Search

Tourists' narrow escape after Great Barrier Reef plane crash

Nine tourists and a pilot on board a plane that flipped and crashed while trying to land on Lizard Island in the Great Barrier Reef are "lucky to be alive". The light plane bound for Cairns, was carrying nine adults and one 14-year-old girl, when it crashed shortly after 7:30am on Monday morning. It is believed that the plane tried to return to the Island after a mechanical malfunction, colliding with trees as it came down. Queensland Ambulance operations sent two rescue helicopters to the Island, shortly after the accident, and four passengers were flown back to Cairns Hospital for treatment. Royal Flying Doctor Service nurse Stephanie Beatty said it was remarkable that they managed to come out of the crash relatively unharmed. "Minor injuries, minor head injury and a fractured arm, otherwise most shaken but okay," she said. "I think the people are very lucky to be alive." Queensland Ambulance Service Acting Assistant Commissioner Brina Keating also said that it was "incredible" they managed to walk out alive. "All were walking — they were able to get out of the aircraft," she told ABC News. "To walk away from something like that is incredible." Ms Keating also said that the cause of the crash was being investigated. Footage of the wreckage shared on <a href="https://twitter.com/AnnaRawlings_/status/1744170681749946773?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1744170681749946773%7Ctwgr%5E4bc69f9710cd8300d7b1080153bf7dc1e4e405d4%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.9news.com.au%2Fnational%2Fplane-crash-lizard-island-great-barrier-reef%2F78af78a6-2df7-4ad3-86ce-57e724512856" target="_blank" rel="noopener">social media</a> show the mangled plane lying upside down with broken propellers, and emergency tape closing off the area. According to the Cairns Hospital and Health Service, all 10 people are in a stable condition. Images: Anna Rawlings/ X

Travel Trouble

Record coral cover doesn’t necessarily mean the Great Barrier Reef is in good health (despite what you may have heard)

In what seems like excellent news, coral cover in parts of the Great Barrier Reef is at a record high, according to <a href="https://www.aims.gov.au/information-centre/news-and-stories/highest-coral-cover-central-northern-reef-36-years" target="_blank" rel="noopener">new data</a> from the Australian Institute of Marine Science. But this doesn’t necessarily mean our beloved reef is in good health. In the north of the reef, coral cover usually fluctuates between 20% and 30%. Currently, it’s at 36%, the highest level recorded since monitoring began more than three decades ago. This level of coral cover comes hot off the back of a <a href="https://theconversation.com/another-mass-bleaching-event-is-devastating-the-great-barrier-reef-what-will-it-take-for-coral-to-survive-180180" target="_blank" rel="noopener">disturbing decade</a> that saw the reef endure six mass coral bleaching events, four severe tropical cyclones, active outbreaks of crown-of-thorns starfish, and water quality impacts following floods. So what’s going on? High coral cover findings <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-lot-of-coral-doesnt-always-mean-high-biodiversity-10548" target="_blank" rel="noopener">can be deceptive</a> because they can result from only a few dominant species that grow rapidly after disturbance (such as mass bleaching). These same corals, however, are extremely susceptible to disturbance and are likely to die out within a few years. <h2>The data are robust</h2> The <a href="https://peerj.com/articles/4747/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Great Barrier Reef spans</a> 2,300 kilometres, comprising more than 3,000 individual reefs. It is an exceptionally diverse ecosystem that features more than 12,000 animal species, plus many thousand more species of plankton and marine flora. The reef has been teetering on the edge of receiving an “in-danger” <a href="https://theconversation.com/not-declaring-the-great-barrier-reef-as-in-danger-only-postpones-the-inevitable-164867" target="_blank" rel="noopener">listing</a> from the World Heritage Committee. And it was <a href="https://theconversation.com/this-is-australias-most-important-report-on-the-environments-deteriorating-health-we-present-its-grim-findings-186131" target="_blank" rel="noopener">recently described</a> in the State of the Environment Report as being in a poor and deteriorating state. To protect the Great Barrier Reef, we need to routinely monitor and report on its condition. The Australian Institute of Marine Science’s long-term monitoring program has been collating and delivering this information since 1985. Its approach involves surveying a selection of reefs that represent different habitat types (inshore, midshelf, offshore) and management zones. The <a href="https://www.aims.gov.au/monitoring-great-barrier-reef/gbr-condition-summary-2021-22" target="_blank" rel="noopener">latest report</a> provides a robust and valuable synopsis of how coral cover has changed at 87 reefs across three sectors (north, central and south) over the past 36 years. <h2>The results</h2> Overall, the long-term monitoring team found coral cover has increased on most reefs. The level of coral cover on reefs near Cape Grenville and Princess Charlotte Bay in the northern sector has bounced back from bleaching, with two reefs having <a href="https://www.aims.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-08/AIMS_LTMP_Report_on%20GBR_coral_status_2021_2022_040822F3.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">more than 75% cover</a>. In the central sector, where coral cover has historically been lower than in the north and south, coral cover is now at a region-wide high, at 33%. The southern sector has a dynamic coral cover record. In the late 1980s coral cover surpassed 40%, before dropping to a region-wide low of 12% in 2011 after Cyclone Hamish. The region is currently experiencing outbreaks of crown-of-thorns starfish. And yet, coral cover in this area is still relatively high at 34%. Based on this robust data set, which shows increases in coral cover indicative of region-wide recovery, things must be looking up for the Great Barrier Reef – right? <h2>Are we being catfished by coral cover?</h2> In the Australian Institute of Marine Science’s report, reef recovery relates solely to an increase in coral cover, so let’s unpack this term. Coral cover is a broad proxy metric that indicates habitat condition. It’s relatively easy data to collect and report on, and is the most widely used monitoring metric on coral reefs. The finding of high coral cover may signify a reef in good condition, and an increase in coral cover after disturbance may signify a recovering reef. But in this instance, it’s more likely the reef is being dominated by only few species, as the report states that branching and plating Acropora species have driven the recovery of coral cover. Acropora coral are renowned for a “boom and bust” life cycle. After disturbances such as a cyclone, Acropora species function as pioneers. They quickly recruit and colonise bare space, and the laterally growing plate-like species can rapidly cover large areas. Fast-growing Acropora corals tend to dominate during the early phase of recovery after disturbances such as the recent series of mass bleaching events. However, these same corals are often susceptible to wave damage, disease or coral bleaching and tend to go bust within a few years. Inferring that a reef has recovered by a person being towed behind a boat to obtain a rapid visual estimate of coral cover is like flying in a helicopter and saying a bushfire-hit forest has recovered because the canopy has grown back. It provides no information about diversity, or the abundance and health of other animals and plants that live in and among the trees, or coral. <h2>Cautious optimism</h2> My <a href="https://theconversation.com/almost-60-coral-species-around-lizard-island-are-missing-and-a-great-barrier-reef-extinction-crisis-could-be-next-163714" target="_blank" rel="noopener">study</a>, published last year, examined 44 years of coral distribution records around Jiigurru, Lizard Island, at the northern end of the Great Barrier Reef. It suggested that 28 of 368 species of hard coral recorded at that location haven’t been seen for at least a decade, and are at risk of local extinction. Lizard Island is one location where coral cover has rapidly increased since the devastating 2016-17 bleaching event. Yet, there is still a real risk local extinctions of coral species have occurred. While there’s no data to prove or disprove it, it’s also probable that extinctions or local declines of coral-affiliated marine life, such as coral-eating fishes, crustaceans and molluscs have also occurred. Without more information at the level of individual species, it is impossible to understand how much of the Great Barrier Reef has been lost, or recovered, since the last mass bleaching event. Based on the coral cover data, it’s tempting to be optimistic. But given more frequent and severe heatwaves and cyclones are predicted in the future, it’s wise to be cautious about the reef’s perceived recovery or resilience. This article originally appeared on The Conversation. Image: Shutterstock

Travel Trouble

The Great Barrier Reef – what does a new Labor government mean for its future?

The Great Barrier Reef was inscribed on the UNESCO World Heritage list in 1981, and with good reason – it’s the world’s largest single structure made by living organisms. It’s an Australian icon intrinsically tied to our national identity, but the reef is in danger due to the effects of climate change. Just this past summer it experienced its fourth mass-bleaching event in seven years, with 91% of the reef experiencing some level of bleaching according to the summer 2021-22 Reef Snapshot report. Every Federal election, the Great Barrier Reef becomes a bit of a poster child for climate change, but what does the recent change in government actually mean for its future? The Labor government’s climate policies are more ambitious than those of the Coalition, but will it be enough to save the reef from devastation? Are we finally taking steps in the right direction? <h2>Climate change and its impact on the reef</h2> The effects of climate change are being felt majorly by the Great Barrier Reef already. Especially apparent are the mass coral-bleaching events caused by increasing ocean temperatures as a result of global warming. “Corals can (and frequently do) recover from bleaching, but just like forest recovery after a bushfire, they need time, and the speed of the recovery can vary depending on the severity of the heatwave and the types of corals growing on the reef,” explains Dr Emma Kennedy, a research scientist in Coral Reef Ecology at the Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS). But according to Dr Jodie Rummer, associate professor at the Australian Research Council (ARC) Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies at James Cook University, these events are only going to become more frequent. “With the trajectory that we’re on right now, what we’ll seeing by even the year 2044 is annual mass-bleaching events on the Great Barrier Reef, and coral reefs worldwide,” she says. “Even our more robust coral species require eight to 10 years to fully recover from these repeated heat waves. “We’re just losing that window of recovery for not only the coral reef and the coral organisms, but also all the other organisms that the coral reef supports.” Current greenhouse gas emissions trajectories indicate that globally we’re tracking towards an increase in global temperatures approaching 3°C above pre-industrial levels, by 2100. This is incompatible with healthy, thriving reefs. If warming exceeds 1.5°C “we would lose the reef altogether,” warns Rummer. <h2>Labor’s Great Barrier Reef policies</h2> With a new government comes new targets and policies that affect the reef. To start with, let’s look at the funding. The Labor government has promised to invest almost $1.2 billion in reef preservation and restoration by 2030 – that’s an extra $194.5 million on top of the LNP’s existing $1 billion reef package. This money will be used to tackle issues such as pollution from agricultural runoff, a more sustainable fishing sector, funding scientific research into thermal-tolerant corals, and funding protection and restoration work by Indigenous ranger organisations. The government also plans to continue and double the funding of the Reef 2050 Plan, which was initially released in 2015 to address the concerns of the World Heritage Committee. “It’s an awful lot of money, but it actually isn’t a lot of money when you think of it like $100 million each year,” says Dr Maxine Newlands, political scientist at James Cook University, Australia. “That’s not very much given the size of the Great Barrier Reef and what needs to be done.” It’s also important to keep in mind that the electorates that fringe the Great Barrier Reef in Queensland are Liberal seats. It remains to be seen whether there will be any opposition to funds being directed at the Great Barrier Reef – or calls for it to be redirected elsewhere, such as to farming, instead. But while it’s important to be mindful of these second and tertiary stressors to the reef, and to be acting on them, if we’re not addressing the number-one stressor that the Great Barrier Reef is facing – climate change – we’re not getting to the heart of the problem. “No more band aids on arterial wounds,” emphasises Rummer. “So, the money is great,” she adds. “And in terms of research, management and policy, we absolutely need it right now.” But the ideal is money being allocated toward reducing impacts of climate change – like the triple threat of global warming, ocean acidification and declining ocean oxygen levels. <h2>Emissions reductions targets must be increased</h2> Speaking of the reef’s number-one stressor, the outcome of this election has started Australia moving towards more action on climate change. The Labor government’s energy plan includes a target of a 43% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 2005 levels by 2030, which is far more ambitious than the previous 26% to 28% target set by the Coalition. The previous government’s policies were consistent with 3˚C of warming, whilst Labor’s policy is consistent with 2˚C, according to a report by Climate Analytics. It’s definitely a step in the right direction, but not enough to ensure the survival of the reef. Instead, the Greens’ target of a 74% emissions reduction, and teal independents’ targets of a 60% reduction, are consistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C. With an unprecedented number of Greens candidates and the “teal wave” of independents elected into the crossbench, it’s a sign of shifting public sentiment. “It’s put a bit of a magnifying glass onto the policies of the two major parties, because while I think climate change is always an issue, it’s become more prominent in this election,” says Newlands. According to Newlands, the presence of these climate-forward members is likely to “either expedite the current target of net zero by 2050, or at least have that conversation of ‘well, that’s not enough but what is?’ “Having those independents in will keep climate change on the political agenda. So, it puts pressure on particularly Labor, but Liberals as well, to address that.” The 2020s are a critical decade for climate and we’re already two years in. But we have the opportunity to catalyse action on climate change and take the necessary steps to ensure the continued survival of the Great Barrier Reef. “No other developed country in the world has more to lose from inaction on climate change than we do,” says Rummer. “But we also have the most to gain. “It’s important to look forward into the future with a lot of optimism.” This article originally appeared on <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/earth/great-barrier-reef-labor-government/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">cosmosmagazine.com</a> and was written by Imma Perfetto. Image: Shutterstock

