Annual report 1992 - North Pacific Marine Science Organization (PICES). First meeting, Victoria, B.C., Canada, October 12-17, 1992

Document has 52 pages.

Report of the Study Group on “Ecosystem-Based Management Science and its application to the North Pacific”

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW OF INTERNATIONAL EBM HISTORY References CANADA Overview Activities to date Integrated Management implementation in Canada Objectives, indicators and reference points Assessment approaches Research directions for the future Management directions for the future References JAPAN Overview Conservation and sustainable use of marine living resources Harvest control by TAC system Stock Recovery Plan and effort regulation system Stock enhancement by hatchery-produced juvenile release Conservation and sustainable develop-ment on coastal waters The implementation of ecosystem-based management PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA Overview Current actions Output control Input control Summer fishing ban Enhance ecosystem health REPUBLIC OF KOREA Initiatives and actions of ecosystem-based management in Korea Current ecosystem-based management initiatives in Korea Precautionary TAC-based fishery management Closed fishing season/areas Fish size- and sex-controls Fishing gear design restrictions Marine protected areas (MPA) RUSSIA Existing and anticipated ecosystem-based management initiatives Issues related to the implementation of ecosystem-based management UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Definitions and approaches to ecosystem-based fishery management in the United States Present U.S. legislative mandates relating to ecosystem-based fishery management Target species Bycatch species Threatened or endangered species Habitats Food webs Ecosystems Integration of legislative mandates into an ecosystem approach Scientific issues in implementing ecosystem-based approaches References DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS APPENDICES Appendix 10.1 Study group membership and participants Appendix 10.2 Terminology definitions Appendix 10.3 Present state of implementing ecosystem-based fishery management in Alaska: Alaska groundfish fisheries Appendix 10.4 Present state of implementing ecosystem-based fishery management off the West Coast of the United States: Pacific Coast groundfish fisheries Appendix 10.5 Descriptions of multi-species and ecosystem models developed or under development in the U.S. North Pacific region that might be used to predict effects of fishing on ecosystems Appendix 10.6 A potential standard reporting format (developed by Australia, and currently being used by the U.S.A in their contribution to this report) (83 page document)

PICES Science: the first ten years and a look to the future

Introduction [pdf, 0.17 MB] Warren S. Wooster [pdf, 0.12 MB] PICES - the first decade, and beyond Paul H. LeBlond [pdf, 0.03 MB] The Physical Oceanography and Climate Committee: The first decade D.E. Harrison and Neville Smith [pdf, 0.04 MB] Ocean observing systems and prediction - the next ten years Tsutomu Ikeda and Patricia A. Wheeler [pdf, 0.85 MB] Ocean impacts from the bottom of the food web to the top: Biological Oceanography Committee (BIO) retrospective Timothy R. Parsons [pdf, 0.2 MB] Future needs for biological oceanographic studies in the Pacific Ocean Douglas E. Hay, Richard J. Beamish, George W. Boehlert, Vladimir I. Radchenko, Qi-Sheng Tang, Tokio Wada, Daniel W. Ware and Chang-Ik Zhang [pdf, 0.2 MB] Ten years FIS in PICES: An introspective, retrospective, critical and constructive review of fishery science in PICES Richard F. Addison, John E. Stein and Alexander V. Tkalin [pdf, 0.12 MB] Marine Environmental Committee in review Robie W. Macdonald, Brian Morton, Richard F. Addison and Sophia C. Johannessen [pdf, 1.89 MB] Marine environmental contaminant issues in the North Pacific: What are the dangers and how do we identify them? R. Ian Perry, Anne B. Hollowed and Takashige Sugimoto [pdf, 0.36 MB] The PICES Climate Change and Carrying Capacity Program: Why, how, and what next? List of acronyms [pdf, 0.07 MB] (Document contains 108 pages)

Proceedings of the 1998 Science Board Symposium on The Impacts of the 1997/98 El Niño Event on the North Pacific Ocean and Its Marginal Seas

