[Coral-List] Consensus statements in general

Pedro M Alcolado gmalcolado at gmail.com
Thu Oct 29 17:18:38 EDT 2015

I support Nohora Galvis' statements; both action directions are valid
and should work together without denying one to another. Doing the
opposite we would loss credibility. Let us act locally and globally.

On 10/28/15, Fundación ICRI Colombia en Pro de los Arrecifes Coralinos
<icri.colombia at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Steve,
> Both statements have a rationale. Local and Global stressors affect
> coral reefs spatially in timescales (duration, frequency, intensity)
> according to concentration / exposure to pollutants and / or other
> stress factors.
> We should try to convince local managers / developers with the ICRS
> statement while the ISRS statement as it was written pretend to
> influence top decision makers such presidents and ministers, in
> general, through engaging participants at the meeting in Paris COP21.
> If we do want to have a positive impact #GlobalBehaviorChange to more
> environmental friendly behaviors then, it is not time for denials
> about the potential negative effect of local pollution and overfishing
> on coral reefs. On the basis of precautionary principle besides the
> many scientific publications, it is advisable to think global and act
> locally being each one of us examples of not polluters or
> over-fishers.
> Local governments should not allow sewage water run-off sediments,
> chemicals, oil explorations / exploitations among a long list of local
> stressors close to coral reef areas and conservation efforts should be
> more effective in the control of these unsustainable developing
> activities.
> When I mentioned in a past post, the need to consider all levels, I
> was also thinking in the relevance of involving scientists,
> communities and citizens to engage them in a trend of
> #GlobalBehaviorChange cause the general public wants to know what they
> can do to help from their houses and offices. We are all
> decision-makers at different levels.
> In the Society for Conservation Biology SCB, we have formed a Coral
> Reefs Working Group with Conservation Scientists. We are preparing
> statements to deliver in the following International Coral Reef
> meetings. All interested scientists in this field are welcome to join
> us.
> Nohora Galvis
> SCB Member
> Coral Reefs Working Group
> 2015-10-27 12:46 GMT-05:00, Steve Mussman <sealab at earthlink.net>:
>> 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
> --
> Siguenos https://twitter.com/ArrecifesCoral (Español)
> https://twitter.com/ICRIcolombia (Inglés)
> https://www.facebook.com/ICRI.COLOMBIA
> _______________________________________________
> Coral-List mailing list
> Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list

More information about the Coral-List mailing list