[Coral-List] 82 coral species listing

Pedro H. Rodríguez phernanrod at yahoo.com
Wed Jul 11 10:33:12 EDT 2012

Do you reckon that the health of those corals be worse off with their listing? Unfortunately, crystal balls were not available in the 70s and 80s, and so it is hard to know what would have happened, but in all likelihood (1) nothing bad for the corals, (2) something good by increased public perception on something being wrong in the ECOSYSTEM, and (3) something very good as pressure would have been applied to government agencies to look for root causes (including the spraying of mosquitoes, which seems to be your favorite but unconfirmed pet peeve). Am I missing something important from your insistent criticism? 

From: Gene Shinn <eshinn at marine.usf.edu>
To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov 
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 3:21 PM
Subject: [Coral-List] 82 coral species listing

I am sitting on my boat in Marathon Florida Having just completed 
photographing my two main serial photography sites. One at Carysfort 
reef and one at Grecian rocks reef. The series is now 52 years in 
length. You can view the first 50 years of this series at the USGS 
What does the series show? The advent of coral diseases in the late 
1970s and the demise of Acropora cervicornis that culminated in 1983 
throughout the Caribbean. Decline due to bleaching and disease has 
continued to the present.  At both study sites which were once lush 
there is no longer any A. cervicornis. I found one small sickly 
colony about the size of a grapefruit at Grecian Rocks. I have to ask 
the question. Had Acropora been listed back in 1984 when it was 
apparent to all that the species was in a spiraling decline would it...

More information about the Coral-List mailing list