[Coral-List] New York Times op-ed piece - thoughts for Phase II

Douglas Fenner douglasfennertassi at gmail.com
Thu Jul 26 16:48:50 EDT 2012


I agree that we coral reef scientists get into vigorous debates, and that
there are some very different opinions on some issues.  But my impression
is that there is very wide agreement among people working on coral reefs
that many or most reefs around the world have undergone serious declines
(that is well documented in the literature), and that the greatest threats
include global warming, acidification, overfishing, sedimentation,
nutrients, and coral disease, but that there are many other lesser threats
as well.  True that there are some differences about which specific threats
people think are the greatest threats.  But surely we all agree those are
among the greatest threats, and that we must do something about them.  What
I hear is that people think we need to work on all of these, and sure
people have their favorites.
     Seems to me that there is good documentation showing each one of these
has or will cause damage to reefs, and we need to work on all of them.  But
I think people *are* working on all of them.  The problem, as you say, is
that the reefs are still going down hill.  We have to do better.
Cheers,  Doug


On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 1:35 AM, Michael Risk <riskmj at mcmaster.ca> wrote:

> Hi Doug.
>
> I'm staying out of this, mostly. These debates, it seems to me, have
> cycled off and on for decades-and we keep losing reefs at 3-4% per year.
> Part of the reason is the inexhaustible appetite of our species, but I
> think we scientists have to share some of the blame. There is no agreement
> on the priority of stresses, and endless, acrimonious debate. (Just try
> getting a bottom-up paper past some top-down reviewers.)
>
> There is one heartening example. There was a small coastal lagoon on
> Barbados that supported a nice little reef community. Limited, but hey,
> tourists loved it. Cyclic sediment deposition closed off one end, making
> the water stagnant. Nutrients piled up. Corals karked, urchins died, no
> fish. 15N very high.
>
> Big storm came along, blew the end off the sand bar-water quality improved
> dramatically. Please note: nothing else changed, just the water quality.
> Instead of a high-nutrient mix of leaking septic tanks and swamp drainage,
> the lagoon (now an inlet) got much cleaner coastal/open ocean water.
>
> Within two years the reef started coming back. Corals recruited, fish came
> back, etc. 15N way down.
>
> Precisely what one would expect-if one were an open-minded reef scientist..
>
> And, what ANY scientist could expect-both energy and time ran out. I was
> only able to get an Abstract out, for the ASLO meeting in St John's Nfld a
> few years back. Preparation of a full paper is on my bucket list-but you
> know, the more of these debates I read, the further down that list it goes.
>
> Mike
>
> On 2012-07-21, at 9:58 PM, Douglas Fenner wrote:
>
> >   I am sorry to hear that Roger Bradbury's paper was not accepted at
> > ICRS.  I think this is one of the most important issues, if not THE most
> > important issue, we who work on coral reefs, must deal with.  I thank
> Roger
> > for bringing this up in his NY Times article.  I hope that his letter in
> > the paper will receive the wide attention it deserves, and convince a lot
> > of people that we are indeed looking into the abyss.  I completely agree
> we
> > need to know what we're up against.
> >   Roger's piece in the NY Times is full of generalities and statements
> > that are not supported by facts there, but that is the nature of
> newspaper
> > articles.  I urge Roger to write a serious piece for a peer-reviewed
> > journal, in which the factual bases for his statements are documented.  I
> > believe this is too important not to have a firm basis for the
> statements.
> >    I argue that there is no good evidence that coral reefs won't recover
> > if the chronic pressures that humans are putting on them are removed.
>  I'm
> > not the first to argue this.  It is currently popular to say that coral
> > reefs can enter alternative stable states, and that transitions between
> > states have a hysteresis to them due to positive feedbacks, so that it
> > takes more to push an ecosystem back into the healthy state than it would
> > have taken to keep it in the healthy state in the first place.  People
> have
> > pointed out many positive feedback loops that may produce such an effect.
> > On the other hand, very few if any situations in which human pressures
> have
> > pushed a coral reef ecosystem into another state have had the human
> > pressures removed.  For example, the overfishing and nutrient inputs to
> the
> > reefs in Jamaica and much of the Caribbean have not been removed, and the
> > Diadema urchins have only begun to recover.  If the pressures that
> produced
> > the phase shift are not removed, the fact that the ecosystem has not
> > recovered is not evidence that it would not recover if the pressures were
> > removed.  Further, once the pressures are removed, recovery may take
> > significant time, there are some examples of this.  Plus there are at
> least
> > a few situations in which the phase shift may indeed be stable over long
> > periods, one being where a ship grounding has crushed everything, another
> > being where a thick layer of silt several feet thick covers a reef (since
> > corals can't get started on silt) and another being loose rubble where
> wave
> > surge moves the rubble continually, abrading any new coral recruits.
> > Anyhow, in the majority of cases, I see no strong evidence that reefs
> > couldn't recover if humans stopped impacting reefs (and that includes
> > releasing greenhouse gases).  I think that is good news and a cause for
> > optimism.  For reviews with details on the phase-shift issues, see my
> paper
> > on reef fisheries, and also the paper by Dudgeon et al 2010.
> >     On the other hand, as I re-read Roger's piece, it seems to me he's
> > saying that the chance that humans will stop impacting reefs is very
> > remote.  At times, I think the same thing.  Sometimes societies decide to
> > tackle a major problem, and solve it.  Other times, society doesn't.
>  Jarad
> > Diamond has a book out talking about the differences between such
> > societies.  I'm  a US citizen, and I see US society failing to fix a
> > variety of problems.  The "drug war" has been going on for decades, and
> the
> > government is not winning it, clearly, and there is no end in sight.
>  Just
> > the other day we had another stark reminder of the failure of US society
> to
> > fix it's gun problem.  Many pieces have been written detailing how the
> > problems in the US financial system that nearly destroyed the economy in
> > the great recession have not been fixed.  We have not fixed our
> healthcare
> > system problems.  We have not fixed the greenhouse gas emission problem..
> > The list goes on and on.  On the other hand, international action has
> fixed
> > air pollution in developed countries, plus acid rain and the ozone hole..
> > We can fix problems we decide to fix, and this one is fixable.
> >     To me, saving coral reefs is a human social problem much more than a
> > biological problem.  Most reefs would heal if we stopped abusing them.
> > Getting humans around the world to reduce their impacts on reefs, when
> > human populations continue to rise and the world economy doubles about
> > every 15 years or so, not only will not be easy, but will be so hard that
> > it is not obvious whether we will manage to do it.  We know what the
> > solutions are, but humans who damage reefs all benefit in some way from
> > their actions.  Cheap energy from fossil fuels that fuel economic growth,
> > farm incomes from farming that produces sediment and nutrient runoff, big
> > money from logging forests that produces runoff, food for very hungry
> poor
> > people from catching reef fish, huge numbers of recreational fishermen
> > having fun catching reef fish, and so on, the list is long indeed.
