What Part Of "Protected" In "Marine Protected Area" Don't You Get?

Marine protected areas (MPAs) work as a conservation tool. No take MPAs have demonstrated their success in allowing previously over-fished species of fish to recover. The consensus of coral reef scientists who gathered in Florida last month for the 11th International Coral Reef Symposium was that MPAs are still our best defense against global coral threats. But we need more of them, and those already in existence need strengthening.

But tell that to decision makers on Guam.

Bill 327, introduced by Sens. Judith Guthertz and Rory Respicio on July 2, seeks to grant Chamorros (indigenous residents of Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana islands) "special rights to off-shore fishing and harvesting of resources in order to redress historical discriminatory policies," according to the proposed legislation. But a pesky little problem has arisen surrounding this bill. Who is Chamorro and how, precisely, does one decide what indigenous means?

As Dave Davis of the Marianas Variety writes,

Most of those who claim Chamorro ethnicity would probably have a tough time proving it through bloodline tracings. After truly indigenous Chamorros were virtually exterminated by the Spaniards in the 1600s, vestiges of original bloodlines were diluted by intermarriage and other less formal domestic relationships with Spaniards; Filipinos; Mexicans (many of whom were ethnic Native Americans); Chinese; Japanese; several varieties of European Caucasian (British, Portuguese, Italian, Scottish, etc.); and who-knows - what else over the ensuing four hundred years, and it continues today. Modern Chamorros can likely trace bloodlines only part way back through that maze, so it's probably not the most reliable proof of origin. Even local law acknowledges that uncertainty by alluding to bloodline qualification "to the remotest degree," but makes no attempt to address any bloodline criteria prior to 1898. That's pretty thin.

If Bill 327 is passed it will open open Guam's MPAs for fishing, claiming that such conservation areas are causing the loss of tradition and culture. So once again, arguments for tradition apparently trump sound resource management. But why do I get the feeling that tradition has very little to do with Bill 327? Color me skeptical, but this smacks more of profit and greed as motivators. And it has all the markings of a certain fisheries lobbying group written all over it.

Wordle! Wordle! Wordle! Then Wordle I Will Play!

A little homage to the Dreidel Song as a hat tip to Miriam. As she posts over on The Oyster's Garter, Wordle is a cute visual word scrambler for blogs and such that creates beautiful word clouds. I suspect it culls from your most recent blog posts to create the cool art.

Any guesses as to what I've been writing about lately? Hmmm...

New Web Site, Same Unanswered Questions

In addition to resuscitating itself with a new name and new web design, San Francisco-based Planktos Science (formerly Planktos) has decided to step up the defense of it's reputation and spurious science by confronting blogosphere naysayers directly. Case in point, Craig over on Deep Sea News has just received a retort to his post on the reappearance of Planktos as Planktos Science. But man, do they need to put someone other than their president, Russ George, behind the keyboard. Word up, Mr. George, you need to save some money on your web design and invest in a PR consultant as you're not really strengthening your cause.

You can head over to Deep Sea News to catch-up on George's rather long paragraph of accusations of how Planktos--and now Planktos Science--has suffered unfair scrutiny and "strawman attacks" for what he sees as pioneering ocean restoration. Yet with all the new rhetoric and dollars apparently dumped into filling a new website with content, old unanswered questions still remain.

Craig's questions as to potential adverse affects to benthic communities from iron dumping are also awaiting a response. But Craig and I are not the only ones befuddled. Miriam has unanswered questions about Planktos. So does Popular Science. And last I checked, Earth2Tech was still waiting for some validation of Planktos' claims,

New web site, same questions: Who are the credible oceanographers that are associated with this effort? Where are the studies, and the modeling for the projects he has proposed? Who will lead the cruise–Russ? Where is the funding and what is the business model? Russ George seems to be a curiosity– a distraction to the real science involved.

I'll get in line for the time that George intends to fully articulate the science behind the hype. But I'm afraid that accusing your critics of having a lack of vision and faith in your unproven (and potentially deleterious methods) is just not sufficient grounds for giving Planktos the benefit of the doubt.

Look, I'm all for solutions to our climate crisis. But dubious, untenable assertions and bad science is not helping any of our efforts. Particularly with a public that is already skeptical of what science has to say.

And as to George's sign-off in his post on Deep Sea News that "ranting and lying about those who actually do things is way easier than actually doing something productive for the benefit of the planet," all I have to say is come spend a week in my shoes, Mr. George. Some of us don't have the luxury of selling promises, but actually need to demonstrate quantifiable results for the resources and support we solicit. If you'd really like to get your hands dirty and start producing results, shoot me your CV. I'm always on the lookout for fresh talent.

Get Sharked!

Yee-Haw! It's Shark Week on the Discovery Channel! Which means another opportunity to further convince my oldest brother why he will never ever step foot in the ocean. I'm certain he's not alone in those sentiments.

But I choose not to focus on the scary side of sharks. Sharks are utterly beautiful. Sharks are what got me interested in the ocean as a child. I so wanted to be Eugenie Clark and dive with and study sharks as an adult (I got to study coral reefs instead, but I see that as a twofer). I still have the shark scrapbooks that I kept of every sharky photo I could find in magazines and newspapers. I have book shelves of shark-tacular titles such as Death in the Sea, Sharks and Other Ocean Killers, Blue Water, White Death, and of course Jaws. If it had a pointy dorsal fin, Ampullae of Lorenzini, and teeth then I did my best to know about it.

While I think Shark Week gets a bad rap for pandering to the sensational, I like to think that it's also an annual opportunity for the public to celebrate a magnificent, and unfortunately endangered, keystone marine species.