Preface [pdf, 0.01 Mb] James J. O'Brien The big picture - The ENSO of 1997-98 [pdf, 0.01 Mb] James E. Overland, Nicholas A. Bond & Jennifer Miletta Adams Atmospheric anomalies in 1997: Links to ENSO? [pdf, 0.54 Mb] Vladimir I. Ponomarev, Olga Trusenkova, Serge Trousenkov, Dmitry Kaplunenko, Elena Ustinova & Antonina Polyakova The ENSO signal in the northwest Pacific [pdf, 0.47 Mb] Robert L. Smith, A. Huyer, P.M. Kosro & J.A. Barth Observations of El Niño off Oregon: July 1997 to present (October 1998) [pdf, 1.31 Mb] Patrica A. Wheeler & Jon Hill Biological effects of the 1997-1998 El Niño event off Oregon: Nutrient and chlorophyll distributions [pdf, 1.13 Mb] William T. Peterson Hydrography and zooplankton off the central Oregon coast during the 1997-1998 El Niño event [pdf, 0.26 Mb] William Crawford, Josef Cherniawsky, Michael Foreman & Peter Chandler El Niño sea level signal along the west coast of Canada [pdf, 1.25 Mb] Howard J. Freeland & Rick Thomson The El Niño signal along the west coast of Canada - temperature, salinity and velocity [pdf, 0.49 Mb] Frank A. Whitney, David L. Mackas, David W. Welch & Marie Robert Impact of the 1990s El Niños on nutrient supply and productivity of Gulf of Alaska waters [pdf, 0.06 Mb] Craig McNeil, David Farmer & Mark Trevorrow Dissolved gas measurements at Stn. P4 during the 97-98 El Niño [pdf, 0.13 Mb] Kristen L.D. Milligan, Colin D. Levings & Robert E. DeWreede Data compilation and preliminary time series analysis of abundance of a dominant intertidal kelp species in relation to the 1997/1998 El Niño event [pdf, 0.05 Mb] S.M. McKinnell, C.C. Wood, M. Lapointe, J.C. Woodey, K.E. Kostow, J. Nelson & K.D. Hyatt Reviewing the evidence that adult sockeye salmon strayed from the Fraser River and spawned in other rivers in 1997 [pdf,0.03 Mb] G.A. McFarlane & R.J. Beamish Sardines return to British Columbia waters [pdf, 0.34 Mb] Ken H. Morgan Impact of the 1997/98 El Niño on seabirds of the northeast Pacific [pdf, 0.06 Mb] Thomas C. Royer & Thomas Weingartner Coastal hydrographic responses in the northern Gulf of Alaska to the 1997-98 ENSO event [pdf, 0.76 Mb] John F. Piatt, Gary Drew, Thomas Van Pelt, Alisa Abookire, April Nielsen, Mike Shultz & Alexander Kitaysky Biological effects of the 1997/98 ENSO in Cook Inlet, Alaska [pdf, 0.22 Mb] H.J. Niebauer The 1997-98 El Niño in the Bering Sea as compared with previous ENSO events and the "regime shift" of the late 1970s [pdf, 0.10 Mb] A.S. Krovnin, G.P. Nanyushin, M.Yu. Kruzhalov, G.V. Khen, M.A. Bogdanov, E.I. Ustinova, V.V. Maslennikov, A.M. Orlov, B.N. Kotenev, V.V. Bulanov & G.P. Muriy The state of the Far East seas during the 1997/98 El Niño event [pdf, 0.15 Mb] Stacy Smith & Susan Henrichs Phytoplankton collected by a time-series sediment trap deployed in the southeast Bering Sea during 1997 [pdf, 0.21 Mb] Cynthia T. Tynan Redistributions of cetaceans in the southeast Bering Sea relative to anomalous oceanographic conditions during the 1997 El Niño [pdf, 0.02 Mb] Akihiko Yatsu, Junta Mori, Hiroyuki Tanaka, Tomowo Watanabe, Kazuya Nagasawa, Yikimasa Ishida, Toshimi Meguro, Yoshihiko Kamei & Yasunori Sakurai Stock abundance and size compositions of the neon flying squid in the central North Pacific Ocean during 1979-1998 [pdf, 0.11 Mb] O.B. Feschenko A new point of view concerning the El Niño mechanism [pdf, 0.01 Mb] Nathan Mantua 97/98 Ocean climate variability in the northeast Pacific: How much blame does El Niño deserve? [pdf, 0.01 Mb] Vadim P. Pavlychev Sharp changes of hydrometeorological conditions in the northwestern Pacific during the 1997/1998 El Niño event [pdf, 0.01 Mb] Jingyi Wang Predictability and forecast verification of El Niño events [pdf, 0.01 Mb] (Document contains 110 pages)

