From bakus at worldnet.att.net Mon Feb 1 00:11:16 1999 From: bakus at worldnet.att.net (Jerry Bakus) Date: Sun, 31 Jan 1999 21:11:16 -0800 Subject: For Coral Reef Workers experienced in Indonesia Message-ID: <36B53774.D24444E3@worldnet.att.net> I hope to conduct quantitative reef studies in Ambon in March-April. Can you suggest some workable polluted and nearby (if possible) relatively non-polluted sites? What is the status of bleaching in the region? Jerry Bakus From reefcheck at gmx.de Mon Feb 1 05:20:35 1999 From: reefcheck at gmx.de (ReefCheck Germany) Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 11:20:35 +0100 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <199902011534.PAA07104@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hi coralisters, I was contacted by a German TV channel. They are preparing a report on bleaching and are looking for good video or TV-material from bleached reefs (preferably Indian Ocean/Pacific). Does anybody have interesting material or knows of somebody whom I could contact? Could be that they will even pay for it. Best wishes Georg _______________________ Reef Check Germany Georg Heiss / Moshira Hassan Karlstalweg 2/1 69412 Eberbach Germany Tel: (49) 6271-1678 Fax: (49) 6271-1678 E-mail: http://ReefCheck.home.pages.de From jim.hendee at noaa.gov Mon Feb 1 12:55:44 1999 From: jim.hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 17:55:44 GMT Subject: SEAKEYS Data Online Message-ID: <199902011755.RAA08346@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Greetings, For those of you who have a need for meteorlogical (NDBC/C-MAN) and oceanographic data collected under the SEAKEYS (FIO, NOAA/SFERPM) Program in the Florida Keys, there is now available a data server for selected queries. Please be advised that these data are raw and have not been quality controlled. Also, more recently added data parameters (e.g., fluorometry, transmissometry) and data values for some stations are not available at this time. However, the database will be updated in the future. The database is updated every morning at around 0915 hrs EST. SEAKEYS Data Server http://www.neptune.aoml.noaa.gov SEAKEYS Daily Data http://www.coral.noaa.gov/cman Overview of the SEAKEYS Program http://www.coral.noaa.gov/sferpm/seakeys/ NDBC C-MAN data http://seaboard.ndbc.noaa.gov/ndbc.html If you have any questions conerning the database, please direct them to me at jim.hendee at noaa.gov. If you have any questions concerning the SEAKEYS Program, please see the "Overview of the SEAKEYS Program" link mentioned above. Cheers, Jim Hendee ---------------------------------------------------- James C. Hendee Ocean Chemistry Division Atlantic Oceanographic and Meteorological Laboratory National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration U.S. Department of Commerce 4301 Rickenbacker Causeway Miami, FL 33149-1026 Voice: (305) 361-4396 Fax: (305) 361-4392 Email: hendee at aoml.noaa.gov Web: http://www.aoml.noaa.gov/ocd From owner-coral-list at aoml.noaa.gov Mon Feb 1 14:38:10 1999 From: owner-coral-list at aoml.noaa.gov (owner-coral-list at aoml.noaa.gov) Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 14:38:10 EST Subject: assistance needed Message-ID: <199902012026.UAA09619@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hello, I am a producer of childrens educational videos. I am currently seeking video clips and unique stills of a reef for an upcoming video about the ocean habitat for 3-4th grade kids. I am especially interested in 'skeletal' photos, close up polyp shots, and live video of the unique creatures and plants found on/in a reef. Can you direct me? I appreciate your time. Thank you, Karen Olson...K4Video at aol.com From astrong at nesdis.noaa.gov Tue Feb 2 10:59:06 1999 From: astrong at nesdis.noaa.gov (astrong at nesdis.noaa.gov) Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1999 10:59:06 -0500 Subject: Bleaching - HotSpots Message-ID: <199902021559.KAA16199@orbit34i.nesdis.noaa.gov> HotSpot Notes February 2, 1999 Western Hemisphere: NOAA satellite data show a large HotSpot appears to be developing, WNW-ESE, south of Tahiti. Compare 2 Feb 99 with 2 Feb 98 [El Nino year]! Eastern Hemisphere: The large HotSpot around the central Great Barrier Reef continues to grow as winds continue to be light and sunshine abundant. We have just received reports of slight bleaching in the past few weeks in the vicinity of Lizard Island [near Cairns] "very minor degree of bleaching in some pocilloporids - patchy and only in some colonies". AES http://psbsgi1.nesdis.noaa.gov:8080/PSB/EPS/SST/climohot.html -- or -- http://manati.wwb.noaa.gov/orad/sub/noaarsrc.html **** <>< ******* <>< ******* <>< ******* <>< ******* <>< ******* <>< ***** Alan E. Strong Phys Scientist/Oceanographer Adj Assoc Res Professor NOAA/NESDIS/ORA/ORAD -- E/RA3 US Naval Academy NOAA Science Center -- RM 711W Oceanography Department 5200 Auth Road Annapolis, MD 21402 Camp Springs, MD 20746-4304 410-293-6550 Alan.E.Strong at noaa.gov 301-763-8102 x170 FAX: 301-763-8108 http://manati.wwb.noaa.gov/orad From yajari at hotmail.com Tue Feb 2 10:53:58 1999 From: yajari at hotmail.com (Taufik Hizbul Haq) Date: Tue, 02 Feb 1999 07:53:58 PST Subject: information Message-ID: <19990202155358.23343.qmail@hotmail.com> Dear all, I'm just want to aks if anyone has information about Pulau Payar in Malaysia; the coral bleaching, tourism activities, etc. I need them for my study. Thank you for your information. Yajari-Lombok ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From bhaskell at ocean.nos.noaa.gov Tue Feb 2 12:14:45 1999 From: bhaskell at ocean.nos.noaa.gov (Haskell, Ben) Date: 2 Feb 1999 12:14:45 -0500 Subject: Jellyfish Lake- Palau Message-ID: I'm forwarding this message (rec'd in Jan. 99) from Dr. Pat Colin: "Besides the terrible coral bleaching we experienced, the population of the large Mastigias jellyfish in the lake where the tourists go has crashed! The sunworshipping jellyfish of jellyfish lake are gone. Seems the big drought we had last year has caused the water there to be too warm and too saline for the young jellyfish to survive. Things are slowly moving back to normal, but it may be some time before the jellyfish come back, maybe as much as six months to a year. It is insane how much things have been affected here by the climate chaos. Palau is certainly not isolated from what's affecting the rest of the world. All for now, cheers, Pat" From coral at aoml.noaa.gov Thu Feb 4 07:40:02 1999 From: coral at aoml.noaa.gov (Coral Workstation at NOAA/AOML) Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 07:40:02 -0500 (EST) Subject: Sorry about that... Message-ID: <199902041241.MAA03288@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Unfortunately, the aging coral workstation, which hosts coral-list, the CHAMP Web Page, and several other Web pages and listservers, was down for about 9 or 10 hours yesterday due to some problems with the hardware and software. Hopefully, these problems are now fixed. Cheers, Jim Hendee NOAA's Coral Health and Monitoring Program Administrator (jim.hendee at noaa.gov) From JAAP_W at epic7.dep.state.fl.us Wed Feb 3 16:13:28 1999 From: JAAP_W at epic7.dep.state.fl.us (Walt Jaap STP) Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 16:13:28 -0500 (EST) Subject: Job at FMRI Message-ID: <199902041355.NAA04394@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> SHORT-TERM JOB AVAILABLE - FLORIDA MARINE RESEARCH INSTITUTE, 100 8th Ave SE, St. Petersburg, FL 33701-5095. The individual will assist research staff in emergency and normal field work (ship groundings, dredge insults, aquaculture surveys, coral reef surveys, and long term ecological research projects). Other responsibilities include equipment maintenance and computer data entry. This is a temporary position paying $8.00 an hour with no benefits. Overtime is paid for work over 40 hours in a week and travel expenses are reimbursed after the event. The individual should be in good health and able to work well with others in stressful circumstances. The work area is in central and southern Florida. Must be able to perform at the scientific diver level of skill and be able to pass all requirements in the American Academy of Underwater Sciences standards for a scientific diver: medical exam, swimming test, written exam, health and safety certifications and openwater checkout (http://www.aaus.org/). Skills that are of primary importance: 1. Operating and primary maintenance of air filling stations (compressor, cascade cylinders). 2. Experience in the use of underwater video equipment: setting up, testing, operating, maintenance, and editing to include copying tapes and frame grabbing images for computer files. 3. Scuba equipment maintenance. 4. The individual should have participated in a small boat safety class and have small boat operating skills (navigation and maintenance). 5. Experience in underwater 35 mm photography to include setting up, testing, operating, and maintenance. 6. Computer systems to include MS Word, spread sheets (Quatro Pro, Excel), image processing software, and the ability to use e-mail. 7. Skills in underwater survey techniques to include quadrats, transects, and photogrammetry. 8. Use of lift bags, epoxy applicators, hydraulic and pneumatic tools, compass, surface supplied diving gear, dry suits, taking measurements (distance and bearings) of distinct features. Respond to Emergency response technical assistant, FAX: 727-893-1270. A resume and the names and phone numbers of two references should be provided. Please respond by 5:00 PM on 10 February. From paul.holthus at aquariumcouncil.org Thu Feb 4 15:48:04 1999 From: paul.holthus at aquariumcouncil.org (Paul Holthus) Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 10:48:04 -1000 Subject: Marine Aquarium Council - Certifying Quality & Sustainability Message-ID: <4.0.1.19990204101337.00dd7570@mail.pixi.com> Dear Coral-Listers, Please allow me to bring the Marine Aquarium Council to your attention. MAC is a major new international effort to address sustainability and quality in the harvesting and commerce of marine aquarium organisms. Below is a brief description of the rationale, background and status of this comprehensive program to develop standards, certification and labeling for the marine ornamentals industry. The MAC website (www.aquariumcouncil.org) contains more information as well as means to register your interest in being a part of this growing global network. We look forward to the involvement of the coral reef science and management community in these efforts. With regards, Paul Holthus Executive Director Marine Aquarium Council 3035 Hibiscus Drive, Honolulu, Hawaii 96815 Ph: +1 808 923-3254 Fax: +1 808 923 -6023 E-mail: paul.holthus at aquariumcouncil.org Website: www.aquariumcouncil.org THE MARINE AQUARIUM COUNCIL: CERTIFYING QUALITY AND SUSTAINABILITY IN THE MARINE AQUARIUM INDUSTRY Market forces are one of the most useful means to encourage and support quality "products" and sustainable practices in the marine ornamentals industry. The demand from informed consumers for such products and practices will create incentives for industry to adopt and adhere to standards to improve quality control and management of the organisms, habitat, and industry practices and provide a quality-assured, higher value-added product. The corollary is that marine aquarium organisms of poor quality and unsustainable practices will face decreasing market acceptance. As a result, destructive and substandard practices (e.g. use of sodium cyanide, lack of water quality control, high levels of mortality) will decrease as these operators either adjust their practices "upward" to comply with the standards or lose the support of the market and fall out of the industry. To put these market forces to work, a Certification System is needed to: ? establish standards for quality products and practices; ? provide a system to document compliance with these standards; ? label the results of certification for quality assurance; and ? create consumer demand and confidence for certified and labeled organisms, practices and industry participants. Due to the global nature of the trade in marine ornamentals, an independent, multi-stakeholder, international institution is required to work with all of the relevant parties, especially the entire industry "Chain of Custody" - i.e. from collectors to exporters to importers/wholesalers to retailers and the consumer. The Marine Aquarium Council has been established for this purpose. The Marine Aquarium Council (MAC) is a non-profit organization that brings together a rapidly growing cross section of representatives of the ornamentals industry, conservation organizations, government agencies, public aquariums, hobbyists and scientists - all with a shared interest in the future of the marine ornamentals industry, the marine organisms it is based on and the habitat that supports them. Stakeholder consultations are underway to develop standards and test them in pilot areas, and begin initial certification in 1999. Participation in MAC is open to those ready to collaborate and contribute to a constructive dialogue and the development of a Certification System for marine ornamentals. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/19990204/d904d08a/attachment.html From aaron at mcbi.org Thu Feb 4 16:50:46 1999 From: aaron at mcbi.org (Aaron Tinker) Date: Thu, 04 Feb 1999 13:50:46 -0800 Subject: Job Posting Message-ID: <3.0.3.32.19990204135046.007cbb70@mail.adhost.com> Exciting job opportunity ? please distribute (sorry for cross-postings) Position: Program and Legislative Associate, Washington DC Description: Marine Conservation Biology Institute (MCBI), a non-profit conservation organization based in Redmond, WA seeks an enthusiastic, energetic, and experienced staff person to lobby Congress and federal agencies on key issues and assist in other program activities in its Washington DC office. The Associate would work closely with the Program Director to identify issues of concern, strategize with others in the conservation community, and carry out successful campaigns. MCBI is dedicated to advancing the science of marine conservation biology by holding multidisciplinary scientific workshops on emerging issues and disseminating the results to policymakers and the public. Advocacy efforts in Washington DC focus largely on policies affecting marine protected areas/marine sanctuaries and improving funding for marine conservation biology research. Other program activities could include organizing and/or facilitating scientific workshops and assisting with workshop publications. Qualifications: Successful candidates will have a graduate degree in marine biology, ecology, oceanography, marine affairs, natural resource management, environmental science, or related field, and at least 2 years experience advocating environmental policies, preferably at the federal level. Excellent oral and written communications skills a must. Candidates must be comfortable dealing with scientists and communicating scientific concepts to policymakers and the public, and must be self-starters capable of working independently. Experience working with the media and generating media coverage a plus. Starting salary: $35,000 - $40,000 depending on experience, plus excellent benefits. To apply: Send resume, brief writing sample, and full contact information for 3 references by mail to Program Director, Marine Conservation Biology Institute, 205 N. Edgewood St., Arlington VA 22201. No phone calls, faxes, or emails please. Deadline: March 9. Http://www.mcbi.org From y at drug.com Thu Feb 4 18:48:47 1999 From: y at drug.com (Yoshi Mizuno) Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 08:48:47 +0900 Subject: Coral Harvesting--CO2 release comparison In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4.0.1-J.19990203054900.020c1ed0@202.33.25.4> Dear Coral-Listers, At 08:36 99/01/19 +0100, Miriam Huitric wrote: >Ultimately, private aquaria coral is a luxury item (after the 2,000 dollar >estimate for the equipment needed - if you can afford that, you can afford >to travel to the reef). In times of healthy reef abundance this market is .. > It has been argued on the list that to have corals in your home brings you > nearer to the reef and its nature - in that case private owners should be > more than sympathetic to a ruling in the favour of coral reefs. Those yet to > live through the experience of privately owning coral could make do with > visiting the aquaria or seeing an actual coral reef in the mean time - or? As a reef keeper and a scuba diver, I have been thinking about the above for a while. Dr. Carlson and others have pointed out the eventual positive effect of coral farming/collecting to the health of the coral reef. Assumin g that the global warming has contributed to this bleaching event, I have come up with the following estimation. I would love to hear any comments or critici sm on the issue. Comparison of Reef Keeping vs. Reef Visiting in terms of CO2 production --------------------------------------------------------- Assumptions: --Compare one trip to Maldives (family of three) vs. reef tank run for a year --Average power consumption of a reef tank: 500W --Estimated fuel consumption per passenger on 747 traveling long distance: 20 km/liter (From Japan Airline Webpage) --Distance from Tokyo to Male, Maldives via Singapore: 8750km --Specific gravity of Jet fuel : 0.8 --Carbon content of Jet Fuel : 0.68kg/liter (My guess) Since Jet Fuel is hydrocarbon, assuming it is normal alkane cabon/hydrogen ratio is Cn vs. Hn x2 + 2. If n=7, H:C(wt) =16:84 So one liter of Jet fuel has 1liter x 0.8 kg/liter x 0.85 = 0.68 kg of car bon --Ignore CO2 production for the aquarium equipment manufacturing; Ignore CO2 production other than jet fuel for the trip. --------------------------------------------------------- Jet Fuel of a reef trip (a family of three). 8750km x 2 / 20km/liter = 880 liter. (Round trip) 880 liter x 3 = 2.6k liter ;-O ------------------------------------------------------------ As Electricity in Tokyo is generate by 43% Nuclear 34% LNG, LPG 12% Oil 7% Hydroelectric. 4% Coal. CO2 (grams of carbon) producing potential per 1kWh generated Coal 270 Oil 200 LNG 178 Nuclear 6 Hydroelectric 5 270 x 0.04 + 200 x 0.12 + 178 x 0.34 + 6 x 0.43 + 5 x 0.07 = 98.25 g/kWh However, Tokyo Denryoku (Electric Power) officially claims that they achieve 81g/kWh of Carbon. So let's use that number. ------------------------------------------------------------ Reef tank power consumption in a year 500W x 24h x 356 days = 4380kWh ------------------------------------------------------------ C02 GENERATED Reef Trip for Three: 2.6kl x 0.68kg/l carbon = 1770kg of carbon Reef Tank in Tokyo: 4.4MWh x 81 kg/MWh = 356kg of carbon The bottom line: "Running reef tank one year" produces about five times less CO2 compared to a "reef trip for three." PS. I think my reef tank is sucking CO2 out of atomosphere ;-) -- I notice pH drop when I have a lots (over 20) people in my living room. . . -- Yoshi Mizuno y at drug.com From paul.marshall at jcu.edu.au Fri Feb 5 11:22:07 1999 From: paul.marshall at jcu.edu.au (Paul Marshall) Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 16:22:07 +0000 Subject: Video footage of bleached reefs Message-ID: <36BB1AAF.486F@jcu.edu.au> Hi Georg Together with another colleague, Andrew Baird, I have been researching the coral bleaching episode of 1998 on the Great Barrier Reef. Our initial results are reported in the last issue of Coral Reefs for 1998 as a Reef Site: Baird, AH; Marshall, PA; 1998 "Mass bleaching of corals on the Great Barrier Reef " CORAL REEFS; VOL 17; NUMBER 4; pp. 376 During our surveys we obtained some dramatic video (Hi8) footage of some of the worst affected reefs during the height of bleaching. While the water visibility is typical for inshore reefs, the images are quite spectacular. Please let me know if you think that the German TV channel might be interested. cheers Paul Marshall CRC Reef Research Centre James Cook University Townsville Australia email: paul.marshall at jcu.edu.au From Coral-List.Administrator at aoml.noaa.gov Fri Feb 5 08:21:30 1999 From: Coral-List.Administrator at aoml.noaa.gov (Coral-List.Administrator at aoml.noaa.gov) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 13:21:30 GMT Subject: Coral workstation at AOML Message-ID: <199902051321.NAA05954@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> My apologies to all who have tried to post messages to coral-list but could not. I have had to replace the hard drive on the coral workstation, and the operating system, and there were some problems with messages going to some locations. If you have recently (yesterday or today) tried to post a message, but it failed, please drop me a note at jim.hendee at noaa.gov and forward to me any error message(s) you received. Thanks for your patience and help. Cheers, Jim Hendee coral-list administrator From mbm4 at duke.edu Fri Feb 5 11:23:25 1999 From: mbm4 at duke.edu (Mike Mascia) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 11:23:25 -0500 (EST) Subject: Duke Marine Conservation Program Message-ID: APOLOGIES FOR CROSS LISTING Duke University Integrated Marine Conservation Program The Nicholas School of the Environment Marine Laboratory at Duke University is offering an unparalleled educational opportunity from July 12 to August 13, 1999. Duke's Integrated Marine Conservation Program teaches the principles necessary for the conservation and preservation of the coastal and oceanic environment. The focus is on interdisciplinary problem solving--using natural and social science theory to resolve real world environmental problems. The Duke summer faculty will be joined by distinguished scholars from around the country for this intensive five week program. Visiting faculty include: Kai Lee, Williams College; Bonnie J. McCay, Rutgers University; John McQuaid, The Times-Picayune (New Orleans, Louisiana); and Peter B. Moyle, University of California at Davis. Participants in the Integrated Marine Conservation Program usually enroll in the program's 'core' course (Conservation Biology and Policy) and one of six elective courses offered concurrently. Enrollment in any one course is also possible. Scholarships are available, including several earmarked for international students. In order to receive full consideration, applications for general scholarships must be received by March 1. Applications for international student scholarships must be received by April 1. Applications for the Integrated Marine Conservation Program will be accepted until the program is full. For further information, see our web site at http://www.env.duke.edu/marinelab/mlterm2.html or contact Ms Helen Nearing at hnearing at duke.edu, (252) 504-7502. From PATTERSON_M at epic7.dep.state.fl.us Fri Feb 5 14:53:09 1999 From: PATTERSON_M at epic7.dep.state.fl.us (Matt Patterson) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 19:53:09 GMT Subject: Job at FMRI Message-ID: <199902051953.TAA08553@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Concerning Walt Jaap's recent posting of a job at FMRI, please also read this, if you are interested in the position. It has some necessary legalese and important descriptions. JOB OPPORTUNITY FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION FLORIDA MARINE RESEARCH INSTITUTE 100 8th Ave S.E. St. Petersburg, FL 33701-5095. POSITION: (OPS) TECHNICAL STAFF, $8.00 PER HOUR-NO BENEFITS APPLY TO: Emergency response technical assistant FAX #: 727-893-1270 CLOSING DATE: February 10, 1999, 5:00 p.m. Fax resume and the names and phone numbers of two references by the closing date. JOB DESCRIPTION: asist research staff in emergency and normal field (Overtime is paid for work hours over 40 in a week week (Friday to Thursday) and approved travel expenses are reimbursed after the event.) DESIRED QUALIFICATIONS: 1. Ability to work in the field under demanding physical conditions and work well with others in stressful circumstances. 2. Ability to perform at the scientific diver lev 3. Skill in the operation and primary maintenance of air filling stations (compressor, cascade cylinders). 4. Experience in the use of underwater video equipment: setup, testing, operating, maintenance, and editing to include copying tapes and frame grabbing images for computer files. 5. Scuba equipment maintenance. 6. Possession of Small Boat Safety Class certification and skill in the operation and maintenance of small boat s 7. Experience in underwater 35 mm photography to include setup, testing, operating, and maintenance. 8. Experience with Personal Computer systems and software including MS Word, spread sheets (Quatro Pro, Excel), image processing software, and the ability to use e-mail. 9. Skill in underwater survey techniques to include quadrats, transects, and photogrammetry. 10. Experience with lift bags, epoxy applicators, hydraulic and pneumatic tools, compass, surface supplied diving gear, dry suits, taking measurements (distance and bearings) of distinct features. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER FEDERAL LAW REQUIRES THAT WE HIRE ONLY U.S. CITIZENS AND LAWFULLY AUTHROIZED ALIENS WHO CAN PROVIDE PROOF OF THEIR IDENTITY AND EMPLOYMENT ELIGIBILITY. From Piers.Larcombe at jcu.edu.au Fri Feb 5 17:40:22 1999 From: Piers.Larcombe at jcu.edu.au (Piers Larcombe) Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 08:40:22 +1000 (EST) Subject: Great Barrier Reef Field Course Message-ID: The School of Earth Sciences at James Cook University is offering a field course which may be of interest to readers of the newsgroup. DO YOUR FIELD COURSE ON THE GREAT BARRIER REEF AND ADJACENT COAST (June 7-28, 1999) 'Coral Reefs and Mangroves of the Great Barrier Reef' Focus: Field studies in shelf sedimentology Location : Townsville and environs Duration: 3 weeks from June 7 to June 28, 1999. Credit: 4 credit points from James Cook University (contact James Cook University for information on credit transferability). Cost: $3600 (Australian dollars - approximately US$2500 - includes accommodation and transport once you arrive at James Cook University to start the course). This course introduces students to the cutting-edge of sedimentology research using the central Great Barrier Reef Lagoon as its laboratory. The focus is on the sedimentary processes which control the distribution of shelf sediments and coral reefs. The course will consist of an introduction (delivered remotely via the web and by lectures and practical work at JCU), followed by 12-14 days of fieldwork, using the University research vessels Mudskipper and James Kirby. Students may have the option to view the reef from the air (through an overflight by small plane) and to visit the outer reef. During the first half of the course, participants will be introduced to a range of instrumentation and equipment (including current meters, bed-level sensors, grab samplers, side-scan sonar, vibrocorer, sub-bottom profiler) and sedimentary environments (including fringing coral reefs, near-shore turbid-zone reefs, coastal sediment bodies, shelf sediment bodies and the outer reef). During the second half of the course, participants will develop and focus on a specific research issue. This elite course is designed to provide hands-on experience on the Great Barrier Reef itself, an unparalleled setting in which to learn the complexities of the shelf system from experts in the field. See website http://www.jcu.edu.au/school/earth/teaching/fieldov.html Primary Contact: Professor Tim Bell tim.bell at jcu.edu.au fax: +61 (0)7 4725-1501 COURSE OUTLINE Course Leaders: Dr Ken Woolfe, Dr Piers Larcombe Jun 7 Lecture 1 Introduction to the GBR, the School and the Course Lecture 2 The GBR Shelf Lecture 3 Trade Winds and Cyclones Prac 1: Tides, Currents and regional sedimentation patterns and geology (Townsville Region) and a BBQ Jun 8 Field Trip Inter-tidal sedimentary environments (Shelly Bay). Jun 9 Field Trip Inter-tidal sedimentary environments (Shelly Bay). Jun 10 Lecture 4 Applications of particle size analysis Lecture 5 Petrology and grain shape Prac 2 Particle size analysis, petrology and grain shape. Prac 3 Reporting. Jun 11 Lecture 6 Tides and tidal creeks Lecture 7 Mangrove systems Lecture 8 Collection of real-time data Prac 4 Working with data loggers and data. Jun 12 Field Trip Mangrove creeks and salt flats (Cocoa Creek) Jun 13 Travel to field camp (probably Whitsunday Islands) Jun 14 - 18 Small group activities A) Tides, currents and waves B) Inter-tidal sediments C) Supra-tidal deposits D) Sub-tidal sediments E) Seismic stratigraphy Jun 19 Outer Reef Trip Jun 20 Small group project generation Jun 21-26 Small group research projects Jun 27 Day trip to investigate a quartz sand problem Jun 28 Return to Townsville Please address initial enquiries to tim.bell at jcu.edu.au. Piers -------------------------------------------------------- Dr. Piers Larcombe piers.larcombe at jcu.edu.au Tel. +61 7 47815056 Fax. +61 7 47251501 http://www.jcu.edu.au/dept/Earth/ http://www.jcu.edu.au/dept/Earth/people/Larcombe.html Marine Geophysical Laboratory, School of Earth Sciences James Cook University, Townsville, 4811 Australia -------------------------------------------------------- From auger at cbl.umces.edu Fri Feb 5 06:35:45 1999 From: auger at cbl.umces.edu (auger at cbl.umces.edu) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 11:35:45 +0000 (EST) Subject: Articles on captive farming and propagation. Message-ID: At EPARC(Eastern PA Reef Club) we are currently involved in the administration of a group of web pages which are entirely devoted to the captive propagation of corals. We hope to create the largest informational resource on the web, and the most navigable. But we need the help of every reefkeeper and scientist out there. The decline of our coral reefs can in some ways be attributed to our hobby. We as a hobby can serve to show the world that we are taking a stance and trying to stop the reef destruction by propagating and raising fish and corals in our aquariums. EPARC wants to join this effort by making available a large library of techniques used to accomplish just that. We hope that all reefers can use and contribute to this effort. Thanks Paul Auger EPARC http://www.eparc.com From mbm4 at duke.edu Sat Feb 6 11:51:28 1999 From: mbm4 at duke.edu (Mike Mascia) Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 11:51:28 -0500 (EST) Subject: Duke Marine Conservation Program Message-ID: I apologize if this is a duplicate message. When originally posted this message appears to have been distributed to some members of coral-list but not others, perhaps because of recent problems with the server. ********** APOLOGIES FOR CROSS LISTING Duke University Integrated Marine Conservation Program The Nicholas School of the Environment Marine Laboratory at Duke University is offering an unparalleled educational opportunity from July 12 to August 13, 1999. Duke's Integrated Marine Conservation Program teaches the principles necessary for the conservation and preservation of the coastal and oceanic environment. The focus is on interdisciplinary problem solving--using natural and social science theory to resolve real world environmental problems. The Duke summer faculty will be joined by distinguished scholars from around the country for this intensive five week program. Visiting faculty include: Kai Lee, Williams College; Bonnie J. McCay, Rutgers University; John McQuaid, The Times-Picayune (New Orleans, Louisiana); and Peter B. Moyle, University of California at Davis. Participants in the Integrated Marine Conservation Program usually enroll in the program's 'core' course (Conservation Biology and Policy) and one of six elective courses offered concurrently. Enrollment in any one course is also possible. Scholarships are available, including several earmarked for international students. In order to receive full consideration, applications for general scholarships must be received by March 1. Applications for international student scholarships must be received by April 1. Applications for the Integrated Marine Conservation Program will be accepted until the program is full. For further information, see our web site at http://www.env.duke.edu/marinelab/mlterm2.html or contact Ms Helen Nearing at hnearing at duke.edu, (252) 504-7502. From delbeek at hawaii.edu Sat Feb 6 13:31:25 1999 From: delbeek at hawaii.edu (J. Charles Delbeek) Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 08:31:25 -1000 Subject: Last Posting, please respond direct. