Marine Mammal Strandings in the United States: Proceedings of the Second Marine Mammal Stranding Workshop, Miami, Florida, December 3-5, 1987

Over a decade ago, in August 1977, the First Marine Mammal Stranding Workshop was convened in Athens, Georgia. That workshop, organized by j.R. Geraci and D.J. St. Aubin, not only considered biology and pathology of stranded marine mammals, but it also served as a springboard for the formation of regional marine mammal stranding networks in the United States. The ramifications have been extremely important to the field of marine mammalogy since, for some species, examination or rehabilitation of stranded specimens serves as virtually the only source of information on distribution, anatomy, physiology, reproduction, and pathology. The First Marine Mammal Stranding Workshop led to increased awareness of the marine mammals themselves, as well as the logistic and legal factors associated with effective handling of the animals. A number of individuals indicated that they felt that a Second Marine Mammal Stranding Workshop held prior to the Seventh Biennial Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals (Miami, Florida; December 1987) would be both timely and productive. Accordingly, we organized the workshop and scheduled it to occur on 3-5 December. Our goals for the workshop were several, including 1) providing descriptions of some research, especially new techniques, regarding stranded marine mammals; 2) providing a forum where scientists could interact and possibly initiate cooperative research activities; 3) presenting information regarding procedures used effectively to handle stranded animals; 4) assessing ways to standardize data and specimen collection, archiving, and retrieval; and 5) providing a forum for assessing accomplishments and status of regional stranding networks to date, as well as for making recommendations regarding future activities of the networks. Nearly 100 individuals representing Federal and State governments, academic institutions, the oceanarium industry, consulting groups, conservation organizations, and the private sector attended the workshop (see Workshop Participants, this volume). (PDF file contains 166 pages.)

Ecology of east Florida sea turtles: Proceedings of the Cape Canaveral, Florida Sea Turtle Workshop Miami, Florida February 26-27, 1985

The Cape Canaveral, Florida, marine ecosystem is unique. There are complex current and temperature regimes that form a faunal transition zone between Atlantic tropical and subtropical waters. This zone is rich faunistically and supports large commercial fISheries for fish, scallops, and shrimp. Canaveral is also unique because it has large numbers of sea turtles year-round, this turtle aggregation exhibiting patterned seasonal changes in numbers, size frequency, and sex ratio. Additionally, a significant portion of this turtle aggregation hibernates in the Canaveral ship channel, a phenomenon rare in marine turtle populations. The Cape Canaveral area has the largest year-round concentration of sea turtles in the United States. However, the ship channel is periodically dredged by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in order to keep Port Canaveral open to U.S. Navy vessels, and preliminary surveys showed that many sea turtles were incidentally killed during dredging operations. In order for the Corps of Engineers to fulfill its defense dredging responsibilities, and comply with the Endangered Species Act of 1973, an interagency Sea Turtle Task Force was formed to investigate methods of reducing turtle mortalities. This Task Force promptly implemented a sea turtle research plan to determine seasonal abundance, movement patterns, sex ratios, size frequencies, and other biological parameters necessary to help mitigate dredging conflicts in the channel. The Cape Canaveral Sea Turtle Workshop is a cooperative effort to comprehensively present research results of these important studies. I gratefully acknowledge the support of everyone involved in this Workshop, particularly the anonymous team of referees who painstakingly reviewed the manuscripts. The cover illustration was drawn by Jack C. Javech. (PDF file contains 86 pages.)

Status, biology, and ecology of fur seals: Proceedings of an International Symposium and Workshop Cambridge, England, 23-27 April 1984