Science Plan, Implementation Plan (Report of the PICES-GLOBEC International Program on Climate Change and Carrying Capacity)

Describes the PICES-GLOBEC International Program on Climate Change and Carrying Capacity (PDF contains 60 pages)

Influence of shelf-break fronts on shellfish and fish stocks off Argentina [Contribution to ICES Annual Science Conference, Reykjavik, Iceland, 27 Sep- 04 Oct 1996]

The general circulation pattern in the western boundary of the SW Atlantic is dominated by the opposite flows of Malvinas (-Falkland)and Brazil Current. In the Confluence region both currents separate from the continental slope and flow offshore creating an area of strong contracts and complex dynamics. The shelf-break fronts off Argentina mark the transition between shelf waters of mixed origin and nutrient rich Malvinas waters. Two areas deserve special attention due to the steep gradients introduced by the outflow of important sources of continental waters: the Rio de la Plata and the Magellan Strait to the north and south of the study area. Characteristics of the front is the high primary and secondary production, and the presence of important invertebrate and fish stocks that concentrate along the front to feed or spawn. The area comprises nearly 30 o/o (333 million U$S in 1995)of all Argentine catches of fish and squid. Resources in the area, beyond the EEZ limits, support international fisheries mainly of Russia, Poland and Spain. (Document contains 15 pages & figs)