Domestic Travel

Past policies have created barriers to voting in remote First Nations communities

The rate of voter participation in federal elections by people living in remote Indigenous communities has been <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8497.2010.01552.x" target="_blank" rel="noopener">lower than the national average</a> since First Nations people were granted the right to vote in 1962. In recent years, the rate has been in <a href="http://doi.org/10.22459/DAER.05.2012;%20http://doi.org/10.25911/5df209771dd57" target="_blank" rel="noopener">decline</a>. Rates are lowest in the Northern Territory. The low rate of participation among First Nations people living in remote communities could affect the lower house election results in the Northern Territory seat of Lingiari. Warren Snowden has stepped down after 20 years holding the seat. Determining rates of voter participation Measuring the number of First Nations people (or any particular demographic group) who vote in federal elections is challenging. Electoral rolls do not include information about cultural identity. Census figures, which could be used as a basis for comparison against voter turnout rates, are imprecise. Data from the 2005 NT Assembly general election <a href="http://doi.org/10.22459/DAER.05.2012;%20https:/press.anu.edu.au/publications/directions-australian-electoral-reform" target="_blank" rel="noopener">show</a> voting rates were 20% lower in electorates with the highest Indigenous populations. In his study of the 2019 federal election, Australian National University researcher <a href="http://doi.org/10.25911/5df209771dd57" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Will Sanders</a> found <blockquote> perhaps only half of eligible Aboriginal citizens […] may be utilising their right to vote. </blockquote> Reports from the Northern Territory’s most recent Assembly election also found <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-21/poor-indigenous-voter-turnout-at-nt-election/12580688" target="_blank" rel="noopener">record low</a><a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-08-15/coronavirus-impacting-on-remote-voter-turnout-nt-election/12559066">turnout</a> across Indigenous communities. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8497.2010.01552.x" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Research</a> <a href="http://doi.org/10.25911/5df209771dd57" target="_blank" rel="noopener">shows</a> rates of informal votes are also higher in remote Indigenous communities. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> NLC accuses the Australian Electoral Commission of 'failing' Aboriginal voters [Matt Garrick, ABC] Northern Territory land council has accused the AEC of failing Aboriginal people by not engaging more bush voters to have their say at the federal election.<a href="https://t.co/fCKRluGaoD">https://t.co/fCKRluGaoD</a> <a href="https://t.co/J3a04DyJJB">pic.twitter.com/J3a04DyJJB</a> — First Nations Tgraph (@FNTelegraph) <a href="https://twitter.com/FNTelegraph/status/1514025685521952770?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 12, 2022</a></blockquote> Barriers to First Nations people voting Decisions made at the federal level over the last three decades appear to have provided significant obstacles to voting in some First Nations communities. First is the 1996 abolition of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Election Education and Information Service. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8497.2010.01552.x" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Two</a> <a href="http://doi.org/10.22459/DAER.05.2012;%20https:/press.anu.edu.au/publications/directions-australian-electoral-reform" target="_blank" rel="noopener">studies</a> point to this abolition as a potential reason for a decline in voting rates in remote Indigenous communities since the mid-nineties. Established in 1979, this service existed specifically to increase voter registration rates among First Nations people. This was done by, for example, providing voter education and election materials in Indigenous languages. The second decision was the 2005 abolition of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission. First Nations people participated in five of the Commission’s elections administered by the same Australian Electoral Commission responsible for federal elections. Although voting was voluntary, <a href="https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/41511/3/2003_DP252.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">analysis</a> shows participation was higher in northern and central Australia than in southern Australia. The third relevant policy change was the passage of the 2006 Electoral Integrity Bill. This introduced more stringent rules for the identification required to vote, making it more difficult for people in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8497.2010.01552.x" target="_blank" rel="noopener">at least one remote community</a> to register to vote. The Morrison government’s unsuccessful 2021 proposal to introduce even tougher <a href="https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/7488468/govt-accused-of-trumpist-move-to-suppress-voting/?cs=14264" target="_blank" rel="noopener">voter identification laws</a> would likely <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/oct/27/proposed-voter-id-laws-real-threat-to-rights-of-indigenous-australians-and-people-without-homes" target="_blank" rel="noopener">exacerbate this problem</a>. The fourth policy decision was a 2012 change to the Commonwealth Electoral Act, known as the “Federal Direct Enrolment and Update”. This enabled the Australian Electoral Commission to register eligible Australians to vote based on information available through several government agencies. These include Centrelink/the Department of Human Services, the Australian Taxation Office, and the National Exchange of Vehicle and Driver Information Service. But the Electoral Commission has <a href="http://doi.org/10.25911/5df209771dd57" target="_blank" rel="noopener">chosen not to use this mechanism for enrolment in parts of Australia</a> where mail is sent to a single community address (“mail exclusion areas”). This means people living in many remote communities are not automatically added to the electoral roll, unlike most of the rest of Australia. West Arnhem Regional Council mayor Matthew Ryan and Yalu Aboriginal Corporation chairman Ross Mandi launched an official complaint to the Australian Human Rights Commissioner over this issue in June last year. They <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-06-19/nt-voters-racial-discrimination-human-rights-commission/100227762" target="_blank" rel="noopener">argued</a> failure to apply the Federal Direct Enrolment and Update in remote communities represents a breach of the Racial Discrimination Act. A <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8497.2010.01552.x" target="_blank" rel="noopener">survey</a> of residents in one remote community on South Australia’s APY lands found a lack of information contributed to low participation in elections. Obstacles included: <ul> <li> a lack of materials available in appropriate languages </li> <li> uncertainty about how to cast a formal vote </li> <li> problems related to literacy, and </li> <li> a lack of appropriate identification necessary to enrol. </li> </ul> In October last year, the Australian Electoral Commission announced new funding for its <a href="https://www.aec.gov.au/media/2021/10-28.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Indigenous Electoral Participation program</a> with the aim of increasing enrolment rates; the upcoming election will show if the program is working. Lingiari Given that voting is compulsory in Australia, non-participation is a concern in any election. But these issues are likely to be particularly relevant in the 2022 federal election, at least in the seat of Lingiari. Lingiari covers all of the Northern Territory outside the greater Darwin/Palmerston area. So it is the one House of Representatives division where Indigenous Australians (many of them living in remote communities) have clear electoral <a href="http://doi.org/10.25911/5df209771dd57" target="_blank" rel="noopener">power</a>. Providing more mobile polling booths could help make voting easier for people in remote Indigenous communities. Currently, these booths can be present for as little as two hours during an entire election period. There is also <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8497.2010.01552.x" target="_blank" rel="noopener">evidence</a> Indigenous people are more likely to vote in elections for Indigenous candidates, and for candidates who have visited their community. Warren Snowden has represented the electorate since its creation in 2001, but he is not contesting this election; the seat is up for grabs. Indigenous people will determine who takes Snowden’s place. But how many of them vote may be limited by their ability to enrol, the availability of information in an appropriate language, and access a polling booth.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/181194/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/morgan-harrington-1207111" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Morgan Harrington</a>, Research Fellow, Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/australian-national-university-877" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Australian National University</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/past-policies-have-created-barriers-to-voting-in-remote-first-nations-communities-181194" target="_blank" rel="noopener">original article</a>. Image: The Australian Electoral Commision (<a href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/auselectoralcom/48720382352/in/album-72157710806573631/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Flickr</a>)

