The Reef is Dying - Almost Everywhere

[greenbean36191]

Eh, no. The fact that something has happened before naturally does not mean that anything that causes it again is natural as well. The CO2 currently dissolving into the ocean and driving down aragonite saturation is decidedly unnatural.

 

[WaterssretaW]

greenbean: I agree. However, the Earths reefs have seen many periods of building and distruction. Earths current reefs have only been aragonite since the end of the paleogene/begining of the neogene...Whether its man made Co2 or the next transition to calcite seas...they will be devistated again at some point...With that said; it doesnt mean man has to contribute to it...

 

[wooden_reefer]

20 years ago an Asfur angel sold for $500 plus.

Last year, they are available at an LFS for $60, about 4 inches long TL.

The owner told me that they were bred in captivity.

At the time it was a stunning realization for me, surreal, sort of.

 

[returnofsid]

VickiNaz, you're being a very extreme alarmist!! Very little damage is done to the reef because of our hobby. Granted, there are places where cyanide is still used to capture fish, doing vast amounts of damage to the reef. However, MUCH MUCH more damage is done by pollution, shipping and many other forms of tourism. In fact, of all the "acts" that remove or destroy from the reef, our hobby is probably the most beneficial to the reef. Our hobby has contributed a lot of scientific knowledge to the reefs, our hobby has "evolved" into one where reefs can now become re-established, using corals that have been grown in captivity. Granted, most of these captive grown corals were not grown in hobbyists tanks, but the work that led to this ability stems from our wonderful hobby.

 

[greenbean36191]

Granted, most of these captive grown corals were not grown in hobbyists tanks, but the work that led to this ability stems from our wonderful hobby.

Not exactly. I think most hobbyists would be surprised to learn that a lot of the methodology used in the hobby was developed by scientists over 100 years ago- artificial seawater mixes, lists of coral requirements, overflows, various methods for filtering and changing water, fragging and gluing, frag plugs, even raising sexually produced corals to adulthood.

The hobby has mostly contributed to the refinement of equipment and reducing its price.

 

[A. Grandis]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15269535#post15269535 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by greenbean36191
Not exactly. I think most hobbyists would be surprised to learn that a lot of the methodology used in the hobby was developed by scientists over 100 years ago- artificial seawater mixes, lists of coral requirements, overflows, various methods for filtering and changing water, fragging and gluing, frag plugs, even raising sexually produced corals to adulthood.

The hobby has mostly contributed to the refinement of equipment and reducing its price.

This is good stuff. Any references or links?
Thanks.
Grandis.

 

[greenbean36191]

Here are PDFs of their papers. You'll want to read about the work of Mayer and Vaughan ~1908-1915 in particular. There are a few other guys you will see who were working with corals at the time, but those are the main 2.
http://www.archive.org/search.php?q...Biology. Papers from the Tortugas laboratory"

 

[A. Grandis]

Thanks a lot Greenbean! I´ll take a look.


Grandis.:thumbsup:

 

[ConserveTheReef]

Enough with the pollution and global warming [profanity] No matter how minimaly destructive wild collection from our reefs is, you can never deny that reef aquarists ARE STILL part of the problem.

Ofcourse, you alone cannot destroy the entire reef ecosystem of the world. But imagine the hundreds of thousands, even millions of reefers like you collecting or buying wild caught reef animals, plus pollution, plus global warming, etc etc...

Anyone who said that, "meh, pollution of other people far dwarfs the wild reef destruction we hobbyists make" is purely in denial of the truth! -and only lives off of his own greed and or the money of others!



(If you're wondering: I've quit this reef-killing business years ago.)

 

[salty316]

Okay okay.... If it weren't for our hobby, thousands, maybe millions wouldn't even know about the plight of the reefs. We know, we educate, we do our best to prevent further decimation. Ten, twenty years ago, you couldn't find a captive raised specimen of any saltwater species. I think we are doing good, we need to try and do better, that's all.

 

[billsreef]

ConserveTheReef,

You need to read from the start. The OP was making an observation that was in error for the locales she was observing. The areas that she mentioned (such as the Caymans) do have any collecting for the hobby occurring. Not there is no collecting going in the tropcial West Atlantic basin, but just not in those areas. Now that is not to say there are not areas of the world where collection for the trade is not a problem, especially such things as cyanide collecting in the Phillipines. But that is another discussion.

 

[gooyferret]

Articles, articles, and just more articles!

You can find articles, books, and everything else under the sun saying this or that. Studies on the Great Reef (protected reef sections) say that reef growth has drastically declined over the years.

IMO humans are not the only cause for reef destruction, but rather the earth going through a transition/cycle. Humans might be speeding the process, but not at the core problem. There is no denying the earth goes through cycles, just change is inevitable. History always repeats itself....

Just my 2 cents.

 

[andrewk529]

.....

 

[andrewk529]

<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15344137#post15344137 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by gooyferret
Articles, articles, and just more articles!

You can find articles, books, and everything else under the sun saying this or that. Studies on the Great Reef (protected reef sections) say that reef growth has drastically declined over the years.

IMO humans are not the only cause for reef destruction, but rather the earth going through a transition/cycle. Humans might be speeding the process, but not at the core problem. There is no denying the earth goes through cycles, just change is inevitable. History always repeats itself....

