Catch rates and demographics of loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta) captured from the Charleston, South Carolina, shipping channel during the period of mandatory use of turtle excluder devices (TEDs)

Trawling was conducted in the Charleston, South Carolina, shipping channel between May and August during 2004–07 to evaluate loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) catch rates and demographic distributions. Two hundred and twenty individual loggerheads were captured in 432 trawling events during eight sampling periods lasting 2–10 days each. Catch was analyzed by using a generalized linear model. Data were fitted to a negative binomial distribution with the log of standardized sampling effort (i.e., an hour of sampling with a net head rope length standardized to 30.5 m) for each event treated as an offset term. Among 21 variables, factors, and interactions, five terms were significant in the final model, which accounted for 45% of model deviance. Highly significant differences in catch were noted among sampling periods and sampling locations within the channel, with greatest catch furthest seaward consistent with historical observations. Loggerhead sea turtle catch rates in 2004–07 were greater than in 1991–92 when mandatory use of turtle excluder devices was beginning to be phased in. Concurrent with increased catch rates, loggerheads captured in 2004–07 were larger than in 1991–92. Eighty-five percent of loggerheads captured were ≤75.0 cm straight-line carapace length (nuchal notch to tip of carapace) and there was a 3.9:1 female-to-male bias, consistent with limited data for this location two decades earlier. Only juvenile loggerheads ≤75.0 cm possessed haplotypes other than CC-A01 or CC-A02 that dominate in the region. Six rare and one un-described haplotype were predominantly found in June 2004.

Studies on kraft paper used for liners and corrugating media of shipping containers for frozen shrimp

An examination was made of the physical properties of kraft paper used for liners and corrugating media of shrimp shipping containers in India. Findings stress the need for use of virgin grade kraft paper and adequate waxing treatment on both sides for water proofing.

Conservation science in NOAA’s National Marine Sanctuaries: description and recent accomplishments

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.)

Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary Area to be Avoided (ATBA) Education and Monitoring Program

The National Marine Sanctuaries Act (16 U.S.C. 1431, as amended) gives the Secretary of Commerce the authority to designate discrete areas of the marine environment as National Marine Sanctuaries and provides the authority to promulgate regulations to provide for the conservation and management of these marine areas. The waters of the Outer Washington Coast were recognized for their high natural resource and human use values and placed on the National Marine Sanctuary Program Site Evaluation List in 1983. In 1988, Congress directed NOAA to designate the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary (Pub. L. 100-627). The Sanctuary, designated in May 1994, worked with the U.S. Coast Guard to request the International Maritime Organization designate an Area to be Avoided (ATBA) on the Olympic Coast. The IMO defines an ATBA as "a routeing measure comprising an area within defined limits in which either navigation is particularly hazardous or it is exceptionally important to avoid casualties and which should be avoided by all ships, or certain classes of ships" (IMO, 1991). This ATBA was adopted in December 1994 by the Maritime Safety Committee of the IMO, “in order to reduce the risk of marine casualty and resulting pollution and damage to the environment of the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary”, (IMO, 1994). The ATBA went into effect in June 1995 and advises operators of vessels carrying petroleum and/or hazardous materials to maintain a 25-mile buffer from the coast. Since that time, Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary (OCNMS) has created an education and monitoring program with the goal of ensuring the successful implementation of the ATBA. The Sanctuary enlisted the aid of the U.S. and Canadian coast guards, and the marine industry to educate mariners about the ATBA and to use existing radar data to monitor compliance. Sanctuary monitoring efforts have targeted education on tank vessels observed transiting the ATBA. OCNMS's monitoring efforts allow quantitative evaluation of this voluntary measure. Finally, the tools developed to monitor the ATBA are also used for the more general purpose of monitoring vessel traffic within the Sanctuary. While the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary does not currently regulate vessel traffic, such regulations are within the scope of the Sanctuary’s Final Environmental Impact Statement/Management Plan. Sanctuary staff participate in ongoing maritime and environmental safety initiatives and continually seek opportunities to mitigate risks from marine shipping.(PDF contains 44 pages.)

