[Coral-List] The Spread of SCTLD

Tue May 30 21:58:01 UTC 2023

Interesting discussion:  " We know that correlation does not prove
causation".  However, I wonder about scientific papers that correlate sites
with SCTLD and scaling up coral restoration projects by fragmentation?

I mean increasing the number of volunteer divers in an area touching and
breaking pieces of entire colony, branches off to paste them using chemicals to
grow new colonies on dead coral colonies or other structures.

Of course, the fragmentation concept also applies when parts of a habitat
are destroyed, leaving behind smaller unconnected areas. This can occur due
to human activity.  Asexual reproduction happens, also, when a larger
colony is broken off from the main colony during a hurricane, storm or boat
grounding.

All the best,

Nohora Galvis
ICRS World Reef Award Winner
ICRO Transdisciplinary Researcher
International Coral Reef Observatory
Follow us on Facebook.com/ICRObservatory
and ICR_Observatory on Twitter / Instagram / YouTube

El lun, 29 may 2023 a las 20:33, Douglas Fenner via Coral-List (<
coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>) escribió:

>      The US now has laws that require ballast water to have lower than a
> certain number of organisms in certain small size ranges.  So the US does
> have regulations, science-based, to try to limit species introduced via
> ballast water.  Wikipedia has an article on it
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballast_water_regulation_in_the_United_States
> It says "Ballast water discharges are believed to be the leading
> source of invasive
> species <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasive_species> in U.S. marine
> waters, thus posing public health <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health>
> and
> environmental risks, as well as significant economic cost to industries
> such as water and power utilities, commercial
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercial_fishing> and recreational
> fisheries <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recreational_fishing>,
> agriculture
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture>, and tourism
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tourism>.[1]
> <
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballast_water_regulation_in_the_United_States#cite_note-1
> >
> Studies
> suggest that the economic cost just from introduction of pest mollusks
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mollusca> (zebra mussels
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zebra_mussel>, the Asian clam
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corbicula_fluminea>, and others) to U.S.
> aquatic ecosystems is more than $6 billion per year."
>
> There is also an International Convention (treaty) on ballast water.
> Wikipedia has a page on it
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ballast_Water_Management_Convention
> Wikipedia says "As of 15 July 2021, 86 countries were contracting States to
> the BWM Convention (representing 91.12% of the gross tonnage of the global
> merchant fleet)"  (to my complete surprise, leadng "flags of convenience
> countries have signed it).  There are several "flags of convenience"
> countries like Liberia and Panama where shipping companies commonly
> register their ships, because they have lower standards for safety (and
> safety standards cost shipping companies money) and/or cheaper fees for
> registering their ships and/or less enforcement of their regulations,
> and/or lower minimum wages, etc.)  I notice the Wikipedia article does not
> talk about enforcement.  Regulations that are not enforced don't mean
> much.  The standards include that ballast water exchanges must be carried
> out at least 200 nautical miles from shore.  I thought I saw in Wikipedia
> that a typical cost of a system to sterilize ballast water up to the
> standard is about $5 million.  Enforcement of ballast water laws may be
> largely done at ports of call, where ballast water can be tested for the
> abundance of plankton and bacteria, etc.  Some countries may enforce it
> more rigorously than others.  They might check ship logs to see whether
> ballast exchanges are far enough from shore.  I'm guessing on this, I
> didn't see it mentioned in the articles, but I haven't read all the details
> in the articles.
>
> You guessed it, Wikipedia has an article on "Flags of Convenience"
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_convenience
> It reports that Panama, Liberia, Marshall Islands, Singapore, and Hong Kong
> have the most ships registered among flags of convenience.  Flags of
> Convenience are also used to hide the identity of ship owners, avoid taxes,
> pay low wages, and engage in a variety of illegal activities, including
> illegal fishing.  I could find no statement of whether Flag of Convenience
> nations have less enforcement of ballast regulations, but I suspect that
> enforcement may be more likely as ships go in and out of ports of countries
> that do enforce such regulations.  But enforcement would surely be a
> critical step.
>
>         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, as Mark has pointed out.  That makes a
> difference, since if that's the cause of the disease increase, then it is
> not just the diving that causes it, and it is likely that better
> organization and investment and laws and enforcement to reduce those
> impacts could reduce the amount of disease produced.  Granted, low-income
> countries have limited abilities to scramble quickly and do those things
> when there is a sudden major increase in dive tourism in a specific area
> and there is sudden large local development.  And there are three major
> aspects of disease, once called the "Coral Disease Triangle", the host, the
> pathogen, and the environment.  Anything that weakens the coral is likely
> to weaken their defense against disease, and some things (like traces of
> iron) can increase diseases without having to provide any pathogens.
> Anything that causes a rapid and very large increase in the local human
> population could cause an increase in diseases by such mechanisms and on
> the other hand, controlling those things could mitigate effects on the
> reefs such as those Mark outlined for us.
>
> Cheers,  Doug
>
> Bruno, J. F. 2015. The coral disease triangle. *Nature Climate Change* 5:
> 302-305.
>
> On Mon, May 29, 2023 at 9:57 AM Steve Mussman via Coral-List <
> coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> wrote:
>
> >
> > I would like to offer a partial retraction to some of the previous
> > comments I made relating to the potential for recreational scuba divers
> to
> > be vectors for SCTLD.
> >
> > Thanks go out to Doug Fenner for providing me with a number of scholarly
> > papers (below) linking recreational scuba divers to reef damage and the
> > prevalence of coral diseases. In light of these findings one could
> conclude
> > that it is reasonable and perhaps even prudent to consider implementing
> > some level of restrictions on divers in an attempt to limit the spread of
> > (some) coral diseases. However, I would also point out that there are
> even
> > a greater number of credible scientific papers on the potential for bilge
> > and ballast water from boats and ships to serve similarly as coral
> disease
> > vectors - but as far as I know, no limitations or restrictions are being
> > put in place to limit the potential impacts from these alternate sources.
> >
> > This further bleeds over into a related discussion on the fallacies
> > underlying the concept of “sustainable tourism”. I would simply assert
> that
> > the failures attributed to “sustainable dive tourism” are actually the
> > result of the fact that the current level of regulations commonly
> > implemented do not rise to the level necessary to actually provide
> > protection for coral reefs. I can envision “true sustainable dive
> tourism”,
> > but the bottom line is that the dive tourism industry (in its current
> > manifestation) is highly unlikely to voluntarily agree to implement and
> > adhere to the standards that would be necessary to truly change the
> > paradigm.
> >
> > Scuba diving damage and intensity of tourist activities increases coral
> > disease prevalence.
> >
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320714002730?via%3Dihub#preview-section-abstract
> >
> > Close encounters of the worst kind: reforms needed to curb coral reef
> > damage by recreational divers.
> > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00338-021-02153-3
> >
> > Recreational Diving Impacts on Coral Reefs and the Adoption of
> > Environmentally Responsible Practices within the SCUBA Diving Industry.
> > https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00267-016-0696-0
> >
> > Using Coral Disease Prevalence to Assess the Effects of Concentrating
> > Tourism Activities on Offshore Reefs in a Tropical Marine Park.
> >
> https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2011.01724.x
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Steve Mussman
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Coral-List mailing list
> > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > https://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> https://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list