[Coral-List] NOAA plan to save coral reefs
Douglas Fenner
douglasfennertassi at gmail.com
Thu Dec 26 19:39:11 UTC 2019
Human population is indeed one of the ultimate drivers, but only
one. Another is economic prosperity, consumption, or money, whichever word
you prefer. And they generally multiply each other, so prosperity is an
important driver as well, and without that there would be few people in
Florida. Those large numbers of people going to Florida for tourism or to
live, driving or flying down, have a lot more disposable income than most
people did back when Gene was talking about. If they didn't, there
wouldn't be so many of them coming to Florida (tourism, after all, is
optional, not required for a person's survival, and tourism costs money,
can be quite a bit), and the people coming there to live wouldn't be doing
things like buying an incredible number of speed boats. I've never seen so
many in my life, the Keys are full of them, marinas, boat dealers, boat
storage facilities, boats in back yards, etc etc, all over the place, many
with big motors on them that aren't handed out free (ever checked what one
of those big motors costs, let alone 2 plus a boat? That's from disposable
income and lots of it, they aren't used for work or transportation to buy
groceries, only used for recreation, and those in storage aren't used daily
for at least part of the year).
The National Marine Sanctuary has a unit in American Samoa. American
Samoa has very few, essentially no tourists, not a single dive shop. I've
never gotten the feeling that the Sanctuary here see their mission as
increasing tourism here. If they did, they are wasting their time and
money, people from the states stop in Hawaii, people from Australia and New
Zealand go mainly to Fiji, and some to western Samoa, but not to American
Samoa. The planes here are mainly full of locals visiting relatives, with
a few business people and government people. Maybe the goals of the
National Marine Sanctuary in Florida are different from that in American
Samoa, but I seriously doubt it. Sure the reefs attract people to
Florida. Maybe dead ones would too. Sometimes I wonder if the divers can
tell the difference between live coral and algae, I remember people coming
up from a reef that had been decimated by Hurricane Gilbert in Cozumel, the
one reef with lots of damage (most of the others had light damage and
recovered quickly), and raving about how beautiful it was. It was almost
entirely algae, and there are some beautiful algae. But they didn't seem
to know the difference. So they may keep coming, coral or no coral (and it
is getting closer and closer to no coral all the time.) And in Florida,
there is a 2 day open recreational lobster season before the commercial
season. In 2 days, 50,000 divers take about 80-90% of the lobsters. They
aren't taking them because they have to have them or else they will starve,
it is recreational fishing, they do it for fun and for a tasty dinner (in
many cases would probably be cheaper just to buy a lobster). Crazy.
I would think that the goal of the Sanctuary in the Keys is to have
reefs in it in the future as close to what they originally were as
possible, and allow people to see and enjoy them. They are kind of like
National Parks, but marine. National Parks' main goals seem to be
preserving special places and allow people to see them. They are NOT
travel agencies or government tourism agencies, but people learn they have
fabulous places and they have become super popular. One item of discussion
at times is "are the national parks being loved to death?" That is NOT the
same thing as trying to increase tourism, though they do provide
information about how to visit and see the parks and have roads and
facilities that enable people to do that. They are for the benefit of the
people as well as preservation. In the USA there is another system called
"Wilderness preserves." Different set of rules, no motorized anything, for
instance. Their primary goal is preservation of nature as it was before
humans invaded, and there is less done to make it easy for humans to see
and enjoy. Tails, but no roads for instance.
There is a page about the US National Marine Sanctuaries' 5-year plan:
https://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/about/five-year-strategy-2017-2022.html
I've written the Goals for the plan below, I won't write out all the
"objectives" under each goal, take a look at the web page to see them.
Goal 1 is "Ensure thriving sanctuaries and other ocean parks."
Objective 1.1 is "Reduce threats to key species and marine habitats"
Objective 1.2 is "Protect significant maritime heritage resources"
Objective 1.3 is "Promote responsible human uses"
Objective 1.4 is "Promote resilience and adaptation"
Goal 2 is "Safeguard more underwater treasures as National Marine
Sanctuaries."
