26 resultados para Outreach
em Aquatic Commons
Resumo:
Lionfish (Pterois volitans/miles complex) are venomous coral reef fishes from the Indian and western Pacific oceans that are now found in the western Atlantic Ocean. Adult lionfish have been observed from Miami, Florida to Cape Hatteras, North Carolina, and juvenile lionfish have been observed off North Carolina, New York, and Bermuda. The large number of adults observed and the occurrence of juveniles indicate that lionfish are established and reproducing along the southeast United States coast. Introductions of marine species occur in many ways. Ballast water discharge, a very common method of introduction for marine invertebrates, is responsible for many freshwater fish introductions. In contrast, most marine fish introductions result from intentional stocking for fishery purposes. Lionfish, however, likely were introduced via unintentional or intentional aquarium releases, and the introduction of lionfish into United States waters should lead to an assessment of the threat posed by the aquarium trade as a vector for fish introductions. Currently, no management actions are being taken to limit the effect of lionfish on the southeast United States continental shelf ecosystem. Further, only limited funds have been made available for research. Nevertheless, the extent of the introduction has been documented and a forecast of the maximum potential spread of lionfish is being developed. Under a scenario of no management actions and limited research, three predictions are made: ● With no action, the lionfish population will continue to grow along the southeast United States shelf. ● Effects on the marine ecosystem of the southeast United States will become more noticeable as the lionfish population grows. ● There will be incidents of lionfish envenomations of divers and/or fishers along the east coast of the United States. Removing lionfish from the southeast United States continental shelf ecosystem would be expensive and likely impossible. A bounty could be established that would encourage the removal of fish and provide specimens for research. However, the bounty would need to be lower than the price of fish in the aquarium trade (~$25-$50 each) to ensure that captured specimens were from the wild. Such a low bounty may not provide enough incentive for capturing lionfish in the wild. Further, such action would only increase the interaction between the public and lionfish, increasing the risk of lionfish envenomations. As the introduction of lionfish is very likely irreversible, future actions should focus on five areas. 1) The population of lionfish should be tracked. 2) Research should be conducted so that scientists can make better predictions regarding the status of the invasion and the effects on native species, ecosystem function, and ecosystem services. 3) Outreach and education efforts must be increased, both specifically toward lionfish and more generally toward the aquarium trade as a method of fish introductions. 4) Additional regulation should be considered to reduce the frequency of marine fish introduction into U.S. waters. However, the issue is more complicated than simply limiting the import of non-native species, and these complexities need to be considered simultaneously. 5) Health care providers along the east coast of the United States need to be notified that a venomous fish is now resident along the southeast United States. The introduction and spread of lionfish illustrates the difficulty inherent in managing introduced species in marine systems. Introduced species often spread via natural mechanisms after the initial introduction. Efforts to control the introduction of marine fish will fail if managers do not consider the natural dispersal of a species following an introduction. Thus, management strategies limiting marine fish introductions need to be applied over the scale of natural ecological dispersal to be effective, pointing to the need for a regional management approach defined by natural processes not by political boundaries. The introduction and success of lionfish along the east coast should change the long-held perception that marine fish invasions are a minimal threat to marine ecosystems. Research is needed to determine the effects of specific invasive fish species in specific ecosystems. More broadly, a cohesive plan is needed to manage, mitigate and minimize the effects of marine invasive fish species on ecosystems that are already compromised by other human activities. Presently, the magnitude of marine fish introductions as a stressor on marine ecosystems cannot be quantified, but can no longer be dismissed as negligible. (PDF contains 31 pages)
Resumo:
