From pawlikj at uncw.edu Tue Nov 1 08:38:43 2011 From: pawlikj at uncw.edu (Pawlik, Joseph) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 08:38:43 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] New MS/PhD student wanted: Coral Reef Ecology In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Colleagues, Please pass on this information to your best and brightest senior Undergraduate students: The Pawlik lab will be recruiting one new MS/PhD student for Fall 2012 to study the ecology of Caribbean coral reefs. Our research program, funded by NSF and NOAA, includes research components in the Bahamas, southern Caribbean, and the Florida Keys, and has included missions in NOAA's Aquarius habitat. More information about our research is at this website: http://people.uncw.edu/pawlikj/index.html Applicants (at the BS level ONLY) should be highly motivated and independent, with an excellent academic record, references, and past field research experiences using SCUBA. More information about the UNCW graduate program and about expectations of graduate students in the Pawlik lab can be found at this website: http://people.uncw.edu/pawlikj/prosStudent.html Completed applications to the UNCW graduate school should be received by late Feb 2012. Thanks for your help, Joe ************************************************************** Joseph R. Pawlik, Professor Dept. of Biology and Marine Biology UNCW Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin Moss Ln Wilmington, NC 28409 USA pawlikj at uncw.edu; Office:(910)962-2377; Cell:(910)232-3579 Website: http://people.uncw.edu/pawlikj/index.html PDFs: http://people.uncw.edu/pawlikj/pubs2.html ************************************************************** From Erin.Hofmann at NFWF.ORG Tue Nov 1 10:29:20 2011 From: Erin.Hofmann at NFWF.ORG (Erin Hofmann) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 10:29:20 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Funding Opportunity: Coral Reef Conservation Fund 2012 Message-ID: The National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and NOAA's Coral Program, announce the availability of grant funding for coral reef domestic U.S. jurisdiction and international projects. The full RFP can be found at www.nfwf.org/coralreef. U.S. Jurisdictions can apply for funding to (1) enhance watershed management planning; (2) reduce sedimentation; or, (3) improve fisheries management. International priorities are to (1) Implement NOAA's International Strategy; (2) Apply Lessons from NOAA-Sponsored Training Programs; or, (3) Increase MPA capacity in the Caribbean. More information on priority geographies can be found at www.nfwf.org/priorities. All persons, organizations, and non-U.S. Federal agencies are eligible to apply, including parties within and outside the United States. The majority of awards under this program will fall in the range of $20,000 to $70,000. Matching funds from non-federal sources are required at a 1:1 ratio for all proposed projects. Please see the RFP announcement for a description of the funding priorities for this competition as well as other important application information. Brief pre-proposals for this competition are due on December 19, 2011 and must be submitted via the NFWF Easygrants system (http://www.nfwf.org/easygrants). NFWF will also host a webinar on November 15th to discuss the priorities identified in the RFP and describe how to write a competitive application. Details and sign up information for the webinar can be found in the RFP and at www.nfwf.org/coralreef. For more information, contact Michelle Pico at pico at nfwf.org or Erin Hofmann at erin.hofmann at nfwf.org From Anete.BERZINA at iucn.org Tue Nov 1 11:35:43 2011 From: Anete.BERZINA at iucn.org (BERZINA Anete) Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 15:35:43 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Share your experience: EBA in islands - IUCN Case Studies Compilation (ENG/FR/ESP due 07 Nov 2011) Message-ID: Dear coral-listers, Could anyone of you advice on new or ongoing projects on Ecosystem Based Approaches (EBA) to climate change adaption in islands - perhaps, related to coral reefs, monitoring/surveys (as research) or management of coral reefs (as on on-the-ground projects or policies and programs), or projects linked to coastlines - mangrove, coral reef, sea grasses, species having these as a habitat, etc? Your help would be very much appreciated. IUCN is planning to attend the UNFCC COP 17 to be held in Durban (South Africa), from 28th November to 9th December, 2011, and make the case for recognizing EBA as one of the strategies for climate change adaptation. IUCN is proposing to showcase EBA approaches to climate change adaption in islands as a part of a broader session on EBA at the Rio Conventions Pavilion in Durban. IUCN is currently collating the case studies on EBA from the Caribbean, Pacific and Indian Regions, which will be used to develop lessons learnt and key messages about EBA and islands to promote at the COP 17. Could you advice of the interesting projects we should include? If so, it would be very much appreciated if you could fill the short questionnaire attached and return to pilar.gomis at iucn.org by following Monday, 7 November 2011. Apologies for short notice. We will share the collated material with you once ready. If there is anyone of you planning to attend the COP 17 in Durban, and would like to be engaged in this case study presentation on EBA in islands, please get in touch with dominique.benzaken at iucn.org. For more information, please see below. Thank you in advance, Kind regards, Anete Berzina Communications Specialist European Union Representative Office IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) 64, Boulevard Louis Schmidt, 1040 Brussels, Belgium Telephone: +32-2-739-1001; Fax +32-2-732-9499 www.iucn.org/ipbes www.iucn.org/euoverseas From: BERZINA Anete Sent: 31 October 2011 16:13 To: EUOVERSEAS; europe_overseas_forum at googlegroups.com; glispa-discuss at googlegroups.com Cc: BENZAKEN Dominique; GOMIS Pilar Subject: Reminder: Share your experience: EBA in islands - IUCN Case Studies Compilation (ENG/FR/ESP due 07 Nov 2011) Importance: High Dear colleagues, Thank you very much for those who have already submitted their case studies on ecosystem based (EBA) approaches to climate change adaption in islands. This compilation, proposed by IUCN, aims to include lessons learnt in Europe?s overseas islands, too (see the message below in English, French or Spanish). It is proposed that these case studies will be a part of a broader event on EBA at the Rio Conventions? Ecosystems and Climate Change Pavilion during the UNFCCC COP 17 in Durban, in one month. Dominique Benzaken, IUCN Europe Overseas Programme Coordinator, will be presenting the lessons learnt and the future directions, based on the case studies received from you. If you are planning to attend the conference and would like to be engaged, please get in touch with Dominique at dominique.benzaken at iucn.org. To remind, there is still one week to submit your contribution to the case studies compilation, if you haven?t yet. Do you have an interesting project to include? Do you wish to showcase your experience and get your message across to the world leaders gathering in Durban? Please fill in the short form attached and send it to Pilar Gomis at pilar.gomis at iucn.org by the following Monday, 7 November 2011. Don?t hesitate to contact Pilar if you need assistance. Thank you, Kind regards, Anete Berzina Communications Specialist European Union Representative Office IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) 64, Boulevard Louis Schmidt, 1040 Brussels, Belgium Telephone: +32-2-739-1001; Fax +32-2-732-9499 www.iucn.org/ipbes www.iucn.org/euoverseas Have your say! Join Europe Overseas Forum on biodiversity and climate change From: europe_overseas_forum at googlegroups.com [mailto:europe_overseas_forum at googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of BERZINA Anete Sent: 10 October 2011 16:46 To: europe_overseas_forum at googlegroups.com; glispa-discuss at googlegroups.com Cc: GOMIS Pilar Subject: [EU Overseas Forum] Share your experience: EBA in islands - IUCN Case Study (English, Fran?ais, Espa?ol) Importance: High **See the message in French and Spanish below** Dear Colleagues, UNFCC COP 17 will be held in Durban (South Africa), from 28th November to 9th December, 2011. One of the objectives of IUCN for Durban is to reach out to external audiences (government, NGO, development community, private sector) and make the case for recognizing Ecosystem-Based Adaptation (EBA) as one of the strategies for climate change adaptation. IUCN is proposing to showcase ecosystem based (EBA) approaches to climate change adaption in islands as a part of a broader session on EBA at the Rio Conventions Pavilion in Durban. We propose to collate case studies on EBA from the Caribbean, Pacific and Indian Regions, including EU overseas, which we will use to develop lessons learnt and key messages about EBA and islands to promote at the COP. Cases studies we are seeking could be new or on-going projects. They could be concerned with: o Policy: EBA measures included in National Adaptation Programs of Action (NAPA?s), management plans and strategies (e.g. ridge to reef, integrated coastal planning, fisheries management). o Research: Impacts studies in island environments, vulnerability assessments, studies on adaptive capacity, economics of EBA, resilience studies. o On-ground implementation measures: (e.g. Integrated Coastal Management, Marine protected areas networks, habitat restoration, community based planning, integration of EBA in resource management). o Capacity building, awareness raising and education: training workshops/awareness raising campaigns (e.g. risk communication, importance of ecosystem for adaptive capacity). o Other? and be national, local or regional and from different sectors e.g.: disaster risk reduction, biodiversity conservation, coastal management, water management, and agriculture or fisheries management. To assist us with collating cases studies, we have attached a 1-page information template (see attachment). It should not take you more than 15 min to fill in. We would be grateful if you could send your contribution to Pilar Gomis (pilar.gomis at iucn.org) before 7th November 2011 COB. With already little time to the event, we will appreciate your interesting case studies as soon as possible! We are also inviting partners from the regions to join in the event. Please advise us your attendance and plans. We are very grateful for your valuable contributions and will keep you updated on progress before and during the COP. Looking forward to hearing from you soon, Best regards, Pilar Gomis Pilar Gomis Marine Officer Global Marine and Polar Programme IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) 28 rue Mauverney, CH-1196 Gland, Switzerland +41 22 999 0398; Fax +41 22 999 0002; www.iucn.org *Fran?ais* Ch?res Coll?gues/Chers Coll?gues, La convention UNFCC COP 17 aura lieu ? Durban (Afrique du Sud), du 22 Novembre au 9 D?cembre 2011. Un des objectifs de l'UICN pour Durban est d'atteindre des publics externes (gouvernement, ONG, communaut? de d?veloppement, secteur priv?) et de faire le cas pour la reconnaissance de ? Ecosystem-Based Adaptation (EBA) ? comme l'une des strat?gies d'adaptation au changement climatique. L'UICN se propose de mettre en valeur les approches EBA dans les ?les comme une partie d?une vaste session au Pavillon de Convention Rio, ? Durban. Nous proposons de rassembler des ?tudes de cas sur les EBA ? partir des r?gions des Cara?bes, Pacifique et Indien, y compris l'UE ? l'?tranger, que nous allons utiliser pour d?velopper des enseignements et messages cl?s sur l'EBA et les ?les de promouvoir ? la COP. Les ?tudes de cas que nous recherchons pourrait ?tre de nouveaux projets ou en cours. Ils pourraient ?tre concern?s par: o Politique: EbA mesures incluses dans les programmes nationaux d'adaptation (NAPA), les plans et strat?gies de gestion (ex : cr?te des r?cifs, la planification int?gr?e des zones c?ti?res, la gestion des p?ches). o La recherche: ?tudes d'impacts dans les milieux insulaires, des ?valuations de vuln?rabilit?, les ?tudes sur la capacit? d'adaptation, de l'?conomie de l'EBA, les ?tudes de la r?silience. o La mise en ?uvre des mesures sur le terrain: (ex: gestion int?gr?e des zones c?ti?res, marines r?seaux de zones prot?g?es, la restauration des habitats, la planification communautaire, l'int?gration de l'EBA en gestion des ressources). o Renforcement des capacit?s, la sensibilisation et l'?ducation: des ateliers de formation/sensibilisation des campagnes (ex : risque de communication, l'importance de l'?cosyst?me pour la capacit? d'adaptation). o Autre? et ?tre national, local ou r?gional et des diff?rents secteurs, par exemple: r?duction des risques de catastrophes, la conservation de la biodiversit?, gestion des zones c?ti?res, la gestion de l'eau, l'agriculture ou la gestion de la p?che. Pour nous aider ? rassembler des ?tudes de cas, nous avons joint un mod?le de 1-page d'information (document attach?). Il ne devrait pas vous prendre plus de 15 minutes pour le remplir. Nous vous serions reconnaissants si vous pouviez envoyer votre contribution ? Pilar Gomis (pilar.gomis at iucn.org) avant le 7 de Novembre. Nous invitons ?galement les partenaires des r?gions ? se joindre ? l'?v?nement. S'il vous pla?t nous aviser de votre pr?sence et de vos plans. Nous sommes tr?s reconnaissants pour votre contribution pr?cieuse et nous vous tiendrons inform?s des progr?s r?alis?s avant et pendant la COP. Au plaisir d'avoir de vos nouvelles bient?t, Cordialement, Pilar Gomis Pilar Gomis Marine Officer Global Marine and Polar Programme IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) 28 rue Mauverney, CH-1196 Gland, Switzerland Tel. +41 22 999 0398; Fax +41 22 999 0002; www.iucn.org *Espa?ol* Estimados colegas, La UNFCC se celebrar? en Durban (Sud?frica), desde el 28 de Noviembre hasta el 9 de Diciembre de 2011. Uno de los objetivos de la UICN en Durban es llegar al p?blico (gobierno, ONG, comunidad de desarrollo, el sector privado) y promover ? Ecosystem-based Adaptation? (EBA) como una de las estrategias de adaptaci?n al cambio clim?tico. La UICN propone mostrar propuestas de adaptaci?n basada en ecosistemas al cambio clim?tico en las islas como parte de una sesi?n m?s amplia sobre EBA en el Pabell?n de Convenciones R?o, en Durban. Proponemos pues, compilar estudios de caso sobre EBA en islas de regiones del Caribe, Pac?fico e ?ndico, incluyendo UE en el extranjero, el cual utilizaremos para desarrollar las lecciones aprendidas y los mensajes clave sobre la EBA y de las islas para promoverlo en la COP. Los estudios que estamos buscando podr?an ser proyectos nuevos o actualmente en curso. Podr?an estar relacionados con: o Pol?tica: medidas EBA incluidas en los Programas de Acci?n Nacionales de Adaptaci?n (NAPA), los planes y estrategias de gesti?n (e.g. planificaci?n integrada de las costas, gesti?n pesquera). o Investigaci?n: Estudios de ambientales en islas, evaluaciones de vulnerabilidad, estudios sobre la capacidad de adaptaci?n, estudios econ?micos de EBA, estudios de resiliencia. o Medidas de implementaci?n en campo: (e.g. gesti?n integrada de zonas costeras, redes de ?reas marinas protegidas, restauraci?n de h?bitat, planificaci?n de base comunitaria, integraci?n de EBA en la gesti?n de recursos. o Refuerzo de capacidades, la sensibilizaci?n y la educaci?n: talleres de formaci?n/campa?as de sensibilizaci?n (e.g. importancia del ecosistema para la capacidad de adaptaci?n). o Otros? y pueden ser tanto nacionales, como regionales o locales y tener relaci?n con los diferentes sectores, e.g. la reducci?n del riesgo de desastres, conservaci?n de la biodiversidad, la gesti?n del litoral, la gesti?n del agua, agricultura o gesti?n de la pesca. Para ayudarnos con la recopilaci?n de estos estudios hemos incluido un 1hoja - plantilla de informaci?n (documento adjunto), la cual no debe tomarle m?s de 15 minutos para rellenarla. Le agradecer?amos nos enviara su contribuci?n a Pilar Gomis (pilar.gomis at iucn.org) antes del pr?ximo 7 de Noviembre. Igualmente, invitamos a los socios de las regiones a participar en el evento. Por favor, h?ganos saber sobre su asistencia, as? como sus planes. Les estamos muy agradecidos por su valiosa contribuci?n y le mantendremos informado sobre los progresos realizados antes y durante la COP. Atentamente, Pilar Gomis Pilar Gomis Marine Officer Global Marine and Polar Programme IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) 28 rue Mauverney, CH-1196 Gland, Switzerland Tel. +41 22 999 0398; Fax +41 22 999 0002; www.iucn.org ________________________________________ This communication, together with any attachment, may contain confidential information and/or copyright material and is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, you received it by error and you are asked to please delete it and promptly notify us. Any review, copying, use, disclosure or distribution of any part of this communication, unless duly authorized by or on behalf of IUCN, is strictly forbidden. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Europe Overseas Forum" group. To post to this group, send email to europe_overseas_forum at googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to europe_overseas_forum+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/europe_overseas_forum?hl=en ________________________________ This communication, together with any attachment, may contain confidential information and/or copyright material and is intended only for the person(s) to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, you received it by error and you are asked to please delete it and promptly notify us. Any review, copying, use, disclosure or distribution of any part of this communication, unless duly authorized by or on behalf of IUCN, is strictly forbidden. From richardunsworth at hotmail.com Wed Nov 2 04:53:20 2011 From: richardunsworth at hotmail.com (Richard Unsworth) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 18:53:20 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] November is Seagrass Month on SeaWeb.org Message-ID: Over the next month, the international marine conservation website SeaWeb.org in collaboration with the World Seagrass Association will be running a range of features highlighting the importance of seagrass meadows. The content contains some interesting articles about the value of seagrass meadows, together with interviews with seagrass researchers, and a range of fun facts and great images. This will be a great resource for students. http://www.seaweb.org/news/Seagrasses.php This also coincides with the recent launch by the World Seagrass Association of the ?Seagrass Syllabus for resource managers? that was developed together with Conservation International. http://wsa.seagrassonline.org/blog/archives/94 -------------------------------------------------------- Dr Richard Unsworth PhD M.Sc B.Sc CMarSci Mob: +44 (0) 77 9531 1166 Skype: richard.unsworth personal e-mail: richardunsworth at hotmail.com my website: http://www.richardunsworth.co.uk check out http://www.climateshifts.org "Hiraeth" -------------------------------------------------------- From karim.benmustapha at instm.rnrt.tn Wed Nov 2 08:33:59 2011 From: karim.benmustapha at instm.rnrt.tn (karim) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 13:33:59 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] November is Seagrass Month on SeaWeb.org In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <001301cc995b$b3a30220$1ae90660$@benmustapha@instm.rnrt.tn> Hi from Tunisia Nice to hear that the focus will be on seagrass, we ended last year a three year marine survey over the Tunisian sousth east coasts to map the seagrass meadows along 700 km linear km, from the shore up to 50 m depth and to study their vitality in 32 locations, then to install #tags# (balises) in their lower and upper limits. The mapping plan was done using direct marine survey methods (diving and skin diving) and indirect ones (Satellites images, C3D phase differencing sonar systems (high resolution side scan sonar and swath bathymetry system), ROV and UW), tagging was done using usual methodology. Our team did a very hard job and we are really happy with the results of both issues (mapping and tagging). We ll be happy to share the results with you, we'll be editing soon a special issue of our bulletin summarizing the results (with an up to date list of marine algae from that area, as well as an actual map of Halophila stipluacea there. Thank you -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Richard Unsworth Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2011 09:53 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] November is Seagrass Month on SeaWeb.org Over the next month, the international marine conservation website SeaWeb.org in collaboration with the World Seagrass Association will be running a range of features highlighting the importance of seagrass meadows. The content contains some interesting articles about the value of seagrass meadows, together with interviews with seagrass researchers, and a range of fun facts and great images. This will be a great resource for students. http://www.seaweb.org/news/Seagrasses.php This also coincides with the recent launch by the World Seagrass Association of the 'Seagrass Syllabus for resource managers' that was developed together with Conservation International. http://wsa.seagrassonline.org/blog/archives/94 -------------------------------------------------------- Dr Richard Unsworth PhD M.Sc B.Sc CMarSci Mob: +44 (0) 77 9531 1166 Skype: richard.unsworth personal e-mail: richardunsworth at hotmail.com my website: http://www.richardunsworth.co.uk check out http://www.climateshifts.org "Hiraeth" -------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From hevals at gmail.com Wed Nov 2 08:36:37 2011 From: hevals at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Henri_Vall=E8s?=) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 08:36:37 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] References for rubble traps in the Caribbean (Zachary Whitener) Message-ID: Hi Zach, I found this method (see reference below) very useful to sample recently settled invertebrates (particularly crustaceans) and several reef fishes that exhibit affinity to rubble during settlement. I have only published the fish component but most of what you would be catching using it would in fact be crustaceans. Valles, H., D.L. Kramer and W. Hunte. 2006. A standard unit for monitoring recruitment of fishes to coral reef rubble. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 336:171-183. I hope this helps Henri Vall?s On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 10:46 AM, wrote: > Send Coral-List mailing list submissions to > ? ? ? ?coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > ? ? ? ?http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > ? ? ? ?coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > You can reach the person managing the list at > ? ? ? ?coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Coral-List digest...", e.g., cut and paste the > Subject line from the individual message you are replying to. Also, > please only include quoted text from prior posts that is necessary to > make your point; avoid re-sending the entire Digest back to the list. > > > Today's Topics: > > ? 1. Re: non artificial reef structures (Douglas Fenner) > ? 2. Request to post the following job opportunity: WWF Indian > ? ? ?Ocean Tuna Programme Officer (Brian, Susanna) > ? 3. Re: Termination of the National Biological Information > ? ? ?Infrastructure program (RainbowWarriorsInternational) > ? 4. Highest Financial Penalty for Illegal Coral Trade > ? ? ?(Susan_White at fws.gov) > ? 5. heat-light stress gene expression in Porites spp. (Carly Kenkel) > ? 6. References for rubble traps in the Caribbean (Zachary Whitener) > ? 7. New MS/PhD student wanted: Coral Reef Ecology (Pawlik, Joseph) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 12:21:24 -0700 (PDT) > From: Douglas Fenner > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] non artificial reef structures > To: Rudy Bonn , ? ?"coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" > ? ? ? ? > Message-ID: > ? ? ? ?<1320088884.12714.YahooMailNeo at web59605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > I seem to remember that dragon flies are predators that eat mosquitoes.? They are also insects, so the insecticides surely kill them as well.? I wonder if in a test location away from people if the insecticide were stopped and large numbers of dragon flies were released, if the mosquitoes couldn't be controlled that way?? I have no idea whether mass dragonfly culture has been worked out.? Or maybe there is some other way.? Just removing standing fresh water where they can breed should help. ?? ? Cheers,? Doug > > ? > Douglas Fenner > Coral Reef Monitoring Ecologist > Dept Marine & Wildlife Resources > American Samoa > > > Mailing address: > PO Box 3730 > Pago Pago, AS 96799 > USA > > > work phone 684 633 4456 > > > Skeptic finds he now agrees global warming is real. > http://news.yahoo.com/skeptic-finds-now-agrees-global-warming-real-142616605.html > > > In 2010, a survey of more than 1,000 of the world's most cited and published climate scientists found that 97 percent believe climate change is very likely caused by the burning of fossil fuels. > > > The American 'allergy' to global warming: why? > http://news.yahoo.com/american-allergy-global-warming-why-171043981.html > > > Bleak prospects for avoiding dangerous global warming. > http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/10/bleak-prospects-for-avoiding-dangerous.html > > > Heat hiding in deep sea, sea level to rise one meter by end of century > http://www.climateactionprogramme.org/news/oceans_are_storing_heat_to_hide_global_warming_whilst_sea_levels_are_rising/?utm_source=Climate+Action+Programme+-+Newsletter&utm_campaign=00b7025746-Climate_Action_Newsletter_Issue_7_9_04_2011&utm_medium=email > > > > ________________________________ > From: Rudy Bonn > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 9:34 AM > Subject: [Coral-List] non artificial reef structures > > Your right Gene, helicopters flying over the place spraying, small trucks with sprayers in the beds are spraying small streets, and even people are getting sprayed down here during fantasy fest, not with malathion though, naked people getting sprayed with body paint, some of them should keep their clothes on believe me, and the funny thing is?Im still get bitten by mosquitoes daily when I walk my dogs,? maybe the buggers have developed an immunity, what is sad though when it rains, and you know what its like down here when it rains heavily, all that malathion and everything else gets washed right into the ocean via storm drains where it eventually reaches the reef tract,?? are we as?humans losing our minds or what?? When you?here talk all the time about my grandkids not being able to see a living coral reef, something is wrong with that picture, when are we going to learn, when we finally destroy it all???? > > Rudy S Bonn > Director of Marine Projects > Reef Relief > 631 Greene Street > Key West, FL 33040 > 305-294-3100 > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 15:50:29 -0400 > From: "Brian, Susanna" > Subject: [Coral-List] Request to post the following job opportunity: > ? ? ? ?WWF Indian Ocean Tuna Programme Officer > To: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" > Message-ID: > ? ? ? ?<82A6D9A07F7E1749A51373E17AC384151E076CB7EF at WWFUS-EXCH10.hq.wwfinternal.org> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > To Whom It May Concern: > > On behalf of WWF- Madagascar/Western Indian Ocean Programme Office and Smart Fishing Initiative could you please post the following job opportunity in case it is of interest to any of your subscribers? > > Many thanks, Susanna > > Susanna Wingard Brian > Fisheries Program Officer > World Wildlife Fund > 1250 24th Street, NW > Washington, DC 20037-1193 > Office: 202-495-4703 ext. 703 > -- > > > > > > > > > INTERNATIONAL RECRUITMENT > > WWF Indian Ocean Tuna Programme Officer > > > The World Wildlife Fund Madagascar/Western Indian Ocean Programme Office and Smart Fishing Initiative is seeking a Tuna Programme Officer . The focus for this role is to increase MSC certification of tuna catches from principal tuna stocks in the Indian Ocean. This position is based in Seychelles under a fixed-term contract starting from January 2012,. > > > > Please visit the following website for a full job description: www.wwf.mg.. > > > > Applications should be sent by mail to WWF Antsakaviro Antananarivo, Lot Pr?s II M 85 Ter or by email to mwiopo.recruitment at wwf.panda.org by 23 November 2011 with the mention ?Application Tuna Programme Officer ? . ?Please include a signed cover letter, a CV(*) with telephone number for quick contact. > > > > (*)Specific templates for cover letter and resume are to be requested by e-mail to mwiopo.recruitment at wwf.panda.org with the mention "Request of template". > > > > Please do not send by registered mail. Only shortlisted applicants will be contacted. > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 14:47:05 -0700 (PDT) > From: RainbowWarriorsInternational > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Termination of the National Biological > ? ? ? ?Information ? ? Infrastructure program > To: "David M. Lawrence" , > ? ? ? ?"coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" > Message-ID: > ? ? ? ?<1320097625.30555.YahooMailNeo at web161017.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > I just learned last week from a NY state based university librarian that some 200 projects like NBII are all going to get axed in the USA. > > Can anyone provide more information about this wide-scale elimination of scientific datasets and databases? > > ? > Milton Ponson, President > Rainbow Warriors Core Foundation > (Rainbow Warriors International) > Tel. +297 568 5908 > PO Box 1154, Oranjestad > Aruba, Dutch Caribbean > Email: southern_caribbean at yahoo.com > http://www.rainbowwarriors.net > > To unite humanity in a global society dedicated to a sustainable way of life > > > ________________________________ > From: David M. Lawrence > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Sent: Saturday, October 8, 2011 8:01 PM > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Termination of the National Biological Information Infrastructure program > > The program cost a whopping $7 million -- obviously a budget buster.? > Allegedly all the data are available elsewhere, but I doubt the data > will be as easy to find scattered around the Netiverse.? I will be > filing FOIAs next week to see if I can get an accurate accounting of > that.? Frankly, I'm skeptical of OMB's claim. > > Dave > > On 10/7/2011 5:44 PM, RainbowWarriorsInternational wrote: >> This is indeed very bad news. How do we compensate for this loss? >> Milton Ponson, President >> Rainbow Warriors Core Foundation >> (Rainbow Warriors International) >> Tel. +297 568 5908 >> PO Box 1154, Oranjestad >> Aruba, Dutch Caribbean >> Email: southern_caribbean at yahoo.com >> http://www.rainbowwarriors.net >> >> *To unite humanity in a global society dedicated to a sustainable way >> of life* >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> *From:* David M. Lawrence >> *To:* coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> *Sent:* Thursday, October 6, 2011 11:53 PM >> *Subject:* [Coral-List] Termination of the National Biological >> Information Infrastructure program >> >> Dear all: >> >> I just heard of this from David Inouye, moderator of the ECOLOG-L list. >> According to the NBII Web site (http://www.nbii.gov): >> >> "In the 2012 President's Budget Request, the National Biological >> Information Infrastructure (NBII) is terminated. As a result, all >> resources, databases, tools, and applications within this web site will >> be removed on January 15, 2012. For more information, please refer to >> the NBII Program Termination page." >> >> The termination page is at http://1.usa.gov/ok8BgX >> >> I doubt the programmatic savings is worth the loss of access to the >> information contained.? More important, how will the closure of this >> program affect the coral research and conservation communities? >> >> Later, >> >> Dave >> >> >> -- >> ------------------------------------------------------ >>? ?David M. Lawrence? ? ? ? | Home:? (804) 559-9786 >>? ?7471 Brook Way Court? ? | Fax:? (804) 559-9787 >>? ?Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com >>? ?USA? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | http:? http://fuzzo.com >> ------------------------------------------------------ >> >> "All drains lead to the ocean."? -- Gill, Finding Nemo >> >> "We have met the enemy and he is us."? -- Pogo >> >> "No trespassing >>? ?4/17 of a haiku"? --? Richard Brautigan >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > ? David M. Lawrence? ? ? ? | Home:? (804) 559-9786 > ? 7471 Brook Way Court? ? ?| Fax:? ?(804) 559-9787 > ? Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com > ? USA? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | http:? http://fuzzo.com > ------------------------------------------------------ > > "All drains lead to the ocean."? -- Gill, Finding Nemo > > "We have met the enemy and he is us."? -- Pogo > > "No trespassing > ? 4/17 of a haiku"? --? Richard Brautigan > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 12:49:12 -1000 > From: Susan_White at fws.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Highest Financial Penalty for Illegal Coral > ? ? ? ?Trade > To: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" > Message-ID: > ? ? ? ? > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Congratulations to all who made case this a success! ?Our law enforcement > and legal teams are a vital part of any successful reef conservation, for > without prosecution there would not likely be effective deterrence. > > Three cheers!! ?hip, hip, hip - hooray! > > "The aggregate financial penalty of $4.47 million makes this the largest > for the illegal trade in coral, the largest non-seafood wildlife > trafficking financial penalty and the fourth largest for any U.S. case > involving the illegal trade of wildlife." > > > > > > > Department of Justice > Office of Public Affairs > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > Wednesday, October 26, 2011 > U.S. Virgin Islands Company Sentenced for Illegal Trade of Protected Coral > Gem Manufacturing Sentenced to Highest Financial Penalty for Illegal Coral > Trade > > WASHINGTON ? A U.S. Virgin Islands company was sentenced Wednesday in > federal court in St. Thomas, U.S.V.I., for knowingly trading in > falsely-labeled, protected black coral that was shipped into the United > States in violation of the Endangered Species Act and the Lacey Act, the > Department of Justice announced. > > On July 15, 2011, GEM Manufacturing LLC, headquartered in St. Thomas, > pleaded guilty to seven counts of v iolations of both the Endangered > Species Act and the Lacey Act. ? The Lacey Act makes it a felony to > falsely label wildlife that is intended for international commerce. The > Endangered Species Act is the U.S. domestic law that implements the > Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and > Flora (CITES). ?Each of the species of black coral is listed in Appendix > II of CITES and is subject to strict trade regulations. > > GEM was sentenced to pay a criminal fine of $1.8 million. ? The criminal > fine will be apportioned between the Lacey Act Reward Fund and the > National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Asset Forfeiture > Fund, accounts established by Congress to assist U.S. Fish and Wildlife > Service (FWS) and NOAA in the enforcement of federal conservation laws. > GEM was sentenced to pay an additional $500,000 in community service > payments for projects to study and protect black coral. > > GEM was also ordered to forfeit dozens of jewelry items, ten artistic > sculptures and over 13,655 pounds of raw black coral, the total value of > which, at current prices, exceeds $2.17 million. The aggregate financial > penalty of $4.47 million makes this the largest for the illegal trade in > coral, the largest non-seafood wildlife trafficking financial penalty and > the fourth largest for any U.S. case involving the illegal trade of > wildlife. > > ?We face a growing challenge to preserve the world?s coral, which serves > as essential habitat for marine biodiversity,? said Ignacia S. Moreno, > Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources > Division at the Department of Justice. ?We will continue to work with our > federal partners to aggressively investigate and prosecute those who > violate U.S. law by illegally trading in protected species.? > > ?I have stated before and reiterate that the U.S. Attorney's Office will > vigorously protect the environment,? said U.S. Attorney Ronald W. Sharpe > for the District of the U.S. Virgin Islands. ?It is critical that we do > everything we can to prevent the decline and depletion of coral and other > protected flora and fauna so that the environment, in this case the marine > environment, may be preserved for our enjoyment and that of future > generations.? > > ?Illegal trade further threatens already fragile coral reef ecosystems. > The penalties here should make it clear that the United States will not > tolerate trafficking in these protected resources,? said William C. Woody, > Chief, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) Office of Law Enforcement. > > ?Black corals are valuable resources that serve as habitat for a myriad of > species in the deep sea,? said Eric Schwaab, assistant NOAA administrator > for NOAA's Fisheries Service. ?They are slow-growing, and some species can > live for hundreds to thousands of years. Effective enforcement and > regulation of their trade in support of CITES are among our most important > tools in ensuring that collection of these species is sustainable and that > their survival in the wild is assured.? > > ??CBP Officers and Agriculture Specialists in the Caribbean work hand in > hand with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to detect and intercept > falsely labeled and concealed wildlife from illegally entering into U.S. > commerce,? said Marcelino Borges, U.S. Customs & Border Protection (CBP) > Director of Field Operations for the Caribbean. ??Cooperation and > collaboration between U.S. Customs & Border Protection and U.S. Fish & > Wildlife Service were critical in the success of this investigation.? > > ?This sentence sends a clear message to black coral traffickers that we > and our federal law enforcement partners are in the business of preventing > illegal wildlife trade,? said Roberto Escobar Vargas, special agent in > charge of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement?s Homeland Security > Investigations (ICE-HSI) in Puerto Rico. ?We will continue to identify and > apprehend those who exploit protected species for commercial gain.? > > GEM was sentenced to three and a half years of probation and a 10-point > compliance plan that includes an auditing, tracking and inventory control > program. ? GEM was also banned from doing business with its former coral > supplier, Peng Chia Enterprise Co. Ltd. and its management team of Ivan > and Gloria Chu. ? GEM was the entity known as ?Company X? in the related > case of U.S. v. Gloria and Ivan Chu, Case No. 2010-003 (D. Virgin > Islands). ? ?In January 2010, federal agents arrested the Chus as part of > a sting operation in Las Vegas. ? The Chus were subsequently indicted in > 2010 for illegally providing black coral to GEM. ? On June 23, 2010, Ivan > Chu was sentenced to serve 30 months in prison and pay a $12,500 fine. > Gloria Chu was sentenced to serve 20 months in prison and pay a $12,500 > fine. > > Black coral is a precious coral that can be polished to a high sheen, > worked into artistic sculptures, and used in inlaid jewelry. ? Black coral > is typically found in deep waters, and many species have long life spans > and are slow-growing. ? Using deep sea submersibles, scientists have > observed that fish and invertebrates tend to accumulate around the black > coral colonies. Thus, black coral communities serve important habitat > functions in the mesophotic and deepwater zones. ? In the last few > decades, pressures from overharvesting, due in part to the wider > availability of scuba gear, and the introduction of invasive species have > threatened this group of coral. ? Recent seizures of illegal black coral > around the world have led many to believe that black coral poaching is on > the rise. > > GEM is a manufacturer of high-end jewelry, art, and sculpture items that > contain black coral. ? The vast majority of GEM?s sales are through retail > stores called ?galleries.? ? In order to facilitate its operations, GEM > Manufacturing LLC operated through several subsidiaries that did business > in Florida, Nevada, California, Hawaii, U.S. Virgin Islands, Alaska and > the Cayman Islands. > > Prior to 2010, GEM?s primary supplier of black coral was a Taiwanese > company, Peng Chia Enterprise Co., Ltd., located in Taipei, Taiwan. ? Peng > Chia was, at times, able to obtain CITES export permits from the Taiwanese > government, but by 2007, the Taiwanese government had increased scrutiny > of the trade and insisted on a proper certificate of origin. ? Because > much of the black coral was of, at best, undeterminable, if not legally > questionable origin, it was basically impossible to arrange for a > legitimate certificate of origin to be issued. > > According to the plea documents, in order to be able to continue to supply > GEM with raw black coral, Peng Chia sought other black coral sources in > mainland China, routing them through Hong Kong on their way to GEM > facilities. ? None of the shipments from Hong Kong had the required CITES > certificates. ? Instead of being labeled ?wildlife,? each shipment was > labeled ?plastic of craft work? or something similarly deficient. ? The > scheme had been running for at least two years by the time the year 2009 > black coral shipments were sent to St. Thomas. ? The 2009 shipments form > the basis of the charges contained in the bill of information. > > A GEM company officer (terminated in early 2010) procured black coral from > Peng Chia knowing that there were no CITES certificates. ? Under the > supervision of this company officer, other GEM personnel confirmed that it > was part of their jobs to receive and sort through incoming boxes of black > coral and that none of those boxes arriving from Hong Kong contained CITES > certificates. ? During the period 2007-2009, those same individuals > reported seeing boxes containing black coral that were externally labeled > as ?plastic of craft work.? ? GEM never ordered plastic and does not use > plastic in any of its manufacturing. > > In January 2009, GEM agreed to pay Peng Chia $38,965.00 for an order of > black coral. ? After the funds were received in February 2009, Peng Chia > used its Chinese supplier and Chinese intermediary to send six separate > shipments of black coral to GEM in St. Thomas. ? Through a then company > officer, GEM knew about the false labeling and lack of CITES certificates > through emails with Peng Chia. ? On Aug. 19, 2009, Peng Chia sent a > shipment comprised of 10 boxes of black coral that were labeled ?plastic > of craft work? to GEM. ? ?A CBP Contraband Enforcement Team flagged the > shipment as suspicious and contacted FWS based in San Juan, Puerto Rico. > ?As part of "Operation Black Gold," boxes from all six of the 2009 > shipments were seized as evidence during a search of GEM?s St. Thomas > facility in September 2009. ? None of these six shipments was accompanied > by CITES certificates. ? Boxes from the Aug. 19, 2009, May 10, 2009, and > other shipments were falsely labeled as ?plastic of craft work.? > > The case was investigated by agents of the FWS and NOAA with support from > ICE-HSI and CBP. ? Analysis of coral samples by the FWS?s National > Forensics Laboratory in Ashland, Ore., was critical to the investigation. > The case is being prosecuted by Christopher Hale of the Justice > Department?s Environmental Crimes Section, Environment and Natural > Resources Division, and Nelson Jones of the U.S. Attorney?s Office in St. > Thomas. > > 11-1410 > Environment and Natural Resources Division > > > > Susan White, ? Project Leader > Pacific Reefs National Wildlife Refuge Complex > email: ?susan_white at fws.gov ? ? ? ? ? ? ph: ?808/792-9560 > http://www.fws.gov/marinenationalmonuments/ >><> ? ><> ? ><> ? ><> ? ><> ? ><> ? ><> ? ><> ? ><> ? ><> > Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument > ? ? Baker, Howland, Jarvis, Palmyra Atoll, Kingman Reef, > ? ? ? Johnston Atoll, Wake Atoll NWRs > Rose Atoll Marine National Monument > ? ? Rose Atoll NWR > Marianas Trench Marine National Monument > ? ? Marianas Arc of Fire, Mariana Trench NWRs >><> ? ><> ? ><> ? ><> ? ><> ? ><> ? ><> ? ><> ? ><> ? ><> > U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service > 300 Ala Moana Blvd. ?Rm 5-231 > Honolulu, HI ?96850 > fax: ?808/792-9585 > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 17:51:19 -0500 > From: Carly Kenkel > Subject: [Coral-List] heat-light stress gene expression in Porites > ? ? ? ?spp. > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Message-ID: > ? ? ? ? > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Dear colleagues, > > PLoS ONE has just published our paper on the development of qPCR-based > assays to detects stress in Porites corals. There are some lab-based > experiments as well as analysis of wild-collected samples from different > thermal regimes. We found that the genes most indicative of ongoing > heat-light stress in P.astreoides (as well as P.lobata) are the small heat > shock protein hsp16, undergoing rapid up-regulation by several hundred (!) > fold under stress, and actin, which becomes down-regulated by about 4-fold. > We introduce a self-normalizing qPCR assay based on just these two genes, > which, by combining their anti-correlated responses, attains a dynamic > range of over 1000-fold. > > This paper is the first one in the series describing the results of our > "QPCR for coral biologists" workshop ( > http://www.bio.utexas.edu/research/matz_lab/matzlab/QPCR.html ), which we > have taught for the past three years in the Florida Keys. > > Here is the link to the paper: > http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0026914 > > cheers > > Carly Kenkel > Mikhail Matz > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2011 19:01:26 -0400 > From: Zachary Whitener > Subject: [Coral-List] References for rubble traps in the Caribbean > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Message-ID: > ? ? ? ? > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Good evening, > > I am a masters student at the University of the Virgin Islands and will be > conducting my thesis research on the relative abundances of cryptic > invertebrates on Montastraea reefs near St Thomas, USVI. ?I am currently > designing my experiment and intend to use rubble traps deployed for a few > months to acquire invertebrates. ?I am trying to figure out the number of > replicates I need at each site and would like to do a power analysis with > previously published variances of reef invertebrates that I am likely to > encounter with this sort of sampling. ?I have been having trouble finding > rubble trap literature from the Caribbean and invertebrate census data thus > am sending this email--do you have good references for me to help design my > study? ?Thank you very much for your help. > > Zach Whitener > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Tue, 1 Nov 2011 08:38:43 -0400 > From: "Pawlik, Joseph" > Subject: [Coral-List] New MS/PhD student wanted: Coral Reef Ecology > To: "Pawlik, Joseph" , > ? ? ? ?"'Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov'" ? ? ? > Message-ID: > ? ? ? ? > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Colleagues, > > Please pass on this information to your best and brightest senior Undergraduate students: > > The Pawlik lab will be recruiting one new MS/PhD student for Fall 2012 to study the ecology of Caribbean coral reefs. ?Our research program, funded by NSF and NOAA, includes research components in the Bahamas, southern Caribbean, and the Florida Keys, and has included missions in NOAA's Aquarius habitat. ?More information about our research is at this website: ?http://people.uncw.edu/pawlikj/index.html > > Applicants (at the BS level ONLY) should be highly motivated and independent, with an excellent academic record, references, and past field research experiences using SCUBA. ?More information about the UNCW graduate program and about expectations of graduate students in the Pawlik lab can be found at this website: ?http://people.uncw.edu/pawlikj/prosStudent.html > Completed applications to the UNCW graduate school should be received by late Feb 2012. > > Thanks for your help, > > Joe > ************************************************************** > Joseph R. Pawlik, Professor > Dept. of Biology and Marine Biology > UNCW Center for Marine Science > 5600 Marvin Moss Ln > Wilmington, NC ?28409 ? USA > pawlikj at uncw.edu; Office:(910)962-2377; Cell:(910)232-3579 > Website: http://people.uncw.edu/pawlikj/index.html > PDFs: http://people.uncw.edu/pawlikj/pubs2.html > ************************************************************** > > > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > 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 39, Issue 1 > ***************************************** > From allison.billiam at gmail.com Wed Nov 2 12:09:21 2011 From: allison.billiam at gmail.com (Bill Allison) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 09:09:21 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] non artificial reef structures In-Reply-To: <1320088884.12714.YahooMailNeo@web59605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> References: <1320006856.75882.YahooMailClassic@web120619.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1320088884.12714.YahooMailNeo@web59605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Complexities: 1. Both reduction or augmentation of dragonfly abundance would presumably cause trophic cascades that cut across ecosystems and that may not be desirable (e.g., dragonfly larvae and adults feed upon a variety of prey including not only those we might want diminished such as mosquitoes and deerflies, but also upon insect pollinators, influencing their abundance and behaviour (Knight et al., 2005)). 2. Mosquitoes can reproduce in very small volumes and very shallow sheets of water (e.g., cans, bottles, film of water produced by air-conditioner drip) common in, but not limited to urban habitats, that preclude dragonfly reproduction so logically it is such habitats that should be removed. 3. Dragonflies and other arthropod and vertebrate insectivores (generally in decline) have much longer reproductive cycles than their prey with implications for both population recovery and adaptation to selective stressors such as insecticides to which mosquitoes adapt rather quickly. The "solution" is the problem and more than band-aids are required. Ref: Knight, T. M., W. M. Michael, et al. (2005). "Trophic cascades across ecosystems." Nature 437(7060): 880-883. Predation can be intense, creating strong direct and indirect effects throughout food webs1?4. In addition, ecologists increasingly recognize that fluxes of organisms across ecosystem boundaries can have major consequences for community dynamics5,6. Species with complex life histories often shift habitats during their life cycles7 and provide potent conduits coupling ecosystems5,6. Thus, local interactions that affect predator abundance in one ecosystem (for example a larval habitat) may have reverberating effects in another (for example an adult habitat). Here we show that fish indirectly facilitate terrestrial plant reproduction through cascading trophic interactions across ecosystem boundaries. Fish reduce larval dragonfly abundances in ponds, leading to fewer adult dragonflies nearby. Adult dragonflies consume insect pollinators and alter their foraging behaviour. As a result, plants near ponds with fish receive more pollinator visits and are less pollen limited than plants near fish-free ponds. Our results confirm that strong species interactions can reverberate across ecosystems, and emphasize the importance of landscape-level processes in driving local species interactions. On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Douglas Fenner wrote: > I seem to remember that dragon flies are predators that eat mosquitoes. > They are also insects, so the insecticides surely kill them as well. I > wonder if in a test location away from people if the insecticide were > stopped and large numbers of dragon flies were released, if the mosquitoes > couldn't be controlled that way? I have no idea whether mass dragonfly > culture has been worked out. Or maybe there is some other way. Just > removing standing fresh water where they can breed should help. > Cheers, Doug > > > Douglas Fenner > Coral Reef Monitoring Ecologist > Dept Marine & Wildlife Resources > American Samoa > > > Mailing address: > PO Box 3730 > Pago Pago, AS 96799 > USA > > > work phone 684 633 4456 > > > Skeptic finds he now agrees global warming is real. > > http://news.yahoo.com/skeptic-finds-now-agrees-global-warming-real-142616605.html > > > In 2010, a survey of more than 1,000 of the world's most cited and > published climate scientists found that 97 percent believe climate change > is very likely caused by the burning of fossil fuels. > > > The American 'allergy' to global warming: why? > http://news.yahoo.com/american-allergy-global-warming-why-171043981.html > > > Bleak prospects for avoiding dangerous global warming. > > http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/10/bleak-prospects-for-avoiding-dangerous.html > > > Heat hiding in deep sea, sea level to rise one meter by end of century > > http://www.climateactionprogramme.org/news/oceans_are_storing_heat_to_hide_global_warming_whilst_sea_levels_are_rising/?utm_source=Climate+Action+Programme+-+Newsletter&utm_campaign=00b7025746-Climate_Action_Newsletter_Issue_7_9_04_2011&utm_medium=email > > > > ________________________________ > From: Rudy Bonn > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 9:34 AM > Subject: [Coral-List] non artificial reef structures > > Your right Gene, helicopters flying over the place spraying, small trucks > with sprayers in the beds are spraying small streets, and even people are > getting sprayed down here during fantasy fest, not with malathion though, > naked people getting sprayed with body paint, some of them should keep > their clothes on believe me, and the funny thing is Im still get bitten by > mosquitoes daily when I walk my dogs, maybe the buggers have developed an > immunity, what is sad though when it rains, and you know what its like down > here when it rains heavily, all that malathion and everything else gets > washed right into the ocean via storm drains where it eventually reaches > the reef tract, are we as humans losing our minds or what? When you here > talk all the time about my grandkids not being able to see a living coral > reef, something is wrong with that picture, when are we going to learn, > when we finally destroy it all? > > Rudy S Bonn > Director of Marine Projects > Reef Relief > 631 Greene Street > Key West, FL 33040 > 305-294-3100 > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > -- ________________________________ Is this how science illuminates "reality"? - "the meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside, enveloping the talk which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze." - narrator's comment about Marlow's tale-telling, in Heart of Darkness (Conrad) From erikcf at hawaii.edu Wed Nov 2 15:26:47 2011 From: erikcf at hawaii.edu (Erik Franklin) Date: Wed, 02 Nov 2011 09:26:47 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Global Symbiodinium data goes online with GeoSymbio Message-ID: We've created GeoSymbio, a hybrid web application that provides an online, easy to use and freely accessible interface for users to discover, explore and utilize global geospatial bioinformatic and ecoinformatic data on Symbiodinium?host symbioses. The novelty of this application lies in the combination of a variety of query and visualization tools, including dynamic searchable maps, data tables with filter and grouping functions, and interactive charts that summarize the data. Importantly, this application is hosted remotely or ?in the cloud? using Google Apps, and therefore does not require any specialty GIS, web programming or data programming expertise from the user. The current version of the application utilizes Symbiodinium data based on the ITS2 genetic marker from PCR-based techniques, including denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis, sequencing and cloning of specimens collected during 1982?2010. All data elements of the application are also downloadable as spatial files, tables and nucleic acid sequence files in common formats for desktop analysis. The application provides a unique tool set to facilitate research on the basic biology of Symbiodinium and expedite new insights into their ecology, biogeography and evolution in the face of a changing global climate. It is our hope that GeoSymbio stimulates an open-collaborative environment among Symbiodinium researchers to accelerate the pace of discovery and innovation, as well as with educators and managers to promote accessibility of the current state of Symbiodinium knowledge in the field. We welcome your feedback and participation with GeoSymbio. GeoSymbio can be accessed at An article describing GeoSymbio is in Molecular Ecology Resources at Aloha, Erik Franklin, Michael Stat, Xavier Pochon, Hollie Putnam, Ruth Gates Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology University of Hawaii, Manoa From douglasfenner at yahoo.com Wed Nov 2 16:23:17 2011 From: douglasfenner at yahoo.com (Douglas Fenner) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 13:23:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Coral-List] non artificial reef structures In-Reply-To: References: <1320006856.75882.YahooMailClassic@web120619.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1320088884.12714.YahooMailNeo@web59605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1320265397.14329.YahooMailNeo@web59605.mail.ac4.yahoo.com> Thanks, Bill!!? Amazing, fish in the pond influencing the plants on land!? Things are connected in ways we scarcely could guess. ???? I think you are saying that the solution is to remove all those little places that collect fresh water where the mosquitoes breed, not spraying toxic chemicals all over.? Removing the little fresh water breeding places costs almost nothing, is totally non-toxic, causes no trophic cascades, can be done right away, is not hard.? The solution is right in front of us, low tech, simple, easy, costs nearly nothing.? But are the Keys full of lots of drainage canals full of fresh water that can't be drained?? ? ? Cheers,? Doug? ? ________________________________ From: Bill Allison To: Douglas Fenner Cc: Rudy Bonn ; "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" Sent: Wednesday, November 2, 2011 5:09 AM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] non artificial reef structures Complexities: 1. Both reduction or augmentation of dragonfly abundance would presumably cause trophic cascades that cut across ecosystems and that may not be desirable (e.g., dragonfly larvae and adults feed upon a variety of prey including not only those we might want diminished such as mosquitoes and deerflies, but also upon insect pollinators, influencing their abundance and behaviour (Knight et al., 2005)). 2. Mosquitoes can reproduce in very small volumes and very shallow sheets of water (e.g., cans, bottles, film of water produced by air-conditioner drip) common in, but not limited to urban habitats, that preclude dragonfly reproduction so logically it is such habitats that should be removed. 3. Dragonflies and other arthropod and vertebrate insectivores (generally in decline) have much longer reproductive cycles than their prey with implications for both population recovery and adaptation to selective stressors such as insecticides to which mosquitoes adapt rather quickly. The "solution" is the problem and more than band-aids are required. Ref: Knight, T. M., W. M. Michael, et al. (2005). "Trophic cascades across ecosystems." Nature 437(7060): 880-883. ??? Predation can be intense, creating strong direct and indirect effects throughout food webs1?4. In addition, ecologists increasingly recognize that fluxes of organisms across ecosystem boundaries can have major consequences for community dynamics5,6. Species with complex life histories often shift habitats during their life cycles7 and provide potent conduits coupling ecosystems5,6. Thus, local interactions that affect predator abundance in one ecosystem (for example a larval habitat) may have reverberating effects in another (for example an adult habitat). Here we show that fish indirectly facilitate terrestrial plant reproduction through cascading trophic interactions across ecosystem boundaries. Fish reduce larval dragonfly abundances in ponds, leading to fewer adult dragonflies nearby. Adult dragonflies consume insect pollinators and alter their foraging behaviour. As a result, plants near ponds with fish receive more pollinator visits and are less pollen limited than plants near fish-free ponds. Our results confirm that strong species interactions can reverberate across ecosystems, and emphasize the importance of landscape-level processes in driving local species interactions. On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Douglas Fenner wrote: I seem to remember that dragon flies are predators that eat mosquitoes.? They are also insects, so the insecticides surely kill them as well.? I wonder if in a test location away from people if the insecticide were stopped and large numbers of dragon flies were released, if the mosquitoes couldn't be controlled that way?? I have no idea whether mass dragonfly culture has been worked out.? Or maybe there is some other way.? Just removing standing fresh water where they can breed should help. ?? ? Cheers,? Doug > >? >Douglas Fenner >Coral Reef Monitoring Ecologist >Dept Marine & Wildlife Resources >American Samoa > > >Mailing address: >PO Box 3730 >Pago Pago, AS 96799 >USA > > >work phone 684 633 4456 > > >Skeptic finds he now agrees global warming is real. >http://news.yahoo.com/skeptic-finds-now-agrees-global-warming-real-142616605.html > > >In 2010, a survey of more than 1,000 of the world's most cited and published climate scientists found that 97 percent believe climate change is very likely caused by the burning of fossil fuels. > > >The American 'allergy' to global warming: why? >http://news.yahoo.com/american-allergy-global-warming-why-171043981.html > > >Bleak prospects for avoiding dangerous global warming. >http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/10/bleak-prospects-for-avoiding-dangerous.html > > >Heat hiding in deep sea, sea level to rise one meter by end of century >http://www.climateactionprogramme.org/news/oceans_are_storing_heat_to_hide_global_warming_whilst_sea_levels_are_rising/?utm_source=Climate+Action+Programme+-+Newsletter&utm_campaign=00b7025746-Climate_Action_Newsletter_Issue_7_9_04_2011&utm_medium=email > > > > >________________________________ >From: Rudy Bonn >To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >Sent: Sunday, October 30, 2011 9:34 AM >Subject: [Coral-List] non artificial reef structures > > >Your right Gene, helicopters flying over the place spraying, small trucks with sprayers in the beds are spraying small streets, and even people are getting sprayed down here during fantasy fest, not with malathion though, naked people getting sprayed with body paint, some of them should keep their clothes on believe me, and the funny thing is?Im still get bitten by mosquitoes daily when I walk my dogs,? maybe the buggers have developed an immunity, what is sad though when it rains, and you know what its like down here when it rains heavily, all that malathion and everything else gets washed right into the ocean via storm drains where it eventually reaches the reef tract,?? are we as?humans losing our minds or what?? When you?here talk all the time about my grandkids not being able to see a living coral reef, something is wrong with that picture, when are we going to learn, when we finally destroy it all???? > >Rudy S Bonn >Director of Marine Projects >Reef Relief >631 Greene Street >Key West, FL 33040 >305-294-3100 >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >_______________________________________________ >Coral-List mailing list >Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > -- ________________________________ Is this how science illuminates "reality"? - "the meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside, enveloping the talk which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze." - narrator's comment about Marlow's tale-telling, in Heart of Darkness (Conrad) From allison.billiam at gmail.com Wed Nov 2 14:20:02 2011 From: allison.billiam at gmail.com (Bill Allison) Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 11:20:02 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Beneath the veneer of eco-tourism Message-ID: Dolphin theme park proposed in Maldives http://www.haveeru.com.mv/news/38459 https://apps.facebook.com/petitions/21/Stop-Dolphin-Lagoon-in-Maldives/ -- ________________________________ Is this how science illuminates "reality"? - "the meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside, enveloping the talk which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze." - narrator's comment about Marlow's tale-telling, in Heart of Darkness (Conrad) From Charles.Sheppard at warwick.ac.uk Thu Nov 3 07:07:02 2011 From: Charles.Sheppard at warwick.ac.uk (Sheppard, Charles) Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 11:07:02 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] One day conference on science of Chagos, Indian Ocean, in London Message-ID: Those in the vicinity of London may be interested in a 1 day programme of presentations on the Chagos archipelago to be held at the Linnean Society of London on Thursday 24 November. Downloadable details of the list of speakers and topics, and registration forms, are to be found at: http://www.linnean.org/fileadmin/events2/events.php?detail=283 . I hope to see some of you there. Best wishes Charles -------------- Professor Charles Sheppard School of Life Sciences University of Warwick Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK charles.sheppard at warwick.ac.uk tel (44) (0) 2476 524975 From Kimberly.Puglise at noaa.gov Thu Nov 3 12:09:06 2011 From: Kimberly.Puglise at noaa.gov (Kimberly Puglise) Date: Thu, 03 Nov 2011 12:09:06 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] WA Post Article on Mesophotic Coral Ecosystems Message-ID: <4EB2BCA2.1030205@noaa.gov> Hi All, Just in case you missed it, this week's Tuesday edition of the Washington Post had an article focused on mesophotic coral ecosystems.. The article highlighted work that we've been funding in Hawaii under the Deep-Coral Reef Ecosystem Studies Program focused on understanding the processes that regulate these ecosystems and assessing their vulnerability to exploitation and human disturbance. Washington Post Article - http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/deep-reef-twilight-zones-slowly-yield-their-secrets-to-explorers/2011/09/22/gIQATnuwZM_story.html Additionally, NOAA announced on October 13, 2011, the awarding of a new project two investigate the role the mesophotic reefs of Pulley Ridge play in replenishing key fish species and other organisms in the downstream reefs of the Florida Keys and the Dry Tortugas. NOAA Press Release - http://www.noaanews.noaa.gov/stories2011/20111013_pulley_ridge.html Kimberly -- >< >< >< >< >< >< Kimberly Puglise Center for Sponsored Coastal Ocean Research National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science NOAA's National Ocean Service 1305 East-West Highway, N/SCI2 Silver Spring, MD 20910 (301) 713-3338 x140 (301) 713-4044 (Fax) From buzzgoatley at gmail.com Fri Nov 4 01:45:10 2011 From: buzzgoatley at gmail.com (Christopher Goatley) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 15:45:10 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] New Publication Message-ID: <1778FF0F-AD89-449B-BACD-342349235F0B@gmail.com> Hey coral listers, PLoS One has just published our latest paper, which introduces the canopy effect and its relevance to modern ecosystem monitoring techniques on coral reefs. By comparing different transect techniques we show that current planar transect techniques, commonly used in coral reef monitoring, have limitations, especially in reporting the impacts of disturbances. We would be happy to receive feedback on this idea http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0027307 Thanks From frahome at yahoo.com Fri Nov 4 12:40:38 2011 From: frahome at yahoo.com (frahome at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 09:40:38 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Coral-List] =?utf-8?q?NOAA_news_release=3A_U=2ES=2E_residents_sa?= =?utf-8?q?y_Hawaii=E2=80=99s_coral_reef_ecosystems_worth_=2433=2E57_billi?= =?utf-8?q?on_per_year?