Tropical river fisheries valuation: background papers to a global synthesis

This report is a compilation of five regional reviews that document the global status of tropical rivers and inland fisheries in three continents: Latin America, Africa and Asia. It explores the role of ‘valuation’ methods and their contribution to policy-making and river fishery management. From the compilation, the best estimate of the global value of inland fisheries for those three continents is US$ 5.58 billion (gross market value), which is equivalent to 19 percent of the current value of annual fish exports from developing countries (US$ 29 billion) for 2004. The compilation shows that there is a general shortage of information on inland fisheries, especially derived from conventional economic valuation methods, though information from economic impact assessment methods and socio-economic and livelihood analysis methods is more widely available. The status of knowledge about the impact of changes in river management on the value of tropical river fisheries is weak and patchy. Although the impacts of large dams on the hydrology, ecology and livelihood support attributes of tropical rivers are well-recognized, there have been only few valuation studies of these issues. The document highlights the need for further valuation studies of tropical river and inland fisheries in developing countries. It underlines how vital it is for policy-makers and other stakeholders to understand the importance of these natural resources in order to make appropriate decisions concerning their role in development policy and illustrates why capacity building in valuation should become a major priority for agencies concerned with fisheries management and policy-making.

South and South-East Asian coastal fisheries: their status and directions for improved management: conference synopsis and recommendations

As a step to address the problems of coastal fisheries in Asia, the WorldFish Center joined forces with fisheries agencies from eight developing Asian countries (Bangladesh, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, The Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam) and the Asian Development Bank, to implement a project entitled “Sustainable Management of Coastal Fish Stocks in Asia” (also known as the “TrawlBase” project). The project was implemented between 1998 and 2001. The main achievements of this partnership were: (a) Development of a database called “Fisheries Resource Information System and Tools” (FiRST), which contains trawl research survey data and socioeconomic information for selected fisheries, and facilitates its analysis; (b) Evaluation of the extent of resource decline and over-fishing, both biological and economic, in the region; (c) Identification of the measures needed to manage coastal fisheries in the participating countries, resulting in draft strategies and action plans; and (d) Strengthening of national capacity in coastal fisheries assessment, planning and management.

Recommendation domains for pond aquaculture

This publication introduces the methods and results of a research project that has developed a set of decision-support tools to identify places and sets of conditions for which a particular target aquaculture technology is considered feasible and therefore good to promote. The tools also identify the nature of constraints to aquaculture development and thereby shed light on appropriate interventions to realize the potential of the target areas. The project results will be useful for policy planners and decision makers in national, regional and local governments and development funding agencies, aquaculture extension workers in regional and local governments, and researchers in aquaculture systems and rural livelihoods. (Document contains 40 pages)

Interim report on salt-water encroachment in Dade County, Florida

Recently there has been much activity in reclaiming the low-lying coastal areas of Dade County for residential use, by the addition of fill. The fill is obtained by digging canals both normal to and parallel to Biscayne Bay. The canals serve the additional purpose of providing an access to the Bay for boats. A problem needing to be considered is the effect that these canals will have on the ground-water resources. It is expected that the canals will have little effect on ground water in parts of the county distant from the coast, but their effect in coastal areas is a matter of concern. In order to predict what, may happen in the vicinity of these new canals if they are not equipped with adequate control structures, it is instructive to review what has happened in the vicinity of similar canals in the past. The U. S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with Dade County, the cities of Miami and Miami Beach, the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control District, and the Florida Geological Survey has collected water-level and salinity data on wells and canals in Dade County since 1939. Some of the agencies named, and others, collected similar data before 1939. Analysis of all the data shows that sea water in the Atlantic Ocean and Biscayne Bayis the sole source of salt-water contamination in the Biscayne aquifer of the Dade County area. (PDF has 19 pages.)

A Review of the Aquatic Environmental Fate of Triclopyr and its Major Metabolites

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the aquatic environmental fate of triclopyr and its major metabolites, TCP and TMP. This review is primarily based on results of laboratory and field studies conducted by various Federal Agencies and the registrant to support the US aquatic registration for triclopyr TEA.

Panel Discussion - Management of Eurasian watermilfoil in the United States using native insects: State regulatory and management issues

While researchers have evaluated the potential of native insect herbivores to manage nonindigenous aquatic plant species such as Eurasian watermilfoil ( Myriophyllum spicatum L.), the practical matters of regulatory compliance and implementation have been neglected. A panel of aquatic nuisance species program managers from three state natural resource management agencies (Minnesota, Vermont and Washington) discussed their regulatory and policy concerns. In addition, one ecological consultant attempting to market one of the native insects to manage Eurasian watermilfoil added his perspective on the special challenges of distributing a native biological control agent for management of Eurasian watermilfoil.

