[Coral-List] what does this new analysis tell us???
Austin Bowden-Kerby
abowdenkerby at gmail.com
Wed Feb 9 15:44:36 UTC 2022
Thanks for that report Ivan, and the courage to express these thoughts,
which really are essential for the coral reef community to discuss.
I too work on some pretty amazing coral reefs in Fiji and in other
countries like Tuvalu, in the less impacted areas of the region. If we
focus on what we have left it looks like people are crying wolf for no
reason. This takes me back to my Titanic analogy, with its carved woodwork
and artistic décor, completely intact in all its glory, when the captain
found out it was heading for total destruction. The cleaning staff might
have continued to sweep and to mop, busy at their jobs.... failing to look
up at the horizon and to see the looming iceberg. Have you too concluded
that based on the present clean and sparkling condition of your own
workstation, that the iceberg is a mirage? Am I just disturbing the peace
with my doom and gloom predictions?
What makes me a lot more jaded is that I worked with corals in the
Caribbean for a decade, and I have also seen the impact of long term and
recurrent mass bleaching in Kiribati, and the mass extinction of corals
that have no up-current larval source for recovery. I have looked the
enemy in the eye, and this is why I believe in the narrative. Yes, the GBR
has in many or most places has rebounded since the die-offs of 2015-16, the
GBR is certainly not half dead!
My own understanding from the Caribbean and Line Islands, is that once
coral reproduction is knocked out, then the real problems begin. The
wonderful recovery of the GBR initially had a glitch that might become
pervasive and that everyone should be aware of: reports show that the year
after the mass coral bleaching, that coral spawning was weak or non
existent, and so larval formation was greatly suppressed. Fortunately by
2018, successful coral reproduction restarted, and recovery is now in many
areas rampantly abundant. But what will happen when bleaching becomes a
regular summer occurrence? Apparently this is what the models show. At
that point, larval formation will fail and there will not be enough lag
time between heat waves for recovery process to operate. Coral cover will
then drop drastically and natural recovery will stop or be greatly
delayed... our entire reality as coral reef scientists will change. Will
those of us who are still living at that point in just 20-30 years lament
about what we might have done to save the reefs - preserve the locally
extinct coral species that once dominated the reefs? If only we had
relocated more of the heat resistant corals from the hottest parts of the
reef to the cooler parts of the reef! At that point, the Coral Ark might
be our best hope, but only if it includes the most bleaching resistant
lineages. Or perhaps selective breeding of corals will have made real
progress and will lessen the collapse?
Statistics are being used to downplay the seriousness of the problem- for
example, we celebrate a reduction in the rate of increase in CO2,
forgetting that the carbon released in 2021 was more than any year in
history, and that 2022 will beat that, and 2023 will beat that and so
forth- the positive sounding stats hide the fact that the total amount
released grows year by year, but the annual rate of that increase is
getting a bit smaller. First we must stabilize what is produced, then we
can reduce it- but even that is not happening!
So even if you are correct that global scale data of the past 7 years does
not see an increase in average global temperatures, if it were true, all
that would represent is a plateau in the trajectory. Using it to say that
the planet is not warming disregards the fact that that the waters are
already unprecedently warm.
In summary, we can not base the future on the present, when the climate
change modelling data, backed up by the increased incidence of mass coral
bleaching, indicates that coral reefs will mostly be gone within 30 years
(again if we move it to 50 or 100 years it does not matter to the ultimate
outcome). If the ranks of coral reef scientists do not believe in
the narrative, of course we can not wage any war at all. The pacifists
initially said that we could co-exist in a world with Hitler, but then it
got a whole lot worse. If he had succeeded in his conquest, human diversity
and entire whole racial groups would now be gone.
Your letter represents dissention in the ranks, but thanks for having the
courage to let us know your reasoning, as it helps me and others understand
what we are up against. I agree that the media narrative is often
exaggerated, and I agree that amazing and diverse reefs still thrive in
many places. The beauty can be intoxicating! If that is your reality and
how you remain focused and sane, then
DON'T LOOK UP!
Austin
Austin Bowden-Kerby, PhD
Corals for Conservation
P.O. Box 4649 Samabula, Fiji Islands
https://www.corals4conservation.org
TEDx talk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PRLJ8zDm0U
https://www.globalgiving.org/projects/emergency-response-to-massive-coral-bleaching/
<https://www.globalgiving.org/projects/emergency-response-to-massive-coral-bleaching/>
=
On Thu, Feb 10, 2022 at 1:58 AM Ivan via Coral-List <
coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> wrote:
> Hi Doug/All,
>
> Good post and very thought provoking points. Interesting perspectives.
