[Coral-List] Artificial Reefs

[crdev]

--- Shark <shortfin_mako_shark at yahoo.com> wrote:
Excellent.  We need to get away from that confusing term 'artificial reef'.

Charles Rowe Creator of the Seacil and Substract underwater concrete structure project for Southeast Asia

> I believe NMFS also uses the term artificial substrate.
> Juan C. Levesque
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE smartphone
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Artificial Reefs
> From: John McManus <jmcmanus at rsmas.miami.edu>
> Date: Fri, 18-Oct-2013 13:44
> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> CC: 
> 
> 
> Clearly a major issue is that people confuse 'artificial reefs' with
> coral
> reefs. They are always enormously different than natural coral
> reefs.
> 
> I suggest we stop using the term 'artificial reefs'. 
> 
> Let us use the following:
>  
> 1. 'artificial underwater structure (AUS)' for any underwater
> structure one
> builds or deploys. These will always support some kind of marine
> life,
> either intentionally or incidentally.
> 
> Or, more specifically:
> 
> 2. 'artificial underwater barrier (AUB)' for an AUS aimed at
> altering water
> (including waves) and/or sediment (including rubble) movements.
> 
> 3. 'artificial underwater habitat (AUH)' for an AUS aimed at
> providing
> habitat for underwater organisms beyond that already found at a
> site. 
> 
> 4. 'multipurpose underwater structure (MUS)' for an AUS which is for
> a
> combination of these purposes.
> 
> 
> We really have to stop being misleading.  
> 
> Cheers!
> 
> John
> 
> John W. McManus, PhD
> Director, National Center for Coral Reef Research (NCORE)
> Professor, Marine Biology and Fisheries
> Coral Reef Ecology and Management Lab (CREM Lab)
> Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science (RSMAS)
> University of Miami, 4600 Rickenbacker Causeway, Miami, 33149
> jmcmanus at rsmas.miami.edu      http://ncore.rsmas.miami.edu/
> Phone: 305-421-4814Â Â  
> 
> "Far better an approximate answer to the right question, which is
> often
> vague, 
> Â Â Â than an exact answer to the wrong question, which can always
> be made
> precise."
> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â  
> Â Â Â Â Â --John Tukey, Statistician, National Medal of Science and
> IEEE Medal of
> Honor
> 
> 
> 
> -----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: Friday, October 18, 2013 9:46 AM
> To: Thomas Le Berre
> Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Artificial Reefs
> 
> Thomas:
> 
> I disagree with your assessment at my core. However, a satisfactory
> response
> will take more time than I have right now, so watch this space.
> 
> Dennis
> 
> 
> On Fri, Oct 18, 2013 at 4:03 AM, Thomas Le Berre
> <thomas at seamarc.com> wrote:
> 
> > Dear Dennis Hubbard,
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks for sharing your experience of your past restoration
> success. I 
> > fail to understand why you now seem to be considering this effort
> as a 
> > youth mistake. I agree with you that any types of structure will 
> > attract fish (in fact I even saw recently an exhibit at the
> Monterey 
> > Bay Aquarium where fish inhabit different pieces of junk on the
> bottom 
> > of the tank, which I thought was quite daring). I also agree that 
> > there may be a lot of things we don't know about the impacts of
> the 
> > artificial reefs. But I would also say that there is a lot of
> things 
> > that we do know and observe. You empirically determined the
> physical 
> > effects your rocks were having on wave propagation currents etc.
> and
> adapted to achieve what seems to be a desirable result.
> > Physical effects are of course more direct to observe than
> ecological 
> > ones, and even though in time they may alter considerably an area 
> > (large events etc.), a good balance seem to have been restored
> through
> luck or skill.
> >
> >
> >
> > Change in the ecological factors of course take longer to be felt,
> but 
> > it seems that 20 years after, there were more fish and more
> corals. I 
> > would think that there is a necessary spill-over effect, more
> fish, 
> > more corals, more larvae, etc.(and if this is used for tourism
> purpose 
> > and not fished, that's again a bonus I guess). I won't go into
> whether 
> > fish were attracted or recruited to your structures. I have seen
> both 
> > depending on sites and species. Anyway, we will agree that on the 
> > ecological point of view, your project was also beneficial and 
> > certainly that the situation now is better than what is was before
> you 
> > started your project (or at least that any decrease in diversity, 
> > productivity cannot be assigned to that activity, but maybe global
> 
> > changes or other "unknown factors").
> >
> >
> >
> > Having been successfully through a major storm, we could also say
> that 
> > the area is more resilient and adapted to climate change. (The
> storm 
> > on the dump would definitely have been a disaster). In addition,
> there 
> > is a better recreational value, possibly keeping the crowds away
> from 
> > the natural reef.
