[Coral-List] Macroalgae in the Keys
Curtis Kruer
kruer at 3rivers.net
Fri Jun 27 17:23:47 EDT 2008
Curtis Kruer response to FKNMS on 6/27/08
Billy and Bill and Bill,
So it seems I crossed the line and Mr. Causey brought the
billy
clubs
out of the closet. But you knew I had to respond and this is it, and
Ill leave it at that. And, after a few days consideration of what you
said, I must admit I made a mistake. But my mistake was only giving the
FKNMS more credit than I should when I responded to Mr. Bruno. Seems I
kind of bought into the suggestion that Billy and the FKNMS are somehow
responsible for the relatively low macroalgal cover on Keys reefs. In my
haste to express other opinions I didnt realize what that was saying.
And so by way of this email I am asking Billy, Bill, and Bill (all
government employees) to inform me and those receiving this mess of an
exchange why you think that, and what is the basis for your belief. Not
local actions, not state actions, not hurricanes, but why Billy and the
FKNMS should be given credit for the relatively low (10% but
increasing?) macroalgal cover on Keys reefs. In my mind, when it comes
to protecting and managing public resources, theres only one thing
worse than government agencies not doing what theyre mandated to do,
and thats taking credit for something they didnt do. Thats one
request and Ill make another at the end of this reply.
Billy C. You know very well that I have more than a
snapshot
view of
the Keys. In addition to living and working there for 22 years and now
occasional visits my information on the FKNMS nowadays includes SAC
meeting minutes, FKNMS staff monthly situations reports, the FKNMS
website, online newspapers, national media, regulations and plan
revisions, FKNMS announcements, scientific literature, etc. etc. So, Im
definitely not in the dark and dont forget those high-res 2006 color
and CIR aerials (and the 1991, 1995, 1998, 1999, and 2005 Keys aerials)
that I use all the time for work. And I do acknowledge the important
accomplishments of NOAA in the Keys.
I agree with virtually everything you say and by no means do I ever
intend to demean the great volunteers in the Keys. Indeed they go at it
hard and I can definitely understand their passion for what theyre
doing. Dont pit me against them, or in this case, them against me. But
they take their direction from the NOAA managers just like the local
and state agencies do. Undoubtedly. And, again, all I try to say in my
own clumsy way, is that its a matter of priorities and the
responsibility of public employees to accomplish protection and
sustainable use not just work at it and not depend on someone else to
do it. And its definitely not the responsibility of the volunteers. As
you know I helped initiate the Seagrass Outreach Partnership in the late
1990s but it appears that boating impacts to seagrasses in the Keys (and
around FL) are getting worse not better. So, what to do?
Where we probably really differ and Im kind of surprised to hear you
express it this way is in interpretation of the statement
The job of
the FKNMS was to protect and manage the coral reef ecosystem of the
Keys_for the good of all_." You seem to suggest that means for the
use
of all no matter what. I wonder if the other 300 million people around
the country would see it that way or maybe believe that
good
equated
more to something like
do what you have to to protect it for all of us
into the future
. Since we know that sustainable use and sustainability
is what we are ultimately supposed to be striving for my bet is on that
opinion. Thinking in terms of everybody being able to
use
the resource
(and thereby overwhelm the government) is a very different thing. The
best example that comes to mind is the annual party of 2000-3000 boats
in very shallow water sand and seagrass habitat off Whale Harbor. You
would say they have right to be there and I would say thats wrong due
to the serious habitat issues involved and they shouldnt be allowed to
do that. I can speak to very specific examples all over the Keys but you
speak to me in generalities - but you dont dispute my conclusions.
You and I seem to agree that theres been a lot of degradation in the
Keys the last few decades and obviously its all about numbers of
people. So, why does NOAA continually express the condition of the Keys
ecosystem in terms of external influences? The public that supported
designation and were willing to sacrifice didnt expect continued
degradation and they definitely didnt expect a global focus with NOAA
staff working with others all over the world. They wanted local
management and protection of the most productive and biologically
diverse coastal system in the US if not the hemisphere. Its an
unbelievable place. But weve all learned the hard way to
trust but
verify
declarations that government throws our way especially about
our own resources. And there absolutely has to be some contrary opinions
allowed.
