A review of the ecological effectiveness of subtidal marine reserves in Central California, Part II: Summary of existing marine reserves in Central California and their potential benefits

In Central California, and elsewhere around the world, a great deal of discussion is occurring about the use of marine protected areas (MPAs) as a tool to help manage marine resources. This discussion is taking place because there is growing evidence that humans have depleted marine resources in many parts of the world, often despite strong regulatory efforts. Moreover, there is also mounting evidence that the degradation of marine resources began long ago, and we do not fully realize how much humans have altered “natural” environments. This uncertainty has led people to discuss the use of MPAs as a precautionary tool to prevent depletion or extinction of marine resources, and as a means of redressing past damages. The discussion about the use of marine reserves is increasing in intensity in California because several resource management agencies are considering reserves as they create or revise management plans. Often, the discussions surrounding this important public policy debate lead to questions about the biological or ecological value of existing marine protected areas. More than 100 MPAs exist along the coast of California. Many of these were established arbitrarily and lack specific purposes. Some California marine protected areas also have co-occurring or overlapping boundaries, have conflicting designations for use, and have conflicting rules and regulations. Because few of the existing marine protected areas have clearly articulated goals or objectives, however, it is difficult or impossible to evaluate their ecological effectiveness. (PDF contains 18 pages.)

Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary: Proceedings of the 1998 Research Workshop, Seattle, Washington

The Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary (OCNMS or Sanctuary) planned and organized the 1998 Research Workshop as part of its mission to protect and improve understanding of its marine resources through research and education programs. The Sanctuary is also mandated to coordinate and facilitate information exchanges and sponsors periodic research workshops to that end. The goals of the 1998 Research Workshop were as follows: A. Highlight and prioritize research needs for the Sanctuary relative to the development of a framework for a five-year research plan; B. Build on results from the Olympic Coast Marine Research Workshop of 1996; C. Present recent/ongoing research; D. Share multi-disciplinary information; E. Select priority sites for multi-disciplinary studies; and F. Promote student participation and research. (PDF contains 93 pages.)

Workshop on marine mammal research & monitoring in the National Marine Sanctuaries, Wailea, Maui, Hawaii, 28 November 1999

The Second National Workshop on Marine Mammal Research and Monitoring in the National Marine Sanctuaries was held on 28 November 1999 in Maui, Hawaii. The workshop preceded the Thirteenth Biennial Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals, and provided an opportunity to review and promote marine mammal research and monitoring in the National Marine Sanctuaries (NMS). The purpose of the workshop was to bring together researchers and sanctuary staff and to improve marine mammal research and monitoring throughout the sanctuaries. Discussion topics included: potential multi-sanctuary projects, sources of funding for multi-sanctuary projects, services and equipment for researchers through the sanctuaries, consolidating small levels of funding, help in funding and support for writing up data, publishing documents in Technical Memoranda, and letters of support. Representatives from the NMS national office and nine sanctuaries provided participants with overviews of marine mammal research within the sanctuaries. Presentations were also given by representatives from the National Marine Fisheries Service’s Permits and Health and Stranding programs. During the breakout working groups, there were several comments and suggestions consistent among each of the groups to improve marine mammal research. Each group emphasized the need to improve communication among researchers and to better share data. These suggestions included web-based information networks, advisory panels, and workshops. Regionally based research projects were also emphasized. In order to best study marine mammal populations, collaborative studies must take place throughout multiple sanctuaries. In order to achieve these large scale studies, funding and staffing must be directed towards these studies and distributed among each of the sanctuaries so that they may all be able to have the staffing, equipment, and vessels necessary to achieve a collaborative, ecosystem-based, regional marine mammal monitoring program. It will take several years to achieve all of the suggestions from the workshop, but thanks to the workshop participants, the National Marine Sanctuary Program has begun to direct marine mammal research and monitoring in order to achieve the goals of the workshop. This document provides a summary of the workshop with a focus on key points/main issues. We have included contact information intended to encourage continued collaboration among the individuals and organizations represented at the 1999 Marine Mammal Research and Monitoring in the National Marine Sanctuaries Workshop. (PDF contains 71 pages.)

