Category Archives: reef conservation

Sunscreen Chemical in Soaps, Cosmetics, & Body Fragrances Threaten Coral Reefs, says Haereticus

Sunscreen Chemical in Soaps, Cosmetics, & Body Fragrances Threaten Coral Reefs, says Haereticus

Industry: Environment

A scientific study to be published shows that a chemical in soaps, cosmetics and body fragrances threatens coral reef conservation and may prohibit recovery of coral reef

Virginia, U.S.A. (PRUnderground) January 15th, 2014

A team of marine scientists from Virginia, Florida, Israel, and the U.S. National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration published a study demonstrating that a common UV absorber found in over 380 different product lines of soaps, laundry detergents, cosmetics, and body fragrances is highly toxic to corals. This chemical, benzophenone-2, commonly known as “BP-2”, is released into the environment through discharges from municipal, residential, and boat/ship waste-water and sewage. Once in the environment, BP-2 can quickly kill juvenile corals at very low concentrations – parts per billion. Furthermore, it can cause corals to bleach – a process where corals that are normally, pink, yellow, purple and brown turn white – often resulting in coral mortality. These researchers also discovered that BP-2 was potentially mutagenic to corals by causing damage to its DNA. BP-2 is similar to oxybenzone, the active ingredient found in many sunscreen lotions sold over the counter today.

What does this mean to coral reef conservation and how does this contribute to the staggering rate of coral reef degradation? One example is the devastation of coral reefs in the Caribbean and Florida Keys. Over 80% of coral reefs in the Caribbean have disappeared since the early 1960s. A vast majority of these reefs are coastal, near-shore reefs. According to the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy, the top three causes of coral reef decline are pollution, abnormally high sea temperatures, and over-exploitation of coral reef resources.

• Benzophenone-2 has been used in personal-care products since the 1960s, the beginning of the “chemical pollution revolution.”

• BP-2 is not removed from most municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and for many islands in the Caribbean, as well as in the IndoPacific, this discharge is often released within 500 yards of near-shore coral reefs.

• Residential septic systems and cesspits can also be major contributors to releasing BP-2 onto near-shore coral reefs.

• Growing human population and activity in the Caribbean and IndoPacific (e.g., Hawaii, Maldives) also means increased waste-water pollution in the coral reef environment – suggesting that environmental pollution of BP-2 levels have increased over time.

• Increasing BP-2 pollution of the marine environment is a serious threat to coral reef restoration efforts and may be a significant factor in why there has been almost no recovery of coral reefs along many of these degraded coasts.

Dr. C.A. Downs, Executive Director of Haereticus Environmental Lab (HEL) who led the research stated that, “Pollution of coral reefs, as a major cause of coral reef degradation, has been intentionally ignored. The irony is that pollution is also the easiest factor to recognize and mitigate. Until we can address the problem of pollution, there is little hope in restoring vibrant communities of coral reefs. In the case of BP-2 pollution, there are a range of options that can be considered for reducing its impact to reefs – from working with manufacturers and innovating more environmentally sustainable products to educating consumers regarding product selection and product disposal.”

Feedback from the scientific community-

Joseph DiNardo, a toxicologist who spent 37 years developing and safety-testing skincare products for several large cosmetic and pharmaceutical corporations, after reading the results of this groundbreaking study stated, “We have overpopulated our world not just with people, we have overpopulated our world with toxic substances—toxic substances we know nothing about. We need to know about the impact these chemicals have on our environment, and unfortunately, we don’t.”

Dr. Michael Risk, a professor of coral reef biology and geology, professed that, “This is more bad news for coral reefs, more evidence of the pervasive and pressing impacts of land-based sources of pollution. The results show that something humans use to protect their skin or toiletries can reach the sea from wastewater discharges, and shut down coral reproduction. In affected areas, the shutdown of larval (juvenile coral) survival means that there soon will be only a few ancient corals staggering on: and when some accident or storm or yacht takes them out, there will be no recovery.”

The scientific article can be e-accessed at the following website: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10646-013-1161-y#

Downs CA, Kramarsky-Winter E, Fauth JE, Segal R, Bronstein O, Jeger R, Lichtenfeld Y, Woodley CM, Pennington P, Kushmaro A, Loya Y. Toxicological effects of the sunscreen UV filter, benzophenone-2, on planula and in vitro cells of the coral, Stylophora pistillata. Ecotoxicology. DOI 10.1007/s10646-013-1161-y

About Haereticus Environmental Laboratory – Haereticus Environmental Laboratory (HEL) is a nonprofit, scientific organization dedicated to increasing scientific, social and economic knowledge of environmental habitats in order to better conserve and restore threatened habitats, resources and ecosystems. Visit www.haereticus-lab.org to learn more about our work.

