Australian farmers must not be blamed for run-off killing GBR coral just because dumped sewage has saturated farms in the USA, blamed for nutrient pollution of The Great Lakes.

Australia lacks frequent rain and run-off.
Failure of news media to report fact of local knowledge and true science involving eutrophication is causing damage to coral and fisheries to continue.

Nutrient overload pollution damaging GBR coral and seagrass nurseries for small fish essential in the food web, is coming from Australian east coast city and town sewage dumped daily. The dissolved nutrient overload is transported northwards into GBR waters by known sediment dispersal current.

Blaming farmers and CO2 is very wrong and is not leading to solutions.

It's not just the GBR in trouble. Nutrient pollution is proliferating algae causing devastation of seagrass nurseries for small fish in the food web. Bigger fish are not immune to starvation.
Devastation of sheltered coastal seagrass nurseries is the fundamental cause of fish depletion linked to undernutrition and disease among seafood dependent Pacific Islands people, and loss of livihood in Australian and NZ coastal professional and amateur fishing tourism economies.

Why is science and news in conflict about eutrophication and CO2 emissions?

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3946114/

Nobody or nothing should be blamed. The GBR is OK; it is used by Leftist wackjobs as just another way to divide and create angst.

JF Aus. The only catch with that theory is that the East Australia Current runs south from the GBR carrying warm water all the way to Tasmania, and presumably picking up pollution from all the cities it passes on the east coast and taking that to Tasmania too. Pollution affecting the reef would come mainly from both urban and farming activities in areas adjacent to the reef.

Also, while Australia as a whole 'lacks frequent rain and runoff', that definitely doesn't apply to coastal Queensland, especially the areas along the Reef, which have some of the highest rainfall and runoff in the country.

Come on JF Aus, an 8 year old bit of bumph that was bulldust when printed, surely you can do a bit better than that. Scare mongering takes more effort to succeed even with the average dill.

AIMS has recently released their annual assessment of the reef stating quite clearly that even after the disastrous cyclones of recent years, the reef has a higher coral cover than at any previous time since their establishment. Kind of knocks your bit for a six doesn't it.

No No No and no.

ttbn,
The whole world ocean including the GBR is not OK.
But yes, the GBR is being used for political agenda.
Angst? The story of cry wolf comes to mind.
However, nobody has evidence to prove the GBR has not been impacted by human activity. And if it has, what is the impact?

....................

Cossom
Wrong.
The East Australian Current does run south but it's offshore and rarely touches the coast, albeit momentarily.

The current transporting dissolved nutrient into GBR waters is the northerly flowing alongshore current that also transports solid matter including vast amounts of sand, the latter that falls down over the continental shelf just north of Fraser Island. Sand even comes into the northerly flow from Tasmania and the Great Australian Bight.
http://www.jcronline.org/doi/abs/10.2112/08-1120.1?code=cerf-site

Fresher alongshore surface water with bonded nutrient continues northwards past Fraser Island and into GBR waters, and can reach Cape York and beyond.
Queensland river runoff has a long history including in forming the GBR.
Sure the rivers now carry human-sourced nutrient, but it's the total load of nutrient from all point sources that amounts and sometimes causes damage. Too much fertilizer can have negative consequence.

Hasbeen,

Prove eutrophication is bulldust. If you can.

Coral is damaged or destroyed worldwide generally but in some areas its thriving, depends on water quality in currents here and there, nothing to do with CO2 emissions or GLOBAl warming, or plastic bags.

AIMS and their coral recovery report, I think, refers to the recovery of coral in the northern GBR that was severely damaged during 2016 by AGW heat as AIMS and JCU etc claim. That is where the highest rate of recovery occurred, not on the whole GBR.
The whole GBR is not like a thriving botanical garden.

The whole GBR is mainly a big dead limestone rock topped with living corals and plant biodiversity with channels cutting in from the ocean and East Australian Current waters. (as Hasbeen would remember).

On the reef top the coral cover now has dead coral in between living corals, some areas such as in the Swains are all dead.
Generally, it's no longer healthy live coral joining up against other healthy living coral, like it used to be.

Its the way coral is observed, trained eye v/s untrained eye, or what is filmed to suit whatever political news agenda.
But the GBR and whole world ocean is in trouble. That's why Australia now has to import aquaculture fish, and why mutton birds are dead in mass starvation events, and why emaciated whales are washing up, and why many seafood-dependent islanders now suffer unprecedented lack of nutrition and increase in disease (NCD).