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 16 Jan 1999, James M. Cervino wrote: > In response to Mark, Craig and Charles Posting, > > I agree with some of the comments my colleagues have been sending me. That > for public or private aquarium research, regulated, commercial > propagation, and for aquariums that employ aquarists who can keep the > corals alive (like the Waikiki Aquarium) for long periods without the > revolving door of new ones, is the only way we should continue. I would like to see how they will draft legislation that will allow one to determine what institutions have "qualified" staff and how they will define qualified. lol > Craig: major issues rather than "feel good" issues that are qualitatively > and quantitatively insignificant. > > CERVINO: I will make it quantitatively significant, I can show you piles of > dead corals from one aquarium and dead un-sold corals from a local > aquarium store. Also the thousands that do make the sale alive. These > stores have customers that are always coming back for new corals. The > average home aquarist has high mortality rate with the numbers of corals he > or she purchases. Multiply this by the thousands of stores across the USA. > > This is not a feel good issue, I worked at an aquarium where they kept > corals as well as friends that worked at other aquariums, I can fill up > dumpsters with the corals that did not survive in aquaria. When the coral > dies they bring in another fresh group of colonies. This is consistent at > most aquariums, a never ending revolving door of corals coming into this > country, keep in mind this is only the aquarium industry, not the > ornamental trade for living rooms. I have faxes from a friend of mine who > owns an aquarium store and I have begun to collect the faxes of the corals > he gets on a bi-weekly basis. We are talking THOUSANDS of colonies per > year! Not counting the ones he throws out upon arrival due to necrotic > tissue. His basement alone can rebuild a reef, he has many dead corals > sitting in a bin for the past two years. No one is disputing that there is loss of corals, the question that remains unanswered I feel, is what is the impact? Does these thousands of corals represent a significant amount compared to what is available for collection? IOW is this level sustainable or not? > Lets not forget SHELL WORLD IN FLORIDA, they are selling dead corals for > coffee tables, and book shelves, how many reefs were ravished for this one > store? Has anyone seen this and other places like shell world in the Fl > Keys? Most of them are not Caribbean Corals, we see Pacific dead corals > sold by the hundreds every day at Shell World and places like it. I wonder how much of the corals they sell are recent acquisitions, compared to ones they have had in stock for quite some time. I have been to the Florida Keys and the west and east FL coasts for many years starting as far back as 1966 and most recently 1994. In going past some of these places I can't say they are actually doing a booming business anymore. Many of the pieces that were in their displays are still there. Also it has been illegal to export corals frok the Philippines for some years nows. Back in the late 80's a large container of dead corals was siezed by USFWS in Chicago under the auspices of CITIES. Turns out it was from the Philippines. It was eventually released because the proper paperwork was in place and because the Philippine government claimed the corals were part of stockpiles of dead corals that had been frozen since the ban had been put in place. If you are going to call for a ban on coral imports I would suggest that you concentrate on dead coral imports first. The curio and precious coral trade accounts for a far greater percentage of the imported corals than does the live trade. At the 1992 AAZPA (American Association of Zoos and Public Aquaria) conference, USFWS special agent David Kirkby presented a paper in which it was stated that from January 1991 to August 1992 USFWS records showed that 627,884 pieces (8 metric tonnes) of live coral were imported, exported and re-exported to and from the US. Contrast that with 2,387,179 pieces (544.025 metric tonnes) of dead coral and 2,864,213 pieces (0.953 metric tonnes) of precious corals. In other words 90% by number or 98% by mass of the corals traded in the US over a period of 20 months were dead corals. Aquarium Biologist Waikiki Aquarium University of Hawaii "The fact that my physiology differs from yours pleases me to no end." Mr. Spock From delbeek at hawaii.edu Sat Feb 6 13:42:50 1999 From: delbeek at hawaii.edu (J. Charles Delbeek) Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 08:42:50 -1000 Subject: Coral Harvesting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 18 Jan 1999, Huitric, Miriam wrote: > Ultimately, private aquaria coral is a luxury item (after the 2,000 dollar > estimate for the equipment needed - if you can afford that, you can afford > to travel to the reef). In times of healthy reef abundance this market is > viable (provided reef-friendly techniques are employed). At the moment there > is much evidence that there is not an abundant resource available. So long > this debated, hindsight has shown us that caution/ precautionary principle > should be applied. Not everyone who can afford $2000 for equipment can afford to travel to a reef. Many of these hobbyists are using the majority of their paycheques to build these systems and purchase animals. Many of them live far enough away from any reef to make the cost of travelling to, visiting and staying anywhere near a reef cost prohibitive, living in Stockholm I am sure you can appreciate this. Then there are the shutins and invalids who maintain aquaria, they certainly cannot afford to travel to a reef or even have the ability to. Many aquarists who mainatin reefs do not SCUBA dive, or cannot swim. > That public aquaria are important as education tools - yes by all > means, not everyone has the opportunity/ means to visit reefs. If we > want people to take the measures to protect them, they should know > what it is they are making sacrifices for. BUT there should be careful > regulation to ensure that the coral mortality of the exhibit in > question does not undermine the aim of the display - otherwise it too > becomes a luxury we can do without during the "coral depression" years > - some supevision of the success rates of different aquaria is needed > to determine their viability. Who would you suggest would do this "supervision" and who would be qualified to? > I am not convinced that the market will naturally regulate these problems - > doesn't scarcity increase value and therefore the amount a harvester makes/ > piece of coral? Unfortunately the harvester makes VERY little per coral. Perhaps if a) the price of the coral were greater importers and shippers would take greater care in shipping and handling then they do now and b), perhaps if the collectors received more per piece they would too. That is the approach being taken by OVI in the Philippines wrt fish collection. > Miriam Huitric > Beijer International Institute of Ecological Economics > The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences > Box 50005 > 104 05 Stockholm > Sweden J. Charles Delbeek M.Sc. Aquarium Biologist Waikiki Aquarium University of Hawaii "The fact that my physiology differs from yours pleases me to no end." Mr. Spock From hwoyt at essex.ac.uk Sun Feb 7 18:32:46 1999 From: hwoyt at essex.ac.uk (H Woyt) Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 23:32:46 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Coral Harvesting Message-ID: Dear Charles, I've been following this argument for quite some time now and there seems to be quite a different attitude in the U.S. than in Europe. > > Ultimately, private aquaria coral is a luxury item (after the 2,000 dollar > > estimate for the equipment needed - if you can afford that, you can afford > > to travel to the reef). In times of healthy reef abundance this market is > > viable (provided reef-friendly techniques are employed). At the moment there > > is much evidence that there is not an abundant resource available. So long > > this debated, hindsight has shown us that caution/ precautionary principle > > should be applied. > > Not everyone who can afford $2000 for equipment can afford to travel to a > reef. Many of these hobbyists are using the majority of their paycheques > to build these systems and purchase animals. Many of them live far enough > away from any reef to make the cost of travelling to, visiting and staying > anywhere near a reef cost prohibitive, living in Stockholm I am sure you > can appreciate this. Then there are the shutins and invalids who maintain > aquaria, they certainly cannot afford to travel to a reef or even have the > ability to. Many aquarists who mainatin reefs do not SCUBA dive, or cannot > swim. Yes, you will probably say that my opinion is quite arrogant, but I truly believe that not everything can be available to everybody. If somebody can't afford to go and see a real reef than that's the way it is. Not everybody can go and see elephants in the wild or visit fragile ecosystems like the Galapagos. Some people simply have to be content to visit one of the beautiful commercial aquaria like the one you are operating in Hawaii. If everybody wants to own what he thinks is beautiful than very soon there wouldn't be much left. The demand for life coral is devastating the reefs (apart from other factors). In a country like Indonesia environmental harvesting techniques will never be successful. It is simply a very different situation than you might have in the Caribbean. You might convince American hobbyists to buy sustainably harvested coral but on the Asian market this will have no impact at all. All that counts is the price. In Europe CITES makes the trade in life coral difficult so that it's really a low key hobby for people who really know what they are doing. I hope it will stay that way. Holger Woyt University of Essex U.K. From carlson at soest.hawaii.edu Sun Feb 7 20:19:58 1999 From: carlson at soest.hawaii.edu (Bruce Carlson) Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 15:19:58 -1000 (HST) Subject: Coral Harvesting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The opinion stated by Woyt is that the "demand for life (sic) coral is devastating the reefs". That may be true or it may not be. Perhaps someone has actually done some field work to determine the effects of collecting and its long-term impacts on reefs. By this I mean systematic, long-term monitoring of collected reefs, "before", "after" and "after-after" (ie, do the reefs recover in time?). Are some species/habitats more vulnerable than others to harvesting? I believe this is being tested in Fiji now, but everything else I've heard is pretty much anecdotal. Seems to me that it would be a very interesting problem to tackle -- how quickly will corals recolonize a reef that has been "devastated" by harvesters? Are the data consistent with storm damage recovery, or, because corals are havested selectively, is the end-result something different? Bruce Carlson Waikiki Aquarium On Sun, 7 Feb 1999, H Woyt wrote: > Dear Charles, > > I've been following this argument for quite some time now and there > seems to be quite a different attitude in the U.S. than in Europe. > > > > Ultimately, private aquaria coral is a luxury item (after the 2,000 dollar > > > estimate for the equipment needed - if you can afford that, you can afford > > > to travel to the reef). In times of healthy reef abundance this market is > > > viable (provided reef-friendly techniques are employed). At the moment there > > > is much evidence that there is not an abundant resource available. So long > > > this debated, hindsight has shown us that caution/ precautionary principle > > > should be applied. > > > > Not everyone who can afford $2000 for equipment can afford to travel to a > > reef. Many of these hobbyists are using the majority of their paycheques > > to build these systems and purchase animals. Many of them live far enough > > away from any reef to make the cost of travelling to, visiting and staying > > anywhere near a reef cost prohibitive, living in Stockholm I am sure you > > can appreciate this. Then there are the shutins and invalids who maintain > > aquaria, they certainly cannot afford to travel to a reef or even have the > > ability to. Many aquarists who mainatin reefs do not SCUBA dive, or cannot > > swim. > > Yes, you will probably say that my opinion is quite arrogant, but I > truly believe that not everything can be available to everybody. If > somebody can't afford to go and see a real reef than that's the way it > is. Not everybody can go and see elephants in the wild or visit fragile > ecosystems like the Galapagos. > Some people simply have to be content to visit one of the beautiful > commercial aquaria like the one you are operating in Hawaii. If > everybody wants to own what he thinks is beautiful than very soon there > wouldn't be much left. > The demand for life coral is devastating the reefs (apart from other > factors). In a country like Indonesia environmental harvesting > techniques will never be successful. It is simply a very different > situation than you might have in the Caribbean. You might convince > American hobbyists to buy sustainably harvested coral but on the Asian > market this will have no impact at all. All that counts is the price. > > In Europe CITES makes the trade in life coral difficult so that it's > really a low key hobby for people who really know what they are doing. > I hope it will stay that way. > > Holger Woyt > University of Essex > U.K. > > > > > From delbeek at hawaii.edu Mon Feb 8 00:11:44 1999 From: delbeek at hawaii.edu (J. Charles Delbeek) Date: Sun, 7 Feb 1999 19:11:44 -1000 Subject: Coral Harvesting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 7 Feb 1999, H Woyt wrote: > Yes, you will probably say that my opinion is quite arrogant, but I > truly believe that not everything can be available to everybody. If > somebody can't afford to go and see a real reef than that's the way it > is. Not everybody can go and see elephants in the wild or visit fragile > ecosystems like the Galapagos. I agree, not everything will be available to everybody. But not everybody wants a reef tank. Exactly, not everyone can afford to visit a reef., which was James' suggestion. The costs for many is prohibitive, but it is not prohibitive to own a reef tank. In speaking with a friend in Holland a few years ago he told me he was selling his tank, it was to oexpensive for him to run any longer. He also told me that with teh trend to have ALRGE systems so favoured in Europe, it was getting so expensive that few could afford to own one. In North America most people have systems under 200 gallons, in Europe is seems as if that is the lower limit > Some people simply have to be content to visit one of the beautiful > commercial aquaria like the one you are operating in Hawaii. If > everybody wants to own what he thinks is beautiful than very soon there > wouldn't be much left. I suppose that may be true if the resource were limited or if the degree of use exceeded the ability for the resource to renew. But where is the evidence/data to prove that coral collection a) is depleting populations beyond their ability to renew and b) that the amount of coral collected is significant to coral reefs overall? > The demand for life coral is devastating the reefs (apart from other > factors). In a country like Indonesia environmental harvesting > techniques will never be successful. It is simply a very different > situation than you might have in the Caribbean. You might convince > American hobbyists to buy sustainably harvested coral but on the Asian > market this will have no impact at all. All that counts is the price. I am very curious to know on what data you are basing your first assertion on? I am not so sure I understand why you think Indonesia vs. the Caribbean would be that different? Also, it has been illegal for quite some time to collect stony corals and sea fans in most of the Caribbean so North American hobbyists rarely see corals from this area. > In Europe CITES makes the trade in life coral difficult so that it's > really a low key hobby for people who really know what they are doing. > I hope it will stay that way. I am a little confused by your statement re:CITIES. Why would this treaty be treated any differently in North America than it would be Europe? Confiscations occur here all the time. J. Charles Delbeek M.Sc. Aquarium Biologist Waikiki Aquarium University of Hawaii "The fact that my physiology differs from yours pleases me to no end." Mr. Spock From h.sweatman at aims.gov.au Mon Feb 8 23:38:40 1999 From: h.sweatman at aims.gov.au (Hugh Sweatman) Date: Tue, 09 Feb 1999 15:38:40 +1100 Subject: GBR Status Report 3 Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19990209153840.00808ad0@email.aims.gov.au> Colleagues, The Australian Institute of Marine Science's Long-term Monitoring of the Great Barrier Reef Status Report 3, which was released as a printed document at the ITMEMS conference in Nov 1998, is now accessible on the AIMS web page: http://www.aims.gov.au/pages/reflib/mon-statrep3/statrep3.html The report summarises information collected in six annual surveys of about 50 reefs spread across the GBR. At these reefs, small reef fishes and benthic organisms are surveyed on fixed sites and crown-of-thorns starfish and general coral cover around the reef perimeter are assessed by manta tows. About another 50 reefs are surveyed by manta tow alone. The report presents information on status and trends for the GBR, by region and for individual reefs. The report is available mainly as a series of .pdf files, though the graphics content make some of these rather large. The authors intend that this report will be a template for future reporting of this long-term program, so we would welcome feedback on content and presentation. Hugh Sweatman Long Term Monitoring Program, Australian Institute of Marine Science, PMB3 Townsville MC, Qld 4810 Australia ph: (07) 4753 4470 / +61 7 4753 4470 [GMT +10] faxes: (07) 4753 4288 / 4772 5852 h.sweatman at aims.gov.au web: http//www.aims.gov.au/ From bztrec at btl.net Fri Feb 5 17:39:35 1999 From: bztrec at btl.net (Belize Marine TREC) Date: Fri, 5 Feb 1999 16:39:35 -0600 Subject: Coral Reef Job for PhD Message-ID: <199902091143.LAA32297@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Marine Professors Network WANTED: Coral Reef Biologist (PhD) to teach field class March 6 to 20, 1999. All expenses paid and $2,000 US honorarium. Reply for more details. From maximefau at hotmail.com Thu Feb 11 04:02:44 1999 From: maximefau at hotmail.com (maxime fau) Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 01:02:44 PST Subject: Tridacna Reproduction Message-ID: <19990211090244.13175.qmail@hotmail.com> Hello, As we know a lot of Tridacna farm are already a success. But i would like to test this reproduction in a totaly closed environment. Does somebody have this kind of experience and can help me in. Excuse for my english. Maxime FAU ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From shenker at winnie.fit.edu Thu Feb 11 10:07:26 1999 From: shenker at winnie.fit.edu (Jonathan M Shenker) Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 10:07:26 -0500 (EST) Subject: Faculty Position Message-ID: Apologies for cross-postings on other lists... Applications are invited for a FULL-TIME POSITION (9 months; rank open) to begin fall 1999. Ph.D. and postdoctoral research experience in INVERTEBRATE BIOLOGY or MARINE ECOLOGY required. The successful candidate is expected to develop a strong, funded research program; to direct graduate students at the M.S. and Ph.D. levels; to teach two undergraduate courses (invertebrate zoology, marine ecology) and other courses related to the candidate?s research interests; and to supervise, maintain, and develop the department?s computer-based instructional facility. Submit a curriculum vitae, a concise statement of research and teaching interests, selected reprints, and the names, addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses of three references to Dr. Richard L. Turner, Chair, Marine Biology Search Committee, Department of Biological Sciences, Florida Institute of Technology, 150 W. University Blvd., Melbourne FL 32901-6975. Phone: 407-674-8196; fax: 407-674-7238; email: rturner at fit.edu. Website: http://www.fit.edu/AcadRes/csla/. An Equal Opportunity Employer. From shenker at winnie.fit.edu Thu Feb 11 10:19:51 1999 From: shenker at winnie.fit.edu (Jonathan M Shenker) Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 10:19:51 -0500 (EST) Subject: Summer Course in Australia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: The Florida Institute of Technology, in association with the University of New South Wales, is offering a 6-week course summer course on the biology, ecology and evolution of terrestrial and coral reef ecosystems in Australia. We'll begin the course in the Kakadu National Forest, then examine the eucalyptus forests of southeast Australia, study the rock intertidal areas around Sydney and Bundaberd, spend a week on Lady Elliott Island on the south Great Barrier Reef, travel into the Daintree Rainforest, and finish on a live-aboard dive boat in the middle GBR. Course dates: 21 June-2 August 1999. For more information, visit http://www.bio.fit.edu/summer/aust.htm Additional questions, and requests for application forms, should be addressed to: Dr. Jon Shenker shenker at fit.edu From delbeek at hawaii.edu Fri Feb 12 02:47:34 1999 From: delbeek at hawaii.edu (J. Charles Delbeek) Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 21:47:34 -1000 Subject: coral (fwd) Message-ID: Anyone care to help this young lady, I have already suggested she needs to reword her hypothesis as it is not the number of reefs that is decreasing, but their health. J. Charles Delbeek M.Sc. Aquarium Biologist Waikiki Aquarium University of Hawaii "The fact that my physiology differs from yours pleases me to no end." Mr. Spock ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 11 Feb 1999 17:33:16 -1000 From: LAS00013 at aol.com To: adjeroud at uni-perp.fr, REEF003 at aol.com, wallison at dhivehinet.net.mv, pbarriga at javercol.javeriana.edu.co, AMORIM at mfca.uem.mz, raronson at jaguar1.usouthal.edu, oneocean at OceanNEnvironment.com.au, abaker at rsmas.miami.edu, david.bellwood at jcu.edu.au, bbest at usaid.gov, p.blanchon at ualberta.ca, eburkett at staff.uwsuper.edu, pbush at candw.ky, furman at mail.biu.ac.il, jcortes at cariari.ucr.ac.cr, mbs at mangga.usc.edu.ph, gdjd at cathar.tesag.jcu.edu.au, delbeek at hawaii.edu, cim at comuh.uh.cu, vangulo at is2.dal.ca, sd008c at uhura.cc.rochester.edu, adunstan at ozemai.com.au, Michael.Eisinger at uni-essen.de, d.fenner at aims.gov.au, fichez at noumea.orstom.nc, info at wcmc.org.uk, iclarm at cgiar.org, lauretta at wri.org, smiller at gate.net, gillispi at vxe.ocis.uncwil.edu, c.wilkinson at aims.gov.au, Frankb at wri.org, Maryh at wri.org, Lauralee at wri.org, Kathyd at wri.org, info at aqua.ucsd.edu, CORALmail at aol.com, o'brien.denise.dm at bhp.com.au Subject: Re:coral To whom it may concern: I am a thirteen-year-old eighth grade student at Green Brook Middle School in New Jersey. I am in a special class called ROGATE, in which I am researching coral reefs. I obtained your name from an online coral researchers directory. My hypothesis is: The number of coral reefs in the world has decreased dramatically due to coral bleaching and increasing population. Do you agree with this statement? Please send me your opinion, any information, photographs, or brochures that you have to support your findings by February 20th. I would appreciate it if you would write to me at the following address or e-mail me at LAS00013 at AOL.com. Thank you very much! Sincerely, Laura Snowden Laura Snowden 6 Green Valley Dr. Green Brook, NJ 08812 USA From chrhueerkamp at hotmail.com Fri Feb 12 13:06:22 1999 From: chrhueerkamp at hotmail.com (christiane hueerkamp) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 10:06:22 PST Subject: dry weight of coral Message-ID: <19990212180622.2797.qmail@hotmail.com> Dear listers, does anybodey have the information of how much dry weight of tissue per area an "average" scleractinian coral has (without skeleton)? Thanks, Christiane Huerkamp ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From Tom.Hourigan at noaa.gov Tue Feb 16 20:36:04 1999 From: Tom.Hourigan at noaa.gov (Tom Hourigan) Date: 16 Feb 1999 20:36:04 -0500 Subject: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List Message-ID: <01BC836CA1D0403C*/c=US/admd=ATTMAIL/prmd=GOV+NOAA/o=CCNMFS/s=Hourigan/g=Tom/@MHS> Dear Coral List, In the U.S. Federal Register Notice January 15, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 10), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) requested information on marine Candidate Species for listing under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. This notice is not a proposal for listing; candidate species do not receive substantive or procedural protection under the Endangered Species Act. The goal of the candidate species program is to identify species as candidates for possible addition to the List of Endangered and Threatened Species and encourage voluntary efforts to help prevent listings. The full text of the Federal Register notice can be found on the web at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/ ACROPORA SPECIES AS CANDIDATES FOR THREATENED OR ENDANGERED SPECIES: In this Notice, NMFS has proposed to add two coral species, elkhorn coral (Acropora palmata) and staghorn coral (Acropora cervicornis) as candidates for possible addition to the List of Endangered and Threatened Species under the Endangered Species Act (FR Doc. 99-1011, 1-15-99). These two species were among the dominant corals in shallow-water Caribbean reef communities. During the last two decades, it appears that populations of A. cervicornis and A. palmata have been greatly reduced throughout their range as a result of hurricane damage, coral diseases, increased predation, hypothermia, boat groundings, sedimentation, and other factors. Losses are well documented at several sites in U.S. waters, where populations declined during the 1980s by up to 96%. To date, acroporid corals have not recovered to their former abundance, and remaining populations may continue be deteriorate from natural and anthropogenic factors. The observed low rates of larval recruitment may hinder recovery of these species, given continuing losses from coral diseases, predators, storms and human impacts. To be listed under the Endangered Species Act, invertebrates must be shown to be threatened throughout the range of the species (in contrast to vertebrates, which can be listed based on specific populations or the status in U.S. jurisdiction). NMFS would appreciate any information on these species that would support or argue against inclusion on the candidate species list. Such information could include historic and current population sizes and distribution, assessments of threats, and existing and future protective measures that may assist to recover these species before listing under the ESA becomes necessary. OTHER CORAL SPECIES We have also examined several other western Atlantic coral species that might merit inclusion as Candidate species. They were not included in the Federal Register Notice since the information available was incomplete. They include: Acropora prolifera Dendrogyra cylindricus - pillar coral Dichocoenia stokessi Oculina varicosa Other species, such as the Porites porites complex, P. astreoides, the