ENN: Human values and coral reef management

From: Robin Blackstone, ENN
Published December 16, 2013 11:12 AM

 

“Human values need to be considered in decision-making to improve long-term coral reef management” says Dr. Christina Hicks, research fellow from Stanford. Researchers from the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies (CoECRS) at James Cook University and Stanford University are linking social science to ecology in order to improve the environmental problems in these sensitive ecosystems. Currently little thought is given to the human community’s needs including food and wellbeing for the more powerful economic interests, such as tourism, which drives coral reef management.

Yet the fishers in the local community play an essential role in coral reef ecology management. Dr. Nick Graham, senior research fellow at the ARC CoECRS says a lack of ‘ownership’ of reef resources for fishers, who depend on fish for their food and livelihoods, underlies a main area of conflict and their priorities need to be considered when managing these natural environments.

Resultantly Hicks and Graham led a study to focus on measuring and comparing the priorities of various coral reef ecosystem stakeholders including managers, scientists and fishers. Fundamentally all groups agreed that fishery, education, and habitat were high priorities but each group prioritized a little differently reflecting the conflict. Managers prioritized culture over the scientists’ priority for coastal protection and fishers’ prioritized fishery and fish education. Managers’ priorities were ultimately more aligned with scientists’ than with fishers but the extent of their agreement differed significantly.

The group believes that measuring ecosystem service priorities would highlight key areas of agreement and conflict, both within and across stakeholder groups. In this way each concern would be reflected when communicating and determining management approach for the coral reef’s ecosystem.

Using network analysis to map interactions between stakeholders’ priorities, distinct synergies and trade-offs were identified in how ecosystem services were administered. For fishers, trade-offs emerged between two services, both of a higher priority: fishery and habitat. Conversely, for scientists, trade-offs emerged between services of a higher and lower priority: habitat and culture. The trade-offs and synergies that emerged for the managers overlap with both fishers and scientists suggesting a potential brokering role for managers in balancing priorities and conflicts for all groups.

“Communities that are engaged and recognized are more likely to trust and support their management agencies,” adds Dr. Hicks. Governments who consult local communities to develop co-management plans generally reduce conflict; see increased livelihood and ecological benefits (such as a rise in fish stocks) in their area. Presently countries like Papua New Guinea and Kenya have successful arrangements.

Read more at ARC Centre of Excellence Coral Reef Studies.

Coral Reef image via Shutterstock.

DIve Travel Business News: The Ocean is our Silent Partner: Yet it has No Place at the Dive Industry Table

http://www.divetravelbusinessnews.com/divetravelarticle/the-ocean-is-our-silent-partner-yet-it-has-no-place-at-the-dive-industry-table

 

(Dive Travel Business News.com – Nov 15, 2013) — DTBN.com Editorial —  by Laurie J. Wilson

DEMA’s Moving Towards 2020: Developing a Strategic Vision for the Recreational Diving Industry brainstorming session was held on the closing Saturday of DEMA Show 2013 in Orlando, Florida.

Scheduled during show exhibit hours, the meeting was well-attended, and well-organized. Before we were divided into working groups, DEMA’s Executive Director Tom Ingram walked the participants through the latest findings of DEMA surveys that pointed to potential markets to re-engage lapsed divers and activate new ones.

It was the first slide that grabbed my attention:
The slide, entitled “Dive Industry Stakeholders” was described something like this: “You all know this already,
but we have to say it anyway”…

According to the Diving Equipment & Marketing Association, the Stakeholders in the Dive Industry are listed as follows:

1. Manufacturers
2. Certification Agencies
3. Media
4. Dive Centers
5. Travel Suppliers

Is there a stakeholder missing?
My first impression was, where’s the environment? Does it not have a seat at the table? Granted, the answer to this question is simple: the DEMA stakeholder list is based on the Association membership segments that have voting rights in the Diving Equipment & Marketing Association. In our association, you pay to play as a dive industry stakeholder.

This point of view completely misses the point, but I am getting ahead of myself.

The Saga of Sipadan
Earlier at DEMA Show 2013, I attended a thought-provoking seminar by Malaysia dive industry pioneer and International Scuba Diving Hall of Famer, Clement Lee. Now a retired partner in Borneo Divers, Clement was once responsible for opening up that gem of an Island called Sipadan, on the east coast of Borneo. And he explained at the Tourism Malaysia seminar how he was partially responsible for closing it down.

