Great Barrier Reef news

[bruno3047]

What ever news people enjoy is fine but the fact is the great barrier reef is not doing good maybe just better than originally predicted, that doesn't mean it's not in extreme danger let's think past decades, the ocean is millions of years old and we screwed it up in a few hundred years, that is not the great barrier reef doing good.... that's like a tree you see dying, first you notice the leaves turning yellow then brown one by one, what leaf are we on? Why is our tree dying!

I have no affiliation with anyone here or any motive but spreading knowledge. I did watch this pod cast and I believe this guy is helping not only the great barrier reef but our planet please check it out (donate if you can) he and his team are a private organization with out government funding and need as much help as they can get! Just watch and hear it in his voice and here's a link to their site.

Reef Legacy

greatbarrierreeflegacy.org

First paragraph of the article

“The Australian Institute of Marine Science has reported a 36-year coral coverage high across the Great Barrier Reef for 2021/22.”

Great Barrier Reef records highest hard coral cover in 36 years | Reef Builders | The Reef and Saltwater Aquarium Blog

The Australian Institute of Marine Science has reported a 36-year coral coverage high across the Great Barrier Reef for 2021/22. The greatest coverage increases were reported in the North and Central…

reefbuilders.com

 

[Thales]

First paragraph of the article

“The Australian Institute of Marine Science has reported a 36-year coral coverage high across the Great Barrier Reef for 2021/22.”

Great Barrier Reef records highest hard coral cover in 36 years | Reef Builders | The Reef and Saltwater Aquarium Blog

The Australian Institute of Marine Science has reported a 36-year coral coverage high across the Great Barrier Reef for 2021/22. The greatest coverage increases were reported in the North and Central…

reefbuilders.com

You’re embarrassing yourself

The GBR is not up in coral cover across its entirety. The Southern third of the GBR is down.
Read the report - https://www.aims.gov.au/monitoring-great-barrier-reef/gbr-condition-summary-2021-22

Here is what everyone should be taking away from the report -

"In periods free from intense acute disturbances, most GBR coral reefs demonstrate resilience through the ability to begin recovery. However, the reefs of the GBR continue to be exposed to cumulative stressors. The prognosis for the future disturbance regime suggests increasing and longer-lasting marine heatwaves, as well as the ongoing risk of outbreaks of crown-of-thorns starfish and tropical cyclones. Therefore, while the observed recovery offers good news for the overall state of the GBR, there is increasing concern for its ability to maintain this state."

 

[revhtree]

Please keep the personal comments out of this thread. Thanks.

 

[Rmckoy]

I watched a documentary on the crown of thorns and what they were doing to try to combat it. They were actually sending divers down to inject poison into the starfish. Crazy stuff. But effective.

Is this the same star they had on another reality show testing different animals stings ?
One episode was all ocean aquatic animals . Lion fish , starfish , and they rated each sting from pain , hoe long it lasts etc ?

 

[bruno3047]

The GBR is not up in coral cover across its entirety. The Southern third of the GBR is down.
Read the report - https://www.aims.gov.au/monitoring-great-barrier-reef/gbr-condition-summary-2021-22

Here is what everyone should be taking away from the report -

"In periods free from intense acute disturbances, most GBR coral reefs demonstrate resilience through the ability to begin recovery. However, the reefs of the GBR continue to be exposed to cumulative stressors. The prognosis for the future disturbance regime suggests increasing and longer-lasting marine heatwaves, as well as the ongoing risk of outbreaks of crown-of-thorns starfish and tropical cyclones. Therefore, while the observed recovery offers good news for the overall state of the GBR, there is increasing concern for its ability to maintain this state."

Yep. Still more work to do. But it’s not going to be the catastrophe that we were told. That’s the point that I’m trying to make.

 

[bruno3047]

Is this the same star they had on another reality show testing different animals stings ?
One episode was all ocean aquatic animals . Lion fish , starfish , and they rated each sting from pain , hoe long it lasts etc ?

