[Coral-List] Cory of Coral
Kaufman, Leslie S
lesk at bu.edu
Wed Dec 19 18:27:37 EST 2012
Dear Dennis and everybody,
As scientific director (and animal wrangler) for City of Coral, I failed to circumvent the waving of Acropora, but man am I delighted that anybody remembers that film!!! Dennis, you are OLD!
Les Kaufman
Professor of Biology
Boston University Marine Program
And
Marine Conservation Fellow
Conservation International
Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 19, 2012, at 3:37 PM, "coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" <coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> 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: Listing Criteria Observation (Steve Mussman)
> 2. Re: Listing Criteria Observation (Delbeek, Charles)
> 3. The listing and coral species identification (McKeon, Sea)
> 4. Effective communications tools? (Kate Jirik)
> 5. Listing Criteria Observation (Eugene Shinn)
> 6. Re: Listing Criteria Observation (Jon Skrapits)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 12:28:10 -0500 (EST)
> From: Steve Mussman <sealab at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Listing Criteria Observation
> To: Jon Skrapits <jon at treasurecoastcorals.com>
> Cc: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
> Message-ID:
> <20831341.1355938090469.JavaMail.root at elwamui-little.atl.sa.earthlink.net>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
>
> Jon,
> It is understandable that you have trepidation regarding regulations
> affecting your business interests, but to suggest that government
> intervention will likely worsen the problem as it relates to the
> sustainability of our coral reefs I believe is unfounded. There are many
> examples of regulations that have been enacted involving marine ecosystems
> and fisheries that in fact have proven beneficial to all including
> commercial interests. It is also true that initially many of these
> restrictions were met with opposition only to be later recognized as
> effective and restorative. At the risk of Gene telling me that I'm sounding
> like Karl Marx, total opposition to all regulation is not the approach taken
> by most responsible businesses and many industries have come to recognize
> that a growing and sustainable economy requires a sophisticated and
> strategic partnership between government and the private sector.
> Regards,
> Steve
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jon Skrapits
> Sent: Dec 18, 2012 6:04 PM
> To: Douglas Fenner
> Cc: coral list , Steve Mussman
> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Listing Criteria Observation
>
> Hey Doug,
>
> You keep referring to the tragedy of the commons dilemma. One particular
> case of this was our early settlers. They almost didn't make it due to
> public ownership of land and resources.
>
> How did they fix it? Elinor Ostrom suggested that non local or gov.
> Intervention would worsen this problem and that local people are better
> suited to solve this. Mariculture is a great means towards sustainability
> for the aquarium trade and for the indigenous people. What I fear is that
> regulations such as these cause problems down the road when more species
> of coral die since the ocean is in decline as a desirable coral habitat.
> That is, more regulations because the first round didn't work. This is
> always how gov. Operates. It never gets rid of regulations. Plus, how will
> the gov ensure that no banned species are in aquariums after the ban? What
> about pre-ban acquisitions? Will it be illegal to possessing them? If so,
> I am throwing my stuff in the Atlantic. You see.... There are many
> externalities that would arise. Gov. Good intentions usually produce bad
> results.
>
> Anyone know the answer to this?
> Is Apal and Acer on the rebound since being listed? If the FL Keys were
> suitable for them to thrive they wouldn't need human help via propagation
> once banned from harvest. They would thrive beyond belief. Much like a
> nuisance coral in an aquarium that is left un-fragmented. Unless I inject
> one of the man made problems we can't seem to agree upon as the main
> problem for reefs declining.
>
> I believe there is no regulation or cultural change that is on the live to
> slow the decline of our reefs. Even if there was, it would still take a
> decade or more to see any positive benefit. If I am right, choose your
> regulations or education of people wisely.
>
> On Dec 18, 2012 5:18 PM, "Douglas Fenner" <[1]douglasfennertassi at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> The restrictions imposed by ESA (Endangered Species Act) on imported corals
> will only affect those listed out of the 66 species proposed, out of over
> 790 reef coral species in the world. The other 724+ species will be
> unaffected. How does that make it so that studies of coral aquaculture
> can't be done?? This proposed ESA listing also doesn't affect the many
> other reef species that are imported which can be aquacultured, such as
> fish, invertebrates, etc.
> I continue to disagree with the view that exploitation of wild species will
> cause the exploiters to value the natural ecosystem. The incentive is in
> fact to exploit, not protect. Fisheries are a great example of this, the
> economic incentive is to fish until it is no longer profitable to fish. In
> other words, fish until there are so few fish left that they are
> economically extinct (though not biologically extinct). Collecting corals
> is a fishery, like collecting (=catching) tuna or any other fish. The
> Status Report on the 82 species petitioned points out that collecting for
> the aquarium trade is one of the more minor threats to these species, as it
> surely is. But all mortality contributes to the decline of a species.
