[Coral-List] Conservation versus restoration of coral reefs

[William Allison]

Dear Machel,
I am familiar with those papers.

Sincerely,

Bill
Incidentally, you might want to check the composition of the precipitate.

On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 1:00 PM, machel malay <malay at flmnh.ufl.edu> wrote:

> Dear Bill,
>
> There have been a couple of papers testing the mineral accretion
> technology published by Sabater and Yap:
>
> Sabater, M. G. and H. T. Yap (2002). Growth and survival of coral
> transplants with and without electrochemical deposition of CaCO3.
> Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 272(2): 131.
>
> Sabater, M. G. and H. T. Yap (2004). Long-term effects of induced
> mineral accretion on growth, survival and corallite properties of
> Porites cylindrica Dana. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and
> Ecology 311(2): 355.
>
> Bottom line of their results: in the Philippine reefs where the
> experiments were conducted, there was short-term enhancement in growth
> rates of Porites cylindrica nubbins; however growth enhancement was
> mostly restricted to the first 4 months of the experiment. After ~6
> months the cathode and anode became fully accreted with CaCO3 and
> electrochemical deposition stopped. However there was also some
> enhancement in the survival of coral nubbins exposed to electrochemical
> deposition.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Machel Malay
> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
> Maria Celia D. Malay
> PhD Candidate
> Dept of Zoology
> & Florida Museum of Natural History
> University of Florida
> ~ malay at flmnh.ufl.edu ~
>
>
> On 24 Feb 2008, at 5:52 AM, William Allison wrote:
>
> > Dear Tom,
> > I think I am getting it. It appears that you are using a kind of
> > medical
> > model in which controls are ethically unacceptable. I am sympathetic
> > to the
> > intent, but suspect the potential of precipitation technology would be
> > more
> > easily assessed if a conventional research approach was used and the
> > whole
> > was more thoroughly explained.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Bill
> >
> > On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 9:44 PM, Thomas Goreau <goreau at bestweb.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Bill,
> >> I'm not sure where the wrong information you have came from, as you
> >> could
> >> easily have asked those involved directly in the projects. For some
> >> curious
> >> reason there is flood of deliberate misinformation on these projects
> >> spread
> >> by those who have never seen them.
> >>
> >> The breakwater reef was built in 1997, the year before the bleaching,
> >> and
> >> had at least 500 to a thousand corals growing well on it before
> >> bleaching.
> >> Most survived, while almost none of the corals on the surrounding
> >> reef did.
> >> The breakwater reef was built in front of a severely eroding beach,
> >> and
> >> turned it into 50 feet (15 m) of new beach sand growth in a few
> >> years. The
> >> three small electrical reef structures were small enough (only 3 m or
> >> so
> >> high) that we did not bother to mention them.
> >>
> >> As mentioned earlier, we used the corals growing in the natural reef
> >> all
> >> around the island as controls, and filmed them extensively before and
> >> after
> >> bleaching. Mortality of the natural reef was around 95% on the outer
> >> slope,
> >> and around 99% on the reef flat, which got much hotter, we measured
> >> temperatures of 34 degrees C in this habitat (these are visual
> >> estimates,
> >> but exact numbers can be taken from my before and after digital video
> >> transects in Maldives and Seychelles). Prior to Wolf Hilbertz and
> >> myself
> >> starting the electrical trickle charge work in the Maldives with Azeez
> >> Hakeem, Azeez had cemented thousands of corals onto bare rock and
> >> cement
> >> blocks of various sizes. We also filmed them as controls. They all
> >> died.
> >>
> >> We had built uncharged steel reefs in Jamaica in the late 1980s, but
> >> they
> >> quickly rusted and collapsed, so we rescued the corals and put them
> >> on the
> >> electrical structures, because we found from time series photographs
> >> that
> >> the charged corals were growing 3-5 times record rates for those
> >> species
> >> (Porites porites and Acropora cervicornis, photographic data shown in
> >> my
> >> talk at the 1996 ICRS). We quickly realized that, as in a medical
> >> study were
> >> an experimental treatment is so clearly superior to the controls that
> >> it
> >> becomes immoral to continue the control treatment, the only ethical
> >> treatment is to treat all the patients you can with the best remedy
> >> in your
> >> arsenal. Nevertheless we do have uncharged reefs in several locations
> >> in
> >> Southeast Asia and the Caribbean, only to keep our student's advisors
> >> happy,
> >> and the differences are immediately clear compared to the identical
> >> charged
> >> reefs next to them.
