From J.MCMANUS at CGIAR.ORG Wed Dec 1 00:01:42 1999 From: J.MCMANUS at CGIAR.ORG (John McManus) Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 21:01:42 -0800 Subject: Grad scientists - a little light hearted philosophy Message-ID: Just an aside on behalf of encouraging wide participation... A grad student wrote: "Although I am not a scientist (working on it)..." All scientists are students. We just stop paying tuition after a while, perhaps after getting a degree or two. When we stop being students, we stop being scientists. Lots of students are scientists. The degree doesn't make someone a scientist, though it often helps with credibility and funding. The value of a contribution does not depend on the degree of the person behind it, but rather on how much closer it brings us to understanding reality. Coral_list is a great opportunity to help keep as much reality as possible in our work. Wide participation is crucial to that task. Degreed scientists, non-degreed scientists, nonscientists and lots of people in-between have been very helpful in our attempts to figure out what's happening to reefs and what should be done about it. John McManus ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From dbaker at tm.net.my Wed Dec 1 05:55:58 1999 From: dbaker at tm.net.my (Don baker) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 18:55:58 +0800 Subject: Cebu & Tawi Tawi Visit - Giant Clams & Coral Farming Message-ID: <3844FEBE.60B7F68D@tm.net.my> From: Don Baker / THE REEF PROJECT Kota Kinabalu - Pulau Gaya Sabah, Malaysia REF: Philippines - Giant Clams & Coral Farming I will be in the Philippines from Dec. 10th to the 29th. I would like to visit with parties in/around Cebu with regards to the present status/state of "coral farming" there and nearby? I will also be in Tawi Tawi to assess conditions and brood stocks for the establishment of a giant clam [Tridacna] hatchery & nursery. I will be in Tawi Tawi from about Dec. 11th to 18th - Cebu around 21st to 30th. Bohol for few days during Xmas. All parties interested in contacting me while I am in the Rep. of the PI, please email me directly to relay contact telephone #s, etc. My personal email: donbakerjr at hotmail.com THE REEF PROJECT "other" email: reefprj at hotmail.com My handphone#: 6 [019 852 1602] [should have intnl "roaming"] Home/Office Fax: 6 088 715 629 Looking forward to it! Don Baker Sabah, Malaysia -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/19991201/f9d29981/attachment.html From szmanta at uncwil.edu Wed Dec 1 12:50:58 1999 From: szmanta at uncwil.edu (Alina M. Szmant) Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 12:50:58 -0500 Subject: New Summer 2000 Coral Reef Research Course: at UNCW and Roatan Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19991201125058.0070c800@pop.uncwil.edu> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 7824 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/19991201/301c49bd/attachment.bin From craig at caribe.net Thu Dec 2 06:29:03 1999 From: craig at caribe.net (Craig Lilyestrom) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 07:29:03 -0400 Subject: Could bombing benefit Vieques reefs? In-Reply-To: <19991121035446.97964.qmail@hotmail.com> Message-ID: Edwin - >Residents of Vieques Island also suffer a 26% incidence of cancer, which is >way higher than the average for the main island of Puerto Rico. This means >that almost one of every three viequenses will die from cancer!!!!! Can >anybody has an explanation for that? Sorry I don't have an explanation. I understand that studies are being done at this time to try to determine the cause or causes of this tragic phenomenon. However, in truth there is a difference between being diagnosed with cancer and dying from it. Not all cancers are terminal, if treated in time. Also, in the absence of hard data on the causes, it would be fair to say that it is premature to suggest any link to any particular cause. At this point, one could easily come up with a list of plausible hypotheses, INCLUDING military activities. I know this has little to do with corals... Not defending the Navy -- just the scientific method and objectivity. Saludos, --Craig ******************************************* Craig G. Lilyestrom, Ph.D. Chief, Marine Resources Division Dept. of Natural & Environmental Resources P.O. Box 9066600 San Juan, P.R. 00906-6600 (787) 724-8772 ext. 4042 (787) 723-2805 (FAX) craig at caribe.net ******************************************* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From scip8370 at nus.edu.sg Thu Dec 2 04:58:20 1999 From: scip8370 at nus.edu.sg (Sasi Nayar) Date: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 17:58:20 +0800 Subject: Planktonnet : A network of planktonlogists. Message-ID: <199912021222.MAA27883@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear all, After a grand regional workshop on plankton ecology at Phuket, Thailand, we felt a need to create a discussion list for plankton researchers. The purpose of the Plankton net list-server is to provide a forum for Internet discussions and announcements among planktonologists researching on ecology, taxonomy, physiology, productivity and monitoring of phytoplankton and zooplankton, in fresh, brackish and sea water throughout the world. The list is primarily for use by plankton researchers and scientists. Currently, about 40 researchers are subscribed to the list. Appropriate subjects for discussion might include: >Primary and secondary production >Toxic algal blooms >Taxonomy >Pollution and plankton dynamics >Announcements of college courses, workshops, symposias, etc >Research funding agencies of interest to planktonologists >Recent reports on plankton research >Publications >Modeling approaches and others To Post a message, send it to: planktonnet at eGroups.com To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: planktonnet-unsubscribe at eGroups.com Archives: http://www.egroups.com/group/planktonnet/ If you have any problems concerning the list, please feel free to drop a line to: scip8370 at nus.edu.sg I apologise if there has been any cross posting. We hope you enjoy the list! Sincerely yours, Sasi Mr.Sasi Nayar ***************************************** Reef Ecology Laboratory Department of Biological Sciences National University of Singapore 10 Kent Ridge Crescent SINGAPORE 119 260 Tel : (+65) 778 7112 Fax : (+65) 779 6155 URL : http://www.dbs.nus.edu.sg/reef/web/websasi.html http://www.qrz.com/callsign.html?callsign=vu3snm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- Save mangroves, save biodiversity. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From coral_giac at hotmail.com Thu Dec 2 18:39:15 1999 From: coral_giac at hotmail.com (Edwin Hernandez-Delgado) Date: Thu, 02 Dec 1999 15:39:15 PST Subject: On the role of the DNER regarding Vieques Message-ID: <19991202233916.39604.qmail@hotmail.com> Craig It has been nearly 8 months since the last bomb was thrown in Vieques Island. The official position of the government of Puerto Rico, since then, has been to stop bombing and that the U.S. Navy should leave Vieques as soon as possible. Excuse me, but I disagree with you. Why don't you go and talk about the scientific method and objectivity to the cancer-diagnosed viequenses? Many rare types of cancer keep showing up in a lot of people there. This is not a random natural phenomenon. But, following a precautionary principle, the U.S. Navy is the most serious environmental threat and the major generator of toxic and carcinogenic pollutants in Vieques. Let's stop the major source of threats until all studies are finished and conclusions are drawn. Damage is already done and we might probably keep looking at the long-term results of that during the next decades. But, many people in the scientific community still have a lot of questions. Why does the Marine Resources Division of the P.R. Department of Natural and Environmental Resources (DNER) has never done anything to quantitatively document damage in those coral reefs? The DNER has plenty of trained personnel, as does the University of Puerto Rico. Also, the DNER has received a lot of money through the International Coral Reef Initiative. Where's that money going to? To pay the high salaries of a private consultant? What is the DNER plan to protect those coral reefs after the Navy is gone? Is the DNER working out a management plan? Not to my knowledge. It's being time to come up with a major effort and do our job. Many of us in the scientific community in Puerto Rico are willing to go there and help the DNER to carry out a multi-disciplinary study of the Vieques Island's coral reefs. Can you take that initiative? Edwin Edwin A. Hernandez-Delgado Investigador Asociado Universidad de Puerto Rico Departamento de Biologia Grupo de Investigacion en Arrecifes de Coral P.O. Box 23360 San Juan, Puerto Rico 00931-3360 Tel. (787) 764-0000, x-4855 Fax (787) 764-2610 e-mail: coral_giac at hotmail.com diploria at coqui.net ****************************************** ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From d.fenner at aims.gov.au Fri Dec 3 10:01:46 1999 From: d.fenner at aims.gov.au (Doug Fenner) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 10:01:46 Subject: Vieques reefs- positive suggestions Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19991203100146.00ade7c0@email.aims.gov.au> Some positive suggestions for Vieques, that may apply to other locations as well: 1. I think that we all are agreed that bombing reefs or island ecologies does not improve them- they do in fact damage them (pretty severely where the bomb drops, no doubt about it). And it is something that reefs have not evolved to cope with, as they have with hurricanes. The original petition was asking for a cessation of active bombing of Vieques, which will undoubtedly help the reefs as well as land ecology and local residents. Some of the discussion has been about what to do after the bombs stop falling. I suggested that leaving it an inactive military base might preserve the reef better than allowing unlimited development. Well-planned and regulated development may be able to preserve the reef and be better for local inhabitants as well, but unbridled development may be worse for all involved, possibly even worse for the reef than continued active bombing of the island and presumably collateral (accidental) bomb damage to reefs (seems unlikely the Navy is deliberately targeting the reefs- they just happen to be nearby and get hit from time to time). Ideas for after the military leaves: 2. No-extraction reserves can significantly increase fishing yields in other nearby areas. Increased fish abundances may produce spillover of fish into nearby fished areas. Larger adult sizes allows greatly increased reproductive effort that may seed large areas of surrounding or downstream fishing areas. In effect, reserves are natural fish farms, which also preserve pieces of the environment. Apo Island, Philippines is an outstanding example. So successful is the reserve system in that part of the Philippines, that villages ask to have reserves set up near them! 3. Consultation of all stakeholders is a must. Dictatorial edicts of central government agencies, including military, that do not involve consultation with local residents builds animosity and may make the project more difficult or even impossible to implement. Besides, it's just plain not democratic. Persuasion, by the facts and good arguments is the tool of choice (not force), and it can (and probably should) go both ways- all parties need to listen as well as make their cases. Sham consultations after the decision has been made will not do the job. Decisions and the process leading to them, must be transparent, i.e., public record. Absolute consensus of all stakeholder parties is often not possible. If the process is perceived to be open and fair, those whose views are not followed will be less likely to be resentful and seek ways to sabotage the adopted plan. As those doing environmental impact assessments say, if you consult and work with all parties, especially environmental groups and those potentially opposed, from the beginning of planning, you can almost always avoid the very expensive and difficult conflicts and suits in the late stages of a project. Consulting all the parties is just plain smart and in your own interest. 4. No-extraction reserves can be used for sustainable, non-destructive uses that provide much more economic benefit to the local community than fishing. Dive tourism can be carried out on an amazingly large scale with surprisingly little effect on reefs. And the economic payoff can be huge- at $50 or so per dive, a moderate size operation can bring in a million dollars in just a couple years. Divers are attracted much more by large fish, and repelled by a lack of fish. Dead, a big fish is worth a few dollars in most markets. Alive, it's made of solid gold, and can keep pulling the income in year after year. And diving employs quite a few people- divemasters, instructors, boat captains and crews, plus all the hotel workers, restaurant, curio shop, transportation, etc. A prime example- Cozumel, Mexico, one of the 3 biggest hard currency-earning resort areas in the whole of Mexico. With a town of 60,000+ people living primarily off of divers and the cascading effect of all the services they purchase. With an average of 2000 dives per day, 364 days a year, the roughly 10 miles of reef that draws the divers receives so little damage from divers that the reef continued to recover from the mild effects of Hurricane Gilbert even when diving had returned to 2000 dives per day. The coral looks great, and the reefs swarm with fish, including big ones like 4 foot long groupers. And the whole dive industry and reef protection there grew out of the divers liking what they saw, and the fishermen finding out they could make a lot more money taking divers out than fishing. The reef protection was very much a local initiative. The beauty is that a reserve can both serve to boost local fisheries in areas outside the reserve, and provide the basis for a thriving diving industry. Both fishermen and dive operators benefit, and need not be in conflict. And the reef benefits. If diving is not properly managed, it too can be destructive. There are published reports of damage from divers in the Red Sea. And to be realistic, diving will always cause some damage, but it can be really quite minor damage compared to other alternative uses of reefs. And it's probably a practical reality that most reefs will have use of some kind or other by humans- we are lucky if we get any choice about which kind of use that is. The best we can do is to minimize damage, hopefully well below the level the reef can recover from. 5. Human population centers, certainly including the tourist accommodations, are best located away from or downstream from reefs. Human populations living close to reefs usually have deleterious effects on those reefs. The closer the people are and the larger their number, the more strictly all sorts of things must be controlled to protect the reef. Land clearing, construction, and runoff and sewage disposal are big ones, but there are probably others, such as gray water disposal, fertilizers & pesticides used on fields, gardens, and ornamental plants, etc. Example: reefs near the population of Curacao are degraded, while those a few kilometers away upstream are in good shape. 6. All-inclusive luxury resorts are no help to the local community. Small-scale, locally owned operations are. Most large luxury resorts have outside owners. Patrons pay the owners through their travel agent, and very little of the money ever gets to the local community the resort is located in. The patrons often don't leave the premises for meals or other services. This system fosters a class system with a huge gap between wealthy visitors and poor residents, that does not foster understanding or tolerance, and may even encourage abuse. Small, locally owned facilities ensure that the income goes into the local community, more local people are employed and benefit, the society has less economic gap between visitors and locals, and the closer contact fosters more understanding and tolerance, maybe even enjoying learning a little bit about another culture. -Doug Douglas Fenner, Ph.D. Coral Biodiversity/Taxonomist Australian Institute of Marine Science PMB No 3 Townsville MC Queensland 4810 Australia phone 07 4753 4334 e-mail: d.fenner at aims.gov.au web: http://www.aims.gov.au ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From reefkeeper at earthlink.net Fri Dec 3 04:48:25 1999 From: reefkeeper at earthlink.net (Alexander Stone) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 09:48:25 +0000 Subject: ReefKeeper Intl on Vieques Bombing Message-ID: <384791E9.989@earthlink.net> DEAR CORAL LISTERS: BELOW IS REEFKEEPER INTERNATIONAL'S REQUEST TO PRESIDENT CLINTON FOR A PERMANENT HALT TO LIVE BOMBING AT VIEQUES. LET'S ALL KEEP THE PRESSURE UP! ALEXANDER STONE REEFKEEPER INTERNATIONAL ------------------------ December 3, 1999 President William J. Clinton The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20500 Re: Navy Bombing at Vieques, Puerto Rico Dear President Clinton: ReefKeeper International urges you to permanently eliminate the live-fire bombing occurring on the coral reefs off Vieques Island, Puerto Rico. ReefKeeper International, a non-profit conservation organization with members in the United States, including Puerto Rico, and abroad, has been working for over 10 years to protect coral reefs throughout the world. Importance of Vieques Island's Marine Environment The marine waters surrounding Vieques Island are home to some of the most extraordinary ecosystems in the world. Of the seven bioluminescent bays in the world, three are at Vieques Island. The coral reefs off Vieques Island where bomb craters are not present are among the healthiest and most diverse in the U.S. Caribbean. Endangered species such as manatees, brown pelicans and four species of sea turtles (green, hawksbill, leatherback, and loggerhead) rely on the marine environment of Vieques Island. The Threat to Vieques' Coral Reefs The Navy has used the marine waters off Vieques Island, including the fragile coral reefs, for live-fire practice. The dropping and subsequent explosions of heavy ordinance has already resulted in significant harm to the marine environment. Craters in the coral reef measuring 25 meters wide and 5 meters deep have been reported (Hernandez-Delgado, 1999). Huge coral heads are cracked or pulverized and large numbers of fish are killed in a matter of seconds when a bomb is dropped. In Sri Lanka, smaller blasting by dynamite has been reported to not only directly damage the blast area but keep larger fish such as groupers away from reefs as far as 1.5 km away from the blast site (Weerakkody, 1999). This adverse impact on reef fish populations from just a small blast must be significantly larger in the area of Vieques Island, where the blasting occurs on a much larger scale. Unexploded ordinances remain around the island, posing a danger not only to fishers and divers but to the marine life inhabiting the area. The precious coral reefs off Vieques Island literally resemble a war zone. 1983 Memorandum of Understanding In 1983, the Government of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Navy entered into a Memorandum of Understanding in which it agreed that the U.S. Navy would stop targeting and shelling offshore coral reefs. In complete violation of that memorandum, the U.S. Navy has continued these practices and caused further destruction to the marine ecosystem. Endangered Species Act Violations The Endangered Species Act requires federal agencies to: "ensure that any action authorized, funded, or carried out by such agency ... . . is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered species or threatened species or result in the destruction or adverse modification of [critical] habitat." The continued bombing of coral reefs off Vieques Island clearly fails to protect endangered manatees, pelicans, and sea turtles. The U.S. Navy has even failed to determine the impact of its actions on endangered or threatened species, as required pursuant by Section 7.0 of the Endangered Species Act. E.O. 13089 - Your Clear Obligation to Act Executive Order 13089, signed by your hand on June 11, 1998, states in Section 2 : "All Federal agencies whose actions may affect U.S. coral reef ecosystems shall: ... (b) utilize their programs and authorities to protect and enhance the conditions of such ecosystems; and (c) to the extent permitted by law, ensure that any actions they authorize, fund, or carry out will not degrade the conditions of such ecosystems." (emphasis added) The continued bombing of the coral reefs off Vieques clearly violate the language and intent of your Executive Order. ReefKeeper International respectfully requests that you immediately ban any further live fire bombing of the coral reefs off Vieques Islands to protect these valuable marine assets. Thank you for your consideration, and anticipated support, of our request. Sincerely, Alexander Stone Director Citations Hernandez-Delgado, Edwin A. Research Associate, University of Puerto Rico. Posting to coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov, November 29, 1999. Weerakkody, Prasanna, Nature Conservation Group (Natcog), Sri Lanka. Posting to coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov, November 29, 1999. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From salbert at cetiis.fr Fri Dec 3 11:03:13 1999 From: salbert at cetiis.fr (vincent salbert) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 17:03:13 +0100 Subject: Bay Islands Honduras Message-ID: <01bf3da7$e7104860$205b38d5@nomade.cetiis.fr> Madam, Sir, I'm presently working on an environmental plan of the Bay Islands and I'm searching for marine references on the Honduras Gulf and the Bay Islands (currents, corals, nutrients, tourism). If you have references or if you know where I can find data, could you please give me the relevant information ? Best regards, Vincent Salbert SAFEGE CETIIS Bat D Aix M?tropole 30 Av. Malacrida 13100 Aix en Provence France Tel : +33 (0)4 42 93 65 26 Fax : +33 (0)4 42 26 52 19 E.mail : salbert at cetiis.fr -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/19991203/d0d8c4bb/attachment.html From Walt.Jaap at dep.state.fl.us Fri Dec 3 15:17:26 1999 From: Walt.Jaap at dep.state.fl.us (Walt Jaap STP) Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 15:17:26 -0500 (EST) Subject: Bay Islands Honduras Message-ID: <199912032033.UAA38778@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> You shoould check out: Plan de Control Ambiental para la Isla de Roatan. 1983. Sir William Halcrow and Partners and Consultecnia. London and Tegucegalpe. There are two reef surveys in the document. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From corals at caribe.net Fri Dec 3 19:54:27 1999 From: corals at caribe.net (CORALations) Date: Fri, 3 Dec 1999 20:54:27 -0400 Subject: Vieques - Sustainable Future Message-ID: <000201bf3df2$64778e40$c16269ce@default> We have been off island and returned to a discussion regarding Vieques. People have expressed concerns about what will happen to Vieques after the Navy leaves. Some have even suggested that the U.S. Navy is conserving Vieques' natural resources from the development juggernaut. While most of us find it hard enough to maintain some level of objectivity in discussions about nutrients, Edwin Hernandez, a Puerto Rican marine biologist, made some well defended points to this list on the Vieques issue. Edwin and his coral reef research team spend many hours underwater monitoring coral reefs in Culebra and Fajardo while listening.. and feeling... the underwater blasts of reefs being destroyed near Vieques -- those sounds which one U.S. Senator so cavalierly (and ironically) described as "The Sounds of Freedom." A civilian is dead and four others injured. For us, and for the people of Puerto Rico, it is too late for more Navy promises. We hope that the events soon to follow with those individuals camping in an act of civil disobedience on the target range do not result in further loss of life. Currently President Clinton is in the process of deciding one thing....is it in the interest of National Security to continue bombing the island of Vieques...with either live and/or inert ordnance? To our knowledge, all of Clinton's National Security advisors are either retired or current military personnel. The Navy is not managing a Nature Reserve on Vieques by any stretch of the imagination. What the U.S. Navy is doing to this fragile and biologically diverse tropical ecosystem, as well as the poor community inhabiting the island, is far from sustainable in terms of natural resources, or ethical in terms of human rights. If this island is so crucial to National Security, as the Navy once similarly claimed of Culebra, why did the Navy so carelessly violate its Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the people of Puerto Rico? Dr. James Porter of the University of Georgia recently surveyed coral reefs in the target area on Vieques on behalf of the government of Puerto Rico. In a letter dated August 27, 1999 to Bruce Babbitt, Secretary of Interior, Dr. Porter wrote the following: "We found substantial evidence that military activity on Vieques is contributing to the degradation of the island's coral reefs. To make matters worse, we also found physical evidence that the Navy has not lived up to its 1983 Memorandum of Understanding not to target or shell offshore coral reefs. Despite signing this MOU, the Navy is in fact still targeting objects positioned on the reef, and believe me, we saw and documented clear signs of coral reef destruction from this bombardment." We have possibly contributed to the confusion regarding sustainable development issues springing up on this topic. For years we have been expressing concerns to both Reef Relief and to CMC regarding Puerto Rico's construction driven economy and government incentives which propel what I would describe as rampant and reckless development. Many scientists on this list have been to Puerto Rico and witnessed the impacts to our reefs from such non-sustainable practice first hand. Our sediment clogged rivers and decimated reef systems surrounding the big island are a testament to the ineffective job local government and indeed organizations like ours are doing to conserve our coastal resources. Local non-government environmental groups in Puerto Rico are admittedly spread very thin. The government of Puerto Rico passes new laws whose objetive is to exclude meaningful public participation and most recently the need to submit an EIS for developments which are "fast tracked" through government offices. We are at constant odds with local and federal government agencies involved in resource conservation, as our mission is strictly one of conservation and their motives often seem less clearly definable. It is of no surprise conservation orgs have not been effective when the only course of action at both the local and federal government levels is to go to court to get government agencies to enforce their own environmental laws. It is also significant that we are united with our local government on this one issue - to stop the bombing of Vieques. As Edwin Hernandez mentioned, there is a multi-disciplinary group of local scientists, engineers and professors now drafting management plans WITH THE LOCAL COMMUNITY of Vieques, to address toxic clean up, conservation management planning and limited sustainable development - if the Navy leaves. This team represents real planning talent with the interest of both the people of Puerto Rico and of conserving their natural heritage. What is of concern is that there are no guarantees this panel's recommendations will be considered or implemented by local government. This, however, in no way influences our conviction that the Navy must stop bombing Vieques. Puerto Rico is not the only place where greed and short sighted planning has resulted in the destruction of coral reefs or other diverse ecosystems. Puerto Rico is the only place where intense evaluation of weapons systems for the U.S. Navy and NATO forces is conducted and concentrated in diverse tropical ecosystems on a small island with over 9,000 inhabitants. We encourage others involved in coral reef conservation issues to fax President Clinton, if you have not already taken action. We live and work in Puerto Rico and recognize this as the first important step toward the community of Vieques achieving their conservation objectives on the biologically diverse, tropical island of Vieques. Let the President know we simply do not have the luxury, if we ever had, of targeting fragile ecosystem with either live or inert ordnance. Sincerely, Mary Ann Lucking Project Coordinator CORALations PMB 222 5900 Isla Verde Ave. L2 Carolina, PR 00979-4901 corals at caribe.