Microsoft’s Paul Allen’s yacht wrecks coral reef

Microsoft's Paul Allen's yacht wrecks coral reef in the Caribbean - YBW

I just came across this article and from the headline assumed that the ship had run aground. Turns out that all that damage (14,000 sq ft of it) was caused by the anchor chain scraping along the reef.

Rather sad when our actions for "harmless enjoyment" turn out to be so destructive. But it's certainly not just coral reefs that are damaged, but any cold or warm water ecosystem where sea life clings to the hard stuff.

For a very balance well thought out view:

https://www.caymancompass.com/2016/01/27/editorial-equal-environmental-justice-for-everyone/

When I installed an advanced fish finder with downscan sonar on my boat I was again reminded of what a horrible fisherman I am

The fish finder wasn't a good use of my money, but I find that sonar incredible helpful at seeking out flat patches of sand amongst the rocks and corals. A safe place to drop the anchor.

I suppose it doesn't hurt for each of us to do our own part, no matter how little.

Which one? he has 4-5 of the top / most expensive private vessels on the planet.

From what I heard, he dropped anchor where they told him to, so who's fault is that?

It's a research boat. Perhaps they are researching what anchor lines do to protected habitats?

According to Bill's article, there have been multiple occasions of reef damage due to the local authorities dictating where to drop anchor. Perhaps that is why no fines have been levied so far?

Still, even if instructed to anchor somewhere, if it endangers your vessel or if there is obvious coral underneath as shown on sonar, then the Captain should be questioning those orders.

Tough judgement call either way for Mr. Allen's captain.

In a place that openly says they will fine you for reef damage and then tells you where to anchor...in you are in a foreign country...


While using personal judgment is admirable...I think most would anchor as directed.

psneeld said:

While using personal judgment is admirable...I think most would anchor as directed.

Click to expand...

Perhaps you're right, but if your equipment or judgement is telling you there might be an issue, then a polite call on the VHF isn't going to get you fined.

However, listening to some banana-republic harbormaster who makes $1 an hour could get you thousands in fines. The visitor will always be wrong, not the local.

Capt.Bill11 said:

For a very balance well thought out view:

Click to expand...

I was in agreement with the "balance" until I hit the last couple of paragraphs where they mentioned the billionaire boys club and the economy.

Sounds like arse kissin' to me.

No reason anyone should be jealous of a billionaire's big yacht, or anyone's. Think of the money that pours into the economy and feeds families during construction, maintenance and cruising.

makobuilders; said:

Think of the money that pours into the economy and feeds families during construction, maintenance and cruising.

Click to expand...

Yup.
The basis of my comment. Don't scare that away.

I'm sure Paul Allen feels terrible about this tragedy. Most people in his position are environmentally conscious and will do the right thing.
If I were in a foreign country and was told where to drop anchor, I would comply as most would.

This is even worse. Sickening. And the Dept of Environment are the ones making it worse!

makobuilders said:

This is even worse. Sickening. And the Dept of Environment are the ones making it worse!

Click to expand...

Well at least it's a relatively dead reef to start with.

It's amazing how dead so much reef is these days.

Perhaps it's a relatively dead reef because of the ships and the dept of environment. That chain is like a bulldozer scraping across those rocks and coral. The same thing happens in Alaska or Maine or anywhere.

That's one of two reasons why I prefer anchoring with rope, and sometimes floating (poly) line in certain areas.

makobuilders said:

Perhaps it's a relatively dead reef because of the ships and the dept of environment. That chain is like a bulldozer scraping across those rocks and coral. The same thing happens in Alaska or Maine or anywhere.

That's one of two reasons why I prefer anchoring with rope, and sometimes floating (poly) line in certain areas.

Click to expand...

Alaska doesn't have dead coral reef's.
And that one is dead, most likely from water temp.

HOLLYWOOD

hollywood8118 said:

Alaska doesn't have dead coral reef's.
And that one is dead, most likely from water temp.

Click to expand...

No coral reefs but eelgrass and kelp beds get severely damaged by anchor chains dragging across the bottom.

What that shows is that there appears to be some real question regarding where boats should and shouldn't anchor in the harbor there. Allen's boat anchored where told, as did the cruise ship. Now why the boats themselves don't use sonar to try to double check or if they could detect it with sonar, I don't know.

There is also what it doesn't show. That is what the reef looked like before they anchored. All the damage most certainly didn't come from this one time. Did it come from previous anchoring or from other issues. It's a bit like having a very small fender bender with an older car which has dents all over it and the owner gets the repair for all of them in the estimate.

