Accelerating loss of seagrasses across the globe threatens coastal ecosystems

Coastal ecosystems and the services they provide are adversely affected by a wide variety of human activities. In particular, seagrass meadows are negatively affected by impacts accruing from the billion or more people who live within 50 km of them. Seagrass meadows provide important ecosystem services, including an estimated $1.9 trillion per year in the form of nutrient cycling; an order of magnitude enhancement of coral reef fish productivity; a habitat for thousands of fish, bird, and invertebrate species; and a major food source for endangered dugong, manatee, and green turtle. Although individual impacts from coastal development, degraded water quality, and climate change have been documented, there has been no quantitative global assessment of seagrass loss until now. Our comprehensive global assessment of 215 studies found that seagrasses have been disappearing at a rate of 110 square kilometers per year since 1980 and that 29% of the known areal extent has disappeared since seagrass areas were initially recorded in 1879. Furthermore, rates of decline have accelerated from a median of 0.9% per year before 1940 to 7% per year since 1990. Seagrass loss rates are comparable to those reported for mangroves, coral reefs, and tropical rainforests and place seagrass meadows among the most threatened ecosystems on earth.

EcoGIS – GIS tools for ecosystem approaches to fisheries management

Executive Summary: The EcoGIS project was launched in September 2004 to investigate how Geographic Information Systems (GIS), marine data, and custom analysis tools can better enable fisheries scientists and managers to adopt Ecosystem Approaches to Fisheries Management (EAFM). EcoGIS is a collaborative effort between NOAA’s National Ocean Service (NOS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and four regional Fishery Management Councils. The project has focused on four priority areas: Fishing Catch and Effort Analysis, Area Characterization, Bycatch Analysis, and Habitat Interactions. Of these four functional areas, the project team first focused on developing a working prototype for catch and effort analysis: the Fishery Mapper Tool. This ArcGIS extension creates time-and-area summarized maps of fishing catch and effort from logbook, observer, or fishery-independent survey data sets. Source data may come from Oracle, Microsoft Access, or other file formats. Feedback from beta-testers of the Fishery Mapper was used to debug the prototype, enhance performance, and add features. This report describes the four priority functional areas, the development of the Fishery Mapper tool, and several themes that emerged through the parallel evolution of the EcoGIS project, the concept and implementation of the broader field of Ecosystem Approaches to Management (EAM), data management practices, and other EAM toolsets. In addition, a set of six succinct recommendations are proposed on page 29. One major conclusion from this work is that there is no single “super-tool” to enable Ecosystem Approaches to Management; as such, tools should be developed for specific purposes with attention given to interoperability and automation. Future work should be coordinated with other GIS development projects in order to provide “value added” and minimize duplication of efforts. In addition to custom tools, the development of cross-cutting Regional Ecosystem Spatial Databases will enable access to quality data to support the analyses required by EAM. GIS tools will be useful in developing Integrated Ecosystem Assessments (IEAs) and providing pre- and post-processing capabilities for spatially-explicit ecosystem models. Continued funding will enable the EcoGIS project to develop GIS tools that are immediately applicable to today’s needs. These tools will enable simplified and efficient data query, the ability to visualize data over time, and ways to synthesize multidimensional data from diverse sources. These capabilities will provide new information for analyzing issues from an ecosystem perspective, which will ultimately result in better understanding of fisheries and better support for decision-making. (PDF file contains 45 pages.)

Coastal & Marine Issues Survey

Florida Sea Grant management and extension specialists developed a questionnaire to solicit information regarding the recipient’s county of residence, occupation, and primary coastal activities. Survey recipients were also asked to select from a list the top five marine-related topics that defined prior strategic plan themes (i.e., marine bio-technology, fisheries, aquaculture, seafood safety, coastal communities, ecosystem health, coastal hazards, and marine education). In addition, questionnaire recipients were asked to evaluate (on a scale of one to five) the importance of a series of listed outcomes that characterize priority planning themes. Last, survey recipients identified up to three priority themes and outcomes that they felt were particularly important and in need of resolution. (PDF contains 36 pages.)