> >>
> >> We are now way past the point where there is any justification for
> >> killing
> >> corals as controls, so it is annoying that so many people just want
> >> us to
> >> watch corals die to keep them happy for statistical reasons.  We only
> >> want
> >> to boost the growth of all we can, and see no point whatsoever in
> >> prolonging
> >> coral suffering.  The results of the spectacular growth of corals on
> >> our
> >> projects are visible on hundreds of projects we have done in some 20
> >> countries, and dying coral reefs are visible in over 100 countries,
> >> to serve
> >> as controls. We now have some 6 independent studies backing our
> >> growth rate
> >> data presented at ICRS 12 years ago, and we find it astonishing to
> >> hear
> >> continued denial from people who seem to believe anything at all they
> >> see
> >> printed on paper, but won''t trust their own lying eyes to look at
> >> these
> >> projects for themselves.
> >>
> >> I saw two of the concrete road bed structures, not all 12, so I don't
> >> know
> >> which ones they were, but they were horrifically barren
> >> post-industrial
> >> concrete wastelands. We'd rather just grow  exceptionally fast-growing
> >> heat-resistant corals swarming with fish schools than waste time
> >> propagating
> >> these sorts of misguided efforts as controls, because anyone can see
> >> that
> >> they hardly work.
> >>
> >> I'll be in the field for a while, and unable to respond.
> >>
> >> Best wishes,
> >> Tom
> >>
> >> Thomas J. Goreau, PhD
> >> President
> >> Global Coral Reef Alliance
> >> 37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge MA 02139
> >> 617-864-4226
> >> goreau at bestweb.net
> >> http://www.globalcoral.org
> >>
> >> On Feb 19, 2008, at 12:35 PM, William Allison wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Tom,
> >>
> >>
> >> Thanks for that information. I had discounted the free-standing
> >> breakwall
> >> because until you mentioned it, I had the impression that it had not
> >> been
> >> entirely completed before the 1998 bleaching event. I did not know of
> >> the
> >> three small cones and could not even find them on your website.
> >> Despite that
> >> information gap, I don't think I was completely incorrect – see below.
> >>
> >>
> >> Btw: I'd be pleased to take up your invitation and visit your
> >> artificial
> >> reefs sometime. Perhaps you would suggest it to Azeez. The
> >> free-standing
> >> breakwall function is especially intriguing.
> >>
> >>
> >> Here is my response to your last. Please excuse me if this seems
> >> elementary but I want to make sure I have got it right. An experiment
> >> aims
> >> to control the effects of all variables other than those under
> >> investigation. Whatever the other alleged attributes of the
> >> technology you
> >> are employing might be, it seems that stimulation of coral growth and
> >> resistance to bleaching mortality, produced directly or indirectly by
> >> the
> >> electrical current, is the main effect relevant to this discussion.
> >> To test
> >> this a sufficient number of identical replicate and control
> >> structures should be randomly dispersed on the reef and transplanted
> >> corals
> >> randomly selected and affixed to the structures, all within a very
> >> short
> >> time interval. If the requirement for identical replicate structures
> >> and
> >> near simultaneous initiation is relaxed, we are still stuck with no
> >> controls
> >> if the effect of electricity is to be evaluated. I hope you will now
> >> tell me
> >> that such structures were in place prior to and during 1998. The
> >> general
> >> point is that until an accessible, clear, precise, description of your
> >> "experiment" is available, complete with aims, falsifiable hypotheses
> >> and
> >> detailed experimental design, the validity of your stated results
> >> cannot be
> >> critically assessed. From another perspective, because you are
> >> promoting
> >> this approach as a conservation superlative and soliciting money that
> >> could
> >> otherwise be spent on other conservation approaches, the onus is on
> >> you to
> >> provide satisfactory evidence that can be critically reviewed. Until
> >> this is
> >> done it will seem more like snake oil than science. Why hasn't it
> >> been set
> >> out on your website or better still in a peer reviewed article? With
> >> regard
> >> to this aspect, your mention of the artificial reef tests on Galu
> >> Faru reef
> >> is apposite.