Legal

No, sunscreen chemicals are not bleaching the Great Barrier Reef

For the sixth time in the last 25 years, the Great Barrier Reef <a href="https://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/the-reef/reef-health" target="_blank" rel="noopener">is bleaching</a>. During bleaching events, people are quick to point the finger at different causes, including <a href="https://owlcation.com/stem/Coral-Bleaching-and-Oxybenzone-Choose-Your-Sunscreen-Carefully" target="_blank" rel="noopener">sunscreen</a>. Why sunscreen? Some active ingredients can wash off snorkelers and into the reef, contaminating the area. So could this be the cause of the Barrier Reef’s bleaching? In a word, no. I reviewed the evidence for sunscreen as a risk to coral in my <a href="https://www.publish.csiro.au/CH/CH21236" target="_blank" rel="noopener">new research</a>, and found that while chemicals in sunscreen pose a risk to corals under laboratory conditions, they are only found at very low levels in real world environments. That means when coral bleaching does occur, it is more likely to be due to the marine heatwaves and increased water temperatures that have come with climate change, as well as land-based run-off. Why have we been concerned over the environmental impact of sunscreens? After we apply sunscreen, the active ingredients can leach from our skin into the water. When we shower after swimming, soaps and detergents can further strip the these sunscreen chemicals off and send them into our waste water systems. They pass through treatment facilities, which cannot effectively remove them, and end up in rivers and oceans. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454296/original/file-20220325-21-1agae0v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="hands putting on sunscreen" /></a><figcaption>Sunscreen isn’t the cause of the coral bleaching. Shutterstock</figcaption></figure> It’s no surprise, then, that sunscreen contamination has been detected in freshwater and seas across the globe, from <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15996716/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Switzerland</a> to <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11356-015-5174-3" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Brazil</a> and <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27235899/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Hong Kong</a>. Contamination is highest in the summer months, consistent with when people are more likely to go swimming, and peaks in the hours after people have finished swimming. Four years ago, the Pacific island nation of Palau made world headlines by announcing plans to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/02/pacific-island-to-introduce-world-first-reef-toxic-sunscreen-ban" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ban all sunscreens</a> that contain specific synthetic active ingredients due to concern over the risk they posed to corals. <a href="https://www.cntraveler.com/story/these-destinations-are-banning-certain-sunscreens" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Similar bans</a> have been announced by Hawaii, as well a number of other popular tourist areas in the Americas and Caribbean. These bans are based on independent scientific studies and <a href="https://coralreefpalau.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/CRRF-UNESCO-Sunscreen-in-Jellyfish-Lake-no.2732.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">commissioned reports</a> which have found contamination from specific active ingredients in sunscreen in the water at beaches, rivers and lakes. Notably, the nations and regions which have banned these active ingredients, like Bonaire and Mexico, have local economies heavily reliant on summer tourism. For these areas, coral bleaching is not only an environmental catastrophe but an economic loss as well, if tourists choose to go elsewhere. How do we know sunscreen isn’t the issue? So if contamination concerns over these active ingredients are warranted, how can we be sure they’re not the cause of the bleaching in the Great Barrier Reef? Put simply, the concentrations of the chemicals are too low to cause the bleaching. The synthetic ingredients used in most products are highly <a href="https://www.corrosionpedia.com/definition/653/hydrophobic#:%7E:text=Hydrophobic%20is%20a%20property%20of,Oils%20and%20fats%20are%20hydrophobic." target="_blank" rel="noopener">hydrophobic</a> and <a href="https://www.greenfacts.org/glossary/jkl/lipophilic.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">lipophilic</a>. That means they shun water and love fats, making them hard to dissolve in water. They’d much prefer to stay in the skin until they break down. Because of this, the levels found in the environment are very low. How low? Think nanograms per litre (a nanogram is 0.000000001 grams) or micrograms per litre (a microgram is 0.00001 grams). Significantly higher levels are found only in waste water treatment sludge and some sediments, not in the water itself. So how do we reconcile this with studies showing sunscreen can damage corals? Under laboratory conditions, many active ingredients in sunscreen have been found to damage corals as well as <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22828885/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">mussels</a>, <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17889917/#:%7E:text=BP%2D2%20was%20accumulated%20in,and%20female%20fish%20were%20observed." target="_blank" rel="noopener">fish</a>, <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24359924/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">small crustaceans</a>, and plant-like organisms such as <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0269749111006713" target="_blank" rel="noopener">algae and phytoplankton</a>. The key phrase above is “under laboratory conditions”. While these studies would suggest sunscreens are a real threat to reefs, it’s important to know the context. Studies like these are usually conducted under artificial conditions which can’t account for natural processes. They usually don’t account for the breakdown of the chemicals by sunlight or dilution through water flow and tides. These tests also use sunscreen concentrations up to thousands of times higher – milligrams per litre – compared to real world contamination levels found in collected samples. In short, laboratory-only studies are not giving us a reliable indication of what happens to these chemicals in real world conditions. <figure class="align-center zoomable"><a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/454298/original/file-20220325-21-1wft8gc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" alt="Sea wave seen side on" /></a><figcaption>Laboratory studies don’t tend to account for dilution in seas or rivers. Shutterstock</figcaption></figure> If it’s not sunscreen, what is it? The greatest threats to the reef are climate change, coastal development, land-based run-off like pesticides, herbicides, and other pollutants, and direct human use like illegal fishing, according to a <a href="https://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/our-work/outlook-report-2019" target="_blank" rel="noopener">2019 outlook report</a> issued by the reef’s managing body. Reefs get their striking colours from single-celled organisms called <a href="https://oceanservice.noaa.gov/education/tutorial_corals/coral02_zooxanthellae.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">zooxanthellae</a> which grow and live inside corals. Importantly, these organisms only grow under very specific conditions, including narrow bands of temperature and light levels. When conditions go outside the zooxanthellaes’ preferred zone, they die and the coral turns white. As a result, the likeliest cause of this bleaching is <a href="https://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/our-work/threats-to-the-reef/climate-change" target="_blank" rel="noopener">climate change</a>, which has increased ocean temperatures and acidity and resulted in more flooding, storms, and cyclones which block light and stir up the ocean floor. So do you need to worry about the impact of your sunscreen on the environment? No. Sunscreen should remain a key part of our sun protection strategy, as a way to protect skin from UV damage, prevention skin cancers, and slow the visible signs of ageing. Our coral reefs face much bigger issues than sunscreen.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/179938/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nial-wheate-96839" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Nial Wheate</a>, Associate Professor of the Sydney Pharmacy School, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-sydney-841" target="_blank" rel="noopener">University of Sydney</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/no-sunscreen-chemicals-are-not-bleaching-the-great-barrier-reef-179938" target="_blank" rel="noopener">original article</a>. Image: Getty Images

Domestic Travel

Overcoming the barriers to reef recovery

<div> <div class="copy"> The Great Barrier Reef has been impacted by three mass bleaching events in the last five years. Foremost, it is being challenged by climate change, particularly ocean warming. There are still areas of the reef that are doing well and demonstrating quite a high level of resilience, but other areas are not. As the climate continues to warm, we predict that these bleaching events will continue to become more frequent and more severe, and this raises concerns about the reef’s long-term outlook. Most corals already live close to what we call their upper thermal limit – the upper temperature of what they can tolerate. When seawater temperatures rise just a degree or so above that upper limit, it begins to cause stress and damage to the coral. Corals also have symbiotic algae called zooxanthellae that live inside their tissues. When a higher water temperature is combined with a high irradiance stress on those days when it’s very calm and very sunny, those two factors together are detrimental to the algae that live in the coral tissues, and it causes a breakdown of that symbiosis. That’s what leads to coral bleaching – and if the water is hot enough, it impacts the coral animal tissue as well. <blockquote class="has-text-color has-weekly-blood-red-color"> When you dive below the surface, all of the noise from the world above is quietened, and it allows you to be completely immersed in an entirely different environment. </blockquote> That’s the mechanism by which temperature causes damage to the corals. If that persists for long enough those corals will often die. And of course, having fewer corals left on a reef impacts the ability of that reef to recover. Many people hear the word coral and think of colourful rocks. It’s important to understand that these are colonial animals. Hundreds or thousands of individual coral polyps make up the larger colony. Through time, as the animal grows, it lays down layers of limestone and that’s what builds the structure of the reef. The living part of the coral is actually the thin veneer of tissue covering the outside of what looks like rock. Since childhood, I’ve always wanted to immerse myself in the underwater world. I grew up in the state of Maryland, on the east coast of the USA, and spent quite a lot of time in the summers on the Chesapeake Bay. It’s certainly not tropical but I found it fascinating and enjoyed exploring my environment. Then I did a bit of travelling to some tropical locations, and I fell in love with reefs. They are so otherworldly, with all their incredible diversity and beauty and colour. They really are quite alien. When you dive below the surface, all of the noise from the world above is quietened, and it allows you to be completely immersed in an entirely different environment that is so fascinating, with so many behaviours and life forms to observe. I’ve been captivated by the connectedness of the reef ecosystem – how these organisms all rely on one another and work cohesively together. Of course, the flashy beautiful fish and charismatic creatures are attractive, but the corals have really enthralled me. I realised early in my studies that corals are the foundational species of the reef ecosystem. They are the giant sequoia, if you like – the massive trees that build the “forest” of the reef. I became very interested in understanding how the system works – how it changes, recovers and maintains its communities – and also wanted to ensure that it will be maintained for future generations. The more that I learned about these ecosystems, the more I saw the challenges that they faced. Many of the reefs in the Caribbean are degraded – I saw how they have been ravaged by diseases and bleaching in the last 15 years. Understanding the drivers of coral diseases became the focus of my dissertation work – and really prompted me to start thinking about how to apply my knowledge and skills to develop ways to help. <blockquote class="has-text-color has-weekly-blood-red-color"> [From] that early life history stage when the coral larvae have just settled onto the reef… it’s likely that fewer than one in a thousand survives to adulthood, maybe less. </blockquote> After my dissertation work in the Caribbean, I saw an opportunity for a postdoctoral position at the <a rel="noreferrer noopener" href="https://www.aims.gov.au/" target="_blank">Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS)</a> here in Australia. It’s been a dream to come here and study the corals of the Great Barrier Reef. One of the key things that we’re working on is trying to overcome the bottleneck in the survival of corals – that early life history stage when the coral larvae have just settled onto the reef. It’s likely that fewer than one in a thousand survives to adulthood, maybe less. In a joint reef resilience project with BHP in Woppaburra Sea Country (the Keppel Islands) I’m working towards identifying ways to overcome that bottleneck by reducing the high mortality during a coral’s first year of life. At a broader scale, we’re really trying to nail down the know-how for generating corals reliably and consistently at scale. Corals have a unique way of reproducing – at least from a human perspective. Obviously, they are attached to the sea floor. So, corals can’t go out and find mates. What most corals have evolved to do is synchronise the spawning of their gametes. They release their eggs and sperm into the sea in a highly synchronous event that only happens once a year for most species. These are animals, remember, and they reproduce like animals, with eggs and sperm released into the water. When the corals on the reef are healthy and densely populated, those eggs and sperm float and then mix at the surface of the ocean – the eggs become fertilised by sperm, and those fertilised eggs develop in the sea. Over the course of a few days to a few weeks, they develop into microscopic larvae that are less than a millimetre in size. Those larvae get moved around by currents, and hopefully get taken to a reef somewhere, where they’ll settle down, attach to the sea floor, and then grow into an adult coral. A single adult coral can release thousands to millions of eggs and sperm. They synchronise this release using a suite of cues from the environment, based on the lunar cycle, the tide and the time of sunset, down to the minute. Once they settle onto the reef they metamorphose into a single, tiny polyp. Over time, that single polyp divides, then divides again, and grows into a larger colony. So most colonies of corals have grown from a single tiny larva that settled into one polyp that grew over many years. At this time of year, the majority of the species of corals that live on the Great Barrier Reef will spawn. It’s interesting because they all spawn around the full moon, over several days, but they’re highly synchronous within a species. One species might spawn at 10 minutes after sunset. And then the next species will spawn 20 minutes after sunset. And then the next 30 minutes after, so that increases the likelihood that they’ll be able to fertilise eggs of the same species right around the same time. It’s not an exact science but we’ve become pretty good at predicting those times, and we expect them to go in a certain order. In general, the corals that we collect for the research we do are synchronised to their natural cycle, and we let them spawn naturally. But there’s a lot of interest in the research community at the moment in manipulating these spawning times. By adjusting the day length and the solar and lunar cycles, it will allow us to have a broader window of opportunity to do our work that is currently constrained to once per year. In my research, many of the corals that are generated from spawning go back out onto the reef. We then track how those corals perform through time and across different reef sites and environments. When a reef is supplied with trillions of larvae each year, then that reef can usually recover on its own. But problems exist when reefs are not getting adequate supplies of larvae because they don’t have adult populations producing them; the reefs may have been degraded, and there aren’t enough individuals spawning to generate the larvae required. Bleaching can also impact a coral’s ability to spawn. If a coral has severely bleached, even if it doesn’t die, it often won’t spawn, or if it does spawn, the eggs and sperm are of poor quality. <blockquote class="has-text-color has-weekly-blood-red-color"> A single adult coral can release thousands to millions of eggs and sperm. They synchronise this release using a suite of cues from the environment, based on the lunar cycle, the tide and the time of sunset, down to the minute. </blockquote> The newest research has suggested that those latent effects of bleaching can persist for several years. While it might seem that the coral has recovered, there can be lingering impacts on their ability to reproduce, which affects the recovery of the reef. What we can do is go out and identify where the adult corals are located, put them together, spawn them, and increase the odds that each larva that’s developed in that process can then settle and survive. That overcomes the bottleneck that would be found naturally that limits the recovery potential of the reefs. The tools that we have currently are insufficient to address the scale of coral decline globally. At AIMS, I’m involved in two big programs focused on developing new and innovative methods to improve the resilience of coral reefs affected by climate change: the Reef Restoration and Adaptation Program and the Australian Coral Reef Resilience Initiative. My hope is that we can develop a toolkit of strategies to implement on reefs that aren’t recovering naturally and that require accelerated adaptation to ocean warming, while we work to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  <img id="cosmos-post-tracker" style="opacity: 0; height: 1px!important; width: 1px!important; border: 0!important; position: absolute!important; z-index: -1!important;" src="https://syndication.cosmosmagazine.com/?id=171406&title=Overcoming+the+barriers+to+reef+recovery" alt="" width="1" height="1" /> </div> <div id="contributors"> <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/nature/marine-life/overcoming-barriers-to-coral-reef-recovery/">This article</a> was originally published on <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com">Cosmos Magazine</a> and was written by <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/contributor/dr-carly-randall">Dr Carly Randall</a>. Dr Carly Randall is a marine scientist with the Australian Institute of Marine Science specialising in coral ecology and reproductive biology. She is currently investigating drivers of post-settlement coral mortality to improve coral restoration methodologies. </div> </div>