The contrasting invertebrate fauna of freshwater habitats in the Swavesey fens of East Anglia

During July and August 1988, 21 ponds and 33 ditch sites were sampled at Swavesey fens in East Anglia. Water from each site was collected and analysed at monthly intervals in the year preceding faunal sampling. Temperature and oxygen were measured on site. The "quality" of the faunal community was assessed by three approaches: a modification of the BMWP scoring system (Biological Monitoring Working Party); faunal richness was calculated as the number of faunal "groups" at each site; and by using Simpson's index of diversity. Statistical analysis was carried out to explore the relationships between sites, environmental variables and faunal diversity. The survey clearly showed the detrimental effects of elevated nitrate and phosphate from agricultural sources and the localised impacts of treated sewage effluent on invertebrates in ditches.

Prevalence of the commensal barnacle Xenobalanus globicipitis on cetacean species in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean, and a review of global occurrence

Distribution and prevalence of the phoretic barnacle Xenobalanus on cetacean species are reported for 22 cetaceans in the eastern tropical Pacific Ocean (21 million km2). Four cetacean species are newly reported hosts for Xenobalanus: Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni), long-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus capensis), humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae), and spinner dolphin (Stenella longirostris). Sightings of Xenobalanus in pelagic waters are reported for the first time, and concentrations were located within three productive zones: near the Baja California peninsula, the Costa Rica Dome and waters extending west along the 10°N Thermocline Ridge, and near Peru and the Galapagos Archipelago. Greatest prevalence was observed on blue whales (Balaenoptera musculus) indicating that slow swim speeds are not necessary for effective barnacle settlement. Overall, prevalence and prevalence per sighting were generally lower than previously reported. The number of barnacles present on an individual whale was greatest for killer whales, indicating that Xenobalanus larvae may be patchily distributed. The broad geographic distribution and large number of cetacean hosts, indicate an extremely cosmopolitan distribution. A better understanding of the biology of Xenobalanus is needed before this species can be used as a biological tag.

NMFS / Interagency Working Group Evaluation of CITES Criteria and Guidelines.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At present, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) criteria used to assess whether a population qualifies for inclusion in the CITES Appendices relate to (A) size of the population, (B) area of distribution of the population, and (C) declines in the size of the population. Numeric guidelines are provided as indicators of a small population (less than 5,000 individuals), a small subpopulation (less than 500 individuals), a restricted area of distribution for a population (less than 10,000 km2), a restricted area of distribution for a subpopula-tion (less than 500 km2), a high rate of decline (a decrease of 50% or more in total within 5 years or two generations whichever is longer or, for a small wild population, a decline of 20% or more in total within ten years or three generations whichever is longer), large fluctuations (population size or area of distribution varies widely, rapidly and frequently, with a variation greater than one order of magnitude), and a short-term fluctuation (one of two years or less). The Working Group discussed several broad issues of relevance to the CITES criteria and guidelines. These included the importance of the historical extent of decline versus the recent rate of decline; the utility and validity of incorporating relative population productivity into decline criteria; the utility of absolute numbers for defining small populations or small areas; the appropriateness of generation times as time frames for examining declines; the importance of the magnitude and frequency of fluctuations as factors affecting risk of extinction; and the overall utility of numeric thresh-olds or guidelines.

Historical Catches of Humpback Whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, in the North Atlantic Ocean: Estimates of Landings and Removals

Whaling for humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, in the North At- lantic Ocean has occurred in various forms (e.g. for local subsistence, for oil to be sold commercially, using hand harpoons and deck-mounted cannons, using oar-driven open boats and modern powered catcher boats) from the early 1600’s to the present. Several previous attempts to estimate the total numbers of humpback whales removed were considered close to comprehensive, but some uncertainties remained. Moreover, the statistical uncertainty was not consistently presented with the previous estimates. Therefore, we have pursued several avenues of additional data collection and conducted further analyses to close outstanding data gaps and address remaining issues. Our new estimates of landings and total removals of humpback whales from the North Atlantic are 21,476 (SE=214) and 30,842 (SE=655), respectively. These results include statistical uncertainty, reflect new data and improved analysis methods, and take account of some fisheries for which estimates had not been made previously. The new estimates are not sufficiently different from previous ones to resolve the major inconsistencies and discrepancies encountered in efforts to determine the conservation status of humpback whale populations in the North Atlantic.

