[Coral-List] Evidence that ocean warming has caused most Caribbean coral loss

Steve Mussman sealab at earthlink.net
Fri May 5 12:56:37 EDT 2017

Got that Peter, so am I wrong to consider efforts which focus solely on locally sourced insults to coral reefs while (seemingly) designedly ignoring the broader impacts of GHGs (climate change, CO2, warming oceans) to be woefully short-sighted? In other words, isn't it the position of the coral science community that even if we effectively address over-fishing, land-based pollutants, plastic debris, lionfish invasions, sunscreen contaminates, etc., on the local level, we are still likely to lose many of those same coral reefs around the world to warming ocean temperatures (and eventually OA) if climate change is left unabated? That has been my understanding, but I've not read every study to date and perhaps I have misinterpreted and misrepresented the intent of the consensus statement that came out of the ICRS (International Coral Reef Symposium) in 2012.   Regards and thanks for your patience, Steve

Sent from my iPad

> On May 5, 2017, at 11:54 AM, Peter Sale <sale at uwindsor.ca> wrote:
> Steve,
> Good question.  I'll give my own opinion -- I don't think it has a single 'correct' scientifically-based answer.  Climate change is demonstrably being caused by human activities, chiefly the emissions of GHGs, especially CO2.   Climate change has many ramifications that challenge the integrity of natural systems and our own socio-economic systems around the world.  Coral bleaching and subsequent death is a powerful demonstration of just how severe these ramifications can be.  Solving this problem -- reducing the rate or actually halting or reversing climate change -- requires a substantial, global effort that cannot be done by one community or any one country, even one powerful country such as USA or China.  There is urgency to move on climate, because the longer we delay, the more difficult to task, and the fewer the 'good options' available.
> For these reasons, I believe the coral reef science community and all other groups and individuals interested in building a livable Anthropocene should be advocating an aggressive effort on climate, and acting in the most effective ways available to each individual to advance that effort.  This should be a primary objective for all of us.
> At the same time (because all of us are capable of doing more than one thing at a time) the coral reef science community has a particular responsibility to articulate the need for, and act to remedy those other insults to coral reefs that we are guilty of.  The precise mix of steps needed will vary regionally, so the message and the action must be nuanced and appropriately directed to the most important needs at each location.
> Way more difficult than rocket science.
> Peter Sale
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Mussman [mailto:sealab at earthlink.net] 
> Sent: Friday, May 5, 2017 10:53 AM
> To: Peter Sale <sale at uwindsor.ca>
> Cc: coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
> Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Evidence that ocean warming has caused most Caribbean coral loss
> Hi Peter,
> A follow up question to you and others. Granted, there are no silver bullets, but does that preclude the formulation of a general hierarchy of factors?  Or put another way, is the coral science community sending the wrong message if it appears they are placing elevated emphasis on CO2 and other GHGs? Accepting the fact that every individual coral reef ecosystem has it's own distinct set of conditions, isn't the threat from rising ocean temperatures overwhelmingly important going forward even if ocean warming has not been identified as the primary cause of (recent) past coral losses on any particular reef? 
> Regards,
> Steve
> Sent from my iPad
> Sent from my iPad
>> On May 4, 2017, at 2:02 PM, Peter Sale <sale at uwindsor.ca> wrote:
>> Wow!
>> I've been watching and reading.  Multiple posts on 'Evidence that ocean warming has caused most Caribbean coral loss", many of them long and thoughtful, but people are starting to talk past one another.  There are really three questions being thought about (at least three): 1) What factors have been responsible for the dramatic loss of corals on Caribbean reefs in recent years (last 50 or so) and how do they interact? 2) What are the consequences if the current trend continues? And 3) What should we do about it (if we assume what is happening is 'bad' and 'needs fixing')?  Additional questions come to mind and have likely been alluded to in some of the numerous posts on the topic.  Such as a) Is the Caribbean similar to, or different from the Indo-Pacific in how coral loss has occurred? b) When did serious coral loss start?  And so on.
>> The first question about causes and their interactions is 
>> intrinsically interesting to scientists, but perhaps of less interest 
>> to others.  As scientists we 'need' to understand the details, and 