> >
> >
> >
> > What other major unknown factors could there have been that would 
> > condemn your project?
> >
> >
> >
> > Now, imagine that this project didn't occur, do you think this
> would 
> > have prevented the developer to do whatever to try and improve
> their 
> > situation, regain a beach etc.probably given it to a contractor
> with 
> > no feeling whatsoever for the marine life (yes, this is almost
> always 
> > the case), cheap and easy, but which would constant recurring
> works 
> > and meddling with the environment, never letting it settle, etc...
> In 
> > developed countries maybe the legislation prevents developers to
> take 
> > the situations into their own hands without the necessary guidance
> and 
> > knowledge, but in many places, trial and error prevails.and the 
> > ecological side of things is always disregarded.
> >
> >
> >
> > At the stage we are at, I am wondering if the shortsightedness
> would 
> > not be to deny this reality, acknowledge "their" shortsightedness
> as a 
> > fact. We need to develop better solutions to the problems caused
> by 
> > coastal developments. Of course: there will be more people, there
> will 
> > be more tourists, there will be more pressure to have more 
> > infrastructure. I don't believe that wisdom will suddenly sink in 
> > politicians brains overnight, and even then they all have their
> crowd 
> > of voters to please. Yes, it may be that not only your project,
> but 
> > the human race as a whole is doomed to failure at the start, and
> yes, 
> > we are going to have to display last minute (in geological terms) 
> > reactions to the discovery of petrol engines and penicillin. I
> would 
> > say that this is more tragic than pathetic.
> >
> >
> >
> > Minor successes after minor successes is already going forward.
> And it 
> > does develop a know-how that can be shared, developed etc... It 
> > eventually develops an economy and more environmentally minded
> people 
> > can find related jobs and help change the present dynamic. I can
> think 
> > of many people educated in marine fields not finding any
> opportunities 
> > to work, what a waste of possible effort. If there is more
> employment 
> > in the sector, surely all the associated research funding will
> grow as 
> > well.Right now, I feel that taking a refuge behind the "unknown 
> > factors" is the root cause for many bank funded developments to 
> > altogether do nothing at all for the ecology in coral reef areas, 
> > thereby saving dollars that would otherwise do very well into this
> 
> > part of the economy. Eager contractors are at times being
> discouraged 
> > to even think about it by local authorities as a result.
> >
> >
> >
> > Far from being a failure that you seem to be ashamed of, I feel
> your 
> > project should be a case study (and I am quite sure that you would
> 
> > love to have yearly monitoring data of the site). I don't question
> 
> > your verdict about your own work and accept your experience, but 
> > sincerely, I fail to be convinced that development of a practical 
> > know-how to successfully "meddle"
> > with the ecological side of things during coastal developments
> needs 
> > to be altogether written off. In fact, I find it quite appealing
> and 
> > possibly necessary. Finally, I am wondering if the denegation of
> your 
> > own work and success story is the result of rational thinking and 
> > field observations or intense peer pressure.
> >
> >
> >
> > This is a long mail, thanks for reading this far.
> >
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Thomas Le Berre
> >
> > Managing director
> >
> > Seamarc Pvt. Ltd.
> >
> > www.reefscapers.com, www.marinesavers.com
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Dennis Hubbard <dennis.hubbard at oberlin.edu>
> >
> > Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Artificial Reefs
> >
> > To: "Rachel D'Silva" <rachdsilva at yahoo.com>
> >
> > Cc: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov"
> <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
> >
> > Message-ID:
> >
> >       
> >
> <CAFjCZNZP011hzEJDtrhr=fpQ7HiveuQQZPnkDcPTPqFnHXwoQA at mail.gmail.com>
> >
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >
> >
> >
> > I think there are two extremes to this discussion. First, if you
> put 
> > ANY
> >
> > topographic structure on an open bottom, it will attract fish
> (they 
> > don't
> >
> > care - look at all the fish around those deep-water nuclear
> disposal
> >
> > sites). Also, corals will grow on it. However, the other side of
> the 
> > coin
> >
> > is that any structure you place into the environment will have
> some
> impact.
> >
> > Some of that will respond to the laws of physics (diffraction, 
> > diversion of
> >
> > flow, etc.) but much of it will respond to factors we largely do
> not
> >
> > understand. So the question is whether we should take the time to 
> > learn
> >
> > those factors so we can engineer the environment.
> >
> >
> >
> > About two decades ago, we placed ca. 100 rocks (5-7,000 lbs each)
> onto 
> > a
> >
> > terrace that had been the site of a flourishing *Acropora palmata*
> 
> > reef in
> >
> > the 60s (we didn't know this when we started the project). It had
> been
> >
> > killed not by disease but by dredge pipes that were raked across
> the 
> > reef
> >
> > to move sediment from the bay to cover the municipal dump for this
> 
> > island
> >
> > of St. Thomas (it was being decommissioned). Ironically, the owner
> of 
> > the
> >
> > dump who wanted to sell the land for development purposes was also
> the
> >
> > first director of the newly created Department of Conservation and
> 
> > Cultural
> >
> > Affairs (talk about irony.... and I can't lay out the half of it
> here).