> >>
> >>
> >> Your description of an artificial reef project as "…a couple of
> >> hundred
> >> meters of concrete superhighway roadbed…" seems to approximate the
> >> one set
> >> up by Newcastle on Anchorage Reef. I know of no other of that
> >> vintage. It
> >> comprised 12 randomly dispersed units of which nine, each about 7-8 m
> >> long
> >> were vaguely like roadbed and three were somewhat larger and made of
> >> one
> >> meter hollow cubes. These three must have stood out from the rest as
> >> distinctly unsuperhighway-like, even by SUV standards. That all 360
> >> tons of
> >> concrete and steel were imported from the UK is not the issue here.
> >>
> >>
> >> With respect to the above-mentioned reef, the assertion that
> >> "Thousands of
> >> corals had been cemented to it, but virtually all of them died BEFORE
> >> the
> >> bleaching." is questionable for several reasons (I assume that the
> >> "it" is a
> >> typo and you meant "them").
> >> 1). Over the years I have frequently looked in on the Anchorage Reef
> >> site.
> >> Your assertion that most of the corals died before the 1998 bleaching
> >> is
> >> astonishing, but not inexplicable if only a few of the widely
> >> dispersed
> >> sites were visited. Although many units supported flourishing coral
> >> carpets,
> >> some were impoverished, particularly those with low topographic
> >> relief (and
> >> possibly resembling "superhighway roadbed"). Perhaps you were exposed
> >> to
> >> only such units? When, exactly, did you visit the site, or did
> >> someone else
> >> provide you with the video – not necessarily of all of the units?
> >> 2). Only three of the twelve units bore coral transplants and these
> >> transplants totaled hundreds, not thousands. The rest of the
> >> "thousands of
> >> corals" you mention seeing got there under their own larval steam,
> >> implying
> >> that if one is compelled to built artificial reefs of any sort,
> >> transplantation is not only unnecessary, but with its financial and
> >> carbon
> >> costs and largely unquantified effects on the donor reefs,
> >> undesirable.
> >>
> >>
> >> Details of the Newcastle project's aims, methods, research design, and
> >> results are readily accessible (Clark & Edwards, 1994, 1999), as is
> >> their
> >> largely negative assessment of the artificial reef and transplant
> >> approach
> >> for reef rehabilitation (Clark & Edwards, 1999; Edwards & Clark,
> >> 1999).
> >>
> >>
> >> References with abstracts appended.
> >>
> >>
> >> Best wishes to you too,
> >> Bill
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> References:
> >> Clark, S. and A. J. Edwards (1994). "Use of artificial reef
> >> structures to
> >> rehabilitate reef flats degraded by coral mining in the Maldives."
> >> *Bulletin
> >> of Marine Science* *55*(2-3): 726-746.
> >> Abstract
> >> Three hundred and sixty tons of concrete reef structures have been
> >> deployed over a 4-ha experimental site on a 1-2 m deep reef flat in
> >> the
> >> Maldives which was mined for coral 20 years ago and still has less
> >> than
> >> 2.5% live coral cover. Colonization of four sets of three,
> >> approximately
> >> 50 m2, artificial reef structures of varying topographic complexity
> >> and
> >> stabilizing effect, and one set of three replicate 50 m2 mined
> >> control areas
> >> has been monitored. All structures were rapidly colonized by fish.
> >>
> >>
> >> Clark, S. and A. J. Edwards (1999). "An evaluation of artificial reef
> >> structures as tools for marine habitat rehabilitation in the
> >> Maldives." *Aquatic
> >> Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems* *9*(1): 5-21.
> >> Abstract
> >> 1. In the Maldives, coral mining for the construction industry has
> >> resulted in widespread degradation of shallow reef-flat areas. Due to
> >> the
> >> loss of these coastal resources and the associated problems of coastal
> >> erosion, there is an urgent need to find practical methods for
> >> rehabilitating mined reefs.  2. The slow rates of natural recovery of
> >> mined reefs has prompted interest in the potential of artificial reef
> >> structures to rehabilitate these degraded habitats. An experimental
> >> artificial reef programme was initiated in 1990 to discover whether
> >> it is
> >> feasible to use a bio-engineering approach to kick-start natural reef
> >> recovery.  3. The main goals of the project were to restore the
> >> capacity
> >> of degraded reefs for sea defense and their ability to harbour fish
> >> species.
> >> Accordingly, 360 t of concrete structures of varying levels of
> >> topographic
> >> complexity, stabilising effect and cost were deployed on a heavily
> >> mined
> >> study site close to the capital island, Male.  4. Within 1 year of
> >> deployment, the artificial reef structures had similar or greater
> >> species
> >> richness and densities of reef fish than did control pristine reef
> >> flats.