So, commence au festival! Oh, and head over to the Discovery Channel Shark Week website to upload your photo and get yourself sharked. I did (above), and I really think it's an improvement.

They're Baaaaaack!

A death rattle is a gurgling or rattle-like noise produced shortly before or after death by the accumulation of excessive respiratory secretions in the throat. I could have sworn I heard one emanate a few months ago from Planktos--the San Francisco-based start-up that claimed it had the answer to fight climate change through the spurious science of iron fertilization of the oceans. But it now seems they are pulling a George Romero and refusing to go gently into that good night.

As I reported back in February, Planktos closed up shop based on lack of investor interest. Me thinks it had something to do with the poor reception of their claims by the scientific community.

But like a zombie in search of fresh brains, Planktos has risen from the grave to convince the public that it's really, really serious about its science by renaming itself Planktos Science. Oh! Well okay, then!

But don't expect to find anything remarkably new here. It's the same high-falutin' vision with little empirical validation. What you will find is a lot of new expansive rhetoric that paints Planktos as the all-things-to-all-investors answer. There's the Planktos fisheries efforts, biofuels research, and drug research. Drug research? You betcha! According to the web copy, Planktos Science intends to "create a collaborative network to speed up research on targeted compounds from the ocean realm. This network includes centers of marine biology, pharmacology, chemistry and world-class basic science and clinical research."

This "oceans as potential medicine cabinets" utilitarian argument is by no means novel. Conservationists have been making this call for preservation of biodiversity of rain forests and coral reefs as treasure troves of novel proteins and other molecules that can benefit human health. That Planktos Science intends to be seen as a preeminent player in this area makes for nice investor copy. But get in line. There are numerous research institutions and Big Pharm companies already making inroads here.

Why am I even bothering to spend my first free Saturday in nearly a month to waste electrons in writing about Planktos again? To tell you the truth, I'm not sure. But it might have something to do with the rambling, unsolicited email I received last week from Planktos founder and president, Russ George. In six turgid, purply-prosed paragraphs, he explained how coral reefs are doomed. The only glimmer of hope is, wait for it... Planktos Science and its proprietary methods of iron fertilization of oceans as a spur to phytoplankton blooms.

I'm choosing not to reprint George's email here, not simply because it's bad science or bad reasoning. Mainly, I'm not reprinting it because it's simply bad writing. Need proof? Here's just one choice, painful example. If left unchecked, ocean acidification will continue to build as, according to George, "our reef beauties cry out and dissolve like Dorothy's wicked witch in our acidifying oceans."

But didn't the Wicked Witch deserve to dissolve? At least in the movie The Wizard of Oz, not the play Wicked. I mean, she was wicked, right? Surely reefs don't deserve to dissolve? And didn't she melt? I remember her saying, "I'm melting... I'm melting!" And coral polyps can "cry out?"

Then again, maybe he is saying reefs deserve to dissolve. His parting salvo suggests that biodiversity loss may be fitting punishment, "If you are a religious person you might liken what we need to do as seeking absolution for our sins of emission by our acts of contrition and ecorestoration, otherwise the path to perdition is that of dissolution of those CO2 sins into dying oceans."

Sins of emission? As a product of catholic schooling, that only means one thing. It's hard to tell what Planktos Science is talking about. Needless to say, I suspect investors and the scientific community won't have a clue either.

Virtual Reef

I'm a big fan of traveling science exhibits. And not just signage, texts, and pictures. That's old school. Today's interpretive exhibits need to be interactive, inquiry-based, and designed to draw the user in and make them think. One new exhibit on display here at the National Marine Educators Association meeting in Savannah does all three.

It's called Discovery Reef, a product of the Mote Marine Laboratory in Sarasota Florida. Discovery Reef consists of six activity stations on three separate kiosks (see above image) that help visitors explore coral reefs using different approaches to learning. My first stop was at the Coral Polyp station, where a three dimensional, enlarged model of an individual coral polyp with labeled parts (image at right) provided a sustainable opportunity to touch coral. I watched as a group of adults explored this station with their hands, running their fingers over the simulated coral nematocysts (stinging cells). There's also a very cool simulation of a coral polyp releasing its spawn.

On the opposite side of the Coral Polyp kisosk is a station devoted to Reef relationships. Here, visitors are challenged to spin wheels (below image) to align reef inhabitants and identify their associated relationship: commensalism, mutualism, or parasitism. Panels illuminate when correct matches are made.


Another station had a video monitor that displayed underwater footage of living reefs. Above the monitor was mounted a video conferencing camera. Jason Robertshaw, one of the Mote educators and designers of this exhibit, described to me how the camera would be used to allow visitors to interact in real time with Mote educators and scientists. A series of video programs can be displayed on the monitor to fill-in when live teleconferencing is not available.


My favorite section of the display was one of the stations on the middle kiosk that displayed a simulated coral reef ecosystem, with coral, fish, and invertebrates in dioramas depicting ecological roles. Best of all, there were child-sized face masks build into the front of the display so little faces could press against the masks and pretend they were diving on a living reef. The effect is powerful and brings you right up close with moray eels (my fave of course), cleaning stations, and amazing adaptations of reef fish.




Mote gets an A+ on this display. Jason says it should be ready to hit the road by 2009, so look for Discovery Reef at your nearby science center or aquarium soon. Perhaps it can inspire a new generation of coral reef lovers, scientists, and conservationists. I only hope that we can act now to reverse coral reef decline so that this traveling exhibit isn't our only reminder of what a healthy reef looked like.

That's A Moray Monday: Stalemate?

