Choosing the best model in the presence of zero trade: a fish product analysis

The purpose of the paper is to test the hypothesis that food safety (chemical) standards act as barriers to international seafood imports. We use zero-accounting gravity models to test the hypothesis that food safety (chemical) standards act as barriers to international seafood imports. The chemical standards on which we focus include chloramphenicol required performance limit, oxytetracycline maximum residue limit, fluoro-quinolones maximum residue limit, and dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) pesticide residue limit. The study focuses on the three most important seafood markets: the European Union’s 15 members, Japan, and North America.

SAMUDRA Report, No. 48, November 2007

Misconceptions, Outright Prejudice - Fishing rights. The Dilemma of the Nile Perch - Africa: Ecolabelling. Fishing Safely - Analysis: Safety at Sea. Shoring Up - Labour: Shore-based Workers. A Sustainable, Equitable, Small-scale Fisheries - Document: Traditional Communities. Getting Their Act Together - India: Co-management. Certifying the Uncertifiable? - Report: Industrial Aquaculture. Shocking Reality - Cambodia: Electro-fishing. Be Consultative, Participatory - Document: Indigenous Peoples. Towing the Line - Peru: Artisanal Shark Fishery. Declaration of Charter. (56 pp.)

Science-based restoration monitoring of coastal habitats, Volume One: A framework for monitoring plans under the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000 (Public Law 160-457)

Executive Summary: The Estuary Restoration Act of 2000 (ERA), Title I of the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000, was created to promote the restoration of habitats along the coast of the United States (including the US protectorates and the Great Lakes). The NOAA National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science was charged with the development of a guidance manual for monitoring plans under this Act. This guidance manual, titled Science-Based Restoration Monitoring of Coastal Habitats, is written in two volumes. It provides technical assistance, outlines necessary steps, and provides useful tools for the development and implementation of sound scientific monitoring of coastal restoration efforts. In addition, this manual offers a means to detect early warnings that the restoration is on track or not, to gauge how well a restoration site is functioning, to coordinate projects and efforts for consistent and successful restoration, and to evaluate the ecological health of specific coastal habitats both before and after project completion (Galatowitsch et al. 1998). The following habitats have been selected for discussion in this manual: water column, rock bottom, coral reefs, oyster reefs, soft bottom, kelp and other macroalgae, rocky shoreline, soft shoreline, submerged aquatic vegetation, marshes, mangrove swamps, deepwater swamps, and riverine forests. The classification of habitats used in this document is generally based on that of Cowardin et al. (1979) in their Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, as called for in the ERA Estuary Habitat Restoration Strategy. This manual is not intended to be a restoration monitoring “cookbook” that provides templates of monitoring plans for specific habitats. The interdependence of a large number of site-specific factors causes habitat types to vary in physical and biological structure within and between regions and geographic locations (Kusler and Kentula 1990). Monitoring approaches used should be tailored to these differences. However, even with the diversity of habitats that may need to be restored and the extreme geographic range across which these habitats occur, there are consistent principles and approaches that form a common basis for effective monitoring. Volume One, titled A Framework for Monitoring Plans under the Estuaries and Clean Waters Act of 2000, begins with definitions and background information. Topics such as restoration, restoration monitoring, estuaries, and the role of socioeconomics in restoration are discussed. In addition, the habitats selected for discussion in this manual are briefly described. (PDF contains 116 pages)

Biological Platforms for Environmental Sensor technologies and their uses as indicators of the marine environment, Seward, Alaska, September 19-21, 2007: workshop proceedings

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]

Enabling Sensor* Interoperability, Portland, Maine, October 16-18 2006: workshop proceedings

The ACT workshop "Enabling Sensor Interoperability" addressed the need for protocols at the hardware, firmware, and higher levels in order to attain instrument interoperability within and between ocean observing systems. For the purpose of the workshop, participants spoke in tern of "instruments" rather than "sensors," defining an instrument as a device that contains one or more sensors or actuators and can convert signals from analog to digital. An increase in the abundance, variety, and complexity of instruments and observing systems suggests that effective standards would greatly improve "plug-and-work" capabilities. However, there are few standards or standards bodies that currently address instrument interoperability and configuration. Instrument interoperability issues span the length and breadth of these systems, from the measurement to the end user, including middleware services. There are three major components of instrument interoperability including physical, communication, and application/control layers. Participants identified the essential issues, current obstacles, and enabling technologies and standards, then came up with a series of short and long term solutions. The top three recommended actions, deemed achievable within 6 months of the release of this report are: A list of recommendations for enabling instrument interoperability should be put together and distributed to instrument developers. A recommendation for funding sources to achieve instrument interoperability should be drafted. Funding should be provided (for example through NOPP or an IOOS request for proposals) to develop and demonstrate instrument interoperability technologies involving instrument manufacturers, observing system operators, and cyberinfrastructure groups. Program managers should be identified and made to understand that milestones for achieving instrument interoperability include a) selection of a methodology for uniquely identifying an instrument, b) development of a common protocol for automatic instrument discovery, c) agreement on uniform methods for measurements, d) enablement of end user controlled power cycling, and e) implementation of a registry component for IDS and attributes. The top three recommended actions, deemed achievable within S years of the release of this report are: An ocean observing interoperability standards body should be established that addresses standards for a) metadata, b) commands, c) protocols, d) processes, e) exclusivity, and f) naming authorities.[PDF contains 48 pages]