As a personal back story, I’d met Clement when I visited the much lauded Sipadan after speaking at DEMA Asia in Kuala Lumpur in 1996. It was the best coral reef diving I’ve ever done. In fact, David Doubilet – along with his 18 cameras – was at Clement’s resort shooting Sipadan’s spectacular coral reef drop-offs and helixing schools of barracuda for National Geographic. Sipadan was really remote – it took a lot of time and effort to get there. It wasn’t cheap either. And the accommodations were “rustic”. Surely with all these factors in place, it would be a gem forever?

But not 7 years after this visit, Clement had decided to pull his resort operation out of Sipadan because of the state of the reefs. He saw that if strong controls were not put in place, the reefs would be destroyed in as little as three years.

Sipadan was being dived to death.

Clement asked fellow dive operators to do the same – to give Sipadan a rest. He explained to the members of the Malaysia Sport Diving Association (MSDA) that while they were all in competition with each other, they shared a common value – and more to the point – a common valuable asset called THE OCEAN. If they could all agree to take care of the ocean together, all the other aspects of their businesses would fall into place in a collaborative win-win.

“The environment is our silent partner,” said Clement to his peers. These are the words of a wise and very successful businessman; yet they fell on deaf ears.

Even with this enlightened plea, the other operators were not interested in leaving Sipadan;  they were hoping to reap all the advantages they could while the going was still good. Clement chose to exit anyway. And it was soon after that that the government asked all operators to leave the island. A strict  limit of 120 divers per day was imposed on outside operators to the island, and several other beautiful dive islands were opened up to balance and mitigate diver impact.

The Success of Sustainability
In 2014 it will be 10 years since Sipadan was “closed” as a resort island and proper controls were put into place to allow it to regenerate itself. It is a huge success story that I’ve asked Clement Lee to share more fully with us in an upcoming post. In a nutshell, the looming environmental crisis in Sipadan brought operators together to work together, it instilled sustainable dive business practices, it opened up new areas, it created more business for everyone, while protecting Malaysia’s marine heritage. The crux of this story is critical for our industry to understand:

The ocean is our silent partner.
And if we don’t take care of it we have no business. It seems so obvious, so essential to our business model and operational mindset, and yet the ocean has no seat at our industry table. It’s evident by its absence on the “Dive Industry Stakeholders” slide at DEMA’s Moving Towards 20:20 brainstorming session.

This is a huge oversight, and we are ALL responsible. The ocean has been our silent partner all along. But with stronger and more frequent storms, coral reef degradation, ocean acidification, coral bleaching, plastic pollution, dwindling shark numbers, diseased whales and dolphins, disseminated fish populations, the ocean is talking to us loud and clear – in the only way it can.

Who cares enough?
Up until now, only a minority of dive operations can be viewed as being truly eco-friendly; giving back through volunteer efforts, partnering with non-profits and scientific groups, making environmental donations as part of doing business, engaging and educating the local community and its own customers, supporting marine protected areas, investing in sustainable infrastructure, and following sustainable practices to protect the environment on which their businesses are based:  Wakatobi in Indonesia, Misool Eco-Resort in Raja Ampat, Matava in Fiji, Southern Cross Club in Little Cayman are some examples.

There are wholesalers and tour operators like Deep Blue Adventures and G Adventures that have the environment and social responsibility as a core piece in their missions. There are dive center owners like Steve Mussman at Sea Lab Diving in Atlanta, Georgia and Sage Dalton at Ocean First Divers in Boulder Colorado who put the ocean first. We are seeing non-profits like the Coral Restoration Foundation partnering with dive operations and dive destination governments to restore reefs and generate new business.

This list of ocean-friendly businesses is by no means exhaustive, but it gives you some examples of those who have brought the ocean into their businesses as a full partner, and not as an after-thought.

It’s time to stop taking our ocean environment for granted.
It’s time to stop ignoring the problem. It’s time to stop paying lip service to marine conservation. Making short shrift of our environmental responsibility is epidemic in this industry.  It’s time to take responsibility.  It’s time for ocean action. We are on the leading edge of ocean protection. As dive business owners we have a vested interest in protecting our marine environment. We see what’s going on. We can do something about it.

Yes. We. Can.

This was the consensus of the participants at a session sponsored by the Colorado Scuba Retailers Association and the Colorado Ocean Coalition, entitled Bluing of the Dive Industry hosted by SSI president Doug McNeeese on Nov 8 at DEMA Show 2013. In spite of the last minute scheduling, and the fact it took place concurrently with the DEMA Show’s Keynote address, it was attended by an impressive cross-section of industry stakeholders who want the environment recognized as an industry stakeholder. Scientists, marine NGO’s, and government policy people were also at this “table”.