U.S. Caribbean fish trap fishery costs and earnings study

Executive Summary: This study describes the socio-economic characteristics of the U.S. Caribbean trap fishery that encompasses the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and Territory of the U.S. Virgin Islands. In-person interviews were administered to one hundred randomly selected trap fishermen, constituting nearly 25% of the estimated population. The sample was stratified by geographic area and trap tier. The number of traps owned or fished to qualify for a given tier varied by island. In Puerto Rico, tier I consisted of fishermen who had between 1-40 fish traps, tier II was made up of fishermen who possessed between 41 and 100 fish traps, and tier III consisted of fishermen who held in excess of 100 fish traps. In St. Thomas and St. John, tier I was composed of fishermen who held between 1 and 50 fish traps, tier II consisted of fishermen who had between 51-150 fish traps and tier III was made up of fishermen who had in excess of 150 fish traps. Lastly, in St. Croix, tier I was made up of fishermen who had less than 20 fish traps and tier II consisted of fishermen who had 20 or more fish traps. The survey elicited information on household demographics, annual catch and revenue, trap usage, capital investment on vessels and equipment, fixed and variable costs, behavioral response to a hypothetical trap reduction program and the spatial distribution of traps. The study found that 79% of the sampled population was 40 years or older. The typical Crucian trap fisherman was older than their Puerto Rican and St. Thomian and St. Johnian counterparts. Crucian fishermen’s average age was 57 years whereas Puerto Rican fishermen’s average age was 51 years, and St. Thomian and St. Johnian fishermen’s average age was 48 years. As a group, St. Thomian and St. Johnian fishermen had 25 years of fishing experience, and Puerto Rican and Crucian fishermen had 30, and 29 years, respectively. Overall, 90% of the households had at least one dependent. The average number of dependents across islands was even, ranging between 2.8 in the district of St. Thomas and St. John and 3.4 in the district of St. Croix. The percentage utilization of catch for personal or family use was relatively low. Regionally, percentage use of catch for personal or family uses ranged from 2.5% in St. Croix to 3.8% in the St. Thomas and St. John. About 47% of the respondents had a high school degree. The majority of the respondents were highly dependent on commercial fishing for their household income. In St. Croix, commercial fishing made up 83% of the fishermen’s total household income, whereas in St. Thomas and St. John and Puerto Rico it contributed 74% and 68%, respectively. The contribution of fish traps to commercial fishing income ranged from 51% in the lowest trap tier in St. Thomas and St. John to 99% in the highest trap tier in St. Croix. On an island basis, the contribution of fish traps to fishing income was 75% in St. Croix, 61% in St. Thomas and St. John, and 59% in Puerto Rico. The value of fully rigged vessels ranged from $400 to $250,000. Over half of the fleet was worth $10,000 or less. The St. Thomas and St. John fleet reported the highest mean value, averaging $58,518. The Crucian and Puerto Rican fleets were considerably less valuable, averaging $19,831 and $8,652, respectively. The length of the vessels ranged from 14 to 40 feet. Fifty-nine percent of the sampled vessels were at least 23 feet in length. The average length of the St. Thomas and St. John fleet was 28 feet, whereas the fleets based in St. Croix and Puerto Rico averaged 21 feet. The engine’s propulsion ranged from 8 to 400 horsepower (hp). The mean engine power was 208 hp in St. Thomas and St. John, 108 hp in St. Croix, and 77 hp in Puerto Rico. Mechanical trap haulers and depth recorders were the most commonly used on-board equipment. About 55% of the sampled population reported owning mechanical trap haulers. In St. Thomas and St. John, 100% of the respondents had trap haulers compared to 52% in Puerto Rico and 20% in St. Croix. Forty-seven percent of the fishermen surveyed stated having depth recorders. Depth recorders were most common in the St. Thomas and St. John fleet (80%) and least common in the Puerto Rican fleet (37%). The limited presence of emergency position indication radio beacons (EPIRBS) and radar was the norm among the fish trap fleet. Only 8% of the respondents had EPIRBS and only 1% had radar. Interviewees stated that they fished between 1 and 350 fish traps. Puerto Rican respondents fished on average 39 fish traps, in contrast to St. Thomian and St. Johnian and Crucian respondents, who fished 94 and 27 fish traps, respectively. On average, Puerto Rican respondents fished 11 lobster traps, and St. Thomian and St. Johnian respondents fished 46 lobster traps. None of the Crucian respondents fished lobster traps. The number of fish traps built or purchased ranged between 0 and 175, and the number of lobster traps built or bought ranged between 0 and 200. Puerto Rican fishermen on average built or purchased 30 fish traps and 14 lobster traps, and St. Thomian and St. Johnian fishermen built or bought 30 fish traps and 11 lobster traps. Crucian fishermen built or bought 25 fish traps and no lobster traps. As a group, fish trap average life ranged between 1.3 and 5 years, and lobster traps lasted slightly longer, between 1.5 and 6 years. The study found that the chevron or arrowhead style was the most common trap design. Puerto Rican fishermen owned an average of 20 arrowhead traps. St. Thomian and St. Johnian and Crucian fishermen owned an average of 44 and 15 arrowhead fish traps, respectively. The second most popular trap design was the square trap style. Puerto Rican fishermen had an average of 9 square traps, whereas St. Thomian and St. Johnian fishermen had 33 traps and Crucian fishermen had 2 traps. Antillean Z (or S) -traps, rectangular and star traps were also used. Although Z (or S) -traps are considered the most productive trap design, fishermen prefer the smaller-sized arrowhead and square traps because they are easier and less expensive to build, and larger numbers of them can be safely deployed. The cost of a fish trap, complete with rope and buoys, varied significantly due to the wide range of construction materials utilized. On average, arrowhead traps commanded $94 in Puerto Rico, $251 in St. Thomas and St. John, and $119 in St. Croix. The number of trips per week ranged between 1 and 6. However, 72% of the respondents mentioned that they took two trips per week. On average, Puerto Rican fishermen took 2.1 trips per week, St. Thomian and St. Johnian fishermen took 1.4 trips per week, and Crucian fishermen took 2.5 trips per week. Most fishing trips started at dawn and finished early in the afternoon. Over 82% of the trips lasted 8 hours or less. On average, Puerto Rican fishermen hauled 27 fish traps per trip whereas St. Thomian and St. Johnian fishermen and Crucian fishermen hauled 68 and 26 fish traps per trip, respectively. The number of traps per string and soak time varied considerably across islands. In St. Croix, 84% of the respondents had a single trap per line, whereas in St. Thomas and St. John only 10% of the respondents had a single trap per line. Approximately, 43% of Puerto Rican fishermen used a single trap line. St. Thomian and St. Johnian fishermen soaked their traps for 6.9 days while Puerto Rican and Crucian fishermen soaked their traps for 5.7 and 3.6 days, respectively. The heterogeneity of the industry was also evidenced by the various economic surpluses generated. The survey illustrated that higher gross revenues did not necessarily translate into higher net revenues. Our analysis also showed that, on average, vessels in the trap fishery were able to cover their cash outlays, resulting in positive vessel income (i.e., financial profits). In Puerto Rico, annual financial profits ranged from $4,760 in the lowest trap tier to $32,467 in the highest tier, whereas in St. Thomas and St. John annual financial profits ranged from $3,744 in the lowest tier to $13,652 in the highest tier. In St. Croix, annual financial profits ranged between $9,229 and $15,781. The survey also showed that economic profits varied significantly across tiers. Economic profits measure residual income after deducting the remuneration required to keep the various factors of production in their existing employment. In Puerto Rico, annual economic profits ranged from ($9,339) in the lowest trap tier to $ 8,711 in the highest trap tier. In St. Thomas and St. John, annual economic profits ranged from ($7,920) in the highest tier to ($18,486) in the second highest tier. In St. Croix, annual economic profits ranged between ($7,453) to $10,674. The presence of positive financial profits and negative economic profits suggests that higher economic returns could be earned from a societal perspective by redirecting some of these scarce capital and human resources elsewhere in the economy. Furthermore, the presence of negative economic earnings is evidence that the fishery is overcapitalized and that steps need to be taken to ensure the long-run economic viability of the industry. The presence of positive financial returns provides managers with a window of opportunity to adopt policies that will strengthen the biological and economic performance of the fishery while minimizing any adverse impacts on local fishing communities. Finally, the document concludes by detailing how the costs and earnings information could be used to develop economic models that evaluate management proposals. (PDF contains 147 pages)