Evaluating approaches and technologies for monitoring organic contaminants in the aquatic environment, Ann Arbor, MI, July 21-23, 2006: workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) convened a workshop on Evaluating Approaches and Technologies for Monitoring Organic Contaminants in the Aquatic Environment in Ann Arbor, MI on July 21-23, 2006. The primary objectives of this workshop were to: 1) identify the priority management information needs relative to organic contaminant loading; 2) explore the most appropriate approaches to estimating mass loading; and 3) evaluate the current status of the sensor technology. To meet these objectives, a mixture of leading research scientists, resource managers, and industry representatives were brought together for a focused two-day workshop. The workshop featured four plenary talks followed by breakout sessions in which arranged groups of participants where charged to respond to a series of focused discussion questions. At present, there are major concerns about the inadequacies in approaches and technologies for quantifying mass emissions and detection of organic contaminants for protecting municipal water supplies and receiving waters. Managers use estimates of land-based contaminant loadings to rivers, lakes, and oceans to assess relative risk among various contaminant sources, determine compliance with regulatory standards, and define progress in source reduction. However, accurately quantifying contaminant loading remains a major challenge. Loading occurs over a range of hydrologic conditions, requiring measurement technologies that can accommodate a broad range of ambient conditions. In addition, in situ chemical sensors that provide a means for acquiring continuous concentration measurements are still under development, particularly for organic contaminants that typically occur at low concentrations. Better approaches and strategies for estimating contaminant loading, including evaluations of both sampling design and sensor technologies, need to be identified. The following general recommendations were made in an effort to advance future organic contaminant monitoring: 1. Improve the understanding of material balance in aquatic systems and the relationship between potential surrogate measures (e.g., DOC, chlorophyll, particle size distribution) and target constituents. 2. Develop continuous real-time sensors to be used by managers as screening measures and triggers for more intensive monitoring. 3. Pursue surrogate measures and indicators of organic pollutant contamination, such as CDOM, turbidity, or non-equilibrium partitioning. 4. Develop continuous field-deployable sensors for PCBs, PAHs, pyrethroids, and emerging contaminants of concern and develop strategies that couple sampling approaches with tools that incorporate sensor synergy (i.e., measure appropriate surrogates along with the dissolved organics to allow full mass emission estimation).[PDF contains 20 pages]

Meteorological Buoy Sensor Workshop, Solomons, Maryland, April 19-21, 2006: workshop proceedings

The co-organized Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) and National Data Buoy Center (NDBC) Workshop "Meteorological Buoy Sensors Workshop" convened in Solomons, Maryland, April 19 to 21,2006, sponsored by the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science (UMCES) Chesapeake Bay Laboratory (CBL), an ACT partner institution. Participants from various sectors including resource managers and industry representatives collaborated to focus on technologies and sensors that measure the near surface variables of wind speed and direction, barometric pressure, humidity and air temperature. The vendor list was accordingly targeted at companies that produced these types of sensors. The managers represented a cross section of federal, regional and academic marine observing interests from around the country. Workshop discussions focused on the challenges associated with making marine meteorological observations in general and problems that were specific to a particular variable. Discussions also explored methods to mitigate these challenges through the adoption of best practices, improved technologies and increased standardization. Some of the key workshop outcomes and recommendations included: 0cean.US should establish a committee devoted to observations. The committee would have a key role in developing observing standards. The community should adopt the target cost, reliability and performance standards drafted for a typical meteorological package to be used by a regional observing system. A forum should be established to allow users and manufacturers to share best practices for the employment of marine meteorological sensors. The ACT website would host the forum. Federal activities that evaluate meteorological sensors should make their results publicly available. ACT should extend their evaluation process to include meteorological sensors. A follow on workshop should be conducted that covers the observing of meteorological variables not addressed by this workshop. (pdf contains 18 pages)

