[Coral-List] (Coral-List) The Spread of SCTLD

Thu Jun 1 16:10:19 UTC 2023

Thank you!

Yes, we agree, the messages that we as coral-listers should envoy to
managers, politicians, general public and other scientists need to be
framed on what is actually happening on sick coral reefs (including all the
factors) and considering what happened since the first report of explosions
for dredging and enlarging Port of Miami, taking into account the
wastewater leaking pipe close to the first observation of SCTLD. Then,
every aspect should be managed properly to avoid further contagion !!

Happy #WorldReefDay  #DiaMundialDelArrecife !! Follow us on twitter
ArrecifesCoral  instagram and  Youtube ICR_Observatory
https://www.facebook.com/ICRObservatory

Nohora Galvis
ICRS World Reef Award
ICRO, International Coral Reef Observatory

El jue, 1 jun 2023 a las 8:04, Steve Mussman (<sealab at earthlink.net>)
escribió:

> Dear Nohora,
>
>
> Congratulations on your recent ICRS award and Happy World Reef Day.
>
>
> “proposing that vessels that have been to a SCTLD-affected area within the
> last five ports, to not discharge ballast water within State Waters and to
> also send prior notification of arrival with information about the vessel’s
> biofouling prevention practices, so a risk assessment may be conducted.”
>
>
> That would be like asking divers to simply sign a waiver in effect
> promising to self-regulate by agreeing not to touch the corals and
> verifying their mastery of buoyancy control skills.
>
>
> Not to belabor the point, but reliance on scientific correlation does not
> explain why the diver-disease correlation, above all others, remains a
> central point of emphasis when it seems so obvious that there are a number
> of other nefarious variables involved. Beyond that, I still feel like we
> are missing out on yet another opportunity to frame the issue properly
> through clear, effective messaging.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Steve
>
>
>
>
> On 5/31/23, 6:31 PM, International Coral Reef Observatory <
> icrobservatory at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Dear All,
>
>
> Perhaps, when this message reaches you, it is already June, the first
> #WorldReefDay. So I invite you to celebrate with us that we still have
> coral reefs to talk about them!!
>
>
> In Hawaii, DAR was also requiring a precautionary principle that applied
> to restrict ships coming from the Caribbean Sea. DLNR asked the State to
> take decisive action to reduce the risk of SCTLD entering Hawaii
> waters. DAR said they were “proposing that vessels that have been to a
> SCTLD-affected area within the last five ports, to not discharge ballast
> water within State Waters and to also send prior notification of arrival
> with information about the vessel’s biofouling prevention practices, so a
> risk assessment may be conducted.”
>
>
>
> https://www-khon2-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.khon2.com/local-news/insidious-new-disease-is-killing-coral-at-a-rapid-pace/amp/
>
>
> Steve, we understand your concern about divers restrictions. But we can
> not deny that to avoid contagion in a disease, the first scientific logical
> approach is to avoid any direct contact to the sick individual (s). Most of
> the coral listers have had microbiological classes and experimented on how
> to cultivate bacteria in vitro: taking small samples and putting them in a
> nurturing environment. So that would be a scientific fact that direct
> contact serves to disperse the cause agent of a disease. There is already
> scientific evidence that evaluated consistent bacteria associated with
> SCTLD across disease zones (vulnerable, endemic, and epidemic), in corals,
> seawater and sediment, which may be sources of SCTLD transmission.
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s43705-023-00220-0 And the Chemical and
> genomic characterization of a potential probiotic treatment for stony coral
> tissue loss disease
>
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-023-04590-y
>
>
> When studying real case studies to evaluate management effectiveness or to
> identify potential causation of negative impacts, social scientists aim to
> take into account most of the possible variables that may cause an impact
> on coral reefs. We can not wait to develop experiments and models to
> understand the whole process (when environmentalists try to stop it). It is
> urgent to analyze the real time changes in human activities that may help
> to understand the negative impact that potentially has triggered or
> assisted the coral reef degradation. Thus, correlation in social sciences
> is a statistical measure (expressed as a number) describing the size and
> direction of a relationship between two or more variables. Therefore,
> when one variable increases as the other variable increases or one variable
> decreases while the other decreases can be an example of what is a social
> (Human Activities occurring in the field) scientific correlation. According
> to the amount of data, it can be qualitatively or quantitatively analyzed. Researchers
> use correlations to see if a relationship between two or more variables
> exists. Of course, the variables themselves are not under the control of
> the researchers!!
>
>
> Nohora Galvis
>
> ICRS World Reef Award Winner
>
> ICRO International Coral Reef Observatory
>
> Follow us on Facebook ICROBSERVATORY
>
> Instagram / Twitter/ YouTube ICR,_Observatory
>
>
> El mié, 31 may 2023 a las 16:20, Steve Mussman via Coral-List (<
> coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>) escribió:
>
>
>
> “In Steve's defense, I would point out that a correlation between
>
>
> the frequency of diving in an area and the amount of coral disease is just
>
>
> that, a correlation, and we know that correlation does not prove
>
>
> causation. Places that have huge amounts of diving also are highly likely
>
>
> to have other major damaging effects of development and human population,
>
>
> such as sewage discharges, etc,”
>
>
> Hi Doug,
>
>
> Apart from it not being established as a scientific fact, at least part of
> my resistance to the idea of divers being singled out with restrictions
> because they are suspected of being potential vectors of coral disease is
> the message (or misconception) that publicly disseminating such an edict
> conveys. There is something inadequate about issuing a statement
> proclaiming that there is an outbreak of a coral disease that threatens our
> coral reefs and then announcing that the primary action we have chosen to
> take in response is . . . to place restrictions on divers. Period. With no
> other remedial actions or contributing factors advanced.
>
>
> I agree with you, there should at least be a disclaimer that makes it
> clear that correlation does not prove causation. And how about advancing a
> more nuanced, comprehensive response that at least attempts to frame the
> outbreak of coral diseases in broader terms? Something along the lines of :
> “Coral disease outbreaks are now recognized as a significant factors in the
> accelerating degradation of coral reefs, and it is commonly accepted that a
> variety of human-related activities have altered environmental conditions,
> potentially impairing coral resistance to microbial infections or
> increasing pathogen virulence.” This could be followed by a more complete
> list of contributing factors reflecting whatever stressors are negatively
> impacting local coral reefs. What do you think? Am I asking too much?
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
> Steve
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Coral-List mailing list
>
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>
> https://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>