Just my 2 cents.

yes the earth is goes through certain climatological shifts historically . The fact of the matter is if you take sequestered carbon which has been stored for millions of years underground and add it into our atmosphere a change will occur.This should be obvious to everyone by now. There has been core samples of ice taken from glaciers which store hundreds of thousands of years of data regarding our atmosphere. None of that data shows the CO2 levels increasing as rapidly as they are currently. The origin for the increase of the CO2 correlates with the industrial revolution of the 1880's. There is a scientific consensus that humans are the cause of our current temperature increases something i feel isn't even debatable

 

[kaptken]

Yes, the Earth biosphere goes along it's merry way on it's own cycle. But then we add to the amplitude of the warming with our effluents. so the curve goes higher. its just math.

The past few years we have had near zero sun spot activity. Sun spots run on an 11 year cycle from high back to low. but we have hovered at a low a couple years too long. Sun spots emit much more energy and warm the earth. In no sun spot periods we should be cooling, but we have hovered at a higher level. The next few years could be much warmer than previous record years as sun spot activity increases again. We just keep ratcheting things up. We havent backed down yet on GHG emissions to see if it makes a difference. But that might be mute. GHGs have a life of their own in the air. and keep right on warming.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jul/27/world-warming-faster-study
In which case, the reefs are in for more heat stress. The average sea surface temp is still rising.
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/global-warming/warmest-seas-on-record-20090724-dw6c.html
so much has happened with less than one degree F in ocean warming. That is a lot of stored energy. What happens when it warms a few degrees more the next 50 years?

Sea Food Chowder?

 

[JSREEF4]

I think this is another great reason to propagate, trade and sell our own corals.

 

[AMW]

I recently returned from scuba diving Borneo, Malaysia where I witnessed vast areas of the coral reef blown to shreds by Sea Gypsies who were using dynamite and cyanide in order capture fish. At first I thought they were fishing but was told by my dive guides that they sell the stunned fish to the aquarium industry. The destroyed areas of the reef looked like the barren surface of the moon. We can deny that the aquarium trade does not impact the world's reefs or does minimal damage, but I most definitely witnessed otherwise. As a reef keeper, this only emphasized the importance of only keeping aquacultured coral and fish.

 

[saltwatercityma]

Do Sea Gypsies fight with the Sea Carnies?

 

[Ross.C]

The only species whose demise can be directly attributed to hobbyists is the Bangai Cardinal. That is a well known and scientific fact. Yes our hobby has a *slight* impact on the reefs of the world. All other factors significantly dwarf us by comparison. However that doesn't necessarily let us off the hook. The fact is, that having wild caught specimens in our tanks is providing a safe haven for them to be kept and stored in a slight attempt to preserve the species. Removing coral specimens from the reefs now is probably one of the very few things that can be done in the short term to preserve the diverse species out there from destruction and potential extinction. Such preservation can keep them alive till we are able to come to grips with global warming and truly fight it if not begin to reverse it. However that process is going to take years upon years. What do we do in the meantime, allow corals to die off in the oceans because removing them is against some perceived social interest. I say removing them could be the very thing that will save them. Now before you all jump to conclusions, I am not talking wholesale removal of the reefs, I am however talking about removal of enough coral to maintain genetic diversity, and the ability to grow them out to the point of maturity so that propagation via natural spawning can occur. Such methodology of propagation will help in the long term of continuing a species that otherwise would die off. We as hobbyists have contributed a fair amount of knowledge to the husbandry of marine aquatic species. To argue otherwise to to belittle the work of many before us that have over time been able to research and advance the process of raising species that previous to them were thought to be unable to spawn in captivity. Furthermore a significant large number of the marine biologists and other scientific specialists are hobbyists, in fact a lot of them pursued their studies due to a love of the hobby.

The next logical and responsible step in our hobby is of coral propagation rather than just aquaculture through fragging.

There are a interesting set of articles in the October 2009 issue of Tropical fish Hobbies about this very topic. You might want to read them. We might be a small part of the problem, but we are a significant part of the education campaign, and over time a big part of the solution.

 

[greenbean36191]

The only species whose demise can be directly attributed to hobbyists is the Bangai Cardinal. That is a well known and scientific fact.

Not really. The Bangaii cardinal is thriving outside of its natural range where it was introduced for the purpose of increasing the area in which it could be collected, but there seems to be a decline in its natural range. There is actually a good bit of disagreement about that though.

There are however, several cases of populations being significantly reduced directly by collection for the hobby. That includes clarion angels, Potter's angels, coral beauties, emperor angels, map angels, goldtail angels, yellow tangs, moorish idols, blue tangs, pebbled butterflies, fourspot butterflies, longnose butterflies, three stripe damsels, clarkii clowns, and sebae anemones. Extensive damage caused to reefs by collectors breaking corals to get small fish and using cyanide are also well documented and there is even one case in the Philippines where there is a 300 mile radius of reef destroyed due to cyanide use.

I am however talking about removal of enough coral to maintain genetic diversity, and the ability to grow them out to the point of maturity so that propagation via natural spawning can occur. Such methodology of propagation will help in the long term of continuing a species that otherwise would die off.

The problem though is that these species don't exist in isolation. The corals don't survive without their supporting cast of fish and inverts and the fish and inverts don't make it without the corals. Once the corals are gone in the wild, they're gone for good even if we can keep them in captivity because we aren't even close to being able to maintain the diversity required to make a reef a functioning community in captivity.