I don’t think so but I can’t be sure. The documentary I saw was focused on the Crown of Thorns and the devastation that it is having on the GBR. The first half was basically about the damage being done, and the second half was basically about what’s being done to counter.

 

[bruno3047]

Is this the same star they had on another reality show testing different animals stings ?
One episode was all ocean aquatic animals . Lion fish , starfish , and they rated each sting from pain , hoe long it lasts etc ?

Here’s a little thing you could check out if you are interested in this topic. Enjoy.

 

[Rmckoy]

I don’t think so but I can’t be sure. The documentary I saw was focused on the Crown of Thorns and the devastation that it is having on the GBR. The first half was basically about the damage being done, and the second half was basically about what’s being done to counter.

Sounds interesting .
I don’t believe everything happening can be blamed solely on one species but a combination . Perhaps in addition to other things as well ?

what documentary ?

 

[Rmckoy]

Here’s a little thing you could check out if you are interested in this topic. Enjoy.

What happens when they completely wipe out this species ?
Is there something else that It also controls which will later become a issue ?

 

[bruno3047]

Here’s a little thing you could check out if you are interested in this topic. Enjoy.

What happens when they completely wipe out this species ?
Is there something else that It also controls which will later become a issue ?

That’s always a question when you take the biological approach to pest eradication. Are you removing the predator of something that’s even worse? Or, in some cases, are you actually adding something that’s even worse? Tough call and way above my pay grade.

 

[jabberwock]

That’s always a question when you take the biological approach to pest eradication. Are you removing the predator of something that’s even worse? Or, in some cases, are you actually adding something that’s even worse? Tough call and way above my pay grade.

A classic example from Australia. Import sugar cane as a cash crop, with it comes cane beetles. They multiple unchecked. Introduce cane toads to eat the cane beetles. Nothing eats cane toads. They are still a problem to this day.

 

[Rmckoy]

That’s always a question when you take the biological approach to pest eradication. Are you removing the predator of something that’s even worse? Or, in some cases, are you actually adding something that’s even worse? Tough call and way above my pay grade.

There were a few examples of this exact topic .

I read something I believe was northern Ontario Canada .
they introduced cougars to control deer population instead of opening up hunting regulations .
Same as there were a few pest bugs , orange lady bugs I believe were one .
These introduced to control something become a large issue later

 

[MoshJosh]

I'm far from an expert on the GBR, so I want to make sure I'm understanding this.

Billions of dollars have been spent to preserve the reef?

Massive efforts have been undertaken to save the reef?

Scientists agree that the ills plaguing the reef are varied, but among them is the rapid change in climate caused by humans?

A recent study indicates some improvement in one area of the reef, though, other areas continue to suffer?

. . . this means what? That climate change isn't real?

Don't get me wrong, I'm glad to hear positive news about the reef, but the study I read seemed to contain plenty of bad news as well. I think putting too positive a spin on this information (or focusing only on the positive aspects of news) is misleading and distracting from what is still a pretty dire situation?

 

[ReefEco]

It may be comforting to see a momentary bounce back of the GBR after so many bleaching events, and it does speak to how fast hard corals can grow. This might seem especially comforting as coral-holics and how we benefit from wild collection. I don't think, however, that we should ignore the study's warning that the overall trajectory of the GBR is still fraught with risk and negative pressures (and keep in mind the study surveyed less than 3% of the GBR and that about half of those 87 reefs surveyed were done so prior to the 2022 bleaching events in the GBR), and that we as hobbyists can still make the ongoing choice to purchase aquacultured corals to do our small part to help. I also don't think that in any discussion of fact-based, evidence-based science upon which preservation of corals, our hobby, or the planet may depend, devolving that discussion into silly polarities about fake news is useful or insightful. If one is going to post about scientific updates about corals around the world, which is very relevant to all of us here, I would suggest sticking to original source studies from reputable sources whose guiding principle is education and sharing the science.

