Great Barrier Reef condition again...

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Coral bleaching impacts 98% of Great Barrier Reef: study

A study [1] released by an Australian university, looking at multiple catastrophes hitting the Great Barrier Reef, has found, for the first time, that only 2% of its area has escaped bleaching since 1998, then the world's hottest year on record.
If global warming is kept to 1.5 degrees, the maximum rise in average global temperature, that was the focus of the COP26 United Nations climate conference, the mix of corals on the Barrier Reef will change, but it could still thrive, said the study's lead author, Professor Terry Hughes, of the Australian Research Council's Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies.

A separate study [2], also in Current Biology, estimates the number of baby corals being produced across the reef had dropped by 71%, since the first mass bleaching event in 1998.

More about ➥ https://phys.org/news/2021-11-coral-...rier-reef.html

[1]“Emergent properties in the responses of tropical corals to recurrent climate extremes" ~ by Terry P.Hughes et al

[1] ➥ https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...1?dgcid=author

[2] “Cumulative bleaching undermines systemic resilience of the Great Barrier Reef” ~ by Mandy W.M. Cheung et al
➥ https://www.cell.com/current-biology...21)01346-4.pdf

Gord, What about these recent quotes about a recovery? Any reputable published studies or reports confirming that?

I am so distrustful of the people who deny climate change and its consequences that I can't accept the reports of a recovery of GBR without some confirmation.

Is there any?

[lo2jones]

With names like that, it is easy to get accused of religious fear mongering. Seriously, We should all head the science and stay away from overused natural areas. Next time you’re in the Keys, head for the mangroves, where many of the fish have taken refuge from the multitude of snorkelers.

[Hasbeen]

My first hand experience.


I first snorkeled the reef off Townsville in the late 40s. I was 8. I had a few years experience before we moved south.. It was the 60s before I spent more tine on the reef, mostly between Gladstone & Townsville.


I then went cruising the Pacific islands, visiting dozens of islands, & the coasts of New Guinea most of the Solomon Islands among others. I also visited many isolated atolls through out the area.


I built small jetties for plantations on both high volcanic islands & atolls. These had cast in place cement piles using 44 gallon drums as formers, hand grafted into fringing coral using hookah gear. I got up close & personal with a lot of coral. I had a lot to do with fringing reefs, & discovered a few things.


Firstly fresh water is deadly to coral. In the 70s much of the coastline of islands was only partially charted. The coast was often a dotted line, so you can imagine reefs were not charted. I learned to look for rivers when I wanted to get in behind a fringing reef where shallow water permitted them. There would be a clear channel in front of almost all even little rivers.


I also learnt that even pristine islands were surrounded by water dirty to some extent. Eyeball navigation was no safer on the New Guinea or Solomon island coasts than the Australian coast. The higher the island the greater the run off the dirtier the water.


In the same way coral will be seriously inhibited in an atoll lagoon due to the lower salinity inside it during the wet season.


I returned to the Whitsundays & ran tourist boats both for resort islands & from the mainland for 10 years. Island boats did everything from visiting other resorts through snorkeling trips to outer reef trips. I also ran outer fishing trips, usually ranging from 3 to 5 days.


In the 80s I installed a facility at Hardy Reef. I spent 2 weeks in the water, drifting up & down the 10 mile channel between Hook & hardy reefs looking for somewhere with good coral, but where snorkelers would not be swept away by a 4 knot tidal current. This facility had a 60Ft imitation submarine coral viewing boat surveyed for 60 passengers, & catered to an average of 700 tourists a week., with a maximum of about 1100 at peak season.


I do know a bit about coral. I have seen seasons with bad weed infestations, & years with little. I have seen turbid water after a particularly heavy wet season, & clearer seasons. I have seen cyclone damage, & been a bit surprised at how quickly reefs do recover.


I visited the area last year, & found the coral surprisingly good after the recent severe cyclone. What I saw was well above the average in my experience

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by wingssail

Gord, What about these recent quotes about a recovery? Any reputable published studies or reports confirming that?

