Slashdot Mirror

The scientists who have most studied the Reef work for the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, and these are what they list as primary threats to the reef. Warming is far from the only problem (and acidification is a fair ways down the list) - agricultural runoff has been a problem for years, and the stress from that is aggravating the stress from warming. The other threats are a much bigger issue for the southern third of the reef, where the water remains relatively cool.

Additionally, the science research includes efforts to identify and nurture coral species that are more resistant to warming waters and acidification. It may be too late to preserve the bulk of the Reef in its current form, but we may be able to lay the groundwork to speed any future recovery.

Sea levels at the last ice age were about 120 meters lower than they are today. Most of the reef has a depth around 35 meters. Thus most of the reef - as we see it today - was about 85 meters above the tide line just 15,000 years ago. If it was laid down 2 million years ago, then the reef has migrated up the continental shelf as the water levels increased.

Before Global Warming was blamed for it, the Crown of Thorns starfish was identified as the culprit. It's not clear to me why temperature is now the cause with no mention of the starfish.

According to research by the Australian Institute of Marine Science, coral cover on surveyed reefs between 1985 and 2012 declined by about 50 per cent over that 27 year period. Crown-of-thorns starfish were responsible for almost half of this decline.

Research estimates that if crown-of-thorns starfish predation had not occurred over the past three decades, there would have been a net increase in average coral cover.

Yes, you're wrong. The strong El Niño amplified sea surface temperatures for the Reef.

Yes, you're wrong. The strong El Niño amplified sea surface temperatures for the Reef.

The Great Barrier Reef has been monitored by AIMS since 1980. The first mass bleaching event occurred in (then) record warm year 1998 when 50 per cent of the reefs suffered bleaching. The next in 2002 where 60 per cent of reefs were affected. In both events, about five per cent of the Great Barrier Reef's coral reefs were severely damaged. (compared to 22% now)

The impact from this most recent bleaching event, the most widespread and severe ever recorded on the Great Barrier Reef, is still unfolding.

So even if the Russians are correct, it doesn't matter. :rollseyes

While you were rolling your eyes, you overlooked the context of that sentence. "It" in this case was referring to coral bleaching and melting glaciers. Regardless of whether the Russians win their $10K, the climate is being disrupted, and we are already seeing the effects.

is if these things actually get out in the wild.

"Fish", you ask. "How could they get out in the wild?"

Simple. People flush them down the toilet. Where I live, Carp are a big problem. Our lake is full of them, they disturb all the mud and turn the lake into more of a mud-puddle. How did they get there? People flushing goldfish down the toilet, apparently.

Now, that's bad. But imagine if The Great Barrier Reef got a couple of these genetically engineered monsters onto it. It's biological integrity would be instantly compromised; who knows what will happen with these fish in 5, 10, 50 years time?

-- james

As the Road to Tycho is for intellectual property reform advocates, so should this be for those interested in the environment.

Commondreams.org has written a fictional address; conservatives and non-believers will call it propaganda, but then, as the weather patterns continue to change and the news stories about environmental catastrophes keep coming, they may have some trouble making the charge stick...