Soviet-American Cooperative Research on Marine Mammals. Volume 1- Pinnipeds: Under Project V.6. Marine Mammals, of the US-USSR Agreement on Cooperation in the Field of Environmental Protection

Some 25 to 30 yr ago, when we as students were beginning our respective careers and were developing for the first time our awareness of marine mammals in the waters separating western North America from eastern Asia, we had visions of eventually bridging the communication gap which existed between our two countries at that time. Each of us was anxious to obtain information on the distribution, biology, and ecological relations of "our" seals and walruses on "the other side," beyond our respective political boundari~s where we were not permitted to go to study them. We were concerned that the resource management practices on the other side of the Bering and Chukchi Seas, implemented in isolation, on a purely unilateral basis, might endanger the species which we had come to know and were striving to conserve. At once apparent to both of us was the need for free exchange of biological information between our two countries and, ultimately, joint management of our shared resources. In a small way, we and others made some initial efforts to generate that exchange by personal correspondence and through vocal interchange at the annual meetings of the North Pacific Fur Seal Commission. By the enabling Agreement on Cooperation in the Field of Environmental Protection, reached between our two countries in 1972, our earlier visions at last came true. Since that time, within the framework of the Marine Mammal Project under Area V of that Agreement, we and our colleagues have forged a strong bond of professional accord and respect, in an atmosphere of free intercommunication and mutual understanding. The strength and utility of this arrangement from the beginning of our joint research are reflected in the reports contained in this, the first compendium of our work. The need for a series of such a compendia became apparent to us in 1976, and its implementation was agreed on by the regular meeting of the Project in La Jolla, Calif., in January 1977. Obviously, the preparation and publication of this first volume has been excessively delayed, in part by continuing political distrust between our governments but mainly by increasing demands placed on the time of the contributors. In this period of growing environmental concern in both countries, we and our colleagues have been totally immersed in other tasks and have experienced great difficulty in drawing together the works presented here. Much of the support for doing so was provided by the State of Alaska, through funding for Organized Research at the University of Alaska-Fairbanks. For its ultimate completion in publishable form we wish to thank Helen Stockholm, Director of Publications, Institute of Marine Science, University of Alaska, and her staff, especially Ruth Hand, and the numerous referees narned herein who gave willingly oftheir time to review each ofthe manuscripts critically and to provide a high measure of professionalism to the final product. (PDF file contains 110 pages.)

Sensitivity of sturgeons to environmental hypoxia: a review of physiological and ecological evidence

In this essay, three lines of evidence are developed that sturgeons in the Chesapeake Bay and elsewhere are unusually sensitive to hypoxic conditions: 1. In comparison to other fishes,sturgeons have a limited behavioral and physiological capacity to respond to hypoxia. Basal metabolism, growth, feeding rate, and survival are sensitive to changes in oxygen level, which may indicate a relatively poor ability of sturgeons to oxyregulate. 2. During summertime, temperatures >20°C amplify the effect of hypoxia on sturgeons and other fishes due to a temperature oxygen "squeeze" (Coutant 1987). In bottom waters, this interaction results in substantial reduction of habitat; in dry years, sturgeon nursery habitats in the Chesapeake Bay may be particularly reduced or even eliminated. 3. While evidence for population level effects due to hypoxia is circumstantial, there are corresponding trends between the absence of Atlantic sturgeon reproduction in estuaries like the Chesapeake Bay where summertime hypoxia predominates on a system-wide scale. Also, the recent and dramatic recovery of shortnose sturgeon in the Hudson River (4-bid increase in abundance from 1980 to1995) may have been stimulated by improvement of a large portion of the nursery habitat that was restored from hypoxia to normoxia during the period 1973-1978.

Control of Variable Watermilfoil in Bashan Lake, CT with 2,4-D: Monitoring of Lake and Well Water.