I am so distrustful of the people who deny climate change and its consequences that I can't accept the reports of a recovery of GBR without some confirmation.

Is there any?

Yes, as has been reported, in this thread ➥ https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums...us-256732.html

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Hasbeen

My first hand experience.


I first snorkeled the reef off Townsville in the late 40s. I was 8. I had a few years experience before we moved south.. It was the 60s before I spent more tine on the reef, mostly between Gladstone & Townsville.


I then went cruising the Pacific islands, visiting dozens of islands, & the coasts of New Guinea most of the Solomon Islands among others. I also visited many isolated atolls through out the area.


I built small jetties for plantations on both high volcanic islands & atolls. These had cast in place cement piles using 44 gallon drums as formers, hand grafted into fringing coral using hookah gear. I got up close & personal with a lot of coral. I had a lot to do with fringing reefs, & discovered a few things.


Firstly fresh water is deadly to coral. In the 70s much of the coastline of islands was only partially charted. The coast was often a dotted line, so you can imagine reefs were not charted. I learned to look for rivers when I wanted to get in behind a fringing reef where shallow water permitted them. There would be a clear channel in front of almost all even little rivers.


I also learnt that even pristine islands were surrounded by water dirty to some extent. Eyeball navigation was no safer on the New Guinea or Solomon island coasts than the Australian coast. The higher the island the greater the run off the dirtier the water.


In the same way coral will be seriously inhibited in an atoll lagoon due to the lower salinity inside it during the wet season.


I returned to the Whitsundays & ran tourist boats both for resort islands & from the mainland for 10 years. Island boats did everything from visiting other resorts through snorkeling trips to outer reef trips. I also ran outer fishing trips, usually ranging from 3 to 5 days.


In the 80s I installed a facility at Hardy Reef. I spent 2 weeks in the water, drifting up & down the 10 mile channel between Hook & hardy reefs looking for somewhere with good coral, but where snorkelers would not be swept away by a 4 knot tidal current. This facility had a 60Ft imitation submarine coral viewing boat surveyed for 60 passengers, & catered to an average of 700 tourists a week., with a maximum of about 1100 at peak season.


I do know a bit about coral. I have seen seasons with bad weed infestations, & years with little. I have seen turbid water after a particularly heavy wet season, & clearer seasons. I have seen cyclone damage, & been a bit surprised at how quickly reefs do recover.


I visited the area last year, & found the coral surprisingly good after the recent severe cyclone. What I saw was well above the average in my experience

Coral is the magnet that attracts the doomsayers. Maybe because it looks pretty or something. Forget, for the most part, the regular molluscs and fish and birds and cetaceans and other things that live there or are otherwise a destination of their migratory travels.



My mooring is located within about 50m or so of a coral reef and I can attest that it's chain pendant can become quite a nice mini reef itself if left undisturbed in the water for a few months. It's apparent on threads like this that many do not quite comprehend just how prolific coral can grow (and I guess, inversely die) and hence the reason why the oft reported poor health of the reef appears to conflict with overall observation. For example, the "98% of the reef has died since 1998" headline is perhaps true, but the story omits that most, if not all, of that has most likely recovered. And of course the smoking gun to confirm this is simply to observe how reef structures form.

[barcoo]

Having gone fishing with my father in the1960s from Port Douglas N Qld I seem to recall that yes the reef is going to die off in 10 years or so was a recurring newsmaker. About every 10 years a red sea would come in and the fish would jump out of the water because the water was so " polluted" from agri runnoff and the fish we caught were poisoned. About a month later fishing resumed, the water cleared up, visibility was about 50'. Then every other year it seemed the crown of thorns was going to destroy the reef, because its natural enemy the conch shell was harvested to oblivion.
Now I am not there to judge the clarity of the water but Im sure if we all get off our high horses and wait, then the reef will recover by it self. After all, it was there thousands of years before Cook and crew ran aground on Endeavour reef.