> I suggest that non-consumptive uses have a greater incentive for conserving
> natural ecosystems than exploitation, particularly when the use depends on
> high quality ecosystem. Diving can fit that bill, when divers can tell the
> difference between living and dead reef, and because they love really big
> fish, and lots of fish. Aquaculture does have the potential to avoid the
> exploitation of wild stocks, which would be good. I am told that at least
> in the past, some or many aquaculture projects actually were grow-outs,
> where wild corals continued to be collected, broken into fragments which
> were then grown and exported. The advantage of aquarium-grown corals in the
> country where the coral is sold is that no additional wild collecting is
> necessary.
> Does anybody have a reference to the "new study" referred to in this
> article?
> Cheers, Doug
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Jon Skrapits
> <[2]jon at treasurecoastcorals.com> wrote:
>
> Agreed Steve,
> I was being sarcastic about the parrot and trying to show that they are a
> benefit but at a quick glance it may seem as though they are destructive.
> Check this out.
> [3]http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/17/finding-a-place-for-coral-far
> ms-in-a-changing-ocean/
> How can we develop scientific studies on the benefits of aquaculture if we
> never pursue that avenue due to restrictions.
>
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Steve Mussman <[4]sealab at earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>> Jon,
>>
>> In response to your side note:
>
>> **
>
>> "If limiting actions that deplete the ocean such as
>> harvesting coral to grow it, then why aren't we destroying parrot fish
> that
>> eat the coral? I blame them for the destruction of the reef".
>>
>> A paper by the Universities of Exeter and California Davis, published
>> November 1, 2007 in Nature explains that Parrotfish are now the sole
>> grazers of seaweed on many Caribbean reefs, but fishing has limited their
>> numbers. With insufficient Parrotfish grazing, corals are unable to
>> recover after major disturbances like hurricanes and become much less
>> healthy as a result. The paper argues that in order to secure a future
>> for coral reefs, particularly in light of the predicted impact of climate
>> change, Parrotfish need to be protected. The good news is that we can
>> take practical steps to protect Parrotfish and help reef regeneration. We
>> recommend a change in policy to establish controls over the use of fish
>> traps, which Parrotfish are particularly vulnerable to. We also call on
>> anyone who visits the Caribbean and sees Parrotfish on a restaurant menu
> to
>> voice their concern to the management.
>>
>> This research was published in Nature: vol 450, issue 7166.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Steve
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>
>>> From: Jon Skrapits **
>>> Sent: Dec 18, 2012 10:24 AM
>>> To: [5]coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>>> Subject: [Coral-List] Listing Criteria Observation
>>>
>>> I looked over the criteria the best I could. I apologize if I
>> misunderstood
>>> but it seems as though the driving factor for determining the listing of
> a
>>> coral is by counting the number of animals distributed in an ecosystem.
>>> Then many different hypotheses are thrown out to state a personal case or
>>> blame a general global phenomenon or "problem." I never heard more
>> specific
>>> questions such as these.
>>>
>>> What does an acropora(or other corals) look like when it is subjected to
>>> low pH?
>>> How about inadequate flow?(How can a fragmentation survive if you place
> it
>>> improperly?)
>>> How about elevated levels of nitrates?(does it even affect them?)
>>> Phosphates?
>>> Insufficient calcium levels?
>>> What about the overall chemistry of seawater when Magnesium is low?
>>> Temp fluctuations?
>>> Effects of a changing ecosystem causing a lack of food for corals?
>>> Do corals really need fish or is it the other way around?( I have many
>>> systems w/out fish and pleny of corals)
>>>
>>> These and many other questions must be answered every hour in aquaculture
>>> and guessing wrong causes mass deaths in some cases. Much can be learned
>>> from this.
>>>
>>>
>>> On a side note.... If limiting actions that deplete the ocean such as
>>> harvesting coral to grow it, then why aren't we destroying parrot fish
>> that
>>> eat the coral? I blame them for the destruction of the reefs.
>>>
>>> As I have said many times, gov. regulation will only kill the reefs.
>> Making
>>> it a profitable venture will save them. Educate not regulate. If we can't
>>> agree on what is killing the reefs and change our habits, the ocean will
>>> not improve and the corals will sit on the reef awaiting their demise.
> Are
>>> the oceans improving? What are we doing to improve that? Just ban
>>> havesting? That is the answer? I will collect as many species as possible
>>> to have a genetic pool of hearty corals that have been through
>> fluctuations
>>> and hopefully one day I can help or my kids can help to replant the
> ocean.