Raumordnung in der AWZ: Mittlere Anlandungen der deutschen und internationalen Fischereiflotten aus deutschen Nordseegewässern im Zeitraum von 2000 bis 2004

The pressure of users other than shipping and fishery on the national EEZs for territorial claims has increased in recent years. So it becomes necessary to carry out a spatial planning for which all users have to indicate their recent and planned future activities. For the German waters in the North Sea a first attempt was made to calculate the mean international landings for the commercially important fish and crustacean species on the spatial scale of ICES-rectangles. The relationships between the German and international landings per species are listed in a table and the distribution of the landings for each species within the area are shown in 13 figures.

Integrated Sensor Systems for Vessels of Opportunity, National Oceanographic Centre, Southampton, UK, October 10-12,2006 : workshop proceedings

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]

Historical knowledge of sharks: ancient science, earliest American encounters, and American science, fisheries, and utilization

In western civilization, the knowledge of the elasmobranch or selachian fishes (sharks and rays) begins with Aristotle (384–322 B.C.). Two of his extant works, the “Historia Animalium” and the “Generation of Animals,” both written about 330 B.C., demonstrate knowledge of elasmobranch fishes acquired by observation. Roman writers of works on natural history, such as Aelian and Pliny, who followed Aristotle, were compilers of available information. Their contribution was that they prevented the Greek knowledge from being lost, but they added few original observations. The fall of Rome, around 476 A.D., brought a period of economic regression and political chaos. These in turn brought intellectual thought to a standstill for nearly one thousand years, the period known as the Dark Ages. It would not be until the middle of the sixteenth century, well into the Renaissance, that knowledge of elasmobranchs would advance again. The works of Belon, Salviani, Rondelet, and Steno mark the beginnings of ichthyology, including the study of sharks and rays. The knowledge of sharks and rays increased slowly during and after the Renaissance, and the introduction of the Linnaean System of Nomenclature in 1735 marks the beginning of modern ichthyology. However, the first major work on sharks would not appear until the early nineteenth century. Knowledge acquired about sea animals usually follows their economic importance and exploitation, and this was also true with sharks. The first to learn about sharks in North America were the native fishermen who learned how, when, and where to catch them for food or for their oils. The early naturalists in America studied the land animals and plants; they had little interest in sharks. When faunistic works on fishes started to appear, naturalists just enumerated the species of sharks that they could discern. Throughout the U.S. colonial period, sharks were seldom utilized for food, although their liver oil or skins were often utilized. Throughout the nineteenth century, the Spiny Dogfish, Squalus acanthias, was the only shark species utilized in a large scale on both coasts. It was fished for its liver oil, which was used as a lubricant, and for lighting and tanning, and for its skin which was used as an abrasive. During the early part of the twentieth century, the Ocean Leather Company was started to process sea animals (primarily sharks) into leather, oil, fertilizer, fins, etc. The Ocean Leather Company enjoyed a monopoly on the shark leather industry for several decades. In 1937, the liver of the Soupfin Shark, Galeorhinus galeus, was found to be a rich source of vitamin A, and because the outbreak of World War II in 1938 interrupted the shipping of vitamin A from European sources, an intensive shark fishery soon developed along the U.S. West Coast. By 1939 the American shark leather fishery had transformed into the shark liver oil fishery of the early 1940’s, encompassing both coasts. By the late 1940’s, these fisheries were depleted because of overfishing and fishing in the nursery areas. Synthetic vitamin A appeared on the market in 1950, causing the fishery to be discontinued. During World War II, shark attacks on the survivors of sunken ships and downed aviators engendered the search for a shark repellent. This led to research aimed at understanding shark behavior and the sensory biology of sharks. From the late 1950’s to the 1980’s, funding from the Office of Naval Research was responsible for most of what was learned about the sensory biology of sharks.

