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" <treesandseas at yahoo.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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
> <CRW Carib Bleach Report Form.xls>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
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: <LOBBKAMMJJGBIOMKCMJBAELODBAA.dhopley@austarnet.com.au>
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: <fdd37a8c389ad8b4481d896a8091bcb1@icm.csic.es>
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 <treesandseas at yahoo.com>
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: <OBEJKDBGLDJLEHJAIOPOOEFFCBAA.thierry_work@usgs.gov>
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:
<mailto:keulen at murdoch.edu.au>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: <F2953F02-B708-4092-BD8D-B688F73D6E24@zmt-bremen.de>
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: <ea55d5d28235c8c9a5a37b83dec11b3c@trilliumfilms.net>
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: <ED7FAF65-3D6E-4361-8FD2-3D753070931D@noaa.gov>
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: <BAY109-DAV220F820C243DD4A237BB1F1000@phx.gbl>
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 <BLOCKED::mailto:szmanta at uncw.edu>
Web Page:  http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
<BLOCKED::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: <C75D6479-E192-45BD-8A47-7527323E4A44@scu.edu.au>
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 <mjnewman at ucsd.edu>
 >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: <b1f784080602121820w5668930ew5f4643d3a20c15b8@mail.gmail.com>
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: <BAY114-F1790EE24244B0F451FCD2B8050@phx.gbl>
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 <sajhowe at yahoo.com>
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 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 21:20:41 2006
Return-Path: <thedivinebovine at gmail.com>
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 <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	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 <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 16so873573nzp
	for <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	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: <b1f784080602121820w5668930ew5f4643d3a20c15b8 at mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800
From: wai leong <thedivinebovine at gmail.com>
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  <coral-list.coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list>,
	<mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list>
List-Post: <mailto:coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
List-Help: <mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list>,
	<mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=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 <G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au> 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: <BAY110-F35E5BED6AA0B834F82AFE1B9FA0@phx.gbl>
   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: <BAY110-F35E5BED6AA0B834F82AFE1B9FA0@phx.gbl>
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" <burdickdr at hotmail.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoch.edu.au>
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: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoc
	h.edu.au>
References: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoch.edu.au>
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:  <mailto:rvw at fit.edu> rvw at fit.edu
 <http://www.fit.edu/~rvw/> 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: <MEBBLBBNICHKKKLLJMPEEEDHCFAA.meaghan_johnson@tnc.org>
Message-ID: <NMEAIGIEDMJDEAEEGGOBIEEOCCAA.pkramer@tnc.org>
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: <DF5BEA7FB371DE43871F62A1B56901D701385312@GOBY.WORLDFISH.CGIARAD.ORG>
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 <http://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 <http://portals.conservation.org/marine/codebase/handlers/objectview_handler.cfm?objectid=13A4A027-CA9F-F3C6-6A4D-68FACC299192&classid=47>.
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: <http://www.conservation.org/xp/CIWEB/about/jobs/sr_res_scientist.xml>
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: <C01F3706.2C9B%sjameson@coralseas.com>
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 <http://www.coralseas.com>.
