and it finally begins, en masse :(

[Kalkbreath]

Cyanide is naturally found in all seawater around the globe.
Its the concentration thats the stickler.

even more so when people like you keep spreading falsehoods about cyanide's lethality to the above

Coming from a guy who lives in a city with 65% impermeable surfaces, its kinda funny to have the pot calling the kettle black.
City folk who live where most of the land surface is either cement, asphalt or rooftop is a poor place to preach about ecologically responsible dialog (like how dare I speak of the flip side of cyanide)
None of the Atlantic or Caribbean reef deaths can be traced to our trade or the use of cyanide.and not really on zoozanthella abandoning their host.
Its really about the Amerian lifestyle and how we have continualy used the ocean as our dump for fifty years.
Can you name one proposed event or measure aimed at reducing the occurrence of disease outbreaks in the Atlantic?
Any usefull sewage or runoff proposals to curb soil in the ocean contamination?
Any suggestions on reducing the red tide events in the Gulf of Mexico from whats left of New Orleans to the Tampa BAy area?
What if the Philippine Government stepped in and demanded we do so?
The area where the CHattahoochee River drains into the Gulf of Mex turns the ocean dirt red for twenty miles out to sea year round now. 9it used to be just during heavy rains)
The sport fishing in Cedar Key area to Tampa is fruitless now. The ocean is dead in this hundred mile stretch all summer long.
And so on and so on........
You really continue to hold fast to the notion that other island nations apon seeing how we treat our own waters would then respect our opinions on how they should run their natural resourches? The Philippines reefs and waterways are many times more healthy then our own. Year after year, their reefs produce more kilos of fish then any other country in the world.
Sure they have a poison fishing problem, but thats a far cry from the plethora of reef killing activities we Americans seem to overlook as we foist our warped double standards on far away native islanders. |
Its not that we fish buyers should not be doing anything to curb cyanide fishing.
Buy fish from Tonga Fiji Vanuatu etc.(I do! I even know the collectors by name. ) do so as well and you will have exculpated yourself quite nicely.
just stop pretending anyone is listinging to us Americans.
Its their reefs ............just like these were our reefs.....back in the 1970s.
We are in no position to preach.
I swam in the keys in the mid 1970s........Again swam last year.
I questioned why the helicopters were spraying Paraquat on the water plants in the Florida Lakes and rivers in 1973.( I liked the look of floating waterplants)
In 1971, I used to be able to see deep into the St. johns river and watch the manatee and alligators down ten feet deep..... today you cant see your feet in one foot of muddy water.
When we killed our own U.S.waterways, will not only ruined our little bits of heaven........we also ruined the chance of any onlookers using the USA as a role model.
I need to stop typing now so I can go into the back yard and take a poop..........no flushing at the Kalk house hold,I respect the local streams! :wink:

 

[PeterIMA]

Kalk, I have to admit that your last posting makes a lot of sense. You didn't get everything right (Chattahoochee River probably should be the Caloosahatchee River). Furthermore, cyanide is not found naturally in marine systems in measurable concentrations. But, your other points are well taken.

As someone who lives in Florida and does research on marine systems and also someone who has observed and written about the cyanide problem and other forms of reef destruction in the Philippines, I agree that we could be doing a better job in the USA. Part of the problem is that marine fishery managment in the USA is not habitat related. So, we have degredation of coastal estuarine and marine habitats, despite that fact that most of the recreational and commecial fish and invertebrate species are being managed and have quotas based on populatution models.

Much of the authority over coastal habitats, freshwater inflows, and pollution lies with other state agencies or federal agencies. With modifications to the Magnusen Stevens Conservation and Management Act we now have Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) provisions that give NMFS and the Councils (e.g. Gulf of Mexico FMC) the ability to comment on the effects of alterations to coastal ecosytems. But, there are definitely many problems over which the fisheries agencies (state and federal) have little control. Many agencies pay lip service to "Ecosystem Mangement". The councils are now obligated to develop Fisheries Ecosystem Plans (FEP). I have recently partipated in workshops sponsored by the South Atlantic Fisheries Management Council that is leading the way by developing a FEP for the South Atlantic area.

It is recognized that the managment of EFH needs the use of Geographic Information System (GIS). I am a Fisheries Research Scientist with Florida Fish & Wildlife and am part of the Center for Spatial Analysis (GIS facility) at the Fish & Wildlife Research Institute in St. Petersburg. My research is focused on the development of spatial Habitat Suitability Models (HSM). These models allow fish abundances (catch rates also called CPUEs) to be mapped in relation to environmental variables such as temperature, salinity, dissolved oxygen, depth, and bottom type. I have been modeling about a dozen species of estuarine fish and shrimp by life stage and season in Tampa Bay, Charlotte Harbor, and Rookery Bay. Recently, I completed a study where we mapped habitats for the West Florida Shelf (by linking our HSM models to outputs from oceanographic modeling) and modeled and mapped the distributions and relative abundances of pink shrimp over four zones (Low to Optimum) for a 16 month period. Monthly HSM maps were created from March 2004 to June 2005.