As I'm currently preoccupied with sessions at the National Marine Educators Association conference in Savannah, I don't have time to do Moray Monday justice this week. Besides, you can still reflect back on last week's wonderful post. But to keep you moray fans entertained, I thought I'd post an apropos Moray Monday image that was forwarded to me by Liz Foote, CORAL Hawaii Field Manager.

It's obviously a moray, but look closer. There are sea urchin spines protruding from the head of this specimen. Did the vertebrate make a poor choice for dinner and get served by a humble urchin? Or did the invertebrate put up a good fight, but end up in the moray digestive tract? Impossible to tell from the evidence. So let's call this a draw.

So if I'm keeping up with the stats, that makes this:
Inverts: 11
Verts: 2
Stalemate: 1

Ocean Blogging 2.0

Fete accompli!

I'm quite happy with how Ocean Blogging 2.0: Expanding the Conversation turned out. That's the workshop Jason Robertshaw and I pulled together for the National Marine Educators Association annual conference here in Savannah. We had a great attendance (practically standing room only) of ocean educators who were interested in exploring how to get involved in ocean blogging. If we were successful, we might expect a new crop of ocean blogs to appear on the scene or maybe even more commenter's frequenting existing ocean blogs. Either way, as Martha Stewart might say, "It's a good thing!"

Participant evaluations indicate either agreement or strong agreement that Jason and I apparently knew our subject area (phew!), were well organized and prepared, presented information in an interesting manner, and provided useful information. Quite a few comments indicated that participants now see ocean blogs as a novel way to incorporate research and writing into their classrooms. That's very cool!

A few people wanted more time on the "how," that is tips and suggestions for those less technologically inclined. Also, classroom teachers were looking for specific ideas for incorporating blogs in their lesson plans. Good suggestions for ocean bloggers who are looking for new audiences.

Jason will be uploading a podcast of the fully narrated event over on Cephalopodcast (where you'll be able to savor my booming voice as it keeps educators awake for an early morning workshop).

Pre-Conference Savannah Song

Proceedings of the National Marine Educators Association annual meeting kick-off Monday morning here in Savannah, Georgia and I'm looking forward to it. I've been exploring a bit of the historic district close to my hotel today. To be honest, I explored the historic district until I was reduced to a sweaty, overheated mess. Which didn't take very long.

I know this climate is probably comfortable to the locals, but it feels like Papua New Guinea to me. Already damp from sweat at 10AM, I strolled along the Savannah River past the odd monument to "Savannah's Waving Girl." Apparently, this young woman made a habit of waving a towel at passing ships from 1900-1931. At night, she apparently waved a lantern. It's not clear why she did this. But this is Savannah, so you don't really need a logical reason.

I made my way along the tourist traps of River Street, climbed up the bank (and steps) to Bay and Congress Street and eventually down to City Market, the dining, shopping, arts, and cultural hub of this beautiful city. I walked along streets lined with amazing antebellum architecture and trees dripping with Spanish moss. All a feast for the eyes. That is, it would be if my eyes weren't blurry from the rivers of flop sweat pouring down my face.

I paused in front of the local celebrity restaurant, The Lady & Sons, home of Food Network star Paula Deen. I paused not because I particularly enjoy Ms. Deen's style of deep-fried everything, but because she had the genius to install mist sprayers beneath the restaurant awnings that cooled the air. I quite literally basked in the cool mist and found the reserves to continue my explorations. Ms. Deen, I promise to drop by for dinner this week just to drop coin as a "thank you." Not that you need it.

Savannah's history is everywhere. Want revolutionary trappings? There's a pair of bronze cannons on display that were presented to the city by General Washington after his visit in 1791. Pirate lore more your thing? There's the Pirates House, built in 1753 and allegedly the drinking hole of many a privateer. Cotton is what made Savannah the Jewel of the South, underwriting much of the historic architecture now under preservation. The Cotton Exchange above River Street was the portal for all cotton business through the city.

Cotton was also the fuel for the slave trade in the south, and Savannah does not hide this unfortunate legacy. The First African Baptist Church was established by former slaves and is the oldest black church in North America. The pews I saw and touched were hand-made by Savannah slaves. But according to oral tradition, the church was also an important stopping point along the Underground Railroad. Downstairs, we were shown floorboards in the church that had an unusual pattern of holes in the boards. We were told these were breathing holes for runaway slaves holed-up beneath the floors. The hole patterns are said to be traditional African symbols. The ceiling of the church consists of a quilted pattern of nine-patch squares. This pattern, we were told, was a code used along the Underground Railroad for slaves and their supporters to communicate safe havens.

I love the depth and breadth of East coast history. Having grown-up near Philadelphia and spent a good portion of my life in Boston, I was surrounded by American history all the time. And like most things that surround us every day, we often take them for granted. So now that I live in San Francisco, where 1849 Gold Rush seems like "deep history," I treasure the chances I get to bask in the trappings of a rich historic city like Savannah. I certainly hope I get a chance to see a bit before heading home.

Good Advice

I know I've had a recurring crocodilian theme the past few weeks, but it's been a convergence of crazy reptilian coincidence. Here's yet another. A sign posted on the hotel deck overlooking the Savannah River. Needless to say, swimming is ill advised.

I Live In Airports

I survived, enjoyed, and blogged right through the 11th International Coral Reef Symposium in Florida. I sweated gallons while live blogging the annual meeting of the Society for Conservation Biology in Chattanooga. And now my final leg is before me as I leave at 4AM for the annual meeting of the National Marine Educators Association in Savannah, GA.