>  People
> > who benefit from these things will not change their ways if we just
> > politely ask them to.  If what they are doing becomes economically less
> > profitable than doing something else, as Ove is saying may soon happen
> for
> > fossil fuels vs renewable energy, the change can happen quite quickly
> > without drawn out battles.  If not, we need to find ways that people can
> > derive their benefits without damaging the reefs.  The damage is all side
> > effects of activities to produce other benefits, nobody sets out with the
> > sole purpose of damaging reefs, the damage is just a side effect of what
> > they do to derive benefits.
> >       I don't know if human society around the world will make the
> changes
> > needed in time.  I do know that if we don't try to get people to change,
> we
> > can seal the fate of reefs and doom them to destruction.  I'm not willing
> > to do that.  I will fight to the end, I think reefs are worth it.  I
> don't
> > think the alternative is viable.  Dead reefs don't produce fish, nor do
> > they protect shorelines.  Reefs produce hundreds of billions of dollars
> of
> > ecosystem services a year, and we are spending peanuts trying to save
> > them.  We cannot put artificial reefs over all of the area of coral reefs
> > of the world to produce the fish needed to feed people, the area is way
> way
> > too large.  We can't armor all the coastlines protected by coral reefs,
> > coastlines are too long.  People on atolls are already talking about how
> > they will be forced to move entire nations due to sea level rise and
> > erosion.  I think we have NO choice but to fight for coral reefs every
> step
> > of the way, down to the very last ditch effort to save them.  I think
> > diverting money to serious efforts to try to replace coral reefs will
> > divert desperately needed funding to save them.  If your ship has a hole
> in
> > the hull, do you immediately abandon ship??  If the hole can be repaired,
> > you are better off saving the ship (as Captain Cook did when he hit the
> > Great Barrier Reef).  We know how to do it!!  We just have to get society
> > willing to do it.  I'm with Ove on that.  President Kennedy said, "We
> > choose to go to the moon, not because it is easy, but because it is
> > hard."   We can't afford to just give up and walk away from reefs and let
> > them die, just because saving them is going to be hard.  Most things
> worth
> > doing are not easy.  I think Ove's energy and enthusiasm in getting to
> work
> > on this is fantastic.
> > Cheers,  Doug
> >
> > Dudgeon, S.R.; Aronson, R.B.; Bruno, J.F.; Precht, W.F. Phase shifts and
> > stable states on coral
> > reefs. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 2010, 413, 201–216.
> >
> > Fenner, D. 2012.  Challenges for managing fisheries on diverse coral
> reefs.
> > Diversity 4(1): 105-160.  http://www.mdpi.com/journal/diversity
> >
> >
> > My previous post on coral-list on this topic for those who haven't seen
> it:
> >
> >     Ray Bradbury, as Tom Goreau pointed out in a message on “coralreef
> > freeforall”, missed the boat from the start in saying that “Overfishing,
> > acidification, and pollution are pushing coral reefs into oblivion.”  He
> > missed the largest single threat, global-warming produced mass coral
> > bleaching.  There is also no mention of coral disease, probably the
> single
> > largest contributor to the decline in coral reefs in the Caribbean (which
> > we need to remember is an important but quite small part of the world’s
> > coral reefs).  By “pollution” I presume he means sedimentation,
> > nutrification, and chemical pollution.  There are a host of other
> damaging
> > factors, but these are the main ones.
> >
> >      In Bradbury’s defense, a close reading shows that he initially says
> > that reefs are “on a trajectory to collapse within a human generation”,
> > which is different from saying they certainly will.  I’d argue that if a
> > human generation is 33 years, it might well take two generations.  He
> also
> > shows he’s aware that not every scrap of reef will be dead at that time.
> >
> >      He then says that the “fact” than any one of the three factors he
> > says is causing reef demise could cause their death by itself (a point I
> > would not concede is based on science that is “compelling and
> unequivocal”)
> > logically leads to the conclusion that “there is no hope of saving the
> > global coral reef ecosystem.”  NO hope??  Give me a break.  The continued
> > decline of coral reefs depends on humans continuing to damage reefs the
> way
> > they have been.  That is NOT an inevitable consequence of what we have
> done
> > in the past.  Humans are capable of learning and changing what they do.
> >
> >       Bradbury says that “scientists don’t see the reefs for the
> corals.”  I
> > beg to differ.  In fact, we all know how severe the problem is, precisely
> > because there are more and more scientists who not only grasp how
> important
> > it is to find out the truth about how the world’s reefs are doing and
> what
> > the future holds for reefs, but also have figured out new ways to assess
> > reefs over huge areas of the world ocean.  I refer in particular to
> papers
> > like the Gardner et al (2003) paper demonstrating the severity of the
> > decline in the Caribbean, the Bruno & Selig (2007) paper on the decline
> of
> > reefs in the Pacific, Wilkinson’s GCRMN books on the state of the reefs
> of
> > the world, the Wilkinson et al. (1999) paper reporting the loss of most
> of
> > the coral in the Indian Ocean in the 1998 bleaching event, the paper by
> > Paddack et al. (2009) on the decline of reef fish in the Caribbean, and
> the
> > Alvarez-Philip et al. (2009) paper showing the decline of coral reef
> > rugosity in the Caribbean, plus many others.  My recent paper on
> challenges
> > for managing coral reef fisheries (Fenner, 2012) listed 39 references of
> > papers documenting the decline of coral reefs around the world, and there
> > are surely more.  Meta-analyses of reef data from entire ocean basins
> are a
> > cottage industry at the moment, and the results are the main source of
> > evidence of the decline Bradbury decries.  Scientists are anything but
> > sticking their heads in the sand.
> >
> >      I agree with John Bruno that there is no hard evidence that local
> > threats like overfishing and pollution are accelerating.  Increasing
> > certainly, but the rate of increase has not been shown to be
> accelerating.  I
> > would have to say, though, that greenhouse gas emissions and their
> effects
> > are accelerating.  The rate of greenhouse gas emissions continue to
> > increase, so emissions are accelerating.  The rate of sea level rise will
> > surely accelerate as the world warms, with most of the rise that will
> > happen this century occurring in the latter part of the century, and the
> > rate of rise will likely increase well into the next century unless we
> get
> > emissions under control.  Acidification will increase proportionally to
> the
> > rate of CO2 release, which is indeed accelerating.
> >
> >      Bradbury says that “There will be remnants here and there” left.  I
> > would like to point that not all of the world’s reefs are on steep
> declines.
