Guest essay by Eric Worrall
The Guardian claims tour operators are refusing to take people to see coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef, for fear it will put tourists off from visiting. My question – if coral bleaching has killed the whole reef, why bother hiding it?
Great Barrier Reef: tourism operators urge Australian government to tackle climate change
Letter calls for rapid shift to renewable energy after natural wonder affected by worst coral bleaching event yet seen.
Tourism operators have broken their silence about the worst crisis ever faced by the Great Barrier Reef, with more than 170 businesses and individuals pleading with the Australian government to take urgent action to tackle climate change and ensure the reef survives.
Many tourism operators in Queensland have previously been quiet about concerns for the reef, fearful that speaking about the mass bleaching event would turn tourists away, lowering their incomes in the short term.
The Great Barrier Reef is in the midst of the worst bleaching event ever seen, with virtually the entire reef affected. Unusually warm water has killed as much as half the corals in the northern sections and scientists have found climate change will make the those conditions normal in fewer than 20 years.
A group has now spoken out, writing to several politicians, including the prime minister, the federal environment minister and local representatives, as well as taking out an advertisement in a Queensland paper.
“Many tourism operators, they don’t want people not to come to the reef, so they’ve been reluctant to speak out” said John Rumney, who has run diving and fishing tours on the Great Barrier Reef for the past four decades.
“They are worried it will have a negative impact on the short-term cash flow. But if we don’t take care of this issue we will have no reef in the future.”
Hangon, does that mean the reef is expected to recover from this episode of bleaching?
Australia’s largest oceanic reef system, Scott Reef, is relatively isolated, sitting out in the Indian Ocean some 250 km from the remote coastline of north Western Australia (WA). Prospects for the reef looked gloomy when in 1998 it suffered catastrophic mass bleaching, losing around 80% of its coral cover. The study shows that it took just 12 years to recover.
Spanning 15 years, data collected and analysed by the researchers shows how after the 1998 mass bleaching the few remaining corals provided low numbers of recruits (new corals) for Scott Reef. On that basis recovery was projected to take decades, yet within 12 years the cover and diversity of corals had recovered to levels similar to those seen pre-bleaching.
“The initial projections for Scott Reef were not optimistic,” says Dr James Gilmour from AIMS, the lead author on the publication, “because, unlike reefs on the Great Barrier Reef, there were few if any reefs nearby capable of supplying new recruits to replenish the lost corals at Scott Reef.
“However, the few small corals that did settle at Scott Reef had excellent rates of survival and growth, whereas on many nearshore reefs high levels of algae and sediment, and poor water quality will often suppress this recovery.
Read more: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/07/good-news-about-coral-reefs-they-recovered-from-warming/
What about the future? Assuming global warming occurs, what happens to reefs which are frequently subject to extreme temperatures?
We tend to associate coral reefs with tropical seas of around 28 degrees, where even slight warming can have devastating effects on corals. But in the Arabian/Persian Gulf, corals survive seawater temperatures of up to 36 degrees Celsius every summer, heat levels that would kill corals elsewhere.
In their study, the NOCS team worked closely with NYUAD researchers to select and characterise model corals from the Arabian/Persian Gulf, which will facilitate future molecular-scale investigations into why they can tolerate heat stress.
Read more: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/02/06/some-corals-do-well-in-warmer-waters-researchers-ask-how/
Perhaps there is a protective adaption which helps coral survive extreme temperatures?
That warning about poor water quality near coastlines, near human habitation is a concern – what could humans be doing, which might be stressing the corals of the Great Barrier Reef, causing them to become more vulnerable to warm water?
Swimmers’ Sunscreen Killing Off Coral
The sunscreen that you dutifully slather on before a swim on the beach may be protecting your body—but a new study finds that the chemicals are also killing coral reefs worldwide.
Four commonly found sunscreen ingredients can awaken dormant viruses in the symbiotic algae called zooxanthellae that live inside reef-building coral species.
The chemicals cause the viruses to replicate until their algae hosts explode, spilling viruses into the surrounding seawater, where they can infect neighboring coral communities.
Zooxanthellae provide coral with food energy through photosynthesis and contribute to the organisms’ vibrant color. Without them, the coral “bleaches” — turns white — and dies.
“The algae that live in the coral tissue and feed these animals explode or are just released by the tissue, thus leaving naked the skeleton of the coral,” said study leader Roberto Danovaro of the Polytechnic University of Marche in Italy.
The researchers estimate that 4,000 to 6,000 metric tons of sunscreen wash off swimmers annually in oceans worldwide, and that up to 10 percent of coral reefs are threatened by sunscreen-induced bleaching.