>
> I'm going to quickly and anecdotally support Doug here regarding
> observations in the Indo-Pacific. Call it cherry picking if you like, but
> until we can all systematically, accurately and repeatedly monitor across
> the entire globe, with as close to replicate efforts spatially and
> regarding methods as possible (the replication problem in science having
> been well recognized), we still have something of a puzzle in front of us.
> It's good to see improvement with standardized efforts over time.
>
> Firstly, you're probably all far more qualified and experienced to comment
> than me. It is what it is. I'm not looking to make sweeping determinations
> one way or the other. I leave that folly to politicians.
>
> I'm just sharing my recent observations.
>
> I've been doing monitoring work, mainly in PNG, for about 15 years. I go
> where projects send me. That's all. No big systematic and well funded
> government or academic research programs across endless stretches of coast.
> I dive or tow cameras, review footage, make observations and assessments
> and try to pick out trends. In PNG I have monitored at one location not far
> from Port Moresby for 10 years. Also surveyed at Madang, around the Morobe
> Coast near Lae, Woodlark, Lihir and Manus Islands and Milne Bay.
>
> Most recently, in November 2021 I conducted monitoring around Misima
> Island, way off the PNG east coast mainland in the Solomon Sea. Has anyone
> else been there and done survey work?
>
> What I observed from 14 transects (between 100 and 200m length) along the
> southern, northern and eastern coasts (if you'd like I can share the
> videos) was that with the exception of fairly localized areas in the
> south the reefs are, frankly, in pretty wonderful shape. Water temps around
> 2 m depth ranged from 28.7 to 29.7 C. pH ranged from 8.16 to 8.26. Pretty
> standard stuff for that region. The water was not bubbling, steaming or
> caustic, miraculously.
>
> In the south, and only near freshwater outflows that have been affected by
> amplified sedimentation from alluvial mining upstream, the reefs have been
> demonstrably hammered. It's not the whole coast though, e.g. in one spot
> where there's obvious damage, less than 100 m away the reefs look 'pretty
> normal'. So, damage is localized and has obvious causation.
>
> Otherwise, there's no widespread bleaching or major disease in sight, or
> recent evidence of same (no extensive rubble beyond what is 'normal',
> fragments of recent dead skeletons, macroalgal dominance etc). No evidence
> of COTS.
>
> Large, multispecific stands of reef are present all around the island. The
> reefs are relatively restricted in extent offshore due to steep slopes and
> deep waters, but what's present looks very healthy, for all intents and
> purposes. If you took the biased transect survey approach and focused on
> 'good reef' as Doug calls it, you're looking at upward of 50-60% cover
> across the board. Some very large and well established colonies of Acropora
> muricata are present.
>
> Usefully, monitoring from both 30 and 20 years ago indicated a similar
> story, though there's no photos to compare against, just written reports.
> Importantly, the old monitoring noted the presence of Halimeda back then,
> and it's still there as a feature of the ecosystem, but doesn't appear to
> have taken over at all. The turtles eat it, as they have always done. I
> also found extensive tracts of contiguous reef in places where Allen's
> Coral Atlas indicates it to be absent.
>
> There's some evidence of overfishing of reef fish (related to human
> population pressure) but the reef structure and live coral cover do not
> match a narrative of 'systemic mass destruction' or even 'gradual ongoing
> decline'.
>
> I'd hazard a guess that much of the Louisiade Archipelago looks about the
> same as I can think of no reason why Misima is a special case in terms of
> broader regional oceanographic processes that may render it immune from
> large scale changes. Louisiade is a large area without that much pressure
> on the reefs (compared to those areas proximate to industry and lots of
> people etc.), aside from what happens on land, and the locals dropping
> fishing lines over the edge of dugout canoes.
>
> And to open myself up to mass vitriol no doubt...on the climate
> issue...hasn't the 'official data' shown no net warming over the last 7
> years now? Call me a glass half fuller, but I prefer that signal over
> models and doomsday prophets that have been, to be honest, wrong more often
> than not.
>
> The above examples seem like a disconnect between what media reports are
> telling us and observed reality (again, fully recognising that I have not
> been everywhere, but for context I have also dived in Madagascar, Belize,
> Fiji, American Samoa, Mexico, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar,
> Thailand and Egypt). The recent GBR situation also fits in the 'disconnect'
> basket to my mind. It's simply not 'dead' as it was all but proclaimed to
> be, and that's a good thing.
