[Coral-List] Reminder: Deadline for submitting comments on 82 corals is April 12

[Eugene Shinn]

Jennifer, I read your posting and also made another attempt to 
penetrate the one posted by CBD. The CBD website provides the list of 
82 species but no way to make critical comments. It is an 
advertisement directed toward providing additional support for the 
listing and CBD. We as scientists should be asking, do we need the 
listings, and will it save any of the 82 species? 
     I also read the list of 6 questions you provided.  I was looking 
for question 7 which should ask, Why do we need these listings? It 
was not there. Your 6 questions seem to be aimed at soliciting 
additional ammunition to support listing. That of course is you job. 
You conclude with, "If any species are proposed for listing, we will 
issue a Federal Register Notice of the proposed rule and solicit 
"comments" at that time." I suspect from past experience that when we 
reach that stage the decision will have already been made. Further 
comments at that time will likely have no effect on the outcome. As I 
recall that is what happened with the Acropora listing.
      As coral scientists I think we should focus on the basic 
question. Is it needed? Is there any scientific basis for listing? 
Should we not ask, "how will it save the corals?" My main concern is 
on the Atlantic species, especially the Mostastreas, where I have 
more than 50 years of observation and research experience. This 
Genera is the basic builder of patch reefs in The Florida Keys Marine 
Sanctuary (where they are already protected by law) as well as in the 
rest of the Caribbean. As you know many of these corals in the 
Sanctuary were killed, or highly stressed, in the recent January, 
2010 cold spell. Would listing have prevented that from happening? 
The cold spell in 1969/70 killed 80 percent of these same species at 
Hens and Chickens reef (now a SPA) and their death was well 
documented. The data was published and remains uncontested (Hudson et 
al 1976). Again no amount of legal protection would have prevented 
that mortality. We also know that the cold spell of 1977 (when it 
snowed in Miami) wiped out the vast majority of Acropora at Dry 
Tortugas. That mortality was well documented, (Davis 1982 and Porter 
et. al 1982). Would listing have saved those corals? I won't go into 
hurricanes. USGS reef coring at Tortugas demonstrated that Acropora 
had never been a major reef builder there during the past 5,000 years 
(Shinn et al 1977 and Shinn and Jaap 2005). Nevertheless after it was 
listed as threatened the Tortugas was classified as "critical 
habitat" for Acropora. Geologic history assures us that it never was 
a significant reef builder there in the past thus indicating it will 
not be in the future. So what did listing accomplish? I might also 
mention the Caribbean-wide demise of both Acropora and Diadema that 
peaked in 1983 and 84. Would listing have saved them? The answer of 
course is no.
      The hidden agenda that has recently emerged from the closet is 
Co2 rise and possible acidification, a highly politicized issue as 
everyone is aware. The fact is that if all Co2 emissions were stopped 
tomorrow it would likely take about 50 years to see a reduction in 
atmospheric and oceanic Co2 levels. It is also evident that we will 
not be free of Co2 emissions for a very long time because we 
presently get only about 3 percent of our energy from combined solar, 
and wind.  Reduction of Co2 will necessarily come very gradually. In 
50 yrs we will likely be running out of fossil fuels to burn so 
reduction in these emissions will come regardless.
      Besides the effects of reduced water temperature it is well 
established that in the late 1980s the major killer of Montastrea was 
water borne black band disease. The occurrence of black band disease, 
along with bleaching, is well documented. Bleaching usually did not 
kill but black band did. Black band disease killed at least 90 
percent of the 200-year-old Montastrea heads at Carysfort Reef which 
until the late 1970s was one of the most prolific reefs in the 
Sanctuary. Carysfort even survived construction of the lighthouse in 
1850 and the periodic blasting that kept the supply channel clear of 
coral growth. Black band disease also killed Montastrea species 
throughout the Caribbean. Its exact cause (i.e. the source of the 
pathogens) has never been identified, especially around uninhabited 
island in the eastern Caribbean where sewage can not be blamed. If we 
actually knew the source of such a wide-spread pathogens listing 
would make some sense. Without knowing the major cause of Montastrea 
death we clearly do not know what to protect it from or how to do so. 
Clearly the listing of these species will have no effect on 
preserving these Atlantic species. I suspect the same is true for 
many in the Pacific but I am not well versed in Pacific corals 
although the politics are probably the same. So, one has to ask one 
more time, what is the motive for listing? What is the hidden agenda? 
Is it just a "feel good" action? Will it fill the coffers of 
attorneys at CBD or is the motive to expand NMFS, or both? Common 
sense shows that listing will not save these corals. I think I 
partially answered the 6 questions but not in the way intended. So 
where are we? Why is NMFS and the CBD appear to be soliciting only 
information that will further aid the adoption and passage of 
additional laws and regulations that will not save corals in our life 
times, or our children's, lifetime? Beware of the law of unintended 
consequences. Gene



--


No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS)
------------------------------------ -----------------------------------
E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor
University of South Florida
Marine Science Center (room 204)
140 Seventh Avenue South
St. Petersburg, FL 33701
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- 
-----------------------------------

-- 


No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS)
------------------------------------ -----------------------------------
E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor
University of South Florida
Marine Science Center (room 204)
140 Seventh Avenue South
St. Petersburg, FL 33701
<eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- 
-----------------------------------