There is obviously some issue with where boats should and shouldn't be anchoring in that area and it seems they really need to figure that out and instruct accordingly as to where the safe anchorage is.

There is also the possibility that the reef in question was long dead and THAT is why it was deemed ok to anchor there.

Then some couple with a pair if fins and an underwater camera sees an opportunity for a facebook fame and the world goes nuts with an sensationalist headline like "Microsoft's Paul Allen's yacht wrecks coral."

We do live in a world where very little is what it appears.

Actually there are corals that grow in Alaska. Amazing stuff. And there are reefs of stone and limestone, kelp beds, etc. all over the world.

I'd agree that the reef in the video is not the rich, diverse one that we picture in our minds, but it is not dead. I have volunteered with research studies and the bleached reefs (due to water temperature) all had a different appearance. Here in the Persian Gulf the summer water temperature hovers around 92 degrees F. There are very few corals here in the coastal area. Tons of dead coral though, so the temperature must have been a lot cooler decades ago.

In any case, in the video there are fish trying to make a living, soft corals holding on for dear life and sponges trying to do what sponges do all day.

But then again, perhaps that harbor has no large sandy areas at all, so a compromise was needed to balance man's needs versus nature's needs. The strange thing is how the commentary states that no one is allowed to collect from the reef, that it is protected. THAT is some serious hypocrisy!

Hawgwash said:

There is also the possibility that the reef in question was long dead and THAT is why it was deemed ok to anchor there.

Then some couple with a pair if fins and an underwater camera sees an opportunity for a facebook fame and the world goes nuts with an sensationalist headline like "Microsoft's Paul Allen's yacht wrecks coral."

We do live in a world where very little is what it appears.

Click to expand...

That's why I usually wait for "the rest of the story"....

Also why I wait till long after an accident occurs and read usually not one but several sources of investigation reporting. Being a "Columbo" detective is fun...but not appropriate in a public forum as it is forever and often most of it is incorrect speculation that people misinterpret and carry with them against the participant. And why people wonder why I bother to dispute "wild theories" based on nothing more than a headline. Look at this case...the vessel anchored where told by the authorities...for whatever the reason. Yet is the scapegoat in the thread title and Paul Allen probably wasn't even in the decision where to anchor precisely.

Even here on TF there are reasons people do and like things that other's can't imagine (for several reasons I suppose)...yet their philosophies may not be that far apart in the end. Jumping to conclusions is never a great idea.

psneeld said:

Yet is the scapegoat in the thread title and Paul Allen probably wasn't even in the decision where to anchor precisely.

Click to expand...

And like newspapers, magazines and web sites, thread titles are often sensationalized to attract readers. How often have you read an article to find that the title wasn't at all reflective of the content?

BandB said:

And like newspapers, magazines and web sites, thread titles are often sensationalized to attract readers. How often have you read an article to find that the title wasn't at all reflective of the content?

Click to expand...

I agree & personally find this trend disturbing,,, just sayin'

Hawgwash said:

There is also the possibility that the reef in question was long dead and THAT is why it was deemed ok to anchor there.

Then some couple with a pair if fins and an underwater camera sees an opportunity for a facebook fame and the world goes nuts with an sensationalist headline like "Microsoft's Paul Allen's yacht wrecks coral."

We do live in a world where very little is what it appears.

Click to expand...

Exactly, P.Allen is a easy target... those two wanted to ride on his coat tails.


That reef isn't dead.. but it is certain that the damage done to that reef was years in the making.

Hollywood

I think you guys are either reading too deeply into the article or just trying to make arguments for the fun of it. The title of the original article Microsoft’s Paul Allen’s yacht wrecks coral reef, is entirely factual. It was his boat. It did damage a reef. Inside the article it states that the yacht was instructed to anchor there, so a reader could draw the conclusion that it is the government's own fault. That's why the yacht did not receive a fine.

What gets me is the hypocrisy of how it is a protected reef and divers cannot collect specimens or fish, yet the cruise ships and yachts are instructed to toss their anchors up on it.

PS - Headlines have to be short by nature, and they have to capture the reader's attention, and yahoo/similar are not exactly bastions of journalistic integrity.

Maybe the complaint is that the word "wrecks" implies that an otherwise healthy reef was destroyed as opposed to a struggling reef ecosystem was further damaged by an anchor chain.