= In-Reply-To: <4EA6E326.8050602@noaa.gov> References: <4EA6E326.8050602@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <1320424838.84622.YahooMailNeo@web32502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> What does it mean? That if we find a (long term?) alternative use for these sites worth $40 billion per year we can feel fine to blow the Hawaiian reefs up? I am very curious to understand how is "the willingness to pay to protect the coral reef ecosystem for future generations" evaluated? Like for example if I was one of those interviewed and I had no money on my account how much could I have offered maximum to protect the reef? I noted there is a special category for people considering themselves environmentalists. Why? Are their values taken more or less into account? I apologize in advance for not having time to read and understand the full report. Greetings Francesca ________________________________ From: Jon Corsiglia To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2011 6:26 PM Subject: [Coral-List] NOAA news release: U.S. residents say Hawaii?s coral reef ecosystems worth $33.57 billion per year U.S. residents say Hawaii?s coral reef ecosystems worth $33.57 billion per year Peer-reviewed survey asked U.S. public value of protecting the main Hawaiian Islands? corals October 21, 2011 http://coralreef.noaa.gov/hicoraleconval/ A peer-reviewed study commissioned by NOAA shows the American people assign an estimated total economic value of $33.57 billion for the coral reefs of the main Hawaiian Islands. ?The study shows that people from across the United States treasure Hawaii?s coral reefs, even though many never get to visit them,? said Jane Lubchenco, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator. ?It illustrates the economic value of coral reefs to all Americans, and how important it is to conserve these ecosystems for future generations.? "We are pleased that research is being done to look at the value of Hawaii's coral reefs, but before we consider any potential applications of the study we will consult closely with local communities," said William J. Aila, Jr., chairperson of the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources. The study employed a scientifically developed national Internet survey of more than 3,200 households ? a representative sample of all U.S. residents, not just Hawaii or coastal residents. From June through October 2009, the survey allowed the public to express its preferences and values for protection and restoration of the coral reef ecosystems around the main Hawaiian Islands. In this study, total economic value includes so-called passive use values, such as the willingness to pay to protect the coral reef ecosystem for future generations, as well as direct use values, such as snorkeling over a coral reef or consuming fish supported by coral reef ecosystems. A panel of independent university and private scientists, from both Hawaii and the continental U.S., provided facts to the survey design team about the Hawaiian coral reef ecosystems and provided estimates of how the coral reef ecosystems would change in response to the two possible management options. The descriptions, including illustrations, of improvement to coral ecosystems gave survey respondents a clear understanding of what they were being asked to value and how the ecosystems would change as a result of the protection measures. To estimate underlying values the public places on coral reef ecosystems, the study team presented survey participants with two specific measures to protect and restore coral reef ecosystems. One measure aimed at reducing effects to coral ecosystems from fishing, and another to repair reefs damaged by ships. The main Hawaiian Islands consist of eight volcanic islands that range in age from active lava flows on the east side of the Big Island to seven million-year-old Kauai. Despite their economic significance, reefs near urbanized areas, such as Honolulu, Wailuku, and Kahului, have experienced increasing stress from ever-increasing population and other pressures. The national survey was funded by NOAA and the National Science Foundation, and was designed to address the issue of Internet bias. The survey was conducted through two Internet panels; one recruited participants using controlled random digit dialing telephone surveys and the other using standard U.S. Bureau of the Census methods of randomly selecting households and going to each household to recruit participants via face-to-face interviewing. NOAA will use this study to provide a reliable estimate of the value of the coral reef ecosystem around the main Hawaiian Islands. It also demonstrates that coral reefs provide valuable ecological services for U.S. residents, regardless of whether they actually use them. NOAA?s mission is to understand and predict changes in the Earth's environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, and to conserve and manage our coastal and marine resources. Join us on Facebook, Twitter and our other social media channels. -- Jon Corsiglia Communications&? Outreach Specialist NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program Find us online: http://coralreef.noaa.gov 'Like' us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/uscoralreefgov _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From m.milanese at studioassociatogaia.com Fri Nov 4 14:46:40 2011 From: m.milanese at studioassociatogaia.com (Martina Milanese) Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2011 19:46:40 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] =?iso-8859-1?q?NOAA_news_release=3A_U=2ES=2E_residen?= =?iso-8859-1?q?ts_say_Hawaii=B9s_coral_reef_ecosystems_worth_=2433=2E57_b?= =?iso-8859-1?q?illion_per_year?= In-Reply-To: <1320424838.84622.YahooMailNeo@web32502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Well... Ecological economics is all but an easy science. I am approaching it as a non-practitioner (I am a marine biologist as a background) and struggle all the time. We speak a different language, communication is difficult, I always re-read the same pages so many times that I finally end up wondering if it's me to be stupid. But I do think it is essential if we want to live in a world that is made of nature and - whether we like it or not - humans. Nobody claims the theory and protocols are perfect. Not even those who apply them. If we can't agree on hard science, imagine on socio-economic one... However there are many good points in ecological economics. And for those you don't agree upon, complete rejection may not be the best approach. Take a deep breath, find the time to read this or other documents (I haven't read this one yet, for example, but others yes). Point out weakness, advice for improvements, team up. If you don't like it, you may help make it better. For a quick shot have a look at Wam 2010, Ecol econ 69(4): 675-679. I am trying to do it in my spare time - so far it has been quite a nightmare. But a useful one. Cheers Martina On 04/11/11 17:40, "frahome at yahoo.com" wrote: > What does it mean? That if we find a (long term?) alternative use for these > sites worth $40 billion per year we can feel fine to blow the Hawaiian reefs > up? I am very curious to understand how is "the willingness to pay to > protect the coral reef ecosystem for future generations" evaluated? Like for > example if I was one of those interviewed and I had no money on my account how > much could I have offered maximum to protect the reef? I noted there is a > special category for people considering themselves environmentalists. Why? Are > their values taken more or less into account? I apologize in advance for not > having time to read and understand the full > report. Greetings Francesca ________________________________ From: Jon > Corsiglia To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: > Tuesday, October 25, 2011 6:26 PM Subject: [Coral-List] NOAA news release: > U.S. residents say Hawaii?s coral reef ecosystems worth $33.57 billion per > year U.S. residents say Hawaii?s coral reef ecosystems worth $33.57 billion > per year Peer-reviewed survey asked U.S. public value of protecting the main > Hawaiian Islands? corals October 21, > 2011 http://coralreef.noaa.gov/hicoraleconval/ A peer-reviewed study > commissioned by NOAA shows the American people assign an estimated total > economic value of $33.57 billion for the coral reefs of the main Hawaiian > Islands. ?The study shows that people from across the United States treasure > Hawaii?s coral reefs, even though many never get to visit them,? said Jane > Lubchenco, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and > NOAA administrator. ?It illustrates the economic value of coral reefs to all > Americans, and how important it is to conserve these ecosystems for future > generations.? "We are pleased that research is being done to look at the > value of Hawaii's coral reefs, but before we consider any potential > applications of the study we will consult closely with local communities," > said William J. Aila, Jr., chairperson of the Hawaii Department of Land and > Natural Resources. The study employed a scientifically developed national > Internet survey of more than 3,200 households ? a representative sample of > all U.S. residents, not just Hawaii or coastal residents. From June through > October 2009, the survey allowed the public to express its preferences and > values for protection and restoration of the coral reef ecosystems around the > main Hawaiian Islands. In this study, total economic value includes so-called > passive use values, such as the willingness to pay to protect the coral reef > ecosystem for future generations, as well as direct use values, such as > snorkeling over a coral reef or consuming fish supported by coral reef > ecosystems. A panel of independent university and private scientists, from > both Hawaii and the continental U.S., provided facts to the survey design > team about the Hawaiian coral reef ecosystems and provided estimates of how > the coral reef ecosystems would change in response to the two possible > management options. The descriptions, including illustrations, of improvement > to coral ecosystems gave survey respondents a clear understanding of what > they were being asked to value and how the ecosystems would change as a > result of the protection measures. To estimate underlying values the public > places on coral reef ecosystems, the study team presented survey participants > with two specific measures to protect and restore coral reef ecosystems. One > measure aimed at reducing effects to coral ecosystems from fishing, and > another to repair reefs damaged by ships. The main Hawaiian Islands consist > of eight volcanic islands that range in age from active lava flows on the > east side of the Big Island to seven million-year-old Kauai. Despite their > economic significance, reefs near urbanized areas, such as Honolulu, Wailuku, > and Kahului, have experienced increasing stress from ever-increasing > population and other pressures. The national survey was funded by NOAA and > the National Science Foundation, and was designed to address the issue of > Internet bias. The survey was conducted through two Internet panels; one > recruited participants using controlled random digit dialing telephone > surveys and the other using standard U.S. Bureau of the Census methods of > randomly selecting households and going to each household to recruit > participants via face-to-face interviewing. NOAA will use this study to > provide a reliable estimate of the value of the coral reef ecosystem around > the main Hawaiian Islands. It also demonstrates that coral reefs provide > valuable ecological services for U.S. residents, regardless of whether they > actually use them. NOAA?s mission is to understand and predict changes in the > Earth's environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, > and to conserve and manage our coastal and marine resources. Join us on > Facebook, Twitter and our other social media channels. -- Jon > Corsiglia Communications&? Outreach Specialist NOAA Coral Reef Conservation > Program Find us online: http://coralreef.noaa.gov 'Like' us on Facebook: > http://www.facebook.com/uscoralreefgov _____________________________________ > __________ Coral-List mailing > list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinf > o/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List > mailing > list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinf > o/coral-list From jeanne_brown at TNC.ORG Fri Nov 4 17:15:37 2011 From: jeanne_brown at TNC.ORG (Jeanne Brown) Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 21:15:37 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Volunteer or University Student Opportunity Message-ID: <3EB4D80D934DD54F83B40E68D150015A014795@MAILBOX2.TNC.ORG> The Nature Conservancy is seeking a volunteer or graduate student (who is not subject to finals this semester) to assist in an upcoming meeting, the Coral Assembly in San Juan, Puerto Rico, December 8-9. This is a regional assembly of coral reef managers, researchers and regulators from Puerto Rico, US and British Virgin Islands. We'd like to provide the opportunity for a graduate student or others with coral reef career interests to attend the meeting, work with the Conservancy staff assist in making a compilation of USVI/Puerto Rico and BVI relevant information regarding management of coral reefs, note taking during the meeting, and assist in producing the proceedings from the Assembly. I am anticipating this would require a few weeks of prep time (flexible time), more intense involvement in the week of the Assembly (December 5-9), assistance with note taking and meeting logistics during the meeting (December 8-9) and then some follow-up reporting following the assembly, so about 2-3 months total. If it seems this will constitute an internship for credit, we can work with the student on that. Otherwise, is good exposure and opportunity in exchange for some volunteer time. We would be able to support travel to St. Croix for a few strategic meetings before and after the Assembly, housing and per diem while here, plus Assembly expenses paid. Please contact me with a statement of interest in a cover letter and a CV if interested! Thank you, Jeanne Jeanne B. Brown VI Coastal Program Director The Nature Conservancy 3052 Estate Little Princess Christiansted, VI 00820 jeanne_brown at tnc.org (340) 718-5575 From david.hopley at bigpond.com Fri Nov 4 22:56:23 2011 From: david.hopley at bigpond.com (David Hopley) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 12:56:23 +1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Guy Cabioch, a sad passing Message-ID: <002001cc9b66$81571880$84054980$@hopley@bigpond.com> It is with great sadness that we acknowledge the passing of our friend and colleague Guy Cabioch. Although Guy was still very active it came after a long illness. Nonetheless, in recent times he has co-operated in a number of projects, not least of which was on the Editorial Board of the Encyclopedia of Modern Coral Reefs : Structure, Form and Process. Those of us recognising his passing in this note to Coral-List were also members of the Editorial Board and can attest to his enthusiastic co-operation. Also here and wishing their names to be added to this valediction are those with whom Guy worked with on other projects, though if all had been added the list would have been unending. Guy centred his research on New Caledonia but his work was spread throughout the French south-west Pacific as is testified by his impressive bibliography. He has been a classic carbonate geologist, as can be seen from his entries in the coral reef encyclopedia : barrier reef (ribbon), emerged reefs, fore reef (reef front), New Caledonia, post glacial transgression, Vanuatu. A further search of the literature however, indicates just how wide a contribution to reef geology in the south and south-west Pacific that Guy has made. Not surprisingly, Guy Cabioch's name appears on many committees. He was a member of the LOCEAN research team and Vice President of IRD Earth Science Commission. Earlier he worked in the UR14, GEOAZUR and PALEOTROPIQUE research teams. He joined IRD in 1992 and spent most of his career in New Caledonia, Vanuatu and French Polynesia studying cores for marine and palaeoenvironmental work for which he gained international recognition. In spite of his illness over the last 10 years, Guy continued his research and even at present has papers about to be published in Marine Geology (Quaternary history of western New Caledonia) and in Coral Reefs (Disappearance of Acropora from the Marquesas). The name of a scientist with Guy Cabioch's reputation will be long remembered not only by his colleagues in IRD Noumea, but also by those who appreciated the contact they had with him during the writing of the encyclopedia including other members of the Editorial Board (Peter Davies, Terry Done, Eberhard Gischler, Ian Macintyre, Rachel Wood and Colin Woodroffe), and in much appreciated collaborative research (including Serge Andrefouet, Rolf Bak, Lucien Montaggioni, Michel Pichon, Carden Wallace and Jody Webster), a distinguished list to which the addition of my own name is particularly humbling. David Hopley. HOME ADDRESS: 8 Lilydale Pocket IDALIA TOWNSVILLE QLD 4811 AUSTRALIA PHONE: +61 07 4729 0671 EMAIL: david.hopley at bigpond.com From frahome at yahoo.com Sat Nov 5 07:02:17 2011 From: frahome at yahoo.com (frahome at yahoo.com) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 04:02:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [Coral-List] =?iso-8859-1?q?NOAA_news_release=3A_U=2ES=2E_residen?= =?iso-8859-1?q?ts_say_Hawaii=B9s_coral_reef_ecosystems_worth_=2433=2E57_b?= =?iso-8859-1?q?illion_per_year?= In-Reply-To: References: <1320424838.84622.YahooMailNeo@web32502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1320490937.2683.YahooMailNeo@web32507.mail.mud.yahoo.com> This study should not belong to ecological economics (which in principle I support in its "highest" form) but rather to environmental economics. In all cases I was not rejecting it but asking questions to understand its methods and overall, its implications. Greetings Francesca ________________________________ From: Martina Milanese To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: Friday, November 4, 2011 7:46 PM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] NOAA news release: U.S. residents say Hawaii?s coral reef ecosystems worth $33.57 billion per year Well... Ecological economics is all but an easy science. I am approaching it as a non-practitioner (I am a marine biologist as a background) and struggle all the time. We speak a different language, communication is difficult, I always re-read the same pages so many times that I finally end up wondering if it's me to be stupid. But I do think it is essential if we want to live in a world that is made of nature and - whether we like it or not - humans. Nobody claims the theory and protocols are perfect. Not even those who apply them. If we can't agree on hard science, imagine on socio-economic one... However there are many good points in ecological economics. And for those you don't agree upon, complete rejection may not be the best approach. Take a deep breath, find the time to read this or other documents (I haven't read this one yet, for example, but others yes). Point out weakness, advice for improvements, team up. If you don't like it, you may help make it better. For a quick shot have a look at Wam 2010, Ecol econ 69(4): 675-679. I am trying to do it in my spare time - so far it has been quite a nightmare. But a useful one. Cheers Martina On 04/11/11 17:40, "frahome at yahoo.com" wrote: What does it mean? That if we find a (long term?) alternative use for these sites worth $40 billion per year we can feel fine to blow the Hawaiian reefs up? I am very curious to understand how is "the willingness to pay to protect the coral reef ecosystem for future generations" evaluated? Like for example if I was one of those interviewed and I had no money on my account how much could I have offered maximum to protect the reef? I noted there is a special category for people considering themselves environmentalists. Why? Are their values taken more or less into account? I apologize in advance for not having time to read and understand the full report. Greetings Francesca ________________________________ From: Jon > Corsiglia To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: > Tuesday, October 25, 2011 6:26 PM Subject: [Coral-List] NOAA news release: > U.S. residents say Hawaii?s coral reef ecosystems worth $33.57 billion per > year U.S. residents say Hawaii?s coral reef ecosystems worth $33.57 billion > per year Peer-reviewed survey asked U.S. public value of protecting the main > Hawaiian Islands? corals October 21, > 2011 http://coralreef.noaa.gov/hicoraleconval/ A peer-reviewed study > commissioned by NOAA shows the American people assign an estimated total > economic value of $33.57 billion for the coral reefs of the main Hawaiian > Islands. ?The study shows that people from across the United States treasure > Hawaii?s coral reefs, even though many never get to visit them,? said Jane > Lubchenco, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and > NOAA administrator. ?It illustrates the economic value of coral reefs to all > Americans, and how important it is to conserve these ecosystems for future > generations.? "We are pleased that research is being done to look at the > value of Hawaii's coral reefs, but before we consider any potential > applications of the study we will consult closely with local communities," > said William J. Aila, Jr., chairperson of the Hawaii Department of Land and > Natural Resources. The study employed a scientifically developed national > Internet survey of more than 3,200 households ? a representative sample of > all U.S.. residents, not just Hawaii or coastal residents. From June through > October 2009, the survey allowed the public to express its preferences and > values for protection and restoration of the coral reef ecosystems around the > main Hawaiian Islands. In this study, total economic value includes so-called > passive use values, such as the willingness to pay to protect the coral reef > ecosystem for future generations, as well as direct use values, such as > snorkeling over a coral reef or consuming fish supported by coral reef > ecosystems. A panel of independent university and private scientists, from > both Hawaii and the continental U.S., provided facts to the survey design > team about the Hawaiian coral reef ecosystems and provided estimates of how > the coral reef ecosystems would change in response to the two possible > management options. The descriptions, including illustrations, of improvement > to coral ecosystems gave survey respondents a clear understanding of what > they were being asked to value and how the ecosystems would change as a > result of the protection measures. To estimate underlying values the public > places on coral reef ecosystems, the study team presented survey participants > with two specific measures to protect and restore coral reef ecosystems. One > measure aimed at reducing effects to coral ecosystems from fishing, and > another to repair reefs damaged by ships. The main Hawaiian Islands consist > of eight volcanic islands that range in age from active lava flows on the > east side of the Big Island to seven million-year-old Kauai. Despite their > economic significance, reefs near urbanized areas, such as Honolulu, Wailuku, > and Kahului, have experienced increasing stress from ever-increasing > population and other pressures. The national survey was funded by NOAA and > the National Science Foundation, and was designed to address the issue of > Internet bias. The survey was conducted through two Internet panels; one > recruited participants using controlled random digit dialing telephone > surveys and the other using standard U.S. Bureau of the Census methods of > randomly selecting households and going to each household to recruit > participants via face-to-face interviewing. NOAA will use this study to > provide a reliable estimate of the value of the coral reef ecosystem around > the main Hawaiian Islands. It also demonstrates that coral reefs provide > valuable ecological services for U.S. residents, regardless of whether they > actually use them. NOAA?s mission is to understand and predict changes in the > Earth's environment, from the depths of the ocean to the surface of the sun, > and to conserve and manage our coastal and marine resources. Join us on > Facebook, Twitter and our other social media channels. -- Jon > Corsiglia Communications&? Outreach Specialist NOAA Coral Reef Conservation > Program Find us online: http://coralreef.noaa.gov 'Like' us on Facebook: > http://www.facebook.com/uscoralreefgov _____________________________________ > __________ Coral-List mailing > list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinf > o/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List > mailing > list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinf > o/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From lesk at bu.edu Sat Nov 5 12:50:57 2011 From: lesk at bu.edu (Les Kaufman) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 12:50:57 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Coral Reefs Message-ID: Dear Francesca (and everybody), Ecological and environmental economists have been struggling to find ways to explain the real value of nature without trivializing, bastardizing, or prostituting things that are important to us, yet very difficult to equate with more familiar currencies such as money. Despite our ability to see far into the future, most of us rarely do so. Consequently, we respond to stimuli that immediately impact us, like the possibility of suddenly acquiring, or losing, a lot of money. This is especially true of ecosystem services- the essential things for life and health that nature provides to us without us lifting a pinkie, but that require intact, robust ecosystems to keep flowing. These are the things we take for granted, like breathable air and clean water, as well as things we pay at least a little bit of attention to, such as the natural beauty that supports the tourism industry, all the way to more obviously valuable commodities like food, minerals, and fuels. There are several classification schemes for ecosystem services, but the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment is the one most widely used right now. Check out: http://www.pnas.org/content/106/5/1305.short for a short comment on where this is heading. One way to express the value of nature is in terms of dollars. It is not necessarily the best way, but it is the way that the greatest number of people understand. There is a lot of baggage associated with it- the questions you raise come up all the time, plus "willingness to pay" doesn't always mean that when you ask people what they are willing to pay to keep something around, that they will actually fork over the money when things start hitting the fan. If you have a better way of expressing the value of Hawaii's coral reefs- or any coral reef- it would be useful to share it. This is a young field, and people respond to the strangest things. Les Message: 1 Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 09:40:38 -0700 (PDT) From: "frahome at yahoo.com" Subject: Re: [Coral-List] NOAA news release: U.S. residents say Hawaii?s coral reef ecosystems worth $33.57 billion per year To: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" Message-ID: <1320424838.84622.YahooMailNeo at web32502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 What does it mean? That if we find a (long term?) alternative use for these sites worth $40 billion per year we can feel fine to blow the Hawaiian reefs up? I am very curious to understand how is "the willingness to pay to protect the coral reef ecosystem for future generations" evaluated? Like for example if I was one of those interviewed and I had no money on my account how much could I have offered maximum to protect the reef? I noted there is a special category for people considering themselves environmentalists. Why? Are their values taken more or less into account? I apologize in advance for not having time to read and understand the full report. Greetings Francesca Les Kaufman Professor of Biology Boston University Marine Program and Senior Marine Scientist Conservation International lesk at bu.edu From bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com Sat Nov 5 12:41:37 2011 From: bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com (Bastiaan Vermonden) Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 17:41:37 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] =?iso-8859-1?q?NOAA_news_release=3A_U=2ES=2E_residen?= =?iso-8859-1?q?ts_say_Hawaii=B9s_coral_reef_ecosystems_worth_=2433?= =?iso-8859-1?q?=2E57_billion_per_year?= In-Reply-To: References: <1320424838.84622.YahooMailNeo@web32502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Dear all, I did a contingent valuation study for my master thesis so hopefully I can help people understand this study better. Please see the Power point attachment for my explanation. I hope it helps! regards Bastiaan From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Mon Nov 7 12:11:00 2011 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Eugene Shinn) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 12:11:00 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] NOAA news release: U.S. residents say Hawaii?s coral reef ecosystems worth $33.57 billion per year Message-ID: I wonder what those giant surfing waves are worth to the economy? Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida College of Marine Science Room 221A 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From horlicks_1989 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 7 14:17:17 2011 From: horlicks_1989 at yahoo.com (Peter Edwards) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 11:17:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawiian Reefs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1320693437.26833.YahooMailNeo@web160510.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> ?Hello Francesca, All, As a Marine Scientist turned Environmental/Natural Resource Economist I am aware of the philosophical differences (ecological vs environmental economics) that this type of study might bring to the surface. ?I?d like to offer a few thoughts and hopefully insight on some of the issues raised.? First of all one could argue that (when dealing with this topic) there are two definitions of ?Value? From an Ecologists perspective ? Value is that which is worthy of esteem for its own sake; thing or quality having intrinsic worth, Or from an Economists perspective? Value is a fair and proper equivalent in money, commodities etc.? ?Equivalent in money? here represents the sum of money that would have an equivalent effect on the ?welfare, utility, well being (feel-goodness) of individuals. Social scientists (including economists) would argue that value as a concept, is anthropogenic in nature.. ?Because as sentient beings people/society ascribe(s) their/its own values to things/concepts. The economic value of something is a measure of its contribution to human well being (welfare).? Hence use of this type of methodological approach attempt to estimate the economic values of natural systems and the contributions that the variety of ecosystem functions and services make to human well being.? Therefore, ecosystem services cannot be defined independently of human values.? The end goal of ecosystem service valuation is to be able to demonstrate the tradeoffs in ecosystem services resulting from policy decisions.? In some cases the incorporation of a monetary metric into cost-benefit analyses or other quantitative or qualitative means of assessing the losses and/or gains of ecosystem services is appropriate. ?The basic premise is, if a resource is value-less then society will tend to overuse (mis-allocate) said resource. With respect to the coral reef study, I will attempt to answer some of your questions. Please note I was not a part of this study team. Others can add/edit/correct/refute if they so choose. ? What does it mean? That if we find a (long term?) alternative use for these sites worth $40 billion per year we can feel fine to blow the Hawaiian reefs up? ? NO.? It is unlikely that this course of action (blowing up the reefs) would supersede the opportunity costs of keeping the reefs healthy and protected. ?See basic premise above. ? How is "the willingness to pay to protect the coral reef ecosystem for future generations" evaluated? ? Individual WTP?s are aggregated and extrapolated across the wider population based on the random sampling methods used in the study. It is difficult to say what future generations will use. Typically people use discount rates (?interest rates?) to project net present value into the future.? There are ongoing academic arguments about what is the correct rate for natural resources such as reefs or the price of Carbon.? In typical benefit cost analyses 3% is used as a discount rate. I noted there is a special category for people considering themselves environmentalists. Why? Are their values taken more or less into account? Like for example if I was one of those interviewed and I had no money on my account how much could I have offered maximum to protect the reef? Attempted Answer ? The parameters (after regression analysis) associated with these characteristics are called demand shifters.?These individual characteristics may cause a shift in the demand curve (inward or outward).? Sometimes Gender, age, income, political affiliation etc may influence value (outside of your income). Why is this important? This is because the area under the demand curve is what is typically estimated as the value or ?consumer surplus?.? It is important to take note of these characteristics as these variables may have an impact on the slope of the demand curve. It is also important to capture these differences as the data is aggregated across the population and should represent the reality that some people will have more value than others for the same resource. I?ll stop here But before closing, I will agree that this field young ? that is if you consider 1947 recent. You may Google ?Harold Hotelling?s Letter on preserving national parks?. This letter is often credited as the catalyst that spawned this ?nascent? field of environmental economics. ? Peter E.T. Edwards +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ If you say you can't put a price on nature, then essentially you are saying it has no value. ? = ________________________________ From: "coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: Monday, 7 November 2011, 12:00 Subject: Coral-List Digest, Vol 39, Issue 8 Send Coral-List mailing list submissions to ??? coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit ??? http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ??? coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov You can reach the person managing the list at ??? coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Coral-List digest....", e.g., cut and paste the Subject line from the individual message you are replying to. Also, please only include quoted text from prior posts that is necessary to make your point; avoid re-sending the entire Digest back to the list. Today's Topics: ? 1. Value of Hawaiian Coral Reefs (Les Kaufman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 12:50:57 -0400 From: Les Kaufman Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Coral Reefs To: Coral List Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset=us-ascii Dear Francesca (and everybody), Ecological and environmental economists have been struggling to find ways to explain the real value of nature without trivializing, bastardizing, or prostituting things that are important to us, yet very difficult to equate with more familiar currencies such as money.? Despite our ability to see far into the future, most of us rarely do so.? Consequently, we respond to stimuli that immediately impact us, like the possibility of suddenly acquiring, or losing, a lot of money. This is especially true of ecosystem services- the essential things for life and health that nature provides to us without us lifting a pinkie, but that require intact, robust ecosystems to keep flowing.? These are the things we take for granted, like breathable air and clean water, as well as things we pay at least a little bit of attention to, such as the natural beauty that supports the tourism industry, all the way to more obviously valuable commodities like food, minerals, and fuels.? There are several classification schemes for ecosystem services, but the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment is the one most widely used right now.? Check out: http://www.pnas.org/content/106/5/1305.short for a short comment on where this is heading. One way to express the value of nature is in terms of dollars.? It is not necessarily the best way, but it is the way that the greatest number of people understand.? There is a lot of baggage associated with it- the questions you raise come up all the time, plus "willingness to pay" doesn't always mean that when you ask people what they are willing to pay to keep something around, that they will actually fork over the money when things start hitting the fan.? If you have a better way of expressing the value of Hawaii's coral reefs- or any coral reef- it would be useful to share it.? This is a young field, and people respond to the strangest things. Les Message: 1 Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 09:40:38 -0700 (PDT) From: "frahome at yahoo.com" Subject: Re: [Coral-List] NOAA news release: U.S. residents say ??? Hawaii?s coral reef ecosystems worth $33.57 billion per year To: "coral-list at coral..aoml.noaa.gov" Message-ID: ??? <1320424838.84622.YahooMailNeo at web32502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 What does it mean? That if we find a (long term?) alternative use for these sites worth $40 billion per year we can feel fine to blow the Hawaiian reefs up? I am very curious to understand how is "the willingness to pay to protect the coral reef ecosystem for future generations" evaluated? Like for example if I was one of those interviewed and I had no money on my account how much could I have offered maximum to protect the reef? I noted there is a special category for people considering themselves environmentalists. Why? Are their values taken more or less into account? I apologize in advance for not having time to read and understand the full report. Greetings Francesca Les Kaufman Professor of Biology Boston University Marine Program and Senior Marine Scientist Conservation International lesk at bu.edu From abaker at rsmas.miami.edu Mon Nov 7 22:15:27 2011 From: abaker at rsmas.miami.edu (Andrew Baker) Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 22:15:27 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Seeking nominations for the Rosenstiel Award from the University of Miami Message-ID: <050f01cc9dc4$aa35dfb0$fea19f10$@rsmas.miami.edu> We are seeking nominations for this year's Rosenstiel Award from the University of Miami. Criteria: A mid-career person who is making an outstanding contribution towards advancement of the understanding of the oceans. Important: This year, the Division of Marine Affairs and Policy is selecting the award recipient, and the focus is on human/environmental interactions. This includes anthropology on marine management and conservation, climate, marine ecology and policy. Award: The Rosenstiel Award includes a $10,000 check and a ceremony in April 2012 at the Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science at the University of Miami in Miami, Florida, USA. History: Last year's recipient, chosen by the Division of Marine Biology and Fisheries, went to Professor Pete Mumby of the University of Queensland. A list of previous recipients, and more information on the award, can be found here: http://www.rsmas.miami.edu/newsroom/rosenstiel-award/ Please send electronic nominations by November 12, 2011 with brief bio and cv to: Sarah Meltzoff, Award Committee, Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science of the University of Miami at: smeltzoff at rsmas.miami.edu ___________________ Andrew C. Baker, Ph.D. Associate Professor Division of Marine Biology and Fisheries Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science University of Miami 4600 Rickenbacker Cswy. Miami, FL 33149, USA Office: +1 (305) 421-4642 Lab: +1 (305) 421-4226 Fax: +1 (305) 421-4600 Email: abaker at rsmas.miami.edu Visit the lab on Facebook by clicking here From GBUCK at crs.loc.gov Tue Nov 8 08:14:38 2011 From: GBUCK at crs.loc.gov (Gene Buck) Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 08:14:38 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Washington, DC: coral reef conservation contacts In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4EB8E4EE020000C20009AB23@crsgw04.loc.gov> Colleagues, I have a congressional office asking for a short list of who might be 8-10 key people working with or conversant on coral reef conservation available in the Washington, DC area (or within a short commute) and representing a spectrum of interests. I'd appreciate your recommendations, with contact information, if possible. Thanks in advance. Gene Buck, specialist in natural resources policy Congressional Research Service Washington, DC From frahome at yahoo.com Tue Nov 8 10:50:02 2011 From: frahome at yahoo.com (frahome at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 07:50:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawiian Reefs In-Reply-To: <1320693437.26833.YahooMailNeo@web160510.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <1320693437.26833.YahooMailNeo@web160510.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1320767402.75309.YahooMailNeo@web32503.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Thank you to those that are trying to explore further the issue. I really appreciate their time and respect their opinions. Unfortunately I find the reasoning so faulty in its essence that I have troubles following most of the basic assumptions and flows of thought. Just to briefly list a couple: the necessity of expressing the value with a number just because economy requires it, the belief that dollars are the only value most people understand (or are they constantly taught so in our society and this is just another way to feed this system? Do people need to convert family values in dollars to understand them?). Not to mention the quote at the end of Peter's email that I guess is there only to "promote" the debate. But let me try more. Peter answered my question this way: Q:What does it mean?That if we find a (long term?) alternative use for these sites worth $40 billion per year we can feel fine to blow the Hawaiian reefs up? A: NO.? It is unlikely that this course of action (blowing up the reefs) would supersede the opportunity costs of keeping the reefs healthy and protected. ?See basic premise above. My new question. Which basic premises? They gave a number, all we need is a bigger one.Why unlikely? Oil and coal companies came with a nice dollar number and now are "blowing up" boreal forests in Canada and mountains in the Appalachia together with their associated ecosystem services and own sake value. Reefs might be next. Non-use and existance value linked to people well being can not be fairly taken into account as people experiencing them can not sell them on the market thus their willingness to pay is strictly restrained to their bank account (while a mining company can use the gains obtained by the use of the resource to express their value for using it). At least this is my understanding. If people could convert in dollars the well being associated to intrinsic values (conversion that Peter calls ?Equivalent in money, representing the sum of money that would have an equivalent effect on the ?welfare, utility, well being of individuals)? nothing on the market could out weight it that's for sure (my number alone likely would be sufficient). And as this was not enough, if I understood correctly, it seems that answers from people that in principle care about nature need to be "adjusted".? Why didn't I see a category for anthropocentric people, careless people, people disconnected from nature? "Being environmentalist" should be the norm not a label for a bias to be corrected. Greetings Francesca ________________________________ From: Peter Edwards To: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" Sent: Monday, November 7, 2011 8:17 PM Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawiian Reefs ?Hello Francesca, All, As a Marine Scientist turned Environmental/Natural Resource Economist I am aware of the philosophical differences (ecological vs environmental economics) that this type of study might bring to the surface. ?I?d like to offer a few thoughts and hopefully insight on some of the issues raised.? First of all one could argue that (when dealing with this topic) there are two definitions of ?Value? From an Ecologists perspective ? Value is that which is worthy of esteem for its own sake; thing or quality having intrinsic worth, Or from an Economists perspective? Value is a fair and proper equivalent in money, commodities etc.? ?Equivalent in money? here represents the sum of money that would have an equivalent effect on the ?welfare, utility, well being (feel-goodness) of individuals. Social scientists (including economists) would argue that value as a concept, is anthropogenic in nature.. ?Because as sentient beings people/society ascribe(s) their/its own values to things/concepts. The economic value of something is a measure of its contribution to human well being (welfare).? Hence use of this type of methodological approach attempt to estimate the economic values of natural systems and the contributions that the variety of ecosystem functions and services make to human well being.? Therefore, ecosystem services cannot be defined independently of human values.? The end goal of ecosystem service valuation is to be able to demonstrate the tradeoffs in ecosystem services resulting from policy decisions.? In some cases the incorporation of a monetary metric into cost-benefit analyses or other quantitative or qualitative means of assessing the losses and/or gains of ecosystem services is appropriate. ?The basic premise is, if a resource is value-less then society will tend to overuse (mis-allocate) said resource. With respect to the coral reef study, I will attempt to answer some of your questions. Please note I was not a part of this study team. Others can add/edit/correct/refute if they so choose. ? What does it mean? That if we find a (long term?) alternative use for these sites worth $40 billion per year we can feel fine to blow the Hawaiian reefs up? ? NO.? It is unlikely that this course of action (blowing up the reefs) would supersede the opportunity costs of keeping the reefs healthy and protected. ?See basic premise above. ? How is "the willingness to pay to protect the coral reef ecosystem for future generations" evaluated? ? Individual WTP?s are aggregated and extrapolated across the wider population based on the random sampling methods used in the study. It is difficult to say what future generations will use. Typically people use discount rates (?interest rates?) to project net present value into the future.? There are ongoing academic arguments about what is the correct rate for natural resources such as reefs or the price of Carbon.? In typical benefit cost analyses 3% is used as a discount rate. I noted there is a special category for people considering themselves environmentalists. Why? Are their values taken more or less into account? Like for example if I was one of those interviewed and I had no money on my account how much could I have offered maximum to protect the reef? Attempted Answer ? The parameters (after regression analysis) associated with these characteristics are called demand shifters.?These individual characteristics may cause a shift in the demand curve (inward or outward).? Sometimes Gender, age, income, political affiliation etc may influence value (outside of your income). Why is this important? This is because the area under the demand curve is what is typically estimated as the value or ?consumer surplus?.? It is important to take note of these characteristics as these variables may have an impact on the slope of the demand curve.. It is also important to capture these differences as the data is aggregated across the population and should represent the reality that some people will have more value than others for the same resource. I?ll stop here But before closing, I will agree that this field young ? that is if you consider 1947 recent. You may Google ?Harold Hotelling?s Letter on preserving national parks?. This letter is often credited as the catalyst that spawned this ?nascent? field of environmental economics. ? Peter E.T. Edwards +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ If you say you can't put a price on nature, then essentially you are saying it has no value. ? = ________________________________ From: "coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: Monday, 7 November 2011, 12:00 Subject: Coral-List Digest, Vol 39, Issue 8 Send Coral-List mailing list submissions to ??? coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit ??? http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ??? coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov You can reach the person managing the list at ??? coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Coral-List digest....", e.g., cut and paste the Subject line from the individual message you are replying to. Also, please only include quoted text from prior posts that is necessary to make your point; avoid re-sending the entire Digest back to the list. Today's Topics: ?? 1. Value of Hawaiian Coral Reefs (Les Kaufman) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 12:50:57 -0400 From: Les Kaufman Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Coral Reefs To: Coral List Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset=us-ascii Dear Francesca (and everybody), Ecological and environmental economists have been struggling to find ways to explain the real value of nature without trivializing, bastardizing, or prostituting things that are important to us, yet very difficult to equate with more familiar currencies such as money.? Despite our ability to see far into the future, most of us rarely do so.? Consequently, we respond to stimuli that immediately impact us, like the possibility of suddenly acquiring, or losing, a lot of money. This is especially true of ecosystem services- the essential things for life and health that nature provides to us without us lifting a pinkie, but that require intact, robust ecosystems to keep flowing.? These are the things we take for granted, like breathable air and clean water, as well as things we pay at least a little bit of attention to, such as the natural beauty that supports the tourism industry, all the way to more obviously valuable commodities like food, minerals, and fuels.?? There are several classification schemes for ecosystem services, but the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment is the one most widely used right now.? Check out: http://www.pnas.org/content/106/5/1305.short for a short comment on where this is heading. One way to express the value of nature is in terms of dollars.? It is not necessarily the best way, but it is the way that the greatest number of people understand.? There is a lot of baggage associated with it- the questions you raise come up all the time, plus "willingness to pay" doesn't always mean that when you ask people what they are willing to pay to keep something around, that they will actually fork over the money when things start hitting the fan.? If you have a better way of expressing the value of Hawaii's coral reefs- or any coral reef- it would be useful to share it.? This is a young field, and people respond to the strangest things. Les Message: 1 Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 09:40:38 -0700 (PDT) From: "frahome at yahoo.com" Subject: Re: [Coral-List] NOAA news release: U.S. residents say ??? Hawaii?s coral reef ecosystems worth $33.57 billion per year To: "coral-list at coral..aoml.noaa.gov" Message-ID: ??? <1320424838.84622.YahooMailNeo at web32502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 What does it mean? That if we find a (long term?) alternative use for these sites worth $40 billion per year we can feel fine to blow the Hawaiian reefs up? I am very curious to understand how is "the willingness to pay to protect the coral reef ecosystem for future generations" evaluated? Like for example if I was one of those interviewed and I had no money on my account how much could I have offered maximum to protect the reef? I noted there is a special category for people considering themselves environmentalists. Why? Are their values taken more or less into account? I apologize in advance for not having time to read and understand the full report. Greetings Francesca Les Kaufman Professor of Biology Boston University Marine Program and Senior Marine Scientist Conservation International lesk at bu.edu _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From allison.billiam at gmail.com Tue Nov 8 13:15:27 2011 From: allison.billiam at gmail.com (Bill Allison) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 10:15:27 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawiian Reefs In-Reply-To: <1320693437.26833.YahooMailNeo@web160510.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <1320693437.26833.YahooMailNeo@web160510.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Niel Evernden discusses these two valuation approaches, which he calls "intrinsic" and "instrumental" and concludes that one should be wary of playing by instrumental rules that may win battles but lose the war. I suppose his strategy will most often be successful in practice when a price cannot be assigned to the resource (i.e., it is priceless). For more see: Evernden, N. (1985). The Natural Alien. Toronto, University of Toronto Press On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Peter Edwards wrote: > Hello Francesca, All, > > As a Marine Scientist turned Environmental/Natural Resource > Economist I am aware of the philosophical differences (ecological vs > environmental > economics) that this type of study might bring to the surface. I?d like > to offer a few thoughts and hopefully > insight on some of the issues raised. > > > First of all one could argue that (when dealing with this > topic) there are two definitions of ?Value? > > From an Ecologists perspective ? Value is that > which is worthy of esteem for its own sake; thing or quality having > intrinsic > worth, > > Or from an Economists perspective? Value is a fair and > proper equivalent in money, commodities etc. ?Equivalent in money? here > represents the sum of money that would have > an equivalent effect on the ?welfare, utility, well being (feel-goodness) > of > individuals. > > Social scientists (including economists) would argue that value as a > concept, is anthropogenic in > nature.. Because as sentient beings people/society > ascribe(s) their/its own values to things/concepts. > > The economic value of something is a measure of its > contribution to human well being (welfare). Hence use of this type of > methodological approach attempt to estimate the economic > values of natural systems and the contributions that the variety of > ecosystem > functions and services make to human well being. Therefore, ecosystem > services cannot be > defined independently of human values. > > The end goal of ecosystem service valuation is to be able to > demonstrate the tradeoffs in ecosystem services resulting from policy > decisions. In some cases the incorporation of a monetary metric into > cost-benefit > analyses or other quantitative or qualitative means of assessing the losses > and/or gains of ecosystem services is appropriate. The basic premise is, > if a resource is > value-less then society will tend to overuse (mis-allocate) said resource.. > > > With respect to the coral reef study, I will attempt to > answer some of your questions. Please note I was not a part of this study > team. > Others can add/edit/correct/refute if they so choose. > > What does it mean? > That if we find a (long term?) alternative use for these sites worth $40 > billion per year we can feel fine to blow the Hawaiian reefs up? ? NO. It > is unlikely that this course of action (blowing > up the reefs) would supersede the opportunity costs of keeping the reefs > healthy and protected. See basic premise > above. > > How is "the > willingness to pay to protect the coral reef ecosystem for future > generations" evaluated? ? Individual WTP?s are aggregated and extrapolated > across the wider population based on the random sampling methods used in > the > study. It is difficult to say what future generations will use. Typically > people use discount rates (?interest rates?) to project net present value > into > the future. There are ongoing academic arguments > about what is the correct rate for natural resources such as reefs or the > price > of Carbon. In typical benefit cost > analyses 3% is used as a discount rate. > > I noted there is a > special category for people considering themselves environmentalists. Why? > Are > their values taken more or less into account? > Like for example if I > was one of those interviewed and I had no money on my account how much > could I > have offered maximum to protect the reef? > > Attempted Answer ? The parameters (after regression analysis) associated > with these characteristics are called demand shifters. These individual > characteristics may cause a shift > in the demand curve (inward or outward). Sometimes Gender, age, income, > political > affiliation etc may influence value (outside of your income). Why is this > important? This is because > the area under the demand curve is what is typically estimated as the > value or ?consumer > surplus?. It is important to take note > of these characteristics as these variables may have an impact on the > slope of > the demand curve. It is also important to capture these differences as the > data is > aggregated across the population and should represent the reality that > some people will > have more value than others for the same resource. > > I?ll stop here > > But before closing, I will agree that this field young ? that is if you > consider 1947 recent. You may Google ?Harold > Hotelling?s Letter on preserving national parks?. This letter is often > credited > as the catalyst that spawned this ?nascent? field of environmental > economics. > > Peter E.T. Edwards > > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > If you say you can't put a price on nature, then essentially > you are saying it has no value. > > = > > > > > ________________________________ > From: "coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" < > coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Sent: Monday, 7 November 2011, 12:00 > Subject: Coral-List Digest, Vol 39, Issue 8 > > Send Coral-List mailing list submissions to > coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > You can reach the person managing the list at > coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Coral-List digest....", e.g., cut and paste the > Subject line from the individual message you are replying to. Also, > please only include quoted text from prior posts that is necessary to > make your point; avoid re-sending the entire Digest back to the list. > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Value of Hawaiian Coral Reefs (Les Kaufman) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2011 12:50:57 -0400 > From: Les Kaufman > Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Coral Reefs > To: Coral List > Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Dear Francesca (and everybody), > > Ecological and environmental economists have been struggling to find ways > to explain the real value of nature without trivializing, bastardizing, or > prostituting things that are important to us, yet very difficult to equate > with more familiar currencies such as money. Despite our ability to see > far into the future, most of us rarely do so. Consequently, we respond to > stimuli that immediately impact us, like the possibility of suddenly > acquiring, or losing, a lot of money. > > This is especially true of ecosystem services- the essential things for > life and health that nature provides to us without us lifting a pinkie, but > that require intact, robust ecosystems to keep flowing. These are the > things we take for granted, like breathable air and clean water, as well as > things we pay at least a little bit of attention to, such as the natural > beauty that supports the tourism industry, all the way to more obviously > valuable commodities like food, minerals, and fuels. There are several > classification schemes for ecosystem services, but the Millennium Ecosystem > Assessment is the one most widely used right now. Check out: > http://www.pnas.org/content/106/5/1305.short for a short comment on where > this is heading. > > One way to express the value of nature is in terms of dollars. It is not > necessarily the best way, but it is the way that the greatest number of > people understand. There is a lot of baggage associated with it- the > questions you raise come up all the time, plus "willingness to pay" doesn't > always mean that when you ask people what they are willing to pay to keep > something around, that they will actually fork over the money when things > start hitting the fan. > > If you have a better way of expressing the value of Hawaii's coral reefs- > or any coral reef- it would be useful to share it. This is a young field, > and people respond to the strangest things. > > Les > > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 09:40:38 -0700 (PDT) > From: "frahome at yahoo.com" > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] NOAA news release: U.S. residents say > Hawaii?s coral reef ecosystems worth $33.57 billion per year > To: "coral-list at coral..aoml.noaa.gov" > Message-ID: > <1320424838.84622.YahooMailNeo at web32502.mail.mud.yahoo.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > > What does it mean? That if we find a (long term?) alternative use for > these sites worth $40 billion per year we can feel fine to blow the > Hawaiian reefs up? > > > I am very curious to understand how is "the willingness to pay to protect > the coral reef ecosystem for future generations" evaluated? > > Like for example if I was one of those interviewed and I had no money on > my account how much could I have offered maximum to protect the reef? > I noted there is a special category for people considering themselves > environmentalists. Why? Are their values taken more or less into account? > > > I apologize in advance for not having time to read and understand the full > report. > > > Greetings > Francesca > Les Kaufman > Professor of Biology > Boston University Marine Program > and > Senior Marine Scientist > Conservation International > lesk at bu.edu > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list -- ________________________________ Is this how science illuminates "reality"? - "the meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside, enveloping the talk which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze." - narrator's comment about Marlow's tale-telling, in Heart of Darkness (Conrad) From kruer at 3rivers.net Tue Nov 8 17:13:13 2011 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 15:13:13 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Research Needs In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <05e801cc9e63$9bacdd50$d30697f0$@net> Folks - but a little more realistic, and specific to the Florida Keys, how about reef research that relates to: ScienceDaily (Oct. 21, 2011) via the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary - "NOAA scientists have found that pressure from increasing coastal populations, ship and boat groundings, marine debris, poaching, and climate change are critically threatening the health of the Florida Keys ecosystem." We seem to routinely identify and popularize threats but then fund universities and others to carry out expensive research unrelated to the problems we identify. Curtis Kruer -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Eugene Shinn Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 1:00 PM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Research Needs Its all very simple for those who think human behavior is the cause. Stop the mosquito spraying and half of the human population in the Florida Keys will clear out in a year or two. Most of the other recommendations only pick around the edges. Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida College of Marine Science Room 221A 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From usseglio at hawaii.edu Tue Nov 8 19:00:37 2011 From: usseglio at hawaii.edu (Paolo usseglio) Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 14:00:37 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Reference on Galapagos grouper Message-ID: <9E1892F3-4B01-4156-879F-F071C0E842B6@hawaii.edu> Hi all, I have been, very unsuccessfully, trying to locate the following reference: Coello and Grimm, 1993. S. Coello and A.S. Grimm, The reproductive biology of Mycteroperca olfax (Jenyns) (Pisces Serranidae): protoginy and breeding season. Rev. Cien. Mar. Limn. 3 (1993), pp. 115?128. So far the databases provided by my university as well as other reference collections have failed to turn up the article. Does anyone have a copy of it? Mahalo Paolo Usseglio -------><((('>--------- Paolo usseglio Graduate Research Assistant University of Hawai'i Hawai'i Fisheries Cooperative Research Unit 2538 The mall, 152 EDM Honolulu, Hawaii 96822 usseglio at hawaii.edu From jault at rsmas.miami.edu Wed Nov 9 10:04:23 2011 From: jault at rsmas.miami.edu (Jerald S. Ault) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 10:04:23 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Research Needs In-Reply-To: <05e801cc9e63$9bacdd50$d30697f0$@net> References: <05e801cc9e63$9bacdd50$d30697f0$@net> Message-ID: <516a02c64994512de8d04fbd6098097e.squirrel@webmail.rsmas.miami.edu> Curtis, For a snoot-full regarding the Florida Keys, take a look at the following papers listed below. I respectfully submit that you are way off base here. Jerry Bohnsack, J.A., and J.S. Ault. 1996. Management strategies to conserve marine biodiversity. Oceanography 9(1): 73-82. Ault, J.S., J.A. Bohnsack, and G.A. Meester. 1997. Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary: retrospective (1979-1995) assessment of reef fish and the case for protected marine areas. Pages 415-425 in Developing and Sustaining World Fisheries Resources: The State of Science and Management, Hancock, D.A., Smith, D.C., Grant, A., and Beumer, J.P. (eds.). 2nd World Fisheries Congress, Brisbane, Australia, 797 p. Ault, J.S., J.A. Bohnsack, and G.A. Meester. 1998. A retrospective (1979-1996) multispecies assessment of coral reef fish stocks in the Florida Keys. Fishery Bulletin 96(3): 395-414. Meester, G.A., A. Mehrotra, J.S. Ault, and E.K. Baker. 2004. Designing marine reserves for fishery management. Management Science 50(8): 1031-1043. Bohnsack, J.A., J.S. Ault, and B. Causey. 2004. Why have no-take marine protected areas? American Fisheries Society Symposium 42: 185-193. Ault, J.S., S.G. Smith, J.A. Bohnsack, J. Luo, D.E. Harper, and D.B. McClellan. 2006. Building sustainable fisheries in Florida?s coral reef ecosystem: positive signs in the Dry Tortugas. Bulletin of Marine Science 78(3): 633-654. Ault, J.S., S.G. Smith, and J.A. Bohnsack. 2005. Evaluation of average length as an estimator of exploitation status for the Florida coral reef fish community. ICES Journal of Marine Science 62: 417-423. Ault, J.S., J.A. Bohnsack, S.G. Smith, and J. Luo. 2005. Towards sustainable multispecies fisheries in the Florida USA coral reef ecosystem. Bulletin of Marine Science 76(2): 595-622. Bartholomew, A., J.A. Bohnsack, S.G. Smith, J.S. Ault, D.E. Harper, and D.B. McClellan. 2008. Influence of marine reserve size and boundary length on the initial response of exploited reef fishes in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary, USA. Landscape Ecology 23(Suppl. 1): 55-65. Ault, J.S., S.G. Smith and J.T. Tilmant. 2009. Are the coral reef finfish fisheries of south Florida sustainable? Proceedings International Coral Reef Symposium 11: 989-993. Ault, J.S., S.G. Smith, J. Luo, M.E. Monaco and R.S. Appeldoorn. 2008. Length-based assessment of sustainability benchmarks for coral reef fishes in Puerto Rico. Environmental Conservation 35(3): 221-231. Smith, S.G., Swanson, D.W., Chiappone, M., Miller, S.L., & Ault, J.S. 2011. Probability sampling of stony coral populations in the Florida Keys. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 183(1-4): 121-138. Farmer, N.A., and J.S. Ault. 2011. Grouper and snapper movements and habitat use in Dry Tortugas, Florida. Marine Ecology Progress Series 433: 169-184. Smith, S.G., J.S. Ault, J.A. Bohnsack, D.E. Harper, J. Luo, and D.B. McClellan. 