In my mind, and Ive clumsily tried to express it before, the key word
is
ecosystem
and it always seems to be overlooked when I get blasted
that Im speaking to the entire place not just
the reef
. FKNMS and its
mandate extends to the mean high water line along the entire chain of
islands. And thats where the issue of local and state government
looking to the feds for guidance and priorities comes in. Youre doing
all the science and spending all the money on science and what is funded
(priorities) sends a very important message to others. So, we agree that
degradation continues and agree that external influences have a lot to
do with reef problems. How about seagrass, hardbottom, and mangroves
problems in the Keys? External influences? And Miami-Dade and Broward
counties dont count. We agree that there are problems and I believe
that if one strategy doesnt work then you try new strategies or have
new regulations enacted to up the ante on abusers of the resource. The
degradation cannot continue and the laws requiring protection and
sustainability have to be followed. Your not managing a par 3 golf
course full of hackers in some little country town. I think that NOAA
needs to come clean with the public about problems in the Keys.
To Bill P.: I really think you need to be careful who your talking down
to. I couldnt find the email that you refer to even though I keep all
of them. But I bet I said a bit more than
you dont get it
. If I
suggested that it was because you also think the FKNMS is all about
the
reef
. But I do admit that that is the most fun part. A reading of your
response below suggests that to put it mildly. And good timing re
leaving the development consulting firm of PBSJ boy that was some
disgrace when 2 of the top executives in that office pled to charges
involving a long-running scheme to use campaign contributions to win
government contracts. Boy, thats a lot of money but thats development
consulting. But then again its good that you
put your money where your
mouth is
.
And indeed you are a big picture thinker. On March 3, 2006 you wrote to
the world of coral_listers
Without coming to grips with the
big-picture, global-scale, politically challenging stuff - reefs will be
managed to death at the local-scale. Or should I say, reefs will die in
front of
the very managers and scientists dedicated to protecting them.
Im
still trying to figure that one out but I dont really think theres a
risk of Keys reefs being
managed to death
.
And you should be careful or Ill ask you to back up your statement
This includes research and on-the-ground projects with seagrass and
mangrove habitats as well.
I know better.
I dont need to justify my opinions on the health and needs of the Keys
system to you one bit. In 1979 I put together the federal case (U.S. v
C. McCoy, yes that McCoy) that led to seagrass restoration and helped
put the nail in the coffin of open water fill in the Keys. In 1981 I
helped DOJ and the Corps put together the case (U.S. vs MCC) that
created a new and much needed focus on seagrass destruction by vessels
(27 acres in that case). Where were you in 1979 and 1981? Those are a
few of the successful Keys state and federal court cases in which I
participated (Billy knows). Current successful (to this point) efforts
include the FEMA/FWS case and the County Tier Map case. And your
team
would still have thousands of damn rhesus monkeys swimming around in the
lower Keys if it werent for me. If you use NOAAs benthic habitat maps
of the FKNMS youre using my maps (and Ziemans), if you use EPAs ADID
wetland maps youre using my maps, if you use the FNAI hammock maps and
descriptions, the current Keys exotic vegetation maps, or the FMRI Keys
prop scar maps, yes, youre using my maps. If you want to compare notes
about ALL of the Keys ecosystems just let me know. And Ive never done a
lick of development work even though, as you know, that is where the
money is.
So, regarding your
&..naysayers that take unwarranted shots&.
Spare me.
There, thats it from me and thanks for listening. Out of all of this my
requests to NOAA and Billy and Bill and Bill are simply:
#1. Inform me and those receiving this mess of an exchange why you think
that the FKNMS should be given any credit for the overall low macroalgal
cover on Keys reefs, and what is the basis for your belief, and
#2. For the 20th anniversary of the FKNMS designation in 2010 (and Im
sure there will be a party) prepare a simple review of important metrics
(scientists like this term now) or measurements that can give a glimpse
of how the Keys ecosystem has fared or changed since 1990. Something
people can understand and something to help get a focus on change (no
matter what the cause, for better or worse). Hard coral cover,
macroalgal cover, lobster harvest, finfish harvest, prop scars, vessel
groundings, water quality in terms of nutrients and transparency, beach
closures, wetland fill permits, boat accidents and fatalities, boat
registrations, commercial permits, guide permits, acres of marine
habitat restored, # of channel markers and marked channels, # and size
of cruise ships, # tourists, and # vehicles all come to mind as another
snapshot
of what has changed in the Keys since 1990. Im sure Keys
folks and NOAA staff could think of other and better measures to view
for trends. Why not? I think the public would find it very interesting
and useful and I bet a lot of this information is easily at hand.
I look forward to hearing from you.
In case this doesnt email very well I have a .pdf of this exchange if
anyone is interested.
Thanks again. Have a good weekend.