> > In American Samoa, we have about 30% coral cover, and the trend over the
> > last 7 years is slightly upward.  Wilkinson (2006) presented a graph that
> > showed that Australia, the Coral Triangle, and Pacific Islands were the
> > areas of the world’s reefs that were in the best condition at that time
> > (based on the huge Reef Check data set).  In the Wilkinson Status of
> Coral
> > Reefs of the World: 2008 report, his graph on page 134 shows coral cover
> in
> > Indonesia as steady.  In a plenary talk a few days ago at ICRS in Cairns,
> > Australia, Jamalludin Jompa showed graphs of coral cover over time at
> > several sites in Indonesia, with good coral cover and different sites
> going
> > up or down, but no overall change (you can view this presentation and
> that
> > of the other plenary presentations I refer to below at
> > http://www.coralcoe.org.au/icrs2012/Default.htm).  That is a small
> sample
> > of Indonesia’s reefs, but if that is indicative of reefs there, that is
> > huge; Indonesia is not a small and unimportant place, it rivals Australia
> > for the country in the world with the most coral reefs.  I claim that not
> > all is lost, not by a long shot.
> >
> >      As some other commentators have said, the fate of the world’s coral
> > reefs are in our hands.  More accurately, in the hands of the world’s
> > people and their governments.  It is quite true that currently people are
> > abusing reefs badly in many ways, over most of the world.  It is also
> true
> > that scientists and managers are working flat out to reduce damage done
> by
> > humans, and like the review of NOAA’s coral reef programs concluded ‘many
> > wonderful things are being done, but the reefs are still going down the
> > tubes.’  Maybe nothing will change over the coming decades, and indeed
> most
> > all of the world’s reefs will be degraded beyond recognition, such that
> > coral reefs as we know them will largely cease to exist.  That is quite
> > possible, maybe even probable, especially if people don’t change their
> ways.
> > We are indeed staring into the abyss, I think agreement on that is very
> > widespread.
> >
> >      But another presentation at ICRS, by Peter Kareiva (chief scientist
> > and vice president of the Nature Conservancy) pointed out that many
> > measures of environmental decline have peaked in developed countries and
> > have declined, some greatly.  So, for instance, air and water quality
> have
> > improved in Europe, the US, and Japan.  He showed a picture of when
> > Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA, was blackened by soot from smoke produced
> by
> > steel mills and the rivers were so polluted that people didn’t want to
> live
> > near them.  Now the skies are clear, the soot has been cleaned off the
> > buildings, the city sparkles, and the rivers have fish that can be caught
> > and are safe to eat, and the city is rated one of the most liveable in
> the
> > U.S.  Some of us remember when a river in Ohio was so polluted it caught
> > fire!  No longer.  At one time the smog in London from heating homes by
> > burning coal was so bad people were dying from coal soot.  No longer.  At
> > one time the air of Tokyo was so bad there were vending machines
> dispensing
> > oxygen for those who had breathing problems.  No longer, the skies are
> > clear now.  Yes, China is building a new coal power plant every week and
> a
> > huge cloud of air pollution blows from China over Japan and out over the
> > Pacific.  But they know they have a problem and are already the world’s
> > leader in manufacturing renewable energy equipment.  They will clean up
> > their energy production as soon as they can afford it.  Human per capita
> > consumption in developed countries has already peaked and started to
> > decline, world population growth is slowing as family sizes come down in
> > many countries and world population growth may well peak in coming
> decades
> > and begin to slowly decline.  A variety of other unsustainable practices
> > also are probably heading towards their peaks and future declines.  Human
> > population and consumption/development are widely acknowledged to be the
> > ultimate drivers of damage to the environment (e.g., Sodhi & Ehrlich,
> 2010)
> > including to coral reefs (e.g. Brainard, et al. 2011; Fenner, 2012; and
> > many others).  It is quite true that the world community has not
> committed
> > to a serious program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and if it
> doesn’t
> > we can kiss coral reefs as we know them goodby.  But Australia has now
> > passed legislation committing itself to drastic reductions in greenhouse
> > gas emissions, and the cost for them and the world to do this is vastly
> > less than the public thinks, only about 1.2% of the economy.  We spend
> more
> > on that for junk we throw away.
> >
> >     In another plenary presentation at ICRS, Madeleine van Oppen
> presented
> > work on the question of whether corals can acclimate and/or adapt fast
> > enough to buy us some time to work on controlling greenhouse gases.
>  There
> > is no question that corals can acclimate and adapt some, but the jury is
> > still out on how fast they can do it, and how much they can adjust to.
>  As
> > Ove Hoegh-Guldberg pointed out in his plenary talk, there is every reason
> > to be doubtful that they can adjust to 5-7o C temperature increase that
> we
> > are in for in the next couple hundred years if we don't do something.
>  There
> > are limits to what every species can adapt to.  But that much temperature
> > increase is far enough off that if we get to work reducing greenhouse
> gases
> > soon, we can limit temperature increases to amounts that some or most
> > corals probably can adapt to.  There is no question that much more reef
> > degradation is going to happen before we get all the threats under
> control,
> > but if we do get them under control, we can avoid complete reef
> degradation..
> >
> >    Don't tell me that there is NO hope, and we should just let the reefs
> > and world go down the tube.  I don’t believe it, and I think the evidence
> > doesn’t support it.  Humans have a long history of muddling through,
> > waiting until a problem is huge and obvious, but then putting their
> > shoulders to the grindstone and doing what is necessary.  That is the
> > history with air pollution, acid rain and the ozone hole.  I submit that
> > the question is not whether humanity will fix these problems, but whether
> > they will do it in time to avoid the worst damages in decades to come.  I
> > think we need to be very realistic about the challenges, they are very
> > great indeed, but it can be done, we know how to do it, we just have to
> > have the world’s populations and governments decide that it is worth the
> > effort and cost, and get going to do it.
> >
> >      Coral reefs provide people with hundreds of billions of dollars of
> > ecosystem services around the world every year.  Bradbury says we should
> > stop wasting money on trying to save reefs and instead put the money into
> > figuring out what ecosystems will replace reefs, and how to nudge them to
> > produce the food and other ecosystem services people depend on.  That’s a
> > recipe for disaster in my opinion.  I agree with Bradbury that if we
> don't
> > act, living coral reefs will be replaced by degraded reefs made of rubble
> > or dead reef matrix covered with filamentous algae and macroalgae, with
> > lots of microbes and jellyfish.  That can’t be nudged into producing
> large
> > amounts of reef fish without putting out vast “artificial reefs.”  But
> > reefs are far too vast for that to be practical.  Further, as reef growth
> > slows with coral death and acidification and sea level continues to rise,
> > reefs will provide less and less shoreline protection, and many tropical
> > shorelines will erode away, taking with them houses, villages and towns,
> > farmland and entire atoll nations.  Some shorelines can be hardened at
> > great expense, but many countries have way too much shoreline and way too
> > little money to do that, like the Philippines with 3000 islands and
> > Indonesia with 13-15,000 islands.  Hardening will probably not work on
> > atolls where the only land is low lying and made of sand, so thousands of
> > atolls around the world will go under.  If Bradbury wants to face hard
> > facts, the hard fact is that we have NO alternative that will preserve
> the
> > ecosystem services of coral reefs.  We must save them, or lose hundreds
> of
> > billions of dollars per year in benefits around the world, much of it in
> > countries that can least afford to lose it.