In February 2006, an Alternative Platform Observer Program (APP) was implemented in North Carolina (NC) to observe commercial gillnet trips by small vessels [<24 ft (7.2 m)] in nearshore waters out to three nm (5.6 km). Efforts began with outreach to the fishing industry while simultaneously gathering information to be incorporated in a Database of Fishermen. From 30 March 2006 through 31 March 2007, 36 trips were observed. Observed trips of the NC nearshore gillnet fishery targeted seven species: kingfish (Menticirrhus spp.), Spanish mackerel (Scomberomorus maculatus), spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias), spot (Leiostomus xanthurus), spotted seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus), striped bass (Morone saxatilis), and weakfish (Cynoscion regalis). Of the 36 trips, 20 (55.6%) were with vessels that were new to the Northeast Fisheries Observer Program (NEFOP), having never carried an observer. Based on the landings data for small vessels from North Carolina Division of Marine Fisheries (NCDMF), the APP has achieved 10.1% coverage by number of trips and 4.0% by pounds landed. No incidental takes of bottlenose dolphins were observed by the APP, although bottlenose dolphins were sighted during 19 (52.8%) observed trips. The APP has drastically increased the number of observed trips of small vessels in the nearshore waters of NC. When combined with trips observed by NEFOP (n=205), the APP resulted in a 15.6% increase in the number of observed gillnet trips. (PDF contains 34 pages)
Resumo:
Executive Summary: The marine environment plays a critical role in the amount of carbon dioxide (CO2) that remains within Earth’s atmosphere, but has not received as much attention as the terrestrial environment when it comes to climate change discussions, programs, and plans for action. It is now apparent that the oceans have begun to reach a state of CO2 saturation, no longer maintaining the “steady-state” carbon cycle that existed prior to the Industrial Revolution. The increasing amount of CO2 present within the oceans and the atmosphere has an effect on climate and a cascading effect on the marine environment. Potential physical effects of climate change within the marine environment, including ocean acidification, changes in wind and upwelling regimes, increasing global sea surface temperatures, and sea level rise, can lead to dramatic, fundamental changes within marine and coastal ecosystems. Altered ecosystems can result in changing coastal economies through a reduction in marine ecosystem services such as commercial fish stocks and coastal tourism. Local impacts from climate change should be a front line issue for natural resource managers, but they often feel too overwhelmed by the magnitude of this issue to begin to take action. They may not feel they have the time, funding, or staff to take on a challenge as large as climate change and continue to not act as a result. Already, natural resource managers work to balance the needs of humans and the economy with ecosystem biodiversity and resilience. Responsible decisions are made each day that consider a wide variety of stakeholders, including community members, agencies, non-profit organizations, and business/industry. The issue of climate change must be approached as a collaborative effort, one that natural resource managers can facilitate by balancing human demands with healthy ecosystem function through research and monitoring, education and outreach, and policy reform. The Scientific Expert Group on Climate Change in their 2007 report titled, “Confronting Climate Change: Avoiding the Unmanageable and Managing the Unavoidable” charged governments around the world with developing strategies to “adapt to ongoing and future changes in climate change by integrating the implications of climate change into resource management and infrastructure development”. Resource managers must make future management decisions within an uncertain and changing climate based on both physical and biological ecosystem response to climate change and human perception of and response to the issue. Climate change is the biggest threat facing any protected area today and resource managers must lead the charge in addressing this threat. (PDF has 59 pages.)
Resumo:
This report describes cases relating to the management of national marine sanctuaries in which certain scientific information was required so managers could make decisions that effectively protected trust resources. The cases presented represent only a fraction of difficult issues that marine sanctuary managers deal with daily. They include, among others, problems related to wildlife disturbance, vessel routing, marine reserve placement, watershed management, oil spill response, and habitat restoration. Scientific approaches to address these problems vary significantly, and include literature surveys, data mining, field studies (monitoring, mapping, observations, and measurement), geospatial and biogeographic analysis, and modeling. In most cases there is also an element of expert consultation and collaboration among multiple partners, agencies with resource protection responsibilities, and other users and stakeholders. The resulting management responses may involve direct intervention (e.g., for spill response or habitat restoration issues), proposal of boundary alternatives for marine sanctuaries or reserves, changes in agency policy or regulations, making recommendations to other agencies with resource protection responsibilities, proposing changes to international or domestic shipping rules, or development of new education or outreach programs. (PDF contains 37 pages.)