>>> I will watch the rest of mankind squabble over what they think is the
>>> problem as it worsens. Maybe we will knock off parrot fish as a last
>> resort
>>> if they are still alive.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks,
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Coral-List mailing list
>>> [6]Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>>> [7]http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>
>> **
>
> --
> Thanks,
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> [8]Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> [9]http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>
> --
> Dept. Marine & Wildlife Resources, American Samoan Government
> PO Box 7390
> Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799 USA
>
> References
>
> 1. mailto:douglasfennertassi at gmail.com
> 2. mailto:jon at treasurecoastcorals.com
> 3. http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/17/finding-a-place-for-coral-farms-in-a-changing-ocean/
> 4. mailto:sealab at earthlink.net
> 5. mailto:coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa..gov
> 6. mailto:Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> 7. http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> 8. mailto:Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> 9. http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 10:13:42 -0800
> From: "Delbeek, Charles" <CDelbeek at calacademy.org>
> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Listing Criteria Observation
> Cc: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
> Message-ID:
> <09DB2E532F2E564EAA2B49C495D7CDB15D4D551AF8 at MAILBOXCLUSTER.calacademy.org>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
> This reminds me of a comment overheard between a woman and her elementary aged daughter as she read the ID label for an exhibit of a preserved coelacanth "Look honey, this fish was extinct and then they found more. Just goes to show ... you can't trust what a scientist tells you." Yes people, we have an image problem and we have a major scientific literacy problem in this country. I think that many institutions should put a much greater effort into training their staff on a) how to give effective presentations and b) how to interact with the media.
>
> Best regards,
>
> J. Charles Delbeek, M.Sc.
> Assistant Curator, Steinhart Aquarium
> California Academy of Sciences
>
> p 415.379.5303
> f. 415.379.5304
> cdelbeek at calacademy.org
> www.calacademy.org
>
> 55 Music Concourse Drive
> Golden Gate Park
> San Francisco, CA 94118
>
> Facebook | Twitter
>
> 'Tis the Season for Science - Now through January 6.
> Meet live reindeer, experience indoor snow flurries,
> and learn how animals adapt to winter.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Dennis Hubbard
> Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 6:22 AM
> To: Szmant, Alina
> Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov; Jon Skrapits
> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Listing Criteria Observation
>
> Alina makes an excellent point that I have thought about many times. We, as
> scientists, are not particularly good at public speaking. Yes, we stand in
> front of (hopefully) huge audiences at international conventions and are
> (again hopefully) asked by colleagues to give lectures to various academic
> audiences. But, few of us are particularly good at laying out our ideas in
> a public forum (let alone a hostile one). This is not for lack of good
> intentions, but the reality is that MOST of us don't take on these public
> opportunities as carefully as we might. In academic circles, we double- and
> triple-check our slides and what we have in them (well, some of us do
> anyway - we've all been to one of those talks where you wish someone had
> taken Gene up on his suggestions to have a basket of duck calls at the
> entrance to blow on when you see an awful slide). But, in public, we either
> don't have control of the medium we are using (TV, radio) or we simply
> aren't as careful and assume the venue will be similar to a professional
> meeting. Two examples come to mind, and I use them because these are
> friends (at least I hope they still will be) and well-respected scientists.
> Also, I cinsider them to be among the very best of us at public advocacy.
>
> When I was still at West Indies Laboratory, a movie outlet produced "City
> of Coral". They had the appropriate star sitting on the gunwale of a whaler
> and John Ogden sitting on the other. Over they went to view the reef. Enter
> the narrator...." as they swim over the fields of *Acropora
> cervicornis*waving in the current". OK, missing gorgonians didn't put
> staghorn on the
> endangered list, but this gaff is still in the movie. On another instance,
> I saw Jim Porter on something like CNN describing their recent surveys of
> the Florida Keys well after the decimation of *A. palmata*. He made the
> point that the species was exceedingly rare - that it just wasn't there or
> it was sufficiently rare that it didn't appear in a single quadra... can't
> remember which. BUT..... the station had either gone through some video he
> brought with him or had stock video from somewhere else and picked the most
> striking segment. You guessed it..... non-stop healthy stands of *A. palmata
> *.
>
> So, coming back to Alina's post, we have to be very careful when we step
> outside the protected walls of the scientific cloister. There are things I
> discuss in class or mention in this forum that I am scared to death to
> mention in a public form full of skeptics. I believe that the apparent
> dies-back of *A. palmata* ca 6,000 and 3,000 years ago is important and is
> telling us something important about the species. I still don't know what
> that is, but I'd really hesitate to bring this up in a more skeptical
> setting where there are many opportunities to take this out of context and
> post something like, "Scientists report *Acropora* went extinct and came
> back from the dead..... twice!!!" So, we need to take control of our
> science and make sure it is well represented - I am assuming, of course,
> that the "scientist didn't believe it was acidification making rings on
> corals, in which case we have a bigger problem.
>
> Dennis
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 10:16 PM, Szmant, Alina <szmanta at uncw.edu> wrote:
>
>> Wow! The first sentence in the article pointed to by the link below has
>> left me speechless (but luckily I can still type!).
