ALEXANDRIA, VA -- The new movie, "Titanic," has been released and is a box office hit -- the historic tragedy now more firmly ingrained in U.S. consciousness. The reminder of nature's power, seen when the ship strikes that infamous iceberg, is an important one. But more than icebergs in the North Atlantic cause damage to ships. The natural blockades of reefs, particularly in the Caribbean and around the Florida Keys, pose a much worse threat to vessels of all sizes. The problem is that the boats can cause just as much damage, if not more, to the beautiful coral reefs.

"Ship groundings are among the most destructive chronic anthropogenic factors causing significant localized damage on coral reefs," writes William F. Precht in the January issue of Geotimes. His article, "The Art and Science of Reef Restoration," discusses the history of reef grounding and reef restoration, looks at restoration and the law, and maps out goals for those involved with the management of reefs and reef programs. Precht explains how important the various steps are in approaching restoration, and stresses that "the obvious answer to maintaining healthy reefs is to avoid damaging them in the first place."

With an active prevention program of management, enforcement, and education, Precht believes we can begin to reduce the number of ship groundings. He offers his own program design for restoration, including stabilizing reef surfaces, recreating topography and aesthetics, and reintroducing dominant organisms. The article is an important discussion of past difficulties, present approaches, and future possibilities for saving coral reefs.

The January issue of Geotimes also includes the second installment of Joseph A. Briskey's series, "Communicating with Congress." In December, he had explained "The Nature of the Beast," with a description of congressional motivations and operations. This month, Briskey's article, "Contacting the Beast," reminds scientists and the public of our responsibility to communicate with Congress effectively and in a timely way. Politicians need our help as much as we need theirs, and earth scientists must be willing to work hard to make their needs and their research known.

"Congress is interested in the results of scientific research," Briskey writes. "But for research to be useful to these decision makers, the results must be known to exist, concisely summarized and illustrated in a nontechnical format, credible, and on time." The communication strategies he offers should be useful and relevant to anyone in the scientific and lay communities. And the next installment of the series, in which Briskey will examine indirect means of communicating with Congress, will be just as helpful.

In the third feature article, Christopher Grant Maples offers "A Rotator's Perspective" in Earth-Science Funding Trends at NSF (National Science Foundation). Maples, on a three-year assignment as a program director for the Geology and Paleontology Program, focuses on "historic trends and future directions in the funding process," explaining the grant proposal process and debunking several myths along the way. It's an enlightening look at how scientists receive the all-important grant, and a fair assessment of the difficulties NSF faces in the process.