2011. Multispecies survey design for assessing reef-fish stocks, spatially-explicit management performance, and ecosystem condition. Fisheries Research 109(1): 25-41. > Folks - but a little more realistic, and specific to the Florida Keys, how > about reef research that relates to: > > ScienceDaily (Oct. 21, 2011) via the Florida Keys National Marine > Sanctuary > - "NOAA scientists have found that pressure from increasing coastal > populations, ship and boat groundings, marine debris, poaching, and > climate > change are critically threatening the health of the Florida Keys > ecosystem." > > We seem to routinely identify and popularize threats but then fund > universities and others to carry out expensive research unrelated to the > problems we identify. > > Curtis Kruer > > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Eugene Shinn > Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 1:00 PM > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Research Needs > > Its all very simple for those who think human behavior is the cause. > Stop the mosquito spraying and half of the human population in the > Florida Keys will clear out in a year or two. Most of the other > recommendations only pick around the edges. Gene > > No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) > ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- > E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor > University of South Florida > College of Marine Science Room 221A > 140 Seventh Avenue South > St. Petersburg, FL 33701 > > Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- **************************************************** Jerald S. Ault, Ph.D. Professor of Marine Biology and Fisheries Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science University of Miami, 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway Miami, FL 33149 jault at rsmas.miami.edu (305)421-4884 ph (305)421-4791 fax http://femar.rsmas.miami.edu/ http://bonefishresearch.com/ http://tarponresearch.com/ **************************************************** From kruer at 3rivers.net Wed Nov 9 10:18:26 2011 From: kruer at 3rivers.net (Curtis Kruer) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 08:18:26 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Research Needs In-Reply-To: <516a02c64994512de8d04fbd6098097e.squirrel@webmail.rsmas.miami.edu> References: <05e801cc9e63$9bacdd50$d30697f0$@net> <516a02c64994512de8d04fbd6098097e.squirrel@webmail.rsmas.miami.edu> Message-ID: Jerry, I know the Keys, I know fish in the Keys, and luckily there's much more to the Keys than reef fish altho they're definitely the most fun, the most popular, and often the easiest to work with. If I'm "way off base" than why does NOAA in late 2011 state "......increasing coastal populations, ship and boat groundings, marine debris, poaching, and climate change are critically threatening the health of the Florida Keys ecosystem."? "ecosystem" is NOAA's term of choice and that's my point exactly. The place seems sterile compared to just 30-40 years ago. Good work on the reef fish end of things though. Curtis Kruer -------------------------------------------------- From: "Jerald S. Ault" Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 8:04 AM To: "Curtis Kruer" Cc: Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Reef Research Needs > Curtis, For a snoot-full regarding the Florida Keys, take a look at the > following papers listed below. I respectfully submit that you are way off > base here. Jerry > > Bohnsack, J.A., and J.S. Ault. 1996. Management strategies to conserve > marine biodiversity. Oceanography 9(1): 73-82. > > Ault, J.S., J.A. Bohnsack, and G.A. Meester. 1997. Florida Keys National > Marine Sanctuary: retrospective (1979-1995) assessment of reef fish and > the case for protected marine areas. Pages 415-425 in Developing and > Sustaining World Fisheries Resources: The State of Science and Management, > Hancock, D.A., Smith, D.C., Grant, A., and Beumer, J.P. (eds.). 2nd World > Fisheries Congress, Brisbane, Australia, 797 p. > > Ault, J.S., J.A. Bohnsack, and G.A. Meester. 1998. A retrospective > (1979-1996) multispecies assessment of coral reef fish stocks in the > Florida Keys. Fishery Bulletin 96(3): 395-414. > > Meester, G.A., A. Mehrotra, J.S. Ault, and E.K. Baker. 2004. Designing > marine reserves for fishery management. Management Science 50(8): > 1031-1043. > > Bohnsack, J.A., J.S. Ault, and B. Causey. 2004. Why have no-take marine > protected areas? American Fisheries Society Symposium 42: 185-193. > > Ault, J.S., S.G. Smith, J.A. Bohnsack, J. Luo, D.E. Harper, and D.B. > McClellan. 2006. Building sustainable fisheries in Florida's coral reef > ecosystem: positive signs in the Dry Tortugas. Bulletin of Marine Science > 78(3): 633-654. > > Ault, J.S., S.G. Smith, and J.A. Bohnsack. 2005. Evaluation of average > length as an estimator of exploitation status for the Florida coral reef > fish community. ICES Journal of Marine Science 62: 417-423. > > Ault, J.S., J.A. Bohnsack, S.G. Smith, and J. Luo. 2005. Towards > sustainable multispecies fisheries in the Florida USA coral reef > ecosystem. Bulletin of Marine Science 76(2): 595-622. > > Bartholomew, A., J.A. Bohnsack, S.G. Smith, J.S. Ault, D.E. Harper, and > D.B. McClellan. 2008. Influence of marine reserve size and boundary length > on the initial response of exploited reef fishes in the Florida Keys > National Marine Sanctuary, USA. Landscape Ecology 23(Suppl. 1): 55-65. > > Ault, J.S., S.G. Smith and J.T. Tilmant. 2009. Are the coral reef finfish > fisheries of south Florida sustainable? Proceedings International Coral > Reef Symposium 11: 989-993. > > Ault, J.S., S.G. Smith, J. Luo, M.E. Monaco and R.S. Appeldoorn. 2008. > Length-based assessment of sustainability benchmarks for coral reef fishes > in Puerto Rico. Environmental Conservation 35(3): 221-231. > > Smith, S.G., Swanson, D.W., Chiappone, M., Miller, S.L., & Ault, J.S. > 2011. Probability sampling of stony coral populations in the Florida Keys. > Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 183(1-4): 121-138. > > Farmer, N.A., and J.S. Ault. 2011. Grouper and snapper movements and > habitat use in Dry Tortugas, Florida. Marine Ecology Progress Series 433: > 169-184. > > Smith, S.G., J.S. Ault, J.A. Bohnsack, D.E. Harper, J. Luo, and D.B. > McClellan. 2011. Multispecies survey design for assessing reef-fish > stocks, spatially-explicit management performance, and ecosystem > condition. Fisheries Research 109(1): 25-41. > >> Folks - but a little more realistic, and specific to the Florida Keys, >> how >> about reef research that relates to: >> >> ScienceDaily (Oct. 21, 2011) via the Florida Keys National Marine >> Sanctuary >> - "NOAA scientists have found that pressure from increasing coastal >> populations, ship and boat groundings, marine debris, poaching, and >> climate >> change are critically threatening the health of the Florida Keys >> ecosystem." >> >> We seem to routinely identify and popularize threats but then fund >> universities and others to carry out expensive research unrelated to the >> problems we identify. >> >> Curtis Kruer >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Eugene Shinn >> Sent: Wednesday, October 26, 2011 1:00 PM >> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Research Needs >> >> Its all very simple for those who think human behavior is the cause. >> Stop the mosquito spraying and half of the human population in the >> Florida Keys will clear out in a year or two. Most of the other >> recommendations only pick around the edges. Gene >> >> No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) >> ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- >> E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor >> University of South Florida >> College of Marine Science Room 221A >> 140 Seventh Avenue South >> St. Petersburg, FL 33701 >> >> Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- > > **************************************************** > Jerald S. Ault, Ph.D. > Professor of Marine Biology and Fisheries > Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science > University of Miami, 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway > Miami, FL 33149 jault at rsmas.miami.edu > (305)421-4884 ph (305)421-4791 fax > http://femar.rsmas.miami.edu/ > http://bonefishresearch.com/ > http://tarponresearch.com/ > **************************************************** > From linwood.pendleton at duke.edu Wed Nov 9 13:32:04 2011 From: linwood.pendleton at duke.edu (Linwood Pendleton) Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 18:32:04 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Folks. Now that the Hawaii study has your attention, you may wish to start to plumb the wealth of studies on marine ecosystem services that exists. Please visit our beta site http://www.marineecosystemservices.org/ to view (using a mapper like that developed for OBIS SEAMAP) basic information about marine ecosystem service valuations conducted across the globe. These studies are compiled from a variety of extant and extinct databases from around the world. Also, consider joining the Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership community of practice at www.ecosystemcommons.org - a great place to open this important discussion to those interested in marine ecosystem services writ large. Best wishes, Linwood p.s. I also was not part of the team working on the Hawaii study. So, my ability to answer questions about this study is limited. Linwood Pendleton Director of Ocean and Coastal Policy, Duke's Nicholas Institute Senior Economic Advisor, NOAA 805-794-8206 blog: www.nioceans.org Connect with the Nicholas Institute through our social media ****************************************** From pawlikj at uncw.edu Thu Nov 10 09:25:51 2011 From: pawlikj at uncw.edu (Pawlik, Joseph) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 09:25:51 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] BioScience article: Ecology of Caribbean sponges from molecule to ecosystem Message-ID: Hi Coral-listers, I'd like to alert you to the cover article in this month's Bioscience, which summarizes the last 20 years of research by my group on the chemical ecology of sponges on Caribbean coral reefs. This synthesis is notable in ecology because of its span from the level of molecules to an entire ecosystem, and because of its validation of theoretical concepts of resource allocation, for which there has been only limited success from studies of terrestrial systems. The conceptual model presented in the article illustrates a simple, clear and predictive narrative that is rare in ecology. Our ongoing surveys indicate that sponges now cover more reef surface than hard corals on >60% of Caribbean coral reefs. We are currently investigating how different levels of fishing pressure (from the indiscriminate use of fish traps to the long-term imposition of marine protected areas) alter the abundance of sponge-eating fishes, and consequently, the composition of the sponge and coral community on reefs across the Caribbean. Pawlik, J.R. 2011. The chemical ecology of sponges on Caribbean reefs: Natural products shape natural systems. BioScience, 61: 888-898. If you don't have access to the article through your institutional website, you can find it as #113 at this website: http://people.uncw.edu/pawlikj/pubs2.html Regards, Joe ************************************************************** Joseph R. Pawlik, Professor Department of Biology and Marine Biology UNCW Center for Marine Science 5600 Marvin K Moss Lane Wilmington, NC 28409 USA pawlikj at uncw.edu; Office:(910)962-2377; Cell:(910)232-3579 Website: http://people.uncw.edu/pawlikj/index.html PDFs: http://people.uncw.edu/pawlikj/pubs2.html ************************************************************** From deaconblue at gmail.com Thu Nov 10 11:01:17 2011 From: deaconblue at gmail.com (David Branson) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 11:01:17 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Up to date resources for possible assistantships Message-ID: I understand that posting job requests and resumes on the list is restricted so I apologize if this is a violation. I've tried accessing the link provided via the coral-list info page but it is dead and I'm looking for up to date information about available Ph.D assistantships in corals and marine research. If someone is aware of any resources or has advice regarding ferreting these positions out, would you please post to the list? I'm sure I'm not the only list member looking. Thanks, David Branson Graduate Assistant Aquatic Ecology-Conservation Biology Central Michigan University Ex Scientia, Veritas From jim.hendee at noaa.gov Thu Nov 10 11:17:50 2011 From: jim.hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 11:17:50 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Up to date resources for possible assistantships In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4EBBF92E.5080402@noaa.gov> There are many resources out there for this, but here's how you can search the Coral-List archives. Put any of these search terms in your Google or other search engine: site:coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list/ assistantship site:coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list/ job site:coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list/ position site:coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list/ scholarship ....or any search word you'd like. Hope this work. Cheers, Jim On 11/10/11 11:01 AM, David Branson wrote: > I understand that posting job requests and resumes on the list is > restricted so I apologize if this is a violation. > > I've tried accessing the link provided via the coral-list info page but it > is dead and I'm looking for up to date information about available Ph.D > assistantships in corals and marine research. > > If someone is aware of any resources or has advice regarding ferreting > these positions out, would you please post to the list? I'm sure I'm not > the only list member looking. > > Thanks, > David Branson > Graduate Assistant > Aquatic Ecology-Conservation Biology > Central Michigan University > > Ex Scientia, Veritas > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From juergen.herler at univie.ac.at Fri Nov 11 05:57:05 2011 From: juergen.herler at univie.ac.at (juergen.herler at univie.ac.at) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 11:57:05 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawiian Reefs (Juergen Herler) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4EBD0D91.10402.A4F772@juergen.herler.univie.ac.at> Dear all! Francesca, I can well understand your frustration and this discussion must be seen as part of a discussion that has arisen some weeks or even much longer ago on this list and certainly years ago in the community. The definition of "value" is a very complicated one and can certainly not be restricted to economic value or but must include immaterial values such as ecological value and emotional value which we especially develop through our experiences with nature (including ourselves of course). Here the meaningfulness of language may be helpful. It is interesting that the term "in-valu- able" is treated as the comparative of "valuable", while in both words the term "value" seems to be synonymous with economic value since it can also be expressed as "not valuable (in money)". That make definitions of "value" a bit more difficult than maybe in German, where the same meaning is expressed in a different term (unschaetzbarer Wert), which would translate as "a value that cannot be estimated". So I think the main problem lies in that we try to estimate the value of things or qualities which do not only have an economic value (which can be estimated somehow) but also have ecological and emotional values and in summary therefore appear "invaluable", or maybe better, "of incalculable value" to us. If we put a price- tag to something we probably can better communicate this "value" to economists but we just show half the picture and reduce everything to a fraction of its "true" value. And why at all put a price-tag on something which is not for sale? Not to forget that money in itself has no value but only the things it can be exchanged for or the qualities it suggests have. So it is probably time to say good bye to the attempt of expressing everything in economic value and solve this issue on a more philosophical level. This of course is much more challenging than the already hard task of current ecosystem valuation (in economic value), especially for economists. Asking people for how much the are willing to pay for conserving something is useless if they cannot actually imagine the product or service they have to validate (in terms of money). Other methods such as the travel-cost-method may work for small-scaled projects but will of course fail when applied to entire ecosystems which provides many other services and also do not account for sustainability. So in addition to any economic value, there needs to be a good estimate for immaterial values (maybe a rating of how people feel or think in terms of ethics, safety for their health and future, etc. when they have to decide about having a power plant or huge dam versus an untouched river, coral reef versus a coal mine or highway versus a meadow). And of course must the requirements of sustainability be met and validated. Certainly this will not resolve the huge dilemma that we continue to consume the energy and products that are delivered by the destructive forces we try to ban. However, if the sad statement that we do not understand anything else than dollars is true (I am certainly not convinced), we obviosuly do not deserve anything else than money. In a local initiative here in Vienna we saved a park from destruction through a large building project (some 20 million dollars worth) by telling the owner that the park is in-valu-able to the population. It took us more than a year to stop the whole story and we have never been talking about numbers ... If we put a price-tag on nature, we put a price-tag on ourselves (as an integrated part of it), and we will eventually end up with a lot of money but with little left to buy for it. We are all "green" but some obviously don't know ... Have a good day! Juergen --------------------------------------------- < Dr. Juergen Herler Department of Integrative Zoology Faculty of Life Sciences University of Vienna Althanstra?e 14 A-1090 Vienna/Austria/Europe Tel.: +43-4277-76313 e-mail: Juergen.Herler at univie.ac.at http://homepage.univie.ac.at/juergen.herler > > Thank you to those that are trying to explore further the issue. I > really appreciate their time and respect their opinions. > Unfortunately I find the reasoning so faulty in its essence that I > have troubles following most of the basic assumptions and flows of > thought. Just to briefly list a couple: the necessity of expressing > the value with a number just because economy requires it, the belief > that dollars are the only value most people understand (or are they > constantly taught so in our society and this is just another way to > feed this system? Do people need to convert family values in dollars > to understand them?). Not to mention the quote at the end of Peter's > email that I guess is there only to "promote" the debate. > > But let me try more. > Peter answered my question this way: > Q:What does it mean?That if we find a (long term?) alternative use > for these sites worth $40 billion per year we can feel fine to blow > the Hawaiian reefs up? > A: NO.? It is unlikely that this course of action (blowing up the > reefs) would supersede the opportunity costs of keeping the reefs > healthy and protected. ?See basic premise above. > > My new question. Which basic premises? They gave a number, all we > need is a bigger one.Why unlikely? Oil and coal companies came with > a nice dollar number and now are "blowing up" boreal forests in > Canada and mountains in the Appalachia together with their > associated ecosystem services and own sake value. Reefs might be > next. > > Non-use and existance value linked to people well being can not be > fairly taken into account as people experiencing them can not sell > them on the market thus their willingness to pay is strictly > restrained to their bank account (while a mining company can use the > gains obtained by the use of the resource to express their value for > using it). At least this is my understanding. If people could > convert in dollars the well being associated to intrinsic values > (conversion that Peter calls ?Equivalent in money, representing the > sum of money that would have an equivalent effect on the ?welfare, > utility, well being of individuals)? nothing on the market could out > weight it that's for sure (my number alone likely would be > sufficient). > And as this was not enough, if I understood correctly, it seems that > answers from people that in principle care about nature need to be > "adjusted".? Why didn't I see a category for anthropocentric people, > careless people, people disconnected from nature? "Being > environmentalist" should be the norm not a label for a bias to be > corrected. > > Greetings > Francesca > > From sealab at earthlink.net Fri Nov 11 09:43:26 2011 From: sealab at earthlink.net (Steve Mussman) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 09:43:26 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Coral Reefs Message-ID: <25135888.1321022606629.JavaMail.root@wamui-hunyo.atl.sa.earthlink.net> This recently released report may shine some light on the prevailing approach being deployed in attempts to "appraise" ecosystems.It won't satisfy those of us who consider coral reefs to be priceless, but this "ecosystem services approach" provides insight into the current trend in efforts to quantify values. httpp://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=13141 Regards, Steve From rudy_bonn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 11 12:21:36 2011 From: rudy_bonn at yahoo.com (Rudy Bonn) Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 09:21:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Ecosystem value Message-ID: <1321032096.82150.YahooMailClassic@web120618.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Food for thought folks: ? Approaches for Ecosystem Services Valuation for the Gulf of Mexico After the Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Interim Report (2011) The unprecedented magnitude of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill presents significant challenges for oil spill responders and those tasked with assessing the impacts of the spill. Evaluating changes to ecosystem services?the benefits people receive from natural resources and processes?caused by the oil spill could expand the potential to capture and value the full breadth of impacts to the ecosystem and the public. This report assesses the methods and metrics that could help scientists effectively evaluate ecosystem services. Key Findings The Oil Pollution Act of 1990 establishes a formal legal framework for determining when an oil spill results in an "injury"-- defined as an observable or measurable adverse change or impairment in a natural resource. This requires assessment of the extent and severity of an injury to a natural resource through a process known as the Natural Resources Damage Assessment (NRDA). In addition to quantifying the extent of damage the assessment includes plans for developing, implementing, and monitoring restoration and compiles expenses for both assessment and restoration costs from those deemed responsible. The magnitude and depth of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, together with the inherent complexity of the Gulf of Mexico ecosystem, pose serious challenges to those charged with assessing damages and developing restoration plans. For a spill the size of the Deepwater Horizon, an "ecosystem services approach" may complement the Natural Resources Damage Assessment and offer a broader opportunity to capture, value, and appropriately restore the full breadth of impacts to the ecosystem and the public. This approach would focuses not only on replacing or repairing damaged natural resources but also on re-establishing or replacing the ecosystem's interdependent processes. In order to assess the impacts of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, scientists need to establish a baseline of ecosystem conditions before the spill took place. However, there are natural variations in conditions in the Gulf of Mexico over time, as well as human-made changes to the environment. Analysis of the impact of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill will need to take into account the fundamental complexity of the Gulf of Mexico ecosystem, and the past and ongoing affects of phenomena, both natural and human-induced, that are unrelated to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Implementing an ecosystem approach to damage assessment requires an understanding of the complex linkages amongst various ecosystem components, including the impact of humans on the structure and function of the ecosystem, the resulting changes in ecosystem services, and how these changes affect human well-being. Determining the impact of human actions on the structure and function of the ecosystem Scientists will need to investigate each ecosystem service by carrying out specific types of sampling and analysis to complement the information collected under the existing damage assessment process. In order to extend the current damage assessment to include an ecosystem services approach, scientists need to understand how these various components have been affected by human actions, the consequences for the structure and function of the ecosystem, and ultimately the changes in ecosystem services caused by the spill. Establishing how changes in the ecosystem lead to changes in ecosystem services This step determines ecosystem production functions ?how the ecosystem transforms inputs into outputs such as the yields of crops or fisheries.. For many ecosystem services, a lack of mechanistic understanding and data inhibits accurate quantification of ecosystem services. The complexity of marine ecosystems makes it difficult to understand how disturbances to an ecosystem will reverberate through the system and ultimately lead to changes in the provision of ecosystem services. Establishing how changes in the provision of ecosystem services affect human well-being. The third component of the ecosystem services approach focuses on establishing the value of ecosystem services. This involves combining economic methods with ecological assessments to estimate the value of changes in ecosystem services as a result of environmental impacts. Valuation methods are used to provide a common, quantitative measure to facilitate comparisons among various services as an indication of how much the availability of the service contributes to the improvement in human well-being. Alternatively, in the case of damage to the environment, valuation methods could be applied to assess how much value has been lost as a consequence of reduced ecosystem services. Rudy S Bonn Director of Marine Projects Reef Relief 631 Greene Street Key West, FL 33040 305-294-3100 From rbourke at OCEANIT.COM Fri Nov 11 21:26:29 2011 From: rbourke at OCEANIT.COM (Robert Bourke) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 02:26:29 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value Message-ID: <81E2132A21060942816F5784DB0C5CFB9EC80162@exch10.oceanit.local> Coral Listers: I'm going to take some heat for this, so as a pre-amble I'm a private sector environmental consultant, who has worked in Hawaii for 35 years, was one of the first proponents of widespread MPAs in Hawaii, and consider myself a staunch protector of the environment. The NOAA funded study "Total Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef Ecosystems" which places a total value of the reefs in the Main Hawaiian Islands at $33.5B is seriously flawed due to some basic assumptions it has made. As scientists with expertise in coral reefs and likely a great love of these ecosystems it is very important that we critically examine all studies - even those that appear to place a high value towards an argument we'd personally like to believe. Poor science will do little to forward this important environmental cause. First, I'd like to put the study into perspective. $33.5B per year is a lot of money. A prior study (Cesar, 2002) examined the value of the fishing, recreation, research, boating, and intrinsic value of these same reefs came up with a value roughly 1% of the NOAA study. The Hawaii State budget for 2009 was about $22B, and the Gross State Economic Product for 2009 was $66B. Does it make sense that the value of protecting and restoring "only" the reefs is more than the entire state budget and about half the total economic output of the entire State? $33.5B over 300,000 acres of reef works out to about $2.50 per square foot/year. For those interested in mitigation for reef damage this figure will lead to some interesting calculations. The study conducted 3277 surveys, primarily by computer, to individuals in the contiguous 48 States. Hawaii residents and Alaska residents were excluded from the study. 40% of those surveyed had no more than a high school education. Half had never been to a coral reef. Think about that. The first part of the survey educates the survey taker about the degraded condition of reefs in Hawaii, including a statement that 5-acres of reef are damaged every year by boat groundings (false) and that closing 25% of the reef to fishing would result in an increase from the present day 10% to 50% of historical fish stocks within 10 years (unsubstantiated). The survey asks a bunch of questions to help characterize the survey taker and then asks two key questions (paraphrased): 1) Would you pay an additional $X in Federal taxes to increase the MPAs in Hawaii to 25% coverage? 2) Would you pay an additional $Y in Federal taxes to repair the annual 5-acres of reef damage? The study allows a choice between $0 (no fix) to values from $45 to $170 per year per household to develop MPAs (X value), and a similar choice for reef repair varying from $35 to $135 (Y-value). The average X and Y are then added together for a total willingness to pay of $287 per household. This value times the number of households in the US (~117M) =$33.5B per year. There are two problems with the numbers used to estimate X and Y. A) these represent Monopoly Money figures for respondents. They know this isn't really going to result in an increase to their taxes & these nice people have just shown lots of pretty pictures showing that things really need to get fixed, so "Why not select some value to fix their problem?". To anyone who believes these values mirror real choices, I suggest you look at what has been happening to taxes across the country for causes (such as education) that are much more important and closer to home. B) the choices given, even at the lowest levels, are much higher than reasonable. Assuming that 5-acres of coral really did get damaged each year (an unsubstantiated claim), the lowest selective choice of a $35 per year tax increase to fix the problem would result in annual tax revenues of ($35 x 117M families) $6.4B, or roughly $18,000 per square foot of reef repaired! The study appears to have been designed in such a way that it is almost guaranteed to yield an unrealistically high value for the coral reef resources. Aloha Bob Bourke -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Linwood Pendleton Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 8:32 AM To: Subject: [Coral-List] Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership Folks. Now that the Hawaii study has your attention, you may wish to start to plumb the wealth of studies on marine ecosystem services that exists. Please visit our beta site http://www.marineecosystemservices.org/ to view (using a mapper like that developed for OBIS SEAMAP) basic information about marine ecosystem service valuations conducted across the globe. These studies are compiled from a variety of extant and extinct databases from around the world. Also, consider joining the Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership community of practice at www.ecosystemcommons.org - a great place to open this important discussion to those interested in marine ecosystem services writ large. Best wishes, Linwood p.s. I also was not part of the team working on the Hawaii study. So, my ability to answer questions about this study is limited. Linwood Pendleton Director of Ocean and Coastal Policy, Duke's Nicholas Institute Senior Economic Advisor, NOAA 805-794-8206 blog: www.nioceans.org Connect with the Nicholas Institute through our social media ****************************************** _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From sealab at earthlink.net Sat Nov 12 14:25:58 2011 From: sealab at earthlink.net (Steve Mussman) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2011 14:25:58 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Coral Reefs Message-ID: <20928462.1321125958536.JavaMail.root@wamui-hunyo.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Bob Bourke?s critique of the NOAA funded study on the economic values relating to Hawaii?s coral reef ecosystems may be enlightening, but perhaps not in the way intended. Upon critically examining the study, the science applied may well have faults, but the metric used (cost-benefit analysis) may simply be more convenient than appropriate when applied to the subject at hand. Understanding that dollar values have commonality doesn?t necessarily mean that this form of measure represents the most suitable approach. Limiting the debate to descriptions in monetary terms often introduces biases designed to benefit one side or another. In this case, it is possible that the $33 billion per year reflects an inflated value, but more critical is the fact that it points to the realization that there are some things that defy accurate description in these limited terms. How exactly do we objectively place a fair dollar value on a breaching whale or even Gene?s giant surfing waves? Maybe we shouldn?t even try and instead begin to apply new and different approaches when dealing with issues that may come to symbolize an impending ecological collapse. Regards, Steve From marie at seamarc.com Mon Nov 14 05:30:11 2011 From: marie at seamarc.com (Marie Saleem) Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 16:00:11 +0530 Subject: [Coral-List] Job opening for EIA Consultant in the Maldives Message-ID: <70BBFBC3-8C2F-4DC1-9F48-3583930030A9@seamarc.com> Dear Listers, I am looking for someone who has a background in environmental management/ Coastal engineering with experience in carrying out Environmental Impact Assessments. The post is based at Seamarc in Male', the capital of Maldives with frequent travel to the islands for data collection. Basic requirements are as follows: - MSc or higher in Marine Biology/ Coastal Engineering with a focus on Environmental Impact Assessment - Excellent spoken and written English - Surveying and monitoring skills - Certified SCUBA diver (At least Advanced level) - Excellent leadership qualities and able to work in a team - Previous work experience in developing EIAs will be an added advantage If you are interested and match the basic requirements please email me with your CV. Thank you, Marie Saleem ________________________________________ Marie Saleem Environmental Consultant Seamarc Pvt. Ltd. 7th FL, M. Maya Gandhakoalhi Magu Male', Maldives Tel: +960 3331626 Fax: +960 3336575 Mobile 1: +960 7783694 Mobile 2: +94 774229997 Email: marie at seamarc.com Web: www.reefscapers.com / www.seamarc.com From christian.voolstra at kaust.edu.sa Tue Nov 15 06:29:32 2011 From: christian.voolstra at kaust.edu.sa (Christian R. Voolstra) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 14:29:32 +0300 Subject: [Coral-List] Laboratory Technician opportunity: Next-Generation Sequencing libraries Message-ID: We are looking for a highly motivated, independent but team-oriented laboratory technical with a strong expertise in the preparation of Next Generation Sequencing libraries for the Illumina, 454, and SOLID platforms. The successful candidate will join the Group of Prof. Christian R. Voolstra at the Red Sea Research Center of the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) and will be mainly responsible for the generation of high quality sequencing libraries from marine samples. This also includes the development, adaptation, and improvement of methods as well as validation of new procedures. Since the work with non-model organisms and difficult samples often requires the modification of existing protocols, we highly encourage experienced applicants with a proven molecular biology background and strong problem solving skills. Job description: conduct sample preparation, quantification, and quality control Generate high quality sequencing libraries (PE and MP libraries) for genomic DNA, RNA-seq, small RNAs (Illumina, 454, SOLID) Quality assessment of respective libraries (qPCR) Analyze current process procedures and provide feedback for their optimization and improvement Consult on research projects with our in-house sequencing core facility Documenting processes and improvements to methods Develop, assess, and adapt new technologies, protocols, and software Conduct other laboratory work as needed Contribute to the writing of project proposals and manuscripts describing the methodology Requirements: Completed education as a laboratory technician (Federal Certificate of Capacity, BSc or MSc) in Molecular Biology, Biotechnology, Biochemistry or related field plus laboratory experience in nucleic acid research > 1 year of experience with Next Generation Sequencing library construction (preferentially Illumina and/or 454) sound knowledge of molecular biology methods, protocols, and equipment (including RNA and DNA preparation, RNA and DNA quantification, PCR, qPCR and bead-based technologies). Familiarity with Microsoft Word, Excel, and PowerPoint English proficiency Experience with bioinformatics analysis is a plus KAUST is a dynamic new university campus and campus community in Saudi Arabia that opened in September 2009. The campus is located directly at the Red Sea, near Jeddah. More information is available at www.kaust.edu.sa. The position package includes a competitive base salary ($40k-$50k) as well as a benefits package that is further defined depending on applicant?s experience and duration of contract. To apply: Please send cover letter summarizing your qualifications and interests, a curriculum vitae, and the names and contact information for 2 references to christian.voolstra at kaust.edu.sa and manuel.aranda at kaust.edu.sa. Applications that do not fulfill requirements outlined above will not be considered. posting date: November 15, 2011 / closing date: December 20, 2011 From frahome at yahoo.com Tue Nov 15 13:56:53 2011 From: frahome at yahoo.com (frahome at yahoo.com) Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:56:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value In-Reply-To: <81E2132A21060942816F5784DB0C5CFB9EC80162@exch10.oceanit.local> References: <81E2132A21060942816F5784DB0C5CFB9EC80162@exch10.oceanit.local> Message-ID: <1321383413.55663.YahooMailNeo@web32501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Robert's post inspired me to check and compare real figures. $33.5 billions? match about the 2010 earnings of corporations such as Exxon Mobile or Nestl?. Wallmart 2010 revenue was $421 trillions...as far as contributions to the GDP god, it sounds like we are better off sticking with corporations protected areas... Greetings Francesca ________________________________ From: Robert Bourke To: Linwood Pendleton ; "" Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2011 3:26 AM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value Coral Listers: ??? I'm going to take some heat for this, so as a pre-amble I'm a private sector environmental consultant, who has worked in Hawaii for 35 years, was one of the first proponents of widespread MPAs in Hawaii, and consider myself a staunch protector of the environment. ??? The NOAA funded study "Total Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef Ecosystems" which places a total value of the reefs in the Main Hawaiian Islands at $33.5B is seriously flawed due to some basic assumptions it has made.? As scientists with expertise in coral reefs and likely a great love of these ecosystems it is very important that we critically examine all studies - even those that appear to place a high value towards an argument we'd personally like to believe.? Poor science will do little to forward this important environmental cause. ??? First, I'd like to put the study into perspective.? $33.5B per year is a lot of money.? A prior study (Cesar, 2002) examined the value of the fishing, recreation, research, boating, and intrinsic value of these same reefs came up with a value roughly 1% of the NOAA study.? The Hawaii State budget for 2009 was about $22B, and the Gross State Economic Product for 2009 was $66B.? Does it make sense that the value of protecting and restoring "only" the reefs is more than the entire state budget and about half the total economic output of the entire State?? $33.5B over 300,000 acres of reef works out to about $2.50 per square foot/year.? For those interested in mitigation for reef damage this figure will lead to some interesting calculations. ??? The study conducted 3277 surveys, primarily by computer, to individuals in the contiguous 48 States.? Hawaii residents and Alaska residents were excluded from the study.? 40% of those surveyed had no more than a high school education.? Half had never been to a coral reef.? Think about that. The first part of the survey educates the survey taker about the degraded condition of reefs in Hawaii, including a statement that 5-acres of reef are damaged every year by boat groundings (false) and that closing 25% of the reef to fishing would result in an increase from the present day 10% to 50% of historical fish stocks within 10 years (unsubstantiated).? The survey asks a bunch of questions to help characterize the survey taker and then asks two key questions (paraphrased): ??? 1) Would you pay an additional $X in Federal taxes to increase the MPAs in Hawaii to 25% coverage? ??? 2) Would you pay an additional $Y in Federal taxes to repair the annual 5-acres of reef damage? The study allows a choice between $0 (no fix) to values from $45 to $170 per year per household to develop MPAs (X value), and a similar choice for reef repair varying from $35 to $135 (Y-value).? The average X and Y are then added together for a total willingness to pay of $287 per household.? This value times the number of households in the US (~117M) =$33.5B per year.? ? There are two problems with the numbers used to estimate X and Y.? A) these represent Monopoly Money figures for respondents.? They know this isn't really going to result in an increase to their taxes & these nice people have just shown lots of pretty pictures showing that things really need to get fixed, so "Why not select some value to fix their problem?".? To anyone who believes these values mirror real choices, I suggest you look at what has been happening to taxes across the country for causes (such as education) that are much more important and closer to home.? B) the choices given, even at the lowe st levels, are much higher than reasonable.? Assuming that 5-acres of coral really did get damaged each year (an unsubstantiated claim), the lowest selective choice of a $35 per year tax increase to fix the problem would result in annual tax revenues of ($35 x 117M families) $6.4B, or roughly $18,000 per square foot of reef repaired! ??? The study appears to have been designed in such a way that it is almost guaranteed to yield an unrealistically high value for the coral reef resources.? ? Aloha Bob Bourke? -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Linwood Pendleton Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 8:32 AM To: Subject: [Coral-List] Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership Folks.? Now that the Hawaii study has your attention, you may wish to start to plumb the wealth of studies on marine ecosystem services that exists.? Please visit our beta site http://www.marineecosystemservices.org/ to view (using a mapper like that developed for OBIS SEAMAP) basic information about marine ecosystem service valuations conducted across the globe.? These studies are compiled from a variety of extant and extinct databases from around the world.. Also, consider joining the Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership community of practice at www.ecosystemcommons.org - a great place to open this important discussion to those interested in marine ecosystem services writ large. Best wishes, Linwood p..s.? I also was not part of the team working on the Hawaii study.? So, my ability to answer questions about this study is limited. Linwood Pendleton Director of Ocean and Coastal Policy, Duke's Nicholas Institute Senior Economic Advisor, NOAA 805-794-8206 blog: www.nioceans.org Connect with the Nicholas Institute through our social media ****************************************** _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From kkirbo at hotmail.com Wed Nov 16 14:29:44 2011 From: kkirbo at hotmail.com (kathy kirbo) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 14:29:44 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value In-Reply-To: <1321383413.55663.YahooMailNeo@web32501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <81E2132A21060942816F5784DB0C5CFB9EC80162@exch10.oceanit.local>, <1321383413.55663.YahooMailNeo@web32501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: All these posts regarding placing value on natural resources made me think of a great essay that Paul Hawken wrote in 1997 called "Natural Capitalism".. lIt is splendid article that is thought provoking and is an excellent syllabus of his book of the same title ""Natural Capitalism". The essay is a bit lengthy, but well worth it if you have an interest in the subject: http://www.paulhawken.com/multimedia/motherjones_naturalcapitalism.pdf Paul Hawken is also the author of some other great books on the subject including, "The Ecology of Commerce" and "The Blessed Unrest". The Ecology of Commerce has even inspired some industrialists to rethink their business model. One of the most impressive stories was Ray Anderson CEO of Interface who unfortunately died recently. I wrote a little tribute to his initiative-- and to him-- since it was not well known in many circles. It sums up the whole story in one short page: http://flagpole.com/Weekly/Letters/AGeorgiaHero-31Aug11 Thanks, Katherine Kirbo Executive Director, The Reef Ball Foundation www.reefball.org > Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:56:53 -0800 > From: frahome at yahoo.com > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value > > Robert's post inspired me to check and compare real figures. $33.5 billions match about the 2010 earnings of corporations such as Exxon Mobile or Nestl?. > Wallmart 2010 revenue was $421 trillions...as far as contributions to the GDP god, it sounds like we are better off sticking with corporations protected areas... > > Greetings > Francesca > > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Robert Bourke > To: Linwood Pendleton ; "" > Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2011 3:26 AM > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value > > Coral Listers: > I'm going to take some heat for this, so as a pre-amble I'm a private sector environmental consultant, who has worked in Hawaii for 35 years, was one of the first proponents of widespread MPAs in Hawaii, and consider myself a staunch protector of the environment. > The NOAA funded study "Total Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef Ecosystems" which places a total value of the reefs in the Main Hawaiian Islands at $33.5B is seriously flawed due to some basic assumptions it has made. As scientists with expertise in coral reefs and likely a great love of these ecosystems it is very important that we critically examine all studies - even those that appear to place a high value towards an argument we'd personally like to believe. Poor science will do little to forward this important environmental cause. > First, I'd like to put the study into perspective. $33.5B per year is a lot of money. A prior study (Cesar, 2002) examined the value of the fishing, recreation, research, boating, and intrinsic value of these same reefs came up with a value roughly 1% of the NOAA study. The Hawaii State budget for 2009 was about $22B, and the Gross State Economic Product for 2009 was $66B. Does it make sense that the value of protecting and restoring "only" the reefs is more than the entire state budget and about half the total economic output of the entire State? $33.5B over 300,000 acres of reef works out to about $2.50 per square foot/year. For those interested in mitigation for reef damage this figure will lead to some interesting calculations. > The study conducted 3277 surveys, primarily by computer, to individuals in the contiguous 48 States. Hawaii residents and Alaska residents were excluded from the study. 40% of those surveyed had no more than a high school education. Half had never been to a coral reef. Think about that.. The first part of the survey educates the survey taker about the degraded condition of reefs in Hawaii, including a statement that 5-acres of reef are damaged every year by boat groundings (false) and that closing 25% of the reef to fishing would result in an increase from the present day 10% to 50% of historical fish stocks within 10 years (unsubstantiated). The survey asks a bunch of questions to help characterize the survey taker and then asks two key questions (paraphrased): > 1) Would you pay an additional $X in Federal taxes to increase the MPAs in Hawaii to 25% coverage? > 2) Would you pay an additional $Y in Federal taxes to repair the annual 5-acres of reef damage? > The study allows a choice between $0 (no fix) to values from $45 to $170 per year per household to develop MPAs (X value), and a similar choice for reef repair varying from $35 to $135 (Y-value). The average X and Y are then added together for a total willingness to pay of $287 per household. This value times the number of households in the US (~117M) =$33.5B per year. There are two problems with the numbers used to estimate X and Y. A) these represent Monopoly Money figures for respondents. They know this isn't really going to result in an increase to their taxes & these nice people have just shown lots of pretty pictures showing that things really need to get fixed, so "Why not select some value to fix their problem?". To anyone who believes these values mirror real choices, I suggest you look at what has been happening to taxes across the country for causes (such as education) that are much more important and closer to home. B) the > choices given, even at the lowe > st levels, are much higher than reasonable. Assuming that 5-acres of coral really did get damaged each year (an unsubstantiated claim), the lowest selective choice of a $35 per year tax increase to fix the problem would result in annual tax revenues of ($35 x 117M families) $6.4B, or roughly $18,000 per square foot of reef repaired! > The study appears to have been designed in such a way that it is almost guaranteed to yield an unrealistically high value for the coral reef resources. > Aloha > > Bob Bourke > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Linwood Pendleton > Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 8:32 AM > To: > Subject: [Coral-List] Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership > > Folks. Now that the Hawaii study has your attention, you may wish to start to plumb the wealth of studies on marine ecosystem services that exists. Please visit our beta site http://www.marineecosystemservices.org/ to view (using a mapper like that developed for OBIS SEAMAP) basic information about marine ecosystem service valuations conducted across the globe. These studies are compiled from a variety of extant and extinct databases from around the world.. > > Also, consider joining the Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership community of practice at www.ecosystemcommons.org - a great place to open this important discussion to those interested in marine ecosystem services writ large. > > Best wishes, > > Linwood > p..s. I also was not part of the team working on the Hawaii study. So, my ability to answer questions about this study is limited. > > Linwood Pendleton > Director of Ocean and Coastal Policy, Duke's Nicholas Institute Senior Economic Advisor, NOAA > 805-794-8206 > blog: www.nioceans.org > Connect with the Nicholas Institute through our social media > > ****************************************** > > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From rudy_bonn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 16 21:59:34 2011 From: rudy_bonn at yahoo.com (Rudy Bonn) Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 18:59:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Ocean adification and biomineralization of otoliths Message-ID: <1321498774.61674.YahooMailClassic@web120605.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> ? ? ? Just curious, since now we use ototliths instead of scales, giving away my age I guess, ? ? ? ?on life l ?history studies, aging ,and others, in teleosts ,hich Ive read that the otoliths are composed of arognite? in terms of fishery management, how are we going to deal with? the implications? that? arogonite,?being the fundamental compontent??of biomineralization?processes in otolith?formation how are we going to use otolith intepretation as a means to?introduce?fishery management practices.? that interpretation?could be flawed?due to ocean acidification processes on otolith biomineralization? anyone want to a look at that or as anyone taken a peek at that, I would like to know ? Rudy S Bonn Director of Marine Projects Reef Relief 631 Greene Street Key West, FL 33040 305-294-3100 From chris.jeffrey at noaa.gov Thu Nov 17 09:30:25 2011 From: chris.jeffrey at noaa.gov (Chris Jeffrey) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 09:30:25 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Request for job posting In-Reply-To: <4E1F5C99.70309@noaa.gov> References: <4E1F5C99.70309@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <4EC51A81.7010804@noaa.gov> *Job Title:* Natural Resource Scientist *Job Location*: Silver Spring, MD *Start Date*: September 1, 2011 *Where To Apply*: https://jobs-consolidatedsafety.icims.com/jobs/1350/job *Responsibilities: * Seeking a Natural Resource Social Scientist to support the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. The successful candidate will work with a research team investigating community aspects of well-being associated with coastal ecosystem health and the provision of ecosystem services, as well as support other projects on a variety of topics within the Biogeography Branch. The position will have the following core responsibilities: 1. Provide research support to projects in one or more of the following topical areas: well-being indicator development; the social or economic dimensions of coastal and ocean activities, use, values and preferences; competing human use of coastal and ocean resources; or valuation of natural resources or ecosystem services; 2 .Conduct and draft comprehensive literature reviews to support research projects; 3. Identify, evaluate, acquire and manage existing, secondary data and/or data sets; 4. Participate in the design and execution of primary data collections; 5. Evaluate, clean and statistically analyze social science and other data; 6. Assist with preparation of reports and journal articles describing the results of analyses; 7. Assist with other project-related tasks and duties as needed. *Essential Qualifications: * Master's degree in sociology, economics, human/social geography, demography, anthropology or similar discipline; Research experience beyond the requirements for academic training; Demonstrated interest in the social and economic dimensions of coastal and ocean ecosystems, natural resource use and management, and/or environmental policy and planning; Demonstrated experience conducting social science research related to natural resource issues and topics; Demonstrated experience finding, cleaning, preparing, analyzing, and interpreting social science data using appropriate statistical techniques; Demonstrated ability to communicate effectively, orally and in writing; Attention to detail with outstanding organizational and time-management skills; and Ability to work efficiently and effectively with minimal supervision, as well as part of a research team. *Preferred Qualifications:* Experience using ArcGIS to conduct analysis and produce maps; Experience conducting predictive modeling of human behavior, resource use patterns, values, and/or preferences in a coastal or ocean context; or Experience conducting valuation studies of ecosystem services or natural resources in a coastal or ocean context. *Where to Apply*: https://jobs-consolidatedsafety.icims.com/jobs/1350/job -- ******************************************* Christopher F.G. Jeffrey, Ph.D Project Manager, Scientific Programs CSS-Dynamac (www.css-dynamac.com) Scientific Minds. Common Sense Solutions ++++ Marine Spatial Ecologist NOAA National Ocean Service NCCOS | CCMA | Biogeography Branch 1305 East-West Hwy, SSMC-4, #9213, N/SCI-1 Silver Spring, MD 20910-3281 301.713.3028 x-134 (Tel) 301.713.4384 (Fax) http://ccma.nos.noaa.gov/about/biogeography/ ******************************************* From eracila at rareconservation.org Thu Nov 17 13:35:31 2011 From: eracila at rareconservation.org (Emma Racila) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 12:35:31 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Solution Search: Turning the Tide for Coastal Fisheries - CAST YOUR VOTES! Message-ID: <41E30FDBBB3D574FA1A2F1F32BF5E6F03043C47C8C@DFW1MBX08.mex07a.mlsrvr.com> Dear Colleagues, It's time to cast your votes! Rare, National Geographic and the judges have named the 10 finalists for the first ever Solution Search. Now it is up to YOU to select the top three and award the $20,000 grand prize and two $5,000 runner-ups. Vote today at www.solutionsearch.org. Solution Search is an innovative online platform dedicated to finding proven community-based solutions for global environmental issues. The first contest, "Turning the Tide for Coastal Fisheries," sought entrants from organizations worldwide that demonstrated proven innovations that benefit coastal communities and marine biodiversity. Over 100 entries were submitted from 48 different countries. Public voting will be open from November 16, 2011 through December 24, 2011 and the winners will be announced January 6, 2012. If you have any questions, please contact Emma Racila at eracila at rareconservation.org or +1 703 522 5070 ext 141 Our Best, The Solution Search Team From allison.billiam at gmail.com Thu Nov 17 15:41:22 2011 From: allison.billiam at gmail.com (Bill Allison) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 15:41:22 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value In-Reply-To: References: <81E2132A21060942816F5784DB0C5CFB9EC80162@exch10.oceanit.local> <1321383413.55663.YahooMailNeo@web32501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Nicholas Georgescu-Roegen and later Herman Daly and others have critiqued the use of money as currency for the valuation of nature and natural resources. Georgescu-Roegen proposed grounding economics in material reality using energy as the currency. His 1975 essay is a useful introduction to his thesis and a critique of neoclassical economic theory. Georgescu-Roegen, N. (1975). "Energy and Economic Myths." Southern Economic Journal 41(3): 347-381. Introduction There is an appreciable grain of truth in one of Percy Bridgman's[*] remarks that the economic profession is the most opportunistic of all. Indeed, economists' attention has continually shifted from one problem to another, the problems often being not even closely related. Search all economic periodicals of the English-speaking world before 1950, for example, and you will hardly find any mention of "economic development." It is curious, therefore, that economists have over the last hundred years remained stubbornly attached to one particular idea, the mechanistic epistemology which dominated the orientation of the founders of the Neoclassical School. By their own proud admission, the greatest ambition of these pioneers was to build an economic science after the model of mechanics-in the words of W. Stanley Jevons - as "the mechanics of utility and self-interest" [48, 23]. Like almost every scholar and philosopher of the first half of the nineteenth century, they were fascinated by the spectacular successes of the science of mechanics in astronomy and accepted Laplace's famous apotheosis of mechanics [53, 4] as the evangel of ultimate scientific knowledge. They thus had some attenuating circumstances, which cannot, however, be invoked by those who came long after the mechanistic dogma had been banished even from physics [23, 69-122; 5]. For more: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1056148 or, most of it: http://dieoff.org/page148.htm [*] WRA annotation: Bridgman is noteworthy, not only because of his observations about economists feature in the first line of this paper, but because he was, a Nobel prize winner, a proponent of operationalism in the scientific method (something coral reef survey could profit from more of), and early on kicked Nazi scientists out of his atomic physics research lab. (Bridgman, P. W., "Statistical Mechanics and the Second Law of Thermodynamics," in Reflections of a Physicist, 2d ed. New York: Philosophical Library, 1955, pp. 236-268.) On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 2:29 PM, kathy kirbo wrote: > > All these posts regarding placing value on natural resources made me think > of a great essay that Paul Hawken wrote in 1997 called "Natural > Capitalism".. lIt is splendid article that is thought provoking and is an > excellent syllabus of his book of the same title ""Natural Capitalism". The > essay is a bit lengthy, but well worth it if you have an interest in the > subject: > http://www.paulhawken.com/multimedia/motherjones_naturalcapitalism.pdf > Paul Hawken is also the author of some other great books on the subject > including, "The Ecology of Commerce" and "The Blessed Unrest". The Ecology > of Commerce has even inspired some industrialists to rethink their business > model. One of the most impressive stories was Ray Anderson CEO of Interface > who unfortunately died recently. I wrote a little tribute to his > initiative-- and to him-- since it was not well known in many circles. It > sums up the whole story in one short page: > http://flagpole.com/Weekly/Letters/AGeorgiaHero-31Aug11 > Thanks, > > Katherine Kirbo > Executive Director, > The Reef Ball Foundation > www.reefball.org > > > > > > > > Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 10:56:53 -0800 > > From: frahome at yahoo.com > > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value > > > > Robert's post inspired me to check and compare real figures. $33.5 > billions match about the 2010 earnings of corporations such as Exxon > Mobile or Nestl?. > > Wallmart 2010 revenue was $421 trillions...as far as contributions to > the GDP god, it sounds like we are better off sticking with corporations > protected areas... > > > > Greetings > > Francesca > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Robert Bourke > > To: Linwood Pendleton ; "< > coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>" > > Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2011 3:26 AM > > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value > > > > Coral Listers: > > I'm going to take some heat for this, so as a pre-amble I'm a > private sector environmental consultant, who has worked in Hawaii for 35 > years, was one of the first proponents of widespread MPAs in Hawaii, and > consider myself a staunch protector of the environment. > > The NOAA funded study "Total Economic Value for Protecting and > Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef Ecosystems" which places a total value of the > reefs in the Main Hawaiian Islands at $33.5B is seriously flawed due to > some basic assumptions it has made. As scientists with expertise in coral > reefs and likely a great love of these ecosystems it is very important that > we critically examine all studies - even those that appear to place a high > value towards an argument we'd personally like to believe. Poor science > will do little to forward this important environmental cause. > > First, I'd like to put the study into perspective. $33.5B per year > is a lot of money. A prior study (Cesar, 2002) examined the value of the > fishing, recreation, research, boating, and intrinsic value of these same > reefs came up with a value roughly 1% of the NOAA study. The Hawaii State > budget for 2009 was about $22B, and the Gross State Economic Product for > 2009 was $66B. Does it make sense that the value of protecting and > restoring "only" the reefs is more than the entire state budget and about > half the total economic output of the entire State? $33.5B over 300,000 > acres of reef works out to about $2.50 per square foot/year. For those > interested in mitigation for reef damage this figure will lead to some > interesting calculations. > > The study conducted 3277 surveys, primarily by computer, to > individuals in the contiguous 48 States. Hawaii residents and Alaska > residents were excluded from the study. 40% of those surveyed had no more > than a high school education. Half had never been to a coral reef. Think > about that.. The first part of the survey educates the survey taker about > the degraded condition of reefs in Hawaii, including a statement that > 5-acres of reef are damaged every year by boat groundings (false) and that > closing 25% of the reef to fishing would result in an increase from the > present day 10% to 50% of historical fish stocks within 10 years > (unsubstantiated). The survey asks a bunch of questions to help > characterize the survey taker and then asks two key questions (paraphrased): > > 1) Would you pay an additional $X in Federal taxes to increase the > MPAs in Hawaii to 25% coverage? > > 2) Would you pay an additional $Y in Federal taxes to repair the > annual 5-acres of reef damage? > > The study allows a choice between $0 (no fix) to values from $45 to $170 > per year per household to develop MPAs (X value), and a similar choice for > reef repair varying from $35 to $135 (Y-value). The average X and Y are > then added together for a total willingness to pay of $287 per household. > This value times the number of households in the US (~117M) =$33.5B per > year. There are two problems with the numbers used to estimate X and Y.. > A) these represent Monopoly Money figures for respondents. They know this > isn't really going to result in an increase to their taxes & these nice > people have just shown lots of pretty pictures showing that things really > need to get fixed, so "Why not select some value to fix their problem?". > To anyone who believes these values mirror real choices, I suggest you look > at what has been happening to taxes across the country for causes (such as > education) that are much more important and closer to home. B) the > > choices given, even at the lowe > > st levels, are much higher than reasonable. Assuming that 5-acres of > coral really did get damaged each year (an unsubstantiated claim), the > lowest selective choice of a $35 per year tax increase to fix the problem > would result in annual tax revenues of ($35 x 117M families) $6.4B, or > roughly $18,000 per square foot of reef repaired! > > The study appears to have been designed in such a way that it is > almost guaranteed to yield an unrealistically high value for the coral reef > resources. > > Aloha > > > > Bob Bourke > > -----Original Message----- > > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto: > coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Linwood Pendleton > > Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 8:32 AM > > To: > > Subject: [Coral-List] Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership > > > > Folks. Now that the Hawaii study has your attention, you may wish to > start to plumb the wealth of studies on marine ecosystem services that > exists. Please visit our beta site > http://www.marineecosystemservices.org/ to view (using a mapper like that > developed for OBIS SEAMAP) basic information about marine ecosystem service > valuations conducted across the globe. These studies are compiled from a > variety of extant and extinct databases from around the world.. > > > > Also, consider joining the Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership > community of practice at www.ecosystemcommons.org< > http://www.ecosystemcommons.org> - a great place to open this important > discussion to those interested in marine ecosystem services writ large. > > > > Best wishes, > > > > Linwood > > p..s. I also was not part of the team working on the Hawaii study. So, > my ability to answer questions about this study is limited. > > > > Linwood Pendleton > > Director of Ocean and Coastal Policy, Duke's Nicholas Institute Senior > Economic Advisor, NOAA > > 805-794-8206 > > blog: www.nioceans.org > > Connect with the Nicholas Institute through our social media > > > > ****************************************** > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Coral-List mailing list > > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > > Coral-List mailing list > > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > > Coral-List mailing list > > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > -- ________________________________ Is this how science illuminates "reality"? - "the meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside, enveloping the talk which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze." - narrator's comment about Marlow's tale-telling, in Heart of Darkness (Conrad) From frahome at yahoo.com Thu Nov 17 16:31:26 2011 From: frahome at yahoo.com (frahome at yahoo.com) Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 13:31:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Fw: $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value In-Reply-To: <1321383413.55663.YahooMailNeo@web32501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <81E2132A21060942816F5784DB0C5CFB9EC80162@exch10.oceanit.local> <1321383413.55663.YahooMailNeo@web32501.