002) Feeding behavior, epidermal structure and mucus cytochemistry of the scleractinian Mycetophyllia reesi, a coral without tentacles. Tissue & Cell 34:232-245 Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates Volume 2 Placozoa, Porifera, Cnidaria & Ctenophora by FW Harrison (Editor) Wiley Press. -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Yael Ben-Haim Rozenblat Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 11:25 PM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] mucus in the ectodermal epithelium of corals Hi all coral listrers, Does anyone knows if there is mucus secretion (or something similar to mucus) from the ectodermal epithelium layer of corals? (meaning the calicoblastic ectodermis, close to the skeleton), and/ or any microorganisms associated with this microlayer of the corals? Are there any publications or work done about this? I appreciate any advice and help , and thank you in advance, Yael Yael Ben-Haim , Pn.D The Institute of Earth Sciences The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Givat Ram Campus, Israel Office: (+972) 2 6586194 _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From keulen at murdoch.edu.au Fri Feb 3 01:08:30 2006 From: keulen at murdoch.edu.au (Mike van Keulen) Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:08:30 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera In-Reply-To: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20060203135409.0238a638@www.mail.murdoch.edu.au> Hi Michelle, I've been using Olympus cameras for some time and found they're excellent for underwater use. Most models have reasonably priced dedicated housings and third party strobes are available for them too. The ones I've used are the C-5060 (5 megapixel) and the C-8080 (8 megapixel) - I think these models have been superseded, but I would guess there would be a suitable replacement. Both the models I use have an excellent super-macro allowing you to get to within 2 cm of the subject. Colour reproduction is excellent. Cheers, Mike At 15:34 2/02/2006, Trees Seas wrote: >Hello > >I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with >an underwater housing) that takes good underwater >pictures in natural light. I generally work in the >5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so >I usually use natural light to save on power. In my >experience not all cameras that take good pictures >above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind >having to do a little color correction afterwards but >I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater >photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel >resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show >corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any >recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks a lot >Michelle Reyes > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Dr Mike van Keulen Lecturer in Plant Sciences and Marine Biology Research Director - Coral Bay Research Station Murdoch University, WA 6150, Australia List-owner: Seagrass_Forum, Mangrove Ph: +61 8 93602369 E-mail: keulen at murdoch.edu.au Fax: +61 8 93606303 URL: http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~keulen/ From jware at erols.com Fri Feb 3 09:34:36 2006 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 09:34:36 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43E369FC.4090403@erols.com> Michelle, I would guess that you are going to get dozens of replies and end up just as confused as before. First question back to you is: How much money do you have? Next would be: Why natural light? (and let me tell you why later). As you have noted, the thing that limits the number of UW pictures you can take in one dive is usually power. So having come to that conclusion let me point out that: 1- The primary camera battery drain is the LCD (or whatever) display. Therefore, if your need is to take 100+ pictures per dive or per excursion (e.g., on a small boat and can't change batteries) go with an SLR (single lens reflex) and set the camera so that it only displays on the LCD for a few seconds after the picture is taken (to assure that you have actually got a decent picture. Using my Nikon D70, I have taken hundreds and hundreds of pictures over the course of a week on a single battery charge. 2- The strobe. I know you wanted to use natural light, but that doesn't always work depending upon depth and the screwing around underwater with white balance. If you use a strobe that holds 8 AAs (e.g. Sea&Sea YS90) and use NiMH batteries rated at 2000+ Ma, you should get at least 200 full strobe flashes. Since you won't need full strobe for most pictures, the actual number will be much greater. My only experience is with the Nikon D70 in a Sea&Sea housing. However, I have friends who use a EOS rebel in a Ikelite housing with the new digital TTL in the housing. I seem to recall that Yossi Loya was not too happy with his at first, I don't know about now. Nikon makes 2 very good, and reasonably priced, digital cameras, the D50 and the D70. About the only difference from a practical viewpoint is the storage media. I prefer the D70 because the compact flash storage is sturdy. Only 6 MegPix but that is plenty because of what appears to be superior interpolation scheme. Also, Nikon has a zoom lens, often part of the purchase package, 28 to 80. This gives reasonable wide angle and still allows sufficient close ups. However, you must make sure that the housing will allow adjusting the zoom as Nikon has a couple of different but very similar lenses, one that doesn't quite fit. But now the price. The camera is not too bad, its the housings that kill you. I suspect that, as with most research, money is limiting. The set ups I have been describing will probably cost about US3000 for everything, maybe even a little more. Having said that, my long experience in UW photography is that, whenever I have tried to go cheap I eventually end up so dissatisfied that I end up buying twice. John Trees Seas wrote: >Hello > >I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with >an underwater housing) that takes good underwater >pictures in natural light. I generally work in the >5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so >I usually use natural light to save on power. In my >experience not all cameras that take good pictures >above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind >having to do a little color correction afterwards but >I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater >photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel >resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show >corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any >recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks a lot >Michelle Reyes > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886, USA * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * http://www.seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * Treasurer and Member of the Council: * * International Society for Reef Studies * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Untainted by Technology \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************* From John.Rollino at earthtech.com Fri Feb 3 07:40:19 2006 From: John.Rollino at earthtech.com (Rollino, John) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 04:40:19 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Species List - CARICOMP Algae Classification Message-ID: <0FE7A03100C5D949A074D0A58DBCCEEA032D1ABE@usnycmail01.et.rootad.com> Hello All: Can someone direct me to a list that identifies which algal species are classified by CARICOMP as the following: * Turf Algae * Fleshy Algae * Calcareous Algae * Encrusting Calcareous Algae Thank you, John This e-mail is intended to be delivered only to the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and proprietary. If this information is received by anyone other than the named addressee(s), the recipient(s) should immediately notify the sender by e-mail and promptly delete the transmitted material from your computer and server. In no event shall this material be read, used, stored, or retained by anyone other than the named addressee(s) without the express written consent of the sender or the named addressee(s). From nithyrna at yahoo.co.in Sun Feb 5 11:47:21 2006 From: nithyrna at yahoo.co.in (nithy anand) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 16:47:21 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] query to coral microbiologist & biotechnologists Message-ID: <20060205164721.48797.qmail@web8314.mail.in.yahoo.com> Dear Listers, Is anyone working with Vibrioids and Pseudomonads associated with corals? I want to know the predominant species and total count associated with them. Somebody please help on these aspects. cheers, Nithy P.Nithyanand Research Scholar C/O Dr. S. Karutha Pandian Department of Biotechnology Alagappa University Karaikudi - 630 003 TamilNadu INDIA H/P: 9443743580 --------------------------------- Jiyo cricket on Yahoo! India cricket From shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au Sun Feb 5 19:22:57 2006 From: shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au (Shelley Anthony) Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 10:22:57 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] 2006/2007 Research Internships available at ReefHQ Aquarium, Townsville, Australia Message-ID: <43E696E1.7080308@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear Colleagues, I would very much appreciate it if you could forward this internship offer to appropriate students and staff, and/or post it on your university job notice board. We are also still seeking qualified applicants for a position to start in September 2006. Regards, Shelley / /As part of its education and outreach role, Reef HQ is offering four curatorial internship positions to suitable applicants for 2007. Each internship position involves one specialist research and development project, that will be the core duty of the candidate. However, interns will also assist with extensive water quality analyses, routine diving and field trips, construction and maintenance of aquarium systems, and other duties related to animal care. This program is designed for university-level or recently graduated individuals intending to undertake a technical or professional career in marine science, aquaculture or a closely related discipline. Please refer to the following link for further information: "http://www.reefhq.com.au/involved/intern/curatorial.html"./ /// -- Shelley L. Anthony, M.Sc. Acting Biologist - Coral Reef Ecosystems ReefHQ Aquarium/The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2-68 Flinders St. PO Box 1379 Townsville QLD 4810 AUSTRALIA Ph: (07)4750-0876 Fax: (07)4772-5281 email: shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au PhD Student ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies School of Marine Biology & Aquaculture James Cook University Townsville QLD 4811 AUSTRALIA shelley.anthony at jcu.edu.au ============================================================================== If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ============================================================================== From claudio.richter at zmt-bremen.de Mon Feb 6 11:31:09 2006 From: claudio.richter at zmt-bremen.de (Claudio Richter) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 17:31:09 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Meeting Announcement: ISRS European Coral Reef Conference 2006 in Bremen Message-ID: 1st Circular 6th European Coral Reef Conference 2006 European Meeting of the International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) 19 - 22 September, 2006, Bremen, Germany Welcome to Bremen! The 6th European Coral Reef Conference 2006 in Bremen is expected to bring together leading coral reef scientists and students to present and discuss state-of-the-art scientific results, education and outreach. It covers all aspects of research, use and management of reefs with a focus on European and European partner contributions from tropical shallow waters to high-latitude deep continental shelves. Date: September 19-22, 2006 Venue: University of Bremen & Center for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT), Bremen, Germany Organisation: Center for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT) Deadline for submission of Abstracts: 15 May, 2006 Deadline for Early Registration: 15 May, 2006 Programme Schedule A regional focus will be on the Indian Ocean and adjacent seas, taking into account the wealth of studies conducted in response to the 1998 bleaching event and the 2004 earthquake and tsunami. As another scientific highlight we expect first results from the IODP Tahiti reef drilling programme. There are many more interesting sessions, and abstracts on all aspects of basic and applied research are welcome! Please submit your abstract by 15 May, 2006! For details, please visit the conference webpage at isrs2006.zmt.uni-bremen.de On behalf of ZMT, the ISRS President and Council, we hope to see you in Bremen! Dr. Claudio Richter Zentrum f?r Marine Tropen?kologie Center for Tropical Marine Ecology Fahrenheitstr. 6 D-28359 Bremen Germany T. +49-421-2380025 F. +49-421-2380030 From michelc at squ.edu.om Mon Feb 6 23:29:13 2006 From: michelc at squ.edu.om (Michel Claereboudt) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 08:29:13 +0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Software to analyse coral video transects Message-ID: <30052D55-B224-46FE-B2AC-E6D2AD95E070@squ.edu.om> I have been off the list for a while. Apparently, a subscriber was interested in a software to analyse (sample I suppose) video transects of coral communities. I have written (still under development, but usable at this stage) such software. If anyone is interested I can email a copy. It works on both PCs and Mac and requires the presence of Quicktime. All formats that quicktime understands can be used as video source files. Dr. Michel Claereboudt Sultan Qaboos University College Agr. and Mar. Sciences Dpt. Marine Sci. and Fisheries Box 34, al-khod 123 Sultanate of Oman Tel: (968) 244 15 249 Fax; (968) 244 13 418 email: michelc at squ.edu.om From eweil at caribe.net Tue Feb 7 08:11:32 2006 From: eweil at caribe.net (EWeil) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 09:11:32 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Information on white plague outbreaks in the Caribbean Message-ID: <0b1ec65a6a674213a4b12aaaa117d18e.eweil@caribe.net> Dear listers, I am interested in observations and/or reports on outbreaks of white plague (or any other coral reef disease) during or after the mass bleaching event of last year in the Caribbean. I know there was an outbreak in St. John reported by Jeff Miller and we put something out from Puerto Rico where we observed and quantified WP outbreaks in several reefs that started around mid-late November. The outbreak was also more intensive in offshore, deep reefs (>15 m) with better water quality compared to inshore and/or shallower reef areas (???). If you have observed any outbreaks, could you please contact me and include the following information: 1- Disease 2- Date outbreak started (approximation will be ok) 3- Locality - reef (if possible GPS coordinates) and approximate depth interval. 4- Any assessment of intensity (proportion of colonies affected) and extension (area - reefs - etc) 5- Current status (still going or it arrested) 6- Any other information/observations you deem relevant Thank you all for your cooperation!! EW Dr. Ernesto Weil Department of Marine Sciences University of Puerto Rico PO BOX 3208 Lajas PR 00667 Pho: (787) 899-2048 x. 241 Fax: (787) 899-5500 - 2630 From david at trilliumfilms.net Tue Feb 7 20:47:58 2006 From: david at trilliumfilms.net (David McGuire) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 17:47:58 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] coral bleaching and selecting marine protected areas Message-ID: Hello, I am new to the list. I am working on a coral reef conservation documentary and would like to do some fact checking. Much of the underwater imagery is shot in atolls in the north and south pacific. We are supporting the NWHI MPA in the film as one solution to protect reef habitat. However, it is difficult to protect against global sea water temperature rises and large scale bleaching events. Would it be accurate to say that the NWHI are well situated geographically in the Pacific gyre to minimize the coral reefs exposure to sea water increase and subsequent bleaching events in comparison to other island groups or reef systems? The Hawaiian Islands experienced cool water temperatures in 1998 and experienced little bleaching effects. It is a bit of a leap perhaps but makes for a good generalized statement of support. Thanks for your advice David McGuire Trillium Films Sausalito CA From G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au Wed Feb 8 01:08:50 2006 From: G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au (Gillian Goby) Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 16:08:50 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] GBRMPA Current Conditions Report (3) Message-ID: <43E98AF2.5040404@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear All, *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the third Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 6 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, the threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region is currently rated as moderate. Sea temperatures in the southern GBR have remained significantly warmer than average (+ 0.5 - 2.5 degrees C) since December 2005 (ReefTemp), and are now exceeding the long-term summer maxima by up to 2 degrees C (NOAA HotSpot map). In contrast, recent heavy cloud cover and rain over northern parts of the GBR has kept temperatures close to average conditions for this region (Reef Futures). Central GBR waters have shown a warming tendency in recent weeks, with sea surface temperatures currently exceeding the January long-term average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C (ReefTemp). Consistent with these temperature patterns, reports of severe coral bleaching have now been confirmed for some reefs in the southern region, with minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer, and with the bleaching risk period far from over we are heavily relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ From jware at erols.com Tue Feb 7 11:01:37 2006 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:01:37 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43E369FC.4090403@erols.com> Message-ID: <43E8C461.4090609@erols.com> Not to belabor this UW camera thing, but I have been corrected: the Sea&Sea YS-90 uses 4 AAs, it is the YS120 that uses 8 AAs and, therefore, carries twice the milliamp*hours for the same type of batteries. John -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886, USA * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * http://www.seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * Treasurer and Member of the Council: * * International Society for Reef Studies * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Untainted by Technology \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************* From Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov Tue Feb 7 11:28:00 2006 From: Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:28:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Update: Bleaching Potential around Melanesia and Australia Message-ID: Melanesia: Bleaching Warning in Fiji-Beqa Warming in Melanesia continues. DHWs now exceed 8 in some areas to the east of Papua New Guinea and around the Solomon Islands. The region of heat stress may be contracting slightly around the Solomon Islands, but warming is now evident to the south of Samoa, American Samoa, and Fiji. A bleaching warning has now been issued for Fiji-Beqa. Australia: Heat Stress is Subsiding on GBR Fortunately, the center of anomalously warm ocean temperatures has moved farther south along the eastern Australian coast. The region of warming evidenced by HotSpot values over 1 degree C is now largely south and east of the Gold Coast, so the immediate threat to the GBR has ended. However, early warming such as this has frequently preceded bleaching stress late in the austral summer. The warming in the Timor Sea has also abated. According to our past data, some bleaching is likely at DHW values of 4 or above and large-scale bleaching and some mortality is likely above 8. We encourage researchers in these regions to watch out for signs of bleaching. Current HotSpot and Degree Heating Week charts can be found at: http://coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/index.html Improved time series graphics for index sites can be found at http:// coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/current/sstdhwsba_series_24reefs.html You can sign up for automated bleaching alerts at http:// coralreefwatch-satops.noaa.gov/SBA.html Please continue reporting bleaching events (or non-events) at http:// www.reefbase.org/input/bleachingreport/index.asp Regards, Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ C. Mark Eakin, Ph.D. Coordinator, NOAA Coral Reef Watch National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Satellite Applications and Research Satellite Oceanography & Climate Division e-mail: mark.eakin at noaa.gov url: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov E/RA31, SSMC1, Room 5308 1335 East West Hwy Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226 301-713-2857 x109 Fax: 301-713-3136 From sdalton at nmsc.edu.au Tue Feb 7 18:58:53 2006 From: sdalton at nmsc.edu.au (Steve Dalton) Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 10:58:53 +1100 Subject: [Coral-List] Management of disease outbreaks Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20060208105247.02428320@mail> Firstly I would like to thank everyone for their replies to my email regarding software to analyse video transects, the response was great, and certainly shows the benefits of this list. I was wondering if anyone has done any studies involving diseased corals where the active margin has been completely removed from the infected colonies and monitored the colony for reinfection? Has anyone had any success in stopping progressive disease/syndrome by removing the margin? Any comments would be welcome Regards Steven Dalton PhD student University of New England NMSC Postgraduate Representative National Marine Science Centre Bay Drive, Charlesworth Bay (PO Box J321) Coffs Harbour, NSW Australia 2450 Ph: 6648 3928 Mob: 0432 946 782 sdalton at nmsc.edu.au From thomas_houze at hotmail.com Wed Feb 8 05:47:11 2006 From: thomas_houze at hotmail.com (Thomas Houze) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 11:47:11 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: Request for Coral manuscript Message-ID: Dear coral biologist, Recently I had the good fortune to see that the first batch of EST for the corals Acropora palmata and Montastraea faveolata are available for download from the NCBI. I was wondering if someone could please send me a copy of the manuscript as an attachment. I am particularly interested in what life-phase the samples used to create the ESTs where in that where used in the study. Thomas Houze, Ph.D. Bioinformatics G?teborg University Dept. of Cell and Molecular Biology Lundberg Laboratory Medicinaregatan 9C 405 30 G?teborg Sweden From ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com Wed Feb 8 12:02:46 2006 From: ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com (Eric Coral Inquiry) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 01:02:46 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Information/Literature on Mineral Accretion Technology (Biorock) Message-ID: <6400622e0602080902w3dd3f2caq3178e612c947a853@mail.gmail.com> Dear Listers, I am planning to carry out research on how MAT, Mineral Accretion Technology (Biorock) affect the growth rate of different coral species in my area. I would like to find out if there is anyone who has any helpful information, or literature references related to MAT, Biorock that can help me. Also, I like to find out if anyone currently doing any research on Biorock and I would like to get in touch with you. At the same time, would also appreciate your help on any existing literature regarding the species of coral found in Sabah (North Borneo) waters. 1) Info/literature on Biorock (I have already been to the Biorock website http://www.globalcoral.org/ , www.*biorock*.net/, www.*wolf**hilbertz*.com/) 2) Like to geet in touch with you if you are doing anything on Biorock 3) Coral Species found in Sabah (North Borneo) waters. Really appreciate your help on the above-mentioned matter. Eric YSY "Marine Biologist in the making" Kota Kinabalu Sabah Malaysia. You can also reach me at: ericevany at gmail.com erjonah at hotmail.com From mjnewman at ucsd.edu Wed Feb 8 12:10:53 2006 From: mjnewman at ucsd.edu (Marah Newman) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:10:53 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons Message-ID: <3F2A27B5-FC18-44CA-8EFB-55300C6CF781@ucsd.edu> Hi All, I have several bleached coral skeletons and I need to calculate skeleton density. I have looked at several papers that detail methods for calculating density via buoyant weights, but I believe this is to get measurements of live corals. Since I have the coral skeleton only, is there any reason why I cannot simple use the basic water displacement method (aka Archimedes)? I know there is some concern regarding trapped air, but if I soak the corals overnight first in DI water, will this take care of it? Any comments as to why this will NOT work, would be great. Thanks. Marah Newman From cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw Thu Feb 9 07:18:39 2006 From: cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw (Chaolun Allen Chen) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 20:18:39 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] coconut crabs and horseshoe crabs conservation genetics Message-ID: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> Dear All, We are developing the conservation project targeted on two large arthropods, coconut crab (Birgus latro) and horseshoe crab ( Tachypleus tridentatus ) in the Indo-West-Pacific region. Our team includes two groups, one is developing aquaculture technique to propagate of these two species. So far we have quite successful results. The other group is developing microsatellite markers for conservation genetics of these two species. For this part of project, we are seeking for the help to collect a small portion of crab's appendage for genetic study throughout the region. For those who can kindly provide us samples, host our field collection, or just want to know the propagation technique of these two crabs, please feel free to contact me. Thank you in advance for your help. Allen Chen, PhD Associate Research Fellow Evolutionary Ecology and Genetics of Coral Reef Laboratory Research Centre for Biodiversity, Academia Sinica, Taiwan E-mail: cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw From csaenger at MIT.EDU Thu Feb 9 11:08:55 2006 From: csaenger at MIT.EDU (Casey Saenger) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 11:08:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Instrumental Salinity/Temperature in Bahamas In-Reply-To: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> References: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> Message-ID: <3762cdc14b847029eaef3aa95240017f@mit.edu> Dear All, Does someone know when noaa's CREWS monitoring of temperature and salinity began in the Bahamas? Thanks, Casey Saenger > Woods Hole Oceanographic Inst. M.S. #23, Clark 117 Woods Hole, MA 02543 508-289-3418 csaenger at mit.edu From szmanta at uncw.edu Thu Feb 9 12:20:07 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 12:20:07 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] New articles on e-journal "Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy" Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A6763A1@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Greetins All: The conservation oriented, free e-journal "Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy" has new publications that can be access through the URL below http://ejournal.nbii.org/progress/index.html ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From Eileen.Alicea at noaa.gov Thu Feb 9 13:04:32 2006 From: Eileen.Alicea at noaa.gov (Eileen Alicea) Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 13:04:32 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Searching for Carib fish out-of-water photos Message-ID: <43EB8430.4010503@noaa.gov> Hello Coral listers, I'm working with the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources on the development of a Spanish (regulated) fish guide for their enforcement officers. We are collecting excellent resolution photos of fish out of the water because they are more realistic for the rangers to learn from and use when inspecting fishers' catches. We have many so far but I'm still searching for the following. We have already searched the DNER files, Fishbase.org and Google images and I'm in the process of reaching the photographers. If you can facilitate these named below, please write to me directly. It will greatly serve the coral reef and fisheries conservation goals of Puerto Rico. 1) Scomberomorus regalis- Cero; Sierra 2) Istiophorus platypterus or albicans; Sailfish - Pez vela. 3) Tetrapturus pfluegeri; Longbill spearfish; aguja picuda. 4) Epinephelus guttatus- Red Hind- Mero Cabrilla 5) Epinephelus striatus- Nassau Grouper; Mero Cherna Thank you, Eileen Alicea NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program From dbucher at scu.edu.au Thu Feb 9 18:40:49 2006 From: dbucher at scu.edu.au (dbucher) Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:40:49 +1100 Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons Message-ID: Hi Marah, Try the following reference for a discussion of Archimedian methods for determining density of bleached coral skeletons. The important distinction is whether you want bulk density/porosity or the specific gravity of the mineral matrix (microdensity). We recommended the use of acetone to penetrate the small pore spaces as the surface tension in water is too great to remove all gas bubbles. We accelerated the process by using a vacuum pump and a bell-jar to lower the pressure. Without the vacuum pump overnight soaking was not long enough - you need several days at least for porous skeletons. The acetone- saturated skeleton was then soaked in several changes of water. Acetone has the added advantage of dissolving residual organic matter (waxes, oils etc) left behind by the bleaching process. Buoyant weigh the saturated skeleton, dry it, coat it with a thin layer of parafin wax and buoyant weigh it again - if you accurately measure the specific density of the water in the weighing apparatus you can calculate the coral's total enclosed volume (matrix plus pore spaces), its dry weight and the volume of the matrix alone. It's not the most exciting thing you will ever do, but it worked for us. Bucher, D., Harriott, V. and Roberts, L. 1998 Skeletal bulk density, micro-density and porosity of acroporid corals. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 228(1)117-135. It's not the most exciting thing you will ever do, but it worked for us. See my small contribution to the next reference for an application of this method. K. Koop, D. Booth, A. Broadbent, J. Brodie, D. Bucher, D. Capone, J. Coll, W. Dennison, M. Erdmann, P. Harrison, O. Hoegh-Guldberg, P. Hutchings, G.B. Jones, A.W.D. Larkum, J. O'Neil, A. Steven, E. Tentori, S. Ward, J. Williamson, D. Yellowlees 2001 ENCORE: The effect of nutrient enrichment on coral reefs: Synthesis of results and conclusions. Marine Pollution Bulletin 42(2):91-120. Cheers, Danny Dr Daniel Bucher Lecturer, Marine Biology and Fisheries School Director of Postgraduate Studies and Research School of Environmental Science and Management Southern Cross University PO Box 157 Lismore, NSW 2480 Australia Ph: 02 6620 3665 Fax: 02 6621 2669 Mobile: 0414 864085 >Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:10:53 -0500 >From: Marah Newman >Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons >To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >Hi All, > >I have several bleached coral skeletons and I need to calculate >skeleton density. I have looked at several papers that detail...snip From sajhowe at yahoo.com Sat Feb 11 19:52:32 2006 From: sajhowe at yahoo.com (Steffan Howe) Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:52:32 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] Eritrean coral reef surveys Message-ID: <20060212005232.60854.qmail@web34707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear coral-listers I am interested in obtaining as much information as possible about coral reef surveys (biodiversity or monitoring etc.) or habitat maps (e.g. showing coral reef locations) from the Eritrean Red Sea for Eritrea?s Coastal, Marine and Island Biodiversity Conservation Project (UNDP/GEF). The Project has already conducted some of its own surveys, but if anyone out there as has any more information it would be greatly appreciated. Regards Steffan Howe --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos ? NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo. From thedivinebovine at gmail.com Sun Feb 12 21:20:32 2006 From: thedivinebovine at gmail.com (wai leong) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Whether Alizarin S dye affects coral recruits Message-ID: Dear coral-listers, I'm investigating the effects of depth on coral growth and survivorship for my final year undergraduate research project in the National University of Singapore. I will be setting out tiles on the reef slope for a 3-4 months before shifting them up to the reef crest and leaving them out for another 3-4 months before taking them out to measure any differences in size and survivorship. As part of this study, I'd have to be able to differentiate the recruits that settled prior to shifting from the ones that settle post-shifting. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I should tag the recruits, apart from trying to find them individually under a microscope before shifting and marking them by hand? I was thinking of marking them with Alizarin S, but am not sure about any effects this might have on the recruits. I should be able to use a low concentration since I'm only trying to faintly dye the existing polyps to be able to tell them apart from the ones that recruit later on. Would appreciate any advice or suggestions anyone might have about this. Thank you! Sincerely, Leong Wai leongwai at nus.edu.sg From will_m_holden at hotmail.com Sat Feb 11 14:57:53 2006 From: will_m_holden at hotmail.com (Will Holden) Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 19:57:53 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] the next step Message-ID: Hi, my name is william holden and i have recently graduated from Newcastle University with a 2:1 degree in Marine biology. I am based in the Uk and am currently looking for work. Whilst this email is an attempt to get advice fon the best way of going about finding work, i do not want people to read this and simply think i am trying to sell myself to the highest bidder (if there happen to be any) I am hoping to get a job either working in a recognised aquarium in the Uk or at a dive centre as it is scuba diving that i am interested in and wish to pursue. This email is merely to ask for advice and any advice given would be gratefully received. Many thanks Will Holden _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN Search Toolbar now includes Desktop search! http://toolbar.msn.co.uk/ From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Mon Feb 13 18:24:00 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:24:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] New Coral-List Posting Policy Message-ID: <1214c8122b5a.122b5a1214c8@noaa.gov> Greetings! I'm afraid the amount of incoming spam to coral-list has become way too burdensome for the coral-list administrators. From now on, all messages from non-members will be automatically discarded, instead of being queued for review. For those of you who like to read from one email address yet post from another, you can add both addresses to coral-list, but enable/disable the other (see http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list, bottom of page, to subscribe/unsubscribe and choose other delivery options). I realize some folks are not subscribers to coral-list and like to occasionally post job or meeting announcements, and when that happens we have sometimes approved those messages. If your colleagues fall into that category, let me know and I'll add them to a special "free pass" sort of category so that those messages can be placed in the queue for consideration. You might also want to review how your address appears to coral-list. For instance, your address may be listed as, say, john.smith at university.edu but when you post, it comes across as john.smith at mach1.university.edu, which might be rejected by the software. Again, check your settings at http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list. If you have any problems with posting a message, please let us know. Thank you for your support and patience. Cheers, Louis Florit Mike Jankulak Jim Hendee From personal at hellenfaus.com Tue Feb 14 07:11:06 2006 From: personal at hellenfaus.com (Hellen Faus ) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 13:11:06 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Presentation In-Reply-To: <20060213170042.BD7031795C@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> Hi all! I'm new at the list and at coral world research itself. I'm a Veterinarian but not working in clinics but in travel and dive issues. I've just discovered the amazing world of corals and want to bet for it and its knowledge and conservation here in Spain, where I live, and over the world. My idea is, with time and a lot of learning, becoming part of any project (new or existent) that involves he sea health... Actually I'm collaboration in the translation into spanish of a web page dedicated to coral and plan to do a educative programme with time. At the end of the year I'll join a 9 months study of coral in the Australian and Indonesian seas, on board of Heraclitus, and meanwhile I want to learn and do as much as I can in this field... Just this presentation to tell you I'm learning a lot here, and would love to participate and have all the ideas you may give to me. Anything you consider to tell me, websites to look to, people to met, places to go, things to read, actions to do, ideas to carry on... do it!! Any help I could offer, any question or information you want to ask me -not about corals as you are the experts ;-) - feel free!! Thanks a lot to all, and remember, here I am! Hellen Faus, DVM Spain. hellen at viajarsolo.com +34 658 421 629 -----Mensaje original----- De: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] En nombre de coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Enviado el: lunes, 13 de febrero de 2006 18:01 Para: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Asunto: Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 10 Send Coral-List mailing list submissions to coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov You can reach the person managing the list at coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Coral-List digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Eritrean coral reef surveys (Steffan Howe) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:52:32 +0000 (GMT) From: Steffan Howe Subject: [Coral-List] Eritrean coral reef surveys To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: <20060212005232.60854.qmail at web34707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Dear coral-listers I am interested in obtaining as much information as possible about coral reef surveys (biodiversity or monitoring etc.) or habitat maps (e.g. showing coral reef locations) from the Eritrean Red Sea for Eritreas Coastal, Marine and Island Biodiversity Conservation Project (UNDP/GEF). The Project has already conducted some of its own surveys, but if anyone out there as has any more information it would be greatly appreciated. Regards Steffan Howe --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos  NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo.From thedivinebovine at gmail.com Sun Feb 12 21:20:41 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Delivered-To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Received: by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (Postfix, from userid 504) id EF7B417952; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.domain.tld (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0152717950 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.194]) by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36EF9177C7 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 16so873573nzp for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:33 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=EYFv37Az2pz4SnGOY6LRlxh7kV2NoEMZshiR354Tdgta8+juuYrulgfSukykT2q1wwUFgZD6wg p/Ndvt7nKVgjenuoAAMvBg4aqCrUDNNVMjSGN0K31Ap0HdrFoz9If16fPuhslODtFDt0SNTkz1A6 aLQTCwSjlObxtUJggo6XY= Received: by 10.36.88.13 with SMTP id l13mr2188985nzb; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.36.36.6 with HTTP; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800 From: wai leong To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov MIME-Version: 1.0 /usr/bin/arc: /usr/bin/arc X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on coral.aoml.noaa.gov X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=HTML_00_10,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_BY_IP autolearn=no version=3.0.4 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 07:57:08 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.2 Subject: [Coral-List] Whether Alizarin S dye affects coral recruits X-BeenThere: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: NOAA's Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP) listserver for coral reef information and news List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Dear coral-listers, I'm investigating the effects of depth on coral growth and survivorship for my final year undergraduate research project in the National University of Singapore. I will be setting out tiles on the reef slope for a 3-4 months before shifting them up to the reef crest and leaving them out for another 3-4 months before taking them out to measure any differences in size and survivorship. As part of this study, I'd have to be able to differentiate the recruits that settled prior to shifting from the ones that settle post-shifting. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I should tag the recruits, apart from trying to find them individually under a microscope before shifting and marking them by hand? I was thinking of marking them with Alizarin S, but am not sure about any effects this might have on the recruits. I should be able to use a low concentration since I'm only trying to faintly dye the existing polyps to b= e able to tell them apart from the ones that recruit later on. Would appreciate any advice or suggestions anyone might have about this. Thank you! Sincerely, Leong Wai leongwai at nus.edu.sg ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 10 ****************************************** From manfrino at reefresearch.org Tue Feb 14 11:54:07 2006 From: manfrino at reefresearch.org (manfrino at reefresearch.org) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 09:54:07 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Little Cayman Research Centre opens for Visiting Researchers this spring... Message-ID: <20060214095407.cc3c2c4bf8d3647e4241dc6e34e2d1c6.eb2d37bf1a.wbe@email.email.secureserver.net> The Little Cayman Research Centre opens for visiting researchers this spring. The Central Caribbean Marine Institute is proud to announce that Caribbean's newest field station, the Little Cayman Research Centre (LCRC) fringed by the world-renowned coral reefs of Bloody Bay Marine Park, is open to researchers. The Centre opened to students late last summer. Shallow lagoon, wall, and deep ocean (several thousand meters) habitats are all within swimming distance of the LCRC field station. The coral reefs of Little Cayman are among the best in the Caribbean for research due to the fact that they are isolated from continental and anthropogenic influences and water quality is excellent. In addition to diverse oceanographic settings over relatively short distances, Little Cayman has a well-established marine park system and one of the last spawning aggregations of the Nassau grouper. For more information on the research centre, please visit [1]www.reefresearch.org or contact me or our [2]manager at reefresearch.org to book a project (group or class). Thanks, Carrie Manfrino Central Caribbean Marine Institute [3]www.reefresearch.org Dr. Carrie Manfrino, President P.O. Box 1461 Princeton, NJ 08540 Ph:(609) 933-4559 Caribbean Headquarters Little Cayman Research Centre North Coast Road P.O. Box 37 Little Cayman, Cayman Islands (345) 926-2789 References 1. http://www.reefresearch.org/ 2. mailto:manager at reefresearch.org 3. http://www.reefresearch.org/ From pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr Tue Feb 14 18:14:32 2006 From: pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr (sandrine job) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:14:32 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] Killing Acanthaster planci In-Reply-To: <43E98AF2.5040404@gbrmpa.gov.au> Message-ID: <20060214231432.46799.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Dear Coral List, Firstly I would like to thank all the person who answered my questions about the Culcita pleague I observed on one of my restoration site in New Caledonia. I will keep you inform on the progress on this phenomenon during the course of the monitoring. So far, from the latest observations I have made on site, their number seems to stabilise and only very few coarls were attacked lately. It thus seems to confirm that they were attracted by stressed corals just after their transplantation and now that transplants are adapting to their new environmeent (and repair their lost tissue), the mortality is lower... These trends need to be confirmed. Once again thank you coral list members and if you hear anything about Culcita let me know. Secondly I had a question about what is the best way to kill COTs? Is it appropriate to kill them under the water by smashing them? or should we remove them from the water?and what about pricking them to catch them? Is it true that they will release eggs and worsten their invasion?? Cheers, Sandrine JOB Gillian Goby a ?crit : Dear All, *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the third Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 6 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, the threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region is currently rated as moderate. Sea temperatures in the southern GBR have remained significantly warmer than average (+ 0.5 - 2.5 degrees C) since December 2005 (ReefTemp), and are now exceeding the long-term summer maxima by up to 2 degrees C (NOAA HotSpot map). In contrast, recent heavy cloud cover and rain over northern parts of the GBR has kept temperatures close to average conditions for this region (Reef Futures). Central GBR waters have shown a warming tendency in recent weeks, with sea surface temperatures currently exceeding the January long-term average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C (ReefTemp). Consistent with these temperature patterns, reports of severe coral bleaching have now been confirmed for some reefs in the southern region, with minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer, and with the bleaching risk period far from over we are heavily relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.T?l?chargez la version beta. From burdickdr at hotmail.com Wed Feb 15 07:03:06 2006 From: burdickdr at hotmail.com (David burdick) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 07:03:06 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? Message-ID: Greetings coral-listers, I am interested in obtaining coral recruit/juvenile coral data for the Bahamas from 2002-2004 but I haven't had any luck finding anything in the literature - any suggestions? I performed a small-scale study looking at the effects of macroalgal reduction and Diadema antillarum addition on a set of small patch reefs off the SW coast of Eleuthera and wish to compare the results of my juvenile coral surveys to that of other researchers in the area. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! David R. Burdick NOAA Pacific Islands Assistant Guam Guam Coastal Management Program Phone: 671.472.4201 From ccook at HBOI.edu Wed Feb 15 10:14:11 2006 From: ccook at HBOI.edu (Clay Cook) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:14:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Professorship in Marine Biology Message-ID: <2309E53F80BD7841A64800D44F69F71B270239@sailfish.hboi.edu> Dear Coral-listers, Note the following position that is currently available at Florida Atlantic University, as part of the joint FAU-Harbor Branch Oceanographic partnership. Inquiries should be sent to Dr. Rod Murphey, (rmurph16 at fau.edu),Chairman, Department of Biological Sciences. Please pass this on to interested parties. Thanks and cheers, Clay Clayton B. Cook, Ph. D. Senior Scientist Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution Ft. Pierce, FL 34946 USA Ph. 772-465-2400 x 301 Mobile 772-579-0599 Fax 772-468-0757 McGinty Endowed Chair in Marine Biology The Department of Biological Sciences at Florida Atlantic University (FAU) invites nominations and applications for the John Thomas Ladue McGinty Eminent Scholar chair position in Marine Biology. Candidates should be internationally recognized as distinguished leaders in their specific field of marine biology and currently have a well-established research program. We seek an individual deeply committed to both research and teaching, particularly at the graduate level, in order to enhance a new Ph.D. program in Integrative Biology. Special consideration will be given to candidates whose research takes full advantage of FAU's geographic proximity to the marine and estuarine environments of Florida and the tropical Atlantic-Caribbean region. Applicants from a diversity of subdisciplines will be considered including, but not limited to ecology, physiology, molecular biology and organismal biology. The McGinty Eminent Scholar will conduct a program of research that facilitates collaborations with departmental faculty and strengthens current collaborations with Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution (HBOI) and other marine institutes in the region. Biology faculty are actively involved in marine biological research at both the Boca Raton (www.science.fau.edu/biology) and HBOI campuses (www.hboi.edu). The Eminent Scholar will be active on both campuses having primary research space in the new 40,000 sq. ft. FAU-HBOI facility. He/she will be expected to guide the recruitment of several new junior faculty positions aimed at enhancing the Marine Biology initiative at FAU. The endowed chair position will be filled at the full professor level with a joint appointment at the Senior Scientist level at HBOI. Review of applications will start March 1, 2006 and continue until the position is filled. Further information regarding the position can be obtained from Dr. Rod Murphey (rmurph16 at fau.edu),Chairman, Department of Biological Sciences. Applications and nominations should include curriculum vitae, five representative publications, a short description of research and teaching interests, and names and contact information of three referees. Submit applications electronically to Mrs. Lynn Sargent (lsargent at fau.edu) McGinty Eminent Scholar Search Committee, Department of Biological Sciences, Florida Atlantic University, 777 Glades Rd., Boca Raton, FL 33431. FAU is an Equal Opportunity/Equal Access Institution. From reefball at reefball.com Wed Feb 15 10:30:52 2006 From: reefball at reefball.com (Todd Barber) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:30:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? References: Message-ID: <00fa01c63244$f657c530$6501a8c0@LaFalda> Hi David, You might check with the Island School on Eleuthera. The kids there did a Reef Ball project and various classes did various monitoring projects on them. I'm not sure you could give much power to any data collected since I doubt they had adequate controls or even consistent data collection methods but there might be something there for at least sounding board. Thanks, Todd Barber Chairman Reef Ball Foundation, Inc. 3305 Edwards Court Greenville, NC 27858 reefball at reefball.com http://www.artificialreefs.org http://www.reefball.org http://www.reefball.com Direct: 252-353-9094 mobile: 941-720-7549 Fax 425-963-4119 Personal Space: http://www.myspace/reefball Group Space http://groups.myspace.com/reefballfoundation Skype & MSN For Voice or Video Conferences: Available upon request Atlanta/Athens Office 890 Hill Street Athens, GA 30606 USA 770-752-0202 (Our headquarters...not where I work see above) ----- Original Message ----- From: "David burdick" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 7:03 AM Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? > > Greetings coral-listers, > > I am interested in obtaining coral recruit/juvenile coral data for the > Bahamas from 2002-2004 but I haven't had any luck finding anything in > the literature - any suggestions? I performed a small-scale study > looking at the effects of macroalgal reduction and Diadema antillarum > addition on a set of small patch reefs off the SW coast of Eleuthera > and wish to compare the results of my juvenile coral surveys to that > of other researchers in the area. Any help would be greatly > appreciated. > > Thanks! > > David R. Burdick > > NOAA Pacific Islands Assistant Guam > > Guam Coastal Management Program > > Phone: 671.472.4201 > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From F.Webster at murdoch.edu.au Wed Feb 15 20:43:11 2006 From: F.Webster at murdoch.edu.au (Fiona Webster) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:43:11 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Postings please Message-ID: Hi I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after references and/or unpublished data. Thank you Fiona Webster Phd student Marine Ecology School Biological Sciences Department of Science and Engineering Murdoch University From deevon at bellsouth.net Thu Feb 16 09:56:52 2006 From: deevon at bellsouth.net (DeeVon Quirolo) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:56:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20060216094920.026ff5c0@bellsouth.net> Dr. Brian Lapointe of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution and Dr. Peter Bell of University of Queensland/Australia both arrived at the same thresholds from different perspectives, but they are: 1 mg/L dissolved inorganic nitrogen, .01 mg/L soluble reactive phosphorus. You can contact either Lapointe or Bell for further info. These thresholds are far lower than any current water quality regulations. Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Reef Relief www.reefrelief.org At 08:43 PM 2/15/2006, Fiona Webster wrote: >content-class: urn:content-classes:message >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="utf-8" > >Hi >I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in >Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down >effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral >health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal >growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar >level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient >enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and >phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after >references and/or unpublished data. >Thank you > > >Fiona Webster > >Phd student > >Marine Ecology > >School Biological Sciences > >Department of Science and Engineering > >Murdoch University > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From dustanp at cofc.edu Thu Feb 16 10:39:04 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:39:04 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> References: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> Message-ID: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil From info at reefguardian.org Thu Feb 16 09:34:44 2006 From: info at reefguardian.org (ReefDispatch) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:34:44 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Will Development Smother Guana Cay Reef? Message-ID: <43F48D84.78CE@reefguardian.org> ****************************** * February 16, 2006 * * R E E F D I S P A T C H * * __________________________ * * Will Unwise Development * * Smother Guana Cay Reef? * * * * -- sign on via -- * *http://www.reefguardian.org * ****************************** A Periodic Inside Look at a Coral Reef Issue from Alexander Stone, ReefGuardian International Director ____________________________________________________ Dear Friend of Coral Reefs, The coral reefs off tiny seven-mile Great Guana Cay in the northern Bahamas is under threat by an irresponsible mega-development.? Scientists around the world -- including top coral reef ecologists, and coral pathologists -- agree that the Discovery Land Company's plans to build a golf course, 500 residential units and a 180-slip marina will kill the coral reef in a matter of a few years. You could help prevent this by speaking up for this coral reef through the Featured Petition at ReefGuardian's just-updated website at http://www.reefguardian.org. Coral reefs are in serious decline around the world, and especially in the Caribbean.? But the reef at Great Guana Cay is among the few remaining healthy reefs in the entire Caribbean.? This reef, which is only 45 feet away from the beach of the proposed development, contains an incredible diversity of reef fishes, sharks, and brilliant corals. But that will all become an algae-ridden dead zone in just a few years if the Discovery Land development proceeds as planned. That's why I urge you to get involved through the Speak Up section at http://www.reefguardian.org. The native inhabitants of Guana Cay have formed an environmental organization to fight this development. But they need all the help they can get. Normally, such small islands never have an international voice.? Help prove that even little islands can have a strong voice in defense of their coral reefs. Go to our newly-updated website at http://www.reefguardian.org to learn how. Thanks so much for caring! Alexander Stone Director ReefGuardian International *************************** http://www.reefguardian.org *************************** From rvw at fit.edu Thu Feb 16 09:36:11 2006 From: rvw at fit.edu (Robert van Woesik) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:36:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Funding opportunity: Six ISRS/TOC fellowships for 2006 Message-ID: <000001c63306$55445600$6c4876a3@CORAL> Dear coral-list, The International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) are very pleased to announce that in 2006 we will be supporting up to six Ph.D. students in the general area of coral reef ecosystem research. Each award will be up to US$15,000. Submission DEADLINE - 31 March 2006 The following text is available in pdf format at http://www.fit.edu/isrs/ Fellowship announcement for coral reef studies Six ISRS/TOC fellowships (2006): International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) graduate fellowship for coral reef research DEADLINE - 31 March 2006 - for funds up to US$15,000 per award are available to support up to six Ph.D. students in the general area of coral reef ecosystem research. 1) Background and Fellowship Goals "Considerable thicknesses of rock have certainly been formed within the present geological era by the growth of coral and the accumulation of its detritus; and, secondly, that the increase of individual corals and of reefs, both out wards or horizontally and upwards or vertically, under the peculiar conditions favourable to such increase, is not slow, when referred either to the standard of the average oscillations of level in the earth's crust, or to the more precise but less important one of a cycle of years" (page 79, Darwin, 1842 The Structure & Distribution of Coral Reefs). Indeed, Darwin would be surprised just how 'peculiar' those conditions are on contemporary coral reefs. In 2006 unfavorable conditions are ubiquitous on reefs globally. Scientists and reef managers are increasingly working together to develop sound management strategies that are based on rigorous science. Scientific questions are being addressed on reef disturbances and reef resilience, climate change and adaptation, reef connectivity, and effective management practices, to name a few. Many coral reefs are in poor condition, yet we know very little about the very threats that are undermining the integrity of coral reefs. What processes and mechanisms are causing differential mortality and how are some species still able to survive and indeed be successful in times of stress. Studies are needed that will combine management with process level information. Research supported by the ISRS/TOC Fellowship should increase our understanding of processes on coral reefs that are relevant to management at local, regional, or global scales. 2) Conditions Within the proposal, and as a condition of each ISRS/TOC Fellowship, recipients will be required to articulate how they will report back to the ISRS/TOC on their research progress, outline their findings, acknowledge the support, and publicize the outcomes. 3) Who can apply? The Fellowship is available to students worldwide, who are already admitted to a graduate program at an accredited university. The intent of the fellowship is to help Ph.D. students develop skills and to address problems related to relevant applications of coral reef ecosystem research and management. The Fellowship can be used to support salary, travel, fieldwork, and laboratory analyses. The student can work entirely at the host institution, or can split time between developed and developing country institutions. 4) Application materials A four page proposal as a pdf document, using 12-point font or larger, double spaced, in English, is required from prospective fellowship candidates: proposals that do not meet these criteria may be returned. The proposal should include the following sections: a. Overview: The overview starts with the Proposal Title, Author Name, Author's Address, Major Professor Name, Major Professor's Address (if different than the Author's), and total amount in the budget request. The overview should place the proposed research in context. We are looking for a clearly stated rationale, research objectives and a clear question that is driving the research within the context of the literature. b. Methods: The methods section includes hypotheses, methods, and experimental design - including details on field or laboratory techniques and how data will be analyzed. c. Relevance & implications of research: This section will outline expected outcomes, how the work is relevant to host country management and science issues and the implications of the research within a broader context. This section also includes evidence of host country coordination (e.g., identification of individuals or programs that will benefit from your results); The following three sections are required but do not count against the four page limit: d. Detailed Budget: The budget must not exceed $15,000. Evidence of cost sharing is desirable for the application. Cost sharing might include, for example, additional funding, accommodation, the loan of equipment, or access to analytical facilities. e. Literature Cited: Use a bibliographic format that includes full titles in the citations. f. Applicant CV: 2 pages maximum. g. Letter of support: The student's major professor must submit a support letter for the project based on their knowledge of the project, and familiarity with the student's background and abilities. If work will be conducted at another university, a support letter is required from the sponsoring Professor. 5) Submitting your application All application materials must be submitted electronically as follows: a) All materials must be sent to Dr. Robert van Woesik at: rvw at fit.edu b) The completed proposal (items 4a-f above) must be combined into a single document and sent as an attachment in pdf format. Please enter the subject line of your message as your last name followed by "ISRS/TOC Proposal" (e.g., "VAN WOESIK_ISRS/TOC Proposal") c) The letter of support (item 4g above) must come directly from the major professor as an e-mail attachment (pdf format). Please enter the subject line of the message as the last name of the applicant followed by "ISRS/TOC Support" (e.g., "VAN WOESIK_ISRS/TOC Support"). Applications will be considered complete only after the support letter has arrived. You should ensure that your sponsors are aware of the deadline, and can get their letters submitted in a timely manner. Only completed electronic applications will be reviewed, and this will be accomplished by an ISRS panel. 6) Evaluation Criteria include: a) scientific merit, b) feasibility, c) support letter from major professor, d) host country coordination, e) relevancy to the Fellowship guidelines, f) reporting strategy (on research progress and findings, see conditions in 2, above). 7) Administration of the Fellowship The International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) support the Fellowship through professional and administrative contributions. ISRS/TOC is committed to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination. The mission of the ISRS is to promote for the benefit of the public, the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge and understanding concerning coral reefs, both living and fossil. The TOC is committed to protecting ocean environments and conserving the global abundance and diversity of marine life. Through science-based advocacy, research, and public education, TOC promotes informed citizen participation to reverse the degradation of our oceans. Dr. Robert van Woesik Professor Department of Biological Sciences Florida Institute of Technology 150 West University Boulevard Melbourne Florida 32901-6988 USA Email: rvw at fit.edu http://www.fit.edu/~rvw/ Phone 321 674 7475 From chwkins at yahoo.com Thu Feb 16 11:17:01 2006 From: chwkins at yahoo.com (Christopher Hawkins) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 08:17:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060216161702.33190.qmail@web32802.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Phil- A good question. I know that TNC folks, as part of the Florida Reef Resiliency Program (which has state, Sanctuary, NOAA and university partners), is working on this as we speak. I am fairly sure they haven't inked anything concrete yet, though. Best, Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Hawkins at forwild.umass.edu Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil --------------------------------- What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos From pkramer at tnc.org Thu Feb 16 15:18:04 2006 From: pkramer at tnc.org (Phillip Kramer) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:18:04 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Phil- As Chris mentioned, The Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) has been working on this question for the past year. Finding few agreed upon quantitative metrics for assessing resilience on Florida reefs in the literature has led us to approaching it from a number of different angles- expert input, review and analysis of existing monitoring data, statistically based broad-scale surveys to quantify response to disturbance (in this case bleaching) across all sub-regions and reef zones that have been identified within the Florida reef tract, and finer scale investigations tracking coral survivorship along selected gradients. Below is a summary from a pilot expert based (delphic) exercise we did last year to tap into local knowledge. Not surprisingly, we found quite a bit of disparity between what experts thought were "resilient" often based on background/expertise/age of the person. From this excersise, we have a GIS database and can provide maps which identify over 43 "resilient" reefs as identified by experts along with the reasons these reefs were identified. This might be a useful starting point for where to start looking at some standard metrics. Steven Miller's group also has a very rich baseline dataset collected over a number of years for a much broader set of functional and structural indicators that may also help inform this question. If anyone is interested in the expert maps or an overview of the FRRP program just let me know. We can also share results of the first broad scale bleaching surveys carried out last summer. Regards, Phil Philip Kramer, Ph. D. Director, Caribbean Marine Program The Nature Consevancy 55 N. Johnson Road Sugarloaf Key, FL 33042 305-745-8402 ext. 103 Summary of South Florida Reef Expert Meetings on Reslience One of the initial goals of the Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) is to locate and map coral reefs within the region that exhibit characteristics of resilience. To arrive at this goal, several activities have been implemented by The Nature Conservancy during spring 2005. Along with conducting an analysis of existing coral reef monitoring data, anecdotal information has been collected from local reef experts to help identify where potentially resilient reefs are located. A diverse array of individuals with considerable first hand knowledge of the coral reef resources within the region were identified and subsequently interviewed for this effort. Three tropical sea life collectors, 2 fishers, 6 federal employees (NOAA and USGS), 1 state employee, 5 individuals affiliated with universities, 7 members of local non-governmental organizations, and 1 dive industry representative were involved with this process. These 25 individuals provided a wealth of information from a wide geographic range and from varying perspectives. Interviews with individuals or small groups were conducted over a 4 week period; from April 1 through Aril 26, 2005. During each interview, a similar range of questions were asked to ensure compatibility of responses. Reef experts were first given a brief description about the FRRP goals and overview of a number of activities currently underway. Each person was first asked to comment on the spatial framework which identifies unique reef ?strata? that occur within different subregions and cross shelf zones of the Florida reef tract. This spatial framework will function to identify distinct reef biotopes within the region and guide the a regional stratiofied sampling design to assess response to disturbances such as coral bleaching. Interviewed participants provided useful information on ways to improve the framework and/or confirm it?s accuracy from their point of view. Experts were asked if they know of existing data sets that may be useful for the further improvement of the spatial framework as well. In order to assess the geographic areas each individual is most familiar with, the zones and sub-regions within the spatial framework were used as a reference. Following these discussions, using nautical charts, benthic habitat maps, and other spatial datasets, reef experts were asked to identify reef or hardbottom areas they believe have maintained its functional integrity over the past years to decades given the various disturbances which have influenced south Florida. They were also asked if they know of ?special or unique areas? that may act as refuges (e.g., do not bleach when other areas do or have functional or structural characteristics indicative of resilience such areas with particularly high coral cover or large living coral heads, etc..). Interviewees identified a wide range of potentially resilient areas- from specific parts of individual reefs to entire habitats or zones. The information gathered from these interviews on potentially resilient reef areas was tabulated and then digitized in GIS. Along with these questions, we asked the experts to comment on why they belief these areas are showing signs of ?resilience? (factors of resilience). Finally, we asked each expert to describe what attributes of a reef is most valuable to them. Table 1: List of interviewed reef experts Reef Expert Organization/Occupation Geographic Area of Expertise Don de Maria Fisher Lower Keys Billy Causey Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Region wide Ken Nedimyer Tropical sea life collector Upper and Lower Keys Lad Atkins Reef Environmental Education Foundation Keys wide and SE coast Harold Hudson Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Keys wide Forest Young Dynasty Marine Rebecca Shoal to Middle Keys Bob Ginsburg University of Miami, RSMAS Region wide Margaret Miller NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami Dana Williams NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami Rodrigo Garza University of Miami, RSMAS Tortugas and Miami Michelle PaddockUniversity of Miami, RSMAS Upper Keys through Miami Bill Parks Tropical sea life collector Palm Beach County Gene Shinn US Geological Survey Region wide Bob Halley US Geological Survey Region wide Walt Jaap Florida Wildlife Research Institute Region wide Pam Muller University of South Florida Region wide Dr. Ray McAllister Prof. Emeritus, Florida Atlantic University SE Coast Stephen Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Timothy Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Debrorah Devers Vone Research (501c3) Broward County David Zinni Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Randy Brooks Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Jeff Torode Greater Ft. Lauderdale Diving Association Broward County Peter Cone Lobster diver Key West Erich Bartels Mote Marine Laboratory Region wide -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Christopher Hawkins Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 11:17 AM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Cc: Dave Loomis Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Phil- A good question. I know that TNC folks, as part of the Florida Reef Resiliency Program (which has state, Sanctuary, NOAA and university partners), is working on this as we speak. I am fairly sure they haven't inked anything concrete yet, though. Best, Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Hawkins at forwild.umass.edu Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil --------------------------------- What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From reef at bellsouth.net Thu Feb 16 16:47:14 2006 From: reef at bellsouth.net (reef at bellsouth.net) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:47:14 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] (no subject) Message-ID: <20060216214714.DCBQ1775.ibm67aec.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> RE: healthy coral in the Florida Keys I would suggest Western Samboos off of Key West. There is a lot of healthy elkhorn (alittle storm damage from Wilma though). Parts of it is from the coral nursery project that had great results (done by Reef Relief). The Dry Tortugas park is a great resource as well. Hope this helps! Vicky Ten Broeck From julian at twolittlefishies.com Thu Feb 16 18:17:33 2006 From: julian at twolittlefishies.com (Julian Sprung) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 18:17:33 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs Message-ID: <60146F1515751D4AA4CB4D3EC514F9E311AA1C@SERVER.tlf.local> It may be news to some members of the list to know that aquarists growing corals in reef aquariums come to essentially the same recommended background level for phosphorus, about 0.015 mg/L being a threshold that seems to be important in managing the proliferation of algae in reef aquariums. Some other observations about it - 1. corals will grow at substantially higher phosphorus concentrations in aquariums, especially when grazers are present to control algae. 2. Some corals will stop growing or bleach and die when the phosphate level is maintained not very much below the abovementioned threshold! This is a point of great interest as aquarists balance food inputs and phosphate export. Apparently corals can acclimate to lower levels as long as the transition is not too fast. Acclimation to "higher" concentrations, but still close to the abovementioned threshold, does not kill corals, but may cause SPS corals to become less colorful. It should also be noted that the observations may have some relation to the loss of corals to bleaching events in the most nutrient poor waters in the natural environment. There was already a long thread on this list about inorganic nitrogen in aquarium culture of corals, but suffice it to say that corals in aquariums grow well with background levels much higher than proposed for their natural environment. They also grow well at nitrogen poor conditions, but may bleach if the levels become too low in an aquarium, especially when food inputs are scarce. Maintaining low levels help promote bright color in (Indo-Pacific) SPS corals, as the "background" zoox brown color is reduced and other pigments become more obvious. When discussing nutrients I like to make an analogy that I think is appropriate-- I compare nutrients to light availability. If you think about sunlight on the reef, it comes in 2 distinct forms: background sky light and light from the sun itself. Nutrients as a background level (the abovementioned thresholds) could be thought of as analogous to sky light- all around and just right for normal growth. There are other sources of nutrients that are like the point source of light from the sun-- more intense and focused. Fish living (and eliminating waste) among coral branches would be an example of a nutrient supply that far exceeds the "background." These point sources (light or nutrients) seem to enhance growth. The analogy works but does not correspond with respect to water movement effects on nutrient availability. Julian > ---------- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of DeeVon Quirolo > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 9:56 AM > To: Fiona Webster; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov; coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs > > Dr. Brian Lapointe of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution and Dr. > Peter Bell of University of Queensland/Australia both arrived at the > same thresholds from different perspectives, but they are: 1 mg/L > dissolved inorganic nitrogen, .01 mg/L soluble reactive > phosphorus. You can contact either Lapointe or Bell for further > info. These thresholds are far lower than any current water quality > regulations. > > Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Reef Relief www.reefrelief.org > > > > At 08:43 PM 2/15/2006, Fiona Webster wrote: > >content-class: urn:content-classes:message > >Content-Type: text/plain; > > charset="utf-8" > > > >Hi > >I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in > >Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down > >effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral > >health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal > >growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar > >level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient > > >enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and > >phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after > >references and/or unpublished data. > >Thank you > > > > > >Fiona Webster > > > >Phd student > > > >Marine Ecology > > > >School Biological Sciences > > > >Department of Science and Engineering > > > >Murdoch University > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Coral-List mailing list > >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From colocha30 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 16 18:52:05 2006 From: colocha30 at yahoo.com (carolina castro) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 17:52:05 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Looking for PDF articles Message-ID: <20060216235205.65991.qmail@web34712.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear All, I am looking for some articles that I couldn?t be able to download. I would really appreciate if somebody could attach them on PDF format for me. Thank you. Brander, et.al., 1971. Comparison of species diversity and ecology of reef-living invertebrates on Aldabra Atoll and at Watamu, Kenya. Symp. Zool. Soc. London, 28: 397-431. J.B. Lewis and P.V.R. Snelgrove, 1989. Response of a coral-associated crustacean community to eutrophication. Marine Biology, 101(2): 249-257. J.B. Lewis and P.V.R. Snelgrove, 1990. Corallum morphology and composition of crustacean cryptofauna of the hermatypic coral Madrasis mirabilis. Marine Biology, 106(2): 267-272. Carolina Castro S. Biologa Marina UJTL Bogota, Colombia __________________________________________________ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ?gratis! Reg?strate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/ From gregorh at reefcheck.org Thu Feb 16 19:42:31 2006 From: gregorh at reefcheck.org (Gregor Hodgson) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:42:31 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <003301c6335b$0d0a57e0$0600a8c0@toshibauser> Hi Phil, I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and only one species of human. Regards, Greg -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From j.oliver at cgiar.org Fri Feb 17 03:31:44 2006 From: j.oliver at cgiar.org (Oliver, Jamie (WorldFish)) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 16:31:44 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef Scientist Position at the WorldFish Center - Penang Message-ID: Dear Colleagues The WorldFish Center has an exciting new position opening for a Coral Reef Scientist at the WorldFish Center. This is a normal staff position with a 3 year renewable contract. The Scientist would lead a new GEF-funded project examining lessons learned and best practices in coral reef management, and would also be expected to develop and lead other coral reef projects relevant to the mission of the Center. The position would contribute to, and assist in the strategic planning and oversight of ReefBase, the Center's global information system on coral reefs. This position will be one of several new positions currently being filled at the Center in the field of Natural Resources management, and offers the opportunity to join a dynamic new multi-disciplinary team seeking to make a significant impact on poverty and food security in developing countries. (see "jobs" on our website www.worldfishcenter.org ). Please pass this message on to any potential candidates or interested parties. Best regards Jamie Oliver Research Scientist - Coral Reefs Description: The WorldFish Center , located on the island of Penang , Malaysia , is a world-class scientific research organization. Our mission is to reduce poverty and hunger by improving fisheries and aquaculture. We have offices in nine countries and engaged in collaborative research with our partners in more than 50 countries. The Center is a nonprofit organization and a member of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). A unique opportunity has arisen for a gifted individual to contribute to the mission of the Center and make a personal impact on the lives of millions of less fortunate people in developing countries around the world. We seek a highly competent and motivated individual to fill the following position within the Natural Resources Management Discipline: Responsibilities: Provide scientific leadership and vision in the development of new research and knowledge management opportunities relating to coral reefs and associated ecosystems. Design, develop and submit project proposals relevant to the management and sustainable use of coral reefs in developing countries. Develop collaborative arrangements with advanced scientific institutions and national research systems to increase the outputs for agreed research projects Prepare proposals to development agencies for funding of new priority projects and the continuation of existing long-term projects Publish results of research in peer-reviewed scientific journals, and disseminate in web pages, newsletters and other popular media Prepare scientific reports for donors and WorldFish management Represent the Center at relevant high level scientific fora Supervise and mentor relevant staff Contribute to strategic science discussions and the development of science directions within the NRM Discipline and relevant regional strategies and global initiatives. Requirements: Phd in Ecology, tropical fisheries, or related discipline and 3 year's research experience related to coral reefs or tropical coastal systems. Demonstrated research innovation, publications in internationally reefed journals and the application of research to management issues Experience in assembling, organizing and analyzing large volumes of information from a variety of sources and disciplines and synthesizing these into clear themes and identifying emergent issues and ideas. Strong quantitative skill in statistical and spatial analysis, and relevant computer programs Excellent program management skills, including planning organization, and budgeting. Ability to manage several projects simultaneously. Experience in multi-disciplinary and multi-organization and multi-country projects. Ability to work effectively in diverse cultural contexts English proficiency and excellent project management skills The WorldFish Center offers a competitive remuneration package, a non-discriminatory policy and provides an innovative work environment. Interested applicants are invited to submit a comprehensive curriculum vitae that includes names and contacts (telephone, fax, and e-mail address) of three (3) professional referees who are familiar with the candidate's qualifications and work experience, via e-mail to worldfish-hr at cgiar.org, no later than 15 March 2006. Only short-listed candidates will be notified. ============================================ Jamie Oliver Director, Science Coordination The WorldFish Center PO Box 500, GPO, 10670 Penang Malaysia Street address: Jalan Batu Maung, 11960 Bayan Lepas, Penang, Malaysia Ph: 60 4 620 2209 Fax: 60 4 626 5690 email: J.Oliver at cgiar.org ========================================== From laura.jeffrey at imperial.ac.uk Fri Feb 17 04:26:23 2006 From: laura.jeffrey at imperial.ac.uk (Jeffrey, Laura) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 09:26:23 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] MSc Thesis Ideas Imperial Message-ID: <37629CD96DEBCF42B807EAD22EA7EF78C84EC5@icex3.ic.ac.uk> Dear All, I am a postgrad presently reading for an MSc in Environmental Technology at Imperial College, London. In April we are due to start our dissertations and my hope that I would be able to investigate coral reefs and their current level or protection through policy/initiatives and such like. I hold a 1+3 studentship so the hope is that this project will be the stepping-stone to a PhD in the same field. I have attached below my current thoughts and ideas regarding this subject. However, I am well aware that I am limited in knowledge on this subject and would therefore appreciate any suggestions that come my way. I was advised by a colleague that the coral list was the best way to go with regards finding the right experts to talk to; useful contacts; projects that are currently underway so that maybe I could join one; advising a specific region to focus on; further suggestions re the direction of my ideas so that they mat form a project and such like. Any help on this matter would be much appreciated! Yours Sincerely, Laura Jeffrey Project Ideas: Environmental Law/Policy and Biodiversity/Conservation: Coral Reef Project Ideas Coral Reefs are not only extremely aesthetically pleasing, but they support an extraordinary amount of biodiversity and have enormous economic value. However, at present coral reefs are at serious risk of decline considering the current trends in climate change (threats posed by global warming), coastal development, pressure from over-fishing, fishing practices such as cyanide poisoning and explosives and tourism, along with other environmental stressors. According to The Nature Conservancy, if the destruction increases at the current rate, 70% of the world's coral reefs will have disappeared within 50 years. Such a loss would have dramatic impacts on marine biodiversity, fisheries, shore protection, tourism and would be an economic disaster for those people living in the tropics. Dissertation: Initially set out to see whether or not the world's coral reefs are being sufficiently protected by reviewing (investigation into?) the current level of protection, including MPAs, any policy instruments, environmental agreements already in place to encourage protection, or lack thereof. Given the depth and breath of the subject matter, the study would invariably have to be selective....zone in on specific area/case study PhD: Is there a role for environmental law (policy/treaties) to tackle the environmental degradation of coral reefs? Assess the viability of transposing legal remedies to environmental protection of this endangered area with a view that the author would hopefully provide recommendations/possible options at the end! Included in thesis/PhD? * The best methods of protection are those that are specific to the problem, therefore explore the role of how science can inform policy here (make policy makers aware/political science of MPAs). * (From Dr Polunin, Newcastle, "and nearly all the science is derived from reef habitats that don't apply at al to continental shelf waters" ??? Significant? * What determines the most viable strategy? * What would influence uptake? * How would this be implemented and enforced? Specific criteria for successful implementation. * Interaction between different sectors, national, provincial, and local community level? I am aware that America is very forward thinking in this field and has initiatives in place. Maybe this would be an appropriate case study? Again, any help much appreciated!! From esther.peters at verizon.net Fri Feb 17 11:40:25 2006 From: esther.peters at verizon.net (Esther Peters) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:40:25 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? References: <003301c6335b$0d0a57e0$0600a8c0@toshibauser> Message-ID: <43F5FC79.7090506@verizon.net> Gregor and Phil make good points. As part of an exercise to look at reef classification for the purpose of developing coral reef biocriteria, I examined the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program data from the Keys collected in 1996, looking at coral cover, species dominance, and richness, and applying the "coral morphological triangles" (conservation class) concept of Edinger and Risk (2000). A preliminary comparison with the results obtained from the 2004 CREMP dataset revealed that just in those few years there were significant structural and functional changes at some offshore shallow reef sites. And of course, based on long-time Keys' residents and reef scientists, we know of even more changes over the past 25 years. The Nature Conservancy's diverse approach is also important to help us understand reef dynamics in the Keys and the influences of natural and anthropogenic disturbances. I'm not sure that anyone has figured out the "standard, or baseline reef." My first look at this issue indicates that even in the Keys there are several biotopes and more investigations are needed as to which one(s) should serve as "reference condition" for each class. Esther Peters Gregor Hodgson wrote: > Hi Phil, > > I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a > "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? > > Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be > a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It > is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs > given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, > sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing > conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging > will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. > > Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and > only one species of human. > > Regards, > Greg > > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? > > > Dear Listers, > With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency > underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as > measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or > Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". > Thanks, > Phil > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From esther.peters at verizon.net Fri Feb 17 11:56:47 2006 From: esther.peters at verizon.net (Esther Peters) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:56:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] 2006 Advanced Courses in Tropical Marine Sciences in the Florida Keys Message-ID: <43F6004F.1080103@verizon.net> The following opportunities for advanced studies on coral reefs will be offered at Mote Marine Laboratory's Tropical Research Laboratory in the Florida Keys this summer. Please use these links to learn more about each session and obtain application materials: Coral Tissue Slide Reading Workshop (July 25-28) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/slide_workshop.phtml Diseases of Corals and Other Reef Organisms (July 29-August 6) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/disease_workshop.phtml Secondary Succession on Damaged Coral Reefs Workshop (August 7-10) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/succession_workshop.phtml From l.bunce at conservation.org Fri Feb 17 12:14:52 2006 From: l.bunce at conservation.org (Leah Bunce) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 12:14:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] MPA Social Scientist position Message-ID: <64207F75AB45B54296B2E2DAA4DA9D8B08707302@ci-mail1.ci.conservation.org> Dear Coral Colleagues, I would greatly appreciate it if you would forward the announcement below to social scientists who might be interested or who know those who might. This is a unique opportunity to direct a large social science research initiative to further management effectiveness of marine protected areas worldwide. The position involves working with CI here in DC and closely with CI and partners in-country. For more info about the program, see . Thank you! Leah ______________ Leah Bunce, PhD Senior Director Marine Management Area Science Program Center for Applied Biodiversity Science Conservation International 1919 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 (202) 912-1238 l.bunce at conservation.org Position: Research Scientist - MPA Social Scientist Program: Center for Applied Biodiversity Sciences, Conservation International Location: Washington, DC The social scientist will be responsible for overseeing Conservation International's Marine Management Area Science Program social science research activities. This is a unique opportunity for someone with strong academic credentials and overseas conservation experience to gain experience managing a large program of applied marine research across many sites. Program research is focused around critical marine management area research needs related to management effectiveness, connectivity, resiliency, valuation, economic development and enforcement. Required: A solid understanding of the marine protected area social science field. Preferred: Four years of experience conducting applied social science research and translating the results into conservation action. Experience in tropical nations, preferably in one of the 4 priority sites (Brazil, Belize, Panama & Ecuador and Fiji). Project management experience, including planning, working with a range of colleagues, and budgeting. Experience conducting social science to benefit marine conservation and establishing a process to ensure the results are used by decision-makers. Flexibility and the ability to coordinate science activities outside the person's immediate area of expertise. Master's degree required, Ph.D. preferred. To apply: Application deadline - March 1, 2006 From hyamano at nies.go.jp Mon Feb 20 00:10:03 2006 From: hyamano at nies.go.jp (hyamano at nies.go.jp) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 14:10:03 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Dear colleagues, Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th ICRS, Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD-ROMs will be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send it to all the participants. For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the print. If the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop printing the Proceedings. More news will be sent as soon as I hear. Best wishes, Hiroya Yamano Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html From eborneman at uh.edu Mon Feb 20 10:00:11 2006 From: eborneman at uh.edu (Eric Borneman) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:00:11 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS In-Reply-To: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> References: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Message-ID: <09599ED7-B06F-4340-9BBE-76B3B0CA8921@uh.edu> Hello Hiroya: Thank you for the update on the Proceedings and I am greatly looking forward to seeing them and appreciate the work that has certainly been required to produce them. I am curious, though, about the printing. If the CD-ROM is already formatted, as it should be given the nature of the formatting required for submitted material, then any of thousands of print-on- demand printers should be able to produce bound volumes by a print-on- demand cost that can be from 1 to many thousands of copies. For example, one print-on-demand company found with a quick google search will print hardback copies (6x9) with full color covers, dust jackets, up to 500 pages and provide 10 free copies of the book for US $1000 and this includes free CD e-books and 30% royalties for each copy sold if they are the distributor and 50% of CD-ROM sales. I consider this to be quite expensive. I think others on this list I know who have written full color books over 500 pages would agree that we would not be writing (or selling) much if printing costs and selling prices were this high. While I don't have the details of the manuscript, the minimum order and costs seem very out of line with what I know about book publishing (which isn't much), having written two books. I think the cost of book series, such as Corals of the World, which are similarly large, colorful (which previous Proceedings have never been) and well made indicates what is possible. The costs of scientific publication have always been a mystery to me, to say the least, and in terms of most journals, an outrageous racket. If, however, there are very few orders for text-based copies I can see that the cost would be high, but I see no reason for it to be impossible for even one copy to be produced given the nature of POD technology today. I hope others on the list who have published books could comment further. Best, Eric Borneman Dept. of Biology and Biochemistry University of Houston Science and Research Bldg. II 4800 Calhoun Houston, TX 77204 On Feb 19, 2006, at 11:10 PM, hyamano at nies.go.jp wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th > ICRS, > Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. > > We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD- > ROMs will > be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send > it to > all the participants. > > For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. > However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the > print. If > the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop > printing the Proceedings. > > More news will be sent as soon as I hear. > > Best wishes, > > Hiroya Yamano > Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS > Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings > > ---- > Hiroya Yamano > UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement > BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia > Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 > Also at NIES > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From sjameson at coralseas.com Mon Feb 20 04:06:15 2006 From: sjameson at coralseas.com (Dr. Stephen Jameson) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:06:15 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Message-ID: Dear Phil, Thanks for the Coral-List note regarding: >> Dear Listers, >> With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency >> underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as >> measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or >> Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Per: Jameson SC, Erdmann MV, Karr JR, Potts KW (2001) Charting a course toward diagnostic monitoring: A continuing review of coral reef attributes and a research strategy for creating coral reef indexes of biotic integrity. Bull Mar Sci 69(2):701-744 "In multimetric biological assessment, reference condition equates with biological integrity. Biological integrity is defined as the condition at sites able to support and maintain a balanced, integrated, and adaptive biological system having the full range of elements and processes expected for that biogeographical region and type of environment (coral reef zone) (Jameson et al. 2001, Table 1, page 702). Biological integrity is the product of ecological and evolutionary processes at a site with MINIMAL human influence (determined by best available information)." As you well know, there is no reef in the Florida Keys with minimal human influence. For a recent summary of this situation see: Jameson SC, Tupper MH, Ridley JM (2002) The three screen doors: can marine ?protected? areas be effective? Marine Pollution Bulletin 44(11):1177-1183. So how could you approach this problem? Your question is assuming just using a "single" reference site to create a reference condition. (Note of caution: I would recommend using more than one reference site to create a reference condition for a specific biogeographic region. Also, reference conditions based on reference sites may incorporate considerable variability because of scale and in some biogeographic regions this variability may be unsatisfactory.) However, you can create reference conditions using a combination of the following types of data (Jameson et al. 2001, page 705). Each approach has its strength and weaknesses. Historical Paleoecological Experimental Laboratory Quantitative Models Best Professional Judgment References Sites But, before this question can be answered a few more questions need to be addressed. 1. What metrics and related organisms are you using in your monitoring and assessment program? Are you just looking at corals or are you developing a more complex invertebrate, algae and/or fish index of biotic integrity with a mix of species? For example, if you were using forams you might have good paleo data to create your reference condition with. If you are using corals, there might be good historical data or you might be able to use agent based models (like John McManus is developing) and run them backwards to get a historical perspective. Best professional judgment will also be a valuable resource for all metrics. Your sampling protocol is critical, it needs to be consistent and this will control what organisms are available for analysis - and determine what reference conditions are needed. If you can't create a defendable reference condition then your chosen metric is of little use. 2. What coral reef zone are you targeting (Esther's point). Different types of organisms will be found in different zones, so you want to be comparing apples to apples and not confounding (mixing) data. This will also influence what reference conditions you need to develop. 3. How far back in history do you want to go with your reference condition - pre-Columbus, start of the industrial revolution, pre-Miami development? Bottom line: just using a single Florida Keys reference site selected in 2006 will not produce a satisfactory reference condition in the Florida Keys situation no matter what metric/s you are using - which I know you realize. I am putting the final touches on the following paper that outlines these concepts in more detail. Jameson SC, Karr JR, Potts KW (in ms) Coral reef biological response signatures: a new approach to coral reef monitoring and assessment with early warning, diagnostic, and status & trend capabilities. Coral Reefs Also see, when it comes out: Jameson SC (in press) Summary of Mini-Symposium 4-2, Diagnostic Monitoring and Assessment of Coral Reefs: Studies from Around the World. Proc 10th Intl Coral Reef Symposium, Okinawa, Japan I hope this brief summary helps. All papers referenced can be downloaded at . If I can be of further service please give me a call. PS. Caution should be used with respect to using "resilient reefs" for reference sites as the fact that they are categorized as "resilient" suggests that they have been subjected to stressors and are not located in minimally impaired environments. We are looking for those reefs that have not bleached - which as Greg points out - will be harder and harder to find, thus reinforcing the need to use the other approaches for creating reference conditions. Best regards, Dr. Stephen C. Jameson, President Coral Seas Inc. - Integrated Coastal Zone Management 4254 Hungry Run Road, The Plains, VA 20198-1715 USA Office: 703-754-8690, Fax: 703-754-9139 Email: sjameson at coralseas.com Web Site: http://www.coralseas.com and Research Collaborator Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History Washington, DC 20560 ******************* > Gregor and Phil make good points. As part of an exercise to look at > reef classification for the purpose of developing coral reef > biocriteria, I examined the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program > data from the Keys collected in 1996, looking at coral cover, species > dominance, and richness, and applying the "coral morphological > triangles" (conservation class) concept of Edinger and Risk (2000). A > preliminary comparison with the results obtained from the 2004 CREMP > dataset revealed that just in those few years there were significant > structural and functional changes at some offshore shallow reef sites. > And of course, based on long-time Keys' residents and reef > scientists, we know of even more changes over the past 25 years. The > Nature Conservancy's diverse approach is also important to help us > understand reef dynamics in the Keys and the influences of natural and > anthropogenic disturbances. I'm not sure that anyone has figured out > the "standard, or baseline reef." My first look at this issue indicates > that even in the Keys there are several biotopes and more investigations > are needed as to which one(s) should serve as "reference condition" for > each class. > > Esther Peters > > > Hi Phil- As Chris mentioned, The Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) has > been working on this question for the past year. Finding few agreed upon > quantitative metrics for assessing resilience on Florida reefs in the > literature has led us to approaching it from a number of different angles- > expert input, review and analysis of existing monitoring data, statistically > based broad-scale surveys to quantify response to disturbance (in this case > bleaching) across all sub-regions and reef zones that have been identified > within the Florida reef tract, and finer scale investigations tracking coral > survivorship along selected gradients. > > Below is a summary from a pilot expert based (delphic) exercise we did last > year to tap into local knowledge. Not surprisingly, we found quite a bit of > disparity between what experts thought were "resilient" often based on > background/expertise/age of the person. From this excersise, we have a GIS > database and can provide maps which identify over 43 "resilient" reefs as > identified by experts along with the reasons these reefs were identified. > This might be a useful starting point for where to start looking at some > standard metrics. Steven Miller's group also has a very rich baseline > dataset collected over a number of years for a much broader set of > functional and structural indicators that may also help inform this > question. > > If anyone is interested in the expert maps or an overview of the FRRP > program just let me know. We can also share results of the first broad > scale bleaching surveys carried out last summer. > > Regards, > Phil > > Philip Kramer, Ph. D. > Director, Caribbean Marine Program > The Nature Consevancy > 55 N. Johnson Road > Sugarloaf Key, FL 33042 > 305-745-8402 ext. 103 > > Summary of South Florida Reef Expert Meetings on Reslience > > One of the initial goals of the Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) is to > locate and map coral reefs within the region that exhibit characteristics of > resilience. To arrive at this goal, several activities have been > implemented by The Nature Conservancy during spring 2005. Along with > conducting an analysis of existing coral reef monitoring data, anecdotal > information has been collected from local reef experts to help identify > where potentially resilient reefs are located. A diverse array of > individuals with considerable first hand knowledge of the coral reef > resources within the region were identified and subsequently interviewed for > this effort. Three tropical sea life collectors, 2 fishers, 6 federal > employees (NOAA and USGS), 1 state employee, 5 individuals affiliated with > universities, 7 members of local non-governmental organizations, and 1 dive > industry representative were involved with this process. These 25 > individuals provided a wealth of information from a wide geographic range > and from varying perspectives. > > Interviews with individuals or small groups were conducted over a 4 week > period; from April 1 through Aril 26, 2005. During each interview, a > similar range of questions were asked to ensure compatibility of responses. > Reef experts were first given a brief description about the FRRP goals and > overview of a number of activities currently underway. Each person was > first asked to comment on the spatial framework which identifies unique reef > ?strata? that occur within different subregions and cross shelf zones of the > Florida reef tract. This spatial framework will function to identify > distinct reef biotopes within the region and guide the a regional > stratiofied sampling design to assess response to disturbances such as coral > bleaching. Interviewed participants provided useful information on ways to > improve the framework and/or confirm it?s accuracy from their point of view. > Experts were asked if they know of existing data sets that may be useful for > the further improvement of the spatial framework as well. In order to > assess the geographic areas each individual is most familiar with, the zones > and sub-regions within the spatial framework were used as a reference. > Following these discussions, using nautical charts, benthic habitat maps, > and other spatial datasets, reef experts were asked to identify reef or > hardbottom areas they believe have maintained its functional integrity over > the past years to decades given the various disturbances which have > influenced south Florida. They were also asked if they know of ?special or > unique areas? that may act as refuges (e.g., do not bleach when other areas > do or have functional or structural characteristics indicative of resilience > such areas with particularly high coral cover or large living coral heads, > etc..). Interviewees identified a wide range of potentially resilient > areas- from specific parts of individual reefs to entire habitats or zones. > The information gathered from these interviews on potentially resilient reef > areas was tabulated and then digitized in GIS. Along with these questions, > we asked the experts to comment on why they belief these areas are showing > signs of ?resilience? (factors of resilience). Finally, we asked each > expert to describe what attributes of a reef is most valuable to them. > > Table 1: List of interviewed reef experts > > Reef Expert Organization/Occupation Geographic Area of Expertise > Don de Maria Fisher Lower Keys > Billy Causey Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Region wide > Ken Nedimyer Tropical sea life collector Upper and Lower Keys > Lad Atkins Reef Environmental Education Foundation Keys wide and SE coast > Harold Hudson Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Keys wide > Forest Young Dynasty Marine Rebecca Shoal to Middle Keys > Bob Ginsburg University of Miami, RSMAS Region wide > Margaret Miller NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami > Dana Williams NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami > Rodrigo Garza University of Miami, RSMAS Tortugas and Miami > Michelle PaddockUniversity of Miami, RSMAS Upper Keys through Miami > Bill Parks Tropical sea life collector Palm Beach County > Gene Shinn US Geological Survey Region wide > Bob Halley US Geological Survey Region wide > Walt Jaap Florida Wildlife Research Institute Region wide > Pam Muller University of South Florida Region wide > Dr. Ray McAllister Prof. Emeritus, Florida Atlantic University SE Coast > Stephen Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Timothy Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Debrorah Devers Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > David Zinni Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Randy Brooks Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Jeff Torode Greater Ft. Lauderdale Diving Association Broward County > Peter Cone Lobster diver Key West > Erich Bartels Mote Marine Laboratory Region wide > Gregor Hodgson wrote: > >> Hi Phil, >> >> I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a >> "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? >> >> Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be >> a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It >> is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs >> given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, >> sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing >> conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging >> will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. >> >> Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and >> only one species of human. >> >> Regards, >> Greg >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan >> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM >> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? >> >> >> Dear Listers, >> With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency >> underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as >> measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or >> Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From simmi_nuern at yahoo.com Mon Feb 20 09:32:24 2006 From: simmi_nuern at yahoo.com (Simone Nuernberger) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 06:32:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Coralliophila In-Reply-To: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Message-ID: <20060220143224.12107.qmail@web60313.mail.yahoo.com> Hi everyone, Can anyone please tell me (as detailed as possible) how the gastropod Coralliophila sp. affects hard corals and how this predation can be visually identified? Do signs of Coralliophila differ with the presence of algae in coral tissue? How can these predation scars be distinguished from coral diseases? One more question: Has anyone encountered a syndrome showing as ?green spots? ? small necrotic patches of light green coloration on the coral surface? Our studies were based in Indonesia and we mostly found these impairments on massive colonies of Porites spp. I appreciate your help! Cheers, Simone *************************************************************************** Simone N?rnberger (M.Sc.) simone_nuernberger at web.de Institute of Biology (Biological Oceanography) University of Southern Denmark DK-5230 Odense M --------------------------------- Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses! From habakuk at nova.edu Mon Feb 20 21:31:43 2006 From: habakuk at nova.edu (Lindsey Klink) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 21:31:43 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Mooring Buoy Questionnaire Message-ID: <20060220213143.2hlykz9pcks048k8@mail.acast.nova.edu> Mooring Buoy Questionnaire I am a Research Assistant with the National Coral Reef Institute (NCRI). I am currently conducting a mooring buoy use and effectiveness study. As part of this study I am compiling detailed information about mooring buoy programs around the world. To collect this information I have created a web-based questionnaire to be filled out by individuals associated with mooring buoy programs. To read more about this effort and to take part in the study, please visit: www.nova.edu/ncri/mooringbuoy.html Thank you very much for your time and any information about mooring buoy programs that you are able to provide! Lindsey H. Klink Research Assistant National Coral Reef Institute Nova Southeastern Univ. Oceanographic Center 8000 N. Ocean Dr. Dania Beach, FL 33004 USA habakuk at nova.edu From dustanp at cofc.edu Tue Feb 21 09:32:11 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Message-ID: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And probably haven't been for a long time. My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses that are far greater, supports this form of denial. Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even be up to R4 if conservation is successful. Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) From ctwiliams at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 11:59:39 2006 From: ctwiliams at yahoo.com (Tom Williams) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 08:59:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060221165939.90967.qmail@web50408.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Agreed - what is left after 50-100years of farm runoff, fertilizer, golf courses, bottle/dynamite blasting, etc. would be a better question - at this stage, every coral should be precious and protected, but they are in the wrong places.... Recent discussions regarding Arabian/Persian Gulf and Red Sea, and East Malaysia, Philippines, and Majuro/Marshalls can be added to the Keys. Costs $50 to reclaim and can sell for $500...OK But some for Dubai Claim that programs are underway to mitigate and compensate after the fact and since fish like the reclamation it is improved. Dr. Tom Williams The original is too long --- Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots > of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are > none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > My point is that before we talk about resilience, > maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of > their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost > over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the > 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing > vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been > talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in > full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to > minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be > worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully > engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, > or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, > some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or > boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no > point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are > the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting > (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. From szmanta at uncw.edu Tue Feb 21 12:35:10 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:35:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] FW: Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813A2D@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Dear Dr. Yamano: I am concerned about the proposed high cost of hard copies of the proceedings. Since I came to UNCW, I have helped our library acquire all of the series of proceedings (most we obtained for free from the various institutions that had published them) so that our students could use these valuable tomes to learn from and plan research. But my institution, as I am sure is true for so many others, does not have enough funds to pay for all the journals and books we need, and such a high cost could mean that they would decide not to buy this proceedings set. I suggest an alternative: The cost of the CD set is reasonable I hope. If the 10thICRS committee would permit non-for-profit academic institutions to make their own hard copies from the CDs, then each institution could find a less expensive way to make a permanent copy for their collections. It should certainly cost less that a few hundred dollars to print out a full copy (and there would be no shipping of heavy books across the seas!). It may not be as nice as a professionally printed copy but it will do the job. At least my university library would not do this unless there was an explicit permission to make such a copy so as not to violate copyright laws. Unless you can find a less expensive printer, I suggest you consider this option. It would be a shame if after all that work on your part, the Proceedings didn't find homes in our libraries. Sincerely, Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of hyamano at nies.go.jp Sent: Mon 2/20/2006 12:10 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Cc: paal.buhl.mortensen at imr.no; i04t0021 at k.hosei.ac.jp; purkis at nova.edu; c.roelfsema at uq.edu.au; rwaller at whoi.edu; p.kench at auckland.ac.nz; jan.helge.fossaa at imr.no; jgoodman at uprm.edu; Qamar.Schuyler at crm.gov.mp; yamano at noumea.ird.nc; andrefou at noumea.ird.nc Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Dear colleagues, Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th ICRS, Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD-ROMs will be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send it to all the participants. For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the print. If the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop printing the Proceedings. More news will be sent as soon as I hear. Best wishes, Hiroya Yamano Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From riskmj at univmail.cis.mcmaster.ca Tue Feb 21 12:45:43 2006 From: riskmj at univmail.cis.mcmaster.ca (Michael Risk) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:45:43 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: Hi Phil. Thanks you for crystallising the discussion, and articulating some of my own concerns. One of the many problems is: "All politics is local." (Tip O'Neil, American politician) It is always easier to blame the external. One of my students was in the back of a hall in the Keys 2-3 years ago during one of those public meetings, and heard a senior Florida reef manager say the decline in the reefs was caused by "All those Canadians driving down here every winter in their SUV's, making Carbon Dioxide." (True quote-no one has to MAKE UP things reef managers say.) Now, it may well be that no one should drive SUV's, but it cannot be said enough times: bleaching has had NOTHING TO DO with the decline of Florida's reefs. Everyone reading this list should repeat after me-and Phil-NOTHING TO DO. And now we see that the new kid on the block, FRRP, will focus only on bleaching. Something is badly wrong. We don't need more science-the science has spoken eloquently. In...2000? (help me, Walt, Phil-when was it?) I was a member of a NOAA panel that evaluated all the reef monitoring programs in the Florida Keys. (Why was there more than one, you may ask? In fact, there were about six.) Our conclusion was that monitoring had done its job. (Monitoring can NEVER identify causes, although a good monitoring program can allow selection of hypotheses.) In this case, the monitoring programs, especially the FMRI program, had successfully documented the regional mass extinction under way in the Keys. And that was the panel's carefully-chosen phrase: "regional mass extinction." We recommended consolidation of the monitoring programs, and an immediate increase in funding designed to rank the various land-based threats, in order that action could be taken. We also recommended an outreach program. That may be the key to the Keys. Every citizen of Florida should be told that: 1. there is big trouble in the Keys, and that 2. the causes are all local. The managers will be reluctant to be too assertive-after all, they have Big Sugar and Big God-knows-what watching them. The impetus has to be bottom-up. To coin a phrase. And we reef scientists have to learn that we score our own points at the expense of the ecosystem. Mike On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but > no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach > a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty > fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about > studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right > in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this > years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the > built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in > continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of > a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the > losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps > there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many > people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not > simply > sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s > > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of > having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats > their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and > denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > > than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or > slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the > R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might > even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor > is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > > -- > Phillip Dustan Ph.D. > Department of Biology > College of Charleston > Charleston SC 29424 > (843) 953-8086 voice > (843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From chwkins at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 13:15:18 2006 From: chwkins at yahoo.com (Christopher Hawkins) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:15:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060221181518.99270.qmail@web32813.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Phil and everyone: Your shot across the bow is welcome by some of us who realize that the biology only holds so much promise for a solution, and that there are a suite of things that need to be employed in tandem with the biophysical sciences to address these issues. I am not sure where I stand about remnancy vs. resiliency. It has a bit of a chicken and the egg connotation to it. Are some reefs remnant because they are resilient? Are they now resilient because they are remnant, for whatever reason? It is a tough one to wrap your head around... I'd like to comment, though, on one part of your posting, and that is the notion that promoting competition among dive shops with a "R" scale. I would think that identifying a reef as an R3 would prompt management to look more towards limiting activities at that site, rather than a "rush to destroy it" approach. At first glance, I might suggest that such a scale would be useful, though. However, it is critical not just to understand the reef condition, but also the users of that reef(s). Specialization theory (a human dimensions tool) offers a framework to do this. With specialization, we know that there are is a continuum of users from low to highly specialized (e.g. PADI Open Water Divers to Nitrox Divers), and that highly specialized users are the ones most likey to obey regulations and support management actions (Ditton, Loomis, Choi, 1992; Salz and Loomis, 2005, Salz, Loomis and Finn, 2001; Bryan, 1977/2000). Directing those users with to an R3, R4, or R5 reef would be then become a management alternative. In addition, management alternatives such as placing only a few mooring bouys at the highest "R" sites, would seem like a good strategy. Of course, all of this depends on identifiying resilient or remnant reefs and then scaling them, which seems to be what is causing some problems. And on understanding the nature of the area's user groups, which is never done very methodically. I have just identified one potential way to like resiliency to a conservation mechanism. I believe there are others, but we need to know all of the tools available. Thanks. Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Marine and Coastal Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And probably haven't been for a long time. My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses that are far greater, supports this form of denial. Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply sewage But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, Carysfort R1, etc Maybe this might help create public awareness and political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even be up to R4 if conservation is successful. Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. From ricksanders at comcast.net Tue Feb 21 13:34:49 2006 From: ricksanders at comcast.net (Rick Sanders) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:34:49 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas References: <6.0.1.1.2.20060118164353.02559c00@mail.waquarium.org> <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CAE9A@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <004b01c63715$7fa4b760$650da8c0@manta> Dear Listers, I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find an image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been unable to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish brown color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each other in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped into more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm in width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if to crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what I am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a copy or link. Thanks very much in advance, Best regards, Rick Rick Sanders Deep Blue Solutions Media, PA 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net From kruer at 3rivers.net Tue Feb 21 15:27:21 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:27:21 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <43FB77A9.7050007@3rivers.net> Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil Dustan. But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true change in direction. There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the amazingly productive Keys (and no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, and no it should never be held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with problems much broader than simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying that the problem with seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important figure easily dispenses with all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and filling, thousands upon thousands of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc etc., See how easy it is. And it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself during some of the countless consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I refused to play along with the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys all would be OK. What a joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo is going to change much is wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions to upgrade the Key West plant to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything measurable? And we were promised that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds good but can't happen on a scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of the Keys as I began to see myself as a part of the problem. The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the Keys ecosystem and manage human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too much attention is focused on a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that most else would be protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's limited funds on a new facility in Key West is going to change much? Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as stand alone systems and the problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands continue to be lost and degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are trying legally to protect the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving activity (and associated impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the state and the state points to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have taken place but it's not working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - but it's obviously not enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live bottom and predictably now hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of miles of slow-degrading poly line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to replace them every year just to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by the tens of thousands daily, fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot long cruise ships plow up the bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone effectively turns a blind eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. Shallow water marine habitats throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are subjected to the disturbing and destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster boats of all types. People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is failing. The rate of loss and anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that is what matters. Large vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's great. But new leadership is needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? Catering to virtually every user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in ecosystem protection or even maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef management in the Keys as a success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New leadership is needed and that leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and address all issues throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And they need to be loudly supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has the most knowledge about what has been lost and is being lost. Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and other lists will lead to something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and misdirected effort. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply > sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > From szmanta at uncw.edu Tue Feb 21 17:33:52 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 17:33:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813BB7@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Hello Mike, Phil and Curtis: The problem with attributing all of the loss of coral in the Florida Keys to local human impacts, as you three have done in your comments, is that the same pattern of loss of live coral is being observed in remote places of the Bahamas and other small Caribbean islands with small or no human populations, no sewage to speak of and no cruise ships. To ignore the dramatic effect coral bleaching and subsequent disease outbreaks, on top of overfishing, have had on Keys and northern Caribbean corals since the mid-1990s and especially since the severe 1997-1998 back-to-back bleaching events, is not helpful to conservation or management efforts. Bleaching has reached reefs that are distant from direct human impact as well as the Keys, with similar effects on both. Overfishing is far more pervasive than water quality degradation because boats go everywhere to extract the last lobster and grouper. The healthiest Caribbean reefs, if one judges that based on live coral cover, that I have seen in a long while are those in the lower Caribbean where they have, for hydrographic and climatic reasons, not been as impacted by either bleaching or major storms: Reefs on the S side of Curacao and Bonaire still have more coral now than what I remember for places like PR and the USVI back in the 1960s and 1970s. And they have high coral cover within 1 km of where the cruise ships docks and next to the outflow from the desalination plant. And they have very high rates of coral recruitment and no algae even on boulders with no Diadema, and few fishes. Go figure! There are many reefs on the GBR with water quality conditions far worse than in the Florida Keys (in terms of turbidity, nutrient levels and such variables) with much higher coral cover and diversity. Ken Anthony is even showing corals on these turbid reefs feed on the detritus and have higher growth rates than corals on more offshore reefs. Florida reefs have a disadvantage of being at the northern limits of the climatic window for coral well being in the Atlantic province, with way too many severe winter and summer storms. These geographic limitations have existed for thousands of years and have limited coral reef growth over Holocene time frames. When I first visited Nassau reefs in 1971 and the Florida reefs during the 1977 symposium, when my frame of reference was Puerto Rican reefs, my opinion of Florida/Bahamas reefs was that they were puny and depauperate. Now they are even more depauperate. That is no excuse to abuse them, but to ignore the climatic factor is not helpful towards restoring or protecting them (if that is possible). Multiple factors are at work, and a single quick fix will not do the trick. Over-simplification and trying to crucify a single factor will not help society deal with these complex issues. Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Curtis Kruer Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 3:27 PM To: Phil Dustan Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil Dustan. But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true change in direction. There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the amazingly productive Keys (and no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, and no it should never be held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with problems much broader than simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying that the problem with seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important figure easily dispenses with all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and filling, thousands upon thousands of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc etc., See how easy it is. And it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself during some of the countless consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I refused to play along with the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys all would be OK. What a joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo is going to change much is wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions to upgrade the Key West plant to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything measurable? And we were promised that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds good but can't happen on a scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of the Keys as I began to see myself as a part of the problem. The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the Keys ecosystem and manage human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too much attention is focused on a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that most else would be protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's limited funds on a new facility in Key West is going to change much? Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as stand alone systems and the problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands continue to be lost and degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are trying legally to protect the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving activity (and associated impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the state and the state points to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have taken place but it's not working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - but it's obviously not enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live bottom and predictably now hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of miles of slow-degrading poly line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to replace them every year just to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by the tens of thousands daily, fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot long cruise ships plow up the bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone effectively turns a blind eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. Shallow water marine habitats throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are subjected to the disturbing and destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster boats of all types. People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is failing. The rate of loss and anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that is what matters. Large vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's great. But new leadership is needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? Catering to virtually every user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in ecosystem protection or even maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef management in the Keys as a success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New leadership is needed and that leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and address all issues throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And they need to be loudly supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has the most knowledge about what has been lost and is being lost. Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and other lists will lead to something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and misdirected effort. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I'd like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it's patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there's a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we've know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply > sewage......But still we look for bright spots. I think it's because it's > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It's been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > than resiliency, I'd favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc... Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it's a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From knudby at gmail.com Tue Feb 21 16:48:14 2006 From: knudby at gmail.com (Anders Knudby) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:48:14 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] instrument to measure water depths Message-ID: <551b8dba0602211348y1e58fb60y20da80776e676217@mail.gmail.com> Hi coral listers, I am looking for an instrument that I can use to measure consecutive substrate depths on a reef. Ideally something that I can place on or just above the substrate, press a button to take a measurement (for direct display or preferably download later), and then move on to the next point of measurement and press the button again. Quick and simple. I have found a couple of instruments (pressure transducers) that almost fit that specification, but not quite, and I would like to hear if anybody out there have already found exactly what I am looking for. If so please let me know. (sorry to post a monitoring-related question in the middle of the more important remnancy discussion, seems out of place, but I'm trying to do my PhD..... thus perhaps scoring my own points at the expense of the ecosystem) Best regards, Anders Knudby -- Anders Knudby PhD Candidate Department of Geography University of Waterloo, Canada phone: +1 519 888 4567 x7575 e-mail: knudby at gmail.com From pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr Tue Feb 21 18:52:43 2006 From: pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr (sandrine job) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:52:43 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] Coral farming In-Reply-To: <09599ED7-B06F-4340-9BBE-76B3B0CA8921@uh.edu> Message-ID: <20060221235243.68069.qmail@web25108.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Dear all, I am seeking for any information related to coral farms, especially farms made in situ. The best would be to send me email adresses or web sites of Coral Farms. Thanks to you all, Cheers, Sandrine JOB Eric Borneman a ?crit : Hello Hiroya: Thank you for the update on the Proceedings and I am greatly looking forward to seeing them and appreciate the work that has certainly been required to produce them. I am curious, though, about the printing. If the CD-ROM is already formatted, as it should be given the nature of the formatting required for submitted material, then any of thousands of print-on- demand printers should be able to produce bound volumes by a print-on- demand cost that can be from 1 to many thousands of copies. For example, one print-on-demand company found with a quick google search will print hardback copies (6x9) with full color covers, dust jackets, up to 500 pages and provide 10 free copies of the book for US $1000 and this includes free CD e-books and 30% royalties for each copy sold if they are the distributor and 50% of CD-ROM sales. I consider this to be quite expensive. I think others on this list I know who have written full color books over 500 pages would agree that we would not be writing (or selling) much if printing costs and selling prices were this high. While I don't have the details of the manuscript, the minimum order and costs seem very out of line with what I know about book publishing (which isn't much), having written two books. I think the cost of book series, such as Corals of the World, which are similarly large, colorful (which previous Proceedings have never been) and well made indicates what is possible. The costs of scientific publication have always been a mystery to me, to say the least, and in terms of most journals, an outrageous racket. If, however, there are very few orders for text-based copies I can see that the cost would be high, but I see no reason for it to be impossible for even one copy to be produced given the nature of POD technology today. I hope others on the list who have published books could comment further. Best, Eric Borneman Dept. of Biology and Biochemistry University of Houston Science and Research Bldg. II 4800 Calhoun Houston, TX 77204 On Feb 19, 2006, at 11:10 PM, hyamano at nies.go.jp wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th > ICRS, > Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. > > We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD- > ROMs will > be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send > it to > all the participants. > > For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. > However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the > print. If > the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop > printing the Proceedings. > > More news will be sent as soon as I hear. > > Best wishes, > > Hiroya Yamano > Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS > Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings > > ---- > Hiroya Yamano > UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement > BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia > Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 > Also at NIES > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.T?l?chargez la version beta. From hyamano at nies.go.jp Tue Feb 21 19:23:08 2006 From: hyamano at nies.go.jp (hyamano at nies.go.jp) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:23:08 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <20060222002306689.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Dear coral-listers, Thank you very much for sending comments, especially on the hard copies of the 10ICRS Proceedings. I forwarded the messages to the 10ICRS program committee and asked reconsideration. We will decide the contact information for the purchase and also the price of the CDs for non- participants, in addition to the price of the hard copies. I appreciate to have received some orders of the hard copies, but please do not send more orders to me before the next news. We should be very pleased if you could let us have some more time for the details. I will let you know the news as soon as I hear. Again, thank you very much for your cooperation and patience. Best wishes, Hiroya ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html ---- From cat64fish at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 20:49:22 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:49:22 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB77A9.7050007@3rivers.net> Message-ID: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi everyone, Certainly an interesting discussion on the fate of the Florida reefs. Not being from the US, and never having had the opportunity to visit the Florida Keys, I am unable to fully appreciate the extent fo the damage that has been done to that rich ecosystem. Mike, as usual, you have cut through the bs and succinctly stated the problem in the Florida Keys. I suspect similar situations occur wolrdwide, where reef systems are in decline (for example, I've heard from fishermen how their reefs have been destroyed by blast fishing caused by fishermen from the "other" island). While sitting on the fence, and agreeing that there needs to be more science directed at the reef ecosystem, the impacts would seem to far, far outweigh the need for more exacting science. Conservation, and perhaps even the more exacting word, preservation, is needed, if reefs are to survive the human onslaught. Someone mentioned (I am not sure of it is on this list or somewhere else) that it was a good ting that there are many coral species and only one human. Be that as it may, that one species has the capacity to totally destroy the diversity that exists today. Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place. MPAs managed in isolation, was something else that was brought up in this discussion. While it is undeniable (at least to me) that MPAs do help in the conservation of coral reefs and other marine ecosystems, the term MPA itself is an "isolationist" word, as it implies some sought of boundary. "Enlightened management plans" that look at the totality of the marine system, that will conserve and sustain our marine resources, understanding that it is inter-connected and intricately linked system, are what is needed. I suspect that part of the reason that scientists treat reef systems in isolation is that if they did not, then there would be no "scientific" papers (as we know them) in existence. The momentum of publishing, or doing publishable research, is probably what is limiting the science from expanding beyond its narrow confines. Reef managers on the other hand, must not only be biologists, but people managers, ecosystem managers, fund managers, and sometimes, visionaries, all rolled into one. Good luck finding such people in great enough quantity to "manage" even the existing MPAs. To round up, I agree with Mike that "people power" may be the way to go to get the necessary protection for our marine resources. "People cannot love, what they do not know", or so I've been told. While I cannot "love" the Florida Keys, I do love the coral reefs in my own backyard, and sometimes the wrangling that goes on between scientists, conservationists and politicians, while the reefs are slowly but surely being degraded, is more than I can bear. Holding out for coral reefs the world over Jeff --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. From Craig.Bonn at noaa.gov Wed Feb 22 09:44:49 2006 From: Craig.Bonn at noaa.gov (Craig S Bonn) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:44:49 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43FC78E1.10008@noaa.gov> Hi listers, I recently accepted a position with the Dry Tortugas NP where I will be coordinating a monitoring program within a new 47 square mile research natural area recently established within park boundaries where all consumptive practices will be prohibited. Diving and snorkeling will still be allowed and a system of mooring buoys has been established for boaters to tie up to within the RNA. I have worked in the Tortugas for the past six years and have witnessed myself the degradation that is occurring there-- some of the reefs are almost completely dead and covered in algae while others (Sherwood Forest in the northern portion of the TER) while healthier in terms of percent cover are also exhibiting signs of degradation and that it may simply be not how but when these reefs will suffer to the point of no return. I also know that there are so many variables involved in what is happening to our reefs on a global scale that the task at hand almost seems impossible especially when you listen to the doom sayers who state that the worlds reefs will be gone in a matter of years if nothing is done to correct the mistakes we have all made with regards to stewardship of our planet. If we take a look at the variables involved: water quality, over fishing, vessel groundings, seagrass dieoffs, urchin dieoffs, bleaching, coral disease, the possibility that our planet and our oceans are warming with subsequent melting of our polar regions and of course one of the biggest problems in my opinion is complete lack of concern by many. Lets admit it, some people simply dont care and I think this has a lot to do with the state our world is in now, cultural, religious, and political differences also play a role here but Im not going to get into that. Anyway, Im looking forward to the challenges that this new position will present to me and my colleagues and I guess what Im asking for is some advice. I am very concerned as many of you are as well and I would like to part of a new approach to management issues of not only the coral reefs of the world but our entire world. I believe that education an outreach could play an important role and will be one of my priorities along with others. Any advice would certainly be appreciated, perhaps efforts focused on small areas can have a spillover effect in terms of getting the public really involved, but I think its going to have to be a worldwide involvement if we really want to improve things. But its only a start, we have to finish, and send the right messages to generations of scientists coming behind us to better improve things so that they, and we, can perhaps begin to see positive changes taking place for the planet we all call home. thanks Craig Michael Risk wrote: >Hi Phil. > >Thanks you for crystallising the discussion, and articulating some of >my own concerns. One of the many problems is: > >"All politics is local." (Tip O'Neil, American politician) > >It is always easier to blame the external. One of my students was in >the back of a hall in the Keys 2-3 years ago during one of those public >meetings, and heard a senior Florida reef manager say the decline in >the reefs was caused by "All those Canadians driving down here every >winter in their SUV's, making Carbon Dioxide." (True quote-no one has >to MAKE UP things reef managers say.) > > >Now, it may well be that no one should drive SUV's, but it cannot be >said enough times: bleaching has had NOTHING TO DO with the decline of >Florida's reefs. Everyone reading this list should repeat after me-and >Phil-NOTHING TO DO. > >And now we see that the new kid on the block, FRRP, will focus only on >bleaching. Something is badly wrong. We don't need more science-the >science has spoken eloquently. > >In...2000? (help me, Walt, Phil-when was it?) I was a member of a NOAA >panel that evaluated all the reef monitoring programs in the Florida >Keys. (Why was there more than one, you may ask? In fact, there were >about six.) > >Our conclusion was that monitoring had done its job. (Monitoring can >NEVER identify causes, although a good monitoring program can allow >selection of hypotheses.) In this case, the monitoring programs, >especially the FMRI program, had successfully documented the regional >mass extinction under way in the Keys. And that was the panel's >carefully-chosen phrase: "regional mass extinction." > >We recommended consolidation of the monitoring programs, and an >immediate increase in funding designed to rank the various land-based >threats, in order that action could be taken. We also recommended an >outreach program. > >That may be the key to the Keys. Every citizen of Florida should be >told that: >1. there is big trouble in the Keys, and that >2. the causes are all local. > >The managers will be reluctant to be too assertive-after all, they have >Big Sugar and Big God-knows-what watching them. The impetus has to be >bottom-up. To coin a phrase. > >And we reef scientists have to learn that we score our own points at >the expense of the ecosystem. > >Mike > >On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 > Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Coral List, >> I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about >> >>healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but >>no >>one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And >>probably haven't been for a long time. >> >> My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach >>a >>true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my >>calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their >>living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The >>Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty >>fast >>too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about >>studies, >>monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right >>in >>front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, >> >>even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to >>protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this >>years >>ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or >>look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to >>think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the >>built >>it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in >>continuing >>to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of >>a >>far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the >>losses >>that are far greater, supports this form of denial. >> >> Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long >>time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps >>there >>are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many >>people >>fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage >>system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not >>simply >>sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s >> >>more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is >>hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, >>sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of >>having >>a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? >> >> It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats >>their >>young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and >>denial. >> The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather >> >>than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) >>that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or >>slower >>in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the >>R >>scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, >>Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and >>political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between >> >>dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 >> >>when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might >>even >>be up to R4 if conservation is successful. >> Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline >> >>downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we >>need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor >>is >>wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. >> Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just >>imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From kruer at 3rivers.net Wed Feb 22 12:27:54 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 10:27:54 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813BB7@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <43FC9F1A.5020204@3rivers.net> Dr. Szmant, Thanks for the note. You are a reef researcher and you love to research and explore reefs around the world and you agree that Florida's reefs are under multiple stresses, including due to their geographic location. I too began exploring Keys reefs in the 1970s and have witnessed the dramatic changes there. My approach is simply that management should start by dealing with the stresses that can realistically be managed (routine, easily identified, cumulative, physical impacts in particular and habitat degradation in general) and quit using issues like climate change as an excuse to do virtually nothing on a local level. It's getting old. To me that would be like us agreeing that due to its importance we should all start working towards stopping the melting of the Greenland ice sheets, and ignore local problems that unequivocally are trashing coastal resources on a daily basis. And don't forget that in the 1980s and 1990s the mantra from many outspoken reef types was that wastewater and other nutrients were killing Keys reefs. I participated in a couple of recent exchanges wherein a federal manager suggested that researchers were not provididng needed information for reef management (and more research was needed), while at the same time a researcher was stating that managers were not using data made available by researchers - and that direction needed to be given for what information was needed. Both argued that more research and information is needed for proper reef management and this is what I reject - the excuses for not curtailing destructive human practices that are obviously and directly degrading reef ecosystem resources. And I believe that the notion that we can completely decipher to the nth degree (or ever really know) what is going on with reefs (and many other natural systems) is a loser from the get-go, and very self-serving. I don't ignore climate change as you suggest (and I doubt that others do) but recognize and embrace the notion that it's here to stay and nothing that you or I can do individually will change that - but you and others prominent in the scientific and management community can individually make changes and help force changes that will help protect and conserve reef resources. If you truly want to help coral reef ecosystems argue for improved funding for broader and more effective management based on what we do know and less funding for research to try to learn (forever) what we don't know. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Szmant, Alina wrote: > Hello Mike, Phil and Curtis: > > The problem with attributing all of the loss of coral in the Florida > Keys to local human impacts, as you three have done in your comments, is > that the same pattern of loss of live coral is being observed in remote > places of the Bahamas and other small Caribbean islands with small or no > human populations, no sewage to speak of and no cruise ships. To ignore > the dramatic effect coral bleaching and subsequent disease outbreaks, on > top of overfishing, have had on Keys and northern Caribbean corals since > the mid-1990s and especially since the severe 1997-1998 back-to-back > bleaching events, is not helpful to conservation or management efforts. > Bleaching has reached reefs that are distant from direct human impact as > well as the Keys, with similar effects on both. Overfishing is far more > pervasive than water quality degradation because boats go everywhere to > extract the last lobster and grouper. The healthiest Caribbean reefs, if > one judges that based on live coral cover, that I have seen in a long > while are those in the lower Caribbean where they have, for hydrographic > and climatic reasons, not been as impacted by either bleaching or major > storms: Reefs on the S side of Curacao and Bonaire still have more > coral now than what I remember for places like PR and the USVI back in > the 1960s and 1970s. And they have high coral cover within 1 km of > where the cruise ships docks and next to the outflow from the > desalination plant. And they have very high rates of coral recruitment > and no algae even on boulders with no Diadema, and few fishes. Go > figure! > > There are many reefs on the GBR with water quality conditions far worse > than in the Florida Keys (in terms of turbidity, nutrient levels and > such variables) with much higher coral cover and diversity. Ken Anthony > is even showing corals on these turbid reefs feed on the detritus and > have higher growth rates than corals on more offshore reefs. Florida > reefs have a disadvantage of being at the northern limits of the > climatic window for coral well being in the Atlantic province, with way > too many severe winter and summer storms. These geographic limitations > have existed for thousands of years and have limited coral reef growth > over Holocene time frames. When I first visited Nassau reefs in 1971 > and the Florida reefs during the 1977 symposium, when my frame of > reference was Puerto Rican reefs, my opinion of Florida/Bahamas reefs > was that they were puny and depauperate. Now they are even more > depauperate. That is no excuse to abuse them, but to ignore the > climatic factor is not helpful towards restoring or protecting them (if > that is possible). Multiple factors are at work, and a single quick fix > will not do the trick. Over-simplification and trying to crucify a > single factor will not help society deal with these complex issues. > > Alina Szmant > > ******************************************************************* > Dr. Alina M. Szmant > Coral Reef Research Group > UNCW-Center for Marine Science > 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln > Wilmington NC 28409 > Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 > Cell: (910)200-3913 > email: szmanta at uncw.edu > Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta > ****************************************************************** > > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Curtis > Kruer > Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 3:27 PM > To: Phil Dustan > Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency > > Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil > Dustan. > But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true > change in direction. > > There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the > amazingly productive Keys (and > no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, > and no it should never be > held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). > > And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with > problems much broader than > simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying > that the problem with > seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important > figure easily dispenses with > all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and > filling, thousands upon thousands > of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc > etc., See how easy it is. And > it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself > during some of the countless > consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I > refused to play along with > the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys > all would be OK. What a > joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo > is going to change much is > wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions > to upgrade the Key West plant > to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything > measurable? And we were promised > that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds > good but can't happen on a > scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of > the Keys as I began to see > myself as a part of the problem. > > The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the > Keys ecosystem and manage > human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too > much attention is focused on > a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that > most else would be > protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's > limited funds on a new > facility in Key West is going to change much? > > Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as > stand alone systems and the > problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands > continue to be lost and > degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are > trying legally to protect > the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving > activity (and associated > impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the > state and the state points > to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have > taken place but it's not > working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - > but it's obviously not > enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live > bottom and predictably now > hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of > miles of slow-degrading poly > line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to > replace them every year just > to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by > the tens of thousands daily, > fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot > long cruise ships plow up the > bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone > effectively turns a blind > eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. > Shallow water marine habitats > throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are > subjected to the disturbing and > destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster > boats of all types. > > People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is > failing. The rate of loss and > anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that > is what matters. Large > vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's > great. But new leadership is > needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? > Catering to virtually every > user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in > ecosystem protection or even > maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef > management in the Keys as a > success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New > leadership is needed and that > leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and > address all issues > throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And > they need to be loudly > supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has > the most knowledge about what > has been lost and is being lost. > > Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and > other lists will lead to > something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and > misdirected effort. > > Thanks. > > Curtis Kruer > > > > > Phil Dustan wrote: > >>Dear Coral List, >> I'd like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion > > about > >>healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > > >>one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And >>probably haven't been for a long time. >> >> My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can > > reach a > >>true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my >>calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their >>living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The >>Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > > >>too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about > > studies, > >>monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right > > in > >>front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, >>even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to >>protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > > >>ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it's patchy, or not here, or >>look over there, there's a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to >>think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > > >>it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in > > continuing > >>to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > > >>far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the > > losses > >>that are far greater, supports this form of denial. >> >> Well, the water is too polluted and we've know this for a very > > long > >>time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > > >>are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many > > people > >>fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage >>system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not > > simply > >>sewage......But still we look for bright spots. I think it's because > > it's > >>more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is >>hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, >>sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of > > having > >>a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? >> >> It's been said by many that the coral reef science community > > eats their > >>young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and > > denial. > >> The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather >>than resiliency, I'd favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) >>that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or > > slower > >>in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the > > R > >>scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, >>Carysfort R1, etc... Maybe this might help create public awareness and > > >>political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between >>dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 >>when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > > >>be up to R4 if conservation is successful. >> Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the > > baseline > >>downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it's a problem that we >>need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor > > is > >>wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. >> Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > > >>imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? >> Phil >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From albert at ecology.su.se Wed Feb 22 09:46:53 2006 From: albert at ecology.su.se (Albert Norstrom) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:46:53 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Thanks Phil for starting what must be the most interesting discourse held on these boards in a long time. Some extremely thought-provoking comments all around. Yes, the Keys do seem to have it real bad, but this isn't a problem isolated to the Caribbean. I've conducted field trips in the Phillippines and Zanzibar during the past years and we are witnessing moderate-to-severe degradation in those regions too. The general feeling diving on reefs off the North coast of the Philippines is that of entering a ghost town. Fish abundnace is frighteningly low (you'd be lucky to see a parrotfish above 35cm after a week of diving), and community changes are rapidly manifesting themselves (we have observed some sites where soft corals are taking over completely following the bleaching event of '98). The causes behind this seem to be a confounding mixture of synergistic factors, just as in the Caribbean. As Alina points out, local factors alone (such as a decline water quality due to human terrestrial activities) cannot be ascertained to be the single driving forces behind the changes. As such, what speaks for a sudden improvement in reef conditon if we manage to address that single point - when the problems of climate change and lack of grazers (due to a brutal historical overfishing and disease) loom overhead? I found Jeffrey Lowes comment "Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place." interesting. How about I play devils advocate with you all for awhile. A few months ago, a very interesting point of discourse popped up during an internal discussion group at the department. The notion that ecosystems are intrinsically unpredictable and characterized by alternative system regimes is gaining more and more weight in the coral ecology community. It is thus interesting that we as a group (and society as a whole) are continually so ill-prepared for when such shifts occur. For 20 or so odd years the Caribbean has been dominated by macroalgae regime that seems pretty resilient itself (probably due a strengthening of certain internal feedback loops in that system over the years). I'm curious to know if any serious attempt has been made to investigate what goods and services are available from these new regimes (e.g. what kinds of fish can be harvested), and if fishing communities have adapted in any way, and if so are they succesful, to these new conditions? For sure, I'm an advocate for proactive measures to foster resilience of coral ecosystems. (Already an array of tools have been suggested, MPA's being the most popular at the moment, but in order to succeed with this I think we have to witness a more fundamental change in our economic and social structures. How on earth will MPA's solve anything if market economy dictates that its economically viable to continue overfishing an already ecologically depleted fish stock in the regions outside these sanctuaries? Forgive the side-note, back to being devils advocate again.) But it seems equally important to create institutional frameworks that can foster adaptivity in social systems. The new macroalgal regimes could be the norm for the Caribbean for the next unforeseeable future, much as (from my own personal observations, and research) other regimes are becoming more common in other biogeographic regions. Is it "fatalistic" to start looking around us and maybe accept that coral ecosystems are dynamic and alternative regimes are not something aberrant, but a phenomenon we could (or should) get accustomed to as conditions change. Maybe the pressing question is, not if we can restore reefs to some abstract baseline level, but can we predict these new regimes (I think never completely, seeing the complex nature of ecosystsm) and can we adapt to them? /Cheers Albert Norstr?m PhD Student Dept. Systems Ecology Natural Resource Management Group Stockholm University SE-106 91 Stockholm Sweden Tel: +46 (0)8 16 44 84 Email: albert at ecology.su.se Fax: +46 (0)8 15 84 17 Personal page: http://www.ecology.su.se/staff/personal.asp?id=119 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffrey Low" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 2:49 AM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency > Hi everyone, > > Certainly an interesting discussion on the fate of the Florida reefs. Not being from the US, and never having had the opportunity to visit the Florida Keys, I am unable to fully appreciate the extent fo the damage that has been done to that rich ecosystem. > > Mike, as usual, you have cut through the bs and succinctly stated the problem in the Florida Keys. I suspect similar situations occur wolrdwide, where reef systems are in decline (for example, I've heard from fishermen how their reefs have been destroyed by blast fishing caused by fishermen from the "other" island). > > While sitting on the fence, and agreeing that there needs to be more science directed at the reef ecosystem, the impacts would seem to far, far outweigh the need for more exacting science. Conservation, and perhaps even the more exacting word, preservation, is needed, if reefs are to survive the human onslaught. > > Someone mentioned (I am not sure of it is on this list or somewhere else) that it was a good ting that there are many coral species and only one human. Be that as it may, that one species has the capacity to totally destroy the diversity that exists today. > > Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place. > > MPAs managed in isolation, was something else that was brought up in this discussion. While it is undeniable (at least to me) that MPAs do help in the conservation of coral reefs and other marine ecosystems, the term MPA itself is an "isolationist" word, as it implies some sought of boundary. "Enlightened management plans" that look at the totality of the marine system, that will conserve and sustain our marine resources, understanding that it is inter-connected and intricately linked system, are what is needed. > > I suspect that part of the reason that scientists treat reef systems in isolation is that if they did not, then there would be no "scientific" papers (as we know them) in existence. The momentum of publishing, or doing publishable research, is probably what is limiting the science from expanding beyond its narrow confines. Reef managers on the other hand, must not only be biologists, but people managers, ecosystem managers, fund managers, and sometimes, visionaries, all rolled into one. Good luck finding such people in great enough quantity to "manage" even the existing MPAs. > > To round up, I agree with Mike that "people power" may be the way to go to get the necessary protection for our marine resources. "People cannot love, what they do not know", or so I've been told. While I cannot "love" the Florida Keys, I do love the coral reefs in my own backyard, and sometimes the wrangling that goes on between scientists, conservationists and politicians, while the reefs are slowly but surely being degraded, is more than I can bear. > > Holding out for coral reefs the world over > > Jeff > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From smiller at gate.net Wed Feb 22 11:15:20 2006 From: smiller at gate.net (Steven Miller) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:15:20 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef condition discussion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43FC8E18.1090108@gate.net> All politics is local? Tell that to Acropora and other coral species (and Diadema too) after Caribbean-wide waves of disease and bleaching helped push the system in Florida, already at the northern limit geographically of coral distribution in this part of the world, to - or over - the edge. Alina's response hit all the high points about why it's necessary to consider complexity (ecologically and I would add politically). Much of this was previously addressed in a series of letters published in Science Magazine (Science 17 June 2005 308) including a summary of work already accomplished or underway related to management of water quality in the Keys. To try and advance this discussion (without writing anything lengthy) rather than dwell too much on the negative, I think it's important to ask, "Is there any good news on the coral reef front?" Well, mostly not. BUT, we know we can do better with MPAs to help manage resource use (fishing, boating, diving) and to - at the very least - watch (research) what happens to fish and benthic communities when no-take protection is enforced. I like the idea that a 75 pound grouper is more valuable as a tourist attraction than on dinner plates, but some might argue that point. And many don't know this, but there remain spectacular places in the Keys with high cover and corals in relatively good condition, just not offshore where so much was previously considered in "good" condition because large stands of Acropora persisted in the days before bleaching and disease. Where are these sites? They are found near s;yc0bhokr npobno rouubs and xoyub=- hpbsl ngpui. Sorry, that was too easy, but the sites are real. Also, we know that Acropora is a fast-growing species and that under the right set of circumstances we could see massive proliferation over relatively short time scales, maybe even sufficient to match sea level rise that will result from global warming. Of course, coastal areas will also flood and that will degrade water quality, which might prevent more immediate coral growth - there's that complexity thing again. So what's my take home message? The sky might be falling - remember the chicken little thread so many years ago? You can duck and cover or you can do what you can to try and make things better. Personally, I think we are in trouble because environment (and not just coral reefs, but also our air and water and if some have their way endangered species too) is not a political issue these days. How does it get political? Environmentalism needs to become a social movement the way it was in the 1960s and 1970s. That will only happen when a thousand grassroots efforts at the local level merge and become something bigger. In that regard, I agree that all politics is local. Best regards. Steven Miller, Ph.D. Research Professor UNC Wilmington And a possibly relevant plug... see the trailer for a new movie about the Evolution and Intelligent Design Circus at www.flockofdodos.com, a feature documentary written and directed by former marine biologist Dr. Randy Olson (and exec produced by me). The movie is ultimately about communication of science in today's media landscape. Coral reef scientists have much to learn about communicating for the benefit of coral reefs and not personal agendas or career advancement (my personal and I'm sure provocative opinion, and not directed to the current thread). From delbeek at waquarium.org Wed Feb 22 20:27:56 2006 From: delbeek at waquarium.org (Charles Delbeek) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:27:56 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> References: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20060222152219.02a7f8d0@mail.waquarium.org> >It is very interesting to follow this discussion and draw parallels >with closed system reef aquariums. The problems of algal overgrowth, >nutrient load, temperature, water motion, nutrient uptake, >ultraviolet intensity, coral bleaching, coral tissue loss are ALL >encountered in closed systems. Though we do not have all the answers >we do know enough to control some of these factors and what effects >changing such factors can have on our miniature "ecosystems". I >strongly believe that some of the answers to problems facing wild >reefs can be mirrored in closed reef systems, and perhaps can yield >some answers as well. The rapid advancements in coral husbandry >opens up tremendous opportunities for coral researchers to >manipulate systems within a controlled setting. Aloha! J. Charles Delbeek M.Sc. Aquarium Biologist III Waikiki Aquarium, University of Hawaii 2777 Kalakaua Ave. Honolulu, HI, USA 96815 www.waquarium.org 808-923-9741 ext. 0 VOICE 808-923-1771 FAX From cat64fish at yahoo.com Wed Feb 22 21:25:26 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 10:25:26 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Message-ID: <20060223022526.80199.qmail@web35310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi Albert and others .... Does that phrase "... let me play devil's advocate ..." mean that I am the angel? ... :P Anyway, frivolity aside, you raise a very pertinent point, that coral ecosystems are dynamic, and that different "regimes" can arise, oftentimes from similar starting points. I am sure someone can list a series of papers and research showing this to be the case. However, what is the acceptable change that we (at this point in time) are willing to accept? I find myself asking, more and more, not questions that are quantifiable, like "What percent of coral cover is on the reef?" Or "How many species are there?" but "Can I accept seeing the change of *my* coral reefs from the reefal system to [an algal dominanted one] / [rubble reef] / [artificial reef]?". Monitoring seems to be something that almost *everyone* does. I do it ... and I've been doing for almost 20 years now (*geez*). But where has that gotten me ... or rather the reefs? I know it is in decline ... *everyone* who has worked in the field for any length of time knows this. Do we need to conduct another study to confirm the results of a study that has confirmed the decline of the reefs, which was conducted to confirm the results of a previous study? Even though the formation of coral reef system (or any other ecosystem, for that matter) may be inherently unpredictable - I don't think the question is whether we can predict what it will change into, but can we live with it changing, in the first place? Knowing that it was through our inaction that the changes occurred? Adaptation would be an inevitable result of change (or else you would die out), so I don't think it is a major part of the equation. On the "local" vs. "global" issue, I will sit on the fence on this one - I see the merits of both "camps". My feeling is that what occurs locally, will affect things globally. Take carbon emissions, for example. If, and this is a BIG IF, everyone were to convert to less carbon emitting vehicles, would [human-input to the magnitude of] global warming be reduced? If the answer is yes (to me it is a "yes"), then what needs to be in place before this conversion can come about? The changes would be in three main areas: - Political : "Local" politicians must push for the necessary legislative changes to limit the carbon emissions in all aspects of industry, and to enfrce them - Infrastructure : "Local" businesses must be ready to support technology that emits less carbon - Lifestyle changes need to be made : The most "local" aspect of all ... the people must embrace low / no carbon emiision technology (that might mean giving up that 10-litre, SUV-built-like-a-tank-off-roader-that-I-drive-in-the-city car) There would be global issues, of course .... even with carbon reducing industries, the shear magnitude of the human population would probably over whelm the ecosystems. The "global" issue, to my mind, isn't the fact that warming is occurring, but what the world (as in its people) are going to do about it. Cheers, Jeff --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. From martin_moe at yahoo.com Wed Feb 22 23:52:45 2006 From: martin_moe at yahoo.com (Martin Moe) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 20:52:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20060222152219.02a7f8d0@mail.waquarium.org> Message-ID: <20060223045245.67761.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com> Hi all, I?m always hesitant to comment in these threads since I?m not a ?real? coral reef scientist, but Steven Miller?s comment ?You can duck and cover or you can do what you can to try and make things better.? stimulated me to weigh in on this. There are efforts now underway to try to make things better on Florida?s coral reefs, but has been exceedingly difficult to get support for these efforts. As Steven said, the factors negatively affecting the coral reefs of Florida, Bahamas and the Caribbean are many and complex, but there are things that can be done to improve specific reef areas and perhaps even reef ecosystems. Site restoration of reef areas impacted by boat groundings and protection of the reefs through good management (MPA establishment) and water quality improvement are very important and essential to the future of the reefs, but even more important is to achieve ecological restoration. This may be an impossible task but we won?t know that if we don?t try. We can?t restore the reefs to the conditions that were present 100 or even 50 years ago but I am of the opinion that it is possible to achieve some level of ecological restoration if we make a serious effort to do so. I attended a talk that Alina Szmant gave in 1999 on her coral reef research and she greatly impressed me with the take home message of her talk that the decline of the reefs was caused more by the loss of biodiversity than anthropogenic nutrients. That made a lot of sense to me, and subsequent research indicates that she is correct. The loss of the Diadema sea urchins in 1983-4, the keystone herbivores of the Western Atlantic coral reefs, shifted the ecology of the reefs from coral dominance to macro algae dominance, a well accepted premise by most coral reef scientists. In addition, on Florida reefs, the almost total loss of populations of adult spiny lobster removed an important predator of coralivorus snails and other small predators that feed on living coral tissue and create opportunities for introduction of coral disease. If we were really serious about coral reef restoration, we would eliminate lobster fishing, recreational and commercial, on all offshore reefs past a certain distance from shore, perhaps 3 miles, and most important, really get serious about researching the possibility of restoration of pre plague population levels of Diadema on the reefs. These are not impossible tasks, but they do require concerted effort and scientific collaboration. And the lobster issue is also fraught with political mine fields. But these are real possibilities for ecological improvement of our coral reefs and to not explore them fully is grossly irresponsible. Ken Nedimyer and I did a experimental re establishment of Diadema on two small patch reefs in the Upper Keys in 2001 supported by the Florida Keys Marine Sanctuary (http://www.fknms.nos.noaa.gov/research_monitoring/report/diadema/diadema/.html) and this study well illustrated the positive effect a marginal population of Diadema can have on a Florida reef in the short space of one year. We are now working with the Mote Marine Laboratory to expand this work. There has also been work by The Nature Conversancy in the Keys on similar projects and there have been other studies as well. So research on ecological restoration has begun and hopefully will produce an effective reef restoration program while there is still reef left to restore. Martin A. Moe, Jr. Adjunct Scientist, Mote Marine Laboratory> > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From simmi_nuern at yahoo.com Thu Feb 23 04:10:55 2006 From: simmi_nuern at yahoo.com (Simone Nuernberger) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 01:10:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Coralliophila - Thank you Message-ID: <20060223091055.63682.qmail@web60313.mail.yahoo.com> Hello again, I just wanted to thank all the people who took the time to reply. Your emails were extremely helpful! Thank you very much! Best regards, Simone *************************************************************************** Simone N?rnberger (M.Sc.) simone_nuernberger at web.de Institute of Biology (Biological Oceanography) University of Southern Denmark DK-5230 Odense M --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. From andy_wb at email.com Thu Feb 23 04:25:39 2006 From: andy_wb at email.com (Andy Woods-Ballard) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:25:39 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Instrument to measure water depths. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060223092544.AF9DE1795C@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hi Anders Working in Mexico with Global Vision International, we used a handheld depth sounder, Plastimo Echotest II. I believe this has a range of about 80m. But more importantly for you, I think it is submersible and water proof to depths of 50m. It will not however store data and might need to be used with a slate for recording. Check out the product to be sure, but I hope this helps. Andy Woods-Ballard From ckappel at stanford.edu Thu Feb 23 12:49:05 2006 From: ckappel at stanford.edu (Carrie Vanessa Kappel) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:49:05 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas Message-ID: <1140716945.43fdf59126a88@webmail.stanford.edu> Hi Rick, >From your description, it sounds like what you were seeing was likely Microdictyon marinum, which has been observed to have strong summertime blooms on reefs in The Bahamas. We also saw high densities of Microdictyon during our surveys on North Andros in July 2002 and San Salvador in July 2003. It's not clear why this seaweed has increased so dramatically on Bahamian reefs in recent years, but I'd guess it's due to an interaction between nutrient runoff and grazing. Brian Lapointe and coauthors suggested that Microdictyon marinum might benefit from submarine groundwater discharge, whereby nutrients (in this case dissolved inorganic nitrogen) from land are transported to reefs offshore via groundwater fluxes through porous limestone (Lapointe et al. 2004. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. 298:275-301). The Littler and Littler Caribbean Reef Plants book has a nice picture of this species and others with which it might be confused. Cheers, Carrie Carrie Kappel Postdoctoral Fellow National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis University of California Santa Barbara 735 State Street, Suite 300 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 kappel at nceas.ucsb.edu 805.966.1677 w 805.892.2510 f 831.869.1503 m Permanent email address Carrie.Kappel at alumni.brown.edu ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:34:49 -0500 From: "Rick Sanders" Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas To: Message-ID: <004b01c63715$7fa4b760$650da8c0 at manta> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Dear Listers, I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find an image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been unable to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish brown color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each other in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped into more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm in width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if to crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what I am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a copy or link. Thanks very much in advance, Best regards, Rick Rick Sanders Deep Blue Solutions Media, PA 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net ------------------------- From Bprecht at pbsj.com Thu Feb 23 14:14:47 2006 From: Bprecht at pbsj.com (Precht, Bill) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:14:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef condition discussion Message-ID: <8511092CB6C11C4BB2632F61A82C620C03FD68B2@MIAMBX.pbsj.com> Dear Coral-List: I have read with great interest the recent thread on Florida's reef woes. In Steven Miller's recent message, he reminds us of the "reefs at risk" thread that discussed the very same issues on the Coral-List during June and July of 1998. It was in-part, as an outcome of that discussion that Steven and I decided to write a book chapter on this very subject entitled: Precht, W.F. and Miller, S.L.(in press) Ecological shifts along the Florida reef tract: the past as a key to the future: in Aronson, R.B. (ed) Geological Approaches to Coral Reef Ecology. Springer Verlag, NY If anyone is interested in a pre-print of this chapter please send me an email and I'll send it along. Cheers, Bill Precht Senior Scientist PBS&J - Division of Ecological Sciences Miami, FL From abaker at rsmas.miami.edu Thu Feb 23 14:26:34 2006 From: abaker at rsmas.miami.edu (Andrew Baker) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:26:34 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Laboratory Technician Position in Coral Molecular Ecology In-Reply-To: <10313196.1129601388953.JavaMail.SYSTEM@us-webcti01> Message-ID: <00e601c638af$0e8bc0f0$3d6fab81@DellD600> Funding is available for a Laboratory Technician in coral molecular ecology at the Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science (RSMAS) at the University of Miami, Florida, USA (www.rsmas.miami.edu ). The successful candidate will assume primary responsibility for the management and day-to-day operations of a molecular laboratory specializing in the ecology and systematics of corals and their symbiotic dinoflagellates ("zooxanthellae"), but will also be involved in physiological experimental work at the University's Experimental Hatchery facility, and coral reef fieldwork in Florida and elsewhere. Specific duties include extracting, purifying, archiving and analyzing DNA from coral samples, ordering and management of scientific supplies and reagents, managing undergraduate volunteers and interns, and working with the principal investigator, postdoctoral associate and graduate students on collaborative research projects. Ongoing research, funded principally by the US National Science Foundation, the Pew Institute for Ocean Science, and the Wildlife Conservation Society, uses both field survey and experimental approaches to study the responses of reef corals to climate change. The position is funded for three years, subject to satisfactory performance. The successful candidate will also be encouraged to pursue independent research and publication in related fields of interest. Candidates should have a Master's degree in molecular systematics, molecular ecology and/or population genetics, but candidates with Bachelor's degrees and an equivalent level of molecular experience will also be considered. Ideal candidates should be SCUBA-certified and be able to pass a physical examination to obtain scientific diver certification with the American Academy of Underwater Sciences (AAUS). Experience manipulating computer models of climate change (e.g., Hadley dataset) and/or maintaining outdoor aquarium systems is desirable, but not required. Position includes benefits and a retirement package. Please submit a current CV, names and contact information of three references, and a cover letter indicating research interests and experience electronically as a single .pdf file to Andrew Baker at abaker at rsmas.miami.edu. Applications are being accepted immediately. The position will remain open until filled. The University of Miami is an EEO/AA Employer. Please post this advertisement as appropriate. ___________________ Andrew C. Baker, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Division of Marine Biology and Fisheries Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science University of Miami 4600 Rickenbacker Cswy. Miami, FL 33149, USA Voice: +1 (305) 421-4642 Fax: +1 (305) 421-4600 From milviapin at yahoo.com Thu Feb 23 18:37:21 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:37:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Microdyction Message-ID: <20060223233721.57467.qmail@web50313.mail.yahoo.com> Dear listers, Large abundance of this algae were found in Namu atoll, Marshall islands, in November 2004. Lagoon and ocean sides were covered by the alga. No nutrients inputs are known in this slighlty populated atoll (300 people). Other outgrowth of this alga ave been noticed in different atolls although not to this extent. Thank you silvia Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. From ctwiliams at yahoo.com Fri Feb 24 00:43:55 2006 From: ctwiliams at yahoo.com (Tom Williams) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 21:43:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Microdyction In-Reply-To: <20060223233721.57467.qmail@web50313.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060224054355.9921.qmail@web50412.mail.yahoo.com> I worked in Majuro on ADB job for water supply/wastewater. Please provide more details. Simply put - where do they get the nitrate for the algal growth. 300 people = say =>75kg of nitrate + plus agriculture = NHNO People on septic tanks?? or seawater flushing?? Green grass lawns anywhere?? ?Any previous military operations on island?? Follow the nitrate. --- Silvia Pinca wrote: > Dear listers, > Large abundance of this algae were found in Namu > atoll, Marshall islands, in November 2004. Lagoon > and ocean sides were covered by the alga. No > nutrients inputs are known in this slighlty > populated atoll (300 people). Other outgrowth of > this alga ave been noticed in different atolls > although not to this extent. > Thank you > silvia > > > Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. > NRAS - Marshall Islands > Nature Resources Assessment Surveys > Research and Education for Conservation > spinca at nras-conservation.org > www.nras-conservation.org > > > --------------------------------- > Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get > pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Fri Feb 24 09:37:55 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:37:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] resiliency vs. "remnancy" vs. sustainability Message-ID: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> It would seem most people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what they used to be. The word resiliency is another word for resilient, which means an ability to quickly (usually) recover from a bad or unnatural condition--in the present case, we might assume from a previously pristine (i.e., uncorrupted by civilization) condition. I wonder if there are any such reefs left. I'm not so sure the word is being used correctly in our fellowship (more below). Although "remnancy" is not a real word, one would infer that our colleague Phil's intended usage would be as a means to describe the degree or condition of the reef after it has been adversely affected by civilization (more colloquially: trashed); that is, how it can be described as a remnant of its former "self" (biome?). I'm not so sure describing how much a reef has been adversely affected from its former condition is useful, though, since (as was pointed out) in many cases the reef in question may never have been adequately described (have any?), especially since they're always changing (evolving) anyway, thus few cases in which to measure past against current condition (I guess that's what started the whole discussion). But don't get me wrong: we should understand what is adversely affecting the reefs so we can stop or ameliorate the condition. I'm just not so sure "remnancy" has much practical application for science, although for political purposes it is probably perfectly practical. Instead, since we want to keep coral reefs in existence, and we want to provide them with the proper environment and support their vitality, where we can, perhaps a better word for purposes of marshaling our efforts is sustainability (I know I'm not the first to suggest this). Shouldn't we sustain the reefs until we remedy what ails them? (Now there's a concept: clean up the environment!) We can't really do anything to promote resiliency (how do you measure such an ecologically difficult concept?), although a conducive environment might be sustained or managed (i.e., "cleaned up") to allow full (how to measure?) resiliency. Is it possible to describe how all the members of the coral ecosystem interact to contribute to an integral resiliency? This is extremely difficult stuff, yet I would agree the goal is laudable and should be pursued. Okay, I know, the word sustain might imply leaving everything as it is, rather than making things better, but I'm just not comfortable with the word resiliency or "remnancy." Just my two cents... Cheers, Jim From deevon at bellsouth.net Fri Feb 24 10:10:09 2006 From: deevon at bellsouth.net (DeeVon Quirolo) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 10:10:09 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] resiliency vs. "remnancy" vs. sustainability In-Reply-To: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> References: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20060224100227.026dd6d8@bellsouth.net> Ok ok, I'll add my two cents. At this time for coral reefs, I think that what we need are efforts to RESTORE coral reefs, including immediate efforts to reduce heavy physical impacts and habitat destruction, as well as improve water quality from local and regional pollution sources and reduce global warming (although we may have already crossed the critical threshold there). We already know that corals need clear clean nutrient free waters to thrive and that they do not do well when battered by various user groups and of course natural events such as storms. I think the reef resiliency approach is flawed because it proposes to study healthy reefs, and looks the other way while those corals that need our help most are ignored. Applying what we know already to these reefs on the part of current managers would do wonders. There you have it. Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Executive Director, Reef Relief At 09:37 AM 2/24/2006, Jim Hendee wrote: >It would seem most people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what >they used to be. > >The word resiliency is another word for resilient, which means an >ability to quickly (usually) recover from a bad or unnatural >condition--in the present case, we might assume from a previously >pristine (i.e., uncorrupted by civilization) condition. I wonder if >there are any such reefs left. I'm not so sure the word is being used >correctly in our fellowship (more below). > >Although "remnancy" is not a real word, one would infer that our >colleague Phil's intended usage would be as a means to describe the >degree or condition of the reef after it has been adversely affected by >civilization (more colloquially: trashed); that is, how it can be >described as a remnant of its former "self" (biome?). I'm not so sure >describing how much a reef has been adversely affected from its former >condition is useful, though, since (as was pointed out) in many cases >the reef in question may never have been adequately described (have >any?), especially since they're always changing (evolving) anyway, thus >few cases in which to measure past against current condition (I guess >that's what started the whole discussion). But don't get me wrong: we >should understand what is adversely affecting the reefs so we can stop >or ameliorate the condition. I'm just not so sure "remnancy" has much >practical application for science, although for political purposes it is >probably perfectly practical. > >Instead, since we want to keep coral reefs in existence, and we want to >provide them with the proper environment and support their vitality, >where we can, perhaps a better word for purposes of marshaling our >efforts is sustainability (I know I'm not the first to suggest this). >Shouldn't we sustain the reefs until we remedy what ails them? (Now >there's a concept: clean up the environment!) We can't really do >anything to promote resiliency (how do you measure such an ecologically >difficult concept?), although a conducive environment might be sustained >or managed (i.e., "cleaned up") to allow full (how to measure?) >resiliency. Is it possible to describe how all the members of the >coral ecosystem interact to contribute to an integral resiliency? This >is extremely difficult stuff, yet I would agree the goal is laudable and >should be pursued. > >Okay, I know, the word sustain might imply leaving everything as it is, >rather than making things better, but I'm just not comfortable with the >word resiliency or "remnancy." > >Just my two cents... > > Cheers, > Jim > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From dustanp at cofc.edu Fri Feb 24 12:23:45 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 12:23:45 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Message-ID: <43FF4121.6040400@cofc.edu> Dear Colleagues, Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote and less remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own history and ecology. Let?s face it: The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human reproductive success. Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the radar screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities (along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying and we have got to do more. As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we are going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect?.. And the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost every reef on the planet. This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal agency, is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think can be done right now as well as over the long term? Thanks, Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Fri Feb 24 15:58:39 2006 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Gene Shinn) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Not what they used to be Message-ID: >>I have to agree with Jim Hendee when he wrote, "It would seem most >>people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what they used to >>be." As a geologist I can honestly agree that Holocene reefs are >>not what they "used to be" during the Pleistocene, and they were >>not what they "used to be" earlier during the Pliocene, and they >>certainly were not what "they used to be" during the Lower >>Cretaceous, (and there were hardly any during the Upper Cretaceous) >>and then there are the well known Permian reefs which were not what >>they "used to be" during the Cambrian. >>Yes, nothing is what "it used to be." May be we just need to take a >>longer view of things. Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida Marine Science Center (room 204) 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu Fri Feb 24 14:42:13 2006 From: rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu (Richard Grigg) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:42:13 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <43FF4121.6040400@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let?s face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 03:45:17 2006 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E. Strong) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 03:45:17 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <4400191D.6040105@noaa.gov> Hi Phil, Even Plenary talk at Ocean Sciences here in Hawaii this week...George Philander...claims the evidence is not that clear... Cheers, Al Richard Grigg wrote: >Phil, > > Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > > Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Colleagues, >> Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >>thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >>years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >>continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >>thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. >> We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote >>and less >>remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >>different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >>nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >>diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >>Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >>cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >>signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >>blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >>history and ecology. >> >>Let?s face it: >> The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >>varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >>ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >>record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >>in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >>have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >>outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >>its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >>seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >>in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >>spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >>Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >>reproductive success. >> >> Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the >>radar >>screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >>of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >>opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >>(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >>health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >>reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >>earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >>and we have got to do more. >> >> As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >>resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >>scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >>everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >>resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >>ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >>with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >>ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. >> >> As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we >>are >>going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >>list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >>should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >>scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >>could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >>example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >>of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >>health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >>concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >>resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >>simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >>lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >>still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >>exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >>sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect?.. And >>the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >>had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >>every reef on the planet. >> >> This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal >>agency, >>is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >>reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >>process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >>in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >>on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >>forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >>of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >>can be done right now as well as over the long term? >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 04:14:00 2006 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E. Strong) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 04:14:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] "Caribbean" Bleaching Verification needed - Moderate to Light to No Message-ID: <44001FD8.1030507@noaa.gov> Information sought: Over the next month Coral Reef Watch is hoping to finalize feedback from the field for the 2005 Caribbean bleaching event for issuing a report. At present this appears to be the most well documented bleaching event ever conducted....for all of you who have provided information to date: THANK YOU! Nevertheless we are still missing those "negative" reports that are needed to fill out the other end of the bleaching spectrum in areas where minimal bleaching was observed. From our HotSpot DHWs we expect those regions might include (but not necessarily limited to): ...Bermuda ...Bonaire...Curacao...Aruba and possibly ...Belize. Can any of you provide verification to Coral Reef Watch over the next few weeks for these more fortunate areas?? Please send your info to: Mark Eakin and/or Jessica Morgan. Thanks, Al Strong Coral Reef Watch From mtupper at picrc.org Sat Feb 25 02:00:14 2006 From: mtupper at picrc.org (Mark Tupper) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 16:00:14 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <000e01c639d9$23c94fc0$63c8c814@TUPPER> Rick Grigg wrote: "Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations." Isn't that just a matter of semantics? There are many dead or dying reefs in the Pacific, the Indian Ocean and Caribbean, and probably everwhere that coral reefs are found. So one could say, as Phil Dustan did, that "coral reefs are dying all over the world". However, since there are also healthy reefs in all of these places, someone who's agenda did not include coral reef conservation could just as easily say "coral reefs are healthy all over the world." I have heard exactly that claim from several politicians and agency spokespeople in the last few years. Rick is right, though, in that sweeping generalizations are not helpful to management of coral reefs (or any other resource). If one "side" makes sweeping generalizations to support their view, it becomes easier for others to support an opposing viewpoint with their own generalizations. I think that it's important to be as specific and factual as possible when emphasizing the need for coral reef conservation. It's much harder to argue against specifics than generalities. Having said that, I liked Phil's idea about finding a set of action items we could use to move forward now. Cheers, Mark Dr. Mark H Tupper, Senior Scientist Palau International Coral Reef Center PO Box 7086, Koror, Palau 96940 tel (680) 488-6950; fax (680) 488-6951 and Adjunct Research Associate University of Guam Marine Laboratory UOG Station, Mangilao, Guam 96923, USA tel (671) 735-2375; fax (671) 734-6767 From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 07:16:55 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 07:16:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Message-ID: <14f78414cb3b.14cb3b14f784@noaa.gov> Hiya, Phil, Concerning your quote: "Lots of us have struggled with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind." I think this is a more tractable approach when you consider finite financial resources and manhours (peoplehours?) to throw at the problem. What I'm getting at is that defining an organism or ecosystem in terms of the "normal" environment (i.e., that which promotes optimal vitality) may be an easier way to present the problem to the public. For instance, look at the Goreau and Hayes (1994) concept and Al Strong's presentation and further elucidation of the concept to the public on how HotSpots (unseasonably high sea temperatures) coincide with bleaching events: it's an easier way for the public to understand large-scale environmental stress and the result, rather than trying to explain all the actual physiology behind the phenomenon, which is still not totally understood. I believe Basset Maguire had in mind a "niche response structure" idea years ago which described organisms as a response to their environment, and if I remember correctly, he tried to quantify that for selected species. Maybe the same approach is valid for coral ecosystems. That may be easier than trying to define "ecosystem vitality" in terms of each organism's "health," a difficult concept to quantify. Defining "ecosystem health" would seem to be fraught with unending debate on what constitutes each contributing organism's normal (uncompromised?) lifecycle. (Again, I'm not saying we shouldn't try to undertake such research, and unending debate is what all science needs and likes--I'm mainly trying to get at a way to awaken the public and policy makers.) Anyway, I would like to hear of the approaches you mention, and I would vote that defining the recent historical and current physical environment for each major coral reef area as one of the 8-10 action items you mention. This should be a fundamental part of any "ecosystem vitality index," at least in my mind. This would also give us a platform from which to say, "This is how it was when corals were doing well, and this is how it is now, and corals are not doing well," without having to explain the physiology of why this is so. This would also give us a solid comparison basis for understanding why one reef ecosystem in the Pacific is doing swimmingly (so to speak), and another is not. I think the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force and the Interntational Coral Reef Initiative and NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation Program and other groups have already listed this as a goal, but I think it's an important one for your list. In fact, if you cross-compare a lot of the conservation groups' action items, I think you could probably come up with 8-10 items in a prioritized list most would agree upon. In other words, a lot of people are already working on these problems, and it is extremely difficult to make decisions on what activities to fund, but I think what you are also saying is we need to shake the tree a little harder. I have no suggestion on how to do that! [Mea culpa: We at NOAA/AOML are already compiling physical environmental data and establishing environmental indices, so this whole rap of course appears self-serving and provincially contrived. Hey, it's all I know, and at least I'm being honest about it!] Okay, that makes 4 cents from me... :) Cheers, Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil Dustan Date: Friday, February 24, 2006 12:23 pm Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 > Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most > interesting > thread. It also reminds me...[etc.] From cat64fish at yahoo.com Sat Feb 25 08:52:17 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:52:17 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <4400191D.6040105@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <20060225135217.56489.qmail@web35313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> It boggles the mind (ok, just mine) that some one at a PLENARY talk could say something like this. To say that there is evidence of reefs that have been impacted, and reefs that have not, I can understand ... but the "evidence is not clear"? .... *shakes head in disbelief and disgust* Jeff "Alan E. Strong" wrote: Hi Phil, Even Plenary talk at Ocean Sciences here in Hawaii this week...George Philander...claims the evidence is not that clear... Cheers, Al Richard Grigg wrote: >Phil, > > Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > > Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Colleagues, >> Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >>thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >>years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >>continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >>thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. >> We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote >>and less >>remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >>different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >>nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >>diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >>Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >>cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >>signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >>blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >>history and ecology. >> >>Let?s face it: >> The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >>varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >>ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >>record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >>in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >>have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >>outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >>its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >>seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >>in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >>spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >>Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >>reproductive success. >> >> Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the >>radar >>screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >>of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >>opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >>(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >>health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >>reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >>earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >>and we have got to do more. >> >> As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >>resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >>scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >>everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >>resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >>ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >>with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >>ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. >> >> As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we >>are >>going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >>list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >>should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >>scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >>could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >>example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >>of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >>health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >>concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >>resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >>simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >>lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >>still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >>exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >>sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >>the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >>had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >>every reef on the planet. >> >> This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal >>agency, >>is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >>reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >>process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >>in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >>on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >>forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >>of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >>can be done right now as well as over the long term? >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 1GB free storage! From lesk at bu.edu Sat Feb 25 11:03:06 2006 From: lesk at bu.edu (lesk at bu.edu) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:03:06 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060225110306.0iwtfp3s0kcg84sw@www.bu.edu> Dear Colleagues, It is extremely important that we converge on a common and consistant view on coral reef health that we can convey to the lay public. We must also speak precisely when referring to any particular symptom of coral reef health on a global scale. I challenge anybody to produce data demonstrating that the tropical west Atlantic coral reefs have improved in condition or remained at level condition, by any measure you wish, over the past 25 years. That does not mean that the changes are irreversible or unprecedented in deep time, Gene. It only means that it is a sad thing for us and for our childern that this is happening at this particular time, for we now cause this decline knowingly and deliberately, recovery will likely be a very lengthy process, and we are seem to be doing our best to inhibit even that. The long view will always be there to make us feel better in some existential sense, but it is no balm to those of us who wish to enjoy and benefit from coral reefs during our lives and the lives of our children and grandchildren. Indo-Pacific coral reefs exhibit a vigorous ability to bounce back from denudation or phase shift, so long as there is a stable physical substratum on which they can rebuild (dynamite rubble piles are not very good for this). However, the proportion of reef surface that is in a disturbed, regenerating state at any given time, and more importantly, the size-frequency distribution of these disturbances, looks very odd and very different than when I was a graduate student. Are we using the right data to characterize and track these changes, Rick? Because the Pacific is still more robust than the Atlantic, there is much of concern that we can choose to overlook if that is our bias. We'd better be careful not to be too easily reassured by the positive signs that coral reefs in the Pacific could hold their own, given the chance...because they by and large are not being given the chance. The pace and extent of bleaching alone is awesome. Who is coming forward to call this a non-event, or our response to it exagerated and misplaced? Who is saying that overfishing is something that will have no effect on reefs worth worrying about, and that we can ignore it? Who is saying that the industrialization of reef destruction is not a real thing worth keeping in check? Who is saying with confidence that the earth is not getting warmer, that bleaching is not more frequent and severe, or that corals will definitely adapt to these changes and that the world shall remain much as wonderful as it has always been for us, no matter what we do? So what gentle hand is it, exactly that Gene and Rick wish to lay upon the scene? Les Kaufman From szmanta at uncw.edu Sat Feb 25 08:50:30 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 08:50:30 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 3 References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From anderson at africaonline.co.tz Sat Feb 25 12:38:51 2006 From: anderson at africaonline.co.tz (Jim Anderson) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 20:38:51 +0300 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence - Effect of Bombing References: Message-ID: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> Dear Listers, Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is sibylle at chumbeisland.com] Jim Anderson, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. From manfrino at reefresearch.org Sat Feb 25 12:55:45 2006 From: manfrino at reefresearch.org (Carrie Manfrino) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:55:45 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Summer Coral Reef Internship and Conservation Programs at the Little Cayman Research Centre Message-ID: <014101c63a34$b5315f60$2f01a8c0@CPQ10443900021> Summer Coral Reef Research Internship -a four-week program through Rutgers University Study Abroad at the Little Cayman Research Centre >From July 15 - August 10 2006, the Central Caribbean Marine Institute (CCMI) offers a four-week voluntary research internship program through Rutgers University's Institute of Marine & Coastal Sciences. This program is an opportunity for graduate students and conservation professionals (a few advanced undergraduates may be accepted) to gain advanced underwater research experience. The goals of the program are to train participants in coral ecology protocols and to provide scientifically usable data to assist CCMI in its ecosystem monitoring and coral disease research initiatives. For more information, go to www.reefresearch.org and click on educational and field programs where students will find full details on program cost, credits, registration process, and activities. An Introduction to Tropical Marine Conservation & Field Research Methodologies - a one-week Tropical Marine Conservation course at the Little Cayman Research Centre >From June 23-30 2006, the Central Caribbean Marine Institute offers a one week course at the Little Cayman Research Centre designed to introduce undergraduates to the biology and ecology of tropical marine habitats and to the basics of field research. Students will come away with a strong understanding of the conservation challenge associated with protecting rapidly declining coral reef systems and be prepared to take more advanced research courses or internships. For more information on this course offered through Kean University's Travelearn program, go to www.reefresearch.org and click on educational and field programs where students will find full details on program cost, credits, registration process, and activities. Central Caribbean Marine Institute www.reefresearch.org Dr. Carrie Manfrino, President P.O. Box 1461 Princeton, NJ 08540 Ph:(609) 933-4559 Caribbean Headquarters Little Cayman Research Centre North Coast Road P.O. Box 37 Little Cayman, Cayman Islands (345) 926-2789 From kruer at 3rivers.net Sat Feb 25 14:22:48 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:22:48 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence References: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> Message-ID: <4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net> Folks, In just a few days we've gone from a discussion of reef problems and degradation in the Florida Keys, and how best to approach them after all these years, to a global (and even geologic time, which I too find foolish) focus promoted by US scientists. And the more global the view, the more complicated and diverse the opinions about what is going on and what should be done (if anything) become. And I suspect that those who still question worldwide reef problems are limiting their view to the role of climate change. So what a great irony today to read Anderson's concern of dynamite fishing increasing on reefs in Tanzania. While US NOAA scientists continually move the target and encourage us to think big. Keys problems don't rise to the level of dynamite fishing but the end result may be the same. My suggestions are simply to do what we can locally in places like the Florida Keys to deal with obvious problems, not mysteries - but we're not even close to doing what is possible to protect and conserve the place. In light of the fact that the budget of NOAA's Habitat Conservation Division and other programs have been cut nationally that will only be more difficult in the future. Time to come home. Curtis Kruer ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim Anderson wrote: > Dear Listers, > > Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from > episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet > bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any > prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars > that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? > > The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the > fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast > becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are > pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district > governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those > who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that > network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is > sibylle at chumbeisland.com] > > Jim Anderson, > Dar es Salaam, > Tanzania. > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From phoetjes at cura.net Sat Feb 25 20:45:29 2006 From: phoetjes at cura.net (Paul Hoetjes) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence In-Reply-To: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> 4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net References: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> 4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net Message-ID: <44010839.4050303@cura.net> This has been a most stirring discussion, and I believe very much to the point of what those of us who are extremely worried about the future of coral reefs as we know them, are trying to do. As Les said we really need a common and consistent viewpoint, and that will need to focus down on particulars and concrete activities, and not stay afloat on the 'big' picture, whether it be global or geological. Though thank you Alina for putting things so eloquently depressing. Local people are experiencing this unprecedented (Gene: in the sense that we humans have never experienced it before, AND we are actually causing it) disaster that is befalling our reefs. Whether it be in Florida, or Tanzania, or down here in Curacao in the Southern Caribbean, those of us old enough to know the reefs at the time when reef science really started coming into its own in the sixties, we experienced their demise (not decline, let's face it the reefs of the sixties are dead, what we still have are pale ghosts of them) in disaster after disaster. First it was spearfishing with world championship tournaments moving from place to place in the sixties and early seventies, when everyone was spearfishing and within ten years every big fish was gone anywhere that was accessible to divers. Then (in the Caribbean) the Diadema die-off, completely changing the reef as we knew it, and followed by an insidious wasting away of shallow water reefs (and I mean shallow, 1-4 ft deep, yes there was actual reef at those shallow depths in those days in the Caribbean!). Then the white-band disease neatly removed miles and miles of Acropora cervicornis forests. Then in the nineties bleaching and yellow-blotch disease started in on our remaining reef infrastructure. What was left standing was now called 'coral reef', and it was still magnificent, and although we did start to worry by then, nobody really believed that the dire predictions of the ISRS meeting in the early nineties that we would lose 20-40 % of our (still remaining) reefs within a generation, would come true. But, we had white plague and more bleaching and increasing numbers of hurricanes wreaking havoc on the weakened reef structure, and 15 years later we have a prediction that in twenty years we will loose 40 % of what is left if we don't do something. What we should say is that in another 20 years we may have 10 % of our reefs left! Sorry for this somewhat lengthy introduction, but we cannot keep on pretending everything is hunky dory, and oh, since we don't have any reefs left that are a shadow of what they once were, let's call some of the hardiest weed patches that are so adapted to inhospitable circumstance that most of the changes going on elsewhere left them mostly untouched, let's call those 'resilient' reefs, and focus all our meager resources on protecting those. Oh, oh, and guess what, since nothing seems to have been able to kill these little hardy patches, protecting them is a good bet since we're likely to be succesful even if we can't stop all the causes that are killing all the other reefs. I feel that this focusing on 'resilient' reefs is confusing the issues. It's a giving up on trying to stop the causes of reef death. We can be happy that there are still some areas that look remotely like a reef used to, but we can't lower our standards and forget about what a reef once was. We need to keep fighting to protect all our coasts with an eye to reef preservation, not just those pieces of coast with 'resilient' reefs and elsewhere giving a free reign to developers and erosion and overfishing and irresponsible boating and pollution and septic tanks. Those need to be controlled effectively, everywhere, leaving only a few 'resilient' areas where people can still behave unsustainably. That is what resilience should mean, places that you can't destroy because they've already been completely trashed (and we have plenty of those). If we can achieve only that much, restrict people's activities directly affecting reefs to recreational reserves where they can't do much damage, then we can maybe start worrying about really combating global warming instead of just talking about it. As it stands, all our reefs will have been killed long before global warming will really get it's licks in. So, speaking from an area where reefs are still in somewhat better shape than elsewhere in the region, in summary: There are no reefs left in anything approaching untouched condition. Diseases, and (because of?) overfishing, insiduous pollution and siltation, not just bleaching, have taken care of most of the original reefs. Focusing protection on those reefs that apparently had least need of protection over the past 40 years (resilient reefs) is a cop out. We need to protect all reefs (or what can still with leniency be called reefs). We need to protect them from such 'easy' (well, at least clear cut) things to control as human destructiveness and gregariousness. PS, I'm writing this from a non-airconditioned house in the tropics, I drive a fuel efficient small car, so I do my bit against global warming (though I do have a computer and a television and leave more lights on than strictly necessary, sorry). Cheers, Paul Hoetjes Dept. of Environment Netherlands Antilles Curtis Kruer wrote: >Folks, > >In just a few days we've gone from a discussion of reef problems and degradation in the Florida >Keys, and how best to approach them after all these years, to a global (and even geologic time, >which I too find foolish) focus promoted by US scientists. And the more global the view, the more >complicated and diverse the opinions about what is going on and what should be done (if anything) >become. > >And I suspect that those who still question worldwide reef problems are limiting their view to the >role of climate change. So what a great irony today to read Anderson's concern of dynamite fishing >increasing on reefs in Tanzania. While US NOAA scientists continually move the target and encourage >us to think big. Keys problems don't rise to the level of dynamite fishing but the end result may be >the same. My suggestions are simply to do what we can locally in places like the Florida Keys to >deal with obvious problems, not mysteries - but we're not even close to doing what is possible to >protect and conserve the place. In light of the fact that the budget of NOAA's Habitat Conservation >Division and other programs have been cut nationally that will only be more difficult in the future. > Time to come home. > >Curtis Kruer > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > >Jim Anderson wrote: > > >>Dear Listers, >> >>Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from >>episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet >>bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any >>prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars >>that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? >> >>The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the >>fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast >>becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are >>pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district >>governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those >>who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that >>network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is >>sibylle at chumbeisland.com] >> >>Jim Anderson, >>Dar es Salaam, >>Tanzania. >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> -- Paul C. Hoetjes Senior Policy Advisor Department of Environment & Nature (MINA) Ministry of Public Health & Social Development (VSO) Schouwburgweg 26 (APNA building) Cura?ao Netherlands Antilles tel. +(599-9)466-9307; fax: +(599-9)461-0254 e-mail: paul at mina.vomil.an =========================================== -- http://mina.vomil.an -- =========================================== This message has been scanned for Spam and Virus by CuraNet. From jhocevar at dialb.greenpeace.org Sat Feb 25 22:31:44 2006 From: jhocevar at dialb.greenpeace.org (John Hocevar) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:31:44 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] consensus statement References: Message-ID: <277f01c63a85$3ddc58b0$fc02a8c0@Bolivar> Greetings, I'm enjoying this discussion. While it is admittedly frustrating to see some of the conversation focusing on semantics rather than the seriousness of the threats to coral reefs, it would appear that most, if not all, would agree that there is an observable trend of reef decline, and that anthropogenic impacts are among the primary causes. Global Warming and its more direct and potentially devastating cousin Acidification would present enormous challenges for conservationists even if these burdens were being placed on the shoulders of pristine reefs. Of course, that is hardly the case, as erosion, high nutrient run-off, and toxic pollution have already taken a toll. Fishing has done a job on reefs as well, whether by removing algal grazers or even by dynamiting or poisoning. There is no doubt need for exploration of the degree to which the above statement is true in different regions, and the degree to which the above factors are responsible for past declines or future threats. For the most part, though, it seems that this has been sufficiently well established. Is the general public aware of this situation? Are policy makers placing solutions high enough on their agendas? Clearly not. I strongly support Phil Dustan's proposal for production of a consensus statement (in this case, probably a sign-on statement) of actions that can be taken to conserve coral reefs. My hope is that this community will not shy away from addressing the need to reduce consumption of fossil fuels, unsustainable fishing practices, or coastal development. Human behaviors are contributing to reef decline, so policies must be created to guide changes in those behaviors. If those who best understand the problems are unwilling to propose these changes, there is little hope that this decline can be slowed, much less halted or turned around. As someone who decided to leave academia for conservation advocacy, I can offer to help bring together environmental organizations to broadcast your concerns and recommendations to a wider audience. A coalition of a broad spectrum of organizations representing millions of people working to communicate a solution-oriented scientific consensus on the coral reef crisis would be a strong force for reef conservation. (This would not occur in a vacuum; any successful collaboration of this kind would utilize existing networks and build on past statements.) John Hocevar Oceans Specialist Greenpeace USA Office: 512 454-6140 Cel: 512 577-3868 From estherborell at yahoo.co.uk Sun Feb 26 02:13:43 2006 From: estherborell at yahoo.co.uk (Esther Borell) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 07:13:43 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? In-Reply-To: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <20060226071343.24908.qmail@web86912.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hi Alina and all others, I think your letter has not only contextualized our ?reef problems? but also hit a nerve. Its time to change our dogma. Its time to strip down the fancy costume of sustainability. I sometimes even wonder whether this word was invented to keep social economists in business. I don?t want to see them unemployed, the contrary, but I believe that sustainability, as a concept needs to be reinvented. The red queen is running faster than ever, unable to not only maintain her position, but even starting to fall behind. I am currently based in southeast Sulawesi, alleged centre of coral reef biodiversity but I am placing a safe bet that 70% of reefs here in the Spermonde archipel are very ill, losing their diversity, maybe not like rainforests in %s, not yet but it?s probably only a matter of time ? on an ecological, not geological time scale. Diving reminds me of walking along the Via Appia in Rome, looking at the remains of the past, providing faint evidence of how ?it?used be. Many of the reefs here look like rubble deserts. To see fish one has to pay extra entrance fee. I have counted 7 bombs on a one and a half our dive the other day. Reefs here don?t seem to suffer from bleaching (ironically I am researching just that) but from structural devastation (bombing), insane overfishing and severe eutrophication. Most corals of the inner and middle shelf within this archipelago are heavily infested by all sorts of borers. Its like cancer. Seemingly healthy and flourishing to the outside, but then unable to withstand January and February storms, which have eroded large patches of reefs and signs of algal succession are already on the way. The only way to sustain would be to stop ANY reef and coastal related activities until further notice. But this of course is just na?ve wishful thinking. The present resilience vs remnance discussion has been largely gravitated around the Keys and I noticed that most if not all participants were ?1st world scientists?. I am sitting in the middle of the 3rd world biodiversity hot spot wondering where our ?hotspot affilated collegues? are. I am guessing, that many are oblivious to this discussion due to the lack of adequate internet access, which at least here in Indonesia is still a novelty, slow and expensive. But they need to be integrated ? asap. Reef decline here is more than the problem of policy implementation, local politics and steak holder conflicts. It?s the consequence on the tail of a much bigger issue, an issue of local culture and education. We, the 1st world scientists live in a world of health insurances, unemployment insurances and mortgages. Hooray to those that can afford to recycle their rubbish. It?s a luxury. In Germany every household has more rubbish bins than fingers on one hand. Here in Indonesia we have none. Rubbish is dumped into the ocean, onto the reefs or disposed of ?thermally? (I know ...weve been there - still are?). My point is, we are living in a world that has conditioned us to think ahead, trying to not only predict but also prepare for future, featuring perspectives extending beyond that of individuality - a concept as such alien to indonesien society. Family rules. Thinking future is much more confined to the individual and future predictions seldom appear to penetrate any further then to the F1 generation. Producing offsprings to secure the future. Offsprings are the real existing currency.And can we blame them? I cant. The 62 yr old woman in the states really didn?t need the 12th child. That?s pure stupidity. She probably didn?t even need 3, but I am hitting thin ice here. Women on the archipel islands however do need children (but not 12). Most people on the islands don?t qualify for mortgages and likes, most don?t even qualify for simple bank accounts. They borrow money from affluent parties, thereby entering into a livelong dependence, becoming an accessory to the complex network of the local illegal fishing industry, paying off their debts by carrying out the task at hand, namely bombing. Many of them risking their lives in doing so, many being driven into invalidity of some sort. What we need, is educational sustainability. Education that lasts. Education that indoctrinates and is assimilated and passed on to F2, F3 .Fn. Academically and practically its time for consilience, in the sense it was formulated by O. Wilson. We need a unification of knowledge in order to act. Disciplines need to be pulled together. Reef conservation here in spermonde is a first order task for anthropologists, sociologists, and socioeconomists, then for marinebiologists and in the last instance for politicians, but creating a circular network of exchange. Maybe its time that universities teach marine anthropology. But yes, its easy to stay in our studies busying us with intellectual chit chat contemplating fancy ?nce words ..creating awareness amongst those that are aware anyway. I am just wearing the shoes of the devils advocate, and am certainly not throwing the first stone. After all I am researching bleaching in corals that do not bleach and my bahasa Indonesia is as fragile as the reefs. So whats the new dogma? What do do? And who is doing it? Learning the language, going into teaching after finishing the PhD? Become a marineanthropologist? Maybe I should give up my oil leaking motorbike and do what with it?...dump it the ocean? trying to keep up optimism esther . "Szmant, Alina" wrote: Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now --------------------------------- From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sun Feb 26 08:58:31 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 08:58:31 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Message-ID: <4401B407.2000407@noaa.gov> Hey, folks, I'm certainly not going to be one who runs around waving the flag of *sustainability*. My main point was that these words means different things to different people, most likely because they aren't being used correctly. Like, let's look at the definition of the word *sustain*, then look at how it is currently being used: sus?tain 1. To keep in existence; maintain. 