[Coral-List] Consensus statements in general

[Jeremy Jackson]

Hello Steve

Although it may surprise my most strident critics, I strongly support your
balanced and thoughtful consensus statement.

It is my personal belief, based on what I believe is very strong evidence,
that most of the coral decline in the two graphs you present has been to
local stressors. But that in itself is very bad news, and in no way
diminishes the obvious and growing threat to the future survival of coral
reefs in the face of global climate change and the incontrovertible
evidence that bleaching and disease are an ever increasing threat to coral
survival.

I appreciate your efforts on this.

Sincerely

Jeremy Jackson

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Steve Mussman <sealab at earthlink.net> wrote:

> 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%20Statement%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
>