Domestic Travel

5 major heatwaves in 30 years have turned the Great Barrier Reef into a bleached checkerboard

Just 2% of the Great Barrier Reef remains untouched by bleaching since 1998 and 80% of individual reefs have bleached severely once, twice or three times since 2016, <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0960982221014901">our new study</a> reveals today. We measured the impacts of five marine heatwaves on the Great Barrier Reef over the past three decades: in 1998, 2002, 2016, 2017 and 2020. We found these bouts of extreme temperatures have transformed it into a checkerboard of bleached reefs with very different recent histories. Whether we still have a functioning Great Barrier Reef in the decades to come depends on how much higher we allow global temperatures to rise. The bleaching events we’ve already seen in recent years are a result of the world warming by 1.2℃ since pre-industrial times. World leaders meeting at the climate summit in Glasgow must commit to more ambitious promises to drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions. It’s vital for the future of corals reefs, and for the hundreds of millions of people who depend on them for their livelihoods and food security. <h2>Coral in a hotter climate</h2> The Great Barrier Reef is comprised of more than 3,000 individual reefs stretching for <a href="https://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/the-reef/reef-facts">2,300 kilometres</a>, and supports more than 60,000 jobs in reef <a href="https://www.gbrmpa.gov.au/our-work/Managing-multiple-uses/tourism-on-the-great-barrier-reef">tourism</a>. Under climate change, the frequency, intensity and scale of climate extremes is changing rapidly, including the record-breaking marine heatwaves that cause corals to bleach. Bleaching is a stress response by overheated corals, where they lose their colour and many struggle to survive. If all new COP26 pledges by individual countries are actually met, then the projected increase in average global warming could be brought down <a href="https://www.climate-resource.com/tools/ndcs">to 1.9℃</a>. In theory, this would put us in line with the goal of the Paris Agreement, which is to keep global warming below 2℃, but preferably 1.5℃, this century. However, it is still not enough to prevent the <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/chapter/spm/">ongoing degradation</a> of the world’s coral reefs. The damage to coral reefs from anthropogenic heating so far is very clear, and further warming will continue to <a href="https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aan8048">ratchet down</a> reefs throughout the tropics. <h2>Ecological memories of heatwaves</h2> Most reefs today are in early <a href="https://www.aims.gov.au/reef-monitoring/gbr-condition-summary-2020-2021">recovery mode</a>, as coral populations begin to re-build since they last experienced bleaching in 2016, 2017 and 2020. It takes about a decade for a decent recovery of the fastest growing corals, and much longer for slow-growing species. Many coastal reefs that were severely bleached in 1998 have never fully recovered. <a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430169/original/file-20211104-19-1po1sc2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430169/original/file-20211104-19-1po1sc2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="" /></a> The fringing reef flat at Orpheus Island on the central Great Barrier Reef, prior to mass coral bleaching in 1998. Bette Willis and Andrew Baird, Author provided <a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430168/original/file-20211104-27-16wyz5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430168/original/file-20211104-27-16wyz5j.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="" /></a> The same reef flat at Orpheus Island after further bleaching in 2002 and 2016. Bette Willis and Andrew Baird, Author provided Each bleaching event so far has a different geographic footprint. Drawing upon <a href="https://www.mdpi.com/2072-4292/6/11/11579">satellite data</a>, we measured the duration and intensity of heat stress that the Great Barrier Reef experienced each summer, to explain why different parts were affected during all five events. The bleaching responses of corals differed greatly in each event, and was strongly influenced by the recent history of previous bleaching. For this reason, it’s important to measure the extent and severity of bleaching directly, where it actually occurs, and not rely exclusively on water temperature data from satellites as an indirect proxy. We found the most vulnerable reefs each year were the ones that had not bleached for a decade or longer. On the other hand, when successive episodes were close together in time (one to four years apart), the heat threshold for severe bleaching increased. In other words, the earlier event had hardened regions of the Great Barrier Reef to subsequent impacts. <a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430176/original/file-20211104-15-noksid.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430176/original/file-20211104-15-noksid.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="Bleached coral" /></a> Bleaching is a stress response by overheated corals. Shutterstock For example, in 2002 and 2017, it took much more heat to trigger similar levels of bleaching that were measured in 1998 and 2016. The threshold for bleaching was much higher on reefs that had experienced an earlier episode of heat stress. Similarly, southern corals, which escaped bleaching in 2016 and 2017, were the most vulnerable in 2020, compared to central and northern reefs that had bleached severely in previous events. Many different mechanisms could generate these historical effects, or ecological memories. One is <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0041-2">heavy losses</a> of the more heat-susceptible coral species during an earlier event – dead corals don’t re-bleach. Nowhere left to hide Only a single cluster of reefs remains unbleached in the far south, downstream from the rest of the Great Barrier Reef, in a small region that has remained consistently cool through the summer months during all five mass bleaching events. These reefs lie at the outer edge of the Great Barrier Reef, where upwelling of cool water may offer some protection from heatwaves, at least so far.<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430397/original/file-20211104-23-29h946.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430397/original/file-20211104-23-29h946.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="" /></a> Map of the Great Barrier Reef showing the cumulative level of bleaching observed in 2016, 2017 and 2020. The colours represent the intensity of bleaching, ranging from zero (category 1, dark blue) to severe bleaching that affected more than 60% of corals (category 4, red) Author provided In theory, a judiciously placed network of well-protected, climate-resistant reefs might help to repopulate the <a href="https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/conl.12587">broader seascape</a>, if greenhouse gas emissions are curtailed to stabilise temperatures later this century. But the unbleached southern reefs are too few in number, and too far away from the rest of the Great Barrier Reef to produce and deliver sufficient coral larvae, to promote a long-distance recovery. Instead, future replenishment of depleted coral populations is more likely to be local. It would come from the billions of larvae produced by recovering adults on nearby reefs that have not bleached for a while, or by corals inhabiting reef in deeper waters which tend to experience less heat stress than those living in shallow water. Future recovery of corals will increasingly be temporary and incomplete, before being interrupted again by the inevitable next bleaching event. Consequently, the patchiness of living coral on the Great Barrier Reef will increase further, and corals will continue to decline under climate change. Our findings make it clear we no longer have the luxury of studying individual climate-related events that were once unprecedented, or very rare. Instead, as the world gets hotter, it’s increasingly important to understand the effects and combined outcomes of sequences of rapid-fire catastrophes.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/170719/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/terry-hughes-9894">Terry Hughes</a>, Distinguished Professor, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/james-cook-university-1167">James Cook University</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/sean-connolly-94343">Sean Connolly</a>, Research Biologist, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/smithsonian-institution-1227">Smithsonian Institution</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/5-major-heatwaves-in-30-years-have-turned-the-great-barrier-reef-into-a-bleached-checkerboard-170719">original article</a>.

