got ethical husbandry?

Interesting article in the Times

That is an awesome article Jeremy!
I totally agree with the statement someone made regarding stopping the cause of coral die off. They can continue to plant coral fragments with the best intentions, however unless some action is taken to reduce things "like coastal redevelopment and chemical runoff from terrestrial agriculture" I almost want to say the project they've undertaken is in the end a futile, and uphill battle. As the years come, if those problems mentioned aren't solved, I'd imagine they would only get worse.
Maybe Charles Delbeek can share his secrets to getting corals to grow like weeds with some aqua-culture facilities over there :D
 
I hope it is not too little too late. I hope they are successful, despite a political agenda. And as Anthony said, I truly hope they are able to reverse the root cause of the reef degradations.
 
Grrr G.D. website... I hate that it makes me leave this every time I click!!! It's the 21st century webmistress!!! ;)


Anyways, I always wondered why they didn't do this more often. Seems that we're more concerned with potentially introducing a "non-native" species of fish/coral/whatever than we are about introducing the products of our economy that destroy it even more so.
 
Hehehe Jeremy... oh if we only had a true democracy where even the tiniest of laws that impact our lives were voted on by us instead of some "representation" that we really don't have...

With that said, I think worrying about non-native species is warranted ;)
 
Not in the manor the bills states ;) As it stands it would wipe a 50+ BILLION dollar trade out, puts thousands of people out of work, shutter thousands of businesses and even cut out most veterinarians that don't currently work withing the FDA or meat packing industry. Aquaculture would be highly at risk as most are non native. Poorly written bill. Regulation is needed, just not knee jerk reactionary blanket regulations made in a vacuum.

If you know anyone in Santa Cruz country have them contact Sam Farr and tell him to remove his co-sponsorship of HR669.


www.NoHR669.com
 
I dunno, by the strict definition of the word native, most people are true native Americans... if you want to constrain it as the "Indians" what makes them any more native than others? They were here first? (they immigrated as well), What about the ones that came after? Are they any less native?

That being said the article is about trying to repopulate reefs around Japan, not about HR669 :p
 
Kennewick man was here first, the "Native Americans" should give all of their land to him :D


On the subject though, as we globalize it will be near impossible to keep things from becoming a global ecosystem, so IMO Japan is doing the right thing by giving it a go. Considering it's the Pacific and not the Caribbean they have a shot at making it work.
 
The nature and scope of the problem. Corals in the Pacific tend to recover from bleaching events quicker with much less in the way residual disease issues. I'd also reckon that the water quality is not degrading as rapidly as it is in the Caribbean.
 
Not to mention the genetic diversity in Pac vs. Atlantic corals. And the areas where coral grow in the ATL are near giant industrialized areas...the pollution is much greater then IIRC then the non populated Pac reef regions.
 
I'm thinking more like agricultural run off and septic leakage :) But yah, golf course as well :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top