Read more: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/01/080129-sunscreen-coral.html
Sun cream is a big deal in Australia. Schools demand parents apply suncream to children before attending. Sky high skin cancer rates, and decades of government campaigns, ensure a high level of awareness, and a relatively high rate of suncream application – especially when bathing under the blazing tropical sunlight of the Coral Sea. Newer suncreams, spray on nanoparticle creams, as opposed to the old oily white suspension, make suncream more convenient to apply, and less damaging to clothes. Even though applying suncream likely helps to kill the coral.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Blasphemy! Yer prolly in cahoots with this subversive liturcher-
http://phe.rockefeller.edu/docs/Nature_Rebounds.pdf
either that.. or I’ve built hundreds in reefs in the last 15+ years.. :p
Good discussion. I do wonder just how much sunscreen is really being used, and if it is toxic to corals at that level–greens have a problem with math.
No doubt when they studied this, they put a large amount of the ingredients tested into a small closed water body with corals in it, like their acidity tests, and could only cause mortality with ludicrously high ppm.
Busy beaches near reefs and reefs that see a lot of water activity would mean direct delivery of sunscreen ingredients into reefs.
Still, its always amusing that life is allegedly static and never changing until “humans change things”.
Cos you know, if man wasn’t around 99.999% of all the species that ever lived EVAH would be here today.. 😀
Life is simple for a green activist…
Who done it? (all things bad)
If it happened in nature, mankind done it.
If it happened in the human social/political world, Bush, the US, and evil capitalists done it.
Where man does not go-
“Fifty years after the atomic blast that devastated the Bikini Atoll, vast expanses of corals in the area seem to be flourishing once again, much to the surprise of scientists”
“I didn’t know what to expect — some kind of moonscape perhaps. But it was incredible, huge matrices of branching Porites coral (up to 8 meters [25 feet] high) had established, creating a thriving coral reef habitat,” said study team member Zoe Richards of the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies and James Cook University. “Throughout other parts of the lagoon it was awesome to see coral cover as high as 80 percent and large tree-like branching coral formations with trunks 30 centimeters [12 inches] thick.”
http://www.livescience.com/2438-bikini-atoll-corals-recovering-atomic-blast.html
The Great barrier reef is also on the border of the hi UV range zone, and with El Nino UV conditions can rather quickly (relatively speaking) go up.
“When a strong El Niño occurs, there is a substantial change in the major east-west tropical circulation, causing a significant redistribution of atmospheric gases like ozone”
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?feature=4791
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/polar/gif_files/uv_dosage_world_est.gif
The change in UV over a month, this is may 2016
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/polar/gif_files/uv_dosage_world_est.gif
This one IS May duh
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/polar/gif_files/uv_dosage_world_est.gif
OK the image on their site is May yet that April keeps showing up
In May UV is 1000+ joules lower on the reef than in April
Today is the great Dickie Attenborough’s ninetieth birthday. Such a pity that he was conned by the BBC to say that Adelie penguins were declining and Antarctic ice shrinking when neither was true. His recent TV programmes about the Barrier Reef were full of warmist alarmism. Such a pity.
Attenborough at least admitted he has no clue about “global warming” even though he believes it. He’s at least got some integrity, much to the annoyance of many environmentalists who cited his support as a reason to believe.
Hi Mark, can you point me to where he says he has no clue? I have a relative who would benefit from that. Thanks
+ 1.
And now they have even named the new research ship after him.
Sigh …. .
Yes – Sir Boaty McBoatface.
Boaty McAttenborough Face?
David Attenborough. Dickie (Sir Richard) was his brother, the actor and film director.
The Current iteration of the Great Barrier Reef is only 8000 years old as sea level was a lot lower before the current inter-glacial. It’s very hard for coral to grow out of water especially when it’s nearly 400ft above sea level.
The very reason corals can keep up with sea level is because they die and more grow atop the dead ones.
The greenies and marine biologists either forget or willfully ignore that fact.
Reefs cannot grow upwards without coral mortality, it is essential
So logically, as coral grows toward the surface it can only get within a certain distance of the surface. Perhaps UV is the limiting factor. Perhaps different corals have different tolerances. In a mature reef the various types of coral will all have grown to the limit of their proximity to the surface and become vulnerable to any increase of UV?
Iffen, ….. iffen, …… ifffen, ….
What about all of these other coral reefs?
http://www.coris.noaa.gov/about/what_are/coral_dist.jpg
“Major coral reef sites are seen as red dots on this world map. Most of the reefs, with a few exceptions are found in tropical and semitropical waters, between 30° north and 30° south latitudes.” Read more @ur momisugly http://www.coris.noaa.gov/about/what_are/
What are those red dots well inland in central Australia? There also appear to be coral reefs inland in Madagascar, along the border of Chile and Argentina, and south of the Amazonian delta in Brazil.