>>
>> It shows a photo of some A cervicornis with some strips of tissue missing
>> (likely Coralliophila predation or some such), and the caption below this
>> photo reads:
>>
>> "Staghorn coral afflicted by whitening, which is associated with ocean
>> acidification and rising ocean temperatures.".
>>
>> This kind of pseudo-reporting and sensationalism by whomever wrote this
>> article and whomever scientist was interviewed is a large part of the
>> problem of why people stop believing 'scientists'. Ocean acidification has
>> not reached levels in any place in the Caribbean to have any possible or
>> even dreamed about physiological effects on staghorn coral, and cannot at
>> all be responsible for the lesions visible in the photograph. Nor can
>> "rising ocean temperatures" which can cause bleaching but that is NOT what
>> this photo shows.
>>
>> Can we please get back to real science and have some quality control over
>> what information is broadly disseminated?
>>
>> *************************************************************************
>> 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 Jon Skrapits
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 2:26 PM
>> To: Steve Mussman
>> Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Listing Criteria Observation
>>
>> Agreed Steve,
>>
>> I was being sarcastic about the parrot and trying to show that they are a
>> benefit but at a quick glance it may seem as though they are destructive..
>>
>> Check this out.
>>
>>
>> http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/17/finding-a-place-for-coral-farms-in-a-changing-ocean/
>>
>> How can we develop scientific studies on the benefits of aquaculture if we
>> never pursue that avenue due to restrictions.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Steve Mussman <sealab at earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Jon,
>>>
>>> In response to your side note:
>>>
>>> **
>>> "If limiting actions that deplete the ocean such as harvesting coral
>>> to grow it, then why aren't we destroying parrot fish that eat the
>>> coral? I blame them for the destruction of the reef".
>>>
>>> A paper by the Universities of Exeter and California Davis, published
>>> November 1, 2007 in Nature explains that Parrotfish are now the sole
>>> grazers of seaweed on many Caribbean reefs, but fishing has limited
>>> their numbers. With insufficient Parrotfish grazing, corals are unable
>>> to recover after major disturbances like hurricanes and become much
>>> less healthy as a result. The paper argues that in order to secure a
>>> future for coral reefs, particularly in light of the predicted impact
>>> of climate change, Parrotfish need to be protected. The good news is
>>> that we can take practical steps to protect Parrotfish and help reef
>>> regeneration. We recommend a change in policy to establish controls
>>> over the use of fish traps, which Parrotfish are particularly
>>> vulnerable to. We also call on anyone who visits the Caribbean and
>>> sees Parrotfish on a restaurant menu to voice their concern to the
>> management.
>>>
>>> This research was published in Nature: vol 450, issue 7166.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Steve
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Jon Skrapits **
>>>> Sent: Dec 18, 2012 10:24 AM
>>>> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>>>> Subject: [Coral-List] Listing Criteria Observation
>>>>
>>>> I looked over the criteria the best I could. I apologize if I
>>> misunderstood
>>>> but it seems as though the driving factor for determining the listing
>>>> of a coral is by counting the number of animals distributed in an
>> ecosystem.
>>>> Then many different hypotheses are thrown out to state a personal
>>>> case or blame a general global phenomenon or "problem." I never heard
>>>> more
>>> specific
>>>> questions such as these.
>>>>
>>>> What does an acropora(or other corals) look like when it is subjected
>>>> to low pH?
>>>> How about inadequate flow?(How can a fragmentation survive if you
>>>> place it
>>>> improperly?)
>>>> How about elevated levels of nitrates?(does it even affect them?)
>>>> Phosphates?
>>>> Insufficient calcium levels?
>>>> What about the overall chemistry of seawater when Magnesium is low?
>>>> Temp fluctuations?
>>>> Effects of a changing ecosystem causing a lack of food for corals?
>>>> Do corals really need fish or is it the other way around?( I have
>>>> many systems w/out fish and pleny of corals)
>>>>
>>>> These and many other questions must be answered every hour in
>>>> aquaculture and guessing wrong causes mass deaths in some cases. Much
>>>> can be learned from this.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On a side note.... If limiting actions that deplete the ocean such as
>>>> harvesting coral to grow it, then why aren't we destroying parrot
>>>> fish
>>> that
>>>> eat the coral? I blame them for the destruction of the reefs.
>>>>
>>>> As I have said many times, gov. regulation will only kill the reefs.
>>> Making
>>>> it a profitable venture will save them. Educate not regulate. If we
>>>> can't agree on what is killing the reefs and change our habits, the
>>>> ocean will not improve and the corals will sit on the reef awaiting
>>>> their demise. Are the oceans improving? What are we doing to improve
>>>> that? Just ban havesting? That is the answer? I will collect as many
>>>> species as possible to have a genetic pool of hearty corals that have
>>>> been through
>>> fluctuations
>>>> and hopefully one day I can help or my kids can help to replant the
>> ocean.