[lestersails]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Carrying on like wannabe eco-warriors and declaring "When will our local and global priorities change? When will we shift our focus to the real crisis of our time?" whilst prancing around on a 52 foot cat fitted with recently installed twin 54hp engines kind of nulls the message somewhat.

Ahh, here we go again. Just so we are clear - per reefmagnet NO ONE is allowed to advocate for the environment unless they live in a cave, make fires only from dung, and eat only beetles. Because, of course, the slightest tinge of hypocrisy invalidates all such criticism. You have to be perfect to make any pro-environmental assertion.
See? Isn't that easy? He makes all environmentalist arguments go away with the wave of his hand!
One post and I'm outta this one - this pathetic shtick gets really tiresome.

[RaymondR]

I spend half my life keeping off it, damned thing is a nuisance.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by lestersails

Ahh, here we go again. Just so we are clear - per reefmagnet NO ONE is allowed to advocate for the environment unless they live in a cave, make fires only from dung, and eat only beetles. Because, of course, the slightest tinge of hypocrisy invalidates all such criticism. You have to be perfect to make any pro-environmental assertion.
See? Isn't that easy? He makes all environmentalist arguments go away with the wave of his hand!
One post and I'm outta this one - this pathetic shtick gets really tiresome.

Yeah because "practising what you preach" is just so over rated. I can only suppose your raw nerve has been exposed because you're another one that soaks in the excesses and trappings of a privileged life whilst pretending to be green. Am I wrong?

[tp12]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Yeah because "practising what you preach" is just so over rated. I can only suppose your raw nerve has been exposed because you're another one that soaks in the excesses and trappings of a privileged life whilst pretending to be green. Am I wrong?

You’ve displayed little knowledge of what it is that these scientists and environmentalists actually preach in favour of some simplistic and punitive actions as though they’re somehow relevant. It’s nothing more than a straw man used to dismiss valid arguments - a rhetoric device.

[lestersails]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Yeah because "practising what you preach" is just so over rated. I can only suppose your raw nerve has been exposed because you're another one that soaks in the excesses and trappings of a privileged life whilst pretending to be green. Am I wrong?

Trolling.
Not taking the bait.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Reefmagnet

Yeah because "practising what you preach" is just so over rated. I can only suppose your raw nerve has been exposed because you're another one that soaks in the excesses and trappings of a privileged life whilst pretending to be green. Am I wrong?

Ridiculous argument. For starters, I'm certain there's no point in your weighted scale that would be sufficiently green to meet your approval. Just being on the Internet would be a disqualifier, I'm sure. That would certainly silence disagreement though, right?

It's a public-school-level taunt, and didn't much play well there either.

Systemic changes will achieve the most harm-reduction, but I'm not deaf to the potential reductions from personal action either, if enough people do likewise. As I posted earlier. And if you don't think that most of us green-leaning folks walk the talk where we can... you're mistaken.

So yeah, you're wrong.

[danstanford]

Originally Posted by lestersails

Ahh, here we go again. Just so we are clear - per reefmagnet NO ONE is allowed to advocate for the environment unless they live in a cave, make fires only from dung, and eat only beetles. Because, of course, the slightest tinge of hypocrisy invalidates all such criticism. You have to be perfect to make any pro-environmental assertion.

This is a great point Lester, I will try to remember this more often.

Perhaps the objective should be for those on all sides to be less judgemental. I remain unimpressed by the number of private jets flown to the environmental summit though.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by lestersails

Trolling.

Not taking the bait.

not 'fessing up more likely.

[Reefmagnet]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Ridiculous argument. For starters, I'm certain there's no point in your weighted scale that would be sufficiently green to meet your approval. Just being on the Internet would be a disqualifier, I'm sure. That would certainly silence disagreement though, right?

It's a public-school-level taunt, and didn't much play well there either.

Systemic changes will achieve the most harm-reduction, but I'm not deaf to the potential reductions from personal action either, if enough people do likewise. As I posted earlier. And if you don't think that most of us green-leaning folks walk the talk where we can... you're mistaken.

So yeah, you're wrong.

And so says the king of "do as i say, not as I do".