Looking for safe harbor in a crowded sea: Coastal space use conflict and marine renewable energy development

Technological advances in the marine renewable energy industry and increased clarity about the leasing and licensing process are fostering development proposals in both state and federal waters. The ocean is becoming more industrialized and competition among all marine space users is developing (Buck et al. 2004). More spatial competition can lead to conflict between ocean users themselves, and to tensions that spill over to include other stakeholders and the general public (McGrath 2004). Such conflict can wind up in litigation, which is costly and takes agency time and financial resources away from other priorities. As proposals for marine renewable energy developments are evaluated, too often decision-makers lack the tools and information to properly account for the cumulative effects and the tradeoffs associated with alternative human uses of the ocean. This paper highlights the nature of marine space conflicts associated with marine renewable energy literature highlights key issues for the growth of the marine renewable energy sector in the United States. (PDF contains 4 pages)

Developing alternative shoreline armoring strategies: the living shoreline approach in North Carolina

This paper reviews the scientific data on the ecosystem services provided by shoreline habitats, the evidence for adverse impacts from bulkheading on those habitats and services, and describes alternative approaches to shoreline stabilization, which minimize adverse impacts to the shoreline ecosystem. Alternative shoreline stabilization structures that incorporate natural habitats, also known as living shorelines, have been popularized by environmental groups and state regulatory agencies in the mid-Atlantic. Recent data on living shoreline projects in North Carolina that include a stone sill demonstrate that the sills increase sedimentation rates, that after 3 years marshes behind the sills have slightly reduced biomass, and that the living shoreline projects exhibit similar rates of fishery utilization as nearby natural fringing marshes. Although the current emphasis on shoreline armoring in Puget Sound is on steeper, higher-energy shorelines, armoring of lower-energy shorelines may become an issue in the future with expansion of residential development and projected rates of sea level rise. The implementation of regulatory policy on estuarine shoreline stabilization in North Carolina and elsewhere is presented. The regulatory and public education issues experienced in North Carolina, which have made changes in estuarine shoreline stabilization policy difficult, may inform efforts to adopt a sustainable shoreline armoring strategy in Puget Sound. A necessary foundation for regulatory change in shoreline armoring policy, and public support for that change, is rigorous scientific assessment of the variety of services that natural shoreline habitats provide both to the ecosystem and to coastal communities, and evidence demonstrating that shoreline armoring can adversely impact the provision of those services.