Saturday, 14 July 2012

A World Without Coral Reefs

quote [ there seems to be a collective reluctance to accept the logical conclusion — that there is no hope of saving the global coral reef ecosystem ]

A very grim assessment.

Ocean Acidification is an ongoing, measurable consequence of anthropogenic CO2 in the atmosphere.

Full NY Times op-ed:
+

July 13, 2012
A World Without Coral Reefs
By ROGER BRADBURY

Canberra, Australia

IT’S past time to tell the truth about the state of the world’s coral reefs, the nurseries of tropical coastal fish stocks. They have become zombie ecosystems, neither dead nor truly alive in any functional sense, and on a trajectory to collapse within a human generation. There will be remnants here and there, but the global coral reef ecosystem — with its storehouse of biodiversity and fisheries supporting millions of the world’s poor — will cease to be.

Overfishing, ocean acidification and pollution are pushing coral reefs into oblivion. Each of those forces alone is fully capable of causing the global collapse of coral reefs; together, they assure it. The scientific evidence for this is compelling and unequivocal, but there seems to be a collective reluctance to accept the logical conclusion — that there is no hope of saving the global coral reef ecosystem.

What we hear instead is an airbrushed view of the crisis — a view endorsed by coral reef scientists, amplified by environmentalists and accepted by governments. Coral reefs, like rain forests, are a symbol of biodiversity. And, like rain forests, they are portrayed as existentially threatened — but salvageable. The message is: “There is yet hope.”

Indeed, this view is echoed in the “consensus statement” of the just-concluded International Coral Reef Symposium, which called “on all governments to ensure the future of coral reefs.” It was signed by more than 2,000 scientists, officials and conservationists.

This is less a conspiracy than a sort of institutional inertia. Governments don’t want to be blamed for disasters on their watch, conservationists apparently value hope over truth, and scientists often don’t see the reefs for the corals.

But by persisting in the false belief that coral reefs have a future, we grossly misallocate the funds needed to cope with the fallout from their collapse. Money isn’t spent to study what to do after the reefs are gone — on what sort of ecosystems will replace coral reefs and what opportunities there will be to nudge these into providing people with food and other useful ecosystem products and services. Nor is money spent to preserve some of the genetic resources of coral reefs by transferring them into systems that are not coral reefs. And money isn’t spent to make the economic structural adjustment that communities and industries that depend on coral reefs urgently need. We have focused too much on the state of the reefs rather than the rate of the processes killing them.

Overfishing, ocean acidification and pollution have two features in common. First, they are accelerating. They are growing broadly in line with global economic growth, so they can double in size every couple of decades. Second, they have extreme inertia — there is no real prospect of changing their trajectories in less than 20 to 50 years. In short, these forces are unstoppable and irreversible. And it is these two features — acceleration and inertia — that have blindsided us.

Overfishing can bring down reefs because fish are one of the key functional groups that hold reefs together. Detailed forensic studies of the global fish catch by Daniel Pauly’s lab at the University of British Columbia confirm that global fishing pressure is still accelerating even as the global fish catch is declining. Overfishing is already damaging reefs worldwide, and it is set to double and double again over the next few decades.

Ocean acidification can also bring down reefs because it affects the corals themselves. Corals can make their calcareous skeletons only within a special range of temperature and acidity of the surrounding seawater. But the oceans are acidifying as they absorb increasing amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Research led by Ove Hoegh-Guldberg of the University of Queensland shows that corals will be pushed outside their temperature-acidity envelope in the next 20 to 30 years, absent effective international action on emissions.

We have less of a handle on pollution. We do know that nutrients, particularly nitrogenous ones, are increasing not only in coastal waters but also in the open ocean. This change is accelerating. And we know that coral reefs just can’t survive in nutrient-rich waters. These conditions only encourage the microbes and jellyfish that will replace coral reefs in coastal waters. We can say, though, with somewhat less certainty than for overfishing or ocean acidification that unstoppable pollution will force reefs beyond their survival envelope by midcentury.

This is not a story that gives me any pleasure to tell. But it needs to be told urgently and widely because it will be a disaster for the hundreds of millions of people in poor, tropical countries like Indonesia and the Philippines who depend on coral reefs for food. It will also threaten the tourism industry of rich countries with coral reefs, like the United States, Australia and Japan. Countries like Mexico and Thailand will have both their food security and tourism industries badly damaged. And, almost an afterthought, it will be a tragedy for global conservation as hot spots of biodiversity are destroyed.