The 1984 International Symposium and Workshop on the Biology of Fur Seals originated in informal talks in 1981. However, the scope and focus of the symposium remained unclear until an informal workshop was held in San Diego in June 1983. This meeting synthesised data on the foraging and pup attendance activities of six species of fur seals, and attempted to formulate a coherent framework for the adaptations associated with their maternal strategies (Gentry et al. 1986). During the workshop it was clear that comparative data on many key aspects of fur seal biology and ecology were missing. This absence of data applied not only to less well known species, for some of which considerable unpublished data existed, but also to better known species for which research in some areas had either been neglected or unreported. The value of applying the comparative method to seals, especially comparisons integrating physiology, ecology, and reproductive biology, was amply demonstrated by the results of the 1983 workshop (Gentry and Kooyman 1986). However, we were also aware that many other problems outside the area of maternal strategies could benefit from comparative data, such as recovery of populations from the effects of harvesting. Therefore, to accommodate the range of potential research, we organized this symposium to produce an up-to-date synthesis of relevant information for all species of fur seals. It was also clear that fur seal research could benefit from increased communication and collaboration among its practitioners. To foster the spread of ideas, we held oral presentations on some topics of current research and techniques and organized workshops on specific topics, in addition to providing opportunities for informal talks among participants. Thanks to generous support from the British Antarctic Survey, the National Marine Fisheries Service of the United States, and the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research, the International Fur Seal Symposium was held at the British Antarctic Survey, Cambridge, England, 23-27 April 1984. The 36 participants are shown in Figure 1. A list of Symposium participants and authors is presented in Appendix 1 of the Proceedings. (PDF file contains 220 pages.)

Widow rockfish: Proceedings of a workshop, Tiburon, California, December 11-12, 1980

This workshop was organized because of the increase between 1978 and 1980 in coastwide landings of widow rockfish, from less than 1,000 mt to more than 20,000 mt, and because of scientists' concern with the lack of knowledge both of the fishery and biology of the species. Most scientists active in research on Pacific groundfish, as well as some members of the fishing industry and fishery managers, attended the workshop. These proceedings contain the report of the workshop discussion panel, status reports on California, Oregon, and Washington fisheries through 1980, and a collection of seven papers presented at the workshop. The status reports provide an historical perspective of the development of an important fishery. The papers present a fairly complete survey of biological knowledge of widow rockfish, economic status of the fishery, and fishery-independent methods for estimation of abundance. The papers also contain some information developed after the workshop. Since the workshop, the fishery has matured. Largest landings were made in 1981, when more than 28,000 mt were landed. Maximum sustainable yield (MSY) is estimated to be slightly less than 10,000 mt, and the stock appeared to be at about the MSY level in 1985. The Pacific Fishery Management Council and National Marine Fisheries Service have implemented regulations that have maintained landings since 1983 at approximately the maximum sustainable yield level. Fishery-dependent stock assessments are being made on an annual basis for the Pacific Fishery Management Council. While these assessments are considered to be the best possible with available data, scientists responsible for the assessment have chosen to delay their publication in the formal scientific literature until more data are obtained. However, the stock assessment reports are available from the Pacific Fishery Management Council. In addition to the papers in this collection, three papers have been published on widow rockfish since 1980. BoehIert, Barss, and Lamberson (1982) estimate fecundity of the species off Oregon; Gunderson (1984) describes the fishery and management actions; and Laroche and Richardson (1981) describe the morphology and distribution of juvenile widow rockfish off Oregon. During the past decade, the fishery for widow rockfish has developed from a minor fishery to one of the more important on the Pacific Coast. Our knowledge of the biology and dynamics of the species has progressed from minimal to relatively extensive for a groundfish species. It is our intention in preparing this collection of papers to make this knowledge readily available to the scientific community. (PDF file contains 63 pages.)

Environment and resources of seamounts in the North Pacific: Proceedings of a workshop, March 21-23, 1984, Shimizu, Japan

The trawl fishery for pelagic annorhead, Pseuaopentaceros wheeleri(fonnerly referred to as Pentaceros richardsoni), and alfonsin, Beryx splendens, over the central North Pacific seamounts has a relatively short history. Before 1967, fishery scientists were generally unaware of the resources on seamounts; however, the discovery of commercial concentrations of pelagic armorhead on seamounts in the southern Emperor Seamounts by a Russian commercial trawler in November 1967 led to almost immediate exploitation of the species by the Soviets. Unconfinned reports indicated that the schools of pelagic annorhead on the seamounts averaged 30 m thick and catches averaged from 3 to 50 metric tons on 10-20 min hauls (Sakiura 1972). Japanese trawlers entered the fishery in 1969. To assist in the development of this tishery, Japanese research vessels conducted extensive surveys in 1972 on the distribution and potential for development ofthe pelagic armorhead and alfonsin resources. The results of their surveys to the central North Pacific and mid-Pacific seamounts showed that many had summits that were too deep for trawling. Those found suitable were concentrated in the southern Emperor-northern Hawaiian Ridge. (PDF file contains 113 pages.)