Commercial Whaling, Especially for Gray Whales, Eschrichtius robustus, and Humpback Whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, at California and Baja California Shore Stations in the 19th Century (1854–1899)

Shore whaling along North America’s California and Baja California coasts during 1854–99 was ancillary to the offshore and alongshore American whale fishery, which had begun in the North Pacific in the early 1800’s and was flourishing by the 1840’s. From its inception at Monterey, Calif., in the mid 1850’s, the shore fishery, involving open boats deployed from land to catch and tow whales for processing, eventually spread from Monterey south to San Diego and Baja California and north to Crescent City near the California–Oregon border. It had declined to a relict industry by the 1880’s, although sporadic efforts continued into the early 20th century. The main target species were gray whales, Eschrichtius robustus, and humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, with the valuable North Pacific right whale, Eubalaena japonica, also pursued opportunistically. Catch data are grossly incomplete for most stations; no logbooks were kept for these operations as they were for high-seas whaling voyages. Even when good information is available on catch levels, usually as number of whales landed or quantity of oil produced, it is rarely broken down by species. Therefore, we devised methods for extrapolation, interpolation, pro rationing, correction, and informed judgment to produce time series of catches. The resulting estimates of landings from 1854 to 1899 are 3,150 (SE = 112) gray whales and 1,637 (SE = 62) humpback whales. The numbers landed should be multiplied by 1.2 to account for hunting loss (i.e. whales harpooned or shot but not recovered and processed).

Nineteenth-century Ship-based Catches of Gray Whales, Eschrichtius robustus, in the Eastern North Pacific

The 19th century commercial ship-based fishery for gray whales, Eschrichtius robustus, in the eastern North Pacific began in 1846 and continued until the mid 1870’s in southern areas and the 1880’s in the north. Henderson identified three periods in the southern part of the fishery: Initial, 1846–1854; Bonanza, 1855–1865; and Declining, 1866–1874. The largest catches were made by “lagoon whaling” in or immediately outside the whale population’s main wintering areas in Mexico—Magdalena Bay, Scammon’s Lagoon, and San Ignacio Lagoon. Large catches were also made by “coastal” or “alongshore” whaling where the whalers attacked animals as they migrated along the coast. Gray whales were also hunted to a limited extent on their feeding grounds in the Bering and Chukchi Seas in summer. Using all available sources, we identified 657 visits by whaling vessels to the Mexican whaling grounds during the gray whale breeding and calving seasons between 1846 and 1874. We then estimated the total number of such visits in which the whalers engaged in gray whaling. We also read logbooks from a sample of known visits to estimate catch per visit and the rate at which struck animals were lost. This resulted in an overall estimate of 5,269 gray whales (SE = 223.4) landed by the ship-based fleet (including both American and foreign vessels) in the Mexican whaling grounds from 1846 to 1874. Our “best” estimate of the number of gray whales removed from the eastern North Pacific (i.e. catch plus hunting loss) lies somewhere between 6,124 and 8,021, depending on assumptions about survival of struck-but-lost whales. Our estimates can be compared to those by Henderson (1984), who estimated that 5,542–5,507 gray whales were secured and processed by ship-based whalers between 1846 and 1874; Scammon (1874), who believed the total kill over the same period (of eastern gray whales by all whalers in all areas) did not exceed 10,800; and Best (1987), who estimated the total landed catch of gray whales (eastern and western) by American ship-based whalers at 2,665 or 3,013 (method-dependent) from 1850 to 1879. Our new estimates are not high enough to resolve apparent inconsistencies between the catch history and estimates of historical abundance based on genetic variability. We suggest several lines of further research that may help resolve these inconsistencies.

Estimates of Marine Mammal, Sea Turtle, and Seabird Mortality in the California Drift Gillnet Fishery for Swordfish and Thresher Shark, 1996–2002