What we will be left with is an algal-dominated hard ocean bottom, as the remains of the limestone reefs slowly break up, with lots of microbial life soaking up the sun’s energy by photosynthesis, few fish but lots of jellyfish grazing on the microbes. It will be slimy and look a lot like the ecosystems of the Precambrian era, which ended more than 500 million years ago and well before fish evolved.

Coral reefs will be the first, but certainly not the last, major ecosystem to succumb to the Anthropocene — the new geological epoch now emerging. That is why we need an enormous reallocation of research, government and environmental effort to understand what has happened so we can respond the next time we face a disaster of this magnitude. It will be no bad thing to learn how to do such ecological engineering now.

Roger Bradbury, an ecologist, does research in resource management at Australian National University.
-


tl;dr version:
Due to a deadly combination of human causes- overfishing, ocean acidification from carbon absorption, and general pollution, Earth's coral reefs are doomed. Kaput. Locked in an irreversible death spiral.
Resources now being expended to save them would be better spent figuring out how to deal with a post-coral reef world.

Update: in the NYT Dot Earth blog Andrew Revkin cites marine biologists who both agree and disagree with the assessment in this op-ed. I hope the ones who disagree turn out to be right.
[sci&tech] [by sanepride@10:19pmGMT] [+10 Interesting]

Comments

moriati said @ 10:23pm GMT on 14th Jul [Score:2 Insightful]
So long, and thanks for all the fish.
profetscott said @ 11:27pm GMT on 14th Jul
I camped out at a location in Southern Baja in the sea of Cortez. It had had campers for over twenty years, and that was the last year camping was allowed there. There is a Coral Reef there. It was not apparently growing. A couple of years later. I visited the area in a boat, and did some free diving. I was surprised how much growth had taken place in the couple of years without the campers around. Sorry to hear that they are doomed, if they are .
-_- said @ 11:32pm GMT on 14th Jul [Score:1 Informative]
zenviper said @ 1:27am GMT on 15th Jul [Score:1 Interesting]
damnit said @ 3:56am GMT on 15th Jul
I miss the old days. Nip slips were acceptable and nobody bats an eye
tickaz said @ 4:11am GMT on 15th Jul
they bat something else though.
endopol said @ 8:38am GMT on 17th Jul
I like the present day, when porn is plentiful and separate from terrible music. I have to admit that I watched the whole thing, though.
mechanical contrivance said @ 2:19am GMT on 15th Jul
Who else heard the post title in their head in the movie trailer guy's voice?
Barnabas_Truman said @ 2:28am GMT on 15th Jul
Grim news indeed. I am reminded of a depressing but informative children's book called A World without Fish on a similar topic that I skimmed last week.

I despise seafood but recognize its importance.
structured_spirits said @ 3:36am GMT on 15th Jul
The conspiracy theory angle on climate collapse is that the two prevailing slave mythologies are that either we can consume our way out of climate collapse, (continue to support our economic system), or that it's already too late to stop climate collapse and we're all fucker, (so we might as well continue to support our economic system.)

This pro-ecoterrorism documentary posits that the only real viable option left is to dismantle the economic system from the supply side. I don't really have strong opinions on this issue. But some people might find it interesting if a total downer.

sanepride said @ 2:35pm GMT on 15th Jul
Don't forget about the most prominent conspiracy theory angle- that the whole thing is a hoax perpetrated by opportunistic environmentalists and greedy scientists seeking funds.
The funny thing is that your conspiracy theories are actually more plausible.
incpenners said @ 3:49am GMT on 15th Jul
A very grim assessment.

Oh thank God!
azazel said @ 6:20am GMT on 15th Jul
Not a big fan of coral reefs?
cb361 said @ 8:20am GMT on 15th Jul [Score:1 Funny]
Coral reefs killed his father.
pleaides said @ 9:05am GMT on 15th Jul
So Penners is Inigo Montoya?
cb361 said @ 4:38pm GMT on 15th Jul
Yep. That's why they're killing them all. To get the right one.
ckfahrenheit said @ 8:20am GMT on 15th Jul
polypsist?
sanepride said @ 1:29pm GMT on 15th Jul
Coral reefs tend to vote Democrat. So fuck 'em.
incpenners said @ 5:13pm GMT on 15th Jul [Score:1 Funny]
We need to identify more 'problems', so that we can take things away from people in order to fix the problems.