Technologies for Measuring Currents in Coastal Environments, Portland, Maine, October 26-28, 2005:workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) Workshop entitled "Technologies for Measuring Currents in Coastal Environments" was held in Portland, Maine, October 26-28, 2005, with sponsorship by the Gulf of Maine Ocean Observing System (GoMOOS), an ACT partner organization. The primary goals of the event were to summarize recent trends in nearshore research and management applications for current meter technologies, identify how current meters can assist coastal managers to fulfill their regulatory and management objectives, and to recommend actions to overcome barriers to use of the technologies. The workshop was attended by 25 participants representing state and federal environmental management agencies, manufacturers of current meter technologies, and researchers from academic institutions and private industry. Common themes that were discussed during the workshop included 1) advantages and limitations of existing current measuring equipment, 2) reliability and ease of use with each instrument type, 3) data decoding and interpretation procedures, and 4) mechanisms to facilitate better training and guidance to a broad user group. Seven key recommendations, which were ranked in order of importance during the last day of the workshop are listed below. 1. Forums should be developed to facilitate the exchange of information among users and industry: a) On-line forums that not only provide information on specific instruments and technologies, but also provide an avenue for the exchange of user experiences with various instruments (i.e. problems encountered, cautions, tips, advantages, etc). (see References for manufacturer websites with links to application and technical forums at end of report) b) Regional training/meetings for operational managers to exchange ideas on methods for measuring currents and evaluating data. c) Organize mini-meetings or tutorial sessions within larger conference venues. 2. A committee of major stakeholders should be convened to develop common standards (similar to the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) committee) that enable users to switch sensors without losing software or display capabilities. (pdf contains 28 pages)

Measures of turbidity in coastal waters, Coconut Island, Oahu, Hawaii, August 31 - September 2, 2005: workshop proceedings

A three day workshop on turbidity measurements was held at the Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology from August 3 1 to September 2, 2005. The workshop was attended by 30 participants from industry, coastal management agencies, and academic institutions. All groups recognized common issues regarding the definition of turbidity, limitations of consistent calibration, and the large variety of instrumentation that nominally measure "turbidity." The major recommendations, in order of importance for the coastal monitoring community are listed below: 1. The community of users in coastal ecosystems should tighten instrument design configurations to minimize inter-instrument variability, choosing a set of specifications that are best suited for coastal waters. The IS0 7027 design standard is not tight enough. Advice on these design criteria should be solicited through the ASTM as well as Federal and State regulatory agencies representing the majority of turbidity sensor end users. Parties interested in making turbidity measurements in coastal waters should develop design specifications for these water types rather than relying on design standards made for the analysis of drinking water. 2. The coastal observing groups should assemble a community database relating output of specific sensors to different environmental parameters, so that the entire community of users can benefit from shared information. This would include an unbiased, parallel study of different turbidity sensors, employing a variety of designs and configuration in the broadest range of coastal environments. 3. Turbidity should be used as a measure of relative change in water quality rather than an absolute measure of water quality. Thus, this is a recommendation for managers to develop their own local calibrations. See next recommendation. 4. If the end user specifically wants to use a turbidity sensor to measure a specific water quality parameter such as suspended particle concentration, then direct measurement of that water quality parameter is necessary to correlate with 'turbidity1 for a particular environment. These correlations, however, will be specific to the environment in which they are measured. This works because there are many environments in which water composition is relatively stable but varies in magnitude or concentration. (pdf contains 22 pages)

Developing effective restoration plans to tackle the widespread impairment of coastal swimming and shellfishing waters

Congress established a legal imperative to restore the quality of our surface waters when it enacted the Clean Water Act in 1972. The act requires that existing uses of coastal waters such as swimming and shellfishing be protected and restored. Enforcement of this mandate is frequently measured in terms of the ability to swim and harvest shellfish in tidal creeks, rivers, sounds, bays, and ocean beaches. Public-health agencies carry out comprehensive water-quality sampling programs to check for bacteria contamination in coastal areas where swimming and shellfishing occur. Advisories that restrict swimming and shellfishing are issued when sampling indicates that bacteria concentrations exceed federal health standards. These actions place these coastal waters on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agencies’ (EPA) list of impaired waters, an action that triggers a federal mandate to prepare a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) analysis that should result in management plans that will restore degraded waters to their designated uses. When coastal waters become polluted, most people think that improper sewage treatment is to blame. Water-quality studies conducted over the past several decades have shown that improper sewage treatment is a relatively minor source of this impairment. In states like North Carolina, it is estimated that about 80 percent of the pollution flowing into coastal waters is carried there by contaminated surface runoff. Studies show this runoff is the result of significant hydrologic modifications of the natural coastal landscape. There was virtually no surface runoff occurring when the coastal landscape was natural in places such as North Carolina. Most rainfall soaked into the ground, evaporated, or was used by vegetation. Surface runoff is largely an artificial condition that is created when land uses harden and drain the landscape surfaces. Roofs, parking lots, roads, fields, and even yards all result in dramatic changes in the natural hydrology of these coastal lands, and generate huge amounts of runoff that flow over the land’s surface into nearby waterways. (PDF contains 3 pages)