2. To supply with necessities or nourishment; provide for. Don't we want to do this for coral reefs? Of course we do. But now that I've thrown the word out there (after admittedly not ever really using it much--certainly not in fora like these), I'm starting to notice it more. Like, I now see a Request For Proposals that mentions sustainable development. What the heck is that supposed to mean? It means, essentially, let's develop some enterprise(s) near the coast or coral reef area that can support economies, yet not compromise the environment. I think that's what it means. The concept of how you can support an economy near a reef area, yet not compromise it (the reef area, that is), is what should separate the good proposals and actions from the bad. This approach says "let's find a way for people to live [*develop*] near ecosystems without messing them up [too much]." Those who are against sustainable development would prefer to either not develop near these areas, or keep people out of the area, which is a great idea if it is a realistic approach, but how do you push back the tide of people? So, to me "sustainable development" seems to be an oxymoron and a phrase meant to countenance or disguise coastal development. I'll bet a real estate developer came up with that phrase. So, what I said was we should sustain the reefs, not (necessarily) permit sustainable development. I personally don't see how you can sustain a clean environment and also permit people to crawl (swim) all over it. I guess I'm saying our goal should be to sustain the reefs that are in good condition, but what I admittedly didn't address was how to fix the compromised reefs. You have to accept what Alina says, that we're in a big mess and we have to work with what we have, but to do that we all have to do our part and we need strong leadership. Our leaders listen (theoretically) to lots of voices and also to big money. Now, addressing the charge that we first-world (and NOAA) coral scientists have no clue as to what's going on in the rest of the world, I would have to agree that THIS scientist is clueless about a lot of international coral problems, at least from a first-person account. I have never seen bombs on the ocean floor, and have never had my ear drums blown out from blast-fishing. HOWEVER, I have been part of proposal review processes before and I can tell you that a large number of very savvy coral scientists (NOAA, academic and NGO) and policy makers put large numbers of well-meaning hours into trying to determine where best to fund coral conservation efforts (but the process is not perfect). It's a very difficult decision process, and the final decision makers ultimately have no other agenda except to conserve coral reefs. If the squeaky wheel gets the grease (see also last sentence of previous paragraph), then we have to agree on what needs to squeak the loudest, or at least prioritize the squeaks. Which is what Phil was saying with his plea to come up with 8 - 10 action items. Later... From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sun Feb 26 09:10:34 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 09:10:34 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] disclaimer Message-ID: <4401B6DA.3060400@noaa.gov> Whoops, I should have put this at the bottom of my last couple of messages, because it's true: "The contents of this message are mine personally and do not necessarily reflect any position of the Government or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration." From cnidaria at earthlink.net Sun Feb 26 12:34:28 2006 From: cnidaria at earthlink.net (James M Cervino) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 12:34:28 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Resilience? After Heat Stroke? Message-ID: Dear Coral Reef Scientists, Alina's post states the truth as it address our cultural behavior in the USA and how this may be having a negative impact on the reefs throughout the world. We all agree that thermal stress is the number one cause of coral mortality coupled with localized deforestation and anthropogenic nutrient enrichment. However, it was not long ago that there were people out there (marine scientists) that refused to admit that global warming induced thermal heat shock is the number one threat reefs are facing today. Reef Resilience! Are we fooling ourselves? With the growing population and the types of vehicles we use to transport our kiddies to soccer practice we will continue to produce more heat trapping gasses into the atmosphere that are directly correlated with higher sea surface temperatures. This will have a serious effect on tropical corals that are sensitive and already threatened. The major reef builders of the Pacific are not resilient, and will not be resistant to thermal stress and coral disease. We can say good-by to the diversity of corals I am looking at in Jen Veron's book that is sitting in front of me on my desk, especially if we all are not vocal about the Energy Policy produced by the Whitehouse this year. Were there any atmospheric and marine scientists acting as advisors quoted in this Energy Policy brief? We as marine scientists should be outraged as we all know now that reefs will not be resilient to the changing oceanographic conditions in the next decade. So the question is, how will we address this as marine scientists? Create more MPAs? I don't care how many MPAs we create throughout the world, if we are not going to get serious about global warming and anthropogenic nutrient enrichment we are wasting time. Will MPAs protect corals from heat stroke or nutrient enrichment? Are corals protected from global warming and nutrient pollution and is this addressed in MPAs ? Below are some vital statistics regarding how the USA is addressing global warming induced climate change: In 2004, China consumed 6.5 million barrels of oil per day. The United States consumed 20.4 million barrels, and demand is rising as a result of economic growth and American cars. It has been estimated that the bulk of the imports are going directly to SUVs. SUVs made up 5% of the American arsenal of cars in 1990; currently they make up 54%. U.S. oil imports are at the highest ever, 55%. Department of Energy projections show imports rising to 70 percent by 2025. Interpreting this to a global scale the United States transportation sector produces about 8% of world global warming pollution and accounts for 18 percent of an increasingly tight world oil market each year according to the Energy Foundation and the Association for Peak Oil&Gas (http://www.peakoil.net/). If American cars averaged 40 miles per gallon, we would soon reduce consumption by 2 million to 3 million barrels of oil a day. That could translate into a sustained price drop of more than $20 a barrel. And getting cars to be that efficient is easy. This was not addressed in the recent energy bill recently passed by Congress. Global oil use = 31.5 billion barrels per year One barrel oil = 42 U.S. gallons One cubic foot = 7.48 U.S. gallons One cubic mile = 147.2 billion cubic feet Country Barrels of oil per person annually United States 25 Japan 14.0 Spain 13.8 Mexico 6.0 Brazil 3.5 China 1.5 India 0.8 Source: Goldman Sachs, Energy Weekly, August 11, 1999 Consumption (Millions of barrels per day): Source DOE ------------------------------------------------------------------------ United States: 19.993 Japan: 5.423 China: 4.854 Germany: 2.814 Russia: 2.531 South Korea: 2.126 Brazil: 2.123 Canada: 2.048 France: 2.040 India: 2.011 Mexico: 1.932 Italy: 1.881 United Kingdom: 1.699 Spain: 1.465 SaudiArabia: 1.415 Iran: 1.109 Indonesia: 1.063 Netherlands: .881 Australia: .879 Taiwan: .846 -- ************************************************** Dr. James M. Cervino, MS, Ph.D. Marine Biologist Department of Biological & Health Sciences Pace University New York NYC Phone: (917) 620-5287 Web site: http://www.globalcoral.org *************************************************** From reginal at hawaii.edu Sun Feb 26 16:56:04 2006 From: reginal at hawaii.edu (Regina) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:56:04 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? Message-ID: <67fdad82756000d396460a6add72f34e@hawaii.edu> Esther and all, As a marine anthropologist, I read your post with great interest and had to resist the temptation to shout out loud "here here!!" lest my office mates think me a bit mad. There are actually a few universities teaching marine anthropology and I agree that the inclusion of a marine anthropologist in interdisciplinary marine science projects is vital. As Chuck Birkeland, one of my favorite professors often says, one cannot manage the marine environment, one has to manage the people using it. Aloha, Regina Regina Woodrom Luna Maritime and Fisheries Anthropologist PhD Candidate, Ecological Anthropology Program (Marine) University of Hawaii Manoa Lecturer: Biology of Marine Reptiles, Human Adaptation to the Sea, Anthropology of Tourism, American Cultures Biological Assistant: Oahu Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvaging Group ReginaL at hawaii.edu >From: Esther Borell >To: "Szmant, Alina" >CC: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? >Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 07:13:43 +0000 (GMT) > > >Hi Alina and all others, > I think your letter has not only contextualized our ?reef problems? but also hit a nerve. > Its time to change our dogma. Its time to strip down the fancy costume of sustainability. I sometimes even wonder whether this word was invented to keep social economists in business. I don?t want to see them unemployed, the contrary, but I believe that sustainability, as a concept needs to be reinvented. > The red queen is running faster than ever, unable to not only maintain her position, but even starting to fall behind. > I am currently based in southeast Sulawesi, alleged centre of coral reef biodiversity but I am placing a safe bet that 70% of reefs here in the Spermonde archipel are very ill, losing their diversity, maybe not like rainforests in %s, not yet but it?s probably only a matter of time ? on an ecological, not geological time scale. Diving reminds me of walking along the Via Appia in Rome, looking at the remains of the past, providing faint evidence of how ?it?used be. > Many of the reefs here look like rubble deserts. To see fish one has to pay extra entrance fee. I have counted 7 bombs on a one and a half our dive the other day. > Reefs here don?t seem to suffer from bleaching (ironically I am researching just that) but from structural devastation (bombing), insane overfishing and severe eutrophication. Most corals of the inner and middle shelf within this archipelago are heavily infested by all sorts of borers. Its like cancer. Seemingly healthy and flourishing to the outside, but then unable to withstand January and February storms, which have eroded large patches of reefs and signs of algal succession are already on the way. > > The only way to sustain would be to stop ANY reef and coastal related activities until further notice. But this of course is just na?ve wishful thinking. > > The present resilience vs remnance discussion has been largely gravitated around the Keys and I noticed that most if not all participants were ?1st world scientists?. I am sitting in the middle of the 3rd world biodiversity hot spot wondering where our ?hotspot affilated collegues? are. I am guessing, that many are oblivious to this discussion due to the lack of adequate internet access, which at least here in Indonesia is still a novelty, slow and expensive. But they need to be integrated ? asap. Reef decline here is more than the problem of policy implementation, local politics and steak holder conflicts. It?s the consequence on the tail of a much bigger issue, an issue of local culture and education. > We, the 1st world scientists live in a world of health insurances, unemployment insurances and mortgages. Hooray to those that can afford to recycle their rubbish. It?s a luxury. In Germany every household has more rubbish bins than fingers on one hand. Here in Indonesia we have none. Rubbish is dumped into the ocean, onto the reefs or disposed of ?thermally? (I know ...weve been there - still are?). > My point is, we are living in a world that has conditioned us to think ahead, trying to not only predict but also prepare for future, featuring perspectives extending beyond that of individuality - a concept as such alien to indonesien society. Family rules. Thinking future is much more confined to the individual and future predictions seldom appear to penetrate any further then to the F1 generation. Producing offsprings to secure the future. Offsprings are the real existing currency.And can we blame them? I cant. The 62 yr old woman in the states really didn?t need the 12th child. That?s pure stupidity. She probably didn?t even need 3, but I am hitting thin ice here. Women on the archipel islands however do need children (but not 12). > Most people on the islands don?t qualify for mortgages and likes, most don?t even qualify for simple bank accounts. They borrow money from affluent parties, thereby entering into a livelong dependence, becoming an accessory to the complex network of the local illegal fishing industry, paying off their debts by carrying out the task at hand, namely bombing. Many of them risking their lives in doing so, many being driven into invalidity of some sort. > > What we need, is educational sustainability. Education that lasts. Education that indoctrinates and is assimilated and passed on to F2, F3 ?.Fn. > Academically and practically its time for consilience, in the sense it was formulated by O. Wilson. We need a unification of knowledge in order to act. Disciplines need to be pulled together. Reef conservation here in spermonde is a first order task for anthropologists, sociologists, and socioeconomists, then for marinebiologists and in the last instance for politicians, but creating a circular network of exchange. > Maybe its time that universities teach marine anthropology. But yes, its easy to stay in our studies busying us with intellectual chit chat contemplating fancy ?nce words?..creating awareness amongst those that are aware anyway. > > I am just wearing the shoes of the devils advocate, and am certainly not throwing the first stone. After all I am researching bleaching in corals that do not bleach and my bahasa Indonesia is as fragile as the reefs. So whats the new dogma? What do do? And who is doing it? > Learning the language, going into teaching after finishing the PhD? Become a marineanthropologist? Maybe I should give up my oil leaking motorbike ?and do what with it?...dump it the ocean? > > trying to keep up optimism > > esther > > > > . > > > > >"Szmant, Alina" wrote: > Hi Phil & others: > >I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created > through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not > taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? > >You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I > have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? > >China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. > >For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. > >So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. > >Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. > >So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. > >So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. > >In a pessimistic mood this morn', > >Alina Szmant > > >******************************************************************* >Dr. Alina M. Szmant >Coral Reef Research Group >UNCW-Center for Marine Science >5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln >Wilmington NC 28409 >Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 >Cell: (910)200-3913 >email: szmanta at uncw.edu >Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta >****************************************************************** > >________________________________ > >From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg >Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM >To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 > > > >Phil, > >Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > >Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > >Dear Colleagues, > > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting > >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few > >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to > >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our > >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > > and less > >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by > >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from > >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of > >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the > >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral > >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show > >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to > >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own > >history and ecology. > > > >Let's face it: > > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, > >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is > >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological > >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal > >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't > >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's > >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take > >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the > >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all > >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread > >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. > >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human > >reproductive success. > > > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > > radar > >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation > >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my > >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities > >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the > >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs > >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this > >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying > >and we have got to do more. > > > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think > >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We > >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the > >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of > >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of > >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled > >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and > >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > > are > >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral > >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, > >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own > >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and > >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For > >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes > >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, > >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations > >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a > >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is > >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the > >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and > >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the > >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is > >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And > >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we > >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost > >every reef on the planet. > > > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > > agency, > >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for > >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a > >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded > >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus > >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would > >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study > >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think > >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > > Thanks, > > Phil > > > >-- > >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. > >Department of Biology > >College of Charleston > >Charleston SC 29424 > >(843) 953-8086 voice > >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Coral-List mailing list > >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > >--------------------------------- > Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now >--------------------------------- > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From lesk at bu.edu Sun Feb 26 11:08:47 2006 From: lesk at bu.edu (lesk at bu.edu) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:08:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Faith in local efforts; ferocity in facing the world In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060226110847.e61yypg760ww0w8w@www.bu.edu> Phil Dustan asked what we can do. Perhaps a start is to share what we are doing now, and help each other forge our puzzle pieces into a whole. This sometimes works better than launching a new big empty vessel with a fancy name and fundraising needs in hopes of picking up paying passengers along the way. Here is the piece I am on now. A small idea emerged from a workshop several years ago in Los Cabos. Conservation International organized a party called "Defying Ocean's End". No, I did not make up that name, though margaritas inspired an indecent salute to go along with it. DOE is a business plan to save the sea, vetted by folks from Goldman Sachs Inc. to make sure the scientists, environmentalists and stakeholders present were able to add up the numbers properly. A news piece on DOE is at http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/ 2003/06/0603_030603_oceanboundaries.html and the resulting Island Press book is at: http://www.islandpress.org/books/detail.html/SKU/1-55963-753-6 At DOE, Jeremy Jackson and I co-chaired a very lively working group focussed on science to "restore and maintain marine ecosystem function." In order to restore a marine ecosystem, we reasoned that we should first restore faith in a coastal community that they can steward their local marine environment despite the sky falling all about them. The small idea is this: resistance is not futile. This is a tough nut because people are hearing that no matter what they do to control fishing pressure and overdevelopment in their own front yards, the First World is going to get them- cook them, innundate them, poison them, and overpower them economically, to the strains of a siren call irresistable to their greedy and their young. The key would be for a local community to do their level best to manage their doings in their own bit of sea in an enduring and rewarding fashion (the "S" word). If it works even a little, empowerment can hopefully do the rest. After DOE, I teamed up with CI to work on this problem. We were fortunate to get start-up funding from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation for a project called the Marine Management Area Science program (MMAS). We have four years to get going. Dr. Leah Bunce is the Project Director. I am the PI. Roger McManus is supervising staffer. Sylvia Earle is spokesperson/Godess. CI staff and partners are the implementing folks. For anybody who is interested, as materials become available they are posted to a general access web site. The quickest route to a fact sheet and workplan for the project is to put "CI MMAS" into Google and take the top hits. The project is evolving faster than the web portal and we do need some privacy and distance to get something done. However, link-ups, partnerships, criticisms are welcome. At its core MMAS is a natural and social science research project. Because it is a research project, parts of it that are new will appear in peer-reviewed papers first, and then be applied and publicized. These parts mostly have to do with the invention of new diagnostics to help sort out the effects of local management efforts, from changes (good or bad) in marine and social systems due to other causes. But much of what you will see in MMAS sounds like what others are doing, because all are part of the same global context. Let us call it: Alina's Lament. It is essential that these more general objectives be achieved collaboratively with other projects being carried out in the same geographical areas, in a united front. The egofriction static charge of NGO's and Kurtz-like characters- scientists and saviors, parachute-diplomats and prodigal sons alike- must be smoothed or we will be each others' failures. We are all human and we all set up fiefdoms and power structures as automatically as dogs piss to mark their having passed. Once everybody has pissed we can get down to work, and the mix will smell at least as good, or as bad, as the mark of any one. The Scientific Advisory Committee for MMAS has helped to guide us into a focus for the project in four primary geographical areas, and two for work to ramp up later on. These areas are: Greater Caribbean- primary focus on Belize and MBRS region Brazil- Abrolhos Shelf Tropical Eastern Pacific- Coiba, Cocos, Malpelo, Galapagos Fiji Archipelago The two areas for later on are Raja Ampat (eastern Indonesia) and the western Indian Ocean someplace. In each place we are fitting our little piece (MMA science) into the context of existing, locally initiated partnerships and projects. We also have some small, thematic research projects that are not geographically tied down to these spots except that the products will then be applied in each of them. Those are our beans. We have decided to work small. Together, the sites constitute a global observatory for the efficacy of MMA effects under varied biological and social conditions, strewn across E-W and N-S biodiversity gradients. Okay, that was my sharing time. Now it is all of your turns. Perhaps we can look at different parts of the world of tropical nearshore marine conservation organizationally, the way that ReefBase has helped us to do biologically. Find the pressure points. Hone the messages and the campaigns. Move from one immediate objective to the next. Shout into the media's ear instead of the other way. Remember, this isn't to say that the global UN diplomacy march on Washington thing isn't important, too. All of us have folks in our organizations who, bless their hearts, are doing just that. It just isn't what I am doing right now. Sounds kind of like baloney but maybe what we do can be better than what it sounds like. Now, that would be really novel. Les From JKoven at aol.com Sun Feb 26 18:05:29 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:05:29 EST Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Message-ID: Yes, Jim, "sustainable" and "development" ARE? oxymorons.? It all depends on what level of income/development the community stakeholders need to produce from their reefs, absent other income sources.? Their choices are often limited - they can bring in tourists/divers or over-fish, even though that diminishes or damages the resources.? Reefs provided sustenance for entire island communities for millenia - they can't now sustain other urban communities with growing populations.? The needs of these stakeholders has changed over the past 50 years - they want to send their children to schools off-island, they want the same techological "improvements" in their lives that those in the urban areas have and to catch up with the 21st century world.? Both climate change and over-fishing have? affected many Pacific reefs that have not been subjected to gross land-based pollution.? Nothing the stakeholders of small islands can do will change the global climate picture and fishing is part of their culture.? The search is on for other ways to sustain the way of life they wish to have, without further destroying fisheries and thus reefs. It's interesting that outrigger canoes once sped villagers to other islands.? Then came the diesel powered boats - slower and costly, although one was less dependant upon weather and perhaps drier upon arrival.? Now faster fiberglass boats are the thing.....they travel as swiftly as an outrigger in a decent wind, but leave one beholden to the fuel companies.? Progress?? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From JKoven at aol.com Sun Feb 26 18:04:05 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:04:05 EST Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence - Effect of Bombing Message-ID: <290.64bb747.31338de5@aol.com> Has anyone studied the reefs in Guam since WWII? Of course....but the diversity was vastly reduced. Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu Sun Feb 26 18:16:56 2006 From: rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu (Richard Grigg) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 13:16:56 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today In-Reply-To: <20060225110306.0iwtfp3s0kcg84sw@www.bu.edu> References: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20060226131545.01ca73d8@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Les, My real opinion and view of the world is much the same as Alina Szmant's. Overpopulation is the problem. The Club of Rome estimated that the carrying capacity of planet earth is about 3 billion people. We are double that now and there is no going back, at least not without a catastrophic event. The 1000's of reefs that are still healthy in the Pacific are in places underpopulated or even uninhabited. I visited about 25 such places several years ago in the Tuamotu Archipelago. Unfortunately, they too will probably be discovered. After that, if humankind does not face the human population issue head on, I don't think we can prevent these reefs from the same fate as those Phil Dustan was talking about. There is time, but not the political will on a global scale. But rather than dooming and glooming all the reefs in the world (dead or not), I think the number one action item should be containing the human population bomb. Not overgeneralizing about the reefs but facing the real issue....us. Rick Grigg At 11:03 AM 2/25/2006 -0500, lesk at bu.edu wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > >It is extremely important that we converge on a common and consistant >view on coral reef health that we can convey to the lay public. We >must also speak precisely when referring to any particular symptom of >coral reef health on a global scale. > >I challenge anybody to produce data demonstrating that the tropical >west Atlantic coral reefs have improved in condition or remained at >level condition, by any measure you wish, over the past 25 years. That >does not mean that the changes are irreversible or unprecedented in >deep time, Gene. It only means that it is a sad thing for us and for >our childern that this is happening at this particular time, for we now >cause this decline knowingly and deliberately, recovery will likely be >a very lengthy process, and we are seem to be doing our best to inhibit >even that. The long view will always be there to make us feel better >in some existential sense, but it is no balm to those of us who wish to >enjoy and benefit from coral reefs during our lives and the lives of >our children and grandchildren. > >Indo-Pacific coral reefs exhibit a vigorous ability to bounce back from >denudation or phase shift, so long as there is a stable physical >substratum on which they can rebuild (dynamite rubble piles are not >very good for this). However, the proportion of reef surface that is >in a disturbed, regenerating state at any given time, and more >importantly, the size-frequency distribution of these disturbances, >looks very odd and very different than when I was a graduate student. >Are we using the right data to characterize and track these changes, >Rick? Because the Pacific is still more robust than the Atlantic, >there is much of concern that we can choose to overlook if that is our >bias. We'd better be careful not to be too easily reassured by the >positive signs that coral reefs in the Pacific could hold their own, >given the chance...because they by and large are not being given the >chance. > >The pace and extent of bleaching alone is awesome. Who is coming >forward to call this a non-event, or our response to it exagerated and >misplaced? Who is saying that overfishing is something that will have >no effect on reefs worth worrying about, and that we can ignore it? >Who is saying that the industrialization of reef destruction is not a >real thing worth keeping in check? Who is saying with confidence that >the earth is not getting warmer, that bleaching is not more frequent >and severe, or that corals will definitely adapt to these changes and >that the world shall remain much as wonderful as it has always been for >us, no matter what we do? > >So what gentle hand is it, exactly that Gene and Rick wish to lay upon >the scene? > >Les Kaufman > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From milviapin at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 18:41:09 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 15:41:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <20060226234109.88917.qmail@web50303.mail.yahoo.com> dear listers, I agree with Rick, there are reefs that are considered pristine in RMI for example. No diseases, no bleaching, no eutrophication, no overfishing or destructive fishing nor boat damage threaten some of the reefs in remote areas . At many locations, we can still witness this ecosystem as clean, productive, diverse as some can only imagine it "should have been" earlier. No take areas or sanctuaries are indeed to be made the rule, and governments and managers in remote island countries hear this message, although thay often have to apply it not as a recovery or restoration process but as a conservation of extant natural health. This decision is often more difficult than similar action needed when the damage is instead evident and advanced. Also, I do not think people in the Pacific islands nor in South East Asia can agree we (they) can live "without reefs". It is not just a question of loosing biodiversity or beauty! Millions of people still REALLY depend on these ecosystems for their food AND income! Thank you Silvia Richard Grigg wrote: Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let?s face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze. From milviapin at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 19:07:07 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 16:07:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 3 In-Reply-To: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <20060227000708.48318.qmail@web50311.mail.yahoo.com> Alina, I think you had a very important message for all of us. "For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! " If we are not ready to relinquish some of our personal comfort(s), we cannot expect politicians to make things better for all of us and we should stop blaiming international politics for the damage caused to the global environment. I believe protecting reefs, or the environment, or the forests is less an issue of political decision and more of behaviour. Everybody's. Each one can make a little change in each one's life. All together we are definetely more powerful than a few "decision makers". cheers silvia "Szmant, Alina" wrote: Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. From szmanta at uncw.edu Sun Feb 26 20:09:28 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 20:09:28 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline References: <46F56ACD52BC5F4F911EF9C4264FB46404AD29DE@UNCWMAILVS1.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB028@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> For those of you loooking for how some scientists are trying to desseminate the word.... ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From: Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST) To: Subject: University of Texas Ocean Research Webcast Dear Science Enthusiast, University of Texas at Austin Webcast Entitled "Brave New Ocean." A webcast presentation given by Professor Jeremy Jackson, William E. and Mary B. Ritter Professor and Director of the Geosciences Research Division at Scripps Institution of Oceanography will be March 3, 2006 at 7pm. Dr. Jeremy Jackson is one of the most prominent marine ecologists in the world and he has a message to get out about the world's oceans - it documents declines in coral reefs, decreasing numbers of large marine fish, and losses of coastal and marine ecosystems. More than just an academic researcher, Dr. Jackson has actively searched for innovative ways to reach the public, applying his skills as a communicator with his scientific knowledge to inspire action. Dr. Jackson desires to reach a broader audience and affect change into the future with tomorrow's generation on this topic of interest. View a FREE web broadcast of the lecture live Friday, March 3, 2006 at 7 pm CST. During the live webcast, you can submit questions to Dr. Jackson and he will answer as many as he can for the live and webcast audiences. If possible, can you distribute or post a link to this webcast on your website, newsletter, or listserv as well as pass this notice on to any colleagues of yours that may be interested. The link to our Lecture Series website, where the details of the lecture and the webcast can be found, is: http://www.esi.utexas.edu/outreach/ols/lectures/Jackson/ Please let me know if you will consider posting this information. Thanks for your time, Brian Zavala Environmental Science Institute The University of Texas at Austin brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu 512.471.5847 ------ End of Forwarded Message From mtupper at picrc.org Sun Feb 26 21:11:37 2006 From: mtupper at picrc.org (Mark Tupper) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 11:11:37 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] vehicle emissions, lifestyle changes and global warming References: <20060223022526.80199.qmail@web35310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <009901c63b43$26543be0$63c8c814@TUPPER> Hi listers, I think James, Jeff and Alina are right on the money when they talk about vehicle emissions and today's "bigger is better" SUV mindset. I doubt that the public has any realization of the degree to which vehicle emissions contribute to greenhouse gases. A quote from the California Cars Initiative: "In California, transportation accounts for over 40% of greenhouse gas emissions. Nationally the number is around 33%. Globally it's 20% and rising fast, especially as car-starved China, India and Russia add to their fleets." So, if we can agree that global warming and climate change are adversely affecting coral reefs, then vehicle emissions are one of the major culprits. But have governments or the auto industry made any attempt to educate the public on this issue? If so, I must have missed it... This is one of the most challenging problems our environment faces, given the long history of our deep-rooted "car culture" lifestyle in North America. It's amazing to me that with sky-high gas prices unlikely to change while there is continuing war in the Middle East, people still want to buy the biggest, most expensive SUV they can. For example, in the last decade, Hummer went from a cottage industry aimed at producing exclusive (and enormous) vehicles for celebrities, to a major automaker producing over 100,000 SUVs per year. And as Jeff said, how many of those are ever taken off-road? And while DaimlerChrysler has been touting their advances in PHEV technology (plug-in hybrid electric vehicles that can get 100+ mpg), they were busy reviving the 425 horsepower Hemi engine and stuffing it into 4-door family sedans, and then developing a 500 horsepower V-10 for their SUVs and pickup trucks. Do soccer moms really need to go 0-60 in under 5 seconds and cruise the highway at over 170 mph, which just 10 years ago could only be done with a $200,000 exotic sports car? No. It would be illegal anyway. Has DaimlerChrysler sold any mass-produced PHEVs yet? No. Why not? Because hybrids are for nerdy enviro-geeks like us. Nobody else would pay the premium price charged for them when they could get a "real" car for less. In North America's car culture, big and powerful is sexy; small and efficient is lame. Sorry if this post seems too much about vehicles and not enough about coral reefs, but I'm trying to address one of the root causes of coral reef decline. We might say that greenhouse gases and resulting thermal stress are a root cause of decline but they aren't the ultimate cause. They are a symptom generated by human activities - a symptom that happens to trigger its own set of secondary symptoms, including coral bleaching and disease. In addressing the ultimate cause, the question is, how do we change the mindset of an entire nation from one of spending all their disposable income on unnecessary luxuries to one of moderation and conservation? Cheers, Mark Dr. Mark H Tupper, Senior Scientist Palau International Coral Reef Center PO Box 7086, Koror, Palau 96940 tel (680) 488-6950; fax (680) 488-6951 and Adjunct Research Associate University of Guam Marine Laboratory UOG Station, Mangilao, Guam 96923, USA tel (671) 735-2375; fax (671) 734-6767 From A.J.G.Williams at newcastle.ac.uk Mon Feb 27 14:30:15 2006 From: A.J.G.Williams at newcastle.ac.uk (Andrew Williams) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 19:30:15 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Resilience, Remnancy, Sustainability - Semantics? References: <46F56ACD52BC5F4F911EF9C4264FB46404AD29DE@UNCWMAILVS1.dcs.uncw.edu> <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB028@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <0BE60E6F26C4034388842EA9FA0DC94525281B@quarrel.campus.ncl.ac.uk> Dear All, I started out reading this topic with interest, but it is now becoming irritation, because it seems to be a great deal of definitions, discussions of semantics and ego flattering statements. Do I intend to be insulting? No, I attempt to point out that if this discussion is affecting me in this way (an alleged scientist), imagine what it does for members of the public... Now watch me reel off a massive list of definitions! *laughs* Global warming - fossil fuels are the key issue, yet they are owned by massive MNCs whose sole interest is capital generation. The technology to replace these energy sources already exists, is owned by MNCs and DODs around the world, either hidden from public use for protectionism of markets or national security (i.e. protectionism of national markets!). The USA is 'run' by an oil baron, a man who was re-elected by over 50% (ish) of the nation (well those who voted). What is the solution when the public are disinterested in (global) politics, and the politicians are interested in re-election and capital accumulation? Education is fundamentally important to changing public, and thus political, agendas, yet who controls school curricula? What happens when the media has become mankind's source of (dis)information? What happens when scientists cannot even decide within themselves the 'correct' course of action? I'll tell you what I believe happens, things get worse, further ingrained, more polarised and more self-centred. There are two real problems in this world, apathy and greed. If these two variables can be addressed, mankind has a chance at not destroying itself and the planet in the process. I've seen/heard various people say things like, "thanks for that depressing outlook" to which my response is, do we live on the same planet? I would dearly love to be optimistic about global affairs, but I think it's deluded. I don't believe in the Hollywood happy ending, in fact if I did, I wouldn't be studying natural resource management. I will happily admit that there are success stories about the place and I will come to that point 'shortly'. We are creeping in the right direction, but we could be walking, if not running (hand in hand into the sunset...sorry!). We all talk about globalisation, yet where are the international laws, where is the international institution that represents mankind's interest and not national interests? None of us alone is going to change global problems, it is going to take a concerted global effort, it is not going to be easy, it is going to require considerable pain in the process, because current consumption of global resources are not sustainable (yup sorry, there's that buzz word again). There are no 'silver bullets', if we haven't learned that yet... Admittedly, all this globalisation 'stuff' is in it's infancy, it is barely crawling, but someone (plural) MUST teach it how to walk and it cannot be driven solely by the free market ideology. 'Over' population - Carrying capacities do not take into account advances in technology, so improvements in agricultural practices increases production (agreed, simply pouring chemicals into the ground is not sustainable, but there are alternatives). There's plenty of food being produced today, it's not a production issue it's a distribution issue. I only have to wander around shops like 'Pound Land' to realise there are massive amounts of resources being poured into utterly useless products, yet people still buy them. My computers enable me to communicate globally, increase my productivity, my lights enable me to work in the dark, but, for example, these ridiculous plastic (oil derivative) desk ornaments - where's the utility in that? Don't even get me started on SUVs! To say China has the right idea about birth control, is rather simplistic, just look at how many female babies are abandoned or aborted, I feel that women being marched en-mass into sterilisation programs (India) against their will is totally indefensible. Human rights on one hand, control systems on the other - where is the middle ground? I personally would like to see a licensing system, whereby people have to prove they are capable of being good parents and are economically able to raise their kids - but of course that only works in developed nations, I could not possibly argue for that to be applied in developing nations. I'm sure that would cause a massive outcry, it being a fundamental human right to have children, but this example of the women having her 12th baby - what about the rights of people who don't want to live in an overcrowded world? Since when do the rights of the individual outweigh the rights of the many (sorry, rather star trek I know!)? We are boxing ourselves into a corner with all this political correctness. Timescales - someone mentioned that on a long enough time line, reefs will be gone. Well in several billion years the sun will expand to the point Earth will be uninhabitable - does this mean we should all just give up and damn the world to extinction early? I absolutely take the point that ecosystems are processes, (perhaps they should be renamed as ecoprocesses and not systems (I am so joking!)) and that on a long enough time line everything will change, but these changes are for the most part geologically slow - slow enough for evolution to keep pace. Mankind's affects on the planet are accelerating beyond the pace of evolution, plus I would prefer to live in a world where the atmosphere is breathable, the water drinkable, the soils cultivable... Spatial scales - I vaguely remember mentioning I would come to a point and this is it - start small, lead by example and the people will follow! We can't take on global issues, the institutions and laws simply are not there yet, it's currently far too voluntary and un-enforceable. Apart from anything else, ecosystems are site specific - there are reefs on the east coast of Australia that are growing in highly turbid conditions, whereas in other places, turbidity is fatal. I don't think it is possible to come up with a 10 point plan to global success, because by doing so you are going to have to cut down a 1000 points to 10, what if the 990 disregarded points aggregate to greater importance than the 10 you chose? Global affairs are for the politicians, scientists should be there in an advisory capacity but when I say scientists I mean all of them, not just e.g. Marine Biologists - see my next point. Integration - So, one school of thought cries out for public awareness and consumer driven market forces, one cries out for more stringent laws and regulations, another for strict conservationism, another for... where is the integration, where's the facilitator, the chair person co-ordinating all these schools? If you are going to try and solve issues, then you must consider (in alphabetical order) economics, environment, politics and social anthropology - not on a sectoral basis but as an integrated whole. You cannot just form MPAs where ever biodiversity is greatest, because you will more than likely marginalise the people living off that resource. Making the poor poorer just causes further environmental degradation as they are forced to exploit any (free/common) natural resource they can. If you exclude people from the picture, you have an issue of non-compliance and thus a cost in enforcement. I entered into my first degree of the opinion that the environment should be protected no matter the human cost, I have since completely amended that outlook since it's myopic at best and downright inhumane at worst. Participation - To overcome issues of non-compliance, marginalisation and often to increase knowledge of local systems, people must be allowed to participate at ALL levels of project and policy formulation/implementation - that does not mean consultation, that means active participation. Process - Sustainable Development (sorry but I don't see it as an oxymoron - I do see it's false implementation as oxy-moronic) is a process, not a system, thus projects and policies should be re-evaluated as often as humanly possible, because making changes causes changes. Good governance - We are only just starting to see models of good governance, not top-down, not bottom-up, but multi-tier (local, regional, national, international) well organised/managed, with an ability to pass information/resources up and down the system with speed and efficiency. Good governance starts with individuals and ends with international agreements, with every single organisation/institution in-between. It needs to be based on equity, equality and shared interest, not ego, power and greed. Now that's a serious challenge because a majority of the current systems of governance are corrupt and unwieldy, favouring the rich and powerful, self-protecting and exacerbating poverty. Developed nations cannot dictate how developing nations can and cannot develop when, as someone has already pointed out, a large proportion of greenhouse gases derive from our activities. Good governance must be about setting a good example, not just enforcing it. I think I am probably boring everyone by now, but I have one more thing to say. All of the above I have been taught, ok some of it I consciously/sub-consciously knew already, but there are more people behind me, coming up through the 'new' schools of thought. One day, these people will be the top scientists of the day, the politicians, the decision makers - when that day comes, I think (hope) we will see some real changes being made. I can only hope that some of the above will help people break free of the chains of sectoralism and start seeing things from a holistic perspective, you cannot save reefs by simply speaking about how they are dying at n.nnn% a year. Of all the traits of human nature, survival is one of the greatest, otherwise we'd already be gone. The glass can be half empty and/or half full, it all depends on how you view it, but why does no one ever consider topping it back up to brim? Stop observing, start doing! A passionate Msc Student From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Mon Feb 27 10:32:07 2006 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Gene Shinn) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 10:32:07 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Intellectual chit chat Message-ID: The letter by Esther Borell is a most thoughtful, sobering and revealing one and should serve as a lesson to all of us "first world scientists" with our "intellectual chit chat." We should all applaud Ester for "trying to keep up optimism." Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida Marine Science Center (room 204) 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From martin_moe at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 22:55:02 2006 From: martin_moe at yahoo.com (Martin Moe) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 19:55:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence Message-ID: <20060227035502.81516.qmail@web60014.mail.yahoo.com> Hi All, Hoo Boy! The world is a scary place these days. Alina is right, James is right, Curtis is right, Steven is right, everyone commenting is right to a greater or lesser degree. I wonder if Malthus was right .. While acknowledging the global problems, the reefs of the Florida Keys, and to a lesser extent, the Bahamas and the Caribbean, are what concern me most personally. It pains me to see huge coral heads slowly dying, the tissue receding and the exposed coral rock thick with algae and sediment, to see acres of coral rock rubble composed of easily identifiable pieces of the remains of huge elkhorn coral skeletons, and patch reefs covered by extensive growths of Sargassum and Dictyota algae. I know what the reefs were like only a few decades ago and the loss is staggering. The TDC knows this also or at least it seems like they should. (This is the Tourist Development Council for Monroe County, the Florida Keys) Their latest brochure http://www.fla-keys.com/diving/ has fantastically beautiful pictures of the coral reefs of yesteryear, some from the Bahamas but most from the Keys reefs of the 60s and 70s available for download on the diving page. Diving tourists are lured to the Keys by these spectacular photos but the reality they find is quite different. There are no vast growths of huge elkhorn coral colonies, and few great healthy heads of brain and star coral, a sort of governmental ?Bait and Switch? advertising. So what can we do? Of course there is no simple answer. All reefs, Pacific or Atlantic, are separate ecosystems connected closely or distantly, and each reef area has its own web of life and its own constellation of problems and solutions. Some problems are global and some are local, the only way to proceed is as the bumper sticker says, ?Think globally, act locally?. Grand analysis of global and regional social, industrial, population and pollution problems are critical and essential and must be pursued and solutions sought on a national governmental scale, but we also have to take care of the trees as well as worry about the forest. As many contributors to this thread have stated, we have to focus on local conditions and find ways to improve specific reef areas, and what we learn and achieve on a ?micro? level will pave the way for ?macro? efforts. (Or we can say, ?Nothing can be done, the world is going to collapse.? And move to the mountains and seek self sustainability with a cache of weapons and foodstuffs. Hmmm The Rockys or the Appalachians?) To do nothing is not an option, I repeat, not an option. We have monitored and measured and we know the problems. We don?t know all the causes and we don?t know the future of the global problems but we have to work with what we have. We talk of resiliency, remmancy, and sustainability and look for coral genotypes with the capability to survive despite adverse conditions, and this is good, but a coral reef is much, much more than just coral. It is a web of life that interacts with itself and feeds upon itself and grows according to the balance of its life forms. A reef in all its complexity cannot be resilient and withstand adversity if the ecology that drove its evolution is impaired. And the reefs of Florida, the Bahamas and the Caribbean are greatly impaired by the almost total loss of the herbivores that maintained the balance between the slow growing, reef forming stony corals and the rapid growing, energy producing macro algae. Without herbivores, establishment of functional reef resiliency is the ?impossible dream?. Without herbivores, planting seedling coral colonies on the reefs has little chance to succeed. Without herbivores, coral larvae have no place to settle. The extent and depth of other problems that plague our reefs cannot be accurately determined until the herbivores return. The first consideration in ecological reef restoration in this region should be how to return herbivores (think Diadema) to the reefs. And like all great journeys, we have to start with small steps, but we must start. Actually the work of Szmant, Miller, Capo, Nedimyer, me, and the Nature Conservency, FKNMS, and Mote Marine Laboratory is a start. I hope we never abandon this effort because it just seems like an impossible task. Martin Moe From eweil at caribe.net Mon Feb 27 02:45:23 2006 From: eweil at caribe.net (EWeil) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 03:45:23 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] "resilience".... Message-ID: Dear coral listers, I agree that the source of all environmental problems affecting terrestrial and marine systems have a common denominator, human population growth, as Alina so eloquently put it. It is also clear to me that lack of education, and wrong government decisions significantly compounds the problem. If this list can somehow help to actively educate people about the benefits of having fewer children and not driving an 8-cylinder, 340 HP truck to get the kids to the soccer game, it would be wonderful. However, after dealing with politicians in Latin America, watching todays religious moderate and extreme fanatism, the Bush administration at work and the selfishness of most people, I remain highly eskeptical and pesimistic about the future of coral reefs and most other ecosystems as well. Saludos! Dr. Ernesto Weil Department of Marine Sciences University of Puerto Rico PO BOX 3208 Lajas PR 00667 Pho: (787) 899-2048 x. 241 Fax: (787) 899-5500 - 2630 From ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com Mon Feb 27 12:05:27 2006 From: ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com (Eric Coral Inquiry) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:05:27 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Corals Gonad Development Message-ID: <6400622e0602270905k186c1de2la565ddd1c991c9ab@mail.gmail.com> Dear listers, Expertise help needed in the area of corals gonad development. Welcome any information, literatures, resources and recommendation of presons who have done work in this area. I am interested to look at the gonad development of corals under artificial reed structures and compare that to nature colony but unfortunately I do not have a clue where, how to start and the place where I come from is lacking in expertise in such area. Is there anyone who has done histological examation on corals gonad development? Do keep in touch. Billion Thanks. Eric YSY "Marine Biologist in the Making" Kota Kinabalu. P.S: This is my mailing address : Eric Yu S Y NO:93, JALAN KIJANG, LUYANG PHASE 3, 88300 KOTA KINABALU SABAH MALAYSIA TEL:+6088213276 From clarionreef at aol.com Mon Feb 27 17:24:59 2006 From: clarionreef at aol.com (clarionreef at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 17:24:59 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8C80A03C77FEB1B-AD4-1654@FWM-M02.sysops.aol.com> People, I relize that many folks in the scientific community and academia often refer to the Marine Aquarium Council [ MAC ] as some kind of intelligent response to ensuring "sustainability" in the growing trade in reef tropical fishes and organisms. Having followed them for years since their inception, I can assure you that they are adrift and without results, achievement or leadership to go with all the public relations that have fooled so many. They have endeavored to "train" collectors to fish sustainably and disdain cyanide and yet have pretty much driven collectors back to cyanide with their ill-advised, culturally insensitive, top-down approach. Faced with a mass exodus from their well financed "cause", they re-certified marinelife dealers with out cause and without clean fish supply. The lack of fish supply to go with all the trouble and expense to become certified had left many dealers with a desire to end the game and not re-certify this year. The non interest in re-certifying as the years deadline approached left MAC in a panic at the pending loss of all their members on a single date. So, in an effort to prevent the exodus from MAC and a collapse of the small level of industry support that existed anyway...they just automatically re-certified for free all those who were certified before. Have a look and see the admission of chronic failure to provide substance to go with the wordplay in 7 year old drama...in quotes from memos to the dealers who carry cyanide fish for lack of any certified, netcaught fishes. On paragraph two regard the following ; "This was based on an assumption that there would be a steadily increasing supply of MAC certified organisms from the early days of certification. Unfortunately this supply has not materialised and this has left MAC certified exporters, importers and retailers without access to a meaningful supply of MAC certified organisms on a regular basis." And then everyones certification status was automatically extended til 2008! And so on it goes, fooling people who hope and want a cleaner industry ...cashing in on it without reforming it. Sincerely, Steve Robinson commercial collector & past president AMDA American Marinelife Deales Assoc PS. 5 years and 5 million dollars of Packard, McArthur and US AID money etc. ... and no fish supply? As I said long ago..."That dog don't hunt".. -----Original Message----- From: JKoven at aol.com To: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:05:29 EST Subject: Re: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Yes, Jim, "sustainable" and "development" ARE oxymorons. It all depends on what level of income/development the community stakeholders need to produce from their reefs, absent other income sources. Their choices are often limited - they can bring in tourists/divers or over-fish, even though that diminishes or damages the resources. Reefs provided sustenance for entire island communities for millenia - they can't now sustain other urban communities with growing populations. The needs of these stakeholders has changed over the past 50 years - they want to send their children to schools off-island, they want the same techological "improvements" in their lives that those in the urban areas have and to catch up with the 21st century world. Both climate change and over-fishing have affected many Pacific reefs that have not been subjected to gross land-based pollution. Nothing the stakeholders of small islands can do will change the global climate picture and fishing is part of their culture. The search is on for other ways to sustain the way of life they wish to have, without further destroying fisheries and thus reefs. It's interesting that outrigger canoes once sped villagers to other islands. Then came the diesel powered boats - slower and costly, although one was less dependant upon weather and perhaps drier upon arrival. Now faster fiberglass boats are the thing.....they travel as swiftly as an outrigger in a decent wind, but leave one beholden to the fuel companies. Progress? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From JKoven at aol.com Mon Feb 27 17:49:43 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 17:49:43 EST Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today Message-ID: <67.55e12d55.3134dc07@aol.com> The people who live in these underpopulated areas are still trying to earn a living...often by fishing their own reefs and selling to those who have depleted their own fisheries and willing to pay the price. Yes, over-population is at the base of many world problems but it is a sticky issue, at once cultural, ethnic and religious.? Not exactly one to be solved by reef scientists.? Perhaps women's education in general and in reproductive rights are the answers?? Women want better lives for their children, after they've been fed, saved from curable infectious diseases, and educated....and who is to determine what that better life is?? Is it what they perceive as the lives that other children in the world have, including yours?? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From jandl at rivnet.net Mon Feb 27 19:15:17 2006 From: jandl at rivnet.net (Judith Lang/Lynton Land) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 19:15:17 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] How to inspire responsible actions? Message-ID: Dear listers, I seems we are painfully aware of problems, from overpopulation to all manner of over-indulgence. But how to inspire responsible actions on our part and others? Absent easily available remedies, inspirational messages/reminders/ exhortations, however persuasive, are unlikely to have much effect. Jamaican members of the list can correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been thinking we could borrow some strategies from its early family- planning campaign. After initial successes targeting women with the simple but powerful theme, "Plan Your Family; Better Your Life," plus birth control pills that would either have been free or very cheap, it was realized that, to be truly successful, men also had to be included in the decision-making process. I remember a creative campaign of newspaper advertisements suggesting the more nuanced idea that "of course" dads want their children to have a chance to grow up and achieve some measure of respectable employment and social status (e.g., bank teller, carpenter), paired with condom advertisements on billboards that featured an enormous and very sexy looking, black panther. Surely we could come up with some attention-grabbing, genuine solutions to offer the world? Judy From G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au Tue Feb 28 00:38:07 2006 From: G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au (Gillian Goby) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 15:38:07 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] GBRMPA Current Conditions Report (4) Message-ID: <4403E1BF.8040308@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear Coral- Listers, apologies for cross-postings. Please find below the latest Current Conditions report for bleaching on the GBR. *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the Fourth Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 23 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current weather conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, *the* *threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region continues to be rated as moderate*. Severe coral bleaching has been confirmed for several reefs in the southern region during recent GBRMPA surveys. In addition, BleachWatch participants have recorded minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR and more recently the northern GBR. Temperature patterns are consistent with these reports. Although sea temperatures in the southern GBR have slightly decreased, they continue to exceed the February average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C and long-term summer maxima by 0.5 degrees C respectively. Central GBR waters have remained warm in recent weeks, and sea surface temperatures are still currently exceeding the February long-term average by 0.5 to 1.5 degrees C. Temperatures in northern parts of the GBR have increased and are elevated 0.5 to 2.0 degrees C above the February long-term average. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer we are still relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ From solutions at cozm.co.uk Tue Feb 28 03:25:57 2006 From: solutions at cozm.co.uk (Duncan MacRae) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 08:25:57 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Conservation work in Nusa Lembongan and Nusa Penida, near Bali - Indonesia Message-ID: <001801c63c40$99a579d0$4fd7fea9@Sarah> Dear all, Does anyone know of any marine conservation work carried out around the Nusa Lembongan/Penida Island group near Bali, Indonesia? Regards, Duncan R. MacRae Director Coastal Zone Management (UK) Integrated Conservation Solutions Blythe Cottage, 22 Rosemundy, St Agnes, Cornwall. UK ++(0) 1872 552 219 ++(0) 7958 230 076 e-mail: solutions at cozm.co.uk web: www.cozm.co.uk This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version From nhg3 at hw.ac.uk Tue Feb 28 12:54:47 2006 From: nhg3 at hw.ac.uk (Galvis, Nohora H) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 17:54:47 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline Message-ID: <2DEC240A2A06F04BB9D3BBF02DE198BD4D3382@ex5.mail.win.hw.ac.uk> I have followed with a lot of interest the discussions of the last days, confirming how passionate scientists have become nowadays when talking about the evidence of the coral reefs decline. This is a Social Psychological trend of applied science: Scientists engage with the study of environmental problems and feel an urgent need to contribute identifying solutions as a matter of ethical responsibility. This new perspective makes acceptable and even desirable for scientists to express emotions of frustration for being eyewitnesses of decline in the past decades and now by changing their priorities, attitudes and behaviours towards environmental management to get involved trying to communicate a pertinent message to decision makers, decision takers and the general public to allow them to be part of the solutions. Thanks to Dr. Alina Szmant for the webpage information about the web cast presentation of Dr. Jeremy Jackson. Nohora Galvis (Mental Models to improve coral reef management) ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Szmant, Alina Sent: Mon 27/2/06 1:09 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline For those of you loooking for how some scientists are trying to desseminate the word.... ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From: Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST) To: Subject: University of Texas Ocean Research Webcast Dear Science Enthusiast, University of Texas at Austin Webcast Entitled "Brave New Ocean." A webcast presentation given by Professor Jeremy Jackson, William E. and Mary B. Ritter Professor and Director of the Geosciences Research Division at Scripps Institution of Oceanography will be March 3, 2006 at 7pm. Dr. Jeremy Jackson is one of the most prominent marine ecologists in the world and he has a message to get out about the world's oceans - it documents declines in coral reefs, decreasing numbers of large marine fish, and losses of coastal and marine ecosystems. More than just an academic researcher, Dr. Jackson has actively searched for innovative ways to reach the public, applying his skills as a communicator with his scientific knowledge to inspire action. Dr. Jackson desires to reach a broader audience and affect change into the future with tomorrow's generation on this topic of interest. View a FREE web broadcast of the lecture live Friday, March 3, 2006 at 7 pm CST. During the live webcast, you can submit questions to Dr. Jackson and he will answer as many as he can for the live and webcast audiences. If possible, can you distribute or post a link to this webcast on your website, newsletter, or listserv as well as pass this notice on to any colleagues of yours that may be interested. The link to our Lecture Series website, where the details of the lecture and the webcast can be found, is: http://www.esi.utexas.edu/outreach/ols/lectures/Jackson/ Please let me know if you will consider posting this information. Thanks for your time, Brian Zavala Environmental Science Institute The University of Texas at Austin brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu 512.471.5847 ------ End of Forwarded Message _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From treesandseas at yahoo.com Tue Feb 28 22:51:15 2006 From: treesandseas at yahoo.com (Trees Seas) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 19:51:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060301035115.72877.qmail@web32709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Many thanks to everyone who responded to my query about a good underwater camera. The advice was greatly appreciated! Michelle Reyes __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From ricksanders at comcast.net Tue Feb 28 00:44:10 2006 From: ricksanders at comcast.net (Rick Sanders) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 00:44:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen onreefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas References: Message-ID: <007201c63c29$ffade530$650da8c0@manta> Raphael, That photo looks like it? I have gotten so many responses and I haven't had a chance to write back to thank any of you for sending your information on the macro algae. The photo you sent looks like a good example of the what I saw on the reefs in Cat Island. Quite a few other also suggested it was Microdictyon. Who is doing work on this algae and its impacts in the Bahamas? It seems strange that this algae is popping up in such remote locations...it has been suggested that currents may be carrying nutrients into these areas from other locations where the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients are greater. What is the impact that Microdictyon is having on these reefs? It seems to be overgrowing many healthy corals. It was also mentioned in other responses that I have gotten that this algae is seasonal. Does this mean that it's impact is only temporary and the impacted corals have a chance to recover from the infestation? Thanks again for the great photo and information, Rick Rick Sanders President Deep Blue Solutions 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "Raphael Williams" To: Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 4:13 PM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen onreefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas > Hi Rick this is probably a species of Microdictyon, I've attached a photo > from Sweetings Key, Bahamas. We found it there very common. I usually > use > the Littler's book "Caribbean Reef Plants" to id the common algae, it is a > very useful guide, written by Diane Littler and Mark Littler, 2000, > published by OffShore Graphics Inc. I hope this helps. Cheers,Raphael > > Raphael Ritson-Williams > Laboratory Technician Marine Chemical Ecology > Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce > 701 Seaway Dr, Fort Pierce, Fl, 34949 > (772) 465-6630 x146 > williams at sms.si.edu > >>>> "Rick Sanders" 02/21 1:34 PM >>> > Dear Listers, > > I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find > an > image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I > dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been > unable > to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. > > Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish > brown > color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each > other > in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped > into > more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm > in > width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if > to > crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing > many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. > > I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs > there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the > first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what > I > am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a > copy or link. > > Thanks very much in advance, > > Best regards, > > Rick > > > Rick Sanders > Deep Blue Solutions > Media, PA > 610-892-5272 > ricksanders at comcast.net > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From seaflower22 at gmail.com Wed Feb 1 03:55:34 2006 From: seaflower22 at gmail.com (Melanie Gomes) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 08:55:34 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Western Australia reference? Message-ID: <8793949b0602010055h2fcd9499h@mail.gmail.com> Dear All, Hope you are all having a good start to 2006! I was wondering if anyone could possibly help me to find a recent reference on the marine flora and fauna of Western Australia (I think this book was advertised on this list but can't seem to find the details). This was not the title although the book included, inverts and fish and was a general guide, a very good and recent one which I wrote down on an important piece of paper which I then lost! Any specially recommended guides on this part of the world would be appreciated as I'm going out there in March for a season to dive with the whale sharks and would also appreciate any recent refs on the sharks themselves for that matter. Thank you very much for your help, much appreciated. Best wishes Melanie Melanie Gomes B.Sc. M.Sc. From rousseau_herve at yahoo.fr Wed Feb 1 08:00:33 2006 From: rousseau_herve at yahoo.fr (=?iso-8859-1?q?herv=FFffffe9=20Rousseau?=) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:00:33 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] marine farm for sustainable development of aquariologytrade Message-ID: <20060201130033.85607.qmail@web25511.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hello, Frenchies answer to frenchies... If you need information in french about this topic, you can visit http://www.recifs.org which contain a lot of information about reef aquarium, aquarium trade, and sustainable development. You can focus on Vincent Chalias articles on aquarium trade, fishery and MAC (Marine Aquarium Council) activities. See you Herv? -----Message d'origine----- De : coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] De la part de yoann aumond Envoy? : mardi 31 janvier 2006 16:30 ? : coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Objet : [Coral-List] marine farm for sustainable development of aquariologytrade Hello, I'm a young french man with a degree in Marine Biology. I would like to investigate my self for the management of animal trade, and especially fish, for aquariology trade. This buisness make endangered the coral reef ecosystem physically and biologicaly due to the destructive practise (cyanure and explosive methods) which threaten the enormous diversity (important and essential for all the reasons you know). This practise occurs mainly in the south asia coral reef ecosystem which is the hot spoy for biodiversity. So I need more field information and a maximum of contact from people who are involved in this fight (scientist, association, local initiatives, possible grants....). I'm thinking about a project of a marine farm in the field, sustainable, which give a work to all the actual fisherman, give a high quality to the fish in the aim to reduce their mortality and the volume of export... I have a lot of good idea but I need support and help from people which know well this problem, from field, and are involved in and trust in the possibility to change the way of working (and of course the way of thinking). Thank you for you help and informations. Yoann AUMOND, "a motivated and hard worker dreamer" P.S.: sorry for my english, but I'm french... _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list ___________________________________________________________________________ Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international. T?l?chargez sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com From Chris.Ryan at irc-australia.com Wed Feb 1 18:25:27 2006 From: Chris.Ryan at irc-australia.com (Chris Ryan) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 07:25:27 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: Western Australia reference? Message-ID: <69D776850E99934E9FE517A99D52F2640111DBA6@ircs0001.intrisk.com> Hi Melanie This may be the reference you're after. Wells, FE, Walker, DI & Jones, DS (2003) The marine flora and fauna of Dampier, Western Australia: Proceedings of the twelfth International Marine Biological Workshop; held in Dampier from 24 Jul to 11 Aug 2000 [2 volumes Western Australian Museum, Perth, WA Cheers Chris Ryan Principal Consultant - Coastal and Marine Biology IRC Environment 26 Colin Street West Perth WA 6005 Tel: +61-8-9481-0100 Fax: +61-8-9481-0111 chris.ryan at irc-australia.com http://www.irc-australia.com Innovate | Resolve | Commit From reef at bellsouth.net Wed Feb 1 14:15:10 2006 From: reef at bellsouth.net (Vicky Ten Broeck) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:15:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] for coral list Message-ID: <20060201191512.HCBZ1691.ibm56aec.bellsouth.net@fiji> I am looking to go over to Madagascar this summer before graduate school to do coral reef research with a UK based non-profit and I was wondering if anyone knew of any agencies that might help fund the $5000 trip (6 weeks of diving research to help them establish a marine sanctuary). Thanks in advance! Vicky Ten Broeck Reef Relief Intern and Educational Assistant PO Box 430, Key West, FL 33040 (305) 294-3100 From treesandseas at yahoo.com Thu Feb 2 02:34:33 2006 From: treesandseas at yahoo.com (Trees Seas) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 23:34:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera Message-ID: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hello I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with an underwater housing) that takes good underwater pictures in natural light. I generally work in the 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so I usually use natural light to save on power. In my experience not all cameras that take good pictures above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind having to do a little color correction afterwards but I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater photos canNOT be color corrected. Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot Michelle Reyes __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From reefball at reefball.com Thu Feb 2 09:35:34 2006 From: reefball at reefball.com (Todd Barber) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 09:35:34 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <018c01c62805$ed9acad0$6501a8c0@LaFalda> Hi Trees, The Reef Ball Foundation's Coral Team has had very good results using the Cannon Powershot 400 series. The have an inexpensive housing that is rated to 100 feet. The trick to taking pictures in natural light is to set the white balance just before taking pictures and change it whenever you change depths. This can be done with the Cannon....whatever camera you get make SURE you can set the white balance with the controls available on the housing...many camera housings cannot control this feature on many cameras. The only disadvantage is the Cannon housing is plastic....so you have to be a bit careful with it heat wise. Also, if you are taking allot of pictures (more than 50 or so) in a short period of time, the lens tends to fog (common in most battery operated cameras) but using a little bit of mask defog on the underwater housing lens will usually stop this problem. Happy shooting. "take only pictures and leave only footprints," Todd Barber Chairman Reef Ball Foundation, Inc. 3305 Edwards Court Greenville, NC 27858 reefball at reefball.com http://www.artificialreefs.org http://www.reefball.org http://www.reefball.com Direct: 252-353-9094 mobile: 941-720-7549 Fax 425-963-4119 Personal Space: http://www.myspace/reefball Group Space http://groups.myspace.com/reefballfoundation Skype & MSN For Voice or Video Conferences: Available upon request Atlanta/Athens Office 890 Hill Street Athens, GA 30606 USA 770-752-0202 (Our headquarters...not where I work see above) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Trees Seas" To: Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 2:34 AM Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera > Hello > > I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with > an underwater housing) that takes good underwater > pictures in natural light. I generally work in the > 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so > I usually use natural light to save on power. In my > experience not all cameras that take good pictures > above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind > having to do a little color correction afterwards but > I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater > photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel > resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show > corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any > recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks a lot > Michelle Reyes > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From TDWYATT at aol.com Thu Feb 2 11:28:14 2006 From: TDWYATT at aol.com (TDWYATT at aol.com) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 11:28:14 EST Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera Message-ID: <59.36a3ea91.31138d1e@aol.com> In a message dated 2/2/2006 6:45:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, treesandseas at yahoo.com writes: Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Nikon D70, Prolly the D50 as well. HTH, Tom Wyatt _tdwyatt at aol.com_ (mailto:tdwyatt at aol.com) From Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov Thu Feb 2 16:24:30 2006 From: Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:24:30 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: 2nd Call - Requesting Data on 2005 Caribbean Bleaching In-Reply-To: <43DAA0C6.8030600@noaa.gov> References: <43DAA0C6.8030600@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <7A2DDF74-0D42-4AC6-895D-5BA448045803@noaa.gov> As an update on this request that we sent out last week, I want to emphasize that we also need reports from those areas that did not bleach. We need to get information from reefs that fell outside the thermal stress zone, or where stress was less severe to really anchor the bottom end of the response of corals to thermal stress. If we only have positive bleaching reports, we can't nail down the threshold below which we did not see bleaching. Thanks, Mark On Jan 27, 2006, at 5:37 PM, Jessica A. Morgan wrote: > TO: Bleaching Observation Contributors > FROM: Jessica Morgan and Mark Eakin, NOAA Coral Reef Watch > > Second call: Deadline for data submission to be included in our > publication is Friday, February 3. Please contact me if you will > have any problems meeting this deadline. > > --------------------------- > > As you know, bleaching reports from contributors have been coming > in from much of the Caribbean and western North Atlantic. The US > Coral Reef Task Force (USCRTF) Bleaching Committee has held > conference calls to bring together and solicit input from NOAA and > DOI personnel, as well as other federal agencies, NGO partners, and > local Caribbean scientists and managers. The outcomes of the > initial meetings include the development of a 3-phase response > approach (including an initial response, near-term reporting and > assessment, and long-term monitoring) and identification of key > partners, resources, and issues. > > A part of the first phase is to identify and assess bleaching > severity throughout the region. I am collating these reports with > the plan to produce a multi-author, quick paper to Science or > Nature that documents the event. From there, I am sure that more > publications will follow. Everyone who provides data that are used > in the analysis of the event will be included as an author on the > resulting paper(s). Our intent is to provide the broad, Caribbean- > wide analysis, comparing the thermal stress recorded from > satellites with local observations of bleaching and temperatures. > That publication will only include summaries of the information > that you submit. We hope that all of our collaborators will > produce more detailed national or local analyses to further > document the event. At this point we have almost 1000 observations > contributed by 70 individuals in 18 jurisdictions. > > To collect the details needed for the first analysis and to > establish a baseline for follow-up work, a spreadsheet > questionnaire (?CRW Carib Bleach Report Form?) has been developed > for bleaching reports. We would like to invite all ReefBase > contributors who have made bleaching observations for the Caribbean > in 2005 to expand upon the original ReefBase information by > submitting a more quantitative report via the attached > questionnaire (an Excel file) to coralreefwatch at noaa.gov. Please > note that we are only seeking quantitative reports for this analysis. > > The blank questionnaire form, along with information from the US > Coral Reef Task Force, NOAA meetings held to date, and more, are > available for download at the website http:// > coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/caribbean2005. > > Thanks to all of you for your help, > Jessica > -- > Jessica A. Morgan > Operations Manager, NOAA Coral Reef Watch > SSMC1, E/RA 31, Rm. 5309, Silver Spring, MD 20910 > Phone: (301) 713-2857 x129 Fax: (301) 713-3136 > Email: Jessica.Morgan at noaa.gov Web: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ C. Mark Eakin, Ph.D. Coordinator, NOAA Coral Reef Watch National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Satellite Applications and Research Satellite Oceanography & Climate Division e-mail: mark.eakin at noaa.gov url: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov E/RA31, SSMC1, Room 5308 1335 East West Hwy Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226 301-713-2857 x109 Fax: 301-713-3136 From matz at whitney.ufl.edu Thu Feb 2 07:59:29 2006 From: matz at whitney.ufl.edu (Mikhail Matz) Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 07:59:29 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: coral facility @ austin, TX Message-ID: <43E20231.8010207@whitney.ufl.edu> Hello listers, I want to thank everybody for an extremely enthusiastic and helpful response concrrning the design of new coral facility. I've been given a lot of advice and put in contact with the most experienced people in the trade. Now I can really see it all happening! cheers Misha -- -------------------- Mikhail V Matz, Ph.D Research Assistant Professor Whitney Laboratory for Marine Bioscience University of Florida 9505 Ocean Shore Blvd St Augustine, FL 32080, USA phone 904 461 4025 fax 904 461 4008 matz at whitney.ufl.edu www.whitney.ufl.edu/research_programs/matz.htm From ashadevos at gmail.com Thu Feb 2 22:56:58 2006 From: ashadevos at gmail.com (Asha de Vos) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 09:56:58 +0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Coolpix and Strobes Message-ID: <90f39b5f0602021956r514b0e19q@mail.gmail.com> Hi I've recently started using a Nikon Coolpix 5600 with underwater housing to take photos while diving. However, the flash is not very strong and therefore photographs (other than macros - which come out beautifully) are not very clear. Does anyone use this (or a similar model) of camera and if yes, can anyone recommend a compatible strobe that I could purchase? Thanks. Asha. From dhopley at austarnet.com.au Sun Feb 5 18:37:37 2006 From: dhopley at austarnet.com.au (David Hopley) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 09:37:37 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Palau photographs Message-ID: Dear All, A quick thanks to all of you who provided me with photographs of the Palau Rock Islands, or referred me to sources. I've tried to respond to everybody and am sending this out just in case I missed anyone. David Dr. David Hopley Coastal and Marine Consultant 3 Wingadee Court ANNANDALE QLD 4814 AUSTRALIA PHONE: +61 7 4725 2856 dhopley at austarnet.com.au From Georgios at icm.csic.es Fri Feb 3 16:58:25 2006 From: Georgios at icm.csic.es (Georgios Tsounis) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 22:58:25 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: underwater camera In-Reply-To: <20060202170041.80E481795F@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> References: <20060202170041.80E481795F@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: Hi Michelle, back in 2001 when 7 Megapixels were still expensive, we used a small sony digital compact with great success for a population structure study. The only drawback of the compacts compared to a digital SLR was the extreme shutterlag (annoying and at times stressful, but still tolerable with coral work). I would rather recomend something like a Nikon Coolpix 5000, if 5MP are enough, as our colleagues have had good experience with this one. If you need a certain range from wideangle to macro, then the compact cameras offer more flexibility than an SLR with a macro lens, and are much cheaper to house. The macro ability was quite astonishing to me, but it is important to check it out before purchase. I am pretty sure the coolpix range of nikons allow whitebalance settings. However, I suspect whitebalance has limits when used at 20m (did not ry this though). In our experience flash use under water was problematic with compacts. I usually switched off the build in flash, or blocked it by hand. Instead we used a divers light on a strobe arm to illuminate the corals and provide a focussing light to the autofocus. It worked fine, but required sufficient battery capacity. With some underwaterhousings (such as Sealux), you can connect an external flash. Amphibious flashes by Nikon are compatible with the Nikon digitals. However, you can only use the flash in manual mode, unless you use a pro SLR. For our work I really think 5Megapixels are sufficient. I found this website helpful in this regard: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm There is a wealth of information on the net about compatibility of cameras, housings and strobes. You can always ask questions about digital underwater photography on the forum mantained by: www.wetpixel.com. I think there was a good article on white balance by Alexander Mustard stored in the archives. You can see how we used the digicams in our work by downloading the results of our survey (3.6 mb document): http://elib.suub.uni-bremen.de/publications/dissertations/E- Diss1246_TsounisG.pdf Cheers, Georgios Dr. Georgios Tsounis Institut de Ci?ncies del Mar, CMIMA (CSIC) Passeig Mar?tim de la Barceloneta, 37-49 08003 Barcelona, Spain Phone: 34 93 230 96 07 Fax: 34 93 230 95 55 E-mail: georgios at icm.csic.es http://www.icm.csic.es Message: 4 Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 23:34:33 -0800 (PST) From: Trees Seas Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: <20060202073433.87687.qmail at web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Hello I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with an underwater housing) that takes good underwater pictures in natural light. I generally work in the 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so I usually use natural light to save on power. In my experience not all cameras that take good pictures above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind having to do a little color correction afterwards but I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater photos canNOT be color corrected. Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot Michelle Reyes _____________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 2 ***************************************** From thierry_work at usgs.gov Sun Feb 5 14:49:47 2006 From: thierry_work at usgs.gov (Thierry Work) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 09:49:47 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] mucus in the ectodermal epithelium of corals In-Reply-To: <003f01c624b5$d6dfa7a0$e3904084@es.huji.ac.il> Message-ID: Dear Yael: yes, mucocytes definitely are present in calicoblastic epithelium (at least in Porite compressa and lobata) as visualized on electron microscopy. I have, however, yet to see micro-organisms associated with this layer. Thierry M. Work Wildlife Disease Specialist USGS-National Wildlife Health Center Honolulu Field Station PO Box 50167 Honolulu, HI 96850 Tel: 808 792-9520 Fax: 808 792-9596 Cel: 808 554-6490 Web: www.nwhc.usgs.gov/hfs/Homepage.htm Check out the following references on microscopic morphology of corals. These may help: Goldberg W, Makemson J, Colley S (1984) Entoclada endozoica sp. nov., a pathogenic chlorophyte: structure, life history, physiology, and effect on its coral host. Biological Bulletin 166:368-383 Goldberg W, Taylor G (1989) Cellular structure and ultrastructure of the black coral Antipathes aperta: 2. the gastrodermis and its collar cells. Journal of Morphology 202:255-269 Goldberg WM, Taylor G (1989) Cellular structure and ultrastructure of the black coral Antipathes aperta: 1. Organization of the tentacular epidermis and nervous system. Journal of Morphology 202:239-253 Goldberg WM (2001) Acid polysaccharides in the skeletal matrix and calicoblastic epithelium of the stony coral Mycetophyllia reesi. Tissue & Cell 33:376-387 Goldberg WM (2001) Desmocytes in the calicoblastic epithelium of the stony coral Mycetophyllia reesi and their attachment to the skeleton. Tissue & Cell 33:388-394 Goldberg W (2002) Gastrodermal structure and feeding response in the scleractinian Mycetophyllia reesi, a coral with novel digestive filaments. Tissue & Cell 34:246-261 Goldberg WM (2002) Feeding behavior, epidermal structure and mucus cytochemistry of the scleractinian Mycetophyllia reesi, a coral without tentacles. Tissue & Cell 34:232-245 Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates Volume 2 Placozoa, Porifera, Cnidaria & Ctenophora by FW Harrison (Editor) Wiley Press. -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Yael Ben-Haim Rozenblat Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 11:25 PM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] mucus in the ectodermal epithelium of corals Hi all coral listrers, Does anyone knows if there is mucus secretion (or something similar to mucus) from the ectodermal epithelium layer of corals? (meaning the calicoblastic ectodermis, close to the skeleton), and/ or any microorganisms associated with this microlayer of the corals? Are there any publications or work done about this? I appreciate any advice and help , and thank you in advance, Yael Yael Ben-Haim , Pn.D The Institute of Earth Sciences The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Givat Ram Campus, Israel Office: (+972) 2 6586194 _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From keulen at murdoch.edu.au Fri Feb 3 01:08:30 2006 From: keulen at murdoch.edu.au (Mike van Keulen) Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:08:30 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera In-Reply-To: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20060203135409.0238a638@www.mail.murdoch.edu.au> Hi Michelle, I've been using Olympus cameras for some time and found they're excellent for underwater use. Most models have reasonably priced dedicated housings and third party strobes are available for them too. The ones I've used are the C-5060 (5 megapixel) and the C-8080 (8 megapixel) - I think these models have been superseded, but I would guess there would be a suitable replacement. Both the models I use have an excellent super-macro allowing you to get to within 2 cm of the subject. Colour reproduction is excellent. Cheers, Mike At 15:34 2/02/2006, Trees Seas wrote: >Hello > >I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with >an underwater housing) that takes good underwater >pictures in natural light. I generally work in the >5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so >I usually use natural light to save on power. In my >experience not all cameras that take good pictures >above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind >having to do a little color correction afterwards but >I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater >photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel >resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show >corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any >recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks a lot >Michelle Reyes > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Dr Mike van Keulen Lecturer in Plant Sciences and Marine Biology Research Director - Coral Bay Research Station Murdoch University, WA 6150, Australia List-owner: Seagrass_Forum, Mangrove Ph: +61 8 93602369 E-mail: keulen at murdoch.edu.au Fax: +61 8 93606303 URL: http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~keulen/ From jware at erols.com Fri Feb 3 09:34:36 2006 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 09:34:36 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43E369FC.4090403@erols.com> Michelle, I would guess that you are going to get dozens of replies and end up just as confused as before. First question back to you is: How much money do you have? Next would be: Why natural light? (and let me tell you why later). As you have noted, the thing that limits the number of UW pictures you can take in one dive is usually power. So having come to that conclusion let me point out that: 1- The primary camera battery drain is the LCD (or whatever) display. Therefore, if your need is to take 100+ pictures per dive or per excursion (e.g., on a small boat and can't change batteries) go with an SLR (single lens reflex) and set the camera so that it only displays on the LCD for a few seconds after the picture is taken (to assure that you have actually got a decent picture. Using my Nikon D70, I have taken hundreds and hundreds of pictures over the course of a week on a single battery charge. 2- The strobe. I know you wanted to use natural light, but that doesn't always work depending upon depth and the screwing around underwater with white balance. If you use a strobe that holds 8 AAs (e.g. Sea&Sea YS90) and use NiMH batteries rated at 2000+ Ma, you should get at least 200 full strobe flashes. Since you won't need full strobe for most pictures, the actual number will be much greater. My only experience is with the Nikon D70 in a Sea&Sea housing. However, I have friends who use a EOS rebel in a Ikelite housing with the new digital TTL in the housing. I seem to recall that Yossi Loya was not too happy with his at first, I don't know about now. Nikon makes 2 very good, and reasonably priced, digital cameras, the D50 and the D70. About the only difference from a practical viewpoint is the storage media. I prefer the D70 because the compact flash storage is sturdy. Only 6 MegPix but that is plenty because of what appears to be superior interpolation scheme. Also, Nikon has a zoom lens, often part of the purchase package, 28 to 80. This gives reasonable wide angle and still allows sufficient close ups. However, you must make sure that the housing will allow adjusting the zoom as Nikon has a couple of different but very similar lenses, one that doesn't quite fit. But now the price. The camera is not too bad, its the housings that kill you. I suspect that, as with most research, money is limiting. The set ups I have been describing will probably cost about US3000 for everything, maybe even a little more. Having said that, my long experience in UW photography is that, whenever I have tried to go cheap I eventually end up so dissatisfied that I end up buying twice. John Trees Seas wrote: >Hello > >I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with >an underwater housing) that takes good underwater >pictures in natural light. I generally work in the >5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so >I usually use natural light to save on power. In my >experience not all cameras that take good pictures >above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind >having to do a little color correction afterwards but >I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater >photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel >resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show >corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any >recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks a lot >Michelle Reyes > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886, USA * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * http://www.seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * Treasurer and Member of the Council: * * International Society for Reef Studies * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Untainted by Technology \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************* From John.Rollino at earthtech.com Fri Feb 3 07:40:19 2006 From: John.Rollino at earthtech.com (Rollino, John) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 04:40:19 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Species List - CARICOMP Algae Classification Message-ID: <0FE7A03100C5D949A074D0A58DBCCEEA032D1ABE@usnycmail01.et.rootad.com> Hello All: Can someone direct me to a list that identifies which algal species are classified by CARICOMP as the following: * Turf Algae * Fleshy Algae * Calcareous Algae * Encrusting Calcareous Algae Thank you, John This e-mail is intended to be delivered only to the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and proprietary. If this information is received by anyone other than the named addressee(s), the recipient(s) should immediately notify the sender by e-mail and promptly delete the transmitted material from your computer and server. In no event shall this material be read, used, stored, or retained by anyone other than the named addressee(s) without the express written consent of the sender or the named addressee(s). From nithyrna at yahoo.co.in Sun Feb 5 11:47:21 2006 From: nithyrna at yahoo.co.in (nithy anand) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 16:47:21 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] query to coral microbiologist & biotechnologists Message-ID: <20060205164721.48797.qmail@web8314.mail.in.yahoo.com> Dear Listers, Is anyone working with Vibrioids and Pseudomonads associated with corals? I want to know the predominant species and total count associated with them. Somebody please help on these aspects. cheers, Nithy P.Nithyanand Research Scholar C/O Dr. S. Karutha Pandian Department of Biotechnology Alagappa University Karaikudi - 630 003 TamilNadu INDIA H/P: 9443743580 --------------------------------- Jiyo cricket on Yahoo! India cricket From shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au Sun Feb 5 19:22:57 2006 From: shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au (Shelley Anthony) Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 10:22:57 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] 2006/2007 Research Internships available at ReefHQ Aquarium, Townsville, Australia Message-ID: <43E696E1.7080308@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear Colleagues, I would very much appreciate it if you could forward this internship offer to appropriate students and staff, and/or post it on your university job notice board. We are also still seeking qualified applicants for a position to start in September 2006. Regards, Shelley / /As part of its education and outreach role, Reef HQ is offering four curatorial internship positions to suitable applicants for 2007. Each internship position involves one specialist research and development project, that will be the core duty of the candidate. However, interns will also assist with extensive water quality analyses, routine diving and field trips, construction and maintenance of aquarium systems, and other duties related to animal care. This program is designed for university-level or recently graduated individuals intending to undertake a technical or professional career in marine science, aquaculture or a closely related discipline. Please refer to the following link for further information: "http://www.reefhq.com.au/involved/intern/curatorial.html"./ /// -- Shelley L. Anthony, M.Sc. Acting Biologist - Coral Reef Ecosystems ReefHQ Aquarium/The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2-68 Flinders St. PO Box 1379 Townsville QLD 4810 AUSTRALIA Ph: (07)4750-0876 Fax: (07)4772-5281 email: shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au PhD Student ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies School of Marine Biology & Aquaculture James Cook University Townsville QLD 4811 AUSTRALIA shelley.anthony at jcu.edu.au ============================================================================== If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ============================================================================== From claudio.richter at zmt-bremen.de Mon Feb 6 11:31:09 2006 From: claudio.richter at zmt-bremen.de (Claudio Richter) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 17:31:09 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Meeting Announcement: ISRS European Coral Reef Conference 2006 in Bremen Message-ID: 1st Circular 6th European Coral Reef Conference 2006 European Meeting of the International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) 19 - 22 September, 2006, Bremen, Germany Welcome to Bremen! The 6th European Coral Reef Conference 2006 in Bremen is expected to bring together leading coral reef scientists and students to present and discuss state-of-the-art scientific results, education and outreach. It covers all aspects of research, use and management of reefs with a focus on European and European partner contributions from tropical shallow waters to high-latitude deep continental shelves. Date: September 19-22, 2006 Venue: University of Bremen & Center for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT), Bremen, Germany Organisation: Center for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT) Deadline for submission of Abstracts: 15 May, 2006 Deadline for Early Registration: 15 May, 2006 Programme Schedule A regional focus will be on the Indian Ocean and adjacent seas, taking into account the wealth of studies conducted in response to the 1998 bleaching event and the 2004 earthquake and tsunami. As another scientific highlight we expect first results from the IODP Tahiti reef drilling programme. There are many more interesting sessions, and abstracts on all aspects of basic and applied research are welcome! Please submit your abstract by 15 May, 2006! For details, please visit the conference webpage at isrs2006.zmt.uni-bremen.de On behalf of ZMT, the ISRS President and Council, we hope to see you in Bremen! Dr. Claudio Richter Zentrum f?r Marine Tropen?kologie Center for Tropical Marine Ecology Fahrenheitstr. 6 D-28359 Bremen Germany T. +49-421-2380025 F. +49-421-2380030 From michelc at squ.edu.om Mon Feb 6 23:29:13 2006 From: michelc at squ.edu.om (Michel Claereboudt) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 08:29:13 +0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Software to analyse coral video transects Message-ID: <30052D55-B224-46FE-B2AC-E6D2AD95E070@squ.edu.om> I have been off the list for a while. Apparently, a subscriber was interested in a software to analyse (sample I suppose) video transects of coral communities. I have written (still under development, but usable at this stage) such software. If anyone is interested I can email a copy. It works on both PCs and Mac and requires the presence of Quicktime. All formats that quicktime understands can be used as video source files. Dr. Michel Claereboudt Sultan Qaboos University College Agr. and Mar. Sciences Dpt. Marine Sci. and Fisheries Box 34, al-khod 123 Sultanate of Oman Tel: (968) 244 15 249 Fax; (968) 244 13 418 email: michelc at squ.edu.om From eweil at caribe.net Tue Feb 7 08:11:32 2006 From: eweil at caribe.net (EWeil) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 09:11:32 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Information on white plague outbreaks in the Caribbean Message-ID: <0b1ec65a6a674213a4b12aaaa117d18e.eweil@caribe.net> Dear listers, I am interested in observations and/or reports on outbreaks of white plague (or any other coral reef disease) during or after the mass bleaching event of last year in the Caribbean. I know there was an outbreak in St. John reported by Jeff Miller and we put something out from Puerto Rico where we observed and quantified WP outbreaks in several reefs that started around mid-late November. The outbreak was also more intensive in offshore, deep reefs (>15 m) with better water quality compared to inshore and/or shallower reef areas (???). If you have observed any outbreaks, could you please contact me and include the following information: 1- Disease 2- Date outbreak started (approximation will be ok) 3- Locality - reef (if possible GPS coordinates) and approximate depth interval. 4- Any assessment of intensity (proportion of colonies affected) and extension (area - reefs - etc) 5- Current status (still going or it arrested) 6- Any other information/observations you deem relevant Thank you all for your cooperation!! EW Dr. Ernesto Weil Department of Marine Sciences University of Puerto Rico PO BOX 3208 Lajas PR 00667 Pho: (787) 899-2048 x. 241 Fax: (787) 899-5500 - 2630 From david at trilliumfilms.net Tue Feb 7 20:47:58 2006 From: david at trilliumfilms.net (David McGuire) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 17:47:58 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] coral bleaching and selecting marine protected areas Message-ID: Hello, I am new to the list. I am working on a coral reef conservation documentary and would like to do some fact checking. Much of the underwater imagery is shot in atolls in the north and south pacific. We are supporting the NWHI MPA in the film as one solution to protect reef habitat. However, it is difficult to protect against global sea water temperature rises and large scale bleaching events. Would it be accurate to say that the NWHI are well situated geographically in the Pacific gyre to minimize the coral reefs exposure to sea water increase and subsequent bleaching events in comparison to other island groups or reef systems? The Hawaiian Islands experienced cool water temperatures in 1998 and experienced little bleaching effects. It is a bit of a leap perhaps but makes for a good generalized statement of support. Thanks for your advice David McGuire Trillium Films Sausalito CA From G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au Wed Feb 8 01:08:50 2006 From: G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au (Gillian Goby) Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 16:08:50 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] GBRMPA Current Conditions Report (3) Message-ID: <43E98AF2.5040404@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear All, *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the third Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 6 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, the threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region is currently rated as moderate. Sea temperatures in the southern GBR have remained significantly warmer than average (+ 0.5 - 2.5 degrees C) since December 2005 (ReefTemp), and are now exceeding the long-term summer maxima by up to 2 degrees C (NOAA HotSpot map). In contrast, recent heavy cloud cover and rain over northern parts of the GBR has kept temperatures close to average conditions for this region (Reef Futures). Central GBR waters have shown a warming tendency in recent weeks, with sea surface temperatures currently exceeding the January long-term average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C (ReefTemp). Consistent with these temperature patterns, reports of severe coral bleaching have now been confirmed for some reefs in the southern region, with minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer, and with the bleaching risk period far from over we are heavily relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ From jware at erols.com Tue Feb 7 11:01:37 2006 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:01:37 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43E369FC.4090403@erols.com> Message-ID: <43E8C461.4090609@erols.com> Not to belabor this UW camera thing, but I have been corrected: the Sea&Sea YS-90 uses 4 AAs, it is the YS120 that uses 8 AAs and, therefore, carries twice the milliamp*hours for the same type of batteries. John -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886, USA * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * http://www.seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * Treasurer and Member of the Council: * * International Society for Reef Studies * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Untainted by Technology \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************* From Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov Tue Feb 7 11:28:00 2006 From: Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:28:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Update: Bleaching Potential around Melanesia and Australia Message-ID: Melanesia: Bleaching Warning in Fiji-Beqa Warming in Melanesia continues. DHWs now exceed 8 in some areas to the east of Papua New Guinea and around the Solomon Islands. The region of heat stress may be contracting slightly around the Solomon Islands, but warming is now evident to the south of Samoa, American Samoa, and Fiji. A bleaching warning has now been issued for Fiji-Beqa. Australia: Heat Stress is Subsiding on GBR Fortunately, the center of anomalously warm ocean temperatures has moved farther south along the eastern Australian coast. The region of warming evidenced by HotSpot values over 1 degree C is now largely south and east of the Gold Coast, so the immediate threat to the GBR has ended. However, early warming such as this has frequently preceded bleaching stress late in the austral summer. The warming in the Timor Sea has also abated. According to our past data, some bleaching is likely at DHW values of 4 or above and large-scale bleaching and some mortality is likely above 8. We encourage researchers in these regions to watch out for signs of bleaching. Current HotSpot and Degree Heating Week charts can be found at: http://coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/index.html Improved time series graphics for index sites can be found at http:// coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/current/sstdhwsba_series_24reefs.html You can sign up for automated bleaching alerts at http:// coralreefwatch-satops.noaa.gov/SBA.html Please continue reporting bleaching events (or non-events) at http:// www.reefbase.org/input/bleachingreport/index.asp Regards, Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ C. Mark Eakin, Ph.D. Coordinator, NOAA Coral Reef Watch National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Satellite Applications and Research Satellite Oceanography & Climate Division e-mail: mark.eakin at noaa.gov url: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov E/RA31, SSMC1, Room 5308 1335 East West Hwy Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226 301-713-2857 x109 Fax: 301-713-3136 From sdalton at nmsc.edu.au Tue Feb 7 18:58:53 2006 From: sdalton at nmsc.edu.au (Steve Dalton) Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 10:58:53 +1100 Subject: [Coral-List] Management of disease outbreaks Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20060208105247.02428320@mail> Firstly I would like to thank everyone for their replies to my email regarding software to analyse video transects, the response was great, and certainly shows the benefits of this list. I was wondering if anyone has done any studies involving diseased corals where the active margin has been completely removed from the infected colonies and monitored the colony for reinfection? Has anyone had any success in stopping progressive disease/syndrome by removing the margin? Any comments would be welcome Regards Steven Dalton PhD student University of New England NMSC Postgraduate Representative National Marine Science Centre Bay Drive, Charlesworth Bay (PO Box J321) Coffs Harbour, NSW Australia 2450 Ph: 6648 3928 Mob: 0432 946 782 sdalton at nmsc.edu.au From thomas_houze at hotmail.com Wed Feb 8 05:47:11 2006 From: thomas_houze at hotmail.com (Thomas Houze) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 11:47:11 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: Request for Coral manuscript Message-ID: Dear coral biologist, Recently I had the good fortune to see that the first batch of EST for the corals Acropora palmata and Montastraea faveolata are available for download from the NCBI. I was wondering if someone could please send me a copy of the manuscript as an attachment. I am particularly interested in what life-phase the samples used to create the ESTs where in that where used in the study. Thomas Houze, Ph.D. Bioinformatics G?teborg University Dept. of Cell and Molecular Biology Lundberg Laboratory Medicinaregatan 9C 405 30 G?teborg Sweden From ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com Wed Feb 8 12:02:46 2006 From: ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com (Eric Coral Inquiry) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 01:02:46 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Information/Literature on Mineral Accretion Technology (Biorock) Message-ID: <6400622e0602080902w3dd3f2caq3178e612c947a853@mail.gmail.com> Dear Listers, I am planning to carry out research on how MAT, Mineral Accretion Technology (Biorock) affect the growth rate of different coral species in my area. I would like to find out if there is anyone who has any helpful information, or literature references related to MAT, Biorock that can help me. Also, I like to find out if anyone currently doing any research on Biorock and I would like to get in touch with you. At the same time, would also appreciate your help on any existing literature regarding the species of coral found in Sabah (North Borneo) waters. 1) Info/literature on Biorock (I have already been to the Biorock website http://www.globalcoral.org/ , www.*biorock*.net/, www.*wolf**hilbertz*.com/) 2) Like to geet in touch with you if you are doing anything on Biorock 3) Coral Species found in Sabah (North Borneo) waters. Really appreciate your help on the above-mentioned matter. Eric YSY "Marine Biologist in the making" Kota Kinabalu Sabah Malaysia. You can also reach me at: ericevany at gmail.com erjonah at hotmail.com From mjnewman at ucsd.edu Wed Feb 8 12:10:53 2006 From: mjnewman at ucsd.edu (Marah Newman) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:10:53 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons Message-ID: <3F2A27B5-FC18-44CA-8EFB-55300C6CF781@ucsd.edu> Hi All, I have several bleached coral skeletons and I need to calculate skeleton density. I have looked at several papers that detail methods for calculating density via buoyant weights, but I believe this is to get measurements of live corals. Since I have the coral skeleton only, is there any reason why I cannot simple use the basic water displacement method (aka Archimedes)? I know there is some concern regarding trapped air, but if I soak the corals overnight first in DI water, will this take care of it? Any comments as to why this will NOT work, would be great. Thanks. Marah Newman From cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw Thu Feb 9 07:18:39 2006 From: cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw (Chaolun Allen Chen) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 20:18:39 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] coconut crabs and horseshoe crabs conservation genetics Message-ID: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> Dear All, We are developing the conservation project targeted on two large arthropods, coconut crab (Birgus latro) and horseshoe crab ( Tachypleus tridentatus ) in the Indo-West-Pacific region. Our team includes two groups, one is developing aquaculture technique to propagate of these two species. So far we have quite successful results. The other group is developing microsatellite markers for conservation genetics of these two species. For this part of project, we are seeking for the help to collect a small portion of crab's appendage for genetic study throughout the region. For those who can kindly provide us samples, host our field collection, or just want to know the propagation technique of these two crabs, please feel free to contact me. Thank you in advance for your help. Allen Chen, PhD Associate Research Fellow Evolutionary Ecology and Genetics of Coral Reef Laboratory Research Centre for Biodiversity, Academia Sinica, Taiwan E-mail: cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw From csaenger at MIT.EDU Thu Feb 9 11:08:55 2006 From: csaenger at MIT.EDU (Casey Saenger) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 11:08:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Instrumental Salinity/Temperature in Bahamas In-Reply-To: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> References: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> Message-ID: <3762cdc14b847029eaef3aa95240017f@mit.edu> Dear All, Does someone know when noaa's CREWS monitoring of temperature and salinity began in the Bahamas? Thanks, Casey Saenger > Woods Hole Oceanographic Inst. M.S. #23, Clark 117 Woods Hole, MA 02543 508-289-3418 csaenger at mit.edu From szmanta at uncw.edu Thu Feb 9 12:20:07 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 12:20:07 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] New articles on e-journal "Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy" Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A6763A1@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Greetins All: The conservation oriented, free e-journal "Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy" has new publications that can be access through the URL below http://ejournal.nbii.org/progress/index.html ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From Eileen.Alicea at noaa.gov Thu Feb 9 13:04:32 2006 From: Eileen.Alicea at noaa.gov (Eileen Alicea) Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 13:04:32 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Searching for Carib fish out-of-water photos Message-ID: <43EB8430.4010503@noaa.gov> Hello Coral listers, I'm working with the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources on the development of a Spanish (regulated) fish guide for their enforcement officers. We are collecting excellent resolution photos of fish out of the water because they are more realistic for the rangers to learn from and use when inspecting fishers' catches. We have many so far but I'm still searching for the following. We have already searched the DNER files, Fishbase.org and Google images and I'm in the process of reaching the photographers. If you can facilitate these named below, please write to me directly. It will greatly serve the coral reef and fisheries conservation goals of Puerto Rico. 1) Scomberomorus regalis- Cero; Sierra 2) Istiophorus platypterus or albicans; Sailfish - Pez vela. 3) Tetrapturus pfluegeri; Longbill spearfish; aguja picuda. 4) Epinephelus guttatus- Red Hind- Mero Cabrilla 5) Epinephelus striatus- Nassau Grouper; Mero Cherna Thank you, Eileen Alicea NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program From dbucher at scu.edu.au Thu Feb 9 18:40:49 2006 From: dbucher at scu.edu.au (dbucher) Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:40:49 +1100 Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons Message-ID: Hi Marah, Try the following reference for a discussion of Archimedian methods for determining density of bleached coral skeletons. The important distinction is whether you want bulk density/porosity or the specific gravity of the mineral matrix (microdensity). We recommended the use of acetone to penetrate the small pore spaces as the surface tension in water is too great to remove all gas bubbles. We accelerated the process by using a vacuum pump and a bell-jar to lower the pressure. Without the vacuum pump overnight soaking was not long enough - you need several days at least for porous skeletons. The acetone- saturated skeleton was then soaked in several changes of water. Acetone has the added advantage of dissolving residual organic matter (waxes, oils etc) left behind by the bleaching process. Buoyant weigh the saturated skeleton, dry it, coat it with a thin layer of parafin wax and buoyant weigh it again - if you accurately measure the specific density of the water in the weighing apparatus you can calculate the coral's total enclosed volume (matrix plus pore spaces), its dry weight and the volume of the matrix alone. It's not the most exciting thing you will ever do, but it worked for us. Bucher, D., Harriott, V. and Roberts, L. 1998 Skeletal bulk density, micro-density and porosity of acroporid corals. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 228(1)117-135. It's not the most exciting thing you will ever do, but it worked for us. See my small contribution to the next reference for an application of this method. K. Koop, D. Booth, A. Broadbent, J. Brodie, D. Bucher, D. Capone, J. Coll, W. Dennison, M. Erdmann, P. Harrison, O. Hoegh-Guldberg, P. Hutchings, G.B. Jones, A.W.D. Larkum, J. O'Neil, A. Steven, E. Tentori, S. Ward, J. Williamson, D. Yellowlees 2001 ENCORE: The effect of nutrient enrichment on coral reefs: Synthesis of results and conclusions. Marine Pollution Bulletin 42(2):91-120. Cheers, Danny Dr Daniel Bucher Lecturer, Marine Biology and Fisheries School Director of Postgraduate Studies and Research School of Environmental Science and Management Southern Cross University PO Box 157 Lismore, NSW 2480 Australia Ph: 02 6620 3665 Fax: 02 6621 2669 Mobile: 0414 864085 >Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:10:53 -0500 >From: Marah Newman >Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons >To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >Hi All, > >I have several bleached coral skeletons and I need to calculate >skeleton density. I have looked at several papers that detail...snip From sajhowe at yahoo.com Sat Feb 11 19:52:32 2006 From: sajhowe at yahoo.com (Steffan Howe) Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:52:32 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] Eritrean coral reef surveys Message-ID: <20060212005232.60854.qmail@web34707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear coral-listers I am interested in obtaining as much information as possible about coral reef surveys (biodiversity or monitoring etc.) or habitat maps (e.g. showing coral reef locations) from the Eritrean Red Sea for Eritrea?s Coastal, Marine and Island Biodiversity Conservation Project (UNDP/GEF). The Project has already conducted some of its own surveys, but if anyone out there as has any more information it would be greatly appreciated. Regards Steffan Howe --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos ? NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo. From thedivinebovine at gmail.com Sun Feb 12 21:20:32 2006 From: thedivinebovine at gmail.com (wai leong) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Whether Alizarin S dye affects coral recruits Message-ID: Dear coral-listers, I'm investigating the effects of depth on coral growth and survivorship for my final year undergraduate research project in the National University of Singapore. I will be setting out tiles on the reef slope for a 3-4 months before shifting them up to the reef crest and leaving them out for another 3-4 months before taking them out to measure any differences in size and survivorship. As part of this study, I'd have to be able to differentiate the recruits that settled prior to shifting from the ones that settle post-shifting. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I should tag the recruits, apart from trying to find them individually under a microscope before shifting and marking them by hand? I was thinking of marking them with Alizarin S, but am not sure about any effects this might have on the recruits. I should be able to use a low concentration since I'm only trying to faintly dye the existing polyps to be able to tell them apart from the ones that recruit later on. Would appreciate any advice or suggestions anyone might have about this. Thank you! Sincerely, Leong Wai leongwai at nus.edu.sg From will_m_holden at hotmail.com Sat Feb 11 14:57:53 2006 From: will_m_holden at hotmail.com (Will Holden) Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 19:57:53 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] the next step Message-ID: Hi, my name is william holden and i have recently graduated from Newcastle University with a 2:1 degree in Marine biology. I am based in the Uk and am currently looking for work. Whilst this email is an attempt to get advice fon the best way of going about finding work, i do not want people to read this and simply think i am trying to sell myself to the highest bidder (if there happen to be any) I am hoping to get a job either working in a recognised aquarium in the Uk or at a dive centre as it is scuba diving that i am interested in and wish to pursue. This email is merely to ask for advice and any advice given would be gratefully received. Many thanks Will Holden _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN Search Toolbar now includes Desktop search! http://toolbar.msn.co.uk/ From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Mon Feb 13 18:24:00 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:24:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] New Coral-List Posting Policy Message-ID: <1214c8122b5a.122b5a1214c8@noaa.gov> Greetings! I'm afraid the amount of incoming spam to coral-list has become way too burdensome for the coral-list administrators. From now on, all messages from non-members will be automatically discarded, instead of being queued for review. For those of you who like to read from one email address yet post from another, you can add both addresses to coral-list, but enable/disable the other (see http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list, bottom of page, to subscribe/unsubscribe and choose other delivery options). I realize some folks are not subscribers to coral-list and like to occasionally post job or meeting announcements, and when that happens we have sometimes approved those messages. If your colleagues fall into that category, let me know and I'll add them to a special "free pass" sort of category so that those messages can be placed in the queue for consideration. You might also want to review how your address appears to coral-list. For instance, your address may be listed as, say, john.smith at university.edu but when you post, it comes across as john.smith at mach1.university.edu, which might be rejected by the software. Again, check your settings at http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list. If you have any problems with posting a message, please let us know. Thank you for your support and patience. Cheers, Louis Florit Mike Jankulak Jim Hendee From personal at hellenfaus.com Tue Feb 14 07:11:06 2006 From: personal at hellenfaus.com (Hellen Faus ) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 13:11:06 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Presentation In-Reply-To: <20060213170042.BD7031795C@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> Hi all! I'm new at the list and at coral world research itself. I'm a Veterinarian but not working in clinics but in travel and dive issues. I've just discovered the amazing world of corals and want to bet for it and its knowledge and conservation here in Spain, where I live, and over the world. My idea is, with time and a lot of learning, becoming part of any project (new or existent) that involves he sea health... Actually I'm collaboration in the translation into spanish of a web page dedicated to coral and plan to do a educative programme with time. At the end of the year I'll join a 9 months study of coral in the Australian and Indonesian seas, on board of Heraclitus, and meanwhile I want to learn and do as much as I can in this field... Just this presentation to tell you I'm learning a lot here, and would love to participate and have all the ideas you may give to me. Anything you consider to tell me, websites to look to, people to met, places to go, things to read, actions to do, ideas to carry on... do it!! Any help I could offer, any question or information you want to ask me -not about corals as you are the experts ;-) - feel free!! Thanks a lot to all, and remember, here I am! Hellen Faus, DVM Spain. hellen at viajarsolo.com +34 658 421 629 -----Mensaje original----- De: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] En nombre de coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Enviado el: lunes, 13 de febrero de 2006 18:01 Para: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Asunto: Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 10 Send Coral-List mailing list submissions to coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov You can reach the person managing the list at coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Coral-List digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Eritrean coral reef surveys (Steffan Howe) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:52:32 +0000 (GMT) From: Steffan Howe Subject: [Coral-List] Eritrean coral reef surveys To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: <20060212005232.60854.qmail at web34707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Dear coral-listers I am interested in obtaining as much information as possible about coral reef surveys (biodiversity or monitoring etc.) or habitat maps (e.g. showing coral reef locations) from the Eritrean Red Sea for Eritreas Coastal, Marine and Island Biodiversity Conservation Project (UNDP/GEF). The Project has already conducted some of its own surveys, but if anyone out there as has any more information it would be greatly appreciated. Regards Steffan Howe --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos  NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo.From thedivinebovine at gmail.com Sun Feb 12 21:20:41 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Delivered-To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Received: by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (Postfix, from userid 504) id EF7B417952; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.domain.tld (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0152717950 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.194]) by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36EF9177C7 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 16so873573nzp for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:33 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=EYFv37Az2pz4SnGOY6LRlxh7kV2NoEMZshiR354Tdgta8+juuYrulgfSukykT2q1wwUFgZD6wg p/Ndvt7nKVgjenuoAAMvBg4aqCrUDNNVMjSGN0K31Ap0HdrFoz9If16fPuhslODtFDt0SNTkz1A6 aLQTCwSjlObxtUJggo6XY= Received: by 10.36.88.13 with SMTP id l13mr2188985nzb; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.36.36.6 with HTTP; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800 From: wai leong To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov MIME-Version: 1.0 /usr/bin/arc: /usr/bin/arc X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on coral.aoml.noaa.gov X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=HTML_00_10,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_BY_IP autolearn=no version=3.0.4 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 07:57:08 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.2 Subject: [Coral-List] Whether Alizarin S dye affects coral recruits X-BeenThere: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: NOAA's Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP) listserver for coral reef information and news List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Dear coral-listers, I'm investigating the effects of depth on coral growth and survivorship for my final year undergraduate research project in the National University of Singapore. I will be setting out tiles on the reef slope for a 3-4 months before shifting them up to the reef crest and leaving them out for another 3-4 months before taking them out to measure any differences in size and survivorship. As part of this study, I'd have to be able to differentiate the recruits that settled prior to shifting from the ones that settle post-shifting. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I should tag the recruits, apart from trying to find them individually under a microscope before shifting and marking them by hand? I was thinking of marking them with Alizarin S, but am not sure about any effects this might have on the recruits. I should be able to use a low concentration since I'm only trying to faintly dye the existing polyps to b= e able to tell them apart from the ones that recruit later on. Would appreciate any advice or suggestions anyone might have about this. Thank you! Sincerely, Leong Wai leongwai at nus.edu.sg ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 10 ****************************************** From manfrino at reefresearch.org Tue Feb 14 11:54:07 2006 From: manfrino at reefresearch.org (manfrino at reefresearch.org) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 09:54:07 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Little Cayman Research Centre opens for Visiting Researchers this spring... Message-ID: <20060214095407.cc3c2c4bf8d3647e4241dc6e34e2d1c6.eb2d37bf1a.wbe@email.email.secureserver.net> The Little Cayman Research Centre opens for visiting researchers this spring. The Central Caribbean Marine Institute is proud to announce that Caribbean's newest field station, the Little Cayman Research Centre (LCRC) fringed by the world-renowned coral reefs of Bloody Bay Marine Park, is open to researchers. The Centre opened to students late last summer. Shallow lagoon, wall, and deep ocean (several thousand meters) habitats are all within swimming distance of the LCRC field station. The coral reefs of Little Cayman are among the best in the Caribbean for research due to the fact that they are isolated from continental and anthropogenic influences and water quality is excellent. In addition to diverse oceanographic settings over relatively short distances, Little Cayman has a well-established marine park system and one of the last spawning aggregations of the Nassau grouper. For more information on the research centre, please visit [1]www.reefresearch.org or contact me or our [2]manager at reefresearch.org to book a project (group or class). Thanks, Carrie Manfrino Central Caribbean Marine Institute [3]www.reefresearch.org Dr. Carrie Manfrino, President P.O. Box 1461 Princeton, NJ 08540 Ph:(609) 933-4559 Caribbean Headquarters Little Cayman Research Centre North Coast Road P.O. Box 37 Little Cayman, Cayman Islands (345) 926-2789 References 1. http://www.reefresearch.org/ 2. mailto:manager at reefresearch.org 3. http://www.reefresearch.org/ From pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr Tue Feb 14 18:14:32 2006 From: pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr (sandrine job) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:14:32 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] Killing Acanthaster planci In-Reply-To: <43E98AF2.5040404@gbrmpa.gov.au> Message-ID: <20060214231432.46799.