> >> However, the community structure of the fish populations on the
> >> artificial
> >> reef structures was significantly different to that on unmined reef
> >> flats.
> >> 5. Preliminary results of a monitoring programme indicated that
> >> substantial coral recruitment had occurred on the larger reef
> >> structures
> >> which were each supporting ca. 500 colonies, some of which were
> >> approaching
> >> 25 cm in diameter after 3.5 years.  An evaluation of the
> >> effectiveness of
> >> the various artificial reef structures is discussed in relation to
> >> their
> >> design features and costs and in line with timescales for the recovery
> >> processes.
> >>
> >>
> >> Edwards, A. J. and S. Clark (1999). "Coral Transplantation: A Useful
> >> Management Tool or Misguided Meddling?" *Marine Pollution Bulletin*
> >> *37*(08-12):
> >> 474-487.
> >> Abstract
> >> The primary objectives of coral transplantation are to improve reef
> >> `quality' in terms of live coral cover, biodiversity and topographic
> >> complexity. Stated reasons for transplanting corals have been to: (1)
> >> accelerate reef recovery after ship groundings, (2) replace corals
> >> killed by
> >> sewage, thermal effluents or other pollutants, (3) save coral
> >> communities or
> >> locally rare species threatened by pollution, land reclamation or pier
> >> construction, (4) accelerate recovery of reefs after damage by
> >> Crown-of-
> >> thorns starfish or red tides, (5) aid recovery of reefs following
> >> dynamite
> >> fishing or coral quarrying, (6) mitigate damage caused by tourists
> >> engaged
> >> in water-based recreational activities, and (7) enhance the
> >> attractiveness
> >> of whether the receiving area is failing to recruit naturally.
> >> The potential benefits and dis-benefits of coral trans- plantation are
> >> examined in the light of the results of re- search on both coral
> >> transplantation and recruitment with particular reference to a 4.5
> >> year
> >> study in the Maldives. We suggest that in general, unless receiving
> >> areas
> >> are failing to recruit juvenile corals, natural recovery processes are
> >> likely to be sufficient in the medium to long term and that
> >> transplantation
> >> should be viewed as a tool of last resort. We argue that there has
> >> been too
> >> much focus on transplanting fast-growing branching corals, which in
> >> general
> >> naturally recruit well but tend to survive trans- plantation and
> >> re-location
> >> relatively poorly, to create short-term increases in live coral
> >> cover, at
> >> the expense of slow-growing massive corals, which generally survive
> >> transplantation well but often recruit slowly. In those cases where
> >> transplantation is justified, we advocate that a reversed stance,
> >> which
> >> focuses on early addition of slowly recruiting massive species to the
> >> recovering community, rather than a short-term and sometimes
> >> short-lived
> >> increase in coral cover, may be more appropriate in many cases.
> >>
> >>
> >> Edwards, A. J., S. Clark, et al. (2001). "Coral bleaching and
> >> mortality on
> >> artificial and natural reefs in Maldives in 1998, sea surface
> >> temperature
> >> anomalies and initial recovery." *Marine Pollution Bulletin* *42*(1):
> >> 7-15.
> >> The bleaching and subsequent mortality of branching and massive
> >> corals on
> >> artificial and natural reefs in the central atolls of Maldives in
> >> 1998 are
> >> examined with respect to sea surface temperature (SST) anomalies. SST
> >> normally peaks in April-May in Maldives. The UK Meteorological
> >> Office's
> >> Global sea-Ice and SST data set version 2.3b shows that in 1998
> >> monthly
> >> mean SST was 1.2±4 S.D. above the 1950-1999 average during the warmest
> >> months (March-June), with the greatest anomaly in May of +2.1°C.