This concept of a Blue Industry is a no-brainer that only a relative few are willing to fully embrace. But it’s clear:  If we don’t make an honored place at the head of the table for our oceans, we will have no industry.  The environment must be a part of our business mission, and be an integral part of our day-to-day operations, education programs, trip planning and lifestyle. It’s good for profits, it’s good for the planet and it’s good for people.

It’s a blue attitude. And it’s how we must roll.

Bluing the Dive Industry
You can do one thing right now to make your operation more sustainable. What will it be?  We’ve provided a list of links to Ocean-Friendly Practices on this site. But you can start super simple with this National Geo Ten Things You Can Do To Save The Oceans.  And visit the websites of the examples mentioned above. They will give you some ideas as to where you can take immediate action.

As the Bluing the Industry working groups move forward, I’ll be able to share more specific practices, tools and techniques in upcoming posts.

If you have information, eco-friendly examples or best practices you’d like to share, I’m all ears. If  you would like to join one of the Bluing the Dive Industry working groups I’d be happy to put you in touch with those in the know. Either way, you can email me at Laurie.Wilson@divetravelbusiness.com

** This RSS Feed is brought to you by Dive Travel BusinessNews.com **

 

 

Wildlife Promise: Artificial Reefs: Restoration Beyond Recreation?

Wildlife Promise

 

 


 

 

Posted: 19 Nov 2013 12:15 PM PST

 

Over the past few decades the five Gulf States have built artificial reefs both inshore and offshore with the aim of enhancing recreational fishing and diving opportunities. State and local governments on the Gulf Coast have expressed interest in creating additional artificial reefs with some of the money from the federal funds resulting from the BP oil disaster.

 

 

b50ym1n8ryw31pmkr/4A8CDEA2.jpg

 

Artificial Reef in Southwest Florida. Flickr photo by Florida Sea Grant

 

It is important to make sure these projects are funded appropriately and implemented using the best available science.

 

Artificial Reef Science: Are We There Yet?

 

A number of environmental and economic considerations should be considered when planning and designing new artificial reef projects. Water quality, wave interaction, bottom composition, reef profile, and materials used for construction are just a few things that can influence the effectiveness of these habitats, or potentially cause harm to adjacent habitats.

 

For a more comprehensive look at Gulf State artificial reef programs and key considerations in implementation or management, please take a look at NWF’s new white paper: Artificial Reefs of the Gulf of Mexico: A Review of Gulf State Programs & Key Considerations.

 

b50ym1n8ryw31pmkr/4AF87077.jpg

 

Reef Pyramids being deployed in Florida. Flickr photo by Florida Fish & Wildlife

 

The bottom line is that scientists are still working to unravel the functionality of artificial reefs.  Some experts believe that artificial reefs can function comparably to natural reef communities. Others argue that artificial reefs merely attract existing fish from the adjacent open water habitat, forming more dense fish aggregations.  Only time, and additional research, will tell.

 

Natural Reefs vs. Artificial Reefs

 

Artificial reef projects are designed to enhance recreational fishing opportunities. Reef restoration projects are designed to restore the ecological functions provided by reef systems.  In cases where materials of similar type and size to historical or natural habitats-such as oyster reefs-are placed in nearshore waters in order to help the recovery of related ecological services, the term “artificial reef” is misleading. Because reef restoration projects can restore or replace “natural resources, habitats, or natural resource services” damaged by the Deepwater Horizon oil disaster, they may qualify as an appropriate use of Natural Resource Damage Assessment funding, or even other spill-related resources like the RESTORE Act and the National Fish & Wildlife Foundation Gulf Environmental Benefit Fund.

 

Loss of Human Use?

 

Artificial reefs develop communities of encrusting organisms and thus attract fish, but studies have shown that the communities that develop on artificial reefs remain quite different from those on natural reefs. Because artificial reef projects don’t serve to replace or restore the harm to natural resources, they have a more limited source of appropriate spill-related funding.

 

b50ym1n8ryw31pmkr/23C352B7.jpg

 

Nearshore oyster reef restoration at Helen Wood Park near Mobile, AL. Flickr photo by CesarHarada

 

These types of projects could help to restore or replace the loss of human use stemming from the Deepwater Horizon disaster:

 

1.      The oil disaster resulted in significant closures of recreational fishing, boating and swimming ground. Scaled appropriately, artificial reefs could help compensate the public for lost access (or “human use”) to the Gulf of Mexico by generating new opportunities for angling, snorkeling, and engaging in other recreational activities.

 

2.      Artificial reef projects intended to restore or replace existing artificial reefs that were harmed during the oil disaster would be a justifiable use under the Natural Resources Damage Assessment process.