I'm honestly over all these 3AM and 4AM shuttle rides to the airport. I've been patted-down so many times over the past few weeks that I'm beginning to think that the TSA may ask me to go steady soon.

Regardless, the NMEA conference is once again an opportunity to reconnect with old friends and colleagues and play an active role in the future of ocean science education in the formal and informal worlds. Count on news from interesting sessions, discussions with stars of the ocean education community, and of course local Savannah color (I'm psyched to see the setting for Midnight in the Garden of Good and Evil).

SeaWeb Launches Coral News Portal

SeaWeb, the ocean science and conservation news and information dissemination folks, have used the International Coral Reef Symposium to launch Coral Reef News: a new web portal dedicated to coral reefs. Take a coral reef blog (like Malaria, Bedbugs, Sea Lice and Sunsets), add a discussion board (like the one we just ditched from CORAL's website since it had poor ROI), mix in a news aggregator (like the Coral Reef Alliance coral news page), and sprinkle with an image bank (like the Coral reef Alliance coral photo bank)... that's sort of the idea here.

My first take? I think it's a great idea to consolidate coral news in one place. But I hope the writing peps-up a bit. The purpose statement on the homepage states that SeaWeb aims "to bring you news of the latest developments in coral reef conservation and research in a snappy, easily accessible way." It's not there yet. It's a tad on the dry side. Especially a lot of the coverage of ICRS. When it's not coming off like an advertisement, it's bogged down in minutia (Does anyone really need verbatim transcripts of discussions?).

But it's just getting started. And like I said, I hope it flourishes.

When Bad Science Understanding Happens To Good People

When environmental problems strike, a natural response is to point to the cause. Sometimes that's easy. But more often, it's a complex process to identify causal relationships. In marine ecosystems, it's often incredibly complicated. In part because it's an open system with many inputs. But it's also because we still don't fully understand how marine ecosystems operate. An example of how our lack of understanding is rubbing up against our human desire to cast blame is playing out right now in Hawaii regarding the ornamental fish collection business.

Reef fish collection for the aquarium trade is big business in Hawaii. I've written about it a few times. But the latest round of public input focusing on this issue has raised some concerns over how scientific data is interpreted and used to "support" a cause. On one side is the State of Hawaii Division of Aquatic Resources who have attempted to better manage targeted ornamental reef species through the use of no-take protected areas called fish replenishment areas (or FRAs). The idea being that fish stocks protected within FRA's are able to recover and both adults and juveniles spillover and replenish stocks in non-protected areas.

"But wait," cry some concerned Hawaii residents, that's not happening. Populations of commonly collected ornamental fish such as butterfly fish and some wrasse species are not recovering. Fewer fish are being observed on reefs. And over-collection of grazing species is leading to uncontrolled growth of algae on reefs that can smother healthy coral colonies. Their conclusion? FRA's don't work and ornamental fish collectors are to blame. Their solution? The State of Hawaii needs to ban fish collection or heavily regulate it.

Now let me say right up front that I'm ALL FOR increased regulation around ornamental reef fish collection in Hawaii. But I'm reading the same scientific reports by the State of Hawaii and the rationale being used by local reef fish defenders and I'm coming to a rather different interpretation of the data that leads me to this position.

I certainly agree that some butterfly fish and wrasse species are declining on Hawaiian reefs. But this is a trend almost across the board for both ornamentally collected as well as non-aquarium trade targeted reef fish species. In fact, according to a report released this week, 75 percent of reef fishes are depleted or in critical condition around the main Hawaiian Islands. And while I attended the International Coral Reef Symposium in Florida last week, NOAA released "The State of Coral Reef Ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated States: 2008," which outlined that the nation’s coral reef ecosystems, particularly those adjacent to populated areas, continue to face intense human-derived threats from coastal development, fishing, sedimentation and recreational use. Even the most remote reefs are subject to threats such as marine debris, illegal fishing and climate-related effects of coral bleaching, disease and ocean acidification.

So to single-out the ornamental fish trade alone is disingenuous. In addition, Hawaii reef fish defenders are using selective quote mining from state scientists and officials to bolster their argument.

Let's take a look at the logical problems first. The argument being used to blame the ornamental collectors has an embedded fallacy of reason called Affirming the Consequent. It goes something like this:

If P, then Q;
Q
Therefore, P

Put another way:

If I have the flu, then I have a sore throat;
I have a sore throat;
Therefore, I have the flu.

The logical connections get at the causal relationship. Not all sore throats are caused by the flu. In the same way, not all fish declines in Hawaii are caused by ornamental collectors alone.

The second point about quote mining simply undermines the credibility of the reef fish defenders. Take for example this quote lifted from a report by State of Hawaii scientist Dr. Bill Walsh on the reef defender's website:

“One major challenge in this debate has been gathering sound data on an ecosystem as complex as the reef and an industry as broad-ranging as aquarium collecting. To adequately document the impact of all of these [100] species and their interactions with other members of the reef community, [Bill] Walsh says, would ‘take generations’."

The rhetorical effect of this out-of-context quote is that a State scientist appears to confirm that science is either lacking or cannot provide guidance in a timely manner. But this just isn't the case.

I know Dr. Bill and have interacted with him on a few occasions with our Kailua-Kona projects. His analysis shows a somewhat more complex ecosystem reality. For the top five aquarium species collected in Kona, representing greater than 90% of all collected fishes, three of them have increased pretty dramatically (22%-44%) along the entire coast since the inception of FRA's. The two that didn’t increase are species targeted not only by aquarium collectors but also food fishers. So these fish get pinched from two directions.