Domestic Travel

“My age isn’t a barrier”: Maker Will shares his crafting experience

After an act of kindness saw no eliminations on Making It Australia last week, the Makers returned this week to face another series of challenges that ended with an elimination. Will, the youngest Maker to appear on the show, said his goodbyes to the rest of the contestants. <blockquote style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" class="instagram-media" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/CVEp342lHe-/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"></div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"></div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"></div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"></div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"></div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" rel="noopener" href="https://www.instagram.com/p/CVEp342lHe-/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank">A post shared by Will Thomson (@willmade_aus)</a> </div> </blockquote> Following his elimination, Will sat down with OverSixty to share his experience on the show and how it felt creating pieces under pressure. O60: What was the highlight of being a Maker? I can flat-out just say the entire thing. The entire experience of the show, everything I did. There’s been little highlights, but I definitely can’t pin down one thing [as] the best. It was all just fantastic. O60: It sounds like it, and it looks like you all had an amazing time on the show and made some really great friendships. Yeah for sure. Coming in, I was excited to see other creators and what they did and how they work and how their minds work, and we all met, and we all got along so quickly and well. 30 minutes after we met each other, it was like meeting friends you’d known for two years or five years, 10 years. That was a pretty surreal moment to meet other like minded people and be able to work with them creatively. O60: What surprised you most about your Making It experience? It was all surprising. It was all the emotions at once, but it was all the time. Maybe one thing you could say that surprised me was what people could achieve in a limited time frame, and such a short time frame. O60: Making It saw contestants from a variety of age groups and backgrounds come together to craft, but how did you feel being the youngest competitor on the show? I kind of see myself as an old soul sometimes, so I'm happy to work with anybody. My age isn’t a barrier for me, I don't feel. One thing you could say is [that I was] lucky enough that I kind of found making early and I can grow and develop that for years to come. O60: What’s next for you after Making It? A few things. I finished my trade, so I’ve just become a sparkie. [There are] a few other things on the horizon, which is exciting. There’s some tradie things I want to start and have a dabble in and [I’m] kind of finding those little paths now. O60: Making It posed challenges that saw you use a whole range of different skills and techniques, has it changed how you have gone about your creative practice since leaving the show? I definitely learned a lot from other Makers. I find it easier to use harder material, I suppose, than softer materials … I hadn't done much in textiles or paper and I learnt a little bit more, which is developing into a skill set. O60: Last but not least, if you had the chance, would you do it again? Yes, for sure. It was such a fun, adrenaline-filled challenge. As I said, all the emotions, all the time. The atmosphere and everything was unreal and it was just an absolute delight. Yeah, for sure, I'll do it 100 percent. If you ask me tomorrow, if you ask me in five minutes time, I’ll do it again. <blockquote style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" class="instagram-media" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/CVFUWs5FZI5/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14"> <div style="padding: 16px;"> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"></div> <div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;"> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"></div> <div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"></div> </div> </div> <div style="padding: 19% 0;"></div> <div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"></div> <div style="padding-top: 8px;"> <div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div> </div> <p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" rel="noopener" href="https://www.instagram.com/p/CVFUWs5FZI5/?utm_source=ig_embed&utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank">A post shared by Will Thomson (@willmade_aus)</a> </div> </blockquote> The remaining four contestants will craft their hearts out on the next episode of Making It Australia, airing next Saturday night at 6pm. Image: willmade_aus / Instagram

Home & Garden

Snorkellers discover rare, giant 400-year-old coral – one of the oldest on the Great Barrier Reef

Snorkellers on the Great Barrier Reef have discovered a huge coral more than 400 years old which is thought to have survived 80 major cyclones, numerous coral bleaching events and centuries of exposure to other threats. We describe the discovery in <a href="http://nature.com/articles/s41598-021-94818-w">research</a> published today. Our team surveyed the hemispherical structure, which comprises small marine animals and calcium carbonate, and found it’s the Great Barrier Reef’s widest coral, and one of the oldest. It was discovered off the coast of Goolboodi (Orpheus Island), part of Queensland’s Palm Island Group. Traditional custodians of the region, the Manbarra people, have called the structure Muga dhambi, meaning “big coral”. For now, Muga dhambi is in relatively good health. But climate change, declining water quality and other threats are taking a toll on the Great Barrier Reef. Scientists, Traditional Owners and others must keep a close eye on this remarkable, resilient structure to ensure it is preserved for future generations. <img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/416672/original/file-20210818-19-anzpts.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="coral and snorkellers" /> <h2>Far older than European settlement</h2> Muga dhambi is located in a relatively remote, rarely visited and highly protected marine area. It was found during citizen science research in March this year, on a reef slope not far from shore. We conducted a literature review and consulted other scientists to compare the size, age and health of the structure with others in the Great Barrier Reef and internationally. We measured the structure at 5.3 metres tall and 10.4 metres wide. This makes it 2.4 metres wider than the widest Great Barrier Reef coral <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00345677">previously</a> measured by scientists. Muga dhambi is of the coral genus Porites and is one of a large group of corals known as “massive Porites”. It’s brown to cream in colour and made of small, stony polyps. These polyps secrete layers of calcium carbonate beneath their bodies as they grow, forming the foundations upon which reefs are built. Muga dhambi’s height suggests it is aged between 421 and 438 years old – far pre-dating European exploration and settlement of Australia. We made this calculation based on rock coral growth rates and annual sea surface temperatures. The Australian Institute of Marine Science has investigated more than 328 colonies of massive Porites corals along the Great Barrier Reef and has aged the oldest at 436 years. The institute has not investigated the age of Muga dhambi, however the structure is probably one of the oldest on the Great Barrier Reef. Other comparatively large massive Porites have previously been found throughout the Pacific. One exceptionally large colony in American Samoa measured 17m × 12m. Large Porites have also been found near Taiwan and Japan. <img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/416650/original/file-20210818-23-wt3kj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="Mountainous island and blue sea" /> <h2>Resilient, but under threat</h2> We reviewed environmental events over the past 450 years and found Muga dhambi is unusually resilient. It has survived up to 80 major cyclones, numerous coral bleaching events and centuries of exposure to invasive species, low tides and human activity. About 70% of Muga dhambi consisted of live coral, but the remaining 30% was dead. This section, at the top of the structure, was covered with green boring sponge, turf algae and green algae. Coral tissue can die from exposure to sun at low tides or warm water. Dead coral can be quickly colonised by opportunistic, fast growing organisms, as is the case with Muga dhambi. Green boring sponge invades and excavates corals. The sponge’s advances will likely continue to compromise the structure’s size and health. We found marine debris at the base of Muga dhambi, comprising rope and three concrete blocks. Such debris is a threat to the marine environment and species such as corals. We found no evidence of disease or coral bleaching. <img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/416678/original/file-20210818-21-13b0f9w.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="to come" /> <h2>‘Old man’ of the sea</h2> A Traditional Owner from outside the region took part in our citizen science training which included surveys of corals, invertebrates and fish. We also consulted the Manbarra Traditional Owners about and an appropriate cultural name for the structure. Before recommending Muga dhambi, the names the Traditional Owners considered included: <ul> <li>Muga (big)</li> <li>Wanga (home)</li> <li>Muugar (coral reef)</li> <li>Dhambi (coral)</li> <li>Anki/Gurgu (old)</li> <li>Gulula (old man)</li> <li>Gurgurbu (old person).</li> </ul> Indigenous languages are an integral part of Indigenous culture, spirituality, and connection to country. Traditional Owners suggested calling the structure Muga dhambi would communicate traditional knowledge, language and culture to other Indigenous people, tourists, scientists and students. <img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/416682/original/file-20210818-23-nmb1be.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="coral rock under water with sky" /> <h2>A wonder for all generations</h2> No database exists for significant corals in Australia or globally. Cataloguing the location of massive and long-lived corals can be benefits. For example from a scientific perspective, it can allow analyses which can help understand century-scale changes in ocean events and can be used to verify climate models. Social and economic benefits can include diving tourism and citizen science, as well as engaging with Indigenous culture and stewardship. However, cataloguing the location of massive corals could lead to them being damaged by anchoring, research and pollution from visiting boats. Looking to the future, there is real concern for all corals in the Great Barrier Reef due to threats such as climate change, declining water quality, overfishing and coastal development. We recommend monitoring of Muga dhambi in case restoration is needed in future. We hope our research will mean current and future generations care for this wonder of nature, and respect the connections of Manbarra Traditional Owners to their Sea Country. <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/adam-smith-515741">Adam Smith</a>, Adjunct Associate Professor, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/james-cook-university-1167">James Cook University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/nathan-cook-1261134">Nathan Cook</a>, Marine Scientist , <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/james-cook-university-1167">James Cook University</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/vicki-saylor-1261504">Vicki Saylor</a>, Manbarra Traditional Owner, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/indigenous-knowledge-4846">Indigenous Knowledge</a> This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/snorkellers-discover-rare-giant-400-year-old-coral-one-of-the-oldest-on-the-great-barrier-reef-166278">original article</a>. Image: Richard Woodgett/Shutterstock

Domestic Travel

“Age is no barrier”: Fans rally after Kerri Pottharst's brutal treatment

Viewers of SAS Australia have called out the treatment of Olympic gold medallist Kerri Pottharst on the show, criticising Ant Middleton’s comments on her looks and love life. The former professional beach volleyball player revealed she went on the program to show women life doesn’t end once they reach a certain age. As the oldest competitor on the show, the 55-year-old has completed tough challenges alongside her younger competitors, including other athletes. Tuesday’s challenges In the first exercise on Tuesday night’s episode, Pottharst was singled out as the weakest member in a task viewers described as “cruel”, “heartbreaking”, and “bloody hard”. As a result, Pottharst had to lead one of two teams through a river paddle and mountain climb. Her team finished second, after Pottharst tripped and was screamed at by directing staff. Later in the episode, Pottharst displayed her leadership skills in a kit inspection and her team looked poised to win. However, her water bottle was found to be half empty and she is told to pour it over her head. For losing the challenge, her team stood outside for more than two hours while Pottharst was still wet. <img style="width: 500px; height:281.25px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7844299/pottharst1.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/febb9abe6041458d9bf77db657da8c1a" /> Image: Channel 7 When they were finally allowed inside, Jana Pittman attempted to cheer Pottharst up. “I wanted to show other women you can take on a challenge, that’s seemingly impossible, I’m digging my heels in, I’m going to stay here as long as I can,” Pottharst said. Pottharst’s insulting interrogation When directing staff brought Pottharst in for an interview to discuss her failings, Ant Middleton told her, “You look like you’ve aged 10 years in two days”. After asking how old she is and hearing she is 55, he said, “can I be honest with you, it shows”. In contrast, 51-year-old Pete Murray, the second oldest competitor who left the show due to an injury, did not receive any comments about his age while on the show. “I believe age is no barrier,” Pottharst told directing staff. “Life is not over when you turn 50. It’s about challenging yourself. And this is the ultimate challenge… I love pushing myself.” When asked if her 14-year-old son thinks she’s nuts for going on the show, Pottharst said no. “I think you’re nuts,” Middleton replied. “There’s too many women who think life is over when you hit 40, 50, whatever and it’s all downhill, I completely disagree, I think you can get better and you can keep challenging yourself,” she replied. Later, Middleton asked whether Pottharst had “a man in her life”, and told her she must be lonely when she said she didn’t. “I can see that little bit of loner in you,” he said. “I just feel there’s a little bit of loneliness there.” <img style="width: 500px; height:281.25px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7844300/pottharst2.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/3867de2207a741b29dc4e4a99dab10d5" /> Image: Channel 7 The directing staff told her she was “slowly deteriorating” but still “psychologically strong”, prompting Pottharst to admit she feels “most fragile” on her own. “I know I’m going to feel that on selection night, the lights go out the body’s aching and I have to get up the next day and do it again, that’s probably where I’ll shed a tear,” she said. Viewers shared their support for Pottharst on Twitter, calling her a “star” and an “incredible woman”. Others slammed Channel 7 and Middleton for their line of questioning. “Jeez, the toxic pr*ck parade that is Channel 7,” one person wrote. “Do they ask Sam Burgess if there’s a woman in his life??” another asked. “Omg, is it really necessary for Ant to tell her she looks old. I just think that’s unnecessarily rude,” a third said. “It shows! You pr*ck Ant,” another commented. Others suggested that men and women were being treated on the show. “Oh look, SAS going harder on the women than the men,” another person shared. Image: Channel 7