Saline-saturated DMSO-EDTA as a storage medium for microbial DNA analysis from coral mucus swab samples

The mucus surface layer of corals plays a number of integral roles in their overall health and fitness. This mucopolysaccharide coating serves as vehicle to capture food, a protective barrier against physical invasions and trauma, and serves as a medium to host a community of microorganisms distinct from the surrounding seawater. In healthy corals the associated microbial communities are known to provide antibiotics that contribute to the coral’s innate immunity and function metabolic activities such as biogeochemical cycling. Culture-dependent (Ducklow and Mitchell, 1979; Ritchie, 2006) and culture-independent methods (Rohwer, et al., 2001; Rohwer et al., 2002; Sekar et al., 2006; Hansson et al., 2009; Kellogg et al., 2009) have shown that coral mucus-associated microbial communities can change with changes in the environment and health condition of the coral. These changes may suggest that changes in the microbial associates not only reflect health status but also may assist corals in acclimating to changing environmental conditions. With the increasing availability of molecular biology tools, culture-independent methods are being used more frequently for evaluating the health of the animal host. Although culture-independent methods are able to provide more in-depth insights into the constituents of the coral surface mucus layer’s microbial community, their reliability and reproducibility rely on the initial sample collection maintaining sample integrity. In general, a sample of mucus is collected from a coral colony, either by sterile syringe or swab method (Woodley, et al., 2008), and immediately placed in a cryovial. In the case of a syringe sample, the mucus is decanted into the cryovial and the sealed tube is immediately flash-frozen in a liquid nitrogen vapor shipper (a.k.a., dry shipper). Swabs with mucus are placed in a cryovial, and the end of the swab is broken off before sealing and placing the vial in the dry shipper. The samples are then sent to a laboratory for analysis. After the initial collection and preservation of the sample, the duration of the sample voyage to a recipient laboratory is often another critical part of the sampling process, as unanticipated delays may exceed the length of time a dry shipper can remain cold, or mishandling of the shipper can cause it to exhaust prematurely. In remote areas, service by international shipping companies may be non-existent, which requires the use of an alternative preservation medium. Other methods for preserving environmental samples for microbial DNA analysis include drying on various matrices (DNA cards, swabs), or placing samples in liquid preservatives (e.g., chloroform/phenol/isoamyl alcohol, TRIzol reagent, ethanol). These methodologies eliminate the need for cold storage, however, they add expense and permitting requirements for hazardous liquid components, and the retrieval of intact microbial DNA often can be inconsistent (Dawson, et al., 1998; Rissanen et al., 2010). A method to preserve coral mucus samples without cold storage or use of hazardous solvents, while maintaining microbial DNA integrity, would be an invaluable tool for coral biologists, especially those in remote areas. Saline-saturated dimethylsulfoxide-ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (20% DMSO-0.25M EDTA, pH 8.0), or SSDE, is a solution that has been reported to be a means of storing tissue of marine invertebrates at ambient temperatures without significant loss of nucleic acid integrity (Dawson et al., 1998, Concepcion et al., 2007). While this methodology would be a facile and inexpensive way to transport coral tissue samples, it is unclear whether the coral microbiota DNA would be adversely affected by this storage medium either by degradation of the DNA, or a bias in the DNA recovered during the extraction process created by variations in extraction efficiencies among the various community members. Tests to determine the efficacy of SSDE as an ambient temperature storage medium for coral mucus samples are presented here.

Remote sensing of the oceans from space with special reference to marine resources

A number of ocean science fields have profitted, either directly or indirectly from satellite remote sensing, including physical, biological and geological oceanography. User oriented applications include fishing, shipping, offshore drilling and mining, coastal engineering and coastal hydrology. Following a brief account of the technology involved, areas in oceanography benefitting from satellite information are detailed. Examples are given of satellite data applications to marine resources.

Community-based tarball monitoring in the Maldives

Monitoring oil pollution by using students to count tarballs on beaches. Samples were taken between 2006 and 2010; a significant relationship was demonstrated between the abundance of tarballs and exposure to shipping lanes. The contribution of local communities to monitoring marine pollution was also demonstrated.