> >> Bleaching
> >> was first reported in mid-April and was severe from late April to
> >> mid-May
> >> with some recovery evident by late-May. At least 98% of branching
> >> corals
> >> (Acroporidae, Pocilloporidae) on artificial structures deployed on a
> >> reef
> >> flat in 1990 died whereas the majority of massive corals (Poritidae,
> >> Faviidae, Agariciidae) survived the bleaching. The pre-bleaching coral
> >> community on the artificial reefs in 1994 was 95% branching corals
> >> and 5%
> >> massives (n = 1589); the post-bleaching community was 3% branching
> >> corals
> >> and 97% massives (n = 248). Significant reductions in live coral
> >> cover were
> >> seen at all natural reefs surveyed in the central atolls, with
> >> average live
> >> coral cover decreasing from about 42% to 2%, a 20-fold reduction from
> >> pre-bleaching levels. A survey of recruitment of juvenile corals to
> >> the
> >> artificial structures 10 months after the bleaching event showed that
> >> 67% of
> >> recruits (>0.5 cm diameter) were acroporids and pocilloporids and 33%
> >> were
> >> from massive families (n = 202) compared to 94% and 6%, respectively,
> >> in
> >> 1990-1994 (n = 3136). Similar post-bleaching dominance of recruitment
> >> by
> >> branching corals was seen on nearby natural reef (78% acroporids and
> >> pocilloporids; 22% massives). A linear regression of April mean
> >> monthly SST
> >> against year was highly significant (p < 0:001) and suggests a rise of
> >> 0:16°C per decade. If this trend continues, by 2030 mean April SST in
> >> the
> >> central atolls will normally exceed the anomaly level at which corals
> >> appear
> >> there are susceptible to mass bleaching.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Feb 17, 2008 6:38 PM, Thomas Goreau <goreau at bestweb.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Dear Bill,
> >>> Your statements about controls and replicates in our project are
> >>> completely incorrect. I guess you have not seen them yourself? One
> >>> electric
> >>> reef structure (roughly 5 m high, 4 m wide at the base) on the fore
> >>> reef
> >>> slope had about 16 times higher survival than surrounding reefs,
> >>> three more
> >>> smaller projects (each about 3 m high, and 2x2 meters base) in the
> >>> same
> >>> habitat had similar results, and one structure on the reef flat (50
> >>> m long,
> >>> 1.5 m high, about 5 m wide) had about 50 times higher survival than
> >>> surrounding reefs. The larger projects had many hundreds of corals
> >>> on them,
> >>> not just a few.  Another large project was done after bleaching, and
> >>> so has
> >>> on bearing on bleaching survival. For controls we compared thousands
> >>> of
> >>> corals that had previously been cemented on to concrete blocks and
> >>> dead
> >>> reef. Even though they were all doing well prior to bleaching, every
> >>> single
> >>> one of the control coral transplanted using conventional methods
> >>> died,
> >>> i.e. 100% mortality and 0% survival, compared to around 1-5%
> >>> survival of
> >>> natural corals on the nearby reef, and 50-80 percent survival on the
> >>> electric reefs. We have hundreds of photographs and around 50 hours
> >>> of
> >>> digital video transects of the electric reefs, natural reefs, and
> >>> control
> >>> transplants taken before and after bleaching that document these
> >>> results.
> >>> Typical video of all three before during and after were presented at
> >>> ICRI.
> >>>
> >>> I'm not sure if the artificial reef project by the World Bank you are
> >>> referring to was done before or after the bleaching? If after it has
> >>> no
> >>> bearing on survival from bleaching. The only other reef restoration
> >>> project
> >>> I looked at in North Male Atoll, was where a couple of hundred
> >>> meters of
> >>> concrete superhighway roadbed was laid on a dead reef. Thousands of
> >>> corals
> >>> had been cemented to it, but virtually all of them died BEFORE the
> >>> bleaching. I have video footage of the entire length of these
> >>> projects, and
> >>> the contrast with our results on the electric reefs  couldn't
> >>> possibly be
> >>> more dramatic. I have not had the money to get back to the Maldives
> >>> for the
> >>> last 7 years, but since you live there in the same atoll as both of
> >>> these
> >>> projects, you can easily contrast them yourself. I think you will
> >>> still find
> >>> the difference extraordinary and look forward to your personal
> >>> observations
> >>> of the coral and fish abundance on our projects compared to the
> >>> concrete
> >>> planting projects.
> >>>
> >>> Best wishes,
> >>> Tom
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>  On Feb 17, 2008, at 6:11 PM, William Allison wrote:
> >>>
> >>>  Dear Tom,
> >>>
> >>> In your message of Feb 2 (repeated Feb 13) you assert that the major
> >>> funding agencies are neglecting your product because they have given
> >>> up on
> >>> coral reef restoration. Without condoning it, I can think of at
> >>> least one
> >>> artificial reef project in Maldives funded by an arm of the World
> >>> Bank in
> >>> recent years. Perhaps there is another explanation for your
> >>> situation.
> >>>
> >>> Despite the extraordinary Maldives bleaching results presented in
> >>> your
> >>> message, interest may be low because the experimental design cannot
> >>> sustain
> >>> the conclusions. In this case there was one experimental unit (a
> >>> dome made
> >>> of steel rod grid to which corals were tied and the whole subjected
> >>> to
> >>> electrical input). There were no replicates, there were no controls.
