Cruise Report NOAA Ship McARTHUR II Cruise AR-04-04: Leg 2 (June 1-12, 2004): A pilot survey of deepwater coral/sponge assemblages and their susceptibility to fishing/harvest impacts at the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary (OCNMS)

Summary: The offshore shelf and canyon habitats of the OCNMS (Fig. 1) are areas of high primary productivity and biodiversity that support extensive groundfish fisheries. Recent acoustic surveys conducted in these waters have indicated the presence of hard-bottom substrates believed to harbor unique deep-sea coral and sponge assemblages. Such fauna are often associated with shallow tropical waters, however an increasing number of studies around the world have recorded them in deeper, cold-water habitats in both northern and southern latitudes. These habitats are of tremendous value as sites of recruitment for commercially important fishes. Yet, ironically, studies have shown how the gear used in offshore demersal fishing, as well as other commercial operations on the seafloor, can cause severe physical disturbances to resident benthic fauna. Due to their exposed structure, slow growth and recruitment rates, and long life spans, deep-sea corals and sponges may be especially vulnerable to such disturbances, requiring very long periods to recover. Potential effects of fishing and other commercial operations in such critical habitats, and the need to define appropriate strategies for the protection of these resources, have been identified as a high-priority management issue for the sanctuary. To begin addressing this issue, an initial pilot survey was conducted June 1-12, 2004 at six sites in offshore waters of the OCNMS (Fig. 2, average depths of 147-265 m) to explore for the presence of deep-sea coral/sponge assemblages and to look for evidence of potential anthropogenic impacts in these critical habitats. The survey was conducted on the NOAA Ship McARTHUR-II using the Navy’s Phantom DHD2+2 remotely operated vehicle (ROV), which was equipped with a video camera, lasers, and a manipulator arm for the collection of voucher specimens. At each site, a 0.1-m2 grab sampler also was used to collect samples of sediments for the analysis of macroinfauna (> 1.0 mm), total organic carbon (TOC), grain size, and chemical contaminants. Vertical profiles of salinity, dissolved oxygen (DO), temperature, and pressure were recorded at each site with a small SeaCat conductivity-temperature-depth (CTD) profiler. Niskin bottles attached to the CTD also obtained near-bottom water samples in support of a companion study of microbial indicators of coral health and general ecological condition across these sites. All samples except the sediment-contaminant samples are being analyzed with present project funds. Original cruise plans included a total of 12 candidate stations to investigate (Fig. 3). However, inclement weather and equipment failures restricted the sampling to half of these sites. In spite of the limited sampling, the work completed was sufficient to address key project objectives and included several significant scientific observations. Foremost, the cruise was successful in demonstrating the presence of target deepwater coral species in these waters. Patches of the rare stony coral Lophelia pertusa, more characteristic of deepwater coral/sponge assemblages in the North Atlantic, were observed for the first time in OCNMS at a site in 271 meters of water. A large proportion of these corals consisted of dead and broken skeletal remains, and a broken gorgonian (soft coral) also was observed nearby. The source of these disturbances is not known. However, observations from several sites included evidence of bottom trawl marks in the sediment and derelict fishing gear (long lines). Preliminary results also support the view that these areas are important reservoirs of marine biodiversity and of value as habitat for demersal fishes. For example, onboard examination of 18 bottom-sediment grabs revealed benthic infaunal species representative of 14 different invertebrate phyla. Twenty-eight species of fishes from 11 families, including 11 (possibly 12) species of ommercially important rockfishes, also were identified from ROV video footage. These initial discoveries have sparked considerable interests in follow-up studies to learn more about the spatial extent of these assemblages and magnitude of potential impacts from commercial-fishing and other anthropogenic activities in the area. It is essential to expand our knowledge of these deep-sea communities and their vulnerability to potential environmental risks in order to determine the most appropriate management strategies. The survey was conducted under a partnership between NOAA’s National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) and National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP) and included scientists from NCCOS, OCNMS, and several other west-coast State, academic, private, and tribal research institutions (see Section 4 for a complete listing of participating scientists). (PDF contains 20 pages)

Soft-bottom benthic assemblages and levels of contaminants in sediments and biota at Gray's Reef National Marine Sanctuary and nearby shelf waters off the coast of Georgia (2000 and 2001)

