Acropora spp., endangered

[CORALations]

Dear Mr. Jaap: 

You wrote:   " We do not believe that any of the aforementioned taxa of
corals could satisfy the criteria of endangered or threatened species."

Can someone discuss this criteria or possibly scan and post?  How does this
designation differ from appendix II listing?   

You wrote:  "Firstly, to prove that a coral is threatened or at risk
throughout the Caribbean, Florida, Bahamas, Bermuda, and places in between
is  costly, time consuming, and might be very difficult to prove the case."

Does this mean there is no data backing compliance to ES criteria for the
taxa listed? I was under the impression that this discussion originated
based on evidence which suggests they fit the criteria. Are reefs
considered “shared resources” in these regions with respect to such
legislation? Would, for example,  a disease diagnosed in one region
resulting in extensive mortality of a species of coral be enough of a cause
for concern to protect the same species in other regions given that these
diseases are distributed by currents, or are you saying extensive
monitoring is required in each specific region?  In other words, at this
point in time, how much investigation actually needs to be done in order to
see if criteria are met and to what regions would the protection apply?

You wrote: "Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other
statutes
and management regimes?  I would like to think so."

I would like to think so too. Unfortunately, don't corals continue to
decline in large part due to anthropogenic stressors? The big picture is we
don't seem to be "managing" our selves very well.  We can't even manage
trade, let alone less direct impacts from run off etc.... Look, for
example, at the large black coral galleries on St. Thomas, Cayman and Las
Vegas.  There's a two page magazine add that reads like a documentary in
American Skies, the American Eagle magazine promoting this "art." How are
permits allocated for such exploitation with so little knowledge about the
"protected" species?  In St. Thomas, the existence of this well publicized
gallery has encourage neighboring shops to engage in the trade. Many
fishermen in the DR are risking their lives to harvest this coral. 
My only concern about using endangered species act to protect coral is that
the response to the question you posed: "Are corals currently protected
from human exploitation by other statutes and management regimes?  would be
answered  as casually with "I would like to think so, they're considered
endangered species."  

You wrote: "Would the endangered species act have provided immunity from
these anthropogenic disturbances?    Although, I believe you are
specifically referring to groundings when you discuss "anthropogenic
events" what about development related stress?   Has the endangered species
act been used to stop development? With respect to groundings, could the
endangered species act be used to create legislation which diverts tanker
traffic away from sensitive coral reef areas, minimizing future groundings
and tanker related accidents? Has endangered species act ever been used to
improve water quality? 

You wrote: "Natural events such as hurricanes, ENSO related bleaching
episodes, and global warming are still occurring in spite of the efforts
that the
 coral protection statutes and management regimes. Would additional
 protective legislation such as the endangered species program provide
 more protection to the reef resources?  "  

I believe the answer to this depends on the proposed protective
legislation. We should be using past management failures to discuss
additional protective legislation.   With regard to the endangered species
act, I would think we can use this as another tool to minimize additional
anthropogenic stress to protected corals from proposed development and
water quality issues.   Your “natural events” argument  better defends why
we should do more....not eliminate a legislative avenue that already
exists.    

 You wrote:   Coral populations are very dynamic.  In the case of Acropora
palmata
(Lamarck, 1816) there is good evidence that it has gone through boom and
 bust dynamics for quite some time. 

Are you suggesting that no anthropogenic stressors are currently
contributing to the decline of this species?  

	I respect you for posting your arguments to the web for discussion. I also
have concerns about the effectiveness of the endangered species act to
protect corals.  To many people, corals are just rocks, or rocks with
worms.  However, unlike you, I see this as a cause for concern to open
discussion about more aggressive comprehensive legislation,  not grounds
for abandonment of laws currently on the books.  Other listers have
commented that by protecting one species of coral others will benefit.  In
my opinion, the strongest argument you present is cost - benefit.  
However, I feel your cost-benefit argument fails if a substantial amount of
data  exists which can be used to demonstrate compliance with ES criteria
and other corals benefit by proximity to the species being listed.  

Sincerely, 

Mary Ann Lucking 
Project Coordinator
CORALations
Amapola 14, Suite 901
Isla Verde, PR 00979
phone/fax: 787-791-7372
corals at caribe.net

> From: Walt Jaap STP <JAAP_W at epic7.dep.state.fl.us>
> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> Subject: Acropora spp., endangered
> Date: Friday, February 26, 1999 6:07 AM
> 
> [Moderator's note: this letter to Tom Hourigan from Walt Jaap was
> reprinted with permission from Walt for the purpose of encouraging
> discussion and contrasting or complementary viewpoints.]
> 
> 
> 22 February, 1999
> 
> Dr. Thomas F. Hourigan
> Marine Biodiversity Coordinator
> Office of Protected Resources, NOAAF/PR
> National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
> National Marine Fisheries Service
> 1315 East-West Highway
> Silver Spring, MD 20910
> tom.hourigan at noaa.gov
> 
> 
> Dear Dr. Hourigan:
> 
> I am responding to your internet request about Acropora spp. and other
> Scleractinian species for inclusion as endangered or threatened species.
> We have encountered this option several times from different groups over
> the years; and have looked at the option to see if it was reasonable,
> possible, and would it do a better job protecting corals than the
> existing statutes and management regimes.  We have concluded that it is
> not the best approach for several reasons.
> 
> Firstly, to prove that a coral is threatened or at risk throughout the
> Caribbean, Florida, Bahamas, Bermuda, and places in between is  costly,
> time consuming, and might be very difficult to prove the case.
> 
> Are corals currently protected from human exploitation by other statutes
> and management regimes?  I would like to think so.  In Florida, we have
> a state statute that protects all Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and
> Gorgonia spp from harvest, being sold in a commercial establishment, and
> from destruction on the sea floor.  This statute has been in effect
> since the mid 1970s.  At the federal level the most extensive coral
> protection is found under the Magnuson Act:  The Gulf of Mexico and
> South Atlantic Fisherie s Councils cosponsored the work that resulted in
> the Coral and Coral Reef Fishery Management Plan.  This plan parallels
> the Florida statute, protecting the Scleractinia, Millepora spp, and
> Gorgonia spp. This management regime was recently incorporated into the
> Essential Fish Habitat Plan by the Fishery Management Councils.
> 
> The Department of Interior manages two National Parks (Biscayne and Dry
> Tortugas) in which all corals are protected.  The State of Florida and
> NOAA are the trustees of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
> which includes all the reefs outside the National Park boundaries from
> Fowey Rocks to west of Dry Tortugas, again the regulations protect
> corals and reefs.   When anthropogenic events occur, the trustees have
> successfully prosecuted responsible parties or have negotiated effective
> restoration and mon itoring plans on the sites.  Settlements were in the
> range of millions of dollars. Would the endangered species act have
> provided immunity from these anthropogenic disturbances? I do not think
> it would have.
> 
> Natural events such as hurricanes, ENSO related bleaching episodes, and
> global warming are still occurring in spite of the efforts that the
> coral protection statutes and management regimes.  Would additional
> protective legislation such as the endangered species program provide
> more protection to the reef resources?  I am skeptical that adding a few
> Scleractinia corals to the endangered and threatened species list would
> be of benefit.
> 
> Coral populations are very dynamic.  In the case of Acropora palmata
> (Lamarck, 1816) there is good evidence that it has gone through boom and
> bust dynamics for quite some time.  In 1882, Alexander Agassiz reported
> 44 hectares of A. palmata at Dry Tortugas.  In 1982, Gary Davis reported
> that, A. palmata coverage declined to 0.6 hectares, ten years later we
> measured the remnant population and noted little change.  The decline
> was probably caused by hurricanes and other meteorological phenomena.
> 
> In retrospect, or as they claim hind sight is perfect, when the debate
> over the Everglades Park boundaries was first debated in the late 1940s,
> Gill Voss told me an initial proposal had all of the Florida Keys with
> the exception of Key West and Marathon included in Everglades National
> Park.  Local politics prevailed and the end result is a highly urbanized
> Florida Keys in which the environmental quality has suffered from user
> abuse.  Ah, if we could only go back in time and make it right.
> 
> We recognize that your intentions are well meaning and appreciate your
> concern.  We respectfully disagree that the corals mentioned in your
> communication should be considered for nomination as endangered or
> threatened species.  We do not believe that any of the aforementioned
> taxa of corals could satisfy the criteria of endangered or threatened
> species.   Since we have existing statutes and management regimes that
> are designed to protect corals and reefs, the proposed status would have
> little or no effect o n these resources.
> 
> 
> Sincerely
> 
> Walter C. Jaap Associate Research Scientist Florida Marine Research
> Institute
> 
>