[Coral-List] Consensus statements in general

[Paul Sammarco]

Dear Steve,

I think the more solidarity we can show on this issue, the better.  Any
differences between the two statements would be minor, compared to the major
global issue we are facing.  

Best Wishes,

Paul

Paul W. Sammarco, Ph.D.
Professor
Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium (LUMCON)
8124 Hwy. 56
Chauvin, LA  70344-2110

1-985-851-2876 (tel)
1-985-851-2874 (FAX)
1-985-232-6575 (Cell)
psammarco at lumcon.edu
www.lumcon.edu


-----Original Message-----
From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
[mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of Steve Mussman
Sent: Tuesday, October 27, 2015 12:47 PM
To: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Consensus statements in general

Dear Listers,

As I mentioned in an earlier post, I recognize that coral scientists are not
of one mind, but I need to be able to gauge the level of support that exists
for the consensus statement recently put out by the ISRS. (It can be found
here):
https://www.openchannels.org/sites/default/files/ISRS%20Consensus%20Statemen
t%20on%20Coral%20Bleaching%20%26%20Climate%20Change.pdf
 
It differs somewhat from an earlier (2012) ICRS consensus statement found
here: http://www.icrs2012.com/Consensus_Statement.htm

I understand that there are differences between these two declarations, but
I want to focus on their similarities. 

They both emphasize the fact that climate change presents perhaps the
ultimate threat to coral reefs. As I see it, the ISRS statement focuses only
on CO2 emissions whereas the ICRS statement goes on to mention more about
the role of local stressors. 

Rather than debate every minutia, is it accurate to assume that the coral
science community generally supports the spirit and intent of both
statements?  I think that it does, but quietude is difficult to interpret. I
need feedback and getting scientists to commit is apparently like herding
cats. I don't expect 8,000 responses, but can someone just step up and
publicly confirm or reject my basic supposition?  

Thanks,
Steve




-----Original Message-----
>From: Steve Mussman <sealab at earthlink.net>
>Sent: Oct 23, 2015 11:49 AM
>To: "coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov" <coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
>Subject: [Coral-List] Consensus statement and sunscreens
>
>I recognize that coral scientists are not of one mind, but can I say
categorically that the consensus statement recently put out by the ISRS
(International Society for Reef Studies) has as close to universal backing
as is possible considering the divergent nature of independent thought?  I
want to promote it within the diving industry, but don't want to portray it
as having a unifying level of support if that turns out to be a distortion
of the facts. 
>
>As for sunscreen toxicity, I am concerned that statements like "any small
effort to reduce oxybenzone pollution could mean that a coral reef survives
a long, hot summer, or that a degraded area recovers" could be misleading in
that it may be taken to suggest that we can offset the impacts of other
local and global stressors if we can just manage to eliminate sunblock.
PADI's website now contains a cautionary message about sunscreens and their
effect on corals and even goes further to mention that other threats such as
coastal pollution, overfishing, and marine debris are a greater threat to
marine life . . . but still there remains no mention of climate change. 
>
>Steve Mussman
>Sea Lab Diving      
>_______________________________________________
>Coral-List mailing list
>Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list

_______________________________________________
Coral-List mailing list
Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list