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/19991203/5fbb3df7/attachment.html From corals at caribe.net Sat Dec 4 10:22:46 1999 From: corals at caribe.net (CORALations) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 11:22:46 -0400 Subject: Fw: Clinton's Vieques Statement Message-ID: <003101bf3e6b$6e5748a0$15c55bd1@default> Attached is the Text of President Clinton's statement Friday on U.S. military training on Vieques. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/19991204/c8886890/attachment.html -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/19991204/c8886890/attachment.htm From corals at caribe.net Sat Dec 4 17:39:16 1999 From: corals at caribe.net (CORALations) Date: Sat, 4 Dec 1999 18:39:16 -0400 Subject: Vieques - Historical Perspective (II) Message-ID: <00a501bf3ea8$7b5d4080$15c55bd1@default> We would like to provide some historical perspective based on a similar situation to Vieques which took place on the Puerto Rico island of Culebra. The U.S. Navy also conducted live fire target practice on this biologically diverse and inhabited island of Puerto Rico. Navy was forced out by the people of Culebra in 1976 because Culebra was considered spoils of the Spanish-American war - a land treaty technicality. (The Navy did not leave for ethical reasons). The National Security arguments stated by the military for Culebra in the late 60's are very similar to those being stated today for Vieques. (See Culebra y la Marina de Estados Unidos by Carmelo Delgado Cintr?n, Appendix XX) At the turn of the Century, the Navy was attracted to Culebra because of its large harbor, Ensenada Honda, which the Navy considered the most hurricane safe harbor in the Caribbean. At this time President Theodore Roosevelt set part of this island aside for the Atlantic Fleet's weapons training area and part of the island aside for a Federal Refuge. After the Navy left, more areas including offshore cays littered with unexploded ordnance from the target practice were included under the Federal Refuge status. Around 600 people lived on Culebra at the beginning of the 1900's. Their main town of San Ildefonso (a Taino Indian village 1,000 years earlier) was relocated by the Navy, and renamed Dewey, after the famous Admiral. The Navy left for Cuba to establish a base at Guantanamo, so Culebra was fairly quiet until things began to heat up in Europe in the late 1930's. The Navy returned and began concentrated live fire target practice now on the outskirts of a much larger population on Culebra. Many of the "Old Timers" on Culebra speak English, because they had to learn to deal with the Navy personnel. Many locals have not so flattering stories of the behavior of military personnel when they would come into town binge drinking and assaulting family members. Others to this day are really friendly to gringos and share stories about famous Navy admirals they met, etc... Many Culebrenses have served in the U.S. military and many still do. Locals have also shared stories about how Navy ordnance would drift a considerable distance from the target areas and lodge in their tin roofs in the center of the town of Dewey. They told me how they used to go down to the beaches at night and watch the tracers flying in the sky like fire works displays. A few residents have shell casings in their yards to this day, some white washed, as decorations or possibly memorials of days gone by. Two Sherman tanks stand rusting surreally posed to the backdrop of beautiful Flamenco Beach...once heavily targeted by U.S. Navy warships. The central peninsula of Flamenco was repeatedly napalmed. I was told, (but am not sure it is true), that this altered the vegetation which ironically turned it into ideal nesting habitat for endangered tern colonies. Some 55,000 endangered sea birds return to Culebra and offshore cays every year to nest. Hopefully this does not encourage Audubon Society members to begin napalming hillsides. Only three years ago did the Army Corps of Engineers begin scanning terrestrial areas for unexploded ordnance, outside of the Federal Refuge areas. When the Navy left Culebra, ordnance clean up was not part of the agreement. I have been told by an x-military person, now turned conservationist, that they used to pile up the bombs on the most impressive coral heads and then explode them periodically as part of the clean up. I asked why the most impressive corals and he said...it made for a more spectacular explosion to watch from shore. I have also heard that there used to be "fly over" populations of pink flamingos that would run on Flamenco Beach and feed in the neighboring salt pond. People have said they were shot for target practice by Navy personnel.(I believe this is true as it was confirmed a similar fate happened to the nesting population on Anegada, only it was the locals who shot them. Now local descendants have successfully started and are caring for a new breeding population on Anegada). It is true that some of the best coral reefs remaining in Puerto Rico are found around Culebra. The Navy presence may or may not have halted development on this island for a while. I don't think from this you can conclude that the Navy presence actually "conserved" these resources, even if you are callous enough to take out the human factor of these practices on this small inhabited island. Current coral coverage may rather be a testament to the population of coral which existed 50 years ago, water quality of healthy coral larval source areas, greater and diverse reef fish populations, a fairly disease free environment and less frequent and intense storms. Also the reason Culebra for so long escaped the development juggernaut (I love saying juggernaut) may have more to do with its isolation and changing climate. Fresh water is now limited on Culebra. Two centuries of deforestation, agriculture and now extensive land clearing for development is altering the entire island into a stressed desert ecosystem where once creeks supported crawdads or crayfish (anecdotal evidence). Pending developments are now being approved after the recent completion of an underwater water pipeline, (which based on interoffice government communications - will have no water coming out of it.) The coral reef situation is clearly different for Vieques today. In Culebra there are still giant craters left in some reef areas and unexploded ordnance left in the water. It may have been a blessing the Navy left without cleaning the underwater ordnance, given that their only method for cleaning is piling up the ordnance and exploding. In 1996, for example, the Navy clean up of underwater unexploded WWII bombs off the Pacific island of Rota did an estimated 80 million dollars worth of damage at the Coral Gardens dive site (University of Guam). Terrestrial ordnance accidents have injured several people on Culebra since the Navy left. (anecdotal evidence). Puerto Rico is complicated. For obvious reasons imperialistic approaches attached to anything from economic reform policies to environmental management planning are resisted...and based on PR history, I find this understandable. Today Puerto Rico is asking for your help as coral reef experts, managers and conservationists. If you have not already done so please fax President Clinton and tell him no more live or inert U.S. Navy target practice on Vieques. White House Fax Line: 202-456-2461 Sincerely, Mary Ann Lucking Project Coordinator CORALations PMB 222 5900 Isla Verde Ave. L2 Carolina, PR 00979-4901 corals at caribe.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/19991204/19b355f8/attachment.html From slkyshrk at sgi.net Mon Dec 6 01:11:01 1999 From: slkyshrk at sgi.net (Wendy Jo) Date: Sun, 5 Dec 1999 22:11:01 -0800 Subject: (Fwd) FLORIDA IMPORTER SENTENCED IN LANDMARK CORAL SMUGGLING C Message-ID: <199912060315.WAA07406@pisces.tcg.sgi.net> Apologies to those who receive FWS News. I thought this would be of interest to the Coral Listers. Best, Wendy Jo Shemansky ------- Forwarded message follows ------- Subject: FLORIDA IMPORTER SENTENCED IN LANDMARK CORAL SMUGGLING CASE To: fws-news at web2.irm.r9.fws.gov From: NEWS at fws.gov Date sent: Thu, 2 Dec 1999 15:59:23 -0500 ============================================================ December 2, 1999 Patricia Fisher, Fish and Wildlife Service, 202-208-5634 Sandy Cleva, Fish and Wildlife Service, 703-358-1949 Christine A. Romano, Department of Justice, 202-616-0903 FLORIDA IMPORTER SENTENCED IN LANDMARK CORAL SMUGGLING CASE WASHINGTON, D.C. -- A Florida man and his company were sentenced today in the first successful felony prosecution ever for illegal coral trafficking. Petros "Pete" Leventis will serve 18 months in prison followed by three years of supervised release and pay a $5,000 fine and a $200 special assessment for his role in a smuggling operation that used false declarations, invoices, and shipping documents to circumvent U.S. and Philippine laws as well as international trade restrictions that protect corals and other marine species. His company, Greek Island Imports, was fined $25,000, sentenced to five years probation, and ordered to pay an $800 special assessment in U.S. District Court in Tampa. A federal investigation by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Division of Law Enforcement and the U.S. Customs Service, revealed that Leventis smuggled internationally protected corals and seashells from the Philippines to the United States. "Coral reefs are among the world's most biologically diverse and economically important ecosystems; they are also among the most imperiled," said U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Director Jamie Rappaport Clark. "Stopping illegal coral trade is a vital part of U.S. and international efforts to save these resources." In August 1999, a federal jury found Leventis and his company guilty of smuggling and violating the Lacey Act a federal statute that makes it a crime to import or export wildlife taken in violation of a foreign, state, tribal, or other U.S. law. "Trafficking in endangered species like coral threatens aquatic ecosystems," said Lois Schiffer, Assistant Attorney General for the Department of Justice's Environment and Natural Resources. "Let the message be clear: We will take whatever steps we can here and abroad to stop the black market in endangered species and protect coral reefs." Coral reefs are home to nearly one-fourth of the world's ocean fish and thousands of other marine organisms. Reef ecosystems also contribute billions of dollars to the global economy, supporting tourism and other industries. Commercial exploitation is a serious threat to the survival of the world's reefs, more than half of which are considered at risk because of human activities. Dangers range from unsustainable trade and destructive fishing practices to coastal development and marine pollution. Large-scale degradation of reefs has already occurred in east Africa, south and southeast Asia, parts of the Pacific, and the Caribbean. Concern for reef conservation prompted the Philippines to ban the export of corals in 1977. Many of the species targeted by Leventis, including the blue, organ-pipe, branch, brush, staghorn, finger, brown stem, mushroom, and feather corals, have been listed on Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) since 1985. Such species may not be legally traded without proper documentation from the country where they are collected. "Profiteering at the expense of coral reefs will not go unchecked," Clark said. "As the world's largest consumer of corals and other reef species, the United States is leading the way to ensure that demand for these marine treasures does not ultimately destroy them." Leventis' smuggling activities came to the government's attention in July 1997 when a 40-foot shipping container loaded with some 400 boxes and packages of coral and sea shells arrived in Tampa. Special agents of the Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Customs Service then documented a six-year series of transactions involving protected corals and seashells between Leventis and Esther Flores, the owner of a Philippine seashell and souvenir exporting business. In November 1998, Leventis and Flores were indicted on smuggling and wildlife charges. The Justice Department in February 1999 filed papers with the Philippines seeking the extradition of Flores. Leventis' Lacey Act and smuggling convictions were tied to the July 1997 shipment to Tampa, as well as an illegal 1993 coral importation. Regulating the coral trade is difficult. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wildlife inspectors, Customs officials, and their global counterparts must handle large shipments of both dead and perishable live corals, and be able to identify the different reef species found in trade. The scientific information that exporting countries need to assess the effects of trade is often unavailable, and many nations lack the resources to fully implement and enforce trade controls. Both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Justice Department are participating in the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force (a coalition of federal agencies established by the President) and are working with other coral reef nations and the global CITES community to reduce threats to reefs, including those associated with trade. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service organized a workshop on coral identification for North American wildlife enforcement officers a year ago and provided similar training to all of its own inspectors this fall. On December 6, 1999, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which chairs the trade subgroup of the Coral Reef Task Force, will hold a public meeting to discuss the U.S. role in the coral trade and receive comments about whether there is a need for new authority to restrict commerce in certain coral reef species. "We encourage Americans to be conservation-minded consumers when it comes to the purchase of corals and coral reef products," Clark said. Travelers overseas should check U.S. and local laws before buying coral souvenirs and bringing them home. Purchasers in this country, including marine aquarium owners as well as curio seekers, can help protect coral reefs by insisting that retailers only stock coral reef products harvested from sustainable sources. The case was jointly prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Florida and the Wildlife and Marine Resources Section of the U.S. Department of Justice. Note to media: B-roll film of corals is available by contacting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Public Affairs at (202) 208-5634. Photographs of the smuggled corals and a fact sheet on corals can be found at the FWS Website, www.fws.gov ============================================================ News releases are also available on the World Wide Web at http://www.fws.gov/r9extaff/pubaff.html Questions concerning a particular news release or item of information should be directed to the person listed as the contact. General comments or observations concerning the content of the information should be directed to Mitch Snow (Mitch_Snow at fws.gov) in the Office of Public Affairs. ============================================================ To unsubscribe from the fws-news listserver, send e-mail to listserv at www.fws.gov with "unsubscribe fws-news [your name]" in the **body** of the message. Omit the "quote marks" - and you should not include anything on the Subject: line. For additional information about listser ------- End of forwarded message ------- "The library of life is on fire, and we must put it out." ~~Gro Harlem Brundtland, Prime Minister of Norway >>)):> >>)):> >>)):> >>)):> >>)):> >>)):> >>)):> >>)):> Wendy Jo Shemansky Graduate Student Environmental Research Science and Management Duquesne University Environmental News Director, West Penn Scuba Divers Pittsburgh, PA slkyshrk at sgi.net (412) 244 - 3318 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From Jim_Maragos at r1.fws.gov Tue Dec 7 18:49:01 1999 From: Jim_Maragos at r1.fws.gov (Jim_Maragos at r1.fws.gov) Date: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 15:49:01 -0800 Subject: Could bombing benefit Vieques reefs? Message-ID: <199912081222.MAA76524@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Les Kaufman's comments about Johnston Atollmay be misunderstood bythe uninformed. The reefs of Johnston Atoll were never bombed. There were VERY high atmospheric nuclear tests at the atoll in the late 1950s and possibly the early 1960s, but none of these tests were anywhere near sea level or underwater. A few military rockets blew up on the launch pad and plutonium may have been scattered into the ocean near Johnston Island in the early 60s, but the atoll was never used as a bombing range and there is no evidence of bomb craters or other impacts associated with live firing and bombing. True, the atoll was dredged in the early 60s to expand the land area and construct an airfield and port at the atoll, and indeed during the subsequent 35 years, the reefs have recovered. As a result I don't think the recent history of Johnston Atoll has much relevance to the ongoing discussion regarding the bombing at Vieques. Wouldn't it be better to focus some of our efforts on evaluating reef areas that were actually used for military bombing practice? Where are these areas? Let's make a list of them and find out how they are doing! James E. Maragos, Ph.D. Coral Reef Biologist U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Islands Ecoregion ____________________Reply Separator____________________ Subject: Re: Could bombing benefit Vieques reefs? Author: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Date: 11/20/99 6:14 AM Strong endorsement of Doug's point. Several on the list have visited or worked at Johnston Atoll, site of a facility for the disposal of chemical weapons and a place with a history of environmental insults. The reef is mostly in very beautiful condition due to the restrictions on access and use, and is now within a National Wildlife Sanctuary. Les Kaufman Boston University Marine Program lesk at bio.bu.edu 617-353-5560 office 617-353-6965 lab 617-353-6340 fax ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To unsubscribe from coral-list please send the following text in the body of the message to majordomo at coral.aoml.noaa.gov, unsubscribe coral-list To subscribe to coral-list, substitute "unsubscribe" instead with, subscribe coral-list If you wish to change email addresses, you can combine the above commands in a single message to majordomo at coral.aoml.noaa.gov. .................................................................. The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov) in Miami, Florida, USA. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From coral_giac at hotmail.com Tue Dec 7 22:34:37 1999 From: coral_giac at hotmail.com (Edwin Hernandez-Delgado) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 19:34:37 PST Subject: NAVY's opinion about Vieques and PR Message-ID: <19991208033437.49543.qmail@hotmail.com> Dear coral-listers. This is the correct URL about Vieques. http://www.usni.org/Proceedings/Aritcles99/PNoniel.htm Edwin ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From coral_giac at hotmail.com Tue Dec 7 17:58:44 1999 From: coral_giac at hotmail.com (Edwin Hernandez-Delgado) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 14:58:44 PST Subject: Proceedings Vieques Message-ID: <19991207225844.33485.qmail@hotmail.com> Dear all. I found some messages that people had trouble accessing the web site regarding the Navy opinion about Vieques and Puerto Ricans. For the benefit of those of you who were not able to access the site, here is the information that I just cut and pasted. regards, Edwin Professional Notes The Navy is the Best Thing That Has Happened to Vieques . . . By Captain John E. O'Neil, Jr., U.S. Navy (Retired) sidebar "Bridge, combat--we have an urgent fire mission for illumination and high explosive." "Bridge aye, are navigation and gun plot set?" "Yes, sir." "Very well, batteries released!" Both gun mounts silently traversed 90 degrees out on the smooth riding destroyer's starboard beam and gently quiver with the receipt of the train and elevation gun orders from the fire control computer. Then, with large bang and bright flash, followed by the sound of the smoking, empty powder can clanging on the steel deck under the forward mount, the first star shell left the ship. The sound of the powder can momentarily distracted the skipper as he watched the first round his ship had ever fired in combat arch high over the dark, calm sea to pop 1,500 feet above the target ashore some 8,800 yards away. "Good flare," he said to no one in particular. Several more star shells bloomed high in the near distant night. The commanding officer (CO), Commander Roberto Rodriguez, saw his paraflares blooming brightly over the terrorist position that had been firing at the recently landed mechanized company from the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit. Excitement and tension rose on the bridge as the Marine spotter's voice called for rapid continuous fire. The sharp crack of the aft mount signaled the first of six rounds of high explosive (HE) speeding to the target. Suddenly--even before the last round landed--the spotter's voice came screaming over the bridge and combat information center radio speakers: "Check fire. Check solution. Damn it, your HE rounds are on my position!" Commander Rodriguez, born and raised in Puerto Rico and a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, reacted quickly and saw that the error was corrected. Fortunately, the errant rounds had only slightly damaged two of the Marines lightly armored amphibious assault vehicles. Newly arrived in the Mediterranean, the destroyer was rated M4 (not qualified) in amphibious warfare, a primary mission area, because neither the ship nor the MEU had gone through any of the live-fire training exercises regularly held at the island of Vieques, east of the large Navy base at Roosevelt Roads, Puerto Rico, before they deployed. "That was no way to support my Marines," thought Rodriguez. "Working out gunnery and spotting problems in a combat situation is not the way to learn. People can do more damage to friendly forces than the enemy," the skipper told his officer of the deck on the starboard bridge wing. He was unhappy that some Puerto Ricans--in particular Commonwealth politicians--routinely used the Navy as a convenient scapegoat to cover their own lack of fiscal support for the 9,000 Viequensens. "Statehood, Commonwealth ,or Independence for Puerto Rico" were the politically charged slogans the 39-year old commanding officer had been hearing all his life--but now they were affecting his ability to carry out his mission. Lest this sound melodramatic, consider the real world: On 22 September 1999, shortly after these words were written, Vice Admiral William Fallon, U.S. Navy. Commander Second Fleet, told Congress that the USS John F. Kennedy (CV-67) carrier battle group had left for the Mediterranean only the day before with a destroyer, the USS John Hancock (DD-981), that had been unable to qualify in naval gunfire support during its pre-deployment work-up. "In some cases, we're not trained to the level we'd like to see." 1 He added that the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower (CVN-69) carrier