Marine Vertebrates and Low Frequency Sound: Technical Report for LFA EIS

Over the past 50 years, economic and technological developments have dramatically increased the human contribution to ambient noise in the ocean. The dominant frequencies of most human-made noise in the ocean is in the low-frequency range (defined as sound energy below 1000Hz), and low-frequency sound (LFS) may travel great distances in the ocean due to the unique propagation characteristics of the deep ocean (Munk et al. 1989). For example, in the Northern Hemisphere oceans low-frequency ambient noise levels have increased by as much as 10 dB during the period from 1950 to 1975 (Urick 1986; review by NRC 1994). Shipping is the overwhelmingly dominant source of low-frequency manmade noise in the ocean, but other sources of manmade LFS including sounds from oil and gas industrial development and production activities (seismic exploration, construction work, drilling, production platforms), and scientific research (e.g., acoustic tomography and thermography, underwater communication). The SURTASS LFA system is an additional source of human-produced LFS in the ocean, contributing sound energy in the 100-500 Hz band. When considering a document that addresses the potential effects of a low-frequency sound source on the marine environment, it is important to focus upon those species that are the most likely to be affected. Important criteria are: 1) the physics of sound as it relates to biological organisms; 2) the nature of the exposure (i.e. duration, frequency, and intensity); and 3) the geographic region in which the sound source will be operated (which, when considered with the distribution of the organisms will determine which species will be exposed). The goal in this section of the LFA/EIS is to examine the status, distribution, abundance, reproduction, foraging behavior, vocal behavior, and known impacts of human activity of those species may be impacted by LFA operations. To focus our efforts, we have examined species that may be physically affected and are found in the region where the LFA source will be operated. The large-scale geographic location of species in relation to the sound source can be determined from the distribution of each species. However, the physical ability for the organism to be impacted depends upon the nature of the sound source (i.e. explosive, impulsive, or non-impulsive); and the acoustic properties of the medium (i.e. seawater) and the organism. Non-impulsive sound is comprised of the movement of particles in a medium. Motion is imparted by a vibrating object (diaphragm of a speaker, vocal chords, etc.). Due to the proximity of the particles in the medium, this motion is transmitted from particle to particle in waves away from the sound source. Because the particle motion is along the same axis as the propagating wave, the waves are longitudinal. Particles move away from then back towards the vibrating source, creating areas of compression (high pressure) and areas of rarefaction (low pressure). As the motion is transferred from one particle to the next, the sound propagates away from the sound source. Wavelength is the distance from one pressure peak to the next. Frequency is the number of waves passing per unit time (Hz). Sound velocity (not to be confused with particle velocity) is the impedance is loosely equivalent to the resistance of a medium to the passage of sound waves (technically it is the ratio of acoustic pressure to particle velocity). A high impedance means that acoustic particle velocity is small for a given pressure (low impedance the opposite). When a sound strikes a boundary between media of different impedances, both reflection and refraction, and a transfer of energy can occur. The intensity of the reflection is a function of the intensity of the sound wave and the impedances of the two media. Two key factors in determining the potential for damage due to a sound source are the intensity of the sound wave and the impedance difference between the two media (impedance mis-match). The bodies of the vast majority of organisms in the ocean (particularly phytoplankton and zooplankton) have similar sound impedence values to that of seawater. As a result, the potential for sound damage is low; organisms are effectively transparent to the sound – it passes through them without transferring damage-causing energy. Due to the considerations above, we have undertaken a detailed analysis of species which met the following criteria: 1) Is the species capable of being physically affected by LFS? Are acoustic impedence mis-matches large enough to enable LFS to have a physical affect or allow the species to sense LFS? 2) Does the proposed SURTASS LFA geographical sphere of acoustic influence overlap the distribution of the species? Species that did not meet the above criteria were excluded from consideration. For example, phytoplankton and zooplankton species lack acoustic impedance mis-matches at low frequencies to expect them to be physically affected SURTASS LFA. Vertebrates are the organisms that fit these criteria and we have accordingly focused our analysis of the affected environment on these vertebrate groups in the world’s oceans: fishes, reptiles, seabirds, pinnipeds, cetaceans, pinnipeds, mustelids, sirenians (Table 1).