An investigation of the organization of canoe fisheries in Nigeria: A case study of Ilaje/Esedo local government area of Ondo State

The effects of some socio-economic variables on the performance of artisanal fishermen were investigated. The variables include the age-structure of the fishermen, level of investment, educational background, membership of co-operative societies and marketing arrangements. All these variables were found to be crucial to productivity in the artisanal fishing sector

Problems and prospects of community-based resource management approach: an experience with the implementation of the ban on beach seines on Lake Kainji

Community Based Resource Management (CBRM) understood as an approach emphasizes a community's capability, responsibility and accountability with regards to managing resources. Based on the recommendations for the Nigerian-German Kainji Lake Fisheries Promotion Project (KLFPP), the Niger and Kebbi States Fisheries Edicts were promulgated in 1997. These edicts, among other things, banned the use of beach seines. Given the conviction of KLFPP, that if communities whose livelihood is linked to the fishery, understand and identify the problems and by consensus agree to the solutions of fisheries problems, they are more likely to adhere to any control measures, specifically the ban on beach seine. In 1999 a first agreement was reached between beach seiners, non-beach seiners and government authorities leading to an almost complete elimination of beach seine on the Lake Kainji. However, despite on going efforts of the Kainji Lake Fisheries Management and Conservation Unit in 2000 and possibly because of certain oversights during and after the first agreement, in May 2001 a significant number of beach seiners was observed. This led to a re-assessment of our approach, which lately culminated into another round of negotiation. The paper presents the latest results on this on-going process

Building a sustainable community of coastal leaders to deal with sea level rise and inundation

Sea level rise and inundation were stated to be the highest priorities in the community-developed Ocean Research Priorities Plan and Implementation Strategy in 2005. Although they remain stated priorities, very few resources have been allocated towards this challenge. Inundation poses a substantial risk to many coastal communities, and the risk is projected to increase because of continued development, changes in the frequency and intensity of inundation events, and acceleration in the rate of sea-level rise along our vulnerable shorelines. (PDF contains 4 pages) There is an increasing urgency for federal and state governments to focus on the local and regional levels and consistently provide the information, tools, and methods necessary for adaptation. Calls for action at all levels acknowledge that a viable response must engage federal, state and local expertise, perspectives, and resources in a coordinated and collaborative effort. A workshop held in December 2000 on coastal inundation and sea level rise proposes a shared framework that can help guide where investments should be made to enable states and local governments to assess impacts and initiate adaptation strategies over the next decade.

Coastal community hazard mitigation and community rating system of NFIP

Storm force flooding continues to be a major concern in the hurricane season and causes considerable loss to the coastal communities. National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) provides recovery resources for the flood disaster and dissuades uneconomic uses from locating in flood hazard area. In order to motivate flood insurance purchase and promote increased flood hazard mitigation, the Community Rating System (CRS) that is a part of NFIP, credits 18 community floodplain management activities. However, CRS has been marked by a lack of active participation since its inception limiting its potential effectiveness. As of January 2008, 1080 communities, representing only 5% of all the NFIP communities have enrolled in CRS. Little empirical evidence exists to shed light on what factors influence the establishment of local hazard mitigation projects. To fill this gap, we propose to analyze flood hazard mitigation projects in 37 North Carolina coastal counties between 2002 and 2008. Specifically, we will examine the influence of physical, risk, and socioeconomic factors on coastal community hazard mitigation decisions as reflected in the CRS score. Ultimately, our project will forge a better understanding of community decision making, as related to natural hazards. (PDF contains 4 pages)

Encouraging sustainable development in a coastal community: New Hanover County, North Carolina's exceptional design zoning district

While New Hanover County is the second smallest county in North Carolina, it is also the second most densely populated with approximately 850 people per square mile. Nestled between the Cape Fear River and Atlantic Ocean with surrounding barrier island beach communities, the County’s geographic location provides a prime vacation destination, as well as an ideal location for residents who wish to live at the water’s edge. Wilmington is the largest city in the County with a population just under 200,000. Most of the Wilmington metropolitan area is developed, creating intense development pressures for the remaining undeveloped land in the unincorporated County. In order to provide development opportunities for mixed use or high density projects within unincorporated New Hanover County where appropriate urban features are in place to support such projects without the negative effects of urban sprawl, County Planning Staff recently developed an Exceptional Design Zoning District (EDZD). Largely based on the LEED for Neighborhood Development program, the EDZD standards were scaled to fit the unique conditions of the County with the goal of encouraging sustainable development while providing density incentives to entice the use of the voluntary district. The incentive for the voluntary zoning district is increased density in areas where the density may not be allowed under normal circumstances. The rationale behind allowing for higher density projects is that development can be concentrated in areas where appropriate urban features are in place to support such projects, and the tendency toward urban sprawl can be minimized. With water quality being of high importance, it is perceived that higher density development will better protect water quality then lower density projects. (PDF contains 4 pages)