>>>> I will watch the rest of mankind squabble over what they think is the
>>>> problem as it worsens. Maybe we will knock off parrot fish as a last
>>> resort
>>>> if they are still alive.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Coral-List mailing list
>>>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>>>> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>>> **
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Thanks,
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>
>
>
> --
> Dennis Hubbard
> Dept of Geology-Oberlin College Oberlin OH 44074
> (440) 775-8346
>
> * "When you get on the wrong train.... every stop is the wrong stop"*
> Benjamin Stein: "*Ludes, A Ballad of the Drug and the Dream*"
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 13:20:23 -0500
> From: "McKeon, Sea" <McKeonS at si.edu>
> Subject: [Coral-List] The listing and coral species identification
> To: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
> Message-ID: <E05D0E6C-AA2E-4AF9-976C-061380F76D28 at si.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
>
> Hi all,
> With regards to the proposed listing, I am concerned about the conflicted role of taxonomy and systematics will play in implementation.
> Looking only at the Pocilloporids as an example, the proposal documents our confused understanding of 'species'. The identification offered of Pocillopora danae in the NOAA document consists of two sentences: "Colonies of Pocillopora danae may be greater than 1 m across and are composed of irregular, mostly prostrate branches that tend to form a three-dimensional tangle. Verrucae are widely spaced and irregular in size, although they remain distinct from branches. Colonies are usually cream, brown or pink in color (Veron, 2000)." This description falls well within the range of possible growth forms of other Pocillopora 'species'. No mention of calyx characters, or anything that would separate or identify P. danae in a reliable or systematic manner. Many (?most?) individuals cannot be assigned to species using the original descriptions without an in-situ understanding of the effects of depth and water movement on the growth form of an individual colony. Removed from th
> is context, colony morphology is all but useless- and all too often the only characteristic used in a species 'identification.'
> Add to this the genetic and genomic studies of Pocilloporids, and the situation only becomes more confused, with signatures of hybridization, introgression, and regional mixing rampant. The documents provided by NOAA say as much: "While recent genetic work places all pocilloporid taxonomy based solely on morphology and ecology into question, there was no particular information available to identify taxonomic problems with Pocillopora danae."
> (pg 156 - http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/stories/2012/05/docs/010_corals_status_review_indo_pac1.pdf )
> I am fully in support of conservation measures to protect and enhance corals and coral reefs. However, it seems premature to list taxa that we cannot reliably identify, let alone expect enforcement agents or resource managers to do what coral scientists cannot. The handful of experts in coral identification themselves find the issues in species level identification vexing. Identifiable taxa (such as the two species of Caribbean Acropora) may benefit from species-based conservation measures. The listing of taxa that are less understood, which seems to be the majority of the proposed species, is of more dubious value.
> But perhaps I've misunderstood, will there be some sort of identification tools developed and offered to the managers who need to implement the listing?
> Seabird McKeon
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 10:22:17 -0800 (PST)
> From: Kate Jirik <katejirik at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [Coral-List] Effective communications tools?
> To: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
> Message-ID:
> <1355941337.79145.YahooMailNeo at web160801.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hi Katie,
>
> It is important to determine the goals/outcomes and target audience for your outreach project before choosing a mode of communication (e.g. video, documentary). Is your goal to raise awareness, influence policy, change industry practice, promote consumer behavior change, etc.?
>
> Generally, there is an inverse
> relationship between audience reach and behavior change (though the theory behind this is still being developed). It may be that smaller-group interactions, where feedback can be given, are appropriate for your projects--but a more effective approach is needed. One tool, which has been recommended to me by social scientists conducting empirical research in this field, is community-based social marketing. Values-based messaging is another tool that is helpful for the ecology/conservation work I do.
>
>
> Remember to spend the time and effort to identify barriers to specific behaviors and to pilot test your program.
>
> Best,
>
> Kate Jirik?
>
> ----------------------
> Kate Jirik
> Birch Aquarium at Scripps Institution of Oceanography
> University of California, San Diego
> 9500 Gilman Drive, Dept 0207
> La Jolla, CA 92093-0207
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 11:25:53 -0400
> From: Katherine McLean <kmclean at lakeheadu.ca>
> Subject: [Coral-List] Effective communications tools?
> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> Message-ID:
> ??? <CAGZfut8XVtoh7UJf83SgH9fT+n0VqZA5fAVkZe+ccC0ZdaDC0g at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> I work with a small eNGO that operates in the Caribbean. One of the major
> challenges I am currently facing is the development of effective outreach
> and education campaigns to support our various projects. These projects
> generally deal with coastal resource management issues (fishing, coastal
> development? the usual for a small Caribbean Island). I am hoping that
> there are some of you out there who have recommendations of particularly
> effective communications tools that have been successful in community
> outreach efforts..
