"Most Caribbean coral reefs may disappear in the next 20 years"

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

It would help a little if people (especially those acting as moderators) would stop referring to AGW as 'nonsense'. Every year brings more information that the deniers are wrong and the science is sound.

Another solution - stop pretending there aren't solutions. Anyone who cruises is already experienced with practising moderation and living within reasonable constraints. We need the political will to start practicing that on a broader scale.

"Waterworld" is your answer to invasive species attacking the reefs? I'm trying to picture Al Gore on an enormous catamaran sprouting gills from the sides of his neck.

[Lake-Effect]

Thanks m9. I'm sure most of us agree that Al Gore is not necessarily the official spokesperson for climate science.

Despite last-year's 'polar vortex' in North America, the trend for amount of Arctic is still downward. It will take more than one or two cold winters to disprove the trend. So, the much reviled Mr Gore may have been wrong on the dates, but he isn't yet wrong on the outcome.

Originally Posted by Kenomac

"Waterworld" is your answer to invasive species attacking the reefs?

Kevinn Costner is the answer to EVERYTHING.

[StuM]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Coral threats

The above doesn't specifically mention ocean acidification, which is a major threat to all shell-forming ocean life, including coral.

Really?

Didn't many corals (and shellfish) evolve in the late Jurassic/early Cretaceous when CO2 levels were over 2000 PPM (as opposed to the current 400) and when oceans would, according to climate theory*, therefore have been much more acidic than now? (The later ones seem to have evolved during the Paleocene/Eocene Thermal Maximum - the recent spike when CO2 levels once again went over 1000 ppm for a while)

*As long as you ignore Henry's Law and the decrease in solubility of CO2 with rising temperature

Every seen photos of coral growing comfortably where volcanic vents discharge CO2 directly into the surrounding water? It's quite common in this part of the world.

[a64pilot]

As far as divers damaging reefs, it happens. It happens because the average open water diver is very poorly trained, has terrible buoyancy skill and no concept of proper trim. That is because of the "puppy mill" type of certifications that go on now.
The fix for that is much higher standards of the certification agencies. Diving training long ago became a for profit thing with all of these silly $200 to $400 "cert cards" for everything from picture taking to "self reliance" to who knows what.
Here is a link to one of the more useful PADI cards
Welcome

[avb3]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

It would help a little if people (especially those acting as moderators) would stop referring to AGW as 'nonsense'. Every year brings more information that the deniers are wrong and the science is sound.

Another solution - stop pretending there aren't solutions. Anyone who cruises is already experienced with practising moderation and living within reasonable constraints. We need the political will to start practicing that on a broader scale.

Not all moderators think of AGW as nonsense.

We moderate this board according to the rules and guidelines set out. We are not homogeneous in our opinions on other issues. Which is a good thing, since we have mods from all over the globe here, just like our members.

[motaman9]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Thanks m9. I'm sure most of us agree that Al Gore is not necessarily the official spokesperson for climate science.

Despite last-year's 'polar vortex' in North America, the trend for amount of Arctic is still downward. It will take more than one or two cold winters to disprove the trend. So, the much reviled Mr Gore may have been wrong on the dates, but he isn't yet wrong on .

It's actually thicker than it has been in four or five years right now.....

http://psc.apl.washington.edu/wordpr..._heff.2sst.png




Sailing somewhere.....

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by StuM

Didn't many corals (and shellfish) evolve in the late Jurassic/early Cretaceous when CO2 levels were over 2000 PPM (as opposed to the current 400) and when oceans would, according to climate theory*, therefore have been much more acidic than now? (The later ones seem to have evolved during the Paleocene/Eocene Thermal Maximum - the recent spike when CO2 levels once again went over 1000 ppm for a while)

I wasn't around in the late Jurassic. Perhaps some of the mods could speak to that period? (great big . I kid because I love)

There was more different about the Jurassic than just CO2. We have to work with current conditions and specie.

Originally Posted by StuM

*As long as you ignore Henry's Law and the decrease in solubility of CO2 with rising temperature

The ocean is not saturated with CO2. More atmospheric CO2 means more of it forced into the ocean, even allowing for the warming and corresponding decrease in solubility.

Originally Posted by StuM

Every seen photos of coral growing comfortably where volcanic vents discharge CO2 directly into the surrounding water? It's quite common in this part of the world.

The issue is acidity, not proximity to a gas stream. The effects of acidity are already being noticed.