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Dear Coral List, Firstly I would like to thank all the person who answered my questions about the Culcita pleague I observed on one of my restoration site in New Caledonia. I will keep you inform on the progress on this phenomenon during the course of the monitoring. So far, from the latest observations I have made on site, their number seems to stabilise and only very few coarls were attacked lately. It thus seems to confirm that they were attracted by stressed corals just after their transplantation and now that transplants are adapting to their new environmeent (and repair their lost tissue), the mortality is lower... These trends need to be confirmed. Once again thank you coral list members and if you hear anything about Culcita let me know. Secondly I had a question about what is the best way to kill COTs? Is it appropriate to kill them under the water by smashing them? or should we remove them from the water?and what about pricking them to catch them? Is it true that they will release eggs and worsten their invasion?? Cheers, Sandrine JOB Gillian Goby a ?crit : Dear All, *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the third Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 6 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, the threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region is currently rated as moderate. Sea temperatures in the southern GBR have remained significantly warmer than average (+ 0.5 - 2.5 degrees C) since December 2005 (ReefTemp), and are now exceeding the long-term summer maxima by up to 2 degrees C (NOAA HotSpot map). In contrast, recent heavy cloud cover and rain over northern parts of the GBR has kept temperatures close to average conditions for this region (Reef Futures). Central GBR waters have shown a warming tendency in recent weeks, with sea surface temperatures currently exceeding the January long-term average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C (ReefTemp). Consistent with these temperature patterns, reports of severe coral bleaching have now been confirmed for some reefs in the southern region, with minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer, and with the bleaching risk period far from over we are heavily relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.T?l?chargez la version beta. From burdickdr at hotmail.com Wed Feb 15 07:03:06 2006 From: burdickdr at hotmail.com (David burdick) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 07:03:06 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? Message-ID: Greetings coral-listers, I am interested in obtaining coral recruit/juvenile coral data for the Bahamas from 2002-2004 but I haven't had any luck finding anything in the literature - any suggestions? I performed a small-scale study looking at the effects of macroalgal reduction and Diadema antillarum addition on a set of small patch reefs off the SW coast of Eleuthera and wish to compare the results of my juvenile coral surveys to that of other researchers in the area. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! David R. Burdick NOAA Pacific Islands Assistant Guam Guam Coastal Management Program Phone: 671.472.4201 From ccook at HBOI.edu Wed Feb 15 10:14:11 2006 From: ccook at HBOI.edu (Clay Cook) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:14:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Professorship in Marine Biology Message-ID: <2309E53F80BD7841A64800D44F69F71B270239@sailfish.hboi.edu> Dear Coral-listers, Note the following position that is currently available at Florida Atlantic University, as part of the joint FAU-Harbor Branch Oceanographic partnership. Inquiries should be sent to Dr. Rod Murphey, (rmurph16 at fau.edu),Chairman, Department of Biological Sciences. Please pass this on to interested parties. Thanks and cheers, Clay Clayton B. Cook, Ph. D. Senior Scientist Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution Ft. Pierce, FL 34946 USA Ph. 772-465-2400 x 301 Mobile 772-579-0599 Fax 772-468-0757 McGinty Endowed Chair in Marine Biology The Department of Biological Sciences at Florida Atlantic University (FAU) invites nominations and applications for the John Thomas Ladue McGinty Eminent Scholar chair position in Marine Biology. Candidates should be internationally recognized as distinguished leaders in their specific field of marine biology and currently have a well-established research program. We seek an individual deeply committed to both research and teaching, particularly at the graduate level, in order to enhance a new Ph.D. program in Integrative Biology. Special consideration will be given to candidates whose research takes full advantage of FAU's geographic proximity to the marine and estuarine environments of Florida and the tropical Atlantic-Caribbean region. Applicants from a diversity of subdisciplines will be considered including, but not limited to ecology, physiology, molecular biology and organismal biology. The McGinty Eminent Scholar will conduct a program of research that facilitates collaborations with departmental faculty and strengthens current collaborations with Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution (HBOI) and other marine institutes in the region. Biology faculty are actively involved in marine biological research at both the Boca Raton (www.science.fau.edu/biology) and HBOI campuses (www.hboi.edu). The Eminent Scholar will be active on both campuses having primary research space in the new 40,000 sq. ft. FAU-HBOI facility. He/she will be expected to guide the recruitment of several new junior faculty positions aimed at enhancing the Marine Biology initiative at FAU. The endowed chair position will be filled at the full professor level with a joint appointment at the Senior Scientist level at HBOI. Review of applications will start March 1, 2006 and continue until the position is filled. Further information regarding the position can be obtained from Dr. Rod Murphey (rmurph16 at fau.edu),Chairman, Department of Biological Sciences. Applications and nominations should include curriculum vitae, five representative publications, a short description of research and teaching interests, and names and contact information of three referees. Submit applications electronically to Mrs. Lynn Sargent (lsargent at fau.edu) McGinty Eminent Scholar Search Committee, Department of Biological Sciences, Florida Atlantic University, 777 Glades Rd., Boca Raton, FL 33431. FAU is an Equal Opportunity/Equal Access Institution. From reefball at reefball.com Wed Feb 15 10:30:52 2006 From: reefball at reefball.com (Todd Barber) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:30:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? References: Message-ID: <00fa01c63244$f657c530$6501a8c0@LaFalda> Hi David, You might check with the Island School on Eleuthera. The kids there did a Reef Ball project and various classes did various monitoring projects on them. I'm not sure you could give much power to any data collected since I doubt they had adequate controls or even consistent data collection methods but there might be something there for at least sounding board. Thanks, Todd Barber Chairman Reef Ball Foundation, Inc. 3305 Edwards Court Greenville, NC 27858 reefball at reefball.com http://www.artificialreefs.org http://www.reefball.org http://www.reefball.com Direct: 252-353-9094 mobile: 941-720-7549 Fax 425-963-4119 Personal Space: http://www.myspace/reefball Group Space http://groups.myspace.com/reefballfoundation Skype & MSN For Voice or Video Conferences: Available upon request Atlanta/Athens Office 890 Hill Street Athens, GA 30606 USA 770-752-0202 (Our headquarters...not where I work see above) ----- Original Message ----- From: "David burdick" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 7:03 AM Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? > > Greetings coral-listers, > > I am interested in obtaining coral recruit/juvenile coral data for the > Bahamas from 2002-2004 but I haven't had any luck finding anything in > the literature - any suggestions? I performed a small-scale study > looking at the effects of macroalgal reduction and Diadema antillarum > addition on a set of small patch reefs off the SW coast of Eleuthera > and wish to compare the results of my juvenile coral surveys to that > of other researchers in the area. Any help would be greatly > appreciated. > > Thanks! > > David R. Burdick > > NOAA Pacific Islands Assistant Guam > > Guam Coastal Management Program > > Phone: 671.472.4201 > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From F.Webster at murdoch.edu.au Wed Feb 15 20:43:11 2006 From: F.Webster at murdoch.edu.au (Fiona Webster) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:43:11 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Postings please Message-ID: Hi I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after references and/or unpublished data. Thank you Fiona Webster Phd student Marine Ecology School Biological Sciences Department of Science and Engineering Murdoch University From deevon at bellsouth.net Thu Feb 16 09:56:52 2006 From: deevon at bellsouth.net (DeeVon Quirolo) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:56:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20060216094920.026ff5c0@bellsouth.net> Dr. Brian Lapointe of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution and Dr. Peter Bell of University of Queensland/Australia both arrived at the same thresholds from different perspectives, but they are: 1 mg/L dissolved inorganic nitrogen, .01 mg/L soluble reactive phosphorus. You can contact either Lapointe or Bell for further info. These thresholds are far lower than any current water quality regulations. Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Reef Relief www.reefrelief.org At 08:43 PM 2/15/2006, Fiona Webster wrote: >content-class: urn:content-classes:message >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="utf-8" > >Hi >I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in >Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down >effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral >health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal >growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar >level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient >enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and >phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after >references and/or unpublished data. >Thank you > > >Fiona Webster > >Phd student > >Marine Ecology > >School Biological Sciences > >Department of Science and Engineering > >Murdoch University > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From dustanp at cofc.edu Thu Feb 16 10:39:04 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:39:04 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> References: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> Message-ID: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil From info at reefguardian.org Thu Feb 16 09:34:44 2006 From: info at reefguardian.org (ReefDispatch) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:34:44 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Will Development Smother Guana Cay Reef? Message-ID: <43F48D84.78CE@reefguardian.org> ****************************** * February 16, 2006 * * R E E F D I S P A T C H * * __________________________ * * Will Unwise Development * * Smother Guana Cay Reef? * * * * -- sign on via -- * *http://www.reefguardian.org * ****************************** A Periodic Inside Look at a Coral Reef Issue from Alexander Stone, ReefGuardian International Director ____________________________________________________ Dear Friend of Coral Reefs, The coral reefs off tiny seven-mile Great Guana Cay in the northern Bahamas is under threat by an irresponsible mega-development.? Scientists around the world -- including top coral reef ecologists, and coral pathologists -- agree that the Discovery Land Company's plans to build a golf course, 500 residential units and a 180-slip marina will kill the coral reef in a matter of a few years. You could help prevent this by speaking up for this coral reef through the Featured Petition at ReefGuardian's just-updated website at http://www.reefguardian.org. Coral reefs are in serious decline around the world, and especially in the Caribbean.? But the reef at Great Guana Cay is among the few remaining healthy reefs in the entire Caribbean.? This reef, which is only 45 feet away from the beach of the proposed development, contains an incredible diversity of reef fishes, sharks, and brilliant corals. But that will all become an algae-ridden dead zone in just a few years if the Discovery Land development proceeds as planned. That's why I urge you to get involved through the Speak Up section at http://www.reefguardian.org. The native inhabitants of Guana Cay have formed an environmental organization to fight this development. But they need all the help they can get. Normally, such small islands never have an international voice.? Help prove that even little islands can have a strong voice in defense of their coral reefs. Go to our newly-updated website at http://www.reefguardian.org to learn how. Thanks so much for caring! Alexander Stone Director ReefGuardian International *************************** http://www.reefguardian.org *************************** From rvw at fit.edu Thu Feb 16 09:36:11 2006 From: rvw at fit.edu (Robert van Woesik) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:36:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Funding opportunity: Six ISRS/TOC fellowships for 2006 Message-ID: <000001c63306$55445600$6c4876a3@CORAL> Dear coral-list, The International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) are very pleased to announce that in 2006 we will be supporting up to six Ph.D. students in the general area of coral reef ecosystem research. Each award will be up to US$15,000. Submission DEADLINE - 31 March 2006 The following text is available in pdf format at http://www.fit.edu/isrs/ Fellowship announcement for coral reef studies Six ISRS/TOC fellowships (2006): International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) graduate fellowship for coral reef research DEADLINE - 31 March 2006 - for funds up to US$15,000 per award are available to support up to six Ph.D. students in the general area of coral reef ecosystem research. 1) Background and Fellowship Goals "Considerable thicknesses of rock have certainly been formed within the present geological era by the growth of coral and the accumulation of its detritus; and, secondly, that the increase of individual corals and of reefs, both out wards or horizontally and upwards or vertically, under the peculiar conditions favourable to such increase, is not slow, when referred either to the standard of the average oscillations of level in the earth's crust, or to the more precise but less important one of a cycle of years" (page 79, Darwin, 1842 The Structure & Distribution of Coral Reefs). Indeed, Darwin would be surprised just how 'peculiar' those conditions are on contemporary coral reefs. In 2006 unfavorable conditions are ubiquitous on reefs globally. Scientists and reef managers are increasingly working together to develop sound management strategies that are based on rigorous science. Scientific questions are being addressed on reef disturbances and reef resilience, climate change and adaptation, reef connectivity, and effective management practices, to name a few. Many coral reefs are in poor condition, yet we know very little about the very threats that are undermining the integrity of coral reefs. What processes and mechanisms are causing differential mortality and how are some species still able to survive and indeed be successful in times of stress. Studies are needed that will combine management with process level information. Research supported by the ISRS/TOC Fellowship should increase our understanding of processes on coral reefs that are relevant to management at local, regional, or global scales. 2) Conditions Within the proposal, and as a condition of each ISRS/TOC Fellowship, recipients will be required to articulate how they will report back to the ISRS/TOC on their research progress, outline their findings, acknowledge the support, and publicize the outcomes. 3) Who can apply? The Fellowship is available to students worldwide, who are already admitted to a graduate program at an accredited university. The intent of the fellowship is to help Ph.D. students develop skills and to address problems related to relevant applications of coral reef ecosystem research and management. The Fellowship can be used to support salary, travel, fieldwork, and laboratory analyses. The student can work entirely at the host institution, or can split time between developed and developing country institutions. 4) Application materials A four page proposal as a pdf document, using 12-point font or larger, double spaced, in English, is required from prospective fellowship candidates: proposals that do not meet these criteria may be returned. The proposal should include the following sections: a. Overview: The overview starts with the Proposal Title, Author Name, Author's Address, Major Professor Name, Major Professor's Address (if different than the Author's), and total amount in the budget request. The overview should place the proposed research in context. We are looking for a clearly stated rationale, research objectives and a clear question that is driving the research within the context of the literature. b. Methods: The methods section includes hypotheses, methods, and experimental design - including details on field or laboratory techniques and how data will be analyzed. c. Relevance & implications of research: This section will outline expected outcomes, how the work is relevant to host country management and science issues and the implications of the research within a broader context. This section also includes evidence of host country coordination (e.g., identification of individuals or programs that will benefit from your results); The following three sections are required but do not count against the four page limit: d. Detailed Budget: The budget must not exceed $15,000. Evidence of cost sharing is desirable for the application. Cost sharing might include, for example, additional funding, accommodation, the loan of equipment, or access to analytical facilities. e. Literature Cited: Use a bibliographic format that includes full titles in the citations. f. Applicant CV: 2 pages maximum. g. Letter of support: The student's major professor must submit a support letter for the project based on their knowledge of the project, and familiarity with the student's background and abilities. If work will be conducted at another university, a support letter is required from the sponsoring Professor. 5) Submitting your application All application materials must be submitted electronically as follows: a) All materials must be sent to Dr. Robert van Woesik at: rvw at fit.edu b) The completed proposal (items 4a-f above) must be combined into a single document and sent as an attachment in pdf format. Please enter the subject line of your message as your last name followed by "ISRS/TOC Proposal" (e.g., "VAN WOESIK_ISRS/TOC Proposal") c) The letter of support (item 4g above) must come directly from the major professor as an e-mail attachment (pdf format). Please enter the subject line of the message as the last name of the applicant followed by "ISRS/TOC Support" (e.g., "VAN WOESIK_ISRS/TOC Support"). Applications will be considered complete only after the support letter has arrived. You should ensure that your sponsors are aware of the deadline, and can get their letters submitted in a timely manner. Only completed electronic applications will be reviewed, and this will be accomplished by an ISRS panel. 6) Evaluation Criteria include: a) scientific merit, b) feasibility, c) support letter from major professor, d) host country coordination, e) relevancy to the Fellowship guidelines, f) reporting strategy (on research progress and findings, see conditions in 2, above). 7) Administration of the Fellowship The International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) support the Fellowship through professional and administrative contributions. ISRS/TOC is committed to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination. The mission of the ISRS is to promote for the benefit of the public, the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge and understanding concerning coral reefs, both living and fossil. The TOC is committed to protecting ocean environments and conserving the global abundance and diversity of marine life. Through science-based advocacy, research, and public education, TOC promotes informed citizen participation to reverse the degradation of our oceans. Dr. Robert van Woesik Professor Department of Biological Sciences Florida Institute of Technology 150 West University Boulevard Melbourne Florida 32901-6988 USA Email: rvw at fit.edu http://www.fit.edu/~rvw/ Phone 321 674 7475 From chwkins at yahoo.com Thu Feb 16 11:17:01 2006 From: chwkins at yahoo.com (Christopher Hawkins) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 08:17:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060216161702.33190.qmail@web32802.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Phil- A good question. I know that TNC folks, as part of the Florida Reef Resiliency Program (which has state, Sanctuary, NOAA and university partners), is working on this as we speak. I am fairly sure they haven't inked anything concrete yet, though. Best, Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Hawkins at forwild.umass.edu Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil --------------------------------- What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos From pkramer at tnc.org Thu Feb 16 15:18:04 2006 From: pkramer at tnc.org (Phillip Kramer) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:18:04 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Phil- As Chris mentioned, The Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) has been working on this question for the past year. Finding few agreed upon quantitative metrics for assessing resilience on Florida reefs in the literature has led us to approaching it from a number of different angles- expert input, review and analysis of existing monitoring data, statistically based broad-scale surveys to quantify response to disturbance (in this case bleaching) across all sub-regions and reef zones that have been identified within the Florida reef tract, and finer scale investigations tracking coral survivorship along selected gradients. Below is a summary from a pilot expert based (delphic) exercise we did last year to tap into local knowledge. Not surprisingly, we found quite a bit of disparity between what experts thought were "resilient" often based on background/expertise/age of the person. From this excersise, we have a GIS database and can provide maps which identify over 43 "resilient" reefs as identified by experts along with the reasons these reefs were identified. This might be a useful starting point for where to start looking at some standard metrics. Steven Miller's group also has a very rich baseline dataset collected over a number of years for a much broader set of functional and structural indicators that may also help inform this question. If anyone is interested in the expert maps or an overview of the FRRP program just let me know. We can also share results of the first broad scale bleaching surveys carried out last summer. Regards, Phil Philip Kramer, Ph. D. Director, Caribbean Marine Program The Nature Consevancy 55 N. Johnson Road Sugarloaf Key, FL 33042 305-745-8402 ext. 103 Summary of South Florida Reef Expert Meetings on Reslience One of the initial goals of the Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) is to locate and map coral reefs within the region that exhibit characteristics of resilience. To arrive at this goal, several activities have been implemented by The Nature Conservancy during spring 2005. Along with conducting an analysis of existing coral reef monitoring data, anecdotal information has been collected from local reef experts to help identify where potentially resilient reefs are located. A diverse array of individuals with considerable first hand knowledge of the coral reef resources within the region were identified and subsequently interviewed for this effort. Three tropical sea life collectors, 2 fishers, 6 federal employees (NOAA and USGS), 1 state employee, 5 individuals affiliated with universities, 7 members of local non-governmental organizations, and 1 dive industry representative were involved with this process. These 25 individuals provided a wealth of information from a wide geographic range and from varying perspectives. Interviews with individuals or small groups were conducted over a 4 week period; from April 1 through Aril 26, 2005. During each interview, a similar range of questions were asked to ensure compatibility of responses. Reef experts were first given a brief description about the FRRP goals and overview of a number of activities currently underway. Each person was first asked to comment on the spatial framework which identifies unique reef ?strata? that occur within different subregions and cross shelf zones of the Florida reef tract. This spatial framework will function to identify distinct reef biotopes within the region and guide the a regional stratiofied sampling design to assess response to disturbances such as coral bleaching. Interviewed participants provided useful information on ways to improve the framework and/or confirm it?s accuracy from their point of view. Experts were asked if they know of existing data sets that may be useful for the further improvement of the spatial framework as well. In order to assess the geographic areas each individual is most familiar with, the zones and sub-regions within the spatial framework were used as a reference. Following these discussions, using nautical charts, benthic habitat maps, and other spatial datasets, reef experts were asked to identify reef or hardbottom areas they believe have maintained its functional integrity over the past years to decades given the various disturbances which have influenced south Florida. They were also asked if they know of ?special or unique areas? that may act as refuges (e.g., do not bleach when other areas do or have functional or structural characteristics indicative of resilience such areas with particularly high coral cover or large living coral heads, etc..). Interviewees identified a wide range of potentially resilient areas- from specific parts of individual reefs to entire habitats or zones. The information gathered from these interviews on potentially resilient reef areas was tabulated and then digitized in GIS. Along with these questions, we asked the experts to comment on why they belief these areas are showing signs of ?resilience? (factors of resilience). Finally, we asked each expert to describe what attributes of a reef is most valuable to them. Table 1: List of interviewed reef experts Reef Expert Organization/Occupation Geographic Area of Expertise Don de Maria Fisher Lower Keys Billy Causey Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Region wide Ken Nedimyer Tropical sea life collector Upper and Lower Keys Lad Atkins Reef Environmental Education Foundation Keys wide and SE coast Harold Hudson Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Keys wide Forest Young Dynasty Marine Rebecca Shoal to Middle Keys Bob Ginsburg University of Miami, RSMAS Region wide Margaret Miller NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami Dana Williams NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami Rodrigo Garza University of Miami, RSMAS Tortugas and Miami Michelle PaddockUniversity of Miami, RSMAS Upper Keys through Miami Bill Parks Tropical sea life collector Palm Beach County Gene Shinn US Geological Survey Region wide Bob Halley US Geological Survey Region wide Walt Jaap Florida Wildlife Research Institute Region wide Pam Muller University of South Florida Region wide Dr. Ray McAllister Prof. Emeritus, Florida Atlantic University SE Coast Stephen Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Timothy Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Debrorah Devers Vone Research (501c3) Broward County David Zinni Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Randy Brooks Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Jeff Torode Greater Ft. Lauderdale Diving Association Broward County Peter Cone Lobster diver Key West Erich Bartels Mote Marine Laboratory Region wide -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Christopher Hawkins Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 11:17 AM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Cc: Dave Loomis Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Phil- A good question. I know that TNC folks, as part of the Florida Reef Resiliency Program (which has state, Sanctuary, NOAA and university partners), is working on this as we speak. I am fairly sure they haven't inked anything concrete yet, though. Best, Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Hawkins at forwild.umass.edu Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil --------------------------------- What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From reef at bellsouth.net Thu Feb 16 16:47:14 2006 From: reef at bellsouth.net (reef at bellsouth.net) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:47:14 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] (no subject) Message-ID: <20060216214714.DCBQ1775.ibm67aec.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> RE: healthy coral in the Florida Keys I would suggest Western Samboos off of Key West. There is a lot of healthy elkhorn (alittle storm damage from Wilma though). Parts of it is from the coral nursery project that had great results (done by Reef Relief). The Dry Tortugas park is a great resource as well. Hope this helps! Vicky Ten Broeck From julian at twolittlefishies.com Thu Feb 16 18:17:33 2006 From: julian at twolittlefishies.com (Julian Sprung) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 18:17:33 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs Message-ID: <60146F1515751D4AA4CB4D3EC514F9E311AA1C@SERVER.tlf.local> It may be news to some members of the list to know that aquarists growing corals in reef aquariums come to essentially the same recommended background level for phosphorus, about 0.015 mg/L being a threshold that seems to be important in managing the proliferation of algae in reef aquariums. Some other observations about it - 1. corals will grow at substantially higher phosphorus concentrations in aquariums, especially when grazers are present to control algae. 2. Some corals will stop growing or bleach and die when the phosphate level is maintained not very much below the abovementioned threshold! This is a point of great interest as aquarists balance food inputs and phosphate export. Apparently corals can acclimate to lower levels as long as the transition is not too fast. Acclimation to "higher" concentrations, but still close to the abovementioned threshold, does not kill corals, but may cause SPS corals to become less colorful. It should also be noted that the observations may have some relation to the loss of corals to bleaching events in the most nutrient poor waters in the natural environment. There was already a long thread on this list about inorganic nitrogen in aquarium culture of corals, but suffice it to say that corals in aquariums grow well with background levels much higher than proposed for their natural environment. They also grow well at nitrogen poor conditions, but may bleach if the levels become too low in an aquarium, especially when food inputs are scarce. Maintaining low levels help promote bright color in (Indo-Pacific) SPS corals, as the "background" zoox brown color is reduced and other pigments become more obvious. When discussing nutrients I like to make an analogy that I think is appropriate-- I compare nutrients to light availability. If you think about sunlight on the reef, it comes in 2 distinct forms: background sky light and light from the sun itself. Nutrients as a background level (the abovementioned thresholds) could be thought of as analogous to sky light- all around and just right for normal growth. There are other sources of nutrients that are like the point source of light from the sun-- more intense and focused. Fish living (and eliminating waste) among coral branches would be an example of a nutrient supply that far exceeds the "background." These point sources (light or nutrients) seem to enhance growth. The analogy works but does not correspond with respect to water movement effects on nutrient availability. Julian > ---------- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of DeeVon Quirolo > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 9:56 AM > To: Fiona Webster; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov; coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs > > Dr. Brian Lapointe of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution and Dr. > Peter Bell of University of Queensland/Australia both arrived at the > same thresholds from different perspectives, but they are: 1 mg/L > dissolved inorganic nitrogen, .01 mg/L soluble reactive > phosphorus. You can contact either Lapointe or Bell for further > info. These thresholds are far lower than any current water quality > regulations. > > Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Reef Relief www.reefrelief.org > > > > At 08:43 PM 2/15/2006, Fiona Webster wrote: > >content-class: urn:content-classes:message > >Content-Type: text/plain; > > charset="utf-8" > > > >Hi > >I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in > >Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down > >effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral > >health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal > >growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar > >level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient > > >enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and > >phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after > >references and/or unpublished data. > >Thank you > > > > > >Fiona Webster > > > >Phd student > > > >Marine Ecology > > > >School Biological Sciences > > > >Department of Science and Engineering > > > >Murdoch University > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Coral-List mailing list > >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From colocha30 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 16 18:52:05 2006 From: colocha30 at yahoo.com (carolina castro) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 17:52:05 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Looking for PDF articles Message-ID: <20060216235205.65991.qmail@web34712.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear All, I am looking for some articles that I couldn?t be able to download. I would really appreciate if somebody could attach them on PDF format for me. Thank you. Brander, et.al., 1971. Comparison of species diversity and ecology of reef-living invertebrates on Aldabra Atoll and at Watamu, Kenya. Symp. Zool. Soc. London, 28: 397-431. J.B. Lewis and P.V.R. Snelgrove, 1989. Response of a coral-associated crustacean community to eutrophication. Marine Biology, 101(2): 249-257. J.B. Lewis and P.V.R. Snelgrove, 1990. Corallum morphology and composition of crustacean cryptofauna of the hermatypic coral Madrasis mirabilis. Marine Biology, 106(2): 267-272. Carolina Castro S. Biologa Marina UJTL Bogota, Colombia __________________________________________________ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ?gratis! Reg?strate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/ From gregorh at reefcheck.org Thu Feb 16 19:42:31 2006 From: gregorh at reefcheck.org (Gregor Hodgson) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:42:31 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <003301c6335b$0d0a57e0$0600a8c0@toshibauser> Hi Phil, I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and only one species of human. Regards, Greg -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From j.oliver at cgiar.org Fri Feb 17 03:31:44 2006 From: j.oliver at cgiar.org (Oliver, Jamie (WorldFish)) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 16:31:44 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef Scientist Position at the WorldFish Center - Penang Message-ID: Dear Colleagues The WorldFish Center has an exciting new position opening for a Coral Reef Scientist at the WorldFish Center. This is a normal staff position with a 3 year renewable contract. The Scientist would lead a new GEF-funded project examining lessons learned and best practices in coral reef management, and would also be expected to develop and lead other coral reef projects relevant to the mission of the Center. The position would contribute to, and assist in the strategic planning and oversight of ReefBase, the Center's global information system on coral reefs. This position will be one of several new positions currently being filled at the Center in the field of Natural Resources management, and offers the opportunity to join a dynamic new multi-disciplinary team seeking to make a significant impact on poverty and food security in developing countries. (see "jobs" on our website www.worldfishcenter.org ). Please pass this message on to any potential candidates or interested parties. Best regards Jamie Oliver Research Scientist - Coral Reefs Description: The WorldFish Center , located on the island of Penang , Malaysia , is a world-class scientific research organization. Our mission is to reduce poverty and hunger by improving fisheries and aquaculture. We have offices in nine countries and engaged in collaborative research with our partners in more than 50 countries. The Center is a nonprofit organization and a member of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). A unique opportunity has arisen for a gifted individual to contribute to the mission of the Center and make a personal impact on the lives of millions of less fortunate people in developing countries around the world. We seek a highly competent and motivated individual to fill the following position within the Natural Resources Management Discipline: Responsibilities: Provide scientific leadership and vision in the development of new research and knowledge management opportunities relating to coral reefs and associated ecosystems. Design, develop and submit project proposals relevant to the management and sustainable use of coral reefs in developing countries. Develop collaborative arrangements with advanced scientific institutions and national research systems to increase the outputs for agreed research projects Prepare proposals to development agencies for funding of new priority projects and the continuation of existing long-term projects Publish results of research in peer-reviewed scientific journals, and disseminate in web pages, newsletters and other popular media Prepare scientific reports for donors and WorldFish management Represent the Center at relevant high level scientific fora Supervise and mentor relevant staff Contribute to strategic science discussions and the development of science directions within the NRM Discipline and relevant regional strategies and global initiatives. Requirements: Phd in Ecology, tropical fisheries, or related discipline and 3 year's research experience related to coral reefs or tropical coastal systems. Demonstrated research innovation, publications in internationally reefed journals and the application of research to management issues Experience in assembling, organizing and analyzing large volumes of information from a variety of sources and disciplines and synthesizing these into clear themes and identifying emergent issues and ideas. Strong quantitative skill in statistical and spatial analysis, and relevant computer programs Excellent program management skills, including planning organization, and budgeting. Ability to manage several projects simultaneously. Experience in multi-disciplinary and multi-organization and multi-country projects. Ability to work effectively in diverse cultural contexts English proficiency and excellent project management skills The WorldFish Center offers a competitive remuneration package, a non-discriminatory policy and provides an innovative work environment. Interested applicants are invited to submit a comprehensive curriculum vitae that includes names and contacts (telephone, fax, and e-mail address) of three (3) professional referees who are familiar with the candidate's qualifications and work experience, via e-mail to worldfish-hr at cgiar.org, no later than 15 March 2006. Only short-listed candidates will be notified. ============================================ Jamie Oliver Director, Science Coordination The WorldFish Center PO Box 500, GPO, 10670 Penang Malaysia Street address: Jalan Batu Maung, 11960 Bayan Lepas, Penang, Malaysia Ph: 60 4 620 2209 Fax: 60 4 626 5690 email: J.Oliver at cgiar.org ========================================== From laura.jeffrey at imperial.ac.uk Fri Feb 17 04:26:23 2006 From: laura.jeffrey at imperial.ac.uk (Jeffrey, Laura) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 09:26:23 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] MSc Thesis Ideas Imperial Message-ID: <37629CD96DEBCF42B807EAD22EA7EF78C84EC5@icex3.ic.ac.uk> Dear All, I am a postgrad presently reading for an MSc in Environmental Technology at Imperial College, London. In April we are due to start our dissertations and my hope that I would be able to investigate coral reefs and their current level or protection through policy/initiatives and such like. I hold a 1+3 studentship so the hope is that this project will be the stepping-stone to a PhD in the same field. I have attached below my current thoughts and ideas regarding this subject. However, I am well aware that I am limited in knowledge on this subject and would therefore appreciate any suggestions that come my way. I was advised by a colleague that the coral list was the best way to go with regards finding the right experts to talk to; useful contacts; projects that are currently underway so that maybe I could join one; advising a specific region to focus on; further suggestions re the direction of my ideas so that they mat form a project and such like. Any help on this matter would be much appreciated! Yours Sincerely, Laura Jeffrey Project Ideas: Environmental Law/Policy and Biodiversity/Conservation: Coral Reef Project Ideas Coral Reefs are not only extremely aesthetically pleasing, but they support an extraordinary amount of biodiversity and have enormous economic value. However, at present coral reefs are at serious risk of decline considering the current trends in climate change (threats posed by global warming), coastal development, pressure from over-fishing, fishing practices such as cyanide poisoning and explosives and tourism, along with other environmental stressors. According to The Nature Conservancy, if the destruction increases at the current rate, 70% of the world's coral reefs will have disappeared within 50 years. Such a loss would have dramatic impacts on marine biodiversity, fisheries, shore protection, tourism and would be an economic disaster for those people living in the tropics. Dissertation: Initially set out to see whether or not the world's coral reefs are being sufficiently protected by reviewing (investigation into?) the current level of protection, including MPAs, any policy instruments, environmental agreements already in place to encourage protection, or lack thereof. Given the depth and breath of the subject matter, the study would invariably have to be selective....zone in on specific area/case study PhD: Is there a role for environmental law (policy/treaties) to tackle the environmental degradation of coral reefs? Assess the viability of transposing legal remedies to environmental protection of this endangered area with a view that the author would hopefully provide recommendations/possible options at the end! Included in thesis/PhD? * The best methods of protection are those that are specific to the problem, therefore explore the role of how science can inform policy here (make policy makers aware/political science of MPAs). * (From Dr Polunin, Newcastle, "and nearly all the science is derived from reef habitats that don't apply at al to continental shelf waters" ??? Significant? * What determines the most viable strategy? * What would influence uptake? * How would this be implemented and enforced? Specific criteria for successful implementation. * Interaction between different sectors, national, provincial, and local community level? I am aware that America is very forward thinking in this field and has initiatives in place. Maybe this would be an appropriate case study? Again, any help much appreciated!! From esther.peters at verizon.net Fri Feb 17 11:40:25 2006 From: esther.peters at verizon.net (Esther Peters) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:40:25 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? References: <003301c6335b$0d0a57e0$0600a8c0@toshibauser> Message-ID: <43F5FC79.7090506@verizon.net> Gregor and Phil make good points. As part of an exercise to look at reef classification for the purpose of developing coral reef biocriteria, I examined the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program data from the Keys collected in 1996, looking at coral cover, species dominance, and richness, and applying the "coral morphological triangles" (conservation class) concept of Edinger and Risk (2000). A preliminary comparison with the results obtained from the 2004 CREMP dataset revealed that just in those few years there were significant structural and functional changes at some offshore shallow reef sites. And of course, based on long-time Keys' residents and reef scientists, we know of even more changes over the past 25 years. The Nature Conservancy's diverse approach is also important to help us understand reef dynamics in the Keys and the influences of natural and anthropogenic disturbances. I'm not sure that anyone has figured out the "standard, or baseline reef." My first look at this issue indicates that even in the Keys there are several biotopes and more investigations are needed as to which one(s) should serve as "reference condition" for each class. Esther Peters Gregor Hodgson wrote: > Hi Phil, > > I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a > "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? > > Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be > a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It > is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs > given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, > sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing > conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging > will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. > > Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and > only one species of human. > > Regards, > Greg > > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? > > > Dear Listers, > With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency > underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as > measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or > Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". > Thanks, > Phil > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From esther.peters at verizon.net Fri Feb 17 11:56:47 2006 From: esther.peters at verizon.net (Esther Peters) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:56:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] 2006 Advanced Courses in Tropical Marine Sciences in the Florida Keys Message-ID: <43F6004F.1080103@verizon.net> The following opportunities for advanced studies on coral reefs will be offered at Mote Marine Laboratory's Tropical Research Laboratory in the Florida Keys this summer. Please use these links to learn more about each session and obtain application materials: Coral Tissue Slide Reading Workshop (July 25-28) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/slide_workshop.phtml Diseases of Corals and Other Reef Organisms (July 29-August 6) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/disease_workshop.phtml Secondary Succession on Damaged Coral Reefs Workshop (August 7-10) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/succession_workshop.phtml From l.bunce at conservation.org Fri Feb 17 12:14:52 2006 From: l.bunce at conservation.org (Leah Bunce) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 12:14:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] MPA Social Scientist position Message-ID: <64207F75AB45B54296B2E2DAA4DA9D8B08707302@ci-mail1.ci.conservation.org> Dear Coral Colleagues, I would greatly appreciate it if you would forward the announcement below to social scientists who might be interested or who know those who might. This is a unique opportunity to direct a large social science research initiative to further management effectiveness of marine protected areas worldwide. The position involves working with CI here in DC and closely with CI and partners in-country. For more info about the program, see . Thank you! Leah ______________ Leah Bunce, PhD Senior Director Marine Management Area Science Program Center for Applied Biodiversity Science Conservation International 1919 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 (202) 912-1238 l.bunce at conservation.org Position: Research Scientist - MPA Social Scientist Program: Center for Applied Biodiversity Sciences, Conservation International Location: Washington, DC The social scientist will be responsible for overseeing Conservation International's Marine Management Area Science Program social science research activities. This is a unique opportunity for someone with strong academic credentials and overseas conservation experience to gain experience managing a large program of applied marine research across many sites. Program research is focused around critical marine management area research needs related to management effectiveness, connectivity, resiliency, valuation, economic development and enforcement. Required: A solid understanding of the marine protected area social science field. Preferred: Four years of experience conducting applied social science research and translating the results into conservation action. Experience in tropical nations, preferably in one of the 4 priority sites (Brazil, Belize, Panama & Ecuador and Fiji). Project management experience, including planning, working with a range of colleagues, and budgeting. Experience conducting social science to benefit marine conservation and establishing a process to ensure the results are used by decision-makers. Flexibility and the ability to coordinate science activities outside the person's immediate area of expertise. Master's degree required, Ph.D. preferred. To apply: Application deadline - March 1, 2006 From hyamano at nies.go.jp Mon Feb 20 00:10:03 2006 From: hyamano at nies.go.jp (hyamano at nies.go.jp) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 14:10:03 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Dear colleagues, Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th ICRS, Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD-ROMs will be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send it to all the participants. For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the print. If the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop printing the Proceedings. More news will be sent as soon as I hear. Best wishes, Hiroya Yamano Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html From eborneman at uh.edu Mon Feb 20 10:00:11 2006 From: eborneman at uh.edu (Eric Borneman) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:00:11 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS In-Reply-To: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> References: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Message-ID: <09599ED7-B06F-4340-9BBE-76B3B0CA8921@uh.edu> Hello Hiroya: Thank you for the update on the Proceedings and I am greatly looking forward to seeing them and appreciate the work that has certainly been required to produce them. I am curious, though, about the printing. If the CD-ROM is already formatted, as it should be given the nature of the formatting required for submitted material, then any of thousands of print-on- demand printers should be able to produce bound volumes by a print-on- demand cost that can be from 1 to many thousands of copies. For example, one print-on-demand company found with a quick google search will print hardback copies (6x9) with full color covers, dust jackets, up to 500 pages and provide 10 free copies of the book for US $1000 and this includes free CD e-books and 30% royalties for each copy sold if they are the distributor and 50% of CD-ROM sales. I consider this to be quite expensive. I think others on this list I know who have written full color books over 500 pages would agree that we would not be writing (or selling) much if printing costs and selling prices were this high. While I don't have the details of the manuscript, the minimum order and costs seem very out of line with what I know about book publishing (which isn't much), having written two books. I think the cost of book series, such as Corals of the World, which are similarly large, colorful (which previous Proceedings have never been) and well made indicates what is possible. The costs of scientific publication have always been a mystery to me, to say the least, and in terms of most journals, an outrageous racket. If, however, there are very few orders for text-based copies I can see that the cost would be high, but I see no reason for it to be impossible for even one copy to be produced given the nature of POD technology today. I hope others on the list who have published books could comment further. Best, Eric Borneman Dept. of Biology and Biochemistry University of Houston Science and Research Bldg. II 4800 Calhoun Houston, TX 77204 On Feb 19, 2006, at 11:10 PM, hyamano at nies.go.jp wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th > ICRS, > Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. > > We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD- > ROMs will > be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send > it to > all the participants. > > For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. > However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the > print. If > the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop > printing the Proceedings. > > More news will be sent as soon as I hear. > > Best wishes, > > Hiroya Yamano > Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS > Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings > > ---- > Hiroya Yamano > UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement > BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia > Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 > Also at NIES > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From sjameson at coralseas.com Mon Feb 20 04:06:15 2006 From: sjameson at coralseas.com (Dr. Stephen Jameson) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:06:15 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Message-ID: Dear Phil, Thanks for the Coral-List note regarding: >> Dear Listers, >> With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency >> underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as >> measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or >> Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Per: Jameson SC, Erdmann MV, Karr JR, Potts KW (2001) Charting a course toward diagnostic monitoring: A continuing review of coral reef attributes and a research strategy for creating coral reef indexes of biotic integrity. Bull Mar Sci 69(2):701-744 "In multimetric biological assessment, reference condition equates with biological integrity. Biological integrity is defined as the condition at sites able to support and maintain a balanced, integrated, and adaptive biological system having the full range of elements and processes expected for that biogeographical region and type of environment (coral reef zone) (Jameson et al. 2001, Table 1, page 702). Biological integrity is the product of ecological and evolutionary processes at a site with MINIMAL human influence (determined by best available information)." As you well know, there is no reef in the Florida Keys with minimal human influence. For a recent summary of this situation see: Jameson SC, Tupper MH, Ridley JM (2002) The three screen doors: can marine ?protected? areas be effective? Marine Pollution Bulletin 44(11):1177-1183. So how could you approach this problem? Your question is assuming just using a "single" reference site to create a reference condition. (Note of caution: I would recommend using more than one reference site to create a reference condition for a specific biogeographic region. Also, reference conditions based on reference sites may incorporate considerable variability because of scale and in some biogeographic regions this variability may be unsatisfactory.) However, you can create reference conditions using a combination of the following types of data (Jameson et al. 2001, page 705). Each approach has its strength and weaknesses. Historical Paleoecological Experimental Laboratory Quantitative Models Best Professional Judgment References Sites But, before this question can be answered a few more questions need to be addressed. 1. What metrics and related organisms are you using in your monitoring and assessment program? Are you just looking at corals or are you developing a more complex invertebrate, algae and/or fish index of biotic integrity with a mix of species? For example, if you were using forams you might have good paleo data to create your reference condition with. If you are using corals, there might be good historical data or you might be able to use agent based models (like John McManus is developing) and run them backwards to get a historical perspective. Best professional judgment will also be a valuable resource for all metrics. Your sampling protocol is critical, it needs to be consistent and this will control what organisms are available for analysis - and determine what reference conditions are needed. If you can't create a defendable reference condition then your chosen metric is of little use. 2. What coral reef zone are you targeting (Esther's point). Different types of organisms will be found in different zones, so you want to be comparing apples to apples and not confounding (mixing) data. This will also influence what reference conditions you need to develop. 3. How far back in history do you want to go with your reference condition - pre-Columbus, start of the industrial revolution, pre-Miami development? Bottom line: just using a single Florida Keys reference site selected in 2006 will not produce a satisfactory reference condition in the Florida Keys situation no matter what metric/s you are using - which I know you realize. I am putting the final touches on the following paper that outlines these concepts in more detail. Jameson SC, Karr JR, Potts KW (in ms) Coral reef biological response signatures: a new approach to coral reef monitoring and assessment with early warning, diagnostic, and status & trend capabilities. Coral Reefs Also see, when it comes out: Jameson SC (in press) Summary of Mini-Symposium 4-2, Diagnostic Monitoring and Assessment of Coral Reefs: Studies from Around the World. Proc 10th Intl Coral Reef Symposium, Okinawa, Japan I hope this brief summary helps. All papers referenced can be downloaded at . If I can be of further service please give me a call. PS. Caution should be used with respect to using "resilient reefs" for reference sites as the fact that they are categorized as "resilient" suggests that they have been subjected to stressors and are not located in minimally impaired environments. We are looking for those reefs that have not bleached - which as Greg points out - will be harder and harder to find, thus reinforcing the need to use the other approaches for creating reference conditions. Best regards, Dr. Stephen C. Jameson, President Coral Seas Inc. - Integrated Coastal Zone Management 4254 Hungry Run Road, The Plains, VA 20198-1715 USA Office: 703-754-8690, Fax: 703-754-9139 Email: sjameson at coralseas.com Web Site: http://www.coralseas.com and Research Collaborator Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History Washington, DC 20560 ******************* > Gregor and Phil make good points. As part of an exercise to look at > reef classification for the purpose of developing coral reef > biocriteria, I examined the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program > data from the Keys collected in 1996, looking at coral cover, species > dominance, and richness, and applying the "coral morphological > triangles" (conservation class) concept of Edinger and Risk (2000). A > preliminary comparison with the results obtained from the 2004 CREMP > dataset revealed that just in those few years there were significant > structural and functional changes at some offshore shallow reef sites. > And of course, based on long-time Keys' residents and reef > scientists, we know of even more changes over the past 25 years. The > Nature Conservancy's diverse approach is also important to help us > understand reef dynamics in the Keys and the influences of natural and > anthropogenic disturbances. I'm not sure that anyone has figured out > the "standard, or baseline reef." My first look at this issue indicates > that even in the Keys there are several biotopes and more investigations > are needed as to which one(s) should serve as "reference condition" for > each class. > > Esther Peters > > > Hi Phil- As Chris mentioned, The Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) has > been working on this question for the past year. Finding few agreed upon > quantitative metrics for assessing resilience on Florida reefs in the > literature has led us to approaching it from a number of different angles- > expert input, review and analysis of existing monitoring data, statistically > based broad-scale surveys to quantify response to disturbance (in this case > bleaching) across all sub-regions and reef zones that have been identified > within the Florida reef tract, and finer scale investigations tracking coral > survivorship along selected gradients. > > Below is a summary from a pilot expert based (delphic) exercise we did last > year to tap into local knowledge. Not surprisingly, we found quite a bit of > disparity between what experts thought were "resilient" often based on > background/expertise/age of the person. From this excersise, we have a GIS > database and can provide maps which identify over 43 "resilient" reefs as > identified by experts along with the reasons these reefs were identified. > This might be a useful starting point for where to start looking at some > standard metrics. Steven Miller's group also has a very rich baseline > dataset collected over a number of years for a much broader set of > functional and structural indicators that may also help inform this > question. > > If anyone is interested in the expert maps or an overview of the FRRP > program just let me know. We can also share results of the first broad > scale bleaching surveys carried out last summer. > > Regards, > Phil > > Philip Kramer, Ph. D. > Director, Caribbean Marine Program > The Nature Consevancy > 55 N. Johnson Road > Sugarloaf Key, FL 33042 > 305-745-8402 ext. 103 > > Summary of South Florida Reef Expert Meetings on Reslience > > One of the initial goals of the Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) is to > locate and map coral reefs within the region that exhibit characteristics of > resilience. To arrive at this goal, several activities have been > implemented by The Nature Conservancy during spring 2005. Along with > conducting an analysis of existing coral reef monitoring data, anecdotal > information has been collected from local reef experts to help identify > where potentially resilient reefs are located. A diverse array of > individuals with considerable first hand knowledge of the coral reef > resources within the region were identified and subsequently interviewed for > this effort. Three tropical sea life collectors, 2 fishers, 6 federal > employees (NOAA and USGS), 1 state employee, 5 individuals affiliated with > universities, 7 members of local non-governmental organizations, and 1 dive > industry representative were involved with this process. These 25 > individuals provided a wealth of information from a wide geographic range > and from varying perspectives. > > Interviews with individuals or small groups were conducted over a 4 week > period; from April 1 through Aril 26, 2005. During each interview, a > similar range of questions were asked to ensure compatibility of responses. > Reef experts were first given a brief description about the FRRP goals and > overview of a number of activities currently underway. Each person was > first asked to comment on the spatial framework which identifies unique reef > ?strata? that occur within different subregions and cross shelf zones of the > Florida reef tract. This spatial framework will function to identify > distinct reef biotopes within the region and guide the a regional > stratiofied sampling design to assess response to disturbances such as coral > bleaching. Interviewed participants provided useful information on ways to > improve the framework and/or confirm it?s accuracy from their point of view. > Experts were asked if they know of existing data sets that may be useful for > the further improvement of the spatial framework as well. In order to > assess the geographic areas each individual is most familiar with, the zones > and sub-regions within the spatial framework were used as a reference. > Following these discussions, using nautical charts, benthic habitat maps, > and other spatial datasets, reef experts were asked to identify reef or > hardbottom areas they believe have maintained its functional integrity over > the past years to decades given the various disturbances which have > influenced south Florida. They were also asked if they know of ?special or > unique areas? that may act as refuges (e.g., do not bleach when other areas > do or have functional or structural characteristics indicative of resilience > such areas with particularly high coral cover or large living coral heads, > etc..). Interviewees identified a wide range of potentially resilient > areas- from specific parts of individual reefs to entire habitats or zones. > The information gathered from these interviews on potentially resilient reef > areas was tabulated and then digitized in GIS. Along with these questions, > we asked the experts to comment on why they belief these areas are showing > signs of ?resilience? (factors of resilience). Finally, we asked each > expert to describe what attributes of a reef is most valuable to them. > > Table 1: List of interviewed reef experts > > Reef Expert Organization/Occupation Geographic Area of Expertise > Don de Maria Fisher Lower Keys > Billy Causey Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Region wide > Ken Nedimyer Tropical sea life collector Upper and Lower Keys > Lad Atkins Reef Environmental Education Foundation Keys wide and SE coast > Harold Hudson Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Keys wide > Forest Young Dynasty Marine Rebecca Shoal to Middle Keys > Bob Ginsburg University of Miami, RSMAS Region wide > Margaret Miller NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami > Dana Williams NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami > Rodrigo Garza University of Miami, RSMAS Tortugas and Miami > Michelle PaddockUniversity of Miami, RSMAS Upper Keys through Miami > Bill Parks Tropical sea life collector Palm Beach County > Gene Shinn US Geological Survey Region wide > Bob Halley US Geological Survey Region wide > Walt Jaap Florida Wildlife Research Institute Region wide > Pam Muller University of South Florida Region wide > Dr. Ray McAllister Prof. Emeritus, Florida Atlantic University SE Coast > Stephen Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Timothy Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Debrorah Devers Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > David Zinni Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Randy Brooks Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Jeff Torode Greater Ft. Lauderdale Diving Association Broward County > Peter Cone Lobster diver Key West > Erich Bartels Mote Marine Laboratory Region wide > Gregor Hodgson wrote: > >> Hi Phil, >> >> I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a >> "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? >> >> Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be >> a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It >> is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs >> given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, >> sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing >> conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging >> will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. >> >> Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and >> only one species of human. >> >> Regards, >> Greg >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan >> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM >> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? >> >> >> Dear Listers, >> With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency >> underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as >> measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or >> Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From simmi_nuern at yahoo.com Mon Feb 20 09:32:24 2006 From: simmi_nuern at yahoo.com (Simone Nuernberger) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 06:32:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Coralliophila In-Reply-To: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Message-ID: <20060220143224.12107.qmail@web60313.mail.yahoo.com> Hi everyone, Can anyone please tell me (as detailed as possible) how the gastropod Coralliophila sp. affects hard corals and how this predation can be visually identified? Do signs of Coralliophila differ with the presence of algae in coral tissue? How can these predation scars be distinguished from coral diseases? One more question: Has anyone encountered a syndrome showing as ?green spots? ? small necrotic patches of light green coloration on the coral surface? Our studies were based in Indonesia and we mostly found these impairments on massive colonies of Porites spp. I appreciate your help! Cheers, Simone *************************************************************************** Simone N?rnberger (M.Sc.) simone_nuernberger at web.de Institute of Biology (Biological Oceanography) University of Southern Denmark DK-5230 Odense M --------------------------------- Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses! From habakuk at nova.edu Mon Feb 20 21:31:43 2006 From: habakuk at nova.edu (Lindsey Klink) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 21:31:43 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Mooring Buoy Questionnaire Message-ID: <20060220213143.2hlykz9pcks048k8@mail.acast.nova.edu> Mooring Buoy Questionnaire I am a Research Assistant with the National Coral Reef Institute (NCRI). I am currently conducting a mooring buoy use and effectiveness study. As part of this study I am compiling detailed information about mooring buoy programs around the world. To collect this information I have created a web-based questionnaire to be filled out by individuals associated with mooring buoy programs. To read more about this effort and to take part in the study, please visit: www.nova.edu/ncri/mooringbuoy.html Thank you very much for your time and any information about mooring buoy programs that you are able to provide! Lindsey H. Klink Research Assistant National Coral Reef Institute Nova Southeastern Univ. Oceanographic Center 8000 N. Ocean Dr. Dania Beach, FL 33004 USA habakuk at nova.edu From dustanp at cofc.edu Tue Feb 21 09:32:11 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Message-ID: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And probably haven't been for a long time. My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses that are far greater, supports this form of denial. Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even be up to R4 if conservation is successful. Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) From ctwiliams at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 11:59:39 2006 From: ctwiliams at yahoo.com (Tom Williams) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 08:59:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060221165939.90967.qmail@web50408.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Agreed - what is left after 50-100years of farm runoff, fertilizer, golf courses, bottle/dynamite blasting, etc. would be a better question - at this stage, every coral should be precious and protected, but they are in the wrong places.... Recent discussions regarding Arabian/Persian Gulf and Red Sea, and East Malaysia, Philippines, and Majuro/Marshalls can be added to the Keys. Costs $50 to reclaim and can sell for $500...OK But some for Dubai Claim that programs are underway to mitigate and compensate after the fact and since fish like the reclamation it is improved. Dr. Tom Williams The original is too long --- Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots > of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are > none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > My point is that before we talk about resilience, > maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of > their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost > over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the > 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing > vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been > talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in > full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to > minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be > worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully > engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, > or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, > some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or > boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no > point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are > the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting > (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. From szmanta at uncw.edu Tue Feb 21 12:35:10 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:35:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] FW: Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813A2D@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Dear Dr. Yamano: I am concerned about the proposed high cost of hard copies of the proceedings. Since I came to UNCW, I have helped our library acquire all of the series of proceedings (most we obtained for free from the various institutions that had published them) so that our students could use these valuable tomes to learn from and plan research. But my institution, as I am sure is true for so many others, does not have enough funds to pay for all the journals and books we need, and such a high cost could mean that they would decide not to buy this proceedings set. I suggest an alternative: The cost of the CD set is reasonable I hope. If the 10thICRS committee would permit non-for-profit academic institutions to make their own hard copies from the CDs, then each institution could find a less expensive way to make a permanent copy for their collections. It should certainly cost less that a few hundred dollars to print out a full copy (and there would be no shipping of heavy books across the seas!). It may not be as nice as a professionally printed copy but it will do the job. At least my university library would not do this unless there was an explicit permission to make such a copy so as not to violate copyright laws. Unless you can find a less expensive printer, I suggest you consider this option. It would be a shame if after all that work on your part, the Proceedings didn't find homes in our libraries. Sincerely, Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of hyamano at nies.go.jp Sent: Mon 2/20/2006 12:10 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Cc: paal.buhl.mortensen at imr.no; i04t0021 at k.hosei.ac.jp; purkis at nova.edu; c.roelfsema at uq.edu.au; rwaller at whoi.edu; p.kench at auckland.ac.nz; jan.helge.fossaa at imr.no; jgoodman at uprm.edu; Qamar.Schuyler at crm.gov.mp; yamano at noumea.ird.nc; andrefou at noumea.ird.nc Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Dear colleagues, Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th ICRS, Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD-ROMs will be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send it to all the participants. For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the print. If the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop printing the Proceedings. More news will be sent as soon as I hear. Best wishes, Hiroya Yamano Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From riskmj at univmail.cis.mcmaster.ca Tue Feb 21 12:45:43 2006 From: riskmj at univmail.cis.mcmaster.ca (Michael Risk) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:45:43 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: Hi Phil. Thanks you for crystallising the discussion, and articulating some of my own concerns. One of the many problems is: "All politics is local." (Tip O'Neil, American politician) It is always easier to blame the external. One of my students was in the back of a hall in the Keys 2-3 years ago during one of those public meetings, and heard a senior Florida reef manager say the decline in the reefs was caused by "All those Canadians driving down here every winter in their SUV's, making Carbon Dioxide." (True quote-no one has to MAKE UP things reef managers say.) Now, it may well be that no one should drive SUV's, but it cannot be said enough times: bleaching has had NOTHING TO DO with the decline of Florida's reefs. Everyone reading this list should repeat after me-and Phil-NOTHING TO DO. And now we see that the new kid on the block, FRRP, will focus only on bleaching. Something is badly wrong. We don't need more science-the science has spoken eloquently. In...2000? (help me, Walt, Phil-when was it?) I was a member of a NOAA panel that evaluated all the reef monitoring programs in the Florida Keys. (Why was there more than one, you may ask? In fact, there were about six.) Our conclusion was that monitoring had done its job. (Monitoring can NEVER identify causes, although a good monitoring program can allow selection of hypotheses.) In this case, the monitoring programs, especially the FMRI program, had successfully documented the regional mass extinction under way in the Keys. And that was the panel's carefully-chosen phrase: "regional mass extinction." We recommended consolidation of the monitoring programs, and an immediate increase in funding designed to rank the various land-based threats, in order that action could be taken. We also recommended an outreach program. That may be the key to the Keys. Every citizen of Florida should be told that: 1. there is big trouble in the Keys, and that 2. the causes are all local. The managers will be reluctant to be too assertive-after all, they have Big Sugar and Big God-knows-what watching them. The impetus has to be bottom-up. To coin a phrase. And we reef scientists have to learn that we score our own points at the expense of the ecosystem. Mike On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but > no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach > a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty > fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about > studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right > in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this > years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the > built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in > continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of > a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the > losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps > there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many > people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not > simply > sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s > > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of > having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats > their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and > denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > > than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or > slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the > R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might > even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor > is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > > -- > Phillip Dustan Ph.D. > Department of Biology > College of Charleston > Charleston SC 29424 > (843) 953-8086 voice > (843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From chwkins at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 13:15:18 2006 From: chwkins at yahoo.com (Christopher Hawkins) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:15:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060221181518.99270.qmail@web32813.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Phil and everyone: Your shot across the bow is welcome by some of us who realize that the biology only holds so much promise for a solution, and that there are a suite of things that need to be employed in tandem with the biophysical sciences to address these issues. I am not sure where I stand about remnancy vs. resiliency. It has a bit of a chicken and the egg connotation to it. Are some reefs remnant because they are resilient? Are they now resilient because they are remnant, for whatever reason? It is a tough one to wrap your head around... I'd like to comment, though, on one part of your posting, and that is the notion that promoting competition among dive shops with a "R" scale. I would think that identifying a reef as an R3 would prompt management to look more towards limiting activities at that site, rather than a "rush to destroy it" approach. At first glance, I might suggest that such a scale would be useful, though. However, it is critical not just to understand the reef condition, but also the users of that reef(s). Specialization theory (a human dimensions tool) offers a framework to do this. With specialization, we know that there are is a continuum of users from low to highly specialized (e.g. PADI Open Water Divers to Nitrox Divers), and that highly specialized users are the ones most likey to obey regulations and support management actions (Ditton, Loomis, Choi, 1992; Salz and Loomis, 2005, Salz, Loomis and Finn, 2001; Bryan, 1977/2000). Directing those users with to an R3, R4, or R5 reef would be then become a management alternative. In addition, management alternatives such as placing only a few mooring bouys at the highest "R" sites, would seem like a good strategy. Of course, all of this depends on identifiying resilient or remnant reefs and then scaling them, which seems to be what is causing some problems. And on understanding the nature of the area's user groups, which is never done very methodically. I have just identified one potential way to like resiliency to a conservation mechanism. I believe there are others, but we need to know all of the tools available. Thanks. Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Marine and Coastal Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And probably haven't been for a long time. My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses that are far greater, supports this form of denial. Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply sewage But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, Carysfort R1, etc Maybe this might help create public awareness and political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even be up to R4 if conservation is successful. Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. From ricksanders at comcast.net Tue Feb 21 13:34:49 2006 From: ricksanders at comcast.net (Rick Sanders) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:34:49 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas References: <6.0.1.1.2.20060118164353.02559c00@mail.waquarium.org> <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CAE9A@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <004b01c63715$7fa4b760$650da8c0@manta> Dear Listers, I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find an image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been unable to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish brown color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each other in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped into more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm in width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if to crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what I am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a copy or link. Thanks very much in advance, Best regards, Rick Rick Sanders Deep Blue Solutions Media, PA 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net From kruer at 3rivers.net Tue Feb 21 15:27:21 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:27:21 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <43FB77A9.7050007@3rivers.net> Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil Dustan. But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true change in direction. There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the amazingly productive Keys (and no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, and no it should never be held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with problems much broader than simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying that the problem with seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important figure easily dispenses with all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and filling, thousands upon thousands of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc etc., See how easy it is. And it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself during some of the countless consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I refused to play along with the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys all would be OK. What a joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo is going to change much is wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions to upgrade the Key West plant to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything measurable? And we were promised that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds good but can't happen on a scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of the Keys as I began to see myself as a part of the problem. The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the Keys ecosystem and manage human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too much attention is focused on a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that most else would be protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's limited funds on a new facility in Key West is going to change much? Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as stand alone systems and the problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands continue to be lost and degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are trying legally to protect the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving activity (and associated impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the state and the state points to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have taken place but it's not working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - but it's obviously not enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live bottom and predictably now hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of miles of slow-degrading poly line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to replace them every year just to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by the tens of thousands daily, fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot long cruise ships plow up the bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone effectively turns a blind eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. Shallow water marine habitats throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are subjected to the disturbing and destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster boats of all types. People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is failing. The rate of loss and anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that is what matters. Large vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's great. But new leadership is needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? Catering to virtually every user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in ecosystem protection or even maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef management in the Keys as a success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New leadership is needed and that leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and address all issues throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And they need to be loudly supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has the most knowledge about what has been lost and is being lost. Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and other lists will lead to something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and misdirected effort. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply > sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > From szmanta at uncw.edu Tue Feb 21 17:33:52 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 17:33:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813BB7@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Hello Mike, Phil and Curtis: The problem with attributing all of the loss of coral in the Florida Keys to local human impacts, as you three have done in your comments, is that the same pattern of loss of live coral is being observed in remote places of the Bahamas and other small Caribbean islands with small or no human populations, no sewage to speak of and no cruise ships. To ignore the dramatic effect coral bleaching and subsequent disease outbreaks, on top of overfishing, have had on Keys and northern Caribbean corals since the mid-1990s and especially since the severe 1997-1998 back-to-back bleaching events, is not helpful to conservation or management efforts. Bleaching has reached reefs that are distant from direct human impact as well as the Keys, with similar effects on both. Overfishing is far more pervasive than water quality degradation because boats go everywhere to extract the last lobster and grouper. The healthiest Caribbean reefs, if one judges that based on live coral cover, that I have seen in a long while are those in the lower Caribbean where they have, for hydrographic and climatic reasons, not been as impacted by either bleaching or major storms: Reefs on the S side of Curacao and Bonaire still have more coral now than what I remember for places like PR and the USVI back in the 1960s and 1970s. And they have high coral cover within 1 km of where the cruise ships docks and next to the outflow from the desalination plant. And they have very high rates of coral recruitment and no algae even on boulders with no Diadema, and few fishes. Go figure! There are many reefs on the GBR with water quality conditions far worse than in the Florida Keys (in terms of turbidity, nutrient levels and such variables) with much higher coral cover and diversity. Ken Anthony is even showing corals on these turbid reefs feed on the detritus and have higher growth rates than corals on more offshore reefs. Florida reefs have a disadvantage of being at the northern limits of the climatic window for coral well being in the Atlantic province, with way too many severe winter and summer storms. These geographic limitations have existed for thousands of years and have limited coral reef growth over Holocene time frames. When I first visited Nassau reefs in 1971 and the Florida reefs during the 1977 symposium, when my frame of reference was Puerto Rican reefs, my opinion of Florida/Bahamas reefs was that they were puny and depauperate. Now they are even more depauperate. That is no excuse to abuse them, but to ignore the climatic factor is not helpful towards restoring or protecting them (if that is possible). Multiple factors are at work, and a single quick fix will not do the trick. Over-simplification and trying to crucify a single factor will not help society deal with these complex issues. Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Curtis Kruer Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 3:27 PM To: Phil Dustan Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil Dustan. But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true change in direction. There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the amazingly productive Keys (and no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, and no it should never be held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with problems much broader than simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying that the problem with seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important figure easily dispenses with all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and filling, thousands upon thousands of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc etc., See how easy it is. And it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself during some of the countless consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I refused to play along with the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys all would be OK. What a joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo is going to change much is wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions to upgrade the Key West plant to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything measurable? And we were promised that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds good but can't happen on a scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of the Keys as I began to see myself as a part of the problem. The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the Keys ecosystem and manage human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too much attention is focused on a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that most else would be protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's limited funds on a new facility in Key West is going to change much? Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as stand alone systems and the problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands continue to be lost and degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are trying legally to protect the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving activity (and associated impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the state and the state points to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have taken place but it's not working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - but it's obviously not enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live bottom and predictably now hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of miles of slow-degrading poly line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to replace them every year just to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by the tens of thousands daily, fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot long cruise ships plow up the bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone effectively turns a blind eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. Shallow water marine habitats throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are subjected to the disturbing and destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster boats of all types. People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is failing. The rate of loss and anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that is what matters. Large vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's great. But new leadership is needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? Catering to virtually every user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in ecosystem protection or even maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef management in the Keys as a success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New leadership is needed and that leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and address all issues throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And they need to be loudly supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has the most knowledge about what has been lost and is being lost. Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and other lists will lead to something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and misdirected effort. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I'd like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it's patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there's a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we've know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply > sewage......But still we look for bright spots. I think it's because it's > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It's been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > than resiliency, I'd favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc... Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it's a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From knudby at gmail.com Tue Feb 21 16:48:14 2006 From: knudby at gmail.com (Anders Knudby) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:48:14 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] instrument to measure water depths Message-ID: <551b8dba0602211348y1e58fb60y20da80776e676217@mail.gmail.com> Hi coral listers, I am looking for an instrument that I can use to measure consecutive substrate depths on a reef. Ideally something that I can place on or just above the substrate, press a button to take a measurement (for direct display or preferably download later), and then move on to the next point of measurement and press the button again. Quick and simple. I have found a couple of instruments (pressure transducers) that almost fit that specification, but not quite, and I would like to hear if anybody out there have already found exactly what I am looking for. If so please let me know. (sorry to post a monitoring-related question in the middle of the more important remnancy discussion, seems out of place, but I'm trying to do my PhD..... thus perhaps scoring my own points at the expense of the ecosystem) Best regards, Anders Knudby -- Anders Knudby PhD Candidate Department of Geography University of Waterloo, Canada phone: +1 519 888 4567 x7575 e-mail: knudby at gmail.com From pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr Tue Feb 21 18:52:43 2006 From: pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr (sandrine job) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:52:43 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] Coral farming In-Reply-To: <09599ED7-B06F-4340-9BBE-76B3B0CA8921@uh.edu> Message-ID: <20060221235243.68069.qmail@web25108.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Dear all, I am seeking for any information related to coral farms, especially farms made in situ. The best would be to send me email adresses or web sites of Coral Farms. Thanks to you all, Cheers, Sandrine JOB Eric Borneman a ?crit : Hello Hiroya: Thank you for the update on the Proceedings and I am greatly looking forward to seeing them and appreciate the work that has certainly been required to produce them. I am curious, though, about the printing. If the CD-ROM is already formatted, as it should be given the nature of the formatting required for submitted material, then any of thousands of print-on- demand printers should be able to produce bound volumes by a print-on- demand cost that can be from 1 to many thousands of copies. For example, one print-on-demand company found with a quick google search will print hardback copies (6x9) with full color covers, dust jackets, up to 500 pages and provide 10 free copies of the book for US $1000 and this includes free CD e-books and 30% royalties for each copy sold if they are the distributor and 50% of CD-ROM sales. I consider this to be quite expensive. I think others on this list I know who have written full color books over 500 pages would agree that we would not be writing (or selling) much if printing costs and selling prices were this high. While I don't have the details of the manuscript, the minimum order and costs seem very out of line with what I know about book publishing (which isn't much), having written two books. I think the cost of book series, such as Corals of the World, which are similarly large, colorful (which previous Proceedings have never been) and well made indicates what is possible. The costs of scientific publication have always been a mystery to me, to say the least, and in terms of most journals, an outrageous racket. If, however, there are very few orders for text-based copies I can see that the cost would be high, but I see no reason for it to be impossible for even one copy to be produced given the nature of POD technology today. I hope others on the list who have published books could comment further. Best, Eric Borneman Dept. of Biology and Biochemistry University of Houston Science and Research Bldg. II 4800 Calhoun Houston, TX 77204 On Feb 19, 2006, at 11:10 PM, hyamano at nies.go.jp wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th > ICRS, > Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. > > We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD- > ROMs will > be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send > it to > all the participants. > > For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. > However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the > print. If > the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop > printing the Proceedings. > > More news will be sent as soon as I hear. > > Best wishes, > > Hiroya Yamano > Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS > Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings > > ---- > Hiroya Yamano > UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement > BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia > Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 > Also at NIES > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.T?l?chargez la version beta. From hyamano at nies.go.jp Tue Feb 21 19:23:08 2006 From: hyamano at nies.go.jp (hyamano at nies.go.jp) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:23:08 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <20060222002306689.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Dear coral-listers, Thank you very much for sending comments, especially on the hard copies of the 10ICRS Proceedings. I forwarded the messages to the 10ICRS program committee and asked reconsideration. We will decide the contact information for the purchase and also the price of the CDs for non- participants, in addition to the price of the hard copies. I appreciate to have received some orders of the hard copies, but please do not send more orders to me before the next news. We should be very pleased if you could let us have some more time for the details. I will let you know the news as soon as I hear. Again, thank you very much for your cooperation and patience. Best wishes, Hiroya ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html ---- From cat64fish at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 20:49:22 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:49:22 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB77A9.7050007@3rivers.net> Message-ID: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi everyone, Certainly an interesting discussion on the fate of the Florida reefs. Not being from the US, and never having had the opportunity to visit the Florida Keys, I am unable to fully appreciate the extent fo the damage that has been done to that rich ecosystem. Mike, as usual, you have cut through the bs and succinctly stated the problem in the Florida Keys. I suspect similar situations occur wolrdwide, where reef systems are in decline (for example, I've heard from fishermen how their reefs have been destroyed by blast fishing caused by fishermen from the "other" island). While sitting on the fence, and agreeing that there needs to be more science directed at the reef ecosystem, the impacts would seem to far, far outweigh the need for more exacting science. Conservation, and perhaps even the more exacting word, preservation, is needed, if reefs are to survive the human onslaught. Someone mentioned (I am not sure of it is on this list or somewhere else) that it was a good ting that there are many coral species and only one human. Be that as it may, that one species has the capacity to totally destroy the diversity that exists today. Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place. MPAs managed in isolation, was something else that was brought up in this discussion. While it is undeniable (at least to me) that MPAs do help in the conservation of coral reefs and other marine ecosystems, the term MPA itself is an "isolationist" word, as it implies some sought of boundary. "Enlightened management plans" that look at the totality of the marine system, that will conserve and sustain our marine resources, understanding that it is inter-connected and intricately linked system, are what is needed. I suspect that part of the reason that scientists treat reef systems in isolation is that if they did not, then there would be no "scientific" papers (as we know them) in existence. The momentum of publishing, or doing publishable research, is probably what is limiting the science from expanding beyond its narrow confines. Reef managers on the other hand, must not only be biologists, but people managers, ecosystem managers, fund managers, and sometimes, visionaries, all rolled into one. Good luck finding such people in great enough quantity to "manage" even the existing MPAs. To round up, I agree with Mike that "people power" may be the way to go to get the necessary protection for our marine resources. "People cannot love, what they do not know", or so I've been told. While I cannot "love" the Florida Keys, I do love the coral reefs in my own backyard, and sometimes the wrangling that goes on between scientists, conservationists and politicians, while the reefs are slowly but surely being degraded, is more than I can bear. Holding out for coral reefs the world over Jeff --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. From Craig.Bonn at noaa.gov Wed Feb 22 09:44:49 2006 From: Craig.Bonn at noaa.gov (Craig S Bonn) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:44:49 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43FC78E1.10008@noaa.gov> Hi listers, I recently accepted a position with the Dry Tortugas NP where I will be coordinating a monitoring program within a new 47 square mile research natural area recently established within park boundaries where all consumptive practices will be prohibited. Diving and snorkeling will still be allowed and a system of mooring buoys has been established for boaters to tie up to within the RNA. I have worked in the Tortugas for the past six years and have witnessed myself the degradation that is occurring there-- some of the reefs are almost completely dead and covered in algae while others (Sherwood Forest in the northern portion of the TER) while healthier in terms of percent cover are also exhibiting signs of degradation and that it may simply be not how but when these reefs will suffer to the point of no return. I also know that there are so many variables involved in what is happening to our reefs on a global scale that the task at hand almost seems impossible especially when you listen to the doom sayers who state that the worlds reefs will be gone in a matter of years if nothing is done to correct the mistakes we have all made with regards to stewardship of our planet. If we take a look at the variables involved: water quality, over fishing, vessel groundings, seagrass dieoffs, urchin dieoffs, bleaching, coral disease, the possibility that our planet and our oceans are warming with subsequent melting of our polar regions and of course one of the biggest problems in my opinion is complete lack of concern by many. Lets admit it, some people simply dont care and I think this has a lot to do with the state our world is in now, cultural, religious, and political differences also play a role here but Im not going to get into that. Anyway, Im looking forward to the challenges that this new position will present to me and my colleagues and I guess what Im asking for is some advice. I am very concerned as many of you are as well and I would like to part of a new approach to management issues of not only the coral reefs of the world but our entire world. I believe that education an outreach could play an important role and will be one of my priorities along with others. Any advice would certainly be appreciated, perhaps efforts focused on small areas can have a spillover effect in terms of getting the public really involved, but I think its going to have to be a worldwide involvement if we really want to improve things. But its only a start, we have to finish, and send the right messages to generations of scientists coming behind us to better improve things so that they, and we, can perhaps begin to see positive changes taking place for the planet we all call home. thanks Craig Michael Risk wrote: >Hi Phil. > >Thanks you for crystallising the discussion, and articulating some of >my own concerns. One of the many problems is: > >"All politics is local." (Tip O'Neil, American politician) > >It is always easier to blame the external. One of my students was in >the back of a hall in the Keys 2-3 years ago during one of those public >meetings, and heard a senior Florida reef manager say the decline in >the reefs was caused by "All those Canadians driving down here every >winter in their SUV's, making Carbon Dioxide." (True quote-no one has >to MAKE UP things reef managers say.) > > >Now, it may well be that no one should drive SUV's, but it cannot be >said enough times: bleaching has had NOTHING TO DO with the decline of >Florida's reefs. Everyone reading this list should repeat after me-and >Phil-NOTHING TO DO. > >And now we see that the new kid on the block, FRRP, will focus only on >bleaching. Something is badly wrong. We don't need more science-the >science has spoken eloquently. > >In...2000? (help me, Walt, Phil-when was it?) I was a member of a NOAA >panel that evaluated all the reef monitoring programs in the Florida >Keys. (Why was there more than one, you may ask? In fact, there were >about six.) > >Our conclusion was that monitoring had done its job. (Monitoring can >NEVER identify causes, although a good monitoring program can allow >selection of hypotheses.) In this case, the monitoring programs, >especially the FMRI program, had successfully documented the regional >mass extinction under way in the Keys. And that was the panel's >carefully-chosen phrase: "regional mass extinction." > >We recommended consolidation of the monitoring programs, and an >immediate increase in funding designed to rank the various land-based >threats, in order that action could be taken. We also recommended an >outreach program. > >That may be the key to the Keys. Every citizen of Florida should be >told that: >1. there is big trouble in the Keys, and that >2. the causes are all local. > >The managers will be reluctant to be too assertive-after all, they have >Big Sugar and Big God-knows-what watching them. The impetus has to be >bottom-up. To coin a phrase. > >And we reef scientists have to learn that we score our own points at >the expense of the ecosystem. > >Mike > >On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 > Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Coral List, >> I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about >> >>healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but >>no >>one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And >>probably haven't been for a long time. >> >> My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach >>a >>true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my >>calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their >>living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The >>Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty >>fast >>too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about >>studies, >>monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right >>in >>front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, >> >>even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to >>protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this >>years >>ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or >>look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to >>think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the >>built >>it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in >>continuing >>to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of >>a >>far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the >>losses >>that are far greater, supports this form of denial. >> >> Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long >>time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps >>there >>are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many >>people >>fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage >>system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not >>simply >>sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s >> >>more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is >>hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, >>sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of >>having >>a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? >> >> It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats >>their >>young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and >>denial. >> The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather >> >>than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) >>that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or >>slower >>in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the >>R >>scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, >>Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and >>political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between >> >>dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 >> >>when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might >>even >>be up to R4 if conservation is successful. >> Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline >> >>downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we >>need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor >>is >>wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. >> Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just >>imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From kruer at 3rivers.net Wed Feb 22 12:27:54 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 10:27:54 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813BB7@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <43FC9F1A.5020204@3rivers.net> Dr. Szmant, Thanks for the note. You are a reef researcher and you love to research and explore reefs around the world and you agree that Florida's reefs are under multiple stresses, including due to their geographic location. I too began exploring Keys reefs in the 1970s and have witnessed the dramatic changes there. My approach is simply that management should start by dealing with the stresses that can realistically be managed (routine, easily identified, cumulative, physical impacts in particular and habitat degradation in general) and quit using issues like climate change as an excuse to do virtually nothing on a local level. It's getting old. To me that would be like us agreeing that due to its importance we should all start working towards stopping the melting of the Greenland ice sheets, and ignore local problems that unequivocally are trashing coastal resources on a daily basis. And don't forget that in the 1980s and 1990s the mantra from many outspoken reef types was that wastewater and other nutrients were killing Keys reefs. I participated in a couple of recent exchanges wherein a federal manager suggested that researchers were not provididng needed information for reef management (and more research was needed), while at the same time a researcher was stating that managers were not using data made available by researchers - and that direction needed to be given for what information was needed. Both argued that more research and information is needed for proper reef management and this is what I reject - the excuses for not curtailing destructive human practices that are obviously and directly degrading reef ecosystem resources. And I believe that the notion that we can completely decipher to the nth degree (or ever really know) what is going on with reefs (and many other natural systems) is a loser from the get-go, and very self-serving. I don't ignore climate change as you suggest (and I doubt that others do) but recognize and embrace the notion that it's here to stay and nothing that you or I can do individually will change that - but you and others prominent in the scientific and management community can individually make changes and help force changes that will help protect and conserve reef resources. If you truly want to help coral reef ecosystems argue for improved funding for broader and more effective management based on what we do know and less funding for research to try to learn (forever) what we don't know. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Szmant, Alina wrote: > Hello Mike, Phil and Curtis: > > The problem with attributing all of the loss of coral in the Florida > Keys to local human impacts, as you three have done in your comments, is > that the same pattern of loss of live coral is being observed in remote > places of the Bahamas and other small Caribbean islands with small or no > human populations, no sewage to speak of and no cruise ships. To ignore > the dramatic effect coral bleaching and subsequent disease outbreaks, on > top of overfishing, have had on Keys and northern Caribbean corals since > the mid-1990s and especially since the severe 1997-1998 back-to-back > bleaching events, is not helpful to conservation or management efforts. > Bleaching has reached reefs that are distant from direct human impact as > well as the Keys, with similar effects on both. Overfishing is far more > pervasive than water quality degradation because boats go everywhere to > extract the last lobster and grouper. The healthiest Caribbean reefs, if > one judges that based on live coral cover, that I have seen in a long > while are those in the lower Caribbean where they have, for hydrographic > and climatic reasons, not been as impacted by either bleaching or major > storms: Reefs on the S side of Curacao and Bonaire still have more > coral now than what I remember for places like PR and the USVI back in > the 1960s and 1970s. And they have high coral cover within 1 km of > where the cruise ships docks and next to the outflow from the > desalination plant. And they have very high rates of coral recruitment > and no algae even on boulders with no Diadema, and few fishes. Go > figure! > > There are many reefs on the GBR with water quality conditions far worse > than in the Florida Keys (in terms of turbidity, nutrient levels and > such variables) with much higher coral cover and diversity. Ken Anthony > is even showing corals on these turbid reefs feed on the detritus and > have higher growth rates than corals on more offshore reefs. Florida > reefs have a disadvantage of being at the northern limits of the > climatic window for coral well being in the Atlantic province, with way > too many severe winter and summer storms. These geographic limitations > have existed for thousands of years and have limited coral reef growth > over Holocene time frames. When I first visited Nassau reefs in 1971 > and the Florida reefs during the 1977 symposium, when my frame of > reference was Puerto Rican reefs, my opinion of Florida/Bahamas reefs > was that they were puny and depauperate. Now they are even more > depauperate. That is no excuse to abuse them, but to ignore the > climatic factor is not helpful towards restoring or protecting them (if > that is possible). Multiple factors are at work, and a single quick fix > will not do the trick. Over-simplification and trying to crucify a > single factor will not help society deal with these complex issues. > > Alina Szmant > > ******************************************************************* > Dr. Alina M. Szmant > Coral Reef Research Group > UNCW-Center for Marine Science > 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln > Wilmington NC 28409 > Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 > Cell: (910)200-3913 > email: szmanta at uncw.edu > Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta > ****************************************************************** > > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Curtis > Kruer > Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 3:27 PM > To: Phil Dustan > Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency > > Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil > Dustan. > But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true > change in direction. > > There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the > amazingly productive Keys (and > no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, > and no it should never be > held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). > > And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with > problems much broader than > simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying > that the problem with > seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important > figure easily dispenses with > all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and > filling, thousands upon thousands > of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc > etc., See how easy it is. And > it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself > during some of the countless > consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I > refused to play along with > the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys > all would be OK. What a > joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo > is going to change much is > wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions > to upgrade the Key West plant > to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything > measurable? And we were promised > that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds > good but can't happen on a > scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of > the Keys as I began to see > myself as a part of the problem. > > The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the > Keys ecosystem and manage > human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too > much attention is focused on > a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that > most else would be > protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's > limited funds on a new > facility in Key West is going to change much? > > Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as > stand alone systems and the > problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands > continue to be lost and > degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are > trying legally to protect > the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving > activity (and associated > impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the > state and the state points > to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have > taken place but it's not > working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - > but it's obviously not > enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live > bottom and predictably now > hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of > miles of slow-degrading poly > line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to > replace them every year just > to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by > the tens of thousands daily, > fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot > long cruise ships plow up the > bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone > effectively turns a blind > eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. > Shallow water marine habitats > throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are > subjected to the disturbing and > destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster > boats of all types. > > People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is > failing. The rate of loss and > anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that > is what matters. Large > vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's > great. But new leadership is > needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? > Catering to virtually every > user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in > ecosystem protection or even > maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef > management in the Keys as a > success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New > leadership is needed and that > leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and > address all issues > throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And > they need to be loudly > supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has > the most knowledge about what > has been lost and is being lost. > > Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and > other lists will lead to > something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and > misdirected effort. > > Thanks. > > Curtis Kruer > > > > > Phil Dustan wrote: > >>Dear Coral List, >> I'd like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion > > about > >>healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > > >>one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And >>probably haven't been for a long time. >> >> My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can > > reach a > >>true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my >>calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their >>living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The >>Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > > >>too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about > > studies, > >>monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right > > in > >>front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, >>even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to >>protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > > >>ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it's patchy, or not here, or >>look over there, there's a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to >>think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > > >>it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in > > continuing > >>to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > > >>far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the > > losses > >>that are far greater, supports this form of denial. >> >> Well, the water is too polluted and we've know this for a very > > long > >>time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > > >>are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many > > people > >>fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage >>system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not > > simply > >>sewage......But still we look for bright spots. I think it's because > > it's > >>more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is >>hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, >>sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of > > having > >>a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? >> >> It's been said by many that the coral reef science community > > eats their > >>young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and > > denial. > >> The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather >>than resiliency, I'd favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) >>that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or > > slower > >>in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the > > R > >>scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, >>Carysfort R1, etc... Maybe this might help create public awareness and > > >>political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between >>dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 >>when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > > >>be up to R4 if conservation is successful. >> Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the > > baseline > >>downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it's a problem that we >>need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor > > is > >>wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. >> Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > > >>imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? >> Phil >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From albert at ecology.su.se Wed Feb 22 09:46:53 2006 From: albert at ecology.su.se (Albert Norstrom) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:46:53 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Thanks Phil for starting what must be the most interesting discourse held on these boards in a long time. Some extremely thought-provoking comments all around. Yes, the Keys do seem to have it real bad, but this isn't a problem isolated to the Caribbean. I've conducted field trips in the Phillippines and Zanzibar during the past years and we are witnessing moderate-to-severe degradation in those regions too. The general feeling diving on reefs off the North coast of the Philippines is that of entering a ghost town. Fish abundnace is frighteningly low (you'd be lucky to see a parrotfish above 35cm after a week of diving), and community changes are rapidly manifesting themselves (we have observed some sites where soft corals are taking over completely following the bleaching event of '98). The causes behind this seem to be a confounding mixture of synergistic factors, just as in the Caribbean. As Alina points out, local factors alone (such as a decline water quality due to human terrestrial activities) cannot be ascertained to be the single driving forces behind the changes. As such, what speaks for a sudden improvement in reef conditon if we manage to address that single point - when the problems of climate change and lack of grazers (due to a brutal historical overfishing and disease) loom overhead? I found Jeffrey Lowes comment "Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place." interesting. How about I play devils advocate with you all for awhile. A few months ago, a very interesting point of discourse popped up during an internal discussion group at the department. The notion that ecosystems are intrinsically unpredictable and characterized by alternative system regimes is gaining more and more weight in the coral ecology community. It is thus interesting that we as a group (and society as a whole) are continually so ill-prepared for when such shifts occur. For 20 or so odd years the Caribbean has been dominated by macroalgae regime that seems pretty resilient itself (probably due a strengthening of certain internal feedback loops in that system over the years). I'm curious to know if any serious attempt has been made to investigate what goods and services are available from these new regimes (e.g. what kinds of fish can be harvested), and if fishing communities have adapted in any way, and if so are they succesful, to these new conditions? For sure, I'm an advocate for proactive measures to foster resilience of coral ecosystems. (Already an array of tools have been suggested, MPA's being the most popular at the moment, but in order to succeed with this I think we have to witness a more fundamental change in our economic and social structures. How on earth will MPA's solve anything if market economy dictates that its economically viable to continue overfishing an already ecologically depleted fish stock in the regions outside these sanctuaries? Forgive the side-note, back to being devils advocate again.) But it seems equally important to create institutional frameworks that can foster adaptivity in social systems. The new macroalgal regimes could be the norm for the Caribbean for the next unforeseeable future, much as (from my own personal observations, and research) other regimes are becoming more common in other biogeographic regions. Is it "fatalistic" to start looking around us and maybe accept that coral ecosystems are dynamic and alternative regimes are not something aberrant, but a phenomenon we could (or should) get accustomed to as conditions change. Maybe the pressing question is, not if we can restore reefs to some abstract baseline level, but can we predict these new regimes (I think never completely, seeing the complex nature of ecosystsm) and can we adapt to them? /Cheers Albert Norstr?m PhD Student Dept. Systems Ecology Natural Resource Management Group Stockholm University SE-106 91 Stockholm Sweden Tel: +46 (0)8 16 44 84 Email: albert at ecology.su.se Fax: +46 (0)8 15 84 17 Personal page: http://www.ecology.su.se/staff/personal.asp?id=119 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffrey Low" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 2:49 AM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency > Hi everyone, > > Certainly an interesting discussion on the fate of the Florida reefs. Not being from the US, and never having had the opportunity to visit the Florida Keys, I am unable to fully appreciate the extent fo the damage that has been done to that rich ecosystem. > > Mike, as usual, you have cut through the bs and succinctly stated the problem in the Florida Keys. I suspect similar situations occur wolrdwide, where reef systems are in decline (for example, I've heard from fishermen how their reefs have been destroyed by blast fishing caused by fishermen from the "other" island). > > While sitting on the fence, and agreeing that there needs to be more science directed at the reef ecosystem, the impacts would seem to far, far outweigh the need for more exacting science. Conservation, and perhaps even the more exacting word, preservation, is needed, if reefs are to survive the human onslaught. > > Someone mentioned (I am not sure of it is on this list or somewhere else) that it was a good ting that there are many coral species and only one human. Be that as it may, that one species has the capacity to totally destroy the diversity that exists today. > > Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place. > > MPAs managed in isolation, was something else that was brought up in this discussion. While it is undeniable (at least to me) that MPAs do help in the conservation of coral reefs and other marine ecosystems, the term MPA itself is an "isolationist" word, as it implies some sought of boundary. "Enlightened management plans" that look at the totality of the marine system, that will conserve and sustain our marine resources, understanding that it is inter-connected and intricately linked system, are what is needed. > > I suspect that part of the reason that scientists treat reef systems in isolation is that if they did not, then there would be no "scientific" papers (as we know them) in existence. The momentum of publishing, or doing publishable research, is probably what is limiting the science from expanding beyond its narrow confines. Reef managers on the other hand, must not only be biologists, but people managers, ecosystem managers, fund managers, and sometimes, visionaries, all rolled into one. Good luck finding such people in great enough quantity to "manage" even the existing MPAs. > > To round up, I agree with Mike that "people power" may be the way to go to get the necessary protection for our marine resources. "People cannot love, what they do not know", or so I've been told. While I cannot "love" the Florida Keys, I do love the coral reefs in my own backyard, and sometimes the wrangling that goes on between scientists, conservationists and politicians, while the reefs are slowly but surely being degraded, is more than I can bear. > > Holding out for coral reefs the world over > > Jeff > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From smiller at gate.net Wed Feb 22 11:15:20 2006 From: smiller at gate.net (Steven Miller) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:15:20 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef condition discussion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43FC8E18.1090108@gate.net> All politics is local? Tell that to Acropora and other coral species (and Diadema too) after Caribbean-wide waves of disease and bleaching helped push the system in Florida, already at the northern limit geographically of coral distribution in this part of the world, to - or over - the edge. Alina's response hit all the high points about why it's necessary to consider complexity (ecologically and I would add politically). Much of this was previously addressed in a series of letters published in Science Magazine (Science 17 June 2005 308) including a summary of work already accomplished or underway related to management of water quality in the Keys. To try and advance this discussion (without writing anything lengthy) rather than dwell too much on the negative, I think it's important to ask, "Is there any good news on the coral reef front?" Well, mostly not. BUT, we know we can do better with MPAs to help manage resource use (fishing, boating, diving) and to - at the very least - watch (research) what happens to fish and benthic communities when no-take protection is enforced. I like the idea that a 75 pound grouper is more valuable as a tourist attraction than on dinner plates, but some might argue that point. And many don't know this, but there remain spectacular places in the Keys with high cover and corals in relatively good condition, just not offshore where so much was previously considered in "good" condition because large stands of Acropora persisted in the days before bleaching and disease. Where are these sites? They are found near s;yc0bhokr npobno rouubs and xoyub=- hpbsl ngpui. Sorry, that was too easy, but the sites are real. Also, we know that Acropora is a fast-growing species and that under the right set of circumstances we could see massive proliferation over relatively short time scales, maybe even sufficient to match sea level rise that will result from global warming. Of course, coastal areas will also flood and that will degrade water quality, which might prevent more immediate coral growth - there's that complexity thing again. So what's my take home message? The sky might be falling - remember the chicken little thread so many years ago? You can duck and cover or you can do what you can to try and make things better. Personally, I think we are in trouble because environment (and not just coral reefs, but also our air and water and if some have their way endangered species too) is not a political issue these days. How does it get political? Environmentalism needs to become a social movement the way it was in the 1960s and 1970s. That will only happen when a thousand grassroots efforts at the local level merge and become something bigger. In that regard, I agree that all politics is local. Best regards. Steven Miller, Ph.D. Research Professor UNC Wilmington And a possibly relevant plug... see the trailer for a new movie about the Evolution and Intelligent Design Circus at www.flockofdodos.com, a feature documentary written and directed by former marine biologist Dr. Randy Olson (and exec produced by me). The movie is ultimately about communication of science in today's media landscape. Coral reef scientists have much to learn about communicating for the benefit of coral reefs and not personal agendas or career advancement (my personal and I'm sure provocative opinion, and not directed to the current thread). From delbeek at waquarium.org Wed Feb 22 20:27:56 2006 From: delbeek at waquarium.org (Charles Delbeek) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:27:56 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> References: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20060222152219.02a7f8d0@mail.waquarium.org> >It is very interesting to follow this discussion and draw parallels >with closed system reef aquariums. The problems of algal overgrowth, >nutrient load, temperature, water motion, nutrient uptake, >ultraviolet intensity, coral bleaching, coral tissue loss are ALL >encountered in closed systems. Though we do not have all the answers >we do know enough to control some of these factors and what effects >changing such factors can have on our miniature "ecosystems". I >strongly believe that some of the answers to problems facing wild >reefs can be mirrored in closed reef systems, and perhaps can yield >some answers as well. The rapid advancements in coral husbandry >opens up tremendous opportunities for coral researchers to >manipulate systems within a controlled setting. Aloha! J. Charles Delbeek M.Sc. Aquarium Biologist III Waikiki Aquarium, University of Hawaii 2777 Kalakaua Ave. Honolulu, HI, USA 96815 www.waquarium.org 808-923-9741 ext. 0 VOICE 808-923-1771 FAX From cat64fish at yahoo.com Wed Feb 22 21:25:26 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 10:25:26 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Message-ID: <20060223022526.80199.qmail@web35310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi Albert and others .... Does that phrase "... let me play devil's advocate ..." mean that I am the angel? ... :P Anyway, frivolity aside, you raise a very pertinent point, that coral ecosystems are dynamic, and that different "regimes" can arise, oftentimes from similar starting points. I am sure someone can list a series of papers and research showing this to be the case. However, what is the acceptable change that we (at this point in time) are willing to accept? I find myself asking, more and more, not questions that are quantifiable, like "What percent of coral cover is on the reef?" Or "How many species are there?" but "Can I accept seeing the change of *my* coral reefs from the reefal system to [an algal dominanted one] / [rubble reef] / [artificial reef]?". Monitoring seems to be something that almost *everyone* does. I do it ... and I've been doing for almost 20 years now (*geez*). But where has that gotten me ... or rather the reefs? I know it is in decline ... *everyone* who has worked in the field for any length of time knows this. Do we need to conduct another study to confirm the results of a study that has confirmed the decline of the reefs, which was conducted to confirm the results of a previous study? Even though the formation of coral reef system (or any other ecosystem, for that matter) may be inherently unpredictable - I don't think the question is whether we can predict what it will change into, but can we live with it changing, in the first place? Knowing that it was through our inaction that the changes occurred? Adaptation would be an inevitable result of change (or else you would die out), so I don't think it is a major part of the equation. On the "local" vs. "global" issue, I will sit on the fence on this one - I see the merits of both "camps". My feeling is that what occurs locally, will affect things globally. Take carbon emissions, for example. If, and this is a BIG IF, everyone were to convert to less carbon emitting vehicles, would [human-input to the magnitude of] global warming be reduced? If the answer is yes (to me it is a "yes"), then what needs to be in place before this conversion can come about? The changes would be in three main areas: - Political : "Local" politicians must push for the necessary legislative changes to limit the carbon emissions in all aspects of industry, and to enfrce them - Infrastructure : "Local" businesses must be ready to support technology that emits less carbon - Lifestyle changes need to be made : The most "local" aspect of all ... the people must embrace low / no carbon emiision technology (that might mean giving up that 10-litre, SUV-built-like-a-tank-off-roader-that-I-drive-in-the-city car) There would be global issues, of course .... even with carbon reducing industries, the shear magnitude of the human population would probably over whelm the ecosystems. The "global" issue, to my mind, isn't the fact that warming is occurring, but what the world (as in its people) are going to do about it. Cheers, Jeff --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. From martin_moe at yahoo.com Wed Feb 22 23:52:45 2006 From: martin_moe at yahoo.com (Martin Moe) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 20:52:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20060222152219.02a7f8d0@mail.waquarium.org> Message-ID: <20060223045245.67761.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com> Hi all, I?m always hesitant to comment in these threads since I?m not a ?real? coral reef scientist, but Steven Miller?s comment ?You can duck and cover or you can do what you can to try and make things better.? stimulated me to weigh in on this. There are efforts now underway to try to make things better on Florida?s coral reefs, but has been exceedingly difficult to get support for these efforts. As Steven said, the factors negatively affecting the coral reefs of Florida, Bahamas and the Caribbean are many and complex, but there are things that can be done to improve specific reef areas and perhaps even reef ecosystems. Site restoration of reef areas impacted by boat groundings and protection of the reefs through good management (MPA establishment) and water quality improvement are very important and essential to the future of the reefs, but even more important is to achieve ecological restoration. This may be an impossible task but we won?t know that if we don?t try. We can?t restore the reefs to the conditions that were present 100 or even 50 years ago but I am of the opinion that it is possible to achieve some level of ecological restoration if we make a serious effort to do so. I attended a talk that Alina Szmant gave in 1999 on her coral reef research and she greatly impressed me with the take home message of her talk that the decline of the reefs was caused more by the loss of biodiversity than anthropogenic nutrients. That made a lot of sense to me, and subsequent research indicates that she is correct. The loss of the Diadema sea urchins in 1983-4, the keystone herbivores of the Western Atlantic coral reefs, shifted the ecology of the reefs from coral dominance to macro algae dominance, a well accepted premise by most coral reef scientists. In addition, on Florida reefs, the almost total loss of populations of adult spiny lobster removed an important predator of coralivorus snails and other small predators that feed on living coral tissue and create opportunities for introduction of coral disease. If we were really serious about coral reef restoration, we would eliminate lobster fishing, recreational and commercial, on all offshore reefs past a certain distance from shore, perhaps 3 miles, and most important, really get serious about researching the possibility of restoration of pre plague population levels of Diadema on the reefs. These are not impossible tasks, but they do require concerted effort and scientific collaboration. And the lobster issue is also fraught with political mine fields. But these are real possibilities for ecological improvement of our coral reefs and to not explore them fully is grossly irresponsible. Ken Nedimyer and I did a experimental re establishment of Diadema on two small patch reefs in the Upper Keys in 2001 supported by the Florida Keys Marine Sanctuary (http://www.fknms.nos.noaa.gov/research_monitoring/report/diadema/diadema/.html) and this study well illustrated the positive effect a marginal population of Diadema can have on a Florida reef in the short space of one year. We are now working with the Mote Marine Laboratory to expand this work. There has also been work by The Nature Conversancy in the Keys on similar projects and there have been other studies as well. So research on ecological restoration has begun and hopefully will produce an effective reef restoration program while there is still reef left to restore. Martin A. Moe, Jr. Adjunct Scientist, Mote Marine Laboratory> > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From simmi_nuern at yahoo.com Thu Feb 23 04:10:55 2006 From: simmi_nuern at yahoo.com (Simone Nuernberger) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 01:10:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Coralliophila - Thank you Message-ID: <20060223091055.63682.qmail@web60313.mail.yahoo.com> Hello again, I just wanted to thank all the people who took the time to reply. Your emails were extremely helpful! Thank you very much! Best regards, Simone *************************************************************************** Simone N?rnberger (M.Sc.) simone_nuernberger at web.de Institute of Biology (Biological Oceanography) University of Southern Denmark DK-5230 Odense M --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. From andy_wb at email.com Thu Feb 23 04:25:39 2006 From: andy_wb at email.com (Andy Woods-Ballard) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:25:39 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Instrument to measure water depths. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060223092544.AF9DE1795C@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hi Anders Working in Mexico with Global Vision International, we used a handheld depth sounder, Plastimo Echotest II. I believe this has a range of about 80m. But more importantly for you, I think it is submersible and water proof to depths of 50m. It will not however store data and might need to be used with a slate for recording. Check out the product to be sure, but I hope this helps. Andy Woods-Ballard From ckappel at stanford.edu Thu Feb 23 12:49:05 2006 From: ckappel at stanford.edu (Carrie Vanessa Kappel) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:49:05 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas Message-ID: <1140716945.43fdf59126a88@webmail.stanford.edu> Hi Rick, >From your description, it sounds like what you were seeing was likely Microdictyon marinum, which has been observed to have strong summertime blooms on reefs in The Bahamas. We also saw high densities of Microdictyon during our surveys on North Andros in July 2002 and San Salvador in July 2003. It's not clear why this seaweed has increased so dramatically on Bahamian reefs in recent years, but I'd guess it's due to an interaction between nutrient runoff and grazing. Brian Lapointe and coauthors suggested that Microdictyon marinum might benefit from submarine groundwater discharge, whereby nutrients (in this case dissolved inorganic nitrogen) from land are transported to reefs offshore via groundwater fluxes through porous limestone (Lapointe et al. 2004. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. 298:275-301). The Littler and Littler Caribbean Reef Plants book has a nice picture of this species and others with which it might be confused. Cheers, Carrie Carrie Kappel Postdoctoral Fellow National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis University of California Santa Barbara 735 State Street, Suite 300 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 kappel at nceas.ucsb.edu 805.966.1677 w 805.892.2510 f 831.869.1503 m Permanent email address Carrie.Kappel at alumni.brown.edu ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:34:49 -0500 From: "Rick Sanders" Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas To: Message-ID: <004b01c63715$7fa4b760$650da8c0 at manta> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Dear Listers, I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find an image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been unable to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish brown color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each other in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped into more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm in width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if to crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what I am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a copy or link. Thanks very much in advance, Best regards, Rick Rick Sanders Deep Blue Solutions Media, PA 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net ------------------------- From Bprecht at pbsj.com Thu Feb 23 14:14:47 2006 From: Bprecht at pbsj.com (Precht, Bill) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:14:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef condition discussion Message-ID: <8511092CB6C11C4BB2632F61A82C620C03FD68B2@MIAMBX.pbsj.com> Dear Coral-List: I have read with great interest the recent thread on Florida's reef woes. In Steven Miller's recent message, he reminds us of the "reefs at risk" thread that discussed the very same issues on the Coral-List during June and July of 1998. It was in-part, as an outcome of that discussion that Steven and I decided to write a book chapter on this very subject entitled: Precht, W.F. and Miller, S.L.(in press) Ecological shifts along the Florida reef tract: the past as a key to the future: in Aronson, R.B. (ed) Geological Approaches to Coral Reef Ecology. Springer Verlag, NY If anyone is interested in a pre-print of this chapter please send me an email and I'll send it along. Cheers, Bill Precht Senior Scientist PBS&J - Division of Ecological Sciences Miami, FL From abaker at rsmas.miami.edu Thu Feb 23 14:26:34 2006 From: abaker at rsmas.miami.edu (Andrew Baker) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:26:34 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Laboratory Technician Position in Coral Molecular Ecology In-Reply-To: <10313196.1129601388953.JavaMail.SYSTEM@us-webcti01> Message-ID: <00e601c638af$0e8bc0f0$3d6fab81@DellD600> Funding is available for a Laboratory Technician in coral molecular ecology at the Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science (RSMAS) at the University of Miami, Florida, USA (www.rsmas.miami.edu ). The successful candidate will assume primary responsibility for the management and day-to-day operations of a molecular laboratory specializing in the ecology and systematics of corals and their symbiotic dinoflagellates ("zooxanthellae"), but will also be involved in physiological experimental work at the University's Experimental Hatchery facility, and coral reef fieldwork in Florida and elsewhere. Specific duties include extracting, purifying, archiving and analyzing DNA from coral samples, ordering and management of scientific supplies and reagents, managing undergraduate volunteers and interns, and working with the principal investigator, postdoctoral associate and graduate students on collaborative research projects. Ongoing research, funded principally by the US National Science Foundation, the Pew Institute for Ocean Science, and the Wildlife Conservation Society, uses both field survey and experimental approaches to study the responses of reef corals to climate change. The position is funded for three years, subject to satisfactory performance. The successful candidate will also be encouraged to pursue independent research and publication in related fields of interest. Candidates should have a Master's degree in molecular systematics, molecular ecology and/or population genetics, but candidates with Bachelor's degrees and an equivalent level of molecular experience will also be considered. Ideal candidates should be SCUBA-certified and be able to pass a physical examination to obtain scientific diver certification with the American Academy of Underwater Sciences (AAUS). Experience manipulating computer models of climate change (e.g., Hadley dataset) and/or maintaining outdoor aquarium systems is desirable, but not required. Position includes benefits and a retirement package. Please submit a current CV, names and contact information of three references, and a cover letter indicating research interests and experience electronically as a single .pdf file to Andrew Baker at abaker at rsmas.miami.edu. Applications are being accepted immediately. The position will remain open until filled. The University of Miami is an EEO/AA Employer. Please post this advertisement as appropriate. ___________________ Andrew C. Baker, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Division of Marine Biology and Fisheries Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science University of Miami 4600 Rickenbacker Cswy. Miami, FL 33149, USA Voice: +1 (305) 421-4642 Fax: +1 (305) 421-4600 From milviapin at yahoo.com Thu Feb 23 18:37:21 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:37:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Microdyction Message-ID: <20060223233721.57467.qmail@web50313.mail.yahoo.com> Dear listers, Large abundance of this algae were found in Namu atoll, Marshall islands, in November 2004. Lagoon and ocean sides were covered by the alga. No nutrients inputs are known in this slighlty populated atoll (300 people). Other outgrowth of this alga ave been noticed in different atolls although not to this extent. Thank you silvia Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. From ctwiliams at yahoo.com Fri Feb 24 00:43:55 2006 From: ctwiliams at yahoo.com (Tom Williams) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 21:43:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Microdyction In-Reply-To: <20060223233721.57467.qmail@web50313.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060224054355.9921.qmail@web50412.mail.yahoo.com> I worked in Majuro on ADB job for water supply/wastewater. Please provide more details. Simply put - where do they get the nitrate for the algal growth. 300 people = say =>75kg of nitrate + plus agriculture = NHNO People on septic tanks?? or seawater flushing?? Green grass lawns anywhere?? ?Any previous military operations on island?? Follow the nitrate. --- Silvia Pinca wrote: > Dear listers, > Large abundance of this algae were found in Namu > atoll, Marshall islands, in November 2004. Lagoon > and ocean sides were covered by the alga. No > nutrients inputs are known in this slighlty > populated atoll (300 people). Other outgrowth of > this alga ave been noticed in different atolls > although not to this extent. > Thank you > silvia > > > Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. > NRAS - Marshall Islands > Nature Resources Assessment Surveys > Research and Education for Conservation > spinca at nras-conservation.org > www.nras-conservation.org > > > --------------------------------- > Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get > pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Fri Feb 24 09:37:55 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:37:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] resiliency vs. "remnancy" vs. sustainability Message-ID: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> It would seem most people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what they used to be. The word resiliency is another word for resilient, which means an ability to quickly (usually) recover from a bad or unnatural condition--in the present case, we might assume from a previously pristine (i.e., uncorrupted by civilization) condition. I wonder if there are any such reefs left. I'm not so sure the word is being used correctly in our fellowship (more below). Although "remnancy" is not a real word, one would infer that our colleague Phil's intended usage would be as a means to describe the degree or condition of the reef after it has been adversely affected by civilization (more colloquially: trashed); that is, how it can be described as a remnant of its former "self" (biome?). I'm not so sure describing how much a reef has been adversely affected from its former condition is useful, though, since (as was pointed out) in many cases the reef in question may never have been adequately described (have any?), especially since they're always changing (evolving) anyway, thus few cases in which to measure past against current condition (I guess that's what started the whole discussion). But don't get me wrong: we should understand what is adversely affecting the reefs so we can stop or ameliorate the condition. I'm just not so sure "remnancy" has much practical application for science, although for political purposes it is probably perfectly practical. Instead, since we want to keep coral reefs in existence, and we want to provide them with the proper environment and support their vitality, where we can, perhaps a better word for purposes of marshaling our efforts is sustainability (I know I'm not the first to suggest this). Shouldn't we sustain the reefs until we remedy what ails them? (Now there's a concept: clean up the environment!) We can't really do anything to promote resiliency (how do you measure such an ecologically difficult concept?), although a conducive environment might be sustained or managed (i.e., "cleaned up") to allow full (how to measure?) resiliency. Is it possible to describe how all the members of the coral ecosystem interact to contribute to an integral resiliency? This is extremely difficult stuff, yet I would agree the goal is laudable and should be pursued. Okay, I know, the word sustain might imply leaving everything as it is, rather than making things better, but I'm just not comfortable with the word resiliency or "remnancy." Just my two cents... Cheers, Jim From deevon at bellsouth.net Fri Feb 24 10:10:09 2006 From: deevon at bellsouth.net (DeeVon Quirolo) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 10:10:09 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] resiliency vs. "remnancy" vs. sustainability In-Reply-To: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> References: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20060224100227.026dd6d8@bellsouth.net> Ok ok, I'll add my two cents. At this time for coral reefs, I think that what we need are efforts to RESTORE coral reefs, including immediate efforts to reduce heavy physical impacts and habitat destruction, as well as improve water quality from local and regional pollution sources and reduce global warming (although we may have already crossed the critical threshold there). We already know that corals need clear clean nutrient free waters to thrive and that they do not do well when battered by various user groups and of course natural events such as storms. I think the reef resiliency approach is flawed because it proposes to study healthy reefs, and looks the other way while those corals that need our help most are ignored. Applying what we know already to these reefs on the part of current managers would do wonders. There you have it. Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Executive Director, Reef Relief At 09:37 AM 2/24/2006, Jim Hendee wrote: >It would seem most people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what >they used to be. > >The word resiliency is another word for resilient, which means an >ability to quickly (usually) recover from a bad or unnatural >condition--in the present case, we might assume from a previously >pristine (i.e., uncorrupted by civilization) condition. I wonder if >there are any such reefs left. I'm not so sure the word is being used >correctly in our fellowship (more below). > >Although "remnancy" is not a real word, one would infer that our >colleague Phil's intended usage would be as a means to describe the >degree or condition of the reef after it has been adversely affected by >civilization (more colloquially: trashed); that is, how it can be >described as a remnant of its former "self" (biome?). I'm not so sure >describing how much a reef has been adversely affected from its former >condition is useful, though, since (as was pointed out) in many cases >the reef in question may never have been adequately described (have >any?), especially since they're always changing (evolving) anyway, thus >few cases in which to measure past against current condition (I guess >that's what started the whole discussion). But don't get me wrong: we >should understand what is adversely affecting the reefs so we can stop >or ameliorate the condition. I'm just not so sure "remnancy" has much >practical application for science, although for political purposes it is >probably perfectly practical. > >Instead, since we want to keep coral reefs in existence, and we want to >provide them with the proper environment and support their vitality, >where we can, perhaps a better word for purposes of marshaling our >efforts is sustainability (I know I'm not the first to suggest this). >Shouldn't we sustain the reefs until we remedy what ails them? (Now >there's a concept: clean up the environment!) We can't really do >anything to promote resiliency (how do you measure such an ecologically >difficult concept?), although a conducive environment might be sustained >or managed (i.e., "cleaned up") to allow full (how to measure?) >resiliency. Is it possible to describe how all the members of the >coral ecosystem interact to contribute to an integral resiliency? This >is extremely difficult stuff, yet I would agree the goal is laudable and >should be pursued. > >Okay, I know, the word sustain might imply leaving everything as it is, >rather than making things better, but I'm just not comfortable with the >word resiliency or "remnancy." > >Just my two cents... > > Cheers, > Jim > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From dustanp at cofc.edu Fri Feb 24 12:23:45 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 12:23:45 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Message-ID: <43FF4121.6040400@cofc.edu> Dear Colleagues, Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote and less remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own history and ecology. Let?s face it: The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human reproductive success. Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the radar screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities (along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying and we have got to do more. As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we are going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect?.. And the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost every reef on the planet. This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal agency, is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think can be done right now as well as over the long term? Thanks, Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Fri Feb 24 15:58:39 2006 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Gene Shinn) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Not what they used to be Message-ID: >>I have to agree with Jim Hendee when he wrote, "It would seem most >>people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what they used to >>be." As a geologist I can honestly agree that Holocene reefs are >>not what they "used to be" during the Pleistocene, and they were >>not what they "used to be" earlier during the Pliocene, and they >>certainly were not what "they used to be" during the Lower >>Cretaceous, (and there were hardly any during the Upper Cretaceous) >>and then there are the well known Permian reefs which were not what >>they "used to be" during the Cambrian. >>Yes, nothing is what "it used to be." May be we just need to take a >>longer view of things. Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida Marine Science Center (room 204) 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu Fri Feb 24 14:42:13 2006 From: rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu (Richard Grigg) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:42:13 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <43FF4121.6040400@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let?s face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 03:45:17 2006 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E. Strong) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 03:45:17 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <4400191D.6040105@noaa.gov> Hi Phil, Even Plenary talk at Ocean Sciences here in Hawaii this week...George Philander...claims the evidence is not that clear... Cheers, Al Richard Grigg wrote: >Phil, > > Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > > Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Colleagues, >> Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >>thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >>years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >>continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >>thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. >> We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote >>and less >>remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >>different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >>nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >>diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >>Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >>cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >>signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >>blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >>history and ecology. >> >>Let?s face it: >> The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >>varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >>ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >>record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >>in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >>have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >>outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >>its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >>seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >>in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >>spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >>Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >>reproductive success. >> >> Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the >>radar >>screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >>of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >>opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >>(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >>health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >>reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >>earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >>and we have got to do more. >> >> As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >>resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >>scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >>everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >>resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >>ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >>with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >>ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. >> >> As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we >>are >>going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >>list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >>should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >>scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >>could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >>example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >>of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >>health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >>concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >>resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >>simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >>lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >>still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >>exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >>sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect?.. And >>the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >>had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >>every reef on the planet. >> >> This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal >>agency, >>is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >>reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >>process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >>in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >>on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >>forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >>of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >>can be done right now as well as over the long term? >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 04:14:00 2006 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E. Strong) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 04:14:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] "Caribbean" Bleaching Verification needed - Moderate to Light to No Message-ID: <44001FD8.1030507@noaa.gov> Information sought: Over the next month Coral Reef Watch is hoping to finalize feedback from the field for the 2005 Caribbean bleaching event for issuing a report. At present this appears to be the most well documented bleaching event ever conducted....for all of you who have provided information to date: THANK YOU! Nevertheless we are still missing those "negative" reports that are needed to fill out the other end of the bleaching spectrum in areas where minimal bleaching was observed. From our HotSpot DHWs we expect those regions might include (but not necessarily limited to): ...Bermuda ...Bonaire...Curacao...Aruba and possibly ...Belize. Can any of you provide verification to Coral Reef Watch over the next few weeks for these more fortunate areas?? Please send your info to: Mark Eakin and/or Jessica Morgan. Thanks, Al Strong Coral Reef Watch From mtupper at picrc.org Sat Feb 25 02:00:14 2006 From: mtupper at picrc.org (Mark Tupper) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 16:00:14 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <000e01c639d9$23c94fc0$63c8c814@TUPPER> Rick Grigg wrote: "Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations." Isn't that just a matter of semantics? There are many dead or dying reefs in the Pacific, the Indian Ocean and Caribbean, and probably everwhere that coral reefs are found. So one could say, as Phil Dustan did, that "coral reefs are dying all over the world". However, since there are also healthy reefs in all of these places, someone who's agenda did not include coral reef conservation could just as easily say "coral reefs are healthy all over the world." I have heard exactly that claim from several politicians and agency spokespeople in the last few years. Rick is right, though, in that sweeping generalizations are not helpful to management of coral reefs (or any other resource). If one "side" makes sweeping generalizations to support their view, it becomes easier for others to support an opposing viewpoint with their own generalizations. I think that it's important to be as specific and factual as possible when emphasizing the need for coral reef conservation. It's much harder to argue against specifics than generalities. Having said that, I liked Phil's idea about finding a set of action items we could use to move forward now. Cheers, Mark Dr. Mark H Tupper, Senior Scientist Palau International Coral Reef Center PO Box 7086, Koror, Palau 96940 tel (680) 488-6950; fax (680) 488-6951 and Adjunct Research Associate University of Guam Marine Laboratory UOG Station, Mangilao, Guam 96923, USA tel (671) 735-2375; fax (671) 734-6767 From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 07:16:55 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 07:16:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Message-ID: <14f78414cb3b.14cb3b14f784@noaa.gov> Hiya, Phil, Concerning your quote: "Lots of us have struggled with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind." I think this is a more tractable approach when you consider finite financial resources and manhours (peoplehours?) to throw at the problem. What I'm getting at is that defining an organism or ecosystem in terms of the "normal" environment (i.e., that which promotes optimal vitality) may be an easier way to present the problem to the public. For instance, look at the Goreau and Hayes (1994) concept and Al Strong's presentation and further elucidation of the concept to the public on how HotSpots (unseasonably high sea temperatures) coincide with bleaching events: it's an easier way for the public to understand large-scale environmental stress and the result, rather than trying to explain all the actual physiology behind the phenomenon, which is still not totally understood. I believe Basset Maguire had in mind a "niche response structure" idea years ago which described organisms as a response to their environment, and if I remember correctly, he tried to quantify that for selected species. Maybe the same approach is valid for coral ecosystems. That may be easier than trying to define "ecosystem vitality" in terms of each organism's "health," a difficult concept to quantify. Defining "ecosystem health" would seem to be fraught with unending debate on what constitutes each contributing organism's normal (uncompromised?) lifecycle. (Again, I'm not saying we shouldn't try to undertake such research, and unending debate is what all science needs and likes--I'm mainly trying to get at a way to awaken the public and policy makers.) Anyway, I would like to hear of the approaches you mention, and I would vote that defining the recent historical and current physical environment for each major coral reef area as one of the 8-10 action items you mention. This should be a fundamental part of any "ecosystem vitality index," at least in my mind. This would also give us a platform from which to say, "This is how it was when corals were doing well, and this is how it is now, and corals are not doing well," without having to explain the physiology of why this is so. This would also give us a solid comparison basis for understanding why one reef ecosystem in the Pacific is doing swimmingly (so to speak), and another is not. I think the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force and the Interntational Coral Reef Initiative and NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation Program and other groups have already listed this as a goal, but I think it's an important one for your list. In fact, if you cross-compare a lot of the conservation groups' action items, I think you could probably come up with 8-10 items in a prioritized list most would agree upon. In other words, a lot of people are already working on these problems, and it is extremely difficult to make decisions on what activities to fund, but I think what you are also saying is we need to shake the tree a little harder. I have no suggestion on how to do that! [Mea culpa: We at NOAA/AOML are already compiling physical environmental data and establishing environmental indices, so this whole rap of course appears self-serving and provincially contrived. Hey, it's all I know, and at least I'm being honest about it!] Okay, that makes 4 cents from me... :) Cheers, Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil Dustan Date: Friday, February 24, 2006 12:23 pm Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 > Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most > interesting > thread. It also reminds me...[etc.] From cat64fish at yahoo.com Sat Feb 25 08:52:17 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:52:17 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <4400191D.6040105@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <20060225135217.56489.qmail@web35313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> It boggles the mind (ok, just mine) that some one at a PLENARY talk could say something like this. To say that there is evidence of reefs that have been impacted, and reefs that have not, I can understand ... but the "evidence is not clear"? .... *shakes head in disbelief and disgust* Jeff "Alan E. Strong" wrote: Hi Phil, Even Plenary talk at Ocean Sciences here in Hawaii this week...George Philander...claims the evidence is not that clear... Cheers, Al Richard Grigg wrote: >Phil, > > Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > > Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Colleagues, >> Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >>thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >>years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >>continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >>thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. >> We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote >>and less >>remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >>different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >>nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >>diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >>Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >>cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >>signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >>blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >>history and ecology. >> >>Let?s face it: >> The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >>varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >>ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >>record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >>in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >>have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >>outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >>its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >>seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >>in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >>spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >>Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >>reproductive success. >> >> Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the >>radar >>screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >>of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >>opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >>(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >>health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >>reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >>earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >>and we have got to do more. >> >> As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >>resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >>scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >>everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >>resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >>ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >>with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >>ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. >> >> As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we >>are >>going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >>list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >>should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >>scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >>could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >>example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >>of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >>health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >>concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >>resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >>simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >>lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >>still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >>exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >>sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >>the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >>had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >>every reef on the planet. >> >> This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal >>agency, >>is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >>reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >>process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >>in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >>on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >>forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >>of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >>can be done right now as well as over the long term? >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 1GB free storage! From lesk at bu.edu Sat Feb 25 11:03:06 2006 From: lesk at bu.edu (lesk at bu.edu) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:03:06 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060225110306.0iwtfp3s0kcg84sw@www.bu.edu> Dear Colleagues, It is extremely important that we converge on a common and consistant view on coral reef health that we can convey to the lay public. We must also speak precisely when referring to any particular symptom of coral reef health on a global scale. I challenge anybody to produce data demonstrating that the tropical west Atlantic coral reefs have improved in condition or remained at level condition, by any measure you wish, over the past 25 years. That does not mean that the changes are irreversible or unprecedented in deep time, Gene. It only means that it is a sad thing for us and for our childern that this is happening at this particular time, for we now cause this decline knowingly and deliberately, recovery will likely be a very lengthy process, and we are seem to be doing our best to inhibit even that. The long view will always be there to make us feel better in some existential sense, but it is no balm to those of us who wish to enjoy and benefit from coral reefs during our lives and the lives of our children and grandchildren. Indo-Pacific coral reefs exhibit a vigorous ability to bounce back from denudation or phase shift, so long as there is a stable physical substratum on which they can rebuild (dynamite rubble piles are not very good for this). However, the proportion of reef surface that is in a disturbed, regenerating state at any given time, and more importantly, the size-frequency distribution of these disturbances, looks very odd and very different than when I was a graduate student. Are we using the right data to characterize and track these changes, Rick? Because the Pacific is still more robust than the Atlantic, there is much of concern that we can choose to overlook if that is our bias. We'd better be careful not to be too easily reassured by the positive signs that coral reefs in the Pacific could hold their own, given the chance...because they by and large are not being given the chance. The pace and extent of bleaching alone is awesome. Who is coming forward to call this a non-event, or our response to it exagerated and misplaced? Who is saying that overfishing is something that will have no effect on reefs worth worrying about, and that we can ignore it? Who is saying that the industrialization of reef destruction is not a real thing worth keeping in check? Who is saying with confidence that the earth is not getting warmer, that bleaching is not more frequent and severe, or that corals will definitely adapt to these changes and that the world shall remain much as wonderful as it has always been for us, no matter what we do? So what gentle hand is it, exactly that Gene and Rick wish to lay upon the scene? Les Kaufman From szmanta at uncw.edu Sat Feb 25 08:50:30 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 08:50:30 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 3 References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From anderson at africaonline.co.tz Sat Feb 25 12:38:51 2006 From: anderson at africaonline.co.tz (Jim Anderson) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 20:38:51 +0300 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence - Effect of Bombing References: Message-ID: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> Dear Listers, Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is sibylle at chumbeisland.com] Jim Anderson, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. From manfrino at reefresearch.org Sat Feb 25 12:55:45 2006 From: manfrino at reefresearch.org (Carrie Manfrino) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:55:45 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Summer Coral Reef Internship and Conservation Programs at the Little Cayman Research Centre Message-ID: <014101c63a34$b5315f60$2f01a8c0@CPQ10443900021> Summer Coral Reef Research Internship -a four-week program through Rutgers University Study Abroad at the Little Cayman Research Centre >From July 15 - August 10 2006, the Central Caribbean Marine Institute (CCMI) offers a four-week voluntary research internship program through Rutgers University's Institute of Marine & Coastal Sciences. This program is an opportunity for graduate students and conservation professionals (a few advanced undergraduates may be accepted) to gain advanced underwater research experience. The goals of the program are to train participants in coral ecology protocols and to provide scientifically usable data to assist CCMI in its ecosystem monitoring and coral disease research initiatives. For more information, go to www.reefresearch.org and click on educational and field programs where students will find full details on program cost, credits, registration process, and activities. An Introduction to Tropical Marine Conservation & Field Research Methodologies - a one-week Tropical Marine Conservation course at the Little Cayman Research Centre >From June 23-30 2006, the Central Caribbean Marine Institute offers a one week course at the Little Cayman Research Centre designed to introduce undergraduates to the biology and ecology of tropical marine habitats and to the basics of field research. Students will come away with a strong understanding of the conservation challenge associated with protecting rapidly declining coral reef systems and be prepared to take more advanced research courses or internships. For more information on this course offered through Kean University's Travelearn program, go to www.reefresearch.org and click on educational and field programs where students will find full details on program cost, credits, registration process, and activities. Central Caribbean Marine Institute www.reefresearch.org Dr. Carrie Manfrino, President P.O. Box 1461 Princeton, NJ 08540 Ph:(609) 933-4559 Caribbean Headquarters Little Cayman Research Centre North Coast Road P.O. Box 37 Little Cayman, Cayman Islands (345) 926-2789 From kruer at 3rivers.net Sat Feb 25 14:22:48 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:22:48 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence References: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> Message-ID: <4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net> Folks, In just a few days we've gone from a discussion of reef problems and degradation in the Florida Keys, and how best to approach them after all these years, to a global (and even geologic time, which I too find foolish) focus promoted by US scientists. And the more global the view, the more complicated and diverse the opinions about what is going on and what should be done (if anything) become. And I suspect that those who still question worldwide reef problems are limiting their view to the role of climate change. So what a great irony today to read Anderson's concern of dynamite fishing increasing on reefs in Tanzania. While US NOAA scientists continually move the target and encourage us to think big. Keys problems don't rise to the level of dynamite fishing but the end result may be the same. My suggestions are simply to do what we can locally in places like the Florida Keys to deal with obvious problems, not mysteries - but we're not even close to doing what is possible to protect and conserve the place. In light of the fact that the budget of NOAA's Habitat Conservation Division and other programs have been cut nationally that will only be more difficult in the future. Time to come home. Curtis Kruer ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim Anderson wrote: > Dear Listers, > > Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from > episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet > bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any > prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars > that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? > > The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the > fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast > becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are > pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district > governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those > who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that > network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is > sibylle at chumbeisland.com] > > Jim Anderson, > Dar es Salaam, > Tanzania. > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From phoetjes at cura.net Sat Feb 25 20:45:29 2006 From: phoetjes at cura.net (Paul Hoetjes) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence In-Reply-To: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> 4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net References: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> 4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net Message-ID: <44010839.4050303@cura.net> This has been a most stirring discussion, and I believe very much to the point of what those of us who are extremely worried about the future of coral reefs as we know them, are trying to do. As Les said we really need a common and consistent viewpoint, and that will need to focus down on particulars and concrete activities, and not stay afloat on the 'big' picture, whether it be global or geological. Though thank you Alina for putting things so eloquently depressing. Local people are experiencing this unprecedented (Gene: in the sense that we humans have never experienced it before, AND we are actually causing it) disaster that is befalling our reefs. Whether it be in Florida, or Tanzania, or down here in Curacao in the Southern Caribbean, those of us old enough to know the reefs at the time when reef science really started coming into its own in the sixties, we experienced their demise (not decline, let's face it the reefs of the sixties are dead, what we still have are pale ghosts of them) in disaster after disaster. First it was spearfishing with world championship tournaments moving from place to place in the sixties and early seventies, when everyone was spearfishing and within ten years every big fish was gone anywhere that was accessible to divers. Then (in the Caribbean) the Diadema die-off, completely changing the reef as we knew it, and followed by an insidious wasting away of shallow water reefs (and I mean shallow, 1-4 ft deep, yes there was actual reef at those shallow depths in those days in the Caribbean!). Then the white-band disease neatly removed miles and miles of Acropora cervicornis forests. Then in the nineties bleaching and yellow-blotch disease started in on our remaining reef infrastructure. What was left standing was now called 'coral reef', and it was still magnificent, and although we did start to worry by then, nobody really believed that the dire predictions of the ISRS meeting in the early nineties that we would lose 20-40 % of our (still remaining) reefs within a generation, would come true. But, we had white plague and more bleaching and increasing numbers of hurricanes wreaking havoc on the weakened reef structure, and 15 years later we have a prediction that in twenty years we will loose 40 % of what is left if we don't do something. What we should say is that in another 20 years we may have 10 % of our reefs left! Sorry for this somewhat lengthy introduction, but we cannot keep on pretending everything is hunky dory, and oh, since we don't have any reefs left that are a shadow of what they once were, let's call some of the hardiest weed patches that are so adapted to inhospitable circumstance that most of the changes going on elsewhere left them mostly untouched, let's call those 'resilient' reefs, and focus all our meager resources on protecting those. Oh, oh, and guess what, since nothing seems to have been able to kill these little hardy patches, protecting them is a good bet since we're likely to be succesful even if we can't stop all the causes that are killing all the other reefs. I feel that this focusing on 'resilient' reefs is confusing the issues. It's a giving up on trying to stop the causes of reef death. We can be happy that there are still some areas that look remotely like a reef used to, but we can't lower our standards and forget about what a reef once was. We need to keep fighting to protect all our coasts with an eye to reef preservation, not just those pieces of coast with 'resilient' reefs and elsewhere giving a free reign to developers and erosion and overfishing and irresponsible boating and pollution and septic tanks. Those need to be controlled effectively, everywhere, leaving only a few 'resilient' areas where people can still behave unsustainably. That is what resilience should mean, places that you can't destroy because they've already been completely trashed (and we have plenty of those). If we can achieve only that much, restrict people's activities directly affecting reefs to recreational reserves where they can't do much damage, then we can maybe start worrying about really combating global warming instead of just talking about it. As it stands, all our reefs will have been killed long before global warming will really get it's licks in. So, speaking from an area where reefs are still in somewhat better shape than elsewhere in the region, in summary: There are no reefs left in anything approaching untouched condition. Diseases, and (because of?) overfishing, insiduous pollution and siltation, not just bleaching, have taken care of most of the original reefs. Focusing protection on those reefs that apparently had least need of protection over the past 40 years (resilient reefs) is a cop out. We need to protect all reefs (or what can still with leniency be called reefs). We need to protect them from such 'easy' (well, at least clear cut) things to control as human destructiveness and gregariousness. PS, I'm writing this from a non-airconditioned house in the tropics, I drive a fuel efficient small car, so I do my bit against global warming (though I do have a computer and a television and leave more lights on than strictly necessary, sorry). Cheers, Paul Hoetjes Dept. of Environment Netherlands Antilles Curtis Kruer wrote: >Folks, > >In just a few days we've gone from a discussion of reef problems and degradation in the Florida >Keys, and how best to approach them after all these years, to a global (and even geologic time, >which I too find foolish) focus promoted by US scientists. And the more global the view, the more >complicated and diverse the opinions about what is going on and what should be done (if anything) >become. > >And I suspect that those who still question worldwide reef problems are limiting their view to the >role of climate change. So what a great irony today to read Anderson's concern of dynamite fishing >increasing on reefs in Tanzania. While US NOAA scientists continually move the target and encourage >us to think big. Keys problems don't rise to the level of dynamite fishing but the end result may be >the same. My suggestions are simply to do what we can locally in places like the Florida Keys to >deal with obvious problems, not mysteries - but we're not even close to doing what is possible to >protect and conserve the place. In light of the fact that the budget of NOAA's Habitat Conservation >Division and other programs have been cut nationally that will only be more difficult in the future. > Time to come home. > >Curtis Kruer > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > >Jim Anderson wrote: > > >>Dear Listers, >> >>Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from >>episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet >>bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any >>prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars >>that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? >> >>The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the >>fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast >>becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are >>pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district >>governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those >>who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that >>network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is >>sibylle at chumbeisland.com] >> >>Jim Anderson, >>Dar es Salaam, >>Tanzania. >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> -- Paul C. Hoetjes Senior Policy Advisor Department of Environment & Nature (MINA) Ministry of Public Health & Social Development (VSO) Schouwburgweg 26 (APNA building) Cura?ao Netherlands Antilles tel. +(599-9)466-9307; fax: +(599-9)461-0254 e-mail: paul at mina.vomil.an =========================================== -- http://mina.vomil.an -- =========================================== This message has been scanned for Spam and Virus by CuraNet. From jhocevar at dialb.greenpeace.org Sat Feb 25 22:31:44 2006 From: jhocevar at dialb.greenpeace.org (John Hocevar) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:31:44 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] consensus statement References: Message-ID: <277f01c63a85$3ddc58b0$fc02a8c0@Bolivar> Greetings, I'm enjoying this discussion. While it is admittedly frustrating to see some of the conversation focusing on semantics rather than the seriousness of the threats to coral reefs, it would appear that most, if not all, would agree that there is an observable trend of reef decline, and that anthropogenic impacts are among the primary causes. Global Warming and its more direct and potentially devastating cousin Acidification would present enormous challenges for conservationists even if these burdens were being placed on the shoulders of pristine reefs. Of course, that is hardly the case, as erosion, high nutrient run-off, and toxic pollution have already taken a toll. Fishing has done a job on reefs as well, whether by removing algal grazers or even by dynamiting or poisoning. There is no doubt need for exploration of the degree to which the above statement is true in different regions, and the degree to which the above factors are responsible for past declines or future threats. For the most part, though, it seems that this has been sufficiently well established. Is the general public aware of this situation? Are policy makers placing solutions high enough on their agendas? Clearly not. I strongly support Phil Dustan's proposal for production of a consensus statement (in this case, probably a sign-on statement) of actions that can be taken to conserve coral reefs. My hope is that this community will not shy away from addressing the need to reduce consumption of fossil fuels, unsustainable fishing practices, or coastal development. Human behaviors are contributing to reef decline, so policies must be created to guide changes in those behaviors. If those who best understand the problems are unwilling to propose these changes, there is little hope that this decline can be slowed, much less halted or turned around. As someone who decided to leave academia for conservation advocacy, I can offer to help bring together environmental organizations to broadcast your concerns and recommendations to a wider audience. A coalition of a broad spectrum of organizations representing millions of people working to communicate a solution-oriented scientific consensus on the coral reef crisis would be a strong force for reef conservation. (This would not occur in a vacuum; any successful collaboration of this kind would utilize existing networks and build on past statements.) John Hocevar Oceans Specialist Greenpeace USA Office: 512 454-6140 Cel: 512 577-3868 From estherborell at yahoo.co.uk Sun Feb 26 02:13:43 2006 From: estherborell at yahoo.co.uk (Esther Borell) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 07:13:43 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? In-Reply-To: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <20060226071343.24908.qmail@web86912.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hi Alina and all others, I think your letter has not only contextualized our ?reef problems? but also hit a nerve. Its time to change our dogma. Its time to strip down the fancy costume of sustainability. I sometimes even wonder whether this word was invented to keep social economists in business. I don?t want to see them unemployed, the contrary, but I believe that sustainability, as a concept needs to be reinvented. The red queen is running faster than ever, unable to not only maintain her position, but even starting to fall behind. I am currently based in southeast Sulawesi, alleged centre of coral reef biodiversity but I am placing a safe bet that 70% of reefs here in the Spermonde archipel are very ill, losing their diversity, maybe not like rainforests in %s, not yet but it?s probably only a matter of time ? on an ecological, not geological time scale. Diving reminds me of walking along the Via Appia in Rome, looking at the remains of the past, providing faint evidence of how ?it?used be. Many of the reefs here look like rubble deserts. To see fish one has to pay extra entrance fee. I have counted 7 bombs on a one and a half our dive the other day. Reefs here don?t seem to suffer from bleaching (ironically I am researching just that) but from structural devastation (bombing), insane overfishing and severe eutrophication. Most corals of the inner and middle shelf within this archipelago are heavily infested by all sorts of borers. Its like cancer. Seemingly healthy and flourishing to the outside, but then unable to withstand January and February storms, which have eroded large patches of reefs and signs of algal succession are already on the way. The only way to sustain would be to stop ANY reef and coastal related activities until further notice. But this of course is just na?ve wishful thinking. The present resilience vs remnance discussion has been largely gravitated around the Keys and I noticed that most if not all participants were ?1st world scientists?. I am sitting in the middle of the 3rd world biodiversity hot spot wondering where our ?hotspot affilated collegues? are. I am guessing, that many are oblivious to this discussion due to the lack of adequate internet access, which at least here in Indonesia is still a novelty, slow and expensive. But they need to be integrated ? asap. Reef decline here is more than the problem of policy implementation, local politics and steak holder conflicts. It?s the consequence on the tail of a much bigger issue, an issue of local culture and education. We, the 1st world scientists live in a world of health insurances, unemployment insurances and mortgages. Hooray to those that can afford to recycle their rubbish. It?s a luxury. In Germany every household has more rubbish bins than fingers on one hand. Here in Indonesia we have none. Rubbish is dumped into the ocean, onto the reefs or disposed of ?thermally? (I know ...weve been there - still are?). My point is, we are living in a world that has conditioned us to think ahead, trying to not only predict but also prepare for future, featuring perspectives extending beyond that of individuality - a concept as such alien to indonesien society. Family rules. Thinking future is much more confined to the individual and future predictions seldom appear to penetrate any further then to the F1 generation. Producing offsprings to secure the future. Offsprings are the real existing currency.And can we blame them? I cant. The 62 yr old woman in the states really didn?t need the 12th child. That?s pure stupidity. She probably didn?t even need 3, but I am hitting thin ice here. Women on the archipel islands however do need children (but not 12). Most people on the islands don?t qualify for mortgages and likes, most don?t even qualify for simple bank accounts. They borrow money from affluent parties, thereby entering into a livelong dependence, becoming an accessory to the complex network of the local illegal fishing industry, paying off their debts by carrying out the task at hand, namely bombing. Many of them risking their lives in doing so, many being driven into invalidity of some sort. What we need, is educational sustainability. Education that lasts. Education that indoctrinates and is assimilated and passed on to F2, F3 .Fn. Academically and practically its time for consilience, in the sense it was formulated by O. Wilson. We need a unification of knowledge in order to act. Disciplines need to be pulled together. Reef conservation here in spermonde is a first order task for anthropologists, sociologists, and socioeconomists, then for marinebiologists and in the last instance for politicians, but creating a circular network of exchange. Maybe its time that universities teach marine anthropology. But yes, its easy to stay in our studies busying us with intellectual chit chat contemplating fancy ?nce words ..creating awareness amongst those that are aware anyway. I am just wearing the shoes of the devils advocate, and am certainly not throwing the first stone. After all I am researching bleaching in corals that do not bleach and my bahasa Indonesia is as fragile as the reefs. So whats the new dogma? What do do? And who is doing it? Learning the language, going into teaching after finishing the PhD? Become a marineanthropologist? Maybe I should give up my oil leaking motorbike and do what with it?...dump it the ocean? trying to keep up optimism esther . "Szmant, Alina" wrote: Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now --------------------------------- From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sun Feb 26 08:58:31 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 08:58:31 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Message-ID: <4401B407.2000407@noaa.gov> Hey, folks, I'm certainly not going to be one who runs around waving the flag of *sustainability*. My main point was that these words means different things to different people, most likely because they aren't being used correctly. Like, let's look at the definition of the word *sustain*, then look at how it is currently being used: sus?tain 1. To keep in existence; maintain. 2. To supply with necessities or nourishment; provide for. Don't we want to do this for coral reefs? Of course we do. But now that I've thrown the word out there (after admittedly not ever really using it much--certainly not in fora like these), I'm starting to notice it more. Like, I now see a Request For Proposals that mentions sustainable development. What the heck is that supposed to mean? It means, essentially, let's develop some enterprise(s) near the coast or coral reef area that can support economies, yet not compromise the environment. I think that's what it means. The concept of how you can support an economy near a reef area, yet not compromise it (the reef area, that is), is what should separate the good proposals and actions from the bad. This approach says "let's find a way for people to live [*develop*] near ecosystems without messing them up [too much]." Those who are against sustainable development would prefer to either not develop near these areas, or keep people out of the area, which is a great idea if it is a realistic approach, but how do you push back the tide of people? So, to me "sustainable development" seems to be an oxymoron and a phrase meant to countenance or disguise coastal development. I'll bet a real estate developer came up with that phrase. So, what I said was we should sustain the reefs, not (necessarily) permit sustainable development. I personally don't see how you can sustain a clean environment and also permit people to crawl (swim) all over it. I guess I'm saying our goal should be to sustain the reefs that are in good condition, but what I admittedly didn't address was how to fix the compromised reefs. You have to accept what Alina says, that we're in a big mess and we have to work with what we have, but to do that we all have to do our part and we need strong leadership. Our leaders listen (theoretically) to lots of voices and also to big money. Now, addressing the charge that we first-world (and NOAA) coral scientists have no clue as to what's going on in the rest of the world, I would have to agree that THIS scientist is clueless about a lot of international coral problems, at least from a first-person account. I have never seen bombs on the ocean floor, and have never had my ear drums blown out from blast-fishing. HOWEVER, I have been part of proposal review processes before and I can tell you that a large number of very savvy coral scientists (NOAA, academic and NGO) and policy makers put large numbers of well-meaning hours into trying to determine where best to fund coral conservation efforts (but the process is not perfect). It's a very difficult decision process, and the final decision makers ultimately have no other agenda except to conserve coral reefs. If the squeaky wheel gets the grease (see also last sentence of previous paragraph), then we have to agree on what needs to squeak the loudest, or at least prioritize the squeaks. Which is what Phil was saying with his plea to come up with 8 - 10 action items. Later... From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sun Feb 26 09:10:34 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 09:10:34 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] disclaimer Message-ID: <4401B6DA.3060400@noaa.gov> Whoops, I should have put this at the bottom of my last couple of messages, because it's true: "The contents of this message are mine personally and do not necessarily reflect any position of the Government or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration." From cnidaria at earthlink.net Sun Feb 26 12:34:28 2006 From: cnidaria at earthlink.net (James M Cervino) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 12:34:28 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Resilience? After Heat Stroke? Message-ID: Dear Coral Reef Scientists, Alina's post states the truth as it address our cultural behavior in the USA and how this may be having a negative impact on the reefs throughout the world. We all agree that thermal stress is the number one cause of coral mortality coupled with localized deforestation and anthropogenic nutrient enrichment. However, it was not long ago that there were people out there (marine scientists) that refused to admit that global warming induced thermal heat shock is the number one threat reefs are facing today. Reef Resilience! Are we fooling ourselves? With the growing population and the types of vehicles we use to transport our kiddies to soccer practice we will continue to produce more heat trapping gasses into the atmosphere that are directly correlated with higher sea surface temperatures. This will have a serious effect on tropical corals that are sensitive and already threatened. The major reef builders of the Pacific are not resilient, and will not be resistant to thermal stress and coral disease. We can say good-by to the diversity of corals I am looking at in Jen Veron's book that is sitting in front of me on my desk, especially if we all are not vocal about the Energy Policy produced by the Whitehouse this year. Were there any atmospheric and marine scientists acting as advisors quoted in this Energy Policy brief? We as marine scientists should be outraged as we all know now that reefs will not be resilient to the changing oceanographic conditions in the next decade. So the question is, how will we address this as marine scientists? Create more MPAs? I don't care how many MPAs we create throughout the world, if we are not going to get serious about global warming and anthropogenic nutrient enrichment we are wasting time. Will MPAs protect corals from heat stroke or nutrient enrichment? Are corals protected from global warming and nutrient pollution and is this addressed in MPAs ? Below are some vital statistics regarding how the USA is addressing global warming induced climate change: In 2004, China consumed 6.5 million barrels of oil per day. The United States consumed 20.4 million barrels, and demand is rising as a result of economic growth and American cars. It has been estimated that the bulk of the imports are going directly to SUVs. SUVs made up 5% of the American arsenal of cars in 1990; currently they make up 54%. U.S. oil imports are at the highest ever, 55%. Department of Energy projections show imports rising to 70 percent by 2025. Interpreting this to a global scale the United States transportation sector produces about 8% of world global warming pollution and accounts for 18 percent of an increasingly tight world oil market each year according to the Energy Foundation and the Association for Peak Oil&Gas (http://www.peakoil.net/). If American cars averaged 40 miles per gallon, we would soon reduce consumption by 2 million to 3 million barrels of oil a day. That could translate into a sustained price drop of more than $20 a barrel. And getting cars to be that efficient is easy. This was not addressed in the recent energy bill recently passed by Congress. Global oil use = 31.5 billion barrels per year One barrel oil = 42 U.S. gallons One cubic foot = 7.48 U.S. gallons One cubic mile = 147.2 billion cubic feet Country Barrels of oil per person annually United States 25 Japan 14.0 Spain 13.8 Mexico 6.0 Brazil 3.5 China 1.5 India 0.8 Source: Goldman Sachs, Energy Weekly, August 11, 1999 Consumption (Millions of barrels per day): Source DOE ------------------------------------------------------------------------ United States: 19.993 Japan: 5.423 China: 4.854 Germany: 2.814 Russia: 2.531 South Korea: 2.126 Brazil: 2.123 Canada: 2.048 France: 2.040 India: 2.011 Mexico: 1.932 Italy: 1.881 United Kingdom: 1.699 Spain: 1.465 SaudiArabia: 1.415 Iran: 1.109 Indonesia: 1.063 Netherlands: .881 Australia: .879 Taiwan: .846 -- ************************************************** Dr. James M. Cervino, MS, Ph.D. Marine Biologist Department of Biological & Health Sciences Pace University New York NYC Phone: (917) 620-5287 Web site: http://www.globalcoral.org *************************************************** From reginal at hawaii.edu Sun Feb 26 16:56:04 2006 From: reginal at hawaii.edu (Regina) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:56:04 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? Message-ID: <67fdad82756000d396460a6add72f34e@hawaii.edu> Esther and all, As a marine anthropologist, I read your post with great interest and had to resist the temptation to shout out loud "here here!!" lest my office mates think me a bit mad. There are actually a few universities teaching marine anthropology and I agree that the inclusion of a marine anthropologist in interdisciplinary marine science projects is vital. As Chuck Birkeland, one of my favorite professors often says, one cannot manage the marine environment, one has to manage the people using it. Aloha, Regina Regina Woodrom Luna Maritime and Fisheries Anthropologist PhD Candidate, Ecological Anthropology Program (Marine) University of Hawaii Manoa Lecturer: Biology of Marine Reptiles, Human Adaptation to the Sea, Anthropology of Tourism, American Cultures Biological Assistant: Oahu Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvaging Group ReginaL at hawaii.edu >From: Esther Borell >To: "Szmant, Alina" >CC: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? >Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 07:13:43 +0000 (GMT) > > >Hi Alina and all others, > I think your letter has not only contextualized our ?reef problems? but also hit a nerve. > Its time to change our dogma. Its time to strip down the fancy costume of sustainability. I sometimes even wonder whether this word was invented to keep social economists in business. I don?t want to see them unemployed, the contrary, but I believe that sustainability, as a concept needs to be reinvented. > The red queen is running faster than ever, unable to not only maintain her position, but even starting to fall behind. > I am currently based in southeast Sulawesi, alleged centre of coral reef biodiversity but I am placing a safe bet that 70% of reefs here in the Spermonde archipel are very ill, losing their diversity, maybe not like rainforests in %s, not yet but it?s probably only a matter of time ? on an ecological, not geological time scale. Diving reminds me of walking along the Via Appia in Rome, looking at the remains of the past, providing faint evidence of how ?it?used be. > Many of the reefs here look like rubble deserts. To see fish one has to pay extra entrance fee. I have counted 7 bombs on a one and a half our dive the other day. > Reefs here don?t seem to suffer from bleaching (ironically I am researching just that) but from structural devastation (bombing), insane overfishing and severe eutrophication. Most corals of the inner and middle shelf within this archipelago are heavily infested by all sorts of borers. Its like cancer. Seemingly healthy and flourishing to the outside, but then unable to withstand January and February storms, which have eroded large patches of reefs and signs of algal succession are already on the way. > > The only way to sustain would be to stop ANY reef and coastal related activities until further notice. But this of course is just na?ve wishful thinking. > > The present resilience vs remnance discussion has been largely gravitated around the Keys and I noticed that most if not all participants were ?1st world scientists?. I am sitting in the middle of the 3rd world biodiversity hot spot wondering where our ?hotspot affilated collegues? are. I am guessing, that many are oblivious to this discussion due to the lack of adequate internet access, which at least here in Indonesia is still a novelty, slow and expensive. But they need to be integrated ? asap. Reef decline here is more than the problem of policy implementation, local politics and steak holder conflicts. It?s the consequence on the tail of a much bigger issue, an issue of local culture and education. > We, the 1st world scientists live in a world of health insurances, unemployment insurances and mortgages. Hooray to those that can afford to recycle their rubbish. It?s a luxury. In Germany every household has more rubbish bins than fingers on one hand. Here in Indonesia we have none. Rubbish is dumped into the ocean, onto the reefs or disposed of ?thermally? (I know ...weve been there - still are?). > My point is, we are living in a world that has conditioned us to think ahead, trying to not only predict but also prepare for future, featuring perspectives extending beyond that of individuality - a concept as such alien to indonesien society. Family rules. Thinking future is much more confined to the individual and future predictions seldom appear to penetrate any further then to the F1 generation. Producing offsprings to secure the future. Offsprings are the real existing currency.And can we blame them? I cant. The 62 yr old woman in the states really didn?t need the 12th child. That?s pure stupidity. She probably didn?t even need 3, but I am hitting thin ice here. Women on the archipel islands however do need children (but not 12). > Most people on the islands don?t qualify for mortgages and likes, most don?t even qualify for simple bank accounts. They borrow money from affluent parties, thereby entering into a livelong dependence, becoming an accessory to the complex network of the local illegal fishing industry, paying off their debts by carrying out the task at hand, namely bombing. Many of them risking their lives in doing so, many being driven into invalidity of some sort. > > What we need, is educational sustainability. Education that lasts. Education that indoctrinates and is assimilated and passed on to F2, F3 ?.Fn. > Academically and practically its time for consilience, in the sense it was formulated by O. Wilson. We need a unification of knowledge in order to act. Disciplines need to be pulled together. Reef conservation here in spermonde is a first order task for anthropologists, sociologists, and socioeconomists, then for marinebiologists and in the last instance for politicians, but creating a circular network of exchange. > Maybe its time that universities teach marine anthropology. But yes, its easy to stay in our studies busying us with intellectual chit chat contemplating fancy ?nce words?..creating awareness amongst those that are aware anyway. > > I am just wearing the shoes of the devils advocate, and am certainly not throwing the first stone. After all I am researching bleaching in corals that do not bleach and my bahasa Indonesia is as fragile as the reefs. So whats the new dogma? What do do? And who is doing it? > Learning the language, going into teaching after finishing the PhD? Become a marineanthropologist? Maybe I should give up my oil leaking motorbike ?and do what with it?...dump it the ocean? > > trying to keep up optimism > > esther > > > > . > > > > >"Szmant, Alina" wrote: > Hi Phil & others: > >I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created > through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not > taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? > >You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I > have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? > >China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. > >For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. > >So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. > >Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. > >So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. > >So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. > >In a pessimistic mood this morn', > >Alina Szmant > > >******************************************************************* >Dr. Alina M. Szmant >Coral Reef Research Group >UNCW-Center for Marine Science >5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln >Wilmington NC 28409 >Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 >Cell: (910)200-3913 >email: szmanta at uncw.edu >Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta >****************************************************************** > >________________________________ > >From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg >Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM >To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 > > > >Phil, > >Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > >Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > >Dear Colleagues, > > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting > >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few > >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to > >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our > >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > > and less > >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by > >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from > >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of > >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the > >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral > >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show > >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to > >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own > >history and ecology. > > > >Let's face it: > > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, > >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is > >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological > >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal > >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't > >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's > >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take > >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the > >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all > >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread > >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. > >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human > >reproductive success. > > > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > > radar > >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation > >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my > >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities > >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the > >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs > >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this > >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying > >and we have got to do more. > > > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think > >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We > >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the > >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of > >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of > >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled > >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and > >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > > are > >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral > >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, > >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own > >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and > >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For > >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes > >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, > >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations > >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a > >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is > >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the > >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and > >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the > >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is > >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And > >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we > >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost > >every reef on the planet. > > > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > > agency, > >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for > >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a > >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded > >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus > >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would > >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study > >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think > >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > > Thanks, > > Phil > > > >-- > >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. > >Department of Biology > >College of Charleston > >Charleston SC 29424 > >(843) 953-8086 voice > >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Coral-List mailing list > >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > >--------------------------------- > Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now >--------------------------------- > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From lesk at bu.edu Sun Feb 26 11:08:47 2006 From: lesk at bu.edu (lesk at bu.edu) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:08:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Faith in local efforts; ferocity in facing the world In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060226110847.e61yypg760ww0w8w@www.bu.edu> Phil Dustan asked what we can do. Perhaps a start is to share what we are doing now, and help each other forge our puzzle pieces into a whole. This sometimes works better than launching a new big empty vessel with a fancy name and fundraising needs in hopes of picking up paying passengers along the way. Here is the piece I am on now. A small idea emerged from a workshop several years ago in Los Cabos. Conservation International organized a party called "Defying Ocean's End". No, I did not make up that name, though margaritas inspired an indecent salute to go along with it. DOE is a business plan to save the sea, vetted by folks from Goldman Sachs Inc. to make sure the scientists, environmentalists and stakeholders present were able to add up the numbers properly. A news piece on DOE is at http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/ 2003/06/0603_030603_oceanboundaries.html and the resulting Island Press book is at: http://www.islandpress.org/books/detail.html/SKU/1-55963-753-6 At DOE, Jeremy Jackson and I co-chaired a very lively working group focussed on science to "restore and maintain marine ecosystem function." In order to restore a marine ecosystem, we reasoned that we should first restore faith in a coastal community that they can steward their local marine environment despite the sky falling all about them. The small idea is this: resistance is not futile. This is a tough nut because people are hearing that no matter what they do to control fishing pressure and overdevelopment in their own front yards, the First World is going to get them- cook them, innundate them, poison them, and overpower them economically, to the strains of a siren call irresistable to their greedy and their young. The key would be for a local community to do their level best to manage their doings in their own bit of sea in an enduring and rewarding fashion (the "S" word). If it works even a little, empowerment can hopefully do the rest. After DOE, I teamed up with CI to work on this problem. We were fortunate to get start-up funding from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation for a project called the Marine Management Area Science program (MMAS). We have four years to get going. Dr. Leah Bunce is the Project Director. I am the PI. Roger McManus is supervising staffer. Sylvia Earle is spokesperson/Godess. CI staff and partners are the implementing folks. For anybody who is interested, as materials become available they are posted to a general access web site. The quickest route to a fact sheet and workplan for the project is to put "CI MMAS" into Google and take the top hits. The project is evolving faster than the web portal and we do need some privacy and distance to get something done. However, link-ups, partnerships, criticisms are welcome. At its core MMAS is a natural and social science research project. Because it is a research project, parts of it that are new will appear in peer-reviewed papers first, and then be applied and publicized. These parts mostly have to do with the invention of new diagnostics to help sort out the effects of local management efforts, from changes (good or bad) in marine and social systems due to other causes. But much of what you will see in MMAS sounds like what others are doing, because all are part of the same global context. Let us call it: Alina's Lament. It is essential that these more general objectives be achieved collaboratively with other projects being carried out in the same geographical areas, in a united front. The egofriction static charge of NGO's and Kurtz-like characters- scientists and saviors, parachute-diplomats and prodigal sons alike- must be smoothed or we will be each others' failures. We are all human and we all set up fiefdoms and power structures as automatically as dogs piss to mark their having passed. Once everybody has pissed we can get down to work, and the mix will smell at least as good, or as bad, as the mark of any one. The Scientific Advisory Committee for MMAS has helped to guide us into a focus for the project in four primary geographical areas, and two for work to ramp up later on. These areas are: Greater Caribbean- primary focus on Belize and MBRS region Brazil- Abrolhos Shelf Tropical Eastern Pacific- Coiba, Cocos, Malpelo, Galapagos Fiji Archipelago The two areas for later on are Raja Ampat (eastern Indonesia) and the western Indian Ocean someplace. In each place we are fitting our little piece (MMA science) into the context of existing, locally initiated partnerships and projects. We also have some small, thematic research projects that are not geographically tied down to these spots except that the products will then be applied in each of them. Those are our beans. We have decided to work small. Together, the sites constitute a global observatory for the efficacy of MMA effects under varied biological and social conditions, strewn across E-W and N-S biodiversity gradients. Okay, that was my sharing time. Now it is all of your turns. Perhaps we can look at different parts of the world of tropical nearshore marine conservation organizationally, the way that ReefBase has helped us to do biologically. Find the pressure points. Hone the messages and the campaigns. Move from one immediate objective to the next. Shout into the media's ear instead of the other way. Remember, this isn't to say that the global UN diplomacy march on Washington thing isn't important, too. All of us have folks in our organizations who, bless their hearts, are doing just that. It just isn't what I am doing right now. Sounds kind of like baloney but maybe what we do can be better than what it sounds like. Now, that would be really novel. Les From JKoven at aol.com Sun Feb 26 18:05:29 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:05:29 EST Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Message-ID: Yes, Jim, "sustainable" and "development" ARE? oxymorons.? It all depends on what level of income/development the community stakeholders need to produce from their reefs, absent other income sources.? Their choices are often limited - they can bring in tourists/divers or over-fish, even though that diminishes or damages the resources.? Reefs provided sustenance for entire island communities for millenia - they can't now sustain other urban communities with growing populations.? The needs of these stakeholders has changed over the past 50 years - they want to send their children to schools off-island, they want the same techological "improvements" in their lives that those in the urban areas have and to catch up with the 21st century world.? Both climate change and over-fishing have? affected many Pacific reefs that have not been subjected to gross land-based pollution.? Nothing the stakeholders of small islands can do will change the global climate picture and fishing is part of their culture.? The search is on for other ways to sustain the way of life they wish to have, without further destroying fisheries and thus reefs. It's interesting that outrigger canoes once sped villagers to other islands.? Then came the diesel powered boats - slower and costly, although one was less dependant upon weather and perhaps drier upon arrival.? Now faster fiberglass boats are the thing.....they travel as swiftly as an outrigger in a decent wind, but leave one beholden to the fuel companies.? Progress?? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From JKoven at aol.com Sun Feb 26 18:04:05 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:04:05 EST Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence - Effect of Bombing Message-ID: <290.64bb747.31338de5@aol.com> Has anyone studied the reefs in Guam since WWII? Of course....but the diversity was vastly reduced. Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu Sun Feb 26 18:16:56 2006 From: rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu (Richard Grigg) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 13:16:56 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today In-Reply-To: <20060225110306.0iwtfp3s0kcg84sw@www.bu.edu> References: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20060226131545.01ca73d8@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Les, My real opinion and view of the world is much the same as Alina Szmant's. Overpopulation is the problem. The Club of Rome estimated that the carrying capacity of planet earth is about 3 billion people. We are double that now and there is no going back, at least not without a catastrophic event. The 1000's of reefs that are still healthy in the Pacific are in places underpopulated or even uninhabited. I visited about 25 such places several years ago in the Tuamotu Archipelago. Unfortunately, they too will probably be discovered. After that, if humankind does not face the human population issue head on, I don't think we can prevent these reefs from the same fate as those Phil Dustan was talking about. There is time, but not the political will on a global scale. But rather than dooming and glooming all the reefs in the world (dead or not), I think the number one action item should be containing the human population bomb. Not overgeneralizing about the reefs but facing the real issue....us. Rick Grigg At 11:03 AM 2/25/2006 -0500, lesk at bu.edu wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > >It is extremely important that we converge on a common and consistant >view on coral reef health that we can convey to the lay public. We >must also speak precisely when referring to any particular symptom of >coral reef health on a global scale. > >I challenge anybody to produce data demonstrating that the tropical >west Atlantic coral reefs have improved in condition or remained at >level condition, by any measure you wish, over the past 25 years. That >does not mean that the changes are irreversible or unprecedented in >deep time, Gene. It only means that it is a sad thing for us and for >our childern that this is happening at this particular time, for we now >cause this decline knowingly and deliberately, recovery will likely be >a very lengthy process, and we are seem to be doing our best to inhibit >even that. The long view will always be there to make us feel better >in some existential sense, but it is no balm to those of us who wish to >enjoy and benefit from coral reefs during our lives and the lives of >our children and grandchildren. > >Indo-Pacific coral reefs exhibit a vigorous ability to bounce back from >denudation or phase shift, so long as there is a stable physical >substratum on which they can rebuild (dynamite rubble piles are not >very good for this). However, the proportion of reef surface that is >in a disturbed, regenerating state at any given time, and more >importantly, the size-frequency distribution of these disturbances, >looks very odd and very different than when I was a graduate student. >Are we using the right data to characterize and track these changes, >Rick? Because the Pacific is still more robust than the Atlantic, >there is much of concern that we can choose to overlook if that is our >bias. We'd better be careful not to be too easily reassured by the >positive signs that coral reefs in the Pacific could hold their own, >given the chance...because they by and large are not being given the >chance. > >The pace and extent of bleaching alone is awesome. Who is coming >forward to call this a non-event, or our response to it exagerated and >misplaced? Who is saying that overfishing is something that will have >no effect on reefs worth worrying about, and that we can ignore it? >Who is saying that the industrialization of reef destruction is not a >real thing worth keeping in check? Who is saying with confidence that >the earth is not getting warmer, that bleaching is not more frequent >and severe, or that corals will definitely adapt to these changes and >that the world shall remain much as wonderful as it has always been for >us, no matter what we do? > >So what gentle hand is it, exactly that Gene and Rick wish to lay upon >the scene? > >Les Kaufman > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From milviapin at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 18:41:09 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 15:41:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <20060226234109.88917.qmail@web50303.mail.yahoo.com> dear listers, I agree with Rick, there are reefs that are considered pristine in RMI for example. No diseases, no bleaching, no eutrophication, no overfishing or destructive fishing nor boat damage threaten some of the reefs in remote areas . At many locations, we can still witness this ecosystem as clean, productive, diverse as some can only imagine it "should have been" earlier. No take areas or sanctuaries are indeed to be made the rule, and governments and managers in remote island countries hear this message, although thay often have to apply it not as a recovery or restoration process but as a conservation of extant natural health. This decision is often more difficult than similar action needed when the damage is instead evident and advanced. Also, I do not think people in the Pacific islands nor in South East Asia can agree we (they) can live "without reefs". It is not just a question of loosing biodiversity or beauty! Millions of people still REALLY depend on these ecosystems for their food AND income! Thank you Silvia Richard Grigg wrote: Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let?s face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze. From milviapin at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 19:07:07 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 16:07:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 3 In-Reply-To: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <20060227000708.48318.qmail@web50311.mail.yahoo.com> Alina, I think you had a very important message for all of us. "For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! " If we are not ready to relinquish some of our personal comfort(s), we cannot expect politicians to make things better for all of us and we should stop blaiming international politics for the damage caused to the global environment. I believe protecting reefs, or the environment, or the forests is less an issue of political decision and more of behaviour. Everybody's. Each one can make a little change in each one's life. All together we are definetely more powerful than a few "decision makers". cheers silvia "Szmant, Alina" wrote: Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. From szmanta at uncw.edu Sun Feb 26 20:09:28 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 20:09:28 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline References: <46F56ACD52BC5F4F911EF9C4264FB46404AD29DE@UNCWMAILVS1.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB028@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> For those of you loooking for how some scientists are trying to desseminate the word.... ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From: Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST) To: Subject: University of Texas Ocean Research Webcast Dear Science Enthusiast, University of Texas at Austin Webcast Entitled "Brave New Ocean." A webcast presentation given by Professor Jeremy Jackson, William E. and Mary B. Ritter Professor and Director of the Geosciences Research Division at Scripps Institution of Oceanography will be March 3, 2006 at 7pm. Dr. Jeremy Jackson is one of the most prominent marine ecologists in the world and he has a message to get out about the world's oceans - it documents declines in coral reefs, decreasing numbers of large marine fish, and losses of coastal and marine ecosystems. More than just an academic researcher, Dr. Jackson has actively searched for innovative ways to reach the public, applying his skills as a communicator with his scientific knowledge to inspire action. Dr. Jackson desires to reach a broader audience and affect change into the future with tomorrow's generation on this topic of interest. View a FREE web broadcast of the lecture live Friday, March 3, 2006 at 7 pm CST. During the live webcast, you can submit questions to Dr. Jackson and he will answer as many as he can for the live and webcast audiences. If possible, can you distribute or post a link to this webcast on your website, newsletter, or listserv as well as pass this notice on to any colleagues of yours that may be interested. The link to our Lecture Series website, where the details of the lecture and the webcast can be found, is: http://www.esi.utexas.edu/outreach/ols/lectures/Jackson/ Please let me know if you will consider posting this information. Thanks for your time, Brian Zavala Environmental Science Institute The University of Texas at Austin brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu 512.471.5847 ------ End of Forwarded Message From mtupper at picrc.org Sun Feb 26 21:11:37 2006 From: mtupper at picrc.org (Mark Tupper) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 11:11:37 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] vehicle emissions, lifestyle changes and global warming References: <20060223022526.80199.qmail@web35310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <009901c63b43$26543be0$63c8c814@TUPPER> Hi listers, I think James, Jeff and Alina are right on the money when they talk about vehicle emissions and today's "bigger is better" SUV mindset. I doubt that the public has any realization of the degree to which vehicle emissions contribute to greenhouse gases. A quote from the California Cars Initiative: "In California, transportation accounts for over 40% of greenhouse gas emissions. Nationally the number is around 33%. Globally it's 20% and rising fast, especially as car-starved China, India and Russia add to their fleets." So, if we can agree that global warming and climate change are adversely affecting coral reefs, then vehicle emissions are one of the major culprits. But have governments or the auto industry made any attempt to educate the public on this issue? If so, I must have missed it... This is one of the most challenging problems our environment faces, given the long history of our deep-rooted "car culture" lifestyle in North America. It's amazing to me that with sky-high gas prices unlikely to change while there is continuing war in the Middle East, people still want to buy the biggest, most expensive SUV they can. For example, in the last decade, Hummer went from a cottage industry aimed at producing exclusive (and enormous) vehicles for celebrities, to a major automaker producing over 100,000 SUVs per year. And as Jeff said, how many of those are ever taken off-road? And while DaimlerChrysler has been touting their advances in PHEV technology (plug-in hybrid electric vehicles that can get 100+ mpg), they were busy reviving the 425 horsepower Hemi engine and stuffing it into 4-door family sedans, and then developing a 500 horsepower V-10 for their SUVs and pickup trucks. Do soccer moms really need to go 0-60 in under 5 seconds and cruise the highway at over 170 mph, which just 10 years ago could only be done with a $200,000 exotic sports car? No. It would be illegal anyway. Has DaimlerChrysler sold any mass-produced PHEVs yet? No. Why not? Because hybrids are for nerdy enviro-geeks like us. Nobody else would pay the premium price charged for them when they could get a "real" car for less. In North America's car culture, big and powerful is sexy; small and efficient is lame. Sorry if this post seems too much about vehicles and not enough about coral reefs, but I'm trying to address one of the root causes of coral reef decline. We might say that greenhouse gases and resulting thermal stress are a root cause of decline but they aren't the ultimate cause. They are a symptom generated by human activities - a symptom that happens to trigger its own set of secondary symptoms, including coral bleaching and disease. In addressing the ultimate cause, the question is, how do we change the mindset of an entire nation from one of spending all their disposable income on unnecessary luxuries to one of moderation and conservation? Cheers, Mark Dr. Mark H Tupper, Senior Scientist Palau International Coral Reef Center PO Box 7086, Koror, Palau 96940 tel (680) 488-6950; fax (680) 488-6951 and Adjunct Research Associate University of Guam Marine Laboratory UOG Station, Mangilao, Guam 96923, USA tel (671) 735-2375; fax (671) 734-6767 From A.J.G.Williams at newcastle.ac.uk Mon Feb 27 14:30:15 2006 From: A.J.G.Williams at newcastle.ac.uk (Andrew Williams) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 19:30:15 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Resilience, Remnancy, Sustainability - Semantics? References: <46F56ACD52BC5F4F911EF9C4264FB46404AD29DE@UNCWMAILVS1.dcs.uncw.edu> <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB028@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <0BE60E6F26C4034388842EA9FA0DC94525281B@quarrel.campus.ncl.ac.uk> Dear All, I started out reading this topic with interest, but it is now becoming irritation, because it seems to be a great deal of definitions, discussions of semantics and ego flattering statements. Do I intend to be insulting? No, I attempt to point out that if this discussion is affecting me in this way (an alleged scientist), imagine what it does for members of the public... Now watch me reel off a massive list of definitions! *laughs* Global warming - fossil fuels are the key issue, yet they are owned by massive MNCs whose sole interest is capital generation. The technology to replace these energy sources already exists, is owned by MNCs and DODs around the world, either hidden from public use for protectionism of markets or national security (i.e. protectionism of national markets!). The USA is 'run' by an oil baron, a man who was re-elected by over 50% (ish) of the nation (well those who voted). What is the solution when the public are disinterested in (global) politics, and the politicians are interested in re-election and capital accumulation? Education is fundamentally important to changing public, and thus political, agendas, yet who controls school curricula? What happens when the media has become mankind's source of (dis)information? What happens when scientists cannot even decide within themselves the 'correct' course of action? I'll tell you what I believe happens, things get worse, further ingrained, more polarised and more self-centred. There are two real problems in this world, apathy and greed. If these two variables can be addressed, mankind has a chance at not destroying itself and the planet in the process. I've seen/heard various people say things like, "thanks for that depressing outlook" to which my response is, do we live on the same planet? I would dearly love to be optimistic about global affairs, but I think it's deluded. I don't believe in the Hollywood happy ending, in fact if I did, I wouldn't be studying natural resource management. I will happily admit that there are success stories about the place and I will come to that point 'shortly'. We are creeping in the right direction, but we could be walking, if not running (hand in hand into the sunset...sorry!). We all talk about globalisation, yet where are the international laws, where is the international institution that represents mankind's interest and not national interests? None of us alone is going to change global problems, it is going to take a concerted global effort, it is not going to be easy, it is going to require considerable pain in the process, because current consumption of global resources are not sustainable (yup sorry, there's that buzz word again). There are no 'silver bullets', if we haven't learned that yet... Admittedly, all this globalisation 'stuff' is in it's infancy, it is barely crawling, but someone (plural) MUST teach it how to walk and it cannot be driven solely by the free market ideology. 'Over' population - Carrying capacities do not take into account advances in technology, so improvements in agricultural practices increases production (agreed, simply pouring chemicals into the ground is not sustainable, but there are alternatives). There's plenty of food being produced today, it's not a production issue it's a distribution issue. I only have to wander around shops like 'Pound Land' to realise there are massive amounts of resources being poured into utterly useless products, yet people still buy them. My computers enable me to communicate globally, increase my productivity, my lights enable me to work in the dark, but, for example, these ridiculous plastic (oil derivative) desk ornaments - where's the utility in that? Don't even get me started on SUVs! To say China has the right idea about birth control, is rather simplistic, just look at how many female babies are abandoned or aborted, I feel that women being marched en-mass into sterilisation programs (India) against their will is totally indefensible. Human rights on one hand, control systems on the other - where is the middle ground? I personally would like to see a licensing system, whereby people have to prove they are capable of being good parents and are economically able to raise their kids - but of course that only works in developed nations, I could not possibly argue for that to be applied in developing nations. I'm sure that would cause a massive outcry, it being a fundamental human right to have children, but this example of the women having her 12th baby - what about the rights of people who don't want to live in an overcrowded world? Since when do the rights of the individual outweigh the rights of the many (sorry, rather star trek I know!)? We are boxing ourselves into a corner with all this political correctness. Timescales - someone mentioned that on a long enough time line, reefs will be gone. Well in several billion years the sun will expand to the point Earth will be uninhabitable - does this mean we should all just give up and damn the world to extinction early? I absolutely take the point that ecosystems are processes, (perhaps they should be renamed as ecoprocesses and not systems (I am so joking!)) and that on a long enough time line everything will change, but these changes are for the most part geologically slow - slow enough for evolution to keep pace. Mankind's affects on the planet are accelerating beyond the pace of evolution, plus I would prefer to live in a world where the atmosphere is breathable, the water drinkable, the soils cultivable... Spatial scales - I vaguely remember mentioning I would come to a point and this is it - start small, lead by example and the people will follow! We can't take on global issues, the institutions and laws simply are not there yet, it's currently far too voluntary and un-enforceable. Apart from anything else, ecosystems are site specific - there are reefs on the east coast of Australia that are growing in highly turbid conditions, whereas in other places, turbidity is fatal. I don't think it is possible to come up with a 10 point plan to global success, because by doing so you are going to have to cut down a 1000 points to 10, what if the 990 disregarded points aggregate to greater importance than the 10 you chose? Global affairs are for the politicians, scientists should be there in an advisory capacity but when I say scientists I mean all of them, not just e.g. Marine Biologists - see my next point. Integration - So, one school of thought cries out for public awareness and consumer driven market forces, one cries out for more stringent laws and regulations, another for strict conservationism, another for... where is the integration, where's the facilitator, the chair person co-ordinating all these schools? If you are going to try and solve issues, then you must consider (in alphabetical order) economics, environment, politics and social anthropology - not on a sectoral basis but as an integrated whole. You cannot just form MPAs where ever biodiversity is greatest, because you will more than likely marginalise the people living off that resource. Making the poor poorer just causes further environmental degradation as they are forced to exploit any (free/common) natural resource they can. If you exclude people from the picture, you have an issue of non-compliance and thus a cost in enforcement. I entered into my first degree of the opinion that the environment should be protected no matter the human cost, I have since completely amended that outlook since it's myopic at best and downright inhumane at worst. Participation - To overcome issues of non-compliance, marginalisation and often to increase knowledge of local systems, people must be allowed to participate at ALL levels of project and policy formulation/implementation - that does not mean consultation, that means active participation. Process - Sustainable Development (sorry but I don't see it as an oxymoron - I do see it's false implementation as oxy-moronic) is a process, not a system, thus projects and policies should be re-evaluated as often as humanly possible, because making changes causes changes. Good governance - We are only just starting to see models of good governance, not top-down, not bottom-up, but multi-tier (local, regional, national, international) well organised/managed, with an ability to pass information/resources up and down the system with speed and efficiency. Good governance starts with individuals and ends with international agreements, with every single organisation/institution in-between. It needs to be based on equity, equality and shared interest, not ego, power and greed. Now that's a serious challenge because a majority of the current systems of governance are corrupt and unwieldy, favouring the rich and powerful, self-protecting and exacerbating poverty. Developed nations cannot dictate how developing nations can and cannot develop when, as someone has already pointed out, a large proportion of greenhouse gases derive from our activities. Good governance must be about setting a good example, not just enforcing it. I think I am probably boring everyone by now, but I have one more thing to say. All of the above I have been taught, ok some of it I consciously/sub-consciously knew already, but there are more people behind me, coming up through the 'new' schools of thought. One day, these people will be the top scientists of the day, the politicians, the decision makers - when that day comes, I think (hope) we will see some real changes being made. I can only hope that some of the above will help people break free of the chains of sectoralism and start seeing things from a holistic perspective, you cannot save reefs by simply speaking about how they are dying at n.nnn% a year. Of all the traits of human nature, survival is one of the greatest, otherwise we'd already be gone. The glass can be half empty and/or half full, it all depends on how you view it, but why does no one ever consider topping it back up to brim? Stop observing, start doing! A passionate Msc Student From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Mon Feb 27 10:32:07 2006 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Gene Shinn) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 10:32:07 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Intellectual chit chat Message-ID: The letter by Esther Borell is a most thoughtful, sobering and revealing one and should serve as a lesson to all of us "first world scientists" with our "intellectual chit chat." We should all applaud Ester for "trying to keep up optimism." Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida Marine Science Center (room 204) 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From martin_moe at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 22:55:02 2006 From: martin_moe at yahoo.com (Martin Moe) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 19:55:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence Message-ID: <20060227035502.81516.qmail@web60014.mail.yahoo.com> Hi All, Hoo Boy! The world is a scary place these days. Alina is right, James is right, Curtis is right, Steven is right, everyone commenting is right to a greater or lesser degree. I wonder if Malthus was right .. While acknowledging the global problems, the reefs of the Florida Keys, and to a lesser extent, the Bahamas and the Caribbean, are what concern me most personally. It pains me to see huge coral heads slowly dying, the tissue receding and the exposed coral rock thick with algae and sediment, to see acres of coral rock rubble composed of easily identifiable pieces of the remains of huge elkhorn coral skeletons, and patch reefs covered by extensive growths of Sargassum and Dictyota algae. I know what the reefs were like only a few decades ago and the loss is staggering. The TDC knows this also or at least it seems like they should. (This is the Tourist Development Council for Monroe County, the Florida Keys) Their latest brochure http://www.fla-keys.com/diving/ has fantastically beautiful pictures of the coral reefs of yesteryear, some from the Bahamas but most from the Keys reefs of the 60s and 70s available for download on the diving page. Diving tourists are lured to the Keys by these spectacular photos but the reality they find is quite different. There are no vast growths of huge elkhorn coral colonies, and few great healthy heads of brain and star coral, a sort of governmental ?Bait and Switch? advertising. So what can we do? Of course there is no simple answer. All reefs, Pacific or Atlantic, are separate ecosystems connected closely or distantly, and each reef area has its own web of life and its own constellation of problems and solutions. Some problems are global and some are local, the only way to proceed is as the bumper sticker says, ?Think globally, act locally?. Grand analysis of global and regional social, industrial, population and pollution problems are critical and essential and must be pursued and solutions sought on a national governmental scale, but we also have to take care of the trees as well as worry about the forest. As many contributors to this thread have stated, we have to focus on local conditions and find ways to improve specific reef areas, and what we learn and achieve on a ?micro? level will pave the way for ?macro? efforts. (Or we can say, ?Nothing can be done, the world is going to collapse.? And move to the mountains and seek self sustainability with a cache of weapons and foodstuffs. Hmmm The Rockys or the Appalachians?) To do nothing is not an option, I repeat, not an option. We have monitored and measured and we know the problems. We don?t know all the causes and we don?t know the future of the global problems but we have to work with what we have. We talk of resiliency, remmancy, and sustainability and look for coral genotypes with the capability to survive despite adverse conditions, and this is good, but a coral reef is much, much more than just coral. It is a web of life that interacts with itself and feeds upon itself and grows according to the balance of its life forms. A reef in all its complexity cannot be resilient and withstand adversity if the ecology that drove its evolution is impaired. And the reefs of Florida, the Bahamas and the Caribbean are greatly impaired by the almost total loss of the herbivores that maintained the balance between the slow growing, reef forming stony corals and the rapid growing, energy producing macro algae. Without herbivores, establishment of functional reef resiliency is the ?impossible dream?. Without herbivores, planting seedling coral colonies on the reefs has little chance to succeed. Without herbivores, coral larvae have no place to settle. The extent and depth of other problems that plague our reefs cannot be accurately determined until the herbivores return. The first consideration in ecological reef restoration in this region should be how to return herbivores (think Diadema) to the reefs. And like all great journeys, we have to start with small steps, but we must start. Actually the work of Szmant, Miller, Capo, Nedimyer, me, and the Nature Conservency, FKNMS, and Mote Marine Laboratory is a start. I hope we never abandon this effort because it just seems like an impossible task. Martin Moe From eweil at caribe.net Mon Feb 27 02:45:23 2006 From: eweil at caribe.net (EWeil) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 03:45:23 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] "resilience".... Message-ID: Dear coral listers, I agree that the source of all environmental problems affecting terrestrial and marine systems have a common denominator, human population growth, as Alina so eloquently put it. It is also clear to me that lack of education, and wrong government decisions significantly compounds the problem. If this list can somehow help to actively educate people about the benefits of having fewer children and not driving an 8-cylinder, 340 HP truck to get the kids to the soccer game, it would be wonderful. However, after dealing with politicians in Latin America, watching todays religious moderate and extreme fanatism, the Bush administration at work and the selfishness of most people, I remain highly eskeptical and pesimistic about the future of coral reefs and most other ecosystems as well. Saludos! Dr. Ernesto Weil Department of Marine Sciences University of Puerto Rico PO BOX 3208 Lajas PR 00667 Pho: (787) 899-2048 x. 241 Fax: (787) 899-5500 - 2630 From ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com Mon Feb 27 12:05:27 2006 From: ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com (Eric Coral Inquiry) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:05:27 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Corals Gonad Development Message-ID: <6400622e0602270905k186c1de2la565ddd1c991c9ab@mail.gmail.com> Dear listers, Expertise help needed in the area of corals gonad development. Welcome any information, literatures, resources and recommendation of presons who have done work in this area. I am interested to look at the gonad development of corals under artificial reed structures and compare that to nature colony but unfortunately I do not have a clue where, how to start and the place where I come from is lacking in expertise in such area. Is there anyone who has done histological examation on corals gonad development? Do keep in touch. Billion Thanks. Eric YSY "Marine Biologist in the Making" Kota Kinabalu. P.S: This is my mailing address : Eric Yu S Y NO:93, JALAN KIJANG, LUYANG PHASE 3, 88300 KOTA KINABALU SABAH MALAYSIA TEL:+6088213276 From clarionreef at aol.com Mon Feb 27 17:24:59 2006 From: clarionreef at aol.com (clarionreef at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 17:24:59 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8C80A03C77FEB1B-AD4-1654@FWM-M02.sysops.aol.com> People, I relize that many folks in the scientific community and academia often refer to the Marine Aquarium Council [ MAC ] as some kind of intelligent response to ensuring "sustainability" in the growing trade in reef tropical fishes and organisms. Having followed them for years since their inception, I can assure you that they are adrift and without results, achievement or leadership to go with all the public relations that have fooled so many. They have endeavored to "train" collectors to fish sustainably and disdain cyanide and yet have pretty much driven collectors back to cyanide with their ill-advised, culturally insensitive, top-down approach. Faced with a mass exodus from their well financed "cause", they re-certified marinelife dealers with out cause and without clean fish supply. The lack of fish supply to go with all the trouble and expense to become certified had left many dealers with a desire to end the game and not re-certify this year. The non interest in re-certifying as the years deadline approached left MAC in a panic at the pending loss of all their members on a single date. So, in an effort to prevent the exodus from MAC and a collapse of the small level of industry support that existed anyway...they just automatically re-certified for free all those who were certified before. Have a look and see the admission of chronic failure to provide substance to go with the wordplay in 7 year old drama...in quotes from memos to the dealers who carry cyanide fish for lack of any certified, netcaught fishes. On paragraph two regard the following ; "This was based on an assumption that there would be a steadily increasing supply of MAC certified organisms from the early days of certification. Unfortunately this supply has not materialised and this has left MAC certified exporters, importers and retailers without access to a meaningful supply of MAC certified organisms on a regular basis." And then everyones certification status was automatically extended til 2008! And so on it goes, fooling people who hope and want a cleaner industry ...cashing in on it without reforming it. Sincerely, Steve Robinson commercial collector & past president AMDA American Marinelife Deales Assoc PS. 5 years and 5 million dollars of Packard, McArthur and US AID money etc. ... and no fish supply? As I said long ago..."That dog don't hunt".. -----Original Message----- From: JKoven at aol.com To: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:05:29 EST Subject: Re: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Yes, Jim, "sustainable" and "development" ARE oxymorons. It all depends on what level of income/development the community stakeholders need to produce from their reefs, absent other income sources. Their choices are often limited - they can bring in tourists/divers or over-fish, even though that diminishes or damages the resources. Reefs provided sustenance for entire island communities for millenia - they can't now sustain other urban communities with growing populations. The needs of these stakeholders has changed over the past 50 years - they want to send their children to schools off-island, they want the same techological "improvements" in their lives that those in the urban areas have and to catch up with the 21st century world. Both climate change and over-fishing have affected many Pacific reefs that have not been subjected to gross land-based pollution. Nothing the stakeholders of small islands can do will change the global climate picture and fishing is part of their culture. The search is on for other ways to sustain the way of life they wish to have, without further destroying fisheries and thus reefs. It's interesting that outrigger canoes once sped villagers to other islands. Then came the diesel powered boats - slower and costly, although one was less dependant upon weather and perhaps drier upon arrival. Now faster fiberglass boats are the thing.....they travel as swiftly as an outrigger in a decent wind, but leave one beholden to the fuel companies. Progress? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From JKoven at aol.com Mon Feb 27 17:49:43 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 17:49:43 EST Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today Message-ID: <67.55e12d55.3134dc07@aol.com> The people who live in these underpopulated areas are still trying to earn a living...often by fishing their own reefs and selling to those who have depleted their own fisheries and willing to pay the price. Yes, over-population is at the base of many world problems but it is a sticky issue, at once cultural, ethnic and religious.? Not exactly one to be solved by reef scientists.? Perhaps women's education in general and in reproductive rights are the answers?? Women want better lives for their children, after they've been fed, saved from curable infectious diseases, and educated....and who is to determine what that better life is?? Is it what they perceive as the lives that other children in the world have, including yours?? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From jandl at rivnet.net Mon Feb 27 19:15:17 2006 From: jandl at rivnet.net (Judith Lang/Lynton Land) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 19:15:17 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] How to inspire responsible actions? Message-ID: Dear listers, I seems we are painfully aware of problems, from overpopulation to all manner of over-indulgence. But how to inspire responsible actions on our part and others? Absent easily available remedies, inspirational messages/reminders/ exhortations, however persuasive, are unlikely to have much effect. Jamaican members of the list can correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been thinking we could borrow some strategies from its early family- planning campaign. After initial successes targeting women with the simple but powerful theme, "Plan Your Family; Better Your Life," plus birth control pills that would either have been free or very cheap, it was realized that, to be truly successful, men also had to be included in the decision-making process. I remember a creative campaign of newspaper advertisements suggesting the more nuanced idea that "of course" dads want their children to have a chance to grow up and achieve some measure of respectable employment and social status (e.g., bank teller, carpenter), paired with condom advertisements on billboards that featured an enormous and very sexy looking, black panther. Surely we could come up with some attention-grabbing, genuine solutions to offer the world? Judy From G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au Tue Feb 28 00:38:07 2006 From: G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au (Gillian Goby) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 15:38:07 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] GBRMPA Current Conditions Report (4) Message-ID: <4403E1BF.8040308@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear Coral- Listers, apologies for cross-postings. Please find below the latest Current Conditions report for bleaching on the GBR. *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the Fourth Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 23 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current weather conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, *the* *threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region continues to be rated as moderate*. Severe coral bleaching has been confirmed for several reefs in the southern region during recent GBRMPA surveys. In addition, BleachWatch participants have recorded minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR and more recently the northern GBR. Temperature patterns are consistent with these reports. Although sea temperatures in the southern GBR have slightly decreased, they continue to exceed the February average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C and long-term summer maxima by 0.5 degrees C respectively. Central GBR waters have remained warm in recent weeks, and sea surface temperatures are still currently exceeding the February long-term average by 0.5 to 1.5 degrees C. Temperatures in northern parts of the GBR have increased and are elevated 0.5 to 2.0 degrees C above the February long-term average. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer we are still relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ From solutions at cozm.co.uk Tue Feb 28 03:25:57 2006 From: solutions at cozm.co.uk (Duncan MacRae) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 08:25:57 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Conservation work in Nusa Lembongan and Nusa Penida, near Bali - Indonesia Message-ID: <001801c63c40$99a579d0$4fd7fea9@Sarah> Dear all, Does anyone know of any marine conservation work carried out around the Nusa Lembongan/Penida Island group near Bali, Indonesia? Regards, Duncan R. MacRae Director Coastal Zone Management (UK) Integrated Conservation Solutions Blythe Cottage, 22 Rosemundy, St Agnes, Cornwall. UK ++(0) 1872 552 219 ++(0) 7958 230 076 e-mail: solutions at cozm.co.uk web: www.cozm.co.uk This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version From nhg3 at hw.ac.uk Tue Feb 28 12:54:47 2006 From: nhg3 at hw.ac.uk (Galvis, Nohora H) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 17:54:47 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline Message-ID: <2DEC240A2A06F04BB9D3BBF02DE198BD4D3382@ex5.mail.win.hw.ac.uk> I have followed with a lot of interest the discussions of the last days, confirming how passionate scientists have become nowadays when talking about the evidence of the coral reefs decline. This is a Social Psychological trend of applied science: Scientists engage with the study of environmental problems and feel an urgent need to contribute identifying solutions as a matter of ethical responsibility. This new perspective makes acceptable and even desirable for scientists to express emotions of frustration for being eyewitnesses of decline in the past decades and now by changing their priorities, attitudes and behaviours towards environmental management to get involved trying to communicate a pertinent message to decision makers, decision takers and the general public to allow them to be part of the solutions. Thanks to Dr. Alina Szmant for the webpage information about the web cast presentation of Dr. Jeremy Jackson. Nohora Galvis (Mental Models to improve coral reef management) ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Szmant, Alina Sent: Mon 27/2/06 1:09 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline For those of you loooking for how some scientists are trying to desseminate the word.... ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From: Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST) To: Subject: University of Texas Ocean Research Webcast Dear Science Enthusiast, University of Texas at Austin Webcast Entitled "Brave New Ocean." A webcast presentation given by Professor Jeremy Jackson, William E. and Mary B. Ritter Professor and Director of the Geosciences Research Division at Scripps Institution of Oceanography will be March 3, 2006 at 7pm. Dr. Jeremy Jackson is one of the most prominent marine ecologists in the world and he has a message to get out about the world's oceans - it documents declines in coral reefs, decreasing numbers of large marine fish, and losses of coastal and marine ecosystems. More than just an academic researcher, Dr. Jackson has actively searched for innovative ways to reach the public, applying his skills as a communicator with his scientific knowledge to inspire action. Dr. Jackson desires to reach a broader audience and affect change into the future with tomorrow's generation on this topic of interest. View a FREE web broadcast of the lecture live Friday, March 3, 2006 at 7 pm CST. During the live webcast, you can submit questions to Dr. Jackson and he will answer as many as he can for the live and webcast audiences. If possible, can you distribute or post a link to this webcast on your website, newsletter, or listserv as well as pass this notice on to any colleagues of yours that may be interested. The link to our Lecture Series website, where the details of the lecture and the webcast can be found, is: http://www.esi.utexas.edu/outreach/ols/lectures/Jackson/ Please let me know if you will consider posting this information. Thanks for your time, Brian Zavala Environmental Science Institute The University of Texas at Austin brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu 512.471.5847 ------ End of Forwarded Message _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From treesandseas at yahoo.com Tue Feb 28 22:51:15 2006 From: treesandseas at yahoo.com (Trees Seas) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 19:51:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060301035115.72877.qmail@web32709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Many thanks to everyone who responded to my query about a good underwater camera. The advice was greatly appreciated! Michelle Reyes __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From ricksanders at comcast.net Tue Feb 28 00:44:10 2006 From: ricksanders at comcast.net (Rick Sanders) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 00:44:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen onreefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas References: Message-ID: <007201c63c29$ffade530$650da8c0@manta> Raphael, That photo looks like it? I have gotten so many responses and I haven't had a chance to write back to thank any of you for sending your information on the macro algae. The photo you sent looks like a good example of the what I saw on the reefs in Cat Island. Quite a few other also suggested it was Microdictyon. Who is doing work on this algae and its impacts in the Bahamas? It seems strange that this algae is popping up in such remote locations...it has been suggested that currents may be carrying nutrients into these areas from other locations where the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients are greater. What is the impact that Microdictyon is having on these reefs? It seems to be overgrowing many healthy corals. It was also mentioned in other responses that I have gotten that this algae is seasonal. Does this mean that it's impact is only temporary and the impacted corals have a chance to recover from the infestation? Thanks again for the great photo and information, Rick Rick Sanders President Deep Blue Solutions 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "Raphael Williams" To: Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 4:13 PM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen onreefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas > Hi Rick this is probably a species of Microdictyon, I've attached a photo > from Sweetings Key, Bahamas. We found it there very common. I usually > use > the Littler's book "Caribbean Reef Plants" to id the common algae, it is a > very useful guide, written by Diane Littler and Mark Littler, 2000, > published by OffShore Graphics Inc. I hope this helps. Cheers,Raphael > > Raphael Ritson-Williams > Laboratory Technician Marine Chemical Ecology > Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce > 701 Seaway Dr, Fort Pierce, Fl, 34949 > (772) 465-6630 x146 > williams at sms.si.edu > >>>> "Rick Sanders" 02/21 1:34 PM >>> > Dear Listers, > > I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find > an > image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I > dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been > unable > to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. > > Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish > brown > color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each > other > in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped > into > more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm > in > width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if > to > crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing > many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. > > I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs > there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the > first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what > I > am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a > copy or link. > > Thanks very much in advance, > > Best regards, > > Rick > > > Rick Sanders > Deep Blue Solutions > Media, PA > 610-892-5272 > ricksanders at comcast.net > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From seaflower22 at gmail.com Wed Feb 1 03:55:34 2006 From: seaflower22 at gmail.com (Melanie Gomes) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 08:55:34 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Western Australia reference? Message-ID: <8793949b0602010055h2fcd9499h@mail.gmail.com> Dear All, Hope you are all having a good start to 2006! I was wondering if anyone could possibly help me to find a recent reference on the marine flora and fauna of Western Australia (I think this book was advertised on this list but can't seem to find the details). This was not the title although the book included, inverts and fish and was a general guide, a very good and recent one which I wrote down on an important piece of paper which I then lost! Any specially recommended guides on this part of the world would be appreciated as I'm going out there in March for a season to dive with the whale sharks and would also appreciate any recent refs on the sharks themselves for that matter. Thank you very much for your help, much appreciated. Best wishes Melanie Melanie Gomes B.Sc. M.Sc. From rousseau_herve at yahoo.fr Wed Feb 1 08:00:33 2006 From: rousseau_herve at yahoo.fr (=?iso-8859-1?q?herv=FFffffe9=20Rousseau?=) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:00:33 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] marine farm for sustainable development of aquariologytrade Message-ID: <20060201130033.85607.qmail@web25511.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hello, Frenchies answer to frenchies... If you need information in french about this topic, you can visit http://www.recifs.org which contain a lot of information about reef aquarium, aquarium trade, and sustainable development. You can focus on Vincent Chalias articles on aquarium trade, fishery and MAC (Marine Aquarium Council) activities. See you Herv? -----Message d'origine----- De : coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] De la part de yoann aumond Envoy? : mardi 31 janvier 2006 16:30 ? : coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Objet : [Coral-List] marine farm for sustainable development of aquariologytrade Hello, I'm a young french man with a degree in Marine Biology. I would like to investigate my self for the management of animal trade, and especially fish, for aquariology trade. This buisness make endangered the coral reef ecosystem physically and biologicaly due to the destructive practise (cyanure and explosive methods) which threaten the enormous diversity (important and essential for all the reasons you know). This practise occurs mainly in the south asia coral reef ecosystem which is the hot spoy for biodiversity. So I need more field information and a maximum of contact from people who are involved in this fight (scientist, association, local initiatives, possible grants....). I'm thinking about a project of a marine farm in the field, sustainable, which give a work to all the actual fisherman, give a high quality to the fish in the aim to reduce their mortality and the volume of export... I have a lot of good idea but I need support and help from people which know well this problem, from field, and are involved in and trust in the possibility to change the way of working (and of course the way of thinking). Thank you for you help and informations. Yoann AUMOND, "a motivated and hard worker dreamer" P.S.: sorry for my english, but I'm french... _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list ___________________________________________________________________________ Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international. T?l?chargez sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com From Chris.Ryan at irc-australia.com Wed Feb 1 18:25:27 2006 From: Chris.Ryan at irc-australia.com (Chris Ryan) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 07:25:27 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: Western Australia reference? Message-ID: <69D776850E99934E9FE517A99D52F2640111DBA6@ircs0001.intrisk.com> Hi Melanie This may be the reference you're after. Wells, FE, Walker, DI & Jones, DS (2003) The marine flora and fauna of Dampier, Western Australia: Proceedings of the twelfth International Marine Biological Workshop; held in Dampier from 24 Jul to 11 Aug 2000 [2 volumes Western Australian Museum, Perth, WA Cheers Chris Ryan Principal Consultant - Coastal and Marine Biology IRC Environment 26 Colin Street West Perth WA 6005 Tel: +61-8-9481-0100 Fax: +61-8-9481-0111 chris.ryan at irc-australia.com http://www.irc-australia.com Innovate | Resolve | Commit From reef at bellsouth.net Wed Feb 1 14:15:10 2006 From: reef at bellsouth.net (Vicky Ten Broeck) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:15:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] for coral list Message-ID: <20060201191512.HCBZ1691.ibm56aec.bellsouth.net@fiji> I am looking to go over to Madagascar this summer before graduate school to do coral reef research with a UK based non-profit and I was wondering if anyone knew of any agencies that might help fund the $5000 trip (6 weeks of diving research to help them establish a marine sanctuary). Thanks in advance! Vicky Ten Broeck Reef Relief Intern and Educational Assistant PO Box 430, Key West, FL 33040 (305) 294-3100 From treesandseas at yahoo.com Thu Feb 2 02:34:33 2006 From: treesandseas at yahoo.com (Trees Seas) Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 23:34:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera Message-ID: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hello I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with an underwater housing) that takes good underwater pictures in natural light. I generally work in the 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so I usually use natural light to save on power. In my experience not all cameras that take good pictures above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind having to do a little color correction afterwards but I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater photos canNOT be color corrected. Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot Michelle Reyes __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From reefball at reefball.com Thu Feb 2 09:35:34 2006 From: reefball at reefball.com (Todd Barber) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 09:35:34 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <018c01c62805$ed9acad0$6501a8c0@LaFalda> Hi Trees, The Reef Ball Foundation's Coral Team has had very good results using the Cannon Powershot 400 series. The have an inexpensive housing that is rated to 100 feet. The trick to taking pictures in natural light is to set the white balance just before taking pictures and change it whenever you change depths. This can be done with the Cannon....whatever camera you get make SURE you can set the white balance with the controls available on the housing...many camera housings cannot control this feature on many cameras. The only disadvantage is the Cannon housing is plastic....so you have to be a bit careful with it heat wise. Also, if you are taking allot of pictures (more than 50 or so) in a short period of time, the lens tends to fog (common in most battery operated cameras) but using a little bit of mask defog on the underwater housing lens will usually stop this problem. Happy shooting. "take only pictures and leave only footprints," Todd Barber Chairman Reef Ball Foundation, Inc. 3305 Edwards Court Greenville, NC 27858 reefball at reefball.com http://www.artificialreefs.org http://www.reefball.org http://www.reefball.com Direct: 252-353-9094 mobile: 941-720-7549 Fax 425-963-4119 Personal Space: http://www.myspace/reefball Group Space http://groups.myspace.com/reefballfoundation Skype & MSN For Voice or Video Conferences: Available upon request Atlanta/Athens Office 890 Hill Street Athens, GA 30606 USA 770-752-0202 (Our headquarters...not where I work see above) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Trees Seas" To: Sent: Thursday, February 02, 2006 2:34 AM Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera > Hello > > I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with > an underwater housing) that takes good underwater > pictures in natural light. I generally work in the > 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so > I usually use natural light to save on power. In my > experience not all cameras that take good pictures > above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind > having to do a little color correction afterwards but > I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater > photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel > resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show > corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any > recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks a lot > Michelle Reyes > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From TDWYATT at aol.com Thu Feb 2 11:28:14 2006 From: TDWYATT at aol.com (TDWYATT at aol.com) Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 11:28:14 EST Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera Message-ID: <59.36a3ea91.31138d1e@aol.com> In a message dated 2/2/2006 6:45:51 AM Eastern Standard Time, treesandseas at yahoo.com writes: Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Nikon D70, Prolly the D50 as well. HTH, Tom Wyatt _tdwyatt at aol.com_ (mailto:tdwyatt at aol.com) From Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov Thu Feb 2 16:24:30 2006 From: Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 16:24:30 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: 2nd Call - Requesting Data on 2005 Caribbean Bleaching In-Reply-To: <43DAA0C6.8030600@noaa.gov> References: <43DAA0C6.8030600@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <7A2DDF74-0D42-4AC6-895D-5BA448045803@noaa.gov> As an update on this request that we sent out last week, I want to emphasize that we also need reports from those areas that did not bleach. We need to get information from reefs that fell outside the thermal stress zone, or where stress was less severe to really anchor the bottom end of the response of corals to thermal stress. If we only have positive bleaching reports, we can't nail down the threshold below which we did not see bleaching. Thanks, Mark On Jan 27, 2006, at 5:37 PM, Jessica A. Morgan wrote: > TO: Bleaching Observation Contributors > FROM: Jessica Morgan and Mark Eakin, NOAA Coral Reef Watch > > Second call: Deadline for data submission to be included in our > publication is Friday, February 3. Please contact me if you will > have any problems meeting this deadline. > > --------------------------- > > As you know, bleaching reports from contributors have been coming > in from much of the Caribbean and western North Atlantic. The US > Coral Reef Task Force (USCRTF) Bleaching Committee has held > conference calls to bring together and solicit input from NOAA and > DOI personnel, as well as other federal agencies, NGO partners, and > local Caribbean scientists and managers. The outcomes of the > initial meetings include the development of a 3-phase response > approach (including an initial response, near-term reporting and > assessment, and long-term monitoring) and identification of key > partners, resources, and issues. > > A part of the first phase is to identify and assess bleaching > severity throughout the region. I am collating these reports with > the plan to produce a multi-author, quick paper to Science or > Nature that documents the event. From there, I am sure that more > publications will follow. Everyone who provides data that are used > in the analysis of the event will be included as an author on the > resulting paper(s). Our intent is to provide the broad, Caribbean- > wide analysis, comparing the thermal stress recorded from > satellites with local observations of bleaching and temperatures. > That publication will only include summaries of the information > that you submit. We hope that all of our collaborators will > produce more detailed national or local analyses to further > document the event. At this point we have almost 1000 observations > contributed by 70 individuals in 18 jurisdictions. > > To collect the details needed for the first analysis and to > establish a baseline for follow-up work, a spreadsheet > questionnaire (?CRW Carib Bleach Report Form?) has been developed > for bleaching reports. We would like to invite all ReefBase > contributors who have made bleaching observations for the Caribbean > in 2005 to expand upon the original ReefBase information by > submitting a more quantitative report via the attached > questionnaire (an Excel file) to coralreefwatch at noaa.gov. Please > note that we are only seeking quantitative reports for this analysis. > > The blank questionnaire form, along with information from the US > Coral Reef Task Force, NOAA meetings held to date, and more, are > available for download at the website http:// > coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/caribbean2005. > > Thanks to all of you for your help, > Jessica > -- > Jessica A. Morgan > Operations Manager, NOAA Coral Reef Watch > SSMC1, E/RA 31, Rm. 5309, Silver Spring, MD 20910 > Phone: (301) 713-2857 x129 Fax: (301) 713-3136 > Email: Jessica.Morgan at noaa.gov Web: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ C. Mark Eakin, Ph.D. Coordinator, NOAA Coral Reef Watch National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Satellite Applications and Research Satellite Oceanography & Climate Division e-mail: mark.eakin at noaa.gov url: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov E/RA31, SSMC1, Room 5308 1335 East West Hwy Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226 301-713-2857 x109 Fax: 301-713-3136 From matz at whitney.ufl.edu Thu Feb 2 07:59:29 2006 From: matz at whitney.ufl.edu (Mikhail Matz) Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 07:59:29 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: coral facility @ austin, TX Message-ID: <43E20231.8010207@whitney.ufl.edu> Hello listers, I want to thank everybody for an extremely enthusiastic and helpful response concrrning the design of new coral facility. I've been given a lot of advice and put in contact with the most experienced people in the trade. Now I can really see it all happening! cheers Misha -- -------------------- Mikhail V Matz, Ph.D Research Assistant Professor Whitney Laboratory for Marine Bioscience University of Florida 9505 Ocean Shore Blvd St Augustine, FL 32080, USA phone 904 461 4025 fax 904 461 4008 matz at whitney.ufl.edu www.whitney.ufl.edu/research_programs/matz.htm From ashadevos at gmail.com Thu Feb 2 22:56:58 2006 From: ashadevos at gmail.com (Asha de Vos) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 09:56:58 +0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Coolpix and Strobes Message-ID: <90f39b5f0602021956r514b0e19q@mail.gmail.com> Hi I've recently started using a Nikon Coolpix 5600 with underwater housing to take photos while diving. However, the flash is not very strong and therefore photographs (other than macros - which come out beautifully) are not very clear. Does anyone use this (or a similar model) of camera and if yes, can anyone recommend a compatible strobe that I could purchase? Thanks. Asha. From dhopley at austarnet.com.au Sun Feb 5 18:37:37 2006 From: dhopley at austarnet.com.au (David Hopley) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 09:37:37 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Palau photographs Message-ID: Dear All, A quick thanks to all of you who provided me with photographs of the Palau Rock Islands, or referred me to sources. I've tried to respond to everybody and am sending this out just in case I missed anyone. David Dr. David Hopley Coastal and Marine Consultant 3 Wingadee Court ANNANDALE QLD 4814 AUSTRALIA PHONE: +61 7 4725 2856 dhopley at austarnet.com.au From Georgios at icm.csic.es Fri Feb 3 16:58:25 2006 From: Georgios at icm.csic.es (Georgios Tsounis) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 22:58:25 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: underwater camera In-Reply-To: <20060202170041.80E481795F@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> References: <20060202170041.80E481795F@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: Hi Michelle, back in 2001 when 7 Megapixels were still expensive, we used a small sony digital compact with great success for a population structure study. The only drawback of the compacts compared to a digital SLR was the extreme shutterlag (annoying and at times stressful, but still tolerable with coral work). I would rather recomend something like a Nikon Coolpix 5000, if 5MP are enough, as our colleagues have had good experience with this one. If you need a certain range from wideangle to macro, then the compact cameras offer more flexibility than an SLR with a macro lens, and are much cheaper to house. The macro ability was quite astonishing to me, but it is important to check it out before purchase. I am pretty sure the coolpix range of nikons allow whitebalance settings. However, I suspect whitebalance has limits when used at 20m (did not ry this though). In our experience flash use under water was problematic with compacts. I usually switched off the build in flash, or blocked it by hand. Instead we used a divers light on a strobe arm to illuminate the corals and provide a focussing light to the autofocus. It worked fine, but required sufficient battery capacity. With some underwaterhousings (such as Sealux), you can connect an external flash. Amphibious flashes by Nikon are compatible with the Nikon digitals. However, you can only use the flash in manual mode, unless you use a pro SLR. For our work I really think 5Megapixels are sufficient. I found this website helpful in this regard: http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm There is a wealth of information on the net about compatibility of cameras, housings and strobes. You can always ask questions about digital underwater photography on the forum mantained by: www.wetpixel.com. I think there was a good article on white balance by Alexander Mustard stored in the archives. You can see how we used the digicams in our work by downloading the results of our survey (3.6 mb document): http://elib.suub.uni-bremen.de/publications/dissertations/E- Diss1246_TsounisG.pdf Cheers, Georgios Dr. Georgios Tsounis Institut de Ci?ncies del Mar, CMIMA (CSIC) Passeig Mar?tim de la Barceloneta, 37-49 08003 Barcelona, Spain Phone: 34 93 230 96 07 Fax: 34 93 230 95 55 E-mail: georgios at icm.csic.es http://www.icm.csic.es Message: 4 Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 23:34:33 -0800 (PST) From: Trees Seas Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: <20060202073433.87687.qmail at web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Hello I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with an underwater housing) that takes good underwater pictures in natural light. I generally work in the 5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so I usually use natural light to save on power. In my experience not all cameras that take good pictures above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind having to do a little color correction afterwards but I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater photos canNOT be color corrected. Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. Thanks a lot Michelle Reyes _____________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 2 ***************************************** From thierry_work at usgs.gov Sun Feb 5 14:49:47 2006 From: thierry_work at usgs.gov (Thierry Work) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 09:49:47 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] mucus in the ectodermal epithelium of corals In-Reply-To: <003f01c624b5$d6dfa7a0$e3904084@es.huji.ac.il> Message-ID: Dear Yael: yes, mucocytes definitely are present in calicoblastic epithelium (at least in Porite compressa and lobata) as visualized on electron microscopy. I have, however, yet to see micro-organisms associated with this layer. Thierry M. Work Wildlife Disease Specialist USGS-National Wildlife Health Center Honolulu Field Station PO Box 50167 Honolulu, HI 96850 Tel: 808 792-9520 Fax: 808 792-9596 Cel: 808 554-6490 Web: www.nwhc.usgs.gov/hfs/Homepage.htm Check out the following references on microscopic morphology of corals. These may help: Goldberg W, Makemson J, Colley S (1984) Entoclada endozoica sp. nov., a pathogenic chlorophyte: structure, life history, physiology, and effect on its coral host. Biological Bulletin 166:368-383 Goldberg W, Taylor G (1989) Cellular structure and ultrastructure of the black coral Antipathes aperta: 2. the gastrodermis and its collar cells. Journal of Morphology 202:255-269 Goldberg WM, Taylor G (1989) Cellular structure and ultrastructure of the black coral Antipathes aperta: 1. Organization of the tentacular epidermis and nervous system. Journal of Morphology 202:239-253 Goldberg WM (2001) Acid polysaccharides in the skeletal matrix and calicoblastic epithelium of the stony coral Mycetophyllia reesi. Tissue & Cell 33:376-387 Goldberg WM (2001) Desmocytes in the calicoblastic epithelium of the stony coral Mycetophyllia reesi and their attachment to the skeleton. Tissue & Cell 33:388-394 Goldberg W (2002) Gastrodermal structure and feeding response in the scleractinian Mycetophyllia reesi, a coral with novel digestive filaments. Tissue & Cell 34:246-261 Goldberg WM (2002) Feeding behavior, epidermal structure and mucus cytochemistry of the scleractinian Mycetophyllia reesi, a coral without tentacles. Tissue & Cell 34:232-245 Microscopic anatomy of invertebrates Volume 2 Placozoa, Porifera, Cnidaria & Ctenophora by FW Harrison (Editor) Wiley Press. -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Yael Ben-Haim Rozenblat Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 11:25 PM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] mucus in the ectodermal epithelium of corals Hi all coral listrers, Does anyone knows if there is mucus secretion (or something similar to mucus) from the ectodermal epithelium layer of corals? (meaning the calicoblastic ectodermis, close to the skeleton), and/ or any microorganisms associated with this microlayer of the corals? Are there any publications or work done about this? I appreciate any advice and help , and thank you in advance, Yael Yael Ben-Haim , Pn.D The Institute of Earth Sciences The Hebrew University of Jerusalem Givat Ram Campus, Israel Office: (+972) 2 6586194 _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From keulen at murdoch.edu.au Fri Feb 3 01:08:30 2006 From: keulen at murdoch.edu.au (Mike van Keulen) Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:08:30 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera In-Reply-To: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <6.1.2.0.2.20060203135409.0238a638@www.mail.murdoch.edu.au> Hi Michelle, I've been using Olympus cameras for some time and found they're excellent for underwater use. Most models have reasonably priced dedicated housings and third party strobes are available for them too. The ones I've used are the C-5060 (5 megapixel) and the C-8080 (8 megapixel) - I think these models have been superseded, but I would guess there would be a suitable replacement. Both the models I use have an excellent super-macro allowing you to get to within 2 cm of the subject. Colour reproduction is excellent. Cheers, Mike At 15:34 2/02/2006, Trees Seas wrote: >Hello > >I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with >an underwater housing) that takes good underwater >pictures in natural light. I generally work in the >5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so >I usually use natural light to save on power. In my >experience not all cameras that take good pictures >above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind >having to do a little color correction afterwards but >I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater >photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel >resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show >corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any >recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks a lot >Michelle Reyes > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Dr Mike van Keulen Lecturer in Plant Sciences and Marine Biology Research Director - Coral Bay Research Station Murdoch University, WA 6150, Australia List-owner: Seagrass_Forum, Mangrove Ph: +61 8 93602369 E-mail: keulen at murdoch.edu.au Fax: +61 8 93606303 URL: http://wwwstaff.murdoch.edu.au/~keulen/ From jware at erols.com Fri Feb 3 09:34:36 2006 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 09:34:36 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <43E369FC.4090403@erols.com> Michelle, I would guess that you are going to get dozens of replies and end up just as confused as before. First question back to you is: How much money do you have? Next would be: Why natural light? (and let me tell you why later). As you have noted, the thing that limits the number of UW pictures you can take in one dive is usually power. So having come to that conclusion let me point out that: 1- The primary camera battery drain is the LCD (or whatever) display. Therefore, if your need is to take 100+ pictures per dive or per excursion (e.g., on a small boat and can't change batteries) go with an SLR (single lens reflex) and set the camera so that it only displays on the LCD for a few seconds after the picture is taken (to assure that you have actually got a decent picture. Using my Nikon D70, I have taken hundreds and hundreds of pictures over the course of a week on a single battery charge. 2- The strobe. I know you wanted to use natural light, but that doesn't always work depending upon depth and the screwing around underwater with white balance. If you use a strobe that holds 8 AAs (e.g. Sea&Sea YS90) and use NiMH batteries rated at 2000+ Ma, you should get at least 200 full strobe flashes. Since you won't need full strobe for most pictures, the actual number will be much greater. My only experience is with the Nikon D70 in a Sea&Sea housing. However, I have friends who use a EOS rebel in a Ikelite housing with the new digital TTL in the housing. I seem to recall that Yossi Loya was not too happy with his at first, I don't know about now. Nikon makes 2 very good, and reasonably priced, digital cameras, the D50 and the D70. About the only difference from a practical viewpoint is the storage media. I prefer the D70 because the compact flash storage is sturdy. Only 6 MegPix but that is plenty because of what appears to be superior interpolation scheme. Also, Nikon has a zoom lens, often part of the purchase package, 28 to 80. This gives reasonable wide angle and still allows sufficient close ups. However, you must make sure that the housing will allow adjusting the zoom as Nikon has a couple of different but very similar lenses, one that doesn't quite fit. But now the price. The camera is not too bad, its the housings that kill you. I suspect that, as with most research, money is limiting. The set ups I have been describing will probably cost about US3000 for everything, maybe even a little more. Having said that, my long experience in UW photography is that, whenever I have tried to go cheap I eventually end up so dissatisfied that I end up buying twice. John Trees Seas wrote: >Hello > >I'd like to ask for advice on a digital camera (with >an underwater housing) that takes good underwater >pictures in natural light. I generally work in the >5-20m depth range, taking still photos of benthos, so >I usually use natural light to save on power. In my >experience not all cameras that take good pictures >above water can do the same underwater. I don't mind >having to do a little color correction afterwards but >I've had experience with some cameras whose underwater >photos canNOT be color corrected. > Does anyone know of a good model with 7-8 megapixel >resolution? (A zoom/macro setting good enough to show >corallites in detail would be a definite bonus).Any >recommendations would be greatly appreciated. > >Thanks a lot >Michelle Reyes > >__________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886, USA * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * http://www.seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * Treasurer and Member of the Council: * * International Society for Reef Studies * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Untainted by Technology \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************* From John.Rollino at earthtech.com Fri Feb 3 07:40:19 2006 From: John.Rollino at earthtech.com (Rollino, John) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 04:40:19 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Species List - CARICOMP Algae Classification Message-ID: <0FE7A03100C5D949A074D0A58DBCCEEA032D1ABE@usnycmail01.et.rootad.com> Hello All: Can someone direct me to a list that identifies which algal species are classified by CARICOMP as the following: * Turf Algae * Fleshy Algae * Calcareous Algae * Encrusting Calcareous Algae Thank you, John This e-mail is intended to be delivered only to the named addressee(s) and may contain information that is confidential and proprietary. If this information is received by anyone other than the named addressee(s), the recipient(s) should immediately notify the sender by e-mail and promptly delete the transmitted material from your computer and server. In no event shall this material be read, used, stored, or retained by anyone other than the named addressee(s) without the express written consent of the sender or the named addressee(s). From nithyrna at yahoo.co.in Sun Feb 5 11:47:21 2006 From: nithyrna at yahoo.co.in (nithy anand) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2006 16:47:21 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] query to coral microbiologist & biotechnologists Message-ID: <20060205164721.48797.qmail@web8314.mail.in.yahoo.com> Dear Listers, Is anyone working with Vibrioids and Pseudomonads associated with corals? I want to know the predominant species and total count associated with them. Somebody please help on these aspects. cheers, Nithy P.Nithyanand Research Scholar C/O Dr. S. Karutha Pandian Department of Biotechnology Alagappa University Karaikudi - 630 003 TamilNadu INDIA H/P: 9443743580 --------------------------------- Jiyo cricket on Yahoo! India cricket From shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au Sun Feb 5 19:22:57 2006 From: shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au (Shelley Anthony) Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 10:22:57 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] 2006/2007 Research Internships available at ReefHQ Aquarium, Townsville, Australia Message-ID: <43E696E1.7080308@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear Colleagues, I would very much appreciate it if you could forward this internship offer to appropriate students and staff, and/or post it on your university job notice board. We are also still seeking qualified applicants for a position to start in September 2006. Regards, Shelley / /As part of its education and outreach role, Reef HQ is offering four curatorial internship positions to suitable applicants for 2007. Each internship position involves one specialist research and development project, that will be the core duty of the candidate. However, interns will also assist with extensive water quality analyses, routine diving and field trips, construction and maintenance of aquarium systems, and other duties related to animal care. This program is designed for university-level or recently graduated individuals intending to undertake a technical or professional career in marine science, aquaculture or a closely related discipline. Please refer to the following link for further information: "http://www.reefhq.com.au/involved/intern/curatorial.html"./ /// -- Shelley L. Anthony, M.Sc. Acting Biologist - Coral Reef Ecosystems ReefHQ Aquarium/The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority 2-68 Flinders St. PO Box 1379 Townsville QLD 4810 AUSTRALIA Ph: (07)4750-0876 Fax: (07)4772-5281 email: shelleya at gbrmpa.gov.au PhD Student ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies School of Marine Biology & Aquaculture James Cook University Townsville QLD 4811 AUSTRALIA shelley.anthony at jcu.edu.au ============================================================================== If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ============================================================================== From claudio.richter at zmt-bremen.de Mon Feb 6 11:31:09 2006 From: claudio.richter at zmt-bremen.de (Claudio Richter) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2006 17:31:09 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Meeting Announcement: ISRS European Coral Reef Conference 2006 in Bremen Message-ID: 1st Circular 6th European Coral Reef Conference 2006 European Meeting of the International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) 19 - 22 September, 2006, Bremen, Germany Welcome to Bremen! The 6th European Coral Reef Conference 2006 in Bremen is expected to bring together leading coral reef scientists and students to present and discuss state-of-the-art scientific results, education and outreach. It covers all aspects of research, use and management of reefs with a focus on European and European partner contributions from tropical shallow waters to high-latitude deep continental shelves. Date: September 19-22, 2006 Venue: University of Bremen & Center for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT), Bremen, Germany Organisation: Center for Tropical Marine Ecology (ZMT) Deadline for submission of Abstracts: 15 May, 2006 Deadline for Early Registration: 15 May, 2006 Programme Schedule A regional focus will be on the Indian Ocean and adjacent seas, taking into account the wealth of studies conducted in response to the 1998 bleaching event and the 2004 earthquake and tsunami. As another scientific highlight we expect first results from the IODP Tahiti reef drilling programme. There are many more interesting sessions, and abstracts on all aspects of basic and applied research are welcome! Please submit your abstract by 15 May, 2006! For details, please visit the conference webpage at isrs2006.zmt.uni-bremen.de On behalf of ZMT, the ISRS President and Council, we hope to see you in Bremen! Dr. Claudio Richter Zentrum f?r Marine Tropen?kologie Center for Tropical Marine Ecology Fahrenheitstr. 6 D-28359 Bremen Germany T. +49-421-2380025 F. +49-421-2380030 From michelc at squ.edu.om Mon Feb 6 23:29:13 2006 From: michelc at squ.edu.om (Michel Claereboudt) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 08:29:13 +0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Software to analyse coral video transects Message-ID: <30052D55-B224-46FE-B2AC-E6D2AD95E070@squ.edu.om> I have been off the list for a while. Apparently, a subscriber was interested in a software to analyse (sample I suppose) video transects of coral communities. I have written (still under development, but usable at this stage) such software. If anyone is interested I can email a copy. It works on both PCs and Mac and requires the presence of Quicktime. All formats that quicktime understands can be used as video source files. Dr. Michel Claereboudt Sultan Qaboos University College Agr. and Mar. Sciences Dpt. Marine Sci. and Fisheries Box 34, al-khod 123 Sultanate of Oman Tel: (968) 244 15 249 Fax; (968) 244 13 418 email: michelc at squ.edu.om From eweil at caribe.net Tue Feb 7 08:11:32 2006 From: eweil at caribe.net (EWeil) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 09:11:32 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Information on white plague outbreaks in the Caribbean Message-ID: <0b1ec65a6a674213a4b12aaaa117d18e.eweil@caribe.net> Dear listers, I am interested in observations and/or reports on outbreaks of white plague (or any other coral reef disease) during or after the mass bleaching event of last year in the Caribbean. I know there was an outbreak in St. John reported by Jeff Miller and we put something out from Puerto Rico where we observed and quantified WP outbreaks in several reefs that started around mid-late November. The outbreak was also more intensive in offshore, deep reefs (>15 m) with better water quality compared to inshore and/or shallower reef areas (???). If you have observed any outbreaks, could you please contact me and include the following information: 1- Disease 2- Date outbreak started (approximation will be ok) 3- Locality - reef (if possible GPS coordinates) and approximate depth interval. 4- Any assessment of intensity (proportion of colonies affected) and extension (area - reefs - etc) 5- Current status (still going or it arrested) 6- Any other information/observations you deem relevant Thank you all for your cooperation!! EW Dr. Ernesto Weil Department of Marine Sciences University of Puerto Rico PO BOX 3208 Lajas PR 00667 Pho: (787) 899-2048 x. 241 Fax: (787) 899-5500 - 2630 From david at trilliumfilms.net Tue Feb 7 20:47:58 2006 From: david at trilliumfilms.net (David McGuire) Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 17:47:58 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] coral bleaching and selecting marine protected areas Message-ID: Hello, I am new to the list. I am working on a coral reef conservation documentary and would like to do some fact checking. Much of the underwater imagery is shot in atolls in the north and south pacific. We are supporting the NWHI MPA in the film as one solution to protect reef habitat. However, it is difficult to protect against global sea water temperature rises and large scale bleaching events. Would it be accurate to say that the NWHI are well situated geographically in the Pacific gyre to minimize the coral reefs exposure to sea water increase and subsequent bleaching events in comparison to other island groups or reef systems? The Hawaiian Islands experienced cool water temperatures in 1998 and experienced little bleaching effects. It is a bit of a leap perhaps but makes for a good generalized statement of support. Thanks for your advice David McGuire Trillium Films Sausalito CA From G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au Wed Feb 8 01:08:50 2006 From: G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au (Gillian Goby) Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 16:08:50 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] GBRMPA Current Conditions Report (3) Message-ID: <43E98AF2.5040404@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear All, *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the third Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 6 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, the threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region is currently rated as moderate. Sea temperatures in the southern GBR have remained significantly warmer than average (+ 0.5 - 2.5 degrees C) since December 2005 (ReefTemp), and are now exceeding the long-term summer maxima by up to 2 degrees C (NOAA HotSpot map). In contrast, recent heavy cloud cover and rain over northern parts of the GBR has kept temperatures close to average conditions for this region (Reef Futures). Central GBR waters have shown a warming tendency in recent weeks, with sea surface temperatures currently exceeding the January long-term average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C (ReefTemp). Consistent with these temperature patterns, reports of severe coral bleaching have now been confirmed for some reefs in the southern region, with minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer, and with the bleaching risk period far from over we are heavily relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ From jware at erols.com Tue Feb 7 11:01:37 2006 From: jware at erols.com (John Ware) Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:01:37 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera References: <20060202073433.87687.qmail@web32705.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <43E369FC.4090403@erols.com> Message-ID: <43E8C461.4090609@erols.com> Not to belabor this UW camera thing, but I have been corrected: the Sea&Sea YS-90 uses 4 AAs, it is the YS120 that uses 8 AAs and, therefore, carries twice the milliamp*hours for the same type of batteries. John -- ************************************************************* * * * John R. Ware, PhD * * President * * SeaServices, Inc. * * 19572 Club House Road * * Montgomery Village, MD, 20886, USA * * 301 987-8507 * * jware at erols.com * * http://www.seaservices.org * * fax: 301 987-8531 * * Treasurer and Member of the Council: * * International Society for Reef Studies * * _ * * | * * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * _|_ * * | _ | * * _______________________________| |________ * * |\/__ Untainted by Technology \ * * |/\____________________________________________/ * ************************************************************* From Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov Tue Feb 7 11:28:00 2006 From: Mark.Eakin at noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2006 11:28:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Update: Bleaching Potential around Melanesia and Australia Message-ID: Melanesia: Bleaching Warning in Fiji-Beqa Warming in Melanesia continues. DHWs now exceed 8 in some areas to the east of Papua New Guinea and around the Solomon Islands. The region of heat stress may be contracting slightly around the Solomon Islands, but warming is now evident to the south of Samoa, American Samoa, and Fiji. A bleaching warning has now been issued for Fiji-Beqa. Australia: Heat Stress is Subsiding on GBR Fortunately, the center of anomalously warm ocean temperatures has moved farther south along the eastern Australian coast. The region of warming evidenced by HotSpot values over 1 degree C is now largely south and east of the Gold Coast, so the immediate threat to the GBR has ended. However, early warming such as this has frequently preceded bleaching stress late in the austral summer. The warming in the Timor Sea has also abated. According to our past data, some bleaching is likely at DHW values of 4 or above and large-scale bleaching and some mortality is likely above 8. We encourage researchers in these regions to watch out for signs of bleaching. Current HotSpot and Degree Heating Week charts can be found at: http://coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/index.html Improved time series graphics for index sites can be found at http:// coralreefwatch.noaa.gov/satellite/current/sstdhwsba_series_24reefs.html You can sign up for automated bleaching alerts at http:// coralreefwatch-satops.noaa.gov/SBA.html Please continue reporting bleaching events (or non-events) at http:// www.reefbase.org/input/bleachingreport/index.asp Regards, Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------ C. Mark Eakin, Ph.D. Coordinator, NOAA Coral Reef Watch National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Center for Satellite Applications and Research Satellite Oceanography & Climate Division e-mail: mark.eakin at noaa.gov url: coralreefwatch.noaa.gov E/RA31, SSMC1, Room 5308 1335 East West Hwy Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226 301-713-2857 x109 Fax: 301-713-3136 From sdalton at nmsc.edu.au Tue Feb 7 18:58:53 2006 From: sdalton at nmsc.edu.au (Steve Dalton) Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2006 10:58:53 +1100 Subject: [Coral-List] Management of disease outbreaks Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.0.20060208105247.02428320@mail> Firstly I would like to thank everyone for their replies to my email regarding software to analyse video transects, the response was great, and certainly shows the benefits of this list. I was wondering if anyone has done any studies involving diseased corals where the active margin has been completely removed from the infected colonies and monitored the colony for reinfection? Has anyone had any success in stopping progressive disease/syndrome by removing the margin? Any comments would be welcome Regards Steven Dalton PhD student University of New England NMSC Postgraduate Representative National Marine Science Centre Bay Drive, Charlesworth Bay (PO Box J321) Coffs Harbour, NSW Australia 2450 Ph: 6648 3928 Mob: 0432 946 782 sdalton at nmsc.edu.au From thomas_houze at hotmail.com Wed Feb 8 05:47:11 2006 From: thomas_houze at hotmail.com (Thomas Houze) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 11:47:11 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] RE: Request for Coral manuscript Message-ID: Dear coral biologist, Recently I had the good fortune to see that the first batch of EST for the corals Acropora palmata and Montastraea faveolata are available for download from the NCBI. I was wondering if someone could please send me a copy of the manuscript as an attachment. I am particularly interested in what life-phase the samples used to create the ESTs where in that where used in the study. Thomas Houze, Ph.D. Bioinformatics G?teborg University Dept. of Cell and Molecular Biology Lundberg Laboratory Medicinaregatan 9C 405 30 G?teborg Sweden From ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com Wed Feb 8 12:02:46 2006 From: ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com (Eric Coral Inquiry) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 01:02:46 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Information/Literature on Mineral Accretion Technology (Biorock) Message-ID: <6400622e0602080902w3dd3f2caq3178e612c947a853@mail.gmail.com> Dear Listers, I am planning to carry out research on how MAT, Mineral Accretion Technology (Biorock) affect the growth rate of different coral species in my area. I would like to find out if there is anyone who has any helpful information, or literature references related to MAT, Biorock that can help me. Also, I like to find out if anyone currently doing any research on Biorock and I would like to get in touch with you. At the same time, would also appreciate your help on any existing literature regarding the species of coral found in Sabah (North Borneo) waters. 1) Info/literature on Biorock (I have already been to the Biorock website http://www.globalcoral.org/ , www.*biorock*.net/, www.*wolf**hilbertz*.com/) 2) Like to geet in touch with you if you are doing anything on Biorock 3) Coral Species found in Sabah (North Borneo) waters. Really appreciate your help on the above-mentioned matter. Eric YSY "Marine Biologist in the making" Kota Kinabalu Sabah Malaysia. You can also reach me at: ericevany at gmail.com erjonah at hotmail.com From mjnewman at ucsd.edu Wed Feb 8 12:10:53 2006 From: mjnewman at ucsd.edu (Marah Newman) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:10:53 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons Message-ID: <3F2A27B5-FC18-44CA-8EFB-55300C6CF781@ucsd.edu> Hi All, I have several bleached coral skeletons and I need to calculate skeleton density. I have looked at several papers that detail methods for calculating density via buoyant weights, but I believe this is to get measurements of live corals. Since I have the coral skeleton only, is there any reason why I cannot simple use the basic water displacement method (aka Archimedes)? I know there is some concern regarding trapped air, but if I soak the corals overnight first in DI water, will this take care of it? Any comments as to why this will NOT work, would be great. Thanks. Marah Newman From cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw Thu Feb 9 07:18:39 2006 From: cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw (Chaolun Allen Chen) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 20:18:39 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] coconut crabs and horseshoe crabs conservation genetics Message-ID: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> Dear All, We are developing the conservation project targeted on two large arthropods, coconut crab (Birgus latro) and horseshoe crab ( Tachypleus tridentatus ) in the Indo-West-Pacific region. Our team includes two groups, one is developing aquaculture technique to propagate of these two species. So far we have quite successful results. The other group is developing microsatellite markers for conservation genetics of these two species. For this part of project, we are seeking for the help to collect a small portion of crab's appendage for genetic study throughout the region. For those who can kindly provide us samples, host our field collection, or just want to know the propagation technique of these two crabs, please feel free to contact me. Thank you in advance for your help. Allen Chen, PhD Associate Research Fellow Evolutionary Ecology and Genetics of Coral Reef Laboratory Research Centre for Biodiversity, Academia Sinica, Taiwan E-mail: cac at gate.sinica.edu.tw From csaenger at MIT.EDU Thu Feb 9 11:08:55 2006 From: csaenger at MIT.EDU (Casey Saenger) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 11:08:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Instrumental Salinity/Temperature in Bahamas In-Reply-To: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> References: <20060209121502.M82148@gate.sinica.edu.tw> Message-ID: <3762cdc14b847029eaef3aa95240017f@mit.edu> Dear All, Does someone know when noaa's CREWS monitoring of temperature and salinity began in the Bahamas? Thanks, Casey Saenger > Woods Hole Oceanographic Inst. M.S. #23, Clark 117 Woods Hole, MA 02543 508-289-3418 csaenger at mit.edu From szmanta at uncw.edu Thu Feb 9 12:20:07 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 12:20:07 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] New articles on e-journal "Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy" Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A6763A1@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Greetins All: The conservation oriented, free e-journal "Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy" has new publications that can be access through the URL below http://ejournal.nbii.org/progress/index.html ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From Eileen.Alicea at noaa.gov Thu Feb 9 13:04:32 2006 From: Eileen.Alicea at noaa.gov (Eileen Alicea) Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 13:04:32 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Searching for Carib fish out-of-water photos Message-ID: <43EB8430.4010503@noaa.gov> Hello Coral listers, I'm working with the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources on the development of a Spanish (regulated) fish guide for their enforcement officers. We are collecting excellent resolution photos of fish out of the water because they are more realistic for the rangers to learn from and use when inspecting fishers' catches. We have many so far but I'm still searching for the following. We have already searched the DNER files, Fishbase.org and Google images and I'm in the process of reaching the photographers. If you can facilitate these named below, please write to me directly. It will greatly serve the coral reef and fisheries conservation goals of Puerto Rico. 1) Scomberomorus regalis- Cero; Sierra 2) Istiophorus platypterus or albicans; Sailfish - Pez vela. 3) Tetrapturus pfluegeri; Longbill spearfish; aguja picuda. 4) Epinephelus guttatus- Red Hind- Mero Cabrilla 5) Epinephelus striatus- Nassau Grouper; Mero Cherna Thank you, Eileen Alicea NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program From dbucher at scu.edu.au Thu Feb 9 18:40:49 2006 From: dbucher at scu.edu.au (dbucher) Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2006 10:40:49 +1100 Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons Message-ID: Hi Marah, Try the following reference for a discussion of Archimedian methods for determining density of bleached coral skeletons. The important distinction is whether you want bulk density/porosity or the specific gravity of the mineral matrix (microdensity). We recommended the use of acetone to penetrate the small pore spaces as the surface tension in water is too great to remove all gas bubbles. We accelerated the process by using a vacuum pump and a bell-jar to lower the pressure. Without the vacuum pump overnight soaking was not long enough - you need several days at least for porous skeletons. The acetone- saturated skeleton was then soaked in several changes of water. Acetone has the added advantage of dissolving residual organic matter (waxes, oils etc) left behind by the bleaching process. Buoyant weigh the saturated skeleton, dry it, coat it with a thin layer of parafin wax and buoyant weigh it again - if you accurately measure the specific density of the water in the weighing apparatus you can calculate the coral's total enclosed volume (matrix plus pore spaces), its dry weight and the volume of the matrix alone. It's not the most exciting thing you will ever do, but it worked for us. Bucher, D., Harriott, V. and Roberts, L. 1998 Skeletal bulk density, micro-density and porosity of acroporid corals. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology. 228(1)117-135. It's not the most exciting thing you will ever do, but it worked for us. See my small contribution to the next reference for an application of this method. K. Koop, D. Booth, A. Broadbent, J. Brodie, D. Bucher, D. Capone, J. Coll, W. Dennison, M. Erdmann, P. Harrison, O. Hoegh-Guldberg, P. Hutchings, G.B. Jones, A.W.D. Larkum, J. O'Neil, A. Steven, E. Tentori, S. Ward, J. Williamson, D. Yellowlees 2001 ENCORE: The effect of nutrient enrichment on coral reefs: Synthesis of results and conclusions. Marine Pollution Bulletin 42(2):91-120. Cheers, Danny Dr Daniel Bucher Lecturer, Marine Biology and Fisheries School Director of Postgraduate Studies and Research School of Environmental Science and Management Southern Cross University PO Box 157 Lismore, NSW 2480 Australia Ph: 02 6620 3665 Fax: 02 6621 2669 Mobile: 0414 864085 >Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2006 12:10:53 -0500 >From: Marah Newman >Subject: [Coral-List] density of coral skeletons >To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >Hi All, > >I have several bleached coral skeletons and I need to calculate >skeleton density. I have looked at several papers that detail...snip From sajhowe at yahoo.com Sat Feb 11 19:52:32 2006 From: sajhowe at yahoo.com (Steffan Howe) Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:52:32 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] Eritrean coral reef surveys Message-ID: <20060212005232.60854.qmail@web34707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear coral-listers I am interested in obtaining as much information as possible about coral reef surveys (biodiversity or monitoring etc.) or habitat maps (e.g. showing coral reef locations) from the Eritrean Red Sea for Eritrea?s Coastal, Marine and Island Biodiversity Conservation Project (UNDP/GEF). The Project has already conducted some of its own surveys, but if anyone out there as has any more information it would be greatly appreciated. Regards Steffan Howe --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos ? NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo. From thedivinebovine at gmail.com Sun Feb 12 21:20:32 2006 From: thedivinebovine at gmail.com (wai leong) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Whether Alizarin S dye affects coral recruits Message-ID: Dear coral-listers, I'm investigating the effects of depth on coral growth and survivorship for my final year undergraduate research project in the National University of Singapore. I will be setting out tiles on the reef slope for a 3-4 months before shifting them up to the reef crest and leaving them out for another 3-4 months before taking them out to measure any differences in size and survivorship. As part of this study, I'd have to be able to differentiate the recruits that settled prior to shifting from the ones that settle post-shifting. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I should tag the recruits, apart from trying to find them individually under a microscope before shifting and marking them by hand? I was thinking of marking them with Alizarin S, but am not sure about any effects this might have on the recruits. I should be able to use a low concentration since I'm only trying to faintly dye the existing polyps to be able to tell them apart from the ones that recruit later on. Would appreciate any advice or suggestions anyone might have about this. Thank you! Sincerely, Leong Wai leongwai at nus.edu.sg From will_m_holden at hotmail.com Sat Feb 11 14:57:53 2006 From: will_m_holden at hotmail.com (Will Holden) Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2006 19:57:53 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] the next step Message-ID: Hi, my name is william holden and i have recently graduated from Newcastle University with a 2:1 degree in Marine biology. I am based in the Uk and am currently looking for work. Whilst this email is an attempt to get advice fon the best way of going about finding work, i do not want people to read this and simply think i am trying to sell myself to the highest bidder (if there happen to be any) I am hoping to get a job either working in a recognised aquarium in the Uk or at a dive centre as it is scuba diving that i am interested in and wish to pursue. This email is merely to ask for advice and any advice given would be gratefully received. Many thanks Will Holden _________________________________________________________________ The new MSN Search Toolbar now includes Desktop search! http://toolbar.msn.co.uk/ From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Mon Feb 13 18:24:00 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 18:24:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] New Coral-List Posting Policy Message-ID: <1214c8122b5a.122b5a1214c8@noaa.gov> Greetings! I'm afraid the amount of incoming spam to coral-list has become way too burdensome for the coral-list administrators. From now on, all messages from non-members will be automatically discarded, instead of being queued for review. For those of you who like to read from one email address yet post from another, you can add both addresses to coral-list, but enable/disable the other (see http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list, bottom of page, to subscribe/unsubscribe and choose other delivery options). I realize some folks are not subscribers to coral-list and like to occasionally post job or meeting announcements, and when that happens we have sometimes approved those messages. If your colleagues fall into that category, let me know and I'll add them to a special "free pass" sort of category so that those messages can be placed in the queue for consideration. You might also want to review how your address appears to coral-list. For instance, your address may be listed as, say, john.smith at university.edu but when you post, it comes across as john.smith at mach1.university.edu, which might be rejected by the software. Again, check your settings at http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list. If you have any problems with posting a message, please let us know. Thank you for your support and patience. Cheers, Louis Florit Mike Jankulak Jim Hendee From personal at hellenfaus.com Tue Feb 14 07:11:06 2006 From: personal at hellenfaus.com (Hellen Faus ) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 13:11:06 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Presentation In-Reply-To: <20060213170042.BD7031795C@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> Hi all! I'm new at the list and at coral world research itself. I'm a Veterinarian but not working in clinics but in travel and dive issues. I've just discovered the amazing world of corals and want to bet for it and its knowledge and conservation here in Spain, where I live, and over the world. My idea is, with time and a lot of learning, becoming part of any project (new or existent) that involves he sea health... Actually I'm collaboration in the translation into spanish of a web page dedicated to coral and plan to do a educative programme with time. At the end of the year I'll join a 9 months study of coral in the Australian and Indonesian seas, on board of Heraclitus, and meanwhile I want to learn and do as much as I can in this field... Just this presentation to tell you I'm learning a lot here, and would love to participate and have all the ideas you may give to me. Anything you consider to tell me, websites to look to, people to met, places to go, things to read, actions to do, ideas to carry on... do it!! Any help I could offer, any question or information you want to ask me -not about corals as you are the experts ;-) - feel free!! Thanks a lot to all, and remember, here I am! Hellen Faus, DVM Spain. hellen at viajarsolo.com +34 658 421 629 -----Mensaje original----- De: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] En nombre de coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Enviado el: lunes, 13 de febrero de 2006 18:01 Para: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Asunto: Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 10 Send Coral-List mailing list submissions to coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov You can reach the person managing the list at coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Coral-List digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Eritrean coral reef surveys (Steffan Howe) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 00:52:32 +0000 (GMT) From: Steffan Howe Subject: [Coral-List] Eritrean coral reef surveys To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: <20060212005232.60854.qmail at web34707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Dear coral-listers I am interested in obtaining as much information as possible about coral reef surveys (biodiversity or monitoring etc.) or habitat maps (e.g. showing coral reef locations) from the Eritrean Red Sea for Eritreas Coastal, Marine and Island Biodiversity Conservation Project (UNDP/GEF). The Project has already conducted some of its own surveys, but if anyone out there as has any more information it would be greatly appreciated. Regards Steffan Howe --------------------------------- Yahoo! Photos  NEW, now offering a quality print service from just 8p a photo.From thedivinebovine at gmail.com Sun Feb 12 21:20:41 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Delivered-To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Received: by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (Postfix, from userid 504) id EF7B417952; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.domain.tld (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0152717950 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from zproxy.gmail.com (zproxy.gmail.com [64.233.162.194]) by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36EF9177C7 for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:36 -0500 (EST) Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 16so873573nzp for ; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:33 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type; b=EYFv37Az2pz4SnGOY6LRlxh7kV2NoEMZshiR354Tdgta8+juuYrulgfSukykT2q1wwUFgZD6wg p/Ndvt7nKVgjenuoAAMvBg4aqCrUDNNVMjSGN0K31Ap0HdrFoz9If16fPuhslODtFDt0SNTkz1A6 aLQTCwSjlObxtUJggo6XY= Received: by 10.36.88.13 with SMTP id l13mr2188985nzb; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:32 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.36.36.6 with HTTP; Sun, 12 Feb 2006 18:20:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800 From: wai leong To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov MIME-Version: 1.0 /usr/bin/arc: /usr/bin/arc X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.4 (2005-06-05) on coral.aoml.noaa.gov X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=HTML_00_10,HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_BY_IP autolearn=no version=3.0.4 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 07:57:08 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.2 Subject: [Coral-List] Whether Alizarin S dye affects coral recruits X-BeenThere: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.2 Precedence: list List-Id: NOAA's Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP) listserver for coral reef information and news List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Dear coral-listers, I'm investigating the effects of depth on coral growth and survivorship for my final year undergraduate research project in the National University of Singapore. I will be setting out tiles on the reef slope for a 3-4 months before shifting them up to the reef crest and leaving them out for another 3-4 months before taking them out to measure any differences in size and survivorship. As part of this study, I'd have to be able to differentiate the recruits that settled prior to shifting from the ones that settle post-shifting. Does anyone have any suggestions on how I should tag the recruits, apart from trying to find them individually under a microscope before shifting and marking them by hand? I was thinking of marking them with Alizarin S, but am not sure about any effects this might have on the recruits. I should be able to use a low concentration since I'm only trying to faintly dye the existing polyps to b= e able to tell them apart from the ones that recruit later on. Would appreciate any advice or suggestions anyone might have about this. Thank you! Sincerely, Leong Wai leongwai at nus.edu.sg ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 32, Issue 10 ****************************************** From manfrino at reefresearch.org Tue Feb 14 11:54:07 2006 From: manfrino at reefresearch.org (manfrino at reefresearch.org) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 09:54:07 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Little Cayman Research Centre opens for Visiting Researchers this spring... Message-ID: <20060214095407.cc3c2c4bf8d3647e4241dc6e34e2d1c6.eb2d37bf1a.wbe@email.email.secureserver.net> The Little Cayman Research Centre opens for visiting researchers this spring. The Central Caribbean Marine Institute is proud to announce that Caribbean's newest field station, the Little Cayman Research Centre (LCRC) fringed by the world-renowned coral reefs of Bloody Bay Marine Park, is open to researchers. The Centre opened to students late last summer. Shallow lagoon, wall, and deep ocean (several thousand meters) habitats are all within swimming distance of the LCRC field station. The coral reefs of Little Cayman are among the best in the Caribbean for research due to the fact that they are isolated from continental and anthropogenic influences and water quality is excellent. In addition to diverse oceanographic settings over relatively short distances, Little Cayman has a well-established marine park system and one of the last spawning aggregations of the Nassau grouper. For more information on the research centre, please visit [1]www.reefresearch.org or contact me or our [2]manager at reefresearch.org to book a project (group or class). Thanks, Carrie Manfrino Central Caribbean Marine Institute [3]www.reefresearch.org Dr. Carrie Manfrino, President P.O. Box 1461 Princeton, NJ 08540 Ph:(609) 933-4559 Caribbean Headquarters Little Cayman Research Centre North Coast Road P.O. Box 37 Little Cayman, Cayman Islands (345) 926-2789 References 1. http://www.reefresearch.org/ 2. mailto:manager at reefresearch.org 3. http://www.reefresearch.org/ From pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr Tue Feb 14 18:14:32 2006 From: pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr (sandrine job) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 00:14:32 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] Killing Acanthaster planci In-Reply-To: <43E98AF2.5040404@gbrmpa.gov.au> Message-ID: <20060214231432.46799.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Dear Coral List, Firstly I would like to thank all the person who answered my questions about the Culcita pleague I observed on one of my restoration site in New Caledonia. I will keep you inform on the progress on this phenomenon during the course of the monitoring. So far, from the latest observations I have made on site, their number seems to stabilise and only very few coarls were attacked lately. It thus seems to confirm that they were attracted by stressed corals just after their transplantation and now that transplants are adapting to their new environmeent (and repair their lost tissue), the mortality is lower... These trends need to be confirmed. Once again thank you coral list members and if you hear anything about Culcita let me know. Secondly I had a question about what is the best way to kill COTs? Is it appropriate to kill them under the water by smashing them? or should we remove them from the water?and what about pricking them to catch them? Is it true that they will release eggs and worsten their invasion?? Cheers, Sandrine JOB Gillian Goby a ?crit : Dear All, *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the third Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 6 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, the threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region is currently rated as moderate. Sea temperatures in the southern GBR have remained significantly warmer than average (+ 0.5 - 2.5 degrees C) since December 2005 (ReefTemp), and are now exceeding the long-term summer maxima by up to 2 degrees C (NOAA HotSpot map). In contrast, recent heavy cloud cover and rain over northern parts of the GBR has kept temperatures close to average conditions for this region (Reef Futures). Central GBR waters have shown a warming tendency in recent weeks, with sea surface temperatures currently exceeding the January long-term average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C (ReefTemp). Consistent with these temperature patterns, reports of severe coral bleaching have now been confirmed for some reefs in the southern region, with minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer, and with the bleaching risk period far from over we are heavily relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.T?l?chargez la version beta. From burdickdr at hotmail.com Wed Feb 15 07:03:06 2006 From: burdickdr at hotmail.com (David burdick) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 07:03:06 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? Message-ID: Greetings coral-listers, I am interested in obtaining coral recruit/juvenile coral data for the Bahamas from 2002-2004 but I haven't had any luck finding anything in the literature - any suggestions? I performed a small-scale study looking at the effects of macroalgal reduction and Diadema antillarum addition on a set of small patch reefs off the SW coast of Eleuthera and wish to compare the results of my juvenile coral surveys to that of other researchers in the area. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! David R. Burdick NOAA Pacific Islands Assistant Guam Guam Coastal Management Program Phone: 671.472.4201 From ccook at HBOI.edu Wed Feb 15 10:14:11 2006 From: ccook at HBOI.edu (Clay Cook) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:14:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Professorship in Marine Biology Message-ID: <2309E53F80BD7841A64800D44F69F71B270239@sailfish.hboi.edu> Dear Coral-listers, Note the following position that is currently available at Florida Atlantic University, as part of the joint FAU-Harbor Branch Oceanographic partnership. Inquiries should be sent to Dr. Rod Murphey, (rmurph16 at fau.edu),Chairman, Department of Biological Sciences. Please pass this on to interested parties. Thanks and cheers, Clay Clayton B. Cook, Ph. D. Senior Scientist Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution Ft. Pierce, FL 34946 USA Ph. 772-465-2400 x 301 Mobile 772-579-0599 Fax 772-468-0757 McGinty Endowed Chair in Marine Biology The Department of Biological Sciences at Florida Atlantic University (FAU) invites nominations and applications for the John Thomas Ladue McGinty Eminent Scholar chair position in Marine Biology. Candidates should be internationally recognized as distinguished leaders in their specific field of marine biology and currently have a well-established research program. We seek an individual deeply committed to both research and teaching, particularly at the graduate level, in order to enhance a new Ph.D. program in Integrative Biology. Special consideration will be given to candidates whose research takes full advantage of FAU's geographic proximity to the marine and estuarine environments of Florida and the tropical Atlantic-Caribbean region. Applicants from a diversity of subdisciplines will be considered including, but not limited to ecology, physiology, molecular biology and organismal biology. The McGinty Eminent Scholar will conduct a program of research that facilitates collaborations with departmental faculty and strengthens current collaborations with Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution (HBOI) and other marine institutes in the region. Biology faculty are actively involved in marine biological research at both the Boca Raton (www.science.fau.edu/biology) and HBOI campuses (www.hboi.edu). The Eminent Scholar will be active on both campuses having primary research space in the new 40,000 sq. ft. FAU-HBOI facility. He/she will be expected to guide the recruitment of several new junior faculty positions aimed at enhancing the Marine Biology initiative at FAU. The endowed chair position will be filled at the full professor level with a joint appointment at the Senior Scientist level at HBOI. Review of applications will start March 1, 2006 and continue until the position is filled. Further information regarding the position can be obtained from Dr. Rod Murphey (rmurph16 at fau.edu),Chairman, Department of Biological Sciences. Applications and nominations should include curriculum vitae, five representative publications, a short description of research and teaching interests, and names and contact information of three referees. Submit applications electronically to Mrs. Lynn Sargent (lsargent at fau.edu) McGinty Eminent Scholar Search Committee, Department of Biological Sciences, Florida Atlantic University, 777 Glades Rd., Boca Raton, FL 33431. FAU is an Equal Opportunity/Equal Access Institution. From reefball at reefball.com Wed Feb 15 10:30:52 2006 From: reefball at reefball.com (Todd Barber) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 10:30:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? References: Message-ID: <00fa01c63244$f657c530$6501a8c0@LaFalda> Hi David, You might check with the Island School on Eleuthera. The kids there did a Reef Ball project and various classes did various monitoring projects on them. I'm not sure you could give much power to any data collected since I doubt they had adequate controls or even consistent data collection methods but there might be something there for at least sounding board. Thanks, Todd Barber Chairman Reef Ball Foundation, Inc. 3305 Edwards Court Greenville, NC 27858 reefball at reefball.com http://www.artificialreefs.org http://www.reefball.org http://www.reefball.com Direct: 252-353-9094 mobile: 941-720-7549 Fax 425-963-4119 Personal Space: http://www.myspace/reefball Group Space http://groups.myspace.com/reefballfoundation Skype & MSN For Voice or Video Conferences: Available upon request Atlanta/Athens Office 890 Hill Street Athens, GA 30606 USA 770-752-0202 (Our headquarters...not where I work see above) ----- Original Message ----- From: "David burdick" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 7:03 AM Subject: [Coral-List] Coral recruitment data for the Bahamas (2002-2004)? > > Greetings coral-listers, > > I am interested in obtaining coral recruit/juvenile coral data for the > Bahamas from 2002-2004 but I haven't had any luck finding anything in > the literature - any suggestions? I performed a small-scale study > looking at the effects of macroalgal reduction and Diadema antillarum > addition on a set of small patch reefs off the SW coast of Eleuthera > and wish to compare the results of my juvenile coral surveys to that > of other researchers in the area. Any help would be greatly > appreciated. > > Thanks! > > David R. Burdick > > NOAA Pacific Islands Assistant Guam > > Guam Coastal Management Program > > Phone: 671.472.4201 > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From F.Webster at murdoch.edu.au Wed Feb 15 20:43:11 2006 From: F.Webster at murdoch.edu.au (Fiona Webster) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:43:11 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Postings please Message-ID: Hi I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after references and/or unpublished data. Thank you Fiona Webster Phd student Marine Ecology School Biological Sciences Department of Science and Engineering Murdoch University From deevon at bellsouth.net Thu Feb 16 09:56:52 2006 From: deevon at bellsouth.net (DeeVon Quirolo) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:56:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20060216094920.026ff5c0@bellsouth.net> Dr. Brian Lapointe of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution and Dr. Peter Bell of University of Queensland/Australia both arrived at the same thresholds from different perspectives, but they are: 1 mg/L dissolved inorganic nitrogen, .01 mg/L soluble reactive phosphorus. You can contact either Lapointe or Bell for further info. These thresholds are far lower than any current water quality regulations. Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Reef Relief www.reefrelief.org At 08:43 PM 2/15/2006, Fiona Webster wrote: >content-class: urn:content-classes:message >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="utf-8" > >Hi >I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in >Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down >effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral >health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal >growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar >level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient >enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and >phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after >references and/or unpublished data. >Thank you > > >Fiona Webster > >Phd student > >Marine Ecology > >School Biological Sciences > >Department of Science and Engineering > >Murdoch University > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From dustanp at cofc.edu Thu Feb 16 10:39:04 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 10:39:04 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> References: <009001c6315f$bc1625a0$50b861d4@kivuca> Message-ID: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil From info at reefguardian.org Thu Feb 16 09:34:44 2006 From: info at reefguardian.org (ReefDispatch) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:34:44 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Will Development Smother Guana Cay Reef? Message-ID: <43F48D84.78CE@reefguardian.org> ****************************** * February 16, 2006 * * R E E F D I S P A T C H * * __________________________ * * Will Unwise Development * * Smother Guana Cay Reef? * * * * -- sign on via -- * *http://www.reefguardian.org * ****************************** A Periodic Inside Look at a Coral Reef Issue from Alexander Stone, ReefGuardian International Director ____________________________________________________ Dear Friend of Coral Reefs, The coral reefs off tiny seven-mile Great Guana Cay in the northern Bahamas is under threat by an irresponsible mega-development.? Scientists around the world -- including top coral reef ecologists, and coral pathologists -- agree that the Discovery Land Company's plans to build a golf course, 500 residential units and a 180-slip marina will kill the coral reef in a matter of a few years. You could help prevent this by speaking up for this coral reef through the Featured Petition at ReefGuardian's just-updated website at http://www.reefguardian.org. Coral reefs are in serious decline around the world, and especially in the Caribbean.? But the reef at Great Guana Cay is among the few remaining healthy reefs in the entire Caribbean.? This reef, which is only 45 feet away from the beach of the proposed development, contains an incredible diversity of reef fishes, sharks, and brilliant corals. But that will all become an algae-ridden dead zone in just a few years if the Discovery Land development proceeds as planned. That's why I urge you to get involved through the Speak Up section at http://www.reefguardian.org. The native inhabitants of Guana Cay have formed an environmental organization to fight this development. But they need all the help they can get. Normally, such small islands never have an international voice.? Help prove that even little islands can have a strong voice in defense of their coral reefs. Go to our newly-updated website at http://www.reefguardian.org to learn how. Thanks so much for caring! Alexander Stone Director ReefGuardian International *************************** http://www.reefguardian.org *************************** From rvw at fit.edu Thu Feb 16 09:36:11 2006 From: rvw at fit.edu (Robert van Woesik) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 09:36:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Funding opportunity: Six ISRS/TOC fellowships for 2006 Message-ID: <000001c63306$55445600$6c4876a3@CORAL> Dear coral-list, The International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) are very pleased to announce that in 2006 we will be supporting up to six Ph.D. students in the general area of coral reef ecosystem research. Each award will be up to US$15,000. Submission DEADLINE - 31 March 2006 The following text is available in pdf format at http://www.fit.edu/isrs/ Fellowship announcement for coral reef studies Six ISRS/TOC fellowships (2006): International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) graduate fellowship for coral reef research DEADLINE - 31 March 2006 - for funds up to US$15,000 per award are available to support up to six Ph.D. students in the general area of coral reef ecosystem research. 1) Background and Fellowship Goals "Considerable thicknesses of rock have certainly been formed within the present geological era by the growth of coral and the accumulation of its detritus; and, secondly, that the increase of individual corals and of reefs, both out wards or horizontally and upwards or vertically, under the peculiar conditions favourable to such increase, is not slow, when referred either to the standard of the average oscillations of level in the earth's crust, or to the more precise but less important one of a cycle of years" (page 79, Darwin, 1842 The Structure & Distribution of Coral Reefs). Indeed, Darwin would be surprised just how 'peculiar' those conditions are on contemporary coral reefs. In 2006 unfavorable conditions are ubiquitous on reefs globally. Scientists and reef managers are increasingly working together to develop sound management strategies that are based on rigorous science. Scientific questions are being addressed on reef disturbances and reef resilience, climate change and adaptation, reef connectivity, and effective management practices, to name a few. Many coral reefs are in poor condition, yet we know very little about the very threats that are undermining the integrity of coral reefs. What processes and mechanisms are causing differential mortality and how are some species still able to survive and indeed be successful in times of stress. Studies are needed that will combine management with process level information. Research supported by the ISRS/TOC Fellowship should increase our understanding of processes on coral reefs that are relevant to management at local, regional, or global scales. 2) Conditions Within the proposal, and as a condition of each ISRS/TOC Fellowship, recipients will be required to articulate how they will report back to the ISRS/TOC on their research progress, outline their findings, acknowledge the support, and publicize the outcomes. 3) Who can apply? The Fellowship is available to students worldwide, who are already admitted to a graduate program at an accredited university. The intent of the fellowship is to help Ph.D. students develop skills and to address problems related to relevant applications of coral reef ecosystem research and management. The Fellowship can be used to support salary, travel, fieldwork, and laboratory analyses. The student can work entirely at the host institution, or can split time between developed and developing country institutions. 4) Application materials A four page proposal as a pdf document, using 12-point font or larger, double spaced, in English, is required from prospective fellowship candidates: proposals that do not meet these criteria may be returned. The proposal should include the following sections: a. Overview: The overview starts with the Proposal Title, Author Name, Author's Address, Major Professor Name, Major Professor's Address (if different than the Author's), and total amount in the budget request. The overview should place the proposed research in context. We are looking for a clearly stated rationale, research objectives and a clear question that is driving the research within the context of the literature. b. Methods: The methods section includes hypotheses, methods, and experimental design - including details on field or laboratory techniques and how data will be analyzed. c. Relevance & implications of research: This section will outline expected outcomes, how the work is relevant to host country management and science issues and the implications of the research within a broader context. This section also includes evidence of host country coordination (e.g., identification of individuals or programs that will benefit from your results); The following three sections are required but do not count against the four page limit: d. Detailed Budget: The budget must not exceed $15,000. Evidence of cost sharing is desirable for the application. Cost sharing might include, for example, additional funding, accommodation, the loan of equipment, or access to analytical facilities. e. Literature Cited: Use a bibliographic format that includes full titles in the citations. f. Applicant CV: 2 pages maximum. g. Letter of support: The student's major professor must submit a support letter for the project based on their knowledge of the project, and familiarity with the student's background and abilities. If work will be conducted at another university, a support letter is required from the sponsoring Professor. 5) Submitting your application All application materials must be submitted electronically as follows: a) All materials must be sent to Dr. Robert van Woesik at: rvw at fit.edu b) The completed proposal (items 4a-f above) must be combined into a single document and sent as an attachment in pdf format. Please enter the subject line of your message as your last name followed by "ISRS/TOC Proposal" (e.g., "VAN WOESIK_ISRS/TOC Proposal") c) The letter of support (item 4g above) must come directly from the major professor as an e-mail attachment (pdf format). Please enter the subject line of the message as the last name of the applicant followed by "ISRS/TOC Support" (e.g., "VAN WOESIK_ISRS/TOC Support"). Applications will be considered complete only after the support letter has arrived. You should ensure that your sponsors are aware of the deadline, and can get their letters submitted in a timely manner. Only completed electronic applications will be reviewed, and this will be accomplished by an ISRS panel. 6) Evaluation Criteria include: a) scientific merit, b) feasibility, c) support letter from major professor, d) host country coordination, e) relevancy to the Fellowship guidelines, f) reporting strategy (on research progress and findings, see conditions in 2, above). 7) Administration of the Fellowship The International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS) and The Ocean Conservancy (TOC) support the Fellowship through professional and administrative contributions. ISRS/TOC is committed to equal opportunity and nondiscrimination. The mission of the ISRS is to promote for the benefit of the public, the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge and understanding concerning coral reefs, both living and fossil. The TOC is committed to protecting ocean environments and conserving the global abundance and diversity of marine life. Through science-based advocacy, research, and public education, TOC promotes informed citizen participation to reverse the degradation of our oceans. Dr. Robert van Woesik Professor Department of Biological Sciences Florida Institute of Technology 150 West University Boulevard Melbourne Florida 32901-6988 USA Email: rvw at fit.edu http://www.fit.edu/~rvw/ Phone 321 674 7475 From chwkins at yahoo.com Thu Feb 16 11:17:01 2006 From: chwkins at yahoo.com (Christopher Hawkins) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 08:17:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060216161702.33190.qmail@web32802.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Phil- A good question. I know that TNC folks, as part of the Florida Reef Resiliency Program (which has state, Sanctuary, NOAA and university partners), is working on this as we speak. I am fairly sure they haven't inked anything concrete yet, though. Best, Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Hawkins at forwild.umass.edu Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil --------------------------------- What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos From pkramer at tnc.org Thu Feb 16 15:18:04 2006 From: pkramer at tnc.org (Phillip Kramer) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 15:18:04 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Phil- As Chris mentioned, The Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) has been working on this question for the past year. Finding few agreed upon quantitative metrics for assessing resilience on Florida reefs in the literature has led us to approaching it from a number of different angles- expert input, review and analysis of existing monitoring data, statistically based broad-scale surveys to quantify response to disturbance (in this case bleaching) across all sub-regions and reef zones that have been identified within the Florida reef tract, and finer scale investigations tracking coral survivorship along selected gradients. Below is a summary from a pilot expert based (delphic) exercise we did last year to tap into local knowledge. Not surprisingly, we found quite a bit of disparity between what experts thought were "resilient" often based on background/expertise/age of the person. From this excersise, we have a GIS database and can provide maps which identify over 43 "resilient" reefs as identified by experts along with the reasons these reefs were identified. This might be a useful starting point for where to start looking at some standard metrics. Steven Miller's group also has a very rich baseline dataset collected over a number of years for a much broader set of functional and structural indicators that may also help inform this question. If anyone is interested in the expert maps or an overview of the FRRP program just let me know. We can also share results of the first broad scale bleaching surveys carried out last summer. Regards, Phil Philip Kramer, Ph. D. Director, Caribbean Marine Program The Nature Consevancy 55 N. Johnson Road Sugarloaf Key, FL 33042 305-745-8402 ext. 103 Summary of South Florida Reef Expert Meetings on Reslience One of the initial goals of the Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) is to locate and map coral reefs within the region that exhibit characteristics of resilience. To arrive at this goal, several activities have been implemented by The Nature Conservancy during spring 2005. Along with conducting an analysis of existing coral reef monitoring data, anecdotal information has been collected from local reef experts to help identify where potentially resilient reefs are located. A diverse array of individuals with considerable first hand knowledge of the coral reef resources within the region were identified and subsequently interviewed for this effort. Three tropical sea life collectors, 2 fishers, 6 federal employees (NOAA and USGS), 1 state employee, 5 individuals affiliated with universities, 7 members of local non-governmental organizations, and 1 dive industry representative were involved with this process. These 25 individuals provided a wealth of information from a wide geographic range and from varying perspectives. Interviews with individuals or small groups were conducted over a 4 week period; from April 1 through Aril 26, 2005. During each interview, a similar range of questions were asked to ensure compatibility of responses. Reef experts were first given a brief description about the FRRP goals and overview of a number of activities currently underway. Each person was first asked to comment on the spatial framework which identifies unique reef ?strata? that occur within different subregions and cross shelf zones of the Florida reef tract. This spatial framework will function to identify distinct reef biotopes within the region and guide the a regional stratiofied sampling design to assess response to disturbances such as coral bleaching. Interviewed participants provided useful information on ways to improve the framework and/or confirm it?s accuracy from their point of view. Experts were asked if they know of existing data sets that may be useful for the further improvement of the spatial framework as well. In order to assess the geographic areas each individual is most familiar with, the zones and sub-regions within the spatial framework were used as a reference. Following these discussions, using nautical charts, benthic habitat maps, and other spatial datasets, reef experts were asked to identify reef or hardbottom areas they believe have maintained its functional integrity over the past years to decades given the various disturbances which have influenced south Florida. They were also asked if they know of ?special or unique areas? that may act as refuges (e.g., do not bleach when other areas do or have functional or structural characteristics indicative of resilience such areas with particularly high coral cover or large living coral heads, etc..). Interviewees identified a wide range of potentially resilient areas- from specific parts of individual reefs to entire habitats or zones. The information gathered from these interviews on potentially resilient reef areas was tabulated and then digitized in GIS. Along with these questions, we asked the experts to comment on why they belief these areas are showing signs of ?resilience? (factors of resilience). Finally, we asked each expert to describe what attributes of a reef is most valuable to them. Table 1: List of interviewed reef experts Reef Expert Organization/Occupation Geographic Area of Expertise Don de Maria Fisher Lower Keys Billy Causey Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Region wide Ken Nedimyer Tropical sea life collector Upper and Lower Keys Lad Atkins Reef Environmental Education Foundation Keys wide and SE coast Harold Hudson Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Keys wide Forest Young Dynasty Marine Rebecca Shoal to Middle Keys Bob Ginsburg University of Miami, RSMAS Region wide Margaret Miller NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami Dana Williams NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami Rodrigo Garza University of Miami, RSMAS Tortugas and Miami Michelle PaddockUniversity of Miami, RSMAS Upper Keys through Miami Bill Parks Tropical sea life collector Palm Beach County Gene Shinn US Geological Survey Region wide Bob Halley US Geological Survey Region wide Walt Jaap Florida Wildlife Research Institute Region wide Pam Muller University of South Florida Region wide Dr. Ray McAllister Prof. Emeritus, Florida Atlantic University SE Coast Stephen Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Timothy Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Debrorah Devers Vone Research (501c3) Broward County David Zinni Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Randy Brooks Vone Research (501c3) Broward County Jeff Torode Greater Ft. Lauderdale Diving Association Broward County Peter Cone Lobster diver Key West Erich Bartels Mote Marine Laboratory Region wide -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov]On Behalf Of Christopher Hawkins Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 11:17 AM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Cc: Dave Loomis Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Phil- A good question. I know that TNC folks, as part of the Florida Reef Resiliency Program (which has state, Sanctuary, NOAA and university partners), is working on this as we speak. I am fairly sure they haven't inked anything concrete yet, though. Best, Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Coastal and Marine Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Hawkins at forwild.umass.edu Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil --------------------------------- What are the most popular cars? Find out at Yahoo! Autos _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From reef at bellsouth.net Thu Feb 16 16:47:14 2006 From: reef at bellsouth.net (reef at bellsouth.net) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:47:14 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] (no subject) Message-ID: <20060216214714.DCBQ1775.ibm67aec.bellsouth.net@mail.bellsouth.net> RE: healthy coral in the Florida Keys I would suggest Western Samboos off of Key West. There is a lot of healthy elkhorn (alittle storm damage from Wilma though). Parts of it is from the coral nursery project that had great results (done by Reef Relief). The Dry Tortugas park is a great resource as well. Hope this helps! Vicky Ten Broeck From julian at twolittlefishies.com Thu Feb 16 18:17:33 2006 From: julian at twolittlefishies.com (Julian Sprung) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 18:17:33 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs Message-ID: <60146F1515751D4AA4CB4D3EC514F9E311AA1C@SERVER.tlf.local> It may be news to some members of the list to know that aquarists growing corals in reef aquariums come to essentially the same recommended background level for phosphorus, about 0.015 mg/L being a threshold that seems to be important in managing the proliferation of algae in reef aquariums. Some other observations about it - 1. corals will grow at substantially higher phosphorus concentrations in aquariums, especially when grazers are present to control algae. 2. Some corals will stop growing or bleach and die when the phosphate level is maintained not very much below the abovementioned threshold! This is a point of great interest as aquarists balance food inputs and phosphate export. Apparently corals can acclimate to lower levels as long as the transition is not too fast. Acclimation to "higher" concentrations, but still close to the abovementioned threshold, does not kill corals, but may cause SPS corals to become less colorful. It should also be noted that the observations may have some relation to the loss of corals to bleaching events in the most nutrient poor waters in the natural environment. There was already a long thread on this list about inorganic nitrogen in aquarium culture of corals, but suffice it to say that corals in aquariums grow well with background levels much higher than proposed for their natural environment. They also grow well at nitrogen poor conditions, but may bleach if the levels become too low in an aquarium, especially when food inputs are scarce. Maintaining low levels help promote bright color in (Indo-Pacific) SPS corals, as the "background" zoox brown color is reduced and other pigments become more obvious. When discussing nutrients I like to make an analogy that I think is appropriate-- I compare nutrients to light availability. If you think about sunlight on the reef, it comes in 2 distinct forms: background sky light and light from the sun itself. Nutrients as a background level (the abovementioned thresholds) could be thought of as analogous to sky light- all around and just right for normal growth. There are other sources of nutrients that are like the point source of light from the sun-- more intense and focused. Fish living (and eliminating waste) among coral branches would be an example of a nutrient supply that far exceeds the "background." These point sources (light or nutrients) seem to enhance growth. The analogy works but does not correspond with respect to water movement effects on nutrient availability. Julian > ---------- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of DeeVon Quirolo > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 9:56 AM > To: Fiona Webster; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov; coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Nutrient thresholds for coral reefs > > Dr. Brian Lapointe of Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution and Dr. > Peter Bell of University of Queensland/Australia both arrived at the > same thresholds from different perspectives, but they are: 1 mg/L > dissolved inorganic nitrogen, .01 mg/L soluble reactive > phosphorus. You can contact either Lapointe or Bell for further > info. These thresholds are far lower than any current water quality > regulations. > > Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Reef Relief www.reefrelief.org > > > > At 08:43 PM 2/15/2006, Fiona Webster wrote: > >content-class: urn:content-classes:message > >Content-Type: text/plain; > > charset="utf-8" > > > >Hi > >I am a PhD student study coral reef ecology at the Ningaloo Reef in > >Western Australia. I am interested in bottom up verses top down > >effects on the growth of algae and how this may affect coral > >health. I am going to be looking at the role of nutrients on algal > >growth and would like to set my nutrient concentrations at a similar > >level to other coral reefs which are considered to be nutrient > > >enriched. Can anyone advise what levels of inorganic nitrogen and > >phosphorous in the water column are considered enriched? I am after > >references and/or unpublished data. > >Thank you > > > > > >Fiona Webster > > > >Phd student > > > >Marine Ecology > > > >School Biological Sciences > > > >Department of Science and Engineering > > > >Murdoch University > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Coral-List mailing list > >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From colocha30 at yahoo.com Thu Feb 16 18:52:05 2006 From: colocha30 at yahoo.com (carolina castro) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 17:52:05 -0600 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Looking for PDF articles Message-ID: <20060216235205.65991.qmail@web34712.