Science-based restoration monitoring of coastal habitats, Volume One: A framework for monitoring plans under the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000 (Public Law 160-457)

Executive Summary: The Estuary Restoration Act of 2000 (ERA), Title I of the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000, was created to promote the restoration of habitats along the coast of the United States (including the US protectorates and the Great Lakes). The NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science was charged with the development of a guidance manual for monitoring plans under this Act. This guidance manual, titled Science-Based Restoration Monitoring of Coastal Habitats, is written in two volumes. It provides technical assistance, outlines necessary steps, and provides useful tools for the development and implementation of sound scientific monitoring of coastal restoration efforts. In addition, this manual offers a means to detect early warnings that the restoration is on track or not, to gauge how well a restoration site is functioning, to coordinate projects and efforts for consistent and successful restoration, and to evaluate the ecological health of specific coastal habitats both before and after project completion (Galatowitsch et al. 1998). The following habitats have been selected for discussion in this manual: water column, rock bottom, coral reefs, oyster reefs, soft bottom, kelp and other macroalgae, rocky shoreline, soft shoreline, submerged aquatic vegetation, marshes, mangrove swamps, deepwater swamps, and riverine forests. The classification of habitats used in this document is generally based on that of Cowardin et al. (1979) in their Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, as called for in the ERA Estuary Habitat Restoration Strategy. This manual is not intended to be a restoration monitoring “cookbook” that provides templates of monitoring plans for specific habitats. The interdependence of a large number of site-specific factors causes habitat types to vary in physical and biological structure within and between regions and geographic locations (Kusler and Kentula 1990). Monitoring approaches used should be tailored to these differences. However, even with the diversity of habitats that may need to be restored and the extreme geographic range across which these habitats occur, there are consistent principles and approaches that form a common basis for effective monitoring. Volume One, titled A Framework for Monitoring Plans under the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000, begins with definitions and background information. Topics such as restoration, restoration monitoring, estuaries, and the role of socioeconomics in restoration are discussed. In addition, the habitats selected for discussion in this manual are briefly described. (PDF contains 116 pages)

Biological Platforms for Environmental Sensor technologies and their uses as indicators of the marine environment, Seward, Alaska, September 19-21, 2007: workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) Workshop entitled, "Biological Platforms as Sensor Technologies and their Use as Indicators for the Marine Environment" was held in Seward, Alaska, September 19 - 21,2007. The workshop was co-hosted by the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) and the Alaska SeaLife Center (ASLC). The workshop was attended by 25 participants representing a wide range of research scientists, managers, and manufacturers who develop and deploy sensory equipment using aquatic vertebrates as the mode of transport. Eight recommendations were made by participants at the conclusion of the workshop and are presented here without prioritization: 1. Encourage research toward development of energy scavenging devices of suitable sizes for use in remote sensing packages attached to marine animals. 2. Encourage funding sources for development of new sensor technologies and animal-borne tags. 3. Develop animal-borne environmental sensor platforms that offer more combined systems and improved data recovery methodologies, and expand the geographic scope of complementary fixed sensor arrays. 4. Engage the oceanographic community by: a. Offering a mini workshop at an AGU ocean sciences conference for people interested in developing an ocean carbon program that utilizes animal-borne sensor technology. b. Outreach to chemical oceanographers. 5. Min v2d6.sheepserver.net e and merge technologies from other disciplines that may be applied to marine sensors (e.g. biomedical field). 6. Encourage the NOAA Permitting Office to: a. Make a more predictable, reliable, and consistent permitting system for using animal platforms. b. Establish an evaluation process. c. Adhere to established standards. 7. Promote the expanded use of calibrated hydrophones as part of existing animal platforms. 8. Encourage the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) to promote animal tracking as effective samplers of the marine environment, and use of animals as ocean sensor technology platforms. [PDF contains 20 pages]

Preparing for and adapting to climate change impacts: Next steps for the Washington state department of National Resources Aquatic Resources Program

In response to a growing body of research on projected climate change impacts to Washington State’s coastal areas, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) Aquatic Resources Program (the Program) initiated a climate change preparedness effort in 2009 via the development of a Climate Change Adaptation Strategy (the Strategy)i. The Strategy answers the question “What are the next steps that the Program can take to begin preparing for and adapting to climate change impacts in Washington’s coastal areas?” by considering how projected climate change impacts may effect: (1) Washington’s state-owned aquatic landsii, (2) the Program’s management activities, and (3) DNR’s statutorily established guidelines for managing Washington’s state-owned aquatic lands for the benefit of the public. The Program manages Washington’s state-owned aquatic lands according to the guidelines set forth in Revised Code of Washington 79-105-030, which stipulates that DNR must manage state-owned aquatic lands in a manner which provides a balance of the following public benefits: (1) Encouraging direct public uses and access; (2) Fostering water-dependent uses; (3) Ensuring environmental protection; (4) Utilizing renewable resources. (RCW 79-105-030) The law also stipulates that generating revenue in a manner consistent with these four benefits is a public benefit (RCW 79-105-030). Many of the next steps identified in the Strategy build off of recommendations provided by earlier climate change preparation and adaptation efforts in Washington State, most notably those provided by the Preparation and Adaptation Working Group, which were convened by Washington State Executive Order 70-02 in 2007, and those made in the Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment (Climate Impacts Group, 2009). (PDF contains 4 pages)

The EC Water Framework Directive and its implications for the Environment Agency

The bulk of the European Community's water policy legislation was developed between the mid 1970s and the early 1990s. These directives addressed specific substances, sources, uses or processes but caused problems with differing methods definitions and aims. The Water Framework Directive (WFD) aims to resolve the piecemeal approach. The Environemnt Agency (EA) welcomes and supported the overall objective of establishing a coherent legislative framework. The EA has been discussing the implications of the WFD with European partners and has developed a timetable for the implementation and a special team will commission necessary research.