> >
> >      I submit that we have NO choice but to save the coral reefs, and in
> > fact humanity can do it, if it decides to.
> >
> > Cheers,  Douglas Fenner
> >
> >
> >
> > Alvarez-Filip, L.; Dulvy, N.K.; Gill, J.A.; Côté, I.M.; Watkinson, A.R.
> > Flattening of Caribbean coral reefs: Region-wide declines in
> architectural
> > complexity. *Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B **2009*, *276*,  3019–3025.
> >
> >
> >
> > Brainard, R.E., Birkeland, C., Eakin, C.M., McElhaney, P., Miller, M.W.,
> > Patterson, M., Piniak, G.A. 2011.  Status review report of 82 candidate
> > coral species petitioned under the U.S. Endangered Species Act.  NOAA
> > Technical Memorandum NMFS-PIFSC-27.  530 pp.   Open access, download at:
> > http://www.fpir.noaa.gov/PRD/prd_esa_section_4.html
> >
> >
> >
> > Bruno, J.F.; Selig, E.R. Regional decline of coral cover in the
> > Indo-Pacific: Timing, extent, and subregional comparisons. *PLoS One
> **2007*,
> > *2*, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000711.
> >
> >
> >
> > Fenner, D. 2012.  Challenges for managing fisheries on diverse coral
> reefs.
> > Diversity  4(1): 105-160.  Available online open-access at
> >
> http://www.mdpi.com/search?q=&journal=diversity&volume=&authors=Fenner&section=&issue=&article_type=&special_issue=&page=&search=Search
> >
> >
> > Gardner, T.A.; Côté, I.M.; Gill, J.A.; Grant, A.; Watkinson, A.R.
> Long-term
> > region-wide declines in Caribbean corals. *Science **2003*, *301*,
> 958–960.
> >
> >
> > Paddack, M.J.; Reynolds, J.D.; Aguilar, C.; Appeldoorn, R.S.; Beets, J.;
> > Burkett, E.W.; Chittaro, P.M.; Clarke, K.; Esteves, R.; Fonesca, A.C.;
> *et
> > al. *Recent region-wide declines in Caribbean reef fish abundance. *Curr.
> > Biol. **2009*, *19*, 590–596.
> >
> >
> > Sodhi, N.S., Ehrlich, P.R.  2010.  Conservation Biology for All.  Oxford
> > Univ. Press.  344 pp.  This BOOK is available online open access at:
> > http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199554249.do
> >
> >
> > <http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199554249.do>
> >
> > Wilkinson, C, Linden O, Cesar H, Hodgson G, Rubens J, Strong, AE (1999)
> > Ecological and socioeconomic impacts of 1998 coral mortality in the
> Indian
> > Ocean: an ENSO impact and a warning of future change? Ambio 28:188-196
> >
> >
> > Wilkinson, C. Status of coral reefs of the world: Summary of threats and
> > remedial action.  In *Coral Reef Conservation*, Côté, I.M., Reynolds,
> J..D.,
> > Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2006; pp. 3–39.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 20, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Ove Hoegh-Guldberg <oveh at uq.edu.au>
> wrote:
> >
> >> Dear Alina,
> >>
> >> I totally understand where you're coming from. My message, however, is
> >> that there are growing signs that (a) it is not too late for effective
> >> action to prevent us rising much above 450 ppm, and (b) change in such
> >> complex system is non-linear and is likely to happen extremely quickly..
> >> The future is not going to be determined by the dirt cheap price of gas
> and
> >> coal today. You only had to look at how different parts of the energy
> >> landscape are changing to appreciate the fact that we could see a rapid
> >> shift to renewable energy sources over those depending on fossil fuels..
> And
> >> ultimately, seemingly immovable ideological positions will fall away
> ... if
> >> only because it will become increasingly uneconomic not to shift towards
> >> renewable energy sources. In this regard, individuals and organisations
> >> that are pumping money into gas and coal infrastructure today are
> probably
> >> doing so at great risk to their capital.
> >>
> >> I believe we (as a scientific community) can speed up this transition by
> >> staying the course, and doggedly and faithfully relating to all and
> sundry
> >> what the science tells us.  In this regard, coral reefs and climate
> change
> >> provide a particularly clear parable about the monumentally serious risk
> >> that climate change represents for natural ecosystems and human
> dependents
> >> across the planet. I believe, however, we have much more to do in terms
> of
> >> how we communicate this story - not only should we continue to expand
> our
> >> interaction with the mainstream media but we must also focus on
> capturing
> >> hearts and minds of hundreds of millions through effective social media
> >> campaigns and other mechanisms. Only then will we have the chance to
> speed
> >> up the transition that desperately needs to happen.
> >>
> >> So, I am relieved that you are not lying down and dying over this issue
> -
> >> as you know, I am not and don't think we are quite at that point yet.