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1321565486.79123.YahooMailNeo@web32504.mail.mud.yahoo.com> The figure for Walmart below should read billions not trillions. My apologies! Francesca ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: "frahome at yahoo.com" To: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 7:56 PM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value Robert's post inspired me to check and compare real figures. $33.5 billions? match about the 2010 earnings of corporations such as Exxon Mobile or Nestl?. Wallmart 2010 revenue was $421 trillions...as far as contributions to the GDP god, it sounds like we are better off sticking with corporations protected areas... Greetings Francesca ________________________________ From: Robert Bourke To: Linwood Pendleton ; "" Sent: Saturday, November 12, 2011 3:26 AM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value Coral Listers: ??? I'm going to take some heat for this, so as a pre-amble I'm a private sector environmental consultant, who has worked in Hawaii for 35 years, was one of the first proponents of widespread MPAs in Hawaii, and consider myself a staunch protector of the environment. ??? The NOAA funded study "Total Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef Ecosystems" which places a total value of the reefs in the Main Hawaiian Islands at $33.5B is seriously flawed due to some basic assumptions it has made.? As scientists with expertise in coral reefs and likely a great love of these ecosystems it is very important that we critically examine all studies - even those that appear to place a high value towards an argument we'd personally like to believe.? Poor science will do little to forward this important environmental cause. ??? First, I'd like to put the study into perspective.? $33.5B per year is a lot of money.? A prior study (Cesar, 2002) examined the value of the fishing, recreation, research, boating, and intrinsic value of these same reefs came up with a value roughly 1% of the NOAA study.?? The Hawaii State budget for 2009 was about $22B, and the Gross State Economic Product for 2009 was $66B.? Does it make sense that the value of protecting and restoring "only" the reefs is more than the entire state budget and about half the total economic output of the entire State?? $33.5B over 300,000 acres of reef works out to about $2.50 per square foot/year.? For those interested in mitigation for reef damage this figure will lead to some interesting calculations. ??? The study conducted 3277 surveys, primarily by computer, to individuals in the contiguous 48 States.? Hawaii residents and Alaska residents were excluded from the study.? 40% of those surveyed had no more than a high school education.? Half had never been to a coral reef.? Think about that. The first part of the survey educates the survey taker about the degraded condition of reefs in Hawaii, including a statement that 5-acres of reef are damaged every year by boat groundings (false) and that closing 25% of the reef to fishing would result in an increase from the present day 10% to 50% of historical fish stocks within 10 years (unsubstantiated).? The survey asks a bunch of questions to help characterize the survey taker and then asks two key questions (paraphrased): ??? 1) Would you pay an additional $X in Federal taxes to increase the MPAs in Hawaii to 25% coverage? ??? 2) Would you pay an additional $Y in Federal taxes to repair the annual 5-acres of reef damage? The study allows a choice between $0 (no fix) to values from $45 to $170 per year per household to develop MPAs (X value), and a similar choice for reef repair varying from $35 to $135 (Y-value).? The average X and Y are then added together for a total willingness to pay of $287 per household.? This value times the number of households in the US (~117M) =$33.5B per year.? ? There are two problems with the numbers used to estimate X and Y.? A) these represent Monopoly Money figures for respondents.? They know this isn't really going to result in an increase to their taxes & these nice people have just shown lots of pretty pictures showing that things really need to get fixed, so "Why not select some value to fix their problem?".?? To anyone who believes these values mirror real choices, I suggest you look at what has been happening to taxes across the country for causes (such as education) that are much more important and closer to home.? B) the choices given, even at the lowe st levels, are much higher than reasonable.? Assuming that 5-acres of coral really did get damaged each year (an unsubstantiated claim), the lowest selective choice of a $35 per year tax increase to fix the problem would result in annual tax revenues of ($35 x 117M families) $6.4B, or roughly $18,000 per square foot of reef repaired! ??? The study appears to have been designed in such a way that it is almost guaranteed to yield an unrealistically high value for the coral reef resources.? ? Aloha Bob Bourke? -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Linwood Pendleton Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 8:32 AM To: Subject: [Coral-List] Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership Folks.? Now that the Hawaii study has your attention, you may wish to start to plumb the wealth of studies on marine ecosystem services that exists.? Please visit our beta site http://www.marineecosystemservices.org/ to view (using a mapper like that developed for OBIS SEAMAP) basic information about marine ecosystem service valuations conducted across the globe.? These studies are compiled from a variety of extant and extinct databases from around the world.. Also, consider joining the Marine Ecosystem Services Partnership community of practice at www.ecosystemcommons.org - a great place to open this important discussion to those interested in marine ecosystem services writ large. Best wishes, Linwood p..s.? I also was not part of the team working on the Hawaii study.? So, my ability to answer questions about this study is limited. Linwood Pendleton Director of Ocean and Coastal Policy, Duke's Nicholas Institute Senior Economic Advisor, NOAA 805-794-8206 blog: www.nioceans.org Connect with the Nicholas Institute through our social media ****************************************** _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa..gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From chris.jeffrey at noaa.gov Fri Nov 18 11:01:58 2011 From: chris.jeffrey at noaa.gov (Chris Jeffrey) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 11:01:58 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Position Available In-Reply-To: <4E1F5C99.70309@noaa.gov> References: <4E1F5C99.70309@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <4EC68176.1040906@noaa.gov> *Job Title:* Mapping Specialist *Job Location*: Silver Spring, MD *Job Type*: Full time Contract Position *Company*: CSS-Dynamac** (http://www.consolidatedsafety.com/) *Start Date*: Jan 2, 2011 or until filled *Where To Apply*: https://jobs-consolidatedsafety.icims.com/jobs/1349/job *Salary: $ *Negotiable (commensurate with experience) *Responsibilities:* A person with academic training in biological, earth, physical sciences, geography or spatial ecology is needed for a full-time contract position with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment (CCMA) Biogeography Branch. The Branch conducts ecological studies that map, characterize, assess, and model the spatial distributions and movements of estuarine and marine organisms across habitats throughout the United States and Island Territories. Applicants should have demonstrated experience in conducting spatial analysis in ESRI ArcGIS, and should be available for frequent travel to conduct ship-based mapping missions for periods of two to three weeks. Experience with Hypack/Hysweep, Konsgberg and Reson multibeam systems; NOAA Hydrographic Specifications and Deliverables; and habitat mapping are also desirable. The successful candidate will have the following core responsibilities. 1. Provide GIS and remote sensing support to projects developing benthic habitat maps of marine ecosystems: * Develop cartographic products and metadata from spatial data * Process and archive remotely sensed data (e.g. imagery) for distribution and storage * Assist with acquisition of data or samples in field. 2.Provide data management support to projects conducting ecological assessments of marine ecosystems: * Assist with field mission preparation * Perform quality assurance and control (QA/QC) on collected data * Produce basic descriptive statistical summaries of collected data *Essential Qualifications: * * Experience or academic training in Geographic Information Systems, especially ArcGIS and remote sensing software (e.g. ENVI or PCI) * Basic knowledge of statistics * Experience with acoustic acquisition and processing software, e.g., Hypack and Caris * Familiarity acquiring acoustic data with Reson and Kongsberg multibeam systems * Sea worthiness and ability to travel for two-three week missions at sea multiple times a year * Keen attention to detail * Knowledge of marine science, biology, ecology, or geology * Good written and oral communication skills * Ability to learn quickly, work independently & collaboratively, and show initiative to solve technical problems * Preferred Qualifications:* * Experience or academic training in developing marine benthic habitat maps from remotely-sensed imagery * Experience with ArcGIS editing and the use of ArcGIS extensions such as Spatial Analyst, 3D Analyst, Geostatistical Analyst, Geospatial Modelling Environment, and MGET * Familiarity with LiDAR data processing * Experience coding in a high-level scientific language such as R, Matlab, or Python * Knowledge of Geostatistics and Spatial Statistical Modelling *Where to Apply*: https://jobs-consolidatedsafety.icims.com/jobs/1349/job -- ******************************************* Christopher F.G. Jeffrey, Ph.D Project Manager, Scientific Programs CSS-Dynamac (www.css-dynamac.com) Scientific Minds. Common Sense Solutions ++++ Marine Spatial Ecologist NOAA National Ocean Service NCCOS | CCMA | Biogeography Branch 1305 East-West Hwy, SSMC-4, #9213, N/SCI-1 Silver Spring, MD 20910-3281 301.713.3028 x-134 (Tel) 301.713.4384 (Fax) http://ccma.nos.noaa.gov/about/biogeography/ ******************************************* From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Fri Nov 18 11:24:16 2011 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Eugene Shinn) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 11:24:16 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value Message-ID: Robert, Thank you for exposing the devious nature of the, "Total Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef Ecosystems" survey that came up with an outrageous $33.5B per year value of Hawaiian coral reefs. You did a great job of showing the problems, flaws, and exaggerations. In my long career I have seldom seen a questionnaire type survey that was not self-serving. I like to call them, "when did you stop beating your wife" surveys that imply you have been beating your wife (or dog). Agencies that do these surveys decide what they want to do then ask questions about various options and ways to accomplish the thing they want. They never ask the basic question, Is the thing or action they want necessary in the first place? They are usually all about expanding the agency and squeezing more funding (our money) out of Congress. I suppose they know how poorly educated the vast majority really is (especially in science) and realize they can pull the wool over their eyes. You clearly exposed this attitude in your posting. These days agencies often have covert help from tax exempt Non Government Foundations (NGOs) that are very good at getting press coverage, influencing congress, and squeezing tax exempt donations from those having expendable money or in need of the tax breaks they provide. Gene PS: I could not help noticing posting number 3 that starts with: "Seeking a Natural Resource Social Scientist to support the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. (note key words, "Social Scientist") -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida College of Marine Science Room 221A 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From sealab at earthlink.net Fri Nov 18 14:17:58 2011 From: sealab at earthlink.net (Steve Mussman) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 14:17:58 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value Message-ID: <12354944.1321643879140.JavaMail.root@wamui-haziran.atl.sa.earthlink.net> I would also like to thank those who have helped to expose the ?devious nature? of the NOAA sponsored survey relating to the perceived value of Hawaii?s coral reef ecosystem. Just reading the press release should be more than enough for even the most poorly educated among us to realize the sinister intentions of the covert evil doers. Thank goodness they were exposed for here are just a few of the fraudulent, deceitful and unsupportable misrepresentations of the truth that they attempted to support in promoting their insidious plot: ?The study shows that people from across the United States treasure Hawaii?s coral reefs?. ?It illustrates the economic value of coral reefs to all Americans, and how important it is to conserve these ecosystems for future generations?. ?Despite their economic significance, reefs near urbanized areas, such as Honolulu, Wailuku, and Kahului, have experienced increasing stress from ever-increasing population and other pressures?. ?It also demonstrates that coral reefs provide valuable ecological services for U.S. residents, regardless of whether they actually use them?. The fact is that the dollar amounts applied may well be questionable, but the conclusions drawn are appropriate, important and long over due for public consideration. Regards, Steve From horlicks_1989 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 18 15:43:37 2011 From: horlicks_1989 at yahoo.com (Peter Edwards) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 12:43:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just get along? :-) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1321649017.30745.YahooMailNeo@web160516.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Hello Coral-Listers, I will try not to be-labor the point, and I am pretty sure that the "pure" coral reef biologists, oceanographers, et al will soon chime in to let us know this topic is not "science-y" enough.? And that all this nonsense about people's preferences, values etc has little or nothing to do with coral reefs (chuckle). But to I'd like to refer to Gene's last email and others of a similar "strain".... There will always be debate among and within disciplines.? This should be encouraged as different points of view help to move science and human knowledge forward.? However I believe that we will continue to witness the decline of precious and "invaluable" resources such as coral reefs, mangrove forests, sea grass beds etc if we continue to remain entrenched in our camps.? Dismissive comments and generalizations about a discipline that people may have little understanding about is not helpful.? If we (natural and social) scientists learned to "speak" to each other perhaps we would be more successful at finding solutions to conservation.? Again I am speaking as an individual who has come from a foundation of biology, coral reef ecology who recognized the need for integrating social sciences including neo-classical micro economic theory as part of my tool-kit.? This has helped me better understand issues of efficient allocation of resources and open my eyes to possible solutions for reducing pollution and environmental degradation.? I get the strong sense from some of the comments that there is the suspicion that by conducting these types of studies the results will be "hijacked" by business interests who want to privatize, sell off, steal these resources. Well I am sorry to say...."News Flash...this just in"...it is already happening.? What this discipline and these approaches try to do is find solutions to ensure that these resources get the respect they deserve and are not completely obliterated from the planet. Message:? WE ARE ON THE SAME TEAM!!! I urge some of you with deeply ingrained philosophical biases to try to be a little more open minded and read a little wider.? Instead of just cherry picking articles against this discipline, look for some balanced articles.? There are indeed pros and cons to these approaches.? I would hate to think that scientists such as ourselves are just as entrenched as the political and religious extremists you know that anti-anything-we don't understand- folks that seem to dominate the news and political discourse these days. Nuff Said Peter Edwards The views and comments expressed here do not reflect the official position of any organization I may be employed to or affiliated with -- ? ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 11:24:16 -0500 From: Eugene Shinn Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Robert, Thank you for exposing the devious nature of the,? "Total Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef Ecosystems" survey that came up with an outrageous $33.5B per year value of Hawaiian coral reefs. You did a great job of showing the problems, flaws, and exaggerations. In my long career I have seldom seen a questionnaire type survey that was not self-serving. I like to call them, "when did you stop beating your wife" surveys that imply you have been beating your wife (or dog). Agencies that do these surveys decide what they want to do then ask questions about various options and ways to accomplish the thing they want. They never ask the basic question,? Is the thing or action they want necessary in the first place? They are usually all about expanding the agency and squeezing more funding (our money) out of Congress. ? ? I suppose they know how poorly educated the vast majority really is (especially in science) and realize they can pull the wool over their eyes. You clearly exposed this attitude in your posting. These days agencies often have covert help from tax exempt Non Government Foundations (NGOs) that are very good at getting press coverage, influencing congress, and squeezing tax exempt donations from those having expendable money or in need of the tax breaks they provide. Gene PS: I could not help noticing posting number 3 that starts with: "Seeking a Natural Resource Social Scientist to support the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. (note key words, "Social Scientist") -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida College of Marine Science Room 221A 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- -- From gbustamante09 at gmail.com Fri Nov 18 16:55:17 2011 From: gbustamante09 at gmail.com (Georgina Bustamante) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 16:55:17 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] UNEP-CEP project on building MPA capacity of the islands associate to the Caribbean Challenge: Second Annual Meeting Message-ID: <039d01cca63c$c3568e60$4a03ab20$@com> Apologies for cross posting From: Georgina Bustamante [mailto:gbustamante09 at gmail.com] Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 4:37 PM To: CaMPAM Forum Subject: UNEP-CEP project on building MPA capacity of the islands associate to the Caribbean Challenge: Second Annual Meeting Last November 4th, the focal points, partners and coordinating team of the UNEP-CEP project ?Regional support for the Caribbean Challenge initiative: Networking, consolidation and regional coordination of MPA management" (coordinated by CAMPAM) had its Second Project Update meeting in Puerto Morelos, as part of the Gulf and Caribbean fisheries Institute Annual Conference activities. Information on project activities was shared and actively discussed, and recommendations were made to better implement the oncoming project activities and accomplish its objectives. On behalf of UNEP-CEP, and its SPAW Regional Activity Center and CaMPAM Network and Forum, we would like to acknowledge the presentation and input of marine environmental managers from The Bahamas, Antigua and Barbuda, St. Lucia, Jamaica, St. Kitts and Nevis, Grenada, Dominican Republic and St. Vincent and the Grenadines, the 8 islands associated to the Caribbean Challenge. In addition, almost 15 experts from partner organizations (GCFI, TNC, CERMES, NOAA, etc.) who presented information of their relevant projects. All provided input and good ideas to improve the project activities and identify areas of future collaboration. We are also grateful to the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, for its financial support to this project (see http://campam.gcfi.org/campam.php#CarChall for more information) as well as the Puerto Morelos National Marine Park director who hosted a visit to the park and exchange with its staff and representatives of the local fishing/tourism community. The wonderful snorkeling at the barrier reef was joyful and instructive. It was great to see healthy Acropora stands and abundant fish. Georgina Bustamante, project coordinator Georgina Bustamante, Ph.D. Coordinator, Caribbean Marine Protected Area Management (CaMPAM) Network and Forum GCFI Board of Directors " A social network with a capacity building program for enhancing MPA effectiveness in the Wider Caribbean " Hollywood, Florida, USA Tel./fax (request) +1 (954) 963-3626 Mobile +1 (305) 297-6995 emails: gbustamante09 at gmail.com; gbustamante at gcfi.org skype: yoyibustamante CaMPAM web site: http://campam.gcfi.org/campam.php To subscribe or unsubscribe to CaMPAM list, go to (Para suscribirse o cancelar su subscripci?n de la Red de Internet CaMPAM, vaya a) http://gcfi.org/Forms/CAMPAMLSubscribeEng.php To send a message to CaMPAM List, send it to (Para enviar un mensaje a CaMPAM List, env?elo a) campam-l at listserv.gcfi.org Print only if necessary. From dave at fuzzo.com Fri Nov 18 17:36:41 2011 From: dave at fuzzo.com (David M. Lawrence) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 17:36:41 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4EC6DDF9.6050000@fuzzo.com> Gene, As someone who once designed, administered, analyzed, and wrote up a survey of a major scientific society, I wish you'd keep your uninformed assessments of the "self-serving" nature of surveys to yourself -- unless you have thoroughly reviewed the methods, text of the survey instrument, analytical procedures, etc. I've spent most of my life working in the natural sciences, but I would never be so thoroughly and uninformedly dismissive of procedures used by other disciplines. Dave On 11/18/2011 11:24 AM, Eugene Shinn wrote: > Robert, Thank you for exposing the devious nature of the, "Total > Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef > Ecosystems" survey that came up with an outrageous $33.5B per year > value of Hawaiian coral reefs. You did a great job of showing the > problems, flaws, and exaggerations. In my long career I have seldom > seen a questionnaire type survey that was not self-serving. I like to > call them, "when did you stop beating your wife" surveys that imply > you have been beating your wife (or dog). Agencies that do these > surveys decide what they want to do then ask questions about various > options and ways to accomplish the thing they want. They never ask > the basic question, Is the thing or action they want necessary in > the first place? They are usually all about expanding the agency and > squeezing more funding (our money) out of Congress. > I suppose they know how poorly educated the vast majority really > is (especially in science) and realize they can pull the wool over > their eyes. You clearly exposed this attitude in your posting. These > days agencies often have covert help from tax exempt Non Government > Foundations (NGOs) that are very good at getting press coverage, > influencing congress, and squeezing tax exempt donations from those > having expendable money or in need of the tax breaks they provide. > Gene PS: I could not help noticing posting number 3 that starts with: > "Seeking a Natural Resource Social Scientist to support the National > Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring > and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. (note key words, "Social > Scientist") -- ------------------------------------------------------ David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com ------------------------------------------------------ "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo "No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan From chwkins at yahoo.com Fri Nov 18 18:52:53 2011 From: chwkins at yahoo.com (Christopher Hawkins) Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 15:52:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just get along? :-) In-Reply-To: <1321649017.30745.YahooMailNeo@web160516.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1321660373.81704.YahooMailClassic@web161019.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Peter's post summed it up nicely.? In the spirit of getting us all to a point of interdisciplinary respect and cooperation, I'd add this:? ? I am happy to provide Gene and?others who broadly criticize?all surveys and survey approaches as self-serving with a number of very objective questionnaires that I and my colleagues have been involved with.? The history of good human dimensions work in the natural resource management realm?stretches back decades now.? In that time many very intelligent folks in academia and elsewhere have worked to provide resource management agencies with objective information on which to base policy?decisions.? ? I am afraid that Gene's claim to "have seldom seen a questionnaire type survey that was not self-serving" is?either?exaggerated or is simply based on very limited exposure to quality research.??? ? Social science, like all science, has limitations, and they are often imposed by funding.? But, at the end of the day I am just as?concerned about representativeness, reliability, validity, and generalizability as my friends across the aisle.??If we want to?having a discussion about those four attributes of the scientific method, plus analytical rigor, I'd be happy to point out that?many theses, dissertations, and general biological studies rely on only a handful of observations (e.g., 30 fish in an estuary) but then go on to make some rather sweeping generalizations about all fish in that estuary.? Remember, I don't have to do power analyses,?bootstrapping, or psuedoreplication?to run?statistical analyses.? I typically have hundreds of representative and randomly drawn cases from which to work.... ? Chris ???? --- On Fri, 11/18/11, Peter Edwards wrote: From: Peter Edwards Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just get along? :-) To: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" Date: Friday, November 18, 2011, 3:43 PM Hello Coral-Listers, I will try not to be-labor the point, and I am pretty sure that the "pure" coral reef biologists, oceanographers, et al will soon chime in to let us know this topic is not "science-y" enough.? And that all this nonsense about people's preferences, values etc has little or nothing to do with coral reefs (chuckle). But to I'd like to refer to Gene's last email and others of a similar "strain".... There will always be debate among and within disciplines.? This should be encouraged as different points of view help to move science and human knowledge forward.? However I believe that we will continue to witness the decline of precious and "invaluable" resources such as coral reefs, mangrove forests, sea grass beds etc if we continue to remain entrenched in our camps.? Dismissive comments and generalizations about a discipline that people may have little understanding about is not helpful.? If we (natural and social) scientists learned to "speak" to each other perhaps we would be more successful at finding solutions to conservation.? Again I am speaking as an individual who has come from a foundation of biology, coral reef ecology who recognized the need for integrating social sciences including neo-classical micro economic theory as part of my tool-kit.? This has helped me better understand issues of efficient allocation of resources and open my eyes to possible solutions for reducing pollution and environmental degradation.? I get the strong sense from some of the comments that there is the suspicion that by conducting these types of studies the results will be "hijacked" by business interests who want to privatize, sell off, steal these resources. Well I am sorry to say...."News Flash...this just in"...it is already happening.? What this discipline and these approaches try to do is find solutions to ensure that these resources get the respect they deserve and are not completely obliterated from the planet. Message:? WE ARE ON THE SAME TEAM!!! I urge some of you with deeply ingrained philosophical biases to try to be a little more open minded and read a little wider.? Instead of just cherry picking articles against this discipline, look for some balanced articles.? There are indeed pros and cons to these approaches.? I would hate to think that scientists such as ourselves are just as entrenched as the political and religious extremists you know that anti-anything-we don't understand- folks that seem to dominate the news and political discourse these days. Nuff Said Peter Edwards The views and comments expressed here do not reflect the official position of any organization I may be employed to or affiliated with -- ? ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 11:24:16 -0500 From: Eugene Shinn Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Robert, Thank you for exposing the devious nature of the,? "Total Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef Ecosystems" survey that came up with an outrageous $33.5B per year value of Hawaiian coral reefs. You did a great job of showing the problems, flaws, and exaggerations. In my long career I have seldom seen a questionnaire type survey that was not self-serving. I like to call them, "when did you stop beating your wife" surveys that imply you have been beating your wife (or dog). Agencies that do these surveys decide what they want to do then ask questions about various options and ways to accomplish the thing they want. They never ask the basic question,? Is the thing or action they want necessary in the first place? They are usually all about expanding the agency and squeezing more funding (our money) out of Congress. ? ?? I suppose they know how poorly educated the vast majority really is (especially in science) and realize they can pull the wool over their eyes. You clearly exposed this attitude in your posting. These days agencies often have covert help from tax exempt Non Government Foundations (NGOs) that are very good at getting press coverage, influencing congress, and squeezing tax exempt donations from those having expendable money or in need of the tax breaks they provide. Gene PS: I could not help noticing posting number 3 that starts with: "Seeking a Natural Resource Social Scientist to support the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. (note key words, "Social Scientist") -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida College of Marine Science Room 221A 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- -- _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From allison.billiam at gmail.com Sat Nov 19 08:10:14 2011 From: allison.billiam at gmail.com (Bill Allison) Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2011 08:10:14 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Ocean adification and biomineralization of otoliths In-Reply-To: <1321498774.61674.YahooMailClassic@web120605.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1321498774.61674.YahooMailClassic@web120605.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: This may be of interest: Fablet, R., L. Pecquerie, et al. (2011). "Shedding Light on Fish Otolith Biomineralization Using a Bioenergetic Approach." PLoS ONE 6(11): e27055. Otoliths are biocalcified bodies connected to the sensory system in the inner ears of fish. Their layered, biorhythm-following formation provides individual records of the age, the individual history and the natural environment of extinct and living fish species. Such data are critical for ecosystem and fisheries monitoring. They however often lack validation and the poor understanding of biomineralization mechanisms has led to striking examples of misinterpretations and subsequent erroneous conclusions in fish ecology and fisheries management. Here we develop and validate a numerical model of otolith biomineralization. Based on a general bioenergetic theory, it disentangles the complex interplay between metabolic and temperature effects on biomineralization. This model resolves controversial issues and explains poorly understood observations of otolith formation. It represents a unique simulation tool to improve otolith interpretation and applications, and, beyond, to address the effects of both climate change and ocean acidification on other biomineralizing organisms such as corals and bivalves. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0027055 On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Rudy Bonn wrote: > > > > Just curious, since now we use ototliths instead of scales, giving away my > age I guess, > > > > on life > l > history studies, aging ,and others, in teleosts ,hich Ive read that the > otoliths are composed of arognite in terms of fishery management, how are > we going to deal with the implications that arogonite, being the > fundamental compontent of biomineralization processes in otolith formation > how are we going to use otolith intepretation as a means > to introduce fishery management practices. that interpretation could be > flawed due to ocean acidification processes on otolith biomineralization > anyone want to a look at that or as anyone taken a peek at that, I would > like to know > > > Rudy S Bonn > Director of Marine Projects > Reef Relief > 631 Greene Street > Key West, FL 33040 > 305-294-3100 > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > -- ________________________________ Is this how science illuminates "reality"? - "the meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside, enveloping the talk which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze." - narrator's comment about Marlow's tale-telling, in Heart of Darkness (Conrad) From billy.causey at noaa.gov Sun Nov 20 15:24:59 2011 From: billy.causey at noaa.gov (Billy Causey) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 15:24:59 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just get along? :-) In-Reply-To: <1321649017.30745.YahooMailNeo@web160516.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <888D35080D24854AB67E0FE7147601F30A49D194BA@Vmail51.noaa.nems> Well said Peter! You have made a lot of good points in your post. Billy D. Causey, Ph.D. Southeast Regional Director NOAA's Office of National Marine Sanctuaries 33 East Quay Road Key West, Florida 33040 Office: 305 809 4670 ex 234 Cell: 305 395 0150 Fax: 305 293 5011 Email: billy.causey at noaa.gov Please excuse brevity for messages sent from this BlackBerry. ----- Original Message ----- From: Peter Edwards [mailto:horlicks_1989 at yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 03:43 PM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just get along? :-) Hello Coral-Listers, I will try not to be-labor the point, and I am pretty sure that the "pure" coral reef biologists, oceanographers, et al will soon chime in to let us know this topic is not "science-y" enough.? And that all this nonsense about people's preferences, values etc has little or nothing to do with coral reefs (chuckle). But to I'd like to refer to Gene's last email and others of a similar "strain".... There will always be debate among and within disciplines.? This should be encouraged as different points of view help to move science and human knowledge forward.? However I believe that we will continue to witness the decline of precious and "invaluable" resources such as coral reefs, mangrove forests, sea grass beds etc if we continue to remain entrenched in our camps.? Dismissive comments and generalizations about a discipline that people may have little understanding about is not helpful.? If we (natural and social) scientists learned to "speak" to each other perhaps we would be more successful at finding solutions to conservation.? Again I am speaking as an individual who has come from a foundation of biology, coral reef ecology who recognized the need for integrating social sciences including neo-classical micro economic theory as part of my tool-kit.? This has helped me better understand issues of efficient allocation of resources and open my eyes to possible solutions for reducing pollution and environmental degradation.? I get the strong sense from some of the comments that there is the suspicion that by conducting these types of studies the results will be "hijacked" by business interests who want to privatize, sell off, steal these resources. Well I am sorry to say...."News Flash...this just in"...it is already happening.? What this discipline and these approaches try to do is find solutions to ensure that these resources get the respect they deserve and are not completely obliterated from the planet. Message:? WE ARE ON THE SAME TEAM!!! I urge some of you with deeply ingrained philosophical biases to try to be a little more open minded and read a little wider.? Instead of just cherry picking articles against this discipline, look for some balanced articles.? There are indeed pros and cons to these approaches.? I would hate to think that scientists such as ourselves are just as entrenched as the political and religious extremists you know that anti-anything-we don't understand- folks that seem to dominate the news and political discourse these days. Nuff Said Peter Edwards The views and comments expressed here do not reflect the official position of any organization I may be employed to or affiliated with -- ? ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2011 11:24:16 -0500 From: Eugene Shinn Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Robert, Thank you for exposing the devious nature of the,? "Total Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef Ecosystems" survey that came up with an outrageous $33.5B per year value of Hawaiian coral reefs. You did a great job of showing the problems, flaws, and exaggerations. In my long career I have seldom seen a questionnaire type survey that was not self-serving. I like to call them, "when did you stop beating your wife" surveys that imply you have been beating your wife (or dog). Agencies that do these surveys decide what they want to do then ask questions about various options and ways to accomplish the thing they want. They never ask the basic question,? Is the thing or action they want necessary in the first place? They are usually all about expanding the agency and squeezing more funding (our money) out of Congress. ? ? I suppose they know how poorly educated the vast majority really is (especially in science) and realize they can pull the wool over their eyes. You clearly exposed this attitude in your posting. These days agencies often have covert help from tax exempt Non Government Foundations (NGOs) that are very good at getting press coverage, influencing congress, and squeezing tax exempt donations from those having expendable money or in need of the tax breaks they provide. Gene PS: I could not help noticing posting number 3 that starts with: "Seeking a Natural Resource Social Scientist to support the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. (note key words, "Social Scientist") -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida College of Marine Science Room 221A 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- -- _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From billy.causey at noaa.gov Sun Nov 20 14:38:44 2011 From: billy.causey at noaa.gov (Billy Causey) Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 14:38:44 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value In-Reply-To: <4EC6DDF9.6050000@fuzzo.com> Message-ID: <888D35080D24854AB67E0FE7147601F30A49D194B9@Vmail51.noaa.nems> David, You have provided some excellent advice that we all should consider and practice in our postings. We (coral reef managers) are in serious need of socioeconomic data such as that cited in this study. I have confidence in the PIs and their methodology and am not surprised by the results. $33 Billion is considerably less than what I put on the value of Hawaii's coral reefs, which is priceless. Cheers, Billy Billy D. Causey, Ph.D. Southeast Regional Director NOAA's Office of National Marine Sanctuaries 33 East Quay Road Key West, Florida 33040 Office: 305 809 4670 ex 234 Cell: 305 395 0150 Fax: 305 293 5011 Email: billy.causey at noaa.gov Please excuse brevity for messages sent from this BlackBerry. ----- Original Message ----- From: David M. Lawrence [mailto:dave at fuzzo.com] Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 05:36 PM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value Gene, As someone who once designed, administered, analyzed, and wrote up a survey of a major scientific society, I wish you'd keep your uninformed assessments of the "self-serving" nature of surveys to yourself -- unless you have thoroughly reviewed the methods, text of the survey instrument, analytical procedures, etc. I've spent most of my life working in the natural sciences, but I would never be so thoroughly and uninformedly dismissive of procedures used by other disciplines. Dave On 11/18/2011 11:24 AM, Eugene Shinn wrote: > Robert, Thank you for exposing the devious nature of the, "Total > Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef > Ecosystems" survey that came up with an outrageous $33.5B per year > value of Hawaiian coral reefs. You did a great job of showing the > problems, flaws, and exaggerations. In my long career I have seldom > seen a questionnaire type survey that was not self-serving. I like to > call them, "when did you stop beating your wife" surveys that imply > you have been beating your wife (or dog). Agencies that do these > surveys decide what they want to do then ask questions about various > options and ways to accomplish the thing they want. They never ask > the basic question, Is the thing or action they want necessary in > the first place? They are usually all about expanding the agency and > squeezing more funding (our money) out of Congress. > I suppose they know how poorly educated the vast majority really > is (especially in science) and realize they can pull the wool over > their eyes. You clearly exposed this attitude in your posting. These > days agencies often have covert help from tax exempt Non Government > Foundations (NGOs) that are very good at getting press coverage, > influencing congress, and squeezing tax exempt donations from those > having expendable money or in need of the tax breaks they provide. > Gene PS: I could not help noticing posting number 3 that starts with: > "Seeking a Natural Resource Social Scientist to support the National > Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring > and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. (note key words, "Social > Scientist") -- ------------------------------------------------------ David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com ------------------------------------------------------ "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo "No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From tfelis at marum.de Mon Nov 21 02:41:00 2011 From: tfelis at marum.de (Thomas Felis) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 08:41:00 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] PhD student position in coral paleoclimatology Message-ID: <4ECA008C.4050503@marum.de> MARUM ? Center for Marine Environmental Sciences University of Bremen, Germany PhD student position in coral paleoclimatology TV-L E13 (66%) - under the condition of job release - MARUM ? Center for Marine Environmental Sciences at the University of Bremen (Germany) has an opening for a PhD student position within the project ?Seasonality and interannual to centennial climate variability in the Caribbean during the last interglacial ? Combining coral records, stalagmite records and climate models (CaribClim II)?, funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft within the framework of the DFG Priority Program ?Integrated Analysis of Interglacial Climate Dynamics (INTERDYNAMIK)? (SPP 1266). The project aims at (1) quantifying the natural range of seasonality and interannual to centennial climate variability in the Caribbean during the last interglacial, (2) identifying the forcing mechanisms of variability on these timescales, and (3) unravelling the role of modes of variability (e.g., ENSO, NAO, AMO) and of changes in insolation and Atlantic overturning circulation. The PhD candidate will use fossil corals from the southern Caribbean Sea (Bonaire) to reconstruct seasonality and interannual climate variability for time intervals of the last interglacial. The work will include diagenetic investigations, microsampling, geochemical analyses (oxygen isotopes, Sr/Ca), statistical interpretation of proxy records, and publication in peer-reviewed international journals. Very good English language skills are required. PhD students are requested to attend summerschools and to carry out part of their work at foreign institutions. Highly motivated students with interest/background in paleoceanography/paleoclimatology are encouraged to apply. An academic qualification comparable to a German Diplom or MSc degree in a related discipline is required. Salary will be according to the German civil service remuneration system TV-L E13 (66%). The appointment is initially for two years with possible extension to three years. Please submit your application (motivation letter, detailed CV, copies of certificates, contact details of two referees) under the reference number A 188/11 preferably by e-mail as single pdf file to Dr. Thomas Felis (tfelis at marum.de). Deadline for applications is December 20, 2011. As the University of Bremen intends to increase the proportion of female employees in science, women are particularly encouraged to apply. In case of equal personal aptitudes and qualification priority will be given to disabled persons. We welcome applications of people with migrant background. Further enquiries can be addressed to Dr. Thomas Felis (tfelis at marum.de) MARUM University of Bremen P.O. Box 33 04 40 28334 Bremen Germany -- Dr Thomas Felis MARUM ? Center for Marine Environmental Sciences University of Bremen GEO Building, Klagenfurter St 28359 Bremen GERMANY tfelis at marum.de +49-(0)421-218-65071 (phone) +49-(0)421-218-65505 (fax) www.marum.de/en/Dr._Thomas_Felis.html From ceo at lindorm.com Mon Nov 21 08:53:31 2011 From: ceo at lindorm.com (Ulf Erlingsson) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 08:53:31 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value In-Reply-To: <888D35080D24854AB67E0FE7147601F30A49D194B9@Vmail51.noaa.nems> References: <888D35080D24854AB67E0FE7147601F30A49D194B9@Vmail51.noaa.nems> Message-ID: <5C9A25EB-2EF4-4166-B9BD-9B0165463DFC@lindorm.com> Billy, I think you hit the head on the nail with the reefs being "priceless". Some would take that to be an astronomical sum, other to be zero. In reality, it is neither, it is [ ]. Empty. No amount. And that is why we need another method of evaluating natural resources, one that does NOT put a monetary value on it but, for instance, a measure of sustainability (such as this http://atlantisinireland.com/sustainability.php that I unfortunately never seem to get the time to publish "properly"). Ulf On 2011-11-20, at 14:38, Billy Causey wrote: > David, > You have provided some excellent advice that we all should consider and practice in our postings. > > We (coral reef managers) are in serious need of socioeconomic data such as that cited in this study. I have confidence in the PIs and their methodology and am not surprised by the results. > > $33 Billion is considerably less than what I put on the value of Hawaii's coral reefs, which is priceless. > > Cheers, Billy > > Billy D. Causey, Ph.D. > Southeast Regional Director > NOAA's Office of National Marine > Sanctuaries > 33 East Quay Road > Key West, Florida 33040 > Office: 305 809 4670 ex 234 > Cell: 305 395 0150 > Fax: 305 293 5011 > Email: billy.causey at noaa.gov > > Please excuse brevity for messages sent from this BlackBerry. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: David M. Lawrence [mailto:dave at fuzzo.com] > Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 05:36 PM > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value > > Gene, > > As someone who once designed, administered, analyzed, and wrote up a > survey of a major scientific society, I wish you'd keep your uninformed > assessments of the "self-serving" nature of surveys to yourself -- > unless you have thoroughly reviewed the methods, text of the survey > instrument, analytical procedures, etc. I've spent most of my life > working in the natural sciences, but I would never be so thoroughly and > uninformedly dismissive of procedures used by other disciplines. > > Dave > > On 11/18/2011 11:24 AM, Eugene Shinn wrote: >> Robert, Thank you for exposing the devious nature of the, "Total >> Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef >> Ecosystems" survey that came up with an outrageous $33.5B per year >> value of Hawaiian coral reefs. You did a great job of showing the >> problems, flaws, and exaggerations. In my long career I have seldom >> seen a questionnaire type survey that was not self-serving. I like to >> call them, "when did you stop beating your wife" surveys that imply >> you have been beating your wife (or dog). Agencies that do these >> surveys decide what they want to do then ask questions about various >> options and ways to accomplish the thing they want. They never ask >> the basic question, Is the thing or action they want necessary in >> the first place? They are usually all about expanding the agency and >> squeezing more funding (our money) out of Congress. >> I suppose they know how poorly educated the vast majority really >> is (especially in science) and realize they can pull the wool over >> their eyes. You clearly exposed this attitude in your posting. These >> days agencies often have covert help from tax exempt Non Government >> Foundations (NGOs) that are very good at getting press coverage, >> influencing congress, and squeezing tax exempt donations from those >> having expendable money or in need of the tax breaks they provide. >> Gene PS: I could not help noticing posting number 3 that starts with: >> "Seeking a Natural Resource Social Scientist to support the National >> Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring >> and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. (note key words, "Social >> Scientist") > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 > 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 > Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com > USA | http: http://fuzzo.com > ------------------------------------------------------ > > "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo > > "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo > > "No trespassing > 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 09:39:46 2011 From: bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com (Bastiaan Vermonden) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 15:39:46 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just get along? :-) In-Reply-To: <1321660373.81704.YahooMailClassic@web161019.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <1321649017.30745.YahooMailNeo@web160516.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1321660373.81704.YahooMailClassic@web161019.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Dear Coral Listers, I would like to ask all of you your opinions regarding an idea for a economic strategy which I hope would lead to better protection of coral reefs and the enforcement of marine parks. I also think it fits in well with the discussion about valueing reefs. So my idea began with the question why doesn't the recreational diving and snorkeling tourism industry invest more in coral reefs and hold politicians accountable when they fail to provide sufficient resources to maintain and protect marine parks. *I believe this is due to a basic economic market failure.* What you would expect in a proper economic market is that the price of a good is related to the quality of that good. So to use cars as a metaphor you expect to pay more for a sportscar which goes from 0 to 100 km per hour in 4 seconds than one that does it in 10 seconds. However when we look at tourism related to coral reefs I have the feeling although I cannot substantiate it with hard data that this is not the case for coral reef related tourism. There are locations where the reef is so degraded that it has no recreational value and places where the quality is so good that it is very expensive to visit but in between I have the feeling prices are approximately the same. I believe this is due to local pricing competition which drives down prices to levels which are close to the cost price of organizing diving, snorkeling, recreational angling trips or other tourism activities. I believe that this problem largely exists because recreational users do not have the quantitative data to properly compare different destinations. So for example divers now have to rely on qualitative (anecdotal) evidence to determine which place they should visit. So for example if we have 2 different destinations and both state that divers sometimes see sharks there, then which place is the better one to visit? Maybe at one location there is a 1 in 100 (1%) chance and at the other there is a 1 in 20 (5%) chance of encountering a shark, this is a big difference but without this quantitative data the diver has to hope he is lucky and chooses the right location. However if we inform divers with quantitative data which area is the best then divers will always choose the best place they can afford. So if divers do not know the difference between the 2 locations they have a 50% chance of choosing the best location however if they know the quantitative difference they will have a 100% chance of choosing the best place. This means that the destination where the chance of encountering a shark is 1% has to start improving or lower its prices to become competitive while the other has a strong incentive to protect its sharks to maintain its advantage. So with this quantitative data we can create a national/regional/global market which competes on quality rather than a local market that competes on price. * Setting a standard* Of course to compare different locations it is necessary to have some standardized measures of comparison that can be applied to all or nearly all destinations. I spent some time thinking of this and think that one interesting standard could be the biomass compared to the biomass of a pristine reef. The Northern line islands are some of the last examples of what are considered pristine islands http://www.wri.org/publication/reefs-at-risk-revisited/stories/line-islandswith the biomass at the most pristine reefs being around 530 grams per square meter. So if we round this down to 500 grams per square meter then we can compare the biomass of destinations to this benchmark as a percentage. This allows divers to compare locations and resets their baseline for what constitutes a healthy reef. Then for coral cover we can use the more conventional measure of percentage of live coral cover. So I made a map of biomass in the Caribbean compared to this benchmark and it can be found here along with the standard: http://bastiaan.reislogger.nl/foto/idea/ (I don't have my own website so I used my travelblog website) According to this map divers should choose Cuba as their next diving destination or otherwise Yucatan Mexico. Then next are the countries/islands with 27% of pristine biomass. So with such a map you hope that destinations start to compete with one another so for example Martinique needs to increase its biomass only 3% from 24% to 27% to become competitive with 3rd highest rated locations. Meanwhile those locations rated at 27% only need a small increase to be the third best in the region. Guadeloupe meanwhile needs to improve 4% to become competitive with Martinique. What we see is that countries only need to make small steps to increase their competitiveness. Rather than having to make a huge step to superb quality and then hope their reputation grows they can make small steps to improve their competitive advantage assuming that the area is given a new rating regularly. Of course my standard is one suggestion but it can also be a different one. What is essential is that it lets recreational users easily compare and that it is truly indicative of the health of the reef. Users should not be decision paralyzed by to much information or actually demand less healthy reef environments. (this might be a problem with sharks) *Intended Consequence* So the intention of this idea would be to reward countries who manage their marine environment well with increased or higher value tourism and make countries accountable to the market if they do not manage their marine life well. Hopefully its effect would be Increased biomass = healthier environment = increased business = increased political support Additionally I hope that this will increase the demand for services which assist Marine parks, governments, resorts etc with management advice, monitoring, reef restoration and more because reef quality would be more directly related to tourism demand. This could increase marine conservation effectiveness and decrease protection costs. And decreased costs of protection would lower the barrier to the implementation of more marine protection. *Thank you *If you read my whole idea I would first like to say thank you. So what do you all think of this a good or bad idea? how technically feasible is this idea? what questions do you all have for me and etc? Regards, Bastiaan Vermonden From carly.kenkel at gmail.com Mon Nov 21 09:53:51 2011 From: carly.kenkel at gmail.com (Carly Kenkel) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 08:53:51 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] karyotype of Porites spp.? Message-ID: Dear Listers, I'm wondering if anyone knows the karyotype of Porites astreoides (actually, information on the karyotype of any species of Poritid would be helpful). So far, I haven't been able to find any publications with this information, and before I spend time tackling the problem myself, I thought I'd ask. Thanks for your help! Carly Kenkel Graduate Student Dept of Integrative Biology The Univ of Texas at Austin From gchallenger at msn.com Mon Nov 21 10:27:46 2011 From: gchallenger at msn.com (Greg Challenger ) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 15:27:46 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value Message-ID: The cost of restoring it and preserving it.....if successful the hypothetical value becomes irrelevant. Greg Challenger Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T -----Original Message----- From: Ulf Erlingsson Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 13:53:31 To: Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value Billy, I think you hit the head on the nail with the reefs being "priceless". Some would take that to be an astronomical sum, other to be zero. In reality, it is neither, it is [ ]. Empty. No amount. And that is why we need another method of evaluating natural resources, one that does NOT put a monetary value on it but, for instance, a measure of sustainability (such as this http://atlantisinireland.com/sustainability.php that I unfortunately never seem to get the time to publish "properly"). Ulf On 2011-11-20, at 14:38, Billy Causey wrote: > David, > You have provided some excellent advice that we all should consider and practice in our postings.?? > > We (coral reef managers) are in serious need of socioeconomic data such as that cited in this study.? I have confidence in the PIs and their methodology and am not surprised by the results.? > > $33 Billion is considerably less than what I put on the value of Hawaii's coral reefs, which is priceless. > > Cheers, Billy? > > Billy D. Causey, Ph.D. > Southeast Regional Director > NOAA's? Office of National Marine > Sanctuaries > 33 East Quay Road > Key West, Florida 33040 > Office: 305 809 4670 ex 234 > Cell:? 305 395 0150 > Fax:?? 305 293 5011 > Email: billy.causey at noaa.gov > > Please excuse brevity for messages sent from this BlackBerry. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: David M. Lawrence [mailto:dave at fuzzo.com] > Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 05:36 PM > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value > > Gene, > > As someone who once designed, administered, analyzed, and wrote up a > survey of a major scientific society, I wish you'd keep your uninformed > assessments of the "self-serving" nature of surveys to yourself -- > unless you have thoroughly reviewed the methods, text of the survey > instrument, analytical procedures, etc.? I've spent most of my life > working in the natural sciences, but I would never be so thoroughly and > uninformedly dismissive of procedures used by other disciplines. > > Dave > > On 11/18/2011 11:24 AM, Eugene Shinn wrote: >> Robert, Thank you for exposing the devious nature of the,? "Total >> Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef >> Ecosystems" survey that came up with an outrageous $33.5B per year >> value of Hawaiian coral reefs. You did a great job of showing the >> problems, flaws, and exaggerations. In my long career I have seldom >> seen a questionnaire type survey that was not self-serving. I like to >> call them, "when did you stop beating your wife" surveys that imply >> you have been beating your wife (or dog). Agencies that do these >> surveys decide what they want to do then ask questions about various >> options and ways to accomplish the thing they want. They never ask >> the basic question,? Is the thing or action they want necessary in >> the first place? They are usually all about expanding the agency and >> squeezing more funding (our money) out of Congress. >>????? I suppose they know how poorly educated the vast majority really >> is (especially in science) and realize they can pull the wool over >> their eyes. You clearly exposed this attitude in your posting. These >> days agencies often have covert help from tax exempt Non Government >> Foundations (NGOs) that are very good at getting press coverage, >> influencing congress, and squeezing tax exempt donations from those >> having expendable money or in need of the tax breaks they provide. >> Gene PS: I could not help noticing posting number 3 that starts with: >> "Seeking a Natural Resource Social Scientist to support the National >> Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring >> and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. (note key words, "Social >> Scientist") > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ >? David M. Lawrence??????? | Home:? (804) 559-9786 >? 7471 Brook Way Court???? | Fax:?? (804) 559-9787 >? Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com >? USA????????????????????? | http:? http://fuzzo.com > ------------------------------------------------------ > > "All drains lead to the ocean."? -- Gill, Finding Nemo > > "We have met the enemy and he is us."? -- Pogo > > "No trespassing >? 4/17 of a haiku"? --? Richard Brautigan > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From dustanp at cofc.edu Mon Nov 21 10:31:25 2011 From: dustanp at cofc.edu (Phil Dustan) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 10:31:25 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just get along? :-) In-Reply-To: References: <1321649017.30745.YahooMailNeo@web160516.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1321660373.81704.YahooMailClassic@web161019.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4ECA6ECD.4080900@cofc.edu> Well folks, There goes the political support and economy of the Florida Keys...... Bastiaan Vermonden wrote: > Dear Coral Listers, > > I would like to ask all of you your opinions regarding an idea for a > economic strategy which I hope would lead to better protection of coral > reefs and the enforcement of marine parks. I also think it fits in well > with the discussion about valueing reefs. > > So my idea began with the question why doesn't the recreational diving and > snorkeling tourism industry invest more in coral reefs and hold politicians > accountable when they fail to provide sufficient resources to maintain and > protect marine parks. > > *I believe this is due to a basic economic market failure.* > What you would expect in a proper economic market is that the price of a > good is related to the quality of that good. So to use cars as a metaphor > you expect to pay more for a sportscar which goes from 0 to 100 km per hour > in 4 seconds than one that does it in 10 seconds. > > However when we look at tourism related to coral reefs I have the feeling > although I cannot substantiate it with hard data that this is not the case > for coral reef related tourism. There are locations where the reef is so > degraded that it has no recreational value and places where the quality is > so good that it is very expensive to visit but in between I have the > feeling prices are approximately the same. I believe this is due to local > pricing competition which drives down prices to levels which are close to > the cost price of organizing diving, snorkeling, recreational angling trips > or other tourism activities. > > I believe that this problem largely exists because recreational users do > not have the quantitative data to properly compare different destinations. > So for example divers now have to rely on qualitative (anecdotal) evidence > to determine which place they should visit. So for example if we have 2 > different destinations and both state that divers sometimes see sharks > there, then which place is the better one to visit? Maybe at one location > there is a 1 in 100 (1%) chance and at the other there is a 1 in 20 (5%) > chance of encountering a shark, this is a big difference but without this > quantitative data the diver has to hope he is lucky and chooses the right > location. > > However if we inform divers with quantitative data which area is the best > then divers will always choose the best place they can afford. So if divers > do not know the difference between the 2 locations they have a 50% chance > of choosing the best location however if they know the quantitative > difference they will have a 100% chance of choosing the best place. This > means that the destination where the chance of encountering a shark is 1% > has to start improving or lower its prices to become competitive while the > other has a strong incentive to protect its sharks to maintain its > advantage. So with this quantitative data we can create a > national/regional/global market which competes on quality rather than a > local market that competes on price. > * > Setting a standard* > Of course to compare different locations it is necessary to have some > standardized measures of comparison that can be applied to all or nearly > all destinations. I spent some time thinking of this and think that one > interesting standard could be the biomass compared to the biomass of a > pristine reef. The Northern line islands are some of the last examples of > what are considered pristine islands > http://www.wri.org/publication/reefs-at-risk-revisited/stories/line-islandswith > the biomass at the most pristine reefs being around 530 grams per > square meter. So if we round this down to 500 grams per square meter then > we can compare the biomass of destinations to this benchmark as a > percentage. This allows divers to compare locations and resets their > baseline for what constitutes a healthy reef. > Then for coral cover we can use the more conventional measure of percentage > of live coral cover. > > So I made a map of biomass in the Caribbean compared to this benchmark and > it can be found here along with the standard: > > http://bastiaan.reislogger.nl/foto/idea/ (I don't have my own website so > I used my travelblog website) > > According to this map divers should choose Cuba as their next diving > destination or otherwise Yucatan Mexico. Then next are the > countries/islands with 27% of pristine biomass. So with such a map you hope > that destinations start to compete with one another so for example > Martinique needs to increase its biomass only 3% from 24% to 27% to become > competitive with 3rd highest rated locations. Meanwhile those locations > rated at 27% only need a small increase to be the third best in the region. > Guadeloupe meanwhile needs to improve 4% to become competitive with > Martinique. What we see is that countries only need to make small steps to > increase their competitiveness. Rather than having to make a huge step to > superb quality and then hope their reputation grows they can make small > steps to improve their competitive advantage assuming that the area is > given a new rating regularly. > > Of course my standard is one suggestion but it can also be a different one. > What is essential is that it lets recreational users easily compare and > that it is truly indicative of the health of the reef. Users should not be > decision paralyzed by to much information or actually demand less healthy > reef environments. (this might be a problem with sharks) > > *Intended Consequence* > So the intention of this idea would be to reward countries who manage their > marine environment well with increased or higher value tourism and make > countries accountable to the market if they do not manage their marine life > well. Hopefully its effect would be > > Increased biomass = healthier environment = increased business = increased > political support > > Additionally I hope that this will increase the demand for services which > assist Marine parks, governments, resorts etc with management advice, > monitoring, reef restoration and more because reef quality would be more > directly related to tourism demand. This could increase marine > conservation effectiveness and decrease protection costs. And decreased > costs of protection would lower the barrier to the implementation of more > marine protection. > > *Thank you > *If you read my whole idea I would first like to say thank you. So what do > you all think of this a good or bad idea? how technically feasible is this > idea? what questions do you all have for me and etc? > > Regards, > > Bastiaan Vermonden > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > -- Phillip Dustan Ph.D. Department of Biology College of Charleston Charleston SC 29424 (843) 953-8086 voice (843) 953-5453 (Fax) From jean-francois.flot at fundp.ac.be Mon Nov 21 10:51:06 2011 From: jean-francois.flot at fundp.ac.be (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jean-Fran=E7ois_Flot?=) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 16:51:06 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] karyotype of Porites spp.? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4ECA736A.50703@fundp.ac.be> Dear Carly, To the best of my knowledge, the only poritid species that was karyotyped so far is Goniopora lobata (2n=28). The reference is Heyward AJ (1985) Chromosomes of the coral Goniopora lobata (Anthozoa: Scleractinia). Heredity 55:269-271. You may find other useful references in my paper entitled "Comparative coral cytogenetics" in the proceedings of the 10th ICRS (the PDF is accessible online at http://www.mnhn.fr/jfflot/publications/Flot2006ICRS1.pdf). Best regards, Jean-Fran?ois Le 21/11/2011 15:53, Carly Kenkel a ?crit : > Dear Listers, > > I'm wondering if anyone knows the karyotype of Porites astreoides > (actually, information on the karyotype of any species of Poritid would be > helpful). So far, I haven't been able to find any publications with this > information, and before I spend time tackling the problem myself, I thought > I'd ask. > > Thanks for your help! > > Carly Kenkel > Graduate Student > Dept of Integrative Biology > The Univ of Texas at Austin > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > -- Jean-Fran?ois Flot, Ph.D. Department of Biology University of Namur Rue de Bruxelles 61 5000 Namur, Belgium From pawlikj at uncw.edu Mon Nov 21 11:38:15 2011 From: pawlikj at uncw.edu (Pawlik, Joseph) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 11:38:15 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] PostDoc opportunity, Benthic Ecology/Hydrodynamics, UNC Wilmington Message-ID: Apologies for cross-postings! Postdoctoral Research Associate Marine Benthic Ecology and Ecological Fluid Mechanics The Department of Biology and Marine Biology at the University of North Carolina Wilmington (UNCW) invites applications for the position of Postdoctoral Research Associate starting July 1, 2012. The successful candidate will join an interdisciplinary team of faculty, graduate students, and undergraduates investigating the influence of water flow on physiology, behavior, and ecology of marine organisms. The postdoctoral associate will conduct field and laboratory research related to one or more major themes: suspension feeder ecology, recruitment and larval behavior, olfaction. In addition, the individual will contribute to the day to day functioning of the lab, publish research results in peer reviewed journals, write grants to support research, and mentor graduate and undergraduate students. Applicants must hold a PhD in Biology, Marine Biology, Marine Science or a related discipline with experience in the appropriate discipline. The ideal candidate will have excellent communication skills (written and verbal), experience in field and laboratory methods, familiarity with acoustic and laser based velocimeters, and a record of publication. To apply, complete the online application process at http://consensus.uncw.edu by electronically submitting separately (1) a letter of application including a brief statement of research interests, (2) a curriculum vitae, and (3) contact information for three references. MS Word or Adobe PDF attachments are required. For questions about the position, contact Dr. Chris Finelli, finellic at uncw.edu or (910) 962-3471. For questions about the online application process, contact Ms. Debbie Cronin at cronind at uncw.edu, 910-962-3707. Priority consideration will be given to applications submitted before January 15, 2012. UNCW actively fosters a diverse and inclusive working and learning environment. Qualified men and women from all racial, ethnic, or other minority groups are strongly encouraged to apply. UNCW is an equal opportunity employer ************************************************************** From dave at fuzzo.com Mon Nov 21 11:42:22 2011 From: dave at fuzzo.com (David M. Lawrence) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 11:42:22 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value In-Reply-To: <5C9A25EB-2EF4-4166-B9BD-9B0165463DFC@lindorm.com> References: <888D35080D24854AB67E0FE7147601F30A49D194B9@Vmail51.noaa.nems> <5C9A25EB-2EF4-4166-B9BD-9B0165463DFC@lindorm.com> Message-ID: <4ECA7F6E.3030200@fuzzo.com> We might as well give up on saving anything if we accept your argument, Ulf. If we cannot put a monetary value on ecosystems and their services, we will never have a rational economic system, for I doubt any devotee of Ayn Rand in power today will consider anything worthwhile that doesn't have a price tag on it. Sure, attempts to put a value on natural resources and ecosystem services today are imperfect, but so is measuring forest composition with a tenth-hectare plot or coral diversity in one square meter plots. Those imperfections don't stop any of us from doing our work, though. Dave On 11/21/2011 8:53 AM, Ulf Erlingsson wrote: > Billy, > > I think you hit the head on the nail with the reefs being "priceless". Some would take that to be an astronomical sum, other to be zero. In reality, it is neither, it is [ ]. Empty. No amount. And that is why we need another method of evaluating natural resources, one that does NOT put a monetary value on it but, for instance, a measure of sustainability (such as this http://atlantisinireland.com/sustainability.php that I unfortunately never seem to get the time to publish "properly"). > > Ulf > > On 2011-11-20, at 14:38, Billy Causey wrote: > >> David, >> You have provided some excellent advice that we all should consider and practice in our postings. >> >> We (coral reef managers) are in serious need of socioeconomic data such as that cited in this study. I have confidence in the PIs and their methodology and am not surprised by the results. >> >> $33 Billion is considerably less than what I put on the value of Hawaii's coral reefs, which is priceless. >> >> Cheers, Billy >> >> Billy D. Causey, Ph.D. >> Southeast Regional Director >> NOAA's Office of National Marine >> Sanctuaries >> 33 East Quay Road >> Key West, Florida 33040 >> Office: 305 809 4670 ex 234 >> Cell: 305 395 0150 >> Fax: 305 293 5011 >> Email: billy.causey at noaa.gov >> >> Please excuse brevity for messages sent from this BlackBerry. >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: David M. Lawrence [mailto:dave at fuzzo.com] >> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 05:36 PM >> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value >> >> Gene, >> >> As someone who once designed, administered, analyzed, and wrote up a >> survey of a major scientific society, I wish you'd keep your uninformed >> assessments of the "self-serving" nature of surveys to yourself -- >> unless you have thoroughly reviewed the methods, text of the survey >> instrument, analytical procedures, etc. I've spent most of my life >> working in the natural sciences, but I would never be so thoroughly and >> uninformedly dismissive of procedures used by other disciplines. >> >> Dave >> >> On 11/18/2011 11:24 AM, Eugene Shinn wrote: >>> Robert, Thank you for exposing the devious nature of the, "Total >>> Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef >>> Ecosystems" survey that came up with an outrageous $33.5B per year >>> value of Hawaiian coral reefs. You did a great job of showing the >>> problems, flaws, and exaggerations. In my long career I have seldom >>> seen a questionnaire type survey that was not self-serving. I like to >>> call them, "when did you stop beating your wife" surveys that imply >>> you have been beating your wife (or dog). Agencies that do these >>> surveys decide what they want to do then ask questions about various >>> options and ways to accomplish the thing they want. They never ask >>> the basic question, Is the thing or action they want necessary in >>> the first place? They are usually all about expanding the agency and >>> squeezing more funding (our money) out of Congress. >>> I suppose they know how poorly educated the vast majority really >>> is (especially in science) and realize they can pull the wool over >>> their eyes. You clearly exposed this attitude in your posting. These >>> days agencies often have covert help from tax exempt Non Government >>> Foundations (NGOs) that are very good at getting press coverage, >>> influencing congress, and squeezing tax exempt donations from those >>> having expendable money or in need of the tax breaks they provide. >>> Gene PS: I could not help noticing posting number 3 that starts with: >>> "Seeking a Natural Resource Social Scientist to support the National >>> Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring >>> and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. (note key words, "Social >>> Scientist") >> -- >> ------------------------------------------------------ >> David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 >> 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 >> Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com >> USA | http: http://fuzzo.com >> ------------------------------------------------------ >> >> "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo >> >> "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo >> >> "No trespassing >> 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list -- ------------------------------------------------------ David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com ------------------------------------------------------ "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo "No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan From szmanta at uncw.edu Mon Nov 21 11:52:46 2011 From: szmanta at uncw.edu (Szmant, Alina) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 11:52:46 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] karyotype of Porites spp.? In-Reply-To: <4ECA736A.50703@fundp.ac.be> References: <4ECA736A.50703@fundp.ac.be> Message-ID: <68ECDB295FC42D4C98B223E75A854025D9EDA3598B@uncwexmb2.dcs.uncw.edu> There is a paper published back in mid 1990s in Evolution that presents chromosome numbers for a bunch of Acropora species in which polyploidy of various types were reported. Can't remember the author just now. ************************************************************************* Dr. Alina M. Szmant Professor of Marine Biology Center for Marine Science and Dept of Biology and Marine Biology University of North Carolina Wilmington 5600 Marvin Moss Ln Wilmington NC 28409 USA tel: 910-962-2362 fax: 910-962-2410 cell: 910-200-3913 http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta ******************************************************* -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Jean-Fran?ois Flot Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 10:51 AM To: Carly Kenkel Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] karyotype of Porites spp.? Dear Carly, To the best of my knowledge, the only poritid species that was karyotyped so far is Goniopora lobata (2n=28). The reference is Heyward AJ (1985) Chromosomes of the coral Goniopora lobata (Anthozoa: Scleractinia). Heredity 55:269-271. You may find other useful references in my paper entitled "Comparative coral cytogenetics" in the proceedings of the 10th ICRS (the PDF is accessible online at http://www.mnhn.fr/jfflot/publications/Flot2006ICRS1.pdf). Best regards, Jean-Fran?ois Le 21/11/2011 15:53, Carly Kenkel a ?crit : > Dear Listers, > > I'm wondering if anyone knows the karyotype of Porites astreoides > (actually, information on the karyotype of any species of Poritid > would be helpful). So far, I haven't been able to find any > publications with this information, and before I spend time tackling > the problem myself, I thought I'd ask. > > Thanks for your help! > > Carly Kenkel > Graduate Student > Dept of Integrative Biology > The Univ of Texas at Austin > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > -- Jean-Fran?ois Flot, Ph.D. Department of Biology University of Namur Rue de Bruxelles 61 5000 Namur, Belgium _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From sylvia.galloway at noaa.gov Mon Nov 21 13:37:37 2011 From: sylvia.galloway at noaa.gov (Sylvia Galloway) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 13:37:37 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] karyotype of Porites spp.? In-Reply-To: <68ECDB295FC42D4C98B223E75A854025D9EDA3598B@uncwexmb2.dcs.uncw.edu> References: <4ECA736A.50703@fundp.ac.be> <68ECDB295FC42D4C98B223E75A854025D9EDA3598B@uncwexmb2.dcs.uncw.edu> Message-ID: <4ECA9A71.8050704@noaa.gov> Kenyon, J. C. (1997). "Models of reticulate evolution in the coral genus Acropora based on chromosome numbers: Parallels with plants." Evolution 51(3): 756-767. On 11/21/2011 11:52 AM, Szmant, Alina wrote: > There is a paper published back in mid 1990s in Evolution that presents chromosome numbers for a bunch of Acropora species in which polyploidy of various types were reported. Can't remember the author just now. > > ************************************************************************* > Dr. Alina M. Szmant > Professor of Marine Biology > Center for Marine Science and Dept of Biology and Marine Biology > University of North Carolina Wilmington > 5600 Marvin Moss Ln > Wilmington NC 28409 USA > tel: 910-962-2362 fax: 910-962-2410 cell: 910-200-3913 > http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta > ******************************************************* > > -----Original Message----- > From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Jean-Fran?ois Flot > Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 10:51 AM > To: Carly Kenkel > Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] karyotype of Porites spp.? > > Dear Carly, > > To the best of my knowledge, the only poritid species that was karyotyped so far is Goniopora lobata (2n=28). The reference is Heyward AJ (1985) Chromosomes of the coral Goniopora lobata (Anthozoa: > Scleractinia). Heredity 55:269-271. > You may find other useful references in my paper entitled "Comparative coral cytogenetics" in the proceedings of the 10th ICRS (the PDF is accessible online at http://www.mnhn.fr/jfflot/publications/Flot2006ICRS1.pdf). > > Best regards, > Jean-Fran?ois > > > Le 21/11/2011 15:53, Carly Kenkel a ?crit : >> Dear Listers, >> >> I'm wondering if anyone knows the karyotype of Porites astreoides >> (actually, information on the karyotype of any species of Poritid >> would be helpful). So far, I haven't been able to find any >> publications with this information, and before I spend time tackling >> the problem myself, I thought I'd ask. >> >> Thanks for your help! >> >> Carly Kenkel >> Graduate Student >> Dept of Integrative Biology >> The Univ of Texas at Austin >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> > > -- > Jean-Fran?ois Flot, Ph.D. > Department of Biology > University of Namur > Rue de Bruxelles 61 > 5000 Namur, Belgium > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list -- Sylvia B. Galloway, Ph.D. NOAA/NOS HML 331 Ft Johnson Rd Charleston, SC 29412 email: sylvia.galloway at noaa.gov tel: 843-762-8803 or 843-608-5987 fax: 843-762-8737 From ceo at lindorm.com Mon Nov 21 14:38:43 2011 From: ceo at lindorm.com (Ulf Erlingsson) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 14:38:43 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value In-Reply-To: <4ECA7F6E.3030200@fuzzo.com> References: <888D35080D24854AB67E0FE7147601F30A49D194B9@Vmail51.noaa.nems> <5C9A25EB-2EF4-4166-B9BD-9B0165463DFC@lindorm.com> <4ECA7F6E.3030200@fuzzo.com> Message-ID: <79BB757B-42F6-4FB1-AACE-101414D8A2F6@lindorm.com> Not necessarily, Dave. By thinking outside the closed box of money perhaps it is possible, but if you start out by assuming that money as we know it is the yard stick by which everything shall be measured, of course it will be impossible. I don't have the solution, I'm just saying that there is a significant group of people out there who are making this argument. You can easily find them. Just look as an Occupy site. Ulf On 2011-11-21, at 11:42, David M. Lawrence wrote: > We might as well give up on saving anything if we accept your argument, > Ulf. If we cannot put a monetary value on ecosystems and their > services, we will never have a rational economic system, for I doubt any > devotee of Ayn Rand in power today will consider anything worthwhile > that doesn't have a price tag on it. > > Sure, attempts to put a value on natural resources and ecosystem > services today are imperfect, but so is measuring forest composition > with a tenth-hectare plot or coral diversity in one square meter plots. > Those imperfections don't stop any of us from doing our work, though. > > Dave > > On 11/21/2011 8:53 AM, Ulf Erlingsson wrote: >> Billy, >> >> I think you hit the head on the nail with the reefs being "priceless". Some would take that to be an astronomical sum, other to be zero. In reality, it is neither, it is [ ]. Empty. No amount. And that is why we need another method of evaluating natural resources, one that does NOT put a monetary value on it but, for instance, a measure of sustainability (such as this http://atlantisinireland.com/sustainability.php that I unfortunately never seem to get the time to publish "properly"). >> >> Ulf >> >> On 2011-11-20, at 14:38, Billy Causey wrote: >> >>> David, >>> You have provided some excellent advice that we all should consider and practice in our postings. >>> >>> We (coral reef managers) are in serious need of socioeconomic data such as that cited in this study. I have confidence in the PIs and their methodology and am not surprised by the results. >>> >>> $33 Billion is considerably less than what I put on the value of Hawaii's coral reefs, which is priceless. >>> >>> Cheers, Billy >>> >>> Billy D. Causey, Ph.D. >>> Southeast Regional Director >>> NOAA's Office of National Marine >>> Sanctuaries >>> 33 East Quay Road >>> Key West, Florida 33040 >>> Office: 305 809 4670 ex 234 >>> Cell: 305 395 0150 >>> Fax: 305 293 5011 >>> Email: billy.causey at noaa.gov >>> >>> Please excuse brevity for messages sent from this BlackBerry. >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: David M. Lawrence [mailto:dave at fuzzo.com] >>> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 05:36 PM >>> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value >>> >>> Gene, >>> >>> As someone who once designed, administered, analyzed, and wrote up a >>> survey of a major scientific society, I wish you'd keep your uninformed >>> assessments of the "self-serving" nature of surveys to yourself -- >>> unless you have thoroughly reviewed the methods, text of the survey >>> instrument, analytical procedures, etc. I've spent most of my life >>> working in the natural sciences, but I would never be so thoroughly and >>> uninformedly dismissive of procedures used by other disciplines. >>> >>> Dave >>> >>> On 11/18/2011 11:24 AM, Eugene Shinn wrote: >>>> Robert, Thank you for exposing the devious nature of the, "Total >>>> Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef >>>> Ecosystems" survey that came up with an outrageous $33.5B per year >>>> value of Hawaiian coral reefs. You did a great job of showing the >>>> problems, flaws, and exaggerations. In my long career I have seldom >>>> seen a questionnaire type survey that was not self-serving. I like to >>>> call them, "when did you stop beating your wife" surveys that imply >>>> you have been beating your wife (or dog). Agencies that do these >>>> surveys decide what they want to do then ask questions about various >>>> options and ways to accomplish the thing they want. They never ask >>>> the basic question, Is the thing or action they want necessary in >>>> the first place? They are usually all about expanding the agency and >>>> squeezing more funding (our money) out of Congress. >>>> I suppose they know how poorly educated the vast majority really >>>> is (especially in science) and realize they can pull the wool over >>>> their eyes. You clearly exposed this attitude in your posting. These >>>> days agencies often have covert help from tax exempt Non Government >>>> Foundations (NGOs) that are very good at getting press coverage, >>>> influencing congress, and squeezing tax exempt donations from those >>>> having expendable money or in need of the tax breaks they provide. >>>> Gene PS: I could not help noticing posting number 3 that starts with: >>>> "Seeking a Natural Resource Social Scientist to support the National >>>> Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring >>>> and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. (note key words, "Social >>>> Scientist") >>> -- >>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>> David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 >>> 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 >>> Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com >>> USA | http: http://fuzzo.com >>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>> >>> "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo >>> >>> "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo >>> >>> "No trespassing >>> 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Coral-List mailing list >>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Coral-List mailing list >>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 > 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 > Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com > USA | http: http://fuzzo.com > ------------------------------------------------------ > > "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo > > "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo > > "No trespassing > 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From dave at fuzzo.com Mon Nov 21 15:32:40 2011 From: dave at fuzzo.com (David M. Lawrence) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 15:32:40 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value In-Reply-To: <79BB757B-42F6-4FB1-AACE-101414D8A2F6@lindorm.com> References: <888D35080D24854AB67E0FE7147601F30A49D194B9@Vmail51.noaa.nems> <5C9A25EB-2EF4-4166-B9BD-9B0165463DFC@lindorm.com> <4ECA7F6E.3030200@fuzzo.com> <79BB757B-42F6-4FB1-AACE-101414D8A2F6@lindorm.com> Message-ID: <4ECAB568.60309@fuzzo.com> It's great to think outside the box, but the odds of getting enough people to do so with respect to the economy are pretty slim. I'd rather focus my limited energies on solutions that have a higher probability of success. Dave On 11/21/2011 2:38 PM, Ulf Erlingsson wrote: > Not necessarily, Dave. By thinking outside the closed box of money > perhaps it is possible, but if you start out by assuming that money as > we know it is the yard stick by which everything shall be measured, of > course it will be impossible. I don't have the solution, I'm just > saying that there is a significant group of people out there who are > making this argument. You can easily find them. Just look as an Occupy > site. > > Ulf > > On 2011-11-21, at 11:42, David M. Lawrence wrote: > >> We might as well give up on saving anything if we accept your argument, >> Ulf. If we cannot put a monetary value on ecosystems and their >> services, we will never have a rational economic system, for I doubt any >> devotee of Ayn Rand in power today will consider anything worthwhile >> that doesn't have a price tag on it. >> >> Sure, attempts to put a value on natural resources and ecosystem >> services today are imperfect, but so is measuring forest composition >> with a tenth-hectare plot or coral diversity in one square meter plots. >> Those imperfections don't stop any of us from doing our work, though. >> >> Dave >> >> On 11/21/2011 8:53 AM, Ulf Erlingsson wrote: >>> Billy, >>> >>> I think you hit the head on the nail with the reefs being >>> "priceless". Some would take that to be an astronomical sum, other >>> to be zero. In reality, it is neither, it is [ ]. Empty. No amount. >>> And that is why we need another method of evaluating natural >>> resources, one that does NOT put a monetary value on it but, for >>> instance, a measure of sustainability (such as this >>> http://atlantisinireland.com/sustainability.php that I unfortunately >>> never seem to get the time to publish "properly"). >>> >>> Ulf >>> >>> On 2011-11-20, at 14:38, Billy Causey wrote: >>> >>>> David, >>>> You have provided some excellent advice that we all should consider >>>> and practice in our postings. >>>> >>>> We (coral reef managers) are in serious need of socioeconomic data >>>> such as that cited in this study. I have confidence in the PIs and >>>> their methodology and am not surprised by the results. >>>> >>>> $33 Billion is considerably less than what I put on the value of >>>> Hawaii's coral reefs, which is priceless. >>>> >>>> Cheers, Billy >>>> >>>> Billy D. Causey, Ph.D. >>>> Southeast Regional Director >>>> NOAA's Office of National Marine >>>> Sanctuaries >>>> 33 East Quay Road >>>> Key West, Florida 33040 >>>> Office: 305 809 4670 ex 234 >>>> Cell: 305 395 0150 >>>> Fax: 305 293 5011 >>>> Email: billy.causey at noaa.gov >>>> >>>> Please excuse brevity for messages sent from this BlackBerry. >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: David M. Lawrence [mailto:dave at fuzzo.com] >>>> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 05:36 PM >>>> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>>> > >>>> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value >>>> >>>> Gene, >>>> >>>> As someone who once designed, administered, analyzed, and wrote up a >>>> survey of a major scientific society, I wish you'd keep your uninformed >>>> assessments of the "self-serving" nature of surveys to yourself -- >>>> unless you have thoroughly reviewed the methods, text of the survey >>>> instrument, analytical procedures, etc. I've spent most of my life >>>> working in the natural sciences, but I would never be so thoroughly and >>>> uninformedly dismissive of procedures used by other disciplines. >>>> >>>> Dave >>>> >>>> On 11/18/2011 11:24 AM, Eugene Shinn wrote: >>>>> Robert, Thank you for exposing the devious nature of the, "Total >>>>> Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef >>>>> Ecosystems" survey that came up with an outrageous $33.5B per year >>>>> value of Hawaiian coral reefs. You did a great job of showing the >>>>> problems, flaws, and exaggerations. In my long career I have seldom >>>>> seen a questionnaire type survey that was not self-serving. I like to >>>>> call them, "when did you stop beating your wife" surveys that imply >>>>> you have been beating your wife (or dog). Agencies that do these >>>>> surveys decide what they want to do then ask questions about various >>>>> options and ways to accomplish the thing they want. They never ask >>>>> the basic question, Is the thing or action they want necessary in >>>>> the first place? They are usually all about expanding the agency and >>>>> squeezing more funding (our money) out of Congress. >>>>> I suppose they know how poorly educated the vast majority really >>>>> is (especially in science) and realize they can pull the wool over >>>>> their eyes. You clearly exposed this attitude in your posting. These >>>>> days agencies often have covert help from tax exempt Non Government >>>>> Foundations (NGOs) that are very good at getting press coverage, >>>>> influencing congress, and squeezing tax exempt donations from those >>>>> having expendable money or in need of the tax breaks they provide. >>>>> Gene PS: I could not help noticing posting number 3 that starts with: >>>>> "Seeking a Natural Resource Social Scientist to support the National >>>>> Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring >>>>> and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. (note key words, "Social >>>>> Scientist") >>>> -- >>>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>>> David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 >>>> 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 >>>> Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com >>>> >>>> USA | http: http://fuzzo.com >>>> ------------------------------------------------------ >>>> >>>> "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo >>>> >>>> "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo >>>> >>>> "No trespassing >>>> 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Coral-List mailing list >>>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>>> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Coral-List mailing list >>>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>>> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Coral-List mailing list >>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> >> -- >> ------------------------------------------------------ >> David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 >> 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 >> Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com >> USA | http: http://fuzzo.com >> ------------------------------------------------------ >> >> "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo >> >> "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo >> >> "No trespassing >> 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> > -- ------------------------------------------------------ David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com ------------------------------------------------------ "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo "No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan From chris.jeffrey at noaa.gov Mon Nov 21 16:41:06 2011 From: chris.jeffrey at noaa.gov (Chris Jeffrey) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 16:41:06 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Fwd: Position Available In-Reply-To: <4EC68176.1040906@noaa.gov> References: <4EC68176.1040906@noaa.gov> Message-ID: <4ECAC572.1040809@noaa.gov> *Job Title:* Marine Spatial Analyst *Job Location*: Stennis Space Center, Mississippi, USA *Job Type*: Full time Contract Position *Company*: CSS-Dynamac** (http://www.consolidatedsafety.com/) *Start Date*: Jan 2, 2012 or until filled *Where To Apply*: https://jobs-consolidatedsafety.icims.com/jobs/1354/job *Salary: $ *Negotiable (commensurate with experience) *Responsibilities:* A person with academic training in marine biology, ecology, fisheries, and spatial or landscape ecology is being sought for a full-time contract position with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. The Branch conducts ecological studies that map, characterize, assess, and model the spatial distributions and movements of estuarine and marine organisms across habitats throughout the United States and Island Territories. The successful candidate will have the following core responsibilities. Provide statistical and analytical support to projects that map marine ecosystems and the distributions of biota in the Gulf of Mexico. Initial efforts will focus on mapping fish and their associated habitats. Specific duties include: * Produce detailed statistical summaries of collected data (e.g. estimates of means and variance by seasons, year, other categories, quantiles summaries, etc.); * Evaluate and analyze field data to create maps of benthic habitats and species distributions; * Develop cartographic products and associated metadata; * Assist with writing technical reports and journal articles; and, * Travel to agencies (federal, state, academic) that may provide data or expertise to vet analytical approaches or products. Provide statistical and analytical support for other Biogeography Branch projects including work with deep-water corals, coastal pollution, and marine birds and mammals. *Essential Qualifications: * * Master of Science degree in a Biology, Ecology, Zoology, or a related field; * Excellent written and oral communication skills; * Graduate training in statistics and demonstrated experience in multivariate statistics; * Relevant experience or academic training in Geographic Information Systems, especially ArcGIS; * Knowledge of marine biology and spatial ecology. *Preferred Qualifications:* * Experience with ArcGIS editing and the use of ArcGIS extensions, such as Spatial Analyst, 3D Analyst and Geostatistical Analyst; * Experience with GIS modeling techniques; * Experience with statistical software e.g., SAS, Primer and/or JMP; * Knowledge of coastal and marine ecosystems in the Gulf of Mexico. *Where to Apply*: https://jobs-consolidatedsafety.icims.com/jobs/1354/job -- ******************************************* Christopher F.G. Jeffrey, Ph.D Project Manager, Scientific Programs CSS-Dynamac (www.css-dynamac.com) Scientific Minds. Common Sense Solutions ++++ Marine Spatial Ecologist NOAA National Ocean Service NCCOS | CCMA | Biogeography Branch 1305 East-West Hwy, SSMC-4, #9213, N/SCI-1 Silver Spring, MD 20910-3281 301.713.3028 x-134 (Tel) 301.713.4384 (Fax) http://ccma.nos.noaa.gov/about/biogeography/ ******************************************* From justinenjo at yahoo.com Mon Nov 21 21:10:29 2011 From: justinenjo at yahoo.com (Justin Enjo) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 18:10:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value In-Reply-To: <4ECA7F6E.3030200@fuzzo.com> References: <888D35080D24854AB67E0FE7147601F30A49D194B9@Vmail51.noaa.nems> <5C9A25EB-2EF4-4166-B9BD-9B0165463DFC@lindorm.com> <4ECA7F6E.3030200@fuzzo.com> Message-ID: <1321927829.7349.YahooMailNeo@web121604.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Dave, ? I?might have to lean towards Ulf's logic on this one.? Assigning an economic value to ecosystems may be a bad idea.?Ecosystems arn't liquid nor is there any competitive advantage or?opportunity.? And concerning any rate of return, all of the world's ecosystems are depreciating, so where's the incentive to invest in something that is losing value? Plus, $33 Billion Dollars?? Who knows what that means anyways....? www.chrisjordan.com ? My worst guess at a solution?? No more evaluation.? No more measuring.? Ecosenitive design and habitat engineering must be the norm, now. ? -Justin ________________________________ Justin Enjo (561) 371-2022 (cell) justin.enjo (skype) ________________________________ From: David M. Lawrence To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: Monday, November 21, 2011 10:42 AM Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value We might as well give up on saving anything if we accept your argument, Ulf.? If we cannot put a monetary value on ecosystems and their services, we will never have a rational economic system, for I doubt any devotee of Ayn Rand in power today will consider anything worthwhile that doesn't have a price tag on it. Sure, attempts to put a value on natural resources and ecosystem services today are imperfect, but so is measuring forest composition with a tenth-hectare plot or coral diversity in one square meter plots.? Those imperfections don't stop any of us from doing our work, though. Dave On 11/21/2011 8:53 AM, Ulf Erlingsson wrote: > Billy, > > I think you hit the head on the nail with the reefs being "priceless". Some would take that to be an astronomical sum, other to be zero. In reality, it is neither, it is [ ]. Empty. No amount. And that is why we need another method of evaluating natural resources, one that does NOT put a monetary value on it but, for instance, a measure of sustainability (such as this http://atlantisinireland.com/sustainability.php that I unfortunately never seem to get the time to publish "properly"). > > Ulf > > On 2011-11-20, at 14:38, Billy Causey wrote: > >> David, >> You have provided some excellent advice that we all should consider and practice in our postings. >> >> We (coral reef managers) are in serious need of socioeconomic data such as that cited in this study.? I have confidence in the PIs and their methodology and am not surprised by the results. >> >> $33 Billion is considerably less than what I put on the value of Hawaii's coral reefs, which is priceless. >> >> Cheers, Billy >> >> Billy D. Causey, Ph.D. >> Southeast Regional Director >> NOAA's? Office of National Marine >> Sanctuaries >> 33 East Quay Road >> Key West, Florida 33040 >> Office: 305 809 4670 ex 234 >> Cell:? 305 395 0150 >> Fax:? 305 293 5011 >> Email: billy.causey at noaa.gov >> >> Please excuse brevity for messages sent from this BlackBerry. >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: David M. Lawrence [mailto:dave at fuzzo.com] >> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 05:36 PM >> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value >> >> Gene, >> >> As someone who once designed, administered, analyzed, and wrote up a >> survey of a major scientific society, I wish you'd keep your uninformed >> assessments of the "self-serving" nature of surveys to yourself -- >> unless you have thoroughly reviewed the methods, text of the survey >> instrument, analytical procedures, etc.? I've spent most of my life >> working in the natural sciences, but I would never be so thoroughly and >> uninformedly dismissive of procedures used by other disciplines. >> >> Dave >> >> On 11/18/2011 11:24 AM, Eugene Shinn wrote: >>> Robert, Thank you for exposing the devious nature of the,? "Total >>> Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef >>> Ecosystems" survey that came up with an outrageous $33.5B per year >>> value of Hawaiian coral reefs. You did a great job of showing the >>> problems, flaws, and exaggerations. In my long career I have seldom >>> seen a questionnaire type survey that was not self-serving. I like to >>> call them, "when did you stop beating your wife" surveys that imply >>> you have been beating your wife (or dog). Agencies that do these >>> surveys decide what they want to do then ask questions about various >>> options and ways to accomplish the thing they want. They never ask >>> the basic question,? Is the thing or action they want necessary in >>> the first place? They are usually all about expanding the agency and >>> squeezing more funding (our money) out of Congress. >>>? ? ? I suppose they know how poorly educated the vast majority really >>> is (especially in science) and realize they can pull the wool over >>> their eyes. You clearly exposed this attitude in your posting. These >>> days agencies often have covert help from tax exempt Non Government >>> Foundations (NGOs) that are very good at getting press coverage, >>> influencing congress, and squeezing tax exempt donations from those >>> having expendable money or in need of the tax breaks they provide. >>> Gene PS: I could not help noticing posting number 3 that starts with: >>> "Seeking a Natural Resource Social Scientist to support the National >>> Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring >>> and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. (note key words, "Social >>> Scientist") >> -- >> ------------------------------------------------------ >>? David M. Lawrence? ? ? ? | Home:? (804) 559-9786 >>? 7471 Brook Way Court? ? | Fax:? (804) 559-9787 >>? Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com >>? USA? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | http:? http://fuzzo.com >> ------------------------------------------------------ >> >> "All drains lead to the ocean."? -- Gill, Finding Nemo >> >> "We have met the enemy and he is us."? -- Pogo >> >> "No trespassing >>? 4/17 of a haiku"? --? Richard Brautigan >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml..noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list >> > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list -- ------------------------------------------------------ ? David M. Lawrence? ? ? ? | Home:? (804) 559-9786 ? 7471 Brook Way Court? ? | Fax:? (804) 559-9787 ? Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com ? USA? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? | http:? http://fuzzo.com ------------------------------------------------------ "All drains lead to the ocean."? -- Gill, Finding Nemo "We have met the enemy and he is us."? -- Pogo "No trespassing ? 4/17 of a haiku"? --? Richard Brautigan _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From dave at fuzzo.com Mon Nov 21 21:25:34 2011 From: dave at fuzzo.com (David M. Lawrence) Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 21:25:34 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value In-Reply-To: <1321927829.7349.YahooMailNeo@web121604.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <888D35080D24854AB67E0FE7147601F30A49D194B9@Vmail51.noaa.nems> <5C9A25EB-2EF4-4166-B9BD-9B0165463DFC@lindorm.com> <4ECA7F6E.3030200@fuzzo.com> <1321927829.7349.YahooMailNeo@web121604.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4ECB081E.5090500@fuzzo.com> Why is it a bad idea? I'm sure our survival is worth something in the overall scheme of things. Our economic system values intangibles all the time -- why not try to put our ecosystems on something of an equal footing as corporate executive compensation. Are you guys really that afraid that corporate scum raping our economy are worth more to it than coral reefs and other ecosystems? How much oxygen and buffering capacity does a overpaid CEO provide? The vast majority of the public does not give a tinker's damn about the intangible value of ecosystems. If for no other reason, we need to assign a rhetorical dollar value to the services our ecosystems provide -- jeez, flood control in the Mississippi Valley shouldn't be that hard of a sell, for example. When business interests tell us we cannot afford to protect the environment, we should be providing the data to show we cannot afford not to. But if the scientific community is too cowardly to compete in the true "marketplace" of ideas, the cause is lost. Dave On 11/21/2011 9:10 PM, Justin Enjo wrote: > Dave, > I might have to lean towards Ulf's logic on this one. Assigning an > economic value to ecosystems may be a bad idea. Ecosystems arn't > liquid nor is there any competitive advantage or opportunity. And > concerning any rate of return, all of the world's ecosystems are > depreciating, so where's the incentive to invest in something that is > losing value? Plus, $33 Billion Dollars? Who knows what that means > anyways.... www.chrisjordan.com > My worst guess at a solution? No more evaluation. No more > measuring. Ecosenitive design and habitat engineering must be the > norm, now. > -Justin > /Justin Enjo > (561) 371-2022 (cell) > justin.enjo (skype)/ > > *From:* David M. Lawrence > *To:* coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > *Sent:* Monday, November 21, 2011 10:42 AM > *Subject:* Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value > > We might as well give up on saving anything if we accept your argument, > Ulf. If we cannot put a monetary value on ecosystems and their > services, we will never have a rational economic system, for I doubt any > devotee of Ayn Rand in power today will consider anything worthwhile > that doesn't have a price tag on it. > > Sure, attempts to put a value on natural resources and ecosystem > services today are imperfect, but so is measuring forest composition > with a tenth-hectare plot or coral diversity in one square meter plots. > Those imperfections don't stop any of us from doing our work, though. > > Dave > > On 11/21/2011 8:53 AM, Ulf Erlingsson wrote: > > Billy, > > > > I think you hit the head on the nail with the reefs being > "priceless". Some would take that to be an astronomical sum, other to > be zero. In reality, it is neither, it is [ ]. Empty. No amount. And > that is why we need another method of evaluating natural resources, > one that does NOT put a monetary value on it but, for instance, a > measure of sustainability (such as this > http://atlantisinireland.com/sustainability.php that I unfortunately > never seem to get the time to publish "properly"). > > > > Ulf > > > > On 2011-11-20, at 14:38, Billy Causey wrote: > > > >> David, > >> You have provided some excellent advice that we all should consider > and practice in our postings. > >> > >> We (coral reef managers) are in serious need of socioeconomic data > such as that cited in this study. I have confidence in the PIs and > their methodology and am not surprised by the results. > >> > >> $33 Billion is considerably less than what I put on the value of > Hawaii's coral reefs, which is priceless. > >> > >> Cheers, Billy > >> > >> Billy D. Causey, Ph.D. > >> Southeast Regional Director > >> NOAA's Office of National Marine > >> Sanctuaries > >> 33 East Quay Road > >> Key West, Florida 33040 > >> Office: 305 809 4670 ex 234 > >> Cell: 305 395 0150 > >> Fax: 305 293 5011 > >> Email: billy.causey at noaa.gov > >> > >> Please excuse brevity for messages sent from this BlackBerry. > >> > >> ----- Original Message ----- > >> From: David M. Lawrence [mailto:dave at fuzzo.com ] > >> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 05:36 PM > >> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > > >> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value > >> > >> Gene, > >> > >> As someone who once designed, administered, analyzed, and wrote up a > >> survey of a major scientific society, I wish you'd keep your uninformed > >> assessments of the "self-serving" nature of surveys to yourself -- > >> unless you have thoroughly reviewed the methods, text of the survey > >> instrument, analytical procedures, etc. I've spent most of my life > >> working in the natural sciences, but I would never be so thoroughly and > >> uninformedly dismissive of procedures used by other disciplines. > >> > >> Dave > >> > >> On 11/18/2011 11:24 AM, Eugene Shinn wrote: > >>> Robert, Thank you for exposing the devious nature of the, "Total > >>> Economic Value for Protecting and Restoring Hawaiian Coral Reef > >>> Ecosystems" survey that came up with an outrageous $33.5B per year > >>> value of Hawaiian coral reefs. You did a great job of showing the > >>> problems, flaws, and exaggerations. In my long career I have seldom > >>> seen a questionnaire type survey that was not self-serving. I like to > >>> call them, "when did you stop beating your wife" surveys that imply > >>> you have been beating your wife (or dog). Agencies that do these > >>> surveys decide what they want to do then ask questions about various > >>> options and ways to accomplish the thing they want. They never ask > >>> the basic question, Is the thing or action they want necessary in > >>> the first place? They are usually all about expanding the agency and > >>> squeezing more funding (our money) out of Congress. > >>> I suppose they know how poorly educated the vast majority really > >>> is (especially in science) and realize they can pull the wool over > >>> their eyes. You clearly exposed this attitude in your posting. These > >>> days agencies often have covert help from tax exempt Non Government > >>> Foundations (NGOs) that are very good at getting press coverage, > >>> influencing congress, and squeezing tax exempt donations from those > >>> having expendable money or in need of the tax breaks they provide. > >>> Gene PS: I could not help noticing posting number 3 that starts with: > >>> "Seeking a Natural Resource Social Scientist to support the National > >>> Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Center for Coastal Monitoring > >>> and Assessment (CCMA), Biogeography Branch. (note key words, "Social > >>> Scientist") > >> -- > >> ------------------------------------------------------ > >> David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 > >> 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 > >> Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com > > >> USA | http: http://fuzzo.com > >> ------------------------------------------------------ > >> > >> "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo > >> > >> "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo > >> > >> "No trespassing > >> 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Coral-List mailing list > >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Coral-List mailing list > >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Coral-List mailing list > > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------ > David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 > 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 > Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com > USA | http: http://fuzzo.com > ------------------------------------------------------ > > "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo > > "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo > > "No trespassing > 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > -- ------------------------------------------------------ David M. Lawrence | Home: (804) 559-9786 7471 Brook Way Court | Fax: (804) 559-9787 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: dave at fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com ------------------------------------------------------ "All drains lead to the ocean." -- Gill, Finding Nemo "We have met the enemy and he is us." -- Pogo "No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku" -- Richard Brautigan From juergen.herler at univie.ac.at Tue Nov 22 04:54:37 2011 From: juergen.herler at univie.ac.at (Juergen Herler) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 10:54:37 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just get along? Message-ID: <960eeaf8a268c15ae3f468466ecc2369.squirrel@webmail.univie.ac.at> Dear listers, dear Peter! I doubt that we can get around talking about values in general if we want to establish a useful valuation system. And why considering the monetary value system as the most appropriate one? Having only 2 to 3% of the cash sum being covered by real values, I would consider this unsustainable system - in which values are just ?printed on demand? - as inappropriate for establishing a sustainable valuation for ecosystems. However it may be a good start, before it is too late for everything, but it must not be the final aim. I think Ulf Erlingsson?s suggestion is a much better approach. And why consider a valuation useful, when it asks for how much money people would spend on something when people know they actually don?t have to give it away but still can buy the next-generation flat-screen with it? Would be more interesting to look at the result when people have to exchange their values, which seems not only feasible but even necessary in the future, let?s say live without a car, eat much less meat and certain sea food and try to make a living at 30% of the current energy consumption level but retain primary forests, coral reefs, etc. and have their services available for longer than a few more decades. I wonder whether somebody would dare to make such a survey and take the risk of ending up in deep frustration. The best thing that may turn out is that people just do not know about their dependence on ecosystem services, the worst thing would be that they know about it, but do not value it. But maybe I am just one of these fools who still have a too romantic view of nature (and still have troubles to become familiar with the idea of diving above and doing research in algal mats instead of coral reefs). However, it is for sure less damaging than a too economic view of it. But it is definitely correct that we, since we are all in the same boat, should spend less energy for endless discussions and for blaiming people for putting ?useless? actions. We need this energy not only for uniting disciplines and developing a reasonable philosophy and methodology for valuation (which is maybe out there, but not yet applied) but especially for changing our behavior to match it with our knowlegde. So the ?better-educated? people will be challenged most and are supposed to be the first, and others will (probably) follow!? Best wishes Juergen > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Peter Edwards [mailto:horlicks_1989 at yahoo.com] > Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 03:43 PM > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just > get along? :-) > > > > Hello Coral-Listers, > > I will try not to be-labor the point, and I am pretty sure that the > "pure" coral reef biologists, oceanographers, et al will soon chime in > to let us know this topic is not "science-y" enough.? And that all this > nonsense about people's preferences, values etc has little or nothing to > do with coral reefs (chuckle). > > But to I'd like to refer to Gene's last email and others of a similar > "strain".... > > > There will always be debate among and within disciplines.? This should be > encouraged as different points of view help to move science and human > knowledge forward.? However I believe that we will continue to witness > the decline of precious and "invaluable" resources such as coral reefs, > mangrove forests, sea > grass beds etc if we continue to remain entrenched in our camps.? > Dismissive comments and generalizations about a discipline that people > may have little understanding about is not helpful.? If we (natural and > social) scientists learned to "speak" to each other perhaps we would be > more successful at finding solutions to conservation.? Again I am > speaking as an individual who has come from a foundation of biology, > coral reef ecology who recognized the need for integrating social > sciences including neo-classical micro economic theory as part of my > tool-kit.? This has helped me better understand issues of efficient > allocation of resources and open my eyes to possible solutions for > reducing pollution and environmental degradation.? > > > I get the strong sense from some of the comments that there is the > suspicion that by conducting these types of studies the results will be > "hijacked" by business interests who want to privatize, sell off, steal > these resources. Well I am sorry to say...."News > Flash...this just in"...it is already happening.? What this discipline > and these approaches try to do is find solutions to ensure that these > resources get the respect they deserve and are not completely > obliterated from the planet. Message:? WE ARE ON THE SAME TEAM!!! > > > I urge some of you with deeply ingrained philosophical biases to try to > be a little more open minded and read a little wider.? Instead of just > cherry picking articles against this discipline, look for some balanced > articles.? There are indeed pros and cons to these approaches.? I would > hate to think that scientists such as ourselves are just as entrenched > as the political and religious extremists you know that anti-anything-we > don't understand- > folks that seem to dominate the news and political discourse these days. > > Nuff Said > > Peter Edwards > > The views and comments expressed here do not reflect the official position > of any organization I may be employed to or affiliated with > > > er From allison.billiam at gmail.com Tue Nov 22 09:41:59 2011 From: allison.billiam at gmail.com (Bill Allison) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 09:41:59 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - the fundamental problem? Message-ID: Why purchase flat screen TVs instead of investing in ecosystem conservation? Although one valuation metric may lend itself better to a conservation ethic than does another the valuation metric does not seem to be the main problem. Irregardless of the metric used, the fundamental problem seems to be that on the one hand, any action to conserve resources has a discrete cost to individual entities (people, institutions, nations etc), while on the other hand, the benefits of such action are diffused across the population. The benefits to individuals are small compared to the cost to the individual even though the potential benefits to the population may be enormous. ?Potential? and ?may be? because those benefits will be realized only to the extent that everybody participates. In an unregulated system (e.g., an open access fishery) or one with regulations serving primarily vested or political interests or both, the potential benefits are heavily discounted because the likelihood of a high participation rate is deemed low. Such a ill-managed system can and has collapsed (e.g., the Canadian East Coast Cod fishery). If this argument is accepted, and if it is also accepted that it is the responsibility of government to conserve and improve the common good, then the problem is a gross and systemic governance failure (seen much of that recently?) Note: This is of course just one of several useful ways of framing the dynamic underlying the ?Tragedy of the Commons? brought to our attention in 1968 by Garrett Hardin (Science.1968.162.3859.1243), although he was not the first to discuss it. On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 4:54 AM, Juergen Herler wrote: > Dear listers, dear Peter! > > I doubt that we can get around talking about values in general if we want > to establish a useful valuation system. And why considering the monetary > value system as the most appropriate one? Having only 2 to 3% of the cash > sum being covered by real values, I would consider this unsustainable > system - in which values are just ?printed on demand? - as inappropriate > for establishing a sustainable valuation for ecosystems. However it may be > a good start, before it is too late for everything, but it must not be the > final aim. I think Ulf Erlingsson?s suggestion is a much better approach. > And why consider a valuation useful, when it asks for how much money > people would spend on something when people know they actually don?t have > to give it away but still can buy the next-generation flat-screen with it? > Would be more interesting to look at the result when people have to > exchange their values, which seems not only feasible but even necessary in > the future, let?s say live without a car, eat much less meat and certain > sea food and try to make a living at 30% of the current energy consumption > level but retain primary forests, coral reefs, etc. and have their > services available for longer than a few more decades. I wonder whether > somebody would dare to make such a survey and take the risk of ending up > in deep frustration. The best thing that may turn out is that people just > do not know about their dependence on ecosystem services, the worst thing > would be that they know about it, but do not value it. > But maybe I am just one of these fools who still have a too romantic view > of nature (and still have troubles to become familiar with the idea of > diving above and doing research in algal mats instead of coral reefs). > However, it is for sure less damaging than a too economic view of it. But > it is definitely correct that we, since we are all in the same boat, > should spend less energy for endless discussions and for blaiming people > for putting ?useless? actions. We need this energy not only for uniting > disciplines and developing a reasonable philosophy and methodology for > valuation (which is maybe out there, but not yet applied) but especially > for changing our behavior to match it with our knowlegde. So the > ?better-educated? people will be challenged most and are supposed to be > the first, and others will (probably) follow!? > > Best wishes > Juergen > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Peter Edwards [mailto:horlicks_1989 at yahoo.com] > > Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 03:43 PM > > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > > Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just > > get along? :-) > > > > > > > > Hello Coral-Listers, > > > > I will try not to be-labor the point, and I am pretty sure that the > > "pure" coral reef biologists, oceanographers, et al will soon chime in > > to let us know this topic is not "science-y" enough.? And that all this > > nonsense about people's preferences, values etc has little or nothing to > > do with coral reefs (chuckle). > > > > But to I'd like to refer to Gene's last email and others of a similar > > "strain".... > > > > > > There will always be debate among and within disciplines.? This should be > > encouraged as different points of view help to move science and human > > knowledge forward.? However I believe that we will continue to witness > > the decline of precious and "invaluable" resources such as coral reefs, > > mangrove forests, sea > > grass beds etc if we continue to remain entrenched in our camps.? > > Dismissive comments and generalizations about a discipline that people > > may have little understanding about is not helpful.? If we (natural and > > social) scientists learned to "speak" to each other perhaps we would be > > more successful at finding solutions to conservation.? Again I am > > speaking as an individual who has come from a foundation of biology, > > coral reef ecology who recognized the need for integrating social > > sciences including neo-classical micro economic theory as part of my > > tool-kit.? This has helped me better understand issues of efficient > > allocation of resources and open my eyes to possible solutions for > > reducing pollution and environmental degradation.? > > > > > > I get the strong sense from some of the comments that there is the > > suspicion that by conducting these types of studies the results will be > > "hijacked" by business interests who want to privatize, sell off, steal > > these resources. Well I am sorry to say...."News > > Flash...this just in"...it is already happening.? What this discipline > > and these approaches try to do is find solutions to ensure that these > > resources get the respect they deserve and are not completely > > obliterated from the planet. Message:? WE ARE ON THE SAME TEAM!!! > > > > > > I urge some of you with deeply ingrained philosophical biases to try to > > be a little more open minded and read a little wider.? Instead of just > > cherry picking articles against this discipline, look for some balanced > > articles.? There are indeed pros and cons to these approaches.? I would > > hate to think that scientists such as ourselves are just as entrenched > > as the political and religious extremists you know that anti-anything-we > > don't understand- > > folks that seem to dominate the news and political discourse these days.. > > > > Nuff Said > > > > Peter Edwards > > > > The views and comments expressed here do not reflect the official > position > > of any organization I may be employed to or affiliated with > > > > > > > er > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list -- ________________________________ Is this how science illuminates "reality"? - "the meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside, enveloping the talk which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze." - narrator's comment about Marlow's tale-telling, in Heart of Darkness (Conrad) From ceo at lindorm.com Tue Nov 22 13:50:59 2011 From: ceo at lindorm.com (Ulf Erlingsson) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 13:50:59 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - the fundamental problem? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: The tragic of the commons is a difficult nut to crack. I've been playing with the idea of using the sustainability index as a scale, and TAX businesses (and perhaps individuals) in proportion to their un-sustainability rather than taxing work as today. Although I haven't come further than to think that maybe it could be done... Ulf Erlingsson On 2011-11-22, at 09:41, Bill Allison wrote: > Why purchase flat screen TVs instead of investing in ecosystem conservation? > > > Although one valuation metric may lend itself better to a conservation > ethic than does another the valuation metric does not seem to be the main > problem. Irregardless of the metric used, the fundamental problem seems to > be that on the one hand, any action to conserve resources has a discrete > cost to individual entities (people, institutions, nations etc), while on > the other hand, the benefits of such action are diffused across the > population. The benefits to individuals are small compared to the cost to > the individual even though the potential benefits to the population may be > enormous. ?Potential? and ?may be? because those benefits will be realized > only to the extent that everybody participates. In an unregulated system > (e.g., an open access fishery) or one with regulations serving primarily > vested or political interests or both, the potential benefits are heavily > discounted because the likelihood of a high participation rate is deemed > low. Such a ill-managed system can and has collapsed (e.g., the Canadian > East Coast Cod fishery). If this argument is accepted, and if it is also > accepted that it is the responsibility of government to conserve and > improve the common good, then the problem is a gross and systemic > governance failure (seen much of that recently?) > > > > Note: This is of course just one of several useful ways of framing the > dynamic underlying the ?Tragedy of the Commons? brought to our attention in > 1968 by Garrett Hardin (Science.1968.162.3859.1243), although he was not > the first to discuss it. > > > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 4:54 AM, Juergen Herler > wrote: > >> Dear listers, dear Peter! >> >> I doubt that we can get around talking about values in general if we want >> to establish a useful valuation system. And why considering the monetary >> value system as the most appropriate one? Having only 2 to 3% of the cash >> sum being covered by real values, I would consider this unsustainable >> system - in which values are just ?printed on demand? - as inappropriate >> for establishing a sustainable valuation for ecosystems. However it may be >> a good start, before it is too late for everything, but it must not be the >> final aim. I think Ulf Erlingsson?s suggestion is a much better approach. >> And why consider a valuation useful, when it asks for how much money >> people would spend on something when people know they actually don?t have >> to give it away but still can buy the next-generation flat-screen with it? >> Would be more interesting to look at the result when people have to >> exchange their values, which seems not only feasible but even necessary in >> the future, let?s say live without a car, eat much less meat and certain >> sea food and try to make a living at 30% of the current energy consumption >> level but retain primary forests, coral reefs, etc. and have their >> services available for longer than a few more decades. I wonder whether >> somebody would dare to make such a survey and take the risk of ending up >> in deep frustration. The best thing that may turn out is that people just >> do not know about their dependence on ecosystem services, the worst thing >> would be that they know about it, but do not value it. >> But maybe I am just one of these fools who still have a too romantic view >> of nature (and still have troubles to become familiar with the idea of >> diving above and doing research in algal mats instead of coral reefs). >> However, it is for sure less damaging than a too economic view of it. But >> it is definitely correct that we, since we are all in the same boat, >> should spend less energy for endless discussions and for blaiming people >> for putting ?useless? actions. We need this energy not only for uniting >> disciplines and developing a reasonable philosophy and methodology for >> valuation (which is maybe out there, but not yet applied) but especially >> for changing our behavior to match it with our knowlegde. So the >> ?better-educated? people will be challenged most and are supposed to be >> the first, and others will (probably) follow!? >> >> Best wishes >> Juergen >> >> >> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Peter Edwards [mailto:horlicks_1989 at yahoo.com] >>> Sent: Friday, November 18, 2011 03:43 PM >>> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >>> Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just >>> get along? :-) >>> >>> >>> >>> Hello Coral-Listers, >>> >>> I will try not to be-labor the point, and I am pretty sure that the >>> "pure" coral reef biologists, oceanographers, et al will soon chime in >>> to let us know this topic is not "science-y" enough.? And that all this >>> nonsense about people's preferences, values etc has little or nothing to >>> do with coral reefs (chuckle). >>> >>> But to I'd like to refer to Gene's last email and others of a similar >>> "strain".... >>> >>> >>> There will always be debate among and within disciplines.? This should be >>> encouraged as different points of view help to move science and human >>> knowledge forward.? However I believe that we will continue to witness >>> the decline of precious and "invaluable" resources such as coral reefs, >>> mangrove forests, sea >>> grass beds etc if we continue to remain entrenched in our camps.? >>> Dismissive comments and generalizations about a discipline that people >>> may have little understanding about is not helpful.? If we (natural and >>> social) scientists learned to "speak" to each other perhaps we would be >>> more successful at finding solutions to conservation.? Again I am >>> speaking as an individual who has come from a foundation of biology, >>> coral reef ecology who recognized the need for integrating social >>> sciences including neo-classical micro economic theory as part of my >>> tool-kit.? This has helped me better understand issues of efficient >>> allocation of resources and open my eyes to possible solutions for >>> reducing pollution and environmental degradation.? >>> >>> >>> I get the strong sense from some of the comments that there is the >>> suspicion that by conducting these types of studies the results will be >>> "hijacked" by business interests who want to privatize, sell off, steal >>> these resources. Well I am sorry to say...."News >>> Flash...this just in"...it is already happening.? What this discipline >>> and these approaches try to do is find solutions to ensure that these >>> resources get the respect they deserve and are not completely >>> obliterated from the planet. Message:? WE ARE ON THE SAME TEAM!!! >>> >>> >>> I urge some of you with deeply ingrained philosophical biases to try to >>> be a little more open minded and read a little wider.? Instead of just >>> cherry picking articles against this discipline, look for some balanced >>> articles.? There are indeed pros and cons to these approaches.? I would >>> hate to think that scientists such as ourselves are just as entrenched >>> as the political and religious extremists you know that anti-anything-we >>> don't understand- >>> folks that seem to dominate the news and political discourse these days.. >>> >>> Nuff Said >>> >>> Peter Edwards >>> >>> The views and comments expressed here do not reflect the official >> position >>> of any organization I may be employed to or affiliated with >>> >>> >>> >> er >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Coral-List mailing list >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > > > -- > ________________________________ > Is this how science illuminates "reality"? - "the meaning of an episode was > not inside like a kernel but outside, enveloping the talk which brought it > out only as a glow brings out a haze." > - narrator's comment about Marlow's tale-telling, in Heart of Darkness > (Conrad) > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From eshinn at marine.usf.edu Tue Nov 22 15:43:32 2011 From: eshinn at marine.usf.edu (Eugene Shinn) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 15:43:32 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] . Re: $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value Message-ID: Dear Listers, I did not expect everyone to agree with my last posting on the value of the Hawaii coral reef. Yes it is priceless, what ever that means. Don't we all receive a lot of on-line jokes that claim to be "priceless."