Variable watermilfoil (Myriophyllum heterophyllum Michx.) has recently become a problem in Bashan Lake, East Haddam, CT, USA. By 1998, approximately 4 ha of the 110 ha lake was covered with variable watermilfoil. In 1999, the milfoil was spot treated with Aquacide®, an 18% active ingredient of the sodium salt of 2,4-D [(2,4-dichlorophenoxy) acetic acid], applied at a rate of 114 kg/ha. Aquacide® was used because labeling regarding domestic water intakes and irrigation limitations prevented the use of Navigate® or AquaKleen®, a 19% active ingredient of the butoxyethyl ester of 2,4-D. Variable watermilfoil was partially controlled in shallow protected coves but little control occurred in deeper more exposed locations. 2,4-D levels in the treatment sites were lower than desired and offsite dilution was rapid. In 2000, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) issued a special local need (SLN) registration to allow the use of Navigate ® or AquaKleen® in lakes with potable and irrigation water intakes. Navigate® was applied at a rate of 227 kg/ha to the same areas as treated in 1999. An additional 2 ha of variable watermilfoil was treated with Navigate® in 2001, and 0.4 ha was treated in mid-September. Dilution of the 2,4-D ester formulation to untreated areas was slower than with the salt formulation. Concentrations of 2,4-D exceeded 1000 μg/ L in several lake water samples in 2000 but not 2001. Nearly all of the treated variable watermilfoil was controlled in both years. The mid-September treatment appeared as effective as the spring and early summer treatments. Testing of homeowner wells in all 3 years found no detectable levels of 2,4-D.(PDF contains 8 pages.)

Springs and swallets of the lower Santa Fe River

Many of our surface waters go underground to the aquifer via sinkholes (or swallets) and the water is then called groundwater. Most of us rely on groundwater for our drinking water. Springs are where the groundwater comes to the surface to once again become surface waters. Below is a map of the springs and swallets of the Lower Santa Fe River.

Santa Fe River watershed conservation lands

Conservation lands, which are essential to protecting water resources in the Santa Fe River basin.

Wastewater treatment plant inspection program, fiscal year 2006 and 2007 data report

This data report includes the results from Alachua County Environmental Protection Department’s inspections of wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) within Alachua County during the 2006 and 2007 fiscal years (October 2005 – September 2007). Groundwater monitoring data provided to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection Department by the WWTP operators is included for those treatment plants that are required to submit this information (PDF has 44 pages.)

Freshwater fishes of Connecticut

(PDF contains 135 pages)

Cruise Report: Summer 2008 Ecological Assessment of Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary NOAA Ship NANCY FOSTER NF-08-09-CCEHBR (June 14-June 21, 2008)

Summary: This cruise report is a summary of a field survey conducted within the Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary (SBNMS), located between Cape Cod and Cape Ann at the mouth of Massachusetts Bay. The survey was conducted June 14 – June 21, 2008 on NOAA Ship NANCY FOSTER Cruise NF-08-09-CCEHBR. Multiple indicators of ecological condition and human dimensions were sampled synoptically at each of 30 stations throughout SBNMS using a random probabilistic sampling design. Samples were collected for the analysis of benthic community structure and composition; concentrations of chemical contaminants (metals, pesticides, PAHs, PCBs, PBDEs) in sediments and target demersal biota; nutrient and chlorophyll levels in the water column; and other basic habitat characteristics such as depth, salinity, temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, pH, sediment grain size, and organic carbon content. In addition to the fish samples that were collected for analysis of chemical contaminants relative to human-health consumption limits, other human-dimension indicators were sampled as well including presence or absence of fishing gear, vessels, surface trash, marine mammals, and noxious sediment odors. The overall purpose of the survey was to collect data to assess the status of ecosystem condition and potential stressor impacts throughout SBNMS, based on these various indicators and corresponding management thresholds, and to provide this information as a baseline for determining how such conditions may be changing with time. While sample analysis is still ongoing a few preliminary results and observations are reported here. A final report will be completed once all data have been processed. The results are anticipated to be of value in supporting goals of the SBNMS and National Marine Sanctuary Program aimed at the characterization, protection, and management of sanctuary resources (pursuant to the National Marine Sanctuary Reauthorization Act) as well as a new priority of NCCOS and NOAA to apply Ecosystem Based approaches to the Management of coastal resources (EBM) through Integrated Ecosystem Assessments (IEAs) conducted in various coastal regions of the U.S. including the Northeast Atlantic continental shelf. This was a multi-disciplinary partnership effort made possible by scientists from the following organizations:  NOAA, National Ocean Service (NOS), National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS), Center for Coastal Environmental Health and Biomolecular Research (CCEHBR), Charleston, SC.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory (NHEERL), Atlantic Ecology Division (GED), Narragansett, RI.  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory (NHEERL), Gulf Ecology Division (GED), Gulf Breeze, FL.  U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), National Wetlands Research Center, Gulf Breeze Project Office, Gulf Breeze, FL.  NOAA, Office of Marine and Aviation Operations (OMAO), NOAA ship Nancy Foster. (31pp) (PDF contains 58 pages)