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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 <BLOCKED::mailto:szmanta at uncw.edu>
Web Page:  http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
<BLOCKED::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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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 <eborneman at uh.edu> 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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
References: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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" <cat64fish at yahoo.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
References: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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: <mailman.85.1140569770.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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" <ricksanders at comcast.net>
Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on
	reefs in	southern Cat Island, Bahamas
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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
<http://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 <milviapin at yahoo.com> 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: <a0620071ac02523617bd9@[131.247.136.102]>
>>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
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu>
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" <Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov> 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 &shy; 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: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
References: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
	<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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov><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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <a05111b00c02796e7835e@[192.168.102.100]>
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 <estherborell at yahoo.co.uk>
 >To: "Szmant, Alina" <szmanta at uncw.edu>
 >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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <mailman.168.1140957641.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
References: <mailman.168.1140957641.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
 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: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
	<mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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 <rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu> 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 &shy; 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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <C027A791.465C%morrisonj@uncw.edu>
	<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: <brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST)
To: <morrisonj at uncw.edu>
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: <C027A791.465C%morrisonj@uncw.edu><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: <a06200700c028c98dfd94@[131.247.136.102]>
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
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
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: <c26a78568f8f4c9ca7ace92d4f9eee3d.eweil@caribe.net>
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: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
References: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
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: <ED92F577-D5D4-4E38-B569-AACA7657385F@rivnet.net>
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: <brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST)
To: <morrisonj at uncw.edu>
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: <mailman.184.1141005119.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <s3fb3c17.058@simail1.si.edu>
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" <Williams at sms.si.edu>
To: <ricksanders at comcast.net>
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" <ricksanders at comcast.net> 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" <treesandseas at yahoo.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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
> <CRW Carib Bleach Report Form.xls>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
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: <LOBBKAMMJJGBIOMKCMJBAELODBAA.dhopley@austarnet.com.au>
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: <fdd37a8c389ad8b4481d896a8091bcb1@icm.csic.es>
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 <treesandseas at yahoo.com>
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: <OBEJKDBGLDJLEHJAIOPOOEFFCBAA.thierry_work@usgs.gov>
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:
<mailto:keulen at murdoch.edu.au>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: <F2953F02-B708-4092-BD8D-B688F73D6E24@zmt-bremen.de>
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: <ea55d5d28235c8c9a5a37b83dec11b3c@trilliumfilms.net>
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: <ED7FAF65-3D6E-4361-8FD2-3D753070931D@noaa.gov>
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: <BAY109-DAV220F820C243DD4A237BB1F1000@phx.gbl>
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 <BLOCKED::mailto:szmanta at uncw.edu>
Web Page:  http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
<BLOCKED::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: <C75D6479-E192-45BD-8A47-7527323E4A44@scu.edu.au>
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 <mjnewman at ucsd.edu>
 >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: <b1f784080602121820w5668930ew5f4643d3a20c15b8@mail.gmail.com>
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: <BAY114-F1790EE24244B0F451FCD2B8050@phx.gbl>
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 <sajhowe at yahoo.com>
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 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 21:20:41 2006
Return-Path: <thedivinebovine at gmail.com>
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 <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	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 <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 16so873573nzp
	for <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	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: <b1f784080602121820w5668930ew5f4643d3a20c15b8 at mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800
From: wai leong <thedivinebovine at gmail.com>
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  <coral-list.coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list>,
	<mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list>
List-Post: <mailto:coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
List-Help: <mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list>,
	<mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=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 <G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au> 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: <BAY110-F35E5BED6AA0B834F82AFE1B9FA0@phx.gbl>
   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: <BAY110-F35E5BED6AA0B834F82AFE1B9FA0@phx.gbl>
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" <burdickdr at hotmail.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoch.edu.au>
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: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoc
	h.edu.au>
References: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoch.edu.au>
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:  <mailto:rvw at fit.edu> rvw at fit.edu
 <http://www.fit.edu/~rvw/> 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: <MEBBLBBNICHKKKLLJMPEEEDHCFAA.meaghan_johnson@tnc.org>
Message-ID: <NMEAIGIEDMJDEAEEGGOBIEEOCCAA.pkramer@tnc.org>
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: <DF5BEA7FB371DE43871F62A1B56901D701385312@GOBY.WORLDFISH.CGIARAD.ORG>
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 <http://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 <http://portals.conservation.org/marine/codebase/handlers/objectview_handler.cfm?objectid=13A4A027-CA9F-F3C6-6A4D-68FACC299192&classid=47>.
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: <http://www.conservation.org/xp/CIWEB/about/jobs/sr_res_scientist.xml>
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: <C01F3706.2C9B%sjameson@coralseas.com>
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 <http://www.coralseas.com>.
