Design for Survival: Sustainability for Planet and Structure

Buildings in Port Aransas encounter drastic environmental challenges: the potential catastrophic storm surge and high winds from a hurricane, and daily conditions hostile to buildings, vehicles, and even most vegetation. Its location a few hundred feet from the Gulf of Mexico and near-tropical latitude expose buildings to continuous high humidity, winds laden with scouring sand and corrosive salt, and extremes of temperature and ultraviolet light. Building construction methods are able to address each of these, but doing so in a sustainable way creates significant challenges. The new research building at the Marine Science Institute has been designed and is being constructed to meet the demand for both survivability and sustainability. It is tracking towards formal certification as a LEED Gold structure while being robust and resistant to the harsh coastal environment. The effects of a hurricane are mitigated by elevating buildings and providing a windproof envelope. Ground-level enclosures are designed to be sacrificial and non-structural so they can wash or blow away without imposing damage on the upper portions of the building, and only non-critical functions and equipment will be supported within them. Design features that integrate survivability with sustainability include: orientation of building axis; integral shading from direct summer sunlight; light wells; photovoltaic arrays; collection of rainwater and air conditioning condensate for use in landscape irrigation; reduced impervious cover; xeriscaping and indigenous plants; recycling of waste heat from air conditioning systems; roofing system that reflects light and heat; long life, low maintenance stainless steel, high-tensile vinyl, hard-anodized aluminum and hot-dipped galvanized mountings throughout; chloride-resistant concrete; reduced visual impact; recycling of construction materials.

Seafood safety: economics of Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) programmes

Seventy percent of the world's catch of fish and fishery products is consumed as food. Fish and shellfish products represent 15.6 percent of animal protein supply and 5.6 percent of total protein supply on a worldwide basis. Developing countries account for almost 50 percent of global fish exports. Seafood-borne disease or illness outbreaks affect consumers both physically and financially, and create regulatory problems for both importing and exporting countries. Seafood safety as a commodity cannot be purchased in the marketplace and government intervenes to regulate the safety and quality of seafood. Theoretical issues and data limitations create problems in estimating what consumers will pay for seafood safety and quality. The costs and benefits of seafood safety must be considered at all levels, including the fishers, fish farmers, input suppliers to fishing, processing and trade, seafood processors, seafood distributors, consumers and government. Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) programmes are being implemented on a worldwide basis for seafood. Studies have been completed to estimate the cost of HACCP in various shrimp, fish and shellfish plants in the United States, and are underway for some seafood plants in the United Kingdom, Canada and Africa. Major developments within the last two decades have created a set of complex trading situations for seafood. Current events indicate that seafood safety and quality can be used as non-tariff barriers to free trade. Research priorities necessary to estimate the economic value and impacts of achieving safer seafood are outlined at the consumer, seafood production and processing, trade and government levels. An extensive list of references on the economics of seafood safety and quality is presented. (PDF contains 56 pages; captured from html.)

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)

Use of non-natal estuaries by migratory striped bass (Morone saxatilis) in summer

For most migratory fish, little is known about the location and size of foraging areas or how long individuals remain in foraging areas, even though these attributes may affect their growth, survival, and impact on local prey. We tested whether striped bass (Morone saxatilis Walbaum), found in Massachusetts in summer, were migratory, how long they stayed in non-natal estuaries, whether observed spatial patterns differed from random model predictions, whether fish returned to the same area across multiple years, and whether fishing effort could explain recapture patterns. Anchor tags were attached to striped bass that were caught and released in Massachusetts in 1999 and 2000, and recaptured between 1999 and 2007. In fall, tagged striped bass were caught south of where they were released in summer, confirming that fish were coastal migrants. In the first summer, 77% and 100% of the recaptured fish in the Great Marsh and along the Massachusetts coast, respectively, were caught in the same place where they were released. About two thirds of all fish recaptured near where they were released were caught 2–7 years after tagging. Our study shows that smaller (400–500 mm total length) striped bass migrate hundreds of kilometers along the Atlantic Ocean coast, cease their mobile lifestyle in summer when they use a relatively localized area for foraging (<20 km2), and return to these same foraging areas in subsequent ye