What is Digg?Sponsored by AVG
CNET Top Weekly Download for Free Anti-Virus view!
free.avg.com - 2.4 million people a week get AVG Anti-Virus Free, for the best protection against web threats.
31 Comments
- Junkyarddawg, on 11/02/2009, -1/+17There's already been similar projects proposed for the Brazilian rainforest. These plans are exactly as desperate as they sound, but it may well be the only way to preserve the information in these ecosystems for future research.
- Kungfumantis239, on 11/02/2009, -3/+17As a person who grew up in the Florida Keys, I've watch tourism, over fishing, and pollution turn the main reefs to dead slabs of rock. Only the deeper reefs now have any semblance of the glory they once had. What I would give to free dive and fish the reefs that were in the 60s and 70s.
To be clear, I would be all for a moratorium on all fishing for the next 10 years. It would hurt, (the reefs off of the keys are an estimated 1 billion dollar industry), but I think we could survive on tourism if it meant saving these waters. - namisung, on 11/02/2009, -6/+13at the rate things are declining, i bet this is only the first, of many, that we're gonna have to freeze to preserve.
- drimo, on 11/02/2009, -1/+7It is nice to see that you are such an expert on marine biology to claim this as "hippie *****." Educate yourself: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/science/eart ...
- inactive, on 11/03/2009, -0/+5I once saw an article, with photos, that compared what a trophy fish from the Florida Keys looked like from each decade since the '50s. Every ten years, the fish got smaller and smaller, because the larger species were all killed.
- Ecoversity, on 11/03/2009, -0/+5I think we might freeze trolls, so that people in the future could understand why we were unable to carry on an intelligent debate even when life depended on it.
- catalysis, on 11/03/2009, -1/+5"Nature does not reason, thus any impact is neutral and ends up being a creative force as well as a destructive one."
Sorry, but that makes no sense. Every impact is not neutral, entropy is always increasing. Anyways, even animals don't ***** in their own dens. I think we can aspire to something a little better. - beakerbite, on 11/03/2009, -0/+3Yes the sharp 'rocks' aren't alive but they aren't whats important to save. Its the coral that you need to save. They are little bugs basically that shed and die, thus creating the reefs. The reefs provide protection for some, and food for others. If you don't save the coral, then eventually the reef will wither to nothing.
- chemam, on 11/03/2009, -0/+2We can do something about this!!! They've already started coral gardening in Fiji.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MI04VK0NMyM - merbrian, on 11/02/2009, -1/+3Did you try the link to the BBC where all those quotes came from, big guy? Go ahead, try again. It's not that hard.
- jerryjamesstone, on 11/02/2009, -8/+10I propose we do not freeze any humans as we seem to be ***** everything up
- 2caster3, on 11/03/2009, -0/+1Brilliant.
- earthnatives, on 11/04/2009, -0/+1Watch ACID TEST: The Global Challenge of Ocean Acidification, narrated by Sigourney Weaver, to learn more about coral reef's struggles and what we can do about it at www.acidtestmovie.com
- govtdoesnotwork, on 11/03/2009, -1/+2It probably wouldn't take 10 years...Remember the study when they captured some baby dorado ("dolphin," but its a fish for non-keys people) and they ate so much the scientists had to quit the study because they ran out of money? That only took months. A one year ban would indeed hurt, but it would do a lot to restore things. We also need to look at harvest methods such as trawling for shrimp, which is incredibly wasteful.
- DolphinBlueInc, on 11/03/2009, -0/+1It's only a matter of time until we do this to people. But, if its what is needed to save some of the forests, sea landscapes, then it must, and should, be done.
- Kungfumantis239, on 11/03/2009, -0/+1I'm slightly impressed gov.
People also refer to Dorado more commonly as Mahi-Mahi(which is Hawaiian).
The waters around here around here are devastated, but you're right, fish do repopulate quickly, a 10 year ban would most likely bring the stocks closer to what they were in the 60s. The main problem is the huge hit that Florida Spiny(and Spanish Lobster to a smaller extent, which are illegal to take any way but most people don't even know there's a difference) lobster take every year, 10 years of no fishing at all would return the stocks to what they were when I was a child.
You used to be able to go out, without a set "spot", and meet your limit in about an hour to an hour and a half.
