Eric Borneman coral controversy

[liquid]

"Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

By Ben Kenobi (Star Wars, Episode VI)

 

[sihaya]

Aaahhh.... the timeless wisdom of Star Wars. 8)

Only makes me wish I had a good one from The Matrix...

 

[liquid]

"There is no spoon."

--Neo

8)

 

[Anonymous]

Ah, yes. The Jedi Mind Trick

Guard: Do you have any corals?
Jedi: *waving hand* We do not have any corals.
Guard: You do not have any corals.
Guard Move along

 

[pcardone]

It would be cool to see some before pictures of that wall.

 

[Anonymous]

The very first sentence of the permit application states explicitly that the corals are going to the Reef Savers facility. "Collections of corals from the FKNMS will be put into permanent culture at the designated facility (Reef Savers, Inc.) ..." Additionally, there is an entire passage on Reef Savers as the "Culture Site" on the second page posted of the permit application. For any of these NOAA individuals to allege later that they did not know that the corals were going to Reef Savers is utterly ridiculous.

In the permit, isn't Eric is stated to represent the interest of the University of Houston? I don't see anything in the permit applicaiton that hints that Reef Savers is a commercial for profit aquaculture wharehouse. In fact, it seems billed in the application as the "CDHC culture site" and the, implying that there is nothing there besides the CDHC culture program.

Also, the permits for coral collection give no restrictions on coral size. The only mention of taking larger corals than allowed was nearly a year after the permit was issued and 11 months after Eric gives a detailed inventory of what he took, how much, and what size. Why the wait? Also, if Eric was knowingly taking corals larger than allowed, why in the world would he give a detailed description of what he took, how much, and how large? Why not simply falsify the inventory to cover up the removal? That makes no sense.

While the permits state no restrictions on coral size, they do state that none of the permitted activities are to be conducted without the direct guidance of FKNMS staff. Telling Eric the sizes and specimens he can and cannot take out of the Sanctuary would fall under direct guidance by FKNMS staff.

As to the whys, perhaps they just let it go until they found out the corals weren't being cared for and perhaps Eric thought he wasn't doing anything wrong or if he did think he was doing something wrong.

 

[bookfish]

I think next time I have a tank problem, I will call the police as well. Surely it couldn't be something I forgot to do/fix/maintain - someone is out to get me!

OK, I'm not tanksitting for you ANYMORE!!!

 

[Anonymous]

would NOAA permit corals to be collected and take them to a tropical fish warehouse?

The corals in his home aquarium. Were they also permitted for disease research?

 

[Anonymous]

Why not simply falsify the inventory to cover up the removal?

Woudn't the corals be in baskets with numbers that are on a list giving a description?

Why falsify the report when you are the only one that took corals and theres' already a list? Every body knew what you took.

If he sent in his inventory a few weeks after, the corals would have already been contaminated anyway. No one would want them back, there no place to keep them, and they can't be used for relocation.

 

[Anonymous]

Iread this queston

If nothing was done wrong, why the big stink about having to return them?

 

[Chubosco]

I found a rope.

 

[Charlesr1958]

I thought I would save a good many posters of this thread the trouble of finding a good recipe when the time comes that you will have to eat it. For one, all of this thread is based on very incomplete information, conjecture and sadly, it seems to me, a great deal of just good ol bashing. Until the time comes, if ever, that all correspondence, phone conversations are known, any discussion and accusations made from what little has been thrown out is nothing more than beating the crap out of someone based on VERY bad reporting. And to be honest, ya all should know better and be ashamed.

One of the better recipes I have found quite tasty at times

Chuck

 

[sihaya]

One of the better recipes I have found quite tasty at times

lol... soooo glad I don't eat crows!


This might be a good time to say that if ANYONE can find any more *documented and verifiable* information on this project, I'd be MORE than happy to add it to the list of documents on the site already. And again, if and when I receive any more documents, those will be posted promptly as well.

As Chuck seems to be suggesting, if you don't think you can understand what happened with the project without more information, I encourage you to do your own investigations. Funny thing about information... it seems like the more people looking and asking for it, the more that gets found.

 

[sihaya]

There's also the possibility of inviting hand-written responses to the documents from parties directly involved in the project scanned into electronic read-only files. However, a fair amount of time and notice would have to be given to allow all the parties equal opportunity to respond (so that one doesn't get posted in the absence of another who might want to respond)... but I don't know.

Then again, I don't think too many people involved in the project would want to do this. And I don't think it would be a good idea unless at least a few different parties from different viewpoints wanted to.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm not ashamed at all. For reasons unknown to me, Eric has chosen to not answer any of my questions. Steven Pro didn't answer them and neither have you. I merely asked a few questions and I've not made any accusations.

My questions earlier on this thread are legitimate. Eric is making this worse by not answering some very simple questions. If he answers those questions for me, I'll go away peacefully.

With the above said, I don't think anyone needs to go find a rope. I've met and spoken with Eric numerous times at reef conferences and he's always been cordial. I'll still recommend his book because it's an excellent starter book.

However, this looks REAL BAD and he's refusing to refute any of the questions that the info brings up. If the info is one-sided....fine. That's what's contained in the FOIA requests. There's nothing that anyone outside of the government can do about it. But you can't complain that the government documents are one-sided and refuse to answer questions (or provide refuting documentation) at the same time. That's called having your cake and eating it too.

 

[Anonymous]

I think he is doing the right thing by being silent.

 

[middletonmark]

While the permits state no restrictions on coral size, they do state that none of the permitted activities are to be conducted without the direct guidance of FKNMS staff. Telling Eric the sizes and specimens he can and cannot take out of the Sanctuary would fall under direct guidance by FKNMS staff.

To note, Eric himself states that some are significantly larger:
While some of the colonies acquired have been small (< 10cm), some colonies from the Truman Annex site were quite large (>50cm).

From this article, which is of interest with the current flap. [as it's Eric's introduction of the project a few years back]
http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-08/eb/index.php

Sure seems, from the pics, that there's quite a few decent-sized corals ...

 

[Anonymous]

I think he is doing the right thing by being silent.

Yup. I'd agree with that.

 

[Anonymous]

To be a bit clearer, if he wants to reestablish credibility with the people that matter, he'd do well to avoid getting drawn into an internet discussion of what happened. Far better to quietly work with the facilities concerned to establish the facts and rebuild trust.

 

[Chubosco]

Yeah, but what do I do with the rope.