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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 <BLOCKED::mailto:szmanta at uncw.edu>
Web Page:  http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
<BLOCKED::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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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 <eborneman at uh.edu> 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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
References: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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" <cat64fish at yahoo.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
References: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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: <mailman.85.1140569770.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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" <ricksanders at comcast.net>
Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on
	reefs in	southern Cat Island, Bahamas
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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
<http://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 <milviapin at yahoo.com> 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: <a0620071ac02523617bd9@[131.247.136.102]>
>>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
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu>
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" <Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov> 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 &shy; 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: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
References: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
	<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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov><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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <a05111b00c02796e7835e@[192.168.102.100]>
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 <estherborell at yahoo.co.uk>
 >To: "Szmant, Alina" <szmanta at uncw.edu>
 >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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <mailman.168.1140957641.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
References: <mailman.168.1140957641.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
 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: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
	<mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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 <rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu> 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 &shy; 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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <C027A791.465C%morrisonj@uncw.edu>
	<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: <brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST)
To: <morrisonj at uncw.edu>
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: <C027A791.465C%morrisonj@uncw.edu><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: <a06200700c028c98dfd94@[131.247.136.102]>
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
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
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: <c26a78568f8f4c9ca7ace92d4f9eee3d.eweil@caribe.net>
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: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
References: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
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: <ED92F577-D5D4-4E38-B569-AACA7657385F@rivnet.net>
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: <brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST)
To: <morrisonj at uncw.edu>
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: <mailman.184.1141005119.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <s3fb3c17.058@simail1.si.edu>
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" <Williams at sms.si.edu>
To: <ricksanders at comcast.net>
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" <ricksanders at comcast.net> 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" <treesandseas at yahoo.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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
> <CRW Carib Bleach Report Form.xls>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
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: <LOBBKAMMJJGBIOMKCMJBAELODBAA.dhopley@austarnet.com.au>
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: <fdd37a8c389ad8b4481d896a8091bcb1@icm.csic.es>
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 <treesandseas at yahoo.com>
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: <OBEJKDBGLDJLEHJAIOPOOEFFCBAA.thierry_work@usgs.gov>
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:
<mailto:keulen at murdoch.edu.au>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: <F2953F02-B708-4092-BD8D-B688F73D6E24@zmt-bremen.de>
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: <ea55d5d28235c8c9a5a37b83dec11b3c@trilliumfilms.net>
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: <ED7FAF65-3D6E-4361-8FD2-3D753070931D@noaa.gov>
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: <BAY109-DAV220F820C243DD4A237BB1F1000@phx.gbl>
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 <BLOCKED::mailto:szmanta at uncw.edu>
Web Page:  http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
<BLOCKED::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: <C75D6479-E192-45BD-8A47-7527323E4A44@scu.edu.au>
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 <mjnewman at ucsd.edu>
 >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: <b1f784080602121820w5668930ew5f4643d3a20c15b8@mail.gmail.com>
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: <BAY114-F1790EE24244B0F451FCD2B8050@phx.gbl>
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 <sajhowe at yahoo.com>
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 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 21:20:41 2006
Return-Path: <thedivinebovine at gmail.com>
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 <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	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 <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 16so873573nzp
	for <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	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: <b1f784080602121820w5668930ew5f4643d3a20c15b8 at mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800
From: wai leong <thedivinebovine at gmail.com>
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  <coral-list.coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list>,
	<mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list>
List-Post: <mailto:coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
List-Help: <mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list>,
	<mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=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 <G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au> 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: <BAY110-F35E5BED6AA0B834F82AFE1B9FA0@phx.gbl>
   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: <BAY110-F35E5BED6AA0B834F82AFE1B9FA0@phx.gbl>
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" <burdickdr at hotmail.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoch.edu.au>
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: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoc
	h.edu.au>
References: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoch.edu.au>
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:  <mailto:rvw at fit.edu> rvw at fit.edu
 <http://www.fit.edu/~rvw/> 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: <MEBBLBBNICHKKKLLJMPEEEDHCFAA.meaghan_johnson@tnc.org>
Message-ID: <NMEAIGIEDMJDEAEEGGOBIEEOCCAA.pkramer@tnc.org>
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: <DF5BEA7FB371DE43871F62A1B56901D701385312@GOBY.WORLDFISH.CGIARAD.ORG>
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 <http://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 <http://portals.conservation.org/marine/codebase/handlers/objectview_handler.cfm?objectid=13A4A027-CA9F-F3C6-6A4D-68FACC299192&classid=47>.
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: <http://www.conservation.org/xp/CIWEB/about/jobs/sr_res_scientist.xml>
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: <C01F3706.2C9B%sjameson@coralseas.com>
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 <http://www.coralseas.com>.