Proceedings of the International Workshop on age determination of oceanic pelagic fishes: Tunas, billfishes, and sharks, Miami, Florida, February 15-18,1982

Accurate and precise estimates of age and growth rates are essential parameters in understanding the population dynamics of fishes. Some of the more sophisticated stock assessment models, such as virtual population analysis, require age and growth information to partition catch data by age. Stock assessment efforts by regulatory agencies are usually directed at specific fisheries which are being heavily exploited and are suspected of being overfished. Interest in stock assessment of some of the oceanic pelagic fishes (tunas, billfishes, and sharks) has developed only over the last decade, during which exploitation has increased steadily in response to increases in worldwide demand for these resources. Traditionally, estimating the age of fishes has been done by enumerating growth bands on skeletal hardparts, through length frequency analysis, tag and recapture studies, and raising fish in enclosures. However, problems related to determining the age of some of the oceanic pelagic fishes are unique compared with other species. For example, sampling is difficult for these large, highly mobile fishes because of their size, extensive distributions throughout the world's oceans, and for some, such as the marlins, infrequent catches. In addition, movements of oceanic pelagic fishes often transect temperate as well as tropical oceans, making interpretation of growth bands on skeletal hardparts more difficult than with more sedentary temperate species. Many oceanic pelagics are also long-lived, attaining ages in excess of 30 yr, and more often than not, their life cycles do not lend themselves easily to artificial propagation and culture. These factors contribute to the difficulty of determining ages and are generally characteristic of this group-the tunas, billfishes, and sharks. Accordingly, the rapidly growing international concern in managing oceanic pelagic fishes, as well as unique difficulties in ageing these species, prompted us to hold this workshop. Our two major objectives for this workshop are to: I) Encourage the interchange of ideas on this subject, and 2) establish the "state of the art." A total of 65 scientists from 10 states in the continental United States and Hawaii, three provinces in Canada, France, Republic of Senegal, Spain, Mexico, Ivory Coast, and New South Wales (Australia) attended the workshop held at the Southeast Fisheries Center, Miami, Fla., 15-18 February 1982. Our first objective, encouraging the interchange of ideas, is well illustrated in the summaries of the Round Table Discussions and in the Glossary, which defines terms used in this volume. The majority of the workshop participants agreed that the lack of validation of age estimates and the means to accomplish the same are serious problems preventing advancements in assessing the age and growth of fishes, particularly oceanic pelagics. The alternatives relating to the validation problem were exhaustively reviewed during the Round Table Discussions and are a major highlight of this workshop. How well we accomplished our second objective, to establish the "state of the art" on age determination of oceanic pelagic fishes, will probably best be judged on the basis of these proceedings and whether future research efforts are directed at the problem areas we have identified. In order to produce high-quality papers, workshop participants served as referees for the manuscripts published in this volume. Several papers given orally at the workshop, and included in these proceedings, were summarized from full-length manuscripts, which have been submitted to or published in other scientific outlets-these papers are designated as SUMMARY PAPERS. In addition, the SUMMARY PAPER designation was also assigned to workshop papers that represented very preliminary or initial stages of research, cursory progress reports, papers that were data shy, or provide only brief reviews on general topics. Bilingual abstracts were included for all papers that required translation. We gratefully acknowledge the support of everyone involved in this workshop. Funding was provided by the Southeast Fisheries Center, and Jack C. Javech did the scientific illustrations appearing on the cover, between major sections, and in the Glossary. (PDF file contains 228 pages.)

Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on the Okhotsk Sea and Adjacent Areas

This report is the outcome of the fourth PICES Workshop on “The Okhotsk Sea and Adjacent Waters” held August 27–29, 2008, in Abashiri, Japan. (PDF contains 319 pages)

Report of the Sea Turtle Health Assessment Workshop, 2-3 February 1998, Part I: Background and information needs

A two day workshop was convened on February 2-3, 1998 in Charleston, SC with 20 invited experts in various areas of sea turtle research. The goal of this workshop was to review current information on sea turtles with repect to health and identify data gaps. The use of a suite of health assessment indicators will provide insight on the health status of sea turtle populations. Since the relationship of health factors of sea turtles is limited, a seconde workshop was planned. Using a tiered approach, the first workshop we identified and reviewed the available, pertinent baseline information and data gaps. The second workshop will focus on developing the framework for the research plan. The workshops will address the use of integrated set of health parameters; specific objectives are: 1) Identify reliable indicators of health in sea turtles: assess advantages and disadvantages; determine new indicators/biomarkers which may be useful; 2) Review existing sea turtle field sampling projects; 3) Identify field projects suitable for inclusion for health assessment sampling; 4) Identify data gaps, particularly environmental characterization; 5) Identify new health assessment sampling sites, including reference site(s); and 6) Develop integrated five-year research plan, with focus on health assessment of environmental characterization. (PDF contains 174 pages)

