we seem to be running out of coral reefs...

Please register or login

Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.

Benefits of registering include

  • Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
  • A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
  • You can make this box go away

Joining is quick and easy. Log in or Register now!

archman

ScubaBoard Supporter
ScubaBoard Supporter
Scuba Instructor
Divemaster
Messages
5,061
Reaction score
137
Location
Florida
# of dives
200 - 499
Hot off from CNN:
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Only about 30 percent of the world's coral reefs are healthy, down from 41 percent two years ago, according to a study released Monday that lists global warming as the top threat.

The study found as many as one-fifth of the world's coral reefs have been destroyed. Another half are damaged but could be saved, it said.

Coral reefs are among the oldest and most diverse forms of life. They provide food and shelter to fish and protect shores from erosion.

While covering less than 1 percent of the earth's surface, they help drive the food chains and economies of many on the planet, with $375 billion in economic benefits globally, according to the study by 240 scientists in 96 countries.

After global warming -- blamed for higher water temperatures and carbon dioxide concentrations -- threats to the reefs include coral disease, overfishing, coastal development and pollution runoff from land-based sources.

"Reefs need our help, but they're not going to go extinct," said Clive Wilkinson, the study's lead author and coordinator of the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network. Still, he said, it's crucial to "raise the level of political will" to help reefs around the world.

"We know they're degrading fast, we know what the problems are, we know how to fix them," Wilkinson said at news conference by the Swiss-based World Worldlife Fund. "We've just got to do it."

Destruction or threats to 70 percent of the coral reefs represent a sharp rise from 59 percent in the last study in 2002.

About 65 percent of the Persian Gulf's reefs have been destroyed, the report said. Next in terms of damage are reefs off South and Southeast Asia, where 45 percent and 38 percent, respectively, have been destroyed.

Retired Navy Vice Admiral Conrad Lautenbacher, a Commerce Department undersecretary who heads the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, called reefs a global issue.

"It is not just a nice thing from an environmental perspective," Lautenbacher said. "It is essential to life on earth."

John Turner, assistant secretary of state for oceans and international environmental and scientific affairs, called the report "a wake-up call" and said it would be circulated to U.S. diplomats overseas.

A more positive development is the recovery of about two-fifths of the reefs seriously damaged by an unprecedented coral "bleaching" from unusually warm waters in 1998. About 16 percent of global reefs had been damaged by the bleaching.

Most of the reefs that have recovered are in the Indian Ocean, are part of the Great Barrier Reef off Australia's coast or are in the western Pacific, particularly around Palau. Australia this year put as much as a third of both its Great Barrier Reef and Ningaloo Reef marine park off limits to fishing.

The Caribbean has lost 80 to 98 percent of its elkhorn and staghorn coral, two of the region's most common species, the scientists said, suggesting the United States should look at listing them as endangered species. A petition from an environmental group, the Center for Biological Diversity, to do that is being considered by the Bush administration.

The administration's efforts so far to protect coral reefs include improving monitoring and satellite surveillance, agreeing to Geneva-based treaty restrictions on international trade in coral reefs and passing out $10 million in grants, Lautenbacher said.

The administration is also considering creating a national marine sanctuary and banning commercial fishing in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands to protect the chain's delicate reefs. A decision is expected by the end of 2005, Lautenbacher said.

I was wondering why its so dang hard for me to find branching corals in the Caribbean lately... didn't realize it was THIS bad.

Sounds like if you want to see coral reefs, you'd better book your trips sooner than later. And try not to bang into it!
 
archman:
Hot off from CNN:


I was wondering why its so dang hard for me to find branching corals in the Caribbean lately... didn't realize it was THIS bad.

Sounds like if you want to see coral reefs, you'd better book your trips sooner than later. And try not to bang into it!
With degradation occuring that rapidly, how could migration of reefs be tracked? Coral reefs take years (decades to centuries) to develop, like any other biome, so this is lightening speed stuff we're dealing with!

