If you’ve taken a Fish Identification specialty, you’ve probably heard of REEF, the Reef Environmental Education Foundation. REEF tackles an interesting problem, understanding and protecting marine life, by allowing recreational divers the opportunity to get involved.

REEF was founded in 1990 when its founders realized the increasing threats faced by marine populations. Despite these threats, the scientific community lacked the resources to collect the data needed to combat the problem. By tapping into recreational divers’ affinity for sea life, REEF vastly increases the available amount of resources.

The primary way in which divers help is by surveying fish populations. During a regular dive, the diver simply takes notes on the types and numbers of fish seen. This data is then sent in to REEF, where it is used to increase the knowledge base needed by marine scientists, conservationists, and resource managers.

Note that REEF currently only operates in the coastal regions of North and Central America, the Caribbean, and Hawaii.

Getting started

Interested in getting involved? The first step is to become a REEF member. Membership is free and includes a unique ID number, website login, and a newsletter subscription (annual by mail, monthly by email) that keeps you abreast of developments in the REEF community.

Next, you’ll need to brush up on your fish identification skills. You’re not expected to know every fish, but being able to identify a decent number of fish makes the data you collect all the more useful. See The Diving Blog’s fish identification series for a continual source of learning.

There are a few ways besides self study to learn fish. There are fish identification specialty courses. These will cover the basics of fish families and may involve a few dives to try it out. There are fish identification seminars at REEF field stations—check the website for more information. REEF staff also organize field-survey trips as a hands-on method of learning.

Collecting data

Once you’re ready to collect data, there’s not much left to do. You are welcome to join the aforementioned field-survey trips or survey fish during a dive of your own.

During a dive, REEF recommends what is called the Roving Diver Technique (RDT). This technique is based around the idea that you don’t modify your dive in any way, but simply mark types and quantities of fish as they are encountered.

This information is collected on specialized slates with waterproof forms specific to the region being surveyed. On it, you will mark the species of fish seen and the abundance: “Single” for one fish, “Few” for two to 10, “Many” for 11 to 100, and “Abundant” for over 100.

When you don’t recognize a species, you can sketch it on the slate, taking note of distinguishing features.

Afterwards, you’ll transfer this data to a special scanform (freely available from the REEF store) and send it to REEF headquarters, where it is catalogued and made part of the database.

For fun, REEF has levels of certification based on number of surveys completed and various quizzes that can be taken.

I have yet to collect a survey, but it’s something I’d be interested in doing. If you’re looking to add some purpose to your diving, or if you feel like things have stagnated for you, this could be an interesting way to renew your interest. Sign up and get some scanforms—you’re under no obligation to complete them. Try it out once and see how you like it. You may be surprised.

Last week, California Governor Schwarzenegger signed the California artificial reef bill, laying the ground work for artificial reefing projects in California.

This bill limits the government’s liability for scuba diving and fishing accidents on artificial reefs. This was a huge impediment to laying artificial reefs in the California waters.

There are already a large number of artificial reefs off California, as most west coast divers know. Surprisingly, most of these are composed of quarry rock, rather than ships and barges. Others are made of light poles, pier pilings, concrete chimneys, and old streetcars. Here is a list of artificial reefs and coordinates, which also says what each are made of.

This initiative was pushed by California Ships to Reefs, so I expect newer reefs to be made of unsalvageable ships. While there are a few artificial reefs made of ships off California, like the Yukon in San Diego, they are definitely in the minority.

Not only do artificial wrecks provide shelter for fish, but they also provide a relatively safe wreck diving environment. They tend to be safer than genuine wrecks because all hazardous materials are removed prior to sinking.

Photo from yukonsite.wordpress.com

Oceana, the organization tasked with protecting the world’s oceans, has recently launched a new ad campaign to preserve bluefin tuna.

The 30-second spot features Adrian Grenier (Entourage, The Devil Wears Prada) free-diving with schools of bluefin tuna, while his voiceover informs us of their plight.

Eating sustainable seafood may sound like a full-time job, but it doesn’t have to be that difficult. True, there are a lot of middle-of-the-road fish—those where it would be better to avoid, but its not quite as imperative. If you’re just starting, ignore those for now. Focus on eliminating the fish truly in danger of being wiped out, or, in some cases, where the bycatch from them does incredible harm.

Bluefin tuna falls into this category. They mature a little slower than their tuna brethren, so are often caught before they have spawned. Recently, the gulf oil spill has threatened one of only two spawning sites for Atlantic bluefin tuna.

These are amazing fish, and make for really tasty sushi. I encourage you to lay off for a bit, let them repopulate and allow world agencies to devise a plan to catch them sustainably, then we can all enjoy them responsibly for many many years.

Last Tuesday (June 8) was World Oceans Day. Started in 2009, World Oceans Day was created by the United Nations as an opportunity to celebrate the ocean and the value it provides in the form of seafood, trade routes, and sport (in case you missed it, scuba fits in this category).

As a bit of activism on World Oceans Day, Project AWARE launched a petition to give sharks a fighting chance.

Sharks did not fair well at this year’s Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). Eight threatened shark species were not awarded protection by the convention’s vote. Shark finning was at the top of the target list, but in general the desire is to limit catches based on scientific advice.

This petition was created to give the ordinary folks an avenue to express outrage and frustration at the convention’s shortsightedness. Personally, I am not a strong believer in petitions. I think their greatest strength is also their weakness—they require too little out of the signees. This lets one easily amass a large collection of signatures, but those signatures are relatively worthless.

Nevertheless, I signed it. If you care about the issue, you should sign it too. Even if it can’t help, it certainly can’t hurt. At worst it provides a small line in a future draft of legislature (“A recent petition collected over 100,000 signatures…”).

You can find the petition here: give sharks a chance.