> >> Best wishes,
> >>
> >> Ove
> >>
> >> From: Szmant, Alina [mailto:szmanta at uncw.edu]
> >> Sent: Tuesday, 17 July 2012 11:05 AM
> >> To: Ove Hoegh-Guldberg; Roger Bradbury; Coral List (
> >> coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov)
> >> Cc: john.bythell at usp.ac.fj; William Fitt; rgates at hawaii.edu; Roberto
> >> Iglesias-Prieto; Michael Lesser; Yossi Loya; Robert van Woesik; Tim
> >> McClanahan; Peter Sale; Ernesto, Dr ARIAS; Mark Butler; Robert Cowen;
> Bret
> >> Danilowicz; Geoff Jones; Serge Planes; Barry RUDDICK; Yvonne SADOVY;
> Robert
> >> Steneck; Simon THORROLD; Mary, Dr Coffroth; Ken Lindeman; Drew Harvell;
> >> Garriet, Dr SMITH; Farooq AZAM; Eric Jordan; Eugene ROSENBERG; Ernesto
> >> Weil; Bette WILLIS; Laurie Raymundo; Craig Johnson; Bohdan Durnota;
> >> Porfirio Aliño; Rob SEYMOUR; Peter Campbell; Pascal Perez; Alasdair
> >> Edwards; Loke Chou; Richard Dodge; Ed Gomez; a.heyward at aims.gov.au;
> >> Aileen Morse; Buki Rinkevich; Tadashi Kimura; Makoto Omori;
> >> jrguest at gmail.com; spieler at nova.edu; Peter Mumby; Ellsworth LeDrew; CMS
> >> ext - Mark Eakin; Alan Strong; CMS ext - William Skirving; Laura David;
> >> Stuart Phinn; Nancy Knowlton; Margareth Kyewalyanga; CMS ext
> >> AJH at environmentservices; Mark Paterson; Marea Hatziolos; Kristen
> Sampson;
> >> Paul Dargusch; Jamaluddin Jompa; Shay O'Farrell; Cesar Villanoy; Michael
> >> Mascia; Carl Smith; Beth.Fulton at csiro.au; Randy Olson (rolson at usc.edu);
> >> Mark Milstein; Medrilzam; Sebastian Thomas; annette menez; Maricar
> Samson;
> >> plokani at gmail.com
> >> Subject: RE: New York Times op-ed piece - thoughts for Phase II
> >>
> >> Hi Ove:
> >>
> >> I am not laying down and dying, on this issue, and I put my money where
> my
> >> mouth is:  we installed solar panels on our home that produce 50 % of
> what
> >> we use, and we reduced our monthly electricity consumption by 50 % by
> >> replacing older ACs, appliances, all LED bulbs, etc (major bank loans to
> >> handle this investment).  We drive Pruis' and I've also become a
> vegetarian
> >> to reduce my contribution to climate change related to animal
> husbandry. I
> >> teach seminar courses about human impacts on the environment, hoping to
> >> inspire our college age voters to make good choices with their wallets
> and
> >> lives, and give frequent lectures to our educated seniors as well.  I
> am 66
> >> and have no grandchildren.   Other than slitting my throat, there is
> only
> >> so much more I can do to reduce my contribution to the problem.
> >>
> >> But I am not encouraged that any of this will do any good because the
> >> number of people who like me are spending money to reduce their
> greenhouse
> >> gas footprint are likely less than 1 % of 300 M people in the USA.  Your
> >> cited  reports aside, most of which are meaningless arm-waving because
> no
> >> real action comes out of them, there is not much happening in this
> country
> >> to really grapple with the climate change problem.  I keep hoping some
> >> major disaster will convince people to act (like in the movies), but
> none
> >> of the disasters are large enough to affect more than a few thousand
> people
> >> at a time, not enough to sway voters.  Our upcoming November election
> will
> >> be very telling as to what direction the US will take on major
> >> environmental issues.  If we get more of the 2010 type of results, we
> will
> >> be in for another 4 years of grid-lock and no action.
> >>
> >> I wish I could be more optimistic, and very much hope I am wrong.  Time
> >> will tell, all too soon.  But just spouting optimistic platitudes will
> not
> >> get us anywhere.  The truth is that the human species seldom responds
> to a
> >> problem until after a disaster happens, seldomly as a preventative.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Alina
> >>
> >>
> *************************************************************************
> >> Dr. Alina M. Szmant
> >> Professor of Marine Biology
> >> Center for Marine Science and Dept of Biology and Marine Biology
> >> University of North Carolina Wilmington
> >> 5600 Marvin Moss Ln
> >> Wilmington NC 28409 USA
> >> tel:  910-962-2362  fax: 910-962-2410  cell: 910-200-3913
> >> http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
> >> *******************************************************
> >>
> >> From: Ove Hoegh-Guldberg [mailto:oveh at uq.edu.au]
> >> Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 4:50 PM
> >> To: Szmant, Alina; Roger Bradbury
> >> Cc: john.bythell at usp.ac.fj; William Fitt; rgates at hawaii.edu; Roberto
> >> Iglesias-Prieto; Michael Lesser; Yossi Loya; Robert van Woesik; Tim
> >> McClanahan; Peter Sale; Ernesto, Dr ARIAS; Mark Butler; Robert Cowen;
> Bret
> >> Danilowicz; Geoff Jones; Serge Planes; Barry RUDDICK; Yvonne SADOVY;
> Robert
> >> Steneck; Simon THORROLD; Mary, Dr Coffroth; Ken Lindeman; Drew Harvell;
> >> Garriet, Dr SMITH; Farooq AZAM; Eric Jordan; Eugene ROSENBERG; Ernesto
> >> Weil; Bette WILLIS; Laurie Raymundo; Craig Johnson; Bohdan Durnota;
> >> Porfirio Aliño; Rob SEYMOUR; Peter Campbell; Pascal Perez; Alasdair
> >> Edwards; Loke Chou; Richard Dodge; Ed Gomez; a.heyward at aims.gov.au;
> >> Aileen Morse; Buki Rinkevich; Tadashi Kimura; Makoto Omori;
> >> jrguest at gmail.com; spieler at nova.edu; Peter Mumby; Ellsworth LeDrew; CMS
> >> ext - Mark Eakin; Alan Strong; CMS ext - William Skirving; Laura David;
> >> Stuart Phinn; Nancy Knowlton; Margareth Kyewalyanga; CMS ext
> >> AJH at environmentservices; Mark Paterson; Marea Hatziolos; Kristen
> Sampson;
> >> Paul Dargusch; Jamaluddin Jompa; Shay O'Farrell; Cesar Villanoy; Michael
> >> Mascia; Carl Smith; Beth.Fulton at csiro.au; Randy Olson (rolson at usc.edu);
> >> Mark Milstein; Medrilzam; Sebastian Thomas; annette menez; Maricar
> Samson;
> >> plokani at gmail.com
> >> Subject: RE: New York Times op-ed piece - thoughts for Phase II
> >>
> >> Thank you Alina.  Two very quick points.  I am under no illusion about
> the
> >> current crescendo of enthusiasm for fossil fuels. Australia is also
> going
> >> gangbusters but many in the industry and government are beginning to
> >> understand the economic peril of not adopting renewables.  The latter
> is to
> >> simply good economic and security sense. Part of the current mad rush
> >> forward is about the bravado of fossil fuel industries trying to push a
> >> reality that just isn't.  I urge you to read the GCI energy report I
> >> mentioned in a previous e-mail to get the gist of what I mean in this
> >> respect (note that the advisory group for this study include CEOs of
> energy
> >> companies, grid distributors, energy intensive industries etc). The
> second
> >> point is that to lie down and die on an issue that concerns not only the
> >> health of coral reefs that the future of our children and grandchildren,
> >> and humanity in general, is a complete copout when solutions do exist.