Goal 3 is "Increase support for sanctuaries" (none of the sub-sections of
this goal mention "money," that's not the kind of support they're talking
about.)
Goal 4 is "Deepen our understanding of sanctuaries."
Goal 5 is "Ensure that the office of National Marine Sanctuaries is a great
place to work."
Objective 1.1 is in line with "Saving coral reefs." Increasing tourism is
not listed anywhere in these goals. But if you want to think that
Objective 1.3 "Promote responsible human uses" has the effect of increasing
tourism (just as it does in National Parks), that would be one view of it,
though the objective itself is not just to increase tourism (National
Parks and Sanctuaries don't allow everything that could promote tourism,
like amusement parks, unlimited commercial building, selling anything and
everything, etc). Doing science is a human use, and hopefully usually
responsible, and it is supported by Sanctuaries and National parks, but is
not tourism.
Cheers, Doug
On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 11:44 AM Phillip Dustan via Coral-List <
coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> wrote:
> Hey All,
> As we begin about 50 years of coral reef conservation I offer the following
> to this august group:
> Insanity is described as doing the same thing over and over expecting a
> different result.
> We knew the drivers of coral reef destruction a long time ago, although it
> doesn't seem that long ago.
> Reefs are the messengers.
> We are the bad guys but no one wants to step up.
> No government has the political will.
> No government agencies can really make a difference until there is will -
> or emergency
> Human reproductive success is driving the destruction of our only
> biosphere.
> So work at local levels where you think you can make a difference.
> Attack the fundamental mechanisms ,not the diversions.
> Mother Nature will take care of the rest.........including us.
> Then maybe there will be Peace on Earth.
> P
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 1:42 AM Steve Mussman via Coral-List <
> coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> wrote:
>
> > Hi Steven,
> >
> > I just don’t understand why the effort in Florida doesn’t have the
> > following essential aspects of restoration front and center.
> >
> > From : Rodgers et al. (2017), Effectiveness of coral relocation as a
> > mitigation strategy in
> > Ka ̄ne‘ohe Bay, Hawai‘i.
> >
> > “Coral restoration projects are better designed and implemented today
> than
> > decades ago, but they may take the focus off the underlying problems. We
> > need to reduce pollution, prevent erosion, and reduce carbon emissions.
> > Restoration efforts on reefs vulnerable to poor land management,
> pollution,
> > and/or continued severe bleaching may render restoration efforts futile”.
> >
> > “Effective translocation and management plans should include reduction or
> > elimination of watershed stressors, establishment of marine reserves,
> > development of integrated coastal management systems, and establishment
> and
> > enforcement of regulations that protect coral reefs”.
> >
> >
> > The idea that addressing major stressors is paramount to the long-term
> > success of any such project appears to be based on sound science.
> > Conversely, any large-scale project that does not put emphasis on the
> > underlying problems is setting itself up for criticism to say nothing of
> > increasing the odds of ultimate failure. Restoration is not inherently
> > folly in any sense, but if it by design takes the focus off major
> stressors
> > E.g. water quality and climate change, then it’s setting itself up for an
> > inauspicious ending.
> >
> > There are reasons to support well-conceived restoration projects, but
> they
> > should be framed as a tool, not a solution. If the hype surrounding these
> > efforts even unintentionally delays action on addressing the major
> > stressors one could certainly argue that they may be doing more harm
> than
> > good.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Steve Mussman
> >
> >
> > Sent from my iPad
> >
> > > On Dec 20, 2019, at 5:50 PM, Steven Miller via Coral-List <
> > coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> wrote:
> > >
> > > A quick reply to counter the idea that restoration is folly, even
> though
> > > I'm a co-author on an older restoration paper with folly in the title.
> I
> > > changed my mind. I wonder how many people on the list have changed
> their
> > > minds, moving from one camp to another, or abandoned belief in a
> paradigm
> > > for something that they thought was better? That would be an
> interesting
> > > thread, but I digress.
> > >
> > > Why should anyone support coral restoration when all the stressors
> remain
> > > that got us to where we are now, and related to warming are only
> getting
> > > worse?