Phase 1: Florida's ocean and coastal economics report

This report was prepared for and funded by the Florida State Department of Environmental Protection with the encouragement of members from the Florida Ocean Alliance, Florida Oceans and Coastal Resources Council and other groups with deep interests in the future of Florida’s coast. It is a preliminary study of Florida’s Ocean and Coastal Economies based only on information currently found within the datasets of the National Ocean Economics Program. (NOEP). It reflects only a portion of the value of Florida’s coastal related economy and should not be considered comprehensive. A more customized study based on the unique coastal and ocean-dependent economic activities of the State of Florida should be carried out to complete the picture of Florida’s dependence upon its coasts. (PDF has 129 pages.)

Proceedings fo the Seventeenth Annual Sea Turtle Symposium, 4-8 March 1997, Orlando, Florida, U.S.A.

The 17th Annual Sea Turtle Symposium was held at the Delta Orlando Resort in Orlando, Florida U.S.A. from March 4-8, 1997. The symposium was hosted by Florida Atlantic University, Mote Marine Laboratory, University of Central Florida, University of Florida, Florida Atlantic University and the Comité Nacional para la Conservación y Protección de las Totugas Marinas. The 17th was the largest symposium to date. A total of 720 participants registered, including sea turtle biologists, students, regulatory personnel, managers, and volunteers representing 38 countries. In addition to the United States, participants represented Australia, Austria, the Bahamas, Bonaire, Bermuda, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, England, Guatemala, Greece, Honduras, India, Italy, Japan, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mexico, The Netherlands, Nicaragua, Peru, Philippines, Republic of Seychelles, Scotland, Spain, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey, Uruguay, and Venezuela. In addition to the 79 oral, 2 video, and 120 poster presentations, 3 workshops were offered: Selina Heppell (Duke University Marine Laboratory) provided “Population Modeling,” Mike Walsh and Sam Dover (Sea World-Orlando) conducted “Marine Turtle Veterinary Medicine” and “Conservation on Nesting Beaches” was offered by Blair Witherington and David Arnold (Florida Department of Environmental Protection). On the first evening, P.C.H. Pritchard delivered a thoughtful retrospect on Archie Carr that showed many sides of a complex man who studied and wrote about sea turtles. It was a presentation that none of us will forget. The members considered a number of resolutions at the Thursday business meeting and passed six. Five of these resolutions are presented in the Commentaries and Reviews section of Chelonian Conservation and Biology 2(3):442-444 (1997). The symposium was fortunate to have many fine presentations competing for the Archie Carr Best Student Presentations awards. The best oral presentation award went to Amanda Southwood (University of British Columbia) for “Heart rates and dive behavior of the leatherback sea turtle during the internesting interval.” The two runners-up were Richard Reina (Australian National University) for “Regulation of salt gland activity in Chelonia mydas” and Singo Minamikawa (Kyoto University) for “The influence that artificial specific gravity change gives to diving behavior of loggerhead turtles”. The winner of this year’s best poster competition was Mark Roberts (University of South Florida) for his poster entitled “Global population structure of green sea Turtles (Chelonia mydas) using microsatellite analysis of male mediated gene flow.” The two runners-up were Larisa Avens (University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill) for “Equilibrium responses to rotational displacements by hatchling sea turtles: maintaining a migratory heading in a turbulent ocean” and Annette Broderick (University of Glasgow) for “Female size, not length, is a correlate of reproductive output.” The symposium was very fortunate to receive a matching monetary and subscription gift from Anders J. G. Rhodin of the Chelonian Research Foundation. These enabled us to more adequately reward the fine work of students. The winners of the best paper and best poster awards received $400 plus a subscription to Chelonian Conservation and Biology. Each