>> knowing the details can be very helpful in devising management 
>> solutions.  Most of the posts have centered predominantly on this 
>> question.  May I humbly suggest that the discussion has been 
>> generating a lot more smoke and less light than it would have if we 
>> had begun by recognizing a) that it is quite unlikely that a single 
>> factor has been overwhelmingly important as the cause of coral loss, 
>> and b) that the relative importance of factors, and probably also the 
>> nature of their interactions will vary in space and in time -- and the 
>> Caribbean is plenty large enough to include some of this 
>> heterogeneity.  If we want to answer this first question, we have got 
>> to consider it at specific times and places, and not seek a single 
>> answer applicable across the Caribbean and across all times.  (Ha ving 
>> said that, I remain persuaded by John Bruno's original blog post that 
>> warming has been 'a major factor' in coral decline 'for some time' 
>> across the Caribbean.)
>> If we need to point fingers, we could pick on John Bruno, whose initial post with this subject line seemed to be arguing that ocean warming was 'the prime cause' across the Caribbean.  As the discussion has gone on, there has been a progressive increase in the apparent desire to find a Caribbean-wide causal pattern.  It may, but it probably does not exist because the Florida Keys are not Bonaire, Barbados, or Bimini (forgive me the urge to be alliterative).
>> The second question has hardly been addressed in any posts, presumably because we all agree that coral loss is bad for reefs and for coastal communities.  But frankly, I'd love to learn how much less effective are today's Caribbean reefs at providing fishery resources or protecting coastlines than were the reefs of 50 or 100 years ago.  And also, what will be the trajectory in ecological 'value' of reefs if they continue to lose coral (on human timescales, please).
>> The third question, the one most non-scientists might identify as most important, does depend on how we answer the first question.  If warming now appears to be becoming substantially important as a cause (whether or not it was important in the past), we need to address that issue.  We cannot stop el Nino (so far as I know), but we can stop increasing the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere, and could start to reduce them if the effort to curtail emissions was aggressive enough.  I doubt we can do anything locally on ocean temperature, although I suspect some crazy engineers will want to try.
>> If we decide that pollution (of specified kinds, please) is important everywhere, or even in just some locations, we will need to control/reduce that pollution.  If overfishing is a chief culprit, we will need to start fishing sustainably.  And so on.  Just as I suspect the particular mix of currently important causes of coral loss will vary spatially, the particular mix of efforts to correct the situation must also vary.  Working globally to cut GHG emissions does not preclude simultaneously working locally on specific mixes of other factors.  What we need to avoid is the presumption that there is a silver bullet -- a single, easy-to-understand solution that will solve the problem of coral loss in all locations, preferably overnight with no substantial costs.
>> Two final thoughts:  1) If some of us 'have to' conclude that pollution is the (or an) important cause of coral loss,  GHG emissions are a form of pollution and ocean warming is currently a consequence of this pollution.  Yes, pollution really is the major causal factor.  (On the other hand, to pretend pollution is 'unimportant' simply in order to make 'warming' overwhelmingly important, suggests people have been closing their eyes when near centers of human activity.)  And 2) CO2 is implicated both as a GHG causing warming, and as the cause of ocean acidification.  While I think the evidence for any significant coral loss having already occurred due to OA is slim to nonexistent, drawing a distinction between CO2 and warming as putative causes of coral loss is disingenuous and will convey a confused message to the public.
>> Peter Sale
>> www.petersalebooks.com
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov 
>> [mailto:coral-list-bounces at coral.aoml.noaa.gov] On Behalf Of 
>> coral-list-request at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
>> Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2017 11:27 AM
>> Today's Topics:
>> 1. Re: Evidence that ocean warming has caused most    Caribbean
>>   coral loss (Ulf Erlingsson)
>> 2. Re: Evidence that ocean warming has caused most    Caribbean
>>   coral loss (Bruno, John)
>> 3. Re: Evidence that ocean warming has caused most Caribbean
>>   coral loss (Pedro M Alcolado)
>>   (Robin T Smith PhD)
>> 5. Re: Evidence that ocean warming has caused most    Caribbean
>>   coral loss (Dennis Hubbard)
>> *
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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