A series of studies was initiated to assess the condition of benthic macroinfauna and chemical contaminant levels in sediments and biota of the Gray’s Reef National Marine Sanctuary (GRNMS) and nearby shelf waters off the coast of Georgia. Four key objectives of the research are (1) to document existing environmental conditions within the sanctuary in order to provide a quantitative benchmark for tracking any future changes due to either natural or human disturbances; (2) to examine broader cross-shelf spatial patterns in benthic fauna and sediment contaminant concentrations and to identify potential controlling factors associated with the observed patterns; (3) to assess any between-year temporal variability in benthic fauna; and (4) to evaluate the importance of benthic fauna as prey for higher trophic levels. Such questions are being addressed to help fulfill long-term science and management goals of the GRNMS. However, it is anticipated that the information will be of additional value in broadening our understanding of the surrounding South Atlantic Bight (SAB) ecosystem and in bringing the knowledge to bear on related resourcemanagement issues of the region. We have begun to address the first three of these objectives with data from samples collected in spring 2000 at stations within GRNMS, and in spring 2001 at stations within the sanctuary and along three cross-shelf transects extending from the mouths of Sapelo, Doboy, and Altamaha Sounds out to sanctuary depths (about 17-20 m). This report provides a description of baseline conditions within the sanctuary, based on results of the spring 2000 survey (Section II), and uses data from both 2000 and 2001 to examine overall spatial and temporal patterns in biological and chemical variables within the sanctuary and surrounding inner-shelf environment (Section III). (PDF contains 65 pages)

Techniques for spatial analysis and visualization of benthic mapping data: final report

The mapping and geospatial analysis of benthic environments are multidisciplinary tasks that have become more accessible in recent years because of advances in technology and cost reductions in survey systems. The complex relationships that exist among physical, biological, and chemical seafloor components require advanced, integrated analysis techniques to enable scientists and others to visualize patterns and, in so doing, allow inferences to be made about benthic processes. Effective mapping, analysis, and visualization of marine habitats are particularly important because the subtidal seafloor environment is not readily viewed directly by eye. Research in benthic environments relies heavily, therefore, on remote sensing techniques to collect effective data. Because many benthic scientists are not mapping professionals, they may not adequately consider the links between data collection, data analysis, and data visualization. Projects often start with clear goals, but may be hampered by the technical details and skills required for maintaining data quality through the entire process from collection through analysis and presentation. The lack of technical understanding of the entire data handling process can represent a significant impediment to success. While many benthic mapping efforts have detailed their methodology as it relates to the overall scientific goals of a project, only a few published papers and reports focus on the analysis and visualization components (Paton et al. 1997, Weihe et al. 1999, Basu and Saxena 1999, Bruce et al. 1997). In particular, the benthic mapping literature often briefly describes data collection and analysis methods, but fails to provide sufficiently detailed explanation of particular analysis techniques or display methodologies so that others can employ them. In general, such techniques are in large part guided by the data acquisition methods, which can include both aerial and water-based remote sensing methods to map the seafloor without physical disturbance, as well as physical sampling methodologies (e.g., grab or core sampling). The terms benthic mapping and benthic habitat mapping are often used synonymously to describe seafloor mapping conducted for the purpose of benthic habitat identification. There is a subtle yet important difference, however, between general benthic mapping and benthic habitat mapping. The distinction is important because it dictates the sequential analysis and visualization techniques that are employed following data collection. In this paper general seafloor mapping for identification of regional geologic features and morphology is defined as benthic mapping. Benthic habitat mapping incorporates the regional scale geologic information but also includes higher resolution surveys and analysis of biological communities to identify the biological habitats. In addition, this paper adopts the definition of habitats established by Kostylev et al. (2001) as a “spatially defined area where the physical, chemical, and biological environment is distinctly different from the surrounding environment.” (PDF contains 31 pages)

Coral Remote Sensing Workshop: Proceedings and Recommendations, 17-18 September, Sheraton, Brickell Ave, Miami FL