Report on the pinniped and sea otter tagging workshop 18-19 January 1979 Seattle, Washington

The Marine Mammal Tagging Office has been created by consensus of the agencies responsible for marine mammal management and the scientific community dealing with marine mammal tagging and marking. The purpose of ths office is to facilitate the dissemination of information with regard to tagging, marking, tags, and marks; to determine the need for new and better materials for tags; and to stimulate research, development, and testing programs. The American Institute of Biological Sciences was requested to coordinate a workshop to determine the status of pinniped tagging both nationally and internationally. Approximately 30 scientists were invited to participate in the workshop which was held on 18-19 January 1979 at the Sand Point Laboratory of the National Marine Fisheries Service in Seattle, Washington. Topics included ranged from specific tagging programs to general considerations and similar problems encountered by researchers. Participants also participated in one of three working groups -- Sea Otters, Phocids, and Otariids --to address pertinent issues. These break-out sessions resulted in the general recommendations and specific considerations sections of this report. Abstract authors include: Alton Y. Roppel; Ken Pitcher; Burney J. Le Boeuf; Wybrand Hoek; Robert M. Warneke; Don B. Siniff; Doug P. DeMaster; Daniel J. Miller; Ian Stirling; Roger L. Gentry; Lanny H. Cornell; James E. Antrim; Edward D. Asper; Mark Keyes; R. Keith Farrell; Donald G. Calkins; Bob DeLong; T. A. Gornall; Tom Otten; and, Ancel M. Johnson (PDF contains 54 pages)

Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Sea Turtle Symposium, 3-7 March 1998, Mazatlán, Sinaloa, Mexico

For the first time in its history, the International Symposium on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation migrated to a site outside of the United States. Thus the Eighteenth edition was hosted by the Mazatlán Research Unit of the Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnología of the Mexican National Autonomous University (UNAM) in Mazatlán, Sinaloa (Mexico) where it was held from 3-7, March, 1998. Above all, our symposium is prominent for its dynamism and enthusiasm in bringing together specialists from the world´s sea turtle populations. In an effort to extend this philosophy, and fully aware of how fast the interest in sea turtles has grown, the organizers paid special attention to bring together as many people as possible. With the tremendous efforts of the Travel Committee and coupled with a special interest by the Latin American region´s devotees, we managed to get 653 participants from 43 countries. The number of presentations increased significantly too, reaching a total of 265 papers, ranging from cutting-edge scientific reports based on highly sophisticated methods, to the experiences and successes of community-based and environmental education programs. A priority given by this symposium was the support and encouragement for the construction of "bridges" across cultural and discipline barriers. We found success in achieving a multinational dialogue among interest groups- scientists, resource managers, decision makers, ngo's, private industry. There was a broad representation of the broad interests that stretch across these sectors, yet everyone was able to listen and offer their own best contribution towards the central theme of the Symposium: the conservation of sea turtles and the diversity of marine and coastal environments in which they develop through their complicated and protracted life cycle. Our multidisciplinary approach is highly important at the present, finding ourselves at a cross roads of significant initiatives in the international arena of environmental law, where the conservation of sea turtles has a key role to play. Many, many people worked hard over the previous 12 months, to make the symposium a success. Our sincerest thanks to all of them: Program committee: Laura Sarti (chair), Ana Barragán, Rod Mast, Heather Kalb, Jim Spotilla, Richard Reina, Sheryan Epperly, Anna Bass, Steve Morreale, Milani Chaloupka, Robert Van Dam, Lew Ehrhart, J. Nichols, David Godfrey, Larry Herbst, René Márquez, Jack Musick, Peter Dutton, Patricia Huerta, Arturo Juárez, Debora Garcia, Carlos Suárez, German Ramírez, Raquel Briseño, Alberto Abreu; Registration and Secretary: Jane Provancha (chair), Lupita Polanco; Informatics: Germán Ramírez, Carlos Suárez; Cover art: Blas Nayar; Designs: Germán Ramírez, Raquel Briseño, Alberto Abreu. Auction: Rod Mast; Workshops and special meetings: Selina Heppell; Student prizes: Anders Rhodin; Resolutions committee: Juan Carlos Cantú; Local organizing committee: Raquel Briseño, Jane Abreu; Posters: Daniel Ríos and Jeffrey Semminoff; Travel committee: Karen Eckert (chair), Marydele Donnelly, Brendan Godley, Annette Broderick, Jack Frazier; Student travel: Francisco Silva and J. Nichols; Vendors: Tom McFarland and J. Nichols; Volunteer coordination: Richard Byles; Latin American Reunión: Angeles Cruz Morelos; Nominations committee: Randall Arauz, Colleen Coogan, Laura Sarti, Donna Shaver, Frank Paladino. Once again, Ed Drane worked his usual magic with the Treasury of the Symposium Significant financial contributions were generously provided by government agencies. SEMARNAP (Mexico´s Ministry of Environment, Natural Resources and Fisheries) through its central office, the Mazatlán Regional Fisheries Research Center (CRIP-Mazatlán) and the National Center for Education and Capacity Building for Sustainable Development (CECADESU) contributed to the logistics and covered the costs of auditoria and audiovisual equipment for the Symposium, teachers and their hotels for the Community Development and Environmental Education workshop in the 5th Latin American Sea Turtle Specialists; DIF (Dept of Family Affairs) provided free accomodation and food for the more than 100 participants in the Latin American Reunion. In this Reunion, the British Council-Mexico sponsored the workshop on the Project Cycle. The National Chamber of the Fisheries Industry (CANAINPES) kindly sponsored the Symposium´s coffee breaks. Personnel from the local Navy (Octave Zona Naval) provided invaluable aid in transport and logistics. The Scientific Coordination Office from UNAM (CICUNAM) and the Latin American Biology Network (RELAB) also provided funding. Our most sincere recognition to all of them. In the name of this Symposium´s compilers, I would like to also express our gratitude to Wayne Witzell, Technical Editor for his guidance and insights and to Jack Frazier for his help in translating and correcting the English of contributions from some non-native English speakers. Many thanks to Angel Fiscal and Tere Martin who helped with the typing in the last, last corrections and editions for these Proceedings. To all, from around the world, who generously helped make the 18th Symposium a huge success, shared their experiences and listened to ours, our deepest gratitude! (PDF contains 316 pages)