? I am reminded that when I worked for USGS and wrote proposals for funds to do coral reef studies I always had to justify the work by providing a value of the reef I wanted to study. The value was an inflated amount based on the amount of money tourist spent in the Florida Keys each year. Those numbers were usually provided by the Key West Chamber of Commerce or the Marine Sanctuary and were likely inflated to attract more tourist revenue. It always seemed to me that what diving tourists appeared to appreciate most was the clear warm water that beat the heck out of diving back home. Because of "shifting baselines" few tourist had ever seen the reefs in their pre 1980s pristine glory to compare it with the present situation. All they seemed to care about was that the diving was a lot better than diving in that cold dark quarry back in Michigan. Because of this I can't help but get a knee-jerk reaction when people put a monetary value on a coral reef or anything in nature. I'm sorry if I offended anyone. It seems that society is so divided on any issue these days that no one agrees on anything. Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida College of Marine Science Room 221A 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- From sealab at earthlink.net Tue Nov 22 16:17:44 2011 From: sealab at earthlink.net (Steve Mussman) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 16:17:44 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reefs Economic Value Message-ID: <177890.1321996664978.JavaMail.root@wamui-junio.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Don?t lose sight of the fact that despite divergent perspectives on the methods of appraising coral reef ecosystems, it is apparent that there is unanimity on the basic principle that it is imperative to (in some way) effectively articulate the illimitable value of this resource and the gravity of current conditions. Consider that perhaps the most compelling and persuasive approach should not be one-dimensional anyway. What?s wrong with using monetary values to affect one segment of societies while utilizing a more esoteric approach with those who prefer dealing with more abstract ideals? Invoke Machiavelli on this one. Just do what you have to do to get the point across. Regards, Steve From johnmcdermond at yahoo.com Tue Nov 22 17:06:03 2011 From: johnmcdermond at yahoo.com (john mcdermond) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 14:06:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Coral sampling Message-ID: <1321999563.46044.YahooMailNeo@web112112.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> I was just wondering if I could get some advice/information on sampling techniques (specifically P. porites and P. divaricata, both in situ and in the lab) to be used for histological purposes.? Also, if anyone could provide links to academic papers concerning the growth and reproductive strategies of these "two" species it would be greatly appreciated (this is all for my thesis that I will hopefully be starting soon). From zforsman at gmail.com Tue Nov 22 20:41:09 2011 From: zforsman at gmail.com (Zac Forsman) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 15:41:09 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] List of species-level DNA studies Message-ID: Dear coral listers, I am working on compiling a list for a review of genus and species-level phylogenetic (DNA sequence data) studies on reef building corals. If any of you are aware of any studies that I have not included on this list, I would really appreciate it if you let me know (I'll make sure you are properly credited and I'll disseminate the final list to coral-list). I know that there are additional studies out there that I am missing, or that are in press. Thanks for your help. All the best, Zac References: Odorico DM, Miller DJ. 1997. Variation in the ribosomal internal transcribed ?spacers ?and ?5.8S ?rDNA ?among ?five species ?of Acropora ?(Cnidaria; ?Scleractinia): ?patterns ?of variation consistent ?with ?reticulate ?evolution. ?Molecular Biology and Evolution 14: 465?473. Hatta, ?M., ?Fukami, ?H., ?Wang, ?W.Q., ?Omori, ?M., ?Shimoike, K.,Hayashibara, T., Ina, Y., and Sugiyama, T. 1999. Reproductive and genetic ?evidence ?for ?a ?reticulate ?evolutionary ?history ?of mass-spawning corals. Mol. Biol. Evol. 16: 1607?1613. van Oppen MJH, Willis BL, van Vugt HWJA, Miller DJ. 2000. ?Examination ?of ?species ?boundaries ?in ?the ?Acropora cervicornis ?group (Scleractinia, ?Cnidaria) ?using ?nuclear DNA sequence analyses. Molecular Ecology 9: 1363?1373. Fukami, H., Omori, M., & Hatta, M. 2000. Phylogenetic relationships in the coral family acroporidae, reassessed by inference from mitochondrial genes. Zoological science 17: 689-96. van Oppen, M. J. H., Mcdonald, B. J., Willis, B., & Miller, D. J. 2001. The Evolutionary History of the Coral Genus Acropora (Scleractinia, Cnidaria) Based on a Mitochondrial and a Nuclear Marker: Reticulation, Incomplete Lineage Sorting, or Morphological Convergence? Molecular biology and evolution 18: 1315-1329. van ?Oppen ?MJH, ?Willis ?BL, ?van ?Rheede ?T, ?Miller ?DJ. 2002. Spawning ?times, ?reproductive ?compatibilities ?and genetic structuring in the Acropora aspera group: evidence for ? natural hybridization ? and ? semi-permeable ? species boundaries in corals. Molecular Ecology 11: 1363?1376. Vollmer, Steven V, and Stephen R Palumbi. 2002. ?Hybridization and the evolution of reef coral diversity.? Science (New York, N.Y.) 296(5575): 2023-5. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12065836. Wolstenholme ?JK, ?Wallace ?CC, ?Chen ?CA. ?2003. ?Species boundaries within ?the ?Acropora ?humilis ?species ?group (Cnidaria; Scleractinia): ?a ?morphological ?and ?molecular interpretation ? ?of ?evolution. ? ?Coral ? ?Reefs ? ?22: ? ?155?166 Richards ? ZT, ? van ? Oppen ? MJH, ? Wallace ? CC, ? Willis BL,Miller ? DJ. ? 2008. ? Some ? Rare ? Indo-Pacific ? Coral SpeciesAre ?Probable ?Hybrids. ?PLoS ONE 3:e3240. Gittenberger, A., Reijnen, B. T., & Hoeksema, B. W. 2011. A molecularly based phylogeny reconstruction of mushroom corals (Scleractinia: Fungiidae) with taxonomic consequences and evolutionary implications for life history traits. Contributions to Zoology 80: 107?132. Huang, D., Meier, R., Todd, P. a, & Chou, L. M. 2009. More evidence for pervasive paraphyly in scleractinian corals: systematic study of Southeast Asian Faviidae (Cnidaria; Scleractinia) based on molecular and morphological data. Molecular phylogenetics and evolution 50: 102-16. Chan, Y. L., Pochon, X., Fisher, M. a, Wagner, D., Concepcion, G. T., Kahng, S. E., Toonen, R. J., & Gates, R. D. 2009. Generalist dinoflagellate endosymbionts and host genotype diversity detected from mesophotic (67-100 m depths) coral Leptoseris. BMC ecology 9: 21. Pillay, KRM ?Asahida, Takashi,Chen, CA. 2006. ITS ribosomal DNA distinctions and the genetic structures of populations of two sympatric species of Pavona (Cnidaria: Scleractinia) from Mauritius. Zoological 45: 132-144. Mangubhai S, Souter P, Grahn M. 2007. Phenotypic variation ?in ?coral Platygyra ?daedalea ?in ?Kenya: ?morphometry and genetics. Marine Ecology Progress Series 345: 105?115. Combosch, DJ; Guzman, HM; Schuhmacher, H; Vollmer, SV (2008) Interspecific Hybridization and Restricted Trans-Pacific Gene Flow in the Tropical Eastern Pacific Pocillopora. Molecular Ecology 17: 1304-1312 Flot, J.-F., Magalon, H., Cruaud, C., Couloux, A., & Tillier, S. 2008. Patterns of genetic structure among Hawaiian corals of the genus Pocillopora yield clusters of individuals that are compatible with morphology. Comptes rendus biologies 331: 239-47. Souter, P. 2010. Hidden genetic diversity in a key model species of coral. Marine Biology 157: 875-885. Pinz?n, J. H., & LaJEUNESSE, T. C. 2010. Species delimitation of common reef corals in the genus Pocillopora using nucleotide sequence phylogenies, population genetics and symbiosis ecology. Molecular Ecology: no-no. Flot, J.-F., Couloux, A., & Tillier, S. 2010. Haplowebs as a graphical tool for delimiting species: a revival of Doyle?s ?field for recombination? approach and its application to the coral genus Pocillopora in Clipperton. BMC Evolutionary Biology 10: 372. Hunter, C.L., Morden, C.W., and Smith, C.M. 1997. The utility of ITS sequences ?in ?assessing ?relationships ?among ?zooxanthellae and corals. ?In ?Proceedings ?of ?the ?8th ?Coral ?Reef ?Symposium, Panam?, 24?29 June 1996. Vol. 2. Edited by H.A. Lessios and I.G. Macintyre. ?Smithsonian ?Tropical ?Research ?Institute, ?Balboa, Panam?. pp. 1599?1602. Forsman ZH, Wellington GM, Hunter CL G.E. Fox. (2006) Is the ITS Region the Solution to the ?Species Problem? in corals? Intragenomic Variation, and Alignment Permutation in Porites, Siderastrea and Outgroup Taxa. 10th Int. Coral Reef Symp.14-23 Forsman, Z. H., Barshis, D. J., Hunter, C. L., & Toonen, R. J. 2009. Shape-shifting corals: molecular markers show morphology is evolutionarily plastic in Porites. BMC evolutionary biology 9: 45. Benzoni, F., Stefani, F., Pichon, M., & Galli, P. 2010. The name game: morpho-molecular species boundaries in the genus Psammocora (Cnidaria, Scleractinia). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society: no-no. Stefani F, Benzoni F, Pichon M, Cancelliere C, Galli P. 2008.A multidisciplinary ?approach ?to ?the ?definition ?of ?species boundaries ? ?in ? branching ? ?species ? ?of ? the ? ?coral ? ?genus Psammocora (Cnidaria, Scleractinia). Zool Scripta 37:71?91. Benzoni F, Stefani F, Stolarski J, Pichon M, Mitta G, Galli P. 2007. Debating phylogenetic relationships of the scleractinian Psammocora: molecular and morphological evidences. Contributions to Zoology 76: 35-54. Benzoni, F., Stefani, F., Pichon, M., & Galli, P. 2010. The name game: morpho-molecular species boundaries in the genus Psammocora (Cnidaria, Scleractinia). Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society: no-no. Benzoni, F., Arrigoni, R., & Stefani, F. 2011. Phylogeny of the coral genus Plesiastrea (Cnidaria, Scleractinia). Contributions to Zoology 80: 231-249. Diekmann, O;R, Bak;W, Stam;J, O. 2001. Molecular genetic evidence for probable reticulate speciation in the coral genus Madracis from a Caribbean fringing reef slope. Marine Biology 139: 221-233. Frade, P. R., Reyes-Nivia, M. C., Faria, J., Kaandorp, J. a, Luttikhuizen, P. C., & Bak, R. P. M. 2010. Semi-permeable species boundaries in the coral genus Madracis: Introgression in a brooding coral system. Molecular phylogenetics and evolution 57: 1072-1090. Medina, M., Weil, E., & Szmant, A. 1999. Examination of the Montastraea annularis Species Complex (Cnidaria: Scleractinia) Using ITS and COI Sequences. Marine biotechnology (New York, N.Y.) 1: 89-97. Fukami, H., Budd, A. F., Levitan, D. R., Jara, J., Kersanach, R., & Knowlton, N. 2004. Geographic differences in species boundaries among members of the Montastraea annularis complex based on molecular and morphological markers. Evolution; international journal of organic evolution 58: 324-37. Fukami, H., & Knowlton, N. 2005. Analysis of complete mitochondrial DNA sequences of three members of the Montastraea annularis coral species complex (Cnidaria, Anthozoa, Scleractinia). Coral Reefs 24: 410-417. van Oppen, M. J. H. , Koolmees, E., & Veron, J. 2004. Patterns of evolution in the scleractinian coral genus Montipora (Acroporidae). Marine Biology 144: 9?18. Forsman, Z. H., Concepcion, G. T., Haverkort, R. D., Shaw, R. W., Maragos, J. E., & Toonen, R. J. 2010. Ecomorph or Endangered Coral? DNA and Microstructure Reveal Hawaiian Species Complexes: Montipora dilatata/flabellata/turgescens & M. patula/verrilli (R. C. Fleischer, Ed.). PLoS ONE 5: e15021. Forsman, Z. H., Guzman, H. M., Chen, C. a, Fox, G. E., & Wellington, G. M. 2005. An ITS region phylogeny of Siderastrea (Cnidaria: Anthozoa): is S. glynni endangered or introduced? Coral Reefs 24: 343-347. Flot JF, Licuanan WY, Nakano Y, Payri C, Cruaud C, Tillier ?S. ?2008. Mitochondrial ?sequences ?of ?Seriatopora corals ?show ?little agreement ?with ?morphology ?and ?reveal the ?duplication ?of ?a ?tRNA ?gene ?near ?the ?control ?region. Coral Reefs 27: 789?794. Stefani, F., Benzoni, F., Yang, S.-Y., Pichon, M., Galli, P., & Chen, C. A. 2011. Comparison of morphological and genetic analyses reveals cryptic divergence and morphological plasticity in Stylophora (Cnidaria, Scleractinia). Coral Reefs: 1-17-17. Flot, J.-F., Blanchot, J., Charpy, L., Cruaud, C., Licuanan, W. Y., Nakano, Y., Payri, C., & Tillier, S. 2011. Incongruence between morphotypes and genetically delimited species in the coral genus Stylophora: phenotypic plasticity, morphological convergence, morphological stasis or interspecific hybridization? BMC ecology 11: 22. -- Zac H. Forsman,? Ph.D. Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology - Papah?naumoku?kea Marine National Monument Postdoctoral Fellow Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology P.O. Box 1346 (regular post) 46-007 Lilipuna Rd. (FedEx or other shipping) Kaneohe, HI 96744 808-236-7428 (ph) 808-236-7443 (fax) From cstorlazzi at usgs.gov Wed Nov 23 13:49:55 2011 From: cstorlazzi at usgs.gov (Curt Storlazzi) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 10:49:55 -0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Coral_List post: new editorial on coral demise in the Florida Keys published in Marine Pollution Bulletin Message-ID: <0336B051-7EE3-4A9D-942B-884BDD621887@usgs.gov> Coral_List colleagues, Please note the editorial in the newest edition of Marine Pollution Bulletin, volume 62, issue 12, pages 2581-2583 (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0025326X11004917) titled, "Are we loving 'em to death?". Whether you agree with author or not, I personally think such long-term historical views are necessary to understand many coral declines. Without such detailed histories of both natural and/or anthropogenic impacts, I find it difficult to put our typically small-scale, short-term field experiments in the context of the often larger and longer trends. Or maybe, as a geologist, I'm just a believer of the quote attributed to Karl Marx, "the past is the key to the present", which is a manipulation of James Hutton's and Charles Lyell's uniformitarian theory from the 1800s. Curt ciao..... _______________________ Curt Storlazzi, Ph.D. U.S. Geological Survey Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center 400 Natural Bridges Drive Santa Cruz, CA 95060 (831) 427-4721 phone (831) 427-4748 fax Staff web page: http://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/staff/cstorlazzi/ From rbourke at OCEANIT.COM Wed Nov 23 15:45:57 2011 From: rbourke at OCEANIT.COM (Robert Bourke) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 20:45:57 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reefs Economic Value In-Reply-To: <177890.1321996664978.JavaMail.root@wamui-junio.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <177890.1321996664978.JavaMail.root@wamui-junio.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <81E2132A21060942816F5784DB0C5CFB9EC82540@exch10.oceanit.local> Steve; I disagree. Just because we all believe that coral reef systems have a high value does not mean that we should support questionable survey techniques that give results that are obviously skewed way outside a reasonable value. If studies such as this one are accepted, then other resource agencies, who manage different valuable resources, will merely hire their own economist to use an equally questionable technique to show that THEIR resource is more valuable and therefore that their agency should receive a larger portion of the funding pie. It is our "job" as scientists to keep it real. Bob Bourke -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Steve Mussman Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 11:18 AM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reefs Economic Value Don?t lose sight of the fact that despite divergent perspectives on the methods of appraising coral reef ecosystems, it is apparent that there is unanimity on the basic principle that it is imperative to (in some way) effectively articulate the illimitable value of this resource and the gravity of current conditions. Consider that perhaps the most compelling and persuasive approach should not be one-dimensional anyway. What?s wrong with using monetary values to affect one segment of societies while utilizing a more esoteric approach with those who prefer dealing with more abstract ideals? Invoke Machiavelli on this one. Just do what you have to do to get the point across. Regards, Steve _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From mbjornson at gmail.com Wed Nov 23 16:11:10 2011 From: mbjornson at gmail.com (Matt Bjornson) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 15:11:10 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] . Re: $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am not involved a scientist like the majority here, though I hold advanced degrees in economics and finance... A couple of thoughts... - valuation is hardly the science that us with advanced degrees make it. IMHO this is a limitation in finance/economics, value is purely subjective! If you are passionate about the reefs, you value the reefs much more than another who doesn't care about reefs... - there are many methods or tools to value specific assets, some simple, other insanely complex. An example of these include the net present value of a perpetuity that is simple and at the other end of the scale is something like real options. Some tools are better suited than others depending on the situation. ( IMHO, with all the potentials for action and the highly "connectedness of reef ecosystems, I'd argue real options is more apropos than the former) Also, key to these methods include identifying what an appropriate discount factor is, or what probabilities of a particular decision is - all very difficult to quantify... - related to the previous items but exacerbates this issue, what is the value of species endangerment/extinction and in many developing nations where many obtain sustenance from the seas/oceans/reefs, what is the value of human life? Are we, or any species simply a sum of our monetary outputs or contributions? I think not... 2 cents... On Nov 22, 2011, at 2:43 PM, Eugene Shinn wrote: > Dear Listers, I did not expect everyone to agree with my last posting > on the value of the Hawaii coral reef. Yes it is priceless, what > ever that means. Don't we all receive a lot of on-line jokes that > claim to be "priceless."? > I am reminded that when I worked for USGS and wrote proposals for > funds to do coral reef studies I always had to justify the work by > providing a value of the reef I wanted to study. The value was an > inflated amount based on the amount of money tourist spent in the > Florida Keys each year. Those numbers were usually provided by the > Key West Chamber of Commerce or the Marine Sanctuary and were likely > inflated to attract more tourist revenue. It always seemed to me that > what diving tourists appeared to appreciate most was the clear warm > water that beat the heck out of diving back home. Because of > "shifting baselines" few tourist had ever seen the reefs in their pre > 1980s pristine glory to compare it with the present situation. All > they seemed to care about was that the diving was a lot better than > diving in that cold dark quarry back in Michigan. Because of this I > can't help but get a knee-jerk reaction when people put a monetary > value on a coral reef or anything in nature. I'm sorry if I offended > anyone. It seems that society is so divided on any issue these days > that no one agrees on anything. Gene > > -- > > > No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) > ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- > E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor > University of South Florida > College of Marine Science Room 221A > 140 Seventh Avenue South > St. Petersburg, FL 33701 > > Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- > ----------------------------------- > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From thierry.lison at mail.pf Thu Nov 24 01:17:27 2011 From: thierry.lison at mail.pf (Thierry LISON DE LOMA) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 20:17:27 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] Reminder: Call For Projects - Institute for Pacific Coral Reefs References: <232D3564-3172-47A1-BD45-1F81C1AF7CD4@mail.pf> Message-ID: Dear Listers, this is a reminder for the IRCP Call For Projects. Applications closing deadline is Nov. 30th, midnight Tahiti time (which gives a bit more time to a significant proportion of the planet...). Best regards, Thierry. > De : Thierry LISON DE LOMA > Date : 22 septembre 2011 07:58:44 UTC-10:00 > ? : coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Objet : Call For Projects - Institute for Pacific Coral Reefs > > Dear listers, > > the Institute for Pacific Coral Reefs (IRCP) based in Moorea (www.ircp.pf), French Polynesia, is pleased to announce the 2011 call for projects for research grants for young PhD and/or Postdoc students (or degrees of similar level). Fields of study range from biological to human sciences, but all projects have to relate to coral reefs of French Polynesia. > > For last year's call for project, 4 young scientists were selected, with research subjects ranging from fish larvae physiology to coral nutrition, to coral reefs vulnerability mapping. We hope that this year's CFP will be as successful as last year's, and particularly encourage young scientists from the Pacific region to submit an application. > > > Grants descriptions are available at: > > http://www.ircp.pf/bourses2011.html > > Please feel free to pass this information on to colleagues, or connected lists with similar topics/interests. > > Best regards, > > Thierry. > > > CALL FOR PROJECTS ? > CORAL REEF RESEARCH IN FRENCH POLYNESIA > FUNDAMENTAL OR APPLIED RESEARCH IN NATURAL SCIENCES OR HUMAN SCIENCES > In the context of a Donation funding from Robert WAN - Tahiti Perles group benefiting the Institute for Pacific Coral Reefs (IRCP), four grants are available to young scientists (< 35 yrs) of French nationality or foreigners for scientific projects to be part of PhD, Postdoc or degrees of similar levels. Research projects will deal with coral reefs or lagoons of French Polynesia. > Four candidates will be selected in December 2011, by an IRCP scientific committee. Two candidates will be chosen by this committee while the two remaining candidates will be chosen by the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) from a preselection list established by the IRCP. One of the candidates, at least, will be a South Pacific Island States national, in order to promote training for scientific research in these countries. > Grants of 4500 ? (euros) will cover travel expenses to and from French Polynesia, accommodation and research costs. > Selection results will be notified before January 30th 2012. Selected candidates will perform their respective projects in no more than 12 months, following the grant notification. A preliminary report will be written in the month following the end of field work. A final report, including at least one publication project in a peer reviewed scientific journal of good standard, will be provided by the successful candidate in the following year. The grant will be mentioned in reports and publications under the name ?IRCP ? Tahiti Perles?. > Successful candidates will have their names and corresponding research projects communicated to the media. Research field work will also be covered by the media, when in French Polynesia. > The EPHE (Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes - mother administration of the IRCP) and Tahiti Perles will also seek media coverage in the context of the attributed grants, in French Polynesia, France or any other foreign country. > Applications will include a CV (3 pages max), a research project (5 pages max), a financial appendix (including estimated expenses - 1 page max). > Please send applications prior to November 30th to: admin at ircp.pf > > > > > Thierry Lison de Loma, PhD > > Directeur adjoint / Associate Director > IRCP (Institut des R?cifs Coralliens du Pacifique / Institute for Pacific Coral Reefs) > > CRIOBE (Centre de Recherches Insulaires et Observatoire de l'Environnement) - USR 3278 CNRS-EPHE > > BP 1013 PAPETOAI 98729 > MOOREA - FRENCH POLYNESIA > Ph: (+689) 561345 / 737002 (Cell) > > > > > > > > > From bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com Thu Nov 24 03:58:50 2011 From: bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com (Bastiaan Vermonden) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 09:58:50 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just get along? :-) In-Reply-To: <4ECA6ECD.4080900@cofc.edu> References: <1321649017.30745.YahooMailNeo@web160516.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <1321660373.81704.YahooMailClassic@web161019.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <4ECA6ECD.4080900@cofc.edu> Message-ID: Hi Coral listers, I see that I made a mistake, My biomass numbers are only fish biomass. Bastiaan From sealab at earthlink.net Wed Nov 23 16:30:19 2011 From: sealab at earthlink.net (Steve Mussman) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 16:30:19 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs-why cant we all just get along? (Bastiaan V) Message-ID: <14739715.1322083820008.JavaMail.root@wamui-haziran.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Dear Bastiaan, Great ideas and interesting strategy. I especially like your biomass map and agree with many of it?s conclusions. However, I have to raise issue with some of your assertions and would suggest that you consider some disheartening realities. These are just observations from many years of involvement in the recreational scuba diving / tourism industry. This is in no way an attempt to discourage you from promoting your concept, but feedback may help improve the design. The recreational diving industry has proven to be short sighted. They are, after all, businesses and few have prioritized what may be called ?long-term? goals. Much like other industries, they tend to be focused on quarterly and annual revenue considerations. To be fair, I guess you might say that you can?t really blame a dive charter operator for prioritizing his business?s survival over the ideal of protecting the reefs for the benefit of generations to come. That can be a hard sell. Many dive destinations refuse to face the reality of coral reef degradation.. They are either in denial or just like the public at large, still debating issues relating to cause and effect. You can?t assume that just because the industry is made up of divers that they tend to be "environmentalists" or even presume that they value conservation over what might appear to some as a form of lucrative exploitation. If the reefs are not pristine . . . well that?s what advertising is for . . . just promote an image and they will come. As has been mentioned, many divers have no baseline of comparison and pristine is but an abstract concept. Take the shark diving example you mentioned. For the most part, the popular approach is not to focus concern on diminishing shark populations, but instead to promote unnatural shark feedings to increase the odds of these desirable encounters. The environmental impact of these staged presentations becomes a subordinate concern. Divers want to see sharks and we have found a way to guarantee success. Is it in the long- term interest of the species? Why do you ask? In fact many divers today will choose diving with sharks confined in an aquarium as an acceptable alternative. Why worry about the state of natural coral reef ecology when we can always replicate the scenery in a more accessible, convenient and temperature-controlled venue? Divers and those involved in the industry are simply a cross section of the wider society. Some place a high priority on marine conservation and some have other more dominant concerns. Reef restoration takes time and the industry and most businesses involved don?t have the luxury of waiting it out. Even if in the end, they are reminded that it may eventually lead to their own demise. Of course this doesn?t mean that we have to give up, stand by and become silent observers of a coral reef apocalypse. It may be tough at times to remain optimistic, but the fight goes on. Welcome to the battle. Regards, Steve From sealab at earthlink.net Wed Nov 23 17:51:51 2011 From: sealab at earthlink.net (Steve Mussman) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 17:51:51 -0500 (GMT-05:00) Subject: [Coral-List] $33B Hawaii Reefs Economic Value (Bob Bourke) Message-ID: <7700361.1322088711972.JavaMail.root@wamui-haziran.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Dear Bob, I don?t necessarily accept the ?skewed outside a reasonable value? inference. As has been explained, its is difficult to imagine a monetary value that could represent the overpricing of an ecosystem. Let?s look at a related issue: Apparently, we just lost the last of the Black Rhinoceros. Is there a specific dollar value you would equate to the very existence of this species? How is the value of an endangered species (or ecosystems) to be calculated dispassionately? Do we measure it by just comparing the animal to the market value of powdered rhino horns? Of course scientists should keep it real, but ?real? is in this case an elusive concept. I?m not advocating that science be used to deliberately misrepresent the truth, but how can you argue that a value is inflated if there is no way to measure it with clear objectivity. I also believe that there is more to the advocacy of coral reef preservation than just a fight over the funding pie. Respectfully yours, Steve Mussman From monikafranck at email.com Thu Nov 24 11:59:01 2011 From: monikafranck at email.com (Monika Franck) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 11:59:01 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Sustainable Coral Reef/Dive Operator Certification? Message-ID: <20111124165901.29800@gmx.com> Dear Bastiaan - responding to your "Value of Hawaiian Reefs" email. I think you have a *great idea to develop a globally recognised system that motivates all users*; (hotel/tourism business, divers, dive operators, sports/recreational fisherman, commercial and local fishermen and snorkellers (beach bathers) to visit and use coral reefs or marine resources sustainably *:* *1)* You might want to /try a certification system/ for hotel/dive operators/dive spots/beaches etc similar to a 5 Star status of a hotel to give users an idea; of not only in what physical shape the coral reef/beach is, but also how well it is being enforced/cared/managed for to ensure it stays in good health, and that your visit as a diver/fisher/tourism business is not contributing to its destruction and lack of fish, coral etc. For example a dive operator would get *1 seastar* on their brochure/online site if they had diver environmental education as part of their course/dive trip (content e.g. don't touch/remove anything, don't let your fins or depth gauge drag on the reef and break off coral etc..), *2 seastars* if they also have capacity control, *3 seastars* if they have a clean beach/reef (water quality too) with public litter/water awareness and clean up dives, *4 seastars* if operator contributes financially/physically to enforcement of the protection of the reef, and *5 seastars* if they have a pristine reef with its necessary management in place to keep it pristine. For divers/hoteliers and tourists it needs to be a simple and easily understood system a non-scientist understands enough to know that it benefits the user and not only the coral reef. What happens behind the scenes as to how the reef/operator/hotel/community actually acquires the sustainable coral reef certification may have more criteria/be more complex and integrate with a greater marine resource use framework. Similar to what the MSC have in place for global commercial fishing and giving consumers a sustainable choice when shopping for seafood (http://www.msc.org/). Similar for beaches is the Blue Flag voluntary innitiative (www.blueflag.org), look at their criteria for ideas. Some sustainable certification efforts have attracted criticism but they remain a good step in the right direction to raising awareness in consumers and providing a sustainable choice. Critical though is that auditors of such certification remain ethical, true to aims and independant (not paid by the business wanting the certification), otherwise it could become just another greenwash lable that can be paid for to mislead people into choosing a product that is not necessarily as sustainable in practice as it looks on paper. Also if not implemented correctly, it might become a trade barrier for poorer coastal communities who do not always have the funds to pay for or the know-how for such certification, and lose out on the global market. Such communities or operators would need help with knowledge and funding for sustainable certification via NGO's or government policies to encourage and maintain sustainable use. *2)* I as a diver for example would be /willing to pay more or to dive a protected and well enforced and managed area/, who's diving/tourism fees are also benefitting the local community (not just the hotel, government or dive operator), thereby incentivise users to protect their coral reef resources instead of fish it to pieces or allow commercial fishing to trawl it to pieces for less profit, than a reef is worth in the long term through tourism (diving etc), and well managed local fishing without destructive methods. *3)* *Capacity control*: the system should also reward dive operators and tourism business that do not over commercialise, and who actively restrict tourist/diver numbers from damaging marine resources such as coral reefs by over exploitation such as too many divers or fishing. For example as a diver I would rather want to dive a well managed site who's dive operator limits the number of diver's per dive/day/year accordingly, to prevent damage to coral reef or fish behaviour eg. spawning aggregations from being disturbed etc. important to fish breeding. Problem is there is no standard internationally recognised dive operator or hotel/tourism certification/value system in place to inform me as a diver/tourist as to which operaters/users care about the health of the marine resource their business relies on, so that I as a diver/tourist can make a responsible and informed choice of which dive sites/dive operators to pick. That is an indicator flagging to consumers businesses operating sustainably and contributing to good management enforcement of the marine resource they exploit/use, and should be rewarded by being chosen by divers/tourists wishing to reward environmentally considerate business which gives back to nature and guards and values ecosystem services to sustain long term profit, not just plunder for short term profit/gain. Also look at this paper on part of the value subject: *Peters, H. and Hawkins, J.P. (2009). /Access to marine parks: A comparative study in willingness to pay/, Ocean & Coastal Management 52, 219-228.* All the best with your idea. Its an urgently needed tool and probably requires international input and co-operation from various stakeholders such as divers, dive operators, marine scientists, fishing industry, sport fishermen, tourism business owners, environment departments of governments and NGO's. best wishes Monika ----- Original Message ----- From: Bastiaan Vermonden Sent: 11/21/11 02:39 PM To: Christopher Hawkins Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just get along? :-) Dear Coral Listers, I would like to ask all of you your opinions regarding an idea for a economic strategy which I hope would lead to better protection of coral reefs and the enforcement of marine parks. I also think it fits in well with the discussion about valueing reefs. So my idea began with the question why doesn't the recreational diving and snorkeling tourism industry invest more in coral reefs and hold politicians accountable when they fail to provide sufficient resources to maintain and protect marine parks. *I believe this is due to a basic economic market failure.* What you would expect in a proper economic market is that the price of a good is related to the quality of that good. So to use cars as a metaphor you expect to pay more for a sportscar which goes from 0 to 100 km per hour in 4 seconds than one that does it in 10 seconds. However when we look at tourism related to coral reefs I have the feeling although I cannot substantiate it with hard data that this! is not the case for coral reef re lated tourism. There are locations where the reef is so degraded that it has no recreational value and places where the quality is so good that it is very expensive to visit but in between I have the feeling prices are approximately the same. I believe this is due to local pricing competition which drives down prices to levels which are close to the cost price of organizing diving, snorkeling, recreational angling trips or other tourism activities. I believe that this problem largely exists because recreational users do not have the quantitative data to properly compare different destinations. So for example divers now have to rely on qualitative (anecdotal) evidence to determine which place they should visit. So for example if we have 2 different destinations and both state that divers sometimes see sharks there, then which place is the better one to visit? Maybe at one location there is a 1 in 100 (1%) chance and at the other there is a 1 in 20 (5%) chance of encountering ! a shark, this is a big difference but without this quantitative data the diver has to hope he is lucky and chooses the right location. However if we inform divers with quantitative data which area is the best then divers will always choose the best place they can afford. So if divers do not know the difference between the 2 locations they have a 50% chance of choosing the best location however if they know the quantitative difference they will have a 100% chance of choosing the best place. This means that the destination where the chance of encountering a shark is 1% has to start improving or lower its prices to become competitive while the other has a strong incentive to protect its sharks to maintain its advantage. So with this quantitative data we can create a national/regional/global market which competes on quality rather than a local market that competes on price. * Setting a standard* Of course to compare different locations it is necessary to have some standardized measures of comparison that can be ! applied to all or nearly all desti nations. I spent some time thinking of this and think that one interesting standard could be the biomass compared to the biomass of a pristine reef. The Northern line islands are some of the last examples of what are considered pristine islands http://www.wri.org/publication/reefs-at-risk-revisited/stories/line-islandswith the biomass at the most pristine reefs being around 530 grams per square meter. So if we round this down to 500 grams per square meter then we can compare the biomass of destinations to this benchmark as a percentage. This allows divers to compare locations and resets their baseline for what constitutes a healthy reef. Then for coral cover we can use the more conventional measure of percentage of live coral cover. So I made a map of biomass in the Caribbean compared to this benchmark and it can be found here along with the standard: http://bastiaan.reislogger.nl/foto/idea/ (I don't have my own website so I used my travelblog website) According to this map ! divers should choose Cuba as their next diving destination or otherwise Yucatan Mexico. Then next are the countries/islands with 27% of pristine biomass. So with such a map you hope that destinations start to compete with one another so for example Martinique needs to increase its biomass only 3% from 24% to 27% to become competitive with 3rd highest rated locations. Meanwhile those locations rated at 27% only need a small increase to be the third best in the region. Guadeloupe meanwhile needs to improve 4% to become competitive with Martinique. What we see is that countries only need to make small steps to increase their competitiveness. Rather than having to make a huge step to superb quality and then hope their reputation grows they can make small steps to improve their competitive advantage assuming that the area is given a new rating regularly. Of course my standard is one suggestion but it can also be a different one. What is essential is that it lets recreational users easily compare and that it is tr! uly indicative of the health of th e reef. Users should not be decision paralyzed by to much information or actually demand less healthy reef environments. (this might be a problem with sharks) *Intended Consequence* So the intention of this idea would be to reward countries who manage their marine environment well with increased or higher value tourism and make countries accountable to the market if they do not manage their marine life well. Hopefully its effect would be Increased biomass = healthier environment = increased business = increased political support Additionally I hope that this will increase the demand for services which assist Marine parks, governments, resorts etc with management advice, monitoring, reef restoration and more because reef quality would be more directly related to tourism demand. This could increase marine conservation effectiveness and decrease protection costs. And decreased costs of protection would lower the barrier to the implementation of more marine protection. *Thank yo! u *If you read my whole idea I wou ld first like to say thank you. So what do you all think of this a good or bad idea? how technically feasible is this idea? what questions do you all have for me and etc? Regards, Bastiaan Vermonden _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com Thu Nov 24 11:48:54 2011 From: bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com (Bastiaan Vermonden) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 17:48:54 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs-why cant we all just get along? (Bastiaan V) In-Reply-To: <14739715.1322083820008.JavaMail.root@wamui-haziran.atl.sa.earthlink.net> References: <14739715.1322083820008.JavaMail.root@wamui-haziran.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: Dear Steve, Thanks for your insights I appreciate all advice and input. About those disheartening realities, those are exactly the reason why I devised this strategy. With this strategy improving the reef should increase tourism demand and therefore be good for business. There is no need to think or care about future generations. Also I wanted to use a measurement which can be used to show small improvements so that even small steps can be rewarded. For example currently if you want to become a top diving destination you either have to have a great reputation or have something really amazing. However if you look on my map small differences can alter consumption decisions. So this means that if a country, marine park etc realizes a small increase in fish biomass it might already mean they are better than their neighbor and thus result in more tourism demand. This competition is the most important aspect of my idea. I think that competition can make people do crazy but also amazing things. For example lets look at sports, why do people for example train their whole life to run faster and faster to win the Olympics? If you look at it rationally it is utterly ridiculous (I don't mean to offend anyone) but it is well harnessed competitive drive. The tools they use to create that competition are races where individuals measure themselves to their nearest competitors and a stopwatch to compare their times to the fastest running time ever achieved either in the region, nationally at college level or at olympic level or whatever. Also an olympic runner does not immediately start competing with the best, first he starts competing with those who are closest to his abilities and he will work/run his way to the top. Most reefs are now heavily degraded so pretty much everyone would start in the "little leagues" Maybe its a bit crude but for example if we have an obese person in a running race we don't expect him/her to win but if it is against only other obese people then that changes everything. So I believe that if we give destinations the tools to compete they will do so, and instead of competing for a gold metal and honor they will compete for money and business. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRxs379Vq_k&feature=related Bastiaan From bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com Thu Nov 24 12:50:00 2011 From: bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com (Bastiaan Vermonden) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 18:50:00 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Sustainable Coral Reef/Dive Operator Certification? In-Reply-To: <20111124165901.29800@gmx.com> References: <20111124165901.29800@gmx.com> Message-ID: Hi Monica, It seems like you have put a lot of thought into this as well. However I would like to explain my thinking regarding mainly 3 things. * **"2) I as a diver for example would be willing to pay more or to dive a protected and well enforced and managed area, who's diving/tourism fees are also benefitting the local community (not just the hotel, government or dive operator), thereby incentivise users to protect their coral reef resources instead of fish it to pieces or allow commercial fishing to trawl it to pieces for less profit, than a reef is worth in the long term through tourism (diving etc), and well managed local fishing without destructive methods. "* As a diver I am also willing to pay but my experience in Vietnam taught me that paying doesn't mean that money will actually be used for environmental protection. However with the rating method people actually pay for the protection and maintenance that has taken place before to realize that quality. For example when you want a new car you don't pay someone to start building one but instead you pay someone for a car that has already been built. *"3) **Capacity control: the system should also reward dive operators and tourism business that do not over commercialise, and who actively restrict tourist/diver numbers from damaging marine resources such as coral reefs by over exploitation such as too many divers or fishing. For example as a diver I would rather want to dive a well managed site who's dive operator limits the number of diver's per dive/day/year accordingly, to prevent damage to coral reef or fish behaviour eg. spawning aggregations from being disturbed etc. important to fish breeding.**"* I completely agree that businesses should not over commercialize. However if countries are rated regularly they will have an automatic incentive to ensure that the pressure on the environment does not result in degradation otherwise their rating will decrease. Still it could be very useful to have a quantifyer such as the amount of divers per dive site to indicate to potential visitors what the level of crowding is. Finally what I think will make my idea work is that it is based on results * rather* than on* actions* and on creating *competition*. Regards, Bastiaan From bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com Thu Nov 24 18:13:29 2011 From: bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com (Bastiaan Vermonden) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 00:13:29 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs-why cant we all just get along? (Bastiaan V) In-Reply-To: References: <14739715.1322083820008.JavaMail.root@wamui-haziran.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: Hi Helder, I have been thinking about how to provide you with a meaningful response however before I can do so I feel that you have to elaborate certain points further. What are "our values"? What are "wrong ideas" and then what are "right ideas"? Finally what are "the foundations of our humanity"? So if you can elaborate further on these points than I might be able to better adress these ideas/concerns. Regards, Bastiaan From simone.demelas at gmail.com Fri Nov 25 03:36:58 2011 From: simone.demelas at gmail.com (Simone Demelas) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 09:36:58 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] GIS Course Message-ID: Dear all, I'm searching a good GIS training course, I'm also in doubt if choose a University Master or a Private Course (like ESRI), any advice? I'm searching it in the US or in Europe, but I want to choose the best course that can give me the best knowledge for working both in the academic world and as private consultant. Thanks in advance Simone -- Simone Luciano Antonio Demelas simone.demelas at gmail.com _________________ From helder.perez at gmail.com Thu Nov 24 13:53:49 2011 From: helder.perez at gmail.com (Helder Perez) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 12:53:49 -0600 Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs-why cant we all just get along? (Bastiaan V) In-Reply-To: References: <14739715.1322083820008.JavaMail.root@wamui-haziran.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: What's the point of winning when Honor is set aside? Bastiaan, although your proposed methodology seems to be interesting, effective even, we can't just trade our values for the sake of money and business. What's the point of risking our lives for a better planet if we're feeding the society with wrong ideas? Our fight for coral reefs (rainforests, pandas, penguins, endemic iguanas, and almost everything natural) should never compromise the foundations of our humanity. Just my two centavos on the matter. Cheers, Helder I. P?rez Bay Islands Foundation Honduras On 24 November 2011 10:48, Bastiaan Vermonden wrote: > Dear Steve, > > Thanks for your insights I appreciate all advice and input. About those > disheartening realities, those are exactly the reason why I devised this > strategy. > > With this strategy improving the reef should increase tourism demand and > therefore be good for business. There is no need to think or care about > future generations. > > Also I wanted to use a measurement which can be used to show small > improvements so that even small steps can be rewarded. For example > currently if you want to become a top diving destination you either have to > have a great reputation or have something really amazing. However if you > look on my map small differences can alter consumption decisions. So this > means that if a country, marine park etc realizes a small increase in fish > biomass it might already mean they are better than their neighbor and thus > result in more tourism demand. > > This competition is the most important aspect of my idea. I think that > competition can make people do crazy but also amazing things. For example > lets look at sports, why do people for example train their whole life to > run faster and faster to win the Olympics? > > If you look at it rationally it is utterly ridiculous (I don't mean to > offend anyone) but it is well harnessed competitive drive. The tools they > use to create that competition are races where individuals measure > themselves to their nearest competitors and a stopwatch to compare their > times to the fastest running time ever achieved either in the region, > nationally at college level or at olympic level or whatever. > > Also an olympic runner does not immediately start competing with the best, > first he starts competing with those who are closest to his abilities and > he will work/run his way to the top. Most reefs are now heavily degraded so > pretty much everyone would start in the "little leagues" Maybe its a bit > crude but for example if we have an obese person in a running race we don't > expect him/her to win but if it is against only other obese people then > that changes everything. > > So I believe that if we give destinations the tools to compete they will do > so, and instead of competing for a gold metal and honor they will compete > for money and business. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRxs379Vq_k&feature=related > > Bastiaan > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com Fri Nov 25 05:39:26 2011 From: bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com (Bastiaan Vermonden) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 11:39:26 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Sustainable Coral Reef/Dive Operator Certification? In-Reply-To: <1322172861.22161.YahooMailNeo@web162111.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <20111124165901.29800@gmx.com> <1322172861.22161.YahooMailNeo@web162111.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi Douglas, Thank you for this great feedback, I share many of the same thoughts. This website from National Geographic already shows nicely how a general rating can be used and then subcomponents, http://pristineseas.org/site/ Also you reminded me of another reason why I decided on this method. Indeed the power of dive operators is quite limited so I tried to devise a method which would also create an incentive to other actors to ensure that the reefs remain healthy. Since not only dive operators but also many other businesses such as the hospitality sector benefit from the tourists attracted by coral reefs. So for them it is also essential to ensure the health of the reefs. We will still have the problem of the tragedy of the commons but I hope that rated divesites will make businesses and people more eager to solve these problems and as you said maybe apply more pressure to marine park managers or maybe be more supportive of measures necessary to achieve better quality such as a higher entry fee for a marine park or better sewage management. Regards, Bastiaan On 24 November 2011 23:14, Douglas Fenner wrote: > I think there are excellent ideas in this thread!! I just looked at > Bastiaan's map, and indeed it provides a lot of information that dive > consumers could use, an excellent start. > One thing is that it seems to me like there are at least a couple of > separate, major, divisions in things to rate that have been identified. > One is the "health of the reef" and the other is the "environmental quality > of the dive operations." Those could be quite separate things that vary > independently. At any one location, there may be several or many dive > operators, each of which has a different "environmental quality of dive > operations." There will also be several dive sites, with different quality > reefs. Further, each of these things have sub-components. Monika has > given us some of the different components of a dive operation's quality. > The reef also has sub-components. So Bastiaan's map shows fish biomass. > Fish are important for divers. Overall biomass is a good measure. Another > might be quantity of the largest types of fish, such as sharks, giant size > grouper (Goliath Grouper in the Caribbean, Giant Grouper in the Pacific), > Humphead Wrasse and Bumphead Parrots in the Pacific. Large fish are > especially important, not only because divers like them, but because they > are the first thing that people remove from reefs. Another might be the > quantity of herbivorous fishes. Another might be live coral cover, another > amount of algae, another amount of land sediment. And so on. They may > vary quite independently, so for instance, the Maldives got hit very hard > by mass coral bleaching in 1998, and their coral cover went very low (and > now hopefully is in recovery). But their fish life, including big fish, is > amazing, and the fish life is one of the most attractive things to divers. > Anyhow, I suggest rating the sub-components separately, and having > that information available on the website for diver consumers. And then > also combine the sub-components into one overall rating for reef health, > and one for the environmental quality of the dive operation. So a diver > could look at the overall rating and get a quick comparison, but also look > into the details of sub-components if they want to. Some people will weigh > things differently than the website does, so one person might value coral > more than fish, and just want to know what the coral rating is, while > another might value fish more than coral. Plus, the sub-components will > help identify components that need improving, so that gives an incentive > for the local community to fix whatever needs fixing. > Another model might be "Consumer Reports" which rates all sorts of > things people buy. They rate component aspects, and give an overall > rating, and list things in order of overall rating, and give prices. > Certainly not all divers will pay attention to this rating system, > but some will. I notice in Bastiaan's map it looks like Cozumel has the > second highest fish biomass, which fits with my experience. And Cozumel > has a huge diving industry, partly because there are so many fish and the > reefs are in better shape than some other places, and partly because it is > relatively inexpensive, yet easily accessible to Americans. These things > do make a difference and the word gets around, and divers respond. This > type of rating system and website could go a long ways toward making it > more explicit and obvious to dive operators and reef managers why divers go > to one place more than another, which in turn gives them an incentive to do > better. Competition is indeed a very powerful motivator for people. > It is very important to keep the rating system independent of those > that are rated, so not dependent on money from the dive operators or > tourism representatives. That's needed to keep objectivity and accuracy. > There will be people who don't like their low ratings, and the easy way for > them to get that fixed is to put pressure on the raters, instead of > improving their operation or their reef. > We should remember that we not only want to provide an incentive for > dive operators, but also managers and whole societies, to do a better job > of managing their reefs so the reefs are in better shape. Dive operations > have a limited ability to directly influence the quality of their reefs, > one of the more important things they might do is to provide support for > the managers to better protect their reefs from all sorts of things. > Managers often want to do a lot more for their reefs than the public will > allow them to. If they propose a no-take area, for instance, fishermen may > be up in arms. Managers need strong support to do their part, if they have > no support they can't do it alone. The dive industry could provide > much-needed support for managers to take actions to protect reefs. A > rating system that includes reef health could help provide an incentive for > this. > Cheers, Doug > > Douglas Fenner > Coral Reef Monitoring Ecologist > Dept Marine & Wildlife Resources > American Samoa > > Mailing address: > PO Box 3730 > Pago Pago, AS 96799 > USA > > > work phone 684 633 4456 > > > Greenhouse gases soar: no signs warming is slowed > > http://news.yahoo.com/greenhouse-gases-soar-no-signs-warming-slowed-220224145.html > > > Skeptic finds he now agrees global warming is real. > > http://news.yahoo.com/skeptic-finds-now-agrees-global-warming-real-142616605.html > > > In 2010, a survey of more than 1,000 of the world's most cited and > published climate scientists found that 97 percent believe climate change > is very likely caused by the burning of fossil fuels. > > > The American 'allergy' to global warming: why? > http://news.yahoo.com/american-allergy-global-warming-why-171043981.html > > > Bleak prospects for avoiding dangerous global warming. > > http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/10/bleak-prospects-for-avoiding-dangerous.html > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Monika Franck > *To:* Bastiaan Vermonden > *Cc:* coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov; Peter Edwards < > horlicks_1989 at yahoo.com>; loomisd at ecu.edu > *Sent:* Thursday, November 24, 2011 5:59 AM > *Subject:* [Coral-List] Sustainable Coral Reef/Dive Operator > Certification? > > Dear Bastiaan - responding to your "Value of Hawaiian Reefs" email. > > I think you have a *great idea to develop a globally recognised system > that motivates all users*; (hotel/tourism business, divers, dive operators, > sports/recreational fisherman, commercial and local fishermen and > snorkellers (beach bathers) to visit and use coral reefs or marine > resources sustainably *:* > > *1)* You might want to /try a certification system/ for hotel/dive > operators/dive spots/beaches etc similar to a 5 Star status of a hotel to > give users an idea; of not only in what physical shape the coral reef/beach > is, but also how well it is being enforced/cared/managed for to ensure it > stays in good health, and that your visit as a diver/fisher/tourism > business is not contributing to its destruction and lack of fish, coral etc. > > For example a dive operator would get *1 seastar* on their > brochure/online site if they had diver environmental education as part of > their course/dive trip (content e.g. don't touch/remove anything, don't let > your fins or depth gauge drag on the reef and break off coral etc..), *2 > seastars* if they also have capacity control, *3 seastars* if they have a > clean beach/reef (water quality too) with public litter/water awareness and > clean up dives, *4 seastars* if operator contributes > financially/physically to enforcement of the protection of the reef, and > *5 seastars* if they have a pristine reef with its necessary management in > place to keep it pristine. For divers/hoteliers and tourists it needs to be > a simple and easily understood system a non-scientist understands enough to > know that it benefits the user and not only the coral reef. > > What happens behind the scenes as to how the reef/operator/hotel/community > actually acquires the sustainable coral reef certification may have more > criteria/be more complex and integrate with a greater marine resource use > framework. Similar to what the MSC have in place for global commercial > fishing and giving consumers a sustainable choice when shopping for seafood > (http://www.msc.org/). Similar for beaches is the Blue Flag voluntary > innitiative (www.blueflag.org), look at their criteria for ideas. Some > sustainable certification efforts have attracted criticism but they remain > a good step in the right direction to raising awareness in consumers and > providing a sustainable choice. > > Critical though is that auditors of such certification remain ethical, > true to aims and independant (not paid by the business wanting the > certification), otherwise it could become just another greenwash lable that > can be paid for to mislead people into choosing a product that is not > necessarily as sustainable in practice as it looks on paper. Also if not > implemented correctly, it might become a trade barrier for poorer coastal > communities who do not always have the funds to pay for or the know-how for > such certification, and lose out on the global market. Such communities or > operators would need help with knowledge and funding for sustainable > certification via NGO's or government policies to encourage and maintain > sustainable use. > > *2)* I as a diver for example would be /willing to pay more or to dive a > protected and well enforced and managed area/, who's diving/tourism fees > are also benefitting the local community (not just the hotel, government or > dive operator), thereby incentivise users to protect their coral reef > resources instead of fish it to pieces or allow commercial fishing to trawl > it to pieces for less profit, than a reef is worth in the long term through > tourism (diving etc), and well managed local fishing without destructive > methods. > > *3)* *Capacity control*: the system should also reward dive operators and > tourism business that do not over commercialise, and who actively restrict > tourist/diver numbers from damaging marine resources such as coral reefs by > over exploitation such as too many divers or fishing. For example as a > diver I would rather want to dive a well managed site who's dive operator > limits the number of diver's per dive/day/year accordingly, to prevent > damage to coral reef or fish behaviour eg. spawning aggregations from being > disturbed etc. important to fish breeding. > > > Problem is there is no standard internationally recognised dive operator > or hotel/tourism certification/value system in place to inform me as a > diver/tourist as to which operaters/users care about the health of the > marine resource their business relies on, so that I as a diver/tourist can > make a responsible and informed choice of which dive sites/dive operators > to pick. > > That is an indicator flagging to consumers businesses operating > sustainably and contributing to good management enforcement of the marine > resource they exploit/use, and should be rewarded by being chosen by > divers/tourists wishing to reward environmentally considerate business > which gives back to nature and guards and values ecosystem services to > sustain long term profit, not just plunder for short term profit/gain. > > Also look at this paper on part of the value subject: *Peters, H. and > Hawkins, J.P. (2009). /Access to marine parks: A comparative study in > willingness to pay/, Ocean & Coastal Management 52, 219-228.