> >> Given that we don't know how the future will unfold when we get to 5 or
> 10
> >> years out from now, there is no other rational response than that we
> must
> >> redouble our efforts to bring the reality of dying yet redeemable world
> to
> >> all and sundry. Our community is perfectly situated to tell a simple
> story
> >> regarding coral reefs - straightforward and illustrative of the problem
> and
> >> the linkage between a deteriorating climate, natural ecosystems and the
> >> survival of people.
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> Ove
> >>
> >>
> >> From: Szmant, Alina [mailto:szmanta at uncw.edu]<mailto:[mailto:
> >> szmanta at uncw.edu]>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, 17 July 2012 6:22 AM
> >> To: Ove Hoegh-Guldberg; Roger Bradbury
> >> Cc: john.bythell at usp.ac.fj<mailto:john.bythell at usp.ac.fj>; William
> Fitt;
> >> rgates at hawaii.edu<mailto:rgates at hawaii.edu>; Roberto Iglesias-Prieto;
> >> Michael Lesser; Yossi Loya; Robert van Woesik; Tim McClanahan; Peter
> Sale;
> >> Ernesto, Dr ARIAS; Mark Butler; Robert Cowen; Bret Danilowicz; Geoff
> Jones;
> >> Serge Planes; Barry RUDDICK; Yvonne SADOVY; Robert Steneck; Simon
> THORROLD;
> >> Mary, Dr Coffroth; Ken Lindeman; Drew Harvell; Garriet, Dr SMITH; Farooq
> >> AZAM; Eric Jordan; Eugene ROSENBERG; Ernesto Weil; Bette WILLIS; Laurie
> >> Raymundo; Craig Johnson; Bohdan Durnota; Porfirio Aliño; Rob SEYMOUR;
> Peter
> >> Campbell; Pascal Perez; Alasdair Edwards; Loke Chou; Richard Dodge; Ed
> >> Gomez; a.heyward at aims.gov.au<mailto:a.heyward at aims.gov.au>; Aileen
> Morse;
> >> Buki Rinkevich; Tadashi Kimura; Makoto Omori; jrguest at gmail.com<mailto:
> >> jrguest at gmail.com>; spieler at nova.edu<mailto:spieler at nova.edu>; Peter
> >> Mumby; Ellsworth LeDrew; CMS ext - Mark Eakin; Alan Strong; CMS ext -
> >> William Skirving; Laura David; Stuart Phinn; Nancy Knowlton; Margareth
> >> Kyewalyanga; CMS ext AJH at environmentservices; Mark Paterson; Marea
> >> Hatziolos; Kristen Sampson; Paul Dargusch; Jamaluddin Jompa; Shay
> >> O'Farrell; Cesar Villanoy; Michael Mascia; Carl Smith;
> Beth.Fulton at csiro.au
> >> <mailto:Beth.Fulton at csiro.au>; Mark Milstein; Medrilzam; Sebastian
> >> Thomas; annette menez; Maricar Samson; plokani at gmail.com<mailto:
> >> plokani at gmail.com>
> >> Subject: RE: New York Times op-ed piece - thoughts for Phase II
> >>
> >> Dear Ove:
> >>
> >> If your optimistic comments and opinions about the future of coral reefs
> >> (and the global ecosystem in general) are based on a change of heart and
> >> opinion in the USA about climate change, you are being falsely mislead
> by a
> >> few non-representative newspaper articles, and conversations with
> >> unrealistic people.  The fact of the matter is that efforts to develop
> all
> >> forms of fossil fuel are rampant here in the USA.  The big gas, coal and
> >> oil companies and their super-PACS are flooding the airways with adds
> about
> >> these wonderful forms of "clean energy"  and the importance to the
> future
> >> of American jobs and economy.  The environmental movement in the USA is
> >> weaker than the US economy and job prospects.  Decades of rampant
> >> consumerism and false dreams of everyone having the types of lifestyles
> of
> >> the rich and famous as portrayed on TV, plus inadequate science (or
> >> economic) education in the USA, have led to several generations of
> voters
> >> who have no recognition of the problems we are facing in the near
> future.
> >> In fact, in my current state of NC, the state legislature voted to
> ignore
> >> all recent studies of rates of sea level change, and that these newer
> >> studies cannot be used for coastal zone management policies to limit
> >> development of low lying coastal areas.  So far we have fought off
> offshore
> >> drilling, but they will start fracking soon (this coming year).  And so
> it
> >> is pretty much everywhere in the country you look.  The Obama
> >> administration is doing nothing to educate and warn our populace about
> >> climate change.  Neither are his agencies.
> >>
> >> I agree with Roger that from where I sit, pitifully, it seems pretty
> >> hopeless.  Too little, too slow, too late.
> >>
> >> Alina
> >>
> >>
> *************************************************************************
> >> Dr. Alina M. Szmant
> >> Professor of Marine Biology
> >> Center for Marine Science and Dept of Biology and Marine Biology
> >> University of North Carolina Wilmington
> >> 5600 Marvin Moss Ln
> >> Wilmington NC 28409 USA
> >> tel:  910-962-2362  fax: 910-962-2410  cell: 910-200-3913
> >> http://people.uncw.edu/szmanta
> >> *******************************************************
> >>
> >> From: Ove Hoegh-Guldberg [mailto:oveh at uq.edu.au]<mailto:[mailto:
> >> oveh at uq.edu..au]>
> >> Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 10:48 PM
> >> To: Roger Bradbury
> >> Cc: john.bythell at usp.ac.fj<mailto:john.bythell at usp.ac.fj>; William
> Fitt;
> >> rgates at hawaii.edu<mailto:rgates at hawaii.edu>; Roberto Iglesias-Prieto;
> >> Michael Lesser; Yossi Loya; Robert van Woesik; Tim McClanahan; Peter
> Sale;
> >> Ernesto, Dr ARIAS; Mark Butler; Robert Cowen; Bret Danilowicz; Geoff
> Jones;
> >> Serge Planes; Barry RUDDICK; Yvonne SADOVY; Robert Steneck; Szmant,
> Alina;
> >> Simon THORROLD; Mary, Dr Coffroth; Ken Lindeman; Drew Harvell; Garriet,
> Dr
> >> SMITH; Farooq AZAM; Eric Jordan; Eugene ROSENBERG; Ernesto Weil; Bette
> >> WILLIS; Laurie Raymundo; Craig Johnson; Bohdan Durnota; Porfirio Aliño;
> Rob
> >> SEYMOUR; Peter Campbell; Pascal Perez; Alasdair Edwards; Loke Chou;
> Richard
> >> Dodge; Ed Gomez; a.heyward at aims.gov.au<mailto:a.heyward at aims.gov.au>;
> >> Aileen Morse; Buki Rinkevich; Tadashi Kimura; Makoto Omori;
> >> jrguest at gmail.com<mailto:jrguest at gmail.com>; spieler at nova.edu<mailto:
> >> spieler at nova.edu>; Peter Mumby; Ellsworth LeDrew; CMS ext - Mark Eakin;
> >> Alan Strong; CMS ext - William Skirving; Laura David; Stuart Phinn;
> Nancy
> >> Knowlton; Margareth Kyewalyanga; CMS ext AJH at environmentservices; Mark
> >> Paterson; Marea Hatziolos; Kristen Sampson; Paul Dargusch; Jamaluddin
> >> Jompa; Shay O'Farrell; Cesar Villanoy; Michael Mascia; Carl Smith;
> >> Beth.Fulton at csiro.au<mailto:Beth.Fulton at csiro.au>; Mark Milstein;
> >> Medrilzam; Sebastian Thomas; annette menez; Maricar Samson;
> >> plokani at gmail.com<mailto:plokani at gmail.com>
> >> Subject: RE: New York Times op-ed piece - thoughts for Phase II
> >>
> >> Thanks Roger. I would adopt a similarly pessimistic position except for
> >> the fact that I believe pressure for swift action on fossil fuels and
> >> related issues is building exponentially.  I don't think this has been
> >> truly appreciated within our thinking ... many are now being caught off
> >> guard by the rapid pace at which the climate change impacts such as
> extreme
> >> events in the earth's weather system are building.