"We know they're degrading fast, we know what the problems are, we know how to fix them," Wilkinson said at news conference by the Swiss-based World Worldlife Fund. "We've just got to do it."
They meant "World Wildlife Fund" here, right?

Tom
 
I was just having a conversation with a science writer, the most knowledgeable person I know on the subject of environmental issues. He argues that protocols like Kyoto, which set emissions targets for ten years or more from now, are fairly worthless.

When I see a statistic like an eleven percent drop in coral health in just two years, I understand what he means. At this rate, what does it matter if we set moderate targets on greenhouse gas emissions and agricultural runoff that we hope to achieve in 2025?
 
I'm curious by what you mean by "They're worthless." If it's because it's nothing but a placebo designed to make a bunch of Anti-Americans feel good about themselves, I agree. If you think it's because more action needs to be taken, I feel you're sadly mistaken.
 
There's no real way to protect ecosystems on the scales of coral reefs. Even if we found a "magic bullet" that would do the most good, the economic and social (and therefore political) costs would be staggering. Kyoto was ambitious, but still just one of MANY such large steps thought necessary to curb environmental degradation. They might not even work, anyway.

Therefore we continue to monitor and survey, run experiments, and educate the public as best we can. Stress the last bit. All the science in the world does no good at all if the public does not support (and therefore fund!) it.
 
Here's a question for all you tropical divers that do repeat visits on the same sites.

Over time, have you observed any measurable differences in the community structure? By that, I mean abundance of critters, changes in types of critters, dead stuff, changes in water clarity/color, etc. Don't be shy!
 
archman:
Here's a question for all you tropical divers that do repeat visits on the same sites.

Over time, have you observed any measurable differences in the community structure? By that, I mean abundance of critters, changes in types of critters, dead stuff, changes in water clarity/color, etc. Don't be shy!

The most dramatic change I have seen was after the El Nino of 98. In Boracay, Philippines, I watched the coral bleach, die, then endure a mass invasion of Crown of Thorn starfish. After that it looked like Hollywood layed fake spider webbing over the dead coral. It was a reddish, purpelish .....web. The butterfly fishes and coral feeders disappeared and more surgeon fishes came in. I want to go back and see now. When I left, little staghorns were making a comeback.
This occured only on the west side of the island where there isn't so much current. The back side suffered little to no damage. I guessed becaue there was more tidal movement and cool water passed over the coral on a daily basis. The Crown of Thorns march stopped as it reached the healthy reef. Healthy reefs must have natural defenses to keep them at bay. It was a good education. The reefs do make a comeback. Obvioiusly the large 300 year old massive ones will take a while, but the environment was only temporarily damaged by warmed water.
 
Boogie711:
I'm curious by what you mean by "They're worthless." If it's because it's nothing but a placebo designed to make a bunch of Anti-Americans feel good about themselves, I agree. If you think it's because more action needs to be taken, I feel you're sadly mistaken.

Not sure what you mean by "make a bunch of Anti-Americans feel good about themselves," but I have a feeling we might define Anti-American differently.

I suppose what my friend meant was not necessariy that more action should be taken but that it needs to happen sooner. Our timelines for taking action are extended to the point that they really have no meaning.

I have not been diving long enough to acutally see changes. But I hear dive masters say... "this is one of the last places where you'll see..." often enough.
 
LeFlaneur:
I suppose what my friend meant was not necessariy that more action should be taken but that it needs to happen sooner. Our timelines for taking action are extended to the point that they really have no meaning.

OK - so don't do anything, and do it right now?
:eyebrow:

The Kyoto protocol is useless. It's expensive to the point of insanity with negligible environmental benefit. Using IPCC estimates, if Kyoto is implemented, a Bangladeshi farmer who will have to move his farm in 96 years will now only have to move his land in 101 years.

Yet, this protocol costs approximately $500 billion per year - or enough in the first year alone to provide clean drinking water for every citizen on earth.
 

Back
Top Bottom