The development of the South Carolina Coastal Information Network and portal site: Bringing training opportunities and educational resources to coastal community officials and the public

The South Carolina Coastal Information Network (SCCIN) emerged as a result of a number of coastal outreach institutions working in partnership to enhance coordination of the coastal community outreach efforts in South Carolina. This organized effort, led by the S.C. Sea Grant Consortium and its Extension Program, includes partners from federal and state agencies, regional government agencies, and private organizations seeking to coordinate and/or jointly deliver outreach programs that target coastal community constituents. The Network was officially formed in 2006 with the original intention of fostering intra-and inter- agency communication, coordination, and cooperation. Network partners include the S.C. Sea Grant Consortium, S.C. Department of Health and Environmental Control – Office of Ocean and Coastal Resource Management and Bureau of Water, S.C. Department of Natural Resources – ACE Basin National Estuarine Research Reserve, North Inlet-Winyah Bay National Estuarine Research Reserve, Clemson University Cooperative Extension Service and Carolina Clear, Berkeley-Charleston-Dorchester Council of Governments, Waccamaw Regional Council of Governments, Urban Land Institute of South Carolina, S.C. Department of Archives and History, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration – Coastal Services Center and Hollings Marine Laboratory, Michaux Conservancy, Ashley-Cooper Stormwater Education Consortium, the Coastal Waccamaw Stormwater Education Consortium, the S.C. Chapter of the U.S. Green Building Council, and the Lowcountry Council of Governments. (PDF contains 3 pages)

Annual report 2007 - North Pacific Marine Science Organization (PICES). Sixteenth meeting, Victoria, Canada, October 26-November 5, 2007

Report of Opening Session (p. 1). Report of Governing Council (p. 15). Report of the Finance and Administration Committee (p. 65). Reports of Science Board and Committees: Science Board Inter-Sessional Meeting (p. 83); Science Board (p. 93); Biological Oceanography Committee (p. 105); Fishery Science Committee (p. 117); Marine Environmental Quality Committee (p. 129); Physical Oceanography and Climate Committee (p. 139); Technical Committee on Data Exchange (p. 145); Technical Committee on Monitoring (p. 153). Reports of Sections, Working and Study Groups: Section on Carbon and Climate (p. 161); Section on Ecology of Harmful Algal Blooms in the North Pacific (p. 167); Working Group 19 on Ecosystem-based Management Science and its Application to the North Pacific (p. 173); Working Group 20 on Evaluations of Climate Change Projections (p. 179); Working Group 21 on Non-indigenous Aquatic Species (p. 183); Study Group to Develop a Strategy for GOOS (p. 193); Study Group on Ecosystem Status Reporting (p. 203); Study Group on Marine Aquaculture and Ranching in the PICES Region (p. 213); Study Group on Scientific Cooperation between PICES and Non-member Countries (p. 225). Reports of the Climate Change and Carrying Capacity Program: Implementation Panel on the CCCC Program (p. 229); CFAME Task Team (p. 235); MODEL Task Team (p. 241). Reports of Advisory Panels: Advisory Panel for a CREAMS/PICES Program in East Asian Marginal Seas (p. 249); Advisory Panel on Continuous Plankton Recorder Survey in the North Pacific (p. 253); Advisory Panel on Iron Fertilization Experiment in the Subarctic Pacific Ocean (p. 255); Advisory Panel on Marine Birds and Mammals (p. 261); Advisory Panel on Micronekton Sampling Inter-calibration Experiment (p. 265). 2007 Review of PICES Publication Program (p. 269). Guidelines for PICES Temporary Expert Groups (p. 297). Summary of Scientific Sessions and Workshops (p. 313). Report of the ICES/PICES Conference for Early Career Scientists (p. 355). Membership (p. 367). Participants (p. 387). PICES Acronyms (p. 413). Acronyms (p. 415).