Coral reefs exist in warm, clear, and relatively shallow marine waters worldwide. These complex assemblages of marine organisms are unique, in that they support highly diverse, luxuriant, and essentially self-sustaining ecosystems in otherwise nutrient-poor and unproductive waters. Coral reefs are highly valued for their great beauty and for their contribution to marine productivity. Coral reefs are favorite destinations for recreational diving and snorkeling, as well as commercial and recreational fishing activities. The Florida Keys reef tract draws an estimated 2 million tourists each year, contributing nearly $800 million to the economy. However, these reef systems represent a very delicate ecological balance, and can be easily damaged and degraded by direct or indirect human contact. Indirect impacts from human activity occurs in a number of different forms, including runoff of sediments, nutrients, and other pollutants associated with forest harvesting, agricultural practices, urbanization, coastal construction, and industrial activities. Direct impacts occur through overfishing and other destructive fishing practices, mining of corals, and overuse of many reef areas, including damage from souvenir collection, boat anchoring, and diver contact. In order to protect and manage coral reefs within U.S. territorial waters, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) of the U.S. Department of Commerce has been directed to establish and maintain a system of national marine sanctuaries and reserves, and to monitor the condition of corals and other marine organisms within these areas. To help carry out this mandate the NOAA Coastal Services Center convened a workshop in September, 1996, to identify current and emerging sensor technologies, including satellite, airborne, and underwater systems with potential application for detecting and monitoring corals. For reef systems occurring within depths of 10 meters or less (Figure 1), mapping location and monitoring the condition of corals can be accomplished through use of aerial photography combined with diver surveys. However, corals can exist in depths greater than 90 meters (Figure 2), well below the limits of traditional optical imaging systems such as aerial or surface photography or videography. Although specialized scuba systems can allow diving to these depths, the thousands of square kilometers included within these management areas make diver surveys for deeper coral monitoring impractical. For these reasons, NOAA is investigating satellite and airborne sensor systems, as well as technologies which can facilitate the location, mapping, and monitoring of corals in deeper waters. The following systems were discussed as having potential application for detecting, mapping, and assessing the condition of corals. However, no single system is capable of accomplishing all three of these objectives under all depths and conditions within which corals exist. Systems were evaluated for their capabilities, including advantages and disadvantages, relative to their ability to detect and discriminate corals under a variety of conditions. (PDF contains 55 pages)

Pilot investigation of remote sensing for intertidal oyster mapping in coastal South Carolina: a methods comparison

South Carolina’s oyster reefs are a major component of the coastal landscape. Eastern oysters Crassostrea virginica are an important economic resource to the state and serve many essential functions in the environment, including water filtration, creek bank stabilization and habitat for other plants and animals. Effective conservation and management of oyster reefs is dependent on an understanding of their abundance, distribution, condition, and change over time. In South Carolina, over 95% of the state’s oyster habitat is intertidal. The current intertidal oyster reef database for South Carolina was developed by field assessment over several years. This database was completed in the early 1980s and is in need of an update to assess resource/habitat status and trends across the state. Anthropogenic factors such as coastal development and associated waterway usage (e.g., boat wakes) are suspected of significantly altering the extent and health of the state’s oyster resources. In 2002 the NOAA Coastal Services Center’s (Center) Coastal Remote Sensing Program (CRS) worked with the Marine Resources Division of the South Carolina Department of Natural Resources (SCDNR) to develop methods for mapping intertidal oyster reefs along the South Carolina coast using remote sensing technology. The objective of this project was to provide SCDNR with potential methodologies and approaches for assessing oyster resources in a more efficiently than could be accomplished through field digitizing. The project focused on the utility of high-resolution aerial imagery and on documenting the effectiveness of various analysis techniques for accomplishing the update. (PDF contains 32 pages)

Guidance for benthic habitat mapping: an aerial photographic approach

This document, Guidance for Benthic Habitat Mapping: An Aerial Photographic Approach, describes proven technology that can be applied in an operational manner by state-level scientists and resource managers. This information is based on the experience gained by NOAA Coastal Services Center staff and state-level cooperators in the production of a series of benthic habitat data sets in Delaware, Florida, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Rhode Island, the Virgin Islands, and Washington, as well as during Center-sponsored workshops on coral remote sensing and seagrass and aquatic habitat assessment. (PDF contains 39 pages) The original benthic habitat document, NOAA Coastal Change Analysis Program (C-CAP): Guidance for Regional Implementation (Dobson et al.), was published by the Department of Commerce in 1995. That document summarized procedures that were to be used by scientists throughout the United States to develop consistent and reliable coastal land cover and benthic habitat information. Advances in technology and new methodologies for generating these data created the need for this updated report, which builds upon the foundation of its predecessor.

