[Coral-List] NOAA lists 20 new corals

Eugene Shinn eugeneshinn at mail.usf.edu
Wed Sep 10 15:22:28 EDT 2014

I wish to thank all who sent positive replies (most are offline) to my 
posting re listing of 20 species and failing condition of Florida coral 
reefs. Online Doug Fenner pointed out that NOAA is under dept. of 
Commerce. Thanks but I have known that ever since NOAA was created. I 
was trying to be subtle. I have a lot of friends at NOAA. I frequently 
point out that many researchers have long thought that an agency with 
regulatory authority that funds research related to that agencies 
mission constitutes a conflict of interest. In this case the agency's 
regulations greatly influence the kind of coral research they support. 
We geologists have been fortunate because geology and mapping has not 
been perceived to conflict with Keys commerce or agency management 
objectives. I remain indebted to NOAA for the funding we received in the 
past to do geology and mapping in the past. I suspect biologists have 
been less fortunate. Their proposals, especially those that highlight 
problems that do not underpin Keys tourism-based economy and agency 
objectives have not been supported. For example: effects of all mosquito 
pesticides on coral health, sewage, diver urination, and bleaching 
effects of sunscreens to name a few. Sewage has been perceived by many 
to harm corals but where are the classic straightforward bioassays to 
determine if there are harmful effects? How about sunscreens and the 
spraying of toxic pesticides to control mosquitos? (The draft recovery 
plan mentions only a single mosquito pesticide, Dibrom.) Clearly a ban 
on any one of these substances would have serious economic consequences. 
Yes, The Emperor has no Clothes.

Mussman apparently does not want anyone to know the "Emperor has no 
Clothes." However, he thinks there is hope for me because I mentioned 
climate change----- it might bring me around from the "dark side." Ummm 
I didn't know I was on the dark side! I thought science was all about 
truth. If the cause of coral demise really is climate change as the 
current bandwagon insists there is little hope for corals. It would 
require 50 to 100 years to significantly reduce concentrations in the 
environment if all  emissions were topped today. But don't worry; the 
target time for Acropora recovery in the draft recovery plan is 400 
years! You read that right! Listing corals is a very long-term solution. 
"The Recovery Team estimated that it will take approximately 400 years 
to achieve recovery based on the significant mitigative actions 
identified in this plan." Wow! That is encouraging! Elsewhere it says 
the purpose is to save the coral so it can be delisted!Tell me a lawyer 
didn't write that. Gene


No Rocks, No Water, No Ecosystem (EAS)
------------------------------------ -----------------------------------
E. A. Shinn, Courtesy Professor
University of South Florida
College of Marine Science Room 221A
140 Seventh Avenue South
St. Petersburg, FL 33701
<eugeneshinn at mail.usf.edu>
Tel 727 553-1158
---------------------------------- -----------------------------------

More information about the Coral-List mailing list