Technologies and Methodologies for the Detection of Harmful Algae and Their Toxins, St Petersburg, Florida, Oct 22-24 2008 : workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) Workshop "Technologies and Methodologies for the Detection of Harmful Algae and their Toxins" convened in St. Petersburg, Florida, October 22- 24, 2008 and was co-sponsored by ACT (http://act-us.info); the Cooperative Institute for Coastal and Estuarine Environmental Technology (CICEET, http://ciceet.unh.edu); and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC, http://www.myfwc.com). Participants from various sectors, including researchers, coastal decision makers, and technology vendors, collaborated to exchange information and build consensus. They focused on the status of currently available detection technologies and methodologies for harmful algae (HA) and their toxins, provided direction for developing operational use of existing technology, and addressed requirements for future technology developments in this area. Harmful algal blooms (HABs) in marine and freshwater systems are increasingly common worldwide and are known to cause extensive ecological, economic, and human health problems. In US waters, HABs are encountered in a growing number of locations and are also increasing in duration and severity. This expansion in HABs has led to elevated incidences of poisonous seafood, toxin-contaminated drinking water, mortality of fish and other animals dependent upon aquatic resources (including protected species), public health and economic impacts in coastal and lakeside communities, losses to aquaculture enterprises, and long-term aquatic ecosystem changes. This meeting represented the fourth ACT sponsored workshop that has addressed technology developments for improved monitoring of water-born pathogens and HA species in some form. A primary motivation was to assess the need and community support for an ACT-led Performance Demonstration of Harmful Algae Detection Technologies and Methodologies in order to facilitate their integration into regional ocean observing systems operations. The workshop focused on the identification of region-specific monitoring needs and available technologies and methodologies for detection/quantification of harmful algal species and their toxins along the US marine and freshwater coasts. To address this critical environmental issue, several technologies and methodologies have been, or are being, developed to detect and quantify various harmful algae and their associated toxins in coastal marine and freshwater environments. There are many challenges to nationwide adoption of HAB detection as part of a core monitoring infrastructure: the geographic uniqueness of primary algal species of concern around the country, the variety of HAB impacts, and the need for a clear vision of the operational requirements for monitoring the various species. Nonetheless, it was a consensus of the workshop participants that ACT should support the development of HA detection technology performance demonstrations but that these would need to be tuned regionally to algal species and toxins of concern in order to promote the adoption of state of the art technologies into HAR monitoring networks. [PDF contains 36 pages]

Hydrocarbon sensors for oil spill prevention and response, Seward, Alaska, April 8th-10th, 2008: workshop proceedings

During April 8th-10th, 2008, the Aliance for Coastal Technology (ACT) partner institutions, University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), Alaska SeaLife Center (ASLC), and the Oil Spill Recovery Institute (OSRI) hosted a workshop entitled: "Hydrocarbon sensors for oil spill prevention and response" in Seward, Alaska. The main focus was to bring together 29 workshop participants-representing workshop managers, scientists, and technology developers - together to discuss current and future hydrocarbon in-situ, laboratory, and remote sensors as they apply to oil spill prevention and response. [PDF contains 28 pages] Hydrocarbons and their derivatives still remain one of the most important energy sources in the world. To effectively manage these energy sources, proper protocol must be implemented to ensure prevention and responses to oil spills, as there are significant economic and environmental costs when oil spills occur. Hydrocarbon sensors provide the means to detect and monitor oil spills before, during, and after they occur. Capitalizing on the properties of oil, developers have designed in-situ, laboratory, and remote sensors that absorb or reflect the electromagnetic energy at different spectral bands. Workshop participants identified current hydrocarbon sensors (in-situ, laboratory, and remote sensors) and their overall performance. To achieve the most comprehensive understanding of oil spills, multiple sensors will be needed to gather oil spill extent, location, movement, thickness, condition, and classification. No single hydrocarbon sensor has the capability to collect all this information. Participants, therefore, suggested the development of means to combine sensor equipment to effectively and rapidly establish a spill response. As the exploration of oil continues at polar latitudes, sensor equipment must be developed to withstand harsh arctic climates, be able to detect oil under ice, and reduce the need for ground teams because ice extent is far too large of an area to cover. Participants also recognized the need for ground teams because ice extent is far too large of an area to cover. Participants also recognized the need for the U.S. to adopt a multi-agency cooperation for oil spill response, as the majority of issues surounding oil spill response focuses not on the hydrocarbon sensors but on an effective contingency plan adopted by all agencies. It is recommended that the U.S. could model contingency planning based on other nations such as Germany and Norway. Workshop participants were asked to make recommendations at the conclusion of the workshop and are summarized below without prioritization: *Outreach materials must be delivered to funding sources and Congressional delegates regarding the importance of oil spill prevention and response and the development of proper sensors to achieve effective response. *Develop protocols for training resource managers as new sensors become available. *Develop or adopt standard instrument specifications and testing protocols to assist manufacturers in further developing new sensor technology. *As oil exploration continues at polar latitudes, more research and development should be allocated to develop a suite of instruments that are applicable to oil detection under ice.

