I must first confess to this idea not being my own. This thread will be based on a lot of work that has been done by Jeremy Jackson and Jere Lipps.
The main topic is should we be trying to restore reefs. I decided to start this thread after reading some threads about man-made global warming on another forum. So, there are several issues I would like to address regarding this issue.
1) What state are we restoring the reefs to?
2) Are short-term restorations using man-made items sustainable?
3) Are these short-term man-made items even working?
What state are we actually trying to restore the reefs to? Are we restoring them back to some point 50 years ago? 1,000 years ago? We are restoring them to some state that we deem the most valuable. We like the big corals and the colorful fish when we go scuba diving. But what if the natural state of that reef also includes a lot of sharks? They kind of hamper tourists from wanting to snorkel. What about reef ecosystems that are not like those of the Great barrier reef? There are natural reef ecosystems that are certainly not as pretty as others, but these seem to take a backseat to the pretty ones. Why do we overlook them? It goes back to our decision about what we value more. And do we even have the right to make that judgement call? I don't think so.
A lot of the short-term fixes include introducing large concrete blocks, shipwrecks, iron cages with electrical currents circulating through them and other man-made objects that are meant to promote coral growth. The issue is that most of these either don't work or do more damage than good. The rebar cages with electrical currents do get some corals to grow on them for a short period of time, but take away the electrical current and it turns out that the material that the corals are precipitating is a mineral called Brucite, which is unstable. Not only is it not sustainable over the long-term to continue to supply electricity to these cages, but even the coral that grows on it will die when it is turned off. As for the concrete blocks and other man-made substrates that corals attach to and grow on, these are typically dislodged during big storms. Unlike the seafloor these large blocks move and crush the coral on them and the coral around them. Not very effective in the long-run.
So, let's see what you guys think. My opinion is to leave the reefs alone. That means stop trying to restore them with unnatural products and stop building hotels on top of them. I think we can spend the money we waste on reef restoration on better projects, like trash pick-up.
The main topic is should we be trying to restore reefs. I decided to start this thread after reading some threads about man-made global warming on another forum. So, there are several issues I would like to address regarding this issue.
1) What state are we restoring the reefs to?
2) Are short-term restorations using man-made items sustainable?
3) Are these short-term man-made items even working?
What state are we actually trying to restore the reefs to? Are we restoring them back to some point 50 years ago? 1,000 years ago? We are restoring them to some state that we deem the most valuable. We like the big corals and the colorful fish when we go scuba diving. But what if the natural state of that reef also includes a lot of sharks? They kind of hamper tourists from wanting to snorkel. What about reef ecosystems that are not like those of the Great barrier reef? There are natural reef ecosystems that are certainly not as pretty as others, but these seem to take a backseat to the pretty ones. Why do we overlook them? It goes back to our decision about what we value more. And do we even have the right to make that judgement call? I don't think so.
A lot of the short-term fixes include introducing large concrete blocks, shipwrecks, iron cages with electrical currents circulating through them and other man-made objects that are meant to promote coral growth. The issue is that most of these either don't work or do more damage than good. The rebar cages with electrical currents do get some corals to grow on them for a short period of time, but take away the electrical current and it turns out that the material that the corals are precipitating is a mineral called Brucite, which is unstable. Not only is it not sustainable over the long-term to continue to supply electricity to these cages, but even the coral that grows on it will die when it is turned off. As for the concrete blocks and other man-made substrates that corals attach to and grow on, these are typically dislodged during big storms. Unlike the seafloor these large blocks move and crush the coral on them and the coral around them. Not very effective in the long-run.
So, let's see what you guys think. My opinion is to leave the reefs alone. That means stop trying to restore them with unnatural products and stop building hotels on top of them. I think we can spend the money we waste on reef restoration on better projects, like trash pick-up.