Resumo:
During April 8th-10th, 2008, the Aliance for Coastal Technology (ACT) partner institutions, University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), Alaska SeaLife Center (ASLC), and the Oil Spill Recovery Institute (OSRI) hosted a workshop entitled: "Hydrocarbon sensors for oil spill prevention and response" in Seward, Alaska. The main focus was to bring together 29 workshop participants-representing workshop managers, scientists, and technology developers - together to discuss current and future hydrocarbon in-situ, laboratory, and remote sensors as they apply to oil spill prevention and response. [PDF contains 28 pages] Hydrocarbons and their derivatives still remain one of the most important energy sources in the world. To effectively manage these energy sources, proper protocol must be implemented to ensure prevention and responses to oil spills, as there are significant economic and environmental costs when oil spills occur. Hydrocarbon sensors provide the means to detect and monitor oil spills before, during, and after they occur. Capitalizing on the properties of oil, developers have designed in-situ, laboratory, and remote sensors that absorb or reflect the electromagnetic energy at different spectral bands. Workshop participants identified current hydrocarbon sensors (in-situ, laboratory, and remote sensors) and their overall performance. To achieve the most comprehensive understanding of oil spills, multiple sensors will be needed to gather oil spill extent, location, movement, thickness, condition, and classification. No single hydrocarbon sensor has the capability to collect all this information. Participants, therefore, suggested the development of means to combine sensor equipment to effectively and rapidly establish a spill response. As the exploration of oil continues at polar latitudes, sensor equipment must be developed to withstand harsh arctic climates, be able to detect oil under ice, and reduce the need for ground teams because ice extent is far too large of an area to cover. Participants also recognized the need for ground teams because ice extent is far too large of an area to cover. Participants also recognized the need for the U.S. to adopt a multi-agency cooperation for oil spill response, as the majority of issues surounding oil spill response focuses not on the hydrocarbon sensors but on an effective contingency plan adopted by all agencies. It is recommended that the U.S. could model contingency planning based on other nations such as Germany and Norway. Workshop participants were asked to make recommendations at the conclusion of the workshop and are summarized below without prioritization: *Outreach materials must be delivered to funding sources and Congressional delegates regarding the importance of oil spill prevention and response and the development of proper sensors to achieve effective response. *Develop protocols for training resource managers as new sensors become available. *Develop or adopt standard instrument specifications and testing protocols to assist manufacturers in further developing new sensor technology. *As oil exploration continues at polar latitudes, more research and development should be allocated to develop a suite of instruments that are applicable to oil detection under ice.
Resumo:
The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) Workshop entitled, "Biological Platforms as Sensor Technologies and their Use as Indicators for the Marine Environment" was held in Seward, Alaska, September 19 - 21,2007. The workshop was co-hosted by the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) and the Alaska SeaLife Center (ASLC). The workshop was attended by 25 participants representing a wide range of research scientists, managers, and manufacturers who develop and deploy sensory equipment using aquatic vertebrates as the mode of transport. Eight recommendations were made by participants at the conclusion of the workshop and are presented here without prioritization: 1. Encourage research toward development of energy scavenging devices of suitable sizes for use in remote sensing packages attached to marine animals. 2. Encourage funding sources for development of new sensor technologies and animal-borne tags. 3. Develop animal-borne environmental sensor platforms that offer more combined systems and improved data recovery methodologies, and expand the geographic scope of complementary fixed sensor arrays. 4. Engage the oceanographic community by: a. Offering a mini workshop at an AGU ocean sciences conference for people interested in developing an ocean carbon program that utilizes animal-borne sensor technology. b. Outreach to chemical oceanographers. 5. Min v2d6.sheepserver.net e and merge technologies from other disciplines that may be applied to marine sensors (e.g. biomedical field). 6. Encourage the NOAA Permitting Office to: a. Make a more predictable, reliable, and consistent permitting system for using animal platforms. b. Establish an evaluation process. c. Adhere to established standards. 7. Promote the expanded use of calibrated hydrophones as part of existing animal platforms. 8. Encourage the Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) to promote animal tracking as effective samplers of the marine environment, and use of animals as ocean sensor technology platforms. [PDF contains 20 pages]
Resumo:
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]
Resumo:
