New Deep Reef Found in Gulf

[Corigan]

Pretty Cool article here: http://www.whotv.com/Global/story.asp?S=2754709

Not sure of it's validity but that would be pretty cool.

Matt

 

[archman]

Yeah its true... actually we've known about these "deep reefs" for years. I guess someone decided to raise some hooplah about it, perhaps to get some legislative focus on protective efforts. Of course now that the news is mainstreamed, heaps of recreational fishing charters will head out and try to overfish the things.

Funny how the double-edged sword of media attention works.

 

[SuPrBuGmAn]

I heard a story on it this morning on the news, they are gonna try to keep it "pristine". I'm assuming they mean in its current state. I like seeing news on these kinds of things opposed to the normal garb to be honest.

 

[RonFrank]

From a news source:

"It was tentatively identified as a coral reef in 1999 by a team of marine scientists from the University of South Florida, aboard the research vessel Bellows, based in St. Petersburg. But it took several more years of research to confirm it as a living reef that depends on light filtering down from the surface."

"Although reefs form in the darkest ocean depths, Pulley Ridge is the deepest yet found that is ''photosynthetic,'' depending on light filtered through clear water from the surface."

From another:

"In 1999, a team of USF researchers left St. Petersburg on the R/V Bellows...

The researchers hurled a steel bucket attached to a chain to get a sample of the ocean floor and watched it sink 200 feet. They dragged it for a bit and then hoisted it back to the deck.

The contents stunned them: Bright purple coral shaped like dinner plates were tangled in a bouquet of green, leafy algae.

"What the heck is this?" said researcher Bret Jarrett.

It would take four years, hundreds of thousands of dollars in research grants and six more trips to the area before they determined what they had discovered"

My thoughts...

Corals are found in 1400' Depths and beyond... nothing new there.

What seems to make this unique is that it's a photosynthetic Reef, not just Deep.

So it's NOW time to HOOPLAH! They have finished ENOUGHT of their studies to makee some determinations that were JUST released. Undersea study is NOT something that is like, hey, look what we found, now we have the answers...

Ron

Yeah its true... actually we've known about these "deep reefs" for years. I guess someone decided to raise some hooplah about it, perhaps to get some legislative focus on protective efforts. Of course now that the news is mainstreamed, heaps of recreational fishing charters will head out and try to overfish the things.

Funny how the double-edged sword of media attention works.

 

[archman]

So it's NOW time to HOOPLAH! They have finished ENOUGHT of their studies to makee some determinations that were JUST released. Undersea study is NOT something that is like, hey, look what we found, now we have the answers...
Ron

Er yes, it is. I happen to be such a researcher. I have all sorts of fascinating data and analyses sitting on my computer, that I haven't bothered to publish because I'm busy doing other stuff. So do many other scientists. We tend to sit on our results for years sometimes, for reasons that have little to nothing to do with reporting accuracy.

I've personally known Sherwood Forest to be a Deep Hermatypic Reef for over two years now, because the scientists studying it told me so. It's not a particularly difficult study task either. All you have to do is identify the coral species, and check for a "critical mass" of zooxanthellae. Heck, just the presence of zooxanthellae might be good enough. You could ascertain that just be eyeballing the corals... hermatypic scleractinians derive all their colour from their algal symbionts.

Don't get me wrong. It's nice that the public knows about this stuff, so long as certain "newly educated" individuals don't go out and pillage the area. Stuff like that drives me absolutely batty; I've seen it happen time and again.

 

[drbill]

Yes, as a scientist I agree with Archman. There were a number of discoveries of rare species or genetic types that we have kept quiet around Catalina so some moron won't go out and kill the last one. Precise locations are not given, or the location is simply referred to as Catalina Island (76 sq mi and 54 miles of coastline should keep it hidden!).

Lots of data and findings in my computer yet to be written up... I'm having too much fun diving and taking/editing video!

Dr. Bill

 

[Mo2vation]

I heard this story on the radio the other morning as I was driving to the landing to go dive Catalina. I had to chuckle at the newscopy. Here is how it went:

"Scientists are pleased to report the discovery of the deepest reef yet discovered off the Florida Coast. The new reef rests at approximately 250 feet. The next step, Scientists say, is to preserve this new reef...."

I look at my wife and we just laughed. OK. A new reef, which obviously has been there for a zillion years, has just been discovered.

At 250 feet.

So we go immediately from the thrill of discovery to the chill of preservation

Preservation of something that nobody knew was even there for a zillion years.

Would anyone miss something we didn't know was even there for a zillion years? Something nobody can see?

I mean - we went on and on... it was a fun drive and just silly news copy. Thanks for posting the story.

---
Ken

 

[archman]

I look at my wife and we just laughed. OK. A new reef, which obviously has been there for a zillion years, has just been discovered.
At 250 feet.
So we go immediately from the thrill of discovery to the chill of preservation.
Preservation of something that nobody knew was even there for a zillion years.
Would anyone miss something we didn't know was even there for a zillion years? Something nobody can see?

I am pleased the news had an amusing subcontext to it. But let me discuss the points in a serious manner.

People were unaware of this reef until recently, therefore our "discovery" of it falls under the definition of the word. That's what discovery entails, finding out something that was previously unknown.
As for the preservation aspects, that's probably a major reason the news was leaked in the first place. Its a lot easier to pass conservation-based legislation, when there's public support for it. It would not surprise me if the relevant proposals were already drafted and ready for submission.
I don't know how much this gets mainstreamed into the news, but right now, protection of pristine habitats is a major focus of many governmental agencies. Because quite frankly, we're getting a shortage of them. The threat to this particular habitat would be trawlers and fishing vessels. Even if they didn't know about it before, they certainly are aware now. There's probably deep-sea fishing boats out there already.

Being a deepwater ecologist, my study areas are likely never to be seen by human eyes, except at fleeting, once-in-a-lifetime opportunities. Does that make these areas unimportant for conservation purposes?

The entire purpose of exploration hinges upon discovery... scuba divers take this concept well to heart. If we didn't explore, we wouldn't know about our environment. Think how boring that would be... no National Geographic or Discovery Channel. No scuba diving either.