Now, you could hunt all day and be lucky to get one. 5 year ban would probably be more plausible in this case, i admit. - premiumballin, on 11/02/2009, -4/+4Um... why not increase the amount of aquariums worldwide? In my opinion, living, breeding organisms are better than frozen ones. With that there's always the possibility of altering the genome of the coral through breeding or genetic engineering (we're talking about decades out, aren't we?) to adjust them to a warmer ocean. There needs to be more than one option, especially when that option is cryo.
First and foremost, we need to ban fishing where it needs to be banned. Ban anchors, ban industrial run-off, ban tourism. Ban anything you need in order to save our oceans. - AngryDeuce, on 11/02/2009, -7/+7How depressing.
We'd better start taking DNA samples of like EVERYTHING at this point... - RockMuncher, on 11/03/2009, -2/+2As usual, everyone has forgotten about the cold water coral... which is as least as plentiful, if not more so than their warmer water brothers (and supports massive ecosystems as well). Some of them are in trouble as well, but not nearly to the same extent. Warm water coral actually evolved from cold water coral to fill a new niche.
- rrwest, on 11/03/2009, -0/+0Not true at all.
Those "rocks" you see are the basic building blocks for a very intricate system of living things. And they house the billions of animals which build the reefs.
Without them, ther would be no more plankton, no more crabs, no more worms, no more fish, no more tuna, no more dolphins, no more whales, no more...
You get the picture. Or maybe not. - ZeMoose, on 11/02/2009, -3/+3:*(
- rrwest, on 11/03/2009, -0/+0You are forgetting that lobster stocks grow more slowly than fish stocks, which can swim to better feeding grounds.
If lobsters can't move to better feeding grounds, they tend to die off, since they can't swim that well. - sullivaduggit, on 11/03/2009, -6/+3I Am not a microbiologist or a paleolithic biologist but pretty sure from everything I have read and seen on the coral reef thing is that they go through cycles... and that we as a planet are overdue for a hard time. I am not an educated scientist like Al Gore, but from what I understand our planet goes through cycles and we are overdue for one of those big changes?....... Maybe not guess we can control the climate as people, China did last weekend :P
- Zera, on 11/02/2009, -6/+2- Never called it hippie *****, but thanks for making it political.
- I did click the first three sources and did not see the BBC link down below. First three links were to treehugger blog nonsense that cited the above link in my first comment.
- If it's just a BBC article, why didn't that get dug? ***** blogs with nothing to add just confuse the issue.
- Also, the timesonline link doesn't provide any sources either. - TheAbsintheHare, on 11/03/2009, -10/+5Before this turns into a "HUMANITY IS STUPID! WE'RE KILLING MOTHER EARTH!" thing, I'd like to point out that things go extinct. The Earth goes through phases, life flourishes, life declines, stuff dies. New species appear, and their effect on the environment causes species that cannot cope with this effect to die off. This is called evolution. It's what drives the birth of stronger and more robust life. We wouldn't exist if it weren't for specific species or other factors affecting their environments in negative ways, resulting in life forms finding other ways to survive.
What if the death of coral (creating an abundance of zooplankton) makes way for some other really awesome looking, giant, fluorescent tubeworm with higher than normal intelligence for such a species to take its place in the food web?
I mean, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying "LET'S KILL EVERYTHING AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS!". People just need to accept that humans are humans, and our needs are going to have an impact, and that impact is only seen as negative because humans give it a negative value based on reasoning. Nature does not reason, thus any impact is neutral and ends up being a creative force as well as a destructive one.
˜\(°_o)/˜ - Feenix566, on 11/02/2009, -11/+6EVERYBODY PANIC!!!!
- DulcetTone, on 11/03/2009, -6/+1Why do we poo-poo Pet Rocks and then pretend that coral reefs are alive? They are rocks. Really ugly rocks.
- earther, on 11/02/2009, -10/+3Move along folks, nothing to see here.
- chinaman1212, on 11/02/2009, -9/+2Well the global warming isn't in Missouri.
- Zera, on 11/02/2009, -10/+3What a bunch of *****.
The only link referenced in the article, the "Conference of Ocean Experts 2009" goes here: http://woc2009.org/home.php
LOL !!! I do not understand chicken little syndrome. Gotta stop listening to inflammatory, troll-esque blogs like treehugger. There are already protections in place for most of the coral reefs, and those without protection have legislation in the works.
Some of the treehugger articles are honest, and then, ones like this are totally absurd. - SemiSarcastic, on 11/02/2009, -10/+1pfff...like y are these people so upset about trees and stuff. idk hippies! lulzorzs!
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is