"Father's Day over barriers": Heartbreaking scenes at the border

This year, families came together to celebrate Father's Day a little differently than usual. As state borders remain closed due to COVID-19 restrictions, loved ones gathered on the NSW-Queensland border to spend time together. Hundreds of people were seen gathering at the border barricades that separate the two states on Sunday in a display of "heartbreaking" scenes. <img style="width: 500px; height: 282.6825127334465px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7843731/screen-shot-2021-09-06-at-83432-am.png" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/817640de47c7474ea35a21e4945f0d91" /> Image credit: 7News Mick Barnes, who is on one side of the border, reunited with his children, who are on the other side, after two months apart. “It’s hard, it’s actually very hard,” Barnes told 7NEWS. “I teared up a little bit when I first got here because I can’t actually be with them at all.” Other families were seen engaging in hugs, sharing meals and giving presents, as police watched on nearby. Some families even set up chairs and tables to settle in for valuable lost time with they loved ones. <img style="width: 500px; height: 280.87986463620985px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7843733/screen-shot-2021-09-06-at-84206-am.png" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/ba04d3e34c764e639cf7cbdda13a5379" /> Image credit: 7News Police were also gathered on the border and handed out hundreds of masks to emotional families, but didn't stop people from coming together. The scenes at the border were labelled as “insanity”, “heartbreaking” and “strange” by those on social media, as people continue to struggle with the reality of lockdown. “Bringing tears to my eye thats its come to fathers day over barriers,” one social media user said. “A story that both warms and cools the heart,” another added. “What a cruel world,” a third person said. Queensland's tough border with New South Wales means that no one can enter unless they have been granted an exemption, which has proven difficult to acquire. Image credits: 7News

News

Foreign ship convicted of dumping garbage on Great Barrier Reef

<div class="post_body_wrapper"> <div class="post_body"> <div class="body_text redactor-styles redactor-in"> A foreign shipping company and the chief officer of one of its vessels have been convicted for dumping food scraps on the World-Heritage listed Great Barrier Reef. The Liberian bulk carrier Iron Gate dumped the equivalent of 120-litres of a garbage bin filled with food waste into the reef in 2018. The chief officer approved the discharge of garbage between Brisbane and Gladstone. Fines against both parties totalled $6,600 and were persecuted by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA). “Australians and tourists alike visit Lady Elliot Island to swim with manta rays and turtles – not blended food waste from merchant ships,” ASMA general manager of operations Allan Schwartz said. “We take a zero-tolerance approach to pollution from shipping and that is why, after detecting this breach during a routine inspection of Iron Gate in 2018, we detained the ship and later charged the chief officer and company, Kairasu Shipping S.A.” He said the conviction would impact the company's reputation. “Dumping garbage into the World Heritage-listed Great Barrier Reef isn’t something you want on your professional record,” he said. “These convictions should serve as a reminder to other industry operators that in Australia, we make sure polluters pay.” </div> </div> </div>

Travel Trouble

Incredible private island on Great Barrier Reef for sale

If you've ever dreamed of owning a private island, now could be your chance. Victor Island on the Great Barrier Reef has hit the market at $5.5 million, and it's more affordable than some waterfront homes in Brisbane and Sydney. The eight-acre oasis offers incredible views of the Coral Sea, along with a four-bedroom solar powered house and caretakers cottage. Also included are two boats to help residents make the ride into mainland Mackay. "It's very rare," Barbara Wolveridge from Sotheby's International Realty told 9News. "I've been in the business for 30 years and this is the first time I've actually had an opportunity to sell an island. Owner Meg Sullivan has decided now is the time to part ways with the island after owning it for five years. She's hoping someone else can experience the life she's lived. "It's the freedom of living on the island where you can do what you want, when you want," she said. "If you want to catch a fish for dinner you go and throw a line in." If you're interested you might need to act quickly with the property generating interest from buyers across the country and around the world. "We've got people lining up to come and see it," Ms Wolveridge said. Victor Island is for sale for $5.5 million.

Real Estate

The first step to conserving the Great Barrier Reef is understanding what lives there

Look at this photo of two coral skeletons below. You’d be forgiven for thinking they’re the same species, or at least closely related, but looks can be deceiving. These two species diverged tens of millions of years ago, probably earlier than our human lineage split from baboons and macaques. Scientists have traditionally used morphology (size, shape and colour) to identify species and infer their evolutionary history. But most species were first described in the <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/027073a0">19th century</a>, and based solely on features of the coral skeleton visible under a microscope. Morphology remains important for species recognition. The problem is we don’t know whether a particular morphological feature reflects species ancestry, or evolved independently. Our new study <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1055790320302165">examined</a> the traditional ideas of coral species and their evolutionary relationships using “<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1755-0998.12736">phylogenomics</a>” – comparing thousands of DNA sequences across coral species. Our results revealed the diversity and distributions of corals are vastly different to what we previously thought. It shows we still don’t know many fundamental aspects about the corals on Great Barrier Reef. And after three mass bleaching events in five years, not having a handle on the basics could mean <a href="http://elibrary.gbrmpa.gov.au/jspui/bitstream/11017/3569/4/Draft-restoration-adaptation-policy.pdf">our attempts to intervene</a> and help coral survive climate change may have unexpected consequences. How do we know which species is which? Despite being one of the <a href="https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00146.x">best-studied</a> marine ecosystems on Earth, there are fundamental knowledge gaps around the Great Barrier Reef, including: <ol> <li>how many coral species live there?</li> <li>how do we identify them?</li> <li>where are they found across the vast Great Barrier Reef ecosystem?</li> </ol> Finding the answers to these questions starts with accurate “taxonomy” – the science of naming and classifying living things. Identifying species based on how similar they look may seem straightforward. As Darwin famously said, closely related species often share morphological features because they inherited them from a common ancestor. However, this can be misleading if two unrelated species independently acquire similar features. This process, called convergent evolution, often occurs when different species are faced with similar ecological challenges. A <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/phenomena/2015/02/06/why-an-ichthyosaur-looks-like-a-dolphin/">classic example</a> of convergent evolution is dolphins and the prehistoric ichthyosaurs. These animals are unrelated, but share many similarities since they both occupy a similar ecological niche. At the other end of the spectrum, morphology can vary considerably within a single species. An alien taxonomist visiting Earth could be forgiven for describing the Chihuahua and the Irish Wolfhound as two distinct species. Bringing coral taxonomy into the 21st century We used molecular phylogenetics, a field of research that uses variations in DNA sequences to reconstruct genealogies. From corals to humans, molecular phylogenetics has revolutionised our understanding of the origins and evolution of life on Earth. Molecular approaches have <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-31305-4_4">revolutionised</a> our understanding of the diversity and evolution of corals, shedding light on <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature02339">deeper branches</a> in the coral “tree of life”. But within hyper-diverse, ecologically-important coral groups, such as the staghorn corals from the genus Acropora, we are still in the dark. <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1055790320302165">Our new technique</a> addresses this by comparing thousands of key regions across coral genomes (the entire genetic code of an organism) to help identify species in this ecologically important group for the first time. This method will also allow us to identify morphological features that do reflect shared ancestry and help us recognise species when diving in the reef. About a quarter of all coral species on the Great Barrier Reef are staghorn corals, and they provide much of the three-dimensional structure fishes and many other coral reef animals rely on, just like trees in a forest. Unfortunately, staghorn corals are also highly susceptible to threats such as thermal bleaching and crown-of-thorns seastar predation. The future of reefs will be heavily influenced by the fate of staghorn corals. The risk of ‘silent extinctions’ While we don’t yet know how many coral species occur on the Great Barrier Reef or how widespread they are, many species appear to have far smaller ranges than we previously thought. For example, we now know some of the corals on Lord Howe Island are endemic to only a few reefs in subtropical eastern Australia and <a href="https://www.mapress.com/j/zt/article/view/zootaxa.3626.4.11">occur nowhere else</a>, not even on the Great Barrier Reef. They evolved in isolation and bleach at <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/gcb.14772">much lower temperatures</a> than corals on tropical reefs. This means Lord Howe Island’s corals are of far greater conservation concern than currently recognised, because <a href="https://theconversation.com/bleaching-has-struck-the-southernmost-coral-reef-in-the-world-114433">one severe bleaching event</a> could cause the extinction of these species. The risk of “silent extinctions”, where species go extinct without even being noticed, is one of the reasons behind the Australian Academy of Science’s <a href="https://www.science.org.au/support/analysis/decadal-plans-science/discovering-biodiversity-decadal-plan-taxonomy">Decadal Plan for Taxonomy</a>, which has led to the ambitious goal to document all Australian species in the next 25 years. Intervening now may have unexpected consequences In April, the <a href="https://www.gbrrestoration.org/reports#technical-reports">Reef Restoration and Adaptation Program</a> concept feasibility study found 160 possible interventions to help save the Great Barrier Reef. <a href="https://www.gbrrestoration.org/">Proposed interventions</a> include moving corals from warm to cooler waters, introducing genetically-engineered heat-tolerant corals into wild populations, and the harvest and release of coral larvae. What could go wrong? Well-intentioned interventions may inadvertently threaten coral communities, for example, through introduction or movement of diseases within the Great Barrier Reef. <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/amphibians/c/cane-toad/">Cane toads</a> are a famous example of unintended consequences: introduced in the 1930s to control an insect pest, they are now wreaking havoc on Australian ecosystems. Any intervention affecting the ecology of a system as complex as the Great Barrier Reef requires a precautionary approach to minimise the chance of unintended and potentially negative consequences. What we need, at this time, is far greater investment in fundamental biodiversity research. Without this information, we are not in a position to judge whether particular actions will threaten the resilience of the reef, rather than enhance it. Written by Tom Bridge, Andrea Quattrini, Andrew Baird and Peter Cowman. Republished with permission of <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-first-step-to-conserving-the-great-barrier-reef-is-understanding-what-lives-there-146097">The Conversation.</a>