A review of marine zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary

This report reviews marine zoning in the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary (MBNMS). The 72 zoned areas in the MBNMS are of 13 different zone types. Each marine zone type has associated regulations that restrict or promote specific activities. For example, recreational activities such as boating, fishing, tidepooling, snorkeling, and SCUBA diving are limited in some zones. Scientific research is allowed at all sites, with appropriate permits, and is specifically promoted in a few sites. In addition, motorized personal watercraft use, dredge material disposal, large vessel traffic, jade collection, and aircraft overflight are allowed only in specific zones. The effectiveness of the marine zoning in the MBNMS is difficult to determine for two reasons. Firstly, many of the zones lack a clearly stated purpose or have confusing regulations. Secondly, the majority of the zones have not been evaluated formally by the managing agencies. Of the zones that have been evaluated, such as Dredge Material Disposal zones, Big Creek MRPA Ecological Reserve, and Pt. Lobos State/Ecological Reserve, the majority appear to be achieving their mandated purpose to some extent. Many of the zones in the MBNMS fall under the title "marine reserve." Marine reserves have recently received significant attention internationally, nationally, and in California due to their potential for: improving the status of exploited species; protecting marine habitats and ecosystems from degradation; facilitating scientific research and fisheries management; and increasing ecotourism. However, reserves must be well designed and managed to reach this potential. A well designed and managed reserve will have clearly defined goals, scientifically-based design, proper enforcement of regulations, rigorous evaluation of the reserve's effectiveness, and adaptive management. Based on these criteria, the majority of the marine reserves in California are not well designed or managed. However, the State of California has recognized this problem and is in the process of re-evaluating the California system of marine managed areas. (PDF contains 137 pages.)

Distribution and sighting frequency of reef fishes in the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary

This study analyzed species richness, distribution, and sighting frequency of selected reef fishes to describe species assemblage composition, abundance, and spatial distribution patterns among sites and regions (Upper Keys, Middle Keys, Lower Keys, and Dry Tortugas) within the Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary (FKNMS) barrier reef ecosystem. Data were obtained from the Reef Environmental Education Foundation (REEF) Fish Survey Project, a volunteer fish-monitoring program. A total of 4,324 visual fish surveys conducted at 112 sites throughout the FKNMS were used in these analyses. The data set contained sighting information on 341 fish species comprising 68 families. Species richness was generally highest in the Upper Keys sites (maximum was 220 species at Molasses Reef) and lowest in the Dry Tortugas sites. Encounter rates differed among regions, with the Dry Tortugas having the highest rate, potentially a result of differences in the evenness in fishes and the lower diversity of habitat types in the Dry Tortugas region. Geographic coverage maps were developed for 29 frequently observed species. Fourteen of these species showed significant regional variation in mean sighting frequency (%SF). Six species had significantly lower mean %SF and eight species had significantly higher mean %SF in the Dry Tortugas compared with other regions. Hierarchical clustering based on species composition (presence-absence) and species % SF revealed interesting patterns of similarities among sites that varied across spatial scales. Results presented here indicate that phenomena affecting reef fish composition in the FKNMS operate at multiple spatial scales, including a biogeographic scale that defines the character of the region as a whole, a reef scale (~50-100 km) that include meso-scale physical oceanographic processes and regional variation in reef structure and associated reef habitats, and a local scale that includes level of protection, cross-shelf location and a suite of physical characteristics of a given reef. It is likely that at both regional and local scales, species habitat requirements strongly influence the patterns revealed in this study, and are particularly limiting for species that are less frequently observed in the Dry Tortugas. The results of this report serve as a benchmark for the current status of the reef fishes in the FKNMS. In addition, these data provide the basis for analyses on reserve effects and the biogeographic coupling of benthic habitats and fish assemblages that are currently underway. (PDF contains 61 pages.)

Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary: A rapid assessment of coral, fish, and algae using the AGRRA Protocol

The Flower Garden Banks are topographic features on the edge of the continental shelf in the northwest Gulf of Mexico. These banks are approximately 175 km southeast of Galveston, Texas at 28° north latitude and support the northernmost coral reefs on the North American continental shelf. The East and West Flower Garden Banks (EFG and WFG) and Stetson Bank, a smaller sandstone bank approximately 110 km offshore, are managed and protected as the Flower Garden Banks National Marine Sanctuary (FGBNMS). As part of a region-wide initiative to assess coral reef condition, the benthic and fish communities of the EFG and WFG were assessed using the Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef Assessment (AGRRA) protocol. The AGRRA survey was conducted during a week-long cruise in August 1999 that was jointly sponsored by the FGBNMS and the Reef Environmental Education Foundation (REEF). A total of 25 coral transects, 132 algal quadrats, 24 fish transects, and 26 Roving Diver (REEF) surveys were conducted. These surveys revealed reefs with high coral cover, dominated by large, healthy corals, little macroalgae, and healthy fish populations. The percent live coral cover was 53.9 and 48.8 at the WFG and EFG, respectively, and the average colony diameter was 93 and 81 cm. Fish diversity was lower than most Caribbean reefs, but large abundances and size of many species reflected the low fishing pressure on the banks. The benthic and fish assemblages at the EFG and WFG were similar. Due to its near pristine conditions, the FGB data will prove to be a valuable component in the AGRRA database and its resulting scale of reef condition for the region. (PDF contains 22 pages.)