Curtis Kruer/Sheridan, MT
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
On 6/23/08 John Bruno wrote:
Billy Causey and his team are in my view some of the world's most
successful reef managers; the quantitative monitoring data indicates
that they have been very successful in managing the major threats to
reefs that they are capable of mitigating. They obviously cannot prevent
climate change and coral disease outbreaks, but they have done a good
job at managing for low-ish macroalgal cover (which will ideally, at
some point facilitate coral recovery).
On 6/23/08 Curtis Kruer wrote
Hi John,
If Billy Causey's job was only to manage for minimizing macroalgal cover
cover you might be correct. But the reality is that the Keys' coral reef
ecosystem is a mess (for example shoreline mangroves, shallow seagrass,
marine habitat disturbance and degradation, trap debris and trap
impacts, loss of hard coral cover in popular dive sites, sacrifice zones
on seagrass beds where 1000s of partying boats predictably and routinely
congregate in shallow water, large vessels routinely resuspending
sediment in coral areas, etc.) and has worsened considerably since the
designartion of the FKNMS in 1990. The job of the FKNMS was to protect
and manage the coral reef ecosystem of the Keys for the good of all. In
my view (based on 30+ years of work there), and the view of many others,
it has failed miserably. As your email arrived I was working through
some routine GIS and imagery review I do in the Keys utilizing high
resolution 2006 color aerial imagery. You should get a set and take a
look for yourself. Geez. So that no one on the list is misinformed
possibly you could clarify your comment - "....are in my view some of
the world's most successful reef managers." - and explain that it
applies only to macroalgae?? Thanks. Curtis Kruer
On Jun 24, 2008 Billy Causey wrote:
Curtis,
I will try to respond to your note without seeming personal or
defensive, but both are difficult to manage. However, since you have
sent this message to the Coral-list, and indeed the world, I cannot
stand by without responding this time. A long time ago, when you moved
to Montana, I stopped reading your messages based on your snap-shot
visits to the Florida Keys. Your passion runs high for this very special
place, no one could ever question that about you. What I take exception
to is how you seem to imply that you are the only one who cares about
the Florida Keys coral reef ecosystem - that none of the FKNMS Team
share your passion for this place. You are mistaken.
The FKNMS Team is made up of the most dedicated people I have ever
worked with, in state or federal government. But the FKNMS Team is more
than government employees who get paid for their work (and not nearly
enough). They are government employees who work a third to
half of their time without compensation. We are a community who cares
about this very special place we call home. The paid staff of the FKNMS
Team come from 2 state agencies and 1 federal agency who work together,
focusing on protecting and conserving the resources of this special
area. The FKNMS Team is also made up of dozens of hard working
volunteers, such as those who serve on the Sanctuary Advisory Council,
or Team OCEAN volunteers, or Reef Medic volunteers, or the dozens of
volunteers who support Sanctuary operations in a variety of ways. The
Sanctuary Advisory Council has served since February of 1992, and dozens
of individuals have given of their precious personal time and made
personal sacrifices to helpprotect and conserve the Florida Keys. Curtis
... you should attend one of these meetings some time and experience the
passion and commitment that makes yours pale by comparison. The FKNMS
Team is also comprised of all of the local, state, federal and NGO
partnerships that exist. These are partnerships that are essential if
the goals and objectives of the Sanctuary are to be realized. Goals and
objectives that were created by the Sanctuary Advisory Council - again,
individuals and leaders in the community who have given of their time to
make a difference in this special place.
Coral reef ecosystems around the world are facing the same major
threats: climate change, land-based sources of pollution, habitat loss
and degradation, and overfishing. And the Florida Keys are no different.
Yet there are differences. Millions of people visit the Keys and most of
them end up on the water. The coral reefs here are the most accessible
in the world and are the heaviest used coral reefs in the world. They
are on the door-step of 5-6 million people who
live in South Florida, many of whom trailer their own boats down a
single highway and launch them. The Florida Keys are at a cross-roads of
connectivity between the waters of the Wider Caribbean, 40% of the
drainage off North America and downstream of the South Florida
Ecosystem. It is a special place in high demand and under extraordinary
stresses from use. These acts cannot be denied, or underestimated.
Curtis ... you make a good point in your statement: "The job of the
FKNMS was to protect and manage the coral reef ecosystem of the Keys_for
the good of all_." That one sentence captures the entire challenge of
managing a multiple-use marine protected area like the Florida Keys. Not
everyone shares your values or opinions about how the resources are to
be used. Nor do they share mine or those of the FKNMS Team. In fact I
would say that the vast majority of those visiting the Florida Keys
don't share our values. But they still have a right to access and use of
the resources ... in ways that make me cringe. However, the situation
gets more complicated. The FKNMS shares authority and jurisdiction with
27 other local, state and federal agencies. The State of Florida is
co-trustee and owner of the submerged lands in 65% of the Sanctuary.