He has also indicated that even species which nobody is collecting undergo population changes for reasons we don’t quite understand. Of 50 different species which are in the non-food/non-aquarium collection category, 28 declined and 22 increased. The bottom line seems to be there are variable patterns of abundance in fish population that can occur apart from human influences. Resource managers typically don’t know the cause, but in a healthy ecosystem these changes tend to be relatively minor and likely reverse themselves over time; given, of course, that habitat and water quality don’t degrade.

For dramatic effect, I'll reiterate: Provided HABITAT and WATER QUALITY don't degrade.

So to conclude that regulation is needed because FRA's don't work is not recognizing other reasons for decline and cherry picking the scientific data to suit your agenda. And what agenda might that be? To distance one's own contributions to the problem. Coastal reefs are taking a battering from a variety of local sources. Coastal development and sedimentation, water quality degradation, agricultural inputs to coastal water, unsustainable marine tourism practices, and coastal fishing and collection. We need to be honest with ourselves that coral reef decline is suffering a death by a thousand cuts and we (all of us) are to blame. It's by no means too late to stem this decline. But it will take some tough self-realization of ALL our contributions to reverse this.

It certainly is not helping to constantly look to "the other" for the blame.

Cue Screams And Arterial Bleeding In 3, 2, 1...

Just to give you a taste of some of the challenges we get to deal with in our project sites, here's a picture sent to me by Rich Wilson, my Mesoamerican Barrier Reef Program Manager. It's the latest (and growing) fad in "ecotourism" in Belize: Crocodile Feeding.

Tour guide baits a string with a dead chicken and lures wild American crocodiles (Crocodylus acutus) from the water for photo opportunities. This species of croc averages about 13-15 feet in length though some old males have been reported at a length of 20 feet.

What's so bad about a harmless photo op? The problem is that this behavior habituates fed crocodiles to the presence of humans. In fact, it actually attracts crocodiles who begin associating human activity with a chicken dinner. Problem is, crocodiles are just as happy with fresh human as they are with fresh poultry.

What makes this so frustrating is that this new "tourist attraction" is apparently supported by the town council of San Pedro, Belize. I have no doubt that this activity can put San Pedro on the map as a tourist draw for this daring practice. But at what cost? It's a contrived situation, not "natural." It's "rewarding" tourism operators (and crocodiles) for bad behavior. And should an accident happen to the fellow holding the chicken or to some unsuspecting swimmer attacked by a curious croc, you can be certain that the crocodiles will be the villans and hunted down. NOT the tour operators or the town council.

If you still don't think this is crazy behavior, have a talk with this guy.

I Love The Local Color

I leave for San Francisco in the wee hours of Wednesday morning, and I've gotta say that I'll really miss Chattanooga. Perched on the banks of the Tennessee River, Chattanooga is a beautiful, vibrant, and rejuvenated city. I enjoyed meeting the local people, talking about civil war history, and enjoyed the warm evening walks along the waterfront. If today's news of Volkswagen opening a new manufacturing plant in Chattanooga are any indication, economic prosperity is also assured for this small community.

And despite the crazy humidity and excessive goddiness, it's actually a place I'd like to return to someday soon. The food was great and the hospitality warm. Plus, if the freshwater collections at the Tennessee Aquarium were any indication, I absolutely MUST get underwater in the Tennessee River! From the exhibits, there's some bizzaro, monstrously huge life in there: sturgeon, carp, tarpon, alligator gars (and alligators too!).

And how can you not LOVE a place with classified ads like this (verbatim from the Chattanooga Times Free Press):

Fire Wood for sale, must get rid of, interested email me please. Or if you are in need of the wood we can give you a couple pieces, just email me about it.

Do We Protect The Strong Or Protect The Weak?

No, this post is not an argument for social reform. However it was the underlying question at the heart of a presentation I attended today by Eddie Game (et al.) with The Ecology Centre, University of Queensland, at the Society for Conservation Biology meeting. He presented a paper which had received a lot of buzz at the International Coral Reef Symposium, though I didn't manage to hear him last week in Fort Lauderdale.

With only 18% of the world's coral reefs protected by marine protected areas (MPAs) and only 2% of these in areas of adequate conservation capacity, we need a means to prioritize an approach to protection and MPA strengthening. But how to proceed? Game's paper, Should We Protect The Strong Or Weak? An Analysis Of Risk And Resilience In Marine Protected Areas, asks whether we should prioritize protection for those reefs at greater risk of unfavorable disturbances we can not control, or instead should we invest our limited resources in consolidating the health of those reefs at least risk of disturbance. In other words, should we protect the strong or the weak?

The answer it turns out really depends on what your conservation objective is. Are you looking to protect one reef or are you protecting a network of reefs? This question stirred up some heat at ICRS last week when I suggested during a reef resilience session that this question is not just academic, but a potentially useful conservation approach. Coral reef biologist and author Sue Wells actually got herself worked-up into a bit of a tizzy that I raised the issue. In her opinion, we shouldn't even be asking questions of either/or, but instead protecting all reefs we can.

With all due respect, Ms Wells... No Duh! But if you read Game's paper, that's his point. We can't protect them all and the current situation requires somewhat more pragmatic ideas. And why shouldn't we question our return on conservation investment? I always have to consider potential projects for likelihood of success or even weigh relative "value or importance" of some reef resources against alternate sites.

But that was ICRS. Back to SCB.

Game's finding provide a clever and simple mathematical formula that can provide a rubric for selecting between competing potential protected areas. If our conservation objective is to maximize the chance at least one reef is in a healthy state, then the best strategy is always to protect the reefs at lower risk of catastrophic disturbance. On the other hand, if we wish to maximize the expected number of healthy reefs in our system, then the optimal strategy is more complex.

