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-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.

A review of the ecological effectiveness of subtidal marine reserves in Central California, Part I: Synopsis of scientific investigations

Marine reserves, often referred to as no-take MPAs, are defined as areas within which human activities that can result in the removal or alteration of biotic and abiotic components of an ecosystem are prohibited or greatly restricted (NRC 2001). Activities typically curtailed within a marine reserve are extraction of organisms (e.g., commercial and recreational fishing, kelp harvesting, commercial collecting), mariculture, and those activities that can alter oceanographic or geologic attributes of the habitat (e.g., mining, shore-based industrial-related intake and discharges of seawater and effluent). Usually, marine reserves are established to conserve biodiversity or enhance nearby fishery resources. Thus, goals and objectives of marine reserves can be inferred, even if they are not specifically articulated at the time of reserve formation. In this report, we review information about the effectiveness of the three marine reserves in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (Hopkins Marine Life Refuge, Point Lobos Ecological Reserve, Big Creek Ecological Reserve), and the one in the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary (the natural area on the north side of East Anacapa Island). Our efforts to objectively evaluate reserves in Central California relative to reserve theory were greatly hampered for four primary reasons; (1) few of the existing marine reserves were created with clearly articulated goals or objectives, (2) relatively few studies of the ecological consequences of existing reserves have been conducted, (3) no studies to date encompass the spatial and temporal scope needed to identify ecosystem-wide effects of reserve protection, and (4) there are almost no studies that describe the social and economic consequences of existing reserves. To overcome these obstacles, we used several methods to evaluate the effectiveness of subtidal marine reserves in Central California. We first conducted a literature review to find out what research has been conducted in all marine reserves in Central California (Appendix 1). We then reviewed the scientific literature that relates to marine reserve theory to help define criteria to use as benchmarks for evaluation. A recent National Research Council (2001) report summarized expected reserve benefits and provided the criteria we used for evaluation of effectiveness. The next step was to identify the research projects in this region that collected information in a way that enabled us to evaluate reserve theory relative to marine reserves in Central California. Chapters 1-4 in this report provide summaries of those research projects. Contained within these chapters are evaluations of reserve effectiveness for meeting specific objectives. As few studies exist that pertain to reserve theory in Central California, we reviewed studies of marine reserves in other temperate and tropical ecosystems to determine if there were lessons to be learned from other parts of the world (Chapter 5). We also included a discussion of social and economic considerations germane to the public policy decision-making processes associated with marine reserves (Chapter 6). After reviewing all of these resources, we provided a summary of the ecological benefits that could be expected from existing reserves in Central California. The summary is presented in Part II of this report. (PDF contains 133 pages.)

Non-governmental organizations and multi-sited marine conservation science: A case study

Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are now major players in the realm of environmental conservation. While many environmental NGOs started as national organizations focused around single-species protection, governmental advocacy, and preservation of wilderness, the largest now produce applied conservation science and work with national and international stakeholders to develop conservation solutions that work in tandem with local aspirations. Marine managed areas (MMAs) are increasingly being used as a tool to manage anthropogenic stressors on marine resources and protect marine biodiversity. However, the science of MMA is far from complete. Conservation International (CI) is concluding a 5 year, $12.5 million dollar Marine Management Area Science (MMAS) initiative. There are 45 scientific projects recently completed, with four main “nodes” of research and conservation work: Panama, Fiji, Brazil, and Belize. Research projects have included MMA ecological monitoring, socioeconomic monitoring, cultural roles monitoring, economic valuation studies, and others. MMAS has the goals of conducting marine management area research, building local capacity, and using the results of the research to promote marine conservation policy outcomes at project sites. How science is translated into policy action is a major area of interest for science and technology scholars (Cash and Clark 2001; Haas 2004; Jasanoff et al. 2002). For science to move policy there must be work across “boundaries” (Jasanoff 1987). Boundaries are defined as the “socially constructed and negotiated borders between science and policy, between disciplines, across nations, and across multiple levels” (Cash et al. 2001). Working across the science-policy boundary requires boundary organizations (Guston 1999) with accountability to both sides of the boundary, among other attributes. (Guston 1999; Clark et al. 2002). This paper provides a unique case study illustrating how there are clear advantages to collaborative science. Through the MMAS initiative, CI built accountability into both sides of the science-policy boundary primarily through having scientific projects fed through strong in-country partners and being folded into the work of ongoing conservation processes. This collaborative, boundary-spanning approach led to many advantages, including cost sharing, increased local responsiveness and input, better local capacity building, and laying a foundation for future conservation outcomes. As such, MMAS can provide strong lessons for other organizations planning to get involved in multi-site conservation science. (PDF contains 3 pages)

ICLARM software projects: back to the future

The different computer softwares developed by the International Center for Living Aquatic Resources (ICLARM) and its functions and uses in fisheries science are presented.

Cheshire stillwaters. Summary results of 1997 data Oak Mere, Betley Mere and Marbury Big

This is the Cheshire stillwaters. Summary results of 1997 data Oak Mere, Betley Mere and Marbury Big from the National Rivers Authority, June 1998. In May 1997, a Stillwaters meeting was held to discuss the way forward in stillwaters monitoring. It decided upon the establishment of a three year rolling programme, in which three stillwaters would be monitored three times a year, every third year. The stillwaters where chosen due to water quality (i.e potential polluted / sensitive waters), fisheries and ecological interests. The Still waters chosen for the first year (1997) were Oak Mere, Betley Mere and Marbury Big Mere. The surveys were aimed to produce a comprehensive study of the still water through monitoring a variety of parameters. Algal, zooplankton and water chemical samples were taken three times a year, (April, July and September). In addition, fisheries surveys were taken in July and marginal invertebrate surveys taken in September.