Cruising

The first step to conserving the Great Barrier Reef is understanding what lives there

Look at this photo of two coral skeletons below. You’d be forgiven for thinking they’re the same species, or at least closely related, but looks can be deceiving. These two species diverged tens of millions of years ago, probably earlier than our human lineage split from baboons and macaques. Scientists have traditionally used morphology (size, shape and colour) to identify species and infer their evolutionary history. But most species were first described in the <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/027073a0">19th century</a>, and based solely on features of the coral skeleton visible under a microscope. Morphology remains important for species recognition. The problem is we don’t know whether a particular morphological feature reflects species ancestry, or evolved independently. Our new study <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1055790320302165">examined</a> the traditional ideas of coral species and their evolutionary relationships using “<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1755-0998.12736">phylogenomics</a>” – comparing thousands of DNA sequences across coral species. Join 130,000 people who subscribe to free evidence-based news. Get newsletter Our results revealed the diversity and distributions of corals are vastly different to what we previously thought. It shows we still don’t know many fundamental aspects about the corals on Great Barrier Reef. And after three mass bleaching events in five years, not having a handle on the basics could mean <a href="http://elibrary.gbrmpa.gov.au/jspui/bitstream/11017/3569/4/Draft-restoration-adaptation-policy.pdf">our attempts to intervene</a> and help coral survive climate change may have unexpected consequences. An international team of scientists have developed a new genetic tool that can help them better understand and ultimately work to save coral reefs. How do we know which species is which? Despite being one of the <a href="https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2010.00146.x">best-studied</a> marine ecosystems on Earth, there are fundamental knowledge gaps around the Great Barrier Reef, including: 1. how many coral species live there? 2. how do we identify them? 3. where are they found across the vast Great Barrier Reef ecosystem? Finding the answers to these questions starts with accurate “taxonomy” – the science of naming and classifying living things. Identifying species based on how similar they look may seem straightforward. As Darwin famously said, closely related species often share morphological features because they inherited them from a common ancestor. However, this can be misleading if two unrelated species independently acquire similar features. This process, called convergent evolution, often occurs when different species are faced with similar ecological challenges. A <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/phenomena/2015/02/06/why-an-ichthyosaur-looks-like-a-dolphin/">classic example</a> of convergent evolution is dolphins and the prehistoric ichthyosaurs. These animals are unrelated, but share many similarities since they both occupy a similar ecological niche. Ichthyosaurs dominated the world’s oceans for millions of years. At the other end of the spectrum, morphology can vary considerably within a single species. An alien taxonomist visiting Earth could be forgiven for describing the Chihuahua and the Irish Wolfhound as two distinct species. Bringing coral taxonomy into the 21st century We used molecular phylogenetics, a field of research that uses variations in DNA sequences to reconstruct genealogies. From corals to humans, molecular phylogenetics has revolutionised our understanding of the origins and evolution of life on Earth. Molecular approaches have <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-31305-4_4">revolutionised</a> our understanding of the diversity and evolution of corals, shedding light on <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature02339">deeper branches</a> in the coral “tree of life”. But within hyper-diverse, ecologically-important coral groups, such as the staghorn corals from the genus Acropora, we are still in the dark. <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1055790320302165">Our new technique</a> addresses this by comparing thousands of key regions across coral genomes (the entire genetic code of an organism) to help identify species in this ecologically important group for the first time. This method will also allow us to identify morphological features that do reflect shared ancestry and help us recognise species when diving in the reef. About a quarter of all coral species on the Great Barrier Reef are staghorn corals, and they provide much of the three-dimensional structure fishes and many other coral reef animals rely on, just like trees in a forest. Unfortunately, staghorn corals are also highly susceptible to threats such as thermal bleaching and crown-of-thorns seastar predation. The future of reefs will be heavily influenced by the fate of staghorn corals. The risk of ‘silent extinctions’ While we don’t yet know how many coral species occur on the Great Barrier Reef or how widespread they are, many species appear to have far smaller ranges than we previously thought. For example, we now know some of the corals on Lord Howe Island are endemic to only a few reefs in subtropical eastern Australia and <a href="https://www.mapress.com/j/zt/article/view/zootaxa.3626.4.11">occur nowhere else</a>, not even on the Great Barrier Reef. They evolved in isolation and bleach at <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/gcb.14772">much lower temperatures</a> than corals on tropical reefs. This means Lord Howe Island’s corals are of far greater conservation concern than currently recognised, because <a href="https://theconversation.com/bleaching-has-struck-the-southernmost-coral-reef-in-the-world-114433">one severe bleaching event</a> could cause the extinction of these species. The risk of “silent extinctions”, where species go extinct without even being noticed, is one of the reasons behind the Australian Academy of Science’s <a href="https://www.science.org.au/support/analysis/decadal-plans-science/discovering-biodiversity-decadal-plan-taxonomy">Decadal Plan for Taxonomy</a>, which has led to the ambitious goal to document all Australian species in the next 25 years. Intervening now may have unexpected consequences In April, the <a href="https://www.gbrrestoration.org/reports#technical-reports">Reef Restoration and Adaptation Program</a> concept feasibility study found 160 possible interventions to help save the Great Barrier Reef. <a href="https://www.gbrrestoration.org/">Proposed interventions</a> include moving corals from warm to cooler waters, introducing genetically-engineered heat-tolerant corals into wild populations, and the harvest and release of coral larvae. What could go wrong? Well-intentioned interventions may inadvertently threaten coral communities, for example, through introduction or movement of diseases within the Great Barrier Reef. <a href="https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/amphibians/c/cane-toad/">Cane toads</a> are a famous example of unintended consequences: introduced in the 1930s to control an insect pest, they are now wreaking havoc on Australian ecosystems. Any intervention affecting the ecology of a system as complex as the Great Barrier Reef requires a precautionary approach to minimise the chance of unintended and potentially negative consequences. What we need, at this time, is far greater investment in fundamental biodiversity research. Without this information, we are not in a position to judge whether particular actions will threaten the resilience of the reef, rather than enhance it. Written by Tom Bridge, Andrea Quattrini, Andrew Baird and Peter Crowman. Republished with permission of <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-first-step-to-conserving-the-great-barrier-reef-is-understanding-what-lives-there-146097">The Conversation.</a>

Cruising

We just spent two weeks surveying the Great Barrier Reef – What we saw was an utter tragedy

The Australian summer just gone will be remembered as the moment when human-caused climate change struck hard. First came drought, then deadly bushfires, and now a bout of coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef – the third in just five years. Tragically, the 2020 bleaching is severe and the most widespread we have ever recorded. Coral bleaching at regional scales is caused by spikes in sea temperatures during unusually hot summers. The first recorded mass bleaching event along Great Barrier Reef occurred in 1998, then the <a href="http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/archive/media99.shtml">hottest year on record</a>. Since then we’ve seen four more mass bleaching events – and more temperature records broken – in 2002, 2016, 2017, and again in 2020. This year, February had the<a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-15/cyclone-great-barrier-reef-bleaching-record-seas-temperatures/12050102"> highest monthly sea surface temperatures</a> ever recorded on the Great Barrier Reef since the Bureau of Meteorology’s records began in 1900. Not a pretty picture We surveyed 1,036 reefs from the air during the last two weeks in March, to measure the extent and severity of coral bleaching throughout the Great Barrier Reef region. Two observers, from the ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, scored each reef visually, repeating the same procedures developed during early bleaching events. The accuracy of the aerial scores <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature21707?dom=icopyright&src=">is verified</a> by underwater surveys on reefs that are lightly and heavily bleached. While underwater, we also measure how bleaching changes between shallow and <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-05741-0">deeper reefs</a>. Of the reefs we surveyed from the air, 39.8% had little or no bleaching (the green reefs in the map). However, 25.1% of reefs were severely affected (red reefs) – that is, on each reef more than 60% of corals were bleached. A further 35% had more modest levels of bleaching. Bleaching isn’t necessarily fatal for coral, and it affects <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-much-coral-has-died-in-the-great-barrier-reefs-worst-bleaching-event-69494">some species more than others</a>. A pale or lightly bleached coral typically regains its colour within a few weeks or months and survives. But when bleaching is severe, many corals die. In 2016, half of the shallow water corals died on the northern region of the Great Barrier Reef <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-018-0041-2">between March and November</a>. Later this year, we’ll go underwater to assess the losses of corals during this most recent event. Compared to the four previous bleaching events, there are fewer unbleached or lightly bleached reefs in 2020 than in 1998, 2002 and 2017, but more than in 2016. Similarly, the proportion of severely bleached reefs in 2020 is exceeded only by 2016. By both of these metrics, 2020 is the second-worst mass bleaching event of the five experienced by the Great Barrier Reef since 1998. The unbleached and lightly bleached (green) reefs in 2020 are predominantly offshore, mostly close to the edge of the continental shelf in the northern and southern Great Barrier Reef. However, offshore reefs in the central region were severely bleached again. Coastal reefs are also badly bleached at almost all locations, stretching from the Torres Strait in the north to the southern boundary of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. For the first time, severe bleaching has struck all three regions of the Great Barrier Reef – the northern, central and now large parts of the southern sectors. The north was the worst affected region in 2016, followed by the centre in 2017. In 2020, the cumulative footprint of bleaching has expanded further, to include the south. The distinctive footprint of each bleaching event closely matches the location of <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/nature21707?dom=icopyright&src=">hotter and cooler conditions in different years</a>. Poor prognosis Of the five mass bleaching events we’ve seen so far, only 1998 and 2016 occurred during <a href="http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/updates/articles/a008-el-nino-and-australia.shtml">an El Niño</a> – a weather pattern that spurs warmer air temperatures in Australia. But as summers grow hotter under climate change, we no longer need an El Niño to trigger mass bleaching at the scale of the Great Barrier Reef. We’ve already seen the first example of back-to-back bleaching, in the consecutive summers of 2016 and 2017. The gap between recurrent bleaching events is shrinking, hindering a full recovery. After five bleaching events, the number of reefs that have escaped severe bleaching continues to dwindle. Those reefs are located offshore, in the far north and in remote parts of the south. The Great Barrier Reef will continue to lose corals from heat stress, until global emissions of greenhouse gasses are reduced to net zero, and sea temperatures stabilise. Without urgent action to achieve this outcome, it’s clear our coral reefs will not survive business-as-usual emissions. Written by Terry Hughes and Morgan Pratchett. Republished with permission of <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-just-spent-two-weeks-surveying-the-great-barrier-reef-what-we-saw-was-an-utter-tragedy-135197">The Conversation.</a>