In the Cayman Islands we are enriched with a wonderful natural environment. In this Green Guide to our Marine Environment we hope to show you how all of our lives on these three magical islands are intimately connected to the land and the sea that surrounds it. Like many of our Caribbean neighbours, a large proportion of our economy depends on reef-based fishing, diving and tourism. The beauty of our coral reefs, our beaches and our lagoons is that it is part of our heritage, and it draws many thousands of overseas visitors to our shores. It is our responsibility, as stakeholders sharing this beautiful environment, to do what we can to minimise our impact upon it. Ogier has sponsored the Green Guide, and through this publication, is helping us to preserve our natural and cultural heritage.... [PDF contains 32 pages]
Resumo:
This Green Guide provides a brief summary of the alarming evidence of changing climate in the Cayman Islands. As we illustrated in our first Green Guide (2008), our lives on these three magical islands are intimately connected to the land and the surrounding sea. Our economy depends on keeping our islands healthy, because our coral reefs, our beaches, our natural heritage, all draw many thousands of overseas visitors to our shores. It is our responsibility, as stakeholders sharing this beautiful environment, to do what we can to minimise our impact upon it... [PDF contains 32 pages]
Resumo:
(pdf contains 32 pages)
Resumo:
HIGHLIGHTS FOR FY 2008 1. Completed the first of a two-year Gulf sturgeon population study on the Choctawhatchee River, Florida. The sub adult and adult Gulf sturgeon population was estimated at 2,800 fish. 2. Gulf sturgeon eggs were collected at three hard bottom sites in the Apalachicola River, Florida; two sites were previously confirmed spawning areas and one was a newly confirmed spawning area. 3. Documented 55 potential environmental threats to Gulf sturgeon spawning habitat in the Pea River, Florida and Alabama. 4. Assigned the Eglin AFB Road-Stream Crossing Working Group to guide the closure, repair and maintenance of roads and road stream crossings that impact threatened and endangered species. 5. Conducted 81 assessments of fish and stream invertebrates on and in watersheds surrounding Eglin AFB. 6. Provided technical support for the 5-year status review and reclassification proposed rule for the Okaloosa darter. 7. Initiated an intensive population genetic analysis of the Okaloosa darter throughout its range. Tissues from over 200 Okaloosa darters were collected and analyzed. 8. Established a GIS database to serve as a host for data from any sites sampled for mussels in Northeast Gulf of Mexico drainages. 9. Conducted habitat surveys at 115 locations in the Apalachicola River to assess the effects of drought-related mussel mortality and strandings, evaluate habitat conditions, and assess population demography. 10. A land use/aerial imagery threats assessment data analysis was completed for the Chipola River. A total of 266 impoundments/borrow pits and 471 unpaved road crossings were identified among the threats. 11. Okaloosa darters marked with elastomeric dyes were monitored in Mill Creek, Eglin AFB, to determine movement and habitat use following completion of a fish passage project. 3 12. Partners for Fish and Wildlife funded a streambank and riparian restoration project on Econfina Creek consisting of 3,900 feet of streambank fencing to exclude cattle access. One acre of riparian floodplain was planted with native trees. 13. We provided design and on-the-ground assistance for restoring surface hydrology at St. Vincent NWR. The project restored approximately 1.5 miles of tidal stream and 100 acres of wetlands. 14. A study was completed on 11 coastal streams to document large wood debris relationships with fluvial geomorphic characteristics. 15. We developed a Population Viability Analysis model for the fat threeridge mussel to determine current and future risk of extinction. 17. A Gulf Sturgeon Friends Group, “Gulf Sturgeon Preservation Society” was organized in FY 08. 18. Multiple outreach projects were completed to detail aquatic resource conservation needs and opportunities, including National Fishing Week, Earth Day, several festivals and school outreach.
Resumo:
HIGHLIGHTS FOR FY 2007 1. Completed a three-year Gulf sturgeon population study on the Escambia River, Florida. The population was estimated at 451 fish. 2. Implemented the Gulf Striped Bass Restoration Plan by coordinating the 24th Annual Morone Workshop, leading the technical committee, transporting broodfish, coordinating stocking on the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) river system, and evaluating post-stocking success. 3. Completed a survey to document the extent of aquatic resources, recreational fishing opportunities, and fishery management needs on Department of Defense (DoD) facilities located in Region 4. 4. Continued a project in the Apalachicola River to describe the effects of exceptional drought conditions on freshwater mussel recovery. 5. Initiated a study to locate extant populations of the federally endangered Ochlockonee moccasinshell in the Ochlockonee River Basin. We documented the first live individuals in 14 years. 6. Completed a five-year status review for seven threatened and endangered freshwater mussels in the NEG drainages. 7. Restored Mill Creek to improve habitat for the endangered Okaloosa darter by removing six fish passage barriers and creating approximately 3,000 linear feet of new and regenerated stream channel with floodplain and native vegetation. 8. Completed a fish passage project that connected about 5 miles of habitat in Little Rocky Creek, Eglin Air Force Base, to benefit the Okaloosa darter. 9. Completed a threats analysis to aquatic species in the Chipola River watershed using GIS stream data, aerial imagery, and land cover data. 10. Multiple outreach projects were completed to detail aquatic resource conservation needs and opportunities, including National Fishing Week, Earth Day, several festivals, and school outreach.