They have shared authority and jurisdiction over the majority of the
waters of the Sanctuary. Many who may have read your posting wouldn't
know that there are multiple, overlapping jurisdictions ... in an area
the size of the State of Vermont. Can you imagine ... how many law
enforcement officers there are in the State of Vermont at the local,
county, state and federal levels? If we had that many Enforcement
Officers in the Keys, we would be accused of having a police state. Yet,
with all of that enforcement in Vermont people still speed and have
accidents. And we see that every day on the water in the Keys.
Regardless of the regulations in place in the FKNMS, people still prop
scar and run aground on seagrass beds. The keys to the future of the
Sanctuary lie in the next generations. Education and outreach arethe
most effective management tools that we can utilize. The Seagrass
Outreach Partnership in the FKNMS has gained a tremendous amount of
momentum over the past 5 to 7 years and people are working together to
address a huge problem. Flatsfishermen, agency representatives,
educators and conservationists are working together, to bring attention
to impacts to seagrass. Government cannot do it alone and it is in the
Keys where personal ownership of resource interests come together to
work towards collective long term solutions. In fact, the Keys community
is frequently sought out as a model for cooperative and coordinated
management. The problems affecting coral reefs, especially those in the
Florida Keys, are enormous. There's no question about it. It troubles me
to see the decline at popular reefs like Looe Key Reef, but it also
troubles me to see the decline on coral reefs in remote areas around the
Caribbean, or in the Pacific. It's easy to put ones self in an
adversarial or finger pointing role, however it's more difficult to put
ones self in a role of creating positive change through a public
participatory process. The next time you visit Florida, try to attend a
Sanctuary Advisory Council meeting and learn about passion and
commitment in the trenches. Here you would have an opportunity to
provide cogent and realistic alternatives to our current management
approaches to an Advisory Council comprised of a diverse range of
stakeholders. You have an open invitation to attend and provide public
comment at any Sanctuary Advisory Council meeting.
On 6/24/08 Bill Precht wrote
Billy:
Thank you so much for your passionate note/rebuttal to Curtis.
It is because of your vision and the collective vision of all the folks
you mention that, in part, make this Sanctuary so successful.
As you know, after 26 years as a coral reef researcher and ecosystem
restoration specialist - that I left private industry to join your team
(at a significant cut in pay I might add) for ALL the reasons you note.
I put my money where my mouth is - I can't say the same for most of the
naysayers that take unwarranted shots and you and our team.
Having worked in dozens of island nations in the Caribbean over the past
three decades I can attest that our resource is fairing far better than
many. However, the loss of acroporids due to a Caribbean wide pandemic,
the loss of /Diadema/ to the same, and seven coral bleaching events
since 1983 have been the major causes of reef decline in the FKNMS.
These have nothing to do with local management initiatives and no form
of local management or policy could have changed the trajectory or
ameliorated the coral losses we have observed. While many shallow, low
coral cover reefs in the Caribbean now commonly have >40% macroalgae
cover - our FKNMS reefs in the same habitat have <10% macroalgae. This
is precisely because nutrients are low and herbivory from reef fishes is
high - both the result of positive science-based management strategies
employed by the Sanctuary. With the ongoing implementation of
restoration programs tied to the acroporid corals and /Diadema/ - the
future holds great promise.
But its not just about nutrients and macroalgae - there has been a
constant "progression in protection" throughout the Sanctuary and these
continue to improve with time. It easy to disregard the giant steps we
have taken in the past decade or so if we look at this myopically. On
balance, however, the accomplishments have been extraordinary. This
includes research and on-the-ground projects with seagrass and mangrove
habitats as well.
Interestingly enough, about a year ago when Curtis was spewing venom on
the Coral List, I sent him a copy of my chapter with Steven Miller. His
response to me at that time was "we" didn't get it. I would argue that
after spending as much time as I do on the water (and Steven's SCREAM
team), it is Curtis that doesn't get it.
Cheers,
Bill
On 6/24/08 Billy Causey wrote:
Bill,
Your words and comments are so on target. You are great! I am so
incredibly pleased that you joined our Team ...for we are all going to
do great things together. Thank you for the heartfelt words of
encouragement ....and most of all, thank you for taking that pay cut!
Cheers, Billy
More information about the Coral-List
mailing list