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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 <BLOCKED::mailto:szmanta at uncw.edu>
Web Page:  http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
<BLOCKED::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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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 <eborneman at uh.edu> 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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
References: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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" <cat64fish at yahoo.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
References: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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: <mailman.85.1140569770.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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" <ricksanders at comcast.net>
Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on
	reefs in	southern Cat Island, Bahamas
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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
<http://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 <milviapin at yahoo.com> 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: <a0620071ac02523617bd9@[131.247.136.102]>
>>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
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu>
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" <Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov> 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 &shy; 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: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
References: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
	<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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov><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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <a05111b00c02796e7835e@[192.168.102.100]>
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 <estherborell at yahoo.co.uk>
 >To: "Szmant, Alina" <szmanta at uncw.edu>
 >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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <mailman.168.1140957641.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
References: <mailman.168.1140957641.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
 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: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
	<mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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 <rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu> 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 &shy; 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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <C027A791.465C%morrisonj@uncw.edu>
	<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: <brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST)
To: <morrisonj at uncw.edu>
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: <C027A791.465C%morrisonj@uncw.edu><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: <a06200700c028c98dfd94@[131.247.136.102]>
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
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
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: <c26a78568f8f4c9ca7ace92d4f9eee3d.eweil@caribe.net>
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: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
References: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
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: <ED92F577-D5D4-4E38-B569-AACA7657385F@rivnet.net>
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: <brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST)
To: <morrisonj at uncw.edu>
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: <mailman.184.1141005119.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <s3fb3c17.058@simail1.si.edu>
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" <Williams at sms.si.edu>
To: <ricksanders at comcast.net>
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" <ricksanders at comcast.net> 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" <treesandseas at yahoo.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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
> <CRW Carib Bleach Report Form.xls>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
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: <LOBBKAMMJJGBIOMKCMJBAELODBAA.dhopley@austarnet.com.au>
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: <fdd37a8c389ad8b4481d896a8091bcb1@icm.csic.es>
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 <treesandseas at yahoo.com>
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: <OBEJKDBGLDJLEHJAIOPOOEFFCBAA.thierry_work@usgs.gov>
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:
<mailto:keulen at murdoch.edu.au>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: <F2953F02-B708-4092-BD8D-B688F73D6E24@zmt-bremen.de>
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: <ea55d5d28235c8c9a5a37b83dec11b3c@trilliumfilms.net>
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: <ED7FAF65-3D6E-4361-8FD2-3D753070931D@noaa.gov>
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: <BAY109-DAV220F820C243DD4A237BB1F1000@phx.gbl>
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 <BLOCKED::mailto:szmanta at uncw.edu>
Web Page:  http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
<BLOCKED::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: <C75D6479-E192-45BD-8A47-7527323E4A44@scu.edu.au>
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 <mjnewman at ucsd.edu>
 >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: <b1f784080602121820w5668930ew5f4643d3a20c15b8@mail.gmail.com>
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: <BAY114-F1790EE24244B0F451FCD2B8050@phx.gbl>
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 <sajhowe at yahoo.com>
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 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 21:20:41 2006
Return-Path: <thedivinebovine at gmail.com>
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 <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	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 <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 16so873573nzp
	for <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	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: <b1f784080602121820w5668930ew5f4643d3a20c15b8 at mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800
From: wai leong <thedivinebovine at gmail.com>
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  <coral-list.coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list>,
	<mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list>
List-Post: <mailto:coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
List-Help: <mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list>,
	<mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=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 <G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au> 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: <BAY110-F35E5BED6AA0B834F82AFE1B9FA0@phx.gbl>
   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: <BAY110-F35E5BED6AA0B834F82AFE1B9FA0@phx.gbl>
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" <burdickdr at hotmail.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoch.edu.au>
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: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoc
	h.edu.au>
References: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoch.edu.au>
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:  <mailto:rvw at fit.edu> rvw at fit.edu
 <http://www.fit.edu/~rvw/> 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: <MEBBLBBNICHKKKLLJMPEEEDHCFAA.meaghan_johnson@tnc.org>
Message-ID: <NMEAIGIEDMJDEAEEGGOBIEEOCCAA.pkramer@tnc.org>
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: <DF5BEA7FB371DE43871F62A1B56901D701385312@GOBY.WORLDFISH.CGIARAD.ORG>
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 <http://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 <http://portals.conservation.org/marine/codebase/handlers/objectview_handler.cfm?objectid=13A4A027-CA9F-F3C6-6A4D-68FACC299192&classid=47>.