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Dear All, I am looking for some articles that I couldn?t be able to download. I would really appreciate if somebody could attach them on PDF format for me. Thank you. Brander, et.al., 1971. Comparison of species diversity and ecology of reef-living invertebrates on Aldabra Atoll and at Watamu, Kenya. Symp. Zool. Soc. London, 28: 397-431. J.B. Lewis and P.V.R. Snelgrove, 1989. Response of a coral-associated crustacean community to eutrophication. Marine Biology, 101(2): 249-257. J.B. Lewis and P.V.R. Snelgrove, 1990. Corallum morphology and composition of crustacean cryptofauna of the hermatypic coral Madrasis mirabilis. Marine Biology, 106(2): 267-272. Carolina Castro S. Biologa Marina UJTL Bogota, Colombia __________________________________________________ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ?gratis! Reg?strate ya - http://correo.espanol.yahoo.com/ From gregorh at reefcheck.org Thu Feb 16 19:42:31 2006 From: gregorh at reefcheck.org (Gregor Hodgson) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 16:42:31 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? In-Reply-To: <43F49C98.9070004@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <003301c6335b$0d0a57e0$0600a8c0@toshibauser> Hi Phil, I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and only one species of human. Regards, Greg -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Dear Listers, With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Thanks, Phil _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From j.oliver at cgiar.org Fri Feb 17 03:31:44 2006 From: j.oliver at cgiar.org (Oliver, Jamie (WorldFish)) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 16:31:44 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef Scientist Position at the WorldFish Center - Penang Message-ID: Dear Colleagues The WorldFish Center has an exciting new position opening for a Coral Reef Scientist at the WorldFish Center. This is a normal staff position with a 3 year renewable contract. The Scientist would lead a new GEF-funded project examining lessons learned and best practices in coral reef management, and would also be expected to develop and lead other coral reef projects relevant to the mission of the Center. The position would contribute to, and assist in the strategic planning and oversight of ReefBase, the Center's global information system on coral reefs. This position will be one of several new positions currently being filled at the Center in the field of Natural Resources management, and offers the opportunity to join a dynamic new multi-disciplinary team seeking to make a significant impact on poverty and food security in developing countries. (see "jobs" on our website www.worldfishcenter.org ). Please pass this message on to any potential candidates or interested parties. Best regards Jamie Oliver Research Scientist - Coral Reefs Description: The WorldFish Center , located on the island of Penang , Malaysia , is a world-class scientific research organization. Our mission is to reduce poverty and hunger by improving fisheries and aquaculture. We have offices in nine countries and engaged in collaborative research with our partners in more than 50 countries. The Center is a nonprofit organization and a member of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR). A unique opportunity has arisen for a gifted individual to contribute to the mission of the Center and make a personal impact on the lives of millions of less fortunate people in developing countries around the world. We seek a highly competent and motivated individual to fill the following position within the Natural Resources Management Discipline: Responsibilities: Provide scientific leadership and vision in the development of new research and knowledge management opportunities relating to coral reefs and associated ecosystems. Design, develop and submit project proposals relevant to the management and sustainable use of coral reefs in developing countries. Develop collaborative arrangements with advanced scientific institutions and national research systems to increase the outputs for agreed research projects Prepare proposals to development agencies for funding of new priority projects and the continuation of existing long-term projects Publish results of research in peer-reviewed scientific journals, and disseminate in web pages, newsletters and other popular media Prepare scientific reports for donors and WorldFish management Represent the Center at relevant high level scientific fora Supervise and mentor relevant staff Contribute to strategic science discussions and the development of science directions within the NRM Discipline and relevant regional strategies and global initiatives. Requirements: Phd in Ecology, tropical fisheries, or related discipline and 3 year's research experience related to coral reefs or tropical coastal systems. Demonstrated research innovation, publications in internationally reefed journals and the application of research to management issues Experience in assembling, organizing and analyzing large volumes of information from a variety of sources and disciplines and synthesizing these into clear themes and identifying emergent issues and ideas. Strong quantitative skill in statistical and spatial analysis, and relevant computer programs Excellent program management skills, including planning organization, and budgeting. Ability to manage several projects simultaneously. Experience in multi-disciplinary and multi-organization and multi-country projects. Ability to work effectively in diverse cultural contexts English proficiency and excellent project management skills The WorldFish Center offers a competitive remuneration package, a non-discriminatory policy and provides an innovative work environment. Interested applicants are invited to submit a comprehensive curriculum vitae that includes names and contacts (telephone, fax, and e-mail address) of three (3) professional referees who are familiar with the candidate's qualifications and work experience, via e-mail to worldfish-hr at cgiar.org, no later than 15 March 2006. Only short-listed candidates will be notified. ============================================ Jamie Oliver Director, Science Coordination The WorldFish Center PO Box 500, GPO, 10670 Penang Malaysia Street address: Jalan Batu Maung, 11960 Bayan Lepas, Penang, Malaysia Ph: 60 4 620 2209 Fax: 60 4 626 5690 email: J.Oliver at cgiar.org ========================================== From laura.jeffrey at imperial.ac.uk Fri Feb 17 04:26:23 2006 From: laura.jeffrey at imperial.ac.uk (Jeffrey, Laura) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 09:26:23 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] MSc Thesis Ideas Imperial Message-ID: <37629CD96DEBCF42B807EAD22EA7EF78C84EC5@icex3.ic.ac.uk> Dear All, I am a postgrad presently reading for an MSc in Environmental Technology at Imperial College, London. In April we are due to start our dissertations and my hope that I would be able to investigate coral reefs and their current level or protection through policy/initiatives and such like. I hold a 1+3 studentship so the hope is that this project will be the stepping-stone to a PhD in the same field. I have attached below my current thoughts and ideas regarding this subject. However, I am well aware that I am limited in knowledge on this subject and would therefore appreciate any suggestions that come my way. I was advised by a colleague that the coral list was the best way to go with regards finding the right experts to talk to; useful contacts; projects that are currently underway so that maybe I could join one; advising a specific region to focus on; further suggestions re the direction of my ideas so that they mat form a project and such like. Any help on this matter would be much appreciated! Yours Sincerely, Laura Jeffrey Project Ideas: Environmental Law/Policy and Biodiversity/Conservation: Coral Reef Project Ideas Coral Reefs are not only extremely aesthetically pleasing, but they support an extraordinary amount of biodiversity and have enormous economic value. However, at present coral reefs are at serious risk of decline considering the current trends in climate change (threats posed by global warming), coastal development, pressure from over-fishing, fishing practices such as cyanide poisoning and explosives and tourism, along with other environmental stressors. According to The Nature Conservancy, if the destruction increases at the current rate, 70% of the world's coral reefs will have disappeared within 50 years. Such a loss would have dramatic impacts on marine biodiversity, fisheries, shore protection, tourism and would be an economic disaster for those people living in the tropics. Dissertation: Initially set out to see whether or not the world's coral reefs are being sufficiently protected by reviewing (investigation into?) the current level of protection, including MPAs, any policy instruments, environmental agreements already in place to encourage protection, or lack thereof. Given the depth and breath of the subject matter, the study would invariably have to be selective....zone in on specific area/case study PhD: Is there a role for environmental law (policy/treaties) to tackle the environmental degradation of coral reefs? Assess the viability of transposing legal remedies to environmental protection of this endangered area with a view that the author would hopefully provide recommendations/possible options at the end! Included in thesis/PhD? * The best methods of protection are those that are specific to the problem, therefore explore the role of how science can inform policy here (make policy makers aware/political science of MPAs). * (From Dr Polunin, Newcastle, "and nearly all the science is derived from reef habitats that don't apply at al to continental shelf waters" ??? Significant? * What determines the most viable strategy? * What would influence uptake? * How would this be implemented and enforced? Specific criteria for successful implementation. * Interaction between different sectors, national, provincial, and local community level? I am aware that America is very forward thinking in this field and has initiatives in place. Maybe this would be an appropriate case study? Again, any help much appreciated!! From esther.peters at verizon.net Fri Feb 17 11:40:25 2006 From: esther.peters at verizon.net (Esther Peters) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:40:25 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? References: <003301c6335b$0d0a57e0$0600a8c0@toshibauser> Message-ID: <43F5FC79.7090506@verizon.net> Gregor and Phil make good points. As part of an exercise to look at reef classification for the purpose of developing coral reef biocriteria, I examined the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program data from the Keys collected in 1996, looking at coral cover, species dominance, and richness, and applying the "coral morphological triangles" (conservation class) concept of Edinger and Risk (2000). A preliminary comparison with the results obtained from the 2004 CREMP dataset revealed that just in those few years there were significant structural and functional changes at some offshore shallow reef sites. And of course, based on long-time Keys' residents and reef scientists, we know of even more changes over the past 25 years. The Nature Conservancy's diverse approach is also important to help us understand reef dynamics in the Keys and the influences of natural and anthropogenic disturbances. I'm not sure that anyone has figured out the "standard, or baseline reef." My first look at this issue indicates that even in the Keys there are several biotopes and more investigations are needed as to which one(s) should serve as "reference condition" for each class. Esther Peters Gregor Hodgson wrote: > Hi Phil, > > I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a > "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? > > Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be > a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It > is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs > given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, > sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing > conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging > will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. > > Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and > only one species of human. > > Regards, > Greg > > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan > Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? > > > Dear Listers, > With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency > underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as > measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or > Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". > Thanks, > Phil > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From esther.peters at verizon.net Fri Feb 17 11:56:47 2006 From: esther.peters at verizon.net (Esther Peters) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 11:56:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] 2006 Advanced Courses in Tropical Marine Sciences in the Florida Keys Message-ID: <43F6004F.1080103@verizon.net> The following opportunities for advanced studies on coral reefs will be offered at Mote Marine Laboratory's Tropical Research Laboratory in the Florida Keys this summer. Please use these links to learn more about each session and obtain application materials: Coral Tissue Slide Reading Workshop (July 25-28) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/slide_workshop.phtml Diseases of Corals and Other Reef Organisms (July 29-August 6) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/disease_workshop.phtml Secondary Succession on Damaged Coral Reefs Workshop (August 7-10) http://isurus.mote.org/Keys/succession_workshop.phtml From l.bunce at conservation.org Fri Feb 17 12:14:52 2006 From: l.bunce at conservation.org (Leah Bunce) Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2006 12:14:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] MPA Social Scientist position Message-ID: <64207F75AB45B54296B2E2DAA4DA9D8B08707302@ci-mail1.ci.conservation.org> Dear Coral Colleagues, I would greatly appreciate it if you would forward the announcement below to social scientists who might be interested or who know those who might. This is a unique opportunity to direct a large social science research initiative to further management effectiveness of marine protected areas worldwide. The position involves working with CI here in DC and closely with CI and partners in-country. For more info about the program, see . Thank you! Leah ______________ Leah Bunce, PhD Senior Director Marine Management Area Science Program Center for Applied Biodiversity Science Conservation International 1919 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 (202) 912-1238 l.bunce at conservation.org Position: Research Scientist - MPA Social Scientist Program: Center for Applied Biodiversity Sciences, Conservation International Location: Washington, DC The social scientist will be responsible for overseeing Conservation International's Marine Management Area Science Program social science research activities. This is a unique opportunity for someone with strong academic credentials and overseas conservation experience to gain experience managing a large program of applied marine research across many sites. Program research is focused around critical marine management area research needs related to management effectiveness, connectivity, resiliency, valuation, economic development and enforcement. Required: A solid understanding of the marine protected area social science field. Preferred: Four years of experience conducting applied social science research and translating the results into conservation action. Experience in tropical nations, preferably in one of the 4 priority sites (Brazil, Belize, Panama & Ecuador and Fiji). Project management experience, including planning, working with a range of colleagues, and budgeting. Experience conducting social science to benefit marine conservation and establishing a process to ensure the results are used by decision-makers. Flexibility and the ability to coordinate science activities outside the person's immediate area of expertise. Master's degree required, Ph.D. preferred. To apply: Application deadline - March 1, 2006 From hyamano at nies.go.jp Mon Feb 20 00:10:03 2006 From: hyamano at nies.go.jp (hyamano at nies.go.jp) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 14:10:03 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Dear colleagues, Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th ICRS, Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD-ROMs will be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send it to all the participants. For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the print. If the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop printing the Proceedings. More news will be sent as soon as I hear. Best wishes, Hiroya Yamano Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html From eborneman at uh.edu Mon Feb 20 10:00:11 2006 From: eborneman at uh.edu (Eric Borneman) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:00:11 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS In-Reply-To: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> References: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Message-ID: <09599ED7-B06F-4340-9BBE-76B3B0CA8921@uh.edu> Hello Hiroya: Thank you for the update on the Proceedings and I am greatly looking forward to seeing them and appreciate the work that has certainly been required to produce them. I am curious, though, about the printing. If the CD-ROM is already formatted, as it should be given the nature of the formatting required for submitted material, then any of thousands of print-on- demand printers should be able to produce bound volumes by a print-on- demand cost that can be from 1 to many thousands of copies. For example, one print-on-demand company found with a quick google search will print hardback copies (6x9) with full color covers, dust jackets, up to 500 pages and provide 10 free copies of the book for US $1000 and this includes free CD e-books and 30% royalties for each copy sold if they are the distributor and 50% of CD-ROM sales. I consider this to be quite expensive. I think others on this list I know who have written full color books over 500 pages would agree that we would not be writing (or selling) much if printing costs and selling prices were this high. While I don't have the details of the manuscript, the minimum order and costs seem very out of line with what I know about book publishing (which isn't much), having written two books. I think the cost of book series, such as Corals of the World, which are similarly large, colorful (which previous Proceedings have never been) and well made indicates what is possible. The costs of scientific publication have always been a mystery to me, to say the least, and in terms of most journals, an outrageous racket. If, however, there are very few orders for text-based copies I can see that the cost would be high, but I see no reason for it to be impossible for even one copy to be produced given the nature of POD technology today. I hope others on the list who have published books could comment further. Best, Eric Borneman Dept. of Biology and Biochemistry University of Houston Science and Research Bldg. II 4800 Calhoun Houston, TX 77204 On Feb 19, 2006, at 11:10 PM, hyamano at nies.go.jp wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th > ICRS, > Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. > > We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD- > ROMs will > be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send > it to > all the participants. > > For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. > However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the > print. If > the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop > printing the Proceedings. > > More news will be sent as soon as I hear. > > Best wishes, > > Hiroya Yamano > Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS > Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings > > ---- > Hiroya Yamano > UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement > BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia > Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 > Also at NIES > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From sjameson at coralseas.com Mon Feb 20 04:06:15 2006 From: sjameson at coralseas.com (Dr. Stephen Jameson) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 09:06:15 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? Message-ID: Dear Phil, Thanks for the Coral-List note regarding: >> Dear Listers, >> With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency >> underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as >> measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or >> Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". Per: Jameson SC, Erdmann MV, Karr JR, Potts KW (2001) Charting a course toward diagnostic monitoring: A continuing review of coral reef attributes and a research strategy for creating coral reef indexes of biotic integrity. Bull Mar Sci 69(2):701-744 "In multimetric biological assessment, reference condition equates with biological integrity. Biological integrity is defined as the condition at sites able to support and maintain a balanced, integrated, and adaptive biological system having the full range of elements and processes expected for that biogeographical region and type of environment (coral reef zone) (Jameson et al. 2001, Table 1, page 702). Biological integrity is the product of ecological and evolutionary processes at a site with MINIMAL human influence (determined by best available information)." As you well know, there is no reef in the Florida Keys with minimal human influence. For a recent summary of this situation see: Jameson SC, Tupper MH, Ridley JM (2002) The three screen doors: can marine ?protected? areas be effective? Marine Pollution Bulletin 44(11):1177-1183. So how could you approach this problem? Your question is assuming just using a "single" reference site to create a reference condition. (Note of caution: I would recommend using more than one reference site to create a reference condition for a specific biogeographic region. Also, reference conditions based on reference sites may incorporate considerable variability because of scale and in some biogeographic regions this variability may be unsatisfactory.) However, you can create reference conditions using a combination of the following types of data (Jameson et al. 2001, page 705). Each approach has its strength and weaknesses. Historical Paleoecological Experimental Laboratory Quantitative Models Best Professional Judgment References Sites But, before this question can be answered a few more questions need to be addressed. 1. What metrics and related organisms are you using in your monitoring and assessment program? Are you just looking at corals or are you developing a more complex invertebrate, algae and/or fish index of biotic integrity with a mix of species? For example, if you were using forams you might have good paleo data to create your reference condition with. If you are using corals, there might be good historical data or you might be able to use agent based models (like John McManus is developing) and run them backwards to get a historical perspective. Best professional judgment will also be a valuable resource for all metrics. Your sampling protocol is critical, it needs to be consistent and this will control what organisms are available for analysis - and determine what reference conditions are needed. If you can't create a defendable reference condition then your chosen metric is of little use. 2. What coral reef zone are you targeting (Esther's point). Different types of organisms will be found in different zones, so you want to be comparing apples to apples and not confounding (mixing) data. This will also influence what reference conditions you need to develop. 3. How far back in history do you want to go with your reference condition - pre-Columbus, start of the industrial revolution, pre-Miami development? Bottom line: just using a single Florida Keys reference site selected in 2006 will not produce a satisfactory reference condition in the Florida Keys situation no matter what metric/s you are using - which I know you realize. I am putting the final touches on the following paper that outlines these concepts in more detail. Jameson SC, Karr JR, Potts KW (in ms) Coral reef biological response signatures: a new approach to coral reef monitoring and assessment with early warning, diagnostic, and status & trend capabilities. Coral Reefs Also see, when it comes out: Jameson SC (in press) Summary of Mini-Symposium 4-2, Diagnostic Monitoring and Assessment of Coral Reefs: Studies from Around the World. Proc 10th Intl Coral Reef Symposium, Okinawa, Japan I hope this brief summary helps. All papers referenced can be downloaded at . If I can be of further service please give me a call. PS. Caution should be used with respect to using "resilient reefs" for reference sites as the fact that they are categorized as "resilient" suggests that they have been subjected to stressors and are not located in minimally impaired environments. We are looking for those reefs that have not bleached - which as Greg points out - will be harder and harder to find, thus reinforcing the need to use the other approaches for creating reference conditions. Best regards, Dr. Stephen C. Jameson, President Coral Seas Inc. - Integrated Coastal Zone Management 4254 Hungry Run Road, The Plains, VA 20198-1715 USA Office: 703-754-8690, Fax: 703-754-9139 Email: sjameson at coralseas.com Web Site: http://www.coralseas.com and Research Collaborator Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History Washington, DC 20560 ******************* > Gregor and Phil make good points. As part of an exercise to look at > reef classification for the purpose of developing coral reef > biocriteria, I examined the Coral Reef Evaluation and Monitoring Program > data from the Keys collected in 1996, looking at coral cover, species > dominance, and richness, and applying the "coral morphological > triangles" (conservation class) concept of Edinger and Risk (2000). A > preliminary comparison with the results obtained from the 2004 CREMP > dataset revealed that just in those few years there were significant > structural and functional changes at some offshore shallow reef sites. > And of course, based on long-time Keys' residents and reef > scientists, we know of even more changes over the past 25 years. The > Nature Conservancy's diverse approach is also important to help us > understand reef dynamics in the Keys and the influences of natural and > anthropogenic disturbances. I'm not sure that anyone has figured out > the "standard, or baseline reef." My first look at this issue indicates > that even in the Keys there are several biotopes and more investigations > are needed as to which one(s) should serve as "reference condition" for > each class. > > Esther Peters > > > Hi Phil- As Chris mentioned, The Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) has > been working on this question for the past year. Finding few agreed upon > quantitative metrics for assessing resilience on Florida reefs in the > literature has led us to approaching it from a number of different angles- > expert input, review and analysis of existing monitoring data, statistically > based broad-scale surveys to quantify response to disturbance (in this case > bleaching) across all sub-regions and reef zones that have been identified > within the Florida reef tract, and finer scale investigations tracking coral > survivorship along selected gradients. > > Below is a summary from a pilot expert based (delphic) exercise we did last > year to tap into local knowledge. Not surprisingly, we found quite a bit of > disparity between what experts thought were "resilient" often based on > background/expertise/age of the person. From this excersise, we have a GIS > database and can provide maps which identify over 43 "resilient" reefs as > identified by experts along with the reasons these reefs were identified. > This might be a useful starting point for where to start looking at some > standard metrics. Steven Miller's group also has a very rich baseline > dataset collected over a number of years for a much broader set of > functional and structural indicators that may also help inform this > question. > > If anyone is interested in the expert maps or an overview of the FRRP > program just let me know. We can also share results of the first broad > scale bleaching surveys carried out last summer. > > Regards, > Phil > > Philip Kramer, Ph. D. > Director, Caribbean Marine Program > The Nature Consevancy > 55 N. Johnson Road > Sugarloaf Key, FL 33042 > 305-745-8402 ext. 103 > > Summary of South Florida Reef Expert Meetings on Reslience > > One of the initial goals of the Florida Reef Resilience Program (FRRP) is to > locate and map coral reefs within the region that exhibit characteristics of > resilience. To arrive at this goal, several activities have been > implemented by The Nature Conservancy during spring 2005. Along with > conducting an analysis of existing coral reef monitoring data, anecdotal > information has been collected from local reef experts to help identify > where potentially resilient reefs are located. A diverse array of > individuals with considerable first hand knowledge of the coral reef > resources within the region were identified and subsequently interviewed for > this effort. Three tropical sea life collectors, 2 fishers, 6 federal > employees (NOAA and USGS), 1 state employee, 5 individuals affiliated with > universities, 7 members of local non-governmental organizations, and 1 dive > industry representative were involved with this process. These 25 > individuals provided a wealth of information from a wide geographic range > and from varying perspectives. > > Interviews with individuals or small groups were conducted over a 4 week > period; from April 1 through Aril 26, 2005. During each interview, a > similar range of questions were asked to ensure compatibility of responses. > Reef experts were first given a brief description about the FRRP goals and > overview of a number of activities currently underway. Each person was > first asked to comment on the spatial framework which identifies unique reef > ?strata? that occur within different subregions and cross shelf zones of the > Florida reef tract. This spatial framework will function to identify > distinct reef biotopes within the region and guide the a regional > stratiofied sampling design to assess response to disturbances such as coral > bleaching. Interviewed participants provided useful information on ways to > improve the framework and/or confirm it?s accuracy from their point of view. > Experts were asked if they know of existing data sets that may be useful for > the further improvement of the spatial framework as well. In order to > assess the geographic areas each individual is most familiar with, the zones > and sub-regions within the spatial framework were used as a reference. > Following these discussions, using nautical charts, benthic habitat maps, > and other spatial datasets, reef experts were asked to identify reef or > hardbottom areas they believe have maintained its functional integrity over > the past years to decades given the various disturbances which have > influenced south Florida. They were also asked if they know of ?special or > unique areas? that may act as refuges (e.g., do not bleach when other areas > do or have functional or structural characteristics indicative of resilience > such areas with particularly high coral cover or large living coral heads, > etc..). Interviewees identified a wide range of potentially resilient > areas- from specific parts of individual reefs to entire habitats or zones. > The information gathered from these interviews on potentially resilient reef > areas was tabulated and then digitized in GIS. Along with these questions, > we asked the experts to comment on why they belief these areas are showing > signs of ?resilience? (factors of resilience). Finally, we asked each > expert to describe what attributes of a reef is most valuable to them. > > Table 1: List of interviewed reef experts > > Reef Expert Organization/Occupation Geographic Area of Expertise > Don de Maria Fisher Lower Keys > Billy Causey Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Region wide > Ken Nedimyer Tropical sea life collector Upper and Lower Keys > Lad Atkins Reef Environmental Education Foundation Keys wide and SE coast > Harold Hudson Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary Keys wide > Forest Young Dynasty Marine Rebecca Shoal to Middle Keys > Bob Ginsburg University of Miami, RSMAS Region wide > Margaret Miller NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami > Dana Williams NOAA-Fisheries Upper Keys through Miami > Rodrigo Garza University of Miami, RSMAS Tortugas and Miami > Michelle PaddockUniversity of Miami, RSMAS Upper Keys through Miami > Bill Parks Tropical sea life collector Palm Beach County > Gene Shinn US Geological Survey Region wide > Bob Halley US Geological Survey Region wide > Walt Jaap Florida Wildlife Research Institute Region wide > Pam Muller University of South Florida Region wide > Dr. Ray McAllister Prof. Emeritus, Florida Atlantic University SE Coast > Stephen Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Timothy Attis Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Debrorah Devers Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > David Zinni Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Randy Brooks Vone Research (501c3) Broward County > Jeff Torode Greater Ft. Lauderdale Diving Association Broward County > Peter Cone Lobster diver Key West > Erich Bartels Mote Marine Laboratory Region wide > Gregor Hodgson wrote: > >> Hi Phil, >> >> I think that we are about 25 years too late at best to establish a >> "baseline." Might be good to trawl old video? >> >> Since you raised the "R" word - may I comment that while 'resilency' may be >> a useful heuristic tool, its relevance to coral reef conservation is nil. It >> is impossible to predict what the future holds for individual coral reefs >> given the large scale changes expected in ocean and atmospheric circulation, >> sea level and linked chemical and biological parameters. In fact, basing >> conservation models on our guesses at "resilency" rather than bet-hedging >> will likely increase the chances of losing more reefs. >> >> Over the long term, luckily there are several hundred species of corals and >> only one species of human. >> >> Regards, >> Greg >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Phil Dustan >> Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2006 7:39 AM >> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> Subject: [Coral-List] Re: A healthy Reef in the Florida Keys? >> >> >> Dear Listers, >> With all this work, talk, and conferencing on coral reef resiliency >> underway, I was wondering if anyone can identify a healthy reef (as >> measured by some suite of measurable parameters) in the Florida Keys or >> Dry Tortugas that we could use as a "standard, or baseline reef". >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From simmi_nuern at yahoo.com Mon Feb 20 09:32:24 2006 From: simmi_nuern at yahoo.com (Simone Nuernberger) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 06:32:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Coralliophila In-Reply-To: <20060220051003040.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Message-ID: <20060220143224.12107.qmail@web60313.mail.yahoo.com> Hi everyone, Can anyone please tell me (as detailed as possible) how the gastropod Coralliophila sp. affects hard corals and how this predation can be visually identified? Do signs of Coralliophila differ with the presence of algae in coral tissue? How can these predation scars be distinguished from coral diseases? One more question: Has anyone encountered a syndrome showing as ?green spots? ? small necrotic patches of light green coloration on the coral surface? Our studies were based in Indonesia and we mostly found these impairments on massive colonies of Porites spp. I appreciate your help! Cheers, Simone *************************************************************************** Simone N?rnberger (M.Sc.) simone_nuernberger at web.de Institute of Biology (Biological Oceanography) University of Southern Denmark DK-5230 Odense M --------------------------------- Relax. Yahoo! Mail virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses! From habakuk at nova.edu Mon Feb 20 21:31:43 2006 From: habakuk at nova.edu (Lindsey Klink) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2006 21:31:43 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Mooring Buoy Questionnaire Message-ID: <20060220213143.2hlykz9pcks048k8@mail.acast.nova.edu> Mooring Buoy Questionnaire I am a Research Assistant with the National Coral Reef Institute (NCRI). I am currently conducting a mooring buoy use and effectiveness study. As part of this study I am compiling detailed information about mooring buoy programs around the world. To collect this information I have created a web-based questionnaire to be filled out by individuals associated with mooring buoy programs. To read more about this effort and to take part in the study, please visit: www.nova.edu/ncri/mooringbuoy.html Thank you very much for your time and any information about mooring buoy programs that you are able to provide! Lindsey H. Klink Research Assistant National Coral Reef Institute Nova Southeastern Univ. Oceanographic Center 8000 N. Ocean Dr. Dania Beach, FL 33004 USA habakuk at nova.edu From dustanp at cofc.edu Tue Feb 21 09:32:11 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Message-ID: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And probably haven't been for a long time. My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses that are far greater, supports this form of denial. Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even be up to R4 if conservation is successful. Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) From ctwiliams at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 11:59:39 2006 From: ctwiliams at yahoo.com (Tom Williams) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 08:59:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060221165939.90967.qmail@web50408.mail.yahoo.com> Phil Agreed - what is left after 50-100years of farm runoff, fertilizer, golf courses, bottle/dynamite blasting, etc. would be a better question - at this stage, every coral should be precious and protected, but they are in the wrong places.... Recent discussions regarding Arabian/Persian Gulf and Red Sea, and East Malaysia, Philippines, and Majuro/Marshalls can be added to the Keys. Costs $50 to reclaim and can sell for $500...OK But some for Dubai Claim that programs are underway to mitigate and compensate after the fact and since fish like the reclamation it is improved. Dr. Tom Williams The original is too long --- Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots > of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are > none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > My point is that before we talk about resilience, > maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of > their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost > over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the > 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing > vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been > talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in > full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to > minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be > worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully > engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, > or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, > some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or > boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no > point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are > the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting > (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. From szmanta at uncw.edu Tue Feb 21 12:35:10 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:35:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] FW: Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813A2D@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Dear Dr. Yamano: I am concerned about the proposed high cost of hard copies of the proceedings. Since I came to UNCW, I have helped our library acquire all of the series of proceedings (most we obtained for free from the various institutions that had published them) so that our students could use these valuable tomes to learn from and plan research. But my institution, as I am sure is true for so many others, does not have enough funds to pay for all the journals and books we need, and such a high cost could mean that they would decide not to buy this proceedings set. I suggest an alternative: The cost of the CD set is reasonable I hope. If the 10thICRS committee would permit non-for-profit academic institutions to make their own hard copies from the CDs, then each institution could find a less expensive way to make a permanent copy for their collections. It should certainly cost less that a few hundred dollars to print out a full copy (and there would be no shipping of heavy books across the seas!). It may not be as nice as a professionally printed copy but it will do the job. At least my university library would not do this unless there was an explicit permission to make such a copy so as not to violate copyright laws. Unless you can find a less expensive printer, I suggest you consider this option. It would be a shame if after all that work on your part, the Proceedings didn't find homes in our libraries. Sincerely, Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of hyamano at nies.go.jp Sent: Mon 2/20/2006 12:10 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Cc: paal.buhl.mortensen at imr.no; i04t0021 at k.hosei.ac.jp; purkis at nova.edu; c.roelfsema at uq.edu.au; rwaller at whoi.edu; p.kench at auckland.ac.nz; jan.helge.fossaa at imr.no; jgoodman at uprm.edu; Qamar.Schuyler at crm.gov.mp; yamano at noumea.ird.nc; andrefou at noumea.ird.nc Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Dear colleagues, Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th ICRS, Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD-ROMs will be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send it to all the participants. For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the print. If the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop printing the Proceedings. More news will be sent as soon as I hear. Best wishes, Hiroya Yamano Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From riskmj at univmail.cis.mcmaster.ca Tue Feb 21 12:45:43 2006 From: riskmj at univmail.cis.mcmaster.ca (Michael Risk) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 12:45:43 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: Hi Phil. Thanks you for crystallising the discussion, and articulating some of my own concerns. One of the many problems is: "All politics is local." (Tip O'Neil, American politician) It is always easier to blame the external. One of my students was in the back of a hall in the Keys 2-3 years ago during one of those public meetings, and heard a senior Florida reef manager say the decline in the reefs was caused by "All those Canadians driving down here every winter in their SUV's, making Carbon Dioxide." (True quote-no one has to MAKE UP things reef managers say.) Now, it may well be that no one should drive SUV's, but it cannot be said enough times: bleaching has had NOTHING TO DO with the decline of Florida's reefs. Everyone reading this list should repeat after me-and Phil-NOTHING TO DO. And now we see that the new kid on the block, FRRP, will focus only on bleaching. Something is badly wrong. We don't need more science-the science has spoken eloquently. In...2000? (help me, Walt, Phil-when was it?) I was a member of a NOAA panel that evaluated all the reef monitoring programs in the Florida Keys. (Why was there more than one, you may ask? In fact, there were about six.) Our conclusion was that monitoring had done its job. (Monitoring can NEVER identify causes, although a good monitoring program can allow selection of hypotheses.) In this case, the monitoring programs, especially the FMRI program, had successfully documented the regional mass extinction under way in the Keys. And that was the panel's carefully-chosen phrase: "regional mass extinction." We recommended consolidation of the monitoring programs, and an immediate increase in funding designed to rank the various land-based threats, in order that action could be taken. We also recommended an outreach program. That may be the key to the Keys. Every citizen of Florida should be told that: 1. there is big trouble in the Keys, and that 2. the causes are all local. The managers will be reluctant to be too assertive-after all, they have Big Sugar and Big God-knows-what watching them. The impetus has to be bottom-up. To coin a phrase. And we reef scientists have to learn that we score our own points at the expense of the ecosystem. Mike On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but > no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach > a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty > fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about > studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right > in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this > years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the > built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in > continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of > a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the > losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps > there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many > people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not > simply > sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s > > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of > having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats > their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and > denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > > than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or > slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the > R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might > even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor > is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > > -- > Phillip Dustan Ph.D. > Department of Biology > College of Charleston > Charleston SC 29424 > (843) 953-8086 voice > (843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From chwkins at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 13:15:18 2006 From: chwkins at yahoo.com (Christopher Hawkins) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:15:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <20060221181518.99270.qmail@web32813.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Phil and everyone: Your shot across the bow is welcome by some of us who realize that the biology only holds so much promise for a solution, and that there are a suite of things that need to be employed in tandem with the biophysical sciences to address these issues. I am not sure where I stand about remnancy vs. resiliency. It has a bit of a chicken and the egg connotation to it. Are some reefs remnant because they are resilient? Are they now resilient because they are remnant, for whatever reason? It is a tough one to wrap your head around... I'd like to comment, though, on one part of your posting, and that is the notion that promoting competition among dive shops with a "R" scale. I would think that identifying a reef as an R3 would prompt management to look more towards limiting activities at that site, rather than a "rush to destroy it" approach. At first glance, I might suggest that such a scale would be useful, though. However, it is critical not just to understand the reef condition, but also the users of that reef(s). Specialization theory (a human dimensions tool) offers a framework to do this. With specialization, we know that there are is a continuum of users from low to highly specialized (e.g. PADI Open Water Divers to Nitrox Divers), and that highly specialized users are the ones most likey to obey regulations and support management actions (Ditton, Loomis, Choi, 1992; Salz and Loomis, 2005, Salz, Loomis and Finn, 2001; Bryan, 1977/2000). Directing those users with to an R3, R4, or R5 reef would be then become a management alternative. In addition, management alternatives such as placing only a few mooring bouys at the highest "R" sites, would seem like a good strategy. Of course, all of this depends on identifiying resilient or remnant reefs and then scaling them, which seems to be what is causing some problems. And on understanding the nature of the area's user groups, which is never done very methodically. I have just identified one potential way to like resiliency to a conservation mechanism. I believe there are others, but we need to know all of the tools available. Thanks. Chris ><));> ><));> ><));> ><));> Christopher Hawkins, PhD student Human Dimensions of Resource Management Marine and Coastal Ecosystems Program Department of Natural Resources Conservation 314 Holdsworth Hall University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 413.545.3749 Dear Coral List, I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And probably haven't been for a long time. My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses that are far greater, supports this form of denial. Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply sewage But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, Carysfort R1, etc Maybe this might help create public awareness and political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even be up to R4 if conservation is successful. Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. From ricksanders at comcast.net Tue Feb 21 13:34:49 2006 From: ricksanders at comcast.net (Rick Sanders) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:34:49 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas References: <6.0.1.1.2.20060118164353.02559c00@mail.waquarium.org> <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CAE9A@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <004b01c63715$7fa4b760$650da8c0@manta> Dear Listers, I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find an image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been unable to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish brown color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each other in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped into more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm in width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if to crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what I am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a copy or link. Thanks very much in advance, Best regards, Rick Rick Sanders Deep Blue Solutions Media, PA 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net From kruer at 3rivers.net Tue Feb 21 15:27:21 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:27:21 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <43FB246B.1090205@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <43FB77A9.7050007@3rivers.net> Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil Dustan. But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true change in direction. There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the amazingly productive Keys (and no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, and no it should never be held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with problems much broader than simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying that the problem with seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important figure easily dispenses with all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and filling, thousands upon thousands of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc etc., See how easy it is. And it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself during some of the countless consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I refused to play along with the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys all would be OK. What a joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo is going to change much is wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions to upgrade the Key West plant to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything measurable? And we were promised that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds good but can't happen on a scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of the Keys as I began to see myself as a part of the problem. The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the Keys ecosystem and manage human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too much attention is focused on a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that most else would be protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's limited funds on a new facility in Key West is going to change much? Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as stand alone systems and the problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands continue to be lost and degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are trying legally to protect the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving activity (and associated impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the state and the state points to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have taken place but it's not working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - but it's obviously not enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live bottom and predictably now hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of miles of slow-degrading poly line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to replace them every year just to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by the tens of thousands daily, fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot long cruise ships plow up the bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone effectively turns a blind eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. Shallow water marine habitats throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are subjected to the disturbing and destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster boats of all types. People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is failing. The rate of loss and anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that is what matters. Large vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's great. But new leadership is needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? Catering to virtually every user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in ecosystem protection or even maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef management in the Keys as a success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New leadership is needed and that leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and address all issues throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And they need to be loudly supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has the most knowledge about what has been lost and is being lost. Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and other lists will lead to something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and misdirected effort. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply > sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > From szmanta at uncw.edu Tue Feb 21 17:33:52 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 17:33:52 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813BB7@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Hello Mike, Phil and Curtis: The problem with attributing all of the loss of coral in the Florida Keys to local human impacts, as you three have done in your comments, is that the same pattern of loss of live coral is being observed in remote places of the Bahamas and other small Caribbean islands with small or no human populations, no sewage to speak of and no cruise ships. To ignore the dramatic effect coral bleaching and subsequent disease outbreaks, on top of overfishing, have had on Keys and northern Caribbean corals since the mid-1990s and especially since the severe 1997-1998 back-to-back bleaching events, is not helpful to conservation or management efforts. Bleaching has reached reefs that are distant from direct human impact as well as the Keys, with similar effects on both. Overfishing is far more pervasive than water quality degradation because boats go everywhere to extract the last lobster and grouper. The healthiest Caribbean reefs, if one judges that based on live coral cover, that I have seen in a long while are those in the lower Caribbean where they have, for hydrographic and climatic reasons, not been as impacted by either bleaching or major storms: Reefs on the S side of Curacao and Bonaire still have more coral now than what I remember for places like PR and the USVI back in the 1960s and 1970s. And they have high coral cover within 1 km of where the cruise ships docks and next to the outflow from the desalination plant. And they have very high rates of coral recruitment and no algae even on boulders with no Diadema, and few fishes. Go figure! There are many reefs on the GBR with water quality conditions far worse than in the Florida Keys (in terms of turbidity, nutrient levels and such variables) with much higher coral cover and diversity. Ken Anthony is even showing corals on these turbid reefs feed on the detritus and have higher growth rates than corals on more offshore reefs. Florida reefs have a disadvantage of being at the northern limits of the climatic window for coral well being in the Atlantic province, with way too many severe winter and summer storms. These geographic limitations have existed for thousands of years and have limited coral reef growth over Holocene time frames. When I first visited Nassau reefs in 1971 and the Florida reefs during the 1977 symposium, when my frame of reference was Puerto Rican reefs, my opinion of Florida/Bahamas reefs was that they were puny and depauperate. Now they are even more depauperate. That is no excuse to abuse them, but to ignore the climatic factor is not helpful towards restoring or protecting them (if that is possible). Multiple factors are at work, and a single quick fix will not do the trick. Over-simplification and trying to crucify a single factor will not help society deal with these complex issues. Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Curtis Kruer Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 3:27 PM To: Phil Dustan Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil Dustan. But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true change in direction. There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the amazingly productive Keys (and no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, and no it should never be held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with problems much broader than simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying that the problem with seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important figure easily dispenses with all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and filling, thousands upon thousands of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc etc., See how easy it is. And it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself during some of the countless consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I refused to play along with the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys all would be OK. What a joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo is going to change much is wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions to upgrade the Key West plant to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything measurable? And we were promised that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds good but can't happen on a scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of the Keys as I began to see myself as a part of the problem. The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the Keys ecosystem and manage human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too much attention is focused on a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that most else would be protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's limited funds on a new facility in Key West is going to change much? Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as stand alone systems and the problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands continue to be lost and degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are trying legally to protect the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving activity (and associated impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the state and the state points to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have taken place but it's not working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - but it's obviously not enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live bottom and predictably now hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of miles of slow-degrading poly line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to replace them every year just to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by the tens of thousands daily, fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot long cruise ships plow up the bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone effectively turns a blind eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. Shallow water marine habitats throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are subjected to the disturbing and destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster boats of all types. People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is failing. The rate of loss and anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that is what matters. Large vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's great. But new leadership is needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? Catering to virtually every user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in ecosystem protection or even maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef management in the Keys as a success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New leadership is needed and that leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and address all issues throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And they need to be loudly supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has the most knowledge about what has been lost and is being lost. Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and other lists will lead to something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and misdirected effort. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Phil Dustan wrote: > Dear Coral List, > I'd like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about > healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And > probably haven't been for a long time. > > My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach a > true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my > calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their > living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The > Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about studies, > monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right in > front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, > even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to > protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it's patchy, or not here, or > look over there, there's a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to > think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in continuing > to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the losses > that are far greater, supports this form of denial. > > Well, the water is too polluted and we've know this for a very long > time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many people > fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage > system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not simply > sewage......But still we look for bright spots. I think it's because it's > more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is > hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, > sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of having > a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? > > It's been said by many that the coral reef science community eats their > young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and denial. > The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather > than resiliency, I'd favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) > that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or slower > in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the R > scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, > Carysfort R1, etc... Maybe this might help create public awareness and > political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between > dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 > when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > be up to R4 if conservation is successful. > Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline > downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it's a problem that we > need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor is > wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. > Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? > Phil > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From knudby at gmail.com Tue Feb 21 16:48:14 2006 From: knudby at gmail.com (Anders Knudby) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 16:48:14 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] instrument to measure water depths Message-ID: <551b8dba0602211348y1e58fb60y20da80776e676217@mail.gmail.com> Hi coral listers, I am looking for an instrument that I can use to measure consecutive substrate depths on a reef. Ideally something that I can place on or just above the substrate, press a button to take a measurement (for direct display or preferably download later), and then move on to the next point of measurement and press the button again. Quick and simple. I have found a couple of instruments (pressure transducers) that almost fit that specification, but not quite, and I would like to hear if anybody out there have already found exactly what I am looking for. If so please let me know. (sorry to post a monitoring-related question in the middle of the more important remnancy discussion, seems out of place, but I'm trying to do my PhD..... thus perhaps scoring my own points at the expense of the ecosystem) Best regards, Anders Knudby -- Anders Knudby PhD Candidate Department of Geography University of Waterloo, Canada phone: +1 519 888 4567 x7575 e-mail: knudby at gmail.com From pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr Tue Feb 21 18:52:43 2006 From: pulpito2000 at yahoo.fr (sandrine job) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 00:52:43 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Coral-List] Coral farming In-Reply-To: <09599ED7-B06F-4340-9BBE-76B3B0CA8921@uh.edu> Message-ID: <20060221235243.68069.qmail@web25108.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Dear all, I am seeking for any information related to coral farms, especially farms made in situ. The best would be to send me email adresses or web sites of Coral Farms. Thanks to you all, Cheers, Sandrine JOB Eric Borneman a ?crit : Hello Hiroya: Thank you for the update on the Proceedings and I am greatly looking forward to seeing them and appreciate the work that has certainly been required to produce them. I am curious, though, about the printing. If the CD-ROM is already formatted, as it should be given the nature of the formatting required for submitted material, then any of thousands of print-on- demand printers should be able to produce bound volumes by a print-on- demand cost that can be from 1 to many thousands of copies. For example, one print-on-demand company found with a quick google search will print hardback copies (6x9) with full color covers, dust jackets, up to 500 pages and provide 10 free copies of the book for US $1000 and this includes free CD e-books and 30% royalties for each copy sold if they are the distributor and 50% of CD-ROM sales. I consider this to be quite expensive. I think others on this list I know who have written full color books over 500 pages would agree that we would not be writing (or selling) much if printing costs and selling prices were this high. While I don't have the details of the manuscript, the minimum order and costs seem very out of line with what I know about book publishing (which isn't much), having written two books. I think the cost of book series, such as Corals of the World, which are similarly large, colorful (which previous Proceedings have never been) and well made indicates what is possible. The costs of scientific publication have always been a mystery to me, to say the least, and in terms of most journals, an outrageous racket. If, however, there are very few orders for text-based copies I can see that the cost would be high, but I see no reason for it to be impossible for even one copy to be produced given the nature of POD technology today. I hope others on the list who have published books could comment further. Best, Eric Borneman Dept. of Biology and Biochemistry University of Houston Science and Research Bldg. II 4800 Calhoun Houston, TX 77204 On Feb 19, 2006, at 11:10 PM, hyamano at nies.go.jp wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Our apologies for delayed production of the Proceedings of the 10th > ICRS, > Okinawa. Here are the latest news on the publication. > > We are finishing the final check of the Proceedings, and the CD- > ROMs will > be produced by the end of this month (28 Feb). Then, we will send > it to > all the participants. > > For the printed matter, we determined the price to be about US$ 600. > However, we need to have more than 100 orders as numbers of the > print. If > the order for the printed matter is less 100, we will have to stop > printing the Proceedings. > > More news will be sent as soon as I hear. > > Best wishes, > > Hiroya Yamano > Chief for Public Relations, 10ICRS > Co-editor for 10ICRS Proceedings > > ---- > Hiroya Yamano > UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement > BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia > Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 > Also at NIES > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html > http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Nouveau : t?l?phonez moins cher avec Yahoo! Messenger ! D?couvez les tarifs exceptionnels pour appeler la France et l'international.T?l?chargez la version beta. From hyamano at nies.go.jp Tue Feb 21 19:23:08 2006 From: hyamano at nies.go.jp (hyamano at nies.go.jp) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:23:08 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Proceedings of the 10th ICRS Message-ID: <20060222002306689.hyamano@nies.go.jp> Dear coral-listers, Thank you very much for sending comments, especially on the hard copies of the 10ICRS Proceedings. I forwarded the messages to the 10ICRS program committee and asked reconsideration. We will decide the contact information for the purchase and also the price of the CDs for non- participants, in addition to the price of the hard copies. I appreciate to have received some orders of the hard copies, but please do not send more orders to me before the next news. We should be very pleased if you could let us have some more time for the details. I will let you know the news as soon as I hear. Again, thank you very much for your cooperation and patience. Best wishes, Hiroya ---- Hiroya Yamano UR 128 CoReUs, Institut de Recherche pour le Developpement BP A5 98848 Noumea Cedex, New Caledonia Tel: +687 26 07 19, Fax: +687 26 43 26 Also at NIES http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano.html http://www.nies.go.jp/social/kojin/yamano/yamano_e.html ---- From cat64fish at yahoo.com Tue Feb 21 20:49:22 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:49:22 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <43FB77A9.7050007@3rivers.net> Message-ID: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi everyone, Certainly an interesting discussion on the fate of the Florida reefs. Not being from the US, and never having had the opportunity to visit the Florida Keys, I am unable to fully appreciate the extent fo the damage that has been done to that rich ecosystem. Mike, as usual, you have cut through the bs and succinctly stated the problem in the Florida Keys. I suspect similar situations occur wolrdwide, where reef systems are in decline (for example, I've heard from fishermen how their reefs have been destroyed by blast fishing caused by fishermen from the "other" island). While sitting on the fence, and agreeing that there needs to be more science directed at the reef ecosystem, the impacts would seem to far, far outweigh the need for more exacting science. Conservation, and perhaps even the more exacting word, preservation, is needed, if reefs are to survive the human onslaught. Someone mentioned (I am not sure of it is on this list or somewhere else) that it was a good ting that there are many coral species and only one human. Be that as it may, that one species has the capacity to totally destroy the diversity that exists today. Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place. MPAs managed in isolation, was something else that was brought up in this discussion. While it is undeniable (at least to me) that MPAs do help in the conservation of coral reefs and other marine ecosystems, the term MPA itself is an "isolationist" word, as it implies some sought of boundary. "Enlightened management plans" that look at the totality of the marine system, that will conserve and sustain our marine resources, understanding that it is inter-connected and intricately linked system, are what is needed. I suspect that part of the reason that scientists treat reef systems in isolation is that if they did not, then there would be no "scientific" papers (as we know them) in existence. The momentum of publishing, or doing publishable research, is probably what is limiting the science from expanding beyond its narrow confines. Reef managers on the other hand, must not only be biologists, but people managers, ecosystem managers, fund managers, and sometimes, visionaries, all rolled into one. Good luck finding such people in great enough quantity to "manage" even the existing MPAs. To round up, I agree with Mike that "people power" may be the way to go to get the necessary protection for our marine resources. "People cannot love, what they do not know", or so I've been told. While I cannot "love" the Florida Keys, I do love the coral reefs in my own backyard, and sometimes the wrangling that goes on between scientists, conservationists and politicians, while the reefs are slowly but surely being degraded, is more than I can bear. Holding out for coral reefs the world over Jeff --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. From Craig.Bonn at noaa.gov Wed Feb 22 09:44:49 2006 From: Craig.Bonn at noaa.gov (Craig S Bonn) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 09:44:49 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43FC78E1.10008@noaa.gov> Hi listers, I recently accepted a position with the Dry Tortugas NP where I will be coordinating a monitoring program within a new 47 square mile research natural area recently established within park boundaries where all consumptive practices will be prohibited. Diving and snorkeling will still be allowed and a system of mooring buoys has been established for boaters to tie up to within the RNA. I have worked in the Tortugas for the past six years and have witnessed myself the degradation that is occurring there-- some of the reefs are almost completely dead and covered in algae while others (Sherwood Forest in the northern portion of the TER) while healthier in terms of percent cover are also exhibiting signs of degradation and that it may simply be not how but when these reefs will suffer to the point of no return. I also know that there are so many variables involved in what is happening to our reefs on a global scale that the task at hand almost seems impossible especially when you listen to the doom sayers who state that the worlds reefs will be gone in a matter of years if nothing is done to correct the mistakes we have all made with regards to stewardship of our planet. If we take a look at the variables involved: water quality, over fishing, vessel groundings, seagrass dieoffs, urchin dieoffs, bleaching, coral disease, the possibility that our planet and our oceans are warming with subsequent melting of our polar regions and of course one of the biggest problems in my opinion is complete lack of concern by many. Lets admit it, some people simply dont care and I think this has a lot to do with the state our world is in now, cultural, religious, and political differences also play a role here but Im not going to get into that. Anyway, Im looking forward to the challenges that this new position will present to me and my colleagues and I guess what Im asking for is some advice. I am very concerned as many of you are as well and I would like to part of a new approach to management issues of not only the coral reefs of the world but our entire world. I believe that education an outreach could play an important role and will be one of my priorities along with others. Any advice would certainly be appreciated, perhaps efforts focused on small areas can have a spillover effect in terms of getting the public really involved, but I think its going to have to be a worldwide involvement if we really want to improve things. But its only a start, we have to finish, and send the right messages to generations of scientists coming behind us to better improve things so that they, and we, can perhaps begin to see positive changes taking place for the planet we all call home. thanks Craig Michael Risk wrote: >Hi Phil. > >Thanks you for crystallising the discussion, and articulating some of >my own concerns. One of the many problems is: > >"All politics is local." (Tip O'Neil, American politician) > >It is always easier to blame the external. One of my students was in >the back of a hall in the Keys 2-3 years ago during one of those public >meetings, and heard a senior Florida reef manager say the decline in >the reefs was caused by "All those Canadians driving down here every >winter in their SUV's, making Carbon Dioxide." (True quote-no one has >to MAKE UP things reef managers say.) > > >Now, it may well be that no one should drive SUV's, but it cannot be >said enough times: bleaching has had NOTHING TO DO with the decline of >Florida's reefs. Everyone reading this list should repeat after me-and >Phil-NOTHING TO DO. > >And now we see that the new kid on the block, FRRP, will focus only on >bleaching. Something is badly wrong. We don't need more science-the >science has spoken eloquently. > >In...2000? (help me, Walt, Phil-when was it?) I was a member of a NOAA >panel that evaluated all the reef monitoring programs in the Florida >Keys. (Why was there more than one, you may ask? In fact, there were >about six.) > >Our conclusion was that monitoring had done its job. (Monitoring can >NEVER identify causes, although a good monitoring program can allow >selection of hypotheses.) In this case, the monitoring programs, >especially the FMRI program, had successfully documented the regional >mass extinction under way in the Keys. And that was the panel's >carefully-chosen phrase: "regional mass extinction." > >We recommended consolidation of the monitoring programs, and an >immediate increase in funding designed to rank the various land-based >threats, in order that action could be taken. We also recommended an >outreach program. > >That may be the key to the Keys. Every citizen of Florida should be >told that: >1. there is big trouble in the Keys, and that >2. the causes are all local. > >The managers will be reluctant to be too assertive-after all, they have >Big Sugar and Big God-knows-what watching them. The impetus has to be >bottom-up. To coin a phrase. > >And we reef scientists have to learn that we score our own points at >the expense of the ecosystem. > >Mike > >On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 09:32:11 -0500 > Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Coral List, >> I?d like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion about >> >>healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but >>no >>one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And >>probably haven't been for a long time. >> >> My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can reach >>a >>true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my >>calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their >>living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The >>Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty >>fast >>too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about >>studies, >>monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right >>in >>front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, >> >>even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to >>protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this >>years >>ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it?s patchy, or not here, or >>look over there, there?s a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to >>think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the >>built >>it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in >>continuing >>to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of >>a >>far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the >>losses >>that are far greater, supports this form of denial. >> >> Well, the water is too polluted and we?ve know this for a very long >>time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps >>there >>are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many >>people >>fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage >>system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not >>simply >>sewage??But still we look for bright spots. I think it?s because it?s >> >>more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is >>hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, >>sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of >>having >>a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? >> >> It?s been said by many that the coral reef science community eats >>their >>young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and >>denial. >> The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather >> >>than resiliency, I?d favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) >>that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or >>slower >>in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the >>R >>scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, >>Carysfort R1, etc? Maybe this might help create public awareness and >>political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between >> >>dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 >> >>when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might >>even >>be up to R4 if conservation is successful. >> Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the baseline >> >>downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it?s a problem that we >>need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor >>is >>wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. >> Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just >>imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From kruer at 3rivers.net Wed Feb 22 12:27:54 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 10:27:54 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C90A813BB7@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <43FC9F1A.5020204@3rivers.net> Dr. Szmant, Thanks for the note. You are a reef researcher and you love to research and explore reefs around the world and you agree that Florida's reefs are under multiple stresses, including due to their geographic location. I too began exploring Keys reefs in the 1970s and have witnessed the dramatic changes there. My approach is simply that management should start by dealing with the stresses that can realistically be managed (routine, easily identified, cumulative, physical impacts in particular and habitat degradation in general) and quit using issues like climate change as an excuse to do virtually nothing on a local level. It's getting old. To me that would be like us agreeing that due to its importance we should all start working towards stopping the melting of the Greenland ice sheets, and ignore local problems that unequivocally are trashing coastal resources on a daily basis. And don't forget that in the 1980s and 1990s the mantra from many outspoken reef types was that wastewater and other nutrients were killing Keys reefs. I participated in a couple of recent exchanges wherein a federal manager suggested that researchers were not provididng needed information for reef management (and more research was needed), while at the same time a researcher was stating that managers were not using data made available by researchers - and that direction needed to be given for what information was needed. Both argued that more research and information is needed for proper reef management and this is what I reject - the excuses for not curtailing destructive human practices that are obviously and directly degrading reef ecosystem resources. And I believe that the notion that we can completely decipher to the nth degree (or ever really know) what is going on with reefs (and many other natural systems) is a loser from the get-go, and very self-serving. I don't ignore climate change as you suggest (and I doubt that others do) but recognize and embrace the notion that it's here to stay and nothing that you or I can do individually will change that - but you and others prominent in the scientific and management community can individually make changes and help force changes that will help protect and conserve reef resources. If you truly want to help coral reef ecosystems argue for improved funding for broader and more effective management based on what we do know and less funding for research to try to learn (forever) what we don't know. Thanks. Curtis Kruer Szmant, Alina wrote: > Hello Mike, Phil and Curtis: > > The problem with attributing all of the loss of coral in the Florida > Keys to local human impacts, as you three have done in your comments, is > that the same pattern of loss of live coral is being observed in remote > places of the Bahamas and other small Caribbean islands with small or no > human populations, no sewage to speak of and no cruise ships. To ignore > the dramatic effect coral bleaching and subsequent disease outbreaks, on > top of overfishing, have had on Keys and northern Caribbean corals since > the mid-1990s and especially since the severe 1997-1998 back-to-back > bleaching events, is not helpful to conservation or management efforts. > Bleaching has reached reefs that are distant from direct human impact as > well as the Keys, with similar effects on both. Overfishing is far more > pervasive than water quality degradation because boats go everywhere to > extract the last lobster and grouper. The healthiest Caribbean reefs, if > one judges that based on live coral cover, that I have seen in a long > while are those in the lower Caribbean where they have, for hydrographic > and climatic reasons, not been as impacted by either bleaching or major > storms: Reefs on the S side of Curacao and Bonaire still have more > coral now than what I remember for places like PR and the USVI back in > the 1960s and 1970s. And they have high coral cover within 1 km of > where the cruise ships docks and next to the outflow from the > desalination plant. And they have very high rates of coral recruitment > and no algae even on boulders with no Diadema, and few fishes. Go > figure! > > There are many reefs on the GBR with water quality conditions far worse > than in the Florida Keys (in terms of turbidity, nutrient levels and > such variables) with much higher coral cover and diversity. Ken Anthony > is even showing corals on these turbid reefs feed on the detritus and > have higher growth rates than corals on more offshore reefs. Florida > reefs have a disadvantage of being at the northern limits of the > climatic window for coral well being in the Atlantic province, with way > too many severe winter and summer storms. These geographic limitations > have existed for thousands of years and have limited coral reef growth > over Holocene time frames. When I first visited Nassau reefs in 1971 > and the Florida reefs during the 1977 symposium, when my frame of > reference was Puerto Rican reefs, my opinion of Florida/Bahamas reefs > was that they were puny and depauperate. Now they are even more > depauperate. That is no excuse to abuse them, but to ignore the > climatic factor is not helpful towards restoring or protecting them (if > that is possible). Multiple factors are at work, and a single quick fix > will not do the trick. Over-simplification and trying to crucify a > single factor will not help society deal with these complex issues. > > Alina Szmant > > ******************************************************************* > Dr. Alina M. Szmant > Coral Reef Research Group > UNCW-Center for Marine Science > 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln > Wilmington NC 28409 > Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 > Cell: (910)200-3913 > email: szmanta at uncw.edu > Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta > ****************************************************************** > > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Curtis > Kruer > Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 3:27 PM > To: Phil Dustan > Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency > > Bravo, bravo to a brave and accurate statement by the experienced Phil > Dustan. > But little mention of the road to follow that could be considered a true > change in direction. > > There is no mention of the ultimate value of large, true MPAs in the > amazingly productive Keys (and > no definitely not is the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary a MPA, > and no it should never be > held up as a shining example of what a protected area should be). > > And the focus has to become a coral reef ecosystem based focus - with > problems much broader than > simply water quality. Recently a FWCC official was quoted as saying > that the problem with > seagrasses in Florida is water quality. And with that this important > figure easily dispenses with > all the seagrass impacts from a growing population - dredging and > filling, thousands upon thousands > of docks and piers, widespread boat impacts, vessel wave energy, etc > etc., See how easy it is. And > it's been going on in the Keys for years. I made an ass out of myself > during some of the countless > consensus hearing held in the Keys by EPA and NOAA during the 1990s as I > refused to play along with > the silly notion that if wastewater problems could be solved in the Keys > all would be OK. What a > joke. And believing that putting a sewer treatment plant on Key Largo > is going to change much is > wishful thinking. Is there any evidence that spending tens of millions > to upgrade the Key West plant > to AWT and deep well injection years ago has accomplished anything > measurable? And we were promised > that stormwater could be addressed and great plans were laid - sounds > good but can't happen on a > scale that matters. I lost many arguments and eventually moved out of > the Keys as I began to see > myself as a part of the problem. > > The best we can do is actively and aggressively protect and restore the > Keys ecosystem and manage > human activity - and that is not being done partly because way way too > much attention is focused on > a single part of the system - reefs. Proudly promoted years ago was that > most else would be > protected by education - I wonder if spending several million of NOAA's > limited funds on a new > facility in Key West is going to change much? > > Reef scientists and managers still attempt to deal with coral reefs as > stand alone systems and the > problems with this are now apparent. Seagrasses and shoreline wetlands > continue to be lost and > degraded in the Keys by man's activities and a few persistent groups are > trying legally to protect > the remaining fragments of Keys upland habitats. Boating and diving > activity (and associated > impacts) has been out of control for years and the feds point to the > state and the state points > to.........(Jeb Bush). Tremendous and sincere volunteer efforts have > taken place but it's not > working. Strides have been made in establishing small protected areas - > but it's obviously not > enough. Forty pound lobster traps are still routinely dropped on live > bottom and predictably now > hundreds of thousands of lobster and stone crabs traps and hundreds of > miles of slow-degrading poly > line are lost in Keys waters each year (and fishermen get your money to > replace them every year just > to put them out in hurricane season again), novice divers flail away by > the tens of thousands daily, > fishermen do their thing, anchors away, and all that. Thousand foot > long cruise ships plow up the > bottom of Key West channel and harbor many times a day now and everyone > effectively turns a blind > eye - even though there are various types of reef habitats nearby. > Shallow water marine habitats > throughout the Keys - and fish and wildlife dependent on them - are > subjected to the disturbing and > destructive impacts of ever more numerous and ever larger and faster > boats of all types. > > People are trying hard to "save the Keys" but the current approach is > failing. The rate of loss and > anthropogenic change may be less now but the trends are all bad and that > is what matters. Large > vessel groundings on the reef have been dramatically reduced and that's > great. But new leadership is > needed. Who was it that said consensus is the absence of leadership? > Catering to virtually every > user group in the Keys all these years has predictably not resulted in > ecosystem protection or even > maintenance. And managers traveling around the world touting reef > management in the Keys as a > success story have probably raised more than a few eyebrows. New > leadership is needed and that > leadership needs to pull local, state, and federal agencies together and > address all issues > throughout the ecosystem - not just one aspect in one habitat type. And > they need to be loudly > supported by the coral reef scientific community - the group that has > the most knowledge about what > has been lost and is being lost. > > Perhaps Dr. Dustan's comments and the comments of others to this and > other lists will lead to > something new and novel in reef management - admitting failures and > misdirected effort. > > Thanks. > > Curtis Kruer > > > > > Phil Dustan wrote: > >>Dear Coral List, >> I'd like to thank everyone for participating in the discussion > > about > >>healthy reefs in teh Florida Keys. I've gotten lots of response but no > > >>one can point to a healthy reef, because there are none left. And >>probably haven't been for a long time. >> >> My point is that before we talk about resilience, maybe we can > > reach a > >>true consensus that the reefs are a mere shadow of their past. By my >>calculations nad measurments, the Keys have lost over 90% of their >>living coral since we began to study them in the 1960s and 70s. The >>Tortugas are in better shape, but are also losing vitality pretty fast > > >>too. This is shameful. All this time we have been talking about > > studies, > >>monitoring, and awareness and the house has been in full flames right > > in > >>front of our faces. Shame on everyone that wants to minimize this or, >>even worse, deny it. The authorities should be worried about how to >>protect what is left, and should have been fully engaged in this years > > >>ago, but everyone wants to pretend that it's patchy, or not here, or >>look over there, there's a new recruit! Worse yet, some want us to >>think that we can remake the reef with concrete or boulders- the built > > >>it and they will come mentality. There really is no point in > > continuing > >>to wear a smiley face. Looking for patches that are the remnants of a > > >>far greater luxuriance, without documenting (georeferencing) the > > losses > >>that are far greater, supports this form of denial. >> >> Well, the water is too polluted and we've know this for a very > > long > >>time. We may not know exactly how, but we know it is and perhaps there > > >>are some creative ways to reduce loading. And there are too many > > people > >>fishing and gathering, and Key Largo STILL does not have a sewage >>system because its too expensive? And watershed effluent is not > > simply > >>sewage......But still we look for bright spots. I think it's because > > it's > >>more politically palpable and easier. The really worthwhile road is >>hundreds of years long and involves some really hard reality checks, >>sacrifice, political savy, and serious money. What's the point of > > having > >>a sanctuary if there's nothing left except an economy? >> >> It's been said by many that the coral reef science community > > eats their > >>young. It also seems to be good at reinventing discoveries and > > denial. > >> The reefs are dying faster that we are progressing however. Rather >>than resiliency, I'd favor a term like remnancy (to coin a new term) >>that portrays reality a bit more. Which reefs are hanging on, or > > slower > >>in losing ground. Perhaps we could institute a scale of remnancy (the > > R > >>scale from 0-5). Molasses reef might be rated as R2, Rock Key R3, >>Carysfort R1, etc... Maybe this might help create public awareness and > > >>political pressure. It would also promote healthy competition between >>dives shops and localities along the Keys. Who wants to dive on an R2 >>when we can go to an R3? In a few hundred years some reefs might even > > >>be up to R4 if conservation is successful. >> Otherwise,with business as usual, we just keep shifting the > > baseline > >>downward and keep studying the reef, and gee, it's a problem that we >>need to keep working on. But the house is now ashes and the emperor > > is > >>wearing a beautiful set of new clothes. >> Thanks again and I hope we can keep focusing on the reefs. Just > > >>imagine the Florida Keys without reefs? >> Phil >> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From albert at ecology.su.se Wed Feb 22 09:46:53 2006 From: albert at ecology.su.se (Albert Norstrom) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:46:53 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency References: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Thanks Phil for starting what must be the most interesting discourse held on these boards in a long time. Some extremely thought-provoking comments all around. Yes, the Keys do seem to have it real bad, but this isn't a problem isolated to the Caribbean. I've conducted field trips in the Phillippines and Zanzibar during the past years and we are witnessing moderate-to-severe degradation in those regions too. The general feeling diving on reefs off the North coast of the Philippines is that of entering a ghost town. Fish abundnace is frighteningly low (you'd be lucky to see a parrotfish above 35cm after a week of diving), and community changes are rapidly manifesting themselves (we have observed some sites where soft corals are taking over completely following the bleaching event of '98). The causes behind this seem to be a confounding mixture of synergistic factors, just as in the Caribbean. As Alina points out, local factors alone (such as a decline water quality due to human terrestrial activities) cannot be ascertained to be the single driving forces behind the changes. As such, what speaks for a sudden improvement in reef conditon if we manage to address that single point - when the problems of climate change and lack of grazers (due to a brutal historical overfishing and disease) loom overhead? I found Jeffrey Lowes comment "Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place." interesting. How about I play devils advocate with you all for awhile. A few months ago, a very interesting point of discourse popped up during an internal discussion group at the department. The notion that ecosystems are intrinsically unpredictable and characterized by alternative system regimes is gaining more and more weight in the coral ecology community. It is thus interesting that we as a group (and society as a whole) are continually so ill-prepared for when such shifts occur. For 20 or so odd years the Caribbean has been dominated by macroalgae regime that seems pretty resilient itself (probably due a strengthening of certain internal feedback loops in that system over the years). I'm curious to know if any serious attempt has been made to investigate what goods and services are available from these new regimes (e.g. what kinds of fish can be harvested), and if fishing communities have adapted in any way, and if so are they succesful, to these new conditions? For sure, I'm an advocate for proactive measures to foster resilience of coral ecosystems. (Already an array of tools have been suggested, MPA's being the most popular at the moment, but in order to succeed with this I think we have to witness a more fundamental change in our economic and social structures. How on earth will MPA's solve anything if market economy dictates that its economically viable to continue overfishing an already ecologically depleted fish stock in the regions outside these sanctuaries? Forgive the side-note, back to being devils advocate again.) But it seems equally important to create institutional frameworks that can foster adaptivity in social systems. The new macroalgal regimes could be the norm for the Caribbean for the next unforeseeable future, much as (from my own personal observations, and research) other regimes are becoming more common in other biogeographic regions. Is it "fatalistic" to start looking around us and maybe accept that coral ecosystems are dynamic and alternative regimes are not something aberrant, but a phenomenon we could (or should) get accustomed to as conditions change. Maybe the pressing question is, not if we can restore reefs to some abstract baseline level, but can we predict these new regimes (I think never completely, seeing the complex nature of ecosystsm) and can we adapt to them? /Cheers Albert Norstr?m PhD Student Dept. Systems Ecology Natural Resource Management Group Stockholm University SE-106 91 Stockholm Sweden Tel: +46 (0)8 16 44 84 Email: albert at ecology.su.se Fax: +46 (0)8 15 84 17 Personal page: http://www.ecology.su.se/staff/personal.asp?id=119 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Jeffrey Low" To: Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 2:49 AM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency > Hi everyone, > > Certainly an interesting discussion on the fate of the Florida reefs. Not being from the US, and never having had the opportunity to visit the Florida Keys, I am unable to fully appreciate the extent fo the damage that has been done to that rich ecosystem. > > Mike, as usual, you have cut through the bs and succinctly stated the problem in the Florida Keys. I suspect similar situations occur wolrdwide, where reef systems are in decline (for example, I've heard from fishermen how their reefs have been destroyed by blast fishing caused by fishermen from the "other" island). > > While sitting on the fence, and agreeing that there needs to be more science directed at the reef ecosystem, the impacts would seem to far, far outweigh the need for more exacting science. Conservation, and perhaps even the more exacting word, preservation, is needed, if reefs are to survive the human onslaught. > > Someone mentioned (I am not sure of it is on this list or somewhere else) that it was a good ting that there are many coral species and only one human. Be that as it may, that one species has the capacity to totally destroy the diversity that exists today. > > Perhaps, if we took a longer view (in evolutionary terms), this extinction would not matter .... yes, the ecosystems that we know today might be gone, but other ecosystems and processes will replace them. Much good that would do for us, who have to see these changes taking place. > > MPAs managed in isolation, was something else that was brought up in this discussion. While it is undeniable (at least to me) that MPAs do help in the conservation of coral reefs and other marine ecosystems, the term MPA itself is an "isolationist" word, as it implies some sought of boundary. "Enlightened management plans" that look at the totality of the marine system, that will conserve and sustain our marine resources, understanding that it is inter-connected and intricately linked system, are what is needed. > > I suspect that part of the reason that scientists treat reef systems in isolation is that if they did not, then there would be no "scientific" papers (as we know them) in existence. The momentum of publishing, or doing publishable research, is probably what is limiting the science from expanding beyond its narrow confines. Reef managers on the other hand, must not only be biologists, but people managers, ecosystem managers, fund managers, and sometimes, visionaries, all rolled into one. Good luck finding such people in great enough quantity to "manage" even the existing MPAs. > > To round up, I agree with Mike that "people power" may be the way to go to get the necessary protection for our marine resources. "People cannot love, what they do not know", or so I've been told. While I cannot "love" the Florida Keys, I do love the coral reefs in my own backyard, and sometimes the wrangling that goes on between scientists, conservationists and politicians, while the reefs are slowly but surely being degraded, is more than I can bear. > > Holding out for coral reefs the world over > > Jeff > > > > --------------------------------- > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From smiller at gate.net Wed Feb 22 11:15:20 2006 From: smiller at gate.net (Steven Miller) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 11:15:20 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef condition discussion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <43FC8E18.1090108@gate.net> All politics is local? Tell that to Acropora and other coral species (and Diadema too) after Caribbean-wide waves of disease and bleaching helped push the system in Florida, already at the northern limit geographically of coral distribution in this part of the world, to - or over - the edge. Alina's response hit all the high points about why it's necessary to consider complexity (ecologically and I would add politically). Much of this was previously addressed in a series of letters published in Science Magazine (Science 17 June 2005 308) including a summary of work already accomplished or underway related to management of water quality in the Keys. To try and advance this discussion (without writing anything lengthy) rather than dwell too much on the negative, I think it's important to ask, "Is there any good news on the coral reef front?" Well, mostly not. BUT, we know we can do better with MPAs to help manage resource use (fishing, boating, diving) and to - at the very least - watch (research) what happens to fish and benthic communities when no-take protection is enforced. I like the idea that a 75 pound grouper is more valuable as a tourist attraction than on dinner plates, but some might argue that point. And many don't know this, but there remain spectacular places in the Keys with high cover and corals in relatively good condition, just not offshore where so much was previously considered in "good" condition because large stands of Acropora persisted in the days before bleaching and disease. Where are these sites? They are found near s;yc0bhokr npobno rouubs and xoyub=- hpbsl ngpui. Sorry, that was too easy, but the sites are real. Also, we know that Acropora is a fast-growing species and that under the right set of circumstances we could see massive proliferation over relatively short time scales, maybe even sufficient to match sea level rise that will result from global warming. Of course, coastal areas will also flood and that will degrade water quality, which might prevent more immediate coral growth - there's that complexity thing again. So what's my take home message? The sky might be falling - remember the chicken little thread so many years ago? You can duck and cover or you can do what you can to try and make things better. Personally, I think we are in trouble because environment (and not just coral reefs, but also our air and water and if some have their way endangered species too) is not a political issue these days. How does it get political? Environmentalism needs to become a social movement the way it was in the 1960s and 1970s. That will only happen when a thousand grassroots efforts at the local level merge and become something bigger. In that regard, I agree that all politics is local. Best regards. Steven Miller, Ph.D. Research Professor UNC Wilmington And a possibly relevant plug... see the trailer for a new movie about the Evolution and Intelligent Design Circus at www.flockofdodos.com, a feature documentary written and directed by former marine biologist Dr. Randy Olson (and exec produced by me). The movie is ultimately about communication of science in today's media landscape. Coral reef scientists have much to learn about communicating for the benefit of coral reefs and not personal agendas or career advancement (my personal and I'm sure provocative opinion, and not directed to the current thread). From delbeek at waquarium.org Wed Feb 22 20:27:56 2006 From: delbeek at waquarium.org (Charles Delbeek) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 15:27:56 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> References: <20060222014922.40448.qmail@web35301.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Message-ID: <6.2.3.4.2.20060222152219.02a7f8d0@mail.waquarium.org> >It is very interesting to follow this discussion and draw parallels >with closed system reef aquariums. The problems of algal overgrowth, >nutrient load, temperature, water motion, nutrient uptake, >ultraviolet intensity, coral bleaching, coral tissue loss are ALL >encountered in closed systems. Though we do not have all the answers >we do know enough to control some of these factors and what effects >changing such factors can have on our miniature "ecosystems". I >strongly believe that some of the answers to problems facing wild >reefs can be mirrored in closed reef systems, and perhaps can yield >some answers as well. The rapid advancements in coral husbandry >opens up tremendous opportunities for coral researchers to >manipulate systems within a controlled setting. Aloha! J. Charles Delbeek M.Sc. Aquarium Biologist III Waikiki Aquarium, University of Hawaii 2777 Kalakaua Ave. Honolulu, HI, USA 96815 www.waquarium.org 808-923-9741 ext. 0 VOICE 808-923-1771 FAX From cat64fish at yahoo.com Wed Feb 22 21:25:26 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 10:25:26 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <000a01c637be$d26a8cf0$6faaed82@D6ZGLZ0JAlb> Message-ID: <20060223022526.80199.qmail@web35310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Hi Albert and others .... Does that phrase "... let me play devil's advocate ..." mean that I am the angel? ... :P Anyway, frivolity aside, you raise a very pertinent point, that coral ecosystems are dynamic, and that different "regimes" can arise, oftentimes from similar starting points. I am sure someone can list a series of papers and research showing this to be the case. However, what is the acceptable change that we (at this point in time) are willing to accept? I find myself asking, more and more, not questions that are quantifiable, like "What percent of coral cover is on the reef?" Or "How many species are there?" but "Can I accept seeing the change of *my* coral reefs from the reefal system to [an algal dominanted one] / [rubble reef] / [artificial reef]?". Monitoring seems to be something that almost *everyone* does. I do it ... and I've been doing for almost 20 years now (*geez*). But where has that gotten me ... or rather the reefs? I know it is in decline ... *everyone* who has worked in the field for any length of time knows this. Do we need to conduct another study to confirm the results of a study that has confirmed the decline of the reefs, which was conducted to confirm the results of a previous study? Even though the formation of coral reef system (or any other ecosystem, for that matter) may be inherently unpredictable - I don't think the question is whether we can predict what it will change into, but can we live with it changing, in the first place? Knowing that it was through our inaction that the changes occurred? Adaptation would be an inevitable result of change (or else you would die out), so I don't think it is a major part of the equation. On the "local" vs. "global" issue, I will sit on the fence on this one - I see the merits of both "camps". My feeling is that what occurs locally, will affect things globally. Take carbon emissions, for example. If, and this is a BIG IF, everyone were to convert to less carbon emitting vehicles, would [human-input to the magnitude of] global warming be reduced? If the answer is yes (to me it is a "yes"), then what needs to be in place before this conversion can come about? The changes would be in three main areas: - Political : "Local" politicians must push for the necessary legislative changes to limit the carbon emissions in all aspects of industry, and to enfrce them - Infrastructure : "Local" businesses must be ready to support technology that emits less carbon - Lifestyle changes need to be made : The most "local" aspect of all ... the people must embrace low / no carbon emiision technology (that might mean giving up that 10-litre, SUV-built-like-a-tank-off-roader-that-I-drive-in-the-city car) There would be global issues, of course .... even with carbon reducing industries, the shear magnitude of the human population would probably over whelm the ecosystems. The "global" issue, to my mind, isn't the fact that warming is occurring, but what the world (as in its people) are going to do about it. Cheers, Jeff --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Movies - Search movie info and celeb profiles and photos. From martin_moe at yahoo.com Wed Feb 22 23:52:45 2006 From: martin_moe at yahoo.com (Martin Moe) Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 20:52:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Remnancy not resiliency In-Reply-To: <6.2.3.4.2.20060222152219.02a7f8d0@mail.waquarium.org> Message-ID: <20060223045245.67761.qmail@web60023.mail.yahoo.com> Hi all, I?m always hesitant to comment in these threads since I?m not a ?real? coral reef scientist, but Steven Miller?s comment ?You can duck and cover or you can do what you can to try and make things better.? stimulated me to weigh in on this. There are efforts now underway to try to make things better on Florida?s coral reefs, but has been exceedingly difficult to get support for these efforts. As Steven said, the factors negatively affecting the coral reefs of Florida, Bahamas and the Caribbean are many and complex, but there are things that can be done to improve specific reef areas and perhaps even reef ecosystems. Site restoration of reef areas impacted by boat groundings and protection of the reefs through good management (MPA establishment) and water quality improvement are very important and essential to the future of the reefs, but even more important is to achieve ecological restoration. This may be an impossible task but we won?t know that if we don?t try. We can?t restore the reefs to the conditions that were present 100 or even 50 years ago but I am of the opinion that it is possible to achieve some level of ecological restoration if we make a serious effort to do so. I attended a talk that Alina Szmant gave in 1999 on her coral reef research and she greatly impressed me with the take home message of her talk that the decline of the reefs was caused more by the loss of biodiversity than anthropogenic nutrients. That made a lot of sense to me, and subsequent research indicates that she is correct. The loss of the Diadema sea urchins in 1983-4, the keystone herbivores of the Western Atlantic coral reefs, shifted the ecology of the reefs from coral dominance to macro algae dominance, a well accepted premise by most coral reef scientists. In addition, on Florida reefs, the almost total loss of populations of adult spiny lobster removed an important predator of coralivorus snails and other small predators that feed on living coral tissue and create opportunities for introduction of coral disease. If we were really serious about coral reef restoration, we would eliminate lobster fishing, recreational and commercial, on all offshore reefs past a certain distance from shore, perhaps 3 miles, and most important, really get serious about researching the possibility of restoration of pre plague population levels of Diadema on the reefs. These are not impossible tasks, but they do require concerted effort and scientific collaboration. And the lobster issue is also fraught with political mine fields. But these are real possibilities for ecological improvement of our coral reefs and to not explore them fully is grossly irresponsible. Ken Nedimyer and I did a experimental re establishment of Diadema on two small patch reefs in the Upper Keys in 2001 supported by the Florida Keys Marine Sanctuary (http://www.fknms.nos.noaa.gov/research_monitoring/report/diadema/diadema/.html) and this study well illustrated the positive effect a marginal population of Diadema can have on a Florida reef in the short space of one year. We are now working with the Mote Marine Laboratory to expand this work. There has also been work by The Nature Conversancy in the Keys on similar projects and there have been other studies as well. So research on ecological restoration has begun and hopefully will produce an effective reef restoration program while there is still reef left to restore. Martin A. Moe, Jr. Adjunct Scientist, Mote Marine Laboratory> > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From simmi_nuern at yahoo.com Thu Feb 23 04:10:55 2006 From: simmi_nuern at yahoo.com (Simone Nuernberger) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 01:10:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Coralliophila - Thank you Message-ID: <20060223091055.63682.qmail@web60313.mail.yahoo.com> Hello again, I just wanted to thank all the people who took the time to reply. Your emails were extremely helpful! Thank you very much! Best regards, Simone *************************************************************************** Simone N?rnberger (M.Sc.) simone_nuernberger at web.de Institute of Biology (Biological Oceanography) University of Southern Denmark DK-5230 Odense M --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. From andy_wb at email.com Thu Feb 23 04:25:39 2006 From: andy_wb at email.com (Andy Woods-Ballard) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:25:39 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Instrument to measure water depths. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060223092544.AF9DE1795C@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hi Anders Working in Mexico with Global Vision International, we used a handheld depth sounder, Plastimo Echotest II. I believe this has a range of about 80m. But more importantly for you, I think it is submersible and water proof to depths of 50m. It will not however store data and might need to be used with a slate for recording. Check out the product to be sure, but I hope this helps. Andy Woods-Ballard From ckappel at stanford.edu Thu Feb 23 12:49:05 2006 From: ckappel at stanford.edu (Carrie Vanessa Kappel) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 09:49:05 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas Message-ID: <1140716945.43fdf59126a88@webmail.stanford.edu> Hi Rick, >From your description, it sounds like what you were seeing was likely Microdictyon marinum, which has been observed to have strong summertime blooms on reefs in The Bahamas. We also saw high densities of Microdictyon during our surveys on North Andros in July 2002 and San Salvador in July 2003. It's not clear why this seaweed has increased so dramatically on Bahamian reefs in recent years, but I'd guess it's due to an interaction between nutrient runoff and grazing. Brian Lapointe and coauthors suggested that Microdictyon marinum might benefit from submarine groundwater discharge, whereby nutrients (in this case dissolved inorganic nitrogen) from land are transported to reefs offshore via groundwater fluxes through porous limestone (Lapointe et al. 2004. J. Exp. Mar. Biol. 298:275-301). The Littler and Littler Caribbean Reef Plants book has a nice picture of this species and others with which it might be confused. Cheers, Carrie Carrie Kappel Postdoctoral Fellow National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis University of California Santa Barbara 735 State Street, Suite 300 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 kappel at nceas.ucsb.edu 805.966.1677 w 805.892.2510 f 831.869.1503 m Permanent email address Carrie.Kappel at alumni.brown.edu ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:34:49 -0500 From: "Rick Sanders" Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on reefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas To: Message-ID: <004b01c63715$7fa4b760$650da8c0 at manta> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Dear Listers, I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find an image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been unable to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish brown color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each other in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped into more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm in width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if to crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what I am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a copy or link. Thanks very much in advance, Best regards, Rick Rick Sanders Deep Blue Solutions Media, PA 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net ------------------------- From Bprecht at pbsj.com Thu Feb 23 14:14:47 2006 From: Bprecht at pbsj.com (Precht, Bill) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 14:14:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral Reef condition discussion Message-ID: <8511092CB6C11C4BB2632F61A82C620C03FD68B2@MIAMBX.pbsj.com> Dear Coral-List: I have read with great interest the recent thread on Florida's reef woes. In Steven Miller's recent message, he reminds us of the "reefs at risk" thread that discussed the very same issues on the Coral-List during June and July of 1998. It was in-part, as an outcome of that discussion that Steven and I decided to write a book chapter on this very subject entitled: Precht, W.F. and Miller, S.L.(in press) Ecological shifts along the Florida reef tract: the past as a key to the future: in Aronson, R.B. (ed) Geological Approaches to Coral Reef Ecology. Springer Verlag, NY If anyone is interested in a pre-print of this chapter please send me an email and I'll send it along. Cheers, Bill Precht Senior Scientist PBS&J - Division of Ecological Sciences Miami, FL From abaker at rsmas.miami.edu Thu Feb 23 14:26:34 2006 From: abaker at rsmas.miami.edu (Andrew Baker) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 13:26:34 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Laboratory Technician Position in Coral Molecular Ecology In-Reply-To: <10313196.1129601388953.JavaMail.SYSTEM@us-webcti01> Message-ID: <00e601c638af$0e8bc0f0$3d6fab81@DellD600> Funding is available for a Laboratory Technician in coral molecular ecology at the Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science (RSMAS) at the University of Miami, Florida, USA (www.rsmas.miami.edu ). The successful candidate will assume primary responsibility for the management and day-to-day operations of a molecular laboratory specializing in the ecology and systematics of corals and their symbiotic dinoflagellates ("zooxanthellae"), but will also be involved in physiological experimental work at the University's Experimental Hatchery facility, and coral reef fieldwork in Florida and elsewhere. Specific duties include extracting, purifying, archiving and analyzing DNA from coral samples, ordering and management of scientific supplies and reagents, managing undergraduate volunteers and interns, and working with the principal investigator, postdoctoral associate and graduate students on collaborative research projects. Ongoing research, funded principally by the US National Science Foundation, the Pew Institute for Ocean Science, and the Wildlife Conservation Society, uses both field survey and experimental approaches to study the responses of reef corals to climate change. The position is funded for three years, subject to satisfactory performance. The successful candidate will also be encouraged to pursue independent research and publication in related fields of interest. Candidates should have a Master's degree in molecular systematics, molecular ecology and/or population genetics, but candidates with Bachelor's degrees and an equivalent level of molecular experience will also be considered. Ideal candidates should be SCUBA-certified and be able to pass a physical examination to obtain scientific diver certification with the American Academy of Underwater Sciences (AAUS). Experience manipulating computer models of climate change (e.g., Hadley dataset) and/or maintaining outdoor aquarium systems is desirable, but not required. Position includes benefits and a retirement package. Please submit a current CV, names and contact information of three references, and a cover letter indicating research interests and experience electronically as a single .pdf file to Andrew Baker at abaker at rsmas.miami.edu. Applications are being accepted immediately. The position will remain open until filled. The University of Miami is an EEO/AA Employer. Please post this advertisement as appropriate. ___________________ Andrew C. Baker, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Division of Marine Biology and Fisheries Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science University of Miami 4600 Rickenbacker Cswy. Miami, FL 33149, USA Voice: +1 (305) 421-4642 Fax: +1 (305) 421-4600 From milviapin at yahoo.com Thu Feb 23 18:37:21 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 15:37:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Microdyction Message-ID: <20060223233721.57467.qmail@web50313.mail.yahoo.com> Dear listers, Large abundance of this algae were found in Namu atoll, Marshall islands, in November 2004. Lagoon and ocean sides were covered by the alga. No nutrients inputs are known in this slighlty populated atoll (300 people). Other outgrowth of this alga ave been noticed in different atolls although not to this extent. Thank you silvia Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. From ctwiliams at yahoo.com Fri Feb 24 00:43:55 2006 From: ctwiliams at yahoo.com (Tom Williams) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 21:43:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Microdyction In-Reply-To: <20060223233721.57467.qmail@web50313.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20060224054355.9921.qmail@web50412.mail.yahoo.com> I worked in Majuro on ADB job for water supply/wastewater. Please provide more details. Simply put - where do they get the nitrate for the algal growth. 300 people = say =>75kg of nitrate + plus agriculture = NHNO People on septic tanks?? or seawater flushing?? Green grass lawns anywhere?? ?Any previous military operations on island?? Follow the nitrate. --- Silvia Pinca wrote: > Dear listers, > Large abundance of this algae were found in Namu > atoll, Marshall islands, in November 2004. Lagoon > and ocean sides were covered by the alga. No > nutrients inputs are known in this slighlty > populated atoll (300 people). Other outgrowth of > this alga ave been noticed in different atolls > although not to this extent. > Thank you > silvia > > > Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. > NRAS - Marshall Islands > Nature Resources Assessment Surveys > Research and Education for Conservation > spinca at nras-conservation.org > www.nras-conservation.org > > > --------------------------------- > Yahoo! Autos. Looking for a sweet ride? Get > pricing, reviews, & more on new and used cars. > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Fri Feb 24 09:37:55 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:37:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] resiliency vs. "remnancy" vs. sustainability Message-ID: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> It would seem most people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what they used to be. The word resiliency is another word for resilient, which means an ability to quickly (usually) recover from a bad or unnatural condition--in the present case, we might assume from a previously pristine (i.e., uncorrupted by civilization) condition. I wonder if there are any such reefs left. I'm not so sure the word is being used correctly in our fellowship (more below). Although "remnancy" is not a real word, one would infer that our colleague Phil's intended usage would be as a means to describe the degree or condition of the reef after it has been adversely affected by civilization (more colloquially: trashed); that is, how it can be described as a remnant of its former "self" (biome?). I'm not so sure describing how much a reef has been adversely affected from its former condition is useful, though, since (as was pointed out) in many cases the reef in question may never have been adequately described (have any?), especially since they're always changing (evolving) anyway, thus few cases in which to measure past against current condition (I guess that's what started the whole discussion). But don't get me wrong: we should understand what is adversely affecting the reefs so we can stop or ameliorate the condition. I'm just not so sure "remnancy" has much practical application for science, although for political purposes it is probably perfectly practical. Instead, since we want to keep coral reefs in existence, and we want to provide them with the proper environment and support their vitality, where we can, perhaps a better word for purposes of marshaling our efforts is sustainability (I know I'm not the first to suggest this). Shouldn't we sustain the reefs until we remedy what ails them? (Now there's a concept: clean up the environment!) We can't really do anything to promote resiliency (how do you measure such an ecologically difficult concept?), although a conducive environment might be sustained or managed (i.e., "cleaned up") to allow full (how to measure?) resiliency. Is it possible to describe how all the members of the coral ecosystem interact to contribute to an integral resiliency? This is extremely difficult stuff, yet I would agree the goal is laudable and should be pursued. Okay, I know, the word sustain might imply leaving everything as it is, rather than making things better, but I'm just not comfortable with the word resiliency or "remnancy." Just my two cents... Cheers, Jim From deevon at bellsouth.net Fri Feb 24 10:10:09 2006 From: deevon at bellsouth.net (DeeVon Quirolo) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 10:10:09 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] resiliency vs. "remnancy" vs. sustainability In-Reply-To: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> References: <43FF1A43.5050508@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <7.0.0.16.2.20060224100227.026dd6d8@bellsouth.net> Ok ok, I'll add my two cents. At this time for coral reefs, I think that what we need are efforts to RESTORE coral reefs, including immediate efforts to reduce heavy physical impacts and habitat destruction, as well as improve water quality from local and regional pollution sources and reduce global warming (although we may have already crossed the critical threshold there). We already know that corals need clear clean nutrient free waters to thrive and that they do not do well when battered by various user groups and of course natural events such as storms. I think the reef resiliency approach is flawed because it proposes to study healthy reefs, and looks the other way while those corals that need our help most are ignored. Applying what we know already to these reefs on the part of current managers would do wonders. There you have it. Best, DeeVon Quirolo, Executive Director, Reef Relief At 09:37 AM 2/24/2006, Jim Hendee wrote: >It would seem most people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what >they used to be. > >The word resiliency is another word for resilient, which means an >ability to quickly (usually) recover from a bad or unnatural >condition--in the present case, we might assume from a previously >pristine (i.e., uncorrupted by civilization) condition. I wonder if >there are any such reefs left. I'm not so sure the word is being used >correctly in our fellowship (more below). > >Although "remnancy" is not a real word, one would infer that our >colleague Phil's intended usage would be as a means to describe the >degree or condition of the reef after it has been adversely affected by >civilization (more colloquially: trashed); that is, how it can be >described as a remnant of its former "self" (biome?). I'm not so sure >describing how much a reef has been adversely affected from its former >condition is useful, though, since (as was pointed out) in many cases >the reef in question may never have been adequately described (have >any?), especially since they're always changing (evolving) anyway, thus >few cases in which to measure past against current condition (I guess >that's what started the whole discussion). But don't get me wrong: we >should understand what is adversely affecting the reefs so we can stop >or ameliorate the condition. I'm just not so sure "remnancy" has much >practical application for science, although for political purposes it is >probably perfectly practical. > >Instead, since we want to keep coral reefs in existence, and we want to >provide them with the proper environment and support their vitality, >where we can, perhaps a better word for purposes of marshaling our >efforts is sustainability (I know I'm not the first to suggest this). >Shouldn't we sustain the reefs until we remedy what ails them? (Now >there's a concept: clean up the environment!) We can't really do >anything to promote resiliency (how do you measure such an ecologically >difficult concept?), although a conducive environment might be sustained >or managed (i.e., "cleaned up") to allow full (how to measure?) >resiliency. Is it possible to describe how all the members of the >coral ecosystem interact to contribute to an integral resiliency? This >is extremely difficult stuff, yet I would agree the goal is laudable and >should be pursued. > >Okay, I know, the word sustain might imply leaving everything as it is, >rather than making things better, but I'm just not comfortable with the >word resiliency or "remnancy." > >Just my two cents... > > Cheers, > Jim > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From dustanp at cofc.edu Fri Feb 24 12:23:45 2006 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 12:23:45 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Message-ID: <43FF4121.6040400@cofc.edu> Dear Colleagues, Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote and less remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own history and ecology. Let?s face it: The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human reproductive success. Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the radar screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities (along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying and we have got to do more. As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we are going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect?.. And the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost every reef on the planet. This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal agency, is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think can be done right now as well as over the long term? Thanks, Phil -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Fri Feb 24 15:58:39 2006 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Gene Shinn) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:58:39 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Not what they used to be Message-ID: >>I have to agree with Jim Hendee when he wrote, "It would seem most >>people would agree that coral ecosystems aren't what they used to >>be." As a geologist I can honestly agree that Holocene reefs are >>not what they "used to be" during the Pleistocene, and they were >>not what they "used to be" earlier during the Pliocene, and they >>certainly were not what "they used to be" during the Lower >>Cretaceous, (and there were hardly any during the Upper Cretaceous) >>and then there are the well known Permian reefs which were not what >>they "used to be" during the Cambrian. >>Yes, nothing is what "it used to be." May be we just need to take a >>longer view of things. Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida Marine Science Center (room 204) 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu Fri Feb 24 14:42:13 2006 From: rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu (Richard Grigg) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 09:42:13 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <43FF4121.6040400@cofc.edu> Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let?s face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 03:45:17 2006 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E. Strong) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 03:45:17 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <4400191D.6040105@noaa.gov> Hi Phil, Even Plenary talk at Ocean Sciences here in Hawaii this week...George Philander...claims the evidence is not that clear... Cheers, Al Richard Grigg wrote: >Phil, > > Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > > Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Colleagues, >> Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >>thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >>years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >>continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >>thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. >> We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote >>and less >>remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >>different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >>nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >>diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >>Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >>cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >>signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >>blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >>history and ecology. >> >>Let?s face it: >> The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >>varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >>ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >>record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >>in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >>have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >>outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >>its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >>seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >>in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >>spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >>Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >>reproductive success. >> >> Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the >>radar >>screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >>of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >>opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >>(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >>health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >>reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >>earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >>and we have got to do more. >> >> As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >>resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >>scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >>everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >>resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >>ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >>with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >>ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. >> >> As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we >>are >>going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >>list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >>should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >>scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >>could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >>example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >>of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >>health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >>concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >>resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >>simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >>lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >>still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >>exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >>sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect?.. And >>the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >>had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >>every reef on the planet. >> >> This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal >>agency, >>is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >>reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >>process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >>in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >>on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >>forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >>of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >>can be done right now as well as over the long term? >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 04:14:00 2006 From: Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov (Alan E. Strong) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 04:14:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] "Caribbean" Bleaching Verification needed - Moderate to Light to No Message-ID: <44001FD8.1030507@noaa.gov> Information sought: Over the next month Coral Reef Watch is hoping to finalize feedback from the field for the 2005 Caribbean bleaching event for issuing a report. At present this appears to be the most well documented bleaching event ever conducted....for all of you who have provided information to date: THANK YOU! Nevertheless we are still missing those "negative" reports that are needed to fill out the other end of the bleaching spectrum in areas where minimal bleaching was observed. From our HotSpot DHWs we expect those regions might include (but not necessarily limited to): ...Bermuda ...Bonaire...Curacao...Aruba and possibly ...Belize. Can any of you provide verification to Coral Reef Watch over the next few weeks for these more fortunate areas?? Please send your info to: Mark Eakin and/or Jessica Morgan. Thanks, Al Strong Coral Reef Watch From mtupper at picrc.org Sat Feb 25 02:00:14 2006 From: mtupper at picrc.org (Mark Tupper) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 16:00:14 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <000e01c639d9$23c94fc0$63c8c814@TUPPER> Rick Grigg wrote: "Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations." Isn't that just a matter of semantics? There are many dead or dying reefs in the Pacific, the Indian Ocean and Caribbean, and probably everwhere that coral reefs are found. So one could say, as Phil Dustan did, that "coral reefs are dying all over the world". However, since there are also healthy reefs in all of these places, someone who's agenda did not include coral reef conservation could just as easily say "coral reefs are healthy all over the world." I have heard exactly that claim from several politicians and agency spokespeople in the last few years. Rick is right, though, in that sweeping generalizations are not helpful to management of coral reefs (or any other resource). If one "side" makes sweeping generalizations to support their view, it becomes easier for others to support an opposing viewpoint with their own generalizations. I think that it's important to be as specific and factual as possible when emphasizing the need for coral reef conservation. It's much harder to argue against specifics than generalities. Having said that, I liked Phil's idea about finding a set of action items we could use to move forward now. Cheers, Mark Dr. Mark H Tupper, Senior Scientist Palau International Coral Reef Center PO Box 7086, Koror, Palau 96940 tel (680) 488-6950; fax (680) 488-6951 and Adjunct Research Associate University of Guam Marine Laboratory UOG Station, Mangilao, Guam 96923, USA tel (671) 735-2375; fax (671) 734-6767 From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sat Feb 25 07:16:55 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 07:16:55 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Message-ID: <14f78414cb3b.14cb3b14f784@noaa.gov> Hiya, Phil, Concerning your quote: "Lots of us have struggled with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind." I think this is a more tractable approach when you consider finite financial resources and manhours (peoplehours?) to throw at the problem. What I'm getting at is that defining an organism or ecosystem in terms of the "normal" environment (i.e., that which promotes optimal vitality) may be an easier way to present the problem to the public. For instance, look at the Goreau and Hayes (1994) concept and Al Strong's presentation and further elucidation of the concept to the public on how HotSpots (unseasonably high sea temperatures) coincide with bleaching events: it's an easier way for the public to understand large-scale environmental stress and the result, rather than trying to explain all the actual physiology behind the phenomenon, which is still not totally understood. I believe Basset Maguire had in mind a "niche response structure" idea years ago which described organisms as a response to their environment, and if I remember correctly, he tried to quantify that for selected species. Maybe the same approach is valid for coral ecosystems. That may be easier than trying to define "ecosystem vitality" in terms of each organism's "health," a difficult concept to quantify. Defining "ecosystem health" would seem to be fraught with unending debate on what constitutes each contributing organism's normal (uncompromised?) lifecycle. (Again, I'm not saying we shouldn't try to undertake such research, and unending debate is what all science needs and likes--I'm mainly trying to get at a way to awaken the public and policy makers.) Anyway, I would like to hear of the approaches you mention, and I would vote that defining the recent historical and current physical environment for each major coral reef area as one of the 8-10 action items you mention. This should be a fundamental part of any "ecosystem vitality index," at least in my mind. This would also give us a platform from which to say, "This is how it was when corals were doing well, and this is how it is now, and corals are not doing well," without having to explain the physiology of why this is so. This would also give us a solid comparison basis for understanding why one reef ecosystem in the Pacific is doing swimmingly (so to speak), and another is not. I think the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force and the Interntational Coral Reef Initiative and NOAA's Coral Reef Conservation Program and other groups have already listed this as a goal, but I think it's an important one for your list. In fact, if you cross-compare a lot of the conservation groups' action items, I think you could probably come up with 8-10 items in a prioritized list most would agree upon. In other words, a lot of people are already working on these problems, and it is extremely difficult to make decisions on what activities to fund, but I think what you are also saying is we need to shake the tree a little harder. I have no suggestion on how to do that! [Mea culpa: We at NOAA/AOML are already compiling physical environmental data and establishing environmental indices, so this whole rap of course appears self-serving and provincially contrived. Hey, it's all I know, and at least I'm being honest about it!] Okay, that makes 4 cents from me... :) Cheers, Jim ----- Original Message ----- From: Phil Dustan Date: Friday, February 24, 2006 12:23 pm Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 > Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most > interesting > thread. It also reminds me...[etc.] From cat64fish at yahoo.com Sat Feb 25 08:52:17 2006 From: cat64fish at yahoo.com (Jeffrey Low) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:52:17 +0800 (CST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <4400191D.6040105@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <20060225135217.56489.qmail@web35313.mail.mud.yahoo.com> It boggles the mind (ok, just mine) that some one at a PLENARY talk could say something like this. To say that there is evidence of reefs that have been impacted, and reefs that have not, I can understand ... but the "evidence is not clear"? .... *shakes head in disbelief and disgust* Jeff "Alan E. Strong" wrote: Hi Phil, Even Plenary talk at Ocean Sciences here in Hawaii this week...George Philander...claims the evidence is not that clear... Cheers, Al Richard Grigg wrote: >Phil, > > Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > > Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > > >>Dear Colleagues, >> Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >>thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >>years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >>continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >>thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. >> We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote >>and less >>remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >>different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >>nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >>diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >>Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >>cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >>signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >>blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >>history and ecology. >> >>Let?s face it: >> The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >>varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >>ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >>record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >>in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >>have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >>outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >>its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >>seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >>in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >>spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >>Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >>reproductive success. >> >> Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the >>radar >>screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >>of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >>opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >>(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >>health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >>reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >>earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >>and we have got to do more. >> >> As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >>resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >>scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >>everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >>resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >>ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >>with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >>ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. >> >> As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we >>are >>going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >>list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >>should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >>scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >>could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >>example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >>of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >>health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >>concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >>resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >>simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >>lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >>still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >>exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >>sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >>the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >>had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >>every reef on the planet. >> >> This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal >>agency, >>is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >>reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >>process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >>in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >>on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >>forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >>of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >>can be done right now as well as over the long term? >> Thanks, >> Phil >> >>-- >>Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >>Department of Biology >>College of Charleston >>Charleston SC 29424 >>(843) 953-8086 voice >>(843) 953-5453 (Fax) >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 1GB free storage! From lesk at bu.edu Sat Feb 25 11:03:06 2006 From: lesk at bu.edu (lesk at bu.edu) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 11:03:06 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060225110306.0iwtfp3s0kcg84sw@www.bu.edu> Dear Colleagues, It is extremely important that we converge on a common and consistant view on coral reef health that we can convey to the lay public. We must also speak precisely when referring to any particular symptom of coral reef health on a global scale. I challenge anybody to produce data demonstrating that the tropical west Atlantic coral reefs have improved in condition or remained at level condition, by any measure you wish, over the past 25 years. That does not mean that the changes are irreversible or unprecedented in deep time, Gene. It only means that it is a sad thing for us and for our childern that this is happening at this particular time, for we now cause this decline knowingly and deliberately, recovery will likely be a very lengthy process, and we are seem to be doing our best to inhibit even that. The long view will always be there to make us feel better in some existential sense, but it is no balm to those of us who wish to enjoy and benefit from coral reefs during our lives and the lives of our children and grandchildren. Indo-Pacific coral reefs exhibit a vigorous ability to bounce back from denudation or phase shift, so long as there is a stable physical substratum on which they can rebuild (dynamite rubble piles are not very good for this). However, the proportion of reef surface that is in a disturbed, regenerating state at any given time, and more importantly, the size-frequency distribution of these disturbances, looks very odd and very different than when I was a graduate student. Are we using the right data to characterize and track these changes, Rick? Because the Pacific is still more robust than the Atlantic, there is much of concern that we can choose to overlook if that is our bias. We'd better be careful not to be too easily reassured by the positive signs that coral reefs in the Pacific could hold their own, given the chance...because they by and large are not being given the chance. The pace and extent of bleaching alone is awesome. Who is coming forward to call this a non-event, or our response to it exagerated and misplaced? Who is saying that overfishing is something that will have no effect on reefs worth worrying about, and that we can ignore it? Who is saying that the industrialization of reef destruction is not a real thing worth keeping in check? Who is saying with confidence that the earth is not getting warmer, that bleaching is not more frequent and severe, or that corals will definitely adapt to these changes and that the world shall remain much as wonderful as it has always been for us, no matter what we do? So what gentle hand is it, exactly that Gene and Rick wish to lay upon the scene? Les Kaufman From szmanta at uncw.edu Sat Feb 25 08:50:30 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 08:50:30 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 3 References: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ? albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From anderson at africaonline.co.tz Sat Feb 25 12:38:51 2006 From: anderson at africaonline.co.tz (Jim Anderson) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 20:38:51 +0300 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence - Effect of Bombing References: Message-ID: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> Dear Listers, Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is sibylle at chumbeisland.com] Jim Anderson, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. From manfrino at reefresearch.org Sat Feb 25 12:55:45 2006 From: manfrino at reefresearch.org (Carrie Manfrino) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:55:45 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Summer Coral Reef Internship and Conservation Programs at the Little Cayman Research Centre Message-ID: <014101c63a34$b5315f60$2f01a8c0@CPQ10443900021> Summer Coral Reef Research Internship -a four-week program through Rutgers University Study Abroad at the Little Cayman Research Centre >From July 15 - August 10 2006, the Central Caribbean Marine Institute (CCMI) offers a four-week voluntary research internship program through Rutgers University's Institute of Marine & Coastal Sciences. This program is an opportunity for graduate students and conservation professionals (a few advanced undergraduates may be accepted) to gain advanced underwater research experience. The goals of the program are to train participants in coral ecology protocols and to provide scientifically usable data to assist CCMI in its ecosystem monitoring and coral disease research initiatives. For more information, go to www.reefresearch.org and click on educational and field programs where students will find full details on program cost, credits, registration process, and activities. An Introduction to Tropical Marine Conservation & Field Research Methodologies - a one-week Tropical Marine Conservation course at the Little Cayman Research Centre >From June 23-30 2006, the Central Caribbean Marine Institute offers a one week course at the Little Cayman Research Centre designed to introduce undergraduates to the biology and ecology of tropical marine habitats and to the basics of field research. Students will come away with a strong understanding of the conservation challenge associated with protecting rapidly declining coral reef systems and be prepared to take more advanced research courses or internships. For more information on this course offered through Kean University's Travelearn program, go to www.reefresearch.org and click on educational and field programs where students will find full details on program cost, credits, registration process, and activities. Central Caribbean Marine Institute www.reefresearch.org Dr. Carrie Manfrino, President P.O. Box 1461 Princeton, NJ 08540 Ph:(609) 933-4559 Caribbean Headquarters Little Cayman Research Centre North Coast Road P.O. Box 37 Little Cayman, Cayman Islands (345) 926-2789 From kruer at 3rivers.net Sat Feb 25 14:22:48 2006 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 12:22:48 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence References: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> Message-ID: <4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net> Folks, In just a few days we've gone from a discussion of reef problems and degradation in the Florida Keys, and how best to approach them after all these years, to a global (and even geologic time, which I too find foolish) focus promoted by US scientists. And the more global the view, the more complicated and diverse the opinions about what is going on and what should be done (if anything) become. And I suspect that those who still question worldwide reef problems are limiting their view to the role of climate change. So what a great irony today to read Anderson's concern of dynamite fishing increasing on reefs in Tanzania. While US NOAA scientists continually move the target and encourage us to think big. Keys problems don't rise to the level of dynamite fishing but the end result may be the same. My suggestions are simply to do what we can locally in places like the Florida Keys to deal with obvious problems, not mysteries - but we're not even close to doing what is possible to protect and conserve the place. In light of the fact that the budget of NOAA's Habitat Conservation Division and other programs have been cut nationally that will only be more difficult in the future. Time to come home. Curtis Kruer ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Jim Anderson wrote: > Dear Listers, > > Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from > episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet > bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any > prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars > that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? > > The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the > fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast > becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are > pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district > governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those > who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that > network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is > sibylle at chumbeisland.com] > > Jim Anderson, > Dar es Salaam, > Tanzania. > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > From phoetjes at cura.net Sat Feb 25 20:45:29 2006 From: phoetjes at cura.net (Paul Hoetjes) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:45:29 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence In-Reply-To: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> 4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net References: <005501c63a32$58175de0$c95d19ac@SAMAKIFADS> 4400AE88.7070506@3rivers.net Message-ID: <44010839.4050303@cura.net> This has been a most stirring discussion, and I believe very much to the point of what those of us who are extremely worried about the future of coral reefs as we know them, are trying to do. As Les said we really need a common and consistent viewpoint, and that will need to focus down on particulars and concrete activities, and not stay afloat on the 'big' picture, whether it be global or geological. Though thank you Alina for putting things so eloquently depressing. Local people are experiencing this unprecedented (Gene: in the sense that we humans have never experienced it before, AND we are actually causing it) disaster that is befalling our reefs. Whether it be in Florida, or Tanzania, or down here in Curacao in the Southern Caribbean, those of us old enough to know the reefs at the time when reef science really started coming into its own in the sixties, we experienced their demise (not decline, let's face it the reefs of the sixties are dead, what we still have are pale ghosts of them) in disaster after disaster. First it was spearfishing with world championship tournaments moving from place to place in the sixties and early seventies, when everyone was spearfishing and within ten years every big fish was gone anywhere that was accessible to divers. Then (in the Caribbean) the Diadema die-off, completely changing the reef as we knew it, and followed by an insidious wasting away of shallow water reefs (and I mean shallow, 1-4 ft deep, yes there was actual reef at those shallow depths in those days in the Caribbean!). Then the white-band disease neatly removed miles and miles of Acropora cervicornis forests. Then in the nineties bleaching and yellow-blotch disease started in on our remaining reef infrastructure. What was left standing was now called 'coral reef', and it was still magnificent, and although we did start to worry by then, nobody really believed that the dire predictions of the ISRS meeting in the early nineties that we would lose 20-40 % of our (still remaining) reefs within a generation, would come true. But, we had white plague and more bleaching and increasing numbers of hurricanes wreaking havoc on the weakened reef structure, and 15 years later we have a prediction that in twenty years we will loose 40 % of what is left if we don't do something. What we should say is that in another 20 years we may have 10 % of our reefs left! Sorry for this somewhat lengthy introduction, but we cannot keep on pretending everything is hunky dory, and oh, since we don't have any reefs left that are a shadow of what they once were, let's call some of the hardiest weed patches that are so adapted to inhospitable circumstance that most of the changes going on elsewhere left them mostly untouched, let's call those 'resilient' reefs, and focus all our meager resources on protecting those. Oh, oh, and guess what, since nothing seems to have been able to kill these little hardy patches, protecting them is a good bet since we're likely to be succesful even if we can't stop all the causes that are killing all the other reefs. I feel that this focusing on 'resilient' reefs is confusing the issues. It's a giving up on trying to stop the causes of reef death. We can be happy that there are still some areas that look remotely like a reef used to, but we can't lower our standards and forget about what a reef once was. We need to keep fighting to protect all our coasts with an eye to reef preservation, not just those pieces of coast with 'resilient' reefs and elsewhere giving a free reign to developers and erosion and overfishing and irresponsible boating and pollution and septic tanks. Those need to be controlled effectively, everywhere, leaving only a few 'resilient' areas where people can still behave unsustainably. That is what resilience should mean, places that you can't destroy because they've already been completely trashed (and we have plenty of those). If we can achieve only that much, restrict people's activities directly affecting reefs to recreational reserves where they can't do much damage, then we can maybe start worrying about really combating global warming instead of just talking about it. As it stands, all our reefs will have been killed long before global warming will really get it's licks in. So, speaking from an area where reefs are still in somewhat better shape than elsewhere in the region, in summary: There are no reefs left in anything approaching untouched condition. Diseases, and (because of?) overfishing, insiduous pollution and siltation, not just bleaching, have taken care of most of the original reefs. Focusing protection on those reefs that apparently had least need of protection over the past 40 years (resilient reefs) is a cop out. We need to protect all reefs (or what can still with leniency be called reefs). We need to protect them from such 'easy' (well, at least clear cut) things to control as human destructiveness and gregariousness. PS, I'm writing this from a non-airconditioned house in the tropics, I drive a fuel efficient small car, so I do my bit against global warming (though I do have a computer and a television and leave more lights on than strictly necessary, sorry). Cheers, Paul Hoetjes Dept. of Environment Netherlands Antilles Curtis Kruer wrote: >Folks, > >In just a few days we've gone from a discussion of reef problems and degradation in the Florida >Keys, and how best to approach them after all these years, to a global (and even geologic time, >which I too find foolish) focus promoted by US scientists. And the more global the view, the more >complicated and diverse the opinions about what is going on and what should be done (if anything) >become. > >And I suspect that those who still question worldwide reef problems are limiting their view to the >role of climate change. So what a great irony today to read Anderson's concern of dynamite fishing >increasing on reefs in Tanzania. While US NOAA scientists continually move the target and encourage >us to think big. Keys problems don't rise to the level of dynamite fishing but the end result may be >the same. My suggestions are simply to do what we can locally in places like the Florida Keys to >deal with obvious problems, not mysteries - but we're not even close to doing what is possible to >protect and conserve the place. In light of the fact that the budget of NOAA's Habitat Conservation >Division and other programs have been cut nationally that will only be more difficult in the future. > Time to come home. > >Curtis Kruer > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > >Jim Anderson wrote: > > >>Dear Listers, >> >>Talking about the ability of coral reefs to bounce back, at least from >>episodic damage I've always wondered about the effect of all that carpet >>bombing of the coasts of Pacific islands during WWII. Were there any >>prescient scientists around with some (presumably scarce) research dollars >>that monitored the recovery of the reefs/fisheries there I wonder? >> >>The question has some contemporary relevence because it seems that the >>fishing gears of choice here in central/north coast Tanzania is fast >>becoming dynamite. The local anti-dynamite action network members are >>pulling their collective hair out trying to get the national and district >>governments to respond but the requests are falling on deaf ears. For those >>who may have some bright ideas on combating dynamite fishing I'm sure that >>network would be more than grateful [the energy behind the group is >>sibylle at chumbeisland.com] >> >>Jim Anderson, >>Dar es Salaam, >>Tanzania. >> >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Coral-List mailing list >>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> -- Paul C. Hoetjes Senior Policy Advisor Department of Environment & Nature (MINA) Ministry of Public Health & Social Development (VSO) Schouwburgweg 26 (APNA building) Cura?ao Netherlands Antilles tel. +(599-9)466-9307; fax: +(599-9)461-0254 e-mail: paul at mina.vomil.an =========================================== -- http://mina.vomil.an -- =========================================== This message has been scanned for Spam and Virus by CuraNet. From jhocevar at dialb.greenpeace.org Sat Feb 25 22:31:44 2006 From: jhocevar at dialb.greenpeace.org (John Hocevar) Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2006 21:31:44 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] consensus statement References: Message-ID: <277f01c63a85$3ddc58b0$fc02a8c0@Bolivar> Greetings, I'm enjoying this discussion. While it is admittedly frustrating to see some of the conversation focusing on semantics rather than the seriousness of the threats to coral reefs, it would appear that most, if not all, would agree that there is an observable trend of reef decline, and that anthropogenic impacts are among the primary causes. Global Warming and its more direct and potentially devastating cousin Acidification would present enormous challenges for conservationists even if these burdens were being placed on the shoulders of pristine reefs. Of course, that is hardly the case, as erosion, high nutrient run-off, and toxic pollution have already taken a toll. Fishing has done a job on reefs as well, whether by removing algal grazers or even by dynamiting or poisoning. There is no doubt need for exploration of the degree to which the above statement is true in different regions, and the degree to which the above factors are responsible for past declines or future threats. For the most part, though, it seems that this has been sufficiently well established. Is the general public aware of this situation? Are policy makers placing solutions high enough on their agendas? Clearly not. I strongly support Phil Dustan's proposal for production of a consensus statement (in this case, probably a sign-on statement) of actions that can be taken to conserve coral reefs. My hope is that this community will not shy away from addressing the need to reduce consumption of fossil fuels, unsustainable fishing practices, or coastal development. Human behaviors are contributing to reef decline, so policies must be created to guide changes in those behaviors. If those who best understand the problems are unwilling to propose these changes, there is little hope that this decline can be slowed, much less halted or turned around. As someone who decided to leave academia for conservation advocacy, I can offer to help bring together environmental organizations to broadcast your concerns and recommendations to a wider audience. A coalition of a broad spectrum of organizations representing millions of people working to communicate a solution-oriented scientific consensus on the coral reef crisis would be a strong force for reef conservation. (This would not occur in a vacuum; any successful collaboration of this kind would utilize existing networks and build on past statements.) John Hocevar Oceans Specialist Greenpeace USA Office: 512 454-6140 Cel: 512 577-3868 From estherborell at yahoo.co.uk Sun Feb 26 02:13:43 2006 From: estherborell at yahoo.co.uk (Esther Borell) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 07:13:43 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? In-Reply-To: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <20060226071343.24908.qmail@web86912.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Hi Alina and all others, I think your letter has not only contextualized our ?reef problems? but also hit a nerve. Its time to change our dogma. Its time to strip down the fancy costume of sustainability. I sometimes even wonder whether this word was invented to keep social economists in business. I don?t want to see them unemployed, the contrary, but I believe that sustainability, as a concept needs to be reinvented. The red queen is running faster than ever, unable to not only maintain her position, but even starting to fall behind. I am currently based in southeast Sulawesi, alleged centre of coral reef biodiversity but I am placing a safe bet that 70% of reefs here in the Spermonde archipel are very ill, losing their diversity, maybe not like rainforests in %s, not yet but it?s probably only a matter of time ? on an ecological, not geological time scale. Diving reminds me of walking along the Via Appia in Rome, looking at the remains of the past, providing faint evidence of how ?it?used be. Many of the reefs here look like rubble deserts. To see fish one has to pay extra entrance fee. I have counted 7 bombs on a one and a half our dive the other day. Reefs here don?t seem to suffer from bleaching (ironically I am researching just that) but from structural devastation (bombing), insane overfishing and severe eutrophication. Most corals of the inner and middle shelf within this archipelago are heavily infested by all sorts of borers. Its like cancer. Seemingly healthy and flourishing to the outside, but then unable to withstand January and February storms, which have eroded large patches of reefs and signs of algal succession are already on the way. The only way to sustain would be to stop ANY reef and coastal related activities until further notice. But this of course is just na?ve wishful thinking. The present resilience vs remnance discussion has been largely gravitated around the Keys and I noticed that most if not all participants were ?1st world scientists?. I am sitting in the middle of the 3rd world biodiversity hot spot wondering where our ?hotspot affilated collegues? are. I am guessing, that many are oblivious to this discussion due to the lack of adequate internet access, which at least here in Indonesia is still a novelty, slow and expensive. But they need to be integrated ? asap. Reef decline here is more than the problem of policy implementation, local politics and steak holder conflicts. It?s the consequence on the tail of a much bigger issue, an issue of local culture and education. We, the 1st world scientists live in a world of health insurances, unemployment insurances and mortgages. Hooray to those that can afford to recycle their rubbish. It?s a luxury. In Germany every household has more rubbish bins than fingers on one hand. Here in Indonesia we have none. Rubbish is dumped into the ocean, onto the reefs or disposed of ?thermally? (I know ...weve been there - still are?). My point is, we are living in a world that has conditioned us to think ahead, trying to not only predict but also prepare for future, featuring perspectives extending beyond that of individuality - a concept as such alien to indonesien society. Family rules. Thinking future is much more confined to the individual and future predictions seldom appear to penetrate any further then to the F1 generation. Producing offsprings to secure the future. Offsprings are the real existing currency.And can we blame them? I cant. The 62 yr old woman in the states really didn?t need the 12th child. That?s pure stupidity. She probably didn?t even need 3, but I am hitting thin ice here. Women on the archipel islands however do need children (but not 12). Most people on the islands don?t qualify for mortgages and likes, most don?t even qualify for simple bank accounts. They borrow money from affluent parties, thereby entering into a livelong dependence, becoming an accessory to the complex network of the local illegal fishing industry, paying off their debts by carrying out the task at hand, namely bombing. Many of them risking their lives in doing so, many being driven into invalidity of some sort. What we need, is educational sustainability. Education that lasts. Education that indoctrinates and is assimilated and passed on to F2, F3 .Fn. Academically and practically its time for consilience, in the sense it was formulated by O. Wilson. We need a unification of knowledge in order to act. Disciplines need to be pulled together. Reef conservation here in spermonde is a first order task for anthropologists, sociologists, and socioeconomists, then for marinebiologists and in the last instance for politicians, but creating a circular network of exchange. Maybe its time that universities teach marine anthropology. But yes, its easy to stay in our studies busying us with intellectual chit chat contemplating fancy ?nce words ..creating awareness amongst those that are aware anyway. I am just wearing the shoes of the devils advocate, and am certainly not throwing the first stone. After all I am researching bleaching in corals that do not bleach and my bahasa Indonesia is as fragile as the reefs. So whats the new dogma? What do do? And who is doing it? Learning the language, going into teaching after finishing the PhD? Become a marineanthropologist? Maybe I should give up my oil leaking motorbike and do what with it?...dump it the ocean? trying to keep up optimism esther . "Szmant, Alina" wrote: Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list --------------------------------- Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now --------------------------------- From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sun Feb 26 08:58:31 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 08:58:31 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Message-ID: <4401B407.2000407@noaa.gov> Hey, folks, I'm certainly not going to be one who runs around waving the flag of *sustainability*. My main point was that these words means different things to different people, most likely because they aren't being used correctly. Like, let's look at the definition of the word *sustain*, then look at how it is currently being used: sus?tain 1. To keep in existence; maintain. 2. To supply with necessities or nourishment; provide for. Don't we want to do this for coral reefs? Of course we do. But now that I've thrown the word out there (after admittedly not ever really using it much--certainly not in fora like these), I'm starting to notice it more. Like, I now see a Request For Proposals that mentions sustainable development. What the heck is that supposed to mean? It means, essentially, let's develop some enterprise(s) near the coast or coral reef area that can support economies, yet not compromise the environment. I think that's what it means. The concept of how you can support an economy near a reef area, yet not compromise it (the reef area, that is), is what should separate the good proposals and actions from the bad. This approach says "let's find a way for people to live [*develop*] near ecosystems without messing them up [too much]." Those who are against sustainable development would prefer to either not develop near these areas, or keep people out of the area, which is a great idea if it is a realistic approach, but how do you push back the tide of people? So, to me "sustainable development" seems to be an oxymoron and a phrase meant to countenance or disguise coastal development. I'll bet a real estate developer came up with that phrase. So, what I said was we should sustain the reefs, not (necessarily) permit sustainable development. I personally don't see how you can sustain a clean environment and also permit people to crawl (swim) all over it. I guess I'm saying our goal should be to sustain the reefs that are in good condition, but what I admittedly didn't address was how to fix the compromised reefs. You have to accept what Alina says, that we're in a big mess and we have to work with what we have, but to do that we all have to do our part and we need strong leadership. Our leaders listen (theoretically) to lots of voices and also to big money. Now, addressing the charge that we first-world (and NOAA) coral scientists have no clue as to what's going on in the rest of the world, I would have to agree that THIS scientist is clueless about a lot of international coral problems, at least from a first-person account. I have never seen bombs on the ocean floor, and have never had my ear drums blown out from blast-fishing. HOWEVER, I have been part of proposal review processes before and I can tell you that a large number of very savvy coral scientists (NOAA, academic and NGO) and policy makers put large numbers of well-meaning hours into trying to determine where best to fund coral conservation efforts (but the process is not perfect). It's a very difficult decision process, and the final decision makers ultimately have no other agenda except to conserve coral reefs. If the squeaky wheel gets the grease (see also last sentence of previous paragraph), then we have to agree on what needs to squeak the loudest, or at least prioritize the squeaks. Which is what Phil was saying with his plea to come up with 8 - 10 action items. Later... From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Sun Feb 26 09:10:34 2006 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 09:10:34 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] disclaimer Message-ID: <4401B6DA.3060400@noaa.gov> Whoops, I should have put this at the bottom of my last couple of messages, because it's true: "The contents of this message are mine personally and do not necessarily reflect any position of the Government or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration." From cnidaria at earthlink.net Sun Feb 26 12:34:28 2006 From: cnidaria at earthlink.net (James M Cervino) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 12:34:28 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Resilience? After Heat Stroke? Message-ID: Dear Coral Reef Scientists, Alina's post states the truth as it address our cultural behavior in the USA and how this may be having a negative impact on the reefs throughout the world. We all agree that thermal stress is the number one cause of coral mortality coupled with localized deforestation and anthropogenic nutrient enrichment. However, it was not long ago that there were people out there (marine scientists) that refused to admit that global warming induced thermal heat shock is the number one threat reefs are facing today. Reef Resilience! Are we fooling ourselves? With the growing population and the types of vehicles we use to transport our kiddies to soccer practice we will continue to produce more heat trapping gasses into the atmosphere that are directly correlated with higher sea surface temperatures. This will have a serious effect on tropical corals that are sensitive and already threatened. The major reef builders of the Pacific are not resilient, and will not be resistant to thermal stress and coral disease. We can say good-by to the diversity of corals I am looking at in Jen Veron's book that is sitting in front of me on my desk, especially if we all are not vocal about the Energy Policy produced by the Whitehouse this year. Were there any atmospheric and marine scientists acting as advisors quoted in this Energy Policy brief? We as marine scientists should be outraged as we all know now that reefs will not be resilient to the changing oceanographic conditions in the next decade. So the question is, how will we address this as marine scientists? Create more MPAs? I don't care how many MPAs we create throughout the world, if we are not going to get serious about global warming and anthropogenic nutrient enrichment we are wasting time. Will MPAs protect corals from heat stroke or nutrient enrichment? Are corals protected from global warming and nutrient pollution and is this addressed in MPAs ? Below are some vital statistics regarding how the USA is addressing global warming induced climate change: In 2004, China consumed 6.5 million barrels of oil per day. The United States consumed 20.4 million barrels, and demand is rising as a result of economic growth and American cars. It has been estimated that the bulk of the imports are going directly to SUVs. SUVs made up 5% of the American arsenal of cars in 1990; currently they make up 54%. U.S. oil imports are at the highest ever, 55%. Department of Energy projections show imports rising to 70 percent by 2025. Interpreting this to a global scale the United States transportation sector produces about 8% of world global warming pollution and accounts for 18 percent of an increasingly tight world oil market each year according to the Energy Foundation and the Association for Peak Oil&Gas (http://www.peakoil.net/). If American cars averaged 40 miles per gallon, we would soon reduce consumption by 2 million to 3 million barrels of oil a day. That could translate into a sustained price drop of more than $20 a barrel. And getting cars to be that efficient is easy. This was not addressed in the recent energy bill recently passed by Congress. Global oil use = 31.5 billion barrels per year One barrel oil = 42 U.S. gallons One cubic foot = 7.48 U.S. gallons One cubic mile = 147.2 billion cubic feet Country Barrels of oil per person annually United States 25 Japan 14.0 Spain 13.8 Mexico 6.0 Brazil 3.5 China 1.5 India 0.8 Source: Goldman Sachs, Energy Weekly, August 11, 1999 Consumption (Millions of barrels per day): Source DOE ------------------------------------------------------------------------ United States: 19.993 Japan: 5.423 China: 4.854 Germany: 2.814 Russia: 2.531 South Korea: 2.126 Brazil: 2.123 Canada: 2.048 France: 2.040 India: 2.011 Mexico: 1.932 Italy: 1.881 United Kingdom: 1.699 Spain: 1.465 SaudiArabia: 1.415 Iran: 1.109 Indonesia: 1.063 Netherlands: .881 Australia: .879 Taiwan: .846 -- ************************************************** Dr. James M. Cervino, MS, Ph.D. Marine Biologist Department of Biological & Health Sciences Pace University New York NYC Phone: (917) 620-5287 Web site: http://www.globalcoral.org *************************************************** From reginal at hawaii.edu Sun Feb 26 16:56:04 2006 From: reginal at hawaii.edu (Regina) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:56:04 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? Message-ID: <67fdad82756000d396460a6add72f34e@hawaii.edu> Esther and all, As a marine anthropologist, I read your post with great interest and had to resist the temptation to shout out loud "here here!!" lest my office mates think me a bit mad. There are actually a few universities teaching marine anthropology and I agree that the inclusion of a marine anthropologist in interdisciplinary marine science projects is vital. As Chuck Birkeland, one of my favorite professors often says, one cannot manage the marine environment, one has to manage the people using it. Aloha, Regina Regina Woodrom Luna Maritime and Fisheries Anthropologist PhD Candidate, Ecological Anthropology Program (Marine) University of Hawaii Manoa Lecturer: Biology of Marine Reptiles, Human Adaptation to the Sea, Anthropology of Tourism, American Cultures Biological Assistant: Oahu Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvaging Group ReginaL at hawaii.edu >From: Esther Borell >To: "Szmant, Alina" >CC: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency - maybe consilience? >Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 07:13:43 +0000 (GMT) > > >Hi Alina and all others, > I think your letter has not only contextualized our ?reef problems? but also hit a nerve. > Its time to change our dogma. Its time to strip down the fancy costume of sustainability. I sometimes even wonder whether this word was invented to keep social economists in business. I don?t want to see them unemployed, the contrary, but I believe that sustainability, as a concept needs to be reinvented. > The red queen is running faster than ever, unable to not only maintain her position, but even starting to fall behind. > I am currently based in southeast Sulawesi, alleged centre of coral reef biodiversity but I am placing a safe bet that 70% of reefs here in the Spermonde archipel are very ill, losing their diversity, maybe not like rainforests in %s, not yet but it?s probably only a matter of time ? on an ecological, not geological time scale. Diving reminds me of walking along the Via Appia in Rome, looking at the remains of the past, providing faint evidence of how ?it?used be. > Many of the reefs here look like rubble deserts. To see fish one has to pay extra entrance fee. I have counted 7 bombs on a one and a half our dive the other day. > Reefs here don?t seem to suffer from bleaching (ironically I am researching just that) but from structural devastation (bombing), insane overfishing and severe eutrophication. Most corals of the inner and middle shelf within this archipelago are heavily infested by all sorts of borers. Its like cancer. Seemingly healthy and flourishing to the outside, but then unable to withstand January and February storms, which have eroded large patches of reefs and signs of algal succession are already on the way. > > The only way to sustain would be to stop ANY reef and coastal related activities until further notice. But this of course is just na?ve wishful thinking. > > The present resilience vs remnance discussion has been largely gravitated around the Keys and I noticed that most if not all participants were ?1st world scientists?. I am sitting in the middle of the 3rd world biodiversity hot spot wondering where our ?hotspot affilated collegues? are. I am guessing, that many are oblivious to this discussion due to the lack of adequate internet access, which at least here in Indonesia is still a novelty, slow and expensive. But they need to be integrated ? asap. Reef decline here is more than the problem of policy implementation, local politics and steak holder conflicts. It?s the consequence on the tail of a much bigger issue, an issue of local culture and education. > We, the 1st world scientists live in a world of health insurances, unemployment insurances and mortgages. Hooray to those that can afford to recycle their rubbish. It?s a luxury. In Germany every household has more rubbish bins than fingers on one hand. Here in Indonesia we have none. Rubbish is dumped into the ocean, onto the reefs or disposed of ?thermally? (I know ...weve been there - still are?). > My point is, we are living in a world that has conditioned us to think ahead, trying to not only predict but also prepare for future, featuring perspectives extending beyond that of individuality - a concept as such alien to indonesien society. Family rules. Thinking future is much more confined to the individual and future predictions seldom appear to penetrate any further then to the F1 generation. Producing offsprings to secure the future. Offsprings are the real existing currency.And can we blame them? I cant. The 62 yr old woman in the states really didn?t need the 12th child. That?s pure stupidity. She probably didn?t even need 3, but I am hitting thin ice here. Women on the archipel islands however do need children (but not 12). > Most people on the islands don?t qualify for mortgages and likes, most don?t even qualify for simple bank accounts. They borrow money from affluent parties, thereby entering into a livelong dependence, becoming an accessory to the complex network of the local illegal fishing industry, paying off their debts by carrying out the task at hand, namely bombing. Many of them risking their lives in doing so, many being driven into invalidity of some sort. > > What we need, is educational sustainability. Education that lasts. Education that indoctrinates and is assimilated and passed on to F2, F3 ?.Fn. > Academically and practically its time for consilience, in the sense it was formulated by O. Wilson. We need a unification of knowledge in order to act. Disciplines need to be pulled together. Reef conservation here in spermonde is a first order task for anthropologists, sociologists, and socioeconomists, then for marinebiologists and in the last instance for politicians, but creating a circular network of exchange. > Maybe its time that universities teach marine anthropology. But yes, its easy to stay in our studies busying us with intellectual chit chat contemplating fancy ?nce words?..creating awareness amongst those that are aware anyway. > > I am just wearing the shoes of the devils advocate, and am certainly not throwing the first stone. After all I am researching bleaching in corals that do not bleach and my bahasa Indonesia is as fragile as the reefs. So whats the new dogma? What do do? And who is doing it? > Learning the language, going into teaching after finishing the PhD? Become a marineanthropologist? Maybe I should give up my oil leaking motorbike ?and do what with it?...dump it the ocean? > > trying to keep up optimism > > esther > > > > . > > > > >"Szmant, Alina" wrote: > Hi Phil & others: > >I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created > through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not > taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? > >You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I > have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? > >China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. > >For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. > >So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. > >Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. > >So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. > >So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. > >In a pessimistic mood this morn', > >Alina Szmant > > >******************************************************************* >Dr. Alina M. Szmant >Coral Reef Research Group >UNCW-Center for Marine Science >5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln >Wilmington NC 28409 >Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 >Cell: (910)200-3913 >email: szmanta at uncw.edu >Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta >****************************************************************** > >________________________________ > >From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg >Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM >To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 > > > >Phil, > >Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that >are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it >doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. > >Rick Grigg > > >At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: > >Dear Colleagues, > > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting > >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few > >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to > >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our > >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > > and less > >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by > >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from > >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of > >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the > >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral > >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show > >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to > >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own > >history and ecology. > > > >Let's face it: > > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, > >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is > >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological > >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal > >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't > >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's > >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take > >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the > >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all > >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread > >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. > >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human > >reproductive success. > > > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > > radar > >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation > >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my > >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities > >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the > >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs > >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this > >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying > >and we have got to do more. > > > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think > >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We > >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the > >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of > >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of > >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled > >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and > >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > > are > >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral > >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, > >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own > >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and > >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For > >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes > >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, > >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations > >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a > >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is > >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the > >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and > >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the > >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is > >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And > >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we > >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost > >every reef on the planet. > > > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > > agency, > >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for > >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a > >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded > >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus > >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would > >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study > >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think > >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > > Thanks, > > Phil > > > >-- > >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. > >Department of Biology > >College of Charleston > >Charleston SC 29424 > >(843) 953-8086 voice > >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Coral-List mailing list > >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > >--------------------------------- > Yahoo! Cars NEW - sell your car and browse thousands of new and used cars online search now >--------------------------------- > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From lesk at bu.edu Sun Feb 26 11:08:47 2006 From: lesk at bu.edu (lesk at bu.edu) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:08:47 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Faith in local efforts; ferocity in facing the world In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20060226110847.e61yypg760ww0w8w@www.bu.edu> Phil Dustan asked what we can do. Perhaps a start is to share what we are doing now, and help each other forge our puzzle pieces into a whole. This sometimes works better than launching a new big empty vessel with a fancy name and fundraising needs in hopes of picking up paying passengers along the way. Here is the piece I am on now. A small idea emerged from a workshop several years ago in Los Cabos. Conservation International organized a party called "Defying Ocean's End". No, I did not make up that name, though margaritas inspired an indecent salute to go along with it. DOE is a business plan to save the sea, vetted by folks from Goldman Sachs Inc. to make sure the scientists, environmentalists and stakeholders present were able to add up the numbers properly. A news piece on DOE is at http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/ 2003/06/0603_030603_oceanboundaries.html and the resulting Island Press book is at: http://www.islandpress.org/books/detail.html/SKU/1-55963-753-6 At DOE, Jeremy Jackson and I co-chaired a very lively working group focussed on science to "restore and maintain marine ecosystem function." In order to restore a marine ecosystem, we reasoned that we should first restore faith in a coastal community that they can steward their local marine environment despite the sky falling all about them. The small idea is this: resistance is not futile. This is a tough nut because people are hearing that no matter what they do to control fishing pressure and overdevelopment in their own front yards, the First World is going to get them- cook them, innundate them, poison them, and overpower them economically, to the strains of a siren call irresistable to their greedy and their young. The key would be for a local community to do their level best to manage their doings in their own bit of sea in an enduring and rewarding fashion (the "S" word). If it works even a little, empowerment can hopefully do the rest. After DOE, I teamed up with CI to work on this problem. We were fortunate to get start-up funding from the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation for a project called the Marine Management Area Science program (MMAS). We have four years to get going. Dr. Leah Bunce is the Project Director. I am the PI. Roger McManus is supervising staffer. Sylvia Earle is spokesperson/Godess. CI staff and partners are the implementing folks. For anybody who is interested, as materials become available they are posted to a general access web site. The quickest route to a fact sheet and workplan for the project is to put "CI MMAS" into Google and take the top hits. The project is evolving faster than the web portal and we do need some privacy and distance to get something done. However, link-ups, partnerships, criticisms are welcome. At its core MMAS is a natural and social science research project. Because it is a research project, parts of it that are new will appear in peer-reviewed papers first, and then be applied and publicized. These parts mostly have to do with the invention of new diagnostics to help sort out the effects of local management efforts, from changes (good or bad) in marine and social systems due to other causes. But much of what you will see in MMAS sounds like what others are doing, because all are part of the same global context. Let us call it: Alina's Lament. It is essential that these more general objectives be achieved collaboratively with other projects being carried out in the same geographical areas, in a united front. The egofriction static charge of NGO's and Kurtz-like characters- scientists and saviors, parachute-diplomats and prodigal sons alike- must be smoothed or we will be each others' failures. We are all human and we all set up fiefdoms and power structures as automatically as dogs piss to mark their having passed. Once everybody has pissed we can get down to work, and the mix will smell at least as good, or as bad, as the mark of any one. The Scientific Advisory Committee for MMAS has helped to guide us into a focus for the project in four primary geographical areas, and two for work to ramp up later on. These areas are: Greater Caribbean- primary focus on Belize and MBRS region Brazil- Abrolhos Shelf Tropical Eastern Pacific- Coiba, Cocos, Malpelo, Galapagos Fiji Archipelago The two areas for later on are Raja Ampat (eastern Indonesia) and the western Indian Ocean someplace. In each place we are fitting our little piece (MMA science) into the context of existing, locally initiated partnerships and projects. We also have some small, thematic research projects that are not geographically tied down to these spots except that the products will then be applied in each of them. Those are our beans. We have decided to work small. Together, the sites constitute a global observatory for the efficacy of MMA effects under varied biological and social conditions, strewn across E-W and N-S biodiversity gradients. Okay, that was my sharing time. Now it is all of your turns. Perhaps we can look at different parts of the world of tropical nearshore marine conservation organizationally, the way that ReefBase has helped us to do biologically. Find the pressure points. Hone the messages and the campaigns. Move from one immediate objective to the next. Shout into the media's ear instead of the other way. Remember, this isn't to say that the global UN diplomacy march on Washington thing isn't important, too. All of us have folks in our organizations who, bless their hearts, are doing just that. It just isn't what I am doing right now. Sounds kind of like baloney but maybe what we do can be better than what it sounds like. Now, that would be really novel. Les From JKoven at aol.com Sun Feb 26 18:05:29 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:05:29 EST Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Message-ID: Yes, Jim, "sustainable" and "development" ARE? oxymorons.? It all depends on what level of income/development the community stakeholders need to produce from their reefs, absent other income sources.? Their choices are often limited - they can bring in tourists/divers or over-fish, even though that diminishes or damages the resources.? Reefs provided sustenance for entire island communities for millenia - they can't now sustain other urban communities with growing populations.? The needs of these stakeholders has changed over the past 50 years - they want to send their children to schools off-island, they want the same techological "improvements" in their lives that those in the urban areas have and to catch up with the 21st century world.? Both climate change and over-fishing have? affected many Pacific reefs that have not been subjected to gross land-based pollution.? Nothing the stakeholders of small islands can do will change the global climate picture and fishing is part of their culture.? The search is on for other ways to sustain the way of life they wish to have, without further destroying fisheries and thus reefs. It's interesting that outrigger canoes once sped villagers to other islands.? Then came the diesel powered boats - slower and costly, although one was less dependant upon weather and perhaps drier upon arrival.? Now faster fiberglass boats are the thing.....they travel as swiftly as an outrigger in a decent wind, but leave one beholden to the fuel companies.? Progress?? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From JKoven at aol.com Sun Feb 26 18:04:05 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:04:05 EST Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence - Effect of Bombing Message-ID: <290.64bb747.31338de5@aol.com> Has anyone studied the reefs in Guam since WWII? Of course....but the diversity was vastly reduced. Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu Sun Feb 26 18:16:56 2006 From: rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu (Richard Grigg) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 13:16:56 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today In-Reply-To: <20060225110306.0iwtfp3s0kcg84sw@www.bu.edu> References: Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20060226131545.01ca73d8@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Les, My real opinion and view of the world is much the same as Alina Szmant's. Overpopulation is the problem. The Club of Rome estimated that the carrying capacity of planet earth is about 3 billion people. We are double that now and there is no going back, at least not without a catastrophic event. The 1000's of reefs that are still healthy in the Pacific are in places underpopulated or even uninhabited. I visited about 25 such places several years ago in the Tuamotu Archipelago. Unfortunately, they too will probably be discovered. After that, if humankind does not face the human population issue head on, I don't think we can prevent these reefs from the same fate as those Phil Dustan was talking about. There is time, but not the political will on a global scale. But rather than dooming and glooming all the reefs in the world (dead or not), I think the number one action item should be containing the human population bomb. Not overgeneralizing about the reefs but facing the real issue....us. Rick Grigg At 11:03 AM 2/25/2006 -0500, lesk at bu.edu wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > >It is extremely important that we converge on a common and consistant >view on coral reef health that we can convey to the lay public. We >must also speak precisely when referring to any particular symptom of >coral reef health on a global scale. > >I challenge anybody to produce data demonstrating that the tropical >west Atlantic coral reefs have improved in condition or remained at >level condition, by any measure you wish, over the past 25 years. That >does not mean that the changes are irreversible or unprecedented in >deep time, Gene. It only means that it is a sad thing for us and for >our childern that this is happening at this particular time, for we now >cause this decline knowingly and deliberately, recovery will likely be >a very lengthy process, and we are seem to be doing our best to inhibit >even that. The long view will always be there to make us feel better >in some existential sense, but it is no balm to those of us who wish to >enjoy and benefit from coral reefs during our lives and the lives of >our children and grandchildren. > >Indo-Pacific coral reefs exhibit a vigorous ability to bounce back from >denudation or phase shift, so long as there is a stable physical >substratum on which they can rebuild (dynamite rubble piles are not >very good for this). However, the proportion of reef surface that is >in a disturbed, regenerating state at any given time, and more >importantly, the size-frequency distribution of these disturbances, >looks very odd and very different than when I was a graduate student. >Are we using the right data to characterize and track these changes, >Rick? Because the Pacific is still more robust than the Atlantic, >there is much of concern that we can choose to overlook if that is our >bias. We'd better be careful not to be too easily reassured by the >positive signs that coral reefs in the Pacific could hold their own, >given the chance...because they by and large are not being given the >chance. > >The pace and extent of bleaching alone is awesome. Who is coming >forward to call this a non-event, or our response to it exagerated and >misplaced? Who is saying that overfishing is something that will have >no effect on reefs worth worrying about, and that we can ignore it? >Who is saying that the industrialization of reef destruction is not a >real thing worth keeping in check? Who is saying with confidence that >the earth is not getting warmer, that bleaching is not more frequent >and severe, or that corals will definitely adapt to these changes and >that the world shall remain much as wonderful as it has always been for >us, no matter what we do? > >So what gentle hand is it, exactly that Gene and Rick wish to lay upon >the scene? > >Les Kaufman > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From milviapin at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 18:41:09 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 15:41:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20060224094026.02434928@iniki.soest.hawaii.edu> Message-ID: <20060226234109.88917.qmail@web50303.mail.yahoo.com> dear listers, I agree with Rick, there are reefs that are considered pristine in RMI for example. No diseases, no bleaching, no eutrophication, no overfishing or destructive fishing nor boat damage threaten some of the reefs in remote areas . At many locations, we can still witness this ecosystem as clean, productive, diverse as some can only imagine it "should have been" earlier. No take areas or sanctuaries are indeed to be made the rule, and governments and managers in remote island countries hear this message, although thay often have to apply it not as a recovery or restoration process but as a conservation of extant natural health. This decision is often more difficult than similar action needed when the damage is instead evident and advanced. Also, I do not think people in the Pacific islands nor in South East Asia can agree we (they) can live "without reefs". It is not just a question of loosing biodiversity or beauty! Millions of people still REALLY depend on these ecosystems for their food AND income! Thank you Silvia Richard Grigg wrote: Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it?s important to >continue. And now that we?ve had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it?s probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let?s face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don?t >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it?s >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the ?body of experts? I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I?d like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect .. And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze. From milviapin at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 19:07:07 2006 From: milviapin at yahoo.com (Silvia Pinca) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 16:07:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 3 In-Reply-To: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB009@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <20060227000708.48318.qmail@web50311.mail.yahoo.com> Alina, I think you had a very important message for all of us. "For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! " If we are not ready to relinquish some of our personal comfort(s), we cannot expect politicians to make things better for all of us and we should stop blaiming international politics for the damage caused to the global environment. I believe protecting reefs, or the environment, or the forests is less an issue of political decision and more of behaviour. Everybody's. Each one can make a little change in each one's life. All together we are definetely more powerful than a few "decision makers". cheers silvia "Szmant, Alina" wrote: Hi Phil & others: I am the first to agree with you that human overpopulation, and all of our demands on the environment to support the number of people living today is the root of all 'evil', including over fishing of all marine (and terrestrial) systems, not just coral reefs. World forests are in far worse shape than coral reefs, dissappearing in %s per day and yet we don't do much about it Deforestation to clear land for farming, homesteads, and collect wood for building materials or making charcoal, is followed by soil erosion, and coastal sedimentation. Human needs for food and other commodities lead to over-application of fertilizer and pesticides; fossil fuel burning for modern industries and to support our fat life styles; not to mention religious and ethnic conflicts etc. Not just coral reefs but every marine and terrestrial ecosystem on Earth are being affected by human activity, and many such as tropical rainforests, much more than coral reefs! Think about all the big deserts we have created through deforestation. Every human living in the tropics and elsewhere makes their tiny daily contribution to environmental decline not just of coral reefs but of Earth resources. Look around you and notice how many additional wooded areas in your neighborhoods are being cut down for new developments, and the muddy runoff that seeps into local streams and coastal areas. I have been plugging a new book by Jared Diamond in which he recounts how past and present human societies have gradually over-exploited their environs to their own demise [book is titled: "Collapse: How societies choose to fail or succeed"]. Diamond expressed some hope for the future because he found a few examples where when strong leaders, or small cohesive communities, realized what was happening they were able to choose to take actions that prevented future decline and were able to restore their damaged ecosystems and save their societies. However, he presented many more case studies where such actions were not taken and where the socities ending up becoming extinct. So which way are we headed? You ask for action and in the past few years, the President's Ocean Commission and the Pew's Ocean Commission both reported on and recognized most of the environmental problems above and that you stated in your email. It's not that people don't know what is going on, rather that there are conflicting views about the severity of the problem, and what can be done about it. Those two reports if you read them contain many of the measures needed to at least slow down some of the abuse of the world's oceans, but of course totally side step the human overpopulation issue. This is not a poltically correct issue to bring up in our polite society: you might offend someone who has 5 kids or 53 grand children... If we had strong leadership in our country we would expect to see something happening after the must publicized release of those two extensive reports with long lists of urgently needed action items [Side note: if you look though those reports, pretty coral reef photos abound in them]. I have not seem the US public beating down the doors to Congress making sure those action items are acted on! Why not? China was criticized to high heaven for politically limiting human reproduction. In some parts of the world, people have self-limited family size, but in others 6 to 10 kids is the norm. We glorify in our newspapers that a 62 year old woman who gave birth to her 12th child! (recent article in US news). We don't help women in poor countries control their reproduction so that they fewer children that they can provide for better. We keep coming up with new treatments to reduce infant mortality so that they can survive to live a life of hunger and poverty and contribute to more environmental abuse and political strife. For the first world folks reading this message, I would ask how many of you that clamor for more action be taken right now to save coral reefs drive an unnecessarily big vehicle? (not picking on just SUVs, but Hummers, giant pickups to take kids to soccer etc)? How many TVs and gadgets do you feel you must have? These are all life-style attributes we can chose to change, and if enough people do it, maybe we can turn things around. Unfortunately, people are selfish and few want to give up the better life we have built for oursleves this past century, and all those out there that don't have our modern, high consumption life style know about ours and want it too! Globally, things will only get worse over the next few decades. So where are we headed? I don't believe in "sustainability" because it is a meaningless word the way people think about it, which is: ' if we could only find a way to continue to fish as much as we do now without affecting the fish stocks' [not close a fish stock, and in 20 years or more, fish 1/10th or less of what we take now]. Or cut down all the remaining old growth forests because we need wood now and replant with fast growing pines. Or pump more oil and gas and coal from our own lands so we are not beholden to other countries for energy because we have to support our presnet life style needs and a GROWING economy. Going back to Diamond's book, I am less optimistic than he because (1) I see no evidence of strong or insighful leadership on the global scale needed to get us out of this pickle, and (2) human societies are too conflicted to make much of a difference with the bottom up approach. So when we come down to ot, coral reef decline is the least of our problems, albeit one that readers of this forum hold close to their hearts. But as long as we continue to think about coral reefs as a separate special case of the continuum of nature, we will get nowhere. We are really fighting for the future of the human life-support ecosystem and it needs to be done at every local planning board meeting and in every choice we make. How many of us are up to that level of engagement? I know I am not doing enough or as much as I could. It's easy to sit here in my study and write this long diatribe about world issues and then go on with life as usual. I drive a Pruis but I am surrounded by electronic gadgets I'd be hard pressed to live without. So, we can continue to fret about resiliency, remnancy, vitality indices etc, but as long as we don't connect the dots all the way to the top and start problem solving there, all we are doing is venting our frustrations with being part of the bigger problem. In a pessimistic mood this morn', Alina Szmant ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Richard Grigg Sent: Fri 2/24/2006 2:42 PM To: Phil Dustan; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resiliency: Part 2 Phil, Coral reefs are not dying all over the world. We have 1000's that are very healthy in the Pacific, not to say there are not problems but it doesn't help to make sweeping false generalizations. Rick Grigg At 12:23 PM 2/24/2006 -0500, Phil Dustan wrote: >Dear Colleagues, > Again, thanks to everyone for participating in this most interesting >thread. It also reminds me of the Reefs at Risk thread we had a few >years back but there are more people involved now so it's important to >continue. And now that we've had the opportunity to contribute our >thoughts, perhaps we do some good work. > We all know that reefs are dying all over the world, in remote > and less >remote locations. We know that reefs in different places are stressed by >different things. For example, Florida Reefs show signs of stress from >nature, land based sources of pollution as well as bleaching, loss of >diadema, and anything else you can probably name. Rainbow Gardens in the >Exumas, Bahamas was once pretty little patch reef, lost 80% of its coral >cover between 1991 and 2004. But the biomarkers from there do not show >signs of stress from LBSP and it's probably that global warming is to >blame. And everyone can cite an exception as well. Each reef has its own >history and ecology. > >Let's face it: > The stress to reefs occurs at nested scales from local to global, >varies in severity at different scales in different locations, is >ongoing, and has had cataclysmic results. You can site the geological >record of past changes and say the ongoing decline is really no big deal >in light of what happened in the Tertiary, or say that we really don't >have enough baseline data to make an informed decision, or pretend it's >outside our control. Without human activity, natural change would take >its course, but the human disruption has spread like a flame across the >seas. Mangroves, kelp forests, oyster reefs, salt marshes, etc. are all >in trouble. Dust storms resulting from inefficient agriculture spread >spores, nutrients and pollutants across oceans at global scales. >Everywhere is connected and the dots lead back all the way to human >reproductive success. > > Reefs are dying all over the world. This fact puts reefs on the > radar >screen at conferences, in books, in the media, and drives the formation >of government task forces and increased agency budgets. It is my >opinion, based on what I know, that the demise of coral reef communities >(along with most other coastal ecosystems) is signaling a decline in the >health of the oceans. So can we live without reefs- maybe? Will reefs >reappear after humans leave the planet-probably? But can we live on this >earth without a healthy ocean?- probably not. The canaries are dying >and we have got to do more. > > As I said in my earlier remarks that started this thread, I think >resilience is the wrong term because it gives the wrong impression. We >scientists and managers work with the terms and understand them, but the >everyday person, or politician, may have a very different concept of >resiliency. Instead of remnancy or resiliency, perhaps an index of >ecological integrity might be more realistic. Lots of us have struggled >with this idea and there are some very good protocols, programs, and >ideas floating. An index of ecosystem vitality comes to mind. > > As the "body of experts" I think we have to ask ourselves what we > are >going to do about the coral reef crisis now. Can members of the coral >list find some common ground upon which to proceed as a group? Or, >should be go about our individual ways and do what we can at our own >scales. I'd like to believe that we have more power in numbers and >could help to generate more awareness around the planet as a group. For >example, perhaps the National Science Foundation and National Institutes >of Health could establish a joint program in coral reef, or oceanic, >health and its relationship to human health. Perhaps federal regulations >concerning sanctuaries could be more concerned with conserving a >resource than the economic benefit derived from the resources. It is >simply unconscionable to think that we can harvest virtually all the >lobster and a significant proportion of the fish from a sanctuary and >still call it a sanctuary! No take should be he rule, not the >exception. Who in their right mind can argue that trawling is >sustainable, or thousands of divers on a reef have little effect..... And >the list goes on. Science tells us that optimal yield only works if we >had a valid baseline to begin with and we are way beyond that on almost >every reef on the planet. > > This coral list ­ albeit sponsored and censured by a US Federal > agency, >is probably is the closest thing we have to a real time global forum for >reef advocacy based on science. Perhaps we can begin to embark on a >process that might help generate long term solutions that are grounded >in science. Do people think that it might be possible to reach consensus >on a set of 8-10 action items, or changes in the practice, that would >forward the conservation of coral reefs right now, not that more study >of any factor will not improve our understanding, but what do we think >can be done right now as well as over the long term? > Thanks, > Phil > >-- >Phillip Dustan Ph.D. >Department of Biology >College of Charleston >Charleston SC 29424 >(843) 953-8086 voice >(843) 953-5453 (Fax) > > >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list Silvia Pinca, Ph.D. NRAS - Marshall Islands Nature Resources Assessment Surveys Research and Education for Conservation spinca at nras-conservation.org www.nras-conservation.org --------------------------------- Yahoo! Mail Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments. From szmanta at uncw.edu Sun Feb 26 20:09:28 2006 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 20:09:28 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline References: <46F56ACD52BC5F4F911EF9C4264FB46404AD29DE@UNCWMAILVS1.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB028@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> For those of you loooking for how some scientists are trying to desseminate the word.... ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From: Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST) To: Subject: University of Texas Ocean Research Webcast Dear Science Enthusiast, University of Texas at Austin Webcast Entitled "Brave New Ocean." A webcast presentation given by Professor Jeremy Jackson, William E. and Mary B. Ritter Professor and Director of the Geosciences Research Division at Scripps Institution of Oceanography will be March 3, 2006 at 7pm. Dr. Jeremy Jackson is one of the most prominent marine ecologists in the world and he has a message to get out about the world's oceans - it documents declines in coral reefs, decreasing numbers of large marine fish, and losses of coastal and marine ecosystems. More than just an academic researcher, Dr. Jackson has actively searched for innovative ways to reach the public, applying his skills as a communicator with his scientific knowledge to inspire action. Dr. Jackson desires to reach a broader audience and affect change into the future with tomorrow's generation on this topic of interest. View a FREE web broadcast of the lecture live Friday, March 3, 2006 at 7 pm CST. During the live webcast, you can submit questions to Dr. Jackson and he will answer as many as he can for the live and webcast audiences. If possible, can you distribute or post a link to this webcast on your website, newsletter, or listserv as well as pass this notice on to any colleagues of yours that may be interested. The link to our Lecture Series website, where the details of the lecture and the webcast can be found, is: http://www.esi.utexas.edu/outreach/ols/lectures/Jackson/ Please let me know if you will consider posting this information. Thanks for your time, Brian Zavala Environmental Science Institute The University of Texas at Austin brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu 512.471.5847 ------ End of Forwarded Message From mtupper at picrc.org Sun Feb 26 21:11:37 2006 From: mtupper at picrc.org (Mark Tupper) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 11:11:37 +0900 Subject: [Coral-List] vehicle emissions, lifestyle changes and global warming References: <20060223022526.80199.qmail@web35310.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <009901c63b43$26543be0$63c8c814@TUPPER> Hi listers, I think James, Jeff and Alina are right on the money when they talk about vehicle emissions and today's "bigger is better" SUV mindset. I doubt that the public has any realization of the degree to which vehicle emissions contribute to greenhouse gases. A quote from the California Cars Initiative: "In California, transportation accounts for over 40% of greenhouse gas emissions. Nationally the number is around 33%. Globally it's 20% and rising fast, especially as car-starved China, India and Russia add to their fleets." So, if we can agree that global warming and climate change are adversely affecting coral reefs, then vehicle emissions are one of the major culprits. But have governments or the auto industry made any attempt to educate the public on this issue? If so, I must have missed it... This is one of the most challenging problems our environment faces, given the long history of our deep-rooted "car culture" lifestyle in North America. It's amazing to me that with sky-high gas prices unlikely to change while there is continuing war in the Middle East, people still want to buy the biggest, most expensive SUV they can. For example, in the last decade, Hummer went from a cottage industry aimed at producing exclusive (and enormous) vehicles for celebrities, to a major automaker producing over 100,000 SUVs per year. And as Jeff said, how many of those are ever taken off-road? And while DaimlerChrysler has been touting their advances in PHEV technology (plug-in hybrid electric vehicles that can get 100+ mpg), they were busy reviving the 425 horsepower Hemi engine and stuffing it into 4-door family sedans, and then developing a 500 horsepower V-10 for their SUVs and pickup trucks. Do soccer moms really need to go 0-60 in under 5 seconds and cruise the highway at over 170 mph, which just 10 years ago could only be done with a $200,000 exotic sports car? No. It would be illegal anyway. Has DaimlerChrysler sold any mass-produced PHEVs yet? No. Why not? Because hybrids are for nerdy enviro-geeks like us. Nobody else would pay the premium price charged for them when they could get a "real" car for less. In North America's car culture, big and powerful is sexy; small and efficient is lame. Sorry if this post seems too much about vehicles and not enough about coral reefs, but I'm trying to address one of the root causes of coral reef decline. We might say that greenhouse gases and resulting thermal stress are a root cause of decline but they aren't the ultimate cause. They are a symptom generated by human activities - a symptom that happens to trigger its own set of secondary symptoms, including coral bleaching and disease. In addressing the ultimate cause, the question is, how do we change the mindset of an entire nation from one of spending all their disposable income on unnecessary luxuries to one of moderation and conservation? Cheers, Mark Dr. Mark H Tupper, Senior Scientist Palau International Coral Reef Center PO Box 7086, Koror, Palau 96940 tel (680) 488-6950; fax (680) 488-6951 and Adjunct Research Associate University of Guam Marine Laboratory UOG Station, Mangilao, Guam 96923, USA tel (671) 735-2375; fax (671) 734-6767 From A.J.G.Williams at newcastle.ac.uk Mon Feb 27 14:30:15 2006 From: A.J.G.Williams at newcastle.ac.uk (Andrew Williams) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 19:30:15 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Resilience, Remnancy, Sustainability - Semantics? References: <46F56ACD52BC5F4F911EF9C4264FB46404AD29DE@UNCWMAILVS1.dcs.uncw.edu> <4E15FCC7981F7A4CA5AA0DEF4B2141C9091CB028@UNCWMAILVS2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <0BE60E6F26C4034388842EA9FA0DC94525281B@quarrel.campus.ncl.ac.uk> Dear All, I started out reading this topic with interest, but it is now becoming irritation, because it seems to be a great deal of definitions, discussions of semantics and ego flattering statements. Do I intend to be insulting? No, I attempt to point out that if this discussion is affecting me in this way (an alleged scientist), imagine what it does for members of the public... Now watch me reel off a massive list of definitions! *laughs* Global warming - fossil fuels are the key issue, yet they are owned by massive MNCs whose sole interest is capital generation. The technology to replace these energy sources already exists, is owned by MNCs and DODs around the world, either hidden from public use for protectionism of markets or national security (i.e. protectionism of national markets!). The USA is 'run' by an oil baron, a man who was re-elected by over 50% (ish) of the nation (well those who voted). What is the solution when the public are disinterested in (global) politics, and the politicians are interested in re-election and capital accumulation? Education is fundamentally important to changing public, and thus political, agendas, yet who controls school curricula? What happens when the media has become mankind's source of (dis)information? What happens when scientists cannot even decide within themselves the 'correct' course of action? I'll tell you what I believe happens, things get worse, further ingrained, more polarised and more self-centred. There are two real problems in this world, apathy and greed. If these two variables can be addressed, mankind has a chance at not destroying itself and the planet in the process. I've seen/heard various people say things like, "thanks for that depressing outlook" to which my response is, do we live on the same planet? I would dearly love to be optimistic about global affairs, but I think it's deluded. I don't believe in the Hollywood happy ending, in fact if I did, I wouldn't be studying natural resource management. I will happily admit that there are success stories about the place and I will come to that point 'shortly'. We are creeping in the right direction, but we could be walking, if not running (hand in hand into the sunset...sorry!). We all talk about globalisation, yet where are the international laws, where is the international institution that represents mankind's interest and not national interests? None of us alone is going to change global problems, it is going to take a concerted global effort, it is not going to be easy, it is going to require considerable pain in the process, because current consumption of global resources are not sustainable (yup sorry, there's that buzz word again). There are no 'silver bullets', if we haven't learned that yet... Admittedly, all this globalisation 'stuff' is in it's infancy, it is barely crawling, but someone (plural) MUST teach it how to walk and it cannot be driven solely by the free market ideology. 'Over' population - Carrying capacities do not take into account advances in technology, so improvements in agricultural practices increases production (agreed, simply pouring chemicals into the ground is not sustainable, but there are alternatives). There's plenty of food being produced today, it's not a production issue it's a distribution issue. I only have to wander around shops like 'Pound Land' to realise there are massive amounts of resources being poured into utterly useless products, yet people still buy them. My computers enable me to communicate globally, increase my productivity, my lights enable me to work in the dark, but, for example, these ridiculous plastic (oil derivative) desk ornaments - where's the utility in that? Don't even get me started on SUVs! To say China has the right idea about birth control, is rather simplistic, just look at how many female babies are abandoned or aborted, I feel that women being marched en-mass into sterilisation programs (India) against their will is totally indefensible. Human rights on one hand, control systems on the other - where is the middle ground? I personally would like to see a licensing system, whereby people have to prove they are capable of being good parents and are economically able to raise their kids - but of course that only works in developed nations, I could not possibly argue for that to be applied in developing nations. I'm sure that would cause a massive outcry, it being a fundamental human right to have children, but this example of the women having her 12th baby - what about the rights of people who don't want to live in an overcrowded world? Since when do the rights of the individual outweigh the rights of the many (sorry, rather star trek I know!)? We are boxing ourselves into a corner with all this political correctness. Timescales - someone mentioned that on a long enough time line, reefs will be gone. Well in several billion years the sun will expand to the point Earth will be uninhabitable - does this mean we should all just give up and damn the world to extinction early? I absolutely take the point that ecosystems are processes, (perhaps they should be renamed as ecoprocesses and not systems (I am so joking!)) and that on a long enough time line everything will change, but these changes are for the most part geologically slow - slow enough for evolution to keep pace. Mankind's affects on the planet are accelerating beyond the pace of evolution, plus I would prefer to live in a world where the atmosphere is breathable, the water drinkable, the soils cultivable... Spatial scales - I vaguely remember mentioning I would come to a point and this is it - start small, lead by example and the people will follow! We can't take on global issues, the institutions and laws simply are not there yet, it's currently far too voluntary and un-enforceable. Apart from anything else, ecosystems are site specific - there are reefs on the east coast of Australia that are growing in highly turbid conditions, whereas in other places, turbidity is fatal. I don't think it is possible to come up with a 10 point plan to global success, because by doing so you are going to have to cut down a 1000 points to 10, what if the 990 disregarded points aggregate to greater importance than the 10 you chose? Global affairs are for the politicians, scientists should be there in an advisory capacity but when I say scientists I mean all of them, not just e.g. Marine Biologists - see my next point. Integration - So, one school of thought cries out for public awareness and consumer driven market forces, one cries out for more stringent laws and regulations, another for strict conservationism, another for... where is the integration, where's the facilitator, the chair person co-ordinating all these schools? If you are going to try and solve issues, then you must consider (in alphabetical order) economics, environment, politics and social anthropology - not on a sectoral basis but as an integrated whole. You cannot just form MPAs where ever biodiversity is greatest, because you will more than likely marginalise the people living off that resource. Making the poor poorer just causes further environmental degradation as they are forced to exploit any (free/common) natural resource they can. If you exclude people from the picture, you have an issue of non-compliance and thus a cost in enforcement. I entered into my first degree of the opinion that the environment should be protected no matter the human cost, I have since completely amended that outlook since it's myopic at best and downright inhumane at worst. Participation - To overcome issues of non-compliance, marginalisation and often to increase knowledge of local systems, people must be allowed to participate at ALL levels of project and policy formulation/implementation - that does not mean consultation, that means active participation. Process - Sustainable Development (sorry but I don't see it as an oxymoron - I do see it's false implementation as oxy-moronic) is a process, not a system, thus projects and policies should be re-evaluated as often as humanly possible, because making changes causes changes. Good governance - We are only just starting to see models of good governance, not top-down, not bottom-up, but multi-tier (local, regional, national, international) well organised/managed, with an ability to pass information/resources up and down the system with speed and efficiency. Good governance starts with individuals and ends with international agreements, with every single organisation/institution in-between. It needs to be based on equity, equality and shared interest, not ego, power and greed. Now that's a serious challenge because a majority of the current systems of governance are corrupt and unwieldy, favouring the rich and powerful, self-protecting and exacerbating poverty. Developed nations cannot dictate how developing nations can and cannot develop when, as someone has already pointed out, a large proportion of greenhouse gases derive from our activities. Good governance must be about setting a good example, not just enforcing it. I think I am probably boring everyone by now, but I have one more thing to say. All of the above I have been taught, ok some of it I consciously/sub-consciously knew already, but there are more people behind me, coming up through the 'new' schools of thought. One day, these people will be the top scientists of the day, the politicians, the decision makers - when that day comes, I think (hope) we will see some real changes being made. I can only hope that some of the above will help people break free of the chains of sectoralism and start seeing things from a holistic perspective, you cannot save reefs by simply speaking about how they are dying at n.nnn% a year. Of all the traits of human nature, survival is one of the greatest, otherwise we'd already be gone. The glass can be half empty and/or half full, it all depends on how you view it, but why does no one ever consider topping it back up to brim? Stop observing, start doing! A passionate Msc Student From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Mon Feb 27 10:32:07 2006 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Gene Shinn) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 10:32:07 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Intellectual chit chat Message-ID: The letter by Esther Borell is a most thoughtful, sobering and revealing one and should serve as a lesson to all of us "first world scientists" with our "intellectual chit chat." We should all applaud Ester for "trying to keep up optimism." Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida Marine Science Center (room 204) 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From martin_moe at yahoo.com Sun Feb 26 22:55:02 2006 From: martin_moe at yahoo.com (Martin Moe) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 19:55:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Remnancy vs Resilence Message-ID: <20060227035502.81516.qmail@web60014.mail.yahoo.com> Hi All, Hoo Boy! The world is a scary place these days. Alina is right, James is right, Curtis is right, Steven is right, everyone commenting is right to a greater or lesser degree. I wonder if Malthus was right .. While acknowledging the global problems, the reefs of the Florida Keys, and to a lesser extent, the Bahamas and the Caribbean, are what concern me most personally. It pains me to see huge coral heads slowly dying, the tissue receding and the exposed coral rock thick with algae and sediment, to see acres of coral rock rubble composed of easily identifiable pieces of the remains of huge elkhorn coral skeletons, and patch reefs covered by extensive growths of Sargassum and Dictyota algae. I know what the reefs were like only a few decades ago and the loss is staggering. The TDC knows this also or at least it seems like they should. (This is the Tourist Development Council for Monroe County, the Florida Keys) Their latest brochure http://www.fla-keys.com/diving/ has fantastically beautiful pictures of the coral reefs of yesteryear, some from the Bahamas but most from the Keys reefs of the 60s and 70s available for download on the diving page. Diving tourists are lured to the Keys by these spectacular photos but the reality they find is quite different. There are no vast growths of huge elkhorn coral colonies, and few great healthy heads of brain and star coral, a sort of governmental ?Bait and Switch? advertising. So what can we do? Of course there is no simple answer. All reefs, Pacific or Atlantic, are separate ecosystems connected closely or distantly, and each reef area has its own web of life and its own constellation of problems and solutions. Some problems are global and some are local, the only way to proceed is as the bumper sticker says, ?Think globally, act locally?. Grand analysis of global and regional social, industrial, population and pollution problems are critical and essential and must be pursued and solutions sought on a national governmental scale, but we also have to take care of the trees as well as worry about the forest. As many contributors to this thread have stated, we have to focus on local conditions and find ways to improve specific reef areas, and what we learn and achieve on a ?micro? level will pave the way for ?macro? efforts. (Or we can say, ?Nothing can be done, the world is going to collapse.? And move to the mountains and seek self sustainability with a cache of weapons and foodstuffs. Hmmm The Rockys or the Appalachians?) To do nothing is not an option, I repeat, not an option. We have monitored and measured and we know the problems. We don?t know all the causes and we don?t know the future of the global problems but we have to work with what we have. We talk of resiliency, remmancy, and sustainability and look for coral genotypes with the capability to survive despite adverse conditions, and this is good, but a coral reef is much, much more than just coral. It is a web of life that interacts with itself and feeds upon itself and grows according to the balance of its life forms. A reef in all its complexity cannot be resilient and withstand adversity if the ecology that drove its evolution is impaired. And the reefs of Florida, the Bahamas and the Caribbean are greatly impaired by the almost total loss of the herbivores that maintained the balance between the slow growing, reef forming stony corals and the rapid growing, energy producing macro algae. Without herbivores, establishment of functional reef resiliency is the ?impossible dream?. Without herbivores, planting seedling coral colonies on the reefs has little chance to succeed. Without herbivores, coral larvae have no place to settle. The extent and depth of other problems that plague our reefs cannot be accurately determined until the herbivores return. The first consideration in ecological reef restoration in this region should be how to return herbivores (think Diadema) to the reefs. And like all great journeys, we have to start with small steps, but we must start. Actually the work of Szmant, Miller, Capo, Nedimyer, me, and the Nature Conservency, FKNMS, and Mote Marine Laboratory is a start. I hope we never abandon this effort because it just seems like an impossible task. Martin Moe From eweil at caribe.net Mon Feb 27 02:45:23 2006 From: eweil at caribe.net (EWeil) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 03:45:23 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] "resilience".... Message-ID: Dear coral listers, I agree that the source of all environmental problems affecting terrestrial and marine systems have a common denominator, human population growth, as Alina so eloquently put it. It is also clear to me that lack of education, and wrong government decisions significantly compounds the problem. If this list can somehow help to actively educate people about the benefits of having fewer children and not driving an 8-cylinder, 340 HP truck to get the kids to the soccer game, it would be wonderful. However, after dealing with politicians in Latin America, watching todays religious moderate and extreme fanatism, the Bush administration at work and the selfishness of most people, I remain highly eskeptical and pesimistic about the future of coral reefs and most other ecosystems as well. Saludos! Dr. Ernesto Weil Department of Marine Sciences University of Puerto Rico PO BOX 3208 Lajas PR 00667 Pho: (787) 899-2048 x. 241 Fax: (787) 899-5500 - 2630 From ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com Mon Feb 27 12:05:27 2006 From: ericcoralinquiry at gmail.com (Eric Coral Inquiry) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 12:05:27 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Corals Gonad Development Message-ID: <6400622e0602270905k186c1de2la565ddd1c991c9ab@mail.gmail.com> Dear listers, Expertise help needed in the area of corals gonad development. Welcome any information, literatures, resources and recommendation of presons who have done work in this area. I am interested to look at the gonad development of corals under artificial reed structures and compare that to nature colony but unfortunately I do not have a clue where, how to start and the place where I come from is lacking in expertise in such area. Is there anyone who has done histological examation on corals gonad development? Do keep in touch. Billion Thanks. Eric YSY "Marine Biologist in the Making" Kota Kinabalu. P.S: This is my mailing address : Eric Yu S Y NO:93, JALAN KIJANG, LUYANG PHASE 3, 88300 KOTA KINABALU SABAH MALAYSIA TEL:+6088213276 From clarionreef at aol.com Mon Feb 27 17:24:59 2006 From: clarionreef at aol.com (clarionreef at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 17:24:59 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8C80A03C77FEB1B-AD4-1654@FWM-M02.sysops.aol.com> People, I relize that many folks in the scientific community and academia often refer to the Marine Aquarium Council [ MAC ] as some kind of intelligent response to ensuring "sustainability" in the growing trade in reef tropical fishes and organisms. Having followed them for years since their inception, I can assure you that they are adrift and without results, achievement or leadership to go with all the public relations that have fooled so many. They have endeavored to "train" collectors to fish sustainably and disdain cyanide and yet have pretty much driven collectors back to cyanide with their ill-advised, culturally insensitive, top-down approach. Faced with a mass exodus from their well financed "cause", they re-certified marinelife dealers with out cause and without clean fish supply. The lack of fish supply to go with all the trouble and expense to become certified had left many dealers with a desire to end the game and not re-certify this year. The non interest in re-certifying as the years deadline approached left MAC in a panic at the pending loss of all their members on a single date. So, in an effort to prevent the exodus from MAC and a collapse of the small level of industry support that existed anyway...they just automatically re-certified for free all those who were certified before. Have a look and see the admission of chronic failure to provide substance to go with the wordplay in 7 year old drama...in quotes from memos to the dealers who carry cyanide fish for lack of any certified, netcaught fishes. On paragraph two regard the following ; "This was based on an assumption that there would be a steadily increasing supply of MAC certified organisms from the early days of certification. Unfortunately this supply has not materialised and this has left MAC certified exporters, importers and retailers without access to a meaningful supply of MAC certified organisms on a regular basis." And then everyones certification status was automatically extended til 2008! And so on it goes, fooling people who hope and want a cleaner industry ...cashing in on it without reforming it. Sincerely, Steve Robinson commercial collector & past president AMDA American Marinelife Deales Assoc PS. 5 years and 5 million dollars of Packard, McArthur and US AID money etc. ... and no fish supply? As I said long ago..."That dog don't hunt".. -----Original Message----- From: JKoven at aol.com To: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:05:29 EST Subject: Re: [Coral-List] sustain vs. sustainable development Yes, Jim, "sustainable" and "development" ARE oxymorons. It all depends on what level of income/development the community stakeholders need to produce from their reefs, absent other income sources. Their choices are often limited - they can bring in tourists/divers or over-fish, even though that diminishes or damages the resources. Reefs provided sustenance for entire island communities for millenia - they can't now sustain other urban communities with growing populations. The needs of these stakeholders has changed over the past 50 years - they want to send their children to schools off-island, they want the same techological "improvements" in their lives that those in the urban areas have and to catch up with the 21st century world. Both climate change and over-fishing have affected many Pacific reefs that have not been subjected to gross land-based pollution. Nothing the stakeholders of small islands can do will change the global climate picture and fishing is part of their culture. The search is on for other ways to sustain the way of life they wish to have, without further destroying fisheries and thus reefs. It's interesting that outrigger canoes once sped villagers to other islands. Then came the diesel powered boats - slower and costly, although one was less dependant upon weather and perhaps drier upon arrival. Now faster fiberglass boats are the thing.....they travel as swiftly as an outrigger in a decent wind, but leave one beholden to the fuel companies. Progress? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From JKoven at aol.com Mon Feb 27 17:49:43 2006 From: JKoven at aol.com (JKoven at aol.com) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 17:49:43 EST Subject: [Coral-List] The long view is for the Undead: reefs ARE in trouble today Message-ID: <67.55e12d55.3134dc07@aol.com> The people who live in these underpopulated areas are still trying to earn a living...often by fishing their own reefs and selling to those who have depleted their own fisheries and willing to pay the price. Yes, over-population is at the base of many world problems but it is a sticky issue, at once cultural, ethnic and religious.? Not exactly one to be solved by reef scientists.? Perhaps women's education in general and in reproductive rights are the answers?? Women want better lives for their children, after they've been fed, saved from curable infectious diseases, and educated....and who is to determine what that better life is?? Is it what they perceive as the lives that other children in the world have, including yours?? Joan Koven Astrolabe, Inc. From jandl at rivnet.net Mon Feb 27 19:15:17 2006 From: jandl at rivnet.net (Judith Lang/Lynton Land) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2006 19:15:17 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] How to inspire responsible actions? Message-ID: Dear listers, I seems we are painfully aware of problems, from overpopulation to all manner of over-indulgence. But how to inspire responsible actions on our part and others? Absent easily available remedies, inspirational messages/reminders/ exhortations, however persuasive, are unlikely to have much effect. Jamaican members of the list can correct me if I'm wrong, but I've been thinking we could borrow some strategies from its early family- planning campaign. After initial successes targeting women with the simple but powerful theme, "Plan Your Family; Better Your Life," plus birth control pills that would either have been free or very cheap, it was realized that, to be truly successful, men also had to be included in the decision-making process. I remember a creative campaign of newspaper advertisements suggesting the more nuanced idea that "of course" dads want their children to have a chance to grow up and achieve some measure of respectable employment and social status (e.g., bank teller, carpenter), paired with condom advertisements on billboards that featured an enormous and very sexy looking, black panther. Surely we could come up with some attention-grabbing, genuine solutions to offer the world? Judy From G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au Tue Feb 28 00:38:07 2006 From: G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au (Gillian Goby) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 15:38:07 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] GBRMPA Current Conditions Report (4) Message-ID: <4403E1BF.8040308@gbrmpa.gov.au> Dear Coral- Listers, apologies for cross-postings. Please find below the latest Current Conditions report for bleaching on the GBR. *Current Conditions Report* /This report is compiled by the Climate Change Response Programme of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority. The Climate Change Response Programme provides regular reports on conditions on the Great Barrier Reef throughout summer and publishes early warnings of increases in levels of stress or widespread bleaching of corals. This is the Fourth Current Conditions Report for the summer of 2005/06/. *Updated 23 February 2006 * *Summary * Based on current weather conditions and climate predictions for the summer of 2005/06, *the* *threat of widespread coral bleaching for the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) region continues to be rated as moderate*. Severe coral bleaching has been confirmed for several reefs in the southern region during recent GBRMPA surveys. In addition, BleachWatch participants have recorded minor levels of bleaching in parts of the central GBR and more recently the northern GBR. Temperature patterns are consistent with these reports. Although sea temperatures in the southern GBR have slightly decreased, they continue to exceed the February average by 0.5 - 1.5 degrees C and long-term summer maxima by 0.5 degrees C respectively. Central GBR waters have remained warm in recent weeks, and sea surface temperatures are still currently exceeding the February long-term average by 0.5 to 1.5 degrees C. Temperatures in northern parts of the GBR have increased and are elevated 0.5 to 2.0 degrees C above the February long-term average. For the full current conditions report please visit the GBRMPA website on the link below: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/conditions_report.html_ The GBRMPA Coral Bleaching Response Plan has been implemented, and with a moderate bleaching risk still existent for this summer we are still relying on BleachWatch participants and others to help us detect and report any bleaching that might occur on the GBR . For more information on climate change, BleachWatch or coral bleaching please visit the GBRMPA website at: _http://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/science/climate_change/index.html_ Regards Gillian -- Gillian Goby Climate Change Response Program Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority PO Box 1379 Townsville, Qld 4810 Ph: 07 4750 0762 Fax: 07 4772 6093 Email: g.goby at gbrmpa.gov.au ================================================================================ If you have received this transmission in error please notify us immediately by return email and delete all copies. Any unauthorised use, disclosure or distribution of this email is prohibited. ================================================================================ From solutions at cozm.co.uk Tue Feb 28 03:25:57 2006 From: solutions at cozm.co.uk (Duncan MacRae) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 08:25:57 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Conservation work in Nusa Lembongan and Nusa Penida, near Bali - Indonesia Message-ID: <001801c63c40$99a579d0$4fd7fea9@Sarah> Dear all, Does anyone know of any marine conservation work carried out around the Nusa Lembongan/Penida Island group near Bali, Indonesia? Regards, Duncan R. MacRae Director Coastal Zone Management (UK) Integrated Conservation Solutions Blythe Cottage, 22 Rosemundy, St Agnes, Cornwall. UK ++(0) 1872 552 219 ++(0) 7958 230 076 e-mail: solutions at cozm.co.uk web: www.cozm.co.uk This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. E-mail transmission cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required please request a hard-copy version From nhg3 at hw.ac.uk Tue Feb 28 12:54:47 2006 From: nhg3 at hw.ac.uk (Galvis, Nohora H) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 17:54:47 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline Message-ID: <2DEC240A2A06F04BB9D3BBF02DE198BD4D3382@ex5.mail.win.hw.ac.uk> I have followed with a lot of interest the discussions of the last days, confirming how passionate scientists have become nowadays when talking about the evidence of the coral reefs decline. This is a Social Psychological trend of applied science: Scientists engage with the study of environmental problems and feel an urgent need to contribute identifying solutions as a matter of ethical responsibility. This new perspective makes acceptable and even desirable for scientists to express emotions of frustration for being eyewitnesses of decline in the past decades and now by changing their priorities, attitudes and behaviours towards environmental management to get involved trying to communicate a pertinent message to decision makers, decision takers and the general public to allow them to be part of the solutions. Thanks to Dr. Alina Szmant for the webpage information about the web cast presentation of Dr. Jeremy Jackson. Nohora Galvis (Mental Models to improve coral reef management) ________________________________ From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov on behalf of Szmant, Alina Sent: Mon 27/2/06 1:09 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] Coral reef and ocean decline For those of you loooking for how some scientists are trying to desseminate the word.... ******************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group UNCW-Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K. Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 Tel: (910)962-2362 & Fax: (910)962-2410 Cell: (910)200-3913 email: szmanta at uncw.edu Web Page: http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ****************************************************************** From: Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST) To: Subject: University of Texas Ocean Research Webcast Dear Science Enthusiast, University of Texas at Austin Webcast Entitled "Brave New Ocean." A webcast presentation given by Professor Jeremy Jackson, William E. and Mary B. Ritter Professor and Director of the Geosciences Research Division at Scripps Institution of Oceanography will be March 3, 2006 at 7pm. Dr. Jeremy Jackson is one of the most prominent marine ecologists in the world and he has a message to get out about the world's oceans - it documents declines in coral reefs, decreasing numbers of large marine fish, and losses of coastal and marine ecosystems. More than just an academic researcher, Dr. Jackson has actively searched for innovative ways to reach the public, applying his skills as a communicator with his scientific knowledge to inspire action. Dr. Jackson desires to reach a broader audience and affect change into the future with tomorrow's generation on this topic of interest. View a FREE web broadcast of the lecture live Friday, March 3, 2006 at 7 pm CST. During the live webcast, you can submit questions to Dr. Jackson and he will answer as many as he can for the live and webcast audiences. If possible, can you distribute or post a link to this webcast on your website, newsletter, or listserv as well as pass this notice on to any colleagues of yours that may be interested. The link to our Lecture Series website, where the details of the lecture and the webcast can be found, is: http://www.esi.utexas.edu/outreach/ols/lectures/Jackson/ Please let me know if you will consider posting this information. Thanks for your time, Brian Zavala Environmental Science Institute The University of Texas at Austin brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu 512.471.5847 ------ End of Forwarded Message _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From treesandseas at yahoo.com Tue Feb 28 22:51:15 2006 From: treesandseas at yahoo.com (Trees Seas) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 19:51:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] underwater camera In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20060301035115.72877.qmail@web32709.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Many thanks to everyone who responded to my query about a good underwater camera. The advice was greatly appreciated! Michelle Reyes __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com From ricksanders at comcast.net Tue Feb 28 00:44:10 2006 From: ricksanders at comcast.net (Rick Sanders) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 00:44:10 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen onreefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas References: Message-ID: <007201c63c29$ffade530$650da8c0@manta> Raphael, That photo looks like it? I have gotten so many responses and I haven't had a chance to write back to thank any of you for sending your information on the macro algae. The photo you sent looks like a good example of the what I saw on the reefs in Cat Island. Quite a few other also suggested it was Microdictyon. Who is doing work on this algae and its impacts in the Bahamas? It seems strange that this algae is popping up in such remote locations...it has been suggested that currents may be carrying nutrients into these areas from other locations where the anthropogenic inputs of nutrients are greater. What is the impact that Microdictyon is having on these reefs? It seems to be overgrowing many healthy corals. It was also mentioned in other responses that I have gotten that this algae is seasonal. Does this mean that it's impact is only temporary and the impacted corals have a chance to recover from the infestation? Thanks again for the great photo and information, Rick Rick Sanders President Deep Blue Solutions 610-892-5272 ricksanders at comcast.net ----- Original Message ----- From: "Raphael Williams" To: Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2006 4:13 PM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen onreefs in southern Cat Island, Bahamas > Hi Rick this is probably a species of Microdictyon, I've attached a photo > from Sweetings Key, Bahamas. We found it there very common. I usually > use > the Littler's book "Caribbean Reef Plants" to id the common algae, it is a > very useful guide, written by Diane Littler and Mark Littler, 2000, > published by OffShore Graphics Inc. I hope this helps. Cheers,Raphael > > Raphael Ritson-Williams > Laboratory Technician Marine Chemical Ecology > Smithsonian Marine Station at Fort Pierce > 701 Seaway Dr, Fort Pierce, Fl, 34949 > (772) 465-6630 x146 > williams at sms.si.edu > >>>> "Rick Sanders" 02/21 1:34 PM >>> > Dear Listers, > > I have spent many hours pouring over photos of macro algae trying to find > an > image of the algae that I saw overgrowing corals on many of the reefs I > dived off the southern end of Cat Island in the Bahamas. I have been > unable > to find an image of anything close to what I observed there in July 2003. > > Description: It appears to be a filamentous type algae on a greenish > brown > color that appears to be made up of netting (the filaments cross each > other > in a more or less orthogonal orientation) the netting appears to shaped > into > more or less spherical or roundish mats. The filaments are aprox 2-3 mm > in > width. The mats are easy to dislodge from their substrate and feel as if > to > crinkle when crushed under pressure with ones hand. They are overgrowing > many types of corals in shallow and deeper reefs. > > I am concerned about the impact that this algae might have on the reefs > there and want to get more information on what is happening there and the > first logical step is to identify it if possible. If anyone has seen what > I > am describing and has some photos of this type of algae please send me a > copy or link. > > Thanks very much in advance, > > Best regards, > > Rick > > > Rick Sanders > Deep Blue Solutions > Media, PA > 610-892-5272 > ricksanders at comcast.net > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >