[Coral-List] what agency should list corals under the esa
Rudy Bonn
rudy_bonn at yahoo.com
Fri Mar 29 21:45:37 EDT 2013
lets look at the facts, if it were not for human intervention into the natural order of things, would there even be any endangered species- letting evolution work the way it knows without human intervention I suppose is a fantasy now and has been ever since we climbed out of the trees!
As the human population continues to grow, or as more countries like China continue to pollute their rivers and their air for the sake of economic development we will always and regrettably damage the very resources
that we depend so much upon! I agree with Alina on this one! Too many humans!
Rudy
Rudy S Bonn
--- On Fri, 3/29/13, coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov <coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> wrote:
From: coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov <coral-list-request at coral.aoml..noaa.gov>
Subject: Coral-List Digest, Vol 55, Issue 26
To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
Date: Friday, March 29, 2013, 11:12 AM
Send Coral-List mailing list submissions to
coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
You can reach the person managing the list at
coral-list-owner at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Coral-List digest...", e.g., cut and paste the
Subject line from the individual message you are replying to. Also,
please only include quoted text from prior posts that is necessary to
make your point; avoid re-sending the entire Digest back to the list.
Today's Topics:
1. Re: To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list corals under
the Endangered) (Pedro H. Rodr?guez)
2. Re: To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list corals under
the Endangered) (Szmant, Alina)
3. Re: To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list corals under
the Endangered) (Quenton)
4. Re: What agency should list corals under the Endangered,
species act? (Dwayne Meadows (NOAA Federal))
5. Re: To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list corals under
the Endangered) (Dennis Hubbard)
6. Re: To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list corals under
the Endangered) (Martin Moe)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 11:38:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: Pedro H. Rodr?guez <phernanrod at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list
corals under the Endangered)
To: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
Message-ID:
<1364495920.35726.YahooMailNeo at web140706.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
WE scientists? The social and eonomic scientists dealing with natural-resource use apply the same scientific philosophy as you and me, Dennis, and their goal is to maximize social welfare under the constraint of sustainable resources. I see no conflict of interest.
?
Pedro
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:09:01 -0400
From: "Szmant, Alina" <szmanta at uncw.edu>
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list
corals under the Endangered)
To: Pedro H. Rodr?guez <phernanrod at yahoo.com>,
"coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
Message-ID:
<68ECDB295FC42D4C98B223E75A854025DA47EFCD3C at uncwexmb2.dcs.uncw.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
I think the biggest difference between the natural sciences and the social sciences might be in our views of what is sustainable... Many of us natural scientists think that the terms "sustainable development" or "sustainable exploitation of resources" are oxymorons! There is nothing sustainable about human development or exploitation as long as human population growth is not halted and human population size is greatly reduced.
*************************************************************************
Dr. Alina M. Szmant
Professor of Marine Biology
Center for Marine Science and Dept of Biology and Marine Biology
University of North Carolina Wilmington
5600 Marvin Moss Ln
Wilmington NC 28409 USA
tel: 910-962-2362 fax: 910-962-2410 cell: 910-200-3913
http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
*******************************************************
-----Original Message-----
From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Pedro H. Rodr?guez
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 2:39 PM
To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list corals under the Endangered)
WE scientists? The social and eonomic scientists dealing with natural-resource use apply the same scientific philosophy as you and me, Dennis, and their goal is to maximize social welfare under the constraint of sustainable resources. I see no conflict of interest.
?
Pedro
_______________________________________________
Coral-List mailing list
Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 05:22:57 -0500
From: "Quenton" <qdokken at gulfmex.org>
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list
corals under the Endangered)
To: "'Szmant, Alina'" <szmanta at uncw.edu>, " 'Pedro H. Rodr?guez' "
<phernanrod at yahoo.com>, <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
Message-ID: <003301ce2c67$62f30370$28d90a50$@org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Good Day All;
Social and economic practice do not necessarily follow the constructs of
science and certainly not the realities of the limits of nature. In
economic and social science forums, rarely have I heard discussed the fact
that there are very real limits to the level at which the natural systems
and resources can be impacted before the living resource and/or system
ceases to function in a normal way, if at all. The belief seems to be that
natural habitats, wild populations, and the cycles of ecosystem dynamics
can be compromised infinitely to serve the needs and wants of humans. The
fact is that nature did not evolve in a manner to be sustainable under the
variety and quantity of insults and compromises that humans inflict. Nor is
nature geared to adapt on a human generational time scale. Every
environmental issue we face today can be discussed in terms of lack of
understanding/acceptance of the fact that nature can only be compromised to
a limited extent before it fails. Our regulatory system of issuing permits
is based on the belief that nature can be compromised infinitely. Yes,
society must have jobs and business opportunities to exist and flourish.
Yes, there must be access to natural resources to meet the needs and wants
of humans/society. But, at some point planning and permitting must factor
the limits of nature into the model. Nature does not take into account an
individual's or community's culture, history, religion, uniqueness, dreams,
financial need, property rights, or any other purely human contrivance. In
and of itself, nature is a perpetual motion machine. Nature will function
just fine until something or someone disrupts its cycles to a point that the
engine stops. Very clearly we can see the train coming at us and we don't
seem to be able to get off the track.
Quenton Dokken, Ph.D.
President/CEO
Gulf of Mexico Foundation, Inc.
361-882-3939 office
361-442-6064 cell
qdokken at gulfmex.org
Office:
3833 South Staples
Suite S214
Corpus Christi, TX 78411
Mail:
PMB 51
5403 Everhart Rd.
Corpus Christi, TX 78411
www.gulfmex.org
-----Original Message-----
From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
[mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Szmant, Alina
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 4:09 PM
To: Pedro H. Rodr?guez; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list corals
under the Endangered)
I think the biggest difference between the natural sciences and the social
sciences might be in our views of what is sustainable... Many of us natural
scientists think that the terms "sustainable development" or "sustainable
exploitation of resources" are oxymorons! There is nothing sustainable
about human development or exploitation as long as human population growth
is not halted and human population size is greatly reduced.
*************************************************************************
Dr. Alina M. Szmant
Professor of Marine Biology
Center for Marine Science and Dept of Biology and Marine Biology
University of North Carolina Wilmington
5600 Marvin Moss Ln
Wilmington NC 28409 USA
tel: 910-962-2362 fax: 910-962-2410 cell: 910-200-3913
http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
*******************************************************
-----Original Message-----
From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
[mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Pedro H.
Rodr?guez
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 2:39 PM
To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list corals
under the Endangered)
WE scientists? The social and eonomic scientists dealing with
natural-resource use apply the same scientific philosophy as you and me,
Dennis, and their goal is to maximize social welfare under the constraint of
sustainable resources. I see no conflict of interest.
?
Pedro
_______________________________________________
Coral-List mailing list
Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
_______________________________________________
Coral-List mailing list
Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 07:40:52 -0400
From: "Dwayne Meadows (NOAA Federal)" <dwayne.meadows at noaa.gov>
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] What agency should list corals under the
Endangered, species act?
To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
Message-ID: <51557DC4.9030505 at noaa.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Gene suggests DOC has more of a conflict than DOI in administering the
ESA. Gene seems to have forgotten the debacle of Julie MacDonald, the
deputy assistant secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks at the United
States Department of the Interior (i.e., directly overseeing the Fish
and Wildlife Service that implements ESA for mostly terrestrial and
freshwater species) from 2004 until she was forced to resign in 2007.
Google her name if you want to read the gory details of her ESA
interference. Before the current administration NOAA had very few
political appointees but that has been changing.
Gene also asserts DOC and NOAA are not likely to ban or regulate
products, or activities, that may negatively affect commerce, and he
specifically mentions pesticides as an example. Gene seems to be
unaware this is exactly what NOAA is trying to do under the ESA. Under
the ESA NOAA Fisheries is responsible for administering Section 7 of the
ESA that requires other Federal agencies to consider their activities
for effects on endangered species and if there are potential effects to
consult with NOAA Fisheries (or FWS for their species). If those
activities are determined to jeopardize the continued existence of
listed species, or result in the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat, case modifications to the activities may be needed for
them to go forward. For the past 5 years NOAA Fisheries has been
consulting with the Environmental Protection Agency, one of those other
Federal agencies supposed to be looking out for human and ecosystem
health, and has made dozens of determinations that almost 20 pesticides
THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN USE, are jeoepardizing ESA listed salmon in the
Pacific Northwest. NOAA has suggested modifications to the use of many
of these chemicals to lessen their impact on listed species.
Implementation of these modifications is the subject of ongoing
litigation. You can find more details at:
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/consultation/pesticides.htm (Note I do not
work in that area of ESA implementation).
You might ask what about pesticides in coral reef areas. Well there is
a funny thing about the requirement for Federal agencies to consider
their effects on ESA listed species. The law does not allow NOAA or the
Fish and Wildlife Service to force other agencies to consider those
impacts and consult with their experts. Only that agency's leadership,
the White House, and/or lawsuits by private citizens, businesses, or
non-profits can make that happen. In the case of the Pacific Northwest
salmon pesticide consultations, the consultations only happened after
the Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides sued, EPA had not
been willing to do it on their own accord, for many years and
administrations as I understand it. And yes research on endangered
species can and is routinely approved if it benefits the species.
The pesticide issue is even more timely as yesterday the Natural
Resources Defense Council issued a report detailing that as much as 65%
of 16,000 pesticide chemicals have been allowed on the market by EPA
through a loophole "conditional registration" process where full data
on health and other effects are not required on first use. see
http://www.nrdc.org/health/pesticides/flawed-epa-approval-process.asp
Dwayne
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dwayne Meadows, Ph.D.
Species of Concern National Program Coordinator
Office of Protected Resources (F/PR3)
National Marine Fisheries Service
1315 East West Highway
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Dwayne.Meadows at noaa.gov
http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/concern/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On 3/28/2013 3:23 PM, coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov wrote:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Eugene Shinn <eugeneshinn at mail.usf.edu>
> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 2:58 PM
> Subject: [Coral-List] What agency should list corals under the Endangered
> species act?
>
> *What agency should list corals under the Endangered Species Act?*
>
> Dear Listers,
>
> Because of a petition from the tax exempt Center for Biodiversity, NOAA
> National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) will in all probability list 7
> common Atlantic corals as threatened and upgrade /Acropora/ species to
> endangered.My question is, should the listing be accomplished by an
> agency under the Deparment of Commerce? Is there a conflict of interest?
> Should instead the Department of Interior, e.g., National Park Service
> or Fish and Wildlife, be the official listing agency? Why do I bring
> this up?
>
> My concern is because any agency under the Department of Commerce that
> also supports research is not likely to ban or regulate products, or
> activities, that may negatively affect commerce and/or economics. For
> example: suppose the "gold standard" 96-hr LD-50 bioassay demonstrated
> that the mosquito pesticides Dibrom, Nalid, and Malathion, commonly
> sprayed in the Florida Keys, is detrimental to corals?
>
> That finding would present a problem if not an onerous catch-22
> situation because banning these substances could have a huge negative
> effect on the Florida Keys economy, especially the all-important tourist
> economy.Ironically, after all these years of coral reef research, no one
> has yet performed this straightforward bioassay, even though it is well
> known that these pesticides affect marine life as well mosquitoes and
> butterflies. Note that the Department of Interior does not allow
> spraying of these toxic substances in their parks or on park-owned
> property on Key Largo. Such spraying is also not allowed over the
> State-owned Florida Keys Marine Laboratory on Long Key. The toxic
> effects there are well known to marine scientists. I won't bring up the
> endangered Key Largo Wood Rat that is used to curtail commercial
> activities on State lands on North Key Largo .
>
> But not to worry, if /Acropora/ status is elevated to "endangered," it
> will likely be impossible to conduct those needed bioassays because by
> its very nature the LD-50 test requires the sacrificing of some
> organisms. This bioassay basically determines the level of a substance
> required to kill 50 percent of the organisms in a 96-hr period.. That
> badly long-needed information could then be used to determine if such
> levels are present in marine waters off the Florida Keys, including the
> saline groundwater beneath the keys that ultimately upwells offshore. I
> have to wonder why this simple test has never been done? Since these
> tests have not been attempted after all the years of concern about dying
> corals, it seems unlikely the tests will likely happen while it may
> still be legal to conduct them. Catch-22?
>
> On the other hand, if the Department of Interior were to be in charge of
> listing (they already have control of corals under their jurisdiction at
> Dry Tortugas National Park, Biscayne National Park, and Everglades
> National Park), there would be no conflict. Because of their philosophy,
> the Park Service is generally not constrained by effects on commerce.
>
> One might add that similar LD-50 bioassays should be conducted on
> sunscreens. Sunscreens are banned from use by swimmers in coral reef
> marine parks in Mexico. Do the Mexican authorities know something we do
> not?
>
> One can only imagine other activities that will be affected once these
> new endangered species acts go into effect. One might also wonder why we
> presently have 3 federal and 1 state agency protecting corals?
>
> Gene
>
>
> --
>
------------------------------
Message: 5
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 09:47:12 -0400
From: Dennis Hubbard <dennis.hubbard at oberlin.edu>
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list
corals under the Endangered)
To: "Szmant, Alina" <szmanta at uncw.edu>
Cc: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>,
Pedro H. Rodr?guez <phernanrod at yahoo.com>
Message-ID:
<CAFjCZNYEiySO=SY9uoYt2b0rBEdq839KASs7toE7OWMCre8KaQ at mail.gmail..com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I totally agree with Alina's assessment. Two of the courses I teach (Coral
Reefs: Biology, Geology & Politics and Environmental Geology) have strong
cross-disciplinary content. We often address isssues like mitigation and
adaptation in the context of different societies' ability to take advantage
of these strategies. The hardest thing to get humanists and social
scientists to understand that, to a large extent, social equity is the
left's version of macro-economics. Both assume an infinite pie and that if
we can be either a little more productive or equitable we will be closer to
the mythical "sustainability".
Evolution is by its very nature socially blind ; there are winners and
losers. Unfortunately, the short-term losers in this discussion are the
poor and the disenfranchised who cannot take advantage of what is required
to keep malaria and dengue on the southern side of their borders. Residents
in small island states are among the least responsible for sea-level rise
and will be among the most affected. And our attempts at "law in the sea"
have actually made this a lot tougher on the estimated 30 million climate
refugees that we might see in the coming century. Most of us on this list,
however put-upon we might feel, are among the privileged and have a
responsibility to recognize that fact and act accordingly. However, arguing
for social equity over environmental equity misses the point. And, once we
move into that environmentally equitable maze, we have to decide who are
the unrepresented - species, habitat, the cosmic spaghetti monster?
We are having thoughtful discussions at Oberlin about sustainability and
our carbon footprint. Unfortunately, these too often become self-serving
and fail to recognize that we are all arguing from totally different
perceptions. Great Britain has significantly lowered its carbon footprint,
but largely by de-industrializing and moving to a service economy. While
that's great on the surface, their purchased commodities are rising; they
have, in effect, outsourced their carbon to China and can take credit for
reduced emissions..... unless we account for the carbon that has been
emitted by someone else on their behalf. Here at Oberlin, we just installed
a 10-acre solar array that will cover 10% of our electricity needs. That's
GREAT, but..... the panels were made in Taiwan - they are essentially made
of coal. So... we get credit for the lowered emission while taking no
responsibility for the embedded carbon.