>
> I'm not looking to downplay the clearly depressing decline that has occured
> where it has, particularly the Caribbean. As we know, much of the decline
> is due to direct mechanical damage by irresponsible behaviors (of which
> there are many that folks here don't need to be reminded of too much, from
> coral mining to stupid anchoring to poor diving technique to cyanide and
> dynamite to destructive fishing practices etc. etc.), combined with the
> downstream effects of catchment-level decisions and poor coastal zone
> management i.e., direct pollution, sedimentation/nitrification etc. You
> know, 'the usual stuff' leading to death by a thousand cuts. Stuff that
> seems simple in an ideal world, particularly to us, to avoid. Add natural
> processes/variability to that as well (being things that reefs have dealt
> with for aeons). My point being that in the absence of these things, at the
> local scale especially, reefs grow and change in ways and for reasons we
> still don't fully understand. Dynamic equilibrium and all.
>
> Please don't yell at me or label me a climate denier or any such
> thought-limiting pejorative. Call me a heathen if you must, but as I said,
> just sharing recent personal observations. Evidently we all have our own
> examples one way or the other. I'm simply stating that in my patch of the
> waterworld, the reefs of PNG, where I've been, and where people haven't
> made an obvious mess, seem to be doing okay.
>
> Best,
> Ivan
>
>
>
> On Wednesday, February 9, 2022, Douglas Fenner via Coral-List <
> coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> wrote:
>
> > Yes, but both of these studies are based on the quantitative
> > results of 10's of thousands of reef monitoring or surveying sites. The
> > people who did those studies did NOT make that data up. That's one thing
> > for sure. The data was real. And we can choose to ignore it if it
> doesn't
> > fit with our life experiences, or we can try to deal with it. I think we
> > need to try to deal with it.
> > One of the things I've thought of sometimes when Gene is telling us
> > about Florida reefs, is that although I have absolutely NO doubt he's
> > telling us the truth, and it is good to be reminded, Florida is not the
> > world, and the reefs there, if anything, in their construction, are
> unusual
> > for coral reefs around the world. They're not like an atoll (the world
> has
> > about 400 atolls), the living parts are usually called the "Florida Reef
> > Tract" presumably in part because they don't look like a lot of other
> > reefs. As far as I know, the areas that have living coral are tiny patch
> > reefs.
> > The Caribbean has been the site of probably more research per sq
> km
> > of reef than most anywhere else in the world. The western Atlantic has a
> > set of species that is virtually unique in the world, very few fish
> species
> > and no known native reef coral species are in common with the
> > Indo-Pacific. And now it turns out, it may not be representative of the
> > rest of the reefs of the world.
> > Notice that all your memories but one that you quote are from the
> western
> > Atlantic, the Caribbean and Florida. Remember Mike Risk pointing to the
> > paper from Indonesia which reported on a lava flow, which incinerated
> > anything alive it hit and produced a whole new surface. If I remember,
> > within 6 years, it had a thriving coral reef ecosystem with lots of coral
> > cover. I've read people writing that the Coral Triangle is going down
> hill
> > steeply. That doesn't fit with my experience in the Philippines at about
> > 200 dive sites. Granted, I've always thought that people there showed me
> > the best sites, I do not claim they were randomly chosen or
> > representative. And I haven't been back for about 15 years or so. But
> > those sites showed no signs of the degradation that is apparent virtually
> > everywhere in the Caribbean (Cozumel, Mexico, one of my old haunts, has
> > probably degraded less than most in the Caribbean, Tom Goreau tells me it
> > has lost some coral cover which has largely been replaced with sponge).
> In
> > the Philippines, one place I saw early on, there was nothing but dead
> coral
> > rubble. I asked the resort dive people and they said a typhoon destroyed
> > it. I came back 11 years later, and couldn't find it, until I realized
> > that the mass of near 100% glorious, diverse, coral cover in front of my
> > nose was it. It had completely recovered. The AIMS monitoring results
> > show the same effect, on a vastly greater scale, and quantitatively.
> > Please look at those graphs, and see the radical loss of coral cover that
> > had all of us scared to death. And notice that the coral cover
> completely
> > recovered. That is completely unlike any location in the Caribbean.
> > Discovery Bay, Jamaica, over 40 years after it lost its coral cover,
> still
> > hasn't recovered.
> > A review by Roff and Mumby put their finger on it. The western
> > Atlantic has far less resilience than the Indo-Pacific. Reference below.
> > They try to figure out why, and the why may still be an open question.