battle group, scheduled to deploy in February 2000, probably would be affected also. The admiral's remarks came as he and Lieutenant General Peter Pace, U.S. Marine Corps, commander, Marine Forces Atlantic, testified before Senator James Inhofe's (R-OK) Senate Armed Services Committee's Readiness Panel Pace said that the 22nd Marine Expeditionary Unit (Special Operations Capable) was deploying "this week" without the benefit of training at Vieques. Both flag officers said that they were more than willing to discuss ways to improve the quality of life for island residents, but emphasized that, considering all East Coast locations, " . . . only at Vieques can we do the combined arms training that is so essential to the success of our forces in combat." A little history of the Vieques Weapons Range is in order. The Navy originally bought some 22,000-plus acres of the sparsely populated island during World War II, paying fair market value for the property. Since that time, the Navy has conducted hundreds of thousands of live-fire training missions with shipboard guns, aircraft, and troops ashore using their artillery. Vieques is geographically special because of its overall length with high hills where observation of the fall of shot can be carried out without interfering with ongoing training missions in the Live Impact Area (LIA), located on the last mile or so of the 21-mile-long island, and the 8 to 10 mile by 4-mile-wide Eastern Maneuvering Area (EMA) immediately adjacent to the LIA. Vieques is the only weapons range readily accessible to U.S. East Coast units where mission-essential combined arms training can be conducted. There are five critical war fighting and national security reasons to use the island: Vieques is outside the path of commercial airline flights, thus military pilots can fly the target ranges at the necessary tactical delivery heights. Since the air defenses of potential adversaries are becoming more sophisticated, our aircrews often operate at higher altitudes. Naval ships can operate in deep water (water depths are over 70 feet just 3,000 yards from the island shoreline) within gunfire range of land-based targets without disrupting commercial shipping traffic. The island beaches and land formations, with no existing civilian presence, permit amphibious landings and subsequent operations ashore. Naval Station Roosevelt Roads, only eight miles away, provides for the refueling and supplying of the ships and exercise aircraft and houses the Atlantic Fleet Weapons Training Facility (AFWTF) control center, radar, microwave relay points, and radio communications. The base has contributed thousands of jobs, and pumped literally billions of dollars into the Puerto Rican economy over the years supporting Vieques operations. Most important, the island range offers 22,000 acres on which Marine or Army combat-equipped ground troops can maneuver with appropriate support from aircraft and Naval ships without danger to the adjacent civilian population. In more than 50 years of combat training operations, there has never been a civilian casualty outside the Vieques range, and, until very recently, there had never been a casualty on the range. The entire range complex at Vieques has been designed specifically to give senior commanders an opportunity to train, evaluate, and improve combat readiness. The supporting arms coordination exercises conducted at Vieques just before carrier battle groups and amphibious ready groups deploy assess not only quantitative elements, but also more qualitative, subjective performance criteria. As the units normally deploy within a month of the exercise, the training here is vital for success in combat. Live fire is extremely important to the fleet operators because it provides three critical and interlocked factors in the training equation: Realism, which will save lives in time of crisis Valid assessment of the operators' ability to put ordnance on target End-to-end training, in which the desired ordnance goes directly from the magazines to the actual target ashore on the range All politics are local--except in Vieques. The most challenging piece of the Vieques puzzle is to comprehend thoroughly the economic and, more important, the emotional political issues that have surfaced periodically since Puerto Rico became part of the United States at the turn of the last century. Puerto Ricans became U.S. citizens in 1917, and the great population migrations to the states began in the 1940s. Feelings ran very high over considerations of independence, commonwealth status, or statehood from the late 1940s through the mid 1950s; commonwealth status was granted in 1952. In the late 1970s, President Jimmy Carter pardoned a Puerto Rican convicted in 1950 of trying to kill President Harry Truman and also pardoned four independentistas who had stormed the U.S. House of Representatives in 1954, unfurling the Puerto Rican flag, firing pistols, and wounding five congressmen. Reviewing these facts, you could infer that the pardons were granted because of the rising acts of violence that began with the first terrorist act attributed to the Fuerzas Armadas de Liberacion Nacional (FALN) in the bombing of Fraunce's Tavern in New York in 1975, which killed four patrons and wounded 60. In 1979, macheteros ambushed a military bus full of unarmed U.S. Sailors on their way to the Naval Communications site at Sabana Seca; two Sailors were killed and 10 others were wounded in this murderous act. After the January 1981 bombing of seven Puerto Rican Air National Guard jets, a machetero was convicted in absentia; others were convicted for stealing millions from a Wells Fargo armored car. Some in the press would have readers believe these criminals were patriots. In 1975, the Navy's gave up the live fire ranges on the nearby, smaller, neighboring island of Culebra. Use of Vieques over the years has shown a series of ebbs and flows in the often emotionally charged relationship between the local population--mostly a few fishermen, independentistas, a couple of late 1960s/early 1970s war-protester type immigrants from the states--and the Navy. Many of these ill feelings surface when assorted Puerto Rican independence, statehood, or commonwealth groups get the attention of the press, and in particular when a commonwealth, stateside congressional, or presidential election approaches. New York City residents of Puerto Rican descent--traditionally Democrats--are said to be a key voting bloc in the next New York senatorial election, and Puerto Rico is more in the national political limelight this election because Puerto Rican Governor Rossello is a co-chairman of Vice President Al Gore's campaign and a top Gore fund-raiser. President Bill Clinton's decision to grant conditional clemency to some dozen members or accomplices of the macheteros terrorists and their forefathers, the FALN, does a disservice to the vast majority of law-biding Puerto Ricans in that none of these criminals ever did anything for Puerto Rico. They bombed U.S. political and military sites between 1973 and 1983, stole money, killed innocent people, maimed policemen, and violated numerous firearms and weapons laws. A major fault in the overall handling of the Vieques use issue is that the Navy has essentially worked the problem by itself with little productive assistance from high-level Navy officials, the Congress, or other federal agencies or departments. This has given some Puerto Ricans the feeling that they remain only a colony wrested from Spain and are not important for the common defense of our country. While Puerto Ricans may not vote for the President, they are very well represented by more than 1.4 million expatriates in New York and New Jersey; the island receives more than $12 billion a year in direct federal money, has a large Veterans Administration hospital system, and residents pay no federal income tax. Following the 1979 murders of the innocent Sailors, the Navy and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico in 1983 signed a memorandum of understanding and made significant efforts to orchestrate a cease-fire in the turbulent legal battle over Vieques. Since then, the Navy has put forward a good-faith effort to live up to it, especially in the area of environmental stewardship. A case in point: I recently drove from the Vieques airport to Observation Post (OP)-1, then to the radar site in the Naval Ammunition Supply Depot and conservation area at the western end of the island, back again to OP-1, and finally to the airport. During the nine hours I spent on the island, I carefully noted the general care and upkeep of the Navy property and the civilian areas--including the beach in the LIA where the trespassing squatter/protesters are living illegally. One has only to drive around to observe the immense amounts of trash and junk that exist all over Vieques--and Puerto Rico itself. Violent crime is a daily event in most parts of the main island; police wear blue armored vests in full view of the general public. Few traffic laws are observed by the driving public or enforced by the police. Most telling of the volatility of Puerto Rican political reality in 1999 are the words of Herberto Acosta, writing in The San Juan Star's Viewpoint column of 31 August 1999, headlined "P.R. needs to create civic consciousness." This short but truthful--and painful - article validates the observations I made between the time I arrived in San Juan in late August 1999 until I left 10 days later. According to Acosta, "The worst failure of Puerto Rico in the last 50 years has been the inability to create a society with a civic conscience. Just six months before the millennium, Puerto Rico is unable to reach a civic, economic and social status that will fully define ourselves as part of the first world countries. In a society where our streets, beaches and public places are full of trash, no civic conscience can be established. This lack of responsibility by the citizens is the product of the big pseudo-socialistic and pseudo-capitalistic government, established by Munoz Marin with the precept that big statism, and by a not-so-subtle interchange of favors between citizens and governments, in which government patronized its political acolytes by giving them jobs and saving privileges for them, political power could be maintained." He has struck a nerve. I drove from Fajardo, just outside the base at Roosevelt Roads, through San Juan over to the Camuy Caves and down to Ponce via extremely narrow roads with hairpin turns--colloquially called a scenic route on the tourist maps--and then back to Fajardo via the toll road to San Juan. There is indeed seems to be no civic pride to clean up any of the debris. The difference between Navy and civilian property is night and day. I have been going to Puerto Rico since 1970 and the trash situation remains as bad today as it was then. Acosta goes on to highlight many other needs of the population, which he feels have been totally ignored by the island's governing elite. Many importers find their goods routinely tied up on the docks in the major ports by a series of confusing customs rules that seem to be lifted after a certain amount of time passes or a favor is granted to the official whose stamp is needed to release the material. Incoming privately owned vehicles for service personnel often are held for weeks before being released. The same goes for the military construction materials that contractors attempt to import for federal government contracts. The Puerto Rican press is filled with semi-sensational stories about the environmental disasters that the Navy has visited upon Vieques and Roosevelt Roads. The allegations simply are not true. I saw no trash along the 11-mile gravel roads that I used to travel up to the OP on Vieques. In addition, the return of any Navy property on Vieques to the Commonwealth would certainly trigger a free-for-all among several federal agencies--the Fish and Wildlife Service, the Environmental Protection Agency and other environmental regulators, and the U.S. Forest Service--who will want the present conservation areas to remain undeveloped. This will clash with the small group of politicians and land developers who hope to expand the tourist industry on Vieques. The two southern landing beaches in the Eastern Maneuvering Area were as pristine on this trip as I had seen them 11 years ago during my last coming ashore with my Marines. There are significant wildlife refuges and conservation zones throughout all the Navy property. The silly claims by some--including Ruben Berrios Martinez, president of the Puerto Rican Independence Party--that the Navy is maltreating the sea turtles, brown pelicans, and fish are ridiculous in light of the stringent environmental safeguards the Navy has put in place on the island. In fact, local poachers routinely raid the Navy property to capture these endangered creatures. If the Navy is forced to give up the training sites, I predict every sea turtle and brown pelican will leave their age-old nesting sites; if not, they will be poached into extinction. When all is said and done, the Navy is the best thing that has happened to Vieques In more than 55 years, only one unfortunate incident that resulted in a death on the island. A pair of Mark 82 500-pound iron bombs landed very close to OP-1, spraying heavy shrapnel, causing mortal injuries to a local hire Viequensen who was an employee of the 50-person civilian contract guard force that provides security for the Navy facilities on the island. The bombs landed more than 1,000 yards from their intended target, but were seven miles from the closest town. Nevertheless, the Puerto Rican press, politicians, island agitators, and stateside opportunists, immediately seized upon this accident and filled the print and television media with a gross distortion of the entire Vieques situation. Activists proclaim that stateside Americans do not have to tolerate live bombing ranges "right next to them"--but poor Viequensens do! In fact, Eglin Air Force Base in the Florida panhandle has a variety of live weapon drop areas that are closer to civilians than any of those on Vieques. The Vieques LIA is almost 10 miles from the closest town on the island, and there has never been a piece of live ordnance dropped outside the Navy training areas on the Vieques Island ranges that has injured a local person. Economic development of the small island and other attempts of improving the life of the inhabitants must fall squarely on the local Commonwealth politicians with an assist from the Department of Defense with the Navy as its lead agency. I met several local people on the island and they were very complimentary about the Navy's rapid assistance following hurricanes, as well as the number of jobs the Navy provides. Most interesting, they wanted their leaders in San Juan to get on the ball to help them move forward instead of getting their photos on the social pages of The San Juan Star. The death was truly regrettable, but it was an extremely isolated occurrence. If the President decides to order the Navy to leave the island range, we will see young American blue jackets and Marines--including Puerto Ricans--going into combat without proper predeployment training. 1. Sheila Foote, "Military Officials Seek Dialogue to Reopen Vieques Range," Defense Daily, 23 September 1999. Subsequent quotes and references to this hearing also came from this article. Captain O'Neil, who spent a 30-year career primarily with the 'Gator Navy, is a consultant in Jacksonville, Florida. He is a frequent Proceedings contributor. . . . and it's Not Time to Give it Back As a naval officer who first visited the Navy range facility at Roosevelt Roads, Puerto Rico, in August 1969 and continued sailing or flying down there through August 1999, I must comment on some of the naive, ill-informed comments in Lieutenant Commander Matos's article. (See "It's Time to Return Vieques," Proceedings, October 1999, page 76.) First and foremost, the future of Vieques Island remains the responsibility not of the U.S. Navy, but of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico--whose leadership has shown very little real interest in the island's future. Emotionally biased rhetoric, inaccurate press reports, non-existent high-level participation on both sides in "conflict" resolution, has poisoned a legitimate look at the on-going live-fire issue on Vieques. The author's claim that Pacific Fleet training facilities are not able to provide the particular level of training available at Vieques is inaccurate. West coast units train at Camp Pendleton, California, nearby San Clemente Island, the offshore Pacific Missile Range, and periodically send their aircraft to use the myriad of inland training ranges from Arizona to Washington. Ships routinely fire live ammunition at targets ashore and carefully follow California's environmental rules and guidelines, which are much more demanding than those of Puerto Rico.Regarding opposition criticism of the Navy's environmental stewardship of its Puerto Rican property, one has only to stand at the Navy fence line and look outside; it is night and day. I am hard pressed to see the "harm" that the anti-Navy, get-out-of-Vieques antagonists claim the island residents live under. The Navy population on Vieques is extremely small, and the range is not in constant use as indicated by the opposition. The Navy follows a very detailed set of rules whenever there is a live-fire operation or when the Marines come ashore on the southern Vieques beaches to test their landing plans and weapons support prior to deployment. The claim that supersonic aircraft continually roar over the hapless islanders is bogus. In fact, the small commuter aircraft--and the planned larger jet aircraft that will soon use the larger runway at the local airport being constructed on property the Navy signed over to the island-- will produce a daily level of aircraft noise that will surpass any noise levels that the Navy would ever generate over the populated areas of the island. I predict that if the Navy leaves its present pristine acres, the squatters who are a familiar sight all over Puerto Rico will claim land, trash it, and kill, eat, or capture-then-sell the existing wildlife. The brown pelican, the large sea turtles, and fish are indeed now protected, yet there are well-documented cases of local poachers in these teeming tropical waters and beaches. Economic development has been attempted several times on the island since the 1983 Memorandum of Understanding, but. frankly no one wants to go to the island. The same is the case for the former gunnery range at the smaller yet island of Culebra to the north. Navy money has helped improve the basic infrastructure on both islands, but without Commonwealth interest-- except vitriolic rhetoric at election time--these efforts have failed. Local Viequensens told me that Commonwealth politicians have woefully ignored their true needs for decades. The abysmal roads and public infrastructure serve as mute testimony. While there appears to be a modern hospital/clinic (viewed from the outside), little has been done to staff the facility adequately. Trash disposal is almost nonexistent. The islanders rely upon the Navy to help restore basic services following hurricanes. Last year, a few U.S. expatriate and local anti-Navy protesters even blockaded Sea Bee efforts to deliver clean water to the hospital that the local mayor had agreed to accept! There is no reason for tourists to visit the island because there is nothing available for them to do except to get sunburned, drink rum, and trash the Navy beaches, which generally are available for tourist use. The large charter fishing industry at Fajardo on the large island of Puerto Rico does not want any competition from the looked-down-upon residents of the two nearby islands. There are no Commonwealth programs to assist the job situation, and selling the Navy land back to the people is a silly notion. There is no local money available to provide an economic stimulus, let alone pay a fair market value for the Navy acreage. I am willing to bet that if President Bill Clinton orders the Department of Defense to leave Vieques, very few of the islanders will ever see their way of life improve. The now-clean Navy beaches of the southern side of the island will be littered and trashed in a short amount of time, the sea turtles will be slaughtered, and the brown pelicans taken from their rookeries in the sanctuaries. Little infrastructure money would be saved by closing the small Navy facilities on the island. More than 130 local-hire Viequesens would lose their jobs. And when--not if, but when--Cuban President-for-life Fidel Castro exits the scene, that very large island nation will be ready for major economic development--with tourism at the top of the list. The Cubans might even be ready to provide the United States with some of the old Soviet traing areas--for a price. Whatever happens, Puerto Rican officials confronting a diminished tourist industry will wish they had never brought up the subject of closing down Vieques. The federal government should take the lead in resolving the live-fire controversy. As an aside, the Puerto Rican National Guard routinely conducts artillery firing just south of Roosevelt Roads and occasionally lands a large-caliber round outside the impact areas--in or near a local town; this happened most recently last spring. The Puerto Rican press overlooked this training incident, but the Commonwealth ordered the National Guard to cease firing until the Navy is forced out of Vieques. All politics are indeed local. Many are at fault for the sad way this important national defense issue has been handled. The Navy, by moving out its only flag officer more than four years ago, sent the wrong signal to Puerto Rico: the lack of Department of Defense and Congressional support. The Commonwealth leadership, posturing for votes, has placed the readiness of deployable fleet units at risk. The closure of the U.S. bases in Panama, coupled with the recent relocation and expansion of the Southern Command and Special Operations Command forces in Puerto Rico, will place an even greater demand for live-fire training. More federal money, good will on both sides, and a better exchange of information will solve this problem. Let's get on with it. John O'Neil, U.S. Navy (Retired) return to top Published November, 1999 ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From coral_giac at hotmail.com Tue Dec 7 16:05:23 1999 From: coral_giac at hotmail.com (Edwin Hernandez-Delgado) Date: Tue, 07 Dec 1999 13:05:23 PST Subject: PROCEEDINGS ABOUT VIEQUES Message-ID: <19991207210523.82292.qmail@hotmail.com> Dear coral-listers. For all of you who are truly interested in the Vieques bombing issue, I enclosed some interesting information regarding the position of the U.S. Navy about Vieques and their opinion about us, Puerto Ricans. I won't comment, but judge by yourselves. I included the web site address in case you want to access it directly. http://www.usni.org/Proceedings Regards, Edwin Edwin A. Hernandez-Delgado Investigador Asociado Universidad de Puerto Rico Departamento de Biologia Grupo de Investigacion en Arrecifes de Coral P.O. Box 23360 San Juan, Puerto Rico 00931-3360 Tel. (787) 764-0000, x-4855 Fax (787) 764-2610 e-mail: coral_giac at hotmail.com diploria at coqui.net ****************************************** ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ------=_NextPart_000_6e9088ea_106bbba2$3d6a3f34 From lesk at bio.bu.edu Wed Dec 8 08:52:25 1999 From: lesk at bio.bu.edu (Les Kaufman) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 08:52:25 -0500 (EST) Subject: Could bombing benefit Vieques reefs? In-Reply-To: <199912081222.MAA76524@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: I want to thank Jim for the clarifications regarding Johnston Atoll vs. Vieques, though I am a bit horrified that anything I said could have been misconstrued as having implied that Johnston had been cratered. I must have been too subtle. My point was only thata history of military jursidiction was not an entirely bad thing in all cases or in all ways. It should be obvious that transition to long-term stewardship with conservation in min and adequate resources to effect this goal, is the desired situation. I was also trying to DISPEL a notion that Johnston was a wasteland, an impression that might have been generated by existing misconceptions. The Johnston atoll reef is one of the most beautiful, interesting, and intact that I have ever seen, and is a priceless observatory in which we can learn much about coral reef ecology in an environment where we can also hope to seggregate global from local signals. All of this has nothing to do with the military, and everything to do with recognizing the unique values represented by the coral reef systems historically within military reserves. As for Vieques, these days ANY Caribbean reef under effective stewardship is a priceless thing, especially if it holds hope of preserving intact representatives of Atlantic acroporid assemblages, which have been greatly reduced. Les Kaufman Boston University Marine Program Department of Biology 5 Cummington Street Boston, MA 02215 lesk at bio.bu.edu 617-353-5560 office 617-353-6965 lab 617-353-6340 fax ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From tdone at aims.gov.au Tue Dec 7 18:58:35 1999 From: tdone at aims.gov.au (Terry Done) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 09:58:35 +1000 Subject: 9th International Coral Reef Symposium, Bali, October 23-27 2000 Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19991208095835.00843950@email.aims.gov.au> This is a joint message from: Terry Done President ISRS and Anugerah Nontji Chairman, 9ICRS Organizing Committee Update - December 7th 1999 This note is to confirm that the Symposium will be held in Bali on 23-27 October 2000 as scheduled. We encourage all of you to attend and help make it the best Symposium yet. We welcome oral presentations and posters on any topic within the broad scope of the meeting. We also have an excellent program of mini-symposia under development (see below), but if your topic does not