runner up received $100. The symposium owes a great debt to countless volunteers who helped make the meeting a success. Those volunteers include: Jamie Serino, Alan Bolton, and Karen Bjorndal, along with the UF students provided audio visual help, John Keinath chaired the student awards committee, Mike Salmon chaired the Program Commiteee, Sheryan Epperly and Joanne Braun compiled the Proceedings, Edwin Drane served as treasurer and provided much logistical help, Jane Provancha coordinated volunteers, Thelma Richardson conducted registration, Vicki Wiese coordinated food and beverage services, Jamie Serino and Erik Marin coordinated entertainment, Kenneth Dodd oversaw student travel awards, Traci Guynup, Tina Brown, Jerris Foote, Dan Hamilton, Richie Moretti, and Vicki Wiese served on the time and place committee, Blair Witherington created the trivia quiz, Tom McFarland donated the symposium logo, Deborah Crouse chaired the resolutions committee, Pamela Plotkin chaired the nominations committee, Sally Krebs, Susan Schenk, and Larry Wood conducted the silent auction, and Beverly and Tom McFarland coordinated all 26 vendors. Many individuals from outside the United States were able to attend the 17th Annual Sea Turtle Symposium thanks to the tireless work of Karen Eckert, Marydele Donnelly, and Jack Frazier in soliciting travel assistance for a number of international participants. We are indebted to those donating money to the internationals’ housing fund (Flo Vetter Memorial Fund, Marinelife Center of Juno Beach, Roger Mellgren, and Jane Provancha). We raise much of our money for international travel from the auction; thanks go to auctioneer Bob Shoop, who kept our auction fastpaced and entertaining, and made sure the bidding was high. The Annual Sea Turtle Symposium is unequaled in its emphasis on international participation. Through international participation we all learn a great deal more about the biology of sea turtles and the conservation issues that sea turtles face in distant waters. Additionally, those attending the symposium come away with a tremendous wealth of knowledge, professional contacts, and new friendships. The Annual Sea Turtle Symposium is a meeting in which pretenses are dropped, good science is presented, and friendly, open communication is the rule. The camaraderie that typifies these meetings ultimately translates into understanding and cooperation. These aspects, combined, have gone and will go a long way toward helping to protect marine turtles and toward aiding their recovery on a global scale. (PDF contains 342 pages)

The distribution and size composition of finfish, American lobster, and long-finned squid in Long Island Sound based on the Connecticut Fisheries Division Bottom Trawl Survey, 1984–1994

The distribution, abundance, and length composition of marine finfish, lobster, and squid in Long Island Sound were examined relative to season and physical features of the Sound, using Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection trawl survey data collected from 1984 to 1994. The following are presented: seasonal distribution maps for 59 species, abundance indices for 41 species, and length frequencies for 26 species. In addition, a broader view of habitat utilization in the Sound was examined by mapping aggregated catches (total catch per tow, demersal catch per tow, and pelagic catch per tow) and by comparing species richness and mean aggregate catch/tow by analysis of variance (ANOVA) among eight habitat types defined by depth interval and bottom type. For many individual species, seasonal migration patterns and preference for particular areas within Long Island Sound were evident. The aggregate distribution maps show that overall abundance was lower in the eastern Sound than the central and western portions. Demersal and pelagic temporal abundance show opposite trends—demersals were abundant in spring and declined through summer and fall, whereas pelagic abundance was low in spring and increased into fall. The analysis of habitat types revealed significant differences for both species richness and mean catch per tow. Generally, species richness was highest in habitats within the central area of the Sound and lowest in eastern habitats. The aggregate mean catch was highest in the western and central habitats, and declined eastward. (PDF file contains 199 pages.)

