Weighing your options: how to protect your property from shoreline erosion, a handbook for estuarine property owners in North Carolina

If you own property on one of North Carolina’s estuaries, you can use this guide as a tool to learn about the choices you have to control your shoreline erosion and help decide which approach may be right for you. In North Carolina, we make a distinction between waterfront property that is located on the estuary, referred to as estuarine, shoreline, soundfront or riverside property, and waterfront property located directly on the ocean, referred to as oceanfront. Why? State laws and regulations addressing estuarine and oceanfront property, and the available erosion control methods, are quite different. This guide focuses on estuarine property. We’ll introduce you to the six main erosion control options in use in North Carolina and give you information about the out-of-pocket costs and tangible benefits of each option. We’ll also give you information about “hidden” costs and benefits that you may want to factor into your decision-making. You are fortunate to have a piece of estuarine shoreline to call your own, whether it’s your year-round residence or a weekend getaway. And if you’ve noticed some shoreline erosion lately, you’re probably a little concerned. But there are ready solutions.

Investment prospects in inland capture fisheries with special reference to small reservoirs: the exclusive fishing right licence model

The paper discusses simple methods of estimating fish yield from small reservoirs and establishes 2 indices of fish yield based on: 1) the relationship between the catch per boat in artisanal commercial fish landings and the catch per unit effort in experimental gill-net survey; and also, 2) the relationship between standing crop of fish in reservoirs and catch per unit effort in experimental gill-net survey. The paper then elaborates on the methods of utilizing these simple relationships in managing small reservoirs in Nigeria based on the principle of exclusive fishing right licence with the objective of attracting investors into this viable inland fishery investment project hitherto untapped

Applying hedonic property models in the planning and evaluation of shoreline management

According to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment’s chapter “Coastal Systems” (Agardy and Alder 2005), 40% of the world population falls within 100 km of the coast. Agardy and Alder report that population densities in coastal regions are three times those of inland regions and demographic forecasts suggest a continued rise in coastal populations. These high population levels can be partially traced to the abundance of ecosystem services provided in the coastal zone. While populations benefit from an abundance of services, population pressure also degrades existing services and leads to increased susceptibility of property and human life to natural hazards. In the face of these challenges, environmental administrators on the coast must pursue agendas which reflect the difficult balance between private and public interests. These decisions include maintaining economic prosperity and personal freedoms, protecting or enhancing the existing flow of ecosystem services to society, and mitigating potential losses from natural hazards. (PDF contains 5 pages)

Spatial and temporal distribution of North Atlantic right whales (Eubalaena glacialis) in Cape Cod Bay, and implications for management

Cape Cod Bay (Massachusetts) is the only known winter and early spring feeding area for concentrations of the endangered North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis) population. During January–May, 1998–2002, 167 aerial surveys were conducted (66,466 km of total survey effort), providing a complete representation of the spatiotemporal distribution of right whales in the bay during winter and spring. A total of 1553 right whales were sighted; some of these sightings were multiple sightings of the same individuals. Right whale distribution and relative abundance patterns were quantified as sightings per unit of effort (SPUE) and partitioned into 103 23-km2 cells and 12 2-week periods. Significant interannual variations in mean SPUE and timing of SPUE maxima were likely due to physically forced changes in available food resources. The area of greatest SPUE expanded and contracted during the season but its center remained in the eastern bay. Most cells with SPUE>0 were inside the federal critical habitat (CH) and this finding gave evidence of the need for management measures within CH boundaries to reduce anthropogenic mortality from vessel strikes and entanglement. There was significant within-season SPUE variability: low in December−January, increasing to a maximum in late February−early April, and declining to zero in May; and these results provide support for management measures from 1 January

Common property regimes

Common property regimes are forms of resource management grounded in a set of individually accepted rights and rules for the sustainable and independent use of collective goods. Details about this resource management systems are presented in this article.

Community-based coastal resource management in Orion (Bataan, Philippines) : building community property rights in a fishing community

The Community-based Coastal Resource Management Project in Orion, Bataan, Philippines was started in 1991. The village level fishers organizations have formed a municipal-wide association called the Samahan at Ugnayan ng Pangisdaan sa Orion (SUGPO). It represents 70% of the small-scale fishers in Orion and has taken on the task of rehabilitating the degraded fishing grounds. The experience in Orion indicates that coastal resource management can be successful if the fishers have ownership of the program and the costs and benefits of the program are distributed equally in a manner acceptable to them.

History of Whaling and Estimated Kill of Right Whales, Balaena glacialis, in the Northeastern United States, 1620–1924

This study, part of a broader investigation of the history of exploitation of right whales, Balaena glacialis, in the western North Atlantic, emphasizes U.S. shore whaling from Maine to Delaware (from lat. 45°N to 38°30'N) in the period 1620–1924. Our broader study of the entire catch history is intended to provide an empirical basis for assessing past distribution and abundance of this whale population. Shore whaling may have begun at Cape Cod, Mass., in the 1620’s or 1630’s; it was certainly underway there by 1668. Right whale catches in New England waters peaked before 1725, and shore whaling at Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard, and Nantucket continued to decline through the rest of the 18th century. Right whales continued to be taken opportunistically in Massachusetts, however, until the early 20th century. They were hunted in Narragansett Bay, R.I., as early as 1662, and desultory whaling continued in Rhode Island until at least 1828. Shore whaling in Connecticut may have begun in the middle 1600’s, continuing there until at least 1718. Long Island shore whaling spanned the period 1650–1924. From its Dutch origins in the 1630’s, a persistent shore whaling enterprise developed in Delaware Bay and along the New Jersey shore. Although this activity was most profi table in New Jersey in the early 1700’s, it continued there until at least the 1820’s. Whaling in all areas of the northeastern United States was seasonal, with most catches in the winter and spring. Historically, right whales appear to have been essentially absent from coastal waters south of Maine during the summer and autumn. Based on documented references to specific whale kills, about 750–950 right whales were taken between Maine and Delaware, from 1620 to 1924. Using production statistics in British customs records, the estimated total secured catch of right whales in New England, New York, and Pennsylvania between 1696 and 1734 was 3,839 whales based on oil and 2,049 based on baleen. After adjusting these totals for hunting loss (loss-rate correction factor = 1.2), we estimate that 4,607 (oil) or 2,459 (baleen) right whales were removed from the stock in this region during the 38-year period 1696–1734. A cumulative catch estimate of the stock’s size in 1724 is 1,100–1,200. Although recent evidence of occurrence and movements suggests that right whales continue to use their traditional migratory corridor along the U.S. east coast, the catch history indicates that this stock was much larger in the 1600’s and early 1700’s than it is today. Right whale hunting in the eastern United States ended by the early 1900’s, and the species has been protected throughout the North Atlantic since the mid 1930’s. Among the possible reasons for the relatively slow stock recovery are: the very small number of whales that survived the whaling era to become founders, a decline in environmental carrying capacity, and, especially in recent decades, mortality from ship strikes and entanglement in fishing gear.

Getting it right: incorporating social aspects into MPA planning and implementation

This brochure summarizes a series of case studies done in nine countries—Brazil, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Senegal, South Africa, Spain,Tanzania and Thailand—on the role of communities in the planning and implementation of marine protected areas (MPAs). The studies demonstrate that communities can be powerful allies in efforts for conservation and management of coastal and marine resources. They also underline the need for systematic attention, capacity building, funding and other resources for effective implementation of Programme Element 2 on governance, participation, equity, and benefit sharing of the Programme of Work on Protected Areas (PoWPA) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).