Environmental quality standards to protect identified uses of controlled waters: salmonid fisheries, cyprinid fisheries, migratory fisheries, commercial harvesting of marine fish for public consumption, commercial harvesting of shellfish for for public consumption

This report considers the development of environmental quality standards (EQSs) for the salmonid fishery, cyprinid fishery, migratory fishery, commercial harvesting of marine fish for public consumption and commercial harvesting of shellfish for public consumption uses of controlled surface waters. Previous reports have been used to identify those parameters necessary for the maintenance of these five uses. Each water use is considered in a separate section within which identified parameters are discussed and standards proposed, a summary of the proposed standards is presented at the beginning of the relevant section. For salmonid, cyprinid and migratory fisheries, EQSs for substances in water have been proposed for the protection of these fisheries. For the commercial harvesting of marine fish and shellfish for public consumption uses 'Warning Levels' of substances in waters have been proposed. These 'Warning Levels' have been proposed by considering data on bioaccumulation and food standards and aim to prevent acceptable intake values and concentrations in fish/shellfish flesh exceeding statutory or recommended levels. For the commercial harvesting of marine fish for public consumption it has been concluded that the current EQSs for most List II substances for the protection of salt water life should be adequately stringent to protect this use, however for the commercial harvesting of shellfish for public consumption, these List II EQSs do not appear adequate to protect this use and more stringent 'Warning Levels' have been proposed. For all five uses considered in this report there has been found to be limited information on a number of the parameters considered and in general for indigenous species, this has been found to be especially so when considering migratory fisheries and the commercial harvesting of marine fish and shellfish.

Forensic Fisheries Science: Literature Review and Research Suggestions

Recent years have seen a dramatic increase in litigation against the National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA. Litigation may affect personnel throughout the agency, including scientists, whose work is often directly or indirectly influenced by complex legal requirements, but who may not be in a position to comment or engage in public dialogue. It may be helpful for scientists and other agency personnel to join the ongoing discussion in the legal community regarding the interface of science and law. This paper provides a starting point with a selected introduction to relevant legal literature in this area. It uses the phrase “forensic fisheries science” to describe the application of science to legal requirements in the fishery management context. It concludes with suggestions for future research that could assist NMFS scientists as they grapple with the challenge of using science to help the agency meet its complex legal requirements. Forensic: belonging to, used in, or suitable to courts of judicature or to public discussion and debate; argumentative, rhetorical; relating to or dealing with the application of scientific knowledge to legal problems (Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary )

Quahogs in Eastern North America: Part I, Biology, Ecology, and Historical Uses

The northern quahog, Mercenaria mercenaria, ranges along the Atlantic Coast of North America from the Canadian Maritimes to Florida, while the southern quahog, M. campechiensis, ranges mostly from Florida to southern Mexico. The northern quahog was fished by native North Americans during prehistoric periods. They used the meats as food and the shells as scrapers and as utensils. The European colonists copied the Indians treading method, and they also used short rakes for harvesting quahogs. The Indians of southern New England made wampum from quahog shells, used it for ornaments and sold it to the colonists, who, in turn, traded it to other Indians for furs. During the late 1600’s, 1700’s, and 1800’s, wampum was made in small factories for eventual trading with Indians farther west for furs. The quahoging industry has provided people in many coastal communities with a means of earning a livelihood and has provided consumers with a tasty, wholesome food whether eaten raw, steamed, cooked in chowders, or as stuffed quahogs. More than a dozen methods and types of gear have been used in the last two centuries for harvesting quahogs. They include treading and using various types of rakes and dredges, both of which have undergone continuous improvements in design. Modern dredges are equipped with hydraulic jets and one type has an escalator to bring the quahogs continuously to the boats. In the early 1900’s, most provinces and states established regulations to conserve and maximize yields of their quahog stocks. They include a minimum size, now almost universally a 38-mm shell width, and can include gear limitations and daily quotas. The United States produces far more quahogs than either Canada or Mexico. The leading producer in Canada is Prince Edward Island. In the United States, New York, New Jersey, and Rhode Island lead in quahog production in the north, while Virginia and North Carolina lead in the south. Connecticut and Florida were large producers in the 1990’s. The State of Campeche leads in Mexican production. In the northeastern United States, the bays with large openings, and thus large exchanges of bay waters with ocean waters, have much larger stocks of quahogs and fisheries than bays with small openings and water exchanges. Quahog stocks in certifi ed beds have been enhanced by transplanting stocks to them from stocks in uncertified waters and by planting seed grown in hatcheries, which grew in number from Massachusetts to Florida in the 1980’s and 1990’s.