> But
> > the evidence is that the Caribbean and Florida have not recovered, yet in
> > the Indo-Pacific, often reefs do recover. And there have always been
> > plenty of natural disturbances, the clearest example being cyclones,
> > typhoons and hurricanes (basically the same thing except which way they
> > rotate differs north and south of the equator). These cyclonic storms
> have
> > been happening for time immemorial, surely much longer than coral reefs
> > have existed, probably at least a couple billion years. They can
> > completely flatten coral reefs, and they do that some reefs somewhere
> every
> > year. Yet coral reefs are still here. How can that be?? Coral reefs
> can
> > recover from them. Coral reefs are dynamic instead of static, they are
> > continually in recovery from one thing or another. But most natural
> > disturbances are brief and allow time for recovery, human disturbance,
> like
> > sedimentation, nutrients, overfishing, are continuous, no time for
> > recovery. Caribbean reefs have lost that ability to recover,
> Indo-Pacific
> > reefs have largely not. My impression is that some reefs in the Indian
> > Ocean have recovered from the 1998 El Nino mass bleaching, but others
> have
> > not. So it isn't universal. But the new graphs of world coral cover
> tell
> > us that lots of reefs have been able to recover enough that world coral
> > cover has been roughly steady at about 30% for decades. Surprising, yes.
> > Live and learn.
> > The world in some ways is now a small place, humans are now well
> into
> > the process of destroying SO much of it, not only on land but in the
> oceans
> > and even the atmosphere. That is undeniable. But this new evidence may
> > (may) indicate less corals have been lost that we often think. What the
> > original coral cover was like, IMHO (in my humble opinion) is not really
> > well established, there was far too few early studies. Fact is, if you
> go
> > diving and collect data, you can only cover a tiny area. There are loads
> > of reefs in the oceans out there that have received little or no
> research,
> > and almost all of those are in the Indo-Pacific, because it is gigantic,
> > even though coral reefs are a tiny proportion of the world oceans. No
> one
> > person has seen a majority of the world's coral reefs, and only a few
> have
> > seen a large number of them, my guess is people like Jack Randall and
> > Charlie Veron may have seen the most, I'm certainly not among them,
> though
> > I've seen some. So the rest of us have necessarily seen a very
> > unrepresentative sample of the world's coral reefs.
> > More powerful that the graphs of the world's coral reefs I think,
> > are the AIMS monitoring records of the Great Barrier Reef, itself not a
> > small place. And those records clearly show that huge loss of cover
> > followed by its recovery. It does not document any changes or stability
> in
> > community composition, no one claims that. But it shows that the reports
> > of the GBR being half dead, are from a past snapshot in time, and no
> longer
> > true. It has come back, Phoenix-like, from half dead (not by individual
> > corals coming back to life but the birth and growth of new individual
> > corals). That is the reality, I don't know anyone who disputes it.
> Nobody
> > has better data on the course over time of the corals on the GBR, as far
> as
> > I know, and it is plain for all to see.
> > That appears to be the reality, and I think we need to reflect
> > that. Which means we need to do a better job of making what we say
> reflect
> > reality. I think. Yes it is disconcerting to have our world view
> > challenged. So goes science and life. Mountains of data challenge the
> > views of those who said there was no global warming. Mountains of data
> > challenge the views of those who say there is no evolution, that God made
> > earth and the life on it exactly as it is today. Mountains of data
> > challenge the view the earth is flat. Maybe, just maybe, one of our more
> > cherished views, will need revision. The Great Barrier Reef and the
> > Indo-Pacific corals are not dead.
> > What happens in the future to coral reefs is quite disconnected
> to
> > what has already happened. But the Caribbean and Florida are surely a
> > window into what the future for the rest of the world's reefs are going
> to
> > experience in the next 20-30 years, by all accounts. The fact that not
> all
> > the reefs are already dead does not prove that corals will be just fine
> in
> > the future. And all the many observations and measurements documenting
> the
> > demise of reefs are real. Though some like those on the Great Barrier
> > Reef, may turn out to be followed by at least temporary recovery. Our
> > problem is that the places we have personally seen, and the places we
> have
> > studied most, are not either representative or a random sample of the
> > world's reefs, and so the very real info we have about the decline of
> > individual reefs is not totally representative of the world's reefs. The
> > data from the GBR appears to me to prove that, the world data now
> suggests
> > it.