Towed vehicles: undulating platforms as tools for maping coastal processes and water quality assessment, Seaside, California, February 5-7,2007. Workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) Workshop on Towed Vehicles: Undulating Platforms As Tools for Mapping Coastal Processes and Water Quality Assessment was convened February 5-7,2007 at The Embassy Suites Hotel, Seaside, California and sponsored by the ACT-Pacific Coast partnership at the Moss Landing Marine Laboratories (MLML). The TUV workshop was co-chaired by Richard Burt (Chelsea Technology Group) and Stewart Lamerdin (MLML Marine Operations). Invited participants were selected to provide a uniform representation of the academic researchers, private sector product developers, and existing and potential data product users from the resource management community to enable development of broad consensus opinions on the application of TUV platforms in coastal resource assessment and management. The workshop was organized to address recognized limitations of point-based monitoring programs, which, while providing valuable data, are incapable of describing the spatial heterogeneity and the extent of features distributed in the bulk solution. This is particularly true as surveys approach the coastal zone where tidal and estuarine influences result in spatially and temporally heterogeneous water masses and entrained biological components. Aerial or satellite based remote sensing can provide an assessment of the aerial extent of plumes and blooms, yet provide no information regarding the third dimension of these features. Towed vehicles offer a cost-effective solution to this problem by providing platforms, which can sample in the horizontal, vertical, and time-based domains. Towed undulating vehicles (henceforth TUVs) represent useful platforms for event-response characterization. This workshop reviewed the current status of towed vehicle technology focusing on limitations of depth, data telemetry, instrument power demands, and ship requirements in an attempt to identify means to incorporate such technology more routinely in monitoring and event-response programs. Specifically, the participants were charged to address the following: (1) Summarize the state of the art in TUV technologies; (2) Identify how TUV platforms are used and how they can assist coastal managers in fulfilling their regulatory and management responsibilities; (3) Identify barriers and challenges to the application of TUV technologies in management and research activities, and (4) Recommend a series of community actions to overcome identified barriers and challenges. A series of plenary presentation were provided to enhance subsequent breakout discussions by the participants. Dave Nelson (University of Rhode Island) provided extensive summaries and real-world assessment of the operational features of a variety of TUV platforms available in the UNOLs scientific fleet. Dr. Burke Hales (Oregon State University) described the modification of TUV to provide a novel sampling platform for high resolution mapping of chemical distributions in near real time. Dr. Sonia Batten (Sir Alister Hardy Foundation for Ocean Sciences) provided an overview on the deployment of specialized towed vehicles equipped with rugged continuous plankton recorders on ships of opportunity to obtain long-term, basin wide surveys of zooplankton community structure, enhancing our understanding of trends in secondary production in the upper ocean. [PDF contains 32 pages]