> >>> Proceeding from basic experimental design principles, valid
> >>> inferences about
> >>> an experimental effect are not possible from this setup. Perhaps you
> >>> should
> >>> work on that aspect.
> >>>
> >>> I refer specifically to this segment of your message:
> >>>>>>> There is only one method known that can keep corals alive under
> >>>>>>> high temperatures that would ordinarily kill them. In the
> >>>>>>> Maldives
> >>>>>>> in 1998 the corals we were growing with our electrical trickle
> >>>>>>> charging method had 16 to 50 times higher survival than
> >>>>>>> surrounding reefs (Please note that is TIMES higher survival, not
> >>>>>>> PERCENT. See T. Goreau, W. Hilbertz, & A. Azeez Hakeem, 2000,
> >>>>>>> Increased Coral and Fish Survival on Mineral Accretion Reef
> >>>>>>> Structures in the Maldives after the 1998 Bleaching Event,
> >>>>>>> International Coral Reef Symposium, abstracts p. 263). Our corals
> >>>>>>> bleached too, because they were exposed to the same temperatures,
> >>>>>>> but they did not die,
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>>
> >>> Bill Allison
> >>>
> >>> On Feb 15, 2008 10:52 AM, Thomas Goreau <goreau at bestweb.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>> Dear Dee Von,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The only thing that really works is to stop algae killing reefs is
> >>>>> to stop polluting the water with nutrients, then the weedy algae
> >>>>> die back very fast. In one bay in Jamaica that I got cleaned up of
> >>>>> nutrient sources 10 years ago the weedy algae have not come back,
> >>>>> and elkhorn is growing again! But we also have to cut out the
> >>>>> greenhouse gas emissions too and absorb the excess CO2 now in the
> >>>>> atmosphere.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best wishes,
> >>>>> Tom
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Feb 15, 2008, at 10:46 AM, DeeVon Quirolo wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Well stated Tommy--and the current loss of corals to disease
> >>>>>> driven by pollution and poor water quality is under-estimated,
> >>>>>> with some managers actually mistaking white diseases for bleaching
> >>>>>> to compound the problem.  If we were to put available resources
> >>>>>> into cleaning up the water, coral reefs would be far more
> >>>>>> resilient than we ever imagined; above all coral reefs need is
> >>>>>> clear, clean, nutrient-free waters to thrive.  What a simple
> >>>>>> concept; yet millions are being spent looking for other answers
> >>>>>> while ignoring this obvious, to paraphrase it,  "whale in the
> >>>> room".
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> All the best, DeeVon Quirolo,  Reef Relief
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 2:05 PM, Thomas Goreau
> >>>>>> <goreau at bestweb.net> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> From: Thomas Goreau <goreau at bestweb.net>
> >>>>>>>> Date: February 2, 2008 1:08:20 PM EST
> >>>>>>>> To: coral-list coral-list <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
> >>>>>>>> Cc: miguel_castrence at fulbrightweb.org
> >>>>>>>> Subject: Conservation versus restoration of coral reefs
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Dear Miguel,
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Too true, as pointed out in the New York Times article you
> >>>> quote,
> >>>>>>>> just  letting reefs die as a lost cause is the effective result
> >>>> of
> >>>>>>>> the largely unspoken consensus of most of the big conservation
> >>>>>>>> groups,. governments, and funding agencies. At the UN Climate
> >>>>>>>> Change Conference in Bali, the future of coral reefs and low
> >>>> lying
> >>>>>>>> coasts was deliberately and knowingly sacrificed, by those who
> >>>>>>>> simply want to continue business as usual and the profits it
> >>>>>>>> brings them.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Since the models being used to project future temperature and
> >>>> sea
> >>>>>>>> level impacts have serious and systematic flaws that cause them
> >>>> to
> >>>>>>>> under-estimate future impacts of global warming, the situation
> >>>> is