> > So we live and learn. Cheers, Doug
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 7:04 AM Phillip Dustan via Coral-List <
> > coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> wrote:
> >
> > > Dear Listers,
> > > Coral monitoring began using transects that we first used to
> > understand
> > > the distribution of corals on reefs. Scientists found that corals grow
> in
> > > patches dictated by the prevailing environmental conditions. These
> > patches
> > > were frequently expressed as long bands or groves dominated by a few
> > > species that ran parallel to the shoreline or perpendicular to the
> > > prevailing seas. Tom Goreau's Ecology of West Indian Coral Reefs 1:
> > > Species Composition and Zonation as well as Pacific accounts by the
> > likes
> > > of John Wells and others pointed this out beautifully. Coral cover in
> > some
> > > zones was, and still may be, very high approaching 100% but it depends
> on
> > > the methodology. Does one count the intercolony spaces between Acropora
> > > palmata branches or foliose Agaricia plates? This was the great debate
> > of
> > > the 1970-80's, "How best to measure coral cover"- lines, points,
> chains,
> > > photos, quadrats,........the quest was on for the ultimate measure.
> > Some
> > > of us revisited out old study sites to look for change out of
> curiosity.
> > > Then, reefs began to die and coral monitoring became the mantra-
> Monitor
> > > reefs for conservation. Reef monitoring EXPLODED! In some places it
> > > became institutionalized. Fixed vs "random" sampling was the new
> dilemma;
> > > How many transects, photos, points- the search was on again for the
> > > "ultimate" measure.
> > > All the while reefs were winking out episodically. A rash of disease,
> > or
> > > mass bleaching event would strike and coral cover would drop
> accordingly.
> > > Corals would regrow is the interval between acute stress was long
> enough.
> > > All the while though, oter factors continued to "eat away" are live
> > corals.
> > > In places where I have remeasured the same reef, I have witnessed
> losses
> > of
> > > over 90% in the Florida Keys where the zones were richly covered. On
> > > Dancing Lady Reef in Discovery Bay, Jamaica, the cover of Orbicella
> spp
> > on
> > > the fore reef slope dropped from over 50% to less than 10 and from +25%
> > to
> > > near 0% on the fore reef terrace (
> > > https://biospherefoundation.org/project/coral-reef-change/). This was
> > just
> > > a single species and the reef was heavily covered with other species.
> My
> > > studies in NW Bali, Indonesia revealed a 44% loss from a single
> bleaching
> > > event as measured with repeat transects. The Bahamas yielded similar
> > > results due to bleaching combined with hurricanes. OVerall, the Florida
> > > Keys has lost over 38% cover since 1996 using repeated marked video
> > > transects.. My point is that these studies are all with repeated
> measure
> > > methods and they all reveal the same ecological slide into loss of
> > > ecological integrity. Detecting change is not the same as tabulating
> > coral
> > > cover.
> > > A number of years ago I asked Listers if there were any healthy
> > reefs
> > > in the Caribbean. It generated a raft of replies, but none positive.
> > Maybe
> > > a few were missed and there are whole expeditions roaming the seas
> > looking
> > > for healthy reefs now so they can be "protected". And liveaboard dive
> > boats
> > > roam ply the tropics promising pristine adventures on ever increasingly
> > > more remote reefs (which are running out). Coral reefs are tough.
> They
> > > used to be hard to kill by natural means, but humans are a different
> > story.
> > > Until we deal with how humanity integrates itself into the Biosphere,
> no
> > > reef or any other natural habitat for that matter, will be safe from
> > > humanity's global reach of destruction.
> > > We may be making a few tenuous steps in the right direction but you
> just
> > > can't put a happy face on any of this......
> > > Phil
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 7:00 PM Eugene Shinn via Coral-List <
> > > coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I agree with Alina Szmant's comments. I began diving in the Florida
> > Keys
> > > > in the 1950s. Also visited many Caribbean reefs in the 1980s and
> 1990s.
> > > > All I saw was reefs going down hill after 1983 including those at San
> > > > Salvador which is located well east of the Main Bahama banks reefs.
> See
> > > > a portion of the dying Florida reefs
> > > > here:<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnIzLTi0HGs
> > > > <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnIzLTi0HGs>> Eugene Shinn
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > 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*
> > >
> > > *A Swim Through TIme on Carysfort Reef*
> > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCPJE7UE6sA
> > > *Raja Ampat Sustainability Project video*
> > >
> > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RR2SazW_VY&fbclid=
> > IwAR09oZkEk8wQkK6LN3XzVGPgAWSujACyUfe2Ist__nYxRRSkDE_jAYqkJ7A
> > > *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
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Coral-List mailing list
> > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > https://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> https://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>
More information about the Coral-List
mailing list