Rapid recreation assessment: a tool to assess visitor use and associated impacts at coastal and marine protected areas

As more people discover coastal and marine protected areas as destinations for leisure-time pursuits, the task of managing coastal resources while providing opportunities for high quality visitor experiences becomes more challenging. Many human impacts occur at these sites; some are caused by recreation and leisure activities on-site, and others by activities such as agriculture, aquaculture, or residential and economic development in surrounding areas. Coastal management professionals are continually looking for effective ways to prevent or mitigate negative impacts of visitor use. (PDF contains 8 pages) Most coastal and marine protected area managers are challenged with balancing two competing goals—protection of natural and cultural resources and provision of opportunities for public use. In most cases, some level of compromise between the goals is necessary, where one goal constrains or “outweighs” the other. Often there is a lack of clear agreement about the priority of these competing goals. Consequently, while natural resource decisions should ultimately be science-based and objective, such decisions are frequently made under uncertainty, relying heavily upon professional judgment. These decisions are subject to a complex array of formal and informal drivers and constraints—data availability, timing, legal mandate, political will, diverse public opinion, and physical, human, and social capital. This paper highlights assessment, monitoring, and planning approaches useful to gauge existing resource and social conditions, determine feasibility of management actions, and record decision process steps to enhance defensibility. Examples are presented from pilot efforts conducted at the Rookery Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve (NERR) and Ten Thousand Islands National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) in South Florida.

Residential Docks and Piers: Inventory of laws, regulations, and policies for the New England region

While the homes threatened by erosion and the developer illegally filling in marshlands are the projects that make the headlines, for many state regulatory programs, it’s the residential docks and piers that take up the most time. When is a dock too long? What about crossing extended property lines? And at what point does a creek have too many docks? There are no easy answers to these questions. At the request of the Georgia Coastal Management Program, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center published in April 2003 an inventory of residential dock and pier management information for the southeastern U.S. This inventory builds upon that effort and includes five New England states and one municipality: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and the Town of Falmouth, Massachusetts. Federal laws, state laws and regulations, permitting policies, and contact information are presented in a tabular format that is easy to use. (PDF contains 16 pages)

Residential Docks and Piers: Inventory of laws, regulations, and policies for the Southeastern United States

While the homes threatened by erosion and the developer illegally filling in marshlands are the projects that make the headlines, for many state regulatory programs, it’s the residential docks and piers that take up the most time. When is a dock too long? What about crossing extended property lines? And at what point does a creek have too many docks? There are no easy answers to any of the dock and pier related questions. Each state has to craft the laws and policies that are best for its natural resources and its political and legal environment. At the same time, mistakes in judgment can be costly for the organization, the homeowner, and the natural resources. At the request of the Georgia Coastal Management Program, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center compiled an inventory of dock information for four states—Georgia, Florida, North Carolina, and South Carolina. Federal laws, state laws and regulations, permitting policies, and contact information are included in a tabular format that is easy to use. (PDF contaions 18 pages)

Mapping social change in U.S. coastal counties: a social atlas of coastal North Carolina

This document represents a pilot effort to map social change in the coastal United States—a social atlas characterizing changing population, demographic, housing, and economic attributes. This pilot effort focuses on coastal North Carolina. The impetus for this project came from numerous discussions about the usefulness and need for a graphic representation of social change information for U.S. coastal regions. Although the information presented here will be of interest to a broad segment of the coastal community and general public, the intended target audience is coastal natural resource management professionals, Sea Grant Extension staff, urban and regional land-use planners, environmental educators, and other allied constituents interested in the social aspects of how the nation’s coasts are changing. This document has three sections. The first section provides background information about the project. The second section features descriptions of social indicators and depictions of social indicator data for 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000, and changes from 1970 to 2000 for all North Carolina coastal counties. The third section contains three case studies describing changes in select social attributes for subsets of counties. (PDF contains 67 pages)

Magnitude and extent of sediment toxicity in selected estuaries of South Carolina and Georgia

Toxic chemicals can enter the marine environment through numerous routes: stormwater runoff, industrial point source discharges, municipal wastewater discharges, atmospheric deposition, accidental spills, illegal dumping, pesticide applications and agricultural practices. Once they enter a receiving system, toxicants often become bound to suspended particles and increase in density sufficiently to sink to the bottom. Sediments are one of the major repositories of contaminants in aquatic envronments. Furthermore, if they become sufficiently contaminated sediments can act as sources of toxicants to important biota. Sediment quality data are direct indicators of the health of coastal aquatic habitats. Sediment quality investigations conducted by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and others have indicated that toxic chemicals are found in the sediments and biota of some estuaries in South Carolina and Georgia (NOAA, 1992). This report documents the toxicity of sediments collected within five selected estuaries: Savannah River, Winyah Bay, Charleston Harbor, St. Simons Sound, and Leadenwah Creek (Figure 1). (PDF contains 292 pages)