Integrated Sensor Systems for Vessels of Opportunity, National Oceanographic Centre, Southampton, UK, October 10-12,2006 : workshop proceedings

The use of self-contained, low-maintenance sensor systems installed on commercial vessels is becoming an important monitoring and scientific tool in many regions around the world. These systems integrate data from meteorological and water quality sensors with GPS data into a data stream that is automatically transferred from ship to shore. To begin linking some of this developing expertise, the Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) and the European Coastal and Ocean Observing Technology (ECOOT) organized a workshop on this topic in Southampton, United Kingdom, October 10-12, 2006. The participants included technology users, technology developers, and shipping representatives. They collaborated to identify sensors currently employed on integrated systems, users of this data, limitations associated with these systems, and ways to overcome these limitations. The group also identified additional technologies that could be employed on future systems and examined whether standard architectures and data protocols for integrated systems should be established. Participants at the workshop defined 17 different parameters currently being measured by integrated systems. They identified that diverse user groups utilize information from these systems from resource management agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), to local tourism groups and educational organizations. Among the limitations identified were instrument compatibility and interoperability, data quality control and quality assurance, and sensor calibration andlor maintenance frequency. Standardization of these integrated systems was viewed to be both advantageous and disadvantageous; while participants believed that standardization could be beneficial on many levels, they also felt that users may be hesitant to purchase a suite of instruments from a single manufacturer; and that a "plug and play" system including sensors from multiple manufactures may be difficult to achieve. A priority recommendation and conclusion for the general integrated sensor system community was to provide vessel operators with real-time access to relevant data (e.g., ambient temperature and salinity to increase efficiency of water treatment systems and meteorological data for increased vessel safety and operating efficiency) for broader system value. Simplified data displays are also required for education and public outreach/awareness. Other key recommendations were to encourage the use of integrated sensor packages within observing systems such as 100s and EuroGOOS, identify additional customers of sensor system data, and publish results of previous work in peer-reviewed journals to increase agency and scientific awareness and confidence in the technology. Priority recommendations and conclusions for ACT entailed highlighting the value of integrated sensor systems for vessels of opportunity through articles in the popular press, and marine science. [PDF contains 28 pages]