Resource survey of Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary, 1983

Forward: Looe Key National Marine Sanctuary (LKNMS) was designated in 1981 to protect and promote the study, teaching, and wise use of the resources of Looe Key Sanctuary (Plate A). In order to wisely manage this valuable resource, a quantitative resource inventory was funded by the Sanctuary Programs Division (SPD), Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in cooperation with the Southeast Fisheries Center, National Marine Fisheries Service, NOAA; the Cooperative Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Studies (CIMAS), University of Miami; the Fisher Island Laboratory, United States Geological Survey; and the St. Petersburg Laboratory, State of Florida Department of Natural Resources. This report is the result of this cooperative effort. The objective of this study was to quantitatively inventory selected resources of LKNMS in order to allow future monitoring of changes in the Sanctuary as a result of human or natural processes. This study, referred to as Phase I, gives a brief summary of past and present uses of the Sanctuary (Chapter 2); and describes general habitat types (Chapter 3), geology and sediment distribution (Chapter 4), coral abundance and distribution (Chapter 5), the growth history of the coral Montastraea annularis (Chapter 6), reef fish abundance and distribution (Chapter 7), and status of selected resources (Chapter 8). An interpretation of the results of the survey are provided for management consideration (Chapter 9). The results are expected to provide fundamental information for applied management, natural history interpretation, and scientific research. Numerous photographs and illustrations were used to supplement the report to make the material presented easier to comprehend (Plate B). We anticipate the information provided will be used by managers, naturalists, and the general public in addition to scientists. Unless otherwise indicated, all photographs were taken at Looe Key Reef by Dr. James A. Bohnsack. The top photograph in Plate 7.8 was taken by Michael C. Schmale. Illustrations were done by Jack Javech, NMFS. Field work was initiated in May 1983 and completed for the most part by October 1983 thanks to the cooperation of numerous people and organizations. In addition to the participating agencies and organizations we thank the Newfound Harbor Marine Institute and the Division of Parks and Recreation, State of Florida Department of Natural Resources for their logistical support. Special thanks goes to Billy Causey, the Sanctuary Manager, for his help, information, and comments. We thank in alphabetical order: Scott Bannerot, Margie Bastian, Bill Becker, Barbara Bohnsack, Grant Beardsley, John Halas, Raymond Hixon, Irene Hooper, Eric Lindblad, and Mike Schmale. We dedicate this effort to the memory of Ray Hixon who participated in the study and who loved Looe Key. (PDF contains 43 pages)