 

The Gulf of Mexico is an economic powerhouse and a national treasure. Natural and restored reef habitats can help make it whole again in the wake of the disaster. Strategic and appropriate investment of spill-related funding to restore its use, wildlife habitats, water quality and diversity of ecosystems will pay environmental and economic dividends for generations to come.

 

 

You are subscribed to email updates from Wildlife Promise

Coralations: COURT: Federal Government Must Protect Caribbean Coral Reefs, Better monitoring of fisheries required

A federal district court has ruled that the National Marine Fisheries Service violated the law by allowing fishing for depleted parrotfish and other algae-eating reef fish species without properly monitoring the fishery’s impacts on rare corals that depend on healthy fish populations. The decision came in response to an Endangered Species Act suit filed in January 2012 by Earthjustice on behalf of two conservation groups (CORALations and the Center for Biological Diversity), and Mary Adele Donnelly.  Local counsel for Earthjustice on this case was Miguel Sarriera, who has represented a number of groups battling for environmental protection throughout Puerto Rico.

The court determined the Fisheries Service must do a better job monitoring the effects of commercial fishing on elkhorn and staghorn coral in the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico. These coral species are protected by the Endangered Species Act and serve as essential habitat for fish and other marine species.  Parrotfish protect these corals by grazing on algae that otherwise would smother the reef; removing the fish allows the algae to dominate reef systems and deny corals the space needed to grow.

In his decision Senior Judge Salvador E. Casellas ruled that the Fisheries Service’s monitoring plan was invalid because, as a baseline matter, the agency didn’t even know how many parrotfish were present to begin with and in any event had not committed to monitoring the impacts of the fishery on the parrotfish themselves. Under these circumstances, the court concluded the Service had illegally failed to establish  an adequate  procedure for verifying whether its fishing plan was preventing excessive harm to  the threatened elkhorn and staghorn corals.

“In the Caribbean, we have two big industries, fishing and tourism. Healthy coral reefs support both industries, but they have been dying for decades. Local communities are working with fishermen to successfully restore their reefs; farming corals on nurseries and transplanting them to natural reef in small protected areas,” said Mary Ann Lucking, CORALations. “The ruling compels government to revisit the failures of the balanced fishery management approach in general versus an ecosystem based approach, like community designated marine protected areas.”

“We are concerned that NMFS continues to open new fisheries without safeguards for protected species,” said Mary Adele Donnelly. “The court has demanded the Fisheries Service looks before leaping into yet another ecological disaster.”

“We know that corals face increasing threats from climate change and disease. Keeping a healthy, diverse population of algae-eaters on the reef is crucial to keeping coral reefs healthy,” said Andrea Treece, of Earthjustice.

“The corals in the Caribbean are dying – anyone can see it. This decision means that there will be enough parrotfish around for a healthy coral reef that could then become home for even more precious reef wildlife,” said Miyoko Sakashita, oceans director at the Center for Biological Diversity.

Parrotfish eat algae that can otherwise smother coral habitat.  U.S. Caribbean reefs already suffer from excessive algae cover, a situation exacerbated by scooping out the grazing fish necessary to hold back algal growth.  This situation leads to what scientists call a “death spiral” in which the removal of algae-eaters like parrotfish leads to increased algae and decreased coral, which in turn results in fewer fish and other reef creatures.

Not so long ago, elkhorn and staghorn corals were the main reef-building coral species in the Caribbean.  Yet these species have declined by as much as 98-99 percent since the 1970s thanks to stressors including overfishing, disease, and climate change.  As the corals decline, so does quality habitat for fish and other creatures.

Contacts:

Mary Ann Lucking, CORALations, (787) 556-6234

Miguel Sarriera, (787) 630-8319

Marydele Donnelly, Sea Turtle Conservancy, (410) 750-1561

Andrea Treece, Earthjustice, (415) 217-2089

Miyoko Sakashita, Center for Biological Diversity, (415) 632-5308  


CORALations is an award-winning coral reef conservation organization based on the island of Culebra, Puerto Rico.  CORALations’ conservation work includes partnering on the first successful staghorn coral farming and transplantation project in U.S. Caribbean waters.  CORALations comments on the sustainability of proposed development projects in the coastal zone, litigates coastal clean water issues, and comments on endangered species and fisheries legislation.  Visit us at www.coralations.org – or on facebook at CORALations Culebra.

The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 500,000 members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.  Visit us at www.biologicaldiversity.org 

Earthjustice is the largest non-profit public interest environmental law organization in the world. Since our founding in 1973, we have been dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment, through litigation and advocacy. Visit us at www.earthjustice.org