The votes required 2/3 majority to pass. I’m curious if there was debate, and if so, what the other side had to say in defense of knowingly following a path of extinction for certain species of shark.

I recently watched a documentary called The Cove. You may have heard its name in the past month for winning Best Documentary at the 2010 Academy Awards. In fact, that’s what brought the movie to my attention.

Between Avatar and The Cove, 2009 was a year for hippie movies. And make no mistake, The Cove is a hippie movie. Those with any warm feelings towards oceanic creatures like dolphins—and I would assume that includes all scuba divers—will get at least a little riled up by this film. Those who don’t care probably won’t bother to watch in the first place.

The Cove’s name comes from a small lagoon in the Japanese fishing village of Taiji. This village is small. So small you’ve probably never heard of it. Yet it’s a small village with a big secret.

Dolphins migratory patterns bring them right by the coast of Taiji. They are so close that it is relatively easy for fisherman to herd hundreds of a dolphins into this tiny lagoon, as you’ll see early in the movie. They do this by banging on long submerged poles, which interferes with a dolphin’s senses. What awaits them in this lagoon? At first, the dolphins are greeted by trainers from around the world. These trainers represent the interests of just about every park, zoo, and aquarium that houses trained dolphins. The trainers pick out the “prettiest” dolphins from the bunch to be purchased at a price of $150,000 a head—not bad for a day’s work. These trainers are after the next Flipper, which leads to an interesting aspect of the story.

The documentary is centered around Ric O’Barry. O’Barry achieved success early in his life as the trainer for the dolphins playing Flipper in the US television series. This series is responsible for dolphins entering the world’s consciousness as pets more than free-roaming sea creatures. After the dolphin playing Flipper died from deep depression, O’Barry entered into a depression of his own. He had launched an industry responsible for the captivity and eventual death of thousands of dolphins, and the unspoken thread throughout this film is him dealing with this guilt by dedicating his life to saving dolphins. He is seeking the dolphins’ forgiveness.

Plenty of the movie is dedicated to O’Barry—an interesting character in his own right. He’s been one of the most active environmentalists in the world. Not your Al Gore type activitist, either. He’s been arrested more times than he can count, and is responsible for many changes in how the world’s oceans are treated and perceived. Ric O’Barry’s wikipedia page is a short account of some of his accomplishments.

Back at The Cove, however, the unchosen dolphins are herded into a secret cove that is not visible to any bystanders. What goes on over here? The movie uses a lot of CIA type spy-work to answer this question, with the fishermen going to great lengths to keep them out. We know from the beginning that the dolphins see their end here, but it is the manner in which it is done that is particularly gruesome.

This is not a film for light viewing. Be prepared to decide where you stand on things as you watch. I am far from a militant activist, but I went with this movie, and felt angry at the needless killing and destruction shown. Watch the movie, decide for yourself.

I have my convictions about various practices, like chumming water for sharks, where I’ve decided not to participate. This movie challenged me. I now know the cost of dolphin shows at Sea World and dolphinariums. What am I going to do about it? I don’t know. The least I can do is not contribute to the problem by spending my money at these places, but is there more? I’d like to. This is a hippie movie, and maybe one day I’ll be proud to be counted as one of the hippies.

On a recent Delta flight I found an article in Sky Magazine. It was about environmentalism overall, but a few pages in particular dealt with the oceans.

One section was about American actor Ted Danson’s foray into activism. His page mostly focused on eating sustainable seafood and avoiding seafood with high mercury levels (like swordfish, which no one should ever eat). However, I found myself drawn towards the portion of the article about Dr. Sylvia Earle.

I’ve never heard of Sylivia Earle, but the article says she is referred to by her friends and colleagues as “Her Deepness”—an accolade that caught my attention. Dr. Earle is considered one of the world’s foremost oceans expert, with over 7,000 hours logged underwater in 50+ years of research and exploration.

She also focuses on sustainable fishing, but brings up the issue of the true cost of seafood. She notes that we’ve consumed something like 90 percent of animals like tuna, marlins, and sharks, but with nothing to show for it; we haven’t been feeding millions of starving Africans. Shrimp used to be a delicacy, a rare treat. Now, no menu is complete without it on the menu.

Dr. Earle says the prices we pay for food are not an accurate reflection of their true cost. For instance, orange roughy can live to be 200 years old, yet we can buy it in the local marks for $8.99 US a pound. These low costs demanded by the market are not indicative of the real cost to the ecosystem.

What do we do about it? One recommended approach is to only eat sustainable seafood by keeping up-to-date on the appropriate lists maintained by independent organizations. Dr. Earle has another suggestion: write a letter to someone who makes decisions in Washington or your community.

I’ve heard this a million times, and have become quite jaded to the suggestion. She adds something interesting, though. In her words, “When I served as chief scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), staff would say, ‘Well, why don’t people tell us what they think? We only hear from vested interests—like commercial fisherman—who want to maintain their commercial rights.’ If people would express their concerns, policymakers will respond.”

I like to believe it works that way, but I just don’t know. I’m curious what all of you out there think. Is it as simple as that?

Last week, the New York Times published an op-ed piece entitled To Save the Planet, Save the Seas. The article addresses shortcomings of the recent climate talks in Copenhagen. One result from these discussions is an incentives program encouraging countries to preserve carbon dioxide-absorbing land.

The author points out that while this is a move in the right direction, it neglects an important consideration: in addition to producing oxygen, oceans absorb ~25% of the world’s carbon dioxide emissions. Thus countries should be encouraged to establish marine protected areas to preserve coastal habitats from human interference. Doing so is far less expensive than maintaining land, providing more bang for the buck.

As divers we have a strong incentive to support such marine parks. Existing parks provide some of the most pristine diving and active sea life in the world. Increasing marine preservation could only enhance diving worldwide.