Montastraea annularis complex, M. cavernosa, Diploria strigosa, D. clivosa, and D. labyrinthiformis appear to have undergone some declines at certain sites, but do not appear as threatened as the Acropora spp, at this time. We welcome any discussion and comments members of the coral list may have on the inclusion of these or other coral species on the candidate species list. Formal comments shold be sent to the Chief of the Endangered Species Division in NMFS' Office of Protected Resources at the address listed below. Thanks for your help! Tom Hourigan ^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^~^ Thomas F. Hourigan, Ph.D. Tel: (301) 713-2319 Marine Biodiversity Coordinator Fax: (301) 713-0376 Office of Protected Resources, NOAA/F/PR National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service 1315 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910, USA E-mail: Tom.Hourigan at noaa.gov http://www.nmfs.gov/prot_res.html From rrowan at uog9.uog.edu Wed Feb 17 22:49:39 1999 From: rrowan at uog9.uog.edu (Robert G. Rowan) Date: Thu, 18 Feb 1999 13:49:39 +1000 (GMT+1000) Subject: Postdoctoral Postion Message-ID: Postdoctoral position available to study zooxanthella symbioses at the University of Guam Marine Laboratory, immediately. The research involves field work, experiments in the field and in aquaria, and laboratory work in the areas of physiology and molecular biology, mostly with corals. Examples of current research interests appear in Nature 388:265-269 (1997) and in The Plant Cell 8:539-553 (1996); see also J. Phycology 34:407-417 (1998). I'm looking for a person who would like to participate in these kinds of research. The work will require laboratory skills (e.g., cell biology, physiology, biochemistry, or molecular biology; not necessarily from studies on corals), good field skills (diving), and an ability to work independently. Excellent (for a tropical marine laboratory) facilities are available. If interested, please send me a c.v., a BRIEF description of your research experience and professional goals, and contact information for at least three personal references. Preferably, send these by email. Rob Rowan UOG Marine Laboratory Mangilao, Guam 96923 USA Fax: 671 734 6767 Email: (rrowan at uog9.uog.edu) From eakin at ogp.noaa.gov Thu Feb 18 12:10:44 1999 From: eakin at ogp.noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: 18 Feb 1999 12:10:44 U Subject: NOAA Diving Manuals Message-ID: Subject: Time: 11:53 NOAA Diving Manuals Date: 2/18/99 I have gained possession of several copies of the current (1991) version of the NOAA Diving Manual "Diving for Science and Technology". I understand that a new one is being developed. In the meantime, these are available, free, to a good home. I would provide these to institutions that do not have or have access to the manual currently. If you would like one, please e-mail me. If I get more requests exceed supply, I will use some non-arbitrary method based on need to choose recipients. Cheers, Mark From doccm at prisma-presse.com Fri Feb 19 10:48:46 1999 From: doccm at prisma-presse.com (doccm) Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 16:48:46 +0100 Subject: pictures of bleached coral Message-ID: <199902191835.SAA14845@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> We are a french magazine and we would like to publish an article about coral bleaching. So we are looking for pictures representing a coral reef before and after bleaching (it has to be the picture of a same reef). You can reach me in Paris (France) at the following numbers : tel : 1 44 90 69 88 fax: 1 44 90 68 34 Many thanks in advance for your help Isabelle Bouillot, magazine "Ca m'int=E9resse" From bztrec at btl.net Fri Feb 12 08:48:18 1999 From: bztrec at btl.net (Belize Marine TREC) Date: Fri, 12 Feb 1999 07:48:18 -0600 Subject: Belize Course Message-ID: <199902191838.SAA14855@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Belize Marine TREC Tropical Research & Education Center Announcing: Professors' Preview May 30 to June 5, 1999 $300 If you conduct field classes in the caribbean visit our facility and see what we have to offer. Cost is only $300 and includes room, board and full program. The only required extras are international airfare and departure tax ($15 US). Group size is limited to 20 participants. We generally have a very stimulating group of professors. Intern positions available: next opening June 1 to August 15. Reply for an application to this e-mail address, Subject: intern. Researchers: We are interested in establishing relationships with researchers who wish to conduct their work in this area of the caribbean. We could help facilitate your work without the usual bureaucratic hassles. Coral Reef Ecology Courses: Student Programs run year round. Minimum groups size is 10 students. Our staff and resources assist professors in conducting tropical field courses. We offer classrooms, labs, 50ft research vessels, aquariums and a professional staff. The programs can be adjusted to fit the needs of the instructor. Mayan ruin and jungle excursions can easily be added to mainly marine curricula. For more information contact: Dr. Kenneth C. Mattes, Director bztrec at btl.net From Steneck at maine.maine.edu Sat Feb 20 12:46:36 1999 From: Steneck at maine.maine.edu (Bob Steneck) Date: Sat, 20 Feb 99 12:46:36 -0500 Subject: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List Message-ID: <199902201746.MAA20806@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Tom, It seems to me that the Acropora decline throughout the Caribbean may qualify that genus and all of its species to endangered status. I have seen some recent declines in Porites and to a lesser extent Dichocoenia but some of the other species you have listed I do not think qualify. Most notably is Dendrogyra cylindricus. While I know of no region or reef in the Caribbean where it has ever been abundant, it is remarkably common. Most reefs have a little of that species and most areas I've worked throughout the Bahamas, eastern and western Caribbean seem to have healthy colonies. I suspect you do not want a list of corals that happen to have always had low abundance. It will be relatively easy to query the Atlantic and Gulf Reefs Rapid Assessment data sets to see if higher than average mortality rates are showing up for the species you list below (see: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/agra/agra1.html). In April many of us will be assembling in Fort Lauderdale to present data on the condition of Caribbean reefs, perhaps you could get a consensus of opinions at that time (see: http://www.nova.edu/ocean/ncri/cfp_1.html). Good luck in your efforts. Bob Steneck >We have also examined several other western Atlantic coral species that might >merit inclusion as Candidate species. They were not included in the Federal >Register Notice since the information available was incomplete. They >include: > >Acropora prolifera >Dendrogyra cylindricus - pillar coral >Dichocoenia stokessi >Oculina varicosa > >Other species, such as the Porites porites complex, P. astreoides, the >Montastraea annularis complex, M. cavernosa, Diploria strigosa, D. >clivosa, and >D. labyrinthiformis appear to have undergone some declines at certain >sites, but >do not appear as threatened as the Acropora spp, at this time. ---------------------------- Robert S. Steneck, Ph.D. Professor, School of Marine Sciences University of Maine Darling Marine Center Walpole, ME 04573 207 - 563 - 3146 ext. 233 e-mail: Steneck at Maine.EDU The School of Marine Sciences Web site: http://www.ume.maine.edu/~marine/marine.html From ltpv at online.marine.su Mon Feb 22 00:09:32 1999 From: ltpv at online.marine.su (Latypov) Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 15:09:32 +1000 Subject: message Message-ID: <01be5e21$885bc580$0f02000a@ltpv.online.marine.su> In Institute of Marine Biology (Vladivostok, Russia) Yuri Latypov has finished the description more than 300 species of Scleractinian of Vietnam. Five parts of the monography Scleractinian Corals of Vietnam (in Russian) in which are published many problem questions of morphology, terminology and taxonomy of these corals are surveyed. Is resulted annotated the list of all species, found in Vietnam. The book The principles and methods of the CNIDARIAN classification. (Vladivoistok, Dalnauka, 1998, 244 p.) there is published. The book accounts the main results of more than 20 years of investigations in systematics and taxonomy of the CNIDARIA, which are difficult for taxonomy. The modern ideas abouth the criteria for taxon definition of the fossil and recent corals, actinia, hydroids are shown. Using numerous examples the significance of the various features, definition of the limits of their variability, methods of the resolving of the inevitable problems, which take place in the identification and classification of Cnidarian, are shown. my e-mail: ltpv at online.marine.su -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/19990222/7c94fb94/attachment.html From eakin at ogp.noaa.gov Mon Feb 22 10:38:38 1999 From: eakin at ogp.noaa.gov (Mark Eakin) Date: 22 Feb 1999 10:38:38 U Subject: NOAA Diving Manuals (2) Message-ID: Subject: Time: 10:31 NOAA Diving Manuals (2) Date: 2/22/99 Well, I knew they would be popular. I have received over 100 requests for less than 20 manuals. I will go through these shortly and send them out. I will send e-mails to those that will receive copies. The priority will be for copies that can be shared at labs in developing countries that would have the greatest difficulty accessing it otherwise. I have plenty of requests from labs that fir that category. I will keep the remaining requests in case I get a hold of more copies. Cheers, Mark From JandL at rivnet.net Mon Feb 22 11:13:39 1999 From: JandL at rivnet.net (Judith Lang & Lynton Land) Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 11:13:39 -0500 Subject: Candidates for Endangered Species List Message-ID: Re: the message from CORALations: In fact an ecosystem approach to species conservation has been our theoretical underpinning since about 20 years ago when the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic Fishery Management Councils collaborated on a Fishery Management Plan for Coral and Coral Reefs. The "management unit" here was defined as being composed of about 400 species of fire corals, soft corals, gorgonians, black corals and stony corals. At the time, declaring that its maximum sustainable yield was "incalculable", and that its principal value was in "nonconsumptive uses" certainly was an unusual approach to fishery management! By and large "management for conservation" is working at what is now the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary (where, incidentally, all types of fishing except with hook-and-lines has also been prohibited since 1992). Stony corals have shown no significant changes in cover, species diversity, species evenness or growth rates since the early 1970's, despite their location near active petroleum platforms in the Northwestern Gulf of Mexico [see review of SR Gittings, TJ Bright and DK Hagman, 1994, pp. 181-187 in RN Ginsburg, (compiler), Proc. Colloquium on Global Aspects of Coral Reefs: Health, Hazards and History]. Sadly, the subsequent history of many reefs in the Florida Keys, where both natural and anthropogenic stresses are considerably greater than 200 km offshore Texas, has been less fortunate. Hence, it seems to me that we should continue to CREATIVELY invoke all available legal options --including the endangered species act, with its provisions for habitat acquisition/protection/restoration --as surely, in the long run, that will only help conserve coral reefs and associated ecosystems. Judy Lang >From: "CORALations" >To: "Coral-List" >Subject: Re: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List >Date: Mon, Feb 22, 1999, 8:58 AM > >Based on what we know about the interconnectedness of species in such an >ecosystem, how can we still be selecting individual species for protection >and ignoring others...For example..saying Acropora would qualify as >endangered due to declines throughout the Caribbean does not provide >sollutions for impacts to other species of coral that result from this >decline. Could reef scientists possibly make rational arguments for >considering the entire ecosystem as endangered ...including commercially >valuable fish and shellfish which play a role in nutrient distribution and >recycling etc.? >It seems that the way these systems have evolved is more complicated than >mere % distributions of individual species and if we are going to spend >time and energy trying to protect them could we possibly shoot for a >legislative solution which effectively recognizes this? >I have concerns about scientists becoming too conservative in the manner in >which they convey impacts to the reef in an effort to propell small, less >constroversial solutions to society when these solutions may simply not be >effective. Look how we've bungled and continue to bungle marine fishery >legislation in order to propell small paletable bits of legislation often >too little, too late...rarely complied to or enforced. > >"The problems we have today, will not be solved by thinking the way we >thought when we created them".... Albert Einstein >---------- From reefchck at ust.hk Mon Feb 22 21:29:18 1999 From: reefchck at ust.hk (Reef Check) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 10:29:18 +0800 Subject: Reef Check Update Message-ID: <36D2127E.B0726A6B@ust.hk> Reef Check Update February 19, 1999 Happy Year of the Rabbit!! IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR COORDINATORS INCLUDED HERE Reef Check 1999 is well underway, with surveys already completed in various locations around the world. In several areas, Reef Check has now become an integrated part of multi-level, long-term monitoring programs. There are about 140 countries/territories where we hope to establish Reef Check operations. We are expecting major growth in 1999. The new leadership of the International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI) under the direction of Bernard Salvat, has done a tremendous job of coordinating efforts to systematically round up funding for GCRMN/Reef Check. The next ICRI planning meeting will be held in Paris in March. As more funding becomes available, we will be looking to support more groups. We now have a new website address - please update your bookmarks. Detailed news is given below. New Website address. We have purchased the rights to the website:  HYPERLINK http://www.ReefCheck.org http://www.ReefCheck.org This site name was activated on February 14, 1999 so please update your bookmarks. The old site name is still active, however, it will be phased out. We are continually working to improve the website and a few minor changes are still underway. Suggestions are always welcome. Website revision: The content of the website has been under revision since January. Most changes are clarifications. A significant change will be the addition of instructions on how to use Reef Check for long-term monitoring. Another change is that Reef Check has now become a continuous activity - however, there will be a cut-off date for submission of results for 1999 to be included in our annual Summary Report and Press Conference. The changes will be listed on the "What's new?" page. Help with translations: Our website is available in Japanese and German, thanks to the hard work of Reef Check Coordinators in those countries. We would like to have other languages available, especially French and Spanish. If you are willing to help but short on time, a translation of just the home page would be a great start. Anyone willing to volunteer to translate the pages, please contact us 1997 results in press We are pleased to report that the results of the first global coral reef survey in 1997 are in press in Marine Pollution Bulletin and should be out soon. A big thanks to all who helped collaborate on that pioneering effort! GCRMN/Reef Check Collaboration We are aware that there has been some confusion regarding GCRMN and Reef Check. Please be aware that GCRMN and Reef Check are officially linked together, and increasing effort is being placed on collaboration in our coordinator network, training, and surveys. But for a variety of reasons, particularly funding and administration, it is important they remain separate entities. Both GCRMN and Reef Check are PROGRAMS with the shared goals of increasing the awareness of everyone about the value of coral reefs, threats to their health and solutions. GCRMN is funded through UN agencies and governments, and is meant to work primarily with governments through "official" channels. Reef Check, is a university based operation, and is focused on working with non-governmental organizations (NGOs). While GCRMN is directly coordinating with government agencies, Reef Check prefers local NGOs to provide the linkages with government agencies as needed. Some of the confusion stems from terminology with methods. GCRMN is a broader program than Reef Check, and it is designed to support all types of monitoring. GCRMN is also more democratic than Reef Check and is able to support various different methods for different purposes. Reef Check has only one set of core methods because one goal is to ensure national, regional and global comparability. It was recognised early on by GCRMN that the Reef Check methods were particularly valuable for two applications: to get new groups started in the reef monitoring business (scientists, government staff or NGOs) whether in developed or developing countries; to get community-based groups (non-scientists) involved in reef monitoring (e.g. local recreational divers, tourists, village fishermen). Based on this, and the large Reef Check network already in operation, in 1998 the GCRMN STAC officially approved the use of Reef Check methods as the main GCRMN methods for community-based monitoring. In this respect, the Reef Check program is performing a service for GCRMN. Therefore, all future GCRMN training programs aimed at either a) or b) above, will include Reef Check methods. For groups which need/desire training in more taxonomically detailed methods, advanced training supported by GCRMN will be carried out using a subset of English et al (A Survey Manual for Tropical Marine Resources) and other methods. If you are still confused - please feel free to contact either Clive Wilkinson or Gregor Hodgson for clarification. 4) Special Monitoring Session, Meeting, Training: NCRI Symposium April 14-16, 1999 Special Session: A special monitoring session including presentations by GCRMN and Reef Check coordinators will take place at the coral reef symposium held at the new National Coral Reef Institute in Ft. Lauderdale April 14-16, 1999. The slots are now all filled, but we encourage all those interested in monitoring to attend this half-day session. Meeting: GCRMN/Reef Check status meeting is tentatively scheduled for after the regular presentations on Wednesday night 14 April. Mark your calendars. Reef Check Training: Ben Haskell, Bill Tyler and Alex Stone are organizing a one day post-symposium training session on Saturday 17 April. More details in next update. Indonesia: Coremap and Bali 2000 Coremap, a very large coral reef management project has started in Indonesia. We are very pleased that Coremap has adopted Reef Check as one of its training methods for community-based monitoring. The next International Coral Reef Symposium will be held in Bali, in October 2000. As part of this event, we will be holding an Indonesia-wide Reef Check prior to the symposium. All of you are invited to participate in this event, which should prove to be a lot of fun and very informative. The results of the survey will be presented at the symposium. Philippines: US AID Coastal Resources Management Project Several large monitoring and management programs have recognized the usefulness of Reef Check and have adopted it. One of these projects is the US AID Coastal Resources Management Project, based in Cebu, but carried out nationally. One of the goals of this project is to develop a national monitoring protocol. Andre Jon Uychiaoco has taken on this task. We are grateful to Alan White, Michael Ross and Katherine Courtney for choosing Reef Check to be part of their monitoring program. Training A UNEP/Japan sponsored monitoring training will be held in mid-March at the Nha Trang Institute of Oceanography. Vo Si Tuan will lead the training for scientists from Myanmar, Cambodia, China and Vietnam. The training will start with Reef Check and continue on to high resolution GCRMN methods. AIMS scientists will also be part of the training team. Funding Philosophy: Reef Check is fundamentally based on volunteers, however, there will always be a need for funds to pay for activities, and sponsorship is required initially to get the ball rolling. Over the long term, we hope that a combination of private and government co-financing as well as self-financing mechanisms will pay for Reef Check activities. (We are looking for an MBA student to look carry out research on long-term financing options.) We are actively soliciting financial support on a regional and global scale. If you would like to work with us to develop proposals in your area, please let us know. Grants received: Grants totalling more than US$100,000 have recently been received from CORAL and MacArthur Foundation. We are grateful for this support. ICRAN: ICLARM's John McManus has recently had the initial funding approved for ICRAN, a precursor of a large coral reef monitoring and management package that includes GCRMN/Reef Check. We thank John for doing the hard work to get this off the ground. World Bank: GCRMN/Reef Check are working with World Bank on a number of proposals for national, regional and global programs. 8) Pacific Islands SPREP: The South Pacific Regional Environmental Program has been extremely helpful in offering to collaborate with training and implementation of monitoring work in the Pacific Islands. SPREP has been carrying out a series of training programs over the past several years. We look forward to working with SPREP and sharing the work and coordinators. Thanks to James Aston for his knowledgeable assistance. PNG: Norman Quinn has volunteered for the PNG coordinator position and will be leading training programs at UPNG and in New Britain. -- Keith Kei Assistant Coordinator Institute for Environment and Sustainable Development Applied Technology Centre Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Clearwater Bay Kowloon HONG KONG Tel: (852) 2358-6907 Fax: (852) 2358-1334 e-mail: reefchck at ust.hk web site: http://www.ust.hk/~webrc/ReefCheck/reef.html From corals at caribe.net Mon Feb 22 08:58:48 1999 From: corals at caribe.net (CORALations) Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 09:58:48 -0400 Subject: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List Message-ID: <199902221403.KAA02731@mail.caribe.net> Based on what we know about the interconnectedness of species in such an ecosystem, how can we still be selecting individual species for protection and ignoring others...For example..saying Acropora would qualify as endangered due to declines throughout the Caribbean does not provide sollutions for impacts to other species of coral that result from this decline. Could reef scientists possibly make rational arguments for considering the entire ecosystem as endangered ...including commercially valuable fish and shellfish which play a role in nutrient distribution and recycling etc.? It seems that the way these systems have evolved is more complicated than mere % distributions of individual species and if we are going to spend time and energy trying to protect them could we possibly shoot for a legislative solution which effectively recognizes this? I have concerns about scientists becoming too conservative in the manner in which they convey impacts to the reef in an effort to propell small, less constroversial solutions to society when these solutions may simply not be effective. Look how we've bungled and continue to bungle marine fishery legislation in order to propell small paletable bits of legislation often too little, too late...rarely complied to or enforced. "The problems we have today, will not be solved by thinking the way we thought when we created them".... Albert Einstein ---------- > From: Bob Steneck > To: Tom Hourigan ; Coral List > Subject: Re: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List > Date: Saturday, February 20, 1999 1:46 PM > > Dear Tom, > > It seems to me that the Acropora decline throughout the Caribbean may > qualify that genus and all of its species to endangered status. I have > seen some recent declines in Porites and to a lesser extent Dichocoenia > but some of the other species you have listed I do not think qualify. > Most notably is Dendrogyra cylindricus. While I know of no region or > reef in the Caribbean where it has ever been abundant, it is remarkably > common. Most reefs have a little of that species and most areas I've > worked throughout the Bahamas, eastern and western Caribbean seem to have > healthy colonies. I suspect you do not want a list of corals that happen > to have always had low abundance. > > It will be relatively easy to query the Atlantic and Gulf Reefs Rapid > Assessment data sets to see if higher than average mortality rates are > showing up for the species you list below (see: > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/agra/agra1.html). In April many of us will be > assembling in Fort Lauderdale to present data on the condition of > Caribbean reefs, perhaps you could get a consensus of opinions at that > time (see: http://www.nova.edu/ocean/ncri/cfp_1.html). > > Good luck in your efforts. > > Bob Steneck > > > >We have also examined several other western Atlantic coral species that might > >merit inclusion as Candidate species. They were not included in the Federal > >Register Notice since the information available was incomplete. They > >include: > > > >Acropora prolifera > >Dendrogyra cylindricus - pillar coral > >Dichocoenia stokessi > >Oculina varicosa > > > >Other species, such as the Porites porites complex, P. astreoides, the > >Montastraea annularis complex, M. cavernosa, Diploria strigosa, D. > >clivosa, and > >D. labyrinthiformis appear to have undergone some declines at certain > >sites, but > >do not appear as threatened as the Acropora spp, at this time. > > > ---------------------------- > Robert S. Steneck, Ph.D. > Professor, School of Marine Sciences > University of Maine > Darling Marine Center > Walpole, ME 04573 > 207 - 563 - 3146 ext. 233 > e-mail: Steneck at Maine.EDU > > The School of Marine Sciences Web site: > http://www.ume.maine.edu/~marine/marine.html > > From yfadlal at kfupm.edu.sa Tue Feb 23 07:01:14 1999 From: yfadlal at kfupm.edu.sa (Yusef Fadlalla) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 15:01:14 +0300 Subject: Red Sea-Reef Status Message-ID: <36D2988A.1913CB8B@kfupm.edu.sa> A one page report on the status of coral reef surveys on the Red Sea coast of Saudi Arabia is posted at: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/bulls/red-sea.html. Fringing coastal and offshore reefs in Rabigh (22?N, central Red Sea) were devastated by recent bleaching and subsequent mortality of soft and hard corals during the summer and fall of 1998. In the south, at Jizan (16?N) where nearshore coastal areas are dominated by mudflats and mangroves, intensive trawling and fishing activities in recent years, apparently have resutled in catastrophic destruction of offshore reef corals. Yusef Fadlallah Center for Environment and Water KFUPM Dhahran, 31261 Saudi Arabia Offshore reefs in the south were apparently destroyed by intensive trawling activities in recent years. The nearshore coastline in the south is dominated by mudflats and mangroves. Surveys in both locations covered 50-75 km of latitude distance. Yusef Fadlallah Center for Environment and Water Research Institute - King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals Dhahran 31261, Saudi Arabia From mdyoulgerov at ocean.nos.noaa.gov Tue Feb 23 09:20:48 1999 From: mdyoulgerov at ocean.nos.noaa.gov (Dyoulgerov, Milen) Date: 23 Feb 1999 09:20:48 -0500 Subject: request for assistance Message-ID: <199902231454.OAA39281@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Coral List Members, I am writing to request information on ship groundings and/or ship = anchorings that have damaged coral reefs anywhere in the world. I am = requesting this information as justification for a proposal to uniformly = depict coral reefs, and possibly marine protected areas, on navigational = charts. My office, the International Program Office of the National Ocean Service = of NOAA, is preparing a proposal to the International Hydrographic = Organization for the adoption of a specification requiring uniform = mandatory depiction of coral reefs and, possibly marine protected areas. = In order to build a large support base for the proposal we hope to be = able to present as many examples as possible from the Caribbean region = (outside of the US) of coral reef damage due to ship groundings/salvage = and ship anchoring. Examples from other parts of the world will also be = most helpful. The basic data that we need is some or all of the following: - place/time of the incidents, - name/size of the ship (if available), - area/extend of the damage (anecdotal or, even better, environmental and = economic assessment), and - remarks on the causes of the incidents. At the end of this message I am attaching an example of data on ship = anchoring that we have obtained for the U.S. I will be very grateful for = whatever elements of similar data that you can forward to me. Thank you very much for your assistance, Milen Dyoulgerov Marine Affairs Specialist International Program Office National Ocean Service --------------------------------------------------------------------- Year Vessel Type Anchoring Site Remarks 1994 MANA Panamanian West FG Bank Reef or protected area Freighter nodule terrace not indicated on chart --------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------------------------------ From sjl3 at duke.edu Mon Feb 22 11:02:24 1999 From: sjl3 at duke.edu (Sean Lyman) Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 11:02:24 -0500 (EST) Subject: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List Message-ID: <199902231448.OAA39166@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Good morning: The CORALations folks bring up a good point about classification of the entire coral reef system as endangered, but I think it's a mistake to so quickly dismiss listing of a single species. I do not disagree with their points, but I do think that listing and protection of a single species can be useful. Doing what is necessary to protect a single species (or genus) or coral is going to have a positive effect on the entire system, something I've heard referred to as an "umbrella" of protection. The Endangered Species Act in the US certainly has problems, but the listing and protection of charismatic megafauna has often had trickle-down effects on equally-endangered ecosystems in which they live. I think that we are a long way from the political power to implement an endangered communities act, and therefore should not be shy about using the tools at our disposal. Declaring Acropora as endangered will increase awareness about the decline of the coral reef ecosystems, and steps taken to protect Acropora will most likely benefit at least other corals and at best the entire system. Cheers, Sean ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Sean J. Lyman Duke University Marine Laboratory sjl3 at duke.edu 135 Duke Marine Lab Road sean.lyman at duke.edu Beaufort, NC 28516 USA Phone: (252) 504-7565 Fax: (252) 504-7648 From bcausey at ocean.nos.noaa.gov Tue Feb 23 11:32:39 1999 From: bcausey at ocean.nos.noaa.gov (Causey, B.) Date: 23 Feb 1999 11:32:39 -0500 Subject: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List Message-ID: Some food for thought: Although I am supportive of listing Acropora spp for all the reasons that have been discussed over the past week or so, I too have some comments. The only reason I mention this here is that a few of the comments such as the one from Sean raise some good points about a community approach to protection. Due to the wide range of threats and many issues facing South Florida, EPA and the USFWS have been developing a Multi-species Recovery Plan instead of using the ESA in a species by species approach. We have in the neighborhood of 82 species of threatened or endangered species and the USFWS has produced a draft plan to comprehensively look at the problems. I agree that we should move forward with this listing of Acropora spp to heighten the protection, thus the awareness that there is a serious problem throughout the range of this genus in the Atlantic and Caribbean, but realize that a long-range goal of a multi=species approach should be kept in mind. Cheers, Billy Causey ________________________________________________________ Cc: Coral-List From: Sean Lyman on Tue, Feb 23, 1999 10:46 AM Subject: Re: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List RFC Header:Received: by ocean.nos.noaa.gov with ADMIN;23 Feb 1999 10:46:00 -0500 Received: by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (980427.SGI.8.8.8/930416.SGI) for coral-list-outgoing id OAA39166; Tue, 23 Feb 1999 14:48:59 GMT Message-Id: <199902231448.OAA39166 at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 11:02:24 -0500 (EST) From: Sean Lyman To: CORALations cc: Coral-List Subject: Re: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List Sender: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Precedence: bulk Good morning: The CORALations folks bring up a good point about classification of the entire coral reef system as endangered, but I think it's a mistake to so quickly dismiss listing of a single species. I do not disagree with their points, but I do think that listing and protection of a single species can be useful. Doing what is necessary to protect a single species (or genus) or coral is going to have a positive effect on the entire system, something I've heard referred to as an "umbrella" of protection. The Endangered Species Act in the US certainly has problems, but the listing and protection of charismatic megafauna has often had trickle-down effects on equally-endangered ecosystems in which they live. I think that we are a long way from the political power to implement an endangered communities act, and therefore should not be shy about using the tools at our disposal. Declaring Acropora as endangered will increase awareness about the decline of the coral reef ecosystems, and steps taken to protect Acropora will most likely benefit at least other corals and at best the entire system. Cheers, Sean ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Sean J. Lyman Duke University Marine Laboratory sjl3 at duke.edu 135 Duke Marine Lab Road sean.lyman at duke.edu Beaufort, NC 28516 USA Phone: (252) 504-7565 Fax: (252) 504-7648 From ccc at coralcay.demon.co.uk Tue Feb 23 14:03:25 1999 From: ccc at coralcay.demon.co.uk (Coral Cay Conservation) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 19:03:25 +0000 Subject: Commercial sponges Message-ID: <36D2FB7B.A0B9774D@coralcay.demon.co.uk> Dear coral-listers, Dr Heather Hall (London Zoo) urgently needs a photograph of a commercially harvested sponge (either Spongia officinalis, Spongis germanica or Hippospongia lachne) in its natural environment. The photograph is required for a new educational exhibit at the zoo. Any photograph would be fully credited. Please note that anyone who can help should contact Heather directly at h.hall at ucl.ac.uk. Thanks, Alastair Harborne. -- Coral Cay Conservation. 154 Clapham Park Road, London, SW4 7DE, UK Tel: +44-(0)171-498-6248 Fax: +44-(0)171-498-8447 WWW: http://www.coralcay.org/ "Providing resources to help sustain livelihoods and alleviate poverty through the protection, restoration and management of coral reefs and tropical forests." From corals at caribe.net Tue Feb 23 13:52:01 1999 From: corals at caribe.net (CORALations) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 14:52:01 -0400 Subject: Fw: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List Message-ID: <199902231902.PAA25494@mail.caribe.net> Dear Dr. Precht: I apologize to you and others on the list if what I wrote was not clear...I did not mean in any way to imply that we should abandon the endangered species act or any other legal avenue of protection people have struggled for years to establish in order to embrace what you described as a "shot gun" approach to coral reef conservation. Further, when I was referring to the interconnectedness of species in such an ecosystem I was not only referring to other coral species, but other reef associated species of plants and animals. The point on which I was trying generate a professional discussion stems from ever increasing frustrations in finding "real time" solutions to coral reef conservation problems. I posed the question...could another more holistic approach to reef conservation legislation be argued at this time.......based on what scientists have documented about the interdependence or interconnectedness of species within this ecosystem? Am I correct in interpreting your response to this question as "no" when you wrote: "Well, I think the data tend to argue against these systems being interconnected (i.e. tightly integrated) " By systems, do you mean species within the system? If I am interpreting this correctly, it contradicts what I understand about the co-evolution of species within ecosystems and the importance of conserving species biodiversity. This is of concern to me since this is what I attempt to convey as a "grass roots" educator to the general public about reef systems. Please clarify if I am misinterpreting your comment...it may well have been meant only in relation to Acropora and the lack of data supporting any connection between the decline of other coral species in relation to Acropora declines. Any information you, or anyone on the list can send, is always greatly appreciated. Thanks to the Langs who wrote: "In fact an ecosystem approach to species conservation has been our theoretical underpinning since about 20 years ago when the Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic Fishery Management Councils collaborated on a Fishery Management Plan for Coral and Coral Reefs. The "management unit" here was defined as being composed of about 400 species of fire corals, soft corals, gorgonians, black corals and stony corals. At the time, declaring that its maximum sustainable yield was "incalculable", and that its principal value was in "nonconsumptive uses" certainly was an unusual approach to fishery management!" I had no idea this approach was being taken with any FMP......let alone 20 years ago and plead ignorant! Dr. Precht also wrote: "Although I am in agreement with you that both corals and coral reefs need vigilant protection because they are all at some level of risk, especially at the hands of man coupled with natural disturbances". I believe we should, in the face of what may be considered time constraints on the survival of this ecosystem, carefully scrutinize past conservation management failures and keep our minds open to innovative and more aggressive practices. Please don?t think this statement reflects ignorance about social pressures which govern reef and fish legislation, however, these comments come from Puerto Rico where fishermen from the municipal island of Culebra have been requesting the government establish a Marine Fishery Reserve since 1980 and although final legislation has been drafted for over a year and a half...still awaits final approval from the local government. If the cost to society is the entire ecosystem...maybe we could justify the discussion of more aggressive or comprehensive management strategies? I have trouble defining the pursuit of any legislative action as being "a shot gun approach" as you stated. Legislative channels often take time and are open for meaningful public participation in the form of public hearings etc...........at least they are where you live. Indeed, the broad definition given to coral reef ecosystem in Clinton?s executive order 13089, must be at least some cause for concern to the many "hired gun" consultants whose job it appears is to protect big business and government from the added expense of functioning in an environmentally responsible manner. We should, however, pay close attention and note if even this broad definition given to coral reef ecosystems can effectively be used to contribute to the conservation of these marine systems? For example, much of the money or re-allocation of federal funds associated with this executive order is being focused on mapping and monitoring. Should we be concerned that 20 years from now, scientist may be reviewing what may then be historic information of where the living reefs once were? Should we be concerned that in 20 years scientists may be discussing how hard they "tried" to conserve these systems through the rationalization that the first step must be lengthy mapping and monitoring? Will there be any satisfaction in clearly and empirically demonstrating that these systems were in fact destroyed by multiple anthropogenic stressors ? Do current approaches to coral reef conservation management and associated fund allocation warrant closer evaluation with respect to their potential effective contribution toward meeting conservation related objectives given the rate of system degradation? Could not this money be better spent addressing, for example, more controversial water quality issues? Sincerely, Mary Ann Lucking Project Coordinator CORALations Amapola 14, Suite 901 Isla Verde, PR 00979 787-791-7372 corals at caribe.net > From: Precht,Bill > To: corals at caribe.net > Subject: FW: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List > Date: Monday, February 22, 1999 3:20 PM > > > CORALations: > > > I read with great interest your note to Tom H. regarding the inclusion of > > Acropora and exclusion of other coral species on the E&T Species list. > > > > You state "based on what we know about the interconnectedness of species > > in such an ecosystem" that we need to look at more than just the > > acroporids, even at the ecosystem as a whole. > > > > Well, I think the data tend to argue against these systems being > > interconnected (i.e. tightly integrated) - > > > > The Caribbean wide demise of acroporids over the last two decades has not > > been related to the collapse of other coral species. In cases where other > > corals have declined, it has been for other reasons not related to the > > mortality of the acroporids (white-band disease epizootic and related > > necrosis). The data clearly show the acroporids to be at risk. This is > > not so for all coral species in the Caribbean/western Atlantic. The > > reproductive strategy (poor sexual recruitment success) will not help the > > acroporids recover anytime soon. > > > > I believe it is > > not prudent or a best management practice to use your shotgun approach > > listing the whole ecosystem as endangered. Local extirpation of the > > acroporids has already occurred in some populations and there is a serious > > risk that in the face of continuing disturbances that we may lose the > > whole lot. I would love to discuss this in greater detail if you would > > like. I will send you a copy of some recent publications that I hope you > > may find interesting.... > > > Sincerely yours, > > > Bill > > > > William F. Precht > > Natural Resources Manager > > LAW Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc. > > 5845 NW 158th Street > > Miami Lakes, FL 33014 > > ph (305) 826-5588 x206 > > fax (305) 826-1799 > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: CORALations [SMTP:corals at caribe.net] > > Sent: Monday, February 22, 1999 8:59 AM > > To: Coral-List > > Subject: Re: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List > > > > Based on what we know about the interconnectedness of species in such an > > ecosystem, how can we still be selecting individual species for protection > > and ignoring others...For example..saying Acropora would qualify as > > endangered due to declines throughout the Caribbean does not provide > > sollutions for impacts to other species of coral that result from this > > decline. Could reef scientists possibly make rational arguments for > > considering the entire ecosystem as endangered ...including commercially > > valuable fish and shellfish which play a role in nutrient distribution and > > recycling etc.? > > It seems that the way these systems have evolved is more complicated than > > mere % distributions of individual species and if we are going to spend > > time and energy trying to protect them could we possibly shoot for a > > legislative solution which effectively recognizes this? > > I have concerns about scientists becoming too conservative in the manner > > in > > which they convey impacts to the reef in an effort to propell small, less > > constroversial solutions to society when these solutions may simply not be > > effective. Look how we've bungled and continue to bungle marine fishery > > legislation in order to propell small paletable bits of legislation often > > too little, too late...rarely complied to or enforced. > > > > "The problems we have today, will not be solved by thinking the way we > > thought when we created them".... Albert Einstein > > ---------- > > > From: Bob Steneck > > > To: Tom Hourigan ; Coral List > > > > > Subject: Re: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List > > > Date: Saturday, February 20, 1999 1:46 PM > > > > > > Dear Tom, > > > > > > It seems to me that the Acropora decline throughout the Caribbean may > > > qualify that genus and all of its species to endangered status. I have > > > seen some recent declines in Porites and to a lesser extent Dichocoenia > > > but some of the other species you have listed I do not think qualify. > > > Most notably is Dendrogyra cylindricus. While I know of no region or > > > reef in the Caribbean where it has ever been abundant, it is remarkably > > > common. Most reefs have a little of that species and most areas I've > > > worked throughout the Bahamas, eastern and western Caribbean seem to > > have > > > > > healthy colonies. I suspect you do not want a list of corals that > > happen > > > > > to have always had low abundance. > > > > > > It will be relatively easy to query the Atlantic and Gulf Reefs Rapid > > > Assessment data sets to see if higher than average mortality rates are > > > showing up for the species you list below (see: > > > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/agra/agra1.html). In April many of us will > > be > > > > > assembling in Fort Lauderdale to present data on the condition of > > > Caribbean reefs, perhaps you could get a consensus of opinions at that > > > time (see: http://www.nova.edu/ocean/ncri/cfp_1.html). > > > > > > Good luck in your efforts. > > > > > > Bob Steneck > > > > > > > > > >We have also examined several other western Atlantic coral species that > > might > > > >merit inclusion as Candidate species. They were not included in the > > Federal > > > >Register Notice since the information available was incomplete. They > > > >include: > > > > > > > >Acropora prolifera > > > >Dendrogyra cylindricus - pillar coral > > > >Dichocoenia stokessi > > > >Oculina varicosa > > > > > > > >Other species, such as the Porites porites complex, P. astreoides, the > > > >Montastraea annularis complex, M. cavernosa, Diploria strigosa, D. > > > >clivosa, and > > > >D. labyrinthiformis appear to have undergone some declines at certain > > > >sites, but > > > >do not appear as threatened as the Acropora spp, at this time. > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------- > > > Robert S. Steneck, Ph.D. > > > Professor, School of Marine Sciences > > > University of Maine > > > Darling Marine Center > > > Walpole, ME 04573 > > > 207 - 563 - 3146 ext. 233 > > > e-mail: Steneck at Maine.EDU > > > > > > The School of Marine Sciences Web site: > > > http://www.ume.maine.edu/~marine/marine.html > > > > > > From lfisher at co.broward.fl.us Tue Feb 23 14:59:02 1999 From: lfisher at co.broward.fl.us (LOUIS FISHER) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 14:59:02 -0500 Subject: NCRI conference field trips Message-ID: An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: not available Url: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/19990223/b45752c4/attachment.pl From kenyon_b_mobley at gasou.edu Tue Feb 23 17:03:18 1999 From: kenyon_b_mobley at gasou.edu (kenyon mobley) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 17:03:18 -0500 Subject: ESA Message-ID: <199902232305.XAA39841@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Food (or fodder) for thought about the endangered species act vs. ecosystem approach. >>Published Saturday, February 20, 1999, in the Miami Herald >>------------------------------------------------------------ >> >>Scientists sound the alarm for rare, tiny marine critter >> >>Is there room for lowly, microscopic marine critters on the marquee list of >>America's endangered species, next to the popular manatees, Florida >>panthers and bald eagles? >> >>A coalition of scientists and conservationists is calling the question. >>They are asking the federal government to grant endangered species status >>to 11 species and a new genus of bryozoans found nowhere else but on a >>large sand bar off St. Lucie County. >> >>The marine animals are in immediate danger of extinction, their advocates >>say, because the Army Corps of Engineers plans to mine sand from Capron >>Shoal, where they live, to widen 2.3 miles of beach south of Fort Pierce >>Inlet. >> >>The $6.3 million project is expected to start late next week -- unless the >>National Marine Fisheries Service, which lists endangered marine plants and >>animals, steps in. >> >>The service must step carefully. Listing the bryozoans could have >>implications for other beach-building projects that Florida uses to pump up >>its prime tourist draws. >> >>But not considering them for protection might violate one of the nation's >>most important environmental laws, says attorney Eric Glitzenstein, who >>represents the bryozoans' advocates. >> >>Quoting the >>Endangered<< >>Species<< >>Act<<, he says: "From the >>narrowest point of view, it is in the best interest of mankind to minimize >>the losses of genetic variations. . . . They are potential resources. They >>are keys to puzzles which we cannot solve, and may provide answers to >>questions which we have not yet learned to ask. >> >>A bryozoan is a tiny, invertebrate marine animal that can live its entire >>life on a single grain of sand. >> >>Judith Winston, who co-discovered the Capron Shoal bryozoan colonies 14 >>years ago with a scientist from Denmark, argued in a letter to the >>fisheries service that the species will become extinct -- and with them the >>chemical secrets she says might help battle cancer. >> >>"These unique bryozoans belong to the same order taxonomically as the >>bryozoan species which is the source of a potent anti-cancer agent, >>Bryostatin 1, wrote Winston, the research director at the Virginia Museum >>of Natural History. "Bryostatin 1 derives from the bryozoan Bugula species >>. . . which is also present in the currently rich biotic community of >>Capron Shoal. >> >>"The medicinal properties of the newly discovered bryozoans have not yet >>been explored, and if the species do not receive emergency listing >>protection, the opportunity to conduct such research may be lost forever. >> >>There are about 5,000 species of bryozoans, whose name means "moss animals. >>In his book, Land From the Sea: The Geologic Story of South Florida, marine >>scientist John Edward Hoffmeister says bryozoans grow together to form >>knobby colonies that can be a foot or more in diameter. They are higher on >>the scale of life than corals, he says, but not anywhere near as pretty. >> >>Winston, fellow scientist Brian Killday, the St. Lucie County Audubon >>Society, the St. Lucie Waterfront Council and the St. Lucie County >>Conservation Alliance asked the fisheries service and its parent, the >>Department of Commerce, on Feb. 11 for the emergency listing for bryozoans. >> >>The listing would be temporary, lasting up to 240 days -- or long enough >>for the federal agency to determine whether or not the species warrant >>inclusion among 40 plants and animals listed by the fisheries service as >>endangered or threatened. The proposal asks that the corps not begin >>dredging until the service decides on the emergency listing request. >> >>Gordon Helm, service spokesman, said the agency was studying the request, >>which he described as difficult to evaluate given the size of the species >>in question and complications of searching for it on other shoals. >> >>The corps of engineers, meanwhile, overlooked the bryozoans entirely in its >>planning. Jacqueline Griffin, spokeswoman for the corps' Jacksonville >>district, said the agency had "no knowledge of the bryozoans when the >>project began. >> >>When scientists and conservationists pointed out the omission of the >>bryozoans, the agency responded: "The effect on these and other species >>inhabiting the shoal should be minimal. >> >>Winston says the corps' response rests on sheer speculation since >>scientific research has never been conducted to find these particular >>bryozoans on other shoals nearby. She has found them only on the shallowest >>part of Capron, where the corps plans to dredge. >> >>And fellow researcher Eckart Hakansson of Denmark has never seen those >>species in his work in the Caribbean, Philippines and Australia. >> >>"Whether or not bryozoans exist elsewhere . . . is an important question >>that must be answered before [the corps] begins dredging the only known >>habitat of these unique organisms, she wrote. >> >>Of course, many people scoff at the idea of holding up a >>multimillion-dollar beach-building project while scientists search for >>bryozoans, but ecologists who've dedicated their careers to preserving >>>>biodiversity<< say that the lowliest deserve protection. >> >>"Some of these tiny, unloved marine organisms are proving hugely important >>in the pharmaceutical industry for the compounds they're finding there, >>said Stuart Pimm, a prominent University of Tennessee scientist. >> >>"And that's only one reason to protect these animals. The other is that >>they're found only in one place. By that, they're telling us that something >>unique, special and wonderful is going on there. >> >> >>------------------------------------------------------------ >>NewsHound is a service of Knight Ridder. >>For more information, write to: speak at newshound.com >> >>This material is copyrighted and may not be republished without permission >>of the originating newspaper or wire service. >>------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> >>For more information, visit the NewsHound website at http://www.newshound.com >>or send an email to speak at hound.com. >> >> >> >>Defenders of Wildlife >>1101 14th St. NW, Suite 1400 >>Washington, DC 20005 >>(202)-682-9400 ext. 283 >>fax: (202)-682-1331 >>LHood at Defenders.org Kenyon B. Mobley Georgia Southern University Department of Biology Statesboro, GA 30460-8042 http://www.bio.gasou.edu/bio-home/GRADS/kenyonwebpage/kmhome.html Office (912) 681-5963 Fax: (912) 681-0845 From carlson at soest.hawaii.edu Tue Feb 23 18:48:38 1999 From: carlson at soest.hawaii.edu (Bruce Carlson) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 13:48:38 -1000 Subject: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List Message-ID: <005001be5f87$0c7265c0$22477aa6@uu.waquarium.org> I would like to note that several public aquariums are raising Acropora cervicornis in captivity with excellent results (the Florida Aquarium has some in their coral exhibit and it has grown considerably in the past year). I certainly hope that the means will be found to keep A. cervicornis and A. palmata alive and well in their natural environments, but if it really appears that they are heading towards extinction, it would probably be worthwhile for a few public aquariums to maintain some "genetic diversity" in aquariums, for possible reintroduction to the wild when conditions improve. Based on what we know about keeping Acropora spp. in aquariums, they could probably be maintained almost indefinitely, especially if enough institutions maintain them. We have considered this here in Hawaii to include A. cervicornis among our collection of Pacific acroporids, but we are very reluctant to bring in any Caribbean species that might accidentally also bring in a pathogen (if indeed that is what is causing the problem in the Caribbean). If public aquariums get involved, it will have to be those on the mainland U.S. Just an option for consideration, but a viable option nonetheless. Bruce Carlson Waikiki Aquarium -----Original Message----- From: Sean Lyman To: CORALations Cc: Coral-List Date: Tuesday, February 23, 1999 5:28 AM Subject: Re: Acropora spp. - Candidates for Endangered Species List >Good morning: > >The CORALations folks bring up a good point about classification of the >entire coral reef system as endangered, but I think it's a mistake to so >quickly dismiss listing of a single species. I do not disagree with >their points, but I do think that listing and protection of a single >species can be useful. > >Doing what is necessary to protect a single species (or genus) or coral >is going to have a positive effect on the entire system, something I've >heard referred to as an "umbrella" of protection. The Endangered Species >Act in the US certainly has problems, but the listing and protection of >charismatic megafauna has often had trickle-down effects on >equally-endangered ecosystems in which they live. > >I think that we are a long way from the political power to implement an >endangered communities act, and therefore should not be shy about using >the tools at our disposal. Declaring Acropora as endangered will >increase awareness about the decline of the coral reef ecosystems, and >steps taken to protect Acropora will most likely benefit at least other >corals and at best the entire system. > >Cheers, >Sean > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > >Sean J. Lyman >Duke University Marine Laboratory sjl3 at duke.edu >135 Duke Marine Lab Road sean.lyman at duke.edu >Beaufort, NC 28516 USA > >Phone: (252) 504-7565 >Fax: (252) 504-7648 > > From paul.holthus at aquariumcouncil.org Tue Feb 23 20:56:58 1999 From: paul.holthus at aquariumcouncil.org (Paul Holthus) Date: Tue, 23 Feb 1999 15:56:58 -1000 Subject: Certification for Aquarium Industry: Internet Mtg Message-ID: <4.0.1.19990223155339.00dfbc90@mail.pixi.com> Subject: MAC-MASNA Internet Meeting on Certification for the Aquarium Industry Dear Coral List; The Marine Aquarium Council (MAC) and the Marine Aquarium Societies of North America (MASNA) would like to invite you to participate in an Internet "Town Meeting" on certification for the marine aquarium industry. This will be held on Wednesday, 24 February 1998 beginning at 7:00 PM US Central Time. By way of background: Marine aquarium hobbyists are, of course, the driving force behind the marine aquarium industry and thus a key constituency in the MAC efforts to develop certification and labeling. MASNA is the umbrella organization for the aquarium hobbyist clubs in North America, which is the largest market for marine aquarium organisms. MASNA is on the Interim MAC Board of Directors and Dennis Gallagher, recent past president of MASNA, is their representative. MAC held a multi-stakeholders workshop on the development of certification and labeling in the Philippines in December 1998. Dennis participated in the workshop and made a presentation on the aquarium hobbyist's perspective. This was Dennis' first trip to the Philippines and he was able to visit a collecting area as well as several export facilities. MASNA has quickly become significantly involved