or

This is, to me, the synthesis of this worldview with which I now found myself disenchanted: that everything is always wrong.
Barnabas_Truman said @ 5:28pm GMT on 15th Jul
Would you rather the problems not be fixed? Why do you hate America so much?
Dioxin said @ 8:41pm GMT on 15th Jul
cb361 said @ 8:43pm GMT on 15th Jul [Score:2 Funny]
"America must withdraw, or the Tribbles get it."
arrowhen said @ 8:47pm GMT on 15th Jul
Oh, you mean like the "problem" of not wanting to pay your fair share of taxes so you can take things like food, shelter, and adequate health care away from poor people in order to fix it?
arctan said @ 9:02pm GMT on 15th Jul [Score:4 Underrated]
I too had a period of time when I was convinced that all attempts at regulating my behavior or forcing me to give up things I wanted were just cruel, malign and arbitrary fictions created by power-mad tyrants -- and where I not only accepted my ignorance of the objective proven negative consequences of my actions but was actively *proud* of such ignorance, because I lived in a universe of circular reasoning where observable, obvious facts did not exist and only my feelings about the people telling them to me mattered.

I was convinced that the real truth of the world was that it was a cornucopian wonderland made for my benefit, that nothing I actually did could be wrong or hurtful, and that all bad things were engineered by the people in authority over me just to spite me.

See, my excuse is I was five years old, though. What's yours?
spite48 said @ 9:19pm GMT on 15th Jul [Score:1 Insightful]
I'm not a very good citizen of the earth. I don't recycle if it isn't convenient, and I don't in any way mitigate my consumption.

However, I do think there is a good chance that we're dooming ourselves. If I'm wrong - FANTASTIC! But it is a bit idiotic to bury our heads in the sand and ignore warning signs.

The evidence is that we are dramatically altering the world in ways which are either negatively influencing biodiversity and biomass, or in ways which will have an unpredictable result.

If you discount evidence, then logic will take you there. I we assume that everything will be fine despite on our sheer numbers, as well as our industrial, commercial and agricultural activities, deforestation, floating garbage islands in the oceans, and the relatively small number of nations which significantly control chemical waste, air pollution or effluent - That's sort of like assuming that our goldfish will be fine if we keep pissing in the fishbowl. If we ignore the fact that a few fish start to look ill, well, we shouldn't be surprised if all the fish die.
Dioxin said @ 9:01am GMT on 15th Jul [Score:1 Insightful]
kichijoii said @ 4:39am GMT on 15th Jul
Wow those rebuttals were great. Basically, two of them wrote "We disagree because giving up hope is bad." Also, one wrote, "It will be okay once greenhouse gases are stopped and reduced." (Uh-huh, like that will ever happen.)
cb361 said @ 10:00am GMT on 15th Jul
Man is a nuisance. He eats up his food supply in the forest, then migrates to our green belts and ravages our crops. The sooner he is exterminated, the better.
LeavemeAlone said @ 12:39am GMT on 16th Jul
Sure thing, Agent Smith...
sanepride said @ 5:09am GMT on 16th Jul
I believe that was Dr. Zaius.
sanepride said @ 1:34pm GMT on 15th Jul [Score:1 Insightful]
I'm no marine biologist, and the dissenters are, so it seemed fair to include their views. Nevertheless it seems their prevailing hope is that natural evolutionary adaptation can somehow outrun the rapidly escalating anthropogenic processes. And this very sadly doesn't seem like a likely scenario.
Lacuna said @ 2:53pm GMT on 15th Jul
Unfortunately, that hope is misplaced. If we killed the coral, and we keep on doing what we're doing, whose to say anything will be able to adapt? I mean, other than pests that love humans, and have been successful in their co-evolution with us, we are capable of driving pretty much every other species to extinction for a variety of reasons.
damnit said @ 7:34am GMT on 15th Jul
I'll miss the lines at Golden Coral.
cb361 said @ 3:31pm GMT on 15th Jul
How do we sleep while our beds are burning?

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.




Members

Registered: 24545

Classifieds

Heaven666
What has been seen cannot be un-seen


BOOBLE
Search sites, pics, movies, personals.


Best Porn
Reviews of the best porn sites with pics, vids, scene desription and member area preview


LONELY GUYS
Meet Women Near You