The coral reef degredation in the Philippines is severe (as is the destruction of other coastal habitats) from illegal fishing, siltation, coastal pollution etc. I have been collaborating with Ferdinand Cruz. He is working to create alternative livelihoods for the collectors of MAF, involving mariculture of MAF. He also is working with the net-collectors to upgrade their collecting skills and help them find better prices for their fish. Another program is to develop a Coastal Resource Management Plan (CRMP) for the muncipality of Legaspi City in the Albay Gulf, Province of Bicol. This will include the mapping of benthic habitats using remote sensing, and underwater surveys of MAF distributions and abundances plus status of the corals, and surveys of the fishers' fishing patterns (for both food fish and aquarium fish). All of these data will become part of a GIS database that will be used to support the CRMP. I talked about this at the Marine Ornamentals 06 Conference on February 15th in Las Vegas. We hope to implement a CRMP that will manage mariculture, fisheries, and protect benthic habitats in the Albay Gulf. It is a spatial mangement strategy involving licensing fishermen and collectors, alternative liveloods, and zoning strategies such as MPAs and TURFs.

Peter Rubec, Ph.D.
East Asian Seas and Terrestrial Initiatives

 

[Anonymous]

Kalk, how old where you in 71'?

 

[Anonymous]

Nevermind that


Kalk, how old where you when the great wolly mammoths roamed wild and free?


:lol:

 

[Kalkbreath]

OK! Who told knuckle head what I look like?
I doubt that the mammoth question was out of the blue.
I am old enough to remember how truely awesome the keys were in the early seventies.
First I witnessed the mammoths disapear, then the corals and fish in the keys.
How much can this old guy take?

 

[PeterIMA]

I read an anthropology book that stated that a wooly mamoth fossil was found over top of a fossil human near Melbourne, Florida. It looks like the mammoth squashed the early american. The fossils are believed to be about 10,000 years old. I guess the mammoth missed kalk. That would make Kalk about 10,000 years old (I GUESS).

Peter

 

[Kalkbreath]

I read an anthropology book that stated that a wooly mamoth fossil was found over top of a fossil human near Melbourne, Florida. It looks like the mammoth squashed the early american. The fossils are believed to be about 10,000 years old. I guess the mammoth missed kalk. That would make Kalk about 10,000 years old (I GUESS).

Peter

That was my uncle Fred! Well ,We didnt actually call him Fred.
Its was more like a grunt with a thud sound in the roof of your mouth.
Maybe thats why my spelling is so poor even today.
I wont even begin to explain what fred was doing to that mammoth!
See lady folk back then were few and far between and half the time most of us couldnt even tell the difference any how. Did the Florida scientists say if he still had that half smile/ half terror look on his face when they found him ?
Thats the last image I have of uncle Fred........ haunts me still today.

 

[Anonymous]

:lol:

 

[Anonymous]

reminds me of the following from 'the two thousand year old man' sketches from reiner and brooks, where brooks (the two thousand year old man), is asked by reiner what they did for entertainment in the stone age:

"we had this guy named 'murray the clown' ... every day, murray would run in front of the cave of the sabre tooth tiger, yank his tail real hard, and run away going 'yaha, yaha'.....every day, murray the clown would do this......one day, murray the clown walked up to the mouth of the cave of the sabre tooth tiger, to yank on his tail, and the saber tooth turned around really quick, and ate him!!"........boy, did we laugh!!! "

:lol:

 

[popsock]

lol has this thread gone off track or what! Glad to read Kalkbreath's posts here, as I for one don't agree that tiny water temperature changes and tiny pH changes are wiping out whole reefs. It just doesn't make any sense when you consider what goes on in every reef tank in the world.

Oh, I think we need someone to counter Kalk's posts. Or declare him the winner. Or something.

Andy

 

[Anonymous]

sock":3s83gz5r" data-source="" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">

lol has this thread gone off track or what! Glad to read Kalkbreath's posts here, as I for one don't agree that tiny water temperature changes and tiny pH changes are wiping out whole reefs. It just doesn't make any sense when you consider what goes on in every reef tank in the world.

Oh, I think we need someone to counter Kalk's posts. Or declare him the winner. Or something.