>
> I am not sure that our pamphlets and other papers are very well received by
> fisherfolk, and community meetings are often expensive and poorly attended.
> We are starting to try out hand at videos/documentaries.
>
>
>
> Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Please contact me at
> kmclean at lakeheadu.ca.
>
> Thanks and happy holidays!
>
>
>
> Katie McLean
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 13:48:19 -0500
> From: Eugene Shinn <eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
> Subject: [Coral-List] Listing Criteria Observation
> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> Message-ID: <a062309ceccf7b9db0ec4@[131.247.136.119]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>
> Steve, I know Parrot fish are a delicacy in the Pacific. They are
> protected in the Fla Keys and at anytime of day you can watch them
> biting chunks out of live coral especially Montastrea sp. Once they
> are listed we might want to consider spearing them to protect the
> coral from" harm." Since it was discovered that the listed Spotted
> Owl in old Growth Forests is declining due to predation by Barred
> Owls the Fish and Wild Life Service is shooting the Barred Owls. If
> it works for Spotted Owls maybe it will work for corals...Outrageous
> eh? Well who knows what the future will bring in the world of
> government regulations and unintended consequences. 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
> <eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
> Tel 727 553-1158----------------------------------
> -----------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 14:20:51 -0500
> From: Jon Skrapits <jon at treasurecoastcorals.com>
> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Listing Criteria Observation
> To: Steve Mussman <sealab at earthlink.net>
> Cc: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
> Message-ID:
> <CABjAmuv4BMyzJFON1xhDPMookaUUdJmLAY1p9APYor1pA7A+OA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Steve and Dr. Szmant,
>
> Is government intervention founded to save the reefs? Are listed species in
> FL on the rebound?
>
> I understand that certain animals would benefit by restrictions but I don't
> believe this is the case with coral. If over fishing, eutrophication,
> global warming, marine ornamental harvest, ocean acidification, and other
> debated causes are the problem then how will keeping the corals in the
> ocean save them? Just as if our environment was declining due to slowly
> elevating carbon monoxide levels or something else(imagine), staying here
> would only seal our slow fate. Some would die before others but staying
> here wouldn't be an option unless we reversed the trend which could take
> decades and by that point we could be extinct.
>
> If the ESA passes the proposed restrictions how would the FWC or any other
> governing authority determine if the species in front of them is legal or
> not? How will they determine if it was aquacultured or not? Aquaculture is
> a friend to preserving the reefs. Need me to send you a clipping from one
> of my 600 species for studying? Or should I hire a Dr. to write articles to
> gain legitimacy on what is observed daily with the corals in my facility?
> Does a dive show the same data upon observing a wild reef that I have
> learned from my grown reef? It is much more intimate and species specific
> on land since I don't have to hold my breath. Granted, the conditions are
> not the same as in the wild but that does not mean data is totally
> worthless. I have specimens that I have farmed for years that are
> bulletproof and other that are very fragile. I see valid points in all
> arguments for the mentioned issues destroying the reefs yet I can see where
> they can be incorrect from the work I do. Not all scholarly articles are
> 100% accurate over time. If they were the reefs would be rebounding from
> the years of agreed upon articles that are 100% accurate stating how to
> save the reefs. There would also be zero disagreement about the causes of
> why corals are dying.
>
> Furthermore, what gives the government or anyone the right to restrict
> something when we aren't 100% sure of the causes or how we are going to fix
> the causes? Maybe the cause and solution haven't been found yet? I have
> seen many corals show signs of die off while next to other corals that are
> 100% healthy. Then they rebound and do fine while nothing apparent has
> changed. I have also kept pieces of Acropora for years with no problem and
> thought they were bulletproof only to look at them in the morning and they
> have lost all tissue for no apparent reason. Predation is not an option
> since I quarantine and treat for any predators. I can saw corals in half
> and they beg for more yet a slight swing in temp can do them in.
>
> Dr. Szmant,
>
>> "Can we please get back to real science and have some quality control over
>> what information is broadly disseminated?"
>
> Apologies for not using only scholarly articles. I didn't realize we were
> being graded in this classroom. Also, the reefs need the average person
> reading articles they can understand to become aware of the problems
> encouraging them to get involved. Peer reviewed will not accomplish this.
> The internet makes the average person "smarter" since there is access to
> anything you want to learn.
>
> The point of sharing the link was to show that there are findings in a peer
> reviewed article cited by the NY Times(albeit poor science in the Times
> article) that supports aquaculture as a sustainable means for the aquarium
> industry. Why not use aquaculture for studying coral in a laboratory as
> well and why not teach indigenous islanders to mariculture? Couldn't we
> harvest and re-populate the reefs infinitely once we find the cure for the
> die off?