A manual of previously recorded non-indigenous invasive and native transplanted animal species of the Laurentian Great Lakes and coastal United States

This manual presents geographic information by state of occurrence, and descriptions of the socio-economic impact created by the invasion of non-indigenous and native transplanted animal species in the Laurentian Great Lakes and the coastal waters of the United States. It is not a comprehensive literature review, but rather is intended as a primer for those unfamiliar with the socio-economic impacts of invasive aquatic and marine animals. Readers should also note that the information contained in this manual is current as of its publication date. New information and new species are routinely being added to the wider literature base. Most of the information was gathered from a number of web sites maintained by government agencies, commissions, academic institutions and museums. Additional information was taken from the primary and secondary literature. This manual focuses on socio-economic consequences of invasive species. Thus, ecological impacts, when noted in the literature, are not discussed unless a connection to socio-economic factors can be made. For a majority of the species listed, either the impact of their invasion is not understood, or it is not published in sources surveyed. In the species summaries, sources of information are cited except for information from the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) Nonindigenous Aquatic Species Database http://nas.er.usgs.gov. This website formed the base information used in creating tables on geographic distribution, and in many of the species summaries provided. Thus, whenever information is given without specific author/source and date citation, it has come from this comprehensive source. (PDF contains 90 pages)

Harmful algal research and response: A human dimensions strategy

Harmful Algal Research and Response: A Human Dimensions Strategy (HARR-HD) justifies and guides a coordinated national commitment to human dimensions research critical to prevent and respond to impacts of harmful algal blooms (HABs). Beyond HABs, it serves as a framework for developing hu-man dimensions research as a cross-cutting priority of ecosystem science supporting coastal and ocean management, including hazard research and mitigation planning. Measuring and promoting commu-nity resilience to hazards require human dimensions research outcomes such as effective risk commu-nication strategies; assessment of community vulnerability; identification of susceptible populations; comprehensive assessment of environmental, sociocultural, and economic impacts; development of effective decision support tools; and improved coordination among agencies and stakeholders. HARR-HD charts a course for human dimensions research to achieve these and other priorities through co-ordinated implementation by the Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology (JSOST) In-teragency Working Group on HABs, Hypoxia and Human Health (IWG-4H); national HAB funding programs; national research and response programs; and state research and monitoring programs. (PDF contains 72 pages)

The State of Coral Reef Ecosystems of the United States and Pacific Freely Associated States: 2005

Executive Summary: For over three decades, scientists have been documenting the decline of coral reef ecosystems, amid increasing recognition of their value in supporting high biological diversity and their many benefits to human society. Coral reef ecosystems are recognized for their benefits on many levels, such as supporting economies by nurturing fisheries and providing for recreational and tourism opportunities, providing substances useful for medical purposes, performing essential ecosystem services that protect against coastal erosion, and provid-ing a diversity of other, more intangible contributions to many cultures. In the past decade, the increased awareness regarding coral reefs has prompted action by governmental and non-governmental organizations, including increased funding from the U.S. Congress for conservation of these important ecosystems and creation of the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force (USCRTF) to coordinate activities and implement conservation measures [Presidential Executive Order 13089]. Numerous partnerships forged among Federal agencies and state, local, non-governmental, academic and private partners support activities that range from basic science to systematic monitoring of ecosystem com-ponents and are conducted by government agencies, non-governmental organizations, universities, and the private sector. This report shares the results of many of these efforts in the framework of a broad assessment of the condition of coral reef ecosystems across 14 U.S. jurisdictions and Pacific Freely Associated States. This report relies heavily on quantitative, spatially-explicit data that has been collected in the recent past and comparisons with historical data, where possible. The success of this effort can be attributed to the dedication of over 160 report contributors who comprised the expert writing teams for each jurisdiction. The content of the report chapters are the result of their considerable collaborative efforts. The writing teams, which were organized by jurisdiction and comprised of experts from numerous research and management institutions, were provided a basic chapter outline and a length limit, but the content of each chapter was left entirely to their discretion. Each jurisdictional chapter in the report is structured to: 1) describe how each of the primary threats identified in the National Coral Reef Action Strategy (NCRAS) has manifested in the jurisdiction; 2) introduce ongoing monitoring and assessment activities relative to three major categories of inquiry – water quality, benthic habitats, and associated biological communities – and provide summary results in a data-rich format; and 3) highlight recent management activities that promote conservation of coral reef ecosystems.