Ecosystem science capabilities required to support NOAA’s mission in the year 2020

The mission of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is to understand and predict changes in the Earth’s environment and conserve and manage coastal and marine resources to meet our nation’s economic, social and environmental needs (NOAA, 2004). In meeting its marine stewardship responsibilities, NOAA seeks to ensure the sustainable use of resources and balance competing uses of coastal and marine ecosystems, recognizing both their human and natural components (NOAA, 2004). Authorities for executing these responsibilities come from over 90 separate pieces of Federal legislation, each with unique requirements and responsibilities. Few of these laws explicitly mandate an ecosystem approach to management (EAM) or supporting science. However, resource managers, the science community, and increasingly, the public, are recognizing that significantly greater connectedness among the scientific disciplines is needed to support management and stewardship responsibilities (Browman and Stergiou, 2004; 2005). Neither NOAA nor any other science agency can meet the increasing demand for ecosystem science products addressing each of its mandates individually. Even if it was possible, doing so would not provide the integration necessary to solve the increasingly complex array of management issues. This focus on the integration of science and management responsibilities into an ecosystem view is one of the centerpieces of the U.S. Commission on Ocean Policy’s report (USCOP, 2004), and the Administration’s response to that report in the U.S. Ocean Action Plan (CEQ, 2004). (PDF contains 100 pages)

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)

Science-based restoration monitoring of coastal habitats, Volume Two: Tools for monitoring coastal habitats

Healthy coastal habitats are not only important ecologically; they also support healthy coastal communities and improve the quality of people’s lives. Despite their many benefits and values, coastal habitats have been systematically modified, degraded, and destroyed throughout the United States and its protectorates beginning with European colonization in the 1600’s (Dahl 1990). As a result, many coastal habitats around the United States are in desperate need of restoration. The monitoring of restoration projects, the focus of this document, is necessary to ensure that restoration efforts are successful, to further the science, and to increase the efficiency of future restoration efforts.

Environmental and aesthetic impacts of small docks and piers, workshop report: Developing a science-based decision support tool for small dock management, phase 1: Status of the science

Few issues confronting coastal resource managers are as divisive or difficult to manage as regulating the construction of private recreational docks and piers associated with residential development. State resource managers face a growing population intent on living on or near the coast, coupled with an increasing desire to have immediate access to the water by private docks or piers. (PDF contains 69 pages)

Caribbean connectivity: implications for Marine Protected Area Management. Proceedings of a Special Symposium, 9-11 November 2006, 59th Annual Meeting of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, Belize City, Belize