> > >
> > > Simply, 1) Large numbers (tens of thousands) of corals in offshore
> > > nurseries (mid Hawk Channel in Florida) grow fast and are generally in
> > good
> > > shape after a year or two. 2) Corals in nurseries were derived from
> > > survivors. That is, from wild corals that survived multiple bleaching
> and
> > > disease events. 3) Nursery corals also represent a genetically diverse
> > > population, based on individuals collected across significant spatial
> > > scales and genetic analyses that confirm the diversity of corals in
> > > nurseries capture a significant portion of variability that exists in
> the
> > > wild. 5) Large numbers of nursery-raised corals can be outplanted to
> > reefs
> > > and despite high mortality after 5-10 years, some corals survive.
> > >
> > > So, a result of restoration work (not projects but large-scale
> programs)
> > > that can be sustained at the decadal scale is lots of corals
> (potentially
> > > thousands) on reefs where they were previously absent. Local ecological
> > > extinction is prevented. Even better, outplanted corals have sex and
> > while
> > > the fate of their gametes is unknown, as more adults survive on the
> reef,
> > > perhaps recruitment will eventually result.
> > >
> > > But challenges remain, such as how to get more corals out to reefs in a
> > > cost-efficient manner. Some species present unique challenges, I know.
> > > And more.
> > >
> > > The above summary is based on work from Florida, which perhaps
> represents
> > > the most challenging place to try and conduct this work. After all,
> > > historical baselines suggest that the best reefs were limited to only a
> > > small percentage of total available habitat, due to things like outflow
> > > from Florida Bay and the northern geographic limit of reef growth in
> the
> > > region being just south of Miami.
> > >
> > > My intent with this post is to suggest that there are reasons to
> support
> > > restoration despite the criticism of why do it in the face of existing
> > > stressors. If you don't think it will work, then, by all means,
> > critiques
> > > are warranted that advance the science. But understand that successes
> > have
> > > already occurred that suggest those who are working on restoration are
> > not
> > > doing so in folly.
> > >
> > > Finally, coral restoration science is in its infancy. In my opinion,
> > it's
> > > way too early to give up.
> > >
> > > Best Regards
> > >
> > > Steven Miller. PhD
> > > Halmos College of Natural Sciences and Oceanography
> > > Nova Southeastern University
> > >
> > > On Fri, Dec 20, 2019 at 4:45 PM Risk, Michael via Coral-List <
> > > coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> wrote:
> > >
> > >> The entire article doesn't even mention LBSP. It's as though Brian
> > >> Lapointe's work had been airbrushed away...we never learn, do we?
> > >> ________________________________________
> > >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Coral-List mailing list
> > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > https://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> Phillip Dustan PhD
> Charleston SC 29424
> 843-953-8086 office
> 843-224-3321 (mobile)
>
> "When we try to pick out anything by itself
> we find that it is bound fast by a thousand invisible cords
> that cannot be broken, to everything in the universe. "
> * John Muir 1869*
>
> *Bali Coral Bleaching 2016 video*
>
> *https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxOfLTnPSUo
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yxOfLTnPSUo>*
> TEDx Charleston on saving coral reefs
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwENBNrfKj4
> Google Scholar Citations:
> https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=HCwfXZ0AAAAJ
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> https://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
--
Douglas Fenner
Lynker Technologies, LLC, Contractor
NOAA Fisheries Service
Pacific Islands Regional Office
Honolulu
and:
Consultant
PO Box 7390
Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799 USA
Even 50-year old climate models correctly predicted global warmng
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/12/even-50-year-old-climate-models-correctly-predicted-global-warming?utm_campaign=news_weekly_2019-12-06&et_rid=17045989&et_cid=3113276
Greenhouse gas emissions to set new record this year, but rate of growth
shrinks
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/12/greenhouse-gas-emissions-year-set-new-record-rate-growth-shrinks?utm_campaign=news_weekly_2019-12-06&et_rid=17045989&et_cid=3113276
"Global warming is manifestly the foremost current threat to coral reefs,
and must be addressed by the global community if reefs as we know them will
have any chance to persist." Williams et al, 2019, Frontiers in Marine
Science
More information about the Coral-List
mailing list