First Biennial Ocean Climate Summit: Finding Solutions for San Francisco Bay Area’s Coast and Ocean. Proceedings of the Summit: April 29, 2008, Golden Gate Club, The Presidio San Francisco, California

Executive Summary: The marine environment plays a critical role in the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) that remains within Earth’s atmosphere, but has not received as much attention as the terrestrial environment when it comes to climate change discussions, programs, and plans for action. It is now apparent that the oceans have begun to reach a state of CO2 saturation, no longer maintaining the “steady-state” carbon cycle that existed prior to the Industrial Revolution. The increasing amount of CO2 present within the oceans and the atmosphere has an effect on climate and a cascading effect on the marine environment. Potential physical effects of climate change within the marine environment, including ocean acidification, changes in wind and upwelling regimes, increasing global sea surface temperatures, and sea level rise, can lead to dramatic, fundamental changes within marine and coastal ecosystems. Altered ecosystems can result in changing coastal economies through a reduction in marine ecosystem services such as commercial fish stocks and coastal tourism. Local impacts from climate change should be a front line issue for natural resource managers, but they often feel too overwhelmed by the magnitude of this issue to begin to take action. They may not feel they have the time, funding, or staff to take on a challenge as large as climate change and continue to not act as a result. Already, natural resource managers work to balance the needs of humans and the economy with ecosystem biodiversity and resilience. Responsible decisions are made each day that consider a wide variety of stakeholders, including community members, agencies, non-profit organizations, and business/industry. The issue of climate change must be approached as a collaborative effort, one that natural resource managers can facilitate by balancing human demands with healthy ecosystem function through research and monitoring, education and outreach, and policy reform. The Scientific Expert Group on Climate Change in their 2007 report titled, “Confronting Climate Change: Avoiding the Unmanageable and Managing the Unavoidable” charged governments around the world with developing strategies to “adapt to ongoing and future changes in climate change by integrating the implications of climate change into resource management and infrastructure development”. Resource managers must make future management decisions within an uncertain and changing climate based on both physical and biological ecosystem response to climate change and human perception of and response to the issue. Climate change is the biggest threat facing any protected area today and resource managers must lead the charge in addressing this threat. (PDF has 59 pages.)

Conservation science in NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuaries: description and recent accomplishments

This report describes cases relating to the management of national marine sanctuaries in which certain scientific information was required so managers could make decisions that effectively protected trust resources. The cases presented represent only a fraction of difficult issues that marine sanctuary managers deal with daily. They include, among others, problems related to wildlife disturbance, vessel routing, marine reserve placement, watershed management, oil spill response, and habitat restoration. Scientific approaches to address these problems vary significantly, and include literature surveys, data mining, field studies (monitoring, mapping, observations, and measurement), geospatial and biogeographic analysis, and modeling. In most cases there is also an element of expert consultation and collaboration among multiple partners, agencies with resource protection responsibilities, and other users and stakeholders. The resulting management responses may involve direct intervention (e.g., for spill response or habitat restoration issues), proposal of boundary alternatives for marine sanctuaries or reserves, changes in agency policy or regulations, making recommendations to other agencies with resource protection responsibilities, proposing changes to international or domestic shipping rules, or development of new education or outreach programs. (PDF contains 37 pages.)

A review of the ecological effectiveness of subtidal marine reserves in Central California, Part II: Summary of existing marine reserves in Central California and their potential benefits

In Central California, and elsewhere around the world, a great deal of discussion is occurring about the use of marine protected areas (MPAs) as a tool to help manage marine resources. This discussion is taking place because there is growing evidence that humans have depleted marine resources in many parts of the world, often despite strong regulatory efforts. Moreover, there is also mounting evidence that the degradation of marine resources began long ago, and we do not fully realize how much humans have altered “natural” environments. This uncertainty has led people to discuss the use of MPAs as a precautionary tool to prevent depletion or extinction of marine resources, and as a means of redressing past damages. The discussion about the use of marine reserves is increasing in intensity in California because several resource management agencies are considering reserves as they create or revise management plans. Often, the discussions surrounding this important public policy debate lead to questions about the biological or ecological value of existing marine protected areas. More than 100 MPAs exist along the coast of California. Many of these were established arbitrarily and lack specific purposes. Some California marine protected areas also have co-occurring or overlapping boundaries, have conflicting designations for use, and have conflicting rules and regulations. Because few of the existing marine protected areas have clearly articulated goals or objectives, however, it is difficult or impossible to evaluate their ecological effectiveness. (PDF contains 18 pages.)