in getting the word out about MAC to hobbyists. Dennis posted an article on his Philippine's trip on the MASNA site (www.masna.org) that generated considerable discussion amongst hobbyists. In order to respond to the interest and questions arising amongst the hobbyists, MASNA and Dennis have organized an Internet "Town Meeting" chat on MAC and certification. In keeping with the MAC transparent multi-stakeholder approach, we have a wide range of stakeholder input and perspectives available to the hobbyists at the "Town Meeting". A list of the proposed panelists and "perspective" areas for each is presented below. (Some may not be able to participate due to technical difficulties in connecting.) If you are interested in sitting in on the meeting, please take the time to visit the MAC website (www.aquariumcouncil.org) to ensure that you are familiar with the background to MAC and certification and visit the MASNA website (www.masna.org) to read Dennis' Philippines Trip Report. The announcement for the "Town Meeting" at www.masna.org will guide you to instructions for participating in the meeting. Please keep in mind that the objective of the Town Meeting is to generate awareness and understanding among the hobbyists of the difference perspectives on improving the quality and sustainability of the marine aquarium industry through certification and labeling. With best regards, Paul Holthus Director, MAC MASNA-MAC INTERNET "TOWN MEETING" Time: Wednesday, 24 February 1998; beginning at 7:00 PM US Central Time. Objective: Generate awareness and understanding among the hobbyists of the difference perspectives on improving the quality and sustainability of the marine aquarium industry through certification and labeling. Panel Topic: Developing Certification and Labeling for the Marine Aquarium Trade: Perspectives from the Industry and other Stakeholders Moderator: Dennis Gallagher, 1997-8 President, MASNA Proposed Panel: Paul Holthus, MAC: Standards, certification, and labeling Vaughan Pratt, Int'l Marinelife Alliance: Philippine collector's perspective Pete Basabe, Dive Hawaii: Hawaii collector's perspective Jaime Baquero, Ocean Voice Int'l: Community level perspective Lolita Ty, Aquascapes/Phil. Tropical Fish Export Ass'n: Philippine exporter's perspective Antonio (Toti) Turalba, Asian Marine Resource: Philippine exporter's perspective Phil Shane, Quality Marine: Importer/wholesaler's perspective Rick Oellers, Amer. Marinelife Dealers Ass'n: Retailer's perspective Charles Delbeek, Waikiki Aquarium: Public aquarium's perspective Mon Romero, World Wildlife Fund Philippines: Conservation organization's perspective Marea Hatziolos, World Bank: International institution's perspective Paul Holthus Executive Director Marine Aquarium Council 3035 Hibiscus Dr., Honolulu, Hawaii USA 96815 Phone: (+1 808) 923-3254 Fax: (+1 808) 923-6023 Email: paul.holthus at aquariumcouncil.org Website: www.aquariumcouncil.org From keryea at mail.nsysu.edu.tw Wed Feb 24 03:50:39 1999 From: keryea at mail.nsysu.edu.tw (K. Soong) Date: Wed, 24 Feb 1999 16:50:39 +0800 Subject: spawning Message-ID: <199902241304.NAA44947@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Coral listers: Do you know which sex release gametes first in any broadcasting species? Or do you know any case of spawning induction by conspecifics in corals? Please help me by responding to my address. Thank you very much. Sincerely, Keryea Soong From reef at bellsouth.net Thu Feb 25 16:03:47 1999 From: reef at bellsouth.net (Reef Relief) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 16:03:47 -0500 Subject: Acropora palmata discussions/coral nursery Message-ID: <36D5BAB3.972@bellsouth.net> Reef Relief has released the first year report on the Coral Nursery Project at Western Sambo Reef in the Florida Keys. The report outlines the efforts to stabilize loose fragments of Acropora plamata onto "Acropora rosettes", a design by restoration biologist Harold Hudson, in this cooperative project with the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. Storm-damaged fragments of Acropora palmata were secured with hydraulic cement onto concrete landscaping pads. The effort was launched to save Acropora palmata that was becoming increasingly rare in Keys waters after substantial damage to populations at Western Sambo Reef as a result of the Ground Hog Day Storm of February 1998. The rosettes were not cemented down at first because the plan was to move them to a boat grounding site. As a result, they were damaged during Hurricane Georges but quickly re-established by a Reef Relief team led by Craig Quirolo. This time, they were cemented to the ocean floor and survived through Tropical Storm Mitch. Unfortunately, Acropora palmata colonies at Western Sambo, Rock Key and other Keys reefs suffered substantial losses as a result of these successive storms. REEF RELIEF recommends and encourages the inclusion of all corals in the Acropora genus found in the Caribbean Basin for further protection, including listing through the U.S. Endangered Species Act. The health and abundance of Palmata colonies we have photo-documented in Cuba, Jamaica, and Honduras are being compromised as well. For a copy of the 70-page color report, contact Reef Relief by e-mail, telephone (305) 294-3100, fax (305) 293-9515, or write P.O. Box 430, Key West, Fl. 33041. The report is available on our website, located at www.reefrelief.org. From JAAP_W at epic7.dep.state.fl.us Fri Feb 26 05:07:06 1999 From: JAAP_W at epic7.dep.state.fl.us (Walt Jaap STP) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:07:06 GMT Subject: Acropora spp., endangered Message-ID: <199902261007.KAA58591@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> [Moderator's note: this letter to Tom Hourigan from Walt Jaap was reprinted with permission from Walt for the purpose of encouraging discussion and contrasting or complementary viewpoints.] 22 February, 1999 Dr. Thomas F. Hourigan Marine Biodiversity Coordinator Office of Protected Resources, NOAAF/PR National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service 1315 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 tom.hourigan at noaa.gov Dear Dr. Hourigan: I am responding to your internet request about Acropora spp. and other Scleractinian species for inclusion as endangered or threatened species. We have encountered this option several times from different groups over the years; and have looked at the option to see if it was reasonable, possible, and would it do a better job protecting corals than the existing statutes and management regimes. We have concluded that it is not the best approach for several reasons. Firstly, to prove that a coral is threatened or at risk throughout the Caribbean, Florida, Bahamas, Bermuda, and places in between is costly, time consuming, and might be very difficult to prove the case. Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other statutes and management regimes? I would like to think so. In Florida, we have a state statute that protects all Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and Gorgonia spp from harvest, being sold in a commercial establishment, and from destruction on the sea floor. This statute has been in effect since the mid 1970s. At the federal level the most extensive coral protection is found under the Magnuson Act: The Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic Fisherie s Councils cosponsored the work that resulted in the Coral and Coral Reef Fishery Management Plan. This plan parallels the Florida statute, protecting the Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and Gorgonia spp. This management regime was recently incorporated into the Essential Fish Habitat Plan by the Fishery Management Councils. The Department of Interior manages two National Parks (Biscayne and Dry Tortugas) in which all corals are protected. The State of Florida and NOAA are the trustees of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary which includes all the reefs outside the National Park boundaries from Fowey Rocks to west of Dry Tortugas, again the regulations protect corals and reefs. When anthropogenic events occur, the trustees have successfully prosecuted responsible parties or have negotiated effective restoration and mon itoring plans on the sites. Settlements were in the range of millions of dollars. Would the endangered species act have provided immunity from these anthropogenic disturbances? I do not think it would have. Natural events such as hurricanes, ENSO related bleaching episodes, and global warming are still occurring in spite of the efforts that the coral protection statutes and management regimes. Would additional protective legislation such as the endangered species program provide more protection to the reef resources? I am skeptical that adding a few Scleractinia corals to the endangered and threatened species list would be of benefit. Coral populations are very dynamic. In the case of Acropora palmata (Lamarck, 1816) there is good evidence that it has gone through boom and bust dynamics for quite some time. In 1882, Alexander Agassiz reported 44 hectares of A. palmata at Dry Tortugas. In 1982, Gary Davis reported that, A. palmata coverage declined to 0.6 hectares, ten years later we measured the remnant population and noted little change. The decline was probably caused by hurricanes and other meteorological phenomena. In retrospect, or as they claim hind sight is perfect, when the debate over the Everglades Park boundaries was first debated in the late 1940s, Gill Voss told me an initial proposal had all of the Florida Keys with the exception of Key West and Marathon included in Everglades National Park. Local politics prevailed and the end result is a highly urbanized Florida Keys in which the environmental quality has suffered from user abuse. Ah, if we could only go back in time and make it right. We recognize that your intentions are well meaning and appreciate your concern. We respectfully disagree that the corals mentioned in your communication should be considered for nomination as endangered or threatened species. We do not believe that any of the aforementioned taxa of corals could satisfy the criteria of endangered or threatened species. Since we have existing statutes and management regimes that are designed to protect corals and reefs, the proposed status would have little or no effect o n these resources. Sincerely Walter C. Jaap Associate Research Scientist Florida Marine Research Institute From JAAP_W at epic7.dep.state.fl.us Fri Feb 26 05:07:06 1999 From: JAAP_W at epic7.dep.state.fl.us (Walt Jaap STP) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 10:07:06 GMT Subject: Acropora spp., endangered Message-ID: <199902261007.KAA58591@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> [Moderator's note: this letter to Tom Hourigan from Walt Jaap was reprinted with permission from Walt for the purpose of encouraging discussion and contrasting or complementary viewpoints.] 22 February, 1999 Dr. Thomas F. Hourigan Marine Biodiversity Coordinator Office of Protected Resources, NOAAF/PR National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Marine Fisheries Service 1315 East-West Highway Silver Spring, MD 20910 tom.hourigan at noaa.gov Dear Dr. Hourigan: I am responding to your internet request about Acropora spp. and other Scleractinian species for inclusion as endangered or threatened species. We have encountered this option several times from different groups over the years; and have looked at the option to see if it was reasonable, possible, and would it do a better job protecting corals than the existing statutes and management regimes. We have concluded that it is not the best approach for several reasons. Firstly, to prove that a coral is threatened or at risk throughout the Caribbean, Florida, Bahamas, Bermuda, and places in between is costly, time consuming, and might be very difficult to prove the case. Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other statutes and management regimes? I would like to think so. In Florida, we have a state statute that protects all Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and Gorgonia spp from harvest, being sold in a commercial establishment, and from destruction on the sea floor. This statute has been in effect since the mid 1970s. At the federal level the most extensive coral protection is found under the Magnuson Act: The Gulf of Mexico and South Atlantic Fisherie s Councils cosponsored the work that resulted in the Coral and Coral Reef Fishery Management Plan. This plan parallels the Florida statute, protecting the Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and Gorgonia spp. This management regime was recently incorporated into the Essential Fish Habitat Plan by the Fishery Management Councils. The Department of Interior manages two National Parks (Biscayne and Dry Tortugas) in which all corals are protected. The State of Florida and NOAA are the trustees of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary which includes all the reefs outside the National Park boundaries from Fowey Rocks to west of Dry Tortugas, again the regulations protect corals and reefs. When anthropogenic events occur, the trustees have successfully prosecuted responsible parties or have negotiated effective restoration and mon itoring plans on the sites. Settlements were in the range of millions of dollars. Would the endangered species act have provided immunity from these anthropogenic disturbances? I do not think it would have. Natural events such as hurricanes, ENSO related bleaching episodes, and global warming are still occurring in spite of the efforts that the coral protection statutes and management regimes. Would additional protective legislation such as the endangered species program provide more protection to the reef resources? I am skeptical that adding a few Scleractinia corals to the endangered and threatened species list would be of benefit. Coral populations are very dynamic. In the case of Acropora palmata (Lamarck, 1816) there is good evidence that it has gone through boom and bust dynamics for quite some time. In 1882, Alexander Agassiz reported 44 hectares of A. palmata at Dry Tortugas. In 1982, Gary Davis reported that, A. palmata coverage declined to 0.6 hectares, ten years later we measured the remnant population and noted little change. The decline was probably caused by hurricanes and other meteorological phenomena. In retrospect, or as they claim hind sight is perfect, when the debate over the Everglades Park boundaries was first debated in the late 1940s, Gill Voss told me an initial proposal had all of the Florida Keys with the exception of Key West and Marathon included in Everglades National Park. Local politics prevailed and the end result is a highly urbanized Florida Keys in which the environmental quality has suffered from user abuse. Ah, if we could only go back in time and make it right. We recognize that your intentions are well meaning and appreciate your concern. We respectfully disagree that the corals mentioned in your communication should be considered for nomination as endangered or threatened species. We do not believe that any of the aforementioned taxa of corals could satisfy the criteria of endangered or threatened species. Since we have existing statutes and management regimes that are designed to protect corals and reefs, the proposed status would have little or no effect o n these resources. Sincerely Walter C. Jaap Associate Research Scientist Florida Marine Research Institute From susan_white at mail.fws.gov Thu Feb 25 11:25:30 1999 From: susan_white at mail.fws.gov (susan_white at mail.fws.gov) Date: Thu, 25 Feb 1999 09:25:30 -0700 Subject: More on ESA candidate spp. Message-ID: <199902261001.KAA56134@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> At the risk of beating a dead horse, may I add one more thought into the Endangered and Threatened Acropora 'listing' discussions.... Managing for E & T species, by law, is more than just the individual. The habitat that the species depends upon is a critical part of the protection. There are thousands of species (marine and terrestrial) that deserve listing because they are imperiled. Most of these species are imperiled because of anthropogenic factors, including loss of habitat or habitat degradation. With the current strong U.S. agency focus on ecosystem management -- as opposed to species management -- if a select few representative species are 'listed' and recovery actions are taken to protect the habitat and larger environment of those species; then all the other species within the habitat also benefit. That is why the concept of indicator and keystone species are so useful. It's a round about way of getting the whole system, and there are loopholes, but it can go a long way for establishing the imperiled status of the reefs. /s/ Susan _________________________________ Susan White Marine Resources Manager Florida Keys National Wildlife Refuges PO Box 430510 Big Pine Key, FL 33043 ph: 305.872.2239 fx: 305.872.3675 email: susan_white at fws.gov From corals at caribe.net Fri Feb 26 11:18:41 1999 From: corals at caribe.net (CORALations) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 12:18:41 -0400 Subject: Acropora spp., endangered Message-ID: <199902261624.MAA18722@mail.caribe.net> Dear Mr. Jaap: You wrote: " We do not believe that any of the aforementioned taxa of corals could satisfy the criteria of endangered or threatened species." Can someone discuss this criteria or possibly scan and post? How does this designation differ from appendix II listing? You wrote: "Firstly, to prove that a coral is threatened or at risk throughout the Caribbean, Florida, Bahamas, Bermuda, and places in between is costly, time consuming, and might be very difficult to prove the case." Does this mean there is no data backing compliance to ES criteria for the taxa listed? I was under the impression that this discussion originated based on evidence which suggests they fit the criteria. Are reefs considered ?shared resources? in these regions with respect to such legislation? Would, for example, a disease diagnosed in one region resulting in extensive mortality of a species of coral be enough of a cause for concern to protect the same species in other regions given that these diseases are distributed by currents, or are you saying extensive monitoring is required in each specific region? In other words, at this point in time, how much investigation actually needs to be done in order to see if criteria are met and to what regions would the protection apply? You wrote: "Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other statutes and management regimes? I would like to think so." I would like to think so too. Unfortunately, don't corals continue to decline in large part due to anthropogenic stressors? The big picture is we don't seem to be "managing" our selves very well. We can't even manage trade, let alone less direct impacts from run off etc.... Look, for example, at the large black coral galleries on St. Thomas, Cayman and Las Vegas. There's a two page magazine add that reads like a documentary in American Skies, the American Eagle magazine promoting this "art." How are permits allocated for such exploitation with so little knowledge about the "protected" species? In St. Thomas, the existence of this well publicized gallery has encourage neighboring shops to engage in the trade. Many fishermen in the DR are risking their lives to harvest this coral. My only concern about using endangered species act to protect coral is that the response to the question you posed: "Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other statutes and management regimes? would be answered as casually with "I would like to think so, they're considered endangered species." You wrote: "Would the endangered species act have provided immunity from these anthropogenic disturbances? Although, I believe you are specifically referring to groundings when you discuss "anthropogenic events" what about development related stress? Has the endangered species act been used to stop development? With respect to groundings, could the endangered species act be used to create legislation which diverts tanker traffic away from sensitive coral reef areas, minimizing future groundings and tanker related accidents? Has endangered species act ever been used to improve water quality? You wrote: "Natural events such as hurricanes, ENSO related bleaching episodes, and global warming are still occurring in spite of the efforts that the coral protection statutes and management regimes. Would additional protective legislation such as the endangered species program provide more protection to the reef resources? " I believe the answer to this depends on the proposed protective legislation. We should be using past management failures to discuss additional protective legislation. With regard to the endangered species act, I would think we can use this as another tool to minimize additional anthropogenic stress to protected corals from proposed development and water quality issues. Your ?natural events? argument better defends why we should do more....not eliminate a legislative avenue that already exists. You wrote: Coral populations are very dynamic. In the case of Acropora palmata (Lamarck, 1816) there is good evidence that it has gone through boom and bust dynamics for quite some time. Are you suggesting that no anthropogenic stressors are currently contributing to the decline of this species? I respect you for posting your arguments to the web for discussion. I also have concerns about the effectiveness of the endangered species act to protect corals. To many people, corals are just rocks, or rocks with worms. However, unlike you, I see this as a cause for concern to open discussion about more aggressive comprehensive legislation, not grounds for abandonment of laws currently on the books. Other listers have commented that by protecting one species of coral others will benefit. In my opinion, the strongest argument you present is cost - benefit. However, I feel your cost-benefit argument fails if a substantial amount of data exists which can be used to demonstrate compliance with ES criteria and other corals benefit by proximity to the species being listed. Sincerely, Mary Ann Lucking Project Coordinator CORALations Amapola 14, Suite 901 Isla Verde, PR 00979 phone/fax: 787-791-7372 corals at caribe.net > From: Walt Jaap STP > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: Acropora spp., endangered > Date: Friday, February 26, 1999 6:07 AM > > [Moderator's note: this letter to Tom Hourigan from Walt Jaap was > reprinted with permission from Walt for the purpose of encouraging > discussion and contrasting or complementary viewpoints.] > > > 22 February, 1999 > > Dr. Thomas F. Hourigan > Marine Biodiversity Coordinator > Office of Protected Resources, NOAAF/PR > National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration > National Marine Fisheries Service > 1315 East-West Highway > Silver Spring, MD 20910 > tom.hourigan at noaa.gov > > > Dear Dr. Hourigan: > > I am responding to your internet request about Acropora spp. and other > Scleractinian species for inclusion as endangered or threatened species. > We have encountered this option several times from different groups over > the years; and have looked at the option to see if it was reasonable, > possible, and would it do a better job protecting corals than the > existing statutes and management regimes. We have concluded that it is > not the best approach for several reasons. > > Firstly, to prove that a coral is threatened or at risk throughout the > Caribbean, Florida, Bahamas, Bermuda, and places in between is costly, > time consuming, and might be very difficult to prove the case. > > Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other statutes > and management regimes? I would like to think so. In Florida, we have > a state statute that protects all Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and > Gorgonia spp from harvest, being sold in a commercial establishment, and > from destruction on the sea floor. This statute has been in effect > since the mid 1970s. At the federal level the most extensive coral > protection is found under the Magnuson Act: The Gulf of Mexico and > South Atlantic Fisherie s Councils cosponsored the work that resulted in > the Coral and Coral Reef Fishery Management Plan. This plan parallels > the Florida statute, protecting the Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and > Gorgonia spp. This management regime was recently incorporated into the > Essential Fish Habitat Plan by the Fishery Management Councils. > > The Department of Interior manages two National Parks (Biscayne and Dry > Tortugas) in which all corals are protected. The State of Florida and > NOAA are the trustees of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary > which includes all the reefs outside the National Park boundaries from > Fowey Rocks to west of Dry Tortugas, again the regulations protect > corals and reefs. When anthropogenic events occur, the trustees have > successfully prosecuted responsible parties or have negotiated effective > restoration and mon itoring plans on the sites. Settlements were in the > range of millions of dollars. Would the endangered species act have > provided immunity from these anthropogenic disturbances? I do not think > it would have. > > Natural events such as hurricanes, ENSO related bleaching episodes, and > global warming are still occurring in spite of the efforts that the > coral protection statutes and management regimes. Would additional > protective legislation such as the endangered species program provide > more protection to the reef resources? I am skeptical that adding a few > Scleractinia corals to the endangered and threatened species list would > be of benefit. > > Coral populations are very dynamic. In the case of Acropora palmata > (Lamarck, 1816) there is good evidence that it has gone through boom and > bust dynamics for quite some time. In 1882, Alexander Agassiz reported > 44 hectares of A. palmata at Dry Tortugas. In 1982, Gary Davis reported > that, A. palmata coverage declined to 0.6 hectares, ten years later we > measured the remnant population and noted little change. The decline > was probably caused by hurricanes and other meteorological phenomena. > > In retrospect, or as they claim hind sight is perfect, when the debate > over the Everglades Park boundaries was first debated in the late 1940s, > Gill Voss told me an initial proposal had all of the Florida Keys with > the exception of Key West and Marathon included in Everglades National > Park. Local politics prevailed and the end result is a highly urbanized > Florida Keys in which the environmental quality has suffered from user > abuse. Ah, if we could only go back in time and make it right. > > We recognize that your intentions are well meaning and appreciate your > concern. We respectfully disagree that the corals mentioned in your > communication should be considered for nomination as endangered or > threatened species. We do not believe that any of the aforementioned > taxa of corals could satisfy the criteria of endangered or threatened > species. Since we have existing statutes and management regimes that > are designed to protect corals and reefs, the proposed status would have > little or no effect o n these resources. > > > Sincerely > > Walter C. Jaap Associate Research Scientist Florida Marine Research > Institute > > From corals at caribe.net Fri Feb 26 11:18:41 1999 From: corals at caribe.net (CORALations) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 12:18:41 -0400 Subject: Acropora spp., endangered Message-ID: <199902261624.MAA18722@mail.caribe.net> Dear Mr. Jaap: You wrote: " We do not believe that any of the aforementioned taxa of corals could satisfy the criteria of endangered or threatened species." Can someone discuss this criteria or possibly scan and post? How does this designation differ from appendix II listing? You wrote: "Firstly, to prove that a coral is threatened or at risk throughout the Caribbean, Florida, Bahamas, Bermuda, and places in between is costly, time consuming, and might be very difficult to prove the case." Does this mean there is no data backing compliance to ES criteria for the taxa listed? I was under the impression that this discussion originated based on evidence which suggests they fit the criteria. Are reefs considered ?shared resources? in these regions with respect to such legislation? Would, for example, a disease diagnosed in one region resulting in extensive mortality of a species of coral be enough of a cause for concern to protect the same species in other regions given that these diseases are distributed by currents, or are you saying extensive monitoring is required in each specific region? In other words, at this point in time, how much investigation actually needs to be done in order to see if criteria are met and to what regions would the protection apply? You wrote: "Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other statutes and management regimes? I would like to think so." I would like to think so too. Unfortunately, don't corals continue to decline in large part due to anthropogenic stressors? The big picture is we don't seem to be "managing" our selves very well. We can't even manage trade, let alone less direct impacts from run off etc.... Look, for example, at the large black coral galleries on St. Thomas, Cayman and Las Vegas. There's a two page magazine add that reads like a documentary in American Skies, the American Eagle magazine promoting this "art." How are permits allocated for such exploitation with so little knowledge about the "protected" species? In St. Thomas, the existence of this well publicized gallery has encourage neighboring shops to engage in the trade. Many fishermen in the DR are risking their lives to harvest this coral. My only concern about using endangered species act to protect coral is that the response to the question you posed: "Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other statutes and management