Executive Summary: Tropical marine ecosystems in the Caribbean region are inextricably linked through the movement of pollutants, nutrients, diseases, and other stressors, which threaten to further degrade coral reef communities. The magnitude of change that is occurring within the region is considerable, and solutions will require investigating pros and cons of networks of marine protected areas (MPAs), cooperation of neighboring countries, improved understanding of how external stressors degrade local marine resources, and ameliorating those stressors. Connectivity can be broadly defined as the exchange of materials (e.g., nutrients and pollutants), organisms, and genes and can be divided into: 1) genetic or evolutionary connectivity that concerns the exchange of organisms and genes, 2) demographic connectivity, which is the exchange of individuals among local groups, and 3) oceanographic connectivity, which includes flow of materials and circulation patterns and variability that underpin much of all these exchanges. Presently, we understand little about connectivity at specific locations beyond model outputs, and yet we must manage MPAs with connectivity in mind. A key to successful MPA management is how to most effectively work with scientists to acquire the information managers need. Oceanography connectivity is poorly understood, and even less is known about the shape of the dispersal curve for most species. Dispersal kernels differ for various systems, species, and life histories and are likely highly variable in space and time. Furthermore, the implications of different dispersal kernels on population dynamics and management of species is unknown. However, small dispersal kernels are the norm - not the exception. Linking patterns of dispersal to management options is difficult given the present state of knowledge. The behavioral component of larval dispersal has a major impact on where larvae settle. Individual larval behavior and life history details are required to produce meaningful simulations of population connectivity. Biological inputs are critical determinants of dispersal outcomes beyond what can be gleaned from models of passive dispersal. There is considerable temporal and spatial variation to connectivity patterns. New models are increasingly being developed, but these must be validated to understand upstream-downstream neighborhoods, dispersal corridors, stepping stones, and source/sink dynamics. At present, models are mainly useful for providing generalities and generating hypotheses. Low-technology approaches such as drifter vials and oceanographic drogues are useful, affordable options for understanding local connectivity. The “silver bullet” approach to MPA design may not be possible for several reasons. Genetic connectivity studies reveal divergent population genetic structures despite similar larval life histories. Historical stochasticity in reproduction and/or recruitment likely has important, longlasting consequences on present day genetic structure. (PDF has 200 pages.)

Connectivity: Science, people and policy in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary

Executive Summary: The Connectivity Colloquium evolved from an exhortation by Dan Basta, Director of the National Marine Sanctuary Program, to come together and assess what we know about the condition of our natural resources, identify information gaps and how to fill them, and transform science and management from an emphasis on documentation to a nexus for action. This purpose in some ways reflects the initiation of the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary itself, which was designated by an act of the U.S. Congress in 1990 in the aftermath of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska and three major ship groundings of the Florida Reef Tract in late 1989. Over the next seven years NOAA worked with federal, state, and local partners to develop a comprehensive management plan for the Sanctuary implemented under a co-trustee partnership between NOAA and the State of Florida. (PDF contains 270 pages; 14Mb)

2002-03 Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary science report: An ecosystem report card after five years of marine zoning

Executive Summary: Circulation and Exchange of Florida Bay and South Florida Coastal Waters The coastal ecosystem of South Florida is comprised of distinct marine environments. Circulation of surface waters and exchange processes, which respond to both local and regional forcings, interconnect different coastal environments. In addition, re-circulating current systems within the South Florida coastal ecosystem such as the Tortugas Gyre contribute to retention of locally spawned larvae. Variability in salinity, chlorophyll, and light transmittance occurs on a wide range of temporal and spatial scales, in response to both natural forcing, such as seasonal precipitation and evaporation and interannual “El Niño” climate signals, and anthropogenic forcing, such as water management practices in south Florida. The full time series of surface property maps are posted at www.aoml.noaa.gov/sfp. Regional surface circulation patterns, shown by satellite-tracked surface drifters, respond to large-scale forcing such as wind variability and sea level slopes. Recent patterns include slow flow from near the mouth of the Shark River to the Lower Keys, rapid flow from the Tortugas to the shelf of the Carolinas, and flow from the Tortugas around the Tortugas Gyre and out of the Florida Straits. The Southwest Florida Shelf and the Atlantic side of the Florida Keys coastal zone are directly connected by passages between the islands of the Middle and Lower Keys. Movement of water between these regions depends on a combination of local wind-forced currents and gravitydriven transports through the passages, produced by cross-Key sea level differences on time scales of several days to weeks, which arise because of differences in physical characteristics (shape, orientation, and depth) of the shelf on either side of the Keys. A southeastward mean flow transports water from western Florida Bay, which undergoes large variations in water quality, to the reef tract. Adequate sampling of oceanographic events requires both the capability of near real-time recognition of these events, and the flexibility to rapidly stage targeted field sampling. Capacity to respond to events is increasing, as demonstrated by investigations of the 2002 “blackwater” event and a 2003 entrainment of Mississippi River water to the Tortugas. (PDF contains 364 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.)