As Game states,"If protected reefs are likely to spend a significant amount of time in a degraded state, either through high disturbance or slow recovery rates, then it is best to protect low risk sites. Alternatively, if our reefs are generally in a healthy state due to fast recovery and low disturbance, then we should (counter-intuitively) protect the sites at higher risk of uncontrollable disturbance."

After Game's presentation today, I asked him how he sees ecological connectivity playing into his "strong or weak" considerations. Shouldn't "strong" or "weak" reefs also be weighed against their connections to sources of productivity or, alternatively, as exporters of productivity? After all, we rarely get to select just a single reef system to protect. Doesn't connectivity favor multiple protected areas by default?

He agreed that considerations of connectivity are absolutely important to consider, but also wanted to be clear that our current understanding of reef connectivity may be at too early a stage to be useful to resource managers alone. He suspects that considerations of resilience and connectivity together will play an important role in the future of marine protected area management. As such, the "strong or weak" analysis still provides predictive value.

I think Game's paper is important for the abundance of chatter it has catalyzed. If frequency of appearance in corridor discussions is any indication, he's provided an important contribution to future marine conservation thinking.

Somebody Say Cracker?

I've been way to busy to notice anything going on in the blogosphere (or elsewhere) the past few weeks. So I was taken by surprise by the recent Cracker-gate.

Needless to say, apparently condemnation is a one-way street for the righteous who have whipped themselves up to a frenzy. It's fine for them to dole it out, but oh my do they not like it leveled back at them. MBSL&S's got your back, PZ. Hang tough!

Society For Conservation Biology Update

I haven't posted nearly as much about proceedings of the annual meeting of the Society for Conservation Biology here in Chattanooga. Truth be told, I've been doing a lot more dipping in-and-out of sessions and it's keeping me running around. While there is a marine science working group of the SCB, the offerings of presentations having to do with marine protected areas or coral reef conservation are few and far between.

One of the presentations I was looking forward to this afternoon, How Are Our MPAs Doing? Assessing Global Patterns in Marine Protected Area Management Effectiveness by Jed Holtzman, et al., was withdrawn from today's agenda and moved to Thursday. Bummer for me since I leave Wednesday morning.

Still, there have been several interesting presentations I've attended already:

Larval Spillover From South African Marine Reserves;
Comparing and Integrating Science and Community-Based Conservation Approaches: Prioritizing Areas for Marine Protection;
Promoting Aquatic Tourism Potentials of Nigerian Protected Areas;
Software Tools for Coastal Marine Ecosystem-Based Management.

My favorite presentation today was From Fishmeal To Fish Meals: Affecting the Largest Single Species Fishery in the World. The presenter was the amazing Dr. Patricia Majluf with the Conservation Biology Unit, Cayetano Heredia University, Peru. She described the incredible progress she has made in changing perceptions and attitudes of the commercially harvested Peruvian anchoveta. It's amazingly high in protein and quite delicious. As a fast reproducing planktivore eating low on the food chain, anchoveta are an excellent option as a sustainable fishery.

But anchoveta has had a PR problem. It has historically been considered a "trash catch" and is almost exclusively used for making fishmeal or deriving fish oil in Peru. But things have changed, thanks to Dr. Majluf.

She described an ambitious and amazing campaign to change attitudes and behaviors of consumers in Lima, Peru. From helping to educate consumers through outreach and education and even hosting anchoveta "give-aways" in markets to change tastes and opinions all the way up to facilitating government meetings to talk about incentives for getting more anchoveta into markets. The result has been nothing short of impressive. Majluf even brought a few tins of Peruvian anchoveta and crackers for everyone to taste!

Dr. Majluf admitted that perhaps she had a relatively easier time of convincing consumers to make the perception switch given that Lima is a city of "foodies" anyway. I told her I was skeptical that such a rapid shift can occur here in the States where we are a population absolutely addicted to firm, white fleshed fish. Don't get me wrong, I've already gone on the record as being a big fan of anchovy. But it's not like you find anchovy on many restaurant menus. She agreed that more aggressive strategies would indeed be necessary, and also pointed out that they are far from finished with Peru. There's a long way to go, especially in creating incentives to reduce fishing pressure on those species and fisheries that are less sustainable.

Still, it was a truly inspiring example of what is possible. Find out more about anchoveta fisheries, Dr. Majluf's work, and the "Eat Like a Pig" campaign from a great article by Jennifer Jacquet.

That's A Moray Monday: The "You Ask-I Deliver" Edition

Never let it be said I won't willingly go to great lengths to keep my readers happy. Case in point, a few weeks ago, Christopher Taylor--Kiwi, "working taxonomist," aficionado of well-groomed facial hair, and author of the blog Catalog of Organisms--commented on one of my That's a Moray Monday posts where I put forward that I don’t like to feature images of preserved (or pickled) specimens (such as the one pictured at the top of this post) from museum collections. To which Christopher responded:

Despite your prejudices, can I put in a request for a post about pickled specimens in jars of formalin? It might be interesting to see a "we don't know as much about morays as we think we do" post. Even as a working taxonomist, it always amazes me to consider just how many organisms - from trees to toads to ticks to tapeworms - we know from specimens floating in jars and absolutely f***-all else.

Ask and you shall receive, Christopher. Mind you, it took a wee bit of time to pose your question and a few others to an arbitrary (though distinguished) cadre of museum colleagues:

• Karsten Hartel, Curatorial Associate and Manager of Ichthyology Collections for the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University;
• David Smith, eel specialist with the Division of Fishes, Smithsonian Institution; and,
• Dave Catania, Senior Collection Manager, Ichthyology, at the California Academy of Sciences.

My sincere appreciation at the start to all of these busy scientists for taking time from their daily workload to answer my questions. Mr. Catania was happy to provide some feedback, but referred me to the Academy's legendary John McCosker, as he has published extensively on the systematics of Muraenids. Unfortunately, Dr. McCosker was out of town for July and I wanted to get a post in before too long. What I'm most happy to report is that every one of the museum scientists I contacted replied to my rather unusual query within just a few days. In addition to providing great info, they affirmed warm feelings of science camaraderie while also validating that others share my general geekery about all things moray.

Holy Holotype, Batman
I asked Karsten Hartel if the MCZ has one of the more extensive collections of moray holotype specimens (the actual specimen of an organism that's used when the species was formally described.) He explained that in total, the MCZ's moray collection is not that large (material applied to about 35 names). He noted however that the Smithsonian, by comparison, has 102 type specimens. This was confirmed by the Smithsonian's David Smith who said that the august DC institution probably does indeed have the largest collection of morays in the world (in fact, the Smithsonian has the largest collection of preserved fishes in the world). Cal. Academy's Dave Catania reported back that the Academy has 15 Muraenid holotypes. He suspects that the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia has somewhat more moray holotype specimens.

A Question of Numbers
As far as how many species have been identified, things get a little fuzzy. Karsten noted that if you go to the California Academy of Sciences database (it lists all of the known names ever applied to fishes) and search on Muraenidae (the fish family that includes morays) you will get 533 species names that have been applied to the family at one time or another. However, he explains that we now know that there are almost 200 valid species (Nelson's Fishes of the World says 185) and that is largely because ichthyologists were able to examine the actual specimens used to describe each taxon.

The Smithsonian's eel specialist, David Smith, says no one is really sure precisely how many species of morays there are worldwide. The figure of 200, he said, is almost certainly too low, "We are continually finding new species of morays," reports Smith. "Some species are very widely distributed, while others inhabit only small, restricted areas. One species is known only from Walters Shoals, a submerged reef south of Madagascar. Another is restricted to the Red Sea, and another to the Indian Ocean off South Africa. With the advent of DNA testing, we are sure to find even more species."

Today's Special: Pickled Moray
Getting right to Christopher's primary question of what we know about morays solely from pickled museum specimens, the answer appears to be "quite a lot." The Smithsonian's David Smith responded, "Actually, much of what we know about morays comes from these preserved collections. We can gain information on where each species lives geographically, the ecological habitat, and the variation in characters both within an area and between one place and another." Smith goes on to explain that these preserved specimens also provide information on comparative anatomy, and this in turn can enable us to determine evolutionary relationships.

So with all these one-of-a-kind moray specimens filling up shelf space in museum collections, they must get picked apart and probed a lot, right? "Nope," says MCZ's Karsten Hartel. "Primary type specimens are almost never dissected in order to keep them intact as possible for future generation of scientists," he said. "The non-type parts of the MCZ collections offer a wider opportunity to study all aspects of eel biology from molecular to biodiversity. But by using x-rays or scans, some internal anatomy can be obtained. This, Karsten notes, is very important in eels where the number of vertebrae is incredibly important to understand what is a species and what is not.

Classify Now? Classify Later?
I was curious (as a non working taxonomist) as to the process from collection of specimens in the field to ultimate identification and storage in museum collections. Is this a speedy process or, like a lot of scientific enterprises, does lack of capacity mean that some collected and potentially novel species can sit for quite some time before undergoing classification. In other words, is it possible that our museum collections have new moray species just waiting to be taxonomically defined. David Smith with the Smithsonian was first to weigh-in, "I not only suspect, but I know for a certainty, that many new species of moray eels currently reside in museum collections, some right here at the Smithsonian. With more DNA sampling, those numbers are bound to increase," he said. Harvard's Collection Manager, Hartel, agreed, "I'm sure there are new species out there but I'm not an eel specialist."

I asked if one could quantify an "average time" (if there is indeed such a thing) it might take to ascribe taxonomic description and identity to a collected moray specimen. Do most specimens that are collected by museums sit in bottles on shelves for quite some time before a researcher gets around to writing a monograph or some such taxonomic description? Karsten responded that it's, "Almost impossible to average. He described that the turnaround time depends on current knowledge of the group. "If its a poorly known group that has not been looked at in years, it might require a full review of the group by borrowing material from around the world, visiting museums around the world," he explained. "This can literally take years!"

"On the other hand," he coninued, "if a new very distinctive species is found, then things could move very fast especially with new electronic journals like Zootaxa as was witnessed for the moray species Gymnothorax baranesi. That specimen sat on the shelf since 2002, but once the study was finished and the paper accepted in Nov. 2007 it was published by January 2008."

Smithsonian's David Smith concurred, "There really is no average time between the discovery of a new species and its published description. It depends on the situation." Smith explains, "A scientist may find the new species in the field and describe it shortly after returning to his (her) home base, if he is working on that particular group. Or it may be collected as part of an expedition and sit on a shelf until someone comes along and finds it, recognizes it, and publishes on it. It also depends on how much time a scientist has, how many other tasks compete for his time, etc. It is probably more common for a specimen to sit on a shelf for a while than to be published immediately. There are a lot more specimens in museums than there are scientists to study them. Some groups have no one studying them."

So the message here is clear: We need more moray taxonomists! Hear that, Christopher? For the good of the scientific enterprise, you need to start considering a way to disseminate those taxonomically inclined genes of yours. Take one for the team and get those genes in circulation! Either that or we all need to step up the message that taxonomy and classification is an exciting and living branch of the natural sciences and NOT the dry "stamp collecting" for which it often gets the unfair rap.