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: <http://www.conservation.org/xp/CIWEB/about/jobs/sr_res_scientist.xml>
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: <C01F3706.2C9B%sjameson@coralseas.com>
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 <http://www.coralseas.com>.
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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 <BLOCKED::mailto:szmanta at uncw.edu>
Web Page:  http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
<BLOCKED::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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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 <eborneman at uh.edu> 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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
References: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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" <cat64fish at yahoo.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
References: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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: <mailman.85.1140569770.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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" <ricksanders at comcast.net>
Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on
	reefs in	southern Cat Island, Bahamas
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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
<http://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 <milviapin at yahoo.com> 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: <a0620071ac02523617bd9@[131.247.136.102]>
>>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
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu>
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" <Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov> 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 &shy; 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: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
References: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
	<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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov><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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <a05111b00c02796e7835e@[192.168.102.100]>
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 <estherborell at yahoo.co.uk>
 >To: "Szmant, Alina" <szmanta at uncw.edu>
 >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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <mailman.168.1140957641.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
References: <mailman.168.1140957641.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
 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: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
	<mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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 <rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu> 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 &shy; 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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <C027A791.465C%morrisonj@uncw.edu>
	<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: <brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST)
To: <morrisonj at uncw.edu>
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: <C027A791.465C%morrisonj@uncw.edu><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: <a06200700c028c98dfd94@[131.247.136.102]>
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
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
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: <c26a78568f8f4c9ca7ace92d4f9eee3d.eweil@caribe.net>
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: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
References: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
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: <ED92F577-D5D4-4E38-B569-AACA7657385F@rivnet.net>
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: <brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST)
To: <morrisonj at uncw.edu>
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: <mailman.184.1141005119.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <s3fb3c17.058@simail1.si.edu>
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" <Williams at sms.si.edu>
To: <ricksanders at comcast.net>
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" <ricksanders at comcast.net> 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" <treesandseas at yahoo.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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
> <CRW Carib Bleach Report Form.xls>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
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: <LOBBKAMMJJGBIOMKCMJBAELODBAA.dhopley@austarnet.com.au>
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: <fdd37a8c389ad8b4481d896a8091bcb1@icm.csic.es>
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 <treesandseas at yahoo.com>
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: <OBEJKDBGLDJLEHJAIOPOOEFFCBAA.thierry_work@usgs.gov>
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:
<mailto:keulen at murdoch.edu.au>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: <F2953F02-B708-4092-BD8D-B688F73D6E24@zmt-bremen.de>
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: <ea55d5d28235c8c9a5a37b83dec11b3c@trilliumfilms.net>
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: <ED7FAF65-3D6E-4361-8FD2-3D753070931D@noaa.gov>
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: <BAY109-DAV220F820C243DD4A237BB1F1000@phx.gbl>
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 <BLOCKED::mailto:szmanta at uncw.edu>
Web Page:  http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
<BLOCKED::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: <C75D6479-E192-45BD-8A47-7527323E4A44@scu.edu.au>
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 <mjnewman at ucsd.edu>
 >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: <b1f784080602121820w5668930ew5f4643d3a20c15b8@mail.gmail.com>
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: <BAY114-F1790EE24244B0F451FCD2B8050@phx.gbl>
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 <sajhowe at yahoo.com>
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 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 21:20:41 2006
Return-Path: <thedivinebovine at gmail.com>
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 <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	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 <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 16so873573nzp
	for <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	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: <b1f784080602121820w5668930ew5f4643d3a20c15b8 at mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800
From: wai leong <thedivinebovine at gmail.com>
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  <coral-list.coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list>,
	<mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list>
List-Post: <mailto:coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
List-Help: <mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list>,
	<mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=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 <G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au> 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: <BAY110-F35E5BED6AA0B834F82AFE1B9FA0@phx.gbl>
   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: <BAY110-F35E5BED6AA0B834F82AFE1B9FA0@phx.gbl>
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" <burdickdr at hotmail.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoch.edu.au>
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: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoc
	h.edu.au>
References: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoch.edu.au>
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:  <mailto:rvw at fit.edu> rvw at fit.edu
 <http://www.fit.edu/~rvw/> 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: <MEBBLBBNICHKKKLLJMPEEEDHCFAA.meaghan_johnson@tnc.org>
Message-ID: <NMEAIGIEDMJDEAEEGGOBIEEOCCAA.pkramer@tnc.org>
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: <DF5BEA7FB371DE43871F62A1B56901D701385312@GOBY.WORLDFISH.CGIARAD.ORG>
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 <http://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 <http://portals.conservation.org/marine/codebase/handlers/objectview_handler.cfm?objectid=13A4A027-CA9F-F3C6-6A4D-68FACC299192&classid=47>.