Underwater Passive Acoustic Monitoring for Remote Regions, Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology, Coconut Island, Hawaii, February 7-9, 2007: workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) convened a workshop, sponsored by the Hawaii-Pacific and Alaska Regional Partners, entitled Underwater Passive Acoustic Monitoring for Remote Regions at the Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology from February 7-9, 2007. The workshop was designed to summarize existing passive acoustic technologies and their uses, as well as to make strategic recommendations for future development and collaborative programs that use passive acoustic tools for scientific investigation and resource management. The workshop was attended by 29 people representing three sectors: research scientists, resource managers, and technology developers. The majority of passive acoustic tools are being developed by individual scientists for specific applications and few tools are available commercially. Most scientists are developing hydrophone-based systems to listen for species-specific information on fish or cetaceans; a few scientists are listening for biological indicators of ecosystem health. Resource managers are interested in passive acoustics primarily for vessel detection in remote protected areas and secondarily to obtain biological and ecological information. The military has been monitoring with hydrophones for decades;however, data and signal processing software has not been readily available to the scientific community, and future collaboration is greatly needed. The challenges that impede future development of passive acoustics are surmountable with greater collaboration. Hardware exists and is accessible; the limits are in the software and in the interpretation of sounds and their correlation with ecological events. Collaboration with the military and the private companies it contracts will assist scientists and managers with obtaining and developing software and data analysis tools. Collaborative proposals among scientists to receive larger pools of money for exploratory acoustic science will further develop the ability to correlate noise with ecological activities. The existing technologies and data analysis are adequate to meet resource managers' needs for vessel detection. However, collaboration is needed among resource managers to prepare large-scale programs that include centralized processing in an effort to address the lack of local capacity within management agencies to analyze and interpret the data. Workshop participants suggested that ACT might facilitate such collaborations through its website and by providing recommendations to key agencies and programs, such as DOD, NOAA, and I00s. There is a need to standardize data formats and archive acoustic environmental data at the national and international levels. Specifically, there is a need for local training and primers for public education, as well as by pilot demonstration projects, perhaps in conjunction with National Marine Sanctuaries. Passive acoustic technologies should be implemented immediately to address vessel monitoring needs. Ecological and health monitoring applications should be developed as vessel monitoring programs provide additional data and opportunities for more exploratory research. Passive acoustic monitoring should also be correlated with water quality monitoring to ease integration into long-term monitoring programs, such as the ocean observing systems. [PDF contains 52 pages]

Wave Sensor Technologies, St Petersburg, Florida, March 7-9, 2007: workshop proceedings

The Alliance for Coastal Technologies (ACT) convened a workshop on "Wave Sensor Technologies" in St. Petersburg, Florida on March 7-9, 2007, hosted by the University of South Florida (USF) College of Marine Science, an ACT partner institution. The primary objectives of this workshop were to: 1) define the present state of wave measurement technologies, 2) identify the major impediments to their advancement, and 3) make strategic recommendations for future development and on the necessary steps to integrate wave measurement sensors into operational coastal ocean observing systems. The participants were from various sectors, including research scientists, technology developers and industry providers, and technology users, such as operational coastal managers and coastal decision makers. Waves consistently are ranked as a critical variable for numerous coastal issues, from maritime transportation to beach erosion to habitat restoration. For the purposes of this workshop, the participants focused on measuring "wind waves" (i.e., waves on the water surface, generated by the wind, restored by gravity and existing between approximately 3 and 30-second periods), although it was recognized that a wide range of both forced and free waves exist on and in the oceans. Also, whereas the workshop put emphasis on the nearshore coastal component of wave measurements, the participants also stressed the importance of open ocean surface waves measurement. Wave sensor technologies that are presently available for both environments include bottom-mounted pressure gauges, surface following buoys, wave staffs, acoustic Doppler current profilers, and shore-based remote sensing radar instruments. One of the recurring themes of workshop discussions was the dichotomous nature of wave data users. The two separate groups, open ocean wave data users and the nearshore/coastal wave data users, have different requirements. Generally, the user requirements increase both in spatial/temporal resolution and precision as one moves closer to shore. Most ocean going mariners are adequately satisfied with measurements of wave period and height and a wave general direction. However, most coastal and nearshore users require at least the first five Fourier parameters ("First 5"): wave energy and the first four directional Fourier coefficients. Furthermore, wave research scientists would like sensors capable of providing measurements beyond the first four Fourier coefficients. It was debated whether or not high precision wave observations in one location can take the place of a less precise measurement at a different location. This could be accomplished by advancing wave models and using wave models to extend data to nearby areas. However, the consensus was that models are no substitution for in situ wave data.[PDF contains 26 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]