fit readily into one of them, it can be slotted into one of the general sessions. Abstracts should be sent to David Hopley by April 30 2000 (address details below). Registration and Cancellation Policy Early-bird registrations are due by July 30th 2000, payable to the conference organizers Royalindo, in Jakarta (address and payment details below). Royalindo advise that refunds for cancelled registrations will be made according to the following schedule: Date of cancellation of registration Amount of Refund Before July 30th 2000 100% August 1st - September 30th 90% October 1st - 15th 50% After October 15th 0% Field trips At the initiative of Dr Mark Erdmann, additional pre- and post-symposium scientific field trips on live-aboard dive boats are being investigated. Please watch this space and 3rd Circular for further details. Cheaper accommodation Cheaper accommodations are being investigated and will be announced here and in the 3rd Circular. Dr Terry Done Leader Sustaining Coral Reefs Project Australian Institute of Marine Science PMB #3 Mail Centre, Townsville Qld 4810 Australia Phone 61 7 47 534 344 Fax 61 7 47 725 852 email: tdone at aims.gov.au WEBSITE for 9th International Coral Reef Symposium www.nova.edu/ocean/9icrs ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From JandL at rivnet.net Wed Dec 8 11:26:47 1999 From: JandL at rivnet.net (Judith Lang & Lynton Land) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 11:26:47 -0500 Subject: Vieques: a more balanced news account from the Associated Press Message-ID: Hello everyone, Here's a more balanced news account from the Associated Press. Note the concluding remarks about alternate use of Elgin Airforce Base in Florida for air-to-ground bombing runs and of beaches in North Carolina for amphibious assaults. Judy Lang Clinton ends military use of Vieques unless residents agree By ROBERT BURNS AP Military Writer WASHINGTON (AP) - President Clinton today ordered the military to stop using a Puerto Rican island as a live-bombing range unless residents there allow the practice to continue, and to phase out all use of the island for military training over the next five years. Emphasizing the importance of the island to military readiness, the Clinton administration dangled a $40 million incentive to try to persuade Vieques' 9,000 civilians, who are U.S. citizens, to let the training continue. "I understand the longstanding concerns of residents of the island," Clinton said in a statement that also stressed the importance of military training carried out at Vieques since 1941. "These concerns must be addressed, and I believe our plan will do so in a constructive manner," said Clinton, whose decision was based on the recommendations of Defense Secretary William Cohen. However, Puerto Rico Gov. Pedro Rossello rejected the decision as "unacceptable for the people of Puerto Rico and the people of Vieques." "It doesn't fulfill the expectations we have for the people of Vieques," he said, objecting to any possible renewal of live-bombing on the island. Rossello has called for the Navy to withdraw. The Navy operations have been a target of occasional protests and legal actions since the 1960s, but the controversy erupted into a crisis after a civilian security guard was killed last April. The Navy then suspended training on Vieques but has sought a way to resume it as soon as possible. The Navy has argued that the island was irreplaceable in preparing U.S. forces for combined land, sea and air operations on the Atlantic side of the world. The island, which has been a key training ground for the ships and aircraft of the Navy's Atlantic Fleet since World War II, offers "the most rigorous, realistic training" facility available, Navy Secretary Richard Danzig said. In a letter to Clinton outlining his recommendation on Vieques, Cohen said operations there are "a vital part of training our combat forces." "I also firmly believe that all U.S. citizens, whether they live in states or other jurisdictions, must make sacrifices in order to support the strong national defense that preserves the freedoms we all enjoy," Cohen wrote. "There is not a single part of our country that doesn't make some adjustments or accommodations to sustain the presence of the military." Under the administration's plan, the number of training days would immediately be cut in half from 180 to 90 per year. "Within the five years, the Navy will develop alternatives to the training, and all training will terminate unless agreed to by the Vieques people and the Navy," Danzig said. A resumption of training "would be accompanied by" a $40 million community economic development program, he said. Early reports of the decision sparked a celebration among protesters on Vieques, some of whom have camped on the beach for nearly six months. "If this is true, then it's a triumph of the people," said Ismael Guadelupe, a local fisherman who is among the protest leaders. "But the triumph will be complete when they turn over all the lands, clean up the contamination and compensate the people of Vieques for all their years of suffering." The first military force affected by the decision, the USS Eisenhower battle group, was being sent to the Mediterranean without training on Vieques. Danzig said other battle groups also would be affected until training can resume on the island. The Marines with the Eisenhower, instead of using Vieques, will conduct an amphibious assault on the North Carolina coast, and Navy strike aircraft will conduct air-to-ground bombing runs at Eglin Air Force Base, Fla., officials said earlier. The recommendation means the Eisenhower battle group likely would deploy to the Mediterranean Sea in February at a substantially reduced state of combat readiness, several officials said. The Navy has felt strongly that its carrier battle groups must be allowed the realistic training that Vieques provided to be ready for combat, since they may be called on to begin actual combat once they arrive on station. Navy officials had insisted that Vieques is the only Atlantic Coast site available for such training. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From allard at candw.lc Wed Dec 8 10:56:46 1999 From: allard at candw.lc (Karyn & Michael Allard) Date: Wed, 08 Dec 1999 11:56:46 -0400 Subject: buffer zones between fishing priority areas & marine reserves Message-ID: <199912081648.QAA78564@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Hello: I am chairman of St. Lucia's diving association and run Scuba St. Lucia here in St. Lucia. We are having another boundary dispute with fishermen. A key element of where to place the boundary is allowing enough of a non-reef buffer zone between the area where fish are taken and the coral reefs. Does anyone have any valid information from scientific studies which seem to indicate minimum distances between the 2 areas? If so, would you please forward any pertinent information to me at the above address? Thank you for your help. Michael Allard reefman at candw.lc 758 459 7851 fax 758 459 7755 phone ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From Oceanwatch at aol.com Wed Dec 8 11:51:15 1999 From: Oceanwatch at aol.com (Oceanwatch at aol.com) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 11:51:15 EST Subject: Vieques Article, New York Times Message-ID: <0.c91f7723.257fe683@aol.com> Dear Coral Listers FYI, this article (copy below) appeared last Sunday in the NY Times. It says Vieques has been debated in PR for at least 28 years, but the vehemence of current Navy opposition is apparent in all three factions--the pro-commonwealth, pro-statehood and pro-independence forces--all agree that the Navy must get out. That's the driving force. Sustainability should be a priority but to do that you have to push the ecological priorities from the local political level. regards Cliff McCreedy ><((;> ><((;> ><((;> Oceanwatch 2101 Wilson Boulevard Suite 900 Arlington, VA 22201 phone 703-351-7444 fax 703-351-7472 e-mail: Oceanwatch at aol.com http://www.enviroweb.org/oceanwatch New York Times December 5, 1999, Sunday National Desk Puerto Ricans Gain Ear of Washington But Seek Far More By FRANCIS X. CLINES Again and again across the decades, the United States marines have stormed ashore here on Yellow Beach in a full rain of firepower and won the vital mock battleground that has been made of the eastern third of this small, lush island. But not now, and not ever again, according to the resolve of Senator Ruben Berrios Martinez, the Puerto Rican lawmaker and Independence Party leader who holds the political high ground with a mere pamphleteer's firepower. In seven months of peaceful uprising set off by the death of a civilian in a wayward bombing run, the senator has led dozens of angry squatters in blocking beachfronts of the amphibious training ground for the United States Navy's Atlantic fleet. The squatters have managed to turn ground zero in the Navy's practice wars into a looming bastion of nationalism in Puerto Rico's long struggle for definition in the shadow of the United States. ''It will be a cumulative triumph,'' Mr. Berrios predicted today as he warily patrolled the pristine sands of Yellow Beach and rejected the latest compromise offer by the Clinton administration to gradually return the shell-pocked island to the full control of its 9,300 residents. ''But now we are on their radar screen and all this is a big triumph in the struggle for decolonialization,'' Mr. Berrios said, acknowledging that he was as much amazed as determined in having achieved the full and urgent attention of Washington. This realization of the simmering political power of Puerto Ricans in finally being heeded at the highest levels after centuries of colonial subservience is being celebrated heartily across the main island of Puerto Rico, eight miles to the west, as much as here on this verdant sliver that the Navy has used as it pleased since World War II. ''Navy Out!'' signs dot the rich kaleidoscopic scene of San Juan as Gov. Pedro J. Rossello and other Puerto Rican political leaders across the spectrum echo the firmness of Mr. Berrios, the San Juan politician who first chose the path of civil disobedience. Now, he and his fellow squatters can grin in their storm-tattered tents at the fact that while he was quickly arrested and roundly condemned by the Puerto Rican Legislature when he took a similar protest course 28 years ago, his action this time was avidly blessed by the Legislature as a legitimate and necessary function of lawmaking. In 1971, Mr. Berrios lasted only five days before being imprisoned for three months. ''And now, seven months on the beach is a small kind of victory,'' he said in an interview, citing an array of changed circumstances. These include the vast tide of Spanish Americans now inheriting political power across the United States, he noted, and a growing international realization that if Washington can creatively help Britain clean up its colonial baggage in Northern Ireland, why should it not see as well to the lingering grievances of Puerto Rico in its own sphere. This point was brought home to many Puerto Ricans last month when the leading European heads of state voted as members of the Socialist International not only to support the Vieques cause but also to choose Senator Berrios as its president. Surveying his wind-whipped camp at the foot of the Navy's Vieques observation post, the senator insisted that the simple scene of resistance had the power to revive the independence cause, a minuscule movement eclipsed in the four decades since Puerto Rico became a commonwealth of the United States, a status that Puerto Rican voters have favored repeatedly in plebiscites. ''This is a metaphor, a prelude of what is going to happen in Puerto Rico as a whole soon,'' Mr. Berrios said. ''Because the United States cannot live with a remnant of 19th-century empire like Puerto Rico. It's not being true to its history nor its future.'' The resistance campsites have been growing along with the visits to Vieques by institutional leaders hurrying to catch up with an issue that polls show is engrossing a large part of the Puerto Rican population. It is one of the few issues on which Puerto Ricans of all political persuasions -- pro-commonwealth, pro-statehood and pro-independence -- seem to be united. This week the Roman Catholic hierarchy signaled its own show of force, issuing parish appeals for solidarity behind Vieques even as a Navy battle group led by the aircraft carrier Eisenhower retreated from the training grounds under orders from Washington. Another Vieques squatter, Fernando Martin , a law professor at the University of Puerto Rico who is vice president of the Independence Party, exulted, ''The issue of this little island has taken more of President Clinton's time and, I dare say, anxiety than the whole Puerto Rican issue has received from all the presidents from McKinley up to now.'' President Clinton's latest proposal, to return Vieques to local control within five years, repair the 52-square-mile island with $40 million in aid and have the Navy fire only ''inert'' ammunition, not live salvos, was rejected by Puerto Rican political leaders as inadequate. Inert rounds would rain down with all the power of ''inert'' lead bullet heads, islanders warned. ''It is another trick,'' a fisherman muttered here in Esperanza village amid the usual daily catch of rumors and speculation on the will of Washington. ''Clinton is lulling us so they can sneak in federal agents to arrest the squatters,'' the fisherman insisted at the dockside before setting out for the protest camps on the circuitous choppy water route around the Marines' land sentinels. At critical turnings along the southeast coast, squatters waved at the passing boat from huts jerry-built from wooden Navy target boards and other detritus of the seven-month standoff. The news media of Puerto Rico, and lately the world, course through the whitecaps to feed a story that has seized the commonwealth. ''There is this overwhelming consensus throughout Puerto Rico that has never existed before,'' said Robert Rabin, the director of Vieques's El Fortin museum, which is rich in the history of five centuries of foreigners' claims of empire in Puerto Rico. ''This is a historic moment for Puerto Rico,'' Mr. Rabin said of the civil disobedience galvanized by the once unthinkable notion of resisting the claims of the United States war machine. ''Hundreds of people across the spectrum -- fishermen, housewives, schoolteachers, political leaders -- are united by an issue for the first time.'' Various Pentagon officials have insisted that the Vieques war-games theater cannot be duplicated elsewhere and its loss would result in substandard training for American forces. But Mr. Berrios, 60, a scholar in international law who was educated at Harvard and Oxford Universities and Georgetown Law School, cites arguments to the contrary from authorities like Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the retiring New York Democrat who trained here as a young sailor and was first fascinated by the power politics of Washington and San Juan. Mr. Berrios even cites the marginal note of sympathy for Vieques from Mr. Clinton, disclosed by the White House in response to a letter from Mr. Berrios. ''This is wrong,'' Mr. Clinton jotted in describing the ''colonial commonwealth'' status of the island. Here on Yellow Beach, with the guns safely silenced, Mr. Berrios clings to that jotting more than to the latest formal proposal in the administration's effort to solve this onetime backwater problem that now occupies radar screens far beyond the Navy's beachfront post. ''Are the planets in alignment?'' Mr. Berrios wondered with a big smile. He questioned whether Mr. Clinton would stand by his personal inclination in the face of Navy complaints and resistance. ''If they agree to leave with not one more bomb to fall, we win,'' Mr. Berrios said, snug in his protest camp. ''If they arrest us, they lose.'' ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From Jim_Maragos at r1.fws.gov Wed Dec 8 15:44:43 1999 From: Jim_Maragos at r1.fws.gov (Jim_Maragos at r1.fws.gov) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 12:44:43 -0800 Subject: Could bombing benefit Vieques reefs? Message-ID: <88256841.007DD234.00@fw1ro7.r1.fws.gov> Les, Thank you for your thoughts, but I feel there may still be some possible misconceptions regarding the recent military history at Johnston Atoll, and the military's impact on its coral reefs. Besides serving as an example of positive contemporary military stewardship, the early military presence at Johnston should also serve as a lesson on how NOT to manage an important coral reef, one that was already established as a protected area, BEFORE military involvement. First, let me review the history of the atoll as a means of explaining my points. The atoll was discovered by American ships in 1796 and 1807 and at the time it appeared to have never been inhabited. In 1856, the U.S. claimed the atoll under provisions of the Guano Act, and guano was removed by an American company over the next 50 years. In 1922 the atoll was visited by the Biological Survey of the Department of Agriculture and the Bishop Museum of Hawaii. As a result of the scientific studies, in 1926 Johnston was first established by Executive Order 4467 for use by the Department of Agriculture as a refuge and breeding ground for native birds. Years later Johnston and other similarly designated U.S. islands were established as National Wildlife Refuges under the administration of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. With the threat of war on the distant horizon, Executive Order 6935 in 1934 placed Johnston Atoll under the administration of the U.S. Navy, but retaining earlier provisions for the Refuge. Jurisdictional responsibilities over the atoll were clarified in 1976 when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the Defense Nuclear Agengy signed a Memorandum of Agreement granting the Service jurisdictionand responsibility over the atoll's natural resources. By recent agreement with the base commander, the extent of Refuge jurisdiction has been extended to include all waters within 3 nautical miles of emergent land and all coral reefs exposed at low tide. Commercial fishing is not allowed in the refuge. In 1936 the Navy developed a seaplane base and later an airstrip and refueling facility. In 1941 Executive Order 8682 established a Naval Defensive Sea and Airspace Reservation around Johnston and other nearby U.S. atolls. The original atoll was extensively modified by dredging ship channels and seaplane landing areas and constructing new islands and enlarging existing islands. Over the years the dredging and filling operations destroyed 400 hectares of coral reefs and damaged an additional 2,800 hectares due to sedimentation from military cutterhead dredging operations. Coral recovery has been noticeable but only along the submerged faces of the channels and basin. No recovery has occurred on reefs converted to land and very little recovery has occurred on the deep sandy floor of the dredged channels and basin. At best only 10% of the originally damaged reefs have recovered. After the Vietnam War, thousands of drums of the defoliant Agent Orange were stacked along both sides of the jointly used military and commercial runway for many years. This was probably the worst place in the world to be storing the agent, and the rusting drums released unknown quantities of hazardous and toxic chemicals into the groundwater, and by extension onto adjacent reefs. Subsequent chemical testing has revealed extensive dioxin contamination of groundwater and soils. Eventually the specially designed incinerator ship Vulcanus was contracted to remove the drums and incinerate the agent in the open sea. I'm not sure about the present state of dioxin contamination. During the late 1950s and until 1962, high altitude nuclear testing was carried out at Johnston, and in 1962 three rockets accidentally exploded on or above Johnston Island, scatttering plutonium particles over an area of several square miles. The 1975 cleanup collected most of the contaminated soils on land and then stockpiled them in a 43-acre fenced area which I believe remains to this day. There may have been subsequent projects to remove the contaminants. Adjacent reefs may still be contaminated with plutonium and I'm not sure whether land areas outside the fenced enclosure are still exposed to low level radiation. Plutonium has a "half-life" of about 29,000 years. In 1970 U.S. Army chemical munitions (explosively configured nerve and mustard agents) in Okinawa were transported to Johnston atoll with many stored in aluminum warehousing near the shoreline subject to salt air and tropical, humid conditions. Again from an environmental standpoint, a worst place in the world could not have been chosen, and it should come as no surprise that many of these munitions began to deteriorate and leak before they were later moved into underground igloos. The rapid deterioration of these munitions was the principal reason for establishing JACADS (Johnston Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal System), the first of a specially designed incinerator to destroy the munitions on a large scale basis. Later in 1990, despite protests from many Pacific island nations, the U.S. also agreed to transport additional chemical munitions halfway around the world from Germany to Johnston to be destroyed. After all munitions are destroyed, JACADS is to be dismantled and the atoll relinquished to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Since the late 1970s, the military has steadily improved their capacity to minimize damage to the atoll's natural resources. They have worked closely with other on-site conservation agencies and have funded important environmental research and long range monitoring, including marine life and seabirds. However, they do this in part because they are required by law to do so and in part because many others are looking over their shoulders, or in the case of the Service, working side-by-side them. However, the track record of the military before the mid 1970s at Johnston leaves much to be desired, as can be surmised from above. Notwithstanding the excellent degree of cooperation and stewardship now over natural resources, it does not cancel out the thousands of hectares of reef areas that were destroyed and which will not recover. Furthermore, much of the damage could have been avoided with the imposition of reasonable precautions. Nor can it compensate for the unreasonable exposure of radionuclides, nerve agents and chemical defoliants to the atoll's ecosystem and inhabitants. Indeed it is fortunate that much of the reef at Johnston is pristine and spectacular, but this is not due exemplary military planning. It is due to the fact that these reef areas were probably always in excellent condition and were out of "harms way" during the massive military dredging and filling of the early 1960's. So what lessons can be learned, wither the reefs of Vieques? I'd say that shared responsibility over the reefs is a must. The military should be involved in order to assess and implement resoration actions and fund long range monitoring and cleanup programs, just as they are doing at Johnston. However, they should also be working, if not sponsoring, the activites of management and conservation agencies which have responsibilities over the coral reefs and other natural resources. Some experienced environmental attorneys should also review the actions of the military at Vieques to determine whether they are in compliance with international environmental conventions and several U.S. environmental laws, including the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Coastal Zone Management Act, Superfund Act, other federal acts, the new Executive Order protecting coral reefs, and applicable Puerto Rican statutes. If not in compliance, then the responsible parties can be compelled to do so, including the cessation of bombing and other damaging actions until corrective actions are taken. I make these observations as someone completely unfamiliar with the Vieques situation, and hopefully actions are already underway that will lead to a sustainable and reasonable future for the reefs of Vieques. James Maragos ____________________Reply Separator____________________ Subject: Re: Re[2]: Could bombing benefit Vieques reefs? Author: Les Kaufman Date: 12/8/99 5:52 AM Additional Header Information: Received: from bio.bu.edu ([128.197.80.4]) by fw1ro8.r1.fws.gov (Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.4 (830.2 3-23-1999)) with SMTP id 88256841.004C3A30; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 05:52:36 -0800 Received: from localhost (lesk at localhost) by bio.bu.edu ((8.9.3.buoit.v1.0)/8.9.3/(BU-S-10/28/1999-v1.0pre2)) with SMTP id IAA03990; Wed, 8 Dec 1999 08:52:26 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 08:52:25 -0500 (EST) From: Les Kaufman To: Jim_Maragos at r1.fws.gov cc: Doug Fenner , coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Subject: Re: Re[2]: Could bombing benefit Vieques reefs? In-Reply-To: <199912081222.MAA76524 at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII --------------------------------- I want to thank Jim for the clarifications regarding Johnston Atoll vs. Vieques, though I am a bit horrified that anything I said could have been misconstrued as having implied that Johnston had been cratered. I must have been too subtle. My point was only thata history of military jursidiction was not an entirely bad thing in all cases or in all ways. It should be obvious that transition to long-term stewardship with conservation in min and adequate resources to effect this goal, is the desired situation. I was also trying to DISPEL a notion that Johnston was a wasteland, an impression that might have been generated by existing misconceptions. The Johnston atoll reef is one of the most beautiful, interesting, and intact that I have ever seen, and is a priceless observatory in which we can learn much about coral reef ecology in an environment where we can also hope to seggregate global from local signals. All of this has nothing to do with the military, and everything to do with recognizing the unique values represented by the coral reef systems historically within military reserves. As for Vieques, these days ANY Caribbean reef under effective stewardship is a priceless thing, especially if it holds hope of preserving intact representatives of Atlantic acroporid assemblages, which have been greatly reduced. Les Kaufman Boston University Marine Program Department of Biology 5 Cummington Street Boston, MA 02215 lesk at bio.bu.edu 617-353-5560 office 617-353-6965 lab 617-353-6340 fax ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From bob at westpacfisheries.net Thu Dec 9 10:33:01 1999 From: bob at westpacfisheries.net (Bob Endreson) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 05:33:01 -1000 Subject: Coral Reef Ecosystem Plan Message-ID: <000801bf425a$b76c9660$3128d5d1@bob> We are very concerned that the Western Pacific Council is moving forward with public hearings in the coming weeks concerning the Coral Reef Ecosystem Plan. They are doing so even after the Council, NOAA and NMFS instructed that the staff hold joint Coral Reef Plan Team Meetings with the Advisory Panel. However this was not done as only the chairman of both the AP and Plan team met with the Council staff, which is highly suspicious, knowing the history of what has transpired during the Plan Team and AP process. Reports were altered without the approval of the Plan Team and AP members and then presented as their work. The Plan Team was comprised of Coral Reef Experts, yet 95% of their recommendations were disregarded by the Council in lieu of less restrictive measures, which could impact EFH, as well as endangered and threatened species. Facts and observer information concerning fishermen using fire arms and bait to deter interactions with Monk Seals and dolphins in the North West Hawaiian Islands were not given consideration and the public perception is that the Council is once again violating NEPA and CEQ guidelines which state; "when several proposals for....related action that will have cumulative or synergistic environmental impact upon a region are pending concurrently before an agency, their environmental consequences must be considered together. (40 CFR Sec. 1508.18). In part our concerns include, but are not limited to, recommendations in defining the scope of the bottomfish, lobster, pelagic and Seamount Groundfish FMPs and the Coral Reef Ecosystem FMP. In short we wish to stress the need that all plans be included in the Coral Reef Ecosystem FMP and not simply linked by existing FMPs. We further believe that they all need to be evaluated according to the CEQ Guidelines and provide a full and frank discussion of all the potential direct, indirect and cumulative impacts that the proposed Coral Reef Ecosystem FMP can have on the environment. We therefore request that any public hearing be postponed until these and other concerns are addressed and this fast track that the Council is determined to put this plan on be stopped. Bob Endreson -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/19991209/d02f8565/attachment.html From jch at aoml.noaa.gov Thu Dec 9 08:06:27 1999 From: jch at aoml.noaa.gov (coral-list administrator) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 13:06:27 GMT Subject: Posting of copyrighted material Message-ID: <199912091306.NAA85695@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> It has come to my attention (by an author) that the posting to coral-list of copyrighted material may not consitute "fair use" of the material, and may in fact result in financial harm to the originating news agency. I would therefore like to request that coral-list subscribers NOT post verbatim news articles published at other sites. If the story has a URL at that new agency, then (at least tentatively, until I hear to the contrary), I would like to ask that you just post the URL to the list, if you feel it is noteworthy. I am sure you will all appreciate the reasoning behind this requirement. Cheers, Jim Hendee coral-list administrator ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From JandL at rivnet.net Thu Dec 9 12:01:53 1999 From: JandL at rivnet.net (Judith Lang & Lynton Land) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 12:01:53 -0500 Subject: Personal apologies to the Associated Press Message-ID: As one of the guilty ones who yesterday passed along an article about the Vieques situation, rather than the URL (which I didn't have), I would like to render my apologies to Robert Burns and the Associated Press. Might I also encourage Coral Listers who are journalists to let us know when their articles have been posted and, on behalf of those amongst us whose access to URL sites is restricted by finances or technology, to share with the list the essence of what they wrote? Sincerely, Judy Lang ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From SReifsteck at pop.net Thu Dec 9 15:41:12 1999 From: SReifsteck at pop.net (Shawn Reifsteck) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1999 12:41:12 -0800 Subject: Job Announcements for The Coral Reef Alliance Message-ID: Dear CORAL list serve: The Coral Reef Alliance (CORAL) is posting the following five job announcments today. If you are interested, please see below or check out our website at www.coral.org. Thank you. Director of Conservation Education Nonprofit coral reef conservation group seeks director for global public education program. Responsibilities include coordinating the design and distribution of educational and publicity materials, and supervising employees and contractors. Candidate must have at least three years experience in managing public awareness projects and supervising others, and extensive knowledge of coral reef ecology and conservation. Strong writing and presentation skills required, as well as experience with Internet, radio, television and other media outlets. Competitive salary and generous benefits. Send letter/resume/references (no calls) to: CORAL, 2014 Shattuck Avenue, Berkeley, CA 94704; Fax: 510-848-3720; email: jobs at coral.org. Website: www.coral.org Assistant Program Director - Coral Reef Parks Nonprofit coral reef conservation group seeks Assistant Director for program to strengthen management of coral reef parks and protected areas in the Western Pacific. Responsibilities include helping create training materials, and assisting dive resorts, local communities and government agencies with reef protection projects. Candidate should have a Masters Degree in Coastal Resource Management or equivalent experience. Field work with marine protected areas in Western Pacific countries a strong plus. Scuba diving experience very useful. Should have strong interpersonal skills and ability to work with both the public and private sector. Some travel required/ based in Berkeley, California. Competitive salary and generous benefits. Send letter/resume/references (no calls) to: CORAL, 2014 Shattuck Avenue, Berkeley, CA 94704; Fax: 510-848-3720; email: jobs at coral.org. Website: www.coral.org CORAL Science Fellowship The Coral Reef Alliance (CORAL), a nonprofit conservation group based in Berkeley, California, is offering a one-year fellowship for a scientist seeking to use his/her skills to further coral reef conservation. Responsibilities include reviewing existing educational and conservation materials for scientific accuracy and helping to develop new materials based on recent discoveries. Candidate must have a Masters or Ph.D. in coral reef ecology/biology or related field, a broad knowledge of coral reef conservation issues, strong writing skills and the ability to communicate effectively about coral reefs with non-scientists. Annual stipend and full benefits. Send letter/resume/references (no calls) to: CORAL, 2014 Shattuck Avenue, Berkeley, CA 94704; Fax: 510-848-3720; email: jobs at coral.org. Website: www.coral.org Earth Day 2000 Public Awareness Coordinator Temporary position to coordinate activities of several hundred dive and conservation groups worldwide participating in the "Dive In to Earth Day" program on April 22, 2000. Candidates must have three years training/experience in media relations, coordinating international projects, designing and distributing educational and publicity materials. Experience working with the dive industry strongly preferred. Some travel possible. Six-month position, begins immediately. Competitive salary. Send letter/resume/references (no calls) to: CORAL, 2014 Shattuck Avenue, Berkeley, CA 94704; Fax: 510-848-3720; email: jobs at coral.org. Website: www.coral.org Associate Director Nonprofit coral reef conservation group seeks Associate Director. Responsibilities include staff supervision, financial management, Board of Directors coordination, major donor cultivation, event management, internal communications, general office management, and serve as chief operating officer when Executive Director is not available. Candidate must have at least three years management experience (nonprofit management preferred), excellent interpersonal skills, and ability to handle multiple tasks simultaneously. Background or familiarity with coral reef ecology/biology and scuba diving experience preferred. Competitive salary and generous benefits. Send letter/resume/references (no calls) to: CORAL, 2014 Shattuck Avenue, Berkeley, CA 94704; Fax: 510-848-3720; email: jobs at coral.org. Website: www.coral.org Shawn Reifsteck Managing Director The Coral Reef Alliance 2014 Shattuck Ave. Berkeley, CA 94704 Phone: 510-848-0110 Fax: 510-848-3720 Email: SReifsteck at coral.org Website: www.coral.org Working Together To Keep Coral Reefs Alive -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 5989 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/19991209/222e1292/attachment.bin From yajari at hotmail.com Thu Dec 9 19:40:23 1999 From: yajari at hotmail.com (Taufik Hizbul Haq) Date: Thu, 09 Dec 1999 16:40:23 PST Subject: Coral Farming? Message-ID: <19991210004023.18595.qmail@hotmail.com> dear coral lister, We're looking for information about coral farming around South-east Asia. We're trying to develop a simple method on that matter and we need some input. Juanita Mandagi JARI Foundation Lombok-Indonesia ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com From dugong at md2.vsnl.net.in Fri Dec 10 04:54:53 1999 From: dugong at md2.vsnl.net.in (Dr.K.VENKATARAMAN) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 15:24:53 +0530 Subject: Description for identification of corals recorded in India Message-ID: <3850CDED.6D5E@md2.vsnl.net.in> Dear coral listers, Here with I am sending a list of coral species which are reported from Indian waters but we could not find the descriptions to identify. If any one can send me photocopy of the papers in which the descriptions are available or you may mail the description itself coating the references which will be of great help to us. There are a lot of new records that are to be identified by us. It is far from complete due to want of literature. We will be happy if any one who can help us in this regard. Thanks very much, Yours sincerely, Dr.K.Venkataraman Scientist-SE & Officer-in-Charge Zoological Survey of India Marine Biological Station 100 Santhome High Raod Chennai - 600 028 India. Phone : 91-044-4942680;4943191 Fax : 91-044-4942680 e-mail: dugong at md2.vsnl.net.in ------------------------------------- 1. Montipora elschneri Vaughan,1918 2. Montipora florida Nemenzo 3. Montipora efflorescens 4. Acropora polymorpha (Brook,1891) 5. Acropora pulchra (Brook,1891) 6. Acropora syringodes (Brook,1891) 7. Acropora botryoides 8. Acropora rectina 9. Leptoseris fragilis Milne Edwards and Haime,1849 10. Siderastrea lilacea 11. Cycloseris hexagonalis Milne Edwards and Haime,1849 12. Cycloseris sinensis Milne Edwards and Haime,1849 13. Fungia corona Doderlein,1901 14. Fungia dentigera Leuckart,1841 15. Fungiacyathus symmetrica (Pourtales) 16. Herpetoglossa simplex (Gardiner,1905) 17. Porites porites 18. Porites polymorphus 19. Alveopora superficialis Pillai & Scheer,1976 20. Favia laxa 21. Leptastrea immersa Klunzinger,1879 22. Oulastrea crispata (Lamarck,1816) 23. Mussa angulosa (Pallas) 24. Caryophyllia clavus Scacchi 25. Caryophyllia arcuta Milne Edwards and Haime 26. Caryophyllia acanthocyathus grayi Milne Edwards and Haime 27. Paracyathus stokesi Milne Edwards and Haime 28. Paracyathus indicus Duncan 29. Deltocyathus andamanensis Alcock 30. Polycyathus andamanensis Alcock 31. Stephanocyathus nobilis ( Moseley) 32. Flabellum pavonium Alcock 33. Flabellum stokesi 34. Placotrochus laevis Milne Edwards & Haime, 1848. 35. Balanophyllia affinis (Semper,1872) 36. Balanophyllia imperialis Kent 37. Balanophyllia scabra Alcock 38. Enallopsammia amphelioides (Alcock) 39. Enallopsammia marenzelleri Zivrowius From oveh at bio.usyd.edu.au Tue Dec 7 21:47:12 1999 From: oveh at bio.usyd.edu.au (Ove Hoegh-Guldberg) Date: Wed, 8 Dec 1999 13:47:12 +1100 Subject: Article pdf file available. Message-ID: <003a01bf4126$87baeb40$d3b14e81@fungia.bio.usyd.edu.au> There have been a number of inquiries about the ultimate scientific reference for the review I wrote earlier this year. It is: Hoegh-Guldberg, O. (1999) "Climate change, coral bleaching and the future of the world?s coral reefs", Mar. Freshwater Res., 1999, 50, 839?66. It available for the next month at the site: http://www.reef.edu.au/climate/ Note change of address below at the start of next year. Cheers, Ove Hoegh-Guldberg Associate Professor School of Biological Sciences A08, University of Sydney Ph: +61-2-9351-2389 Fx: +61-2-9351-4119 * Foundation Professor, Marine Studies University of Queensland (from Jan 1 2000) Http: www.reef.edu.au/OHG/ For educational fun: www.reef.edu.au ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Fri Dec 10 08:01:21 1999 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 08:01:21 -0500 (EST) Subject: Vieques Thread Message-ID: For those of you who may have missed some of it, the thread on the Vieques Island discussion is now at the CHAMP Web Page Bulletins link (thanks to the CHAMP Web Master, Monika Gurnee) at, http://www.coral.noaa.gov From fmarubini at bio2.edu Fri Dec 10 14:17:21 1999 From: fmarubini at bio2.edu (Francesca Marubini) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:17:21 -0700 Subject: job position advertised Message-ID: <2.2.32.19991210191721.0073dd50@bio2.edu> Associate Research Scientist Columbia University Biosphere2 Center Columbia University's Biosphere 2 Center, Inc. is recruiting for a Associate Research Scientist in the area of marine research. Marine Research Biosphere 2 Center is seeking a PhD scientist in marine biology, or oceanography with a demonstrated record of scholarly research. The successful candidate will be encouraged to pursue his or her own research, while acting as the onsite scientist for the Biosphere 2 research program in the Biosphere 2 ocean biome (www.bio2.edu). The candidate would be expected to supervise technicians and students involved with the maintenance and sampling of the B2 Ocean, and conduct collaborative research with the ocean research team. The position requires skill in communication, as well as organizational and supervisory skills. Experience in coral reef ecosystems is desirable. The candidate will be encouraged to conduct collaborative research with the ocean research team and jointly publish scientific papers, and to pursue external funding for enhancing Biosphere 2 marine research. A PhD in marine biology, oceanography or marine systems is required. APPLICATION: This position begins Feb. 1, 2000. Closing date: January 20, 2000. Applicants should send a full curriculum vitae (include email address), a brief statement of current research and future plans, and the name, address, telephone and email address of three individuals who can provide recommendations to: Nancy Mager Biosphere 2 Center Columbia University 32540 S. Biosphere Rd. Oracle, AZ 85623 From fautin at eagle.cc.ukans.edu Fri Dec 10 14:03:29 1999 From: fautin at eagle.cc.ukans.edu (FAUTIN DAPHNE G) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 13:03:29 -0600 (CST) Subject: Heather Holden In-Reply-To: <19991210004023.18595.qmail@hotmail.com> Message-ID: The address for Heather Holden that the International Society for Reef Studies has seems not to be working -- mail sent to her has been returned. She is not in the coral reef worker database. I would appreciate hearing from her or anyone who knows where she is so she can be sent her membership materials. Daphne G. Fautin Treasurer, ISRS Professor, Biological Sciences Curator, Natural History Museum and Biodiversity Research Center Haworth Hall University of Kansas Lawrence, Kansas 66045 USA telephone 1-785-864-3062 fax 1-785-864-5321 for e-mail, please use fautin at ukans.edu lab web page: www.nhm.ukans.edu/~inverts direct to sea anemone database version 2.1: biocomplexity.nhm.ukans.edu/ anemones/images/Version.html From fmarubini at bio2.edu Fri Dec 10 14:17:21 1999 From: fmarubini at bio2.edu (Francesca Marubini) Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 12:17:21 -0700 Subject: job position advertised Message-ID: <2.2.32.19991210191721.0073dd50@bio2.edu> Associate Research Scientist Columbia University Biosphere2 Center Columbia University's Biosphere 2 Center, Inc. is recruiting for a Associate Research Scientist in the area of marine research. Marine Research Biosphere 2 Center is seeking a PhD scientist in marine biology, or oceanography with a demonstrated record of scholarly research. The successful candidate will be encouraged to pursue his or her own research, while acting as the onsite scientist for the Biosphere 2 research program in the Biosphere 2 ocean biome (www.bio2.edu). The candidate would be expected to supervise technicians and students involved with the maintenance and sampling of the B2 Ocean, and conduct collaborative research with the ocean research team. The position requires skill in communication, as well as organizational and supervisory skills. Experience in coral reef ecosystems is desirable. The candidate will be encouraged to conduct collaborative research with the ocean research team and jointly publish scientific papers, and to pursue external funding for enhancing Biosphere 2 marine research. A PhD in marine biology, oceanography or marine systems is required. APPLICATION: This position begins Feb. 1, 2000. Closing date: January 20, 2000. Applicants should send a full curriculum vitae (include email address), a brief statement of current research and future plans, and the name, address, telephone and email address of three individuals who can provide recommendations to: Nancy Mager Biosphere 2 Center Columbia University 32540 S. Biosphere Rd. Oracle, AZ 85623 From robbie at bbsr.edu Tue Dec 14 14:02:00 1999 From: robbie at bbsr.edu (robbie at bbsr.edu) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 14:02:00 -0500 Subject: BBSR summer courses, 2000 In-Reply-To: <199909290256.CAA19435@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Message-ID: Dear colleagues, With your indulgence I would like to draw your attention to a suite of Year 2000 summer courses being offered at the Bermuda Biological Station for Research, Inc. Nearly all the courses involve the study of coral reefs, reef organisms or processes that affect reefs. Full course details are available at our web site: www.bbsr.edu. Best wishes for the holiday season. Excellence in Marine Science Education Generous Scholarships Available Bermuda Biological Station for Research, Inc. Summer Courses 2000 Shellfish Aquaculture Faculty: Dr Samia Sarkis, BBSR and Cyr Couturier, Marine Institute of Memorial University of Newfoundland Dates: 14 May - 24 May, 2000 Course fees: $2700 Tropical Marine Invertebrates Faculty: Dr. Kathryn Coates, BBSR and University of Toronto Dates: 4 June - 1 July, 2000 Course fees: $3200 Chemosensory Neurobiology in the Marine Environment Faculty: Drs Hank Trapido-Rosenthal, BBSR, and Chuck Derby, Georgia State University Dates: 4 June - 24 June, 2000 Course fees: $2700 Marine Ecotoxicology Faculty: Drs Peter Wells, Environment Canada, Jack Manock, University of North Carolina - Wilmington, Richard Owen, BBSR, Michael Depledge, University of Plymouth, James Butler, Harvard University Dates: 25 June - 15 July, 2000 Course fees: $2700 Marine Microbial Ecology Faculty: Drs Craig Carlson, BBSR, and Stephen Giovannoni, Oregon State University Dates: 25 June - 15 July, 2000 Course fees: $2700 Coral Reef Ecology Faculty: Drs Fred Lipschultz and Joanna Pitt, BBSR, and Mr Matt Mills, University of Maryland Dates: 2 July - 22 July Course fees: $2700 Human Health and the Ocean Faculty: Dr Eric Dewailly, MD, Laval Laval University and WHO/PAHO Collaborating Center on Environmental and Occupational Health, Qu?b?c Dates: 16 July - 5 August, 2000 Course fees: $2700 Pathology of Coastal Organisms Faculty: Drs Garriet Smith, University of South Carolina - Aiken, and Ernesto Weil, University of Puerto Rico Dates: 23 July - 12 August, 2000 Course fees: $2700 Biology of Fishes Faculty: Dr. Bruce B. Collette, U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service Dates: 30 July - 26 August, 2000 Course fees: $3200 Note: fees are in USD. These include all course costs, tuition, room and board, while in Bermuda. For more information and application details, visit: www.bbsr.edu E-mail: education at bbsr.edu Or mail: Summer Courses The Bermuda Biological Station for Research, Inc. 17 Biological Lane St. George's GE 01 Bermuda Tel: (441) 297 1880 Fax: (441) 297 1919 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Struan Robertson Smith, Ph.D. Assistant Research Scientist Bermuda Biological Station for Research, Inc. Ferry Reach GE01 Bermuda Tel: 441 297 1880 ext. 240 Fax: 441 297 8143 From bob at westpacfisheries.net Wed Dec 15 05:14:38 1999 From: bob at westpacfisheries.net (Bob Endreson) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 00:14:38 -1000 Subject: International Shark Conference 2000 Message-ID: <002a01bf46e5$342d43a0$2b28d5d1@bob> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: December 14, 1999 Shark Conference 2000 As a result of the a growing international concern for the management of shark fisheries and efforts to eliminate the practice of shark finning, the world's first international shark conservation conference will be held in Honolulu, Hawaii February 21-24, 2000. Fishery managers, scientists, government representatives and other interested parties from the United States, South America, South Africa, Europe and Asia will attend the Conference in Honolulu to discuss a variety of issues that could have a significant impact on shark management internationally. WildAid, the Hawaii Audubon Society and the Western Pacific Fisheries Coalition will be presenting the Conference which has set an agenda that will discuss a variety of issues that we hope will assist in furthering management of these fisheries. According to FAO statistics over 100 million sharks were caught last year. However, since bycatch is not recorded, this is likely to be a significant underestimate. Sharks are increasingly used as a food source, predominantly in developing countries, as other fish stocks collapse Shark fisheries are generally poorly documented and poorly regulated, and in many cases appear to be unsustainable even in the short term. The goals of the conference would be: 1) to bring together key activists, conservationists, scientists, fisheries management experts, marine enforcement experts under one roof. 2) to give a state of the planet review of sharks and current problems in their conservation. 3) to foster cooperation in progressing shark issues and to develop strategies. 4) to give donors a chance to assess the various areas of potential investment in shark conservation and research. 