This has gotten pretty far from the original discussion of whether the
Dept. of Commerce is the best agency to coordinate coral listing, but this
seems like a much more interesting way to head. My original comment
regarding Gene's post was not so much that there was a better agency (or
that Commerce was even a "bad" one). The intent was to point out the
economically focused underpinnings of our decisions regardless of who makes
them. This errs on the macro-economic side of things. I suppose on the
equity side, we have to ask "fair to whom"? My own opinion (as opposed to
any professional pronouncement) is that the problem with environmental
decline is systemic and that saving particular corals will do no more good
than preserving one cultural element in Detroit in the hope of returning it
to its former glory. That's evolution! Caveat, I'm thinking like an
uncaring geologist here (BTW, I'm not thrilled by fracking).
Dennis
On Thu, Mar 28, 2013 at 5:09 PM, Szmant, Alina <szmanta at uncw.edu> wrote:
> I think the biggest difference between the natural sciences and the social
> sciences might be in our views of what is sustainable... Many of us
> natural scientists think that the terms "sustainable development" or
> "sustainable exploitation of resources" are oxymorons! There is nothing
> sustainable about human development or exploitation as long as human
> population growth is not halted and human population size is greatly
> reduced.
>
> *************************************************************************
> Dr. Alina M. Szmant
> Professor of Marine Biology
> Center for Marine Science and Dept of Biology and Marine Biology
> University of North Carolina Wilmington
> 5600 Marvin Moss Ln
> Wilmington NC 28409 USA
> tel: 910-962-2362 fax: 910-962-2410 cell: 910-200-3913
> http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
> *******************************************************
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov [mailto:
> coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Pedro H. Rodr?guez
> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 2:39 PM
> To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list
> corals under the Endangered)
>
> WE scientists? The social and eonomic scientists dealing with
> natural-resource use apply the same scientific philosophy as you and me,
> Dennis, and their goal is to maximize social welfare under the constraint
> of sustainable resources. I see no conflict of interest.
>
> Pedro
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>
--
Dennis Hubbard
Dept of Geology-Oberlin College Oberlin OH 44074
(440) 775-8346
* "When you get on the wrong train.... every stop is the wrong stop"*
Benjamin Stein: "*Ludes, A Ballad of the Drug and the Dream*"
------------------------------
Message: 6
Date: Fri, 29 Mar 2013 07:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
From: Martin Moe <martin_moe at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list
corals under the Endangered)
To: Quenton <qdokken at gulfmex.org>, "'Szmant, Alina'"
<szmanta at uncw.edu>, 'Pedro H. Rodr?guez' <phernanrod at yahoo.com>,
"coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
Message-ID:
<1364567083.78207.YahooMailNeo at web160104.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Well said, Quenton. Here's another way to express it.
We do have a balanced approach to the environment. Picture a
seesaw... with population growth on one end and industrial economic growth on the
other. The fulcrum is technology. As population growth increases that end of
the seesaw dips a bit, so the industrial economy then has the opportunity (demand)
to expand and counter the increase in population; and the balance is restored.
The fulcrum of technology groans a bit, but industrial development shores it up
with green revolutions, chemical magic, carbon dioxide production, new ways to
harvest natural resources, and fossil fuel exploitation, err, make that fossil
fuel research and development. And that stimulates more population growth and
creates a dip of the population end of the seesaw. Then the Industrial economic
end of seesaw rises a bit, stimulating population growth back to balance with another groan from the fulcrum, which is quickly made all better by advances in
industrial technology. The balance holds tenaciously through the repetition of
the cycles and all is good, until, until, the fulcrum just can?t continue to
?make it all better? and crumbles under the weight of humanity. But don?t
worry, we, most of us alive in this glorious time of industrial growth and
consumer comfort will be gone before the environmental fan is hit by the
excrement of human civilization, so what do we care what happens after we are
gone. Unfortunately, that attitude, ?don?t care what happens after I?m gone? is
far too prevalent in society today. Will we restore a sustainable balance to
the seesaw and create a stable fulcrum in time to maintain a functional and
progressive civilization? I really, really, hope so. I know, I know, think
positive, work hard to develop constructive solutions to our problems, and I?m
trying, but it?s difficult to do.