> >
> > When we were called in, a huge hotel complex had just been built 
> and
> >
> > someone suddenly realized, "We have no beach!" This reflects a
> common
> >
> > development perception that the natural system can be engineered
> so 
> > all
> >
> > they have to do is throw money at a consultant like they do for 
> > financial
> >
> > issues.
> >
> >
> >
> > In this case, historical research revealed that this site had
> always 
> > had a
> >
> > wide beach and we could identify no realistic reason for it to not
> be 
> > there
> >
> > today. Further research into DPNR records revealed the bizarre 
> > situation I
> >
> > just laid out.... the reef had been mechanically destroyed and the
> 
> > loss of
> >
> > protection caused a wholesale exit of beach sand back into the
> hole).  
> > We
> >
> > ultimately decided that, while we could not replace the biological
> >
> > function, we might replace the physical function by very carefully
> 
> > placing
> >
> > these large stones in a way that allowed wave energy to pas
> through 
> > (i.e.,
> >
> > it was not an impermeable structure but rather large boulders that
> 
> > broke up
> >
> > incoming waves and partially protected the shore). We also set it
> up 
> > so
> >
> > that strong unidirectional flow persisted behind the ridge (all
> that 
> > water
> >
> > coming in between the blocks had to exit - creatinf strong 
> > shore-parallel
> >
> > flow. The net result was that the new artificial beach persisted
> even 
> > after
> >
> > Hurricane Marilyn) and water quality remained acceptable behind
> the 
> > loosely
> >
> > scattered rocks. Our ultimate decisions on rock placement were
> based 
> > on
> >
> > climbing up on the hotel roof and looking at how the 10 rocks we'd
> 
> > placed
> >
> > each day affected wave refraction and diffraction patterns (very
> >
> > empirical). To keep them in place, e had 3-inch holes pre-drilled
> in 
> > the
> >
> > rocks and then pinned them to the bottom by drilling into the 
> > underlying
> >
> > substrate and inserting steel rods and marine cement into the
> rocks 
> > and the
> >
> > underlying substrate).
> >
> >
> >
> > When I visited the site years later, corals (even *Acropora
> palmata*) 
> > had
> >
> > colonized on the rocks - and the fish had moved in. The corals we
> had
> >
> > transplanted to the fron of thi area were still doing better than
> the
> >
> > natural ones nearby. This had become a reasonably popular
> snorkeling 
> > spot
> >
> > due to the easy access from the adjacent beach.
> >
> >
> >
> > Having set up this rosy scenario, I do not advocate the sense that
> 
> > physical
> >
> > structures are anything more than last-minute reactions to poor 
> > decisions
> >
> > in the past. While our structure created protection and made the
> hotel 
> > more
> >
> > viable, this was not a substitute for even a mediocre natural 
> > structure
> >
> > and, while the history of the area is amusing, it is also
> pathetic.I 
> > have
> >
> > always wondered how much these kinds of minor "successes" just
> feed 
> > the
> >
> > perceptions of developers that they can rely on the 
> > engineering/ecological
> >
> > community to come in and move things around a bit to cover their
> >
> > shortsightedness. I consider our project as one that was doomed to
> 
> > failure
> >
> > from the start even though the financial picture was improved and
> the
> >
> > ecological side was at least made no worse. I vowed to never do
> one of
> >
> > these projects again and can happily report that the slate is
> still clean.
> >
> >
> >
> > Dennis
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Rachel D'Silva
> <rachdsilva at yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Hey Coral List,
> >
> > > I'm looking for articles/papers with design and engineering
> options 
> > > for
> >
> > > major functioning breakwaters (shallow) combined with reef 
> > > restoration. I
> >
> > > like the idea of sections of the breakwater having a design 
> > > component
> > that
> >
> > > can be head started with coral fragments as well as functioning
> as a
> >
> > > potential dive/snorkel site. The standard designs and structures
> 
> > > will
> >
> > > function as FADs...but in over fished waters.. this really isnt
> enough.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > I really appreciate any ideas/info you might have.
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Rachel
> >
> > > 'Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, nothing is
> going 
> > > to get
> >
> > > better. It's not'.- The Lorax
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > ________________________________
> >
> > > _______________________________________________
> >
> > > Coral-List mailing list
> >
> > > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> >
> > > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Dennis Hubbard
> >
> > Chair, 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
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Dennis Hubbard
> Chair, 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
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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