> >>>>>>>> more dire than they realize. The predictions being made by the
> >>>>>>>> models for the impacts on coral reefs are mere guesses, not only
> >>>>>>>> do they underestimate the mean rates of increase shown by the
> >>>> data
> >>>>>>>> (which will certainly accelerate) but also they also ignore the
> >>>>>>>> variability of extreme events. An exceptionally hot year or a
> >>>> big
> >>>>>>>> storm will wipe these areas out LONG before mean temperature
> >>>>>>>> change and sea level rise does. No number of papers based on
> >>>>>>>> models in Science and Nature or wishful thinking from IYOR can
> >>>>>>>> reverse this.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The bulk of the "managing resilience" fad now underway has
> >>>> nothing
> >>>>>>>> in fact to do with real resilience, in the sense of making
> >>>> corals
> >>>>>>>> more capable of withstanding thermal stress. It is instead a
> >>>>>>>> desperate search for those sites that had less stress to begin
> >>>>>>>> with, due to local weather or circulation patterns, or had
> >>>> already
> >>>>>>>> long lost the stress-sensitive species and therefore
> >>>> superficially
> >>>>>>>> seem to appear more stress-tolerant. As thermal stress
> >>>> increases,
> >>>>>>>> even those few areas lucky enough to have escaped its serious
> >>>>>>>> effects so far will succumb, sooner rather than later, for the
> >>>>>>>> reasons stated above. Nevertheless, after the Indian Ocean
> >>>> tsunami
> >>>>>>>> the World Bank Expert Group on Coral Reef Restoration and the
> >>>>>>>> International Coral Reef Initiative told the countries affected
> >>>>>>>> that restoration is "neither feasible nor prudent" and that they
> >>>>>>>> should do nothing at all, they should just wait and the
> >>>> resilient
> >>>>>>>> reefs would grow back all by themselves. But almost all of the
> >>>>>>>> reefs in these places were already long dead for one reason or
> >>>>>>>> another, and had failed to recover!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> There is only one method known that can keep corals alive under
> >>>>>>>> high temperatures that would ordinarily kill them. In the
> >>>> Maldives
> >>>>>>>> in 1998 the corals we were growing with our electrical trickle
> >>>>>>>> charging method had 16 to 50 times higher survival than
> >>>>>>>> surrounding reefs (Please note that is TIMES higher survival,
> >>>> not
> >>>>>>>> PERCENT. See T. Goreau, W. Hilbertz, & A. Azeez Hakeem, 2000,
> >>>>>>>> Increased Coral and Fish Survival on Mineral Accretion Reef
> >>>>>>>> Structures in the Maldives after the 1998 Bleaching Event,
> >>>>>>>> International Coral Reef Symposium, abstracts p. 263). Our
> >>>> corals
> >>>>>>>> bleached too, because they were exposed to the same
> >>>> temperatures,
> >>>>>>>> but they did not die, because they had more metabolic energy to
> >>>>>>>> resist stress. Therefore there is a proven way to keep reefs
> >>>> alive
> >>>>>>>> where they would otherwise die, and in our Coral Arks in some 20
> >>>>>>>> countries we are now growing more than 80% of all the coral
> >>>> genera
> >>>>>>>> in the world, despite absolutely no funding whatsoever for
> >>>> serious
> >>>>>>>> coral reef restoration or adaptation work. This work is entirely
> >>>>>>>> being done with very small individual donations and in-kind
> >>>>>>>> funding from concerned locals in poor countries who just want to
> >>>>>>>> keep their corals and fish alive even though the international
> >>>>>>>> community and funding agencies have let them know in the most
> >>>>>>>> tangible possible way that they couldn't care less if they die.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Our work has been widely ridiculed as a futile waste of time by
> >>>>>>>> those tossing around the big bucks. They say: if you can't save
> >>>> it
> >>>>>>>> all, what's the point? Our response is: if we don't save all we
> >>>>>>>> possibly can, what will we have left? They say: it is very
> >>>>>>>> dangerous to tell people you can restore reefs because then you
> >>>>>>>> are encouraging them to go and destroy reefs! We respond: that
> >>>> is
> >>>>>>>> like accusing tree planters of causing rainforest destruction!