regimes? would be answered as casually with "I would like to think so, they're considered endangered species." You wrote: "Would the endangered species act have provided immunity from these anthropogenic disturbances? Although, I believe you are specifically referring to groundings when you discuss "anthropogenic events" what about development related stress? Has the endangered species act been used to stop development? With respect to groundings, could the endangered species act be used to create legislation which diverts tanker traffic away from sensitive coral reef areas, minimizing future groundings and tanker related accidents? Has endangered species act ever been used to improve water quality? You wrote: "Natural events such as hurricanes, ENSO related bleaching episodes, and global warming are still occurring in spite of the efforts that the coral protection statutes and management regimes. Would additional protective legislation such as the endangered species program provide more protection to the reef resources? " I believe the answer to this depends on the proposed protective legislation. We should be using past management failures to discuss additional protective legislation. With regard to the endangered species act, I would think we can use this as another tool to minimize additional anthropogenic stress to protected corals from proposed development and water quality issues. Your ?natural events? argument better defends why we should do more....not eliminate a legislative avenue that already exists. You wrote: Coral populations are very dynamic. In the case of Acropora palmata (Lamarck, 1816) there is good evidence that it has gone through boom and bust dynamics for quite some time. Are you suggesting that no anthropogenic stressors are currently contributing to the decline of this species? I respect you for posting your arguments to the web for discussion. I also have concerns about the effectiveness of the endangered species act to protect corals. To many people, corals are just rocks, or rocks with worms. However, unlike you, I see this as a cause for concern to open discussion about more aggressive comprehensive legislation, not grounds for abandonment of laws currently on the books. Other listers have commented that by protecting one species of coral others will benefit. In my opinion, the strongest argument you present is cost - benefit. However, I feel your cost-benefit argument fails if a substantial amount of data exists which can be used to demonstrate compliance with ES criteria and other corals benefit by proximity to the species being listed. Sincerely, Mary Ann Lucking Project Coordinator CORALations Amapola 14, Suite 901 Isla Verde, PR 00979 phone/fax: 787-791-7372 corals at caribe.net > From: Walt Jaap STP > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: Acropora spp., endangered > Date: Friday, February 26, 1999 6:07 AM > > [Moderator's note: this letter to Tom Hourigan from Walt Jaap was > reprinted with permission from Walt for the purpose of encouraging > discussion and contrasting or complementary viewpoints.] > > > 22 February, 1999 > > Dr. Thomas F. Hourigan > Marine Biodiversity Coordinator > Office of Protected Resources, NOAAF/PR > National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration > National Marine Fisheries Service > 1315 East-West Highway > Silver Spring, MD 20910 > tom.hourigan at noaa.gov > > > Dear Dr. Hourigan: > > I am responding to your internet request about Acropora spp. and other > Scleractinian species for inclusion as endangered or threatened species. > We have encountered this option several times from different groups over > the years; and have looked at the option to see if it was reasonable, > possible, and would it do a better job protecting corals than the > existing statutes and management regimes. We have concluded that it is > not the best approach for several reasons. > > Firstly, to prove that a coral is threatened or at risk throughout the > Caribbean, Florida, Bahamas, Bermuda, and places in between is costly, > time consuming, and might be very difficult to prove the case. > > Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other statutes > and management regimes? I would like to think so. In Florida, we have > a state statute that protects all Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and > Gorgonia spp from harvest, being sold in a commercial establishment, and > from destruction on the sea floor. This statute has been in effect > since the mid 1970s. At the federal level the most extensive coral > protection is found under the Magnuson Act: The Gulf of Mexico and > South Atlantic Fisherie s Councils cosponsored the work that resulted in > the Coral and Coral Reef Fishery Management Plan. This plan parallels > the Florida statute, protecting the Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and > Gorgonia spp. This management regime was recently incorporated into the > Essential Fish Habitat Plan by the Fishery Management Councils. > > The Department of Interior manages two National Parks (Biscayne and Dry > Tortugas) in which all corals are protected. The State of Florida and > NOAA are the trustees of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary > which includes all the reefs outside the National Park boundaries from > Fowey Rocks to west of Dry Tortugas, again the regulations protect > corals and reefs. When anthropogenic events occur, the trustees have > successfully prosecuted responsible parties or have negotiated effective > restoration and mon itoring plans on the sites. Settlements were in the > range of millions of dollars. Would the endangered species act have > provided immunity from these anthropogenic disturbances? I do not think > it would have. > > Natural events such as hurricanes, ENSO related bleaching episodes, and > global warming are still occurring in spite of the efforts that the > coral protection statutes and management regimes. Would additional > protective legislation such as the endangered species program provide > more protection to the reef resources? I am skeptical that adding a few > Scleractinia corals to the endangered and threatened species list would > be of benefit. > > Coral populations are very dynamic. In the case of Acropora palmata > (Lamarck, 1816) there is good evidence that it has gone through boom and > bust dynamics for quite some time. In 1882, Alexander Agassiz reported > 44 hectares of A. palmata at Dry Tortugas. In 1982, Gary Davis reported > that, A. palmata coverage declined to 0.6 hectares, ten years later we > measured the remnant population and noted little change. The decline > was probably caused by hurricanes and other meteorological phenomena. > > In retrospect, or as they claim hind sight is perfect, when the debate > over the Everglades Park boundaries was first debated in the late 1940s, > Gill Voss told me an initial proposal had all of the Florida Keys with > the exception of Key West and Marathon included in Everglades National > Park. Local politics prevailed and the end result is a highly urbanized > Florida Keys in which the environmental quality has suffered from user > abuse. Ah, if we could only go back in time and make it right. > > We recognize that your intentions are well meaning and appreciate your > concern. We respectfully disagree that the corals mentioned in your > communication should be considered for nomination as endangered or > threatened species. We do not believe that any of the aforementioned > taxa of corals could satisfy the criteria of endangered or threatened > species. Since we have existing statutes and management regimes that > are designed to protect corals and reefs, the proposed status would have > little or no effect o n these resources. > > > Sincerely > > Walter C. Jaap Associate Research Scientist Florida Marine Research > Institute > > From fpl10 at calva.net Fri Feb 26 13:09:42 1999 From: fpl10 at calva.net (Fabrice POIRAUD-LAMBERT) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 19:09:42 +0100 (MET) Subject: Acropora palmata discussions/coral nursery Message-ID: Hi, Reef Relief Document and Initiative is really interesting according to me, and I think it should be extended to Maldives and other heavily damaged reefs : I'm just coming back from Maldives, and it's really incredible => 95% of coral coverage as been killed and SPS / LPS corals have deseappered totally in most reefs ! Many colonies has been broken and turned up side down (it happened that I returned 4 still alive Tabular Acropora in less than 10 minutes), and many frags are lying in the sand, dying. SPS and LPS are now very rare in many Maldives Reefs, and I strongly feel that Local Professional Divers and volonteers could help in returning Colonies and using fragments to re-colonize bleached reefs, If it's not too late. Rgds Fabrice POIRAUD-LAMBERT ------- >Reef Relief has released the first year report on the Coral Nursery >Project at Western Sambo Reef in the Florida Keys. The report outlines >the efforts to stabilize loose fragments of Acropora plamata onto >"Acropora rosettes", a design by restoration biologist Harold Hudson, in >this cooperative project with the Florida Keys National Marine >Sanctuary. Storm-damaged fragments of Acropora palmata were secured >with hydraulic cement onto concrete landscaping pads. > >The effort was launched to save Acropora palmata that was becoming >increasingly rare in Keys waters after substantial damage to populations >at Western Sambo Reef as a result of the Ground Hog Day Storm of >February 1998. > >The rosettes were not cemented down at first because the plan was to >move them to a boat grounding site. As a result, they were damaged >during Hurricane Georges but quickly re-established by a Reef Relief >team led by Craig Quirolo. This time, they were cemented to the ocean >floor and survived through Tropical Storm Mitch. Unfortunately, >Acropora palmata colonies at Western Sambo, Rock Key and other Keys >reefs suffered substantial losses as a result of these successive >storms. > >REEF RELIEF recommends and encourages the inclusion of all corals in the >Acropora genus found in the Caribbean Basin for further protection, >including listing through the U.S. Endangered Species Act. The health >and abundance of Palmata colonies we have photo-documented in Cuba, >Jamaica, and Honduras are being compromised as well. > >For a copy of the 70-page color report, contact Reef Relief by e-mail, >telephone (305) 294-3100, fax (305) 293-9515, or write P.O. Box 430, Key >West, Fl. 33041. > >The report is available on our website, located at www.reefrelief.org. From Steneck at maine.maine.edu Fri Feb 26 13:46:37 1999 From: Steneck at maine.maine.edu (Bob Steneck) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 99 13:46:37 -0500 Subject: Acropora spp., endangered Message-ID: <199902261846.NAA52420@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear Walt and others, Isn't the ultimate result of your argument that management cannot do much for coral decline, so why bother? Or perhaps everything that needs to be done is being done in Florida so let's be patient. However, the idea that we just don't know enough will always be used in all management issues. If we cannot make a good case for an Acropora decline throughout the Caribbean, can we ever hope to make a case to managers or legislators that will work for other issues? I hope you see that I'm not directly disagreeing with anything you have said. However working with existing legislation... especially legislation that has some real 'teeth' as is the case for Endangered Species Act, makes sense to me. It seems to me that endangered species may become the 'poster-child' for an educational campaign and I see value in that. Protection of endangered species translates to protection of associated species and the entire local system. For example, the spotted owl has saved lots of old growth forests. There are many other examples. Finally, is there harm in embracing the concept of Acropora meeting the definition of an endangered or threatened species? As far as I can see, only if the science doesn't support it. As you know, there are volumes of studies both qualitative and quantitative that document the Acropora decline. There is a sizable literature arguing for the geological and ecological importance of that genus. Even if there is evidence that this genus has fluctuated in the past (I'm not sure yours is a good example... it suggests the Acropora decline may have begun earlier than we thought), I don't think that should disqualify it from being considered for E & T classification. I also do not think the long-term prognosis for the species has to be good for inclusion to the list. I believe everyone expected the California Condor would go extinct but it was placed on the list anyway. I think that species has surprised some pundits. Walt - I hope I'm not missing some of your key points as to why there is no value in placing acroporids on the endangered list. If I am - please educate me and everyone else. If the scientific community sees general value, there is a slim chance this could happen. At best, this is a long-shot that might help protect some reefs. Cheers, Bob Steneck >22 February, 1999 > >Dr. Thomas F. Hourigan >Marine Biodiversity Coordinator >Office of Protected Resources, NOAAF/PR >National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration >National Marine Fisheries Service >1315 East-West Highway >Silver Spring, MD 20910 >tom.hourigan at noaa.gov > > >Dear Dr. Hourigan: > >I am responding to your internet request about Acropora spp. and other >Scleractinian species for inclusion as endangered or threatened species. >We have encountered this option several times from different groups over >the years; and have looked at the option to see if it was reasonable, >possible, and would it do a better job protecting corals than the >existing statutes and management regimes. We have concluded that it is >not the best approach for several reasons. > >Firstly, to prove that a coral is threatened or at risk throughout the >Caribbean, Florida, Bahamas, Bermuda, and places in between is costly, >time consuming, and might be very difficult to prove the case. > >Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other statutes >and management regimes? I would like to think so. In Florida, we have >a state statute that protects all Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and >Gorgonia spp from harvest, being sold in a commercial establishment, and >from destruction on the sea floor. This statute has been in effect >since the mid 1970s. At the federal level the most extensive coral >protection is found under the Magnuson Act: The Gulf of Mexico and >South Atlantic Fisherie s Councils cosponsored the work that resulted in >the Coral and Coral Reef Fishery Management Plan. This plan parallels >the Florida statute, protecting the Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and >Gorgonia spp. This management regime was recently incorporated into the >Essential Fish Habitat Plan by the Fishery Management Councils. > >The Department of Interior manages two National Parks (Biscayne and Dry >Tortugas) in which all corals are protected. The State of Florida and >NOAA are the trustees of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary >which includes all the reefs outside the National Park boundaries from >Fowey Rocks to west of Dry Tortugas, again the regulations protect >corals and reefs. When anthropogenic events occur, the trustees have >successfully prosecuted responsible parties or have negotiated effective >restoration and mon itoring plans on the sites. Settlements were in the >range of millions of dollars. Would the endangered species act have >provided immunity from these anthropogenic disturbances? I do not think >it would have. > >Natural events such as hurricanes, ENSO related bleaching episodes, and >global warming are still occurring in spite of the efforts that the >coral protection statutes and management regimes. Would additional >protective legislation such as the endangered species program provide >more protection to the reef resources? I am skeptical that adding a few >Scleractinia corals to the endangered and threatened species list would >be of benefit. > >Coral populations are very dynamic. In the case of Acropora palmata >(Lamarck, 1816) there is good evidence that it has gone through boom and >bust dynamics for quite some time. In 1882, Alexander Agassiz reported >44 hectares of A. palmata at Dry Tortugas. In 1982, Gary Davis reported >that, A. palmata coverage declined to 0.6 hectares, ten years later we >measured the remnant population and noted little change. The decline >was probably caused by hurricanes and other meteorological phenomena. > >In retrospect, or as they claim hind sight is perfect, when the debate >over the Everglades Park boundaries was first debated in the late 1940s, >Gill Voss told me an initial proposal had all of the Florida Keys with >the exception of Key West and Marathon included in Everglades National >Park. Local politics prevailed and the end result is a highly urbanized >Florida Keys in which the environmental quality has suffered from user >abuse. Ah, if we could only go back in time and make it right. > >We recognize that your intentions are well meaning and appreciate your >concern. We respectfully disagree that the corals mentioned in your >communication should be considered for nomination as endangered or >threatened species. We do not believe that any of the aforementioned >taxa of corals could satisfy the criteria of endangered or threatened >species. Since we have existing statutes and management regimes that >are designed to protect corals and reefs, the proposed status would have >little or no effect o n these resources. > > >Sincerely > >Walter C. Jaap Associate Research Scientist Florida Marine Research >Institute ---------------------------- Robert S. Steneck, Ph.D. Professor, School of Marine Sciences University of Maine Darling Marine Center Walpole, ME 04573 207 - 563 - 3146 ext. 233 e-mail: Steneck at Maine.EDU The School of Marine Sciences Web site: http://www.ume.maine.edu/~marine/marine.html From rginsburg at rsmas.miami.edu Mon Feb 22 18:37:44 1999 From: rginsburg at rsmas.miami.edu (rginsburg at rsmas.miami.edu) Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1999 18:37:44 -0500 Subject: A must read Message-ID: <199902231451.OAA39294@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Anyone interested in coral reefs and scientific controversies should read WHAT IS NATURAL? by Jan Saap, Oxford University Press, 275 p., 1999, $30.00 It is a penetrating review of the crown-of-thorns controvery and more. Robert Ginsburg From aszmant at rsmas.miami.edu Fri Feb 26 17:26:04 1999 From: aszmant at rsmas.miami.edu (Alina Szmant) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 17:26:04 -0500 (EST) Subject: Acropora spp., endangered Message-ID: <199902262226.RAA01367@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> I have read with interest but stayed out of the fray until now, regarding the listing of Caribbean Acropora species on the endangered species list. However, the response of CORALations to Walter Jaap's posting made me have to "speak up" because it mis-interpreted much of Walt's message and made some rather inane remarks. 1) The Endangered Species Act is an American piece of legislation that is not binding in other countries. Given that most of the range of these species is outside of US jurisdiction (as opposed to the spotted owl or some such beast), inclusion of the Acropora's on the endangered list won't make all that much difference except to prevent importation of dead skeletons of the corals from places like the Dominican Republic with I think still allow harvesting and export. Harvesting of corals and dredging of coral reef habitat is not allowed in any of the US waters. 2) Walt didn't make the requirements up: the Endangered Species Act has some very specific criteria that need to be met in order to justify a species to be included on the list, not just a few people claiming that the "sky is falling" for the Acropora's. While I agree that in SOME locations there have been dramatic decreases in the abundance of these species, in OTHERS they seem to be doing fine, and in fact I've seen some hugh patches of recent Acropora palmata and cervicornis recruitment on the South coast of Puerto Rico that would refute that the species is endangered as defined by the Act. Matter of fact, until Hurricane Georges came along Sept of '98 we had some very healthy and fast growing patches of A. palmata here in the Upper Fla Keys, that were vigorous spawners and much evidence of recruitment, again refuting that the species is truly endangered. I do not know how they will recover from the hurricane and the severe state of bleaching they were in at the time the hurricane struck, and they may not recover fully here on Florida reefs immediately or even after a long time...I don't have a cristal ball... but, as Walt pointed out, until we really have the DATA that demonstrates that the specific species (a) is below reproductive/recuitment capacity in ALL it's range (and I just heard last night about great healthy stands of it in several places in the Bahamas), then they won't meet the specific guidelines to be designated as endangered species. In my opinion, based on what I've seen, theyt are not. 3) Walt never stated that CORAL REEFS shouldn't be protected, nor that water quality problems should be ignored, nor any of the other snotty comments in the CORALations message. He simply pointed out that there are numerous other routes and regulations in place other than the ESA than should be used, and in some places are being used, to protect CORAL REEF ecosystems, which in the process protect all coral species not just a favorite few.. Alina Szmant At 12:18 PM 2/26/99 -0400, you wrote: >Dear Mr. Jaap: > >You wrote: " We do not believe that any of the aforementioned taxa of >corals could satisfy the criteria of endangered or threatened species." > >Can someone discuss this criteria or possibly scan and post? How does this >designation differ from appendix II listing? > >You wrote: "Firstly, to prove that a coral is threatened or at risk >throughout the Caribbean, Florida, Bahamas, Bermuda, and places in between >is costly, time consuming, and might be very difficult to prove the case." > >Does this mean there is no data backing compliance to ES criteria for the >taxa listed? I was under the impression that this discussion originated >based on evidence which suggests they fit the criteria. Are reefs >considered "shared resources" in these regions with respect to such >legislation? Would, for example, a disease diagnosed in one region >resulting in extensive mortality of a species of coral be enough of a cause >for concern to protect the same species in other regions given that these >diseases are distributed by currents, or are you saying extensive >monitoring is required in each specific region? In other words, at this >point in time, how much investigation actually needs to be done in order to >see if criteria are met and to what regions would the protection apply? > >You wrote: "Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other >statutes >and management regimes? I would like to think so." > >I would like to think so too. Unfortunately, don't corals continue to >decline in large part due to anthropogenic stressors? The big picture is we >don't seem to be "managing" our selves very well. We can't even manage >trade, let alone less direct impacts from run off etc.... Look, for >example, at the large black coral galleries on St. Thomas, Cayman and Las >Vegas. There's a two page magazine add that reads like a documentary in >American Skies, the American Eagle magazine promoting this "art." How are >permits allocated for such exploitation with so little knowledge about the >"protected" species? In St. Thomas, the existence of this well publicized >gallery has encourage neighboring shops to engage in the trade. Many >fishermen in the DR are risking their lives to harvest this coral. >My only concern about using endangered species act to protect coral is that >the response to the question you posed: "Are corals currently protected >from human exploitation by other statutes and management regimes? would be >answered as casually with "I would like to think so, they're considered >endangered species." > >You wrote: "Would the endangered species act have provided immunity from >these anthropogenic disturbances? Although, I believe you are >specifically referring to groundings when you discuss "anthropogenic >events" what about development related stress? Has the endangered species >act been used to stop development? With respect to groundings, could the >endangered species act be used to create legislation which diverts tanker >traffic away from sensitive coral reef areas, minimizing future groundings >and tanker related accidents? Has endangered species act ever been used to >improve water quality? > >You wrote: "Natural events such as hurricanes, ENSO related bleaching >episodes, and global warming are still occurring in spite of the efforts >that the > coral protection statutes and management regimes. Would additional > protective legislation such as the endangered species program provide > more protection to the reef resources? " > >I believe the answer to this depends on the proposed protective >legislation. We should be using past management failures to discuss >additional protective legislation. With regard to the endangered species >act, I would think we can use this as another tool to minimize additional >anthropogenic stress to protected corals from proposed development and >water quality issues. Your "natural events" argument better defends why >we should do more....not eliminate a legislative avenue that already >exists. > > You wrote: Coral populations are very dynamic. In the case of Acropora >palmata >(Lamarck, 1816) there is good evidence that it has gone through boom and > bust dynamics for quite some time. > >Are you suggesting that no anthropogenic stressors are currently >contributing to the decline of this species? > > I respect you for posting your arguments to the web for discussion. I also >have concerns about the effectiveness of the endangered species act to >protect corals. To many people, corals are just rocks, or rocks with >worms. However, unlike you, I see this as a cause for concern to open >discussion about more aggressive comprehensive legislation, not grounds >for abandonment of laws currently on the books. Other listers have >commented that by protecting one species of coral others will benefit. In >my opinion, the strongest argument you present is cost - benefit. >However, I feel your cost-benefit argument fails if a substantial amount of >data exists which can be used to demonstrate compliance with ES criteria >and other corals benefit by proximity to the species being listed. > >Sincerely, > >Mary Ann Lucking >Project Coordinator >CORALations >Amapola 14, Suite 901 >Isla Verde, PR 00979 >phone/fax: 787-791-7372 >corals at caribe.net > >> From: Walt Jaap STP >> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> Subject: Acropora spp., endangered >> Date: Friday, February 26, 1999 6:07 AM >> >> [Moderator's note: this letter to Tom Hourigan from Walt Jaap was >> reprinted with permission from Walt for the purpose of encouraging >> discussion and contrasting or complementary viewpoints.] >> >> >> 22 February, 1999 >> >> Dr. Thomas F. Hourigan >> Marine Biodiversity Coordinator >> Office of Protected Resources, NOAAF/PR >> National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration >> National Marine Fisheries Service >> 1315 East-West Highway >> Silver Spring, MD 20910 >> tom.hourigan at noaa.gov >> >> >> Dear Dr. Hourigan: >> >> I am responding to your internet request about Acropora spp. and other >> Scleractinian species for inclusion as endangered or threatened species. >> We have encountered this option several times from different groups over >> the years; and have looked at the option to see if it was reasonable, >> possible, and would it do a better job protecting corals than the >> existing statutes and management regimes. We have concluded that it is >> not the best approach for several reasons. >> >> Firstly, to prove that a coral is threatened or at risk throughout the >> Caribbean, Florida, Bahamas, Bermuda, and places in between is costly, >> time consuming, and might be very difficult to prove the case. >> >> Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other statutes >> and management regimes? I would like to think so. In Florida, we have >> a state statute that protects all Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and >> Gorgonia spp from harvest, being sold in a commercial establishment, and >> from destruction on the sea floor. This statute has been in effect >> since the mid 1970s. At the federal level the most extensive coral >> protection is found under the Magnuson Act: The Gulf of Mexico and >> South Atlantic Fisherie s Councils cosponsored the work that resulted in >> the Coral and Coral Reef Fishery Management Plan. This plan parallels >> the Florida statute, protecting the Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and >> Gorgonia spp. This management regime was recently incorporated into the >> Essential Fish Habitat Plan by the Fishery Management Councils. >> >> The Department of Interior manages two National Parks (Biscayne and Dry >> Tortugas) in which all corals are protected. The State of Florida and >> NOAA are the trustees of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary >> which includes all the reefs outside the National Park boundaries from >> Fowey Rocks to west of Dry Tortugas, again the regulations protect >> corals and reefs. When anthropogenic events occur, the trustees have >> successfully prosecuted responsible parties or have negotiated effective >> restoration and mon itoring plans on the sites. Settlements were in the >> range of millions of dollars. Would the endangered species act have >> provided immunity from these anthropogenic