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: <http://www.conservation.org/xp/CIWEB/about/jobs/sr_res_scientist.xml>
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: <C01F3706.2C9B%sjameson@coralseas.com>
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 <http://www.coralseas.com>.
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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 <BLOCKED::mailto:szmanta at uncw.edu>
Web Page:  http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
<BLOCKED::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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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 <eborneman at uh.edu> 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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
References: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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" <cat64fish at yahoo.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
References: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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: <mailman.85.1140569770.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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" <ricksanders at comcast.net>
Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on
	reefs in	southern Cat Island, Bahamas
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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
<http://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 <milviapin at yahoo.com> 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: <a0620071ac02523617bd9@[131.247.136.102]>
>>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
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu>
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" <Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov> 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 &shy; 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: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
References: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
	<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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov><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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <a05111b00c02796e7835e@[192.168.102.100]>
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 <estherborell at yahoo.co.uk>
 >To: "Szmant, Alina" <szmanta at uncw.edu>
 >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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <mailman.168.1140957641.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
References: <mailman.168.1140957641.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
 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: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
	<mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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 <rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu> 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 &shy; 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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <C027A791.465C%morrisonj@uncw.edu>
	<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: <brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST)
To: <morrisonj at uncw.edu>
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: <C027A791.465C%morrisonj@uncw.edu><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: <a06200700c028c98dfd94@[131.247.136.102]>
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
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
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: <c26a78568f8f4c9ca7ace92d4f9eee3d.eweil@caribe.net>
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: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
References: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
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: <ED92F577-D5D4-4E38-B569-AACA7657385F@rivnet.net>
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: <brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST)
To: <morrisonj at uncw.edu>
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: <mailman.184.1141005119.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <s3fb3c17.058@simail1.si.edu>
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" <Williams at sms.si.edu>
To: <ricksanders at comcast.net>
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" <ricksanders at comcast.net> 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" <treesandseas at yahoo.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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
> <CRW Carib Bleach Report Form.xls>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------
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: <LOBBKAMMJJGBIOMKCMJBAELODBAA.dhopley@austarnet.com.au>
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: <fdd37a8c389ad8b4481d896a8091bcb1@icm.csic.es>
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 <treesandseas at yahoo.com>
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: <OBEJKDBGLDJLEHJAIOPOOEFFCBAA.thierry_work@usgs.gov>
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:
<mailto:keulen at murdoch.edu.au>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: <F2953F02-B708-4092-BD8D-B688F73D6E24@zmt-bremen.de>
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: <ea55d5d28235c8c9a5a37b83dec11b3c@trilliumfilms.net>
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: <ED7FAF65-3D6E-4361-8FD2-3D753070931D@noaa.gov>
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: <BAY109-DAV220F820C243DD4A237BB1F1000@phx.gbl>
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 <BLOCKED::mailto:szmanta at uncw.edu>
Web Page:  http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
<BLOCKED::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: <C75D6479-E192-45BD-8A47-7527323E4A44@scu.edu.au>
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 <mjnewman at ucsd.edu>
 >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: <b1f784080602121820w5668930ew5f4643d3a20c15b8@mail.gmail.com>
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: <BAY114-F1790EE24244B0F451FCD2B8050@phx.gbl>
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 <sajhowe at yahoo.com>
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 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 21:20:41 2006
Return-Path: <thedivinebovine at gmail.com>
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 <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	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 <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	Sun, 12 Feb 2006 21:20:36 -0500 (EST)
Received: by zproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 16so873573nzp