> >>
> >> The other issue which is predictably unpredictable is the rate at which
> >> technology is changing and the cost of renewables plummeting (50%
> decrease
> >> in PV technology the last year alone). Yes, China may be still building
> >> coal-fired power stations but investments in renewables globally have
> >> extended to six times those of fossil fuels (2011:  $260 B versus $40 B<
> >> http://www.abc..
> >>
> net.au/radionational/programs/scienceshow/renewables-investment-eclipses-fossil-fuels/4019784
> >).
> >> A revolution is in progress.  This is generating new thinking at a rapid
> >> rate and massive scale. A recent study by the Renewable Energy Group
> within
> >> the Global Change Institute, for example, has demonstrated that
> Australian
> >> energy generation depending on fossil fuels will be uncompetitive next
> to
> >> renewables within a very short time (see the report here<
> >> http://gci.uq.edu.au/News/CompetitivePowerReport.aspx>).  This goes for
> >> the majority of other countries as well. Given that the hindrance
> towards
> >> adopting policies for a safe climate is not one of technology and
> economics
> >> (as pointed out time and time again by Sir Nicholas Stern and many other
> >> expert economists) but rather one of politics and special interest, I
> >> believe that accepting a rapid and systematic switch (which won't be
> >> comfortable but will be essential) will occur within the next few years.
> >>
> >> After all, this is about people at the end of the day and this issue is
> >> rapidly taking on the dimensions of a short-term/in-your-face issue that
> >> can drive rapid political change.  One only has to look in the
> heartland of
> >> the United States<
> >>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/us-climate-official-says-more-extreme-events-convincing-many-americans-climate-change-is-real/2012/07/06/gJQAHNZ5QW_story.html
> >
> >> truly appreciate how quickly public opinion is and is likely to change..
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Ove
> >>
> >> Ove Hoegh-Guldberg
> >> Global Change Institute
> >> University of Queensland
> >>
> >>
> >> From: Roger Bradbury [mailto:roger.bradbury at mac.com]<mailto:[mailto:
> >> roger.bradbury at mac.com]>
> >> Sent: Sunday, 15 July 2012 11:58 AM
> >> To: Ove Hoegh-Guldberg
> >> Cc: john.bythell at usp.ac.fj<mailto:john.bythell at usp.ac.fj>; William
> Fitt;
> >> rgates at hawaii.edu<mailto:rgates at hawaii.edu>; Roberto Iglesias-Prieto;
> >> Michael Lesser; Yossi Loya; Robert van Woesik; Tim McClanahan; Peter
> Sale;
> >> Ernesto, Dr ARIAS; Mark Butler; Robert Cowen; Bret Danilowicz; Geoff
> Jones;
> >> Serge Planes; Barry RUDDICK; Yvonne SADOVY; Robert Steneck; Alina
> SZMANT;
> >> Simon THORROLD; Mary, Dr Coffroth; Ken Lindeman; Drew Harvell; Garriet,
> Dr
> >> SMITH; Farooq AZAM; Eric Jordan; Eugene ROSENBERG; Ernesto Weil; Bette
> >> WILLIS; Laurie Raymundo; Craig Johnson; Bohdan Durnota; Porfirio Aliño;
> Rob
> >> SEYMOUR; Peter Campbell; Pascal Perez; Alasdair Edwards; Loke Chou;
> Richard
> >> Dodge; Ed Gomez; a.heyward at aims.gov.au<mailto:a.heyward at aims.gov.au>;
> >> Aileen Morse; Buki Rinkevich; Tadashi Kimura; Makoto Omori;
> >> jrguest at gmail.com<mailto:jrguest at gmail.com>; spieler at nova.edu<mailto:
> >> spieler at nova.edu>; Peter Mumby; Ellsworth LeDrew; CMS ext - Mark Eakin;
> >> Alan Strong; CMS ext - William Skirving; Laura David; Stuart Phinn;
> Nancy
> >> Knowlton; Margareth Kyewalyanga; CMS ext AJH at environmentservices; Mark
> >> Paterson; Marea Hatziolos; Kristen Sampson; Paul Dargusch; Jamaluddin
> >> Jompa; Shay O'Farrell; Cesar Villanoy; Michael Mascia; Carl Smith;
> >> Beth.Fulton at csiro.au<mailto:Beth.Fulton at csiro.au>; Mark Milstein;
> >> Medrilzam; Sebastian Thomas; annette menez; Maricar Samson;
> >> plokani at gmail.com<mailto:plokani at gmail.com>
> >> Subject: Re: New York Times op-ed piece - thoughts for Phase II
> >>
> >> Thanks, Ove, for the response.
> >>
> >> But as you say, it all hinges on 'if ...'
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, the realpolitik says that there is a vanishingly small
> prob
> >> of that happening, so small that no reasonable person would bet on it.
> >>
> >> Emissions are not only increasing, but they accelerated in the noughties
> >> compared to the nineties. The actual data are now above the most
> >> pessimistic IPCC projections. China is building coal-fired power
> stations
> >> at a prodigious rate, more than negating any decreases in the Western
> >> world, India is just coming on line. The price of gas is dropping and
> the
> >> energy security issue is ensuring that there will be a gas bonanza in
> the
> >> US and EU. China will not make any concessions that affect its GDP
> growth
> >> rate, since the survival of the regime depends on this. India will go
> ditto
> >> as it ramps up competition with China.