>
> Nevertheless, your point was well taken and it won't happen again. We are
> both trying to help.
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Steve Mussman <sealab at earthlink.net>wrote:
>
>>
>> Jon,
>>
>> It is understandable that you have trepidation regarding regulations
>> affecting your business interests, but to suggest that government
>> intervention will likely worsen the problem as it relates to the
>> sustainability of our coral reefs I believe is unfounded. There are many
>> examples of regulations that have been enacted involving marine
>> ecosystems and fisheries that in fact have proven beneficial to all
>> including commercial interests. It is also true that initially many of
>> these restrictions were met with opposition only to be later recognized as
>> effective and restorative. At the risk of Gene telling me that I'm
>> sounding like Karl Marx, total opposition to all regulation is not the
>> approach taken by most responsible businesses and many industries have
>> come to recognize that a growing and sustainable economy requires asophisticated and
>> strategic partnership between government and the private sector.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Steve
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jon Skrapits **
>> Sent: Dec 18, 2012 6:04 PM
>> To: Douglas Fenner **
>> Cc: coral list **, Steve Mussman **
>> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Listing Criteria Observation
>>
>> Hey Doug,
>>
>> You keep referring to the tragedy of the commons dilemma. One particular
>> case of this was our early settlers. They almost didn't make it due to
>> public ownership of land and resources.
>>
>> How did they fix it? Elinor Ostrom suggested that non local or gov.
>> Intervention would worsen this problem and that local people are better
>> suited to solve this. Mariculture is a great means towards sustainability
>> for the aquarium trade and for the indigenous people. What I fear is that
>> regulations such as these cause problems down the road when more species of
>> coral die since the ocean is in decline as a desirable coral habitat. That
>> is, more regulations because the first round didn't work. This is always
>> how gov. Operates. It never gets rid of regulations. Plus, how will the gov
>> ensure that no banned species are in aquariums after the ban? What about
>> pre-ban acquisitions? Will it be illegal to possessing them? If so, I am
>> throwing my stuff in the Atlantic. You see.... There are many externalities
>> that would arise. Gov. Good intentions usually produce bad results.
>>
>> Anyone know the answer to this?
>> Is Apal and Acer on the rebound since being listed? If the FL Keys were
>> suitable for them to thrive they wouldn't need human help via propagation
>> once banned from harvest. They would thrive beyond belief. Much like a
>> nuisance coral in an aquarium that is left un-fragmented. Unless I inject
>> one of the man made problems we can't seem to agree upon as the main
>> problem for reefs declining.
>>
>> I believe there is no regulation or cultural change that is on the live to
>> slow the decline of our reefs. Even if there was, it would still take a
>> decade or more to see any positive benefit. If I am right, choose your
>> regulations or education of people wisely.
>> On Dec 18, 2012 5:18 PM, "Douglas Fenner" <douglasfennertassi at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The restrictions imposed by ESA (Endangered Species Act) on imported
>>> corals will only affect those listed out of the 66 species proposed, out of
>>> over 790 reef coral species in the world. The other 724+ species will be
>>> unaffected. How does that make it so that studies of coral aquaculture
>>> can't be done?? This proposed ESA listing also doesn't affect the many
>>> other reef species that are imported which can be aquacultured, such as
>>> fish, invertebrates, etc.
>>>
>>> I continue to disagree with the view that exploitation of wild species
>>> will cause the exploiters to value the natural ecosystem. The incentive is
>>> in fact to exploit, not protect. Fisheries are a great example of this,
>>> the economic incentive is to fish until it is no longer profitable to fish.
>>> In other words, fish until there are so few fish left that they are
>>> economically extinct (though not biologically extinct). Collecting corals
>>> is a fishery, like collecting (=catching) tuna or any other fish. The
>>> Status Report on the 82 species petitioned points out that collecting for
>>> the aquarium trade is one of the more minor threats to these species, as it
>>> surely is. But all mortality contributes to the decline of a species.
>>>
>>> I suggest that non-consumptive uses have a greater incentive for
>>> conserving natural ecosystems than exploitation, particularly when the use
>>> depends on high quality ecosystem. Diving can fit that bill, when divers
>>> can tell the difference between living and dead reef, and because they love
>>> really big fish, and lots of fish. Aquaculture does have the potential to
>>> avoid the exploitation of wild stocks, which would be good. I am told that
>>> at least in the past, some or many aquaculture projects actually were
>>> grow-outs, where wild corals continued to be collected, broken into
>>> fragments which were then grown and exported. The advantage of
>>> aquarium-grown corals in the country where the coral is sold is that no
>>> additional wild collecting is necessary.
>>>
>>> Does anybody have a reference to the "new study" referred to in this
>>> article?