Tidal creek habitats: sentinels of coastal health

Tidal creek ecosystems are the primary aquatic link between stormwater runoff form the land and estuaries. Small tidal creeks begin in upland areas and drain into larger creeks forming a network. The creeks increase in size until they join a tidal river, sound, bay, or harbor that ultimately conect to the coastal ocean. The upper regions or headwaters of tidal creeks are "first responders" to stormwater runoff and are an important habitat for evaluating the impacts of coastal development on aquatic ecosystems. (PDF contains 22 pages)

Coral Disease and Health Workshop: Coral Histopathology II

The health and continued existence of coral reef ecosystems are threatened by an increasing array of environmental and anthropogenic impacts. Coral disease is one of the prominent causes of increased mortality among reefs globally, particularly in the Caribbean. Although over 40 different coral diseases and syndromes have been reported worldwide, only a few etiological agents have been confirmed; most pathogens remain unknown and the dynamics of disease transmission, pathogenicity and mortality are not understood. Causal relationships have been documented for only a few of the coral diseases, while new syndromes continue to emerge. Extensive field observations by coral biologists have provided substantial documentation of a plethora of new pathologies, but our understanding, however, has been limited to descriptions of gross lesions with names reflecting these observations (e.g., black band, white band, dark spot). To determine etiology, we must equip coral diseases scientists with basic biomedical knowledge and specialized training in areas such as histology, cell biology and pathology. Only through combining descriptive science with mechanistic science and employing the synthesis epizootiology provides will we be able to gain insight into causation and become equipped to handle the pending crisis. One of the critical challenges faced by coral disease researchers is to establish a framework to systematically study coral pathologies drawing from the field of diagnostic medicine and pathology and using generally accepted nomenclature. This process began in April 2004, with a workshop titled Coral Disease and Health Workshop: Developing Diagnostic Criteria co-convened by the Coral Disease and Health Consortium (CDHC), a working group organized under the auspices of the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force, and the International Registry for Coral Pathology (IRCP). The workshop was hosted by the U.S. Geological Survey, National Wildlife Health Center (NWHC) in Madison, Wisconsin and was focused on gross morphology and disease signs observed in the field. A resounding recommendation from the histopathologists participating in the workshop was the urgent need to develop diagnostic criteria that are suitable to move from gross observations to morphological diagnoses based on evaluation of microscopic anatomy. (PDF contains 92 pages)

Report of the Sea Turtle Health Assessment Workshop, 2-3 February 1998, Part I: Background and information needs

A two day workshop was convened on February 2-3, 1998 in Charleston, SC with 20 invited experts in various areas of sea turtle research. The goal of this workshop was to review current information on sea turtles with repect to health and identify data gaps. The use of a suite of health assessment indicators will provide insight on the health status of sea turtle populations. Since the relationship of health factors of sea turtles is limited, a seconde workshop was planned. Using a tiered approach, the first workshop we identified and reviewed the available, pertinent baseline information and data gaps. The second workshop will focus on developing the framework for the research plan. The workshops will address the use of integrated set of health parameters; specific objectives are: 1) Identify reliable indicators of health in sea turtles: assess advantages and disadvantages; determine new indicators/biomarkers which may be useful; 2) Review existing sea turtle field sampling projects; 3) Identify field projects suitable for inclusion for health assessment sampling; 4) Identify data gaps, particularly environmental characterization; 5) Identify new health assessment sampling sites, including reference site(s); and 6) Develop integrated five-year research plan, with focus on health assessment of environmental characterization. (PDF contains 174 pages)

Good Morning, America! The explosive U.S. awakening to the need for adaptation

Since the early years of the 21st century, and in particular since 2007, the U.S. has been awakening rapidly to the fact that climate change is underway and that even if stringent efforts are undertaken to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, adaptation to the unavoidable impacts from the existing commitment to climate change is still needed and needs to be begun now. This report provides an historical overview of the public, political, and scientific concern with adaptation in the United States. It begins by briefly distinguishing ongoing, historical adaptation to environmental circumstances from deliberate adaptation to human‐induced climate change. It then describes the shift from the early concerns with climate change and adaptation to the more recent awakening to the need for a comprehensive approach to managing the risks from climate change. Ranging from the treatment of the topic in the news media to the drafting of bills in Congress, to state and local government activities with considerable engagement of NGOs, scientists and consultants, it is apparent that adaptation has finally, and explosively, emerged on the political agenda as a legitimate and needed subject for debate. At the same time, the current policy rush is not underlain by widespread public engagement and mobilization nor does it rest on a solid research foundation. Funding for vulnerability and adaptation research, establishing adequate decision support institutions, as well as the building of the necessary capacity in science, the consulting world, and in government agencies, lags far behind the need. (PDF contains 42 pages)