Trackback from The Straits Times:

Of the seacils, National Parks Board (NParks) spokesman George Tay said: 'The project is not harming the environment, since the artificial reef and garden sit on the sea floor, away from the natural coral reef zone of the nature reserve.'...

Trackback from The Moment In Time...: Talk Is Cheap!:

Apparently, some over zealous environmental groups here had taken some picture and posted them on blogs, forums and on-line paper....

Trackback from Innovation Magazine: Artificial Reef Revitalises Marine Life:

The Seacil showcase at Labrador will serve as an educational tool in promoting appreciation of the marine environment...

Trackback from Justin Dive Adventures: Labrador Park seashore environment... with CONCRETE?!?:

To my sadness, I noticed many artificial structures lying around when the tide recedes. Some of them even looked like the SEACILS which was featured on the newspaper on Oct 26th 2007, which aims to build a underwater garden....

Perhaps The SP Project Team can explain :-
1. why they decided to deliberately dump the unwanted parts within the intertidal zone, and
2. whether they had obtained permission to do so from MPA, or NParks or any other entity.

A straightforward reading of the newspaper article today shows that the SP Project Team has basically admitted to deliberately and with full knowledge dumping unwanted (and damaging) items on our shores without any intention whatsoever to properly remove them. And this has gone on for months and months and months...and seems to be still continuing.

The authorities should give serious thought to taking action on this as it sets a very bad precedent for Singapore and at a gazetted nature reserve at that.

The success of the seacils at the deeper part of Labrador is a separate issue from that of these items which have been dumped on purpose. Hopefully, at least the deep end ones are a success! Brownie points for everyone! It would seem that SP has taken a very narrow approach to conservation (building a reef) and ignored a holistic approach (ensuring that the entire ecosystem is cared for). We should learn from this and avoid repeating the same mistakes.

The authorities should not set a negative precedent for such wanton acts of dumping. i.e. "as long as they are seen to do something helpful at the deep end, they can be allowed certain liberties about the parts of the ecosystem nobody else could possibly be interested in or which could be of little or no significance at all."

Immediate remedial action should be taken. Building an artificial reef should not be an excuse for dumping rubbish onto any of our shores...even the protected ones regardless who the project sponsors are.

Perhaps SP should take part in next year's ICCS?
http://coastalcleanup.nus.edu.sg/whycleanup.html

Trackback from the(new)mediaslut e-zine: The Seacil reef of blog ignorance:

The biggest problem highlighted by one blogger, who was also a volunteer for the project, was the way Singapore Polytechnic chose to ignore queries from the bloggers and public which lead to them creating their own conclusions on the reef....

Hi all,

in response to the entry 'Talk is cheap', I would like to highlight that the issues here is not so much about whether the project is a success or not. What we are worried about is more of the effect of the project on the intertidal area which can be seen with our eyes 'literally from the beach and jetty... at low tide'.

Also, I would like to highlight that the patch of Inter-tidal zone on Labrador Park is a Nature Reserve. Thus, no foreign structures should be placeed there in the 1st place, expecially concrete slabs which will instantly destroy whatever organisms, sessile or moving, under it.

Hence, the point here is about being wholistic in the project, and not concentrating only on the subtidal area, which I do not doubt their progress until I see otherwise, but to be sensitive to our last natural ROCKY SHORE MARINE COMMUNITY.... so that our next generation can get a chance to see it as well.