Andy

what goes on in a reef tank has very little 'comparability' with what goes on in the oceans-the ocean environment is far more complex than a simple reef tank

keep in mind that temp and ph changes are stressors, which can affect a coral's resistance to disease, or help certain diseases (like bacteria/viruses) get possibly more aggressive, perhaps

you cannot refute however, the co-incidental (read: nearly simultaneous) issue of the changes in the world oceans regarding those two very major parameters and the sudden/sharp rise in coral mortality that seems to follow (in addition to pollution, silting issues etc etc)

you might want to follow discussions on coral-list-it's a topic that leading scientists from around the world discuss quite frequently via email

http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list

 

[neptunesgardener]

Why do we as a species put eveything into our own timeframe?Reefs have grown and died since long before anything remotely resembling a human walked the earth.If a massive die off occurs in our lifetime it's a catastrophe.If it happened 65 million years ago it's an interesting occurrence worthy of study.We need to develop a realistic outlook on our place in space and time.As much as it sucks,stuff happens.

 

[Anonymous]

chain reactions are unpredictable, yet possibly deadly - it's likely that as the reefs die off-other things in the ocean, along with certain check and balance systems, will too-both because of the same causes, and because of the demise of the reefs directly

do you have the same view of what's happening to the rainforests of south america ?


and besides, no one here had aquariums 65 million years ago

 

[bookfish]

neptunesgardener":183435vf" data-source="" class="bbCodeBlock bbCodeBlock--expandable bbCodeBlock--quote js-expandWatch">

Why do we as a species put eveything into our own timeframe?Reefs have grown and died since long before anything remotely resembling a human walked the earth.If a massive die off occurs in our lifetime it's a catastrophe.If it happened 65 million years ago it's an interesting occurrence worthy of study.We need to develop a realistic outlook on our place in space and time.As much as it sucks,stuff happens.

I agree we need a realistic outlook. One that would include the fact that we, as a species, have altered the planet more dramatically, negatively, and during a shorter time-frame than any other species that has ever lived on this planet. And that rate of change is increasing just as we begin to see obvious signs of how unsustainable these changes are. So, yes, stuff happens, only now it happens faster, bigger, and in ways where the pendulum of change can't swing back in the other direction because we broke the darn pendulum!!! AARGH!!!!

 

[PeterIMA]

Assuming the scientists are right about climate change and that Al Gore is right (for presenting this inconvenient truth) what can be done?

I would like to see our tax money spent on research to help reduce the production of carbon dioxide and and other green house gases (like methane) in the atmosphere.

Some practical steps include the following:

1) The government could give tax breaks for those who insulate their homes to reduce energy consumption.

2) The government could provide tax incentives for people in the southern US to install solar panels and tie the excess energy to the energy grid. Then home owners could sell energy to the utility companies.

3) Car manufacturers have choices.
Electric vehicles running off lithium batteries look very attractive. If we ran our cars locally, we could charge the batteries overnight off the energy grid.

Hybrid cars that run off batteries part of the time and off either ethanol or gasoline (or some combination) would be more fuel efficient. If the Japanese can produce hybrid cars, so can US automakers.

Congress and the states should provide tax incentives to hasten the creation of plants that produce fuels from plant materials such as sugar cane, sugar beats, or corn. These fuels would still produce carbon dioxide, but we would be less dependent on foreign oil or natural gas.

Longer term research should hasten the development of hydrogen vehicles and other uses of energy derived from hydrogen. Some sources of hydrogen would be derived from nuclear power and solar enegy (used to split water to produce hydrogen).

Scientific research and innovation can help save the planet while benefitting the US economy.

PS-It will also help conserve and restore coral reefs.

 

[Anonymous]

i refuse to drive a car


i bet i've done more to save a reef by not driving since '99 (though this was initially not by choice, it continues to be so by choice) and saving the corresponding emissions and NOT contributing to the auto industry than any person who contributes to this forum has in any other fashion

move closer to work, get a bicycle

 

[Anonymous]

Yah, but your still driving the energy companies revinues up by using your computer

 

[Anonymous]

:lol:

all of my posting is done from the puter at work

all of my light bulbs at home are twist flouros-my puter is also my tv-at most i have 30 watts of lights,the puter and a small fridge running at home-my carbon footprint is minimal.

 

[Anonymous]

Although the mines where they got the metals to make your bicylce did wonders for the environment I'm sure. Cars not a big concern as long as we don't rape the earth to try and squeeze the last bit of oil out of her. More like deforestation, mining, pesticides/herbicides, and heavy metal contamination of our oceans phytoplankton is what I'd be worried about...

 

[Anonymous]

I agree we need a realistic outlook. One that would include the fact that we, as a species, have altered the planet more dramatically, negatively, and during a shorter time-frame than any other species that has ever lived on this planet.

A total crock. What do you think the evolution of photosynthetic organisms did to the planet?