The Science Behind The Specimens
A final query I put to my museum contacts was to describe some of the current or recent scientific research in which museum moray specimens have proven vital. Karsten Hartel was first to respond that, "During my tenure, MCZ material (and other museums) has been very important for scientists who have studied eels. One example is the two volume (adults and leptocephali) work on the eels of the western North Atlantic or the Fishes of the Atlantic Ocean regional series." He also provided a link to the volume that describes species from the Western Central Pacific.

Both Karsten and Cal Academy's Dave Catania both pointed out that museum specimens are proving crucial in compiling online, searchable databases for fish species. Karsten mentioned that, "information on the holdings of major museums are being assemble into searchable databases (see the Global Biodiversity Information Facility) which is becoming more and more important for understanding diversity, especially in difficult to identify species where access to museum specimens is a necessity." Catania mentioned that FishBase is another searchable site that is assisting scientists in better understanding fish diversity and biogeography.

Dave Smith with the Smithsonian reminds us that while we have compiled new understandings of morays, a lot of scientific work remains to be done. To this point, he adds, "Very little is known about the anatomy and the biology of morays. Only a couple of species have ever had their osteology (structure of the bones and skeleton) described, and we know very little about their ecology, behavior, and reproduction, except in the most general sense. So, there is much more to learn about morays."

So there you have it, Christopher. Seems we have mapped just the tip of the iceberg in so far as understanding moray species. It's exciting to think that there’s still plenty of work and understanding yet to accomplish. Which to me at least is incredibly encouraging to think that future generations of marine biologists, taxonomists, and museum curatorial personnel can take-up the challenge.

Et Tu, Chattanooga?

From a window display for a local housewares store, downtown Chattanooga.

Coral reefs as window dressing. Sigh.

Butterfly Kisses To Doug

I'm a big fan of Doug Taron's blog, Gossamer Tapestry. This despite his obvious character flaw of neither studying coral reefs nor writing about them. Be that as it may, Doug suggested I check out a few butterfly exhibits while on my conference junket. "Butterflies?", I initially thought. They aren't commonly found on coral reefs. What could possibly be interesting about that.

I've had an epiphany, courtesy of the Tennessee Aquarium's butterfly exhibit. Thanks for the tip, Doug! I only wish I had you there to tell me what I was seeing.

First Four Hours In Chattanooga

The last 48 hours have been a bit of a blur. With the International Coral Reef Symposium winding down on Friday, last minute meetings and fond farewells to friends and colleagues, a 4AM shuttle to the airport on Saturday, a hop up to Atlanta then a skip to Chattanooga for the Society for Conservation Biology conference, some hotel mayhem in finding me a room, a failed attempt at a wake-up call this morning, a scramble to get to the convention center to set-up for my workshop, and then two-hours of presenting, I'm feeling some reality vertigo. Especially since my brain is still on coral-time and I want to process last week.

Anyway, things went well for my workshop (lots of interested participants) and I'm now back at the hotel for some down time.

Some initial thoughts about Chattanooga? It's hot. And humid. But to say that it's humid is missing how soppingly wet the air feels here. Combine that with the thunderstorms last night and this morning, and you get a crushingly heavy humidity that steams-up my glasses going into and out of the hotel and makes me feel like my clothes are lined with rubber.

Did you know that Chattanooga is the birthplace of the bottling industry? True that. It's where Coca Cola bottling first created the iconic image of the product. From here, the bottling technology spread to other products and applications around the world.

I'm also loving the quaint Tennessee dialect. People really do say, "I swear, y'all." No really. And somehow, they can make words like "hey," "that," and "yeah" come out of their mouths with two syllables. Sometimes three.

While Chattanoogans seem like perfectly nice folk so far, there's no question I'm in the bible belt. Easily one-quarter of my flight from Atlanta was on their way to Chattanooga for a bible ministry study. The fellow sitting next to me on the plane was chatting to someone on the phone about that evenings meeting at the church. And based on the drive to my hotel from the airport, you can't swing a cat without hitting a baptist or Lutheran church. When I explained to the local cab driver that our conference officially started tomorrow, he said (shocked), "On a Sunday?"

Needless to say, sticky humidity and god tend to put me in a bit of a mood. Luckily, the Tennessee Aquarium, just a few sweaty blocks from my hotel, saved the day. First of all, it was heavily air conditioned. Secondly, it was well-designed and entertaining. I enjoyed walking through the freshwater river sections with some of the local families, just soaking in the conversations.

It's always interesting to find a local community that's close to their resource. I heard a young boy call out to his father to look at an exhibit, "Dad, look! Mocc's!" Referring to the display of venomous Water moccasin's. I listened as two young boys identified species of river trout in one display of moving water. And I wondered if any of the kids back in San Francisco would know a brook trout if it slapped them in the face. Of course opportunity to interact with the environment is part of the familiarity here. But still, it was just what I needed to hear.

After cooling-down at the aquarium, I was ready to head back to the hotel for a nap. But on my walk back, I found myself pulled, like an iron filing to a magnet, by the aroma of barbecue hanging thick in the Chattanooga air. The source was a barbecue joint called Sticky Fingers. A southern franchise, but still good. Their specialty was dry-rub pork ribs. I settled into a booth and quickly ordered-up a plate that included a 1/2 rack of Memphis-style ribs, pulled pork, baked beans, slaw, and all washed down with a icy glass of southern sweet tea.

At that perfect moment, I allowed for the slight possibility of a divine being.