Illegal destruction of coral reefs worsened impact of tsunami

[RBM]

http://www.physorg.com/news5811.html

Their report is published in the 16 August issue of Eos, the newspaper of the American Geophysical Union.

in the town of Peraliya, a wave of 10-meter [30-foot] height swept 1.5 kilometers [one mile] inland, carrying a passenger train about 50 meters [200 feet] off its tracks, with a death toll of 1,700. Yet, a mere three kilometers [two miles] south, in Hikkaduwa, the tsunami measured just 2-3 meters [7-10 feet] in height, traveled only 50 meters [200 feet] inland, and caused no deaths.

The researchers found that this pattern of patchy inundation to be characteristic of the study area and was not related to such coastline features as headlands, bays, and river channels. Rather, the key factor was the presence or absence of coral and rock reefs offshore.

* * * * * * *
After such a large-scale disaster, they have found a correlation between coral reefs and a protective effect against tsunami's (regardless of other characteristics of the immediate area of shoreline)...and so, what would you expect?

Thaaat's right: Poachers and fishermen are destroying more of the remaining reefs, because the local maritime police had their boats wiped out...by the tsunami.

 

[Ikohn4ever]

well in New Orleans I remember reading that if they didnt destroy so much of the wetlands and the small islands off the coast of it, Katrina would not have been as damaging

 

[elprincipe]

[quote name='Ikohn4ever']well in New Orleans I remember reading that if they didnt destroy so much of the wetlands and the small islands off the coast of it, Katrina would not have been as damaging[/QUOTE]

Very true, although since the main damage was to areas below sea level I'm not sure how much damage it would have prevented in the city itself. Wetlands help control flooding.

 

[White-Wolf]

yeah, mankind is going to make himself dead over a quick buck.

i think building a city bellow sea level wasent a bright idea. When you have a walled city that keeps back water, well i dont know what they were expecting. I sympathise though, It wasent many of the resadance fault, it was the goverment in place and the federal goverment for not steping in.

this video is from 2004. Its alittle creepy how right it was. It debunks the idea that no one knew of the levey problem. Although, when the video was made, the leveys couldent have been fixed in time, but heck they dident even start, its better to try and fail then never try at all.

http://politicalhumor.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=politicalhumor&zu=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ifilm.com%2Fifilmdetail%2F2678951

 

[mykevermin]

I'm curious if you know a rough time frame for reef regrowth. I can't help but think that it isn't something that grows even remotely quickly, but I'm well outside what I know by that point.

In other words, logistic issues of preventing further destruction aside, can it be feasible to assist in or expect reefs to grow back by themselves quickly enough that this could be prevented if a tsunami would happen again in a few decades?

 

[Ikohn4ever]

[quote name='mykevermin']I'm curious if you know a rough time frame for reef regrowth. I can't help but think that it isn't something that grows even remotely quickly, but I'm well outside what I know by that point.

In other words, logistic issues of preventing further destruction aside, can it be feasible to assist in or expect reefs to grow back by themselves quickly enough that this could be prevented if a tsunami would happen again in a few decades?[/QUOTE]


well the most serious problem right now with the coral reefs are bleaching.

"Zooxanthellae live symbiotically within the coral polyp tissues and assist the coral in nutrient production through its photosynthetic activities. These activities provide the coral with fixed carbon compounds for energy, enhance calcification ,and mediate elemental nutrient flux. The host coral polyp in return provides its zooxanthellae with a protected environment to live within, and a steady supply of carbon dioxide for its photosynthetic processes. The symbiotic relationship allows the slow growing corals to compete with the faster growing multicellular algaes because the tight coupling of resources and the fact that the corals can feed by day through photosynthesis and by night through predation.

The tissues of corals themselves are actually not the beautiful colors of the coral reef, but are instead clear. The corals receive their coloration from the zooxanthellae living within their tissues.

Coral reef ecosystems world-wide have been subject to unprecedented degradation over the past few decades. Disturbances affecting coral reefs include anthropogenic and natural events. Recent accelerated coral reef decline seems to be related mostly to anthropogenic impacts (overexploitation, overfishing, increased sedimentation and nutrient overloading. Natural disturbances which cause damage to coral reefs include violent storms, flooding, high and low temperature extremes, El Nino Southern Oscillation (ENSO) events, subaerial exposures, predatory outbreaks and epizootics.

Coral reef bleaching is a common stress response of corals to many of the various disturbances mentioned above. Beginning in the 1980s, the frequency and widespread distribution of reported coral reef bleaching events increased. Widespread bleaching, involving major coral reef regions and resulting in mass coral mortality has raised concerns about linkage of the events to global phenomenons including global warming or climate change and increased UV radiation from ozone depletion."

 

[David85]

New Orleans would have flooded anyways. The wetlands do help but it's one mile of wetlands help prevent 1 foot of stormsurge. At most there were only 5-10 miles of wetlands before we dammed things and destroyed them. The stormsurge was 30 feet, New Orleans was ed since the beginning.

 

[elprincipe]

[quote name='David85']New Orleans would have flooded anyways. The wetlands do help but it's one mile of wetlands help prevent 1 foot of stormsurge. At most there were only 5-10 miles of wetlands before we dammed things and destroyed them. The stormsurge was 30 feet, New Orleans was ed since the beginning.[/QUOTE]

Most certainly it would have flooded anyway. Much of the city is built below sea level and is only not flooded normally thanks to a series of levees that keeps Lake Ponchitrain from flooding it.

The wetlands loss in Louisiana is a long-term issue. Louisiana loses wetlands at a high rate every year because the Mississippi River is not allowed to flood over its banks and deposit sediment. So the state of Louisiana shrinks. I think there was an article about this in National Geographic...

aha, here we go:

http://magma.nationalgeographic.com...ographic.com&fs=plasma.nationalgeographic.com