Originally Posted by motaman9

[Arctic ice is] actually thicker than it has been in four or five years right now.....

http://psc.apl.washington.edu/wordpr..._heff.2sst.png

From the same source:
Sea ice volume is an important climate indicator. It depends on both ice thickness and extent and therefore more directly tied to climate forcing than extent alone.

The trend for volume of Arctic sea ice is still downward. We need more than one or two abnormally cold winters in certain areas to prove the trend is wrong.

[John Drake]

A64Pilot - completely agree. Somewhere along the lines, diving went from an avocation to an industry. Basic SCUBA courses are mills. It is very sad to see, actually. It has gotten so blatant that organization such as PADI actually tell their students that they need more certifications to do certain types of diving. That is fine, but they are in fact, releasing novices into the water, unchecked.

In my observations, the physical damage to the reefs far outweighs the environmental causes, whatever they may be. Deep reefs remain plush, while the popular ones in the Keys and Carib are decimated.

The cause is ...us. The solution is...us. Unfortunately, very few of us seem to be sensitive enough to this issue, even though we debate with such vigor and passion.

Unless you are preaching a hands off doctrine to everyone you dive with, you are the problem.

If you fish and lose line in the sea, you are the problem.

If you anchor near a reef, you are the problem.

If you pump blackwater over the side in the islands, near reefs, you are the problem.

If you are looking for solutions, the above is a start.

Thanks

J

[donradcliffe]

Originally Posted by John Drake

A64Pilot - completely agree. Somewhere along the lines, diving went from an avocation to an industry. Basic SCUBA courses are mills. It is very sad to see, actually. It has gotten so blatant that organization such as PADI actually tell their students that they need more certifications to do certain types of diving. That is fine, but they are in fact, releasing novices into the water, unchecked.

In my observations, the physical damage to the reefs far outweighs the environmental causes, whatever they may be. Deep reefs remain plush, while the popular ones in the Keys and Carib are decimated.

The cause is ...us. The solution is...us. Unfortunately, very few of us seem to be sensitive enough to this issue, even though we debate with such vigor and passion.

Unless you are preaching a hands off doctrine to everyone you dive with, you are the problem. Hurricanes don't damage centimeters of coral--they destroy kilometers of coral. Mother nature is the problem.

If you fish and lose line in the sea, you are the problem. Fishing line is a miniscule problem compared to plastic bags and water containers.

If you anchor near a reef, you are the problem. See comment on divers.

If you pump blackwater over the side in the islands, near reefs, you are the problem. Have you ever seen a bird,fish, porpoise, or seal poop in the ocean??--they are the problem, and we should wipe them out.

If you are looking for solutions, the above is a start.

Thanks

J

I'm sorry, but I'm not buying your new religion, just like I don't think I'm going to burn in hell because I'm not your brand of Christian.

[ImaginaryNumber]

Originally Posted by StuM

Really?

Didn't many corals (and shellfish) evolve in the late Jurassic/early Cretaceous when CO2 levels were over 2000 PPM (as opposed to the current 400) and when oceans would, according to climate theory*, therefore have been much more acidic than now? (The later ones seem to have evolved during the Paleocene/Eocene Thermal Maximum - the recent spike when CO2 levels once again went over 1000 ppm for a while)

*As long as you ignore Henry's Law and the decrease in solubility of CO2 with rising temperature

Every seen photos of coral growing comfortably where volcanic vents discharge CO2 directly into the surrounding water? It's quite common in this part of the world.

My understanding is that those times in Earth's history when there was high atmospheric and ocean CO2 levels resulted in what is now called a Calcite Sea. We now live with what are called Aragonite Seas.

Calcite and Aragonite are both compounds of calcium, and both are extracted from seawater by coral and shellfish to make shells and coral skeletons. Structures made of Calcite can withstand much higher acid levels before they dissolve than those made of Aragonite.

Currently, most coral and shellfish extract both calcite and Aragonite to build with, which is why our present oceans are known as Aragonite Seas. But it is the Aragonite portion which is susceptible to the current acidification of the oceans. Many scientists think this is a big problem.

Given enough time our current corals and shellfish will evolve back to making calcite-only structures, and thus be able to tolerate the increased ocean acidification. The problem is that the current rate of ocean acidification is FAR GREATER than the rate that biological evolution appears to be able to adapt to. Thus, we may be on the verge of a huge human-caused extinction event. Ocean Acidification may turn out to be just as serious a problem as Global Warming, just not as obvious, and so easier to sweep under the rug -- until it is too late to do anything.