That’s a map from a survey that asked Obama Voters to locate Ukraine on a map
We need to see some balance here.
What is not being highlighted, except in some obscure research publications, is the new reefs and reefs growing at extraordinary rates, including OTHER PARTS of the Great Barrier Reef itself!
Another topic being avoided, is the vast devastation of Virgin reefs by China as they develop islands for airports and harbors in the South China Sea.
Shhh China according to Di Caprio are “heroes of climate change”. We must ignore any harm to actual ecosystems.
” These coral reefs are complex beautiful creatures, not only providing shelter for marine life but also providing a critical system for storing excess CO2. They have colonized on the ocean floor, forming iconic “banks” that define the FGBNMS, as well as on the surrounding oil and gas platforms, giving additional (and unexpected) environmental value to the steel structures”
And I was just a pondering, ………………………
Has anyone ever considered the possibility that the aforesaid Coral Bleaching, ….. aka: mass die-off, ….. is nothing more than an inherited genetic function whereby the individuals within the species just up and dies after “X” number of months or years of surviving?
If so, it wouldn’t surprise me ….. simply because there are quite a few different species that are “destined” to comply to a predetermined life expectancy. The most well-known of said species is surely the Salmon ….. with the “13 year” and “17 year” Locusts (cicadas) in 2nd place.
Samuel,
Which salmon do you have in mind? The different species of Pacific salmon have life cycles of different durations.
Some Atlantic salmon don’t die after spawning, but return to the ocean and do it all over again.
@ur momisugly Bye Doom ( I love that one!), On the West coast that species of salmon is known as a “Steel Head” must be from bunking their heads against rocks as they move up-stream and so they survive as their cousins are silly and die off as soon as they get “screwed”. I though that there were “Steel Heads” on the Atlantic coast as well but maybe they are called “New Foundlanders’? 🙂 .
Bye Doom,
If you really think it matters …….. then here are two (2) you can select from.
http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/7462f5285cb241e789dd86cf630852ec/pacific-salmon-oncorhynchus-spec-dead-salmons-at-river-shore-after-cnrf9w.jpg
Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spec.),.
http://khq.images.worldnow.com/images/8418273_G.jpg
Columbia River sockeye salmon
Or, Bye Doom, maybe you could choose a species of Mayfly. There are over 3,000 species of mayflies worldwide, grouped into over 400 genera in 42 families most with different “dying times”.
There must Ave been a few natural events in Earth’s history that converted reefs into atolls, islands, and sand…. It’s the height of human arrogance to believe we are more powerful than Mother Nature. She laughs at us for our puny lifespans and pec kings. We are barely gnats to her. When we are gone, she will just wipe it clean, and start over if she wants to.
I cant say I have ever seem or heard such a thing in 15 years working on reef tanks
I agree with what you say to be honest, as I said above, the study\s done on this involved corals in a tank and someone putting in enough of the suspect chemicals in until it causes bleaching and then they wonder.. idiots.
meanwhile as we can see here, OA is a valid hypothesis… not
http://i90.photobucket.com/albums/k247/dhm1353/GBR_Temp.png
Only one man is cited in the article
A “conservationist” John Rumney who runs a tour business and doesn’t seem keen for competition
He has been predicting the collapse of the reef for some decades now
The moment I was old enough to be frightened, I was told the Great Barrier Reef had limited days because it was dying due to mankind’s evil influence. I’m sure the scare was around long before that too.
I was 12 and the year was 1970 – 46 years ago!
Environmentalists seem to have a sixth sense regarding the apex in the survival curve of any given species. They always seem to know. Yet somehow..
Look at this outlandish claim. Seriously… there is no hope for these idiots
“Scientists estimate that 150-200 species of plant, insect, bird and mammal become extinct every 24 hours. This is nearly 1,000 times the “natural” or “background” rate and, say many biologists, is greater than anything the world has experienced since the vanishing of the dinosaurs nearly 65m years ago”
Estimation has replaced science, empirical data are anathema to these people. The rue the fact Polar Bears are not dying like they predicted
Exactly! They pluck figures from the air, every catastrophe is “just around the corner” but nothing ever happens. At some point we as a society have to deal with this kind of repeated deceit. It’s bad enough when it just worries a few, but this one has shaken the whole world and raked in trillions of dollars, causing incredible damage to the environment and massive hardships to people who should have received cheap abundant energy decades ago. This is a crime and they should not be let off the hook this time. It is too deliberate – they have blood on their hands.
There is increasing evidence that lack of Vitamin D is a very bad thing. Search for Dr Malcolm Kendrick. He seems to be a kind of WUWT for diet/cholesterol/heart disease. Also Vitamin D.