The economic contribution of whalewatching to regional economies: Perspectives from two National Marine Sanctuaries

Whenever human beings have looked out on the sea, they have seen whales. First from the shore and later from ships when humanity entered the ocean realm as seafarers, we have responded to seeing these creatures with awe and wonder. Even when we hunted whales, a period well chronicled both in history and in literature, the sight of a whale brought an adrenaline rush that was not totally linked to potential economic gain. The first trips on boats specifically to watch, rather than hunt, whales began around 45 years ago in Southern California where the migrating gray whales, seen in the distance from land, drew vessels out for a closer look. Since that time whalewatching has boomed, currently conducted in over 40 countries around the world, including Antarctica, and estimated by economists at the Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society to have a 1999 worldwide economic value of around $800 million USD. The economic contribution to local coastal communities is particularly significant in developing countries and those where declining fish populations (and in some cases like the Japanese, international bans on whaling) have driven harvesters to look for viable alternatives. Clearly, whalewatching is now, in many places around the world, a small but thriving part of the regional economy. Like in the days of whaling, we still get the rush, but for some, money is back contributing to the physiological response. (PDF contains 90 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.)

The status of shark and ray fishery resources in the Gulf of California: applied research to improve management and conservation

Seasonal surveys were conducted during 1998–1999 in Baja California, Baja California Sur, Sonora, and Sinaloa to determine the extent and activities of artisanal elasmobranch fisheries in the Gulf of California. One hundred and forty–seven fishing sites, or camps, were documented, the majority of which (n = 83) were located in Baja California Sur. Among camps with adequate fisheries information, the great majority (85.7%) targeted elasmobranchs during some part of the year. Most small, demersal sharks and rays were landed in mixed species fisheries that also targeted demersal teleosts, but large sharks were usually targeted in directed drift gillnet or, to a lesser extent, surface longline fisheries. Artisanal fishermen were highly opportunistic, and temporally switched targets depending on the local productivity of teleost, invertebrate, and elasmobranch fishery resources. Major fisheries for small sharks (< 1.5 m, “cazón”) were documented in Baja California during spring, in Sonora during autumn–spring, and in Sinaloa during winter and spring. Triakid sharks (Mustelus spp.) dominated cazón landings in the northern states, whereas juvenile scalloped hammerheads (Sphyrna lewini) primarily supported the fishery in Sinaloa. Large sharks (> 1.5 m, “tiburón”) were minor components of artisanal elasmobranch fisheries in Sonora and Sinaloa, but were commonly targeted during summer and early autumn in Baja California and Baja California Sur. The pelagic thresher shark (Alopias pelagicus) and silky shark (Carcharhinus falciformis) were most commonly landed in Baja California, whereas a diverse assemblage of pelagic and large coastal sharks was noted among Baja California Sur landings. Rays dominated summer landings in Baja California and Sinaloa, when elevated catch rates of the shovelnose guitarfish (Rhinobatos productus, 13.2 individuals/vessel/trip) and golden cownose ray (Rhinoptera steindachneri, 11.1 individuals/vesse/trip) primarily supported the respective fisheries. The Sonoran artisanal elasmobranch fishery was the most expansive recorded during this study, and rays (especially R. productus) dominated spring and summer landings in this state. Seasonal catch rates of small demersal sharks and rays were considerably greater in Sonora than in other surveyed states. Many tiburón populations (e.g., C. leucas, C. limbatus, C. obscurus, Galeocerdo cuvier) have likely been overfished, possibly shifting effort towards coastal populations of cazón and rays. Management recommendations, including conducting demographic analyses using available life history data, determining and protecting nursery areas, and enacting seasonal closures in areas of elasmobranch aggregation (e.g., reproduction, feeding), are proposed. Without effective, enforceable management to sustain or rebuild targeted elasmobranch populations in the Gulf of California, collapse of many fisheries is a likely outcome. (PDF contains 243 pages)

Rescue, rehabilitation, and release of marine mammals: An analysis of current views and practices.

Stranded marine mammals have long attracted public attention. Those that wash up dead are, for all their value to science, seldom seen by the public as more than curiosities. Animals that are sick, injured, orphaned or abandoned ignite a different response. Generally, public sentiment supports any effort to rescue, treat and return them to sea. Institutions displaying marine mammals showed an early interest in live-stranded animals as a source of specimens -- in 1948, Marine Studios in St. Augustine, Florida, rescued a young short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus), the first ever in captivity (Kritzler 1952). Eventually, the public as well as government agencies looked to these institutions for their recognized expertise in marine mammal care and medicine. More recently, facilities have been established for the sole purpose of rehabilitating marine mammals and preparing them for return to the wild. Four such institutions are the Marine Mammal Center (Sausalito, CA), the Research Institute for Nature Management (Pieterburen, The Netherlands), the RSPCA, Norfolk Wildlife Hospital (Norfolk, United Kingdom) and the Institute for Wildlife Biology of Christian-Albrects University (Kiel, Germany).(PDF contains 68 pages.)