 

[Sump Crab]

The planet will return to homeostasis once the human species is eradicated. Until then, all we are doing is rearranging deck chairs on the titanic.

I think the problem with this type of statement is when looking at the history of the planet through a secular lens then humans are just another natural development in the timeline of earth. That means whatever humans do to the planet is natural. Do we look at mass extinctions in the past as right or wrong? Or just as something that happened on the timeline. Each and every extinction event just opened the door for new species to rise. Some day, millions of years into the future there will be animals specifically evolved to live off nothing but our garbage or whatever other crap we leave behind. The way we leave the planet will be just what the creatures of the future need to thrive.

Now if one views through a non secular lens then the argument that we need to do better certainly becomes more interesting. That’s when the morality of our treatment of the planet really comes into play.

 

[wareagle]

Great barrier reef should be a fully protected national/global park . No fishing. No coral harvesting . No shipping routes for tankers or cruise lines.

Australia is really weird, it's illegal to export any living native mammal, bird, reptile, or amphibian for commercial purposes, but coral didn't make the ban list. They will commonly blacklist zoos and aquariums that try and "donate"/sell anything that came from there. We're constantly hearing about the GBR being in trouble, but the coral doesn't even get a quarter of the protection that other native animals get, seems odd.

 

[Spare time]

Yep.

Great Barrier Reef Defies Doomsayers with Record Coral Growth

Australia's Great Barrier Reef is thriving and defying every forecast of impending doom made for the past 25 years - and longer.

www.breitbart.com

Stop spreading misinformation on here. This is the 2nd time I have seen a user share Breitbart information. That organization is boldly biased and political. Sharing environmental "information" from Breitbart is the same as asking a flat earther if the moon landing was fake. If you want to read science news, get it from journal publications or google scholar (i.e. the article itself)

 

[ReefEco]

Interesting Jrain904 - hmm... I look at the history of the planet mainly through a secular lens, to use your thinking, and based on science, yet I certainly don't think that what we are doing to the planet is natural, or can be excused as such. At all. Just the opposite. Black bears where I live up in the mountains already eat our trash, and their lives are shortened because of it. I also don't need to view through a non-secular lens to make a morality judgement about what we are doing, if that was your implication? I think the argument for not trashing the planet is necessary as a human issue, irregardless of through what lens you view the world...

 

[bruno3047]

Climate change is real. No one can doubt that. But it has never been proven that it is man-made using the “scientific method”. Never. Been. Proven. Scientists look at greenhouses and try to correlate the effects of elevated CO2 and methane levels that occur in a greenhouse with planet earth. Planet earth is not a greenhouse. And it has never been proven that the earth’s atmosphere functions the same way a greenhouse does. One thing we do know is that elevated CO2 levels in the atmosphere are beneficial to plants. In fact, some people argue that the elevated CO2 levels have caused a “greening of the planet“. Some people point to the restoration of the Amazon rainforest as proof of this. Other people say that elevated CO2 levels boost crop yields thereby, reducing world hunger. Until I see proof that climate change is man-made, using the “scientific method“, I remain skeptical of man-made climate change.

 

[jabberwock]

Climate change is real. No one can doubt that. But it has never been proven that it is man-made using the “scientific method”. Never. Been. Proven. Scientists look at greenhouses and try to correlate the effects of elevated CO2 and methane levels that occur in a greenhouse with planet earth. Planet earth is not a greenhouse. And it has never been proven that the earth’s atmosphere functions the same way a greenhouse does. One thing we do know is that elevated CO2 levels in the atmosphere are beneficial to plants. In fact, some people argue that the elevated CO2 levels have caused a “greening of the planet“. Some people point to the restoration of the Amazon rainforest as proof of this. Other people say that elevated CO2 levels boost crop yields thereby, reducing world hunger. Until I see proof that climate change is man-made, using the “scientific method“, I remain skeptical of man-made climate change.

Bruno, I doubt that climate change is real.