> >>
> >> And remember, a few years ago we said that we had to turn emissions down
> >> by 2012. What happened to that?
> >>
> >> And that's only the emissions. Fishing and nitrogen flux follow the same
> >> story.
> >>
> >> Let's chat in more detail when we meet next week in Brisbane.
> >>
> >> Yours in realism
> >>
> >> Rog
> >>
> >>
> >> On 15/07/2012, at 9:49 AM, Ove Hoegh-Guldberg wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Roger,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the link.  I must admit that I don't share your 'game already
> >> over' conclusion (as you probably already know).  If we were to
> >> aggressively shift to zero carbon energy systems by the end of 10-15
> years
> >> from now and pursue the lowest of low climate scenarios (such as the RCP
> >> 2.6 pathway of the IPCC), then coral reefs will have an excellent
> chance of
> >> not only surviving the next century but flourishing and expanding as we
> get
> >> to the latter part of the present century.  In the short term, there is
> no
> >> doubt that coral reefs will decrease to a minimal level.  Strengthening
> our
> >> efforts and renewing our resolve, however, to protect and nourish reefs
> as
> >> we go through this 'coral reef minima' will be absolutely essential to
> >> their survival.
> >>
> >> I believe we are going to decisively tackle the climate change crisis in
> >> this way (for many reasons if not for the growing crisis in extreme
> weather
> >> events around the world and other 'motivators').  There is still time
> and
> >> stabilisation of climate impacts while ramping up efforts to protect
> reefs
> >> from others stressors is key.
> >>
> >> Let's face it, there is no other reasonable and rational alternatives.
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Ove
> >>
> >> Ove Hoegh-Guldberg
> >> Global Change Institute
> >> University of Queensland
> >>
> >> From: Roger Bradbury [mailto:roger.bradbury at mac.com]<mailto:[mailto:
> >> roger.bradbury at mac.com]>
> >> Sent: Sunday, 15 July 2012 8:45 AM
> >> To: Ove Hoegh-Guldberg; john.bythell at usp.ac.fj<mailto:
> >> john.bythell at usp.ac.fj>; William Fitt; rgates at hawaii.edu<mailto:
> >> rgates at hawaii.edu>; Roberto Iglesias-Prieto; Michael Lesser; Yossi
> Loya;
> >> Robert van Woesik; Tim McClanahan; Peter Sale; Ernesto, Dr ARIAS; Mark
> >> Butler; Robert Cowen; Bret Danilowicz; Geoff Jones; Serge Planes; Barry
> >> RUDDICK; Yvonne SADOVY; Robert Steneck; Alina SZMANT; Simon THORROLD;
> Mary,
> >> Dr Coffroth; Ken Lindeman; Drew Harvell; Garriet, Dr SMITH; Farooq AZAM;
> >> Eric Jordan; Eugene ROSENBERG; Ernesto Weil; Bette WILLIS; Laurie
> Raymundo;
> >> Roger Bradbury; Craig Johnson; Bohdan Durnota; Porfirio Aliño; Rob
> SEYMOUR;
> >> Peter Campbell; Pascal Perez; Alasdair Edwards; Loke Chou; Richard
> Dodge;
> >> Ed Gomez; a.heyward at aims.gov.au<mailto:a.heyward at aims.gov.au>; Aileen
> >> Morse; Buki Rinkevich; Tadashi Kimura; Makoto Omori; jrguest at gmail.com
> >> <mailto:jrguest at gmail.com>; spieler at nova.edu<mailto:spieler at nova.edu>;
> >> Peter Mumby; Ellsworth LeDrew; CMS ext - Mark Eakin; Alan Strong; CMS
> ext -
> >> William Skirving; Laura David; Stuart Phinn; Nancy Knowlton; Margareth
> >> Kyewalyanga; CMS ext AJH at environmentservices; Mark Paterson
> >> Cc: Marea Hatziolos; Kristen Sampson; Paul Dargusch; Jamaluddin Jompa;
> >> Shay O'Farrell; Cesar Villanoy; Michael Mascia; Carl
> >> Smith;Beth.Fulton at csiro.au<mailto:Beth.Fulton at csiro.au>; Mark Milstein;
> >> Mark Paterson; Medrilzam; Sebastian Thomas; annette menez; Maricar
> Samson;
> >> plokani at gmail.com<mailto:plokani at gmail.com>
> >> Subject: New York Times op-ed piece - thoughts for Phase II
> >>
> >> Hi everyone
> >>
> >> Sadly, I didn't make it to the ICRS. I offered both a paper and a
> >> mini-symposium to the meeting, but both were rejected.
> >>
> >> I feel that I had some important, new and controversial things to say,
> but
> >> it seems that those fresh ideas were not welcome.
> >>
> >> However, they were avidly welcomed by the New York Times, where you'll
> >> find an op-ed piece published in Saturday's edition.
> >>
> >> See
> >>
> >>
> >>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/14/opinion/a-world-without-coral-reefs.html?_r=2&hpw
> >>
> >> I think there are some ideas in here that bear on Phase II.
> >>
> >> There should, in the least, be a project that looks at Plan B for the
> >> Anthropocene. That is, what will we do if our optimistic plans for
> tropical
> >> coastal waters turn to dust.
> >>
> >> We should be starting work now, on the biophysical side, on how we can
> >> engineer the ecosystems that will replace coral reefs so that they
> provide
> >> useful ecosystem goods and services, and, on the human side of the
> ledger,
> >> on what the necessary structural adjustment will look like.
> >>
> >> This is just the beginning of a new do-list for humanity.
> >>
> >> I look forward to discussing.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >>
> >> Rog
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Roger Bradbury
> >>
> >> Adjunct Professor
> >> College of Asia and the Pacific
> >> Australian National University
> >> Canberra ACT Australia 0200
> >>
> >> Phone   +61 2 6295 2839 (home office)
> >> Mobile  +61 419 221 003
> >> Email   roger at tjurunga.com<mailto:roger at tjurunga.com> or
> >> roger.bradbury at anu..edu.au<mailto:roger.bradbury at anu.edu.au>
> >> Web    http://www.crawford.anu.edu.au/staff/rmap/rbradbury.php
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Coral-List mailing list
> >> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> >> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dept. Marine & Wildlife Resources, American Samoan Government
> > PO Box 7390
> > Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799  USA
> > _______________________________________________
> > Coral-List mailing list
> > Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> > http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
>
> Michael Risk
> riskmj at mcmaster.ca
>
>
>
>


-- 
Dept. Marine & Wildlife Resources, American Samoan Government
PO Box 7390
Pago Pago, American Samoa 96799  USA


More information about the Coral-List mailing list