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers, Doug
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:26 AM, Jon Skrapits <
>>> jon at treasurecoastcorals.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Agreed Steve,
>>>>
>>>> I was being sarcastic about the parrot and trying to show that they are a
>>>> benefit but at a quick glance it may seem as though they are destructive.
>>>>
>>>> Check this out.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/12/17/finding-a-place-for-coral-farms-in-a-changing-ocean/
>>>>
>>>> How can we develop scientific studies on the benefits of aquaculture if
>>>> we
>>>> never pursue that avenue due to restrictions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Steve Mussman <sealab at earthlink.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Jon,
>>>>>
>>>>> In response to your side note:
>>>>>
>>>>> **
>>>>> "If limiting actions that deplete the ocean such as
>>>>> harvesting coral to grow it, then why aren't we destroying parrot fish
>>>> that
>>>>> eat the coral? I blame them for the destruction of the reef".
>>>>>
>>>>> A paper by the Universities of Exeter and California Davis, published
>>>>> November 1, 2007 in Nature explains that Parrotfish are now the sole
>>>>> grazers of seaweed on many Caribbean reefs, but fishing has limited
>>>> their
>>>>> numbers. With insufficient Parrotfish grazing, corals are unable to
>>>>> recover after major disturbances like hurricanes and become much less
>>>>> healthy as a result. The paper argues that in order to secure a future
>>>>> for coral reefs, particularly in light of the predicted impact of
>>>> climate
>>>>> change, Parrotfish need to be protected. The good news is that we can
>>>>> take practical steps to protect Parrotfish and help reef regeneration..
>>>> We
>>>>> recommend a change in policy to establish controls over the use of fish
>>>>> traps, which Parrotfish are particularly vulnerable to. We also call on
>>>>> anyone who visits the Caribbean and sees Parrotfish on a restaurant
>>>> menu to
>>>>> voice their concern to the management.
>>>>>
>>>>> This research was published in Nature: vol 450, issue 7166.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Steve
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Jon Skrapits **
>>>>>> Sent: Dec 18, 2012 10:24 AM
>>>>>> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>>>>>> Subject: [Coral-List] Listing Criteria Observation
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I looked over the criteria the best I could. I apologize if I
>>>>> misunderstood
>>>>>> but it seems as though the driving factor for determining the listing
>>>> of a
>>>>>> coral is by counting the number of animals distributed in an
>>>> ecosystem.
>>>>>> Then many different hypotheses are thrown out to state a personal
>>>> case or
>>>>>> blame a general global phenomenon or "problem." I never heard more
>>>>> specific
>>>>>> questions such as these.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What does an acropora(or other corals) look like when it is subjected
>>>> to
>>>>>> low pH?
>>>>>> How about inadequate flow?(How can a fragmentation survive if you
>>>> place it
>>>>>> improperly?)
>>>>>> How about elevated levels of nitrates?(does it even affect them?)
>>>>>> Phosphates?
>>>>>> Insufficient calcium levels?
>>>>>> What about the overall chemistry of seawater when Magnesium is low?
>>>>>> Temp fluctuations?
>>>>>> Effects of a changing ecosystem causing a lack of food for corals?
>>>>>> Do corals really need fish or is it the other way around?( I have many
>>>>>> systems w/out fish and pleny of corals)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> These and many other questions must be answered every hour in
>>>> aquaculture
>>>>>> and guessing wrong causes mass deaths in some cases. Much can be
>>>> learned
>>>>>> from this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On a side note.... If limiting actions that deplete the ocean such as
>>>>>> harvesting coral to grow it, then why aren't we destroying parrot fish
>>>>> that
>>>>>> eat the coral? I blame them for the destruction of the reefs.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As I have said many times, gov. regulation will only kill the reefs.
>>>>> Making
>>>>>> it a profitable venture will save them. Educate not regulate. If we
>>>> can't
>>>>>> agree on what is killing the reefs and change our habits, the ocean
>>>> will
>>>>>> not improve and the corals will sit on the reef awaiting their
>>>> demise. Are
>>>>>> the oceans improving? What are we doing to improve that? Just ban
>>>>>> havesting? That is the answer? I will collect as many species as
>>>> possible
>>>>>> to have a genetic pool of hearty corals that have been through
>>>>> fluctuations
>>>>>> and hopefully one day I can help or my kids can help to replant the
>>>> ocean.
>>>>>> I will watch the rest of mankind squabble over what they think is the
>>>>>> problem as it worsens. Maybe we will knock off parrot fish as a last
>>>>> resort
>>>>>> if they are still alive.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Coral-List mailing list
>>>>>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>>>>>> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>>>>> **
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Coral-List mailing list
>>>> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>>>> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Dept. Marine & Wildlife Resources, American Samoan Government
>>> PO Box 7390
>>> Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799 USA
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ********
>
>
> --
> Thanks,
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 52, Issue 27
> ******************************************
>
More information about the Coral-List
mailing list