	for <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>;
	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: <b1f784080602121820w5668930ew5f4643d3a20c15b8 at mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2006 10:20:32 +0800
From: wai leong <thedivinebovine at gmail.com>
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  <coral-list.coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list>,
	<mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list>
List-Post: <mailto:coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
List-Help: <mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list>,
	<mailto:coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov?subject=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 <G.Goby at gbrmpa.gov.au> 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: <BAY110-F35E5BED6AA0B834F82AFE1B9FA0@phx.gbl>
   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: <BAY110-F35E5BED6AA0B834F82AFE1B9FA0@phx.gbl>
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" <burdickdr at hotmail.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoch.edu.au>
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: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoc
	h.edu.au>
References: <FA625D4A1DA2464EACA7628152ACF76D02DF1DCB@MERCURY.ad.murdoch.edu.au>
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:  <mailto:rvw at fit.edu> rvw at fit.edu
 <http://www.fit.edu/~rvw/> 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: <MEBBLBBNICHKKKLLJMPEEEDHCFAA.meaghan_johnson@tnc.org>
Message-ID: <NMEAIGIEDMJDEAEEGGOBIEEOCCAA.pkramer@tnc.org>
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: <DF5BEA7FB371DE43871F62A1B56901D701385312@GOBY.WORLDFISH.CGIARAD.ORG>
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 <http://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 <http://portals.conservation.org/marine/codebase/handlers/objectview_handler.cfm?objectid=13A4A027-CA9F-F3C6-6A4D-68FACC299192&classid=47>.
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: <http://www.conservation.org/xp/CIWEB/about/jobs/sr_res_scientist.xml>
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: <C01F3706.2C9B%sjameson@coralseas.com>
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 <http://www.coralseas.com>.
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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 <BLOCKED::mailto:szmanta at uncw.edu>
Web Page:  http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
<BLOCKED::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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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 <eborneman at uh.edu> 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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
References: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu> 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" <cat64fish at yahoo.com>
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
References: <web-118423079@cgpsrv2.cis.mcmaster.ca>
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: <mailman.85.1140569770.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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" <ricksanders at comcast.net>
Subject: [Coral-List] Question about a macro algae species seen on
	reefs in	southern Cat Island, Bahamas
To: <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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
<http://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 <milviapin at yahoo.com> 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: <a0620071ac02523617bd9@[131.247.136.102]>
>>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
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
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 <dustanp at cofc.edu>
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" <Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov> 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 &shy; 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: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
References: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
	<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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov><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: <mailman.152.1140883955.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <a05111b00c02796e7835e@[192.168.102.100]>
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 <estherborell at yahoo.co.uk>
 >To: "Szmant, Alina" <szmanta at uncw.edu>
 >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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <mailman.168.1140957641.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
References: <mailman.168.1140957641.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
 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: <mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
	<mailman.145.1140865190.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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 <rgrigg at soest.hawaii.edu> 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 &shy; 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" <szmanta at uncw.edu> 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 &shy; 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: <C027A791.465C%morrisonj@uncw.edu>
	<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: <brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST)
To: <morrisonj at uncw.edu>
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: <C027A791.465C%morrisonj@uncw.edu><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: <a06200700c028c98dfd94@[131.247.136.102]>
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
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
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: <c26a78568f8f4c9ca7ace92d4f9eee3d.eweil@caribe.net>
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: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
References: <b7.69f4d6bc.31338e39@aol.com>
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: <ED92F577-D5D4-4E38-B569-AACA7657385F@rivnet.net>
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: <brian.zavala at mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 11:39:56 -0600 (CST)
To: <morrisonj at uncw.edu>
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: <mailman.184.1141005119.3297.coral-list@coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
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: <s3fb3c17.058@simail1.si.edu>
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" <Williams at sms.si.edu>
To: <ricksanders at comcast.net>
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" <ricksanders at comcast.net> 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
>