Travel Tips

New virus symptoms to watch out for

<div class="post_body_wrapper"> <div class="post_body"> <div class="body_text "> Sudden loss of sense of smell or taste has been identified as a possible new coronavirus symptom by specialists in the UK. Patients experiencing the loss of smell or taste were discovered “in the absence of other symptoms”, said the British Association of Otorhinolarygology (ENT UK). The finding was based on strong evidence from coronavirus patients in China, Italy and South Korea who had the condition, known as anosmia, according to <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/coronavirus-new-symptoms-of-loss-of-taste-smell/52838e66-e11a-4252-9b39-b01fb35d8cea" target="_blank">9News</a>. "Evidence from other countries that the entry point for the coronavirus is often in the eyes, nose and throat areas,” ENT UK and the British Rhinological Society said in a joint statement. "We have also identified a new symptom (loss of sense of smell and taste) that may mean that people without other symptoms but with just the loss of this sense may have to self-isolate - again to reduce the spread of the virus." The statement also added that these patients may be the “hidden carriers” of the virus and do not meet current guidelines for testing or self isolation. Currently, the Australian Department of Health guidelines say that fever, cough, sore throat and shortness of breath should trigger self isolation. </div> </div> </div>

Body

Age discrimination biggest barrier to job opportunity

Nearly half of Baby Boomers believe their age is the biggest barrier to job opportunities, a new report has found. A <a href="https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/careers/ok-boomer-is-age-stopping-you-from-getting-ahead-20200210-p53zbn">quarter of Australians</a> view age as the biggest barrier to opportunities, while 24 per cent feel most held back by their lack of financial resources, <a href="https://economicgraph.linkedin.com/research/opportunity-index-2020">LinkedIn Opportunity Index 2020</a> revealed. The survey discovered that under one in two (46 per cent) Aussie Baby Boomers, or those born from 1946 to 1964, believe their age is the main hurdle standing in their way of finding employment. Younger generations are less likely to feel inhibited by how old they are, with only 31 per cent of Gen X, 11 per cent of Millennials and 22 per cent of Gen Z sharing the sentiment. “While younger generations feel their age is a reflection of their lack of experience, more mature generations are struggling to adapt their skills for the changing workforce,” said Matt Tindale, country manager for LinkedIn in Australia and New Zealand. “Professionals are working well beyond their retirement years and we now have four generations working together for the very first time. “Embracing Australia’s multigenerational workforce and leveraging this diversity of talent will be imperative in order for businesses to remain successful.” Australians also have low confidence about accessing job opportunities, ranking 17 out of 22 countries. More than 30,000 people around the world, including 1,025 Australians, were polled for the index. LinkedIn’s index came months after Treasurer Josh Frydenberg’s call for <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-11-20/retraining-wont-keep-older-workers-from-choosing-to-retire/11720482">older workers to undergo more training or upskilling</a> to allow for their continued participation in the workforce. “This year, as the economic landscape and job market continues to evolve, it will be important that Australians adopt a growth mindset and embrace lifelong learning to ensure they are best placed to seek the opportunities they want,” Tindale said.

Retirement Income

The main barriers to downsizing

More than half of Australians over the age of 55 are open to downsizing, according to a <a href="https://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/325">new report</a> based on a survey of 2,400 households. The main barrier to moving to a smaller home is a lack of housing that matches their needs and preferences. The rapid growth in the number of older Australians adds to the major challenge housing markets face in meeting their diverse housing needs. Downsizing, or rightsizing, is considered an essential component of meeting the <a href="https://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/317">housing aspirations of older Australians</a>. At the same time, downsizing creates housing opportunities for younger households by freeing up family homes. The ageing population also creates fiscal challenges for government, in terms of delivering services to the home and providing residential care. Downsizing can enable older Australians to age well and age in place rather than potentially move prematurely into residential care. The <a href="https://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/325">report</a> released today by the Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute (AHURI), for which 2,400 households over 55 were surveyed, found 26% of such households had downsized. Another third had thought about it. Overall, the findings point to a strong appetite among older Australians to downsize their dwellings. With about <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/D3310114.nsf/Home/Census?OpenDocument&ref=topBar">6.5 million Australians aged 55 or older</a>, living in about <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/6503.0Main+Features100002015-16?OpenDocument">4.3 million households</a>, our findings suggest downsizing could be relevant to 2.5 million households. Why downsize? And what are the obstacles? We know older Australians downsize in response to life events such as changes in health and relationship status, or children leaving the parental home. Lifestyle preferences and difficulties maintaining their garden or house also <a href="https://businesslaw.curtin.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2016/06/bcec-keeping-a-roof-over-our-heads-report.pdf">shape downsizing behaviour</a>. Barriers to downsizing include a lack of suitable housing and a <a href="https://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/214">lack of financial incentives</a>. There are also emotional and physical barriers to moving. Financial factors, however, do not greatly impact the decision to move, nor does <a href="https://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/321">perceived financial well-being increase</a> once they have downsized. Where those who had downsized were dissatisfied, this was most commonly related to the new dwelling, particularly its size, and the neighbourhood. Is it actually downsizing? One of the policy rationales for downsizing is to reduce the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-17/vacancy-tax-wont-solve-australias-empty-housing-problem/8709184">underutilisation of dwellings</a>. However, this is at odds with the attitude of many older Australians. They consider “spare” bedrooms necessary for use as permanent guest rooms (58%), studies (50%), or dedicated rooms for children or grandchildren (31%). Space remains important to Australian downsizers. Over half of them move to a dwelling with three or more bedrooms. A third move to an apartment. However, two-thirds of downsizers surveyed did move to a dwelling with fewer bedrooms. Three bedrooms was the preferred dwelling size for older Australians. Downsizing the garden was essential for most. <a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/314365/original/file-20200210-27560-1bsfxmt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/314365/original/file-20200210-27560-1bsfxmt.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="" /></a> <a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/314368/original/file-20200210-27548-6krfsn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/314368/original/file-20200210-27548-6krfsn.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" alt="" /></a> Author provided Older Australians aspire to attain or retain home ownership. Their preferred neighbourhood has shopping, medical, recreational and public transport services all within walking distance. Downsizers appear mobile. While under a quarter downsized within their original neighbourhood, 42% moved to a neighbourhood completely new to them. The survey finding of a lack of suitable housing options matching would-be downsizers’ preferences may explain why so few were able to downsize in their original neighbourhood. Delivering what older Australians want If the local market does not have enough options available to meet the needs of older households, it is very difficult to downsize within an existing community. Moving to another desired location can also be problematic. Meeting the needs of older Australians generally means an increase in medium-density housing. Developers are likely to require incentives to produce these medium-density products rather than potentially more profitable high-density development – although there is, of course, a downsizing market for well-located apartments. The retirement industry has begun responding to the aspirations of older Australians. It is developing larger dwellings and offering a growing range of options, from high-end to affordable — all of which are accessible and suitable for ageing in place. Equity-rich older Australians may wish to build a new dwelling in which to downsize. But they are often unable to borrow for this unless they have considerable capital available. To support this avenue, new development finance models could be created to allow older Australians to develop without first having to sell the primary home. This shift would allow more collaborative forms of development, such as a group of <a href="https://www.ahuri.edu.au/research/final-reports/294">like-minded individuals developing</a> a site as housing for a small community. For those <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-10/older-australians-who-own-home-more-than-20-times-better-off/11815006">vulnerable private renters</a> moving into retirement, more secure rental accommodation through the social housing sector and delivered privately is essential. The community housing sector has a key role to play. Where next? The Australian housing landscape must shift towards a model of dwelling diversity with secure tenures – ownership and rental – in neighbourhoods where residents can walk easily to weekly services and recreation facilities, participate socially and be close to public transport options. Design is equally important. Australians need <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-need-more-flexible-housing-for-21st-century-lives-102636">adaptable dwellings</a> that can change to meet housing needs. Such a landscape will provide effective downsizing options in which households can age well in the places that best meet their needs and aspirations. <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/amity-james-272922">Amity James</a>, Senior Lecturer, School of Economics, Finance and Property, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/curtin-university-873">Curtin University</a>; <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/steven-rowley-201914">Steven Rowley</a>, Head of School, Economics, Finance and Property, Curtin University. Director, Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute, Curtin Research Centre, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/curtin-university-873">Curtin University</a>, and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/wendy-stone-9804">Wendy Stone</a>, Associate Professor, Centre for Urban Transitions and Director, Australian Housing and Urban Research Institute Swinburne Research Centre, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/swinburne-university-of-technology-767">Swinburne University of Technology</a> This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/half-of-over-55s-are-open-to-downsizing-if-only-they-could-find-homes-that-suit-them-130531">original article</a>.

Retirement Income

New $10 million floating hotel lets you stay in the Great Barrier Reef

A new $10 million floating hotel on the Great Barrier Reef is offering Australia’s first underwater suites, which means tourists are able to wake up to the natural wildlife. The <a href="https://cruisewhitsundays.com/experiences/reefsuites/">Reefsuites</a> at Hardy Reef are set to be a “game changer” for the local tourism industry, according to Tourism Minister Kate Jones. “This will be one of the most iconic tourism projects in the world,” she said in a <a href="http://statements.qld.gov.au/Statement/2019/8/1/new-attraction-to-bring-thousands-of-tourists-to-the-whitsundays">statement</a>. “We want to invest in tourism attractions that we know will attract more visitors to the Whitsundays and support local jobs – this project will achieve just that.” The two exclusive suites sit four metres below the surface, with just three inches of glass separating you from the reef life outside. At night, outside lights illuminate the waters so you can see what happens in the reef after dark. Floor to ceiling windows are a part of the experience so you don’t miss anything. The project began in 2017 as the pontoon was reconstructed after damage from Cyclone Debbie. The project was developed by Cruise Whitsundays and the Queensland Government. “Today is a landmark moment for Australia,” says Luke Walker, from Journey Beyond, the parent company of Cruise Whitsundays. “We are extremely privileged to have access to such a truly breathtaking and remote part of Australia and to provide both local and international guests the chance to gain a deeper appreciation of our wonderful Great Barrier Reef,” he says. Each Reefsuite has a two-person capacity, but guests can also camp under the stars as the roof of the pontoon is set up to accommodate a dozen queen beds in custom-built canvas canopies. Up to 28 visitors at a time can be on the pontoon. Scroll through the gallery to see the pontoon and how the suites will look underwater. Photo credits: <a href="https://cruisewhitsundays.com/experiences/reefsuites/">Cruise Whitsundays</a>

Domestic Travel

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Newspaper

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Compare

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Tourists' narrow escape after Great Barrier Reef plane crash

Record coral cover doesn’t necessarily mean the Great Barrier Reef is in good health (despite what you may have heard)

The Great Barrier Reef – what does a new Labor government mean for its future?

Past policies have created barriers to voting in remote First Nations communities