Estimates of incidental marine mammal, sea turtle, and seabird mortality in the California drift gillnet fishery for broadbill swordfish, Xiphias gladius, and common thresher shark, Alopias vulpinus, are summarized for the 7-year period, 1996 to 2002. Fishery observer coverage was 19% over the period (3,369 days observed/17,649 days fished). An experiment to test the effectiveness of acoustic pingers on reducing marine mammal entanglements in this fishery began in 1996 and resulted in statistically significant reductions in marine mammal bycatch. The most commonly entangled marine mammal species were the short-beaked common dolphin, Delphinus delphis; California sea lion, Zalophus californianus; and northern right whale dolphin, Lissodelphis borealis. Estimated mortality by species (CV and observed mortality in parentheses) from 1996 to 2002 is 861 (0.11, 133) short-beaked common dolphins; 553 (0.16, 103) California sea lions; 151 (0.25, 31) northern right whale dolphins; 150 (0.21, 27) northern elephant seals, Mirounga angustirostris; 54 (0.41, 10) long-beaked common dolphins, Delphinus capensis; 44 (0.53, 6) Dall’s porpoise, Phocoenoides dalli; 19 (0.60, 5) Risso’s dolphins, Grampus griseus; 11 (0.71, 2) gray whales, Eschrichtius robustus; 7 (0.83, 2) sperm whales, Physeter macrocephalus; 7 (0.96, 1) short-finned pilot whales, Globicephala macrorhychus; 12 (1.06, 1) minke whales, Balaenoptera acutorostrata; 5 (1.05, 1) fin whales, Balaenoptera physalus; 11 (0.68, 2) unidentified pinnipeds; 33 (0.52, 4) leatherback turtles, Dermochelys coriacea; 18 (0.57, 3) loggerhead turtles, Caretta caretta; 13 (0.73, 3) northern fulmars, Fulmarus glacialis; and 6 (0.86, 2) unidentified birds.

An ecological characterization of the Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary Region: oceanographic, biogeographic, and contaminants assessment

The mission of NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP) is to serve as the trustee for a system of marine protected areas, to conserve, protect, and enhance their biodiversity, ecological integrity, and cultural legacy while facilitating compatible uses. Since 1972, thirteen National Marine Sanctuaries, representing a wide variety of ocean environments, have been established, each with management goals tuned to their unique diversity. Extending from Cape Ann to Cape Cod across the mouth of Massachusetts Bay, Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary (NMS) encompasses 2,181 square kilometers of highly productive, diverse, and culturally unique Federal waters. As a result of its varied seafloor topography, oceanographic conditions, and high primary productivity, Stellwagen Bank NMS is utilized by diverse assemblages of seabirds, marine mammals, invertebrates, and fish species, as well as containing a number of maritime heritage resources. Furthermore, it is a region of cultural significance, highlighted by the recent discovery of several historic shipwrecks. Officially designated in 1992, Stellwagen Bank became the Nation’s twelfth National Marine Sanctuary in order to protect these and other unique biological, geological, oceanographic, and cultural features of the region. The Stellwagen Bank NMS is in the midst of its first management plan review since designation. The management plan review process, required by law, is designed to evaluate, enhance, and guide the development of future research efforts, education and outreach, and the management approaches used by Sanctuaries. Given the ecological and physical complexity of Stellwagen Bank NMS, burgeoning anthropogenic impacts to the region, and competing human and biological uses, the review process was challenged to assimilate and analyze the wealth of existing scientific knowledge in a framework which could enhance management decision-making. Unquestionably, the Gulf of Maine, Massachusetts Bay, and Stellwagen Bank-proper are extremely well studied systems, and in many regards, the scientific information available greatly exceeds that which is available for other Sanctuaries. However, the propensity of scientific information reinforces the need to utilize a comprehensive analytical approach to synthesize and explore linkages between disparate information on physical, biological, and chemical processes, while identifying topics needing further study. Given this requirement, a partnership was established between NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuary Program (NMSP) and the National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NCCOS) so as to leverage existing NOAA technical expertise to assist the Sanctuary in developing additional ecological assessment products which would benefit the management plan review process.

Mapping reef fish and the seascape: using acoustics and spatial modeling to guide coastal management

Reef fish distributions are patchy in time and space with some coral reef habitats supporting higher densities (i.e., aggregations) of fish than others. Identifying and quantifying fish aggregations (particularly during spawning events) are often top priorities for coastal managers. However, the rapid mapping of these aggregations using conventional survey methods (e.g., non-technical SCUBA diving and remotely operated cameras) are limited by depth, visibility and time. Acoustic sensors (i.e., splitbeam and multibeam echosounders) are not constrained by these same limitations, and were used to concurrently map and quantify the location, density and size of reef fish along with seafloor structure in two, separate locations in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Reef fish aggregations were documented along the shelf edge, an ecologically important ecotone in the region. Fish were grouped into three classes according to body size, and relationships with the benthic seascape were modeled in one area using Boosted Regression Trees. These models were validated in a second area to test their predictive performance in locations where fish have not been mapped. Models predicting the density of large fish (≥29 cm) performed well (i.e., AUC = 0.77). Water depth and standard deviation of depth were the most influential predictors at two spatial scales (100 and 300 m). Models of small (≤11 cm) and medium (12–28 cm) fish performed poorly (i.e., AUC = 0.49 to 0.68) due to the high prevalence (45–79%) of smaller fish in both locations, and the unequal prevalence of smaller fish in the training and validation areas. Integrating acoustic sensors with spatial modeling offers a new and reliable approach to rapidly identify fish aggregations and to predict the density large fish in un-surveyed locations. This integrative approach will help coastal managers to prioritize sites, and focus their limited resources on areas that may be of higher conservation value.