Panama City Fisheries Resources Office: FY 2003 Annual Report

HIGHLIGHTS FOR FY 2003 1. Continued a 3-year threatened Gulf sturgeon population estimate in the Escambia River, Florida and conducted presence-absence surveys in 4 other Florida river systems and 1 bay. 2. Five juvenile Gulf sturgeon collected, near the mouth of the Choctawhatchee River, Florida, were equipped with sonic tags and monitored while over-wintering in Choctawhatchee Bay. 3. Continued to examine Gulf sturgeon marine habitat use. 4. Implemented Gulf Striped Bass Restoration Plan by coordinating the 20th Annual Morone Workshop, leading the technical committee, transporting broodfish, and coordinating the stocking on the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) river system. 5. Over 73,000 Phase II Gulf striped bass were marked with sequential coded wire tags and stocked in the Apalachicola River. Post-stocking evaluations were conducted at 31 sites. 6. Three stream fisheries assessment s were completed to evaluate the fish community at sites slated for habitat restoration by the Partners for Fish and Wildlife Program (PFW). 7. PFW program identified restoration needs and opportunities for 10 areas. 8. Developed an Unpaved Road Evaluation Handbook. 9. Completed restoration of Chipola River Greenway, Seibenhener Streambank Restoration, Blackwater River State Forest, and Anderson Property. 10. Assessments for fluvial geomorphic conditions for design criteria were completed for 3 projects. 11. Geomorphology in Florida streams initiated development of Rosgen regional curves for Northwest Florida for use by the Florida Department of Transportation. 12. Developed a Memorandum of Understanding between partners for enhancing, protecting, and restoring stream, wetland, and upland habitat in northwest Florida 13. Completed aquatic fauna and fish surveys with new emphasis on integration of data from reach level into watershed and landscape scale and keeping database current. 14. Compliance based sampling of impaired waterbodies on Eglin Air Force Base in conjunction with Florida Department of Environmental Protection for Total Maximum Daily Load development support. 15. Surveyed 20 sites for the federally endangered Okaloosa darter, provided habitat descriptions, worked with partners to implement key recovery tasks and set priorities for restoration. 16. Worked with partners to develop a freshwater mussel survey protocol to provide standard operating procedures for establishing the presence/absence of federally listed mussel species within a Federal project area. 17. GIS database was created to identify all known freshwater mussel records from the northeast Gulf ecosystem. 18. Completed recovery plan for seven freshwater mussels and drafted candidate elevation package for seven additional mussels. Developed proposals to implement recovery plan. 19. Worked with Corps of Engineers and State partners to develop improved reservoir operating policies to benefit both riverine and reservoir fisheries for the ACF river system. 20. Multiple outreach projects were completed to detail aquatic resources conservation opportunities. 21. Multiple stream restoration and watershed management projects initiated or completed (see Appendix A).

Bestimmung der Begriffe Gesamtfang, Fang, Beifang und Rückwürfe

Due to the increasing environmental awareness of the public, marine environmental protection became a general interest. Since fishery is one of the strongest direct influences of man on the marine ecosystem, it became criticised, especially because of the discarding of unused fish, which is considered as a waste of the resource. In the different types of fisheries the calculation of the amounts of discards in relationship to the landings vary strongly. One of the reasons is, however, the different use of the terms 'bycatch' and 'discard'. Thus it is important to work with equal terms and definitions, so that fishermen, protectionists and ecologists talk the same language. This contribution tries to define the following terms achieving a generally acceptable terminology which is also explained by the attached diagram.

Preparing for and adapting to climate change impacts: Next steps for the Washington state department of National Resources Aquatic Resources Program

In response to a growing body of research on projected climate change impacts to Washington State’s coastal areas, the Washington State Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) Aquatic Resources Program (the Program) initiated a climate change preparedness effort in 2009 via the development of a Climate Change Adaptation Strategy (the Strategy)i. The Strategy answers the question “What are the next steps that the Program can take to begin preparing for and adapting to climate change impacts in Washington’s coastal areas?” by considering how projected climate change impacts may effect: (1) Washington’s state-owned aquatic landsii, (2) the Program’s management activities, and (3) DNR’s statutorily established guidelines for managing Washington’s state-owned aquatic lands for the benefit of the public. The Program manages Washington’s state-owned aquatic lands according to the guidelines set forth in Revised Code of Washington 79-105-030, which stipulates that DNR must manage state-owned aquatic lands in a manner which provides a balance of the following public benefits: (1) Encouraging direct public uses and access; (2) Fostering water-dependent uses; (3) Ensuring environmental protection; (4) Utilizing renewable resources. (RCW 79-105-030) The law also stipulates that generating revenue in a manner consistent with these four benefits is a public benefit (RCW 79-105-030). Many of the next steps identified in the Strategy build off of recommendations provided by earlier climate change preparation and adaptation efforts in Washington State, most notably those provided by the Preparation and Adaptation Working Group, which were convened by Washington State Executive Order 70-02 in 2007, and those made in the Washington Climate Change Impacts Assessment (Climate Impacts Group, 2009). (PDF contains 4 pages)