|
Posted by seahunt on April 09, 2007 at 06:33:49:
In Reply to: Clashing Views At The Rigs To Reefs Conference posted by on April 08, 2007 at 21:57:45:
I have to disagree with the environmentalists on this one >>just because animals are living on an artificial structure does not make it habitat anymore than
power lines or garbage dumps constitute habitat.
Then what do you call it? A hole in rocks is habitat. I like capping cracks in the rocks by putting
a rock on top. According to Wheeler North, that is the critical requirement for life in the reef. Is
it not habitat, because I made it? >They also contend that marine species are drawn away from natural reefs to the artificial ones.
Yah, all those Metridiums, Corynactus, scallops, mussels, perch, sheepsheads, etc. that are all wandering in the deep sand suddenly uped and went to the rig. Yah, right. The ocean is fundementally a desert. It becomes more than a desert when there is protective cover, called a reef.
>They further cite the issue of residual contaminants from years of drilling.
Yah, I suspect their may be some leakage, but probably less than the natural leakage. Most
California species (except the birds, because their strategy is quick re-colonization) are
adapted to the re-curring natural (large scale) oil spills.
>Environmental advocates and fishing groups both see the rigs to reefs effort as an attempt by the
oil industry to skirt their contractual obligations of removal and cleanup of obsolete oil rigs by
cynically using the language of the environmental movement to justify avoiding costly removal and
cleanup.
Well, cut off my nose. Use it to get some other concession from them. You can leave your rigs,
but pay 50% of the cost for habitat restoration. Think! Don't react.
Furthermore, environmental advocates and fishing groups worry that the rigs to reefs effort could
set a dangerous legal precedent for other companies to leave or dump their waste into the ocean to
“create artificial reefs.”
Precedent! Precedent???? That's the way it has always been. Now it has been changed. Look at this
fight over this issue, I don't think it is a problem.
Some of the most beautiful and vibrant diving in California, but it has to go, cuz it isn't natural.
It must be a Franken Reef. The environmantalists should learn to pick their battles better. That said, all the oil executives, starting with B & C, should be Bar-B-Qued, no matter how much air pollution it makes. And what happened to the Abalone Advisory Council? A little oil money could help that fishery. Enjoy the diving, seahunt
| 