Martin
________________________________
From: Quenton <qdokken at gulfmex.org>
To: "'Szmant, Alina'" <szmanta at uncw.edu>; 'Pedro H. Rodr?guez' <phernanrod at yahoo.com>; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
Sent: Friday, March 29, 2013 6:22 AM
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list corals under the Endangered)
Good Day All;
Social and economic practice do not necessarily follow the constructs of
science and certainly not the realities of the limits of nature.? In
economic and social science forums, rarely have I heard discussed the fact
that there are very real limits to the level at which the natural systems
and resources can be impacted before the living resource and/or system
ceases to function in a normal way, if at all.? The belief seems to be that
natural habitats, wild populations, and the cycles of ecosystem dynamics
can be compromised infinitely to serve the needs and wants of humans. The
fact is that nature did not evolve in a manner to be sustainable under the
variety and quantity of insults and compromises that humans inflict.? Nor is
nature geared to adapt on a human generational time scale.? Every
environmental issue we face today can be discussed in terms of lack of
understanding/acceptance of the fact that nature can only be compromised to
a limited extent before it fails. Our regulatory system of issuing permits
is based on the belief that nature can be compromised infinitely.? Yes,
society must have jobs and business opportunities to exist and flourish.
Yes, there must be access to natural resources to meet the needs and wants
of humans/society.? But, at some point planning and permitting must factor
the limits of nature into the model.? Nature does not take into account an
individual's or community's culture, history, religion, uniqueness, dreams,
financial need, property rights, or any other purely human contrivance. In
and of itself, nature is a perpetual motion machine.? Nature will function
just fine until something or someone disrupts its cycles to a point that the
engine stops. Very clearly we can see the train coming at us and we don't
seem to be able to get off the track.?
Quenton Dokken, Ph.D.
President/CEO
Gulf of Mexico Foundation, Inc.
361-882-3939 office
361-442-6064 cell
qdokken at gulfmex.org
Office:
3833 South Staples
Suite S214
Corpus Christi, TX 78411
Mail:
PMB 51?
5403 Everhart Rd.
Corpus Christi, TX 78411
www.gulfmex.org
-----Original Message-----
From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
[mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Szmant, Alina
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 4:09 PM
To: Pedro H. Rodr?guez; coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list corals
under the Endangered)
I think the biggest difference between the natural sciences and the social
sciences might be in our views of what is sustainable...? Many of us natural
scientists think that the terms "sustainable development"? or "sustainable
exploitation of resources"? are oxymorons!? There is nothing sustainable
about human development or exploitation as long as human population growth
is not halted and human population size is greatly reduced.
*************************************************************************
Dr. Alina M. Szmant
Professor of Marine Biology
Center for Marine Science and Dept of Biology and Marine Biology
University of North Carolina Wilmington
5600 Marvin Moss Ln
Wilmington NC 28409 USA
tel:? 910-962-2362? fax: 910-962-2410? cell: 910-200-3913
http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
*******************************************************
-----Original Message-----
From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
[mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Pedro H.
Rodr?guez
Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 2:39 PM
To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] To Dennis Hubbard (What agency should list corals
under the Endangered)
WE scientists? The social and eonomic scientists dealing with
natural-resource use apply the same scientific philosophy as you and me,
Dennis, and their goal is to maximize social welfare under the constraint of
sustainable resources. I see no conflict of interest..
?
Pedro
_______________________________________________
Coral-List mailing list
Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
_______________________________________________
Coral-List mailing list
Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
_______________________________________________
Coral-List mailing list
Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Coral-List mailing list
Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
End of Coral-List Digest, Vol 55, Issue 26
******************************************
More information about the Coral-List
mailing list