* > > > All the best with your idea. Its an urgently needed tool and probably > requires international input and co-operation from various stakeholders > such as divers, dive operators, marine scientists, fishing industry, sport > fishermen, tourism business owners, environment departments of governments > and NGO's. > > best wishes > Monika > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Bastiaan Vermonden > Sent: 11/21/11 02:39 PM > To: Christopher Hawkins > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just > get along? :-) > > Dear Coral Listers, I would like to ask all of you your opinions regarding > an idea for a economic strategy which I hope would lead to better > protection of coral reefs and the enforcement of marine parks. I also think > it fits in well with the discussion about valueing reefs. So my idea began > with the question why doesn't the recreational diving and snorkeling > tourism industry invest more in coral reefs and hold politicians > accountable when they fail to provide sufficient resources to maintain and > protect marine parks. *I believe this is due to a basic economic market > failure.* What you would expect in a proper economic market is that the > price of a good is related to the quality of that good. So to use cars as a > metaphor you expect to pay more for a sportscar which goes from 0 to 100 km > per hour in 4 seconds than one that does it in 10 seconds. However when we > look at tourism related to coral reefs I have the feeling although I cannot > substantiate it with hard data that this! > > is not the case for coral reef re > lated tourism. There are locations where the reef is so degraded that it > has no recreational value and places where the quality is so good that it > is very expensive to visit but in between I have the feeling prices are > approximately the same. I believe this is due to local pricing competition > which drives down prices to levels which are close to the cost price of > organizing diving, snorkeling, recreational angling trips or other tourism > activities. I believe that this problem largely exists because recreational > users do not have the quantitative data to properly compare different > destinations. So for example divers now have to rely on qualitative > (anecdotal) evidence to determine which place they should visit. So for > example if we have 2 different destinations and both state that divers > sometimes see sharks there, then which place is the better one to visit? > Maybe at one location there is a 1 in 100 (1%) chance and at the other > there is a 1 in 20 (5%) chance of encountering ! > > a shark, this is a big difference > but without this quantitative data the diver has to hope he is lucky and > chooses the right location. However if we inform divers with quantitative > data which area is the best then divers will always choose the best place > they can afford. So if divers do not know the difference between the 2 > locations they have a 50% chance of choosing the best location however if > they know the quantitative difference they will have a 100% chance of > choosing the best place. This means that the destination where the chance > of encountering a shark is 1% has to start improving or lower its prices to > become competitive while the other has a strong incentive to protect its > sharks to maintain its advantage. So with this quantitative data we can > create a national/regional/global market which competes on quality rather > than a local market that competes on price. * Setting a standard* Of course > to compare different locations it is necessary to have some standardized > measures of comparison that can be ! > > applied to all or nearly all desti > nations. I spent some time thinking of this and think that one interesting > standard could be the biomass compared to the biomass of a pristine reef. > The Northern line islands are some of the last examples of what are > considered pristine islands > http://www.wri.org/publication/reefs-at-risk-revisited/stories/line-islandswiththe biomass at the most pristine reefs being around 530 grams per square > meter. So if we round this down to 500 grams per square meter then we can > compare the biomass of destinations to this benchmark as a percentage. This > allows divers to compare locations and resets their baseline for what > constitutes a healthy reef. Then for coral cover we can use the more > conventional measure of percentage of live coral cover. So I made a map of > biomass in the Caribbean compared to this benchmark and it can be found > here along with the standard: http://bastiaan.reislogger.nl/foto/idea/ (I > don't have my own website so I used my travelblog website) According to > this map ! > > divers should choose Cuba as their > next diving destination or otherwise Yucatan Mexico. Then next are the > countries/islands with 27% of pristine biomass. So with such a map you hope > that destinations start to compete with one another so for example > Martinique needs to increase its biomass only 3% from 24% to 27% to become > competitive with 3rd highest rated locations. Meanwhile those locations > rated at 27% only need a small increase to be the third best in the region. > Guadeloupe meanwhile needs to improve 4% to become competitive with > Martinique. What we see is that countries only need to make small steps to > increase their competitiveness. Rather than having to make a huge step to > superb quality and then hope their reputation grows they can make small > steps to improve their competitive advantage assuming that the area is > given a new rating regularly. Of course my standard is one suggestion but > it can also be a different one. What is essential is that it lets > recreational users easily compare and that it is tr! > > uly indicative of the health of th > e reef. Users should not be decision paralyzed by to much information or > actually demand less healthy reef environments. (this might be a problem > with sharks) *Intended Consequence* So the intention of this idea would be > to reward countries who manage their marine environment well with increased > or higher value tourism and make countries accountable to the market if > they do not manage their marine life well. Hopefully its effect would be > Increased biomass = healthier environment = increased business = increased > political support Additionally I hope that this will increase the demand > for services which assist Marine parks, governments, resorts etc with > management advice, monitoring, reef restoration and more because reef > quality would be more directly related to tourism demand. This could > increase marine conservation effectiveness and decrease protection costs. > And decreased costs of protection would lower the barrier to the > implementation of more marine protection. *Thank yo! > > u *If you read my whole idea I wou > ld first like to say thank you. So what do you all think of this a good or > bad idea? how technically feasible is this idea? what questions do you all > have for me and etc? Regards, Bastiaan Vermonden > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > > > From douglasfenner at yahoo.com Wed Nov 23 20:23:26 2011 From: douglasfenner at yahoo.com (Douglas Fenner) Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 17:23:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] . Re: $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1322097806.56948.YahooMailNeo@web162106.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> ??? Sorry, this is long.? Don't read it if you don't want to read a long post. ??? Gene has touched on something here that I tend to agree with, my impression is that many divers can't tell the difference between a healthy reef and one covered with algae.? He is surely right that they like warm clear water, my bet is that they are most attracted to colorful fish, they also like big fish, and that the reef itself is less important to their experience.? Some surely can tell a reef with lots of coral from one dominated by algae, and truth be told there are a lot of beautiful algae, just look in the algae ID guidebooks the Littlers publish.? Would some kind of social science work with divers to document what they can distinguish and what they like and what they would prefer be worth the effort?? I agree with the idea another person had that divers need better information about which reefs are healthy and which aren't, and that could provide an incentive for locations to clean up their act.? Long ago I used to read every issue of Skin Diver magazine, and eventually I realized that they would always say nice things about any location they covered.? They seemed to try to say only things that were factually true, but they only presented the good things and never the bad.? Well, they were part of the tourist industry, and business has to advertise (and Skin Diver had lots of ads from the very dive operations they were talking about, an obvious conflict of interest), and in advertising you only present the good features of your product, never the bad, and you are often tempted to stretch the truth when talking about the good side.? There has long been a newsletter (Undercurrent) that accepts no advertising, which gives unvarnished reports by divers of various locations and publishes their ratings.? But those are anecdotal, and lack scientific rigor, and a good part of their reporting is about the accommodations and dive operations and so on, only part is about the reef.? I also agree with Gene and suspect that people tend to take the total money spent by all tourists at a reef location like the Florida keys or Queensland, Australia and use that to demonstrate the value of reefs, when only a portion of that money is spent on reef tourism.? We need to take more care.? Scientists have a fundamentally different role to play than Skin Diver magazine.? We have to get at the truth as best we can, we focus on the reef itself not the tourist accommodations, the actual evidence in as unbiased form as we can, whether it is good, bad, or ugly.? Let the cards fall where they may.? I have to agree with the original person posting that exaggerating does not do the environmental movement any good in the long run.? You get caught, you loose credibility.? We're all human, and we all have biases, and they do at times get into our work.? Science, though, can be very corrective, since there are people out there who are likely to have different biases and correct you in public, using evidence.? I recently saw on an environmental NGO's website, information on reefs that looked to me to be exaggerated, so I sent them an email that explained, they replied that they would fix their website.? I think we ought to do more of that.? Make sure they get it right.? I've read and heard people saying that climate change will increase the frequency and strength of hurricanes.? But I've read that the experts predict that while the strength will increase, the frequency won't.? Sometimes people think that El Nino ENSO is part of climate change, the evidence I've read says there is no evidence of a link.? In conversations I've pointed out a few times that sea level rises from global warming would increase the depth of water on reef flats which should allow more corals to grow on reef flats.? But people don't seem to want to hear that, because it indicates something good caused by climate change.? Now Barbara Brown and colleagues have published a paper that documents that several people have published this idea before I came up with it, and gives evidence of just this happening on reef flats in Thailand.? Hey, we scientists have to go with whatever the evidence tells us, good, bad, or ugly.? This effect on reef flats is minor compared to the damage to reefs that mass coral bleaching and acidification have already done and will do in the future.? We have to stick to the facts.? Reefs have declined badly many places.? But not everywhere.? Check the latest issues of Coral Reefs for papers and letters back and forth between Hugh Sweatman on the one side and Hughes et al on the other.? Bellwood, Hughes et al had a graph in a 2004 Nature paper that showed decline of coral cover on the GBR, but did not document the data source.? Looks like two different sets of data, highly variable points in the early years, low variation in later years.? Later year data points were very close to the AIMS monitoring program data points, looks like their points were derived mostly from AIMS data for late years.? The early year data came from some other source, perhaps Joe Connell's Heron Is. data.? They put the data from different sources together, plotted them on one graph, got a downward slope regression line, and declared the GBR to be going downhill.? Not so fast, Sweatman says, if they were different locations and different methods for the early and late data, maybe the data from earlier came from an area with higher coral cover, and the data from later from lower cover areas (AIMS data covers a vastly larger area than just Heron Is) and a difference in location produced the regression line slope, not a change over time.? Sweatman points out that within the AIMS data there is a decline, but smaller than shown in the Hughes et al graph.? Sweatman presents a graph of the early data alone, and within that data set there is no decline at all.? I really wonder if the other meta-analysis studies don't suffer an unknown amount from the same thing- early studies picked the best locations to survey, and late studies had lots more sites that were much more broadly distributed over sites that were good, bad, and ugly.? Could some part of the decline reported by the Gardiner study in the Caribbean or the Bruno and Selig study in the Pacific, have been due to this effect??? I haven't tried to wade through their methods, but I think anything based on just absolute values of coral cover may be subject to this problem.? Any study that compares one location at an early time with a different location at a later time cannot say with certainty that the change was due to time and not a change of location.? Mind you, these studies are a big leap forward from the knowledge we had before they were published, currently they are the best available data, and there is data from individual sites that show declines in the same location, so there is no doubt that they are correct that there have been declines, but the absolute values of coral cover at early times in particular may be unintentionally high- was average coral cover in the Caribbean really 55% in 1975??? That's awfully high, surveys of very remote Pacific reefs that have had very little human impact average lower than that.? John McManus (1995) once surveyed all the literature on near-pristine reefs he could find, and reports by Miller et al. (2008) and Vroom (2011) from the NOAA CRED division in Honolulu that monitors 50 US islands and reefs in the Pacific including many near-pristine reefs, these studies reported average coral cover in the 35-40% range in transects, even lower in towboard surveys (Vroom, 2011).? One way around the problem might be to use percent declines within studies that repeat the same sites.? That should be less subject to this problem.? And last, take a look at a paper by? Ridd (2007) and see what you think.? Now, to be balanced we need to not only not exaggerate, but also to show not just anecdotal examples, we need to give descriptions and measures of the whole situation (which is what the papers on the decline of reefs were doing, which is laudable) (which is why we use descriptive statistics of the central tendency like mean or median when we can).? So yes, some people do get carried away with their desire to raise the alarm about the decline of reefs and the future threats.? But that is actually a quite small portion of the whole of scientific work on the status of coral reefs, and the bulk of the scientific information about reefs that comes out is not exaggerated or heavily biased.? Reefs really have declined many places and are in very deep trouble indeed..? I say that, in spite of working in American Samoa where reefs are in surprisingly good shape, though certainly not unimpacted by humans (so I'm saying some damage has been done) but currently we actually have about 30% coral cover in transects (lower in towboards because transect locations are typically picked on areas of coral not sand or bare rock), and coral cover appears to be rising slightly, and most other indicators are relatively good.? That is, outside the harbor and the airport runway where reefs have been dredged, filled, sedimented, nutrified, and otherwise damaged (Fenner, 2011).? But relatively healthy reefs are more the exception that the rule these days, and the future threats are formidable. ???? I also think that we will do best in dealing with the public to put all the relevant cards on the table, the facts that we like and support our view, and the ones that don't as well.? This is particularly important when discussing with the public things like plans for MPAs and the like.? We need to not get carried away with talking about MPAs like they are a panacea and that they will produce huge increases in fish catches and such, if the evidence actually doesn't show that.? Whatever the evidence actually shows is what we have to go with.? And we have to reflect the best estimates of the levels of uncertainty.? Not easy to present that in a relatively simple and easy to understand way in a short period of time to the public, but that's what we need to do. ???? As several people are saying, surely there are many reefs that have declined, many greatly, the future threats are formidable, and we need to do more, surely we are agreed on that, right??? And don't we need the help of everybody in different disciplines?? And yes, let's look at these things critically and not just take it on faith that the authors have everything right.? I thank those who are pointing out the weaknesses in some of the analyses, we will all be better off for having that pointed out.? But let's not throw the baby out with the bath water; the bulk of the scientific information is good. ???? So, is there a way we could summarize the scientific information about reefs in different locations where dive tourism goes on, for the diving public?? How about the Wilkinson "State of the Reefs of the World" series?? Do we have much scientific information about many individual tourist dive sites?? Maybe we have enough for a start?? (Reef Check may have a lot.)? Summarize it on some kind of website that could be updated frequently and easily accessed by divers? Sorry for the long message,? Doug Brown, B.E., Dunne, R.P., Phongsuwan, N., Somerfield, P.J. Published online 3 Aug 2011.? Increased sea level promotes coral cover on shallow reef flats in the AndamanSea, eastern Indian Ocean.? Coral Reefs. Bellwood, D.R.; Hughes, T.P.; Folke, C.; Nystrom, M. Confronting the coral reef crisis. Nature 2004, 429, 827-833. Sweatman, H.; Delean, S.; Syms, C. Assessing loss of coral cover on Australia?s Great Barrier Reef over two decades, with implications for longer term-trends. Coral Reefs 2011, 30, 521?531. Hughes, T.P.; Bellwood, D.R.; Baird, A.H.; Brodie, J.; Bruno, J.F.; Pandolfi, J.M.? Shifting baselines, declining coral cover, and the erosion of reef resilience: comment on Sweatman et al. (2011).? Coral Reefs 2011, 30, 653-660. Sweatman, H.; Syms, C. 2011. Assessing loss of coral cover on the Great Barrier Reef: a response to Hughes et al. (2011).? Coral Reefs 2011, 30, 661-664.. Gardner, T.A.; C?t?, I.M.; Gill, J.A.; Grant, A.; Watkinson, A.R. Long-term region-wide declines in Caribbeancorals. Science 2003, 301, 958-60. Bruno, J.F.; Selig, E.R. Regional decline of coral cover in the Indo-Pacific: timing, extent, and subregional comparisons. PLoS ONE 2007, 2, e711. Alvarez-Filip, L.; Dulvy, N.K.; Gill, J.A.; C?t?, I.M.; Watkinson, A.R. Flattening of Caribbeancoral reefs: region-wide declines in architectural complexity. Proc. Royal Soc. B 2009, 276, 3019-3025. Paddack, M.J.; Reynolds, J.D.; Aguilar, C.; Appeldoorn, R.S..; Beets, J.; Burkett, E.W.; Chittaro, P.M.; Clarke, K.; Esteves, R.; Fonesca, A.C.; et al.? Recent region-wide declines in Caribbean reef fish abundance.? Curr. Biol. 2009, 19, 590-596. McManus, J.W., Vallejo, B., Me?ez and Coronado, G. (1995) ReefBase: an international database on coral reefs. In: Marine/Coastal Biodiversity in the Tropical Region (workshop proceedings). East-West Center, Honolulu. Miller, J., Maragos, J., Brainard, R., Asher, J., Vargas-Angel, B., Kenyon, J., Schroeder, R., Richards, B., Nadon M., Vroom P., Hall, A., Keenan E., Timmers M., Gove J., Smith E., Weiss J., Lundblad E., Ferguson S., Lichowski F., and Rooney J. 2008. State of coral reef ecosystems of the Pacific remote island areas.. Pp. 353-386. In: J.E. Waddell and A.M. Clarke (eds.), The State of the Coral Reef Ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated States: 2008. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 73. NOAA/NCCOS Center for Coastal Monitoring and Assessment?s Biogeography Team. Silver Spring, MD. 569pp.? http://ccma.nos.noaa.gov/about/biogeography/. Vroom, P.S.? 2011.? ?Coral dominance?: a dangerous ecosystem misnomer?? Journal of Marine Biology, Vol. 2011, article ID 164127, 8 pages. Ridd, P.V. A critique of a method to determine long-term declines of coral reef ecosystems. Energy Environ. 2007, 18, 783?796.? http://eprints.jcu.edu.au/9768/1/EE_18-6_Ridd.pdf Fenner, D.? 2011.? The state of the coral reef habitat in American Samoa, 2008.? Pages42-111 in Kilarsky, S. and Everson, A. R. (eds.), Proceedings of the American SamoaCoral Reef Fishery Workshop.? NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-F/SPO-114.?? http://spo.nmfs.noaa.gov/tm/ ? Douglas Fenner Coral Reef Monitoring Ecologist Dept Marine & Wildlife Resources American Samoa Mailing address: PO Box 3730 Pago Pago, AS 96799 USA work phone 684 633 4456 Greenhouse gases soar: no signs warming is slowed http://news.yahoo..com/greenhouse-gases-soar-no-signs-warming-slowed-220224145.html Skeptic finds he now agrees global warming is real. http://news.yahoo.com/skeptic-finds-now-agrees-global-warming-real-142616605.html In 2010, a survey of more than 1,000 of the world's most cited and published climate scientists found that 97 percent believe climate change is very likely caused by the burning of fossil fuels. The American 'allergy' to global warming: why? http://news.yahoo.com/american-allergy-global-warming-why-171043981.html Bleak prospects for avoiding dangerous global warming. http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/10/bleak-prospects-for-avoiding-dangerous.html ________________________________ From: Eugene Shinn To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2011 9:43 AM Subject: [Coral-List] . Re: $33B Hawaii Reef Economics Value Dear Listers, I did not expect everyone to agree with my last posting on the value of the Hawaii coral reef.? Yes it is priceless, what ever that means. Don't we all receive a lot of on-line jokes that claim to be "priceless."? ? ? I am reminded that when I worked for USGS and wrote proposals for funds to do coral reef studies I always had to justify the work by providing a value of the reef I wanted to study.? The value was an inflated amount based on the amount of money tourist spent in the Florida Keys each year. Those numbers were usually provided by the Key West Chamber of Commerce or the Marine Sanctuary and were likely inflated to attract more tourist revenue. It always seemed to me that what diving tourists appeared to appreciate most was the clear warm water that beat the heck out of diving back home.? Because of "shifting baselines" few tourist had ever seen the reefs in their pre 1980s pristine glory to compare it with the present situation. All they seemed to care about was that the diving was a lot better than diving in that cold dark quarry back in Michigan. Because of this I can't help but get a knee-jerk reaction when people put a monetary value on a coral reef or anything in nature. I'm sorry if I offended anyone. It seems that society is so divided on any issue these days that no one agrees on anything. Gene -- No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS) ------------------------------------ ----------------------------------- E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor University of South Florida College of Marine Science Room 221A 140 Seventh Avenue South St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Tel 727 553-1158---------------------------------- ----------------------------------- _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From douglasfenner at yahoo.com Thu Nov 24 17:14:21 2011 From: douglasfenner at yahoo.com (Douglas Fenner) Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2011 14:14:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Sustainable Coral Reef/Dive Operator Certification? In-Reply-To: <20111124165901.29800@gmx.com> References: <20111124165901.29800@gmx.com> Message-ID: <1322172861.22161.YahooMailNeo@web162111.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> ???? I think there are excellent ideas in this thread!!? I just looked at Bastiaan's map, and indeed it provides a lot of information that dive consumers could use, an excellent start. ???? One thing is that it seems to me like there are at least a couple of separate, major, divisions in things to rate that have been identified.? One is the "health of the reef" and the other is the "environmental quality of the dive operations."? Those could be quite separate things that vary independently.? At any one location, there may be several or many dive operators, each of which has a different "environmental quality of dive operations."? There will also be several dive sites, with different quality reefs.? Further, each of these things have sub-components.? Monika has given us some of the different components of a dive operation's quality.? The reef also has sub-components.? So Bastiaan's map shows fish biomass.? Fish are important for divers.? Overall biomass is a good measure.? Another might be quantity of the largest types of fish, such as sharks, giant size grouper (Goliath Grouper in the Caribbean, Giant Grouper in the Pacific), Humphead Wrasse and Bumphead Parrots in the Pacific.? Large fish are especially important, not only because divers like them, but because they are the first thing that people remove from reefs.? Another might be the quantity of herbivorous fishes.? Another might be live coral cover, another amount of algae, another amount of land sediment.? And so on.? They may vary quite independently, so for instance, the Maldives got hit very hard by mass coral bleaching in 1998, and their coral cover went very low (and now hopefully is in recovery).? But their fish life, including big fish, is amazing, and the fish life is one of the most attractive things to divers.? ???? Anyhow, I suggest rating the sub-components separately, and having that information available on the website for diver consumers.? And then also combine the sub-components into one overall rating for reef health, and one for the environmental quality of the dive operation.? So a diver could look at the overall rating and get a quick comparison, but also look into the details of sub-components if they want to.? Some people will weigh things differently than the website does, so one person might value coral more than fish, and just want to know what the coral rating is, while another might value fish more than coral.? Plus, the sub-components will help identify components that need improving, so that gives an incentive for the local community to fix whatever needs fixing. ???? Another model might be "Consumer Reports" which rates all sorts of things people buy.? They rate component aspects, and give an overall rating, and list things in order of overall rating, and give prices. ???? Certainly not all divers will pay attention to this rating system, but some will.? I notice in Bastiaan's map it looks like Cozumel has the second highest fish biomass, which fits with my experience.? And Cozumel has a huge diving industry, partly because there are so many fish and the reefs are in better shape than some other places, and partly because it is relatively inexpensive, yet easily accessible to Americans.? These things do make a difference and the word gets around, and divers respond.? This type of rating system and website could go a long ways toward making it more explicit and obvious to dive operators and reef managers why divers go to one place more than another, which in turn gives them an incentive to do better.? Competition is indeed a very powerful motivator for people. ???? It is very important to keep the rating system independent of those that are rated, so not dependent on money from the dive operators or tourism representatives.? That's needed to keep objectivity and accuracy.? There will be people who don't like their low ratings, and the easy way for them to get that fixed is to put pressure on the raters, instead of improving their operation or their reef. ? ? We should remember that we not only want to provide an incentive for dive operators, but also managers and whole societies, to do a better job of managing their reefs so the reefs are in better shape.? Dive operations have a limited ability to directly influence the quality of their reefs, one of the more important things they might do is to provide support for the managers to better protect their reefs from all sorts of things.? Managers often want to do a lot more for their reefs than the public will allow them to.? If they propose a no-take area, for instance, fishermen may be up in arms.? Managers need strong support to do their part, if they have no support they can't do it alone.? The dive industry could provide much-needed support for managers to take actions to protect reefs.? A rating system that includes reef health could help provide an incentive for this. ???? Cheers,? Doug ? Douglas Fenner Coral Reef Monitoring Ecologist Dept Marine & Wildlife Resources American Samoa Mailing address: PO Box 3730 Pago Pago, AS 96799 USA work phone 684 633 4456 Greenhouse gases soar: no signs warming is slowed http://news.yahoo.com/greenhouse-gases-soar-no-signs-warming-slowed-220224145.html Skeptic finds he now agrees global warming is real. http://news.yahoo.com/skeptic-finds-now-agrees-global-warming-real-142616605.html In 2010, a survey of more than 1,000 of the world's most cited and published climate scientists found that 97 percent believe climate change is very likely caused by the burning of fossil fuels. The American 'allergy' to global warming: why? http://news.yahoo.com/american-allergy-global-warming-why-171043981.html Bleak prospects for avoiding dangerous global warming. http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/10/bleak-prospects-for-avoiding-dangerous.html ________________________________ From: Monika Franck To: Bastiaan Vermonden Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov; Peter Edwards ; loomisd at ecu.edu Sent: Thursday, November 24, 2011 5:59 AM Subject: [Coral-List] Sustainable Coral Reef/Dive Operator Certification? Dear Bastiaan - responding to your "Value of Hawaiian Reefs" email. I think you have a? *great idea to develop a globally recognised system that motivates all users*; (hotel/tourism business, divers, dive operators, sports/recreational fisherman, commercial and local fishermen and snorkellers (beach bathers) to visit and use coral reefs or marine resources sustainably *:* *1)* You might want to? /try a certification system/ for hotel/dive operators/dive spots/beaches etc similar to a 5 Star status of a hotel to give users an idea; of not only in what physical shape the coral reef/beach is, but also how well it is being enforced/cared/managed for to ensure it stays in good health, and that your visit as a diver/fisher/tourism business is not contributing to its destruction and lack of fish, coral etc. For example a dive operator would get? *1 seastar* on their brochure/online site if they had diver environmental education as part of their course/dive trip (content e.g. don't touch/remove anything, don't let your fins or depth gauge drag on the reef and break off coral etc..),? *2 seastars* if they also have capacity control,? *3 seastars* if they have a clean beach/reef (water quality too) with public litter/water awareness and clean up dives,? *4 seastars* if operator contributes financially/physically to enforcement of the protection of the reef, and? *5 seastars* if they have a pristine reef with its necessary management in place to keep it pristine. For divers/hoteliers and tourists it needs to be a simple and easily understood system a non-scientist understands enough to know that it benefits the user and not only the coral reef. What happens behind the scenes as to how the reef/operator/hotel/community actually acquires the sustainable coral reef certification may have more criteria/be more complex and integrate with a greater marine resource use framework. Similar to what the MSC have in place for global commercial fishing and giving consumers a sustainable choice when shopping for seafood (http://www.msc.org/). Similar for beaches is the Blue Flag voluntary innitiative (www.blueflag.org), look at their criteria for ideas. Some sustainable certification efforts have attracted criticism but they remain a good step in the right direction to raising awareness in consumers and providing a sustainable choice. Critical though is that auditors of such certification remain ethical, true to aims and independant (not paid by the business wanting the certification), otherwise it could become just another greenwash lable that can be paid for to mislead people into choosing a product that is not necessarily as sustainable in practice as it looks on paper. Also if not implemented correctly, it might become a trade barrier for poorer coastal communities who do not always have the funds to pay for or the know-how for such certification, and lose out on the global market. Such communities or operators would need help with knowledge and funding for sustainable certification via NGO's or government policies to encourage and maintain sustainable use. *2)* I as a diver for example would be? /willing to pay more or to dive a protected and well enforced and managed area/, who's diving/tourism fees are also benefitting the local community (not just the hotel, government or dive operator), thereby incentivise users to protect their coral reef resources instead of fish it to pieces or allow commercial fishing to trawl it to pieces for less profit, than a reef is worth in the long term through tourism (diving etc), and well managed local fishing without destructive methods. *3)* *Capacity control*: the system should also reward dive operators and tourism business that do not over commercialise, and who actively restrict tourist/diver numbers from damaging marine resources such as coral reefs by over exploitation such as too many divers or fishing.. For example as a diver I would rather want to dive a well managed site who's dive operator limits the number of diver's per dive/day/year accordingly, to prevent damage to coral reef or fish behaviour eg. spawning aggregations from being disturbed etc. important to fish breeding. Problem is there is no standard internationally recognised dive operator or hotel/tourism certification/value system in place to inform me as a diver/tourist as to which operaters/users care about the health of the marine resource their business relies on, so that I as a diver/tourist can make a responsible and informed choice of which dive sites/dive operators to pick. That is an indicator flagging to consumers businesses operating sustainably and contributing to good management enforcement of the marine resource they exploit/use, and should be rewarded by being chosen by divers/tourists wishing to reward environmentally considerate business which gives back to nature and guards and values ecosystem services to sustain long term profit, not just plunder for short term profit/gain. Also look at this paper on part of the value subject:? *Peters, H. and Hawkins, J.P. (2009).? /Access to marine parks: A comparative study in willingness to pay/, Ocean & Coastal Management 52, 219-228.* All the best with your idea. Its an urgently needed tool and probably requires international input and co-operation from various stakeholders such as divers, dive operators, marine scientists, fishing industry, sport fishermen, tourism business owners, environment departments of governments and NGO's. best wishes Monika ----- Original Message ----- From: Bastiaan Vermonden Sent: 11/21/11 02:39 PM To: Christopher Hawkins Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just get along? :-) Dear Coral Listers, I would like to ask all of you your opinions regarding an idea for a economic strategy which I hope would lead to better protection of coral reefs and the enforcement of marine parks. I also think it fits in well with the discussion about valueing reefs. So my idea began with the question why doesn't the recreational diving and snorkeling tourism industry invest more in coral reefs and hold politicians accountable when they fail to provide sufficient resources to maintain and protect marine parks. *I believe this is due to a basic economic market failure.* What you would expect in a proper economic market is that the price of a good is related to the quality of that good. So to use cars as a metaphor you expect to pay more for a sportscar which goes from 0 to 100 km per hour in 4 seconds than one that does it in 10 seconds. However when we look at tourism related to coral reefs I have the feeling although I cannot substantiate it with hard data that this! ? is not the case for coral reef re lated tourism. There are locations where the reef is so degraded that it has no recreational value and places where the quality is so good that it is very expensive to visit but in between I have the feeling prices are approximately the same. I believe this is due to local pricing competition which drives down prices to levels which are close to the cost price of organizing diving, snorkeling, recreational angling trips or other tourism activities. I believe that this problem largely exists because recreational users do not have the quantitative data to properly compare different destinations. So for example divers now have to rely on qualitative (anecdotal) evidence to determine which place they should visit. So for example if we have 2 different destinations and both state that divers sometimes see sharks there, then which place is the better one to visit? Maybe at one location there is a 1 in 100 (1%) chance and at the other there is a 1 in 20 (5%) chance of encountering ! a shark, this is a big difference but without this quantitative data the diver has to hope he is lucky and chooses the right location. However if we inform divers with quantitative data which area is the best then divers will always choose the best place they can afford. So if divers do not know the difference between the 2 locations they have a 50% chance of choosing the best location however if they know the quantitative difference they will have a 100% chance of choosing the best place. This means that the destination where the chance of encountering a shark is 1% has to start improving or lower its prices to become competitive while the other has a strong incentive to protect its sharks to maintain its advantage. So with this quantitative data we can create a national/regional/global market which competes on quality rather than a local market that competes on price. * Setting a standard* Of course to compare different locations it is necessary to have some standardized measures of comparison that can be ! applied to all or nearly all desti nations. I spent some time thinking of this and think that one interesting standard could be the biomass compared to the biomass of a pristine reef. The Northern line islands are some of the last examples of what are considered pristine islands http://www.wri.org/publication/reefs-at-risk-revisited/stories/line-islandswith the biomass at the most pristine reefs being around 530 grams per square meter. So if we round this down to 500 grams per square meter then we can compare the biomass of destinations to this benchmark as a percentage. This allows divers to compare locations and resets their baseline for what constitutes a healthy reef. Then for coral cover we can use the more conventional measure of percentage of live coral cover. So I made a map of biomass in the Caribbean compared to this benchmark and it can be found here along with the standard: http://bastiaan.reislogger.nl/foto/idea/ (I don't have my own website so I used my travelblog website) According to this map ! divers should choose Cuba as their next diving destination or otherwise Yucatan Mexico. Then next are the countries/islands with 27% of pristine biomass. So with such a map you hope that destinations start to compete with one another so for example Martinique needs to increase its biomass only 3% from 24% to 27% to become competitive with 3rd highest rated locations. Meanwhile those locations rated at 27% only need a small increase to be the third best in the region. Guadeloupe meanwhile needs to improve 4% to become competitive with Martinique. What we see is that countries only need to make small steps to increase their competitiveness. Rather than having to make a huge step to superb quality and then hope their reputation grows they can make small steps to improve their competitive advantage assuming that the area is given a new rating regularly. Of course my standard is one suggestion but it can also be a different one. What is essential is that it lets recreational users easily compare and that it is tr! uly indicative of the health of th e reef. Users should not be decision paralyzed by to much information or actually demand less healthy reef environments. (this might be a problem with sharks) *Intended Consequence* So the intention of this idea would be to reward countries who manage their marine environment well with increased or higher value tourism and make countries accountable to the market if they do not manage their marine life well. Hopefully its effect would be Increased biomass = healthier environment = increased business = increased political support Additionally I hope that this will increase the demand for services which assist Marine parks, governments, resorts etc with management advice, monitoring, reef restoration and more because reef quality would be more directly related to tourism demand. This could increase marine conservation effectiveness and decrease protection costs. And decreased costs of protection would lower the barrier to the implementation of more marine protection. *Thank yo! u *If you read my whole idea I wou ld first like to say thank you. So what do you all think of this a good or bad idea? how technically feasible is this idea? what questions do you all have for me and etc? Regards, Bastiaan Vermonden _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From ljholdstock at hotmail.com Fri Nov 25 10:32:22 2011 From: ljholdstock at hotmail.com (Lorraine Holdstock) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 15:32:22 +0000 Subject: [Coral-List] GIS Course In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Simone As a person that develops maps within local U.K. government, I can recommend ESRI ArcGIS version 9 or 10. I believe many U.K. academic courses use this as well as MapInfo. I hope that this is of some help to you. Regards Lox ljholdstock at hotmail.com > Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 09:36:58 +0100 > From: simone.demelas at gmail.com > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Subject: [Coral-List] GIS Course > > Dear all, > > I'm searching a good GIS training course, I'm also in doubt if choose a > University Master or a Private Course (like ESRI), any advice? I'm > searching it in the US or in Europe, but I want to choose the best course > that can give me the best knowledge for working both in the academic world > and as private consultant. > > Thanks in advance > > Simone > > -- > Simone Luciano Antonio Demelas > simone.demelas at gmail.com > _________________ > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From lbeddoe at gmail.com Fri Nov 25 13:11:13 2011 From: lbeddoe at gmail.com (Lee Ann Beddoe) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 14:11:13 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] GIS Course In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Simone, If you wish you can also take the Intro to GIS course offered via distance learning from The University of the West Indies, St. Augustine. However, you may have to wait until Spetember next year, since that course has already ran for the semester. Please see the link below. http://sta.uwi.edu/fsa/lifesciences/edulink/ You may peruse the course outline to determine if it suits your needs. Take care Lee Ann On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 4:36 AM, Simone Demelas wrote: > Dear all, > > I'm searching a good GIS training course, I'm also in doubt if choose a > University Master or a Private Course (like ESRI), any advice? I'm > searching it in the US or in Europe, but I want to choose the best course > that can give me the best knowledge for working both in the academic world > and as private consultant. > > Thanks in advance > > Simone > > -- > Simone Luciano Antonio Demelas > simone.demelas at gmail.com > _________________ > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > From monikafranck at email.com Fri Nov 25 13:20:36 2011 From: monikafranck at email.com (Monika Franck) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 13:20:36 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Fw: Sustainable Coral Reef/Dive Operator Certification? Message-ID: <20111125182037.29810@gmx.com> Hi Bastiaan What I meant is with "a diver willing to pay more for diving a coral reef"; is that the sustainable coral reef indicator system should guarantee/indicate to a prospective diver whether the fee (or higher fee) they are paying, goes towards measures resulting in better management and enforcement of protection for a coral reef, and not only into the pockets of the dive operator, hotelier, government etc. Better even if the sustainable coral reef indicator system indicates what percentage of the diver's/tourists fees goes towards measures resulting in better management and protection of the reef. Also giving an appropriate percentage of money from the diver's/tourist fees to the local community who normally fish/harvest food from the coral reef as compensation or alternative livelihood for not fishing it, could help to encourage compliance with enforcement and management laws of coral reefs. The sustainable coral reef indicator system ideally should highlight this, as a lot of diver's/tourists are interested in knowing whether the local communities are benefitting from the fees they pay. I'm not sure that basing a sustainable coral reef indicator system on results only rather than actions will maintain results, because without action there can be no further improvement results for many already degraded coral reefs and marine habitat at tourist/diver destinations. Ideally a sustainable coral reef indicator system should be based on indicating both results and actions taken at a coral reef destination. The Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network estimates 25% of the world's reefs are gone or already damaged and another third are degraded and endangered. By 2020 it is estimated that 70% of the reefs will be in this state. So if you only base your system on results ("buying a new car", with no maintenance action indicators), you might end up with many divers, dive operators and tourism developers scrambling for pristine diving destinations (as they know where they all are thanks to the indicator system), and there will be little action incentives to keep those pristine coral reefs healthy and pristine ("keep the new car's engine running well"). And given the trend with a lot of dive spots/tourist destinations that once the pristine coral reefs/habitats attracting tourists and developers have been degraded and beach bought, built up, then divers, diver operators, tourists and developers simply move on to the next best unexploited spot with the highest ratings to repeat the same degradation pattern; caused by lack of capacity control and responsible tourism or natural resource protection actions to prevent it. Thus a sustainable coral reef indicator/certification system should also indicate and reward the users of coral reefs who are applying effective and measurable action to improve their degraded dive spots (even if they have no results to show for it yet), as it is going to take a long time to improve degraded sites. Otherwise degraded coral reef users/operators have little incentive to action improvement management if the sustainable reef indicator system only rewards results. For example as a diver, I would rather use my fees to go dive/support a degraded site that has vastly improved their protection enforcement, and management by e.g. stopping fishing and sewage drainage into the area (an action but no immediate results yet), than a dive operation/hotel that simply moved to or is in a pristine site; enabling it to easily tick all its sustainable coral reef site boxes; simply based on its pristine biomass and little or no evidence of action management to prevent that pristine biomass from getting degraded due to an increase in uncontrolled exploitation attracted by a higher rating. Apologies for so many words but this is such an interesting and much needed tool/topic. Best wishes Monika ----- Original Message ----- From: Bastiaan Vermonden Sent: 11/24/11 05:50 PM To: Monika Franck Subject: Re: Sustainable Coral Reef/Dive Operator Certification? Hi Monica, It seems like you have put a lot of thought into this as well. However I would like to explain my thinking regarding mainly 3 things. "2) I as a diver for example would be *willing to pay more or to dive a protected and well enforced and managed area*, who's diving/tourism fees are also benefitting the local community (not just the hotel, government or dive operator), thereby incentivise users to protect their coral reef resources instead of fish it to pieces or allow commercial fishing to trawl it to pieces for less profit, than a reef is worth in the long term through tourism (diving etc), and well managed local fishing without destructive methods. " As a diver I am also willing to pay but my experience in Vietnam taught me that paying doesn't mean that money will actually be used for environmental protection. However with the rating method people actually pay for the protection and maintenance that has taken place before to realize that quality. For example when you want a new car you don't pay someone to start building one but instead you pay someone for a car that has already been built. "3) *Capacity control*: the system should also reward dive operators and tourism business that do not over commercialise, and who actively restrict tourist/diver numbers from damaging marine resources such as coral reefs by over exploitation such as too many divers or fishing. For example as a diver I would rather want to dive a well managed site who's dive operator limits the number of diver's per dive/day/year accordingly, to prevent damage to coral reef or fish behaviour eg. spawning aggregations from being disturbed etc. important to fish breeding." I completely agree that businesses should not over commercialize. However if countries are rated regularly they will have an automatic incentive to ensure that the pressure on the environment does not result in degradation otherwise their rating will decrease. Still it could be very useful to have a quantifyer such as the amount of divers per dive site to indicate to potential visitors what the level of crowding is. Finally what I think will make my idea work is that it is based on results *rather* than on * actions* and on creating *competition*. Regards, Bastiaan ----- Original Message ----- From: Monika Franck Sent: 11/24/11 04:59 PM To: Bastiaan Vermonden Subject: [Coral-List] Sustainable Coral Reef/Dive Operator Certification? Dear Bastiaan - responding to your "Value of Hawaiian Reefs" email. I think you have a *great idea to develop a globally recognised system that motivates all users*; (hotel/tourism business, divers, dive operators, sports/recreational fisherman, commercial and local fishermen and snorkellers (beach bathers) to visit and use coral reefs or marine resources sustainably *:* *1)* You might want to /try a certification system/ for hotel/dive operators/dive spots/beaches etc similar to a 5 Star status of a hotel to give users an idea; of not only in what physical shape the coral reef/beach is, but also how well it is being enforced/cared/managed for to ensure it stays in good health, and that your visit as a diver/fisher/tourism business is not contributing to its destruction and lack of fish, coral etc. For example a dive operator would get *1 seastar* on their brochure/online site if they had diver environmental education as part of their course/dive trip (content e.g. don't to! uch/remove anything, don't let you r fins or depth gauge drag on the reef and break off coral etc..), *2 seastars* if they also have capacity control, *3 seastars* if they have a clean beach/reef (water quality too) with public litter/water awareness and clean up dives, *4 seastars* if operator contributes financially/physically to enforcement of the protection of the reef, and *5 seastars* if they have a pristine reef with its necessary management in place to keep it pristine. For divers/hoteliers and tourists it needs to be a simple and easily understood system a non-scientist understands enough to know that it benefits the user and not only the coral reef. What happens behind the scenes as to how the reef/operator/hotel/community actually acquires the sustainable coral reef certification may have more criteria/be more complex and integrate with a greater marine resource use framework. Similar to what the MSC have in place for global commercial fishing and giving consumers a sustainable choice when shopping! for seafood (http://www.msc.org/) . Similar for beaches is the Blue Flag voluntary innitiative (www.blueflag.org), look at their criteria for ideas. Some sustainable certification efforts have attracted criticism but they remain a good step in the right direction to raising awareness in consumers and providing a sustainable choice. Critical though is that auditors of such certification remain ethical, true to aims and independant (not paid by the business wanting the certification), otherwise it could become just another greenwash lable that can be paid for to mislead people into choosing a product that is not necessarily as sustainable in practice as it looks on paper. Also if not implemented correctly, it might become a trade barrier for poorer coastal communities who do not always have the funds to pay for or the know-how for such certification, and lose out on the global market. Such communities or operators would need help with knowledge and funding for sustainable certification via NGO's or government ! policies to encourage and maintain sustainable use. *2)* I as a diver for example would be /willing to pay more or to dive a protected and well enforced and managed area/, who's diving/tourism fees are also benefitting the local community (not just the hotel, government or dive operator), thereby incentivise users to protect their coral reef resources instead of fish it to pieces or allow commercial fishing to trawl it to pieces for less profit, than a reef is worth in the long term through tourism (diving etc), and well managed local fishing without destructive methods. *3)* *Capacity control*: the system should also reward dive operators and tourism business that do not over commercialise, and who actively restrict tourist/diver numbers from damaging marine resources such as coral reefs by over exploitation such as too many divers or fishing. For example as a diver I would rather want to dive a well managed site who's dive operator limits the number of diver's per dive/day/year accordingly, to prevent dama! ge to coral reef or fish behaviour eg. spawning aggregations from being disturbed etc. important to fish breeding. Problem is there is no standard internationally recognised dive operator or hotel/tourism certification/value system in place to inform me as a diver/tourist as to which operaters/users care about the health of the marine resource their business relies on, so that I as a diver/tourist can make a responsible and informed choice of which dive sites/dive operators to pick. That is an indicator flagging to consumers businesses operating sustainably and contributing to good management enforcement of the marine resource they exploit/use, and should be rewarded by being chosen by divers/tourists wishing to reward environmentally considerate business which gives back to nature and guards and values ecosystem services to sustain long term profit, not just plunder for short term profit/gain. Also look at this paper on part of the value subject: *Peters, H. and Hawkins, J.P. (2009). /Access to marine parks! : A comparative study in willingne ss to pay/, Ocean & Coastal Management 52, 219-228.* All the best with your idea. Its an urgently needed tool and probably requires international input and co-operation from various stakeholders such as divers, dive operators, marine scientists, fishing industry, sport fishermen, tourism business owners, environment departments of governments and NGO's. best wishes Monika ----- Original Message ----- From: Bastiaan Vermonden Sent: 11/21/11 02:39 PM To: Christopher Hawkins Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs - why cant we all just get along? :-) Dear Coral Listers, I would like to ask all of you your opinions regarding an idea for a economic strategy which I hope would lead to better protection of coral reefs and the enforcement of marine parks. I also think it fits in well with the discussion about valueing reefs. So my idea began with the question why doesn't the recreational diving and snorkeling tourism industry invest more in coral reefs and hold politician! s accountable when they fail to pr ovide sufficient resources to maintain and protect marine parks. *I believe this is due to a basic economic market failure.* What you would expect in a proper economic market is that the price of a good is related to the quality of that good. So to use cars as a metaphor you expect to pay more for a sportscar which goes from 0 to 100 km per hour in 4 seconds than one that does it in 10 seconds. However when we look at tourism related to coral reefs I have the feeling although I cannot substantiate it with hard data that this! is not the case for coral reef re lated tourism. There are locations where the reef is so degraded that it has no recreational value and places where the quality is so good that it is very expensive to visit but in between I have the feeling prices are approximately the same. I believe this is due to local pricing competition which drives down prices to levels which are close to the cost price of organizing diving, snorkeling, recreational angling trips! or other tourism activities. I be lieve that this problem largely exists because recreational users do not have the quantitative data to properly compare different destinations. So for example divers now have to rely on qualitative (anecdotal) evidence to determine which place they should visit. So for example if we have 2 different destinations and both state that divers sometimes see sharks there, then which place is the better one to visit? Maybe at one location there is a 1 in 100 (1%) chance and at the other there is a 1 in 20 (5%) chance of encountering ! a shark, this is a big difference but without this quantitative data the diver has to hope he is lucky and chooses the right location. However if we inform divers with quantitative data which area is the best then divers will always choose the best place they can afford. So if divers do not know the difference between the 2 locations they have a 50% chance of choosing the best location however if they know the quantitative difference they will have a ! 100% chance of choosing the best p lace. This means that the destination where the chance of encountering a shark is 1% has to start improving or lower its prices to become competitive while the other has a strong incentive to protect its sharks to maintain its advantage. So with this quantitative data we can create a national/regional/global market which competes on quality rather than a local market that competes on price. * Setting a standard* Of course to compare different locations it is necessary to have some standardized measures of comparison that can be ! applied to all or nearly all desti nations. I spent some time thinking of this and think that one interesting standard could be the biomass compared to the biomass of a pristine reef. The Northern line islands are some of the last examples of what are considered pristine islands http://www.wri.org/publication/reefs-at-risk-revisited/stories/line-islandswith the biomass at the most pristine reefs being around 530 grams per square meter. So if we roun! d this down to 500 grams per squar e meter then we can compare the biomass of destinations to this benchmark as a percentage. This allows divers to compare locations and resets their baseline for what constitutes a healthy reef. Then for coral cover we can use the more conventional measure of percentage of live coral cover. So I made a map of biomass in the Caribbean compared to this benchmark and it can be found here along with the standard: http://bastiaan.reislogger.nl/foto/idea/ (I don't have my own website so I used my travelblog website) According to this map ! divers should choose Cuba as their next diving destination or otherwise Yucatan Mexico. Then next are the countries/islands with 27% of pristine biomass. So with such a map you hope that destinations start to compete with one another so for example Martinique needs to increase its biomass only 3% from 24% to 27% to become competitive with 3rd highest rated locations. Meanwhile those locations rated at 27% only need a small increase to be the thir! d best in the region. Guadeloupe m eanwhile needs to improve 4% to become competitive with Martinique. What we see is that countries only need to make small steps to increase their competitiveness. Rather than having to make a huge step to superb quality and then hope their reputation grows they can make small steps to improve their competitive advantage assuming that the area is given a new rating regularly. Of course my standard is one suggestion but it can also be a different one. What is essential is that it lets recreational users easily compare and that it is tr! uly indicative of the health of th e reef. Users should not be decision paralyzed by to much information or actually demand less healthy reef environments. (this might be a problem with sharks) *Intended Consequence* So the intention of this idea would be to reward countries who manage their marine environment well with increased or higher value tourism and make countries accountable to the market if they do not manage their marine life well. H! opefully its effect would be Incre ased biomass = healthier environment = increased business = increased political support Additionally I hope that this will increase the demand for services which assist Marine parks, governments, resorts etc with management advice, monitoring, reef restoration and more because reef quality would be more directly related to tourism demand. This could increase marine conservation effectiveness and decrease protection costs. And decreased costs of protection would lower the barrier to the implementation of more marine protection. *Thank yo! u *If you read my whole idea I wou ld first like to say thank you. So what do you all think of this a good or bad idea? how technically feasible is this idea? what questions do you all have for me and etc? Regards, Bastiaan Vermonden _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral! -List mailing list Coral-List at cora l.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com Fri Nov 25 15:05:56 2011 From: bastiaan.vermonden at gmail.com (Bastiaan Vermonden) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 21:05:56 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Fw: Sustainable Coral Reef/Dive Operator Certification? In-Reply-To: <20111125182037.29810@gmx.com> References: <20111125182037.29810@gmx.com> Message-ID: Hi Monika, These are all very legitimate points and something I have also thought about. This behaviour of hoping from destination to destination like grasshoppers already happens sadly enough. However now destinations can benefit for a long time from their reputations even though the reef quality steadily degrades. With a quality indicator system consumers would recognize that the reef is degrading much faster than is now the case. Maybe one idea to better incorporate your concerns is to ensure that once an area has been rated a number of times the trend is monitored. Then with the extra data divers can be informed whether an area has gotten worse, stayed the same or improved? Also it seems marine parks can have big effects in what seems like an acceptable time frame: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_ocnWW6hUs To get to this effect however it will be necessary to make investments. However if we can get better at predicting how long it would take for the fish/coral populations to recover and achieve a commercially interesting quality (for diving/snorkeling) it might be possible to use the same sources of funding as businesses use now, sources such as banks, bonds etc. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_ocnWW6hUs Of course as a last option it might also be possible to not rate areas where the management is considered to irresponsible to exploit the reefs. Regards, Bastiaan By the way I am glad you are also enjoying this topic From m.johnson at hull.ac.uk Fri Nov 25 15:11:47 2011 From: m.johnson at hull.ac.uk (Magnus Johnson) Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 20:11:47 -0000 Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs-conservation and humanity must go hand in hand. In-Reply-To: References: <14739715.1322083820008.JavaMail.root@wamui-haziran.