Cetaceans of Venezuela: Their distribution and conservation status.

Sighting, stranding, and capture records of whales and dolphins for Venezuela were assembled and analyzed to document the Venezuelan cetacean fauna and its distribution in the eastern Caribbean. An attempt was made to confirm species identification for each of the records, yielding 443 that encompass 21 species of cetaceans now confirmed to occur in Venezuelan marine, estuarine, and freshwater habitats. For each species, we report its global and local distribution, conservation status and threats, and the common names used, along with our proposal for a Spanish common name. Bryde’s whale (Balaenoptera edeni) is the most commonly reported mysticete. The long-beaked common dolphin (Delphinus capensis) is the most frequent of the odontocetes in marine waters. The boto or tonina (Inia geoffrensis) was found to be ubiquitous in the Orinoco watershed. The distribution of marine records is consistent with the pattern of productivity of Venezuelan marine waters, i.e., a concentration at 63°07′W through 65°26′W with records declining to the east and to the west. An examination of the records for all cetaceans in the Caribbean leads us to conclude that seven additional species may be present in Venezuelan waters. (PDF file contains 61 pages.)

Our water resources and their conservation

Life history, habits, structure, industry, conservation efforts for: Blue Crabs; Oyster; Fin fishes - shad, rock, croaker; Sport fish and fishing - marine and fresh-water; other aquatic forms - Diamondback terrapin, muskrat. Problems that confront husbandry and conservation of the commercial species, while many of the fish types found in the Chesapeake Bay are superior from the sportive viewpoint. (PDF contains 103 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.)

Field Guide to Nonindigenous Marine Fishes of Florida

The purpose of this field guide is to provide information on nonindigenous (i.e., non-native) fishes that have been observed in Florida’s marine waters. Introductions of non-native marine fishes into Florida’s waters could be intentional or unintentional, and are likely from a variety of sources, including aquarium releases, escape from aquaculture, loss due to extreme weather events (e.g., flooding from hurricanes), and possibly transfer with ballast water or hull-fouling. Presently the lionfishes (Pterois volitans and P. miles) are the only non-native marine fish species known to be established along the coast of Florida. All other marine fishes in this guide (except the euryhaline species, see below) have infrequent occurrences, occur singly or in small groups, and have not yet become self-sustaining populations. Aquarium releases are one of the major pathways whereby nonindigenous fishes gain access to new environments (Ruiz et al. 1997; Fuller et al. 1999). Most of the nonindigenous marine fishes found in Florida’s waters are thought to be aquarium fishes that either were illegally released into the ocean or escaped captivity (e.g., during severe storm/flooding events). Indeed, south Florida is a hotspot for nonindigenous marine aquarium fishes (Semmens et al. 2004). Increased public awareness of the problems caused by released or escaped aquarium fishes may aid in stemming the frequency of releases. For example, HabitattitudeTM (www.habitattitude.net) is a national public awareness and partnership campaign that encourages aquarists and water gardeners to prevent the release of unwanted aquarium plants, fish and other animals. It prompts hobbyists to adopt alternative actions when dealing with these aquatic plants and animals. (PDF file contains 133 pages.)

Conservation Biology of Elasmobranchs

Elasmobranchs are vital and valuable components of the marine biota. From an ecological perspective they occupy the role of top predators within marine food webs, providing a regulatory control that helps balance the ecosystem. From an evolutionary perspective, this group represents an early divergence along the vertebrate line that produced many unusual, but highly successful, adaptations in function and form. From man's perspective, elasmobranchs have been considered both an unavoidable nuisance, and an exploitable fishery resource. A few of the large shark species have earned a dubious notoriety because of sporadic attacks on humans that occur in coastal areas each year worldwide; the hysteria surrounding an encounter with a shark can be costly to the tourist industry. More importantly, elasmobranchs are often considered a detriment to commercial fishing operations; they cause significant economic damage to catches and fishing gear. On the other hand, consumer attitudes have changed concerning many previously unpopular food fishes, including elasmobranchs, and this group of fishes has been increasingly used by both recreational and commercial fishing interests. Many elasmobranchs have become a popular target of recreational fishermen for food and sport because of their abundance, size, and availability in coastal waters. Similarly, commercial fisheries for elasmobranchs have developed or expanded from an increased demand for elasmobranch food products. (PDF file contains 108 pages.)