Technical and mapping support for marine spatial planning: Final report

Washington depends on a healthy coastal and marine ecosystem to maintain a thriving economy and vibrant communities. These ecosystems support critical habitats for wildlife and a growing number of often competing ocean activities, such as fishing, transportation, aquaculture, recreation, and energy production. Planners, policy makers and resource managers are being challenged to sustainably balance ocean uses, and environmental conservation in a finite space and with limited information. This balancing act can be supported by spatial planning. Marine spatial planning (MSP) is a planning process that enables integrated, forward looking, and consistent decision making on the human uses of the oceans and coasts. It can improve marine resource management by planning for human uses in locations that reduce conflict, increase certainty, and support a balance among social, economic, and ecological benefits we receive from ocean resources. In March 2010, the Washington state legislature enacted a marine spatial planning law (RCW §43.372) to address resource use conflicts in Washington waters. In 2011, a report to the legislature and a workshop on human use data provided guidance for the marine spatial planning process. The report outlines a set of recommendations for the State to effectively undertake marine spatial planning and this work plan will support some of these recommendations, such as: federal integration, regional coordination, developing mechanisms to integrate scientific and technical expertise, developing data standards, and accessing and sharing spatial data. In 2012 the Governor amended the existing law to focus funding on mapping and ecosystem assessments for Washington’s Pacific coast and the legislature provided $2.1 million in funds to begin marine spatial planning off Washington’s coast. The funds are appropriated through the Washington Department of Natural Resources Marine Resources Stewardship Account with coordination among the State Ocean Caucus, the four Coastal Treaty Tribes, four coastal Marine Resource Committees and the newly formed stakeholder body, the Washington Coastal Marine Advisory Council.

Gap analysis of marine ecosystem data for the Department of Interior, National Park Service Inventory & Monitoring Program

The Gap Analysis of Marine Ecosystem Data project is a review of available geospatial data which can assist in marine natural resource management for eight park units. The project includes the collection of geospatial information and its incorporation in a single consistent geodatabase format. The project also includes a mapping portal which can be seen at: http://ccma.nos.noaa.gov/explorer/gapanalysis/gap_analysis.html In addition to the collection of geospatial information and mapping portal we have conducted a gap analysis of a standard suite of available information for managing marine resources. Additional gap were identified by interviewing park service staff.

Integrating remote sensing products and GIS tools to support marine spatial management in West Hawai'i

Marine protected areas (MPAs) represent a form of spatial management, and geospatial information on living marine resources and associated habitat is extremely important to support best management practices in a spatially discrete MPA. Benthic habitat maps provide georeferenced information on the geomorphic structure and biological cover types in the marine environment. This information supports an enhanced understanding of ecosystem function and species habitat utilization patterns. Benthic habitat maps are most useful for marine management and spatial planning purposes when they are created at a scale that is relevant to management actions. We sought to improve the resolution of existing benthic habitat maps created during a regional mapping effort in Hawai`i. Our results complemented these existing regional maps and provided more detailed, finer-scale habitat maps for a network of MPAs in West Hawai`i. The map products created during this study allow local planners and managers to extract information at a spatial scale relevant to the discrete management units, and appropriate for local marine management efforts on the Kona Coast. The resultant benthic habitat maps were integrated in a geographic information system (GIS) that also included aerial imagery, underwater video, MPA regulations, summarized ecological data and other relevant and spatially explicit information. The integration of the benthic habitat maps with additional “value added” geospatial information into a dynamic GIS provide a decision support tool with pertinent marine resource information available in one central location and support the application of a spatial approach to the management of marine resources. Further, this work can serve as a case study to demonstrate the integration of remote sensing products and GIS tools at a fine spatial scale relevant to local-level marine spatial planning and management efforts.