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: I agree, conservation and humanity need to go hand in hand - a point that we make often in relation to the Chagossians, whose reefs would be in the premier league (using Bastiaan's analogy). I attended a Chagos meeting yesterday at the Linnean Society (in the room where Darwin first presented his ideas on evolution - very cool!) where I saw an eclectic mixture of excellent science (highlighting the need to protect this area) and really worrying rubbish. Most worrying was to listen to the adviser to the UK government on tropical overseas territories say, when confronted by Philippa Gregory (patron of the Chagos Support Association http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yavFR6MTN4g) reminding people of the appalling history, the human tragedy, of these islands, saying "I'm just a simple scientist" apparently absolving himself from the need to consider human rights issues in the pursuit of science. According to the PEW foundation rep who spoke, the US Navy are going to monitor the MPA for them, anyone arrested will be assumed guilty until they prove themselves innocent and he jokingly suggested (I hope) perhaps we should encourage privateering as a way of funding patrols of MPAs - I guess he was suggesting a way of keeping Somali pirates in gainful employment?? Where I agree with Bastiaan is that for conservation itself to be sustainable we need to use the things that drive humans rather than naively work against them. We need to recognise our own humanity. To give an example in relation to Chagos. In the absence of a pelagic fishery and well funded surveillance, the area is at the mercy of IUU fishing. If you have a well controlled and valued fishery, the fishers themselves will protect their investment, and help protect the unfished reef. Cheers, Magnus -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Helder Perez Sent: 24 November 2011 18:54 To: Bastiaan Vermonden Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs-why cant we all just get along? (Bastiaan V) What's the point of winning when Honor is set aside? Bastiaan, although your proposed methodology seems to be interesting, effective even, we can't just trade our values for the sake of money and business. What's the point of risking our lives for a better planet if we're feeding the society with wrong ideas? Our fight for coral reefs (rainforests, pandas, penguins, endemic iguanas, and almost everything natural) should never compromise the foundations of our humanity. Just my two centavos on the matter. Cheers, Helder I. P?rez Bay Islands Foundation Honduras On 24 November 2011 10:48, Bastiaan Vermonden wrote: > Dear Steve, > > Thanks for your insights I appreciate all advice and input. About those > disheartening realities, those are exactly the reason why I devised this > strategy. > > With this strategy improving the reef should increase tourism demand and > therefore be good for business. There is no need to think or care about > future generations. > > Also I wanted to use a measurement which can be used to show small > improvements so that even small steps can be rewarded. For example > currently if you want to become a top diving destination you either have to > have a great reputation or have something really amazing. However if you > look on my map small differences can alter consumption decisions. So this > means that if a country, marine park etc realizes a small increase in fish > biomass it might already mean they are better than their neighbor and thus > result in more tourism demand. > > This competition is the most important aspect of my idea. I think that > competition can make people do crazy but also amazing things. For example > lets look at sports, why do people for example train their whole life to > run faster and faster to win the Olympics? > > If you look at it rationally it is utterly ridiculous (I don't mean to > offend anyone) but it is well harnessed competitive drive. The tools they > use to create that competition are races where individuals measure > themselves to their nearest competitors and a stopwatch to compare their > times to the fastest running time ever achieved either in the region, > nationally at college level or at olympic level or whatever. > > Also an olympic runner does not immediately start competing with the best, > first he starts competing with those who are closest to his abilities and > he will work/run his way to the top. Most reefs are now heavily degraded so > pretty much everyone would start in the "little leagues" Maybe its a bit > crude but for example if we have an obese person in a running race we don't > expect him/her to win but if it is against only other obese people then > that changes everything. > > So I believe that if we give destinations the tools to compete they will do > so, and instead of competing for a gold metal and honor they will compete > for money and business. > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iRxs379Vq_k&feature=related > > Bastiaan > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From carpenpan1 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 27 07:09:10 2011 From: carpenpan1 at yahoo.com (Paul Jarvis) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 05:09:10 -0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Invasive Species Message-ID: <3272808E-24A3-4776-BA6E-69DADC0A8787@yahoo.com> Hi all, I am a lurker here on the list. I enjoy working with corals and am concerned with reef ecology. I am also a fisheries biologist. One of the lists I belong to is the yahoo tilapia mailing list. This past week a thread was started there on the topic of saline full strength seawater tilapia production. The concept of tilapia reproduction in seawater scares the heck out of me. As you can see this could be an ecological disaster. Tilapia are very fecund and would spread like a disease if ever encouraged to reproduce in full salinity seawater. Just wanted to give the heads up on this before it gets out of hand. According to listers on the tilapia list progress and success has already been achieved. Perhaps you can do something before Pandoras box is opened. Sincerely, Paul Jarvis, Fisheries Biologist, Aquaculturist From juergen.herler at univie.ac.at Sun Nov 27 12:05:59 2011 From: juergen.herler at univie.ac.at (Juergen Herler) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 18:05:59 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Sustainable tourism!? Message-ID: <7d7b05a8376d93c2b6591c09b6712697.squirrel@webmail.univie.ac.at> Dear listers! I really like some of the ideas, especially that well-managed coral reef destinations should be certified and financially rewarded by visitors. However, the main problem why I believe that tourism cannot contribute much for sustaining ecosystems in general is that tourism in itself is highly unsustainable. If you fly across half the world to spent one or two nice weeks in one of the luxury resorts of the Maldives, which takes an enormous amount of gasoline every day to be run in a comfortable way, how can that ever save their coral reefs in the long term and not do major damage to these and other ecosystems in the world? It of course would be great if tourism would become more 'eco' (based for example on some of the good suggestions in previous posts) but in terms of energy consumption, there is no such thing as 'eco'-tourism. Sustainable holidays will unfortunately only be the ones that are spent in the own garden. But since people will certainly not accept that, it is of course good if they prefer short- versus long-distance trips and destinations, which perform good conservation and are highly efficient in terms of water and energy consumption, but such destinations are usually expensive and restricted to the more wealthy people, which do not represent the majority of tourists. I have been doing research in the Red Sea of Egypt for more than seven years and this country has experienced a tremendous tourism boom, especially along the Red Sea coast, but unfortunately they receive many tourists which carry little money to Egypt and do not care much about corals reefs at all. The great majority are even not divers and do not like corals (because it hurts when they step on them during swimming). I also doubt that it is is a very humane approach that we preserve ecosystems (especially those of third world countries) because wealthy people from other countries - who can afford to travel there - would like to see them untouched. Very often you meet tourists who wish that, for example, fishing is banned from reefs so that they can see more fish while diving, but this fish very often feeds the local people (although they very often also do not fish sustainably). This all may apply less to destinations (just for example) like the Caribbean, when visited by US-tourists from the southern USA or to the Great Barrier Reef, visited by eastern Australians, but what I want to say is that it is just not correct to tell people that they do something good for an ecosystem if they travel a long distance to see it, instead of not visiting it, at least as long as tourism is run the way as it currently is (usually starting in pristine areas and degrading those areas quickly). I know this is a dilemma, but Ulf?s suggestion of a sustainability index could be applied to holiday trips also, and tax the travel and service providers according to that would be a necessary thing. So people could not easily shift to cheaper and unsustainable travels or destinations (and there are far too many of those in the world), if the sustainable ones become even more expensive (and some of the previous suggestions would of course cause that). People with less money would probably have to make shorter-distance trips and stay there longer, which for sure would still enable nice holidays. Today, people are 'fined' if they decide for more sustainable holidays. From my point of view, this cannot be the right approach. Best wishes Juergen -- < Dr. Juergen Herler Faculty of Life Sciences University of Vienna Althanstra?e 14 A-1090 Vienna/Austria/Europe e-mail: Juergen.Herler at univie.ac.at http://homepage.univie.ac.at/juergen.herler From douglasfenner at yahoo.com Sun Nov 27 17:42:00 2011 From: douglasfenner at yahoo.com (Douglas Fenner) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 14:42:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Australia's new marine park In-Reply-To: <158863227-1322408999-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-68964395-@b28.c17.bise6.blackberry> References: <158863227-1322408999-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-68964395-@b28.c17.bise6.blackberry> Message-ID: <1322433720.44782.YahooMailNeo@web162109.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Australia announces plans for world's largest marine park: Coral Sea The Guardian http://m.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/25/australia-plans-worlds-biggest-marine-park?cat=environment&type=article ? Although huge, almost all of the area will be open ocean water.? But it also contains coral reefs. Douglas Fenner Coral Reef Monitoring Ecologist Dept Marine & Wildlife Resources American Samoa Mailing address: PO Box 3730 Pago Pago, AS 96799 USA work phone 684 633 4456 Climate summit faces big emitters' stalling tactics http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15894948 Cold Comfort: Frigid Months Will Still Come in a Warming World http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/11/cold-comfort-frigid-months-will-.html?ref=em&elq=e2655e4e80274b0ca3710f83f4f572c9 Greenhouse gases soar: no signs warming is slowed http://news.yahoo.com/greenhouse-gases-soar-no-signs-warming-slowed-220224145.html Skeptic finds he now agrees global warming is real. http://news.yahoo.com/skeptic-finds-now-agrees-global-warming-real-142616605..html In 2010, a survey of more than 1,000 of the world's most cited and published climate scientists found that 97 percent believe climate change is very likely caused by the burning of fossil fuels. The American 'allergy' to global warming: why? http://news.yahoo.com/american-allergy-global-warming-why-171043981.html From camoin at cerege.fr Mon Nov 28 09:33:22 2011 From: camoin at cerege.fr (Gilbert Camoin) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 15:33:22 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Post doc position on Late Holocene reefs Message-ID: <5B9CE010-BBE6-4AB9-8277-1B6BCE77B494@cerege.fr> The CEREGE (Aix-en-Provence, France) invites application for a : Postdoctoral Research Scientist Topic : ? Coral reef records of late Holocene and recent sea-level change in the Pacific and Indian oceans ? for a period of 18 months (with possible extension) starting April 1st, 2012 Job description The research will focus on the reconstruction of late Holocene and recent sea-level change in the Pacific and Indian oceans based on coral reef records. The research will include field studies and laboratory (carbonate sedimentology, mineralogy and geochemistry) work. The post doctoral research scientist will be integrated in an academic network involving French, German, British and Canadian partners. She/he will have autonomy in conducting her/his research activities. The research will be mostly conducted at the CEREGE, Aix-en-Provence (France) ? http://www.cerege.fr - but some visits to the project partners will be planned. Qualifications This position requires a Ph.D in Earth Sciences. The applicant should have proven field and lab experience in sedimentology, in particular of carbonates, but all good candidates are encouraged to apply. Strong written and oral communication skills, as well as the ability to work effectively in a team environment are essential. Salary : Salary will follow CNRS rules and be within the 2000-2200 ? net/month range, according to the qualifications of the candidate. Application To apply, please send a statement of interest, a curriculum vitae, Ph.D. certificate and the names of two references before January 31st, 2012 to : Dr Gilbert CAMOIN, CEREGE, Europ?le M?diterran?en de l?Arbois, BP 80, F-13545 Aix-en-Provence cedex 4 (France). Email : gcamoin at cerege.fr Enquiries concerning this position should be directed to Dr Gilbert CAMOIN at gcamoin at cerege.fr Review of applicants will begin soon after the January 31st, 2012 deadline and will be continued until the position is filled. The Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) is committed to Employment Equity. <<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>> Dr. Gilbert CAMOIN CEREGE UMR 6635 CNRS Europ?le M?diterran?en de l'Arbois BP 80 F-13545 Aix-en-Provence cedex 4 ph : +33-4-42-97-15-14 fax : +33-4-42-97-15-40 cell phone : +33-6-88-12-08-95 email : gcamoin at cerege.fr skype : gcamoin +++++++++++++++++++++ NEW : ICRS 2012 Mini-Symposium and EGU 2012 Session : Reef response to sea-level and environmental changes http://www.icrs2012.com/Prog-Symposium.htm#1 http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2012/session/10200 IGC 2012 Symposium : Reefs and Climate Change http://www.34igc.org/scientific-themes-symposia.php#theme-24-reefs-and-carbonates From atolldino at yahoo.com Sun Nov 27 22:23:26 2011 From: atolldino at yahoo.com (Dean Jacobson) Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 19:23:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Value of Hawaiian Reefs In-Reply-To: References: <14739715.1322083820008.JavaMail.root@wamui-haziran.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <1322450606.60531.YahooMailNeo@web31812.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Listers: ?Paradoxically, the value of some coral reefs in the Marshall Islands, where 100% cover and diversity 10x that of the main Hawaiian Islands is the norm, is quite low. ?Over 100 meters by 30 or 40 meters of lagoon reef (75-100% live cover) were mined on Majuro in 2008 by a company called PII to obtain fill for the adjacent land reclamation, on which our new airport fire station-rescue facility (ARFF) was built, all funded by US FAA. ?This was done without approval of the local EPA or landowners. ?I could obtain volume estimates of this fill, and could look up the local quotes for a cubic meter of fill, if I had time. ?In the real world of the Pacific, reefs will be destroyed when it is convenient to do so; I was the only person out of 25,000 on the islands that protested, despite the presence of other local "conservationists". ?I guess most people thought the sacrifice of the reef at the west end of the runway (over 300 meters in length), that was scheduled to be dredged this past summer, as a means to get some more US money into the local economy, was a good deal. I guess in this case some financial estimates of ecosystem value might have been appropriate; they were absent from the EIA written by Leo A. Daly employees. I am told that the US State Dept has recently asserted its will on the more recent FAA project, involving 14,000 dump truck loads of fill, after US EPA and the Fish and Wildlife service had weighed in, and though I have repeatedly contacted the local US embassy, I have not yet been included in any recent discussions. ?As I mentioned a while back, I would like to attempt reef restoration at the 2008 dredging site, which I have photographically mapped, with a 50 meter marked rope laid out for scale, but have no idea what a feasible budget might be. Any suggestions would be welcome. By the way, I hope that my story might increase the ambitions and optimism of the army of solitary reef monitors out there, often working without a budget, since it suggests what one person can do, acting as a catalyst. ?People talk about having a "sense of place", being rooted in the land, knowing in great detail the mosaic qualities of the landscape. ?I found in the proposed dredge zone the largest spawning aggregation of fish I had ever encountered.. ?It seems we can never spend enough time in the water... the more we swim, the more we learn. ?(I wish I had a rebreather!) ?In my career, I choose access to the field over salary. Cheers, Dean Jacobson College of the Marshall Islands From sromano at uvi.edu Mon Nov 28 14:36:46 2011 From: sromano at uvi.edu (Sandra Romano) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 15:36:46 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Biology Position at the University of the Virgin Islands Message-ID: Position Available: Assistant or Associate Professor of Biology The College of Science and Math is seeking applicants who can teach Biology in the areas of Terrestrial Plant Biology, Plant Physiology, Ecology as well as participation in general science courses, and the core biology curriculum. The successful candidate will also be expected to participate in teaching the first year core courses in the Masters in Marine and Environmental Science program. Faculty members are expected to advise undergraduate and graduate students as well as participate in University and Community service. Funding opportunities may be available through the Virgin Islands EPSCoR program, which supports ongoing development of infrastructure in marine and environmental science, and is focused on the research area of "Integrated Caribbean Coastal Ecosystems" (http://epscor.uvi.edu/). ? PhD in the Biological Sciences is required. All areas of biology will be considered, but preference will be given to individuals with expertise in plant biology, ecology (especially at the community level), environmental science and biostatistics. Demonstrated excellence in teaching at the college level; adaptability and genuine interest in teaching are important assets; strong commitment to teaching excellence, undergraduate research, and scholarship. ? The University of the Virgin Islands is a Historically Black publicly supported land-grant institution. UVI is seeking faculty who will ensure that students meet high academic standards in a nurturing and learner-centered environment in keeping with our HBCU status and with interests, experience and expertise in curriculum innovation, interdisciplinary studies and distance education, as well as teaching and scholarly excellence in their specialties. In addition, academic programs support our land grant designation by integrating instruction with research and community service. Appointees must be able to work productively with students and colleagues of diverse ethnic and cultural backgrounds; serve on the University's committees; and contribute to the development of the University's Vision 2012. Closing Date: Open Until Filled Please visit our career site at https://careers.uvi.edu to complete an application and apply for this position. ****************************************** Sandra L. Romano, PhD Associate Professor of Marine Biology Chair, Dept. of Biological Sciences College of Science and Mathematics University of the Virgin Islands 2 John Brewers Bay St. Thomas 00802 USVI Email: sromano at uvi.edu Voice: (340) 693-1389 Fax: (340) 693-1385 ******************************************* From abigail2105 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 28 21:58:19 2011 From: abigail2105 at yahoo.com (Abigail Moore) Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 18:58:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Invasive Tilapia In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1322535499.17525.YahooMailNeo@web125513.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Dear fellow listers I also am most worried about Tilapia in brackish and salt water environments, thoguh this is the first time I have had any inkling others out there are also concerned. Research by a colleague has shown that the strains used in aquaculture here can withstand very high salinity, even above seawater, though growth is not optimal. These Tilapia are now being grown in tambak, brackish-water ponds originally intended for shrimp culture. Even without actual marine culture being introduced there is I feel a high risk of escape to the marine environment through the water inlet and outlet channels as well as through flooding events. Knowing what Tilapia have done to endemic fish species in the lakes around here (e.g. Lindu and Poso) as well as to the fish fauna of some smaller less famous lakes, essentially outcompeting to the point of extinction or near extinction of native/endemic species, it is indeed very worrying. With the current policy of Indonesia becoing the largest aquaculture producing country in the world by 2015, and ambitioius targets by local governments, it is going to be very hard to stop such activities as are already underway or prevent their spread, unless some compelling economic argument can be put forward. One related to fisheries or some other current economic activity, not tourism which is not a realistic alternative in most of our coastal areas, thoguh almost all have coral reefs, at the very least fringing reefs, arguably the most vulnerable to Tilapia take-over. Best regards Abigail Abigail Moore Sekolah Tinggi Perikanan dan Kelautan (STPL) Kampus Madani Jl Soekarno-Hatta Palu 94118 Sulawesi Tengah Indonesia ________________________________ Message: 1 Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2011 05:09:10 -0700 From: Paul Jarvis Subject: [Coral-List] Invasive Species To: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa..gov" Message-ID: <3272808E-24A3-4776-BA6E-69DADC0A8787 at yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain;??? charset=us-ascii Hi all, I am a lurker here on the list. I enjoy working with corals and am concerned with reef ecology. I am also a fisheries biologist. One of the lists I belong to is the yahoo tilapia mailing list. This past week a thread was started there on the topic of saline full strength seawater tilapia production. The concept of tilapia reproduction in seawater scares the heck out of me. As you can see this could be an ecological disaster. Tilapia are very fecund and would spread like a disease if ever encouraged to reproduce in full salinity seawater. Just wanted to give the heads up on this before it gets out of hand. According to listers on the tilapia list progress and success has already been achieved. Perhaps you can do something before Pandoras box is opened. Sincerely, Paul Jarvis, Fisheries Biologist, Aquaculturist From scubasuebh at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 07:13:33 2011 From: scubasuebh at yahoo.com (Susan Hieter) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 04:13:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Aruba marine science center Message-ID: <1322568813.91935.YahooMailNeo@web120706.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Hello, My name is Susan Hieter and I am currently teaching marine science on?Guam?in the?Pacific?at a private school. I am planning on opening a marine science center?July 2012?on the island of?Aruba?in?the Caribbean. I am still in the planning stages of this endeavor. The center will be working with a local dive shop, JADS dive center:http://www.jadsaruba.com/?. My plan is to offer the local school students and teachers a place to come to reinforce their science curriculum, to do teacher workshops/university courses for local teachers and international teachers and to provide certifications in coral watch, REEF, reefcheck and other diving courses for anyone. I am also interested in having a close relationship/connection with worldwide marine conservation organizations or other educational organizations. I am looking to install and operate some saltwater aquariums and touch tanks. Is there any way you can give me some advice or ideas on how to install and/or operate them? I need to build some resources as in marine science books (English and Dutch), posters, samples, etc. If anyone has any other suggestions or wanting to help me with this endeavor, please don't hesitate to contact me. I am also looking for any donors or sponsors that would like to take on this endeavor with me. Thank you so much for your support. Susan Hieter JADS Dive Center Attn: JP Fang and Susan Hieter Seroe?Colorado?245E Baby Beach San Nicolas, Aruba "Dutch Caribbean" Susan Hieter St. Johns School?of Guam 911 N. Marine Corps Dr. Tumon,?GU?96913 From c.pogoreutz at gmail.com Tue Nov 29 09:28:43 2011 From: c.pogoreutz at gmail.com (Claudia Pogoreutz) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 15:28:43 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Al-Hussaini (1947) Message-ID: Dear listers, I have been looking unsuccesfully for following publication : Al-Hussaini, A.H. 1947. The feeding habits and the morphology of the alimentary tract of some teleosts living in the neighbourhood of the Marine Biological Station, Ghardaga, Red Sea. Publications of the Marine Biology Station, Ghardaga, Red Sea 5, 1-61. If anyone of you has a digital copy of this paper, I'd be very grateful if you could contact me off-list. thank you so much, have a great day Claudia Pogoreutz, M.Sc. Marine Ecology and Fish Biology Department of Theoretical Biology University of Vienna Althanstra?e 14 A-1090 Vienna Austria From abrathwaite at coastal.gov.bb Tue Nov 29 09:53:23 2011 From: abrathwaite at coastal.gov.bb (Angelique Brathwaite) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 10:53:23 -0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Lionfish in Barbados Message-ID: <5c81116a$660cb4ca$5e4ee8f3$@com> Hi, Just letting you know that the first lionfish was observed (and speared) off the west coast of Barbados, November 24th, 2011. It's the only one that has been observed to date. Peace Angie Angelique Brathwaite Marine Biologist Coastal Zone Management Unit Bay St. St. Michael BB11156 Phone: (246) 228 5950/51/52 ext 231 Fax: (246)228 5956 e-mail: abrathwaite at coastal.gov.bb skype: seaeggz From david.derand at gmail.com Wed Nov 30 00:31:47 2011 From: david.derand at gmail.com (david derand) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 09:31:47 +0400 Subject: [Coral-List] Reef Restoration Field Officer position, Seychelles Message-ID: Dear Coral-List subscribers, The following is an announcement for a Reef Restoration Field Officer position to support coral reef restoration in Cousin and Praslin island, Seychelles. Position Title: Reef Restoration Field Officer, USAID-funded Reef Rescuers Project, Nature Seychelles Nature Seychelles, a leading environmental NGO in the Western Indian Ocean, has a potential opening for one Reef Restoration Field Officer to help to implement a 3-years USAID-funded project on coral reef restoration around Cousin and Praslin island, Seychelles. Specific requirements notably include: - At least 5 years working experience in coral reef management and research, including at least 2 years in coral reef restoration (setting up and maintaining underwater coral nurseries and transplanting nursery-grown colonies) - Proven knowledge and practical experience of experimental design, data analysis using statistical packages, standard methodologies for coral reef survey and monitoring - Excellent scientific and report writing skills, scientific publication experience - Academic credentials in coral reef ecology with relevant Ph.D. or similar qualifications - Certified scientific diver with superior technical skills - High physical fitnesss - A good mix of office and field based skills - Be highly diplomatic, possess a culturally sensitive disposition and willing to work within the parameters of a small island developing state - Willingness to work within a small team including volunteers, students and local staff - Possess the ability to adapt to change and learn new skills when these are required - Adept at program planning and ability to use participatory planning processes and have a target-driven approach. For more information, go to: : http://natureseychelles.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=394&Itemid=167 This position is a 2-years contract based in Praslin island, Seychelles, expecting starting date is *beginning of February 2012*. Please apply by sending cover letter, CV with passport size photo, scanned copies of highest academic degree and diving certificate, letters of recommendation (if available) or at least contact details of three professional or academic referees,* by email only* to: The Chief Executive, Nature Seychelles, nature at seychelles.net, copy to the Project Operations Coordinator, david at natureseychelles.org . *Deadline:** Friday 9th December 2011.* ** Note that shortlisted candidates will be contacted for interview by Skype on Tuesday 13th or Wednesday 14th December 2011. Thank you, Gilles-David Derand, MSc Project Operations Coordinator, Nature Seychelles Island Conservation Centre, L'Amitie, Praslin, Seychelles Mobile: + (248) 2729347, Phone: + (248) 4233996 Email: david at natureseychelles.org Web: www.natureseychelles.org Blogs: http://theenvironmentinseychelles.blogspot.com/ and http://savingparadise.wildlifedirect.org/"Nature Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. From marineconservationkt at gmail.com Wed Nov 30 03:36:40 2011 From: marineconservationkt at gmail.com (Chad Scott) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 15:36:40 +0700 Subject: [Coral-List] Sustainable Coral Reef/Dive Operator Certification Message-ID: In response to the talks on the sustainable coral reef/dive operator certification discussion: Many of you have raised some very valuable and important points pertaining to this debate. I currently work with dive schools on the island of Koh Tao in the Gulf of Thailand. Our island of only 19 square kilometers has over 42 dive schools, and issues over 40,000 PADI certifications each year (plus we also have SSI, BSAC, and CMAS schools, but I lack data for them). 5 years ago when I came to the island it was obvious that most dive schools had no idea how to protect or help the reefs, in fact most instructors I worked with couldn?t even tell live coral from dead ones. While I don?t want to reiterate the points already stated, I hope to add to them with my experience. In order to set themselves apart and join the ?eco? trend, many of Koh Tao?s dive schools are promoting themselves as eco friendly just by doing the things any responsible business should do (recycling, planting around the resort, using natural lighting, maintaining boats to prevent oil leakage, etc.) While these actions are commendable, they should not justify receiving an ?eco award?. Our group, the Save Koh Tao Marine Branch, looks past all of these types of actions to real actions which are more difficult to obtain, but still within reach of dive businesses. The following list is the standards and guidelines which must be adopted by the schools to be endorsed by our group: - Conduct regular reef checks. (The Save Koh Tao/SSI EMP, ReefWatch, Greenfins, or Reef Check International methods are all acceptable for this requirement.) - Require that all instructors/DMs learn to do a reef check - Instruct all boat and shop employees as to proper safety and environmental care techniques - Participate and donate boats/equipment to at least 60% of the Save Koh Tao Marine Branch monthly clean-up events. - Conduct monthly or weekly clean-ups independent of the group monthly clean-ups - Attend at least 60% of the Marine Branch Monthly meetings - Provide environmental briefings to all snorkelers and divers, do not provide fins or shoes to snorkelers - Provide recycling at dive school and from the boats (including batteries) - No fishing, spear fishing, or collecting of organisms from dive boats Furthermore, each dive school that wants to be recognized by our group must adopt a reef site, which the requirements are: - Being the representative for a reporting system of illegal fishing/collection or other threats to reef health. Meaning that if you or somebody else sees a problem in your 'adopted reef' that you would be responsible for passing that information of to the Deparmetn of Marine and Coastal Resources or Marine Fisheries Dept. - Once per month your business would need to conduct a simple transect survey to count giant clams, sea urchins, sea cucumbers, and other commonly collected organisms. - After being trained, your school can construct cheap and easy to build coral nurseries (mid-water, mineral accretion, etc) to rehabilitate broken or damaged corals, and maintain those nurseries at least once per month. - When necessary, removing fishing nets/cages that have drifted into or caught on the reef - At least once per month organize a beach/underwater clean-up with the business around you - Monitoring/maintaining mooring buoys at your site Although these actions are sometimes difficult for dive schools, they are all achievable. We have about 8-9 dive schools which continually meet or exceed these requirements. Most of them require no outside funding, but maybe a bit of assistance to get them started and ensure that they continue. I would not say we have solved all of the issues you have raised, but I think through these and similar programs we have made great strides in protecting reefs and putting an end to the boom-bust cycle described by Monika and others. While these don't address the issues of resort construction, we do have separate initiates pertaining to that, and anyways by training the divers those types of initiatives follow close behind. Divers are involved in these programs every step of the way, and the main value of the programs is increasing the awareness and knowledge of the professional divers and their students. In fact, many of the school?s base diver training programs around these requirements so that doing things like monitoring, installing mooring lines, and building coral nurseries actually creates an income stream for them. Instead of divers paying a tax that may or may not go towards good projects, the divers pay to be trained in conservation techniques and help with the actual projects. I know that Koh Tao still has a long way to go, but I hope that others can learn from our mistakes and our achievements. For more info on our group check out www.marineconservationkohtao.com. And to see how these models can be put into action, without outside funding, check out these dive schools webpage?s: http://www.newheavendiveschool.com/en/marine-conservation http://www.ecokohtao.com/ (@Crystal Dive Resort) http://www.kohexist.com Thanks -- Chad Scott Marine Project Coordinator Save Koh Tao Marine Branch Find more information on our webpages Save Koh Tao Save Koh Tao Marine Branch New Heaven Reef Conservation Program Or our Facebook Groups: Save Koh Tao Save Koh Tao Marine Branch New Heaven Reef Conservation Program From douglasfenner at yahoo.com Tue Nov 29 16:58:20 2011 From: douglasfenner at yahoo.com (Douglas Fenner) Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 13:58:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] Sustainable tourism!? In-Reply-To: <7d7b05a8376d93c2b6591c09b6712697.squirrel@webmail.univie.ac.at> References: <7d7b05a8376d93c2b6591c09b6712697.squirrel@webmail.univie.ac.at> Message-ID: <1322603900.36217.YahooMailNeo@web162119.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> ???? I agree that the consumption of fossil fuels in flying to tropical resorts is a major problem for dive tourism.? Trying to reduce fossil fuel burning is also a major problem for a lot of aspects of our lives, not just dive tourism, and one we must solve, but most governments don't want to act, and most individuals don't want to reduce their consumption or pay extra to change to more sustainable ways.? It is a major problem for the whole world, and of course the world is warming which is threatening mass coral mortality from bleaching and acidification that will increasingly slow coral and coralline algae calcification, and together these threaten to end coral reefs as we know them. ???? I think we are going to have trouble getting traction just asking people not to take vacations to go diving in the tropics, I doubt just asking people not to do that will make much of a dent, and if it did it would be a major economic hardship to many poor countries in the tropics that depend heavily on tourism.? But I think we might have better prospects for trying to reduce fossil fuel consumption without reducing dive tourism.? (dive tourism, in spite of all the limitations, still provides an economic incentive for people to protect reefs)? One thought I have long had is that if I could take half as many trips, but stay twice as long, I could have as much diving fun and yet use half as much fossil fuel flying there and back, which would also save me money.? Another idea is that we can fly carbon-neutral.? There are companies that provide the service of reducing greenhouse gas emissions somewhere in an amount equal to that produced by your part of a flight.? They do things like reduce methane emissions from land fills, which provides a relatively large effect for the cost (I was tempted to say "bang for the buck" but with methane, maybe I won't light that match!? grin).? Anyhow, the cost is surprisingly little for a fairly long flight.? The trick is to somehow get people to do this, because it is an extra cost for their trip, and even though it is a small cost, the traveler doesn't experience any immediate direct benefit themselves, other than perhaps feeling a bit less guilty.? But it has the potential to neutralize the effect of flying on greenhouse gas production. ??? Resorts certainly use fossil fuels as well.? One major form of this is electricity for air conditioning, because the electricity is almost always produced by burning fossil fuels.? But there are alternatives, and one is highly cost effective.? Right offshore from most dive resorts there is cold water only 1000 feet deep.? A pipe and pump can bring that water up, distribute it through heat exchangers to cool rooms, using a tiny amount of electricity for the pump for the amount of cooling produced.? The system saves so much money that it quickly pays for itself, and then goes on saving money and CO2 emissions long long after.? A resort in Tahiti that uses it loves it.? I'm told that such a system is planned for Honolulu.? The piping is clearly the main hurdle.? But unlike renewables like solar, wind, and ocean thermal electricity generation, it is much less expensive to run than current practice. ??? My point is, that there are ways of greatly reducing greenhouse gas emissions produced by dive tourism.? We can do much better than we have been doing without killing dive tourism.? Dive tourism helps build a natural constituency of people who love reefs and will stand up for them.? Doesn't seeing them first hand give us motivation to want to save them? ??? Cheers,? Doug ? Douglas Fenner Coral Reef Monitoring Ecologist Dept Marine & Wildlife Resources American Samoa Mailing address: PO Box 3730 Pago Pago, AS 96799 USA work phone 684 633 4456 Climate summit faces big emitters' stalling tactics http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15894948 Rich nations 'give up' on new climate treaty until 2020 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/20/rich-nations-give-up-climate-treaty Cold Comfort: Frigid Months Will Still Come in a Warming World http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/11/cold-comfort-frigid-months-will-.html?ref=em&elq=e2655e4e80274b0ca3710f83f4f572c9 Greenhouse gases soar: no signs warming is slowed http://news.yahoo.com/greenhouse-gases-soar-no-signs-warming-slowed-220224145.html Skeptic finds he now agrees global warming is real. http://news.yahoo.com/skeptic-finds-now-agrees-global-warming-real-142616605.html In 2010, a survey of more than 1,000 of the world's most cited and published climate scientists found that 97 percent believe climate change is very likely caused by the burning of fossil fuels. The American 'allergy' to global warming: why? http://news.yahoo.com/american-allergy-global-warming-why-171043981.html ________________________________ From: Juergen Herler To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 6:05 AM Subject: [Coral-List] Sustainable tourism!? Dear listers! I really like some of the ideas, especially that well-managed coral reef destinations should be certified and financially rewarded by visitors. However, the main problem why I believe that tourism cannot contribute much for sustaining ecosystems in general is that tourism in itself is highly unsustainable. If you fly across half the world to spent one or two nice weeks in one of the luxury resorts of the Maldives, which takes an enormous amount of gasoline every day to be run in a comfortable way, how can that ever save their coral reefs in the long term and not do major damage to these and other ecosystems in the world? It of course would be great if tourism would become more 'eco' (based for example on some of the good suggestions in previous posts) but in terms of energy consumption, there is no such thing as 'eco'-tourism. Sustainable holidays will unfortunately only be the ones that are spent in the own garden. But since people will certainly not accept that, it is of course good if they prefer short- versus long-distance trips and destinations, which perform good conservation and are highly efficient in terms of water and energy consumption, but such destinations are usually expensive and restricted to the more wealthy people, which do not represent the majority of tourists. I have been doing research in the Red Sea of Egypt for more than seven years and this country has experienced a tremendous tourism boom, especially along the Red Sea coast, but unfortunately they receive many tourists which carry little money to Egypt and do not care much about corals reefs at all. The great majority are even not divers and do not like corals (because it hurts when they step on them during swimming). I also doubt that it is is a very humane approach that we preserve ecosystems (especially those of third world countries) because wealthy people from other countries - who can afford to travel there - would like to see them untouched. Very often you meet tourists who wish that, for example, fishing is banned from reefs so that they can see more fish while diving, but this fish very often feeds the local people (although they very often also do not fish sustainably). This all may apply less to destinations (just for example) like the Caribbean, when visited by US-tourists from the southern USA or to the Great Barrier Reef, visited by eastern Australians, but what I want to say is that it is just not correct to tell people that they do something good for an ecosystem if they travel a long distance to see it, instead of not visiting it, at least as long as tourism is run the way as it currently is (usually starting in pristine areas and degrading those areas quickly). I know this is a dilemma, but Ulf?s suggestion of a sustainability index could be applied to holiday trips also, and tax the travel and service providers according to that would be a necessary thing. So people could not easily shift to cheaper and unsustainable travels or destinations (and there are far too many of those in the world), if the sustainable ones become even more expensive (and some of the previous suggestions would of course cause that). People with less money would probably have to make shorter-distance trips and stay there longer, which for sure would still enable nice holidays. Today, people are 'fined' if they decide for more sustainable holidays. From my point of view, this cannot be the right approach. Best wishes Juergen -- < Dr. Juergen Herler Faculty of Life Sciences University of Vienna Althanstra?e 14 A-1090 Vienna/Austria/Europe e-mail: Juergen.Herler at univie.ac.at http://homepage.univie.ac.at/juergen.herler _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From jobs at fieldstudies.org Wed Nov 30 15:21:30 2011 From: jobs at fieldstudies.org (Jobs) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 15:21:30 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Hiring Resident Lecturers for Turks & Caicos Message-ID: <008f01ccaf9d$a5ea6530$f1bf2f90$@fieldstudies.org> The School for Field Studies is hiring for a 2012 start! http://www.fieldstudies.org Resident Lecturer in Environmental Policy & Socioeconomics South Caicos, Turks & Caicos Islands PhD or MS required. Salary, benefits, relocation assistance, and free room and board included. http://fieldstudies.catsone.com/careers/index.php?m=portal&a=details&jobOrderID=722175 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resident Lecturer in Marine Resource Management South Caicos, Turks & Caicos Islands PhD or MS required. Salary, benefits, relocation assistance, and free room and board included. http://fieldstudies.catsone.com/careers/index.php?m=portal&a=details&jobOrderID=747269 Michael Teichberg | Human Resources Manager 10 Federal Street | Suite 24 | Salem, MA USA 01970 (T) 1.978.219.5107 | (F) 1.978.336.0074 mteichberg at fieldstudies.org _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list From richmond at hawaii.edu Wed Nov 30 16:24:04 2011 From: richmond at hawaii.edu (Robert Richmond) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 11:24:04 -1000 Subject: [Coral-List] ISRS Darwin Medal Nominations - Reminder Message-ID: <004d01ccafa6$63184a70$2948df50$@edu> Dear ISRS Members (and those who are not yet members but should join at this auspicious moment - for a great discount on 12th ICRS registration as well as expanding opportunities to engage in the Society to advance coral reef science and it's applications) Nominations for the Darwin Award remain open and will be accepted through December 31, 2011 Darwin Medal The Darwin Medal, the most prestigious award given by the International Society for Reef Studies, is presented every four years at the International Coral Reef Symposium. It is awarded to a senior ISRS member who is recognized worldwide for major contributions throughout her/his career. The next occasion at which the medal will be presented is the 12th International Coral Reef Symposium, to be held in Cairns, Australia, 9-13 July 2012. ISRS members are invited to send nominations (500 words maximum) to the Corresponding Secretary Rupert Ormond [rupert.ormond.mci at gmail.com] by December 31, 2011. All nominations will then be forwarded to the ISRS Council for a vote. Candidates will be judged primarily on their scientific excellence though their service to coral reef research and its dissemination will be taken into account. On receiving the award in Cairns, the medalist will give a plenary address reviewing their field (the Darwin Lecture) and also submit an account of the address in the journal 'Coral Reefs.' Notes for nominations i) All nominators should ensure that their nominees are current members of the International Society for Reef Studies (ISRS). Enquiries to this end can be made via Rupert Ormond [rupert.ormond.mci at gmail.com] who holds an up-to-date list of current members. Non-members of ISRS cannot be considered for the award. ii) All nominators should approach their proposed candidates before nomination to ensure that they are prepared to stand. iii) It is recommended that nominators request an up-to-date curriculum vitae and statement from their candidate on what he/she believes that they have accomplished before writing the supporting statement which should be a comprehensive assessment of their scientific career, including a synthesis of their publication record. Previous Recipients of the Darwin Medal: * Professor Terry Hughes - 2008 (11th International Coral Reef Symposium, Ft Lauderdale) * Dr. J. E. N. (Charlie) Veron - 2004 (10th International Coral Reef Symposium, Okinawa) * Professor Yossi Loya - 2000 (9th International Coral Reef Symposium, Bali) * Dr. Ian G. MacIntyre - 1996 (8th International Coral Reef Symposium, Panama) * Dr. Peter W. Glynn - 1992 (7th International Coral Reef Symposium, Guam) * Dr. David Stoddart - 1988 (Inaugural recipient) Additional information can be found on the ISRS website: http://www.coralreefs.org/darwin-medal.htm Best wishes, Bob Robert H. Richmond, Ph.D. Research Professor Kewalo Marine Laboratory University of Hawaii at Manoa 41 Ahui Street Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 USA Phone: 808-539-7331 Fax: 808-599-4817 E-mail: Richmond at hawaii.edu President, International Society for Reef Studies From swear at TNC.ORG Wed Nov 30 16:33:35 2011 From: swear at TNC.ORG (Stephanie Wear) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 16:33:35 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Halichondria okadai -Japanese sponge on reefs? Message-ID: Hello Listers! I am trying to determine if the sponge: Halichondria okadai is a coral reef sponge ? that is, does it live on or very near coral reefs? I have been trying to cross reference its distribution with coral reef maps in Japan and just want to be sure. Thanks for any info you can provide on this species. Cheers- Stephanie Stephanie Wear Director of Coral Reef Conservation Global Marine Initiative The Nature Conservancy From douglasfenner at yahoo.com Wed Nov 30 16:56:51 2011 From: douglasfenner at yahoo.com (Douglas Fenner) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 13:56:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Coral-List] New book on climate change effects on the Pacific, including coral reefs Message-ID: <1322690211.78733.YahooMailNeo@web162116.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> "Vulnerability of tropical Pacific fisheries and aquaculture to climate change."? is a book published by SPC (Secretariat of the Pacific Community).? It covers coral reefs, mangroves, seagrass, estuaries, and open ocean.? There were 88 contributors.? The whole book is nearly 1000 pages long..? It is available for download from the SPC website for free, open access.? It can be downloaded chapter by chapter (it is very large so that is recommended).? The first section includes the table of contents, and Chapter 5 is on coral reefs.? It looks to me like it probably provides a lot of information that applies much more widely than the Pacific, so it would probably be very useful to people in the Caribbean and Indian Ocean and Red Sea, as well as the Pacific.? The coral reef chapter authors are Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, Serge Andrefouet, Katharina Fabricius, Guillermo Diaz-Pulido, Janice Lough, Paul Marshall, and Morgan Pratchett, so it should be very good. http://www.spc.int/climate-change/fisheries/assessment/ Cheers, Doug Douglas Fenner Coral Reef Monitoring Ecologist Dept Marine & Wildlife Resources American Samoa Mailing address: PO Box 3730 Pago Pago, AS 96799 USA work phone 684 633 4456 Climate summit faces big emitters' stalling tactics http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15894948 Rich nations 'give up' on new climate treaty until 2020 http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/20/rich-nations-give-up-climate-treaty Cold Comfort: Frigid Months Will Still Come in a Warming World http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/11/cold-comfort-frigid-months-will-.html?ref=em&elq=e2655e4e80274b0ca3710f83f4f572c9 Greenhouse gases soar: no signs warming is slowed http://news..yahoo.com/greenhouse-gases-soar-no-signs-warming-slowed-220224145.html Skeptic finds he now agrees global warming is real. http://news.yahoo.com/skeptic-finds-now-agrees-global-warming-real-142616605.html In 2010, a survey of more than 1,000 of the world's most cited and published climate scientists found that 97 percent believe climate change is very likely caused by the burning of fossil fuels. The American 'allergy' to global warming: why? http://news.yahoo.com/american-allergy-global-warming-why-171043981.html From martin.pecheux at free.fr Wed Nov 30 18:21:56 2011 From: martin.pecheux at free.fr (martin pecheux) Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 00:21:56 +0100 Subject: [Coral-List] Sustenable dive Message-ID: <92527FBD-8C6E-498D-A30E-7216EF35B341@free.fr> Dear Douglas, You are perfectly right in that CO2 from flights is a problem. I sometime think of Maldives which need dive tourists in the same time their flight CO2, through ocean acidification first and global warming, kill all their beautiful reefs, or the few remaining. The best now is encourage carbon compensation (I suppose that in a decade or two, it will be obligatory, may be even later with quota). The best Web site is from all points of view (Swiss/International independent organization, kind of projects, easy Web site) : www.myclimate.org (there is also www.donationshop.org, and www.treesfortravel.info, but what to do with woods at end ? The other sites are of flight companies). I do the calculation for my (rare travel) for the 12th ICRS travel from Paris to Cairns. Through Singapoor, I will emit 6.677 tonnes CO2, but I will pay 163? to compensate, that's OK. I think this must be strongly recommended for the ICRS participants. I calculate that, would the seawater pH be kept constant, very crudely all the CO2 would dissolve a 5 meters high x 100 m x100 m of reefal CaCO3, a good patch reef. Dr. Martin Pecheux IPCC 2007, 2013 Contributing Expert Institut des Foraminif?res Symbiotiques 16, rue Lafontaine 92160 Antony, France martin.pecheux at free.fr +33 9 5324 3374 From allison.billiam at gmail.com Wed Nov 30 18:53:44 2011 From: allison.billiam at gmail.com (Bill Allison) Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2011 18:53:44 -0500 Subject: [Coral-List] Sustainable tourism!? In-Reply-To: <1322603900.36217.YahooMailNeo@web162119.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <7d7b05a8376d93c2b6591c09b6712697.squirrel@webmail.univie.ac.at> <1322603900.36217.YahooMailNeo@web162119.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: RE. the deep water cooling, I wonder: 1). What is in the water brought up from depth and how it is to be disposed of? I know of one location that intended to release it into the beach berm. Perhaps closed circuit is the answer? 2). There is a danger that this "free" cooling will be an incentive for even less energy conservation. At many resorts the low-hanging fruit have yet to be picked. On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 4:58 PM, Douglas Fenner wrote: > I agree that the consumption of fossil fuels in flying to tropical > resorts is a major problem for dive tourism. Trying to reduce fossil fuel > burning is also a major problem for a lot of aspects of our lives, not just > dive tourism, and one we must solve, but most governments don't want to > act, and most individuals don't want to reduce their consumption or pay > extra to change to more sustainable ways. It is a major problem for the > whole world, and of course the world is warming which is threatening mass > coral mortality from bleaching and acidification that will increasingly > slow coral and coralline algae calcification, and together these threaten > to end coral reefs as we know them. > > I think we are going to have trouble getting traction just asking > people not to take vacations to go diving in the tropics, I doubt just > asking people not to do that will make much of a dent, and if it did it > would be a major economic hardship to many poor countries in the tropics > that depend heavily on tourism. But I think we might have better prospects > for trying to reduce fossil fuel consumption without reducing dive > tourism. (dive tourism, in spite of all the limitations, still provides an > economic incentive for people to protect reefs) One thought I have long > had is that if I could take half as many trips, but stay twice as long, I > could have as much diving fun and yet use half as much fossil fuel flying > there and back, which would also save me money. Another idea is that we > can fly carbon-neutral. There are companies that provide the service of > reducing greenhouse gas emissions somewhere in an amount equal to that > produced by > your part of a flight. They do things like reduce methane emissions from > land fills, which provides a relatively large effect for the cost (I was > tempted to say "bang for the buck" but with methane, maybe I won't light > that match! grin). Anyhow, the cost is surprisingly little for a fairly > long flight. The trick is to somehow get people to do this, because it is > an extra cost for their trip, and even though it is a small cost, the > traveler doesn't experience any immediate direct benefit themselves, other > than perhaps feeling a bit less guilty. But it has the potential to > neutralize the effect of flying on greenhouse gas production. > Resorts certainly use fossil fuels as well. One major form of this is > electricity for air conditioning, because the electricity is almost always > produced by burning fossil fuels. But there are alternatives, and one is > highly cost effective. Right offshore from most dive resorts there is cold > water only 1000 feet deep. A pipe and pump can bring that water up, > distribute it through heat exchangers to cool rooms, using a tiny amount of > electricity for the pump for the amount of cooling produced. The system > saves so much money that it quickly pays for itself, and then goes on > saving money and CO2 emissions long long after. A resort in Tahiti that > uses it loves it. I'm told that such a system is planned for Honolulu. > The piping is clearly the main hurdle. But unlike renewables like solar, > wind, and ocean thermal electricity generation, it is much less expensive > to run than current practice. > > My point is, that there are ways of greatly reducing greenhouse gas > emissions produced by dive tourism. We can do much better than we have > been doing without killing dive tourism. Dive tourism helps build a > natural constituency of people who love reefs and will stand up for them. > Doesn't seeing them first hand give us motivation to want to save them? > > Cheers, Doug > > > Douglas Fenner > Coral Reef Monitoring Ecologist > Dept Marine & Wildlife Resources > American Samoa > > > Mailing address: > PO Box 3730 > Pago Pago, AS 96799 > USA > > > work phone 684 633 4456 > > > Climate summit faces big emitters' stalling tactics > http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15894948 > > > Rich nations 'give up' on new climate treaty until 2020 > > http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/20/rich-nations-give-up-climate-treaty > > > Cold Comfort: Frigid Months Will Still Come in a Warming World > > http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2011/11/cold-comfort-frigid-months-will-.html?ref=em&elq=e2655e4e80274b0ca3710f83f4f572c9 > > > Greenhouse gases soar: no signs warming is slowed > > http://news.yahoo.com/greenhouse-gases-soar-no-signs-warming-slowed-220224145.html > > > Skeptic finds he now agrees global warming is real. > > http://news.yahoo.com/skeptic-finds-now-agrees-global-warming-real-142616605.html > > > In 2010, a survey of more than 1,000 of the world's most cited and > published climate scientists found that 97 percent believe climate change > is very likely caused by the burning of fossil fuels. > > > The American 'allergy' to global warming: why? > http://news.yahoo.com/american-allergy-global-warming-why-171043981.html > > > ________________________________ > From: Juergen Herler > To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 6:05 AM > Subject: [Coral-List] Sustainable tourism!? > > Dear listers! > > I really like some of the ideas, especially that well-managed coral reef > destinations should be certified and financially rewarded by visitors. > However, the main problem why I believe that tourism cannot contribute > much for sustaining ecosystems in general is that tourism in itself is > highly unsustainable. If you fly across half the world to spent one or two > nice weeks in one of the luxury resorts of the Maldives, which takes an > enormous amount of gasoline every day to be run in a comfortable way, how > can that ever save their coral reefs in the long term and not do major > damage to these and other ecosystems in the world? > It of course would be great if tourism would become more 'eco' (based for > example on some of the good suggestions in previous posts) but in terms of > energy consumption, there is no such thing as 'eco'-tourism. Sustainable > holidays will unfortunately only be the ones that are spent in the own > garden. But since people will certainly not accept that, it is of course > good if they prefer short- versus long-distance trips and destinations, > which perform good conservation and are highly efficient in terms of water > and energy consumption, but such destinations are usually expensive and > restricted to the more wealthy people, which do not represent the majority > of tourists. I have been doing research in the Red Sea of Egypt for more > than seven years and this country has experienced a tremendous tourism > boom, especially along the Red Sea coast, but unfortunately they receive > many tourists which carry little money to Egypt and do not care much about > corals reefs at all. The great majority are even not divers and do not > like corals (because it hurts when they step on them during swimming). I > also doubt that it is is a very humane approach that we preserve > ecosystems (especially those of third world countries) because wealthy > people from other countries - who can afford to travel there - would like > to see them untouched. Very often you meet tourists who wish that, for > example, fishing is banned from reefs so that they can see more fish while > diving, but this fish very often feeds the local people (although they > very often also do not fish sustainably). > This all may apply less to destinations (just for example) like the > Caribbean, when visited by US-tourists from the southern USA or to the > Great Barrier Reef, visited by eastern Australians, but what I want to say > is that it is just not correct to tell people that they do something good > for an ecosystem if they travel a long distance to see it, instead of not > visiting it, at least as long as tourism is run the way as it currently is > (usually starting in pristine areas and degrading those areas quickly). I > know this is a dilemma, but Ulf?s suggestion of a sustainability index > could be applied to holiday trips also, and tax the travel and service > providers according to that would be a necessary thing. So people could > not easily shift to cheaper and unsustainable travels or destinations (and > there are far too many of those in the world), if the sustainable ones > become even more expensive (and some of the previous suggestions would of > course cause that). People with less money would probably have to make > shorter-distance trips and stay there longer, which for sure would still > enable nice holidays. Today, people are 'fined' if they decide for more > sustainable holidays. From my point of view, this cannot be the right > approach. > > Best wishes > Juergen > > > -- > < > Dr. Juergen Herler > Faculty of Life Sciences > University of Vienna > Althanstra?e 14 > A-1090 Vienna/Austria/Europe > e-mail: Juergen.Herler at univie.ac.at > http://homepage.univie.ac.at/juergen.herler > > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > _______________________________________________ > Coral-List mailing list > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list > -- ________________________________ Is this how science illuminates "reality"? - "the meaning of an episode was not inside like a kernel but outside, enveloping the talk which brought it out only as a glow brings out a haze." - narrator's comment about Marlow's tale-telling, in Heart of Darkness (Conrad) From julian at reefcheck.org.my Wed Nov 30 19:43:35 2011 From: julian at reefcheck.org.my (Julian @ Reef Check) Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2011 08:43:35 +0800 Subject: [Coral-List] Sustainable Coral Reef/Dive Operator Certification In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000901ccafc2$45513d50$cff3b7f0$@org.my> Dear all I have been following this thread with great interest, and it has proven very useful. I have posted on a similar theme before. As a former dive centre owner and now manager of Reef Check Malaysia (poacher turned gamekeeper???) this is a constant theme. To put it in words that the tourism industry can understand has been a useful approach for me in the past, and will probably be so in the future. Along the lines of: How can the diving industry treat its main business asset (ie., the coral reef) with such disdain? They don't do any maintenance or servicing, and don't even pay for it in the first place. Any manufacturing company that did the same would soon go out of business. We are currently involved with some snorkel businesses on the west coast of Malaysia, who have realised that various impacts over the last 10-15 years have destroyed their reefs...so they have come forward themselves to ask for assistance to try to rehabilitate their reefs. I don't want to get into a scientific discussion on reef rehab - I leave that to the scientists we are working with - but the main driver is the economic losses they are facing, not the ecological losses. It is a lesson we are trying to spread to other operators on other islands. Chad's scheme sounds like an excellent, practical scheme which will at least get people up to speed on the issues. I particularly like the way that he is moving beyond what amount to no more than green labelling schemes to actually requiring participants to take action. We will be launching something similar next year. Regards Julian Hyde General Manager Reef Check Malaysia Bhd 03 2161 5948 www.reefcheck.org.my Follow us on Facebook at www.facebook.com/rcmalaysia "The bottom line of the Millenium Assessment findings is that human actions are depleting Earth's natural capital, putting such strain on the environment that the ability of the planet's ecosystems to sustain future generations can no longer be taken for granted." -----Original Message----- From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Chad Scott Sent: Wednesday, 30 November, 2011 4:37 PM To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Sustainable Coral Reef/Dive Operator Certification In response to the talks on the sustainable coral reef/dive operator certification discussion: Many of you have raised some very valuable and important points pertaining to this debate. I currently work with dive schools on the island of Koh Tao in the Gulf of Thailand. Our island of only 19 square kilometers has over 42 dive schools, and issues over 40,000 PADI certifications each year (plus we also have SSI, BSAC, and CMAS schools, but I lack data for them). 5 years ago when I came to the island it was obvious that most dive schools had no idea how to protect or help the reefs, in fact most instructors I worked with couldn't even tell live coral from dead ones. While I don't want to reiterate the points already stated, I hope to add to them with my experience. In order to set themselves apart and join the 'eco' trend, many of Koh Tao's dive schools are promoting themselves as eco friendly just by doing the things any responsible business should do (recycling, planting around the resort, using natural lighting, maintaining boats to prevent oil leakage, etc.) While these actions are commendable, they should not justify receiving an 'eco award'. Our group, the Save Koh Tao Marine Branch, looks past all of these types of actions to real actions which are more difficult to obtain, but still within reach of dive businesses. The following list is the standards and guidelines which must be adopted by the schools to be endorsed by our group: - Conduct regular reef checks. (The Save Koh Tao/SSI EMP, ReefWatch, Greenfins, or Reef Check International methods are all acceptable for this requirement.) - Require that all instructors/DMs learn to do a reef check - Instruct all boat and shop employees as to proper safety and environmental care techniques - Participate and donate boats/equipment to at least 60% of the Save Koh Tao Marine Branch monthly clean-up events. - Conduct monthly or weekly clean-ups independent of the group monthly clean-ups - Attend at least 60% of the Marine Branch Monthly meetings - Provide environmental briefings to all snorkelers and divers, do not provide fins or shoes to snorkelers - Provide recycling at dive school and from the boats (including batteries) - No fishing, spear fishing, or collecting of organisms from dive boats Furthermore, each dive school that wants to be recognized by our group must adopt a reef site, which the requirements are: - Being the representative for a reporting system of illegal fishing/collection or other threats to reef health. Meaning that if you or somebody else sees a problem in your 'adopted reef' that you would be responsible for passing that information of to the Deparmetn of Marine and Coastal Resources or Marine Fisheries Dept. - Once per month your business would need to conduct a simple transect survey to count giant clams, sea urchins, sea cucumbers, and other commonly collected organisms. - After being trained, your school can construct cheap and easy to build coral nurseries (mid-water, mineral accretion, etc) to rehabilitate broken or damaged corals, and maintain those nurseries at least once per month. - When necessary, removing fishing nets/cages that have drifted into or caught on the reef - At least once per month organize a beach/underwater clean-up with the business around you - Monitoring/maintaining mooring buoys at your site Although these actions are sometimes difficult for dive schools, they are all achievable. We have about 8-9 dive schools which continually meet or exceed these requirements. Most of them require no outside funding, but maybe a bit of assistance to get them started and ensure that they continue. I would not say we have solved all of the issues you have raised, but I think through these and similar programs we have made great strides in protecting reefs and putting an end to the boom-bust cycle described by Monika and others. While these don't address the issues of resort construction, we do have separate initiates pertaining to that, and anyways by training the divers those types of initiatives follow close behind. Divers are involved in these programs every step of the way, and the main value of the programs is increasing the awareness and knowledge of the professional divers and their students. In fact, many of the school's base diver training programs around these requirements so that doing things like monitoring, installing mooring lines, and building coral nurseries actually creates an income stream for them. Instead of divers paying a tax that may or may not go towards good projects, the divers pay to be trained in conservation techniques and help with the actual projects. I know that Koh Tao still has a long way to go, but I hope that others can learn from our mistakes and our achievements. For more info on our group check out www.marineconservationkohtao.com. And to see how these models can be put into action, without outside funding, check out these dive schools webpage's: http://www.newheavendiveschool.com/en/marine-conservation http://www.ecokohtao.com/ (@Crystal Dive Resort) http://www.kohexist.com Thanks -- Chad Scott Marine Project Coordinator Save Koh Tao Marine Branch Find more information on our webpages Save Koh Tao Save Koh Tao Marine Branch New Heaven Reef Conservation Program Or our Facebook Groups: Save Koh Tao Save Koh Tao Marine Branch New Heaven Reef Conservation Program _______________________________________________ Coral-List mailing list Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list