Edhat Reader
March 27, 2024, 10:48 am
7.0k Views
35 Comments
There is a large vessel and a number of smaller boats off the bluffs of UCSB between Campus Point and Goleta Bech this morning.
Lots of activity with the smaller boats going out and coming back to the larger vessel.
Anyone know what’s going on? I work at UCSB and have never seen this kind of activity out there.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.
To use social login you have to agree with the storage and handling of your data by this website. %privacy_policy%
AcceptHere you'll find all collections you've created before.
It looks like the boats that conduct oil well capping.
vesselfinder.com just shows normal oil derrick passenger ships.
OP: Good for you, observing and asking. Never hurts to ask. I’d be curious to know, too.
The large boat and the other support vessels were deploying Sea Caves in the bay to help restore the kelp forest that used to be in Goleta Bay as part of the Fish Reef Project. You can read more about it here: https://fishreef.org/
Great projects, thanks for the link! I just watched this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XQx8doMJ_I
Fixing sewer pipe
Here’s a little more about it and a video showing the deployment from this week: https://sbfreedivers.com/newsletters/congratulations-to-our-friends-at-fish-reef-project/
They call them reef balls. A group has been working on getting these things dumped out into Goleta Bay for many years now, as an attempt to provide substrate for kelp regrowth. I’m personally skeptical, but only time will tell if it works. Dumping tons of Montecito’s mud into the very same stretch of beach can’t be helpful.
Yeah, mud never gets into the ocean. No doubt you think more oil would be better.
Artificial reefs are wildly successful in just about every instance they’ve been used over the last few decades across the world. Time has already told.
I’m down with artificial reefs (speaking to the choir), but these are not artificial reefs, and the mud dumping around it might be a real problem.
Wrong. Reef balls absolutely, 100% ARE artificial reef components. That’s literally their purpose. To create an artificial ecosystem. In other words, they are used to create artificial reefs.
Why would you even try yo dispute that?
“Why reef balls?
Reef Balls are the world’s leading designed artificial reef modules…” http://www.reefball.org/index.htm#:~:text=Reef%20Balls%20are%20the%20world's,designed%20to%20mimic%20natural%20reefs.
His armchair told him to argue about something.
Basicinfo, you should read up at Fish Reef Project’s site and watch some of their videos.
Do you know what the word “artificial” means?
Of course they are artificial. And if you have any interest at all, there is a ton of info out there on how artificial reef work and can succeed. You could learn enough about it to understand why Chris’ Goldblatt’s project is so good in literally less time than it takes you to post three or four uninformed comments.
https://fishreef.org/reef/california-reef-old/
As well, seaweeds provide a really great biofilter impact so the fact that there is mud that has been dumped there that MAY contain pollutants is in fact an additional argument for installing the reef balls in that area.
Here, read something else that will educate you:
https://fishreef.org/reef/california-reef-old/
Oh gosh, the same link x2 (or 3?) from their own website (which I’ve already looked at) as opposed to any peer-reviewed studies regarding their efficacy (none exist). Wow, what a revelation! Schooled me right there buds?
I have nothing against artificial reefs. They have been done all over the place, of course. It’s an order of magnitude heavier duty than this. These look very lightweight to me. I really wonder how long these will hold up. Mother Nature has a way of breaking this stuff up and tossing it up onto the beach.
I don’t think you’re telling the truth.
1st, if you looked at that site, then you would not have said “these are not artificial reefs.”
2nd, saying “peer-reviewed studies regarding their efficacy (none exist)” is just wrong. The efficacy of artificial reefs are well documented and plenty of studies “exist,” including those specifically discussing Reef Balls.
“Artificial Reefs (AR) show a wide diversity and vary in their construction materials, shape and purpose, as illustrated by the present analysis of 127 scientific papers.” https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989421000883
Did you read about Reef Balls in that study or any of those 127 scientific papers (your “peer-reviewed studies”) cited in that study?
Yes, you HAVE been schooled. You are dead wrong about Reef Balls not being artificial reefs and your position that they might not be effective is similarly wrong as demonstrated by years of studies showing the efficacy of artificial reefs.
The meta-analysis you expertly googled up has all kinds of stuff that isn’t related to this reef ball project with its specific substrate used. So will it work? Who knows? Of course it’s an artificial substrate. Lose that inane argument. Is it an artificial reef? Think sunken ships, massive tons of rocks, etc. that people have done for quite a while now. Those have worked. Will the little concrete balls restore kelp in a polluted Goleta Bay? I don’t think so, but maybe? But hey, keep with the little nitpicky stuff on what an artificial reef means to you. Or shoot out to campus and see what an expert thinks about it. Let us know what they think. ; )
“Is it an artificial reef?” Just stop. You’ve been called out and confirmed.
I’m close friends with a marine biologist at UCSB. I already know “what they think.”
You better wear a helmet with all that backpedaling. Careful you don’t end up in “Goleta Bay” wherever that is.
Oh my god! You’re close friends with a marine biologist at UCSB? I’m backing down from that for sure.
I’m also close friends with a couple of the physician’s assistants there as well. Small town.
You’re still wrong though.
How many people do you know that work on off shore kelp reforestation and cultivation? I know a significant number. Because I’m involved in that industry.
Keep shouting from that armchair though.
What are you even arguing about?
Oh, yeah btw, I did copy post the same link twice, intended to share this other information with you that you almost certainly won’t read…because fActs Are tRIGGerIng!
https://www.behindthechange.org/stories/seafarmijmond/#
Oh crap Sack, you know a PA? That’s very intimidating.
And Alex, google isn’t your friend. Go take a smoke break.
I didn’t mean it to be intimidating, Doc Ranger Captain. I meant it to say, it’s a small town, therefore the fact that I know a marine biologist at your place of work isn’t that big of a surprise to warrant your “Oh my god!”
You do still work at UCSB, right?
I do.
Hmmm… yeah, I don’t believe that.
I don’t know what you mean.
Nor does he.
And yeah, I totally forgot. You did recently say: “”No I don’t “work for ucsb as a physician” – so, I guess we can chalk that up as yet another one.
Sorry if it was not an amicable exit…..
Talk about getting triggered! Wow.
You should familiarize yourself with that term. It really only applies to you here. Pack it in, “Doc”
Not at all. I stated an informed opinion on the topic at hand, and then the usual defensive attack and bs name calling ensues from two triggered posters. Straightforward.
Explain how saying reef balls are not artificial reefs is an “informed opinion.” You didn’t even bother to read about what they are. Further, you stated there are no studies on them, which, again, is contrary to readily available fact.
Don’t kid yourself. Your initial comment was anything but “informed.” No surprise though, making stuff up is kinda your whole MO.
“Informed”. LMFAO. You said the man made cement reef balls are not “artificial”. Then when you are corrected you freak out.