Environmental quality standards to protect identified uses of controlled waters: salmonid fisheries, cyprinid fisheries, migratory fisheries, commercial harvesting of marine fish for public consumption, commercial harvesting of shellfish for for public consumption

This report considers the development of environmental quality standards (EQSs) for the salmonid fishery, cyprinid fishery, migratory fishery, commercial harvesting of marine fish for public consumption and commercial harvesting of shellfish for public consumption uses of controlled surface waters. Previous reports have been used to identify those parameters necessary for the maintenance of these five uses. Each water use is considered in a separate section within which identified parameters are discussed and standards proposed, a summary of the proposed standards is presented at the beginning of the relevant section. For salmonid, cyprinid and migratory fisheries, EQSs for substances in water have been proposed for the protection of these fisheries. For the commercial harvesting of marine fish and shellfish for public consumption uses 'Warning Levels' of substances in waters have been proposed. These 'Warning Levels' have been proposed by considering data on bioaccumulation and food standards and aim to prevent acceptable intake values and concentrations in fish/shellfish flesh exceeding statutory or recommended levels. For the commercial harvesting of marine fish for public consumption it has been concluded that the current EQSs for most List II substances for the protection of salt water life should be adequately stringent to protect this use, however for the commercial harvesting of shellfish for public consumption, these List II EQSs do not appear adequate to protect this use and more stringent 'Warning Levels' have been proposed. For all five uses considered in this report there has been found to be limited information on a number of the parameters considered and in general for indigenous species, this has been found to be especially so when considering migratory fisheries and the commercial harvesting of marine fish and shellfish.

A survey of estuarine oxygen concentrations in relation to the passage of migratory salmonids

This report presents the first attempt at a national assessment of an Environmental Quality Standard (EQS) for dissolved oxygen (DO) in estuaries with the objective of allowing the passage of migratory salmonids. Under the Control of Pollution Act, Water Authorities and River Purification Boards have powers to control discharges to estuaries and need to define an EQS for the calculation of consent conditions. The object of any such standards is to permit the existence of good quality salmonid fisheries with only very occasional restrictions to the passage of fish. The report gives brief summaries of the DO regime in estuaries, the oxygen requirements of salmonids, and of tentative standards proposed by various authorities. These standards are then compared with DO and fishery data from UK estuaries, provided by the appropriate regulatory authorities. It concludes that a minimum annual lower 95-percentile of 5.0 mg/1 will meet the objective in most estuaries, and that a lower value of 3.0 mg/1 will permit the establishment of a more restricted fishery. However, more stringent standards may be needed in estuaries containing high concentrations of toxic pollutants. containing high concentrations of toxic pollutants.

The Great Whales: History and Status of Six Species Listed as Endangered Under the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973

In the history of whaling from prehistoric to modern times, the large whales, sometimes called the “great whales,” were hunted most heavily owing in part to their corresponding value in oil, meat, and baleen. Regional populations of North Atlantic right whales, Eubalaena glacialis glacialis, were already decimated by 1700, and the North Atlantic gray whale, Eschrichtius robustus, was hunted to extinction by the early 1700’s (Mitchell and Mead1).

The Threatened Status of Steller Sea Lions, Eumetopias jubatus, under the Endangered Species Act: Effects on Alaska Groundfish Fisheries Management

In April 1990, the Steller sea lion, Eumetopias jubatus, was listed as threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act by emergency action. Competitive interactions with the billion-dollar Alaska commercial groundfish fisheries have been suggested as one of the possible contributing factors to the Steller sea lion population decline. Since the listing, fisheries managers have attempted to address the potential impacts of the groundfish fisheries on Steller sea lion recovery. In this paper, we review pertinent Federal legislation, biological information on the Steller sea lion decline, changes in the Alaska trawl fishery for walleye pollock, Theragra chalcogramma, since the late 1970's, andpossible interactions between fisheries and sea lions. Using three cases, we illustrate how the listing of Steller sea lions has affected Alaska groundfish fisheries through: I) actions taken at the time of listing designed to limit the potential for directhuman-related sea lion mortality, 2) actions addressing spatial and temporal separation of fisheries from sea lions, and 3) introduction of risk-adverse stock assessment methodologies and Steller sea lion conservation considerations directly in the annual quota-setting process. This discussion shows some of the ways that North Pacific groundfish resource managers have begun to explicitly consider the conservation ofmarine mammal and other nontarget species.