disturbances? I do not think >> it would have. >> >> Natural events such as hurricanes, ENSO related bleaching episodes, and >> global warming are still occurring in spite of the efforts that the >> coral protection statutes and management regimes. Would additional >> protective legislation such as the endangered species program provide >> more protection to the reef resources? I am skeptical that adding a few >> Scleractinia corals to the endangered and threatened species list would >> be of benefit. >> >> Coral populations are very dynamic. In the case of Acropora palmata >> (Lamarck, 1816) there is good evidence that it has gone through boom and >> bust dynamics for quite some time. In 1882, Alexander Agassiz reported >> 44 hectares of A. palmata at Dry Tortugas. In 1982, Gary Davis reported >> that, A. palmata coverage declined to 0.6 hectares, ten years later we >> measured the remnant population and noted little change. The decline >> was probably caused by hurricanes and other meteorological phenomena. >> >> In retrospect, or as they claim hind sight is perfect, when the debate >> over the Everglades Park boundaries was first debated in the late 1940s, >> Gill Voss told me an initial proposal had all of the Florida Keys with >> the exception of Key West and Marathon included in Everglades National >> Park. Local politics prevailed and the end result is a highly urbanized >> Florida Keys in which the environmental quality has suffered from user >> abuse. Ah, if we could only go back in time and make it right. >> >> We recognize that your intentions are well meaning and appreciate your >> concern. We respectfully disagree that the corals mentioned in your >> communication should be considered for nomination as endangered or >> threatened species. We do not believe that any of the aforementioned >> taxa of corals could satisfy the criteria of endangered or threatened >> species. Since we have existing statutes and management regimes that >> are designed to protect corals and reefs, the proposed status would have >> little or no effect o n these resources. >> >> >> Sincerely >> >> Walter C. Jaap Associate Research Scientist Florida Marine Research >> Institute >> >> > > ********************************************** Dr. Alina M. Szmant Coral Reef Research Group RSMAS-MBF University of Miami 4600 Rickenbacker Cswy. Miami FL 33149 TEL: (305)361-4609 FAX: (305)361-4600 or 361-4005 E-mail: ASZMANT at RSMAS.MIAMI.EDU ********************************************** From corals at caribe.net Fri Feb 26 19:26:13 1999 From: corals at caribe.net (CORALations) Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 20:26:13 -0400 Subject: Acropora spp., endangered Message-ID: <199902270031.UAA18220@mail.caribe.net> Dear Alina Szmant and Listers: I'm sorry if you or anyone perceived my comments about Mr. Jaap's letter as "snotty". I don't know Walt Jaap...and meant nothing personal. I certainly apologize to him if he percieved my comments as an attack. It was not meant that way. His letter was posted with intent to foster discussions and I discussed. I would offer to buy you and Walt an apologetic beer at the next conference we mutually attend, but am afraid all the listers will start hurling insults just to try and cash in on my guilt reflex! In my own defense...the quotes I commented on were directly taken from Mr. Jaap's letter specifically to avoid misinterpretations! Endangered Species Act is also binding in Puerto Rico and USVI's where, as you stated, there are still living stands of a. palmata. There are also many large dead a. palmata reefs. If this species was listed as Endangered we may be able to use this listing as a tool to protect reefs like the one you visited from some monstrously ecologically insensitive development. These developments are clearly not endangered. This may also prove a useful tool in the fight for better water quality. I never implied Walt "made" any Endangered Speicies criteria up. This is unfair. You make the comment these species don't fit the Endangered Species criteria based on recruitment and I thank you for listing that criteria.. I think defending his points in relation to this criteria would have made Walt's letter stronger. this is just my opinion. Those questions I asked about endangered species act were not meant sarcastically....I was honestly interested in obtaining more information. You wrote: "(a) is below reproductive/recuitment capacity in ALL it's range (and I just heard last night about great healthy stands of it in several places in the Bahamas), then they won't meet the specific guidelines to be designated as endangered species. In my opinion, based on what I've seen, theyt are not." Could you or someone from this list define "below reproductive/recruitment capacity" and how a healthy stand may indicate this species does not qualify under this criteria. Does a healthy stand automatically imply new new recruits? How is this evaluated? Does this mean that as long as there are healthy stands they will never qualify??? (These are honest questions...not meant snotty. I am trying to learn here! ) Again, very sorry for any misunderstandings, Sincerely, Mary Ann Lucking Project Coordinator CORALations Amapola 14, Suite 901 Isla Verde, PR 00979 phone/fax: 787-791-7372 corals at caribe.net ---------- > From: Alina Szmant > To: CORALations ; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: Re: Acropora spp., endangered > Date: Friday, February 26, 1999 6:27 PM > > I have read with interest but stayed out of the fray until now, regarding > the listing of Caribbean Acropora species on the endangered species list. > However, the response of CORALations to Walter Jaap's posting made me have > to "speak up" because it mis-interpreted much of Walt's message and made > some rather inane remarks. > > 1) The Endangered Species Act is an American piece of legislation that is > not binding in other countries. Given that most of the range of these > species is outside of US jurisdiction (as opposed to the spotted owl or some > such beast), inclusion of the Acropora's on the endangered list won't make > all that much difference except to prevent importation of dead skeletons of > the corals from places like the Dominican Republic with I think still allow > harvesting and export. Harvesting of corals and dredging of coral reef > habitat is not allowed in any of the US waters. > > 2) Walt didn't make the requirements up: the Endangered Species Act has > some very specific criteria that need to be met in order to justify a > species to be included on the list, not just a few people claiming that the > "sky is falling" for the Acropora's. While I agree that in SOME locations > there have been dramatic decreases in the abundance of these species, in > OTHERS they seem to be doing fine, and in fact I've seen some hugh patches > of recent Acropora palmata and cervicornis recruitment on the South coast of > Puerto Rico that would refute that the species is endangered as defined by > the Act. Matter of fact, until Hurricane Georges came along Sept of '98 we > had some very healthy and fast growing patches of A. palmata here in the > Upper Fla Keys, that were vigorous spawners and much evidence of > recruitment, again refuting that the species is truly endangered. I do not > know how they will recover from the hurricane and the severe state of > bleaching they were in at the time the hurricane struck, and they may not > recover fully here on Florida reefs immediately or even after a long > time...I don't have a cristal ball... but, as Walt pointed out, until we > really have the DATA that demonstrates that the specific species (a) is > below reproductive/recuitment capacity in ALL it's range (and I just heard > last night about great healthy stands of it in several places in the > Bahamas), then they won't meet the specific guidelines to be designated as > endangered species. In my opinion, based on what I've seen, theyt are not. > > 3) Walt never stated that CORAL REEFS shouldn't be protected, nor that > water quality problems should be ignored, nor any of the other snotty > comments in the CORALations message. He simply pointed out that there are > numerous other routes and regulations in place other than the ESA than > should be used, and in some places are being used, to protect CORAL REEF > ecosystems, which in the process protect all coral species not just a > favorite few.. > > Alina Szmant > > At 12:18 PM 2/26/99 -0400, you wrote: > >Dear Mr. Jaap: > > > >You wrote: " We do not believe that any of the aforementioned taxa of > >corals could satisfy the criteria of endangered or threatened species." > > > >Can someone discuss this criteria or possibly scan and post? How does this > >designation differ from appendix II listing? > > > >You wrote: "Firstly, to prove that a coral is threatened or at risk > >throughout the Caribbean, Florida, Bahamas, Bermuda, and places in between > >is costly, time consuming, and might be very difficult to prove the case." > > > >Does this mean there is no data backing compliance to ES criteria for the > >taxa listed? I was under the impression that this discussion originated > >based on evidence which suggests they fit the criteria. Are reefs > >considered "shared resources" in these regions with respect to such > >legislation? Would, for example, a disease diagnosed in one region > >resulting in extensive mortality of a species of coral be enough of a cause > >for concern to protect the same species in other regions given that these > >diseases are distributed by currents, or are you saying extensive > >monitoring is required in each specific region? In other words, at this > >point in time, how much investigation actually needs to be done in order to > >see if criteria are met and to what regions would the protection apply? > > > >You wrote: "Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other > >statutes > >and management regimes? I would like to think so." > > > >I would like to think so too. Unfortunately, don't corals continue to > >decline in large part due to anthropogenic stressors? The big picture is we > >don't seem to be "managing" our selves very well. We can't even manage > >trade, let alone less direct impacts from run off etc.... Look, for > >example, at the large black coral galleries on St. Thomas, Cayman and Las > >Vegas. There's a two page magazine add that reads like a documentary in > >American Skies, the American Eagle magazine promoting this "art." How are > >permits allocated for such exploitation with so little knowledge about the > >"protected" species? In St. Thomas, the existence of this well publicized > >gallery has encourage neighboring shops to engage in the trade. Many > >fishermen in the DR are risking their lives to harvest this coral. > >My only concern about using endangered species act to protect coral is that > >the response to the question you posed: "Are corals currently protected > >from human exploitation by other statutes and management regimes? would be > >answered as casually with "I would like to think so, they're considered > >endangered species." > > > >You wrote: "Would the endangered species act have provided immunity from > >these anthropogenic disturbances? Although, I believe you are > >specifically referring to groundings when you discuss "anthropogenic > >events" what about development related stress? Has the endangered species > >act been used to stop development? With respect to groundings, could the > >endangered species act be used to create legislation which diverts tanker > >traffic away from sensitive coral reef areas, minimizing future groundings > >and tanker related accidents? Has endangered species act ever been used to > >improve water quality? > > > >You wrote: "Natural events such as hurricanes, ENSO related bleaching > >episodes, and global warming are still occurring in spite of the efforts > >that the > > coral protection statutes and management regimes. Would additional > > protective legislation such as the endangered species program provide > > more protection to the reef resources? " > > > >I believe the answer to this depends on the proposed protective > >legislation. We should be using past management failures to discuss > >additional protective legislation. With regard to the endangered species > >act, I would think we can use this as another tool to minimize additional > >anthropogenic stress to protected corals from proposed development and > >water quality issues. Your "natural events" argument better defends why > >we should do more....not eliminate a legislative avenue that already > >exists. > > > > You wrote: Coral populations are very dynamic. In the case of Acropora > >palmata > >(Lamarck, 1816) there is good evidence that it has gone through boom and > > bust dynamics for quite some time. > > > >Are you suggesting that no anthropogenic stressors are currently > >contributing to the decline of this species? > > > > I respect you for posting your arguments to the web for discussion. I also > >have concerns about the effectiveness of the endangered species act to > >protect corals. To many people, corals are just rocks, or rocks with > >worms. However, unlike you, I see this as a cause for concern to open > >discussion about more aggressive comprehensive legislation, not grounds > >for abandonment of laws currently on the books. Other listers have > >commented that by protecting one species of coral others will benefit. In > >my opinion, the strongest argument you present is cost - benefit. > >However, I feel your cost-benefit argument fails if a substantial amount of > >data exists which can be used to demonstrate compliance with ES criteria > >and other corals benefit by proximity to the species being listed. > > > >Sincerely, > > > >Mary Ann Lucking > >Project Coordinator > >CORALations > >Amapola 14, Suite 901 > >Isla Verde, PR 00979 > >phone/fax: 787-791-7372 > >corals at caribe.net > > > >> From: Walt Jaap STP > >> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >> Subject: Acropora spp., endangered > >> Date: Friday, February 26, 1999 6:07 AM > >> > >> [Moderator's note: this letter to Tom Hourigan from Walt Jaap was > >> reprinted with permission from Walt for the purpose of encouraging > >> discussion and contrasting or complementary viewpoints.] > >> > >> > >> 22 February, 1999 > >> > >> Dr. Thomas F. Hourigan > >> Marine Biodiversity Coordinator > >> Office of Protected Resources, NOAAF/PR > >> National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration > >> National Marine Fisheries Service > >> 1315 East-West Highway > >> Silver Spring, MD 20910 > >> tom.hourigan at noaa.gov > >> > >> > >> Dear Dr. Hourigan: > >> > >> I am responding to your internet request about Acropora spp. and other > >> Scleractinian species for inclusion as endangered or threatened species. > >> We have encountered this option several times from different groups over > >> the years; and have looked at the option to see if it was reasonable, > >> possible, and would it do a better job protecting corals than the > >> existing statutes and management regimes. We have concluded that it is > >> not the best approach for several reasons. > >> > >> Firstly, to prove that a coral is threatened or at risk throughout the > >> Caribbean, Florida, Bahamas, Bermuda, and places in between is costly, > >> time consuming, and might be very difficult to prove the case. > >> > >> Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other statutes > >> and management regimes? I would like to think so. In Florida, we have > >> a state statute that protects all Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and > >> Gorgonia spp from harvest, being sold in a commercial establishment, and > >> from destruction on the sea floor. This statute has been in effect > >> since the mid 1970s. At the federal level the most extensive coral > >> protection is found under the Magnuson Act: The Gulf of Mexico and > >> South Atlantic Fisherie s Councils cosponsored the work that resulted in > >> the Coral and Coral Reef Fishery Management Plan. This plan parallels > >> the Florida statute, protecting the Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and > >> Gorgonia spp. This management regime was recently incorporated into the > >> Essential Fish Habitat Plan by the Fishery Management Councils. > >> > >> The Department of Interior manages two National Parks (Biscayne and Dry > >> Tortugas) in which all corals are protected. The State of Florida and > >> NOAA are the trustees of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary > >> which includes all the reefs outside the National Park boundaries from > >> Fowey Rocks to west of Dry Tortugas, again the regulations protect > >> corals and reefs. When anthropogenic events occur, the trustees have > >> successfully prosecuted responsible parties or have negotiated effective > >> restoration and mon itoring plans on the sites. Settlements were in the > >> range of millions of dollars. Would the endangered species act have > >> provided immunity from these anthropogenic disturbances? I do not think > >> it would have. > >> > >> Natural events such as hurricanes, ENSO related bleaching episodes, and > >> global warming are still occurring in spite of the efforts that the > >> coral protection statutes and management regimes. Would additional > >> protective legislation such as the endangered species program provide > >> more protection to the reef resources? I am skeptical that adding a few > >> Scleractinia corals to the endangered and threatened species list would > >> be of benefit. > >> > >> Coral populations are very dynamic. In the case of Acropora palmata > >> (Lamarck, 1816) there is good evidence that it has gone through boom and > >> bust dynamics for quite some time. In 1882, Alexander Agassiz reported > >> 44 hectares of A. palmata at Dry Tortugas. In 1982, Gary Davis reported > >> that, A. palmata coverage declined to 0.6 hectares, ten years later we > >> measured the remnant population and noted little change. The decline > >> was probably caused by hurricanes and other meteorological phenomena. > >> > >> In retrospect, or as they claim hind sight is perfect, when the debate > >> over the Everglades Park boundaries was first debated in the late 1940s, > >> Gill Voss told me an initial proposal had all of the Florida Keys with > >> the exception of Key West and Marathon included in Everglades National > >> Park. Local politics prevailed and the end result is a highly urbanized > >> Florida Keys in which the environmental quality has suffered from user > >> abuse. Ah, if we could only go back in time and make it right. > >> > >> We recognize that your intentions are well meaning and appreciate your > >> concern. We respectfully disagree that the corals mentioned in your > >> communication should be considered for nomination as endangered or > >> threatened species. We do not believe that any of the aforementioned > >> taxa of corals could satisfy the criteria of endangered or threatened > >> species. Since we have existing statutes and management regimes that > >> are designed to protect corals and reefs, the proposed status would have > >> little or no effect o n these resources. > >> > >> > >> Sincerely > >> > >> Walter C. Jaap Associate Research Scientist Florida Marine Research > >> Institute > >> > >> > > > > > ********************************************** > Dr. Alina M. Szmant > Coral Reef Research Group > RSMAS-MBF > University of Miami > 4600 Rickenbacker Cswy. > Miami FL 33149 > > TEL: (305)361-4609 > FAX: (305)361-4600 or 361-4005 > E-mail: ASZMANT at RSMAS.MIAMI.EDU > ********************************************** > From delbeek at hawaii.edu Sat Feb 27 23:37:09 1999 From: delbeek at hawaii.edu (J. Charles Delbeek) Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 18:37:09 -1000 Subject: Acropora spp., endangered In-Reply-To: <199902262226.RAA01367@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: I too am somewhat confused as to what additional protection placing Acroporids on the ESA will accimplish that is not already being covered. Could someone who is supporting this idea please outline the additional protection thus afforded and how this is of benefit compared to legislation already in place? I am also perplexed as to how the ESA will protect corals from natural disasters such as hurricanes, or from other affects attributed to coral bleaching i.e. increased surface temperatures? It is somewhat ironic that while many consider Acroporid species "endangered" in Florida, current legislation makes it extremely difficult to obtain collection permits to maintain and cultivate these species in captivity. J. Charles Delbeek M.Sc. Aquarium Biologist Waikiki Aquarium University of Hawaii "The fact that my physiology differs from yours pleases me to no end." Mr. Spock From delbeek at hawaii.edu Sat Feb 27 23:44:34 1999 From: delbeek at hawaii.edu (J. Charles Delbeek) Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 18:44:34 -1000 Subject: Acropora spp., endangered In-Reply-To: <199902270031.UAA18220@mail.caribe.net> Message-ID: Mary Ann's questions bring up an interesting dilemna I think. How does one go about measuring recruitment fitness for a potential ESA listing when said organism releases billions of gametes? Was the ESA ever designed to deal with such a fecund organism or was it more for the "warm and fuzzies" than the image challenged? J. Charles Delbeek M.Sc. Aquarium Biologist Waikiki Aquarium University of Hawaii "The fact that my physiology differs from yours pleases me to no end." Mr. Spock From corals at caribe.net Sun Feb 28 03:41:21 1999 From: corals at caribe.net (CORALations) Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 04:41:21 -0400 Subject: Acropora spp., endangered Message-ID: <199902280846.EAA05791@mail.caribe.net> I've been considering this and listed some examples: I previously stated how this could be a useful tool to stop a development which may impact offshore areas where the listed species is found, or possibly be used to push legislation for stricter clean water standards...and since posting these comments, have come up with a number of other things. Endangered Species Act loses its "warm and fuzzy" aspects in court*, during public hearings...when commenting on Environmental Impact Statements for developments, when pushing for protective legislation which can protect spawning grounds etc....Federal courts pay attention to Endangered Species Act. I don't think any one would challenge your comment that ESA , or any "coral reef" legislation would be effective at protecting corals from natural disasters...but if it can be used to minimize anthropogenic impacts, wouldn't it help reef damaged by such disasters recover? I think captive propogation of corals may also prove useful...to an extent...if well managed. However, good management means restrictions. It should be difficult to obtain a permit for collection in a species that as you wrote many seem to consider "endangered". Collection should also be one of the easiest anthropogenic stresses to control...but I have doubts as to if even this protective legislation is effective. Not to say it should be thrown out....Just to say we should take inventory of what management works and does not work ........and discuss topics like this. Why not list? Do we have the data to support? What does recruitement capacity mean? (*.....hope I don't sound mean..comments not meant that way) ---------- > From: J. Charles Delbeek > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: Re: Acropora spp., endangered > Date: Sunday, February 28, 1999 12:37 AM > > I too am somewhat confused as to what additional protection placing > Acroporids on the ESA will accimplish that is not already being covered. > Could someone who is supporting this idea please outline the additional > protection thus afforded and how this is of benefit compared to > legislation already in place? > > I am also perplexed as to how the ESA will protect corals from natural > disasters such as hurricanes, or from other affects attributed to coral > bleaching i.e. increased surface temperatures? > > It is somewhat ironic that while many consider Acroporid species > "endangered" in Florida, current legislation makes it extremely difficult > to obtain collection permits to maintain and cultivate these species in > captivity. > > J. Charles Delbeek M.Sc. > > Aquarium Biologist > Waikiki Aquarium > University of Hawaii > > "The fact that my physiology differs from yours pleases me to no end." > Mr. Spock > > From osha at pobox.com Sun Feb 28 08:25:24 1999 From: osha at pobox.com (Osha Gray Davidson) Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 07:25:24 -0600 Subject: Virus file: Happy99.exe Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19990228072524.00841de0@soli.inav.net> An attached file called Happy99.exe was just sent to this list. I'm pretty sure it contains a computer virus. A like-named file was just received on another list and infected some computers. The file Happy99.exe is a program. As I understand it, no harm is done unless you open (or run) the program itself. Deleting the file itself (not simply the E-mail message it rode in on) gets rid of the problem. The file came on a message from "CORALations" bearing the subject line: "RE: Acropora spp., endangered," dated 2/28/99. Please note that this information is just to help you find the virus-bearing file and not to place blame on CORALations, who, I'm sure, didn't know this file containted a virus. Cheers, Osha Osha Gray Davidson 14 South Governor St. Iowa City, IA 52240 USA Ph: 319-338-4778 Fax: 319-338-8606 osha at pobox.com Scholar Affiliate, University of Iowa From warrior at bu.edu Sun Feb 28 11:06:13 1999 From: warrior at bu.edu (Jamie D. Bechtel) Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 11:06:13 Subject: Acropora spp., endangered -legal background In-Reply-To: <199902280846.EAA05791@mail.caribe.net> Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.19990228110613.37f76a4c@acs-mail.bu.edu> hello all - i have been following the debate with some interest and thought some background information may be helpful. there is an excellent article discussing the role of science in the listing of endangered species. Bogert, Laurence Michael "That's my story and i'm sticking to it: is the best available science any available science under the endangered species act." 31 Idaho Law Review 85 (1994). despite some recent flexibility mechanisms built into the ESA, it remains a strong legislative tool. the endangered species act (ESA) is unique in terms of environmental legislation in that it contains a flat, substanative prohibition. weighing heavily in favor of the application of the endangered species act is the fact that, beyond a shadow of doubt, congress intended to grant high priority status to endangered species. consequently, the ESA remains a strong legislative tool and is upheld uniformily and consistently in district courts. Sec. 7 of the ESA supplies much of the force of the ESA in "insur[ing] that actions authorized, funded, or carried out by [federal deptarments and agencies] do not jeapardize the continued existence of such endangered species and threatended species or result in the destruction or modification of habitat of such species which is determined by the Secretary, after consultation as appropriate with the affected States, to be critical". in short, if a project will cause harm to an endangered species, that project can likely be brought to a relatively quick halt. 1n 1995, sec 9 (regarding illegal taking species w/i the US and the territorial sea) of the ESA won its day in court. the supreme court allowed the definition of "harm" to include "significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering (babbit v. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon, S. Ct. US 1995) it should be noted that, while application of the ESA is unlikely (not impossible) to improve current water quality and habitat conditions, it could go along way in preventing further decline(although some interesting battles are coming up with regards to language in the esa to promote conservation of species). the law was not designed to determine protective measures for different reproductive behaviors. it is likely that we do not need to consider recruitment fitness. (criteria listed below) it should also be noted that in determining whether a population is threatened, it need not be threatened globally, but throughout a portion of its range. many examples exist, such as the protection of the bald eagle in US domestic populations despite a thriving population in Alaska. distinct population segments can be protected. this arguement is likely to be stronger when additional populations occur outside US states and territories but are threatened within the US. the esa also allows critical habitat to be protected - slightly more complicated to achieve but based on an endangered species listing. the application of esa relies solely on the "best scientific and commercial data available." the act allows that listing of a species as endangered or threatend follows certain criteria: if the species experiences 1. present or threatened destruction or modification of its habitat or range. 2. overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or education purposes 3. disease/predation 4. inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanism or other natural or manmade factors affect its continued existence listing of an organmism that is not truly endangered can be extremely dangerous in providing fuel for politicians and industry trying to bring an end to the act. final thoughts, the legal arena is constantly changing and many questions regarding application of the ESA remain untested until they appear in court. one thought permeating the legal environment is the idea that scientist don't agree on any thing and data is untrustworthy. unfortunately, a few bad apples etc... however, as a scientist interacting in the legal community, i find it disheartening to have to constantly defend the workings of the scientific community. any suggestions on how to begin dispelling the myth and providing explanation? hope this information is helpful - cheers, jamie ____________________________________________________________________________ ________ Jamie D. Bechtel Jamie D. Bechtel Boston University Boston College School of Law Graduate School of Biology 885 Centre Street 5 Cummington Street Newton, MA 02159 Boston, MA 02215 From garettg at mail.state.fl.us Sun Feb 28 11:35:01 1999 From: garettg at mail.state.fl.us (George Garrett) Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 11:35:01 -0500 Subject: FW: Acropora spp., endangered Message-ID: <01BE630E.615B7BF0.garettg@mail.state.fl.us> -----Original Message----- From: Garrett-George Sent: Friday, February 26, 1999 11:13 PM To: 'Bob Steneck' Subject: RE: Acropora spp., endangered Bob and Coral-List: Having had the pleasure of working on both upland and marine management issues, I find this debate to be rather interesting. Though I think that there are arguments for listing, I'm not sure how much it accomplishes as compared to the regulations currently in place (particularly as defined by Walt). I don't believe that the ESA is particularly strong and I don't consider myself to be a "rabid foamy mouth" on the issue. In Florida and other parts of the United State or its protectorates, harvest or coral is not allowed - period. I think that Walt made a good argument for that. Touching coral or creating relatively minor disturbances can be a problem, and though a contributor to coral decline by some accounts, is probably not the major one. Mind you, I don't believe that the ESA would bring much to bare on this problem either. Regardless of the law, it is ultimately an on the water enforcement issue, dealt with under the prevailing political climate. First, I have great respect for the ESA and the many refuges that have been established to protect ETS. There are four wildlife refuges in the Florida Keys. However, and Ah ha, a good opportunity for comparative study. If petting Key deer is the comparative equivalent of touching coral, people do it on Big Pine Key all the time. The refuges discourage it, but reasonably can't STOP it. It's that perception of heavy handed enforcement thing. One more step. It took a third party federal law suit to get FWS to force FEMA to consult with them when issuing flood insurance policies in the Keys (or other flood prone areas with ETS). Taking this a step further, the fact that insurance policies are being issued indicates a significant impact on the habitat of an endangered species through development of the units requiring insurance. Pineland and hardwood hammock is disappearing daily, though because of local regs, this impact is declining significantly (admittedly influenced and assisted by the ESA). But, development is still allowed in developed subdivisions that contain little habitat - flat in the middle of the Key Deer Refuge. It's probably not fair to dump this on FWS, particularly on Big Pine Key - the die was cast there before FWS had a Refuge. Platted lots have existed there for a long time and funding for purchase is limited. However, let's look at the concept of an "Incidental Take Permit" (ITP) or an "Habitat Conservation Plan" (HCP). At the time that I worked on the HCP for Key Largo (crocodile, woodrat, cotton mouse, indigo snake) there were probably 4 other HCPs in existence (in a time period spanning the mid 70s to mid 80s). That was about 15 years ago. Since that time I've dealt more in marine matters and have lost count, but there are literally hundreds of HCPs now. At least one view of an HCP is that it is a compromise between what you want for the ETS and what interested developers want from their land. Frequently, this is a compromise garnered from an inability to adequately enforce the ESA, the drives of those who want to develop, and the strength of the Constitutional "Takings" law (Takings in this sense being property rights and land use). I think you can make similar arguments for ITPs, though perhaps not as strongly because they don't tend to affect as broad a part of the range. I think many of the reasons that the ESA has not been applied more effectively in marine environments (marine mammals and reptiles being the exception) is that reproductive dispersal is perceived to and in fact probably tends to be broad. Walt alluded to this. The coral species being discussed, particularly the Acroporids, are pan Caribbean (and Pacific, etc.) Thus, the ESA would consider this in the listing process and conversely, if listed would not affect these species anywhere but in U.S. states and territories. These are places where they are well protected. In any event, between the State of Florida (in this case), the various Fisheries Acts, and the FKNMS, the Keys are afforded a fair amount of protection. I don't honestly know how much more protection could be afforded them. Having played devils advocate for the last page or so, I certainly don't oppose listing the Acroporids. However, don't expect any panaceas. Its typically the bigger things that are not accounted for in such laws, and probably never will be effectively, that impact our reefs - the Mississippi or the Orinoco, global warming, Saharan dust (that one's for you Gene), and atmospheric deposition. More locally and more tangibly (for Florida), its wastewater outfalls on the east coast, phosphate mining on the west coast and general conditions of coastal eutrophication. We've gotten too big for the place in which we live. We will continue to fight the good fight and do the best we can. Let's list the Acroporids, who knows it may bring greater attention to the things that aren't so heavily regulated. George Garrett Director of Marine Resources Monroe County, Florida Keys PS Regarding the existing laws and least, Walt (and I) argue from the stand point of the laws of Florida, as described above. I do recall some recent permits in Hawaii for marina development in which a significant area of coral was allowed to be destroyed - though, with significant transplant of some as mitigation). Is there a stronger need for concern nationally, in the Pacific or even Puerto Rico (ref. CORALations)? -----Original Message----- From: Bob Steneck [SMTP:Steneck at Maine.Maine.EDU] Sent: Friday, February 26, 1999 1:47 PM To: Walt Jaap STP; Coral List Subject: Re: Acropora spp., endangered Dear Walt and others, Isn't the ultimate result of your argument that management cannot do much for coral decline, so why bother? Or perhaps everything that needs to be done is being done in Florida so let's be patient. However, the idea that we just don't know enough will always be used in all management issues. If we cannot make a good case for an Acropora decline throughout the Caribbean, can we ever hope to make a case to managers or legislators that will work for other issues? I hope you see that I'm not directly disagreeing with anything you have said. However working with existing legislation... especially legislation that has some real 'teeth' as is the case for Endangered Species Act, makes sense to me. It seems to me that endangered species may become the 'poster-child' for an educational campaign and I see value in that. Protection of endangered species translates to protection of associated species and the entire local system. For example, the spotted owl has saved lots of old growth forests. There are many other examples. Finally, is there harm in embracing the concept of Acropora meeting the definition of an endangered or threatened species? As far as I can see, only if the science doesn't support it. As you know, there are volumes of studies both qualitative and quantitative that document the Acropora decline. There is a sizable literature arguing for the geological and ecological importance of that genus. Even if there is evidence that this genus has fluctuated in the past (I'm not sure yours is a good example... it suggests the Acropora decline may have begun earlier than we thought), I don't think that should disqualify it from being considered for E & T classification. I also do not think the long-term prognosis for the species has to be good for inclusion to the list. I believe everyone expected the California Condor would go extinct but it was placed on the list anyway. I think that species has surprised some pundits. Walt - I hope I'm not missing some of your key points as to why there is no value in placing acroporids on the endangered list. If I am - please educate me and everyone else. If the scientific community sees general value, there is a slim chance this could happen. At best, this is a long-shot that might help protect some reefs. Cheers, Bob Steneck >22 February, 1999 > >Dr. Thomas F. Hourigan >Marine Biodiversity Coordinator >Office of Protected Resources, NOAAF/PR >National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration >National Marine Fisheries Service >1315 East-West Highway >Silver Spring, MD 20910 >tom.hourigan at noaa.gov > > >Dear Dr. Hourigan: > >I am responding to your internet request about Acropora spp. and other >Scleractinian species for inclusion as endangered or threatened species. >We have encountered this option several times from different groups over >the years; and have looked at the option to see if it was reasonable, >possible, and would it do a better job protecting corals than the >existing statutes and management regimes. We have concluded that it is >not the best approach for several reasons. > >Firstly, to prove that a coral is threatened or at risk throughout the >Caribbean, Florida, Bahamas, Bermuda, and places in between is costly, >time consuming, and might be very difficult to prove the case. > >Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other statutes >and management regimes? I would like to think so. In Florida, we have >a state statute that protects all Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and >Gorgonia spp from harvest, being sold in a commercial establishment, and >from destruction on the sea floor. This statute has been in effect >since the mid 1970s. At the federal level the most extensive coral >protection is found under the Magnuson Act: The Gulf of Mexico and >South Atlantic Fisherie s Councils cosponsored the work that resulted in >the Coral and Coral Reef Fishery Management Plan. This plan parallels >the Florida statute, protecting the Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and >Gorgonia spp. This management regime was recently incorporated into the >Essential Fish Habitat Plan by the Fishery Management Councils. > >The Department of Interior manages two National Parks (Biscayne and Dry >Tortugas) in which all corals are protected. The State of Florida and >NOAA are the trustees of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary >which includes all the reefs outside the National Park boundaries from >Fowey Rocks to west of Dry Tortugas, again the regulations protect >corals and reefs. When anthropogenic events occur, the trustees have >successfully prosecuted responsible parties or have negotiated effective >restoration and mon itoring plans on the sites. Settlements were in the >range of millions of dollars. Would the endangered species act have >provided immunity from these anthropogenic disturbances? I do not think >it would have. > >Natural events such as hurricanes, ENSO related bleaching episodes, and >global warming are still occurring in spite of the efforts that the >coral protection statutes and management regimes. Would additional >protective legislation such as the endangered species program provide >more protection to the reef resources? I am skeptical that adding a few >Scleractinia corals to the endangered and threatened species list would >be of benefit. > >Coral populations are very dynamic. In the case of Acropora palmata >(Lamarck, 1816) there is good evidence that it has gone through boom and >bust dynamics for quite some time. In 1882, Alexander Agassiz reported >44 hectares of A. palmata at Dry Tortugas. In 1982, Gary Davis reported >that, A. palmata coverage declined to 0.6 hectares, ten years later we >measured the remnant population and noted little change. The decline >was probably caused by hurricanes and other meteorological phenomena. > >In retrospect, or as they claim hind sight is perfect, when the debate >over the Everglades Park boundaries was first debated in the late 1940s, >Gill Voss told me an initial proposal had all of the Florida Keys with >the exception of Key West and Marathon included in Everglades National >Park. Local politics prevailed and the end result is a highly urbanized >Florida Keys in which the environmental quality has suffered from user >abuse. Ah, if we could only go back in time and make it right. > >We recognize that your intentions are well meaning and appreciate your >concern. We respectfully disagree that the corals mentioned in your >communication should be considered for nomination as endangered or >threatened species. We do not believe that any of the aforementioned >taxa of corals could satisfy the criteria of endangered or threatened >species. Since we have existing statutes and management regimes that >are designed to protect corals and reefs, the proposed status would have >little or no effect o n these resources. > > >Sincerely > >Walter C. Jaap Associate Research Scientist Florida Marine Research >Institute ---------------------------- Robert S. Steneck, Ph.D. Professor, School of Marine Sciences University of Maine Darling Marine Center Walpole, ME 04573 207 - 563 - 3146 ext. 233 e-mail: Steneck at Maine.EDU The School of Marine Sciences Web site: http://www.ume.maine.edu/~marine/marine.html From osha at pobox.com Sun Feb 28 13:56:53 1999 From: osha at pobox.com (Osha Gray Davidson) Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 12:56:53 -0600 Subject: More on the Happy99.exe Virus Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19990228125653.0083c6a0@soli.inav.net> In response to some questions I've received, here's a little more information on the Happy99.exe computer virus, sent on the coral-health list-serve today. The information is taken from a posting on another list-serve that was hit, and I merely pass it along (not being a computer expert myself). >If you have already run HAPPY99, go to: > > > >for instructions on how to remove it. For details about the worm >and its effects, see: > > > Hope this helps. Osha Osha Gray Davidson 14 South Governor St. Iowa City, IA 52240 USA Ph: 319-338-4778 Fax: 319-338-8606 osha at pobox.com Scholar Affiliate, University of Iowa From gmoretmo at planete.net Sun Feb 28 15:38:06 1999 From: gmoretmo at planete.net (Georges Moret) Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 21:38:06 +0100 Subject: Acropora spp., endangered Message-ID: <199902282101.WAA27987@unix12.planete.net> Please, pay attention to happy99.exe It"s a funny nice worm but it can replicate and be send by itself You'd better trashed it Georges Moret "Tranquilles cependant, Charlemagne et ses Preux" "Descendaient la montagne et devisaient entre-eux" ---------- From: "CORALations" Subject: Re: Acropora spp., endangered Date: Dim 28 f?v 1999 9:46 From reefcare at cura.net Sun Feb 28 12:42:59 1999 From: reefcare at cura.net (Paul Hoetjes) Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 17:42:59 +0000 Subject: [Fwd: Virus alert] Message-ID: <36D98023.FA8861F7@cura.net> A recent message sent to the list contained an attachment called happy99.exe. On the CTURTLE list a similar message recently was followed by this warning: -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Virus alert Date: Sun, 21 Feb 1999 12:37:01 -0500 From: Peter Bennett Reply-To: Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation To: CTURTLE at LISTS.UFL.EDU The last email from JIWLP was followed by a post that includes the HAPPY99 worm. You will have received email with no text, just an attachment named HAPPY99.EXE. WARNING: DO NOT RUN THIS PROGRAM! If you have already run HAPPY99 (and it is obvious that Wil Burns or someone at JIWLP already has), go to: for instructions on how to remove it. For details about the worm and its effects, see: Please don't blame Wil Burns for this, he's a victim. From d.fenner at aims.gov.au Sun Feb 28 16:42:03 1999 From: d.fenner at aims.gov.au (Doug Fenner) Date: Mon, 01 Mar 1999 08:42:03 +1100 Subject: worm Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19990301084203.006ebf50@email.aims.gov.au> Coralisters, Another web site telling how to get rid of the Happy99 worm is listed below. There are only about 4 steps to it, but if they don't make any sense, you need to find someone who can make sense of them. (in the meantime, don't send anyone e-mail to avoid spreading it further) Also, please alert people you have sent e-mail to since you got it and opened it, or it will continue to spread. I'm told you can't get a virus or worm from an e-mail, but you can get one from an attachment, if there is something executable in the attachment. Word documents now have an executable part of them. Virus check all attachments before opening them, don't open any attachment from someone you don't know. -Doug http://www.symantec.com/avcenter/venc/data/happy99.worm.html Douglas Fenner, Ph.D. Coral Taxonomist Australian Institute of Marine Science PMB No 3 Townsville MC Queensland 4810 Australia phone 07 4753 4241 e-mail: d.fenner at aims.gov.au web: http://www.aims.gov.au From ckievman at turbo.kean.edu Sun Feb 28 23:02:20 1999 From: ckievman at turbo.kean.edu (KIEVMAN) Date: Sun, 28 Feb 1999 23:02:20 -0500 (EST) Subject: MERI Field Course & Scholarship for Coral Reef Research In-Reply-To: <199902191838.SAA14855@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: Please pardon the re-posting of this message. Our "server" inadvertently deleted our email address. Please respond to: CoralReef at turbo.kean.edu ****************************************************************** PLEASE POST MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE'S CORAL REEF FIELD COURSE IN THE CAYMAN ISLANDS The Marine Environmental Research Institute offers undergraduate and graduate field courses to introduce a variety of topics on coral reef environments. Topics include an introduction to coral reef systems, coral reef evolution and succession, and natural and anthropogenic impacts on reef ecosystems. Students have opportunities to become involved in small, short-term field research projects related to the coral reef system. Field course will take place in the Cayman Islands, during the last week of June 1999 and provide graduate (4 or 6 credits) or undergraduate credit (6 credits) through Kean University (a state university of New Jersey), Department of Geology and Meteorology. Students are accepted in the course without regard to race or gender. For additional information visit our web sites: http: //turbo.kean.edu/~meri/course1.html and //turbo.kean.edu/~Meri/Meri_Site/Default2.html MERI SCHOLARSHIP FOR CORAL REEF RESEARCH MERI Scholarship: One scholarship in the amount of $2500.00 will be awarded for the 1999 field course. The scholarship will pay for the expenses related to field research on coral reefs in the Cayman Islands and assist in the cost of college credit offered through Kean University, Department of Geology and Meteorology. Who: Female undergraduate and graduate students who are science majors are invited to apply. Students with a biological or geological background are encouraged to apply. Objective: To introduce college students to the coral reef system by involving them in field course and research opportunities. Application Deadline: Received by March 15, 1999. Application Requirements: Transcripts, application form, resume, 2 letters of recommendation (preferably from your professors). Application can be found at our Website: turbo.kean.edu/~meri/course1.html Submit to: Dr. Carrie M. Kievman, Marine Environmental Research Institute - Coral Reef Scholarship Committee, Kean University, Department of Geology and Meteorology, 1000 Morris Ave, Union, NJ 07083 Email: CoralReef at turbo.kean.edu From tdone at aims.gov.au Thu Feb 4 14:43:03 1999 From: tdone at aims.gov.au (Terry Done <) Date: Fri, 05 Feb 1999 05:43:03 +1000 Subject: International Society for Reef Studies Statement on Diseases on Message-ID: <199903261935.TAA09822@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Coral Reefs Sender: owner-coral-list Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Terry Done < Dear Coral-listers, Below is a statement on diseases of corals and other important coral reef life compiled by the International Society for Reef Studies and released today. The Society believes the statement is warranted at this time, following its earlier statement on Coral Bleaching published in its newsletter "Reef Encounter' and on coral-list. The International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS), consisting of over 750 members in over 50 countries, was founded in 1981 for the purpose of promoting the production and dissemination of scientific knowledge and understanding of coral reefs, both living and fossil. The ISRS publishes the scientific journal CORAL REEFS and holds periodic meetings around the world. Further information as well as membership details can be found at:www.uncwil.edu/isrs. For all correspondence regarding this statement or other ISRS matters, please contact Dr Richard Aronson, Corresponding Secretary, at:- raronson at jaguar1.usouthal.edu. Submitted on behalf of the Society by Terry Done President ISRS ___________________________________________ International Society for Reef Studies Statement on Diseases on Coral Reefs Released February 4 1999 Diseases of corals and other organisms are having significant, negative impacts on the structure and appearance of coral reefs. On some reefs, the effects of disease have been of a similar magnitude to more familiar disturbances, such as outbreaks of the crown-of-thorns starfish in the Indo-Pacific and coral bleaching associated with elevated sea temperatures. A new scientific awareness of diseases on coral reefs leads to a host of questions about the novelty of recently discovered syndromes, the importance of observed trends toward increasing infection rates, and the extent to which human activities are responsible. This statement, issued by the International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS), summarizes current knowledge on the subject. It was compiled by an ad hoc group of scientists in ISRS, composed of individuals who are directly or indirectly considering disease as part of their research programs. Disease is a natural process that has been poorly studied in the oceans because of its ephemeral nature. Epidemics in animal populations, called epizootics, are a serious threat to the health of coral reefs worldwide. Recent observations of epizootics affecting sea urchins and scleractinian corals show that diseases on reefs can devastate their target populations and act as agents of rapid and dramatic community change. Marine pathologists and microbiologists are attempting to identify the causes of infection, but the pathogens responsible for most diseases affecting reef organisms remain elusive. These difficulties are complicating efforts by scientists and managers to study outbreaks and decide if control measures are warranted. It is becoming clear, however, that human activity is at least partially responsible for disease outbreaks on coral reefs over the past decade. Corals are colonial invertebrates related to sea anemones. They lay down the limestone foundations of coral reefs, protecting tropical shorelines and providing habitat for the many fish and invertebrate species that feed a substantial proportion of the world's population. Like all living organisms, corals are prone to diseases of various sorts. The incidence of disease on coral reefs may be on the rise, but without historical, baseline data it is difficult to determine if the observed increase is real or simply a reflection of increased research activity. Recent scientific reviews list four to six confirmed coral diseases in the Caribbean region alone; other estimates, based only on observed symptoms, run as high as fifteen. Bacteria, fungi, and cyanobacteria ("blue-green algae") are known to cause diseases in corals. Sick and dying corals are cause for concern, because coral death slows the rate of reef construction. Reefs devastated by disease (or by other causes of coral mortality) may not be able to keep up with sea-level rise, which is naturally slow but may be accelerating due to global warming. And as reefs degrade, fish and other seafood resources decline as well. Three coral diseases--"white-band," "black-band," and "plague"-were first reported in the Caribbean in the 1970s. The first documented, regional-scale epizootic, however, affected the black-spined sea urchin, Diadema antillarum. In 1983-84, a disease carried by ocean currents killed more than 95 percent of the Diadema throughout the Caribbean. This epizootic clearly demonstrated that diseases can have major impacts on reef ecology. Before its mass mortality, Diadema was an important herbivore: it ate fast-growing fleshy algae (seaweeds), keeping space free for corals to survive and grow. After the urchins died, algae increased dramatically on many Caribbean reefs. They colonized corals that had been killed by hurricanes and by white-band disease. Although the infective agent of white-band disease remains unknown, there is some evidence that it is bacterial. White-band disease infected populations of staghorn and elkhorn coral (Acropora cervicornis and Acropora palmata) throughout the Caribbean region in the 1980s and 1990s, inflicting enormous losses. Because Diadema also disappeared, seaweeds rapidly colonized the dead coral skeletons, and as a result large areas of Caribbean reefs have been covered with fleshy algae for over a decade. Paleontologists working in Belize recently uncovered evidence that the epizootic of white-band disease is without historical precedent: staghorn coral has not died off before on a regional basis in at least several thousand years. Staghorn and elkhorn corals are major constructors of reef framework, and their loss could slow the rate of reef growth in the Caribbean. Many marine scientists suspect that human activities, such as pollution and changing patterns of land use, promoted the spread of white-band disease in Florida and the Caribbean. There is little evidence for a human connection, however, other than the historical novelty of the outbreak. Eutrophication, the enhanced input of nutrients by humans, may be an important source of stress to reef organisms. Eutrophication may compromise disease resistance, allowing opportunistic infections to take hold and new diseases to emerge. A fungal infection of sea fans appears to provide a link to human activity. The fungus, Aspergillus sydowii, has infected large populations of sea fans in the Florida Keys and throughout the Caribbean. Aspergillus sydowii is thought to be a land-based fungus that has invaded the marine environment via the sediment in terrestrial runoff. Reliable information exists for two other diseases: black-band disease and "plague type II." Black-band disease, caused by a consortium of bacteria (including cyanobacteria) attacks and kills massive, head-forming corals. Black-band disease could pose a serious threat to populations of brain corals and star corals, which, like the Acropora species, are important components of reef framework in the Caribbean. Plague type II attacks head corals in Florida, but it has also been observed elsewhere in the Caribbean. In this case, rigorous microbiological work showed that the disease is caused by a single bacterium, a new species of Sphingomonas. Other epizootics are killing corals and many other important species on reefs of the Pacific, Indian and Atlantic Oceans. Black-band disease and white-band disease have now been identified on reefs throughout the tropical Indo-Pacific, including the Red Sea, Mauritius, the Philippines, Papua New Guinea, and the Great Barrier Reef of Australia. In the Arabian Gulf, the newly discovered yellow-band disease is affecting up to 75 percent of the coral colonies in local populations. In addition, diseases of algae, sponges, and fish have been and continue to be identified. Reefs throughout the world were stressed by unusually high sea temperatures in 1997-98, and the worldwide episode of coral bleaching that resulted may render corals more susceptible to disease. In the Mediterranean, bacterial infections are associated with bleaching, and disease outbreaks have been linked to predation by coral-eating snails in the Red Sea. The causal connections among bleaching, predation, and disease remain obscure, however. The role of disease on coral reefs and possible interactions with environmental influences should be a research priority over the next several years. Despite the frustrating inability to identify pathogens in most cases, reef scientists have detected symptoms that could represent over a dozen new diseases. Diseases are now recorded as part of standardized reef monitoring programs throughout the world, including the Caribbean Coastal Marine Productivity (CARICOMP) Program, the worldwide Reef Check, the Atlantic and Gulf Reef Assessment (AGRA) Program, and a variety of government and private programs in Australia. Because corals grow slowly, live for decades to centuries, and reproduce sporadically, today's epizootics will probably have consequences that reach far into the future. Multidisciplinary efforts, combining microbiology, coral physiology and pathology, ecological monitoring, and paleontology, will be necessary if we are to understand what is happening and devise management strategies in response. The International Society of Reef Studies endorses existing government and private funding of multidisciplinary programs to promote research on the changing nature of coral reefs. The Society recognizes the need for an increased level of support if the many threats to reefs worldwide are to be understood and mitigated. <<<<<<<< Dr Terry Done Australian Institute of Marine Science PMB #3 Mail Centre, Townsville Qld 4810 Australia Phone 61 7 47 534 344 Fax 61 7 47 725 852 email: tdone at aims.gov.au