Seems while sunscreen may prevent skin cancers, it may possibly kill up to 10 times as many people in other ways due to low Vitamin D.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbN161yBBGA. Reefs that aren’t protected are in danger from over-fishing.
“The Guardian claims tour operators are refusing to take people to see coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef, for fear it will put tourists off from visiting.”
This statement by the leftist Guardian is patently untrue!!!!!!
The tour operators refused to take a group of Greens politicians to look at only the bleached portions of the reef because they (the Greens politicians) wanted to use the footage that they took in anti coal mining propaganda. The tour operators offered to give them a tour of the reef.
If I can find a link to an interview with one of the tour operators, I will post it here.
Interview with tour operator here.
http://www.2gb.com/audioplayer/172821
Inetrview begins after commercial.
@ur momisugly TedM , + many!!!. And thanks for the link and the truth. The more of these scams are shown in the true light of day the better. Thanks again, I am sharing!
Here’s the truth on the reef. A tour operator in Cairns has refused to take Greens senators to view coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef because negative publicity would be detrimental to the local tourism industry.
Mr McCarthy: “I made if perfectly clear that I wouldn’t have any part of a day on the reef that was going to further build this bloody hysteria story that the reef is dead and all these outlandish claims that is doing a massive amount of damage to the reef’s reputation and to the tourism industry’s reputation around the globe,” he said.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-29/tour-operator-refuses-greens-senators-barrier-reef-bad-publicity/7370336
Did you listen to the interview with the tour operator. I would suggest not. that is where you will get the truth.
Listen to the interview and see just how selective the leftist ABC was in their quotes.
Mate, I would suggest yes, I did listen to the interview. I’m a wake up to “their” ABC as much as you are.
Wonder if Ningaloo reef off the NW coast of WA is suffering bleaching? No reports of bleaching has been seen in MSM. Surely if AGW is truely global all reefs should be suffering.
Bleaching is caused by very low tides which in turn are caused by El Nino. The corals in the Red Sea don’t bleach even at 34 degrees – there’s very little tide there.
“…and that up to 10 percent of coral reefs are threatened by sunscreen-induced bleaching.”
Whether or not that’s really true, what the hell’s wrong with getting a suntan for protection? As someone who’s had psoriasis all his life I’m prepared to argue that, um, ‘suggestion’ with anybody. And, furthermore, what’s wrong with a little vitamin D?
You don’t have to go to the Red Sea, Indonesia or the Persian Gulf to find 36 degree (Celsius) water.
At high tide on a calm hot summer’s day, the water on top of the reefs of the GBR is as hot as a warm bath. Uncomfortably so….. and at low tide it runs off and bathes the top few meters of the surrounding fringe of each reef. As a commercial crayfish (tropical spiny lobster) diver, I used to see this all the time.
The corals have adapted to these conditions…. and it isn’t just one sort of coral, there are numerous species that take advantage of each area. The coastal area is different from the outer reef. The reef fringe is different from the reef tops. The fringe is different from the shallow sunken reefs. The shallow sunken reefs are different from the deeper bottom corals. The northern end of the GBR is different from the southern end of the GBR…..etc.
After a cyclone or extremely heavy flooding, huge lengths of the Queensland coastal area has so much fresh water that the sponges in 25 meters of water and up to 5 miles off the coast are dead and dying…. As a commercial trawler owner we observed this quite stinky fact several times.
The whole bottom was nuked. Nothing was down there alive except fish with high tolerances for fresh water, pony fishes, etc. A week or so later you’d be back there catching good catches of prawns (shrimp)… The sponges that did survive now have a large hole in their center….. The reefs fringing the coastal islands, rocks and shoals still manage to weather these obviously catastrophic salinity, pH and temperature changes.
The GBR is a lot more resilient than people give it credit for…. The Ecofascists have turned it into a funding cash cow by turning every little event into some sort of cataclysm.
Quote “Tourism operators have broken their silence 170 businesses and individuals pleading with the Australian government to take urgent action to tackle climate change and ensure the reef survives.”
Oh yeh everyone, don’t worry – China’s, India’s & Asia’s growing emissions don’t affect our reef.
Nothing to see there
Further to J.H. Comments on types of reefs and exposure to UV at low tide, the water temp range from the bottom of the GBR at say Bundaberg to the tip of Cape York at Thursday Island can be 4-6*C (BOM charts 26-32*C winter/summer) but still way below the Arabian Gulf waters 34-36*C and with El Niño warming being in the order of +1*C. the bleaching, which is on a mass of different coral types, it ain’t just anthro or even ENSO warming.