[John Drake]

Hi Don

I am sorry, I really do not understand your reply. My post is my observations, cause and effect.

Not sure why you think it religion, I think that is a ridiculous statement.

As I stated above, the destruction of corals is manifold. I already wrote that it has many causes, including hurricanes. And plastic bags.

Your comment about fishing line does not follow what actual, real life biologists have published. Have you seen the huge balls of fishing line, nets and other material collected by island care takers in the remote Pacific? Maybe you should educated yourself on this topic.

As for mother nature, I think the reefs have been dealing with that for a millennia. As for dolphin and whale poop, I will refer you to the works of John Sieburth, if you are capable of understanding the science.

The discussion above centers on what WE can do about it. My post, and many others, suggests that we are part of the problem. It follows then, that we are part of the solution. Simple logic, I am sure you can follow that.

No one has suggest a political solution that will come to anything. No one has suggested a scientific or technical solution, period.

If you have something constructive to contribute, by all means, please do. You want to bash, that is neither interesting nor helpful.

Thanks

[transmitterdan]

I have been diving the Caribbean for nearly 30 years. More recently I have also been diving in the South Pacific (e.g. Fiji, Great Barrier Reef). About 50% of my dives are non-guided. I have seen reefs that were in good condition go to terrible shape following tropical cyclones and then recover quickly. Usually much faster than the standard "it takes 100 years for coral to grow 20cm" nonsense I have often heard. Bikini atoll is a good example of recovery from massive devastation.

I would agree there is some decline in some reefs over the past few years. But the damage that divers do to reefs is pretty minuscule on a percentage basis. The vast majority of reefs are not visited by recreational divers. Most Caribbean islands have a lee and a windward side. The seldom visited windward reefs are usually healthy and loaded with corals and fish.

Would it be nice if new divers had better buoyancy skills? Yes, it would. But my experience after seeing several hundred new divers is that they either improve or drop out of the sport quickly. The certification mills crank out new divers that go on 10 dives and they either get better or quit. Very few bad divers keep coming back to crunch up the coral. And most dive operations take these people to the same barren places. If your dive guide is always taking you to barren reefs then that probably says more about you than the health of reefs in general. Maybe you need to work on your buoyancy or the amount of your tips or both.

Boats anchored near reefs are not causing long term damage. Even black water released by cruising boats isn't a serious environmental issue IMO. For every liter of black water released by cruising boats there are many thousands of liters released by land based "water treatment facilities". The "typical" coastal cruiser goes to a shore facility and pumps out their holding tank loaded with formaldehyde. It is very likely this toxic effluent will be dumped into the ocean before they can get back out of the harbor. Where do we think that stuff goes? To some magical holding pond in a parallel universe?

If some people want to "get back to nature" that's great. But to do that they have to give up manufactured drugs, internal combustion engines, artificial light, grocery stores, non-live entertainment and a host of other modern conveniences. Probably they also have to enslave animals as our ancestors did. When I find an "environmental lobbyist" that lives without money or fire then I will gladly listen to them lecture me about the size of my "environmental footprint".

[Pete7]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

It would help a little if people (especially those acting as moderators) would stop referring to AGW as 'nonsense'. Every year brings more information that the deniers are wrong and the science is sound.

So moderators are not allowed to express their own opinion then?

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Another solution - stop pretending there aren't solutions. Anyone who cruises is already experienced with practising moderation and living within reasonable constraints. We need the political will to start practicing that on a broader scale.

I have the gravest doubts that this could be achieved given the conflicts around the world in the last 30 - 40 years. I suspect man will resolve the problem but not in a humane way.

Pete

[Coops]

Not just moderators it seems, nobody is allowed a contrary opinion.

Coops.

[downunder]

Originally Posted by a64pilot

As far as divers damaging reefs, it happens. It happens because the average open water diver is very poorly trained, has terrible buoyancy skill and no concept of proper trim. That is because of the "puppy mill" type of certifications that go on now.
The fix for that is much higher standards of the certification agencies. Diving training long ago became a for profit thing with all of these silly $200 to $400 "cert cards" for everything from picture taking to "self reliance" to who knows what.
Here is a link to one of the more useful PADI cards
Welcome