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> What we can't seem to get these folks to understand is very
> >>>>>>>> simple. We are already way past the point where conservation
> >>>> alone
> >>>>>>>> of what is left can maintain the ecosystem services of coral
> >>>>>>>> reefs. Every Marine Protected Area I've seen is full of dead and
> >>>>>>>> dying corals, and no matter how much money is spent setting them
> >>>>>>>> up and managing them, they are powerless to stop the decline,
> >>>> much
> >>>>>>>> less reverse it. If we don't start large scale restoration we
> >>>> can
> >>>>>>>> kiss our marine biodiversity, fisheries, tourism,beaches, and
> >>>>>>>> shore protection goodbye. Large scale restoration is now our
> >>>> only
> >>>>>>>> hope. But no decision makers or funders seem to get it. Nor will
> >>>>>>>> those who predictably respond to this message saying that marine
> >>>>>>>> protected areas and international campaigns to encourage
> >>>>>>>> resilience are the answer.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Best wishes,
> >>>>>>>> Tom
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Thomas J. Goreau, PhD
> >>>>>>>> President
> >>>>>>>> Global Coral Reef Alliance
> >>>>>>>> 37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge MA 02139
> >>>>>>>> 617-864-4226
> >>>>>>>> goreau at bestweb.net
> >>>>>>>> http://www.globalcoral.org
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:00 PM, coral-list-
> >>>>>>>> request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 09:31:04 -1000
> >>>>>>>>> From: Miguel Castrence <miguel_castrence at fulbrightweb.org>
> >>>>>>>>> Subject: [Coral-List] The Preservation Predicament
> >>>>>>>>> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> This recent NY Times article caught my attention, especially
> >>>> this
> >>>>>>>>> provocative statement:
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> "Some conservationists advocate triage, accepting that some
> >>>>>>>>> ecosystems, like coral reefs, may not survive in a warmer
> >>>>>> world, and
> >>>>>>>>> putting their efforts elsewhere."
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I wonder if such statements could be damaging for our
> >>>> endeavors.
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>> Miguel Castrence
> >>>>>>>>> PhD Student | UH-Manoa Geography | www.geography.hawaii.edu
> >>>>>>>>> Graduate Degree Fellow | East-West Center | eastwestcenter.org
> >>>>>>>>> Research Assistant | Hawai`i Institute of Marine Biology |
> >>>>>>>>> www.himb.hawaii.edu
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Coral-List mailing list
> >>>>>>>>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> >>>>>>>>> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 56, Issue 3
> >>>>>>>>> *****************************************
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Thomas J. Goreau, PhD
> >>>>>>> President
> >>>>>>> Global Coral Reef Alliance
> >>>>>>> 37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge MA 02139
> >>>>>>> 617-864-4226
> >>>>>>> goreau at bestweb.net
> >>>>>>> http://www.globalcoral.org
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Thomas J. Goreau, PhD
> >>>>>> President
> >>>>>> Global Coral Reef Alliance
> >>>>>> 37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge MA 02139
> >>>>>> 617-864-4226
> >>>>>> goreau at bestweb.net
> >>>>>> http://www.globalcoral.org
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> Coral-List mailing list
> >>>>>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> >>>>>> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> DeeVon Quirolo, executive director, Reef Relief
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> NOTE: This is a new email address; please change your records.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Reef Relief, a global nonprofit organization dedicated to
> >>>>>> protecting coral reefs (305) 294-3100 fax (305 293-9515
> >>>>>> www.reefrelief.org Mailing address: Reef Relief, Post Office
> >>>>>> Box430, Key West, Florida 33041-0430. Key West Headquarters/
> >>>>>> Environmental Center, 631 Greene Street, Key West, Florida.
> >>>>>> Bahamas: Captain Roland Roberts House Environmental Center,
> >>>>>> Parliament Street, New Plymouth, Green Turtle Cay, Abaco, Bahamas
> >>>>>> tel/fax (242) 365-4014.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Do you want to make a difference? With the stroke of your
> >>>>>> keyboard, you can. Join Reef Relief's free online community at
> >>>>>> www.reefrelief.org and begin receiving regular updates on coral
> >>>>>> reef news and opportunities to get involved and take action.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Thomas J. Goreau, PhD
> >>>>> President
> >>>>> Global Coral Reef Alliance
> >>>>> 37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge MA 02139
> >>>>> 617-864-4226
> >>>>> goreau at bestweb.net
> >>>>> http://www.globalcoral.org
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Thomas J. Goreau, PhD
> >>>> President
> >>>> Global Coral Reef Alliance
> >>>> 37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge MA 02139
> >>>> 617-864-4226
> >>>> goreau at bestweb.net
> >>>> http://www.globalcoral.org
> >>>>
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> Coral-List mailing list
> >>>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> >>>> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Thomas J. Goreau, PhD
> >>> President
> >>> Global Coral Reef Alliance
> >>> 37 Pleasant Street, Cambridge MA 02139
> >>> 617-864-4226
> >>> goreau at bestweb.net
> >>> http://www.globalcoral.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Coral-List mailing list
> > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> >
>