5) to raise public awareness of the true nature of sharks and shark conservation issues in Hawaii and globally and of the economic and ecological value of sharks. Speakers will present their papers and take questions (see agenda). With the first CITES listings proposed for sharks and a number of countries considering stricter management, 2000 may be a crucial year for shark conservation. Some of the topics that will be covered will include: ...........Why are sharks in trouble and why should we protect them? ...........An Overview of the Biological Status of Shark Species ...........A review of international legislation and fora to protect sharks: CITES, FAO, Barcelona & Bonn Conventions, UN Law of the Sea: How could they help sharks ? ............Shark tourism: the benefits and problems .............An overview of the world trade in sharks and shark products with special reference to meat, fins, oil and cartilage. .............The use of, and attitudes to, shark fin in east Asia how can we reduce consumption? ..............Sharks in longline fisheries ..............Programs in the Pacific with comments on Pacific Ocean distributions and the effects of live finning ..............The bycatch problem and how to reduce it For more information, a complete agenda or to register go to http://209.133.10.132/sharkcon/ There is limited seating and reservations are on a first come, first serve basis. This Conference is being sponsored by: The Barbara Delano Foundation The Homeland Foundation The David & Lucile Packard Foundation The AVINA Foundation -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/pipermail/coral-list-old/attachments/19991215/51772e6a/attachment.html From coral at is.dal.ca Tue Dec 14 09:29:26 1999 From: coral at is.dal.ca (coral) Date: Tue, 14 Dec 1999 10:29:26 -0400 Subject: First International Symposium on Deep Sea Corals Message-ID: <199912151704.RAA02250@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> First International Symposium on Deep Sea Corals Science and Conservation of Deep Sea Corals 30 July - 2 August, 2000 Dalhousie University Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada The purpose of the Symposium is to review, discuss and synthesize all aspects of deep sea, cold water coral biology, ecology, and conservation. The symposium will also address climatic reconstruction using corals and technologies available to map corals. The Symposium will be convened for two and one half days and is open to scientists, managers, ocean users and all those with an interest in deep sea corals. Important Dates 1 February 2000 Pre-registration form and Provisional abstracts 1 June 2000 Final early registration and fees Final abstracts 30 July 2000 Final paper The First International Symposium on Deep Sea Corals is sponsored by the Ecology Action Centre, Dalhousie University, the Nova Scotia Museum of Natural History, the Science and Management of Protected Areas Association, World Wildlife Fund Canada, And the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Canada. For more information please see the Symposium web site: http://home.istar.ca/~eac_hfx/symposium or contact the Symposium Secretariat: Susan Gass, Ecology Action Centre, 1568 Argyle Street, Suite 31 Halifax, Nova Scotia, B3J 2B3, Email: coral at is.dal.ca Telephone: +1-902-429-2202, Fax: + 1-902-422-6410 Susan Gass Symposium Coordinator Ecology Action Centre 1568 Argyle St. Suite 31 Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 2B3 Phone: (902) 429-2202 Fax: (902) 422-6410 Emai: coral at is.dal.ca From reefkeeper at earthlink.net Wed Dec 15 09:55:25 1999 From: reefkeeper at earthlink.net (Alexander Stone) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 14:55:25 +0000 Subject: Please Comment by Jan 3rd on Coral Task Force Oversight Message-ID: <3857ABDD.58AC@earthlink.net> Dear Coral Listers and other Friends of Coral Reefs: We at ReefKeeper International strongly urge you to weigh in with your comments on how the US Coral Reef Task Force is proposing to discharge its responsibility to prevent federal agency activities from degrading coral reef ecosystems. Please send your written comments before January 3rd to the federal official noted below this message. The text of the Task Force's proposed "Oversight of Agency Actions Affecting Coral Reef Protection" can be accessed at http://coralreef.gov. You'll see from our comments appearing below that we are very concerned that the Task Force is proposing to take too collegial an approach to what we argue is an enforcement responsibility on the part of the Task Force. The one real thing that Executive Order 13089 empowers the Task Force to do for actual coral reef protection is to discharge that enforcement responsibility properly. And the Task Force needs to hear from lots of us to have that sink in and take hold. So thanks a lot if you do send in a letter. It could really make a difference. With many thanks, ALEXANDER STONE ReefKeeper International 2809 Bird Avenue - PMB 162 Miami, FL 33133 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - December 14, 1999 Operations Center United States Coral Reef Task Force c/o Patricia Kennedy Office of the Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks U.S. Department of the Interior 1849 C Street, N.W., Mail Stop 3156 Washington, DC 20240 RE: Comments on "Oversight of Agency Actions Affecting Coral Reef Protection" Dear Task Force Members: In response to the notice for public comments by January 3, 2000, ReefKeeper International respectfully submits the following comments to the draft document "Oversight of Agency Actions Affecting Coral Reef Protection", proposed for adoption by the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force (Task Force). Since 1989, ReefKeeper International has operated as a non-profit conservation organization dedicated exclusively to the protection of coral reefs. We have participated in Task Force activities since the Task Force was created in June 1998 by President Clinton's Executive Order 13089. ReefKeeper International urges the Task Force to adopt stronger agency oversight measures that fulfill the Task Force's obligation to provide oversight that will protect and enhance the coral reef resources of the United States. Specifically, we request that a procedure be developed whereby all Federal agencies are required to have a dedicated person co-responsible to the Task Force for reviewing agency actions that may affect coral reefs. The Task Force must assume ultimate responsibility for oversight and be the final decision on controversial actions. We also request that reporting by Federal agencies to the Task Force be required on a more frequent basis. Executive Order 13089 Executive Order 13089, signed by President Clinton on June 11, 1998, established the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force and its obligations to "oversee implementation of the policy and Federal agency responsibilities set forth in this order" (Section 4); "develop, recommend, and seek or secure implementation of measures necessary to reduce and mitigate coral reef ecosystem degradation and to restore damaged coral reefs" (Section 5). Section 2 of the Executive Order states: "(a) All Federal agencies whose actions may affects U.S. coral reef ecosystems shall ... (b) utilize their programs and authorities to protect and enhance the conditions of such ecosystems; and (c) to the extent permitted by law, ensure that any actions they authorize, fund, or carry out will not degrade the conditions of such ecosystems." These two sections clearly outline the goals of the Executive Order as well as the responsibility of the Task Force to oversee the implementation of the Executive Order, including Section 2's requirement for non-degradation of coral reef ecosystems by any federal agency actions. Applicability to All Federal Agencies Section 2 of Executive Order 13089 applies to all federal agencies, not just agencies that are members of the Coral Reef Task Force. All Federal agencies must ensure that actions that they authorize, fund or carry out do not degrade coral reef ecosystems. Therefore, throughout the draft document, ReefKeeper International requests that references to requirements for member Federal agencies be changed to all Federal agencies. Agency Implementation Plans The draft document "Oversight of Agency Actions Affecting Coral Reef Protection" falls short of fulfilling the Task Force's obligations under Executive Order 13089. While the proposal requires Task Force member Federal agencies to develop implementation plans, the member Federal agencies are then virtually free to act without any oversight from the Task Force, except for an annual report summarizing actions already undertaken. Non-member agencies are only advised and encouraged on implementation of the Order. This proposal places the Task Force merely in the role of an observer and/or advisor. Therefore, ReefKeeper International respectfully requests that all Federal agencies be required to designate a person who is responsible to the Task Force for reviewing any and all actions by that agency that may impact coral reefs. Unresolved controversial actions must be brought to the attention of the Task Force by the designated person from the Federal agency. Any member of the public may also bring proposed actions to the attention of the Task Force by the procedures outlined in Section 2 of this document. Therefore, ReefKeeper International recommends that the language under Item 1. Agency implementation plans be changed as follows (proposed changes indicated in italics): 1. Agency implementation plans. By June 11, 2000, each Federal agency will provide the Task Force Co-Chairs with a copy of the Federal agency's Coral Reef Protection Implementation Plan ("Plan") b. The name, title and address of the Federal agency's designated contact for inquiries concerning coral reef protection and for the Federal agency's participation in the Task Force if the Federal agency is a member of the Task Force. Add the following after item b: b2. The name, title and address of the Federal agency's designated person that will review any and all actions that may impact coral reefs that the Federal agency authorizes, carries out, or funds. c. The Task Force Co-Chair will post the Federal agency Implementation Plans on the Internet at http://coralreef.gov. Delete item d. Task Force Oversight The Executive Order clearly intends that the Task Force be placed in the role of enforcer, not observer. The Task Force must not only have direct input into actions that may impact coral reefs but must also enforce the provisions of Section 2 of the Executive Order to protect and enhance those ecosystems. If the designated person from any Federal agency or the Task Force determines that a proposed action will fail to meet the objectives of the Executive Order, then the Task Force must work with the Federal agency to revise the actions or, if necessary, enforce the Executive Order by prohibiting the action. Therefore, ReefKeeper International recommends that a section entitled Task Force Oversight be added to the draft document with the following text: Task Force Oversight: a. The Federal agency's designated person for reviewing projects shall bring to the attention of the Task Force projects which may adversely impact coral reefs that are inconsistent with the requirements of Section 2 (a) (a) -(c) of the Order and are not covered by an exception under Section 2 (b). b. Members of the public may also bring actions to the attention of the Task Force as outlined in Section 2 of this document. c. The Task Force shall review the proposed actions and offer advice and counsel to facilitate resolution of issues. d. The Task Force will enforce the provisions of Section 2 of the Order by prohibiting or modifying proposed actions that are inconsistent with that section of the Order. e. Agreement by the Task Force that the proposed actions meet the requirements of Section 2 of the Order shall be required prior to the initiation of that action. The approval may be granted by the Federal agency's designated person for reviewing projects or the Task Force as outlined above. Public Issue Identification Section 2 of Executive Order 13089 applies to all federal agencies, not just those that are members of the Task Force. Accordingly, the public response section of the draft document should reflect this mandate. Therefore, ReefKeeper International recommends that the language under Item 2. Public issue identification and response be changed as follows (changes indicated in italics): a. ... any Member about the actions of any Federal agency will be referred ... b. Federal agencies whose actions... ii. Communications with the Task Force will not substitute for public comment through Federal agency provisions for public comment or public hearing on actions. [delete remainder of paragraph] Delete item c. Reporting Frequency ReefKeeper International also requests that reporting by Federal agencies be conducted on a quarterly basis, rather than an annual basis as proposed. This will allow the Task Force to be kept more up-to-date on actions by the Federal agencies and meet some of its oversight responsibilities. Therefore, ReefKeeper International recommends that the language under Item 3. Annual Reports be changed as follows (changes indicated in italics): In March, June, September, and December each year Federal agencies will present ... and the public. Federal agencies will provide written ... Thank you for your consideration, and anticipated support, of our request for a Task Force review procedure and quarterly Federal agency reporting that will truly ensure that the intent of Executive Order 13089 to protect coral reef ecosystems is met. Sincerely, Alexander Stone Director cc: A. Gore, U.S. Vice-President Task Force members From Milen.Dyoulgerov at noaa.gov Wed Dec 15 12:51:27 1999 From: Milen.Dyoulgerov at noaa.gov (Milen Dyoulgerov) Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 13:51:27 -0400 Subject: reef damage from ships Message-ID: <199912161238.MAA08581@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear all, Early this year I wrote to you with a request for information on ship groundings and/or anchorings in relation to a proposal that we were developing to introduce uniform depiction of coral reefs and, possibly, MPAs, on navigational charts. I would like to thank all the people that responded to my request and to inform you that the proposal has been put forth for consideration within the IHO system. Many of you expressed interest in the information that we find. Now, you can access our findings (as of June 22, 1999) on the CHAMP Page at: http://www.coral.noaa.gov/bulls/reef-ground.pdf Information on some additional cases in the US and its territories could be found at: http://coralreef.gov/CUWG.pdf (the file name is "Coastal Uses Working Group"; the relevant information is in APPENDIX III-A). I hope that you find the information useful in your work and I would like to ask once again for your help in expanding what we have found so far. Please, send information on any other cases that you are aware of to: milen.dyoulgerov at noaa.gov Of particular interest for us is whether the listed cases, or the cases that you know about, have occurred in an existing or proposed Marine Protected Area. Best regards, Milen Dyoulgerov From fautin at eagle.cc.ukans.edu Fri Dec 17 12:18:19 1999 From: fautin at eagle.cc.ukans.edu (FAUTIN DAPHNE G) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 11:18:19 -0600 (CST) Subject: post-doc position Message-ID: SYSTEMATICS OF MARINE INVERTEBRATES POSTDOCTORAL FELLOWSHIP at University of Kansas for systematic revision of sea anemone genus using laboratory and field techniques. Strong background in modern systematics or study of sea anemones required, both preferred. Experience with molecular techniques, and skill in GIS, databasing, or image manipulation desirable. Position details: assumable 1 September 2000 to 31 January 2001 (doctoral degree must have been granted by then); year-round; full-time position (depends on federal funding); lasting 5 y pending satisfactory performance and funding continuation; open to non-US citizens. Send curriculum vitae, copies of publications, brief statement of interests and career goals, official academic transcripts, and three letters of recommendation to Daphne G. Fautin, Biological Sciences, Haworth Hall, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS 66045 USA (telephone 1-785-864-3062; fax 1-785-864-5321; e-mail fautin at ukans.edu). Application review begins 20 March 2000. The University of Kansas is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer. The University encourages applications from underrepresented group members. Federal and state legislation prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, age, disability, and veteran status. In addition, University policies prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, marital status, and parental status. Daphne G. Fautin Professor, Biological Sciences Curator, Natural History Museum and Biodiversity Research Center Haworth Hall University of Kansas Lawrence, Kansas 66045 USA telephone 1-785-864-3062 fax 1-785-864-5321 for e-mail, please use fautin at ukans.edu lab web page: www.nhm.ukans.edu/~inverts direct to sea anemone database version 2.1: biocomplexity.nhm.ukans.edu/ anemones/images/Version.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From Oceanwatch at aol.com Fri Dec 17 13:58:12 1999 From: Oceanwatch at aol.com (Oceanwatch at aol.com) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 13:58:12 EST Subject: Copyright Concerns, Vieques Article Message-ID: <0.348242a5.258be1c4@aol.com> Coral Listers A fellow Coral Lister raised copyright concerns about my posting of a New York Times article on Vieques. I am posting this with Jim Hendee's approval. I was worried about having done something that might harm the List Serv because I also value the service it provides, with Jim Hendee's hard work. Oceanwatch has a copyright attorney on retainer so I asked him about the issue. First, he agrees that the safest approach is to provide a link, as Jim suggests. But the bottom line is, it's extremely doubtful the New York Times would worry about copyright infringement in this case. The first consideration is, was proper attribution to the source material provided? Yes, I gave full attribution. Second, was the posting done for commercial purposes or commercial gain, or for purely educational reasons? The latter is true, since the purpose of the Coral List is purely information exchange and I shared the article for that reason. Finally, you have to consider the nature of the publication. The NYT is a widely available daily newspaper. If I had copied material from a professional journal that includes information on laboratory equipment or scientific protocols, and the limited market happened to be coral reef scientists, then doing so might take away several hundred potential customers from the publisher. But it was a newspaper item that as a matter of practice gets copied into List Servs, clipping services, media books and interoffice mail at major corporations by the hundreds or thousands of copies. I don't mean to belittle the importance of the issue and I appreciate the Coral Lister raising it. I just think we need to keep it in perspective. Thanks Cliff McCreedy ><((;> ><((;> ><((;> Oceanwatch 2101 Wilson Boulevard Suite 900 Arlington, VA 22201 phone 703-351-7444 fax 703-351-7472 e-mail: Oceanwatch at aol.com http://www.enviroweb.org/oceanwatch ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From Oceanwatch at aol.com Fri Dec 17 13:58:12 1999 From: Oceanwatch at aol.com (Oceanwatch at aol.com) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 13:58:12 EST Subject: Copyright Concerns, Vieques Article Message-ID: <0.348242a5.258be1c4@aol.com> Coral Listers A fellow Coral Lister raised copyright concerns about my posting of a New York Times article on Vieques. I am posting this with Jim Hendee's approval. I was worried about having done something that might harm the List Serv because I also value the service it provides, with Jim Hendee's hard work. Oceanwatch has a copyright attorney on retainer so I asked him about the issue. First, he agrees that the safest approach is to provide a link, as Jim suggests. But the bottom line is, it's extremely doubtful the New York Times would worry about copyright infringement in this case. The first consideration is, was proper attribution to the source material provided? Yes, I gave full attribution. Second, was the posting done for commercial purposes or commercial gain, or for purely educational reasons? The latter is true, since the purpose of the Coral List is purely information exchange and I shared the article for that reason. Finally, you have to consider the nature of the publication. The NYT is a widely available daily newspaper. If I had copied material from a professional journal that includes information on laboratory equipment or scientific protocols, and the limited market happened to be coral reef scientists, then doing so might take away several hundred potential customers from the publisher. But it was a newspaper item that as a matter of practice gets copied into List Servs, clipping services, media books and interoffice mail at major corporations by the hundreds or thousands of copies. I don't mean to belittle the importance of the issue and I appreciate the Coral Lister raising it. I just think we need to keep it in perspective. Thanks Cliff McCreedy ><((;> ><((;> ><((;> Oceanwatch 2101 Wilson Boulevard Suite 900 Arlington, VA 22201 phone 703-351-7444 fax 703-351-7472 e-mail: Oceanwatch at aol.com http://www.enviroweb.org/oceanwatch ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From mcobran at uwimona.edu.jm Fri Dec 17 13:39:42 1999 From: mcobran at uwimona.edu.jm (Marie Cobran) Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1999 13:39:42 -0500 Subject: Position Available Message-ID: <199912181455.OAA24141@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> CENTRE FOR MARINE SCIENCES=20 > >>DISCOVERY BAY MARINE LABORATORY > >>UNIVERSITY OF THE WEST INDIES (MONA) > >> > >>The University of the West Indies is seeking a Lecturer (=F0 > >>Assistant Professor, tenure track) as Assistant Director of the > >>Centre for Marine Sciences, to be based at (and live near) the > >>Discovery Bay Marine Laboratory. She/he will take part in the > >>Laboratory's research and teaching programme, interact with > >>visiting scientists and classes, and participate, in a > >>supervisory/ advisory capacity, in the management of the > >>Laboratory. Applicants should have a Ph.D. and preferably > >>experience of research in coastal physical oceanography OR in the > >>geology, biology or management of coral reefs or related systems. > >>Further particulars of the post, and the Centre, are available at > >>www.uwimona.edu.jm and details of the Laboratory at www.dbml.org. > >>Prior to January 17, 2000 (an extension of a previous closing > >>date), send detailed applications (two copies) giving full > >>particulars of qualifications and experience and the names, > >>addresses and fax numbers of three referees (who should be asked > >>to send their references unsolicited) to the Campus Registrar > >>[Attention: Senior Assistant Registrar (Appointments)], > >>University of the West Indies, Mona, Kingston 7, Jamaica W.I.=20 Marie C. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov Mon Dec 20 10:09:08 1999 From: Jim.Hendee at noaa.gov (Jim Hendee) Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 10:09:08 -0500 (EST) Subject: Can corals adapt? Message-ID: You may be interested in seeing the text of a recent debate on whether or not corals can adapt to the increase in global temperatures. The article is posted at Planet Ark: http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm?newsid=5117 Scientists quoted in the article are Dr. Terry Done, Dr. Ove Hoegh-Guldberg and Dr. Hugh Sweatman, all from Australia, and the discussion centers mostly around the condition and adaptability of the Great Barrier Reef. Cheers, Jim ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From slkyshrk at sgi.net Tue Dec 21 16:15:33 1999 From: slkyshrk at sgi.net (Wendy Jo) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 15:15:33 -0600 Subject: 1998 Article from USGS - Coral Mortality and African Dust Message-ID: <199912212016.PAA14566@pisces.tcg.sgi.net> Dear Coral folks: A friend of mine passed this on to me a few days ago, and I thought it might be of interest to some of you. It is from October 1998, and I checked the archives to see if it might be there, but didn't see it. The URL is http://coastal.er.usgs.gov/african_dust/ The hypothesis to this study was also featured in Science in Paradise, a PBS special in October of 1998. Cheers and Happy Holidays to all. Wendy Jo Shemansky "The library of life is on fire, and we must put it out." ~~Gro Harlem Brundtland, Prime Minister of Norway >>));> >>));> >>));> >>));> >>));> >>));> >>));> >>));> >>));> Wendy Jo Shemansky Environmental Research Science and Education Graduate Student Duquesne University Environmental News Director, Secretary West Penn Scuba Divers Pittsburgh, PA (412) 244-3318 slkyshrk at sgi.net ***************** Seasons Greetings! ****************** * We in NOAA would like to extend our Best Wishes for * * a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all our * * coral-list subscribers. Happy Holidays! * ******************************************************* From jagoodman at ucdavis.edu Tue Dec 21 18:33:16 1999 From: jagoodman at ucdavis.edu (James A Goodman) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 15:33:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Remote sensing references/applications? Message-ID: <199912220014.AAA48918@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Coral-listers: I have recently begun a Ph.D. program at the University of California, Davis and plan to pursue research on coral related remote sensing applications (e.g., mapping, monitoring, assessing relative health etc.). I have started collecting relevant literature and was hoping the collective knowledge of the coral-list group could be helpful in that regard. In the near future I plan to create a website containing a reference list of everything I have found (address to be posted to coral-list once completed). Thus, I am extremely interested whether anyone knows of relevant articles or of any past/current/future coral remote sensing projects? Your knowledge is appreciated. I thank everyone in advance and wish all Happy Holidays. Jamie ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ James Goodman Center for Spatial Technologies and Remote Sensing (CSTARS) Department of Land, Air and Water Resources 113 Viehmeyer Hall University of California, Davis Davis, CA 95616 jgoodman at cstars.ucdavis.edu ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ***************** Seasons Greetings! ****************** * We in NOAA would like to extend our Best Wishes for * * a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all our * * coral-list subscribers. Happy Holidays! * ******************************************************* From Cathy.Coon at noaa.gov Tue Dec 21 21:33:53 1999 From: Cathy.Coon at noaa.gov (Cathy Coon) Date: 21 Dec 1999 21:33:53 -0500 Subject: reef balls Message-ID: <066CE3860389100A*/c=US/admd=ATTMAIL/prmd=GOV+NOAA/o=CCNMFS/s=Coon/g=Cathy/@MHS> Has anyone heard of reefballs? I received this message but can't pull it up?? As a NOAA professional, and particularly if you are with NMFS, we wanted to make you aware of Reef Ball designed artificial reef habitats used primarily to restore ailing coral reefs but also to mimic nearly any reef/structure habitats. Over 50,000 Reef Balls have been used in over 500 worldwide projects and the success has been well documented scientifically. Reef Balls are very cost effective to mitigate damages and provide immediate but also long term habitat. Reef Balls can be tuned to nearly 100% species diversity and population density of nearby natural reefs. To learn more visit our website www.reefball.com. Todd Barber Reef Ball Development Group, Ltd. ***************** Seasons Greetings! ****************** * We in NOAA would like to extend our Best Wishes for * * a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all our * * coral-list subscribers. Happy Holidays! * ******************************************************* From bob at westpacfisheries.net Wed Dec 22 00:27:30 1999 From: bob at westpacfisheries.net (Bob Endreson) Date: Tue, 21 Dec 1999 19:27:30 -1000 Subject: reef balls Message-ID: <001201bf4c3d$3f9971c0$2328d5d1@default> Reef Balls are an excellent way to enhance habitat, however, unless they are being used in a marine protected area, they make it very easy for fishermen to target species occupying the reef ball either by surround net or spear. In areas where fishing and spear fishing is allowed, there are other structures made of waste concrete material that provide better habitat that allows fish to not only be harvested, but to hide in deeper crevices out of the reach of fishermen. Bob Endreson Western Pacific Fisheries Coalition -----Original Message----- From: Cathy Coon To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Date: Tuesday, December 21, 1999 5:16 PM Subject: reef balls > > >Has anyone heard of reefballs? I received this message but can't pull it up?? > >As a NOAA professional, and particularly if you are with NMFS, we wanted to >make you aware of Reef Ball designed artificial reef habitats used >primarily to restore ailing coral reefs but also to mimic nearly any >reef/structure habitats. Over 50,000 Reef Balls have been used in over 500 >worldwide projects and the success has been well documented scientifically. >Reef Balls are very cost effective to mitigate damages and provide >immediate but also long term habitat. Reef Balls can be tuned to nearly >100% species diversity and population density of nearby natural reefs. To >learn more visit our website www.reefball.com. > >Todd Barber >Reef Ball Development Group, Ltd. >***************** Seasons Greetings! ****************** >* We in NOAA would like to extend our Best Wishes for * >* a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all our * >* coral-list subscribers. Happy Holidays! * >******************************************************* > ***************** Seasons Greetings! ****************** * We in NOAA would like to extend our Best Wishes for * * a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all our * * coral-list subscribers. Happy Holidays! * ******************************************************* From d.fenner at aims.gov.au Thu Dec 23 16:00:02 1999 From: d.fenner at aims.gov.au (Doug Fenner) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 16:00:02 Subject: coral photos Message-ID: <3.0.5.32.19991223160002.00afe6a0@email.aims.gov.au> Does anyone have clear color slides of the living corals Schizoculina africana and Schizoculina fissipara (found only in west Africa)? We would like to put them in Veron's forthcoming book and CD, "Corals of the World". The photographer will be acknowledged and receive a copy of the book. We will announce (some months from now when we know) on coral-list when the book and CD will be available, and how to order. -Doug Douglas Fenner, Ph.D. Coral Biodiversity/Taxonomist Australian Institute of Marine Science PMB No 3 Townsville MC Queensland 4810 Australia phone 07 4753 4334 e-mail: d.fenner at aims.gov.au web: http://www.aims.gov.au From martinpecheux at minitel.net Thu Dec 23 14:25:47 1999 From: martinpecheux at minitel.net (MARTIN PECHEUX) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 20:25:47 +0100 (MET) Subject: Iron agaisnt bleaching =?iso-8859-1?Q?=3F?= Message-ID: <199912231925.UAA02589@smtp-out.minitel.net> Dear all, There might be PERHAPS a simple way to act at LOCAL scale against coral reef mass bleaching : by iron fertilization at nanomole concentration. Iron limitation is said to occur in oligotrophic waters, mainly for the photosynthetic apparatus, and photoinhibition is at root of bleaching. Cnidarian respond to nanomole iron enrichment, as a first experiment just realised shows me : tentacles of Anemonia viridis were cut and incubated in 5ml tubes, with either no enrichment (n=8), 3nM Fe as sulfate iron (n=4) and 3uM Fe (n=4) for one day : 1h light (under a mild stress of 320uE/m2.s, 29C), 16h dark, 8h light. Photosynthetic efficiency was measured with a PEA by fast fluorescence kiFnetics. The classical stress indicator Fv/Fm was 0.334 (0.228-0.375) in control, 0.384 (0.345-0.425) at 3nM Fe, different at p=0.024, and 0.437 (0.393-0.512) at 3uM Fe (p=0.0012). Electron transport at PS II Qa-Qb (measured by relative fluorescence at 2 milliseconds) was similarly enhanced. The figure is similar than with plankton experiments and ocean iron fertilisations (Science, 1999, 283, 840-843, Nature, 1994, 371, 143-149, and refs. herein). For coral reef bleaching, there is now good convergence to indicate that it originates at PS II or in the latter electron chain (Jones et al., 1998, Plant Cell Env, 21, 1219-1230, Warner et al., 1994, id, 19, 291-299, Hoegh-Guldberg, www.reef.edu.au and refs. herein). The Fv/Fm bleaching threshold under light, T and CO2 stresses in 7 experiments with corals and forams is 0.275+/-0.050 (subm.). Hence the possibility that local iron enrichment can protect from photoinhibition the PS II, cyt b556, b6-f and/or PS I, and thus alleviate bleaching. I know that more theoritical works would have to be done, primary of iron concentration in reefs (and then indication of a relationship with bleaching or not, that I never saw, nor the contrary) and in situ reaction to Fe enrichment measured by fluorescence. Yet bleaching is catastrophic and iron enrichment is not pollutant nor very difficult. As sulfate iron (FeSO4, 7 H2O, best diluted before), 2nM Fe is 0.28mg/m3, or 1.39kg per km2 of a 5m depth lagoon. Just to be throw from a small boat here and there, or even with a slow leaking can near the beach, according to local hydrological conditions, when bleaching threatens (cf. A. Strong warning). This is the best experiment, I guess. Results may come quickly by comparing different areas. (If it works, I will sell you fireworks with rain of sulfate iron, easy and funny...). Contact me if you are interested by the problematic or thinking to do so. Enrichment raises several questions but here today is just given the principles. Even if effective for a favorite area, this is a "drop in ocean" in face of the bleaching global catastroph. Good week, Martin Pecheux martinpecheux at minitel.net Nice University, 15 bis rue des Roses, 06100 Nice, France Tel +33 492 071 079 From martinpecheux at minitel.net Thu Dec 23 14:25:47 1999 From: martinpecheux at minitel.net (MARTIN PECHEUX) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 20:25:47 +0100 (MET) Subject: Iron agaisnt bleaching =?iso-8859-1?Q?=3F?= Message-ID: <199912231925.UAA02589@smtp-out.minitel.net> Dear all, There might be PERHAPS a simple way to act at LOCAL scale against coral reef mass bleaching : by iron fertilization at nanomole concentration. Iron limitation is said to occur in oligotrophic waters, mainly for the photosynthetic apparatus, and photoinhibition is at root of bleaching. Cnidarian respond to nanomole iron enrichment, as a first experiment just realised shows me : tentacles of Anemonia viridis were cut and incubated in 5ml tubes, with either no enrichment (n=8), 3nM Fe as sulfate iron (n=4) and 3uM Fe (n=4) for one day : 1h light (under a mild stress of 320uE/m2.s, 29C), 16h dark, 8h light. Photosynthetic efficiency was measured with a PEA by fast fluorescence kiFnetics. The classical stress indicator Fv/Fm was 0.334 (0.228-0.375) in control, 0.384 (0.345-0.425) at 3nM Fe, different at p=0.024, and 0.437 (0.393-0.512) at 3uM Fe (p=0.0012). Electron transport at PS II Qa-Qb (measured by relative fluorescence at 2 milliseconds) was similarly enhanced. The figure is similar than with plankton experiments and ocean iron fertilisations (Science, 1999, 283, 840-843, Nature, 1994, 371, 143-149, and refs. herein). For coral reef bleaching, there is now good convergence to indicate that it originates at PS II or in the latter electron chain (Jones et al., 1998, Plant Cell Env, 21, 1219-1230, Warner et al., 1994, id, 19, 291-299, Hoegh-Guldberg, www.reef.edu.au and refs. herein). The Fv/Fm bleaching threshold under light, T and CO2 stresses in 7 experiments with corals and forams is 0.275+/-0.050 (subm.). Hence the possibility that local iron enrichment can protect from photoinhibition the PS II, cyt b556, b6-f and/or PS I, and thus alleviate bleaching. I know that more theoritical works would have to be done, primary of iron concentration in reefs (and then indication of a relationship with bleaching or not, that I never saw, nor the contrary) and in situ reaction to Fe enrichment measured by fluorescence. Yet bleaching is catastrophic and iron enrichment is not pollutant nor very difficult. As sulfate iron (FeSO4, 7 H2O, best diluted before), 2nM Fe is 0.28mg/m3, or 1.39kg per km2 of a 5m depth lagoon. Just to be throw from a small boat here and there, or even with a slow leaking can near the beach, according to local hydrological conditions, when bleaching threatens (cf. A. Strong warning). This is the best experiment, I guess. Results may come quickly by comparing different areas. (If it works, I will sell you fireworks with rain of sulfate iron, easy and funny...). Contact me if you are interested by the problematic or thinking to do so. Enrichment raises several questions but here today is just given the principles. Even if effective for a favorite area, this is a "drop in ocean" in face of the bleaching global catastroph. Good week, Martin Pecheux martinpecheux at minitel.net Nice University, 15 bis rue des Roses, 06100 Nice, France Tel +33 492 071 079 From Jim_Maragos at r1.fws.gov Thu Dec 23 16:20:19 1999 From: Jim_Maragos at r1.fws.gov (Jim_Maragos at r1.fws.gov) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:20:19 -0800 Subject: Iron against bleaching ? Is iron geritol for corals?? Message-ID: <88256851.007044B1.00@fw1ro7.r1.fws.gov> Martin Pecheux has provided an informative review (below) that suggests that iron enrichment may protect corals from bleaching through iron enrichment. However, enrichment may have the opposite effect- accelerate the loss and displacement of living corals and other reef builders from bleached and other injured reefs. We have a "real world" case study providing evidence for iron inhibiting reef recovery- that of a 1993 ship grounding at one of our uninhabited and previously pristine reef areas, the Rose Atoll National Wildlife Refuge in American Samoa (central tropical Pacific). A 250 mt Taiwanese longliner ran aground on the SW perimeter reef of the atoll in Oct 1993 and quickly broke up before a salvage tug could reach the scene six weeks later. A 100,000 gallon fuel, 500 gallon oil, and 2,500 lb ammonia spill from the wreck fanned out over the SW reefs, killing the dominant reef builders: crustose coralline pink algae and reef corals. After the acute phase of the spill, the ship began breaking into hundreds of smaller pieces, releasing ever-increasing quantities of dissolved iron. Dead reef surfaces were invaded by cyanobacteria (bluegreen algae, possibly including Schizothrix and Lyngbya) and Jania (a red alga) near the iron wreckage. Although pink crustose coralline algae and stony corals are now recolonizing some dead reef surfaces away from the wreckage, the bluegreen algae continue to dominate reef surfaces downdrift of the metallic wreckage and have spread to other reef areas of the atoll not originally killed by the spill. Dissolved iron concentrations in the water have been measured both near metallic wreckage and away from it, and increase dramatically over the wreckage site. Iron concentrations also strongly correlate positively with bluegreen algal population densities on the underlying reef surfaces. Although the salvage company was payed about $1.2 million by the ship owner's insurance company to remove the vessel, the salvage company succeeded in removing only a fraction of the vessel (bow section) from the reef, and no further compensation has been payed by the responsible parties. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has raised its own funds to complete removal of ship wreckage from the reef flats by last August and will initiate removal of reef slope wreckage in the next few months. At the end of the August cleanup, bluegreen algal populations were noticeably declining after removal of metallic debris from the flats, and presumably in response to the reduction in water-column iron enrichment. Stay tuned because we intend to initiate another round of dissolved iron and bluegreen algal measurements in the coming months- after the next phase of the cleanup is completed. Our Rose Atoll case study raises several concerns with respect to iron enrichment as a possible panacea for counteracting the effects of coral bleaching: 1) Ship owners and their insurance companies and salvage contractors may argue to leave their wrecked vessels on coral reefs (rather than pay the large expense of removing them) because iron is "good" for reefs. 2) If bleaching results in the die-off of corals, cyanobacteria may invade the available dead surfaces and actually persist for longer periods- because of iron enrichment. 3) After re-reading Martin's comments, I don't see any evidence from the cited laboratory studies that iron itself has actually stimulated photosynthesis in bleached stony corals. 4) Although hypothesis is interesting from a research standpoint, it is important to clarify that it is only a hypothesis at this stage- there is no positive proof showing that iron aids beleaguered corals. 5) It is equally, if not more important, to research the potential negative effects of iron on coral reefs and add to the evidence that invasive bluegreen algae may be stimulated and compete against reef builders for space on injured and healthy reefs. With the increased incidence of vessel groundings on reefs, this research could help compel shippers to be more cautious around reefs and to legally pay all damage and restoration costs associated with groundings. Happy Holidays to you all! Jim Maragos, Ph.D., Coral Reef Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Honolulu ____________________Reply Separator____________________ Subject: Iron agaisnt bleaching ? Author: "MARTIN PECHEUX" Date: 12/23/99 11:25 AM Additional Header Information: Received: from coral.aoml.noaa.gov ([192.111.123.248]) by fw1ro8.r1.fws.gov (Lotus SMTP MTA v4.6.4 (830.2 3-23-1999)) with SMTP id 88256850.0073BAE2; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 13:04:05 -0800 Received: by coral.aoml.noaa.gov (980427.SGI.8.8.8/930416.SGI) for coral-list-outgoing id TAA62174; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 19:26:05 GMT Received: from smtp-out.minitel.net by coral.aoml.noaa.gov via ESMTP (980427.SGI.8.8.8/930416.SGI) for id OAA51866; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 14:25:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from gmvtx1 (gmailvtx1.globalmail.net [192.168.220.100]) by smtp-out.minitel.net ([France Telecom Hebergement]) with SMTP id UAA02589 for coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 20:25:47 +0100 (MET) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 20:25:47 +0100 (MET) Message-Id: <199912231925.UAA02589 at smtp-out.minitel.net> Received: from 60424384227 by minitel.net with X25; Thu, 23 Dec 1999 20:25:47 +0200 From: "MARTIN PECHEUX" To: Subject: Iron agaisnt bleaching =?iso-8859-1?Q?=3F?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: owner-coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "MARTIN PECHEUX" --------------------------------- Dear all, There might be PERHAPS a simple way to act at LOCAL scale against coral reef mass bleaching : by iron fertilization at nanomole concentration. Iron limitation is said to occur in oligotrophic waters, mainly for the photosynthetic apparatus, and photoinhibition is at root of bleaching. Cnidarian respond to nanomole iron enrichment, as a first experiment just realised shows me : tentacles of Anemonia viridis were cut and incubated in 5ml tubes, with either no enrichment (n=8), 3nM Fe as sulfate iron (n=4) and 3uM Fe (n=4) mild stress of 320uE/m2.s, 29C), 16h dark, 8h light. Photosynthetic efficiency was measured with a PEA by fast fluorescence kiFnetics. The classical stress indicator Fv/Fm was 0.334 (0.228-0.375) in control, 0.384 (0.345-0.425) at 3nM Fe, different at p=0.024, and 0.437 (0.393-0.512) at 3uM Fe (p=0.0012). (measured by relative fluorescence at 2 milliseconds) was similarly enhanced. The figure is similar than with plankton experiments and ocean iron fertilisations (Science, 1999, 283, 840-843, Nature, 1994, 371, 143-149, and refs. herein). For coral reef bleaching, there is now good convergence to indicate that it originates at PS II or in the latter electron chain (Jones et al., 1998, Plant Cell Env, 21, 1219-1230, Warner et al., 1994, id, 19, 291-299, Hoegh-Guldberg, www.reef.edu.au and refs. herein). The Fv/Fm bleaching threshold under light, T and CO2 stresses in 7 experiments with corals and forams is 0.275+/-0.050 (subm.). Hence the possibility that local iron enrichment can protect from photoinhibition the PS II, cyt b556, b6-f and/or PS I, and thus alleviate bleaching. I know that more theoritical works would have to be done, primary of iron concentration in reefs (and then indication of a relationship with bleaching or not, that I never saw, nor the contrary) and in situ reaction to Fe enrichment measured by fluorescence. Yet bleaching is catastrophic and iron enrichment is not pollutant nor very difficult. As sulfate iron (FeSO4, 7 H2O, best diluted before), 2nM Fe is 0.28mg/m3, or 1.39kg per km2 of a 5m depth lagoon. Just to be throw from a small boat here and there, or even with a slow leaking can near the beach, according to local hydrological conditions, when bleaching threatens (cf. A. Strong warning). This is the best experiment, I guess. Results may come quickly by comparing different areas. (If it works, I will sell you fireworks with rain of sulfate iron, easy and funny...). Contact me if you are interested by the problematic or thinking to do so. Enrichment raises several questions but here today is just given the principles. Even if effective for a favorite area, this is a "drop in ocean" in face of the bleaching global catastroph. Good week, Martin Pecheux martinpecheux at minitel.net Nice University, 15 bis rue des Roses, 06100 Nice, France Tel +33 492 071 079 From vechet at galilcol.ac.il Sun Dec 26 06:39:49 1999 From: vechet at galilcol.ac.il (Vered Echet) Date: Sun, 26 Dec 1999 13:39:49 +0200 Subject: SELAMAT TAHUN BARU / HAPPY NEW YEAR 2000 from Galillee College - Israel Message-ID: <199912261619.QAA82216@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Dear friend, Galillee College, the leading higher education institute in Israel in training senior managers from Developing Countries, would like to wish you a Happy New Year and to bring your attention to our up coming program on Environmental Management (February 13 - March 2). Based on our new scholarship policy towards developing countries, Galillee College will be able to grant a full tuition scholarship to a qualified candidate who is a citizen of Indonesia. This course is designed to fulfill the special requirements of senior officers and administrators employed in work consistent with the topic of the above course. All applicants must have a University degree and be fluent in English. Once the candidate is admitted, he or she (or your office) will have to cover only the airfare to and from Israel and the living expenses while the participant is in Israel. Should you wish to recommend a candidate or candidates please ask them to fax the complete registration form as well as their c.v. to our International Department. As soon as our Admission Committee reviews and approves the application, a full tuition scholarship will be granted. Please visit our web site at: where you will be able to find general information about Galillee College, review the detailed study program and register. I look forward to cooperating with you and your organization. If you need any additional information, please do not hesitate contacting us at any time. Sincerely yours, Vered E. Ben-Zvi Director Far East Division Galillee College P.O. Box: 1070 Tivon 36000 Israel Tel: +972-4-9837-444 Fax: +972-4-9830-227 GALILLEE COLLEGE -REGISTRATION FORM Environmental Management February 13 - March 2, 2000 September 6 - 25 Mr. [ ] Ms. [ ] Dr. [ ] Name: Surname:________________________ Date & Place of Birth:____________________ Passport No: Date of Expiration:_______________________ Mailing Address:_______________________ Telephone: ________________FAX:___________________ E-mail:_______________ Employer's Name & Address:_______________________ Present Position:__________________________ Main job responsibilities:____________________________ Education: _________________years completed Degree:________________ Knowledge of English: Spoken Written * Excellent _____ _______ * Good _____ ________ Computer Literacy: Proficient Need Help Never Used * Windows ________ ________ _________ * Project ________ ________ _________ * Excel ________ ________ _________ * Other ___________ How did you learn of this programme: Request to apply for TUITION SCHOLARSHIP: Yes [ ] No [ ] Person or organisation responsible for payment of Local Expenses Fees: ______ ____________________________________________________________________ --------------00AD2272EDC979BA1106669E Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From JSprung at compuserve.com Wed Dec 29 01:17:51 1999 From: JSprung at compuserve.com (Julian Sprung) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 01:17:51 -0500 Subject: Iron against bleaching ? Message-ID: <199912290118_MC2-92B0-3784@compuserve.com> Some food for thought- Following Martin PECHEUX's suggestion to experiment with iron fertilizing around bleached reefs I am compelled to share some ideas I have that I hope will be taken in the spirit I intend them- just ideas, a hypothesis, no ill intent, and a hope to open everyone's eyes to the POSSIBILITY that many of us (myself included) up to now have been preaching an erroneous scenario concerning mass bleaching on coral reefs. I'll get to that in a moment. First, regarding the iron fertilization suggestion. I agree with Jim Maragos that the likely result of elevated availability of iron would be a bloom of algae (with undesirable consequences!). Iron fertilization in closed system aquariums often (but not always) produces that effect, explosively at times, the availability of phosphate and CO2 also being important in the equation. The suggestion by Martin PECHEUX to fertilize with iron was based on the notion that bleached corals would benefit if there was a way to stimulate the growth of their lost symbionts. Here's where the possible error about mass bleaching comes in. In general the explanation for recent mass coral bleaching and mortality events (at least as they are reported in the newspapers, dive magazines, environmental publications, etc.) is based on a story along the following lines: 1. High water temperatures STRESS corals. 2. The stressed corals expel their zooxanthellae for some unknown reason (quite reasonable suggestions here usually offer that the symbiotic relationship is possible only within a certain temp. range) 3. The "bleached" corals are still alive, but in a weakened state because they have lost their symbionts that provide an important source of food to them. 4. If the corals "remain stressed" and don't regain their zooxanthellae, they starve and eventually die (or are weakened and subject to attack by disease and smothering mats of algae). 5. Other factors affect the recovery, such as pollution, eutrophication, siltation, etc. What I am going to propose is the POSSIBILITY that this scenario is mostly wrong, based on what work done by (Toren et al., 1998) implies. An article in a recent issue of Reef Encounter, Newsletter of the International Society for Reef Studies describes how bleaching in a species of Oculina is caused by a species of bacteria, Vibrio shiloi. The authors give an analogy to help explain the distinction between the causative environmental conditions and real "cause" of the disease (ie. the microorganism). In their example, the flu is prevalent in the winter, when weather conditions favor its activity. The cause of the flu is the microorganism, however, not winter. In their study they showed that the way Vibrio shiloi affects the Mediterranean species Oculina patagonica is mediated by temperature. At temperatures from 16 - 20 degrees Celsius the disease does not occur, even when large numbers of the pathogen are applied to the coral. At 25 - 30 degrees, even a small quantity of V. shiloi will cause the disease. Further, they showed that at this increased temperature, when antibiotics were used to block the Vibrio, the disease did not occur. In a separate study, (Toren et al., 1998) it was found that V. shiloi adheres to the surface of O. patagonica via a chemical receptor. The bacteria's counterpart adhesin that recognizes this receptor is not produced at lower temperatures. The elevated seawater temperature therefore is what causes the bacteria to become virulent. It effects a change in the bacteria, not the coral- the coral is not stressed. Although the bacteria that affect tropical corals are likely to be different from V. shiloi, their basic behavior may be similar. Elevated seawater temperatures on coral reefs are known to be associated with coral bleaching. The article in Reef Encounter clearly suggests the possibility that the elevated sea surface temperatures associated with mass bleaching and mortality of corals on tropical reefs may indicate a similar process happening there, caused by bacteria, not temperature "stress" on corals. If that is the case, then the scenario could be: 1. At elevated temperatures various strains of bacteria adhere to corals and become virulent. 2. The bacteria cause the corals to expel zooxanthellae (reason not known). 3. The bacteria destroy coral tissue (ie. the corals don't starve, they are destroyed). Based on observations in aquaria I tend to believe the latter scenario, which I am proposing. Furthermore, I believe that there are other environmental factors that may cause various bacteria to become virulent and affect corals, temperature notwithstanding. Of course there may be as many pathogenic bacteria as there are families of corals, and different bacteria may become virulent for different reasons, not always with fatal results. In aquaria I have seen disease affect only members of one species, genus or family, leaving other corals unharmed. Other times I've seen rapid death move through an aquarium, affecting all corals as well as other invertebrates and even fishes! I have seen diseases that cause impaired health, reduced growth, bleaching, and sensitivity to light. In many, but not all cases, treatment with antibiotics or antibacterial chemicals (iodine for example) reverses the symptoms. Such observations are anecdotal and surely need closer study. The beauty of aquariums of course is the ease with which we can control them. Some additional remarks- Of course I know that it can be demonstrated that changes in light intensity and spectrum effect changes in density of pigment and zooxanthellae. I also know that a variety of factors can cause corals to expel zooxanthellae, not just bacteria or disease. Please don't misconstrue what I suggest here. Regarding stress and reduced resistance to disease, I do not doubt that a variety of diseases may affect corals more strongly when the corals are in an environment that is not ideal. However, it is important to accept that at least sometimes a rapidly fatal disease may occur suddenly in perfectly healthy corals when the disease causing organism is "switched on" by an environmental stimulus that does not stress the coral directly. Algae mats grow on exposed coral skeletons, smother, and usually kill corals, but sometimes they offer a life-saving shade to live coral tissue on lower branches during mass bleaching events. Corals on reef flats are routinely exposed to temperatures far above those associated with mass coral bleaching. What gives these corals the ability to tolerate this? Is it just duration of exposure? Intense UV affecting potential pathogens? Changes in their surface chemistry? Production of antibacterial substances? I have for years been bothered by the blurriness in reports of coral bleaching with respect to the distinction between white-but-alive and white-without-tissue. At one time I wanted to suggest that new terminology needs to be adopted to clarify the distinction. The term "bleaching" is truly a poor choice since the curio trade uses bleach to clean coral skeletons, so the public perception is that "bleached" corals are dead. In general, scientists referring to bleaching really refer to corals that have expelled their zoox's but are still alive. Taking into consideration the possibility (of mass bleaching events caused by disease) proposed here, then the distinction between the two conditions ("bleached" vs. dead) in the case of a mass bleaching event may just be a matter of time only, as the cause is the same. Bleaching caused by shading or other factors is of course something different. Do we need more terminology? Finally, if some mass bleaching events are caused by bacteria, can we do something about it? That gets back to the original intention of Martin PECHEUX, which is in principal very worthwhile- even if idealistic- to come up with a way of reducing the loss of corals by intervening when a mass bleaching event ocurs. Treatment with antibiotics is of course out of the question, but what about iodine or other substances that hinder bacteria? Alternatively, is it possible to immunize corals? Is it possible to chemically block the adhesion of bacteria to the coral? I hope that this post stimulates active exchange of ideas in a positive direction to further understanding of the mechanisms behind coral bleaching and disease. I don't mind if I am wrong. I hope others feel the same way. Sincerely, Julian Sprung Rosenberg, E. and Y. Loya. 1999. Vibrio Shiloi is the Etiological (Causative) Agent of Oculina Patagonica Bleaching: General Implications. Reef Encounter. Toren A., Laundau L., Kushmaro A, Loya Y, and E. Rosenberg (1998) Effect of Temperature on the adhesion of Vibrio AK-1 to Oculina patagonica and coral bleaching. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 64: 1379 - 1384. From JandL at rivnet.net Wed Dec 29 20:54:45 1999 From: JandL at rivnet.net (Judith Lang & Lynton Land) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 20:54:45 -0500 Subject: bleaching-more food for thought Message-ID: Hello everyone, Holiday greetings! Several comments on Julian Sprung's most interesting message. 1. The several meanings of the word bleached. ---I suspect that, by now, it is too late to invent a new term to describe the loss of the microalgal symbionts like Symbiodinium spp. that are commonly called zooxanthellae (and/or the loss of photosynthetic pigments from algal symbionts remaining within host tissues), but we can at least clearly explain what we mean when we use the word bleaching. 2. The confusion between freshly-exposed white skeletons and bleached corals (particularly acute when observers have poor eyesight and lack corrective, underwater lenses). ---My experience at dive shops in the wider Caribbean is that the mass bleaching events, especially during 1998, were such large-scale phenomena that many amateurs have learned to tell the difference between bleached (live but colourless soft tissues, through which the white of the underlying skeleton is clearly visible) and parts of corals that are very recently dead (for any reason), particularly the divemasters who watched some bleached corals die whilst others gradually regained their symbionts. Divers in general tend not to understand that coral polyps are also killed by predators, competitors and parasites, in addition to severe bleaching and biotic diseases. 3. Why do reef corals bleach at high temperatures? While not disputing the possibility of a bacterial component, it is relevant to point out that Robert Trench (pers. comm.) and his associates have demonstrated in the laboratory.that Symbiodinium microadriaticum is less tolerant of warm temperatures than its host, the jellyfish Cassiopeia xamachana. In other words, as temperature is increased, bleaching (loss of zooxanthellae) may occur without mortality of the animal host, so long as the thermal tolerance of the latter is not exceeded. Moreover, different species of Symbiodinium have different temperature tolerances, which may not not correlate with their molecular genetic classification into clades. For example, S. microadriaticum belongs to clade A and is sensitive, but S. pilosum, which is also clade A, actually tolerates high temperatures (Trench, pers. comm.). 4. The ability of coral hosts to survive without their algal symbionts. ---Bob and I can both remember when Tom Goreau Sr. maintained live, bleached corals of several genera (mussids, Meandrina meandrites, Manicina areolata) in simple aquaria, with regular feedings of exogenous particles, for months-and even years-at a time. Judy Lang From Bprecht at pbsj.com Thu Dec 30 12:43:11 1999 From: Bprecht at pbsj.com (Precht, Bill) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 11:43:11 -0600 Subject: bleaching-more food for thought Message-ID: Happy New Years... In a recent posting... Judy Lang wrote the following: "The confusion between freshly-exposed white skeletons and bleached corals (particularly acute when observers have poor eyesight and lack corrective, underwater lenses). ---My experience at dive shops in the wider Caribbean is that the mass bleaching events, especially during 1998, were such large-scale phenomena that many amateurs have learned to tell the difference between bleached (live but colourless soft tissues, through which the white of the underlying skeleton is clearly visible) and parts of corals that are very recently dead (for any reason), particularly the divemasters who watched some bleached corals die whilst others gradually regained their symbionts. Divers in general tend not to understand that coral polyps are also killed by predators, competitors and parasites, in addition to severe bleaching and biotic diseases." Although the 1998 bleaching was dramatic... in reading this passage I am reminded of going down to Belize in 1992 (a non-bleaching year in Belize). I ran into a prominent reef scientist who knew of my work on the rhomboid shoals there... he told me that I needed to take a look at the dramatic bleaching event that seemed to be Acropora cervicornis specific on these reefs. Well these corals were not "bleached" in the scientific context, but had recently died due to white-band disease. The moral to this story is even trained observers miss or confuse even the most obvious signals...relying on observations by non-scientists only confounds and often hinders our understanding of even the most dramatic events. The Caribbean wide impact of white-band disease and the demise of the acroporids being the most obvious case in point... Better observations... not just more of them is what we need if we are to effectively manage these ecosystems into the next millennium. Cheers, Bill William F. Precht EcoSciences Program Manager PBS&J Miami From jch at aoml.noaa.gov Fri Dec 31 11:52:18 1999 From: jch at aoml.noaa.gov (coral-list admin) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 16:52:18 GMT Subject: subscribing to coral-list-digest Message-ID: <199912311652.QAA17842@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Greetings! This is just a reminder that you can subscribe to coral-list-digest instead of (or in addition to) coral-list, if you would like to receive a digest of the previous week's messages all in one message. To unsubscribe from coral-list and subscribe to coral-list-digest, you can send both of these lines in one message to majordomo at coral.aoml.noaa.gov, unsubscribe coral-list subscribe coral-list-digest Or, if you want both, just send the second line. The digest usually comes out just once a week (depends on how many messages have been sent during the previous week), on Friday. I hope this helps lighten your e-mail load. Best Wishes for a Happy New Year! Cheers, Jim Hendee coral-list administrator ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From cms at uwimona.edu.jm Wed Dec 29 16:44:07 1999 From: cms at uwimona.edu.jm (Centre for Marine Science) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 16:44:07 -0500 (GMT-0500) Subject: Position available Message-ID: <199912311630.QAA17744@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> The post of Assistant Director in the Centre for Marine Sciences, University of the West Indies, with responsibility for the Discovery Bay Marine Laboratory, was recently advertised (preferably a coastal physical oceanographer or a person interested in coral reefs). The advertisement stated that further particulars were available on the University's web site, but they have only just been posted. Go to www.uwimona.edu.jm/ and click on Staff Info, then Vacancies. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From Sunderland at HBOI.edu Thu Dec 30 09:20:03 1999 From: Sunderland at HBOI.edu (Jill Sunderland) Date: Thu, 30 Dec 1999 09:20:03 -0500 Subject: Summer Course Information Message-ID: <199912311633.QAA17429@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> J. Seward Johnson Marine Education and Conference Center at Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institution announces their Summer Program for 2000. The following courses are accredited either through Florida Atlantic University or Florida Institute of Technology. Scholarships are available for graduate courses and may be substantial for students from developing regions. Internship opportunities (open to US citizens or green card holders) are also available for undergraduates and graduate students and provide a modest stipend. Tuition for FAU undergraduate courses is $75 per credit hour for Florida residents and $308 per credit hour for out-of-state students and FIT graduate courses are $598 per credit hour. For more information and the program brochure, contact Dr. Sue Cook or Jill Sunderland at HBOI, 5600 US #1 North, Ft. Pierce, Florida 34946; Tel: (800) 333-4264, ext. 500; FAX (561) 465-5743; E-mail education at hboi.edu. Undergraduate level courses accredited through Florida Atlantic University Functional Biology of Marine Invertebrates, May 29 - June 23 Drs. Clay Cook and Craig Young (HBOI). Examination of how invertebrate animals with diverse body plans feed, move, reproduce and deal with other biological problems. Lectures complemented by extensive 'hands-on' observations of live animals (primarily marine) and independent research projects. 5 credits. Practical Aquaculture Techniques, July 17- August 4 Leroy Creswell, M.S. and Dr. Megan Davis-Hodgkins (HBOI). A comprehensive focus on aquaculture, design principles for recirculating systems, water quality assessment, clam farming, shrimp farming, finfish farming and live feeds. Extensive practical training in hatchery and grow-out techniques. 4 credits. Biological Oceanography, July 10 - August 4 Physical, chemical and biological processes of the oceans, focusing on special adaptations for life in the sea and factors controlling distribution and abundance of marine organisms in pelagic ecosystems. Emphasis will be on understanding the scales and coupling of biotic and physical variability in open ocean ecosystems and the history and use of modern sampling techniques and equipment. 4 credits Graduate level courses accredited through Florida Institute of Technology Marine Fish Culture, May 15 - May 26 Drs. John Tucker, (HBOI) and Blain Kennedy, (Aquatic Veterinarian). Techniques for spawning and rearing marine finfish. An overview of egg and larval characteristics, nutrition, chemical and physical requirements, diseases, and energetics, with detailed information on representative cultured finfish, live and formulated foods, and health management. 3 credits. Biology of Sea Turtles, May 15 - May 27 Dr. Jeanette Wyneken (Florida Atlantic University). An introduction to the behavioral, ecological and evolutionary adaptations of these threatened or endangered animals. Lecture and labs with field trips to nesting beaches and Indian River Lagoon. 3 credits. Global Environmental Problems and Solutions, May 15 - June 2 Dr. Iver Duedall (Florida Institute of Technology). Global environmental issues including climate change, ozone depletion, population growth and environmental consequences of resource use. Emphasis on the ocean. 3 credits. Ecology and Life History of Fishes in Subtropical Ecosystems, May 22 - June 16 Dr. Denis Goulet (HBOI). Field and laboratory experimental studies of fish ecology and early life histories in freshwater, mangrove and coral reef ecosystems within the Indian River Lagoon and Florida Keys. 5 credits. Molecular Studies of Marine Biological Diversity, June 19 - July 2 Dr. Jose V. Lopez (HBOI). Laboratory and field studies of intra - and interspecific genetic variation of selected marine invertebrates. Studies on tropical mangrove and coral reef habitats in the Indian River Lagoon and Andros Island, Bahamas will be made in a marine conservation context and modern molecular techniques applied. 3 credits. Transport Processes in Marine Environments, July 17 - July 28 Dr. Ned Smith (HBOI). An introduction to the transport of dissolved and suspended material by currents and turbulent mixing. Emphasis on the transport of larvae, pollutants, nutrients and suspended sediments in estuarine and continental shelf waters. 3 credits. Jill Sunderland Administrative Assistant J. Seward Johnson Marine Education and Conference Center 5600 US 1 North Ft. Pierce, FL 34946 phone: 561-465-2400 ext. 506 FAX: 561-465-5743 e-mail sunderland at hboi.edu ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From khutton at cnie.org Fri Dec 31 14:02:10 1999 From: khutton at cnie.org (Kevin Hutton) Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 14:02:10 -0500 Subject: No subject Message-ID: <199912311637.QAA09576@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> >Update From:=A0 The Committee for the National Institute for the Environment >Re:=A0 National Science Foundation Announces $50 million "Special >Competition" for grants on Biocomplexity in the Environment > December 16, 1999 > The National Science Foundation (NSF) has announced a special >competition to award $50 million in grants under the >Biocomplexity in the Environment (BE) initiative launched by >NSF Director Rita Colwell. During 1999, CNIE, with much >assistance from supporters of the NIE, has educated Congress >about the importance of the BE initiative. Congress=A0 funded the >initiative by this fall at the level requested by the Foundation. >"Biocomplexity in the Environment" is now the descriptor of the >full portfolio of environmental science and engineering at NSF. >The grants to be allocated in fiscal year 2000 represents the >beginnings of the additional $1 billion/year that the National >Science Foundation hopes to receive as a result of the recently >adopted report Environmental Science and Engineering in the >21st Century: the role of the National Science Foundation. The >report stems from a congressional request that NSF to study the >creation of a National Institute for the Environment (NIE) >through the Foundation. The report recommends implementing >nearly all the activities proposed for an NIE directly through >the National Science Foundation. CNIE has endorsed the report, >committed to working for its full implementation, and suspended >its call for creation of an NIE. > In recent weeks, CNIE has met with Congressional staff to >further educate them about the BE initiative, its relationship >with the NSF report recommendations, and the need to provide a >major funding increase next year to implement all the >recommendations contained in the report. In November, CNIE >organized a letter to the White House Office of Management and >Budget in support of increased funding for NSF. This letter was >signed by over 175 scientific societies, environmental >organizations, business groups and colleges and universities; >including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Sierra Club. > The introduction to the NSF program announcement=A0 describes >the initiative in the following ways: >"Biocomplexity refers to phenomena that result from dynamic >interactions among the biological, physical and social >components of the Earth's diverse environmental systems. We >commonly experience these phenomena as the "whole being greater >than the sum of the parts." Biocomplexity arises from the >interplay between life and its environment, i.e., from the >behavioral, biological, social, chemical and physical >interactions that affect, sustain, or are modified by living organisms, including humans. > All systems associated with life, including human systems, >exhibit biocomplexity. Population oscillations, host-parasite >interactions, pathogen response to El Nino events, human >responses to environmental stimuli, and bioreactor instability >are but a few examples of complex behaviors exhibited by >environmental systems defined or influenced by living organisms. > Since nonlinear or chaotic behavior, emergent phenomena, and >interactions involving multiple levels of biological >organization and/or multiple spatial (microns to thousands of >kilometers) and temporal (nanoseconds to eons) scales often >identify Biocomplexity, it is difficult to describe and study >experimentally. This greatly restricts our ability to predict >the behavior of most systems with living organisms, including >those formed via human activity. > Breaking such systems into their component parts and studying >them separately cannot lead to complete understanding. At some >point, the system as a whole must be studied to identify >emergent behaviors. In addition to a holistic approach, a >clear, integrated conceptual framework for analysis is >required. Such research is integrated formally and a priori, >rather than by relying on ad hoc analysis of results collected >at different times and places. At the same time the paradigms >used to probe the complete system must be designed on the basis >of the known properties of the components of the system. > Major questions about biocomplexity remain unanswered. How >does complexity among biological, physical and social systems >within the environment arise and change? How do emergent >properties develop? How do systems with living components, >including those that are human based, respond and adapt to >stress? How does information and material move within and >across levels in systems? Are adaptation and change >predictable? How do humans influence and respond to biocomplexity in natural systems? > Decades of fruitful research, following the reductionist >paradigm, generated a vast wealth of knowledge about the living >and non-living subcomponents of many environmental systems. Now >researchers from a broad spectrum of fields, armed with >burgeoning databases and a new array of computational, >observational, and analytical tools can undertake the >integrative research necessary to tackle biocomplexity. The >study of biocomplexity offers many challenges to modeling >methods, including mathematical and computational ones. >Descriptions of aggregate behavior, nonlinear phenomena, >networks with distributed or local control, or combinations of >continuous and discrete behavior as well as new visualization >methods can be applied to address biocomplexity. Genome >sequencing, DNA-chips, robotics, computer simulations, new >sensors and monitoring systems, along with satellite-based >imaging of the land and seas, all contribute to the flood of >data relevant to the understanding of biocomplexity. Knowledge >discovery techniques (e.g., datamining, visualization, >summarization, trend extraction, etc.) are being developed to >convert the volumes of data into new knowledge. > The challenge of understanding biocomplexity in the >environment requires sophisticated and creative approaches that >integrate information across temporal and spatial scales, >consider multiple levels of organization, and cross-conceptual >boundaries. Advancing our understanding of the nature and role >of biocomplexity demands increased attention and new >collaborations of researchers from a broad spectrum of fields >-- biology, physics, chemistry, ecology, geology, hydrology, >mathematics, statistics, social and behavioral sciences, computer sciences and engineering." > See the full text at=A0 >> > The competition will support work in two areas: >=A5 Integrated Research "to better understand and model >complexity that arises from the interaction of biological, >physical, and social systems. . . specifically . . . research >projects which directly explore nonlinearities, chaotic >behavior, emergent phenomena or feedbacks within and between >systems and/or integrate across multiple components or scales >of time and space in order to better understand and predict the >dynamic behavior of systems. " "Research Projects can be up to >5 years in duration. Annual budgets may be up to $600,000, with >budgets up to $1 million each year possible if extremely well justified." >=A5 Incubation Activities "that enable groups of researchers who >have not historically collaborated on biocomplexity research to >develop projects via focused workshops, virtual meetings, and >other types of development and planning Activities." >"Incubation Activities can be up to two years duration with >total budgets not to exceed $100,000 and cannot be renewed." >The deadline for letters of intent is January 31, 2000 and for >proposals March 1, 2000. The anticipated date of awards: September 2000 > CNIE, as a multidisciplinary, multi-institutional, >cross-sectoral coalition, would be pleased to provide pro-bono >assistance anybody seeking to establish new collaborations to >carry out work which will improve the scientific basis for >environmental decisions. Contact David Blockstein >David at CNIE.org or 202-530-5810 x 205 or use the Environmental >Research Information Exchange bulletin board at . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) sponsors coral-list and the Coral Health and Monitoring Program (CHAMP, http://www.coral.noaa.gov). Please visit the Web site for instructions on subscribing and unsubscribing to coral-list. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From riesigtiegel at hotmail.com Thu Dec 23 04:06:30 1999 From: riesigtiegel at hotmail.com (Mark van der Riesigtiegel) Date: Thu, 23 Dec 1999 04:06:30 CET Subject: Looking for Dr. Jokiel Message-ID: <199912231302.NAA59706@coral.aoml.noaa.gov> Greetings, I'm looking for Dr. Paul Jokiel=B4s e-mail. I have visited HIMB home= =20 page, but his e-mail is not listed there. I would appreciate a lot if anyon= e=20 could provide me with it. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year for all=20 coral-listers. From victor.gomelyuk at PWCNT.nt.gov.au Tue Dec 28 18:00:22 1999 From: victor.gomelyuk at PWCNT.nt.gov.au (Gomelyuk, Victor) Date: Wed, 29 Dec 1999 08:30:22 +0930 Subject: Coral species for monitoring Message-ID: Dear Colleagues, I am a newly appointed marine scientist at Cobourg Marine Park (Parks & Wildlife Commission of the Northern Territories). One of my duties is to establish environmental monitoring in the Park. In addition to some other techniques coral growth rate monitoring was selected as a promising approach. It seems to be a very useful technique delivering information on such generalised characteristic as growth. However, I am uncertain, what coral species is/are more suitable for this type of monitoring. Common sense tells me that it is better to choose: 1. Species that is/are common and abundant species in a variety of habitat in the area (inshore and offshore reefs, Arafura Sea, NT, Australia). 2. That/these species should be able to withstand unfavourable environmental factors like water turbidity, changes in temperature, salinity, etc. 3. Forms with faster growth are preferable due to lesser bias. 4. Selected species should be easily (or at least, more easily) identified by even such unenlightened in coral taxonomy person as myself. Can anyone please give me some suggestion on what coral species should be chosen? Thanks in advance. Dr Victor Gomelyuk Marine Scientist Cobourg Marine